Happy New Year! More Freedom Exists

[r3volut!on]

by the way...a lot of those potential terrorists and "enemy combatants" being detained and deprived of their rights ARE in fact american citizens.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by r3volut!on
The thing you fail to realize is that

I don't 'fail to realize' anything. I just choose to doubt theories that can't be substantiated. I make my mind up from reading various sources throughout the world. There are other 'mainstream' outlets not within the US borders.

The 'reputable' sources that are usually posted with these conspiracies are liberal websites and editorials. Factual information tends to get taken a bit more seriously.

 

[r3volut!on]

ok then set the example and provide some links which substantiate your doubts and prove me wrong.

 

[eric]

by the way...a lot of those potential terrorists and "enemy combatants" being detained and deprived of their rights ARE in fact american citizens.

Are you talking about the ones picked up in Afganistan on a battlefield ?

Isn't that a shame, should not have been there in the first place.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by r3volut!on
by the way...a lot of those potential terrorists and "enemy combatants" being detained and deprived of their rights ARE in fact american citizens.

Oh well, sucks to be them! I'll sleep better tonight knowing their sleeping over there.

Things changed after 9/11. If it's in the best interest of our security, I'm all for it. This isn't a time where chances should be taken.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by jimnyc
Links?

We've actually assisted others in arming little kids and beating and torturing people? Or is this just another liberal spin on what those 'animals' have done with the assistance they've received?

Nonetheless, comparing our human rights record to theirs is quite a stretch.

I shouldn't need links for history we already know about, do I Jim? Nicaragua, the iran/iraq war, vietnam....or is that how you mollify yourselves from the guilt and association from it? by denying you had any knowledge that it would be put in the hands of children or used for beatings and torture?and I hardly think its 'liberal' spin.

comparing human rights records isn't the stretch, its trying to say they are the same, which I didn't. I simply said we are not without out own abuses.


sidenote: those 'animals' you speak of, are they animals because you don't agree with HOW they are fighting or WHY they are fighting?

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by r3volut!on
ok then set the example and provide some links which substantiate your doubts and prove me wrong.

Sorry, the major news outlets usually don't run articles on stories that haven't happened. They usually don't live off of rumors and conspiracies either.

YOU made the staments about "US-supported human rights violations in foreign countries", it's up to YOU to backup your own statements.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
I shouldn't need links for history we already know about, do I Jim? Nicaragua, the iran/iraq war, vietnam....or is that how you mollify yourselves from the guilt and association from it? by denying you had any knowledge that it would be put in the hands of children or used for beatings and torture?and I hardly think its 'liberal' spin.

comparing human rights records isn't the stretch, its trying to say they are the same, which I didn't. I simply said we are not without out own abuses.


sidenote: those 'animals' you speak of, are they animals because you don't agree with HOW they are fighting or WHY they are fighting?

Yes, you SHOULD need links. You stated "While we don't arm little kids or beat and torture people we sure as hell help others do it."

I'll still ask you to specifically back that up. I want to see where we have helped people arm little kids. Not your spin, but that the intention was to arm children. Then provide a link showing we helped in beatings and torture. Not your thoughts on an article, but one that shows this to be fact. If you can't provide these, then I'll stick to my original statement that it is just your liberal spin.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by jimnyc
Yes, you SHOULD need links. You stated "While we don't arm little kids or beat and torture people we sure as hell help others do it."

I'll still ask you to specifically back that up. I want to see where we have helped people arm little kids. Not your spin, but that the intention was to arm children. Then provide a link showing we helped in beatings and torture. Not your thoughts on an article, but one that shows this to be fact. If you can't provide these, then I'll stick to my original statement that it is just your liberal spin.

which is exactly how you so called 'right' people absolve yourselves of any wrongdoing. "how did we know they were going to arm little kids?" "who would have thought they could use those airplanes as missiles?" It all ends up the same though, we armed a group of people but we sure didn't want to know what they were going to do with those arms.

and are you denying the events in nicaragua? or are you just denying that little kids were using those weapons or were killed by those weapons, or are you just denying that there was any foreknowledge about little kids and these weapons?

 

[jimnyc]

Just as I figured, no links. Like I said, it's the way you spin it, and you CANNOT provide anything to backup your spin. Typical of liberals to spin their conspiracies and even more typical when no factual data is presented.

 

[DKSuddeth]

oh please jim, would you deny that the revolutionary war happened unless it could be factually proven by a 'reputable' news source? or links provided?

denying that which you know to be true simply because they can't provide a damn link to 'reputable' news sources is simply foolish. Not only that but I've had so many experiences where the 'right' calls CNN or MSNBC a liberal news source one day and the next call it reputable. you guys switch as much as the far left dems do.

 

[r3volut!on]

for DK

I gave up on this thread...DK is right...links don't have to be provided in order to discuss topics that should be common enough knowledge that bibliographical references aren't necessary.

And everytime someone poses a debating question of you Jim, you seem to dodge it by asking for links and references, and instead of explaining your own stance on a topic, you choose to belittle the "libs" instead of stating your case.

What's the point?

