Been-there can't keep his theories straight

The RODOH Lounge is a place for general discussion, preferably non-Holocaust. The Lounge is only lightly moderated but please keep this a friendly place to chat with and get to know your fellow board participants.
Werd
Posts: 9001
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Been-there can't keep his theories straight

Post by Werd » Tue Dec 18, 2018 8:20 pm

Been-there failed my challenge here back in April 2017.
Werd wrote:
Sat Apr 22, 2017 10:19 pm
been-there wrote:You mean you really haven't understood yet what benefit pro-Israeli 'Jews' get from influencing as many people as possible in the West to regard all non-Jewish people from Middle-Eastern countries as fanatical, mysogynistic, clit-clipping, throat-cutting, terrorist muslims?
Erm... er, allright. :?
Ok then.
Stop dodging:

#1
The ultimate conspiracy of the Jews is to trick gentiles into getting angry over nothing. Funny. I thought the ultimate conspiracy was first to INFILTRATE FEMINISM and preach the lie of tolerance and multi culturalism. THEN, AFTER THAT, open the borders and let the savages into live next to the middle class while the Jews get to leave the country or live in safer communities. Not in been-there's world. The Jews never took the conspiracy THAT far. Despite them fucking admitting it. :lol: Been-there still can't explain what it gains Jews to lie about Islam to the gentiles? Why do the Jews do it? What do they want this culture clash for? For us to kill each other off so the Jews can come in and take over all the governments after most of us are gone? What? What is the ultimate conspiracy? Been-there can't say.
I suspect based on my own research that Zionist Jews want global domination, and they can only get it when there are no more white majority countries in the world that can wake up to their scam. Been-there NEEDS TO TELL ME HIMSELF if that is what he also believes. IT IS NOT MY JOB TO FUCKING GUESS!!! Besides, if Zionists get their NWO, how long will it last before Jewish inbreeding starts to happen? Are the conspirators not even considering that, or are they and they have a way around it or a backup plan or something? I don't know. Apparently been-there has all the answers but he just refuses to share them. :lol:

From what I have seen so far Been-there thinks Jews are lying about Islam, the Koran, the Hadiths, and also crime rates of Muslims. He seems to think Islam and Muslims are benign and are no more a problem than naturally born Europeans in Europe. Okay, so if Jews are orchestrating Muslim immigration THEN WHERE IS THE PROBLEM? According to been-there, if Muslims aren't causing problems at a disproportionate rate and are well behaved people THEN THERE SHOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM. But according to him, THERE IS A PROBLEM and I am apparently an "unwitting shill for the Jewish organised destruction of Europe." So if there is a problem of some kind, it's not that Muslims are here per say. It must be because they are here AND Jews are lying about their religion and/or their actual crimes committed and the related crime rates. In other words, been-there thinks this is TWO PRONGED conspiracy of the Jews. I see it as a SINGLE PRONGED CONSPIRACY.
Werd wrote:
Sun May 07, 2017 11:34 pm
My conspiracy theory makes more sense than his.He thinks the Jews would waste extra time AFTER bringing in a culture that allegedly has nothing harmful and has had no bad results apparently in "integration" in the west, to then subsequently spend so much time and money LYING about how bad Islam is. My conspiracy theory is supported by Occam's razor and is more logical. Jews deliberately PICKED a hostile anti western culture and THRUST it into the neighbourhoods of gentiles. The work would do itself and the gentiles would see the results.
[...]
The Jews would not waste their time injecting a culture and then lying about how bad it is. Being historically notorious parasites, they would do as little work as possible to get the job done. Hence, they picked a nasty culture they wouldn't need to waste time and money lying about.
When it comes to Muslim crime rates, this is about STATISTICAL PROOF OF PEOPLE FROM A CERTAIN CULTURE COMMITTING MORE CRIMES THAN THEY SHOULD GIVEN THEIR POPULATION PERCENTAGE IN RELATION TO THE HOST POPULATION NUMBERS. The argument about what's in the religious texts or not is ultimately a red herring to distract from the reality that people who SELF IDENTIFY AS MUSLIMS FROM A CERTAIN PART OF THE WORLD STILL CHOP CLITS, COMMIT TOO MUCH INCEST WITH COUSINS AND ALSO BELIEVE IN HOMICIDAL JIHAD, AND RAPING OF WHITE WOMEN.
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=2829

