1,748 Days since the Declaration Of "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED"

[maineman]

And no one ever claimed there was.

no. but it is my opinion that the administration went to great lengths to create the false impression that there was.

 

[maineman]

Um... no. I'm not.
I haven't credidted/discredited anyone's source on the basis of the source itself.

that's odd. you seem to have forgotten to answer the question:

who do YOU think is more credible in this instance? the 9/11 Commission and the DoD or the Weekly Standard?

 

[red states rule]

that's odd. you seem to have forgotten to answer the question:

who do YOU think is more credible in this instance? the 9/11 Commission and the DoD or the Weekly Standard?

Kets see... names, dates, and places. What flimsy eveidence the Weekly Standard published

So far, I am not aware any iof what they published has been proven wrong

 

[M14 Shooter]

that's odd. you seem to have forgotten to answer the question:

That's because the question isnt addressed to me as I havent questioned the credibility of a source based on the source itself, Skippy.

And as far as not answering questions, YOU still havent told us if you're still mad at RSR for stealing your favorite lay. That's ba-a-a-a-d form.

Nor have you supported your statements of fact, BTW.

 

[M14 Shooter]

o

And an intellectually honest person would leave it at that.

But, the partisan bigot would follow it up with:

but it is my opinion that the administration went to great lengths to create the false impression that there was

Bigotry. It -used- to be considered a terrible thing.
Now, for the Loony Left, its the norm.

 

[maineman]

Kets see... names, dates, and places. What flimsy eveidence the Weekly Standard published

So far, I am not aware any iof what they published has been proven wrong

so. you place more credibility on the Weekly Standard than you do on our department of defense?? and here I thought you supported the troops!

 

[maineman]

And an intellectually honest person would leave it at that.

so, people who express opinions are intellectually dishonest?

 

[M14 Shooter]

so, people who express opinions are intellectually dishonest?

No. YOU are.

You ADMIT that the administration NEVER claimed there was an oiperational alliance-- indeed, that it stated specifically that Iraq was NOT involved -- and then you continue on with your unsupported, unproven, bigoted claims that 'administration went to great lengths to create the false impression that there was'.

That, Skippy, is inetllectual dishonesty.

Not that such a thing bothers you (and your ewe).

 

[maineman]

No. YOU are.

You ADMIT that the administration NEVER claimed there was an oiperational alliance-- indeed, that it stated specifically that Iraq was NOT involved -- and then you continue on with your unsupported, unproven, bigoted claims that 'administration went to great lengths to create the false impression that there was'.

I ask you again: when people in America think of Al Qaeda or Osama bin Laden, what do you think is the very first thing that comes to mind?

It is MY OPINION that 9/11 is what comes to mind.

So...if the administration goes to great lengths to create the false impression that there was a connection between Iraq and AQ, it is my OPINION that most people would consider that to be a connection between Iraq and 9/11.

And the fact that 70% of America believed exactly that tends to support my OPINION.

What do you have, other than YOUR OPINION, that would tend to discredit MY OPINION?

 

[M14 Shooter]

I ask you again: when people in America think of Al Qaeda or Osama bin Laden, what do you think is the very first thing that comes to mind?
It is MY OPINION that 9/11 is what comes to mind.

I would hope so, given that, as you admit, the administration has said that Iraq was not involved.

So...if the administration goes to great lengths to create the false impression that there was a connection between Iraq and AQ....

For the 1,365,961st time:
Prove this to be the case.
Since you have laid this out as an if-then statement, your -entire- argument rests on it.

And the fact that 70% of America believed exactly that tends to support my OPINION.

You really dont understand the difference between correlation and causation, do you?

You're arguing that because people die after the sun goes down, the sun going down kills people.

What do you have, other than YOUR OPINION, that would tend to discredit MY OPINION?

Oh wait -- is this you stating X, not supporting X, and then demandiing that I prove X to be wrong?
Yes, yes it is.
This is a tactic used by stupid 4th graders, Skippy.

 

[maineman]

I have posted numerous links detailing administration statements that suggested links between AQ and Iraq. I really have no intention of doing so again. google it like I did.

I have only stated that it is my opinion that the main reason that people came to believe that Saddam had planned and executed 9/11 was the continual linking of AQ and Saddam by the administration. Obviously, at this point in time, proving that the administration's statements were the primary factor is impossible. That is why it is only my opinion. Would you have an opinion as to why the administration's statements would NOT have been the primary factor? Do you have a suggestion as to what else might have caused that shift in public opinion?

 

[M14 Shooter]

I have posted numerous links detailing administration statements that suggested links between AQ and Iraq.