If I didn't know better, I'd think that you only cater to those who agree with you on this site...and that you certainly don't welcome a diversity of opinions. I don't often see you asking the people who agree with your stance to post links and references supporting their claims.

Oh wait, that's because if they agree with you they're speaking the truth, the unquestionable facts...no need to back those up...

 

[eric]

The difference is when outrageous claims are made they need to be backed up by proof.

 

[jimnyc]

oh please jim, would you deny that the revolutionary war happened unless it could be factually proven by a 'reputable' news source? or links provided?

But it is backed up with factual data, unlike your theory. And I most likely wouldn't believe it if it wasn't for the mountains upon mountains of factual data backing up the events.

denying that which you know to be true simply because they can't provide a damn link to 'reputable' news sources is simply foolish.

Why would I "deny what I know to be true" when I am out and out saying it is horseshit and for you to provide links? I believe what I am saying is that it ISN'T true. You claimed it as fact, I'm asking you to backup your assertions. This happens at least once a month with a wacky liberal on here; they claim they know the facts but when asked to provide backup - they can't.

Did we ever provide arms to other countries? Sure did. Did we ever "help another country arm kids and beat and torture people"? Nope, that's just the spin you put on it, and until you backup your assertions it will remain so.

Don't gun manafacturers know people are going to shoot guns? Then they should be held accountable for every murder committed, no? It's all a conspiracy!!!

Not only that but I've had so many experiences where the 'right' calls CNN or MSNBC a liberal news source one day and the next call it reputable. you guys switch as much as the far left dems do.

Please show me where I did this so called 'flip flop' on these news agencies. If you cannot do so, reserve your baseless accusations for someone more deserving.

I think maybe once I stated certain major outlets had a 'liberal bias' to some of their articles, but never have I stated that they weren't reputable, nor do I believe anything I stated was about CNN or MSNBC.

Try to spin this again anyway you like. YOU made statements and presented them as facts, I'm just asking that you provide proof. Shoot, I'll even take a few wacky websites at this point, I'm bored and it'll make for some entertaining reading!

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by eric
The difference is when outrageous claims are made they need to be backed up by proof.

and my claim about what happened in nicaragua is outrageous?

that must be why kissinger is a wanted war criminal in some countries, right?

 

[jimnyc]

I gave up on this thread...DK is right...links don't have to be provided in order to discuss topics that should be common enough knowledge that bibliographical references aren't necessary.

Yes, this knowledge is SO COMMON that it can't be found anywhere on the internet upon the millions and millions of websites. I'd like to see what meets your definition of 'uncommon'.

And everytime someone poses a debating question of you Jim, you seem to dodge it by asking for links and references, and instead of explaining your own stance on a topic, you choose to belittle the "libs" instead of stating your case.

I stated my feelings on the case, do you have issues with reading?

Do you prefer discussion without facts being presented? You may want to look into whether the National Enquirer or Globe Magazine offers a chat section on their websites.

And I've never dodged anything here before, and it'll hardly be the likes of you that has me backing off.

If I didn't know better, I'd think that you only cater to those who agree with you on this site...and that you certainly don't welcome a diversity of opinions. I don't often see you asking the people who agree with your stance to post links and references supporting their claims.

Well, you obviously DON'T know better, as this site is not catered to anyone. Has your voice been interrupted in any way? Or are you saying that being asked to backup retarded assertions is somehow "discriminatory"?

You've been here less than a week and you're already telling me how it is I respond to everyone on here? Again, how about posting the specific time you're speaking of that I didn't ask someone to backup what they call 'facts'? Why didn't you question it then?

Oh wait, that's because if they agree with you they're speaking the truth, the unquestionable facts...no need to back those up...

Feel free to ask for backup when you don't agree what someone has posted as fact. Is that really so hard? Is it my fault that you droolers are the only ones posting "theories"?

 

[r3volut!on]

Originally posted by eric
The difference is when outrageous claims are made they need to be backed up by proof.

it is interesting that you say that, because I, personally, find many of the claims I've heard from you to be outrageous. So with that in mind, everything anyone says can be considered outrageous, depending on the point of view of the reader, so we ALL either need to start substantiating our claims, or just stop worrying so much about proving each other wrong and engage in some dialogue here.

I've got to say that I'm learning a great deal from all of you, particularly those who are more conservative, and I'm glad you all speak so freely and defend what you believe in. I have a great deal of respect for your views, no matter how much they differ from my own.

 

[eric]

and my claim about what happened in nicaragua is outrageous?

I was not specifically speaking of this claim but rather the many laughable ones I read on a daily basis.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
and my claim about what happened in nicaragua is outrageous?

that must be why kissinger is a wanted war criminal in some countries, right?

Who disputed anything at all about Nicaragua? You only brought that up when I asked you to provide proof on your other 'facts', which you still have failed to do. Broad interpretations won't cut it with such accusations, cite specific proof that the US has helped arm children and helped beat and torture.

 

[eric]

it is interesting that you say that, because I, personally, find many of the claims I've heard from you to be outrageous

Like ? See no proof again !