Australian Politics Forum - Why won't progressiveslol provide documentation?

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Why won't progressiveslol provide documentation?
Reply #15 - Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:14pm

skippy. wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:12pm:

Alevine is correct, prog made all sorts of claims about this over the past months but in particular last couple of days, surly it can't be hard for him to provide links to this document he clearly states is available
for public access, he says it exists, where is it?

claims of what skip. Most of what I put on here about this subject is a direct cut and paste. You would need to be a bit more specific as well.

Back to top

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: Why won't progressiveslol provide documentation?
Reply #16 - Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:16pm

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:11pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:08pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:05pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:04pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:03pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:01pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:00pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:59pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:57pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:57pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:56pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:55pm:

Progressiveslol claims to have documentation relating to Gillard's guilt in the AWU scandal. Yet he won't provide it to prove to all of us that he is right and most importantly that a crime has been committed by Gillard Sad

. Why?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1351812382/45

Hey you could just ask me. What a radicle idea.

You could just provide documentation you claim to possess.

What documentation is that exactly.

The documentation you claim to possess.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1351812382/45

You will need to be a bit more specific. I dont possess any documentation. I have however presented many many links.

So you lied then? So there is no documentation?

You will need to describe what documentation you require.

The documentation you spoke of here:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1351812382/45

Not really that difficult my friend.

But when I referred to documentation, I was not specific. You will need to be specific in order for me to contemplate if I will retrieve the link to it.

This wasn't specific?

Quote:

Is that what was on the documentation that gillard signed and is available for all to see.

Provide it please.

Gillard has signed many documents. Which one are you after exactly.

THe one you're referring to when you say
Quote:

Is that what was on the documentation that gillard signed and is available for all to see.

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 23619 Gender:	Re: Why won't progressiveslol provide documentation? Reply #17 - Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:17pm Now everyone needs to be more specific for progs. Seems you can't keep your lies straight. Despicable.
Back to top	Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of. IP Logged

BigOl64

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male

Re: Why won't progressiveslol provide documentation?
Reply #18 - Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:17pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:09pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:05pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:59pm:

The documentation you claim to possess.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1351812382/45

Just read through that entire post can't see where prog stated that he had documented evidence.

I did see a puerile demand for some poo or other, based on a question posed by prog. Seems just another stupid post generated from an inability to comprehend basic english.

Well I suggest you get a better comprehension of english then. Grin

This is the the quote you are referring to and the initial demand from Aussie..

Quote:

Is that what was on the documentation that gillard signed and is available for all to see.

"Is that what" is the beginning of a question and without the question mark at the end of the sentence you could just accept it as a rhetorical question.

But maybe english is your second language and you don't understand the structure of questions.

So stop being a petulant tool and find an adult conversation to join into.

Back to top

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Why won't progressiveslol provide documentation?
Reply #19 - Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:18pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:16pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:11pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:08pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:05pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:04pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:03pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:01pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:00pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:59pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:57pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:57pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:56pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:55pm:

Progressiveslol claims to have documentation relating to Gillard's guilt in the AWU scandal. Yet he won't provide it to prove to all of us that he is right and most importantly that a crime has been committed by Gillard Sad

. Why?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1351812382/45

Hey you could just ask me. What a radicle idea.

You could just provide documentation you claim to possess.

What documentation is that exactly.

The documentation you claim to possess.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1351812382/45

You will need to be a bit more specific. I dont possess any documentation. I have however presented many many links.

So you lied then? So there is no documentation?

You will need to describe what documentation you require.

The documentation you spoke of here:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1351812382/45

Not really that difficult my friend.

But when I referred to documentation, I was not specific. You will need to be specific in order for me to contemplate if I will retrieve the link to it.

This wasn't specific?

Quote:

Is that what was on the documentation that gillard signed and is available for all to see.

Provide it please.

Gillard has signed many documents. Which one are you after exactly.

THe one you're referring to when you say
Quote:

Is that what was on the documentation that gillard signed and is available for all to see.

But that was not being specific.

Back to top

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: Why won't progressiveslol provide documentation?
Reply #20 - Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:19pm

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:18pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:16pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:11pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:08pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:05pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:04pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:03pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:01pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:00pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:59pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:57pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:57pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:56pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:55pm:

Progressiveslol claims to have documentation relating to Gillard's guilt in the AWU scandal. Yet he won't provide it to prove to all of us that he is right and most importantly that a crime has been committed by Gillard Sad

. Why?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1351812382/45

Hey you could just ask me. What a radicle idea.

You could just provide documentation you claim to possess.

What documentation is that exactly.

The documentation you claim to possess.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1351812382/45

You will need to be a bit more specific. I dont possess any documentation. I have however presented many many links.

So you lied then? So there is no documentation?

You will need to describe what documentation you require.