So when we boil it down, I still don't know what been-there means when he says of me that I am an “an unwitting shill for the Jewish organised destruction of Europe” He has refused to explain himself. All he has ever done when I have brought things up like this before is avoid giving a direct answer. You don't know? How can you not see that you're being used? Do I have to use the Socratic method? He evades giving a direct answer just like Nessie. And he justifies it under the pretext that I am not worth dignifying anymore because I allegedly failed is challenge to find the missing word "unwitting" with only one chance.
So you failed the test. Even though you edited your post twice.
Nope. My post that I edited twice DOES contain the word "unwitting." We have seen that clearly above.
viewtopic.php?p=139424#p139424

That is why been-there engaged in a BAIT AND SWITCH. He moved the goal posts to claim that what he really meant was that I was only given one chance.
been-there wrote:
Wed Dec 12, 2018 5:25 am
I’ll give you one attempt, then I’ll give the correct answer.
I took it to mean one post, but apparently he wants me to think he meant "one post with no edits." He intentionally splits hairs (possibly equivocate) on what is meant by one as I already showed here.
viewtopic.php?p=139433#p139433
Werd wrote:
Sun Dec 16, 2018 4:54 pm
Been-there wants to split hairs because my 8:06 am post was last edited at 10:35 am. Even though it is one post, the fact that it was edited must therefore mean to him that my "one" chance doesn't count as one post in and of itself with its own unique snapback hyperlink, but that "one" chance only means the first attempt and no edits permitted beyond that. :lol: Um, okay. Still doesn't change the fact that I found the missing word and put it back before he made his 1:09 pm post accusing me of still not finding "unwitting" and putting it back.

Been-there is still free anytime to prove his false accusation that I apparently hate all Muslims, with a clear definition of "hate."

Been-there is still free anytime to explain what he means when he says "an unwitting shill for the Jewish organised destruction of Europe"
which is odd considering I have made three topics exposing the Jewish role in immigration and fighting to keep the borders open.
So why does been-there want to claim I misunderstood by what he meant when he said "one attempt?" Simple. To DISTRACT FROM THE LIE that I failed to put the word "unwitting" back into my twice edited post that was first created Wed Dec 12, 2018 8:06 am but last edited on Wed Dec 12, 2018 10:35 am. Again, this lie of his that I never put "Unwitting" back into my two times edited post was exposed for the lie it was back here.
viewtopic.php?p=139424#p139424

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8520
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Been-there can't keep his theories straight

Post by been-there » Wed Dec 19, 2018 7:24 pm

:roll:
From unwitting zionist shill to stubborn, self-justifying, delusional shill.

How easy it is to make people believe a lie,
and [how] hard it is to undo that work again!

-- Mark Twain
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Werd
Posts: 9001
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Been-there can't keep his theories straight

Post by Werd » Thu Dec 20, 2018 12:18 am

Regarding the use of "from"

So now I'm no longer an unwitting Zionist shill? Is been-there abandoning his previous claim? Or am I both types of shill at the same time now? I don't know. He doesn't explain; much less prove anything. He just resorts to ad hominems when directly confronted. How very Nessie like.

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8520
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Been-there can't keep his theories straight

Post by been-there » Thu Dec 20, 2018 2:12 am

Oh boy. :roll:

‘From’ means you have progressed FROM one to the other. :?
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Werd
Posts: 9001
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Been-there can't keep his theories straight

Post by Werd » Thu Dec 20, 2018 2:41 am

Good. You answered the obvious like I thought you would. Now that you have been willing to give me a straight forward, well defined answer to that one simple question, perhaps you will be forthcoming with the same amount of detail for the other questions? It's not like you have an excuse to dodge anymore.

