Sometimes there's a post so good... by Hardware

Quote:
Originally posted by peacekeeper:
The Japanese conflict was YOUR problem.

Wow.

Factual inaccuracies in what you say aside - good thing for you America didn't take that attitude with Hitler.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 5:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:
I think after a rocky start Barak Obama has come to the realization that when it comes to the war on Islamist terror the Bush administration had it right for the most part. Bush fell short on persuing terorists in Pakistan while Obama has done so admirably.

Already rewriting history, I see. Bravo.

Don't forget - Bush was the one who didn't care, and Obama said, back in those "rocky start" days - that he would do exactly what just happened.

It's cute to see you rabid right wingers show your true colors.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 5:59 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:
I think after a rocky start Barak Obama has come to the realization that when it comes to the war on Islamist terror the Bush administration had it right for the most part. Bush fell short on persuing terorists in Pakistan while Obama has done so admirably.

Already rewriting history, I see. Bravo.

Don't forget - Bush was the one who didn't care, and Obama said, back in those "rocky start" days - that he would do exactly what just happened.

It's cute to see you rabid right wingers show your true colors.

Some how 'I told you so', just doesn't say it...

WILLIAMS: I’d like to ask you about the sourcing on the intel that ultimately led to this successful attack. Can you confirm that it was as a result of waterboarding that we learned what we needed to learn to go after Bin Laden?

PANETTA: You know, Brian, in the intelligence business you work from a lot of sources of information, and that was true here. We had a multiple series of sources that provided information with regards to this situation. Clearly, some of it came from detainees and the interrogation of detainees, but we also had information from other sources as well. So it’s a little difficult to say it was due just to one source of information that we got.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb-staff/2011/05/04/open-thread-leon-pane
tta-bursts-lefts-waterboarding-bubble#ixzz1LOpZYXN0

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 6:15 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Oh, just to chime in and then I'm outa' here: there is as much evidence of bin Laden's guilt for 9/11 as there is for Hussein's WMDs. In other words - nada. And, I'm detecting a Bush administration patten here which goes: start a war and look for reasons later. And, uh, fail to find any evidence. Geeeeze. What a dunce.

FAIL

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/binladen_10-29-04.html

I guess you're going to admit that YOU are the dunce?

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

...and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 6:32 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Some how 'I told you so', just doesn't say it...

I'd reply the same, since the White House has denied this. Rumsfeld, too.

But I know you ignore facts that don't fit your narrative, so "clearly" that would fly over your head.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 12:17 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Not that it will mean anything to you, Raptor, but

Quote:
detainees and the interrogation of detainees

doesn’t mean they “got” bin Laden because of waterboarding. First off, he said clearly several times that they had multiple sources. Secondly, from what I’ve heard/read, what they got was that bin Laden had a favorite courier; the name wasn’t given, so it was just one coin dropping. Third, I believe it’s been said before that they only got valid information AFTER the torture stopped, so there’s no way of knowing that waterboarding brought about ANYTHING. Most important of all, in response to the question nowhere did Panetta say waterboarding brought anything, just that some info came from interrogation of detainees. Your point isn’t even slightly made. Weak try at “proving” waterboarding worked, led to the killing of bin Laden, or brought about ANY useful information.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 12:47 PM

Peacekeeper: you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 12:50 PM

Hardware, the report you linked said they were unable to authenticate the tape.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 12:52 PM

CANTTAKESKY

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Thank you DT and Frem.

Yes, thank you DT and Frem.

Frem, that was very well said.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 2:07 PM

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:
Originally posted by peacekeeper:
The Japanese conflict was YOUR problem.

Wow.

Factual inaccuracies in what you say aside - good thing for you America didn't take that attitude with Hitler.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

Very true. And for a time, America DID take exactly that attitude toward Hitler, right up until he declared war on the U.S.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 2:15 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:
I think after a rocky start Barak Obama has come to the realization that when it comes to the war on Islamist terror the Bush administration had it right for the most part. Bush fell short on persuing terorists in Pakistan while Obama has done so admirably.

Already rewriting history, I see. Bravo.

