Enjoy an Ads-Free Jets Insider - Become a Jets Insider VIP!
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 56 of 56

Thread: Wonder if the mainstrem media will pursue this

  1. #41
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,631
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=bitonti]sometimes absurdity warrents absurity. DOCUMENTS are not the same as a massive stockpile of WMD.[/QUOTE]


    OMG PEOPLE!!!! ALL that was said is that there are documents that have titles which SEEM to point to information that would back up the Bush administration. It was also said that no one will know until they're all translated. What's absurd is the automatic negativity coming from the left side of this board. Can't you at least admit when indicators are opposite to what you believe?! There's more proof in these titles backing up Bush's stance than anyone has to back up the "Bush lied" theory! PLEASE try to be objective.

  2. #42
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Camden, NJ
    Posts
    4,745
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Enrique Pallazzo]OMG PEOPLE!!!! ALL that was said is that there are documents that have titles which SEEM to point to information that would back up the Bush administration. It was also said that no one will know until they're all translated. What's absurd is the automatic negativity coming from the left side of this board. Can't you at least admit when indicators are opposite to what you believe?! There's more proof in these titles backing up Bush's stance than anyone has to back up the "Bush lied" theory! PLEASE try to be objective.[/QUOTE]

    no, there is ample evidence to suggest that saddam didnt have weapons of mass destruction, as opposed to document titles (most of which, notably, dont feature dates)...so please stop accusing those of us with differing points of view from yours of jumping the gun, especially since we dont know what new information (if any) is contained in said documents...when their contents are revealed, then you may be able to start making a case, but seriously man, stop acting as though we're being ridiculous for suggesting that these documents may contain nothing of note...

  3. #43
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Enrique Pallazzo]Can't you at least admit when indicators are opposite to what you believe?! [/QUOTE]

    you mean like when the war in Iraq is really going bad but we say it's really going well?

    All im saying is that you can show me all the documents you want. We didn't go to war over documents.

  4. #44
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    19,619
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=bitonti]you guys won't believe this but I have a document right here at my desk that clearly states Jets5ever is planning to kill me.

    I mean cmon it's right here in black and white! It's a Microsoft Word Document people! It's not like someone could just write whatever they want... if it's in print on 8 and 1/2 by 11 paper then jeez - it's true!

    it's paper! what more do you want? PAPER! He's a threat to my way of life! im going to pre-emptively invade his house ASAP.[/QUOTE]

    Stop accepting mail from Mapes and Rather.

  5. #45
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,631
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=deadringer]no, there is ample evidence to suggest that saddam didnt have weapons of mass destruction, as opposed to document titles (most of which, notably, dont feature dates)...so please stop accusing those of us with differing points of view from yours of jumping the gun, especially since we dont know what new information (if any) is contained in said documents...when their contents are revealed, then you may be able to start making a case, but seriously man, stop acting as though we're being ridiculous for suggesting that these documents may contain nothing of note...[/QUOTE]

    LISTEN TO YOURSELF!!!!! It's not a differing point of view... you have a MADE UP point of view based on no facts. You admitted that a week or two ago. All I'm saying is that as soon as ANY information comes out that MAY actually back up Bush you immediately find a way to doubt it. THAT is NOT objective. Don't turn this around on me. I'm laughing at BOTH sides of the aisle... your side just seems more laughable these days. You are INDEED being ridiculous.

  6. #46
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,631
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=bitonti]you mean like when the war in Iraq is really going bad but we say it's really going well?

    All im saying is that you can show me all the documents you want. We didn't go to war over documents.[/QUOTE]

    You've NEVER heard me say that the war is going well. You may have heard me say that the war is not going as poorly as you say, though.
    No, we didn't go to war over documents, but if these documents actually prove that Bush didn't lie then I'll be interested to hear your spin on things. Who knows what these documents will say. It could go any which way. It'll just be interesting to see the poltiical spin from Washington and funny to see the spin that we're sure to see on this message board.

  7. #47
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Camden, NJ
    Posts
    4,745
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Enrique Pallazzo]LISTEN TO YOURSELF!!!!! It's not a differing point of view... you have a MADE UP point of view based on no facts. You admitted that a week or two ago. All I'm saying is that as soon as ANY information comes out that MAY actually back up Bush you immediately find a way to doubt it. THAT is NOT objective. Don't turn this around on me. I'm laughing at BOTH sides of the aisle... your side just seems more laughable these days. You are INDEED being ridiculous.[/QUOTE]

    waaaaaaaaaaait a second...when did i say i have no facts to support my point of view?...the facts are ample, and the circumstantial evidence is as well...the reports of un weapons inspectors, who were able to determine that saddam had destroyed at least 97.1 % of his weapons capacity (and, as i pointed out in an earlier post IN THIS THREAD, they made this determination based on an analysis of purchase orders and things of that sort, which is why i am curious if any new information is contained in these reports), the fact that almost all chemical and biological weapons have a max shelflife of 10 years, so any WMD he had prior to the gulf war (you know, the ones ronnie was so happy to sell him) have expired, and the chief fact that considering the sanctions (overseen primarily by the US), the constant espionage, and constant air raids, it is impossible for me to believe that saddam could have been developing chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons without the knowledge of the united states, and if we had specific evidence, we would have presented it (or, for that matter, found it in the time since we've conquered the country) long ago...

    the closest thing i might have said to your initial remarks is that i dont CARE if evidence is found, it would not justify this war in my opinion...perhaps thats where you are confused...

