The Australian Greens party

[wayneL]

Got a link pls?

Link to full interview therein.

 

[wayneL]

They are protesting because they have no other voice.
Your claim that they take no responsibility themselves is utterly baseless, which seems the norm from you.
Your other comments are equally worthless.

P1ss off Rob, you are boring.

 

[rederob]

P1ss off Rob, you are boring.

Please retract that Wayne.
You are welcome to your views, but not to disparage.

 

[wayneL]

It is hilarious that you don't see the irony in what you just posted. I stand by my comments and refrain from further, more deserved disparagement.

Unbelievable

 

[rederob]

It is hilarious that you don't see the irony in what you just posted. I stand by my comments and refrain from further, more deserved disparagement.
Unbelievable

The forum has a code of conduct.
Maybe try to abide by it.
I let a lot of your commentary pass as it seldom adds anything meaningful to threads.
More often than not it is something to do with your penchant for "labels", perhaps because you are not capable of better contributions.
With regard to your remark on irony, the difference is that I can show that each element of your post was without merit.

 

[rederob]

My comment on your post are in blue.

They protest, yet take no responsibility themselves. Where is your evidence for this claim?
By protesting they are in fact taking taking some responsibility.
Just diabolically hypocritical and downright stupid. What are your grounds for that comment? The scientific community are clear on the potential for a rate of warming which can be calamitous if nothing is done soon. You seem to be making another claim which has no apparent justification.
Plod you are still the only Green I know of, that lives what you preach; the rest are fools, - where is your evidence for this claim? It seems an unsubstantiated idea you have especially these silly little girls. Are they members of the "greens"? You seem to have confused senses here.

 

[wayneL]

zzzz...zzzz....zzzzz

Wake me up when you decide to discontinue your disparagement of me and want to have a reasonable debate

 

[basilio]

Rederob are you finding it challenging to understand Wayne's POV ?
Perhaps you should check out the places he uses to inform his views.

 

[Darc Knight]

Perhaps you should check out the places he uses to inform his views.

Jeez Bas. Pot Kettle Black and all that!

 

[rederob]

zzzz...zzzz....zzzzz
Wake me up when you decide to discontinue your disparagement of me and want to have a reasonable debate

I respond to what you write.
You, personally, are only relevant to me to the extent you present something worthy of comment.
As I said above, I see little from you here that is worth bothering about.

Rederob are you finding it challenging to understand Wayne's POV ?

No.
Only hard to find "content".

 

[basilio]

Just to be clear. The posting I made from Alternative View Ireland was orginally Wayne's post in another thread.

 

[wayneL]

Rederob are you finding it challenging to understand Wayne's POV ?
Perhaps you should check out the places he uses to inform his views.

So you support the Senegalese immigrant attempting to burn 51 children alive ?

Its easy to disingenuously reframe stuff hey bas? Thanks for confirming my acronymonious (sic) categorisation of you Komrade.

 

[wayneL]

Just to be clear. The posting I made from Alternative View Ireland was orginally Wayne's post in another thread.

Smear smear

And FYI, it was a convenient retweet that appeared on my feed; convenient because your statist, agendised MSM had not reported it. I don't follow that entity.

 

[Darc Knight]

Smear smear

And FYI, it was a convenient retweet that appeared on my feed; convenient because your statist, agendised MSM had not reported it. I don't follow that entity.

MSN gets paid by some dubious sites geez. Some of the crap links this morning.

 

[rederob]

And FYI, it was a convenient retweet that appeared on my feed; convenient because your statist, agendised MSM had not reported it. I don't follow that entity.

It was reported by by the New York Times the evening before the tweeted link.
Looks like some people are living in an alternative universe.

 

[wayneL]

It was reported by by the New York Times the evening before the tweeted link.
Looks like some people are living in an alternative universe.

Did I say this was the first iteration of reportage?

No, I didn't, merely a convenient link.

Looks like some people have zero critical thinking skills.

Rob, you *know* this has been under reported, so stick your failing narrative in the memory hole cesspit , where it belongs.

 

[rederob]

Did I say this was the first iteration of reportage?
No, I didn't, merely a convenient link.
Looks like some people have zero critical thinking skills.
Rob, you *know* this has been under reported, so stick your failing narrative in the memory hole cesspit , where it belongs.

Honestly Wayne, your comments are nothing other than clutching at straws.
I read this in the New York Times, before the tweeted time in the link.
Your claim was exactly this, "...convenient because your statist, agendised MSM had not reported it...."
Is it your claim the New York Times is not the mainstream media?
If so, what does constitute your version of the MSM?

 

[IFocus]

"P1ss off Rob, you are boring."

When you don't have an argument that stands up..........personal attacks look really really ugly Wayne your in that hole again stop digging.

 

[wayneL]

Honestly Wayne, your comments are nothing other than clutching at straws.
I read this in the New York Times, before the tweeted time in the link.
Your claim was exactly this, "...convenient because your statist, agendised MSM had not reported it...."
Is it your claim the New York Times is not the mainstream media?
If so, what does constitute your version of the MSM?

Nothing of your speciousness here repudiates the substance of my above points, Rob.

Stop the juvenile hair splitting and debate the major points at hand.

 

[rederob]

Nothing of your speciousness here repudiates the substance of my above points, Rob.
Stop the juvenile hair splitting and debate the major points at hand.

I asked a question of you seeing that you seem to have a view that the New York Times is not MSM.
And you respond in the usual manner - ie. avoid the issue.
At what point will you make a claim of substance as distinct from indulging id superfluous language?