Don't forget - Bush was the one who didn't care, and Obama said, back in those "rocky start" days - that he would do exactly what just happened.

It's cute to see you rabid right wingers show your true colors.

Some how 'I told you so', just doesn't say it...

WILLIAMS: I’d like to ask you about the sourcing on the intel that ultimately led to this successful attack. Can you confirm that it was as a result of waterboarding that we learned what we needed to learn to go after Bin Laden?

PANETTA: You know, Brian, in the intelligence business you work from a lot of sources of information, and that was true here. We had a multiple series of sources that provided information with regards to this situation. Clearly, some of it came from detainees and the interrogation of detainees, but we also had information from other sources as well. So it’s a little difficult to say it was due just to one source of information that we got.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb-staff/2011/05/04/open-thread-leon-pane
tta-bursts-lefts-waterboarding-bubble#ixzz1LOpZYXN0

So, in your estimation, there is no way to "interrogate" somebody that DOESN'T involve torture?

Good to know. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 2:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Hardware, the report you linked said they were unable to authenticate the tape.

Yup, it sure did. Said it right in the middle of the article, too. Here's the quote, pulled from the article:

Quote:
Although there was no way to authenticate the tape or say when it was made, it referenced the upcoming presidential election.

HW, that's not exactly a win for you.

Imagine if Bin Laden made a tape showing Obama's birth certificate. Would you believe him?

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 2:26 PM

By the way, deputy national security advisor says waterboarding DIDN'T play a role in the finding of Bin Laden.

http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/05/obama-advisor-waterboarding-
didnt-lead-to-bin-laden-kill/

Told ya so, indeed.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 5:25 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Hardware, the report you linked said they were unable to authenticate the tape.

Yup, it sure did. Said it right in the middle of the article, too. Here's the quote, pulled from the article:

Quote:
Although there was no way to authenticate the tape or say when it was made, it referenced the upcoming presidential election.

HW, that's not exactly a win for you.

Imagine if Bin Laden made a tape showing Obama's birth certificate. Would you believe him?

So, the man is on tape, admitting involvement in 9/11, but you want more proof? I only posted this, a PBS source, after Kiki insisted that Bin Laden was not involved. Are you that ambivalent about the man's death that you want to apologize for his history of terrorism?

I understand the mechanism of Stockholm syndrome, but I've never understood people that fall victim to it. It's as if their character is so weak they need to identify with a powerful evil, to become that evil in an attempt to pacify it and survive it.

In short, it's pathetic.

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

...and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 6:29 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Hardware

http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_19.htm

Defenders of the 'official story' like to point out to the skeptics of 9/11 that Osama Bin Laden was caught on video proudly confessing to the crime in front of a group of his peers. The now famous 'confession' video was released in December of 2001 by the Department of Defense under growing international pressure to provide definitive proof tying Bin Laden to 9/11. And the defenders of the government's narrative present this oft-broadcast video as tidy proof of that narrative's validity. But as with so much of the 'evidence' covered at length in this paper, this 'definitive' proof is riddled with conflicting facts, quantum leaps in judgment, and, ultimately, inadvertent support not for the official story, but for the very skepticism about 9/11 that the 'proof' was meant to quell.

First of all, Bin Laden's initial reaction to 9/11 was not to take credit for the crime at all. In fact, he continually denied any involvement in 9/11 up until the 'confession' video was mysteriously presented. Almost no one in the U.S. has read Bin Laden's first statement in response to 9/11, which so conflicts the later 'confession'. Here it is, from September 17, 2001:

"I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons. I have been living in the Islamic emirate of Afghanistan and following its leaders' rules. The current leader does not allow me to exercise such operations."

We've been asked to accept without question his other statements of 'confession'. So how do we make sense of the above statement? Or how do we make sense of his second public statement in regards to 9/11, given on October 16, 2001:

"I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle."

