PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
why should I not, I have yet to find anything in your posts that should not be denied....
Do you still support America's genocide in the Middle East?
- Thread starter Rune
- Start date
why should I not, I have yet to find anything in your posts that should not be denied....
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
lol....so you missed the Bush administration completely?....
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
The bet is on our respective levels of education, not your opinion of the intelligence of my posts.
"Prove" an intentional misspelling? Sure, by a preponderance of evidence:
1. You were the one constantly misspelling words.
2. "Edumacation" is a common intentional misspelling. www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=edumacated
3. I used a spell check then, as I do now.
4. I suggested that you use a spell-check, and apparently you took my advice.
Is this trolling, just wanted to know, when you people do this type of constant back and forth, is this a form of trolling? I seriously want to know if this is a definition of the act of trolling? thanks appreciated? it seems you ask once and then when no response, you move on, and not this school yard back and forth. It gets so old and the reason I ask you, is because you are extra sensitive about trolling.
Don't hold your breath. This question perhaps has been asked and not answered since shortly after 9/11/01. What surprises me is the adamant vehemence still in the tone after all these years.
Never seen a liberal graciously handle perhaps being misguided/wrong yet. Looks like I never will.
One day, you too, will give up trying...
/MSG/
Uwaa OmO
Oh yes it did. It's a simple flowchart. You made a claim. You offered no evidence to support your claim. Upon questioning, you demanded that your claim be proven false, without offering any proof that said claim is true.
Lather, rinse, repeat for about 80 posts now and we have everything you've posted in this thread.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
are you on drugs? me asking for proof is trolling? but his making a false claim is not trolling? why you would think my posts are trolling is bizarre.
thank you, this is all the clarification I needed.
okay, maybe griefer or heckler would be a more apt definition of your performance on this board, so carry on...
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
amazing, asking someone to support their claims makes me a griefer or heckler....tff...others ask the same but you don't go after them and call them a griefer or a heckler....and what is further amazing is that you're ok with someone making false claims
you're a whiner, so carry on
I don't make 5000 posts out of it and bore everyone else on the board with my heckling posts, sorry, it just gets old when you and a few other do this constant childish back and forth, it ties a lot of time up skipping your stupid stuff.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
tff...you never get tired of onceler constantly heckling me and not debating, you actually thank him....but you get tired of me asking someone to support their claim
you're ridiculous
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
topspin finally admits he likes watching two gaylords go at it while eating popcorn with one hand.....
Topspin
Verified User
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
so you knew that you were one of the gaylords. OK
no, i'm just laughing that the first thing you think of when watching gaylords is popcorn
LOL
christiefan915
Catalyst
Pmp's comment: "starting from the beginning, nobody claimed Iraq had anything to do with 9/11.....that's a baseless claim from the left and always has been...."
Now you've moved the goalposts to say "leadership", which is not what he said.
Polls show that a certain percentage of individuals believed and still believe there's a link between Saddam and 9/11. I posted one of those polls. That's your answer.
Now maybe you or Pmp can show how his comment is just a "baseless claim from the left and always has been."
You were saying that it was "the drive" it was "why", this would mean the leadership told us all that was what happened.
If such were the case, then you will have no problem whatsoever showing that the leadership told these "believers" what you say they did.
You are moving the goal posts. Was it why we went into Iraq, (which was why I posted the original question)? If it was, then somebody in leadership said it was why we were going. Please link us up. In answer to that original question you posted some poll that showed nothing about anybody who drove towards that invasion saying anything at all about Iraq.
Either put up or shut up. Show "the right" pressing for the invasion because "Saddam caused 9/11"... either it's that or admit you're just flat wrong. Then once you get there we can start talking about WMD, and how it might "get into the hands" of terrorists... Which was the actual reason they were giving. Once we get to what actually happened you can then hold a conversation with me about whether or not we should have invaded.
christiefan915
Catalyst
Clearly you're thinking of what somebody else wrote, not me. I posted ONLY what people polled thought.
My post #133:
From January through September 2003, PIPA/Knowledge Networks conducted seven different polls that dealt with the conflict with Iraq. Among other things, PIPA/KN probed respondents for key perceptions and beliefs as well for their attitudes on what US policy should be. In the course of doing this, it was discovered that a substantial portion of the public had a number of misperceptions that were demonstrably false, or were at odds with the dominant view in the intelligence community.
In the January poll it was discovered that a majority believed that Iraq played an important role in 9/11 and that a minority even expressed the belief that they had seen “conclusive evidence” of such involvement.
My post #157:
"Are you serious? The whole point of posting the poll is to show that Pmp's claim was false: "starting from the beginning, nobody claimed Iraq had anything to do with 9/11.....that's a baseless claim from the left and always has been...."
People believed it then and they believe it now. In fact, a Newsweek poll from a few years ago showed that the belief increased over time.
A new Newsweek poll out this weekend exposed "gaps" in America's knowledge of history and current events.
Perhaps most alarmingly, 41% of Americans answered 'Yes' to the question "Do you think Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq was directly involved in planning, financing, or carrying out the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001?"
That total is actually up 5 points since September 2004.
My only reference to the leadership was post #167, in part "Instead, he [bush] repeatedly (and much more memorably) juxtaposed references to the 9/11 terror attacks to those of Saddam Hussein, thereby helping to create the false impression that Saddam Hussein was connected to 9/11."
I have no idea what you're referring to re: I was saying it was the "drive", etc. I didn't comment at all on this thread until #122, about rumsfeld's new book. I suggest you re-read the thread and get your posters straight before continuing your snippy comments about remarks I never made.