The documentation you spoke of here:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1351812382/45

Not really that difficult my friend.

But when I referred to documentation, I was not specific. You will need to be specific in order for me to contemplate if I will retrieve the link to it.

This wasn't specific?

Quote:

Is that what was on the documentation that gillard signed and is available for all to see.

Provide it please.

Gillard has signed many documents. Which one are you after exactly.

THe one you're referring to when you say
Quote:

Is that what was on the documentation that gillard signed and is available for all to see.

But that was not being specific.

of course it was. Provide it please.

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Why won't progressiveslol provide documentation?
Reply #21 - Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:21pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:19pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:18pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:16pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:11pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:08pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:05pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:04pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:03pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:01pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:00pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:59pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:57pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:57pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:56pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:55pm:

Progressiveslol claims to have documentation relating to Gillard's guilt in the AWU scandal. Yet he won't provide it to prove to all of us that he is right and most importantly that a crime has been committed by Gillard Sad

. Why?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1351812382/45

Hey you could just ask me. What a radicle idea.

You could just provide documentation you claim to possess.

What documentation is that exactly.

The documentation you claim to possess.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1351812382/45

You will need to be a bit more specific. I dont possess any documentation. I have however presented many many links.

So you lied then? So there is no documentation?

You will need to describe what documentation you require.

The documentation you spoke of here:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1351812382/45

Not really that difficult my friend.

But when I referred to documentation, I was not specific. You will need to be specific in order for me to contemplate if I will retrieve the link to it.

This wasn't specific?

Quote:

Is that what was on the documentation that gillard signed and is available for all to see.

Provide it please.

Gillard has signed many documents. Which one are you after exactly.

THe one you're referring to when you say
Quote:

Is that what was on the documentation that gillard signed and is available for all to see.

But that was not being specific.

of course it was. Provide it please.

what. lol. How about you research. It is good that you have taken a shine to the subject and want knowledge about it.

Back to top

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: Why won't progressiveslol provide documentation?
Reply #22 - Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:22pm

BigOl64 wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:17pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:09pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:05pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:59pm:

The documentation you claim to possess.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1351812382/45

Just read through that entire post can't see where prog stated that he had documented evidence.

I did see a puerile demand for some poo or other, based on a question posed by prog. Seems just another stupid post generated from an inability to comprehend basic english.

Well I suggest you get a better comprehension of english then. Grin

This is the the quote you are referring to and the initial demand from Aussie..

Quote:

Is that what was on the documentation that gillard signed and is available for all to see.

"Is that what" is the beginning of a question and without the question mark at the end of the sentence you could just accept it as a rhetorical question.

But maybe english is your second language and you don't understand the structure of questions.

So stop being a petulant tool and find an adult conversation to join into.

First I've heard that rhetorical questions can be accepted without question marks. Re-writing english are we? Progressives may just have bad grammar, and it so happens that in a forum like this that should never matter (at least not to those willing to have a debate rather than pick up on how a person writes).

Not rhetorical. Progressives claims there is some documentation out there. I'm asking for it.

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: Why won't progressiveslol provide documentation?
Reply #23 - Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:23pm

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:21pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:19pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:18pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:16pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:11pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:08pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:05pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:04pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:03pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:01pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:00pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:59pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:57pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:57pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:56pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 4:55pm:

Progressiveslol claims to have documentation relating to Gillard's guilt in the AWU scandal. Yet he won't provide it to prove to all of us that he is right and most importantly that a crime has been committed by Gillard Sad

. Why?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1351812382/45

Hey you could just ask me. What a radicle idea.

You could just provide documentation you claim to possess.

What documentation is that exactly.

The documentation you claim to possess.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1351812382/45

You will need to be a bit more specific. I dont possess any documentation. I have however presented many many links.

So you lied then? So there is no documentation?

You will need to describe what documentation you require.

The documentation you spoke of here:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1351812382/45

Not really that difficult my friend.

But when I referred to documentation, I was not specific. You will need to be specific in order for me to contemplate if I will retrieve the link to it.

This wasn't specific?

Quote:

Is that what was on the documentation that gillard signed and is available for all to see.

Provide it please.

Gillard has signed many documents. Which one are you after exactly.

THe one you're referring to when you say
Quote:

Is that what was on the documentation that gillard signed and is available for all to see.

But that was not being specific.

of course it was. Provide it please.

what. lol. How about you research. It is good that you have taken a shine to the subject and want knowledge about it.

Why do I need to research the documentation you claim you have seen? If you have seen it, provide it! Not that hard. Why are you trying to make it so difficult to prove YOUR OWN POINT?

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

BigOl64

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male

Re: Why won't progressiveslol provide documentation?
Reply #24 - Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:34pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:22pm:

First I've heard that rhetorical questions can be accepted without question marks. Re-writing english are we? Progressives may just have bad grammar, and it so happens that in a forum like this that should never matter (at least not to those willing to have a debate rather than pick up on how a person writes).

