RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered

RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Sinergy -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/7/2007 1:25:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy p.p.s. I am not really saying it was not Al Qaeda (I am a bit dubious, however) but it fascinates me with all the people running around insisting it was them without any sort of empirical evidence to suggest it. What is "an Al Qaeda marker?" I don't know. It could be the beheaded bodies. I agree. Everybody knows that only Al Qaeda beheads people in Iraq. Wait, umm. quote: The AQI explanation seems obvious to me. Simply restating your beliefs is not answering my question. I asked you why it seems obvious to you. Sinergy

TheHeretic -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/7/2007 2:04:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy I asked you why it seems obvious to you. Sinergy Yeah. I stated that (this is much easier now that I got past the damn cut/paste block)... Those are the people Arrowhead Ripper was launched against. As US and Iraqi forces take control, they find evidence that very bad things had been going on while AQI was there. The people (who could have ulterior motives, I suppose) are saying AQI was responsible. It isn't much of a leap. Sorry you missed it the first time. Read twice, post once?

Sinergy -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/7/2007 2:15:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy I asked you why it seems obvious to you. Sinergy Yeah. I stated that (this is much easier now that I got past the damn cut/paste block)... Those are the people Arrowhead Ripper was launched against. As US and Iraqi forces take control, they find evidence that very bad things had been going on while AQI was there. The people (who could have ulterior motives, I suppose) are saying AQI was responsible. It isn't much of a leap. Sorry you missed it the first time. Read twice, post once? I did not miss it the first time. I am not asking why Arrowhead Ripper was sent there. I am not disputing the presence of bodies. I am not really willing to buy into your belief that only Al Qaeda beheads people, so that one you will need to prove without my help. Your comments start off with an assumption that Al Qaeda was there. I keep asking you to provide evidence for this, to prove your claims, which you continue to try to sidestep. The technique this most recent post shows is similar to the question "Do you still beat your wife?" It is based on an unproven statement being passed off as factual. I look forward to your next avoidance technique to avoid answering the question. Sinergy edited for formatting

TheHeretic -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/7/2007 2:30:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy Your comments start off with an assumption that Al Qaeda was there. I keep asking you to provide evidence for this, to prove your claims, which you continue to try to sidestep. Yes. That goes back to the comments I made earlier about some assuming the US side is automatically lying. The evidence I found persuasive that Al Qaeda was operating in the area was that forces were sent in to kill them, and they even gave the operation one of those cool names. It is just too warm for a tin-foil hat today. I can't go looking for oil wells in the area either. It's all fuzzy on Google Earth for some reason....

mnottertail -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/7/2007 3:40:58 PM)
what went on before you could google earth it that would make one fuckin' bit of difference to you me, mine or yours?

Sinergy -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/7/2007 3:49:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic The evidence I found persuasive that Al Qaeda was operating in the area was that forces were sent in to kill them, Huh. Based on that logic, you probably think that the fact that the United States invaded Iraq proves the existence of Saddam's WMDs. Sinergy p.s. I thought that your statement that only Al Qaeda beheads people was obtuse, but this latest one raises (or lowers) the bar to a new level.

TheHeretic -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/7/2007 4:30:28 PM)
<sarcasm> Yes, Sinergy, that must be it. After all, there is no difference between how politicians make decisions, and how military commanders in the field do it. Al Qaeda good. America baa-ad. <end sarcasm>

Sinergy -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/7/2007 4:39:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Al Qaeda good. America baa-ad. That attitude of yours certainly clarifies why you want us to keep throwing good money after bad in Iraq. You made a comment in another thread about minimizing harm. How do you reconcile the sucking chest wound to the United States by staying in Iraq until we go bankrupt and they are able to have their civil war in peace, with the idea that our continued military actions which are bankrupting our economy, destroying our military, and destined for failure, and the concept of minimizing harm? If you really wanted to minimize harm, you would not have put those cretins in office who sent our people there in the first place. No matter how long we stay there, the harm has already been done and there is no way we can stop it. Sinergy

farglebargle -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/7/2007 4:45:29 PM)
quote: That goes back to the comments I made earlier about some assuming the US side is automatically lying. Considering the Laundry List of Lies used to defraud Congress and The People into going along with the AUMF-Iraq, I would say that the US doesn't have the credibility to justify the benefit of the doubt.

Sinergy -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/7/2007 5:24:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle quote: That goes back to the comments I made earlier about some assuming the US side is automatically lying. Considering the Laundry List of Lies used to defraud Congress and The People into going along with the AUMF-Iraq, I would say that the US doesn't have the credibility to justify the benefit of the doubt. The problem, farglebargle