These comments obviously do not prove that Bin Laden did not orchestrate 9/11. But they do raise a crucial question. Why would a man spend six weeks denying a crime, then suddenly flip-flop 180 degrees and happily start taking responsibility for the originally denied crime? Most people - including scientists, CIA analysts, FBI, and other independent investigators, etc. - who have a working familiarity with the 'confession' video, know the answer to this question. And that is that the man in the video making the 'confession' is almost certainly not Osama Bin Laden, and the tape is a fake. The man shown in the video, though bearded, Arabic, and of darkish complexion, is much heavier than all known photos and videos of the actual Bin Laden. The man in the video is seen writing something down with his right hand. Bin Laden is well-known to be left-handed. And there are scores of other reasons to question the validity of the tape.

etc

For your edification, here is the video, showing a clearly right-handed man who does not look like bin Laden.

It's long lost to the internet, but perhaps you remember back when ... after the Taliban was supposedly beaten and when the US was still in Afghanistan in force ...

US troops were tasked with finding proof of bin Laden's involvement. They looked high and low, eventually at one point it was reported that they had translated and searched over 19 boxcars full of papers alone - and found nothing. No plans, no cell phone calls, no names, nothing. Not even a whiff of a hint. To this day, no *** verifiable *** evidence has been found to connect bin Laden with 9/11.

Even the FBI wanted poster doesn't list 9/11, though they were given multiple opportunities to revise the posting, including after the 'confession' tape.

Compare this scenario with Mohamed Atta, who left a wide trail of evidence that he was involved. People were tripping over it once they started looking.

Given the whole picture of the lack of verifiable evidence regarding bin Laden, the abundance of evidence for someone who really was involved, and the truly piss-poor tape you prefer to believe, you have an extremely weak argument. By your standard of proof, Elvis IS alive.

Any questions?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 9:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hardware:

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Hardware, the report you linked said they were unable to authenticate the tape.

Yup, it sure did. Said it right in the middle of the article, too. Here's the quote, pulled from the article:

Quote:
Although there was no way to authenticate the tape or say when it was made, it referenced the upcoming presidential election.

HW, that's not exactly a win for you.

Imagine if Bin Laden made a tape showing Obama's birth certificate. Would you believe him?

So, the man is on tape, admitting involvement in 9/11, but you want more proof? I only posted this, a PBS source, after Kiki insisted that Bin Laden was not involved. Are you that ambivalent about the man's death that you want to apologize for his history of terrorism?

Not sure where you get that I'm "ambivalent" about OBL's death. Clearly not from anything I've said. I'm not sorry the guy's dead; I pointed out that you presented faulty "evidence" to support your point.

You presented your "evidence" as a clear proof of "FAIL" on Kiki's part, and your own "evidence" says outright that your "evidence" cannot be authenticated. That seems to me like a major "FAIL" on your part.

You say *THE* man is on tape; others say that *A* man is on tape, claiming involvement. Kiki pointed out that there was what courts would call "reasonable doubt", but fortunately for the U.S. (and by a remarkable set of circumstances), OBL will never see the inside of a courtroom. I'd have preferred a trial, but it seems others feared things that might be revealed by such an undertaking, so it was never even under consideration.

Quote:

I understand the mechanism of Stockholm syndrome, but I've never understood people that fall victim to it. It's as if their character is so weak they need to identify with a powerful evil, to become that evil in an attempt to pacify it and survive it.

Congratulations. You've just perfectly described Boot Camp and the U.S. military. I could never understand it, either. Weak character sums it up pretty well.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 5, 2011 1:34 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

So, in your estimation, there is no way to "interrogate" somebody that DOESN'T involve torture?

Good to know. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.

It wasn't torture. We just asked, really, really enhanced like.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 5, 2011 3:45 AM

Actually, no. It's because I require better vetting from my journalism sources before they are in fact credible.

Posts have been made and even produced about an Israeli confirmation of Osama death in 2001, but the form of THOSE reports means I can't vet them either. I remain unconvinced on all sides.

Osama is a jerk, and possibly delusional, because he has to know that actions he approved HAVE hurt women and children (and I don't exactly think of men as an expendable gender either, even in "war"), or have incited violence against such. I'm sure he is dead, and I've said that I think that's a good thing, though we need to watch out for retaliation. What I don't know is when he died, but that's ultimately unimportant. What is important, as I and others have said repeatedly, is how the current report of his death is used.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 5, 2011 4:32 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Originally posted by Hardware:

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Hardware, the report you linked said they were unable to authenticate the tape.