Not rhetorical. Progressives claims there is some documentation out there. I'm asking for it.

You do realise I used the word "could" didn't you, doesn't quite mean I'm rewriting the english language now does it? It does mean it is an option you could take if you were being an adult about the whole situation.

Prog made no such claim, the very fact the the sentence is framed as a question, rhetorical or otherwise means it was not a claim of ownership or direct knowledge. Anyone with a pass in Grade 5 english comprehension would be able to understand that

I'm all for a debate, but not with a churlish demand as the premise for that debate.

Back to top

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: Why won't progressiveslol provide documentation?
Reply #25 - Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:37pm

BigOl64 wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:34pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:22pm:

First I've heard that rhetorical questions can be accepted without question marks. Re-writing english are we? Progressives may just have bad grammar, and it so happens that in a forum like this that should never matter (at least not to those willing to have a debate rather than pick up on how a person writes).

Not rhetorical. Progressives claims there is some documentation out there. I'm asking for it.

You do realise I used the word "could" didn't you, doesn't quite mean I'm rewriting the english language now does it? It does mean it is an option you could take if you were being an adult about the whole situation.

Prog made no such claim, the very fact the the sentence is framed as a question, rhetorical or otherwise means it was not a claim of ownership or direct knowledge. Anyone with a pass in Grade 5 english comprehension would be able to understand that

I'm all for a debate, but not with a churlish demand as the premise for that debate.

Even if it was rhetorical it only solidifies that progressive is aware of some documentation. We are asking him to share it with us.

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

BigOl64

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male

Re: Why won't progressiveslol provide documentation?
Reply #26 - Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:45pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:37pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:34pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:22pm:

First I've heard that rhetorical questions can be accepted without question marks. Re-writing english are we? Progressives may just have bad grammar, and it so happens that in a forum like this that should never matter (at least not to those willing to have a debate rather than pick up on how a person writes).

Not rhetorical. Progressives claims there is some documentation out there. I'm asking for it.

You do realise I used the word "could" didn't you, doesn't quite mean I'm rewriting the english language now does it? It does mean it is an option you could take if you were being an adult about the whole situation.

Prog made no such claim, the very fact the the sentence is framed as a question, rhetorical or otherwise means it was not a claim of ownership or direct knowledge. Anyone with a pass in Grade 5 english comprehension would be able to understand that

I'm all for a debate, but not with a churlish demand as the premise for that debate.

Even if it was rhetorical it only solidifies that progressive is aware of some documentation. We are asking him to share it with us.

No it was a question, not a statement, so you cannot on that basis make any demands.

If I ask you a question you cannot demand I hand over the proof that supports or disproves the question I posed. That would be friggen stupid.

If someone poses a question, you can answer it or not. That's it.

Back to top

IP Logged

progressiveslol Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 17029	Re: Why won't progressiveslol provide documentation? Reply #27 - Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 6:16pm
Back to top	IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Why won't progressiveslol provide documentation?
Reply #28 - Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 6:17pm

It's quite clear there is no documentation. The matter has been dealt with by the appropriate authorities and this is just a dirty smear campaign. Abbott is gutlessly hiding behind his deputy's skirts at the moment, but it won't stop his approval rating plunging even further. Abbott did promise us this would be the filthiest campaign ever.

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: Why won't progressiveslol provide documentation?
Reply #29 - Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 6:25pm

BigOl64 wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:45pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:37pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:34pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2012 at 5:22pm:

First I've heard that rhetorical questions can be accepted without question marks. Re-writing english are we? Progressives may just have bad grammar, and it so happens that in a forum like this that should never matter (at least not to those willing to have a debate rather than pick up on how a person writes).

Not rhetorical. Progressives claims there is some documentation out there. I'm asking for it.

You do realise I used the word "could" didn't you, doesn't quite mean I'm rewriting the english language now does it? It does mean it is an option you could take if you were being an adult about the whole situation.

Prog made no such claim, the very fact the the sentence is framed as a question, rhetorical or otherwise means it was not a claim of ownership or direct knowledge. Anyone with a pass in Grade 5 english comprehension would be able to understand that

I'm all for a debate, but not with a churlish demand as the premise for that debate.

Even if it was rhetorical it only solidifies that progressive is aware of some documentation. We are asking him to share it with us.

No it was a question, not a statement, so you cannot on that basis make any demands.

If I ask you a question you cannot demand I hand over the proof that supports or disproves the question I posed. That would be friggen stupid.

If someone poses a question, you can answer it or not. That's it.

Rhetorical question of course I can demand. It implies he knows the answer in which case I'm asking him to produce the documentation that has provided him his answer

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged