Biden reacts to pro-Palestinian protesters: 'They have a point'return2ozma@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.world – 568 points – 8 months agonbcnews.com468Post a CommentPreviewYou are viewing a single commentView all commentsShow the parent commentMy original statements remain largely untouched; it's not my issue you deflected the aforementioned points. Why proceed further? you deflected the aforementioned points. this is ambiguous. what do you mean?Please go back and read more closely; I'd rather not repeat myself.if you can't use clear syntax, repeating yourself will do no good.I think my request is quite clear.but you've been told it's not.I can't teach reading-comprehension over Lemmy. I can’t teach reading-comprehension over Lemmy. your implication that the fault is mine is erroneous.That's certainly your opinion, from which I guess we'll agree to disagree. Anyway, this has been amusing Federatingistoohard.
My original statements remain largely untouched; it's not my issue you deflected the aforementioned points. Why proceed further? you deflected the aforementioned points. this is ambiguous. what do you mean?Please go back and read more closely; I'd rather not repeat myself.if you can't use clear syntax, repeating yourself will do no good.I think my request is quite clear.but you've been told it's not.I can't teach reading-comprehension over Lemmy. I can’t teach reading-comprehension over Lemmy. your implication that the fault is mine is erroneous.That's certainly your opinion, from which I guess we'll agree to disagree. Anyway, this has been amusing Federatingistoohard.
you deflected the aforementioned points. this is ambiguous. what do you mean?Please go back and read more closely; I'd rather not repeat myself.if you can't use clear syntax, repeating yourself will do no good.I think my request is quite clear.but you've been told it's not.I can't teach reading-comprehension over Lemmy. I can’t teach reading-comprehension over Lemmy. your implication that the fault is mine is erroneous.That's certainly your opinion, from which I guess we'll agree to disagree. Anyway, this has been amusing Federatingistoohard.
Please go back and read more closely; I'd rather not repeat myself.if you can't use clear syntax, repeating yourself will do no good.I think my request is quite clear.but you've been told it's not.I can't teach reading-comprehension over Lemmy. I can’t teach reading-comprehension over Lemmy. your implication that the fault is mine is erroneous.That's certainly your opinion, from which I guess we'll agree to disagree. Anyway, this has been amusing Federatingistoohard.
if you can't use clear syntax, repeating yourself will do no good.I think my request is quite clear.but you've been told it's not.I can't teach reading-comprehension over Lemmy. I can’t teach reading-comprehension over Lemmy. your implication that the fault is mine is erroneous.That's certainly your opinion, from which I guess we'll agree to disagree. Anyway, this has been amusing Federatingistoohard.
I think my request is quite clear.but you've been told it's not.I can't teach reading-comprehension over Lemmy. I can’t teach reading-comprehension over Lemmy. your implication that the fault is mine is erroneous.That's certainly your opinion, from which I guess we'll agree to disagree. Anyway, this has been amusing Federatingistoohard.
but you've been told it's not.I can't teach reading-comprehension over Lemmy. I can’t teach reading-comprehension over Lemmy. your implication that the fault is mine is erroneous.That's certainly your opinion, from which I guess we'll agree to disagree. Anyway, this has been amusing Federatingistoohard.
I can't teach reading-comprehension over Lemmy. I can’t teach reading-comprehension over Lemmy. your implication that the fault is mine is erroneous.That's certainly your opinion, from which I guess we'll agree to disagree. Anyway, this has been amusing Federatingistoohard.
I can’t teach reading-comprehension over Lemmy. your implication that the fault is mine is erroneous.That's certainly your opinion, from which I guess we'll agree to disagree. Anyway, this has been amusing Federatingistoohard.
That's certainly your opinion, from which I guess we'll agree to disagree. Anyway, this has been amusing Federatingistoohard.
My original statements remain largely untouched; it's not my issue you deflected the aforementioned points. Why proceed further?
this is ambiguous. what do you mean?
Please go back and read more closely; I'd rather not repeat myself.
if you can't use clear syntax, repeating yourself will do no good.
I think my request is quite clear.
but you've been told it's not.
I can't teach reading-comprehension over Lemmy.
your implication that the fault is mine is erroneous.
That's certainly your opinion, from which I guess we'll agree to disagree.
Anyway, this has been amusing Federatingistoohard.