Are you finally going to tell me exactly what you meant by saying I was an unwitting shill for the Jewish destruction of Europe, despite me making three topics exposing their links to immigration? Because I am apparently no longer one. What did it mean for me to be one, what was your proof/examples, and why does that label no longer apply? When did that change and how? And how do you define this new type of shill that I am? What am I apparently trying to justify that can not be justified? Or have I succeeded? Look, it's not my job to guess. It's your job to tell me.

You keep refusing to give details in order to answer all of these questions I have that naturally follow from your declarations. I guess you have to do something to keep avoiding the lie/mistake when you said I failed to put "unwitting" back into my post that was twice edited. :lol:

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8520
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Been-there can't keep his theories straight

Post by been-there » Thu Dec 20, 2018 10:23 am

Werd wrote:
Thu Dec 20, 2018 2:41 am
Good. You answered the obvious like I thought you would. Now that you have been willing to give me a straight forward, well defined answer to that one simple question, perhaps you will be forthcoming with the same amount of detail for the other questions? It's not like you have an excuse to dodge anymore.

Are you finally going to tell me exactly what you meant by saying I was an unwitting shill for the Jewish destruction of Europe, despite me making three topics exposing their links to immigration? Because I am apparently no longer one. What did it mean for me to be one, what was your proof/examples, and why does that label no longer apply? When did that change and how? And how do you define this new type of shill that I am? What am I apparently trying to justify that can not be justified? Or have I succeeded? Look, it's not my job to guess. It's your job to tell me.

You keep refusing to give details in order to answer all of these questions I have that naturally follow from your declarations. I guess you have to do something to keep avoiding the lie/mistake when you said I failed to put "unwitting" back into my post that was twice edited. :lol:
Please consider this, Werd: you needed an explanation of what the word "from" means!
Do you see what that says about the level of your argument now?
You now need explantions of extrememly common, monsyllabic words that people learn to understand and use in their infancy.

You also initially couldn't see the difference between "you are an unwitting shill" (what I wrote) and "you are a shill" (how you undertood that and repeated it). Do you see what that says about where you are at now?

As a favour, I will have another go — for your benefit — at spelling out for you what I think is now occurring...

EXAMPLE: If I say someone has unwittingly moved from Athens to Jerusalem that OBVIOUSLY does not mean they are in BOTH locations.
Yet you couldn't understand even such an extremely simple point. Think about that for a second or two...

I recently wrote that you are no longer an unwitting shill because you have had what you are doing explained to you repeatedly for months but you stubbornly refuse to understand. You instead spend all your energy obsessively defending yourself and attacking me. If we defend our mistakes and weaknesses sure enough they become ours. That is what I think you are doing now. Which is why I am saying you can longer be called an unwitting shill BECAUSE you have chosen to defend that unintentional shilling.

Any clearer??
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Werd
Posts: 9001
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Been-there can't keep his theories straight

Post by Werd » Thu Dec 20, 2018 11:26 am

been-there wrote:
Thu Dec 20, 2018 10:23 am
Please consider this, Werd: you needed an explanation of what the word "from" means!
If I don't know what "from" means in English, why have I used it before? :roll:

REVISIONISTS BANNED FROM ARCHIVES!!!
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=3474

URGENT MESSAGE FROM ERIC GREENBURG ABOUT RODOH
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=8365

I could post many examples of my using "from" in my posts correctly over and over again, but I think a few will suffice.
Notice how I had to fix his post and plug in the specific numbers from Tauber
[...]
This literally is him side stepping the argument from my first post

viewtopic.php?p=139052#p139052
one corpse took anywhere from 30-40 minutes to be reduced
[...]
It's just an ad hoc he made up to save Tauber from the depths of absurdity
viewtopic.php?p=138960#p138960
Gotta love those argument from negative fallacies.

