Who Supports the War(s)

[slang]

Originally posted by jaguar
Wolf: I prefer people to post content, not articles. When people write their arguements in the own words its far more useful. If i wanted to read a collection of news articles i'd read a newspaper.

Content like you post? Mr. Jaguar, I have absolutely no doubt you are an extremely intelligent young man. I also have no doubt you are miles ahead of me. What I do doubt is your ability to make a valid point without it being just your opinion. What makes you support a specific idea? We rarely know, or at least I rarely know. You assume that everyone is from a similar background as you and has read the exact same information. On top of that you seem to "get feelings" and pass judgement very quickly on issues that you are both unfarmiliar with and disagree with in general principle. This makes both of us look like asses when either of us do this. And, it's your option to access the supporting information that is posted, but it's not required.

Participate in the coversation or not, I don't care. Your responses are weak in comparison to Hermit's. He seems to be interested more in understanding a given postion and debating it. He and I disagree on many issues but I can respect his ability to present the argument with something other than opinion. After reading his posts I can at the very least follow why he supports an idea. You Jag, on the other hand, try to prove to everyone that you are very intelligent with your responses. I doubt anyone would disagree, but you fail to make a rational argument to those of us that are not of exactly the same political background as you.

You could very easily change the opposition's opinion of you from "someone that needs to be bitch-slapped silly from one end of the room to the other" to "someone I disagree with but also respect". I personally hope you raise the bar. You have a lot to contribute, but your arguments thus far are unconvincing.

Slang: Yea i know you'd prefer i didn't, pull bullshit, like DPRK reactors and comunist clinton links or whatever, people are going to call bullshit round here myself included. I"m really interested to see what you're on about with the UN, should be entertaining.

I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to say in the first sentence. That I'm full of bullshit I guess. The communist links to Clinton that I have researched show no conclusive evidence that WJC is a communist sympathizer. And , in these examples, I look like an ass. That isnt to say that other events couldn't lead one to believe that he's a little too cozy with the communists. They would only be an opinion though and I'm looking to avoid opinion without supporting evidence. When and if I have time to make a case that WJC is crooked or red, I will do so. There are many other issues to deal with at the moment.

I'm not providing my "other side of the UN" post for you Jag. When I make a case, you spike it immediately and discredit it by either saying the writing to support the arguement is bad or that you "get feelings" that it's false or invalid. You also totally ignore the fact that tens of millions of people also have opinion as I do and that there must be something that led us to a given conclusion. I don't post for you. That's an exercise in futility.

I still don't buy the Iraqi/OKC thing, its still a very long way from making sense. On the other hand its interesting nad i wouldn't be too shocked if there was something in it.

I say most respectfully Jaguar, it doesnt make sense to you. This is a very complcated case and there are many details that are relevant. I cant say that I buy the case either. What draws me to this controversy is the is the degree that the FBI and the DOJ have attempted to hide supporting evidence and have outright lied to the Government Reform Committee. If you arent following the case, the possibility of middle eastern accomplices seems weak. If you look at the the findings of the committee and the surrounding circumstancial evidence that could easily be proven false, it seems incredible that there isn't something to all this.

At this points, I dont think anything will come of this. Time is running out and the committee must conclude their inqury soon, without key supporting evidence that Ashcroft wont release, for whatever reason. After following this as closely as I have though, I will always be suspect of the FBI, the DOJ, and my government in general.


I also have some offline things I have to do that will hold up the completion my anti-UN explaination. After I finish that, I also have a LOT of other things that will limit my time to reply to questions but I'll do my best.