Do you still support America's genocide in the Middle East?

Yurt said:
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.
Click to expand...

Don't you understand Yurt? You aren't yet a member of the exclusive Liberal Club... where you get a free pass on all things from other libs! You see.. when you are a member of the club, you can say anything, it doesn't have to be honest, because you're a member of the club! You can make unlimited false claims, and other liberal club members will back you up! You don't need or have to provide any proof for anything, again, other liberal club members have your back! You can cheat on your spouse, solicit sex online, get blowjobs from your young interns, not pay your income taxes, use insider trading to make a fortune, have your gay boyfriend run a brothel from your apartment, lie under oath, flip-flop back and forth on principles... ALL without any fear of repercussion, because YOU have club membership!

The rest of us have to follow the rules and laws. :(
 
Damn Yankee said:
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.
Click to expand...



No I didn't, I told you why I can't.
 
Dixie said:
Don't you understand Yurt? You aren't yet a member of the exclusive Liberal Club... where you get a free pass on all things from other libs! You see.. when you are a member of the club, you can say anything, it doesn't have to be honest, because you're a member of the club! You can make unlimited false claims, and other liberal club members will back you up! You don't need or have to provide any proof for anything, again, other liberal club members have your back! You can cheat on your spouse, solicit sex online, get blowjobs from your young interns, not pay your income taxes, use insider trading to make a fortune, have your gay boyfriend run a brothel from your apartment, lie under oath, flip-flop back and forth on principles... ALL without any fear of repercussion, because YOU have club membership!

The rest of us have to follow the rules and laws. :(
Click to expand...

Bullshit. This thread is proof of that. Several libs disagreed with me.
 
christiefan915 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Again, polls showing some people with a mis-perception doesn't change the question I have asked. If "the right" was saying it, you would have myriad examples of their leadership clearly stating so.

Please link to it. Then we can be sure you are actually not being deliberately disingenuous.

Just a few links to some of those who actually made the arguments that brought us into Iraq. One or two of them directly stating that Saddam was complicit? Just a few links to what you claim is all I ask.

I can post polls that show 75% of the nation believes in Jesus, but that doesn't mean I personally convinced them of that. While you might "suggest" it was all my fault, it wouldn't change that it would be wrong.
 
Dune said:
YouTube - Bombing Iraq: Exploiting 9/11
Click to expand...
In this one, it is the same speech. Where they say, "The WMD" was the reason and then tries to say that he'll give WMD to terrorists. It was WMD that he argued we should take from Saddam, in order to stop him from giving even one to terrorists. If we can start building from that truth we can hold a real conversation about whether we should have gone there.

So far your "evidence" supports what I have stated throughout the thread. They simply weren't saying that Saddam was responsible for 9/11. They were saying that "if he has WMD and gives them to people who would do that"...

While I agree that was a bad reason to invade, and that without enough evidence to actually get Congress to declare an actual war, we should never go. I simply refuse to pretend that what I "want" to be true is so that I can say "they" are "worse" than reality already makes them.
 
Dune said:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.html
Click to expand...
Again, in this one nobody makes the link except somebody blaming "the Administration" of it. Accusation is not evidence. Seriously Dune, so far you give my side of the argument stronger evidence.

IMO, this is a case of the left using the "say it often enough and people will believe it" plan.

If they say that "Bush linked those two" often enough then people will believe that they linked them. Even when the closest they ever got was calling Saddam a "state sponsor of terrorism including some members of al qaeda"...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top