The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Australia's 48th Parliament What To Expect

Australia's 48th Parliament What To Expect

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 13
  7. 14
  8. 15
  9. Page 16
  10. 17
  11. All
No, mhaze.

You’re mixing up two entirely different points:

- I corrected a CO2 citation earlier in the thread. That had nothing to do with Brexit.

- On Brexit, I’ve never “admitted” you were right. In fact, I’ve shown - using your own posts - that you shifted from a materially better Brexit deal to merely lower UK tariffs.

Conflating those two doesn’t magically turn your Brexit retreat into a win. It just shows you’re hoping no one notices you’ve tied unrelated debates together to claim a backtrack that never happened.

Do keep up.
Posted by John Daysh, Sunday, 3 August 2025 12:32:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"You didn’t use those exact phrases, true, "

You made that admission of error in relation to my comments about Brexit.

Nothing to do with your errors over CO2 which I let you get away with out of sympathy for your mental struggles with the facts.

I find it very disappointing that, after admitting you got it wrong on my Brexit comments, you are now back-tracking
Posted by mhaze, Sunday, 3 August 2025 1:31:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
No, mhaze, that’s fiction.

When I wrote “You didn’t use those exact phrases, true,” it wasn’t an admission on Brexit. It was me saying you hadn’t literally typed “GDP boost,” while pointing to your actual wording:

“Brexit allowed the UK to negotiate outside the EU and get a materially better trade deal with the US. Even the rabid anti-Brexiteers are now towing the line.”
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=10633#371235

That’s a broad “Brexit win” claim. When challenged, you shrank it to:

“Britain is paying less in tariffs and that’s a victory for Brexit.”
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=10633#371239

Now you’re pretending I admitted error to hide the retreat from “materially better trade deal” to “10% tariff.”

The only correction I made was on CO2; attribution, which I owned, backed with studies, and which you’re now trying to conflate with Brexit.

This isn’t me backtracking, it’s you rewriting history to patch up a point that collapsed days ago.

Is it any wonder you can never seem to lay out quotes chronologically?
Posted by John Daysh, Sunday, 3 August 2025 2:11:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
No No JD, you definitely implied that what I said was true and that you got it wrong when you said otherwise... you even said it was true.

You've now been back-tracking for days from that momentary lapse of honesty.

(That 'implied' wording can carry quite a load, n'est pas?)
Posted by mhaze, Monday, 4 August 2025 5:33:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Where exactly did I do this, mhaze?

//…you definitely implied that what I said was true and that you got it wrong when you said otherwise... you even said it was true.//

Your claim is suspiciously light on quotes.

//That 'implied' wording can carry quite a load, n'est pas?//

No, it can’t.

You need to be able to show how something is implied if called on to do so - which is what I do when you imply then deny.

Notice you’ve not been able to do the same here?
Posted by John Daysh, Monday, 4 August 2025 6:35:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Your claim is suspiciously light on quotes."
It must be helpful for some to have such a short attention span.

""You didn’t use those exact phrases, true, " says JD. The implication of that phrase, the vibe of it, is that JD admits he's wrong but can't bring himself to admit it."
Posted by mhaze, Monday, 4 August 2025 8:32:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 13
  7. 14
  8. 15
  9. Page 16
  10. 17
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy