According to whom? Newsmaxx? You getting information from your asshole again?
It looks to me like Indiana has come up with the most compelling evidence on this matter. The ceremony was intentionally critical of Christian values and was in horribly poor taste. I donât like religion in government or for that matter in sports, but the performance of course was a LEFTIST political attack on Christians. Kudos to Indiana for searching out the truth.
Youâre right Warden. You have a monopoly on sources. Only yours count. How convenient.
You mean, by just writing it himself? What source, exactly?
Not ones that had to pay almost a billion because they lied to you regularly about a stolen election that was never stolen. Yeah.
By the way, whereâs that impact scar you were talking about?
Itâs not Newsmax. But no point in even mentioning the source because you just attack the source when itâs not MSNBC or some other mainstream source. Then you post some left wing rag source. Whatâs the point?
It doesnât matter to me if you believe it or not. Just posting for my validation and for 305 who had a good laugh.
Turns out the initial instinct was right. The left tries to throw the gotchaâs out there and then gets burned in the end.
Remember the Sandmann story? How about Jesse Smollet? What about the NASCAR noose story? I can go on all day. Youâd be better off assuming the opposite of a lot of the news is true as a starting point.
Lies all disproven after the fact.
How many more do I have to find? It happens.
Your source is your asshole, just like normal. Also, itâs a fucking painting from the 15th century. Grow up. You act like DaVinci watched it happen
No source material. Youâre not validating shit.
Zero source. Essentially, youâre citing yourself and claiming that makes you right. What a joke.
You mean like the 30,000 lies of Trumpâs you swallow and wipe your chin?
Shit. You didnât prove anything whatsoever. You listed your opinion and claimed it validated itself
Thereâs quite a difference between being wrong and knowingly lying to your audience.
Again, whereâs your source, Indiana? 
He gets really angry when he gets caught and the media lies to him.
Just admit the loss and move on.
I just named a few of the mainstream media lies. Too easy. You need to default question if itâs even true to start and you probably have a higher success rate.
Again, the only source youâve cited is yourself.
I looked into this in the days after this thread was posted. There are definitely conflicting stories to an extent. Whatâs clear is that the opening ceremony definitely took cues from a lot of French pop culture. So a guy with a hood evoked Ezio from Assassinâs Creed (made by Ubisoft), and there were random references mashed up here and there.
Without a doubt, Bacchus was prominent as a Greek/Olympic reference, with wining and dining. That said, I would not doubt if the Last Supper was one of the references mashed up into the show. Da Vinci painted it in Italy, but afterward he moved to France? So it might be a close enough relation to include it.
I canât say for sure one way or the other, but itâs definitely possible.
That said, the show wasnât âmaking funâ of any of these references, but rather celebrating them. The whole thing was a celebration of French culture, at least from what I understand. So I still donât understand the outrage.
Warden, when you are beaten, shellacked completely, you should admit with a measure of class that Indiana was correct on the Olympic Last Supper matter. Indiana did his homework and deserves plaudit. Were he in Ancient Rome, it would be hailed as a triumph. You need to practice being more modest. Otherwise, you come across as an irritating pedant.
You mean by citing himself as a source?
You need to practice being honest, or you come across as a racist, pathological liar. You guys have delved so low in defeat, youâre now just citing yourselves as source material. Itâs adorable.
Beyond that comment being a lie, Iâm not seeing the humor?
You do realize we can scroll up, right? You literally cited zero source for your comment, other than yourself. Do you know the definition of a lie? Dictionaries are online, not hard to type in the word âdictionary.â
Iâm not surprised you donât see the humor in you citing yourself as a source and then claiming you won. Itâs adorable.
You have reading comprehension problems as well. Pot meat kettle, pothead.
I said why cite a source when you just attack the source? Itâs pointless.
That clearly isnât how I write and it would be idiotic for me if to pretend that was an article when I wrote it.
It was from Breitbart. Here comes the source attack.
Your game on here is an open book. So transparent.
I am definitely a pothead, but againâŚwhat source? Claiming Iâll attack the source so you wonât post it, but youâre right because you say so is just an illogical and dishonest argument.
If your source sucks, then why donât YOU attack your source? Doesnât that shit matter to you? If you donât care if youâre accurate, just that you can claim you won some random argument on a message board, then just say that. If you do care if youâre actually accurate then whatâs wrong with the fucking source, itself? If its a bad source, why use the fucking source, then?
Jesus, like having a discussion on string theory with a retarded puppy.
The fucking thing either did or didnât happen. The thing was clearly the feast of Dionysus. Thatâs basic. Nobody can argue with that. Did they throw in Transformers, Snoopy, make fun of a painting of the Last Supper? It either did or didnât happen. Also, does any of this bother you that youâre so offended by the thought of someone making a tableau of a painting from the 15th Century about an even of which you have literally no idea what it really looked like or even if it happened? Does none of that register with you?
I see pictures of Jesus with blonde hair and blue eyes. No matter what you think, that motherfucker didnât have blonde hair and blue eyes. Do you feel that mocks you? Do you ever get so ticked off that people throw in other peopleâs faces into those pictures, even Trump, himself?
All this is pretty weird, dude.
Well, Breitbart is more of an aggregator. I can definitely mock Breitbart, but typically theyâre citing something else. Do you have the article? Iâd like to see what theyâre citing
Yeah, dudeâŚI can be wrong, an asshole, all kinds of thingsâŚbut, Iâm honest. That part canât be challenged. Hence, an open book. On here.
Iâll white lie your ass to death in the real world. You call me and Iâll tell you Iâm in a meeting and canât talk. I donât want to talk to people.
But, on hereâŚwhatâs the point? Iâm not convincing you of anything. Weâve all proven that. If youâre not on here to work out your own point of view and opinions based upon the responses of the other side, whatâs the point and why lie in that case, right?
Again, I can be wrong on all kinds of shit. But, on hereâŚIâm open and honest. Take if for what you will.