viewtopic.php?p=138691#p138691
And finally, my favourite recent one from Mon Dec 10, 2018 10:44 am
And I can say I don't know where they went, but I know where they didn't. Which is into the chambers and up the chimneys or into the ozone layer from the pyres.

viewtopic.php?p=138425#p138425
Hmmm. Going from one place to the other and not being in two places at the same time. I do get that concept. Kind of like the one been-there asked about at Thu Dec 20, 2018 10:23 am.
EXAMPLE: If I say someone has unwittingly moved from Athens to Jerusalem that OBVIOUSLY does not mean they are in BOTH locations.
Yet you couldn't understand even such an extremely simple point. Think about that for a second or two...
Clearly I do know how to use "from" in more than one sense. Which means I did make a purely rhetorical move above in order to get been-there to start finally being direct with me. Which means I didn't and don't actually lack knowledge about how "from" is used in English.

Are you done being full of shit, been-there? :lol:
been-there wrote:
Thu Dec 20, 2018 10:23 am
Please consider this, Werd: you needed an explanation of what the word "from" means!
&
EXAMPLE: If I say someone has unwittingly moved from Athens to Jerusalem that OBVIOUSLY does not mean they are in BOTH locations.
Yet you couldn't understand even such an extremely simple point. Think about that for a second or two...
Been-there knows damn well that I knew and know what "from" means in one context or another. Been-there demonstrates his lack of ability to detect - or deliberate refusal to acknowledge - sarcasm and rhetoric used by me as a tool.
You answered the obvious like I thought you would.
I asked an obvious question to force him to show he has a disposition to answer easy questions (how to interpret "from"), but an inability to answer hard questions stop dodging other easy questions. I already explained my tactics that were designed to trap him and get him to stop wiggling and dodging.
Now that you have been willing to give me a straight forward, well defined answer to that one simple question, perhaps you will be forthcoming with the same amount of detail for the other questions? It's not like you have an excuse to dodge anymore.
Deep down, he knows he can't prove the following:

1. His lie that I hate all Muslims.
2. His lie I was unable to put "unwitting" back into my two times edited post.
3 a. His claim that as of his post Dec 11, 2018 11:36 am I was an unwitting shill for the Jewish organized destruction of Europe.
3 b. His inability to define what that meant, subsequent proof/examples.

4 a. His claim that I am no longer an unwitting shill for the Jewish organized destruction of Europe and am a new kind.
4 b. Where that change happened, how it happened, documentation of said morphing...
5 a. His claim that I am now apparently a stubborn, self-justifying, delusional shill.
5 b. What I'm being stubborn about (with examples), self-justifying (not yet defined and given examples of), delusional (what am I deluded about) and a shill (for who or what and in what way am I "shilling" or possibly covering up that I don't even acknowledge).

Notice that every single question I asked in my last post was NOT ANSWERED!:
Are you finally going to tell me exactly what you meant by saying

I was an unwitting shill for the Jewish [organised] destruction of Europe, despite me making three topics exposing their links to immigration? Because I am apparently no longer one.

What did it mean for me to be one, what was your proof/examples, and why does that label no longer apply?
When did that change and how?
And how do you define this new type of shill that I am?
What am I apparently trying to justify that can not be justified?
Or have I succeeded?

Look, it's not my job to guess. It's your job to tell me.

You keep refusing to give details in order to answer all of these questions I have that naturally follow from your declarations. I guess you have to do something to keep avoiding the lie/mistake when you said I failed to put "unwitting" back into my post that was twice edited.
Shall I take been-there's new series of dodges to ALSO be a concession that STILL he can't prove the older assertions #1-3? Which would basically just make them lies :lol:
Last edited by Werd on Thu Dec 20, 2018 3:20 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
DasPrussian
Posts: 3257
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Been-there can't keep his theories straight

Post by DasPrussian » Thu Dec 20, 2018 4:42 pm

been-there wrote:
Sun Dec 16, 2018 3:47 am
None of the Islamic scriptures permit muslims to kill people because they are 'infidels' or non-Muslims. FACT!
On the contrary. The Koran and Haditha order muslims to respect and protect ('dimmi') Christians, Jews and Sabians, which were the other monotheistic religions then existent in Arabia. You repeated FALSE statements concerning that.