  8. #48
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,631
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=deadringer]waaaaaaaaaaait a second...when did i say i have no facts to support my point of view?...the facts are ample, and the circumstantial evidence is as well...the reports of un weapons inspectors, who were able to determine that saddam had destroyed at least 97.1 % of his weapons capacity (and, as i pointed out in an earlier post IN THIS THREAD, they made this determination based on an analysis of purchase orders and things of that sort, which is why i am curious if any new information is contained in these reports), the fact that almost all chemical and biological weapons have a max shelflife of 10 years, so any WMD he had prior to the gulf war (you know, the ones ronnie was so happy to sell him) have expired, and the chief fact that considering the sanctions (overseen primarily by the US), the constant espionage, and constant air raids, it is impossible for me to believe that saddam could have been developing chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons without the knowledge of the united states, and if we had specific evidence, we would have presented it (or, for that matter, found it in the time since we've conquered the country) long ago...

    the closest thing i might have said to your initial remarks is that i dont CARE if evidence is found, it would not justify this war in my opinion...perhaps thats where you are confused...[/QUOTE]

    I can go back and dig through old threads, but you DID say that you were not objective and that your opinions lean towards the left. I confused nothing. You use circumstantial evidence only when it helps to back up your extremely liberal POV.

  9. #49
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Enrique Pallazzo]
    No, we didn't go to war over documents, but if these documents actually prove that Bush didn't lie then I'll be interested to hear your spin on things.[/QUOTE]


    I never said Bush lied - I said he made a bad decision.

  10. #50
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,631
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=bitonti]I never said Bush lied - I said he made a bad decision.[/QUOTE]

    My bad if that's the case. I might be getting my liberals mixed up here.

  11. #51
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Camden, NJ
    Posts
    4,745
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Enrique Pallazzo]I can go back and dig through old threads, but you DID say that you were not objective and that your opinions lean towards the left. I confused nothing. You use circumstantial evidence only when it helps to back up your extremely liberal POV.[/QUOTE]

    i absolutely said i wasnt objective, and that my opinions naturally lean left...thats not the same thing as saying i have no evidence to support my POV (which is waht you said to me before)...i mean seriously, how many people on this board are 100% objective with absolutely no political leanings...get real man, i'm not a news network...

  12. #52
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=deadringer]i absolutely said i wasnt objective, and that my opinions naturally lean left...thats not the same thing as saying i have no evidence to support my POV (which is waht you said to me before)...i mean seriously, how many people on this board are 100% objective with absolutely no political leanings...get real man, i'm not a news network...[/QUOTE]

    To be perfectly frank, I'm 100% objective, unbiased and dispassionate - I'm also humble and selfless. I'm also six-foot-five, 225 pounds and shredded.

    I don't lean right or left and consider myself to have the moral clarity and authority of a saint. Oh, and my feces doesn't even produce an odor...weird....

  13. #53
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Camden, NJ
    Posts
    4,745
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=jets5ever]To be perfectly frank, I'm 100% objective, unbiased and dispassionate - I'm also humble and selfless. I'm also six-foot-five, 225 pounds and shredded.

    I don't lean right or left and consider myself to have the moral clarity and authority of a saint. Oh, and my feces doesn't even produce an odor...weird....[/QUOTE]

    Chuck Norris?

  14. #54
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,631
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=deadringer]i absolutely said i wasnt objective, and that my opinions naturally lean left...thats not the same thing as saying i have no evidence to support my POV (which is waht you said to me before)...i mean seriously, how many people on this board are 100% objective with absolutely no political leanings...get real man, i'm not a news network...[/QUOTE]


    Correct it's NOT the same thing, but you DON'T have evidence to back up most of what you spew on this board. Your opinions tend to be based on what you've been brainwashed to believe by left wing politicians and news organizations.
    I'm glad you admitted to not being objective again... it's similar to saying, "What I say shouldn't carry any weight whatsoever so don't listen to me." Saying you have a political slant is NOT the same as saying you're not objective, however. Hopefully, EVERYONE is objective whatever their political slant is. Not being objective is not looking at something with an open mind... potentially ignoring facts... potentially twisting facts. We can all have our conservative or liberal sways, but we also can be objective. You have admitted that you can't be. Thanks for further clearing that up.

  15. #55
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Camden, NJ
    Posts
    4,745
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Enrique Pallazzo]Correct it's NOT the same thing, but you DON'T have evidence to back up most of what you spew on this board. Your opinions tend to be based on what you've been brainwashed to believe by left wing politicians and news organizations.
    I'm glad you admitted to not being objective again... it's similar to saying, "What I say shouldn't carry any weight whatsoever so don't listen to me." Saying you have a political slant is NOT the same as saying you're not objective, however. Hopefully, EVERYONE is objective whatever their political slant is. Not being objective is not looking at something with an open mind... potentially ignoring facts... potentially twisting facts. We can all have our conservative or liberal sways, but we also can be objective. You have admitted that you can't be. Thanks for further clearing that up.[/QUOTE]

    i was in the process of typing a long, thought out response to your comments, but i realized something; you are simply trying to berate me because it is inconceivable to you that someone could look at the facts surrounding this war and arrive at a point of view different from yours...so keep trying to insult me all you'd like, and keep making up things about me all you'd like...it isnt going to change anything...

  16. #56
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    This is a great article:

    [url]http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson200511180818.asp[/url]

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us