Yup, it sure did. Said it right in the middle of the article, too. Here's the quote, pulled from the article:

Quote:
Although there was no way to authenticate the tape or say when it was made, it referenced the upcoming presidential election.

HW, that's not exactly a win for you.

Imagine if Bin Laden made a tape showing Obama's birth certificate. Would you believe him?

So, the man is on tape, admitting involvement in 9/11, but you want more proof? I only posted this, a PBS source, after Kiki insisted that Bin Laden was not involved. Are you that ambivalent about the man's death that you want to apologize for his history of terrorism?

Not sure where you get that I'm "ambivalent" about OBL's death. Clearly not from anything I've said. I'm not sorry the guy's dead; I pointed out that you presented faulty "evidence" to support your point.

You presented your "evidence" as a clear proof of "FAIL" on Kiki's part, and your own "evidence" says outright that your "evidence" cannot be authenticated. That seems to me like a major "FAIL" on your part.

You say *THE* man is on tape; others say that *A* man is on tape, claiming involvement. Kiki pointed out that there was what courts would call "reasonable doubt", but fortunately for the U.S. (and by a remarkable set of circumstances), OBL will never see the inside of a courtroom. I'd have preferred a trial, but it seems others feared things that might be revealed by such an undertaking, so it was never even under consideration.

Quote:

I understand the mechanism of Stockholm syndrome, but I've never understood people that fall victim to it. It's as if their character is so weak they need to identify with a powerful evil, to become that evil in an attempt to pacify it and survive it.

Congratulations. You've just perfectly described Boot Camp and the U.S. military. I could never understand it, either. Weak character sums it up pretty well.

Okay, one more time. I'll type this slow so you can keep up.

Kiki said;

Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Oh, just to chime in and then I'm outa' here: there is as much evidence of bin Laden's guilt for 9/11 as there is for Hussein's WMDs. In other words - nada. And, I'm detecting a Bush administration patten here which goes: start a war and look for reasons later. And, uh, fail to find any evidence. Geeeeze. What a dunce.

And I presented some evidence. Which makes, and continues to make, Kiki's statement a FAIL.

Whether or not that evidence is credible. It is certainly, by it's mere existence, evidence. Which means the statement that there is no evidence incontrovertibly wrong.

Still want to keep arguing this single point or are you going to come up with another convoluted argument that tries to dodge the point?

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

...and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 5, 2011 5:07 AM

I concede there's evidence either way in a number of issues, and it's up to each of us individually to decide what evidence we believe. Though your point doesn't entirely dismiss the whole Osama question, but then it sounds like you weren't trying to.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 5, 2011 6:10 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

It's easy to fall into the trap of debating the efficacy of torture. I do it myself sometimes without thinking.

The debate about its efficacy is the wrong debate.

The real debate is, 'Would you die to protect the freedoms and principles to which you cleave?"

The price of freedom is living in a dangerous world, and choosing not to mitigate that danger by destroying freedom and the 'rights' we have defined as being important to humanity.

Most of us compromise on that to some degree, but my line is drawn well before inflicting agony to get information.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”

Jacob Hornberger

“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”

Mahatma Gandhi

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 5, 2011 8:09 AM

HW, again you FAIL.

Quote:

Kiki said;

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Oh, just to chime in and then I'm outa' here: there is as much evidence of bin Laden's guilt for 9/11 as there is for Hussein's WMDs. In other words - nada. And, I'm detecting a Bush administration patten here which goes: start a war and look for reasons later. And, uh, fail to find any evidence. Geeeeze. What a dunce.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And I presented some evidence. Which makes, and continues to make, Kiki's statement a FAIL.

Whether or not that evidence is credible. It is certainly, by it's mere existence, evidence. Which means the statement that there is no evidence incontrovertibly wrong.

Still want to keep arguing this single point or are you going to come up with another convoluted argument that tries to dodge the point?