In the Koran and Haditha these people were called 'ahl ul dhimma' which literally means "the protected people'.
Within a hundred years of Muhammed's death the Ummah (world muslim community) expanded that to be applied to Zoroastrians, Hindus, Jains and Buddhists. FACT!

Werd, this and the previous information I provided demonstrates that you believe and are spreading anti-Islamic lies.
All your bluster and enlarged text cannot hide that.
You tried to wiggle out of admitting the previous evidence by quoting from Jewish Islamaphobic sites. Which proves my point to you and Turnagain. Which is that Jews are conducting a campaign to misinform, create and feed distrust and hatred of ALL Muslims and Islam. And they are doing that to further their own middle-Eastern geo-political interests — viz. land-theft and ethnic cleansing of non-Jews who are predominantly Muslims. And their campaign of misinformation is working. As you STILL haven't admitted that you were misinformed by them about the Koran and Haditha permitting murdering of non-Muslims.
Re the sentence highlighted in red :

It appears Been There is trying to represent the Muslim/infidel relationship as similar to that of a protective and dutiful nation of Islamic followers gallantly protecting their dhimmi subjects against persecution and attack . Yet one only has to do a little digging to discover the true nature of what the dhimmis were actually being protected against . The term 'protection' offered by the Muslims is more akin to the protection offered by gangsters and terrorists who run 'protection rackets'. In other words , the Muslims are threatening the Christians and Jews with all sorts of horrendous and unjust punishments unless they pay a special tax ( Jizya).


According to Robert Spencer ( Author of several books on Islam, and contributor on his own Jihad Watch website ) the word 'dhimmi ' has dual meaning. It means both 'protected' and 'guilty'. He describes the origins of the word as such : https://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/05/egyp ... es-life-at
The Qur’an calls Jews and Christians ‘People of the Book;’ Islamic law calls them dhimmis, which means ‘protected’ or ‘guilty’ people-the Arabic word means both.” While the classic Islamic laws regarding dhimmis are not in force in Egypt today, they’re still part of Islamic law, and as such Islamic clerics regard them as the proper status that Christians and other “People of the Book” should assume in the Islamic state. The Arabic word ذمي”Ž (dhimmi) is derived from ذمة”Ž (dhimma), “‘protection, custody'”), and from ذم”Ž (dhamma), which means “to blame.” Thus the dhimmis are the blamed, or guilty ones.
Here is Robert Spencer again with a little taster of what conditions the Muslims set for the 'protected' Christians , mainly in respect of the infamous 'pact of Umar'




So, not exactly the same version of 'protected' that Been There is using in his latest propaganda broadcast, eh ?
All I want for Christmas is a Dukla Prague away kit

Werd
Posts: 9001
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Been-there can't keep his theories straight

Post by Werd » Fri Dec 21, 2018 12:02 am

But it's all wrong. It must be all wrong. Because he's Jewish. LOL. :roll:

Nobody said Jews were incapable of telling the truth. It's just that most of the time, they don't.

User avatar
DasPrussian
Posts: 3257
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Been-there can't keep his theories straight

Post by DasPrussian » Fri Dec 21, 2018 6:50 pm

Werd wrote:
Fri Dec 21, 2018 12:02 am
But it's all wrong. It must be all wrong. Because he's Jewish. LOL. :roll:

Nobody said Jews were incapable of telling the truth. It's just that most of the time, they don't.
Wasn't it jolly decent of the Muslims to 'protect' the Jews and Christians that they conquered back in the day ?

Ok , they were protecting them from their very own Muslim selves, but hey lets not get facts get in the way of a good solid piece of bullshit , eh ? :lol:
All I want for Christmas is a Dukla Prague away kit

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 11 guests