Christian book of Daniel - prophecy 2.0

My opponent still does not understand the meaning of CON and PRO, my opponent thinks CON is against and for this debate. Last time i check in all my debates I had, CON was against the PRO, So as my opponent stated he is CON and I am PRO but yet he is listed on PRO and I listed as CON. PRO is for the book and when they have occured, CON is against that. my opponent clearly needs to see that his views and positions need to be properly stated if he is PRO or CON not CON ON PRO and PRO ON CON. ALSO AS PRO YOU ARE FOR THIS BOOK AND BELIEVE IN THE PROPHECIES, WHICH YOU HAVE NOT GAVE ME THE DEFINITION OF PROPHECY IN THE BIBLE. YOU FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE PRO SIDE MEANING YOU DO NOT KNOW TRUELLY WHAT YOUR DOING, IF YOUR TAKING PRO YOUR FOR IT, IF YOUR AGAINST IT YOU SHOULD OF SAID YOUR CON BEFORE ENTERING YOUR OWN DEBATE. I seen your debate history, you tried this debate before, with the same exact beginning you know why the opponent never reply to your debate about this the first time, because you do not understand your own debate or your POSITION ABOUT PRO( MEANING YOUR FOR THE BOOK OF DANIEL, MEANING YOU CAN PROVIDE THAT THE PROPHECY IS TRUE AND LEADING UP TO THE END OF DAYS BASICALLY, THAT YOUR SUPPOSE TO SHOW PROOF OF WHEN THEY HAVE OCCURED, OR WHEN THEY WILL OCCUR IN THE FUTURE. NOT THE CON THE CON IS AGAINST THAT, THATS WHY CON SAYS AGAINST AND PRO SAYS FOR IT. if you was against it as you say you would of choosen con. NOT LET THE CON DO ALL THE WORK FOR BOTH SIDES. YOUR STRICTLY FOR IT, YOU PROVIDE US THE WHEN THEY HAVE OCCURED, AND HOW IT WILL BE PRESENTED IN THE FUTURE. meaning when you say that your saying prophecy is foretelling the future. now that i hopefully got your attention voters look at this debate on which he is presenting, he says he is against the book but yet sided with pro, he tried to manipulate the con side which is against the topic to becoming the pro. he has broken the websites obvious guidlines, he has given no true arguement on his side just what wikipedia said with no knowledge for his views strictly all copy and paste. with nothing to fall on or explanations on why he is PRO AND IS FOR THIS. Since he said copy and paste is something as evidence then if he says its ok then ill debunk the book of daniel using true facts, since he still hasnt posted his position as pro instead of pro thinking hes against clearly can not understand what PRO TRUELY means that means for, so heres websites links my opponent just like he left us confused on his position and what his true position is will now be shown the same treatment and thats debunking the book of daniel. ill post the websites under as sources. I will then see what my opponent says about my proof since clearly my opponent just wants to use copy and paste as his proof for positions we will not know of his intentions. NOTE TAKE SOME TIME TO READ THESE WEBSITES LIKE I HAVE. you cant change pro to con and con to pro you should of truely thought about what position you really wanted before you posted the debate. so as we all understand you lost since basically there is no pro i sure do not believe the book of daniel is accurate and is leading to the worlds doom. as for prophecies its the same it means previsions, previsions are forseeing the future, look at revelations in the bible, none of it occured so its forseeing the future, so its predicting the future. foretold. heres your truth on the book of daniel. my arguement which you will find in these websites and state and get it in your head, your PRO, your not against, im CON im against, look at your picture it says PRO my says AGAINST so you better start doing research and providing us with evidence about WHEN THEY HAVE OCCURED, OR WHEN THEY WILL OCCUR IN THE FUTURE, AKA END OF TIME. ALSO START PROVIDING US HOW THESE PROPHECIES ARE TRUE AND HOW THEY ARE AFFECTING US NOW THATS LEADING US TO THESE END OF TIMES EVENTS. IF YOU CAN NOT PROVIDE US YOUR POSITION AS PRO BEING NOT AGIANST IT SINCE YOU ARE NOT CON, I AM CON THEN YOU HAVE A DEBATE THAT IS POINTLESS ON YOUR PART. LOOK AT THE OBVIOUSE DEFINITION OF PRO AND CON. here is two websites of arguement that CON IS SUPPOSE TO DO BE AGAINST THE PRO, before i leave my opponent to view and read these websites voters please take a look at the usernames on top of the screen, my opponent username albert is pro. my username is aceviper2011 is con. now i politely ask my opponent as i am calm now to review and read the two websites he has two days to do this in so please kindly take the time to review and read these two websites to study them click on any links or anything. then come up with a PRO arguement not a CONS arguement for i am con and you are pro and the facts and truth shows in the username boxes with green and red words with your name above pro and my name above con.website links: below http://www.infidels.org...http://www.harvardhouse.com...