The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered [6]  |  Archives [1] 
 
Witamy, Guest  |  Members
Home / News   99

Is pro-opposition Open Dialogue Foundation a cover for Russian interests



OP Polonius3 1,019 | 12,575    
9 Aug 2017  #91

you claim they committed

It's not me claiming anything, it is common knowledge. The billions (not millions but billions) in vanishing VAT revenues under the scamster regime will probably be dealt with by a parliamentary commission. Suffice it to say that there is now a budget surplus for the first time rather than a deficit and Morawieckii explained it quite simply: IT SUFFICED NOT TO STEAL!


Harry 81 | 13,431    
9 Aug 2017  #92

It's not me claiming anything

You are the one claiming that the Open Dialogue Foundation had a licence to deal arms, why do you refuse to substantiate that claim? Is the problem that even 'Polish' Po now knows he's been caught telling flagrant whoppers and he can't lie his way out of this one?
OP Polonius3 1,019 | 12,575    
10 Aug 2017  #93

Open Dialogue Foundation had a licence to deal arms

That is what counbtless media reports said.I made no claims but merely reported what the media were saying. That's how journalism works.
BTW you were supposed to ask the bastard son of Soviet agents about your allegation that he turned me down for a job. Did you ask him when you were face to face at some rant & chant hate rally?
Harry 81 | 13,431    
10 Aug 2017  #94

I made no claims

Good old 'Polish' Podunk Polly, yet again trying to lie his way out of a hole he's dug for himself.
The exact quote was:

The Tusk-era authorities issued a licence to the foundation to deal in armaments.

Not 'It is reported that the Tusk-era authorities issued ...', not 'According to Polish media sources the Tusk-era authorities issued ...', not 'It is alleged that the Tusk-era authorities issued ...', Not 'Multiple sources have claimed that the Tusk-era authorities issued ...', just a simple statement that the Tusk-era authorities issued a licence to the foundation to deal in armaments.

The problem for 'Polish' Podunk Polly is that no such licence was issued, as is made clear from the permit which was issued to the Open Dialogue Foundation allowing them to buy, sell and possess protective equipment. Poor old 'Polish' Podunk Polly!

That's how journalism works.

If that's your understanding of how journalism works, it's entirely understandable why a certain somebody no longer can even find unpaid work as a journalist.

Anyway, how about you provide some evidence to support your laughable claims that the Open Dialogue Foundation has been dealing arms?
OP Polonius3 1,019 | 12,575    
10 Aug 2017  #95

'Polish' Podunk Polly

More of HB's diarrhoeia of the mouth! Insinuations but no proof. This is not something reported in the media but pure rubbish you make up about people when you lack cogent arguments. Serving the commies, house at knock-down price -- did you think those up while cowering in the bushes outside a PF poster's home? Was lower-case out there in the shadows with you?

This is a discussion forum not a class at J-school. You can shove all your allegedlys, reportedys and suspected and/or accused ofs up your birdcage.
Harry 81 | 13,431    
10 Aug 2017  #96

Insinuations but no proof.

Are you going to offer any proof for your laughable claims that the Open Dialogue Foundation has been dealing arms? Or are you just going to post yet more off-topic ad hom trolling which He Who Must Not Be Named will promptly ignore? It's been pointed out to you repeatedly that the permit issued actually allowed the foundation to buy, sell and possess protective equipment. Why won't you give us proof to support your claims?

This is a discussion forum not a class at J-school.

Indeed, making repeated unsubstantiated claims about respected bodies such as the Open Dialogue Foundation would get one thrown out of journalism school, but here you're free to call respected ladies prostitutes with even being warned. Do note the choice of personal pronouns there.
jon357 70 | 12,793    :-(
10 Aug 2017  #97

Are you going to offer any proof for your laughable claims that the Open Dialogue Foundation has been dealing arms?

Of course not, since they haven't been.

Or are you just going to post yet more off-topic ad hom trolling which He Who Must Not Be Named will promptly ignore?

As normal.
Harry 81 | 13,431    
11 Aug 2017  #98

Of course not, since they haven't been.

It's crystal clear to all now that the Open Dialogue Foundation have not been dealing arms and that the claims about them, such as the ones made here by our 'Polish' 'friend' about them having been issued a licence "to deal in armaments", are entirely false. So the question one needs to ask is why those lies were told in the first place.
delphiandomine 87 | 15,729    
11 Aug 2017  #99

So the question one needs to ask is why those lies were told in the first place.

Hard to break the habit of a lifetime, isn't it?




Home / News / Is pro-opposition Open Dialogue Foundation a cover for Russian interests
Click this icon to move up back to the quoted message. Bold Italic [quote]

 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary and unique username or login and post as a member.