Kiki didn't say there was NO evidence. She/he said there as "as much evidence". Before the Iraq War, we were assured that there was indeed evidence of Saddam's WMD. It was all phony and forgeries, but it was, in your words, "evidence".

So Kiki did not indeed "FAIL", but you have, rather spectacularly, and you keep flaming out. Sorry you're getting so butt-hurt about it, and getting sand in your pussy, in your words, but it's true - you've failed utterly to provide any real evidence. Dan Rather lost his job while providing more factual evidence than you've supplied.

Sorry your reading comprehension is so terrible, and you can't figure out where it all went wrong for you. As Frem suggested before, quit digging!

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 5, 2011 9:22 AM

Kwicko, you constantly amaze me with your dumbfuckery. She said there was nada. Meaning no evidence. I shouldn't expect critical thinking from leftists. You're the type of people who can't understand the phrase; "Shall not be infringed."

I highlighted in bold and red and you still didn't get the inaccuracy of the statement. At this point, I think you are in a parallel delusional state sort of like PN. I don't think you could be shown the truth if I dragged you to it and rubbed your nose in it. Come to think of it, I did and you didn't get it.

And, while we're bringing up Kiki's inaccurate statements, let's look at the second part of the statement;

Quote:

And, I'm detecting a Bush administration patten here which goes:..

So it is Bush's fault that OBL is dead? That IS the point we're arguing, isn't it?

Double fail.

I shouldn't have given you the option of conceding or making another perambulating argument. I don't think you're capable of changing your mind once you've decided you're right.

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

...and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 5, 2011 11:16 AM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht

I still am pondering the use of FAIL as a noun. I heard my older brother say it while we were at the ocean, I still don't think I fancy it, just like I don't fancy it when people say "My bad", my bad what? Bad is an adjective, wouldn't one want ot say "my error"? Oh well, people can say what they like, it isn't hurting anyone to be sure. I just wonder if anyone else thinks about this stuff, finds it perplexing. Oh well.

Insert bemused and perplexed face here.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 5, 2011 1:20 PM

HW, you've posted exactly one piece of evidence, and that very evidence itself says that it has never been authenticated, and can't be.

You actually DO have "nada". Your inbred fuckwit of a brain can't figure that out, can it? I notice that as a pattern with you right-wing idiots - you get stuck on stupid, and refuse to let facts get in your way.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 5, 2011 7:27 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

HW

There were CLAIMS of evidence for WMDs in Iraq, not only before the attack, but after. Centrifuge buried under a rose bush. Satellite photo that might have possibly been A truck by A large building presumed to be a factory. Sworn statements that Hussein had the WMDs sent to Syria ... etc.

If I were to CLAIM that I talked with Santa Claus last Christmas - I swear on the holy bible it's true - would you consider it evidence that Santa exists? What about if I showed you a video of me dressed up as Santa telling you I'm Santa? How about if I wrote it on a piece of paper and underneath wrote - 'this is the word of god'? Would you think that's evidence?

An obviously fake video is not evidence - sorry dude - no matter how much you need to believe it is. But that's the problem with reality, it doesn't care how you feel. It is what it is.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 5, 2011 7:49 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

"I just wonder if anyone else thinks about this stuff, finds it perplexing."

I used to be a stickler for good grammar, until I saw really freakin' BAD grammar in the NYTimes, the WashingtonPost, and other bastions of the English language. I pretty much gave up on it.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 6, 2011 1:37 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by RionaEire:
I still am pondering the use of FAIL as a noun. I heard my older brother say it while we were at the ocean, I still don't think I fancy it, just like I don't fancy it when people say "My bad", my bad what? Bad is an adjective, wouldn't one want ot say "my error"? Oh well, people can say what they like, it isn't hurting anyone to be sure. I just wonder if anyone else thinks about this stuff, finds it perplexing. Oh well.

Insert bemused and perplexed face here.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

"FAIL" as a noun pretty much comes from places like 4chan and failblog, where people would post funny or ironic pictures of things going horribly wrong with the simple caption "FAIL" on them. From there, it morphed into people posting things like "your shipment of FAIL has arrived" and "you're on the FAILboat", etc.