Yes you have.
But this doesnt prove what you claim.
Especially as you have admitted that the administration has said that there Iraq was NOT in on 9-11.

I have only stated that it is my opinion that the main reason that people came to believe that Saddam had planned and executed 9/11 was the continual linking of AQ and Saddam by the administration.

Yes. And has been stated about a zillion times:
Your opinion is unproveable and unsupportable.
But, since you're a intellectually dishonest partisan bigot that believe what he wants to believe regardless of how little there is to support that belief, it doesnt matter to you that your opinion is unproveable and unsupportable.

Would you have an opinion as to why the administration's statements would NOT have been the primary factor? Do you have a suggestion as to what else might have caused that shift in public opinion?

As recently noted, this you stating X, not supporting X, and then demandiing that I prove X to be wrong.
This is a tactic used by stupid 4th graders, and its just another example of your intellectual dishonesty.

 

[maineman]

Or put another way:

on 9/15/01, nearly everyone in America was clearly aware of who OBL was, and what his organization had done - he had planned and executed the attacks of 9/11.

in January of '03, nearly 70% of Americans believed that Saddam Hussein had planned and executed the attacks of 9/11.

It is my opinion that the repeated speeches made by administration officials that suggested a link between Saddam and AQ had a major impact in that shift of opinion. You apparently do not agree.

Fine. Could you give me YOUR opinion as to why, in the space of 16 months, Americans went from thinking that OBL had planned and executed 9/11 to thinking that Saddam had done so?

I would LOVE to hear your ideas on this.

 

[Shogun]

i tellya...


it's pretty rich seeing righties distance themselves from the war drum leading into iraq.. Next thing you know they will be claiming that bill clinton was the guy insisting that iraq had WMDs..

 

[M14 Shooter]

Or put another way:

on 9/15/01, nearly everyone in America was clearly aware of who OBL was, and what his organization had done - he had planned and executed the attacks of 9/11.

in January of '03, nearly 70% of Americans believed that Saddam Hussein had planned and executed the attacks of 9/11.

You really dont understand the difference between correlation and causation, do you?

Fine.

Somehow, I doubt it.

Could you give me YOUR opinion as to why, in the space of 16 months, Americans went from thinking that OBL had planned and executed 9/11 to thinking that Saddam had done so?

I havent made any assertion to this effect and so I am under no obligation whatsoever to back it up -- and in any event, Skippy, your logic 101 class should have taught you that absence of a counter to theory A does not prove theory A.

Or did you miss that part while you were out qualifying with your M1?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Next thing you know they will be claiming that bill clinton was the guy insisting that iraq had WMDs..

Bill Clinton bombed Iraq for 4 days over their WMDs and WMD programs.

 

[maineman]

we're having a discussion here. I have given you my opinion. I have asked for yours. I have tried not to be disrespectful of you, yet you continue to be disrespectful of me. Why not make this less of a school yard taunting session and more of a polite discussion? I would enjoy that.

 

[red states rule]

we're having a discussion here. I have given you my opinion. I have asked for yours. I have tried not to be disrespectful of you, yet you continue to be disrespectful of me. Why not make this less of a school yard taunting session and more of a polite discussion? I would enjoy that.

Does being repsectful mean posting that someone is having sex with animals, or joking about someone's chemo treatments?

 

[maineman]

Does being repsectful mean posting that someone is having sex with animals, or joking about someone's chemo treatments?

I posted an analogy. did you understand what that meant? I never said that you were having sex with animals. you missed the point, obviously.

I am not joking about your chemo treatments at all. I asked you how they were going. I told you that my best friend just got done with his, and that he is doing fine.

It is good to see that you are, at least, spelling it correctly now. See? You DID learn something from me!

 

[M14 Shooter]

we're having a discussion here. I have given you my opinion. I have asked for yours. I have tried not to be disrespectful of you, yet you continue to be disrespectful of me. Why not make this less of a school yard taunting session and more of a polite discussion? I would enjoy that.

Oh. So you're taking back and apoligizing for all the disrespectful schoolyard taunts that you leveled at me? Fair enough.

You -have- given me your opinion.

You have also been shown that your opinion isnt supported and is unproveable. Its based on faulty logic (correlation = causation) and doesnt have any factial evidence to support it -- indeed, the factual evidence runs COUNTER to your opinion.

And so, MY opinion, one that IS supportable, is that YOUR opinion doesnt hold a bit of water, and that you clinging to it regardless of any of the things previously noted is very strong evidence of partisan bigotry and intellectual dishonesty.

And THAT is not a taunt.