So Katrina was a terrorist crime?
Nope but, as usual, you left it overly vague.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So Katrina was a terrorist crime?
Nope but, as usual, you left it overly vague.
Bush administration officials have said Katrina's damage could not have been anticipated, but Gore rejected that.
"What happened was not only knowable, it was known in advance, in great and painstaking detail. They did tabletop planning exercises. They identified exactly what the scientific evidence showed would take place," Gore said.
Umm, do you really think it is a Mayors or a Governors job to stop federal terrorism crimes?
and as usual you would rather argue over people's posting styles instead actually debating the issue. That's your MO, when you can't argue something anymore you go into arguments that have nothing to do with the thread or just abandon them all together.
so you want the feds to save you from middle east freedom fighters but not meddle in your private life ... got it ... which dem candidate will do that again?
Wow...congratulations on making shit up. The only thing you "got" is your uninformed opinions, which happen to be incorrect.
Nobody blamed Bush for Katrina.
Nope but, as usual, you left it overly vague.
wow congradulations on being a stupid wise as know it all c&%# .... your mum must be proud
originally posted by GRGS
Usual leftoid bullshit, playing games because they are incapable of actual substance on issues, prefering to pretend that one says things that were clearly never meant or even implied.
How touchy. And all because I called you on your bullshit.
Do try and be original once in a while. You following me around like a whiny little bitch is getting a bit pesky.
How touchy. And all because I called you on your bullshit.
Do try and be original once in a while. You following me around like a whiny little bitch is getting a bit pesky.
You lying and twisting on purpose what others have said are beyond a bit pesky, Your INCAPABLE of having a discussion with because you do not even try to address issues or facts, your entire posting concerns personal insults, name calling and make idiotic claims about what others said and then claiming you did no such thing.
blow me ya twat.....you launched first when i called you on your free speach rant....and if ya don't like it leave or don't respond ..... you think you can dish but you sure can't take it....
Are you seriously this stupid?
Let me detail to you, slowly, what happened in this thread.
Katherine said something. It was vague. I interpreted it in such a way that, from what she said later, was obviously incorrect. I interpreted it in this way because it was overly vague, and so I pointed that out.
So please tell me what "issue" or "facts" I should have addressed in there?
You didn't "call me" on anything. You made something up about me. And yes I can take it, I was making fun of you over it.
You didn't "call me" on anything. You made something up about me. And yes I can take it, I was making fun of you over it.
Bullshit. You know it, I know it and so do most of the readers of this board. But do continue with your word games. Let me know when you want to actually discuss an issue and not character assassinate, name call or pretend someone said something they did not.
Please, kindly inform me what in this thread it was that I "can't argue anymore".
And exactly what issue is it that I should be debating in this thread? And you go from "This is a refreshing debate, thanks" to "you would rather argue over people's posting styles instead of actually debating the issue". With this kind of childish nonsense, do you wonder why I didn't want to keep riding the merry go round of repeating the same anwsers 5 times to you?
I responded your your reply to kathianne. Instead debating the actual issue you decided to derail the thread but nitpicking at the way she phrased something, which you have done in threads before. You don't respond to the substance of people's posts. You find whatever little thing you can to nit pick instead.
When you find that happening that's the point where maybe you might want to start asking yourself "Am I really right about this." I have posted perfectly logical easy to follow arguments, but when you respond to them you respond to the more trivial parts instead of the actual argument itself.
There's nothing childish about though that is the justification you will attempt to use. the truth of the matter is is you pick the easy targets to respond to. You also started here by saying how nice it was to have an actual conversation. But as soon as it got too difficult you just gave up and started responding to easier target choosing to go after weaker arguments and respond to irrelelvent things.
You better watch your timelines to before you use the excuse you used as well. As you know I am on here quite frequently, therefore I know when posts are responded and I also know when people are here and when they aren't. the two quotes you used in your excuse are 3 days apart. What happenned in three days, well I explained in PM to you, but basically expect a certain level of courtesy from people I'm haveing a conversatin with. That if you want to continue a conversation, do so. If you don't, say so. But don't sneak in here day after day posting here and there and ignoring other threads all together. It is not unreasonable for me to expect that when I reply to your posts you will reply back.
Funny...the terror attack we DID have happened on his watch. You blaming him for that? These people take their time.... they're patient.
Any idea, Tweddle Dum, how many years there were between the two WTC attacks? Let me refresh your memory. It was seven years.
oh...and no one blamed Bush for Katrina...just his incompetence in handling it.
Anyway, Ive gone over this before.
1. Bush is president.
2. There has not been a terrorist attack on US soil since 9-11.
The above are accepted as facts. One cant logically conclude that because Bush is president there has not been another terrorist attack. If you wanted to make that claim, you could just as logically say that 9-11 occurred because Bush was president at that time.
Read my post again. I am not blaming Bush for that. I am merely pointing out the faulty logic in concluding that because Bush is president, there has not been another terrorist attack on US soil.
Ad hominem attacks are not necessary. Please dont stoop to name-calling. I did not call you names. So there were seven years between the two WTC attacks. What is your point in saying that?
That comment was totally off the subject. Anyway, to respond, I have yet to find anyone blame Bush for Katrina. I have found examples of people criticizing Bush for how the Federal government tired to handle it.