"My bad" is generally accepted to be "urban slang" - probably started by someone saying something to a friend - "Yo, that's bad, man" and being responded to with, "Yeah, that's MY bad." And from there it just caught on and grew. Once it gets into a blockbuster movie, or a cult hit, it becomes part of the vernacular and just becomes a commonplace phrase.

I get amused by people who actually say "WTF" in conversation. It's internet shorthand, of course, and quicker to type than "What the fuck?", but it's actually LONGER to say "WTF" than to say "What the fuck". Just the "W" is as many syllables as saying the whole phrase, which just goes to prove language and slang aren't necessarily about shortening things or making them simpler...

I don't find this stuff perplexing so much as I find it fascinating. I love watching the language evolve.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 6, 2011 3:05 AM

This is a link to the CNN transcript of an interview Al Jazeera did with Bin Laden. When CNN aired it in its entirety Al Jazeera severed the media sharing agreement it had with them. They also retracted the rights for CNN to air the interview.

However, CNN has the transcript on their website. Bin Laden claims responsibility for 9/11 in the transcript.

http://articles.cnn.com/2002-02-05/world/binladen.transcript_1_incitem
ent-fatwas-al-qaeda-organization?_s=PM:asiapcf

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

...and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 6, 2011 3:11 AM

DOD transcript of a videotape retrieved from a house in Jalalabad, Afghanistan in November, 2001.

http://www.defense.gov/news/Dec2001/d20011213ubl.pdf

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

...and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 6, 2011 6:01 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Originally posted by RionaEire:
I still am pondering the use of FAIL as a noun. I heard my older brother say it while we were at the ocean, I still don't think I fancy it, just like I don't fancy it when people say "My bad", my bad what? Bad is an adjective, wouldn't one want ot say "my error"? Oh well, people can say what they like, it isn't hurting anyone to be sure. I just wonder if anyone else thinks about this stuff, finds it perplexing. Oh well.

Insert bemused and perplexed face here.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

"FAIL" as a noun pretty much comes from places like 4chan and failblog, where people would post funny or ironic pictures of things going horribly wrong with the simple caption "FAIL" on them. From there, it morphed into people posting things like "your shipment of FAIL has arrived" and "you're on the FAILboat", etc.

"My bad" is generally accepted to be "urban slang" - probably started by someone saying something to a friend - "Yo, that's bad, man" and being responded to with, "Yeah, that's MY bad." And from there it just caught on and grew. Once it gets into a blockbuster movie, or a cult hit, it becomes part of the vernacular and just becomes a commonplace phrase.

I get amused by people who actually say "WTF" in conversation. It's internet shorthand, of course, and quicker to type than "What the fuck?", but it's actually LONGER to say "WTF" than to say "What the fuck". Just the "W" is as many syllables as saying the whole phrase, which just goes to prove language and slang aren't necessarily about shortening things or making them simpler...

I don't find this stuff perplexing so much as I find it fascinating. I love watching the language evolve.

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

Hello,

I know a lot of people who will declare, "Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!" not in an attempt to shorten language (obviously) but rather in an attempt to convey an idea without using language they consider offensive if uttered in public.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”

Jacob Hornberger

“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”

Mahatma Gandhi

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 6, 2011 8:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by RionaEire:
I still am pondering the use of FAIL as a noun. I heard my older brother say it while we were at the ocean, I still don't think I fancy it, just like I don't fancy it when people say "My bad", my bad what? Bad is an adjective, wouldn't one want ot say "my error"? Oh well, people can say what they like, it isn't hurting anyone to be sure. I just wonder if anyone else thinks about this stuff, finds it perplexing. Oh well.

Insert bemused and perplexed face here.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

Language evolves. Always has, always will. A decade or so ago, I didn't figure "text" would become a verb - but it very much is. "Google" was, if anything at all, a description for eyes on stuffed animals. Now it's a verb and a proper noun.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 6, 2011 8:06 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
By the way, deputy national security advisor says waterboarding DIDN'T play a role in the finding of Bin Laden.

http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/05/obama-advisor-waterboarding-
didnt-lead-to-bin-laden-kill/

Told ya so, indeed.

Bah, we all know how Rappy rolls. If it doesn't agree with his narrative, it doesn't count. And you're a fool/denier/yadda yadda for even daring to present it.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 7, 2011 1:17 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
By the way, deputy national security advisor says waterboarding DIDN'T play a role in the finding of Bin Laden.

http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/05/obama-advisor-waterboarding-
didnt-lead-to-bin-laden-kill/

Told ya so, indeed.

Bah, we all know how Rappy rolls. If it doesn't agree with his narrative, it doesn't count. And you're a fool/denier/yadda yadda for even daring to present it.

Leon Panetta, the CIA director, has confirmed that controversial "enhanced interrogation techniques" such as waterboarding yielded some of the intelligence information that ultimately led to Osama bin Laden.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/8491509/Osama-bin-L
aden-killed-CIA-admits-waterboarding-yielded-vital-information.html

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 7, 2011 4:09 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
By the way, deputy national security advisor says waterboarding DIDN'T play a role in the finding of Bin Laden.

http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/05/obama-advisor-waterboarding-
didnt-lead-to-bin-laden-kill/

Told ya so, indeed.

Bah, we all know how Rappy rolls. If it doesn't agree with his narrative, it doesn't count. And you're a fool/denier/yadda yadda for even daring to present it.

Leon Panetta, the CIA director, has confirmed that controversial "enhanced interrogation techniques" such as waterboarding yielded some of the intelligence information that ultimately led to Osama bin Laden.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/8491509/Osama-bin-L
aden-killed-CIA-admits-waterboarding-yielded-vital-information.html

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

Hello,

This is good news, Mr. Raptor. This means that when you boldly stand opposed to violating human rights, you will be traveling the narrow, winding road. Enduring the difficult path, because Freedom isn't free. It demands sacrifice, and as a lover of freedom, you are willing to do what it takes.

If that means living in a world where we don't torture people just to get easy intel, so be it.

I'm proud of you for being willing to endure a little bit more danger and uncertainty in your life in order to uphold the values that make this country great.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”

Jacob Hornberger

“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”

Mahatma Gandhi

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, May 7, 2011 7:55 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Here is an example of the three problems I have with this text:

"(...Inaudible...) we calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower."
The first problem is that parts of it doesn't make sense in English. Unless you tell me that Arabic-speaking people inherently don't make sense no matter how good the translation, there is a problem with the text of what he is saying.

"(...Inaudible...) we calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower (because the tower facing Mecca REALLY made a difference!)"

"(...Inaudible...) we calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy ... who would be killed based on the position of the tower?"

Perhaps he meant:

"(...Inaudible...) we calculated in advance the number of casualties of the enemy, who would be killed based on the placement of the damage to the tower" or,

"(...Inaudible...) we calculated in advance the number of casualties of the enemy, who would be killed based on their position in the tower", or

"(...Inaudible...) we calculated in advance the number of our casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on their position in the tower".

In any case, it is too scrambled to put much faith in it.

The second problem is that it's incomplete, meaning you don't get the context -

"(...Inaudible...) we calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower."

"(After we heard about it we were sitting around and bullshitting one day, and) we calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower."

"(They told us) 'we calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower'."

Many parts are missing, leaving the context in question.

The third and largest problem is the translation.

Here is a quote from the translation you provided:
"The brothers, who conducted the operation, all they knew was that they have a martyrdom operation and we asked each of them to go to America but they didn't know anything about the operation, not even one letter."

Here is the government trial exhibit:
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/moussaoui/zmobltranscrip
t.html

"The brothers who executed . . . . All they knew was that there was a martyrdom operation. They were asked to go to the United States. . . Europe . . . but they did not know one single little thing about the nature of the operation."

Difference much?

Now perhaps you weren't paying attention when all this was going on, but I was. This was the tape I was referring to when I said there was a tape of bin Laden celebrating 9/11. There was a LOT of controversy over this tape, its completeness - or lack thereof (there was quite a bit of evidence from overlapping information held by the British and Italians that the tape had been edited), its provenance, and especially its translation. But the LEGAL translation - the translation of record - does not support bin Laden's involvement. It says 'they were asked' by somebody and not 'we asked them'. Which is why the public translation was consistently shaded - the US needed a PR slam-dunk, even though they didn't have a legal one. The LEGAL EVIDENCE is EXTREMELY ambiguous, most especially when you read the whole transcript.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 4:51 AM

Regardless of your problems with this, it is still evidence. Unless you or Kwicko want to appoint yourself grand arbiter for acceptable evidence.

It appears to me that you can't stand when your "facts" are easily refutable.

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

...and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 5:19 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:
Originally posted by Hardware:
Regardless of your problems with this, it is still evidence. Unless you or Kwicko want to appoint yourself grand arbiter for acceptable evidence.

It appears to me that you can't stand when your "facts" are easily refutable.

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

...and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36

Hello,

It would seem to me that you are quite correct, Mr. Hardware. Bad and easily refutable evidence of questionable quality does indeed exist in this matter.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”

Jacob Hornberger

“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”

Mahatma Gandhi

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 3:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Quote:
Originally posted by Hardware:
Regardless of your problems with this, it is still evidence. Unless you or Kwicko want to appoint yourself grand arbiter for acceptable evidence.

It appears to me that you can't stand when your "facts" are easily refutable.

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

...and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36

Hello,

It would seem to me that you are quite correct, Mr. Hardware. Bad and easily refutable evidence of questionable quality does indeed exist in this matter.

--Anthony

Which is exactly as I stipulated. But certain parties like to hear their keyboards click, apparently, and have trouble admitting they were wrong.
In any event, Bin Leaden deserved to have his ticket punched for the acts of terrorism in the 93 WTC bombing, bombings of the 2 african embassies and the USS Cole, which money trails lead directly back to Al Quaida.

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

...and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 4:22 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht

I don't mind bad grammer, I partake often myself. As long as the person has thought about the phrases they use, know they are peculiar/ off kilter, but choose to use them anyways, then they can say whatever they want. BTW its funny but I never found text being used as a verb to be odd, for some reason I kind of like the sound of it. Lets face it, I'm a very subjective person about language use, some things I like and some things I don't, there's not rhyme or reason to some of it, like "my bad" that one just irks me some, but I think "texting" as a word is cool. Its mostly subjective but there are a few exceptions, there are a couple of words that I hate the current vernacular use for. But most of it is subjective and it really doesn't matter what one individual person thinks one way or the other. When someone uses the one word that I absolutely hate seeing misused I'll say something, the rest is just my opinion and is more musing out loud than anything.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 11:00 AM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

"Regardless of * your * problems with this, it is still evidence."

They aren't just * my * problems with it. Even the US government doesn't consider this to be evidence. That's why prosecutors ignored it and used a different FACTUAL translation/ transcription as legal evidence. And no other government that I know of credits your version as evidence either. Your version was internationally considered untrue (including by our friends the British and Italians). AT THE TIME this was released in the US media, it was widely discredited.

But that you consider it to be 'evidence', means YOU think it is fact, because in order to be EVIDENCE (at least in your mind) it has to be factual. But as I have pointed out, it isn't. The people who have translated and studied it within the US government don't think so, and other governments don't think so either. It is perhaps PR, perhaps a commercial to sell you something, or perhaps intentional propaganda, but YOUR version is not EVIDENCE.

Because it is a fiction.

I'll call it propaganda. Given that the government had BOTH versions and CHOSE to widely release the misleading one tells me that the publicly released version is an intentional effort on the part of government to mislead the public. By definition, it's propaganda. And as a believer in authority, you accept it as fact. Why? Because the authorities told you so.

Yes, they do mislead, and quite often, counting on people like you. They count on their authority to sway your judgment and credit their message, even when it is a fiction.

ETA: if somebody found this for you, they do know that it's as discredited as 'Curveball'. They have fed you bad information to advance their own agenda. Do not assume they are your friend.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 1:22 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Bump for Hware

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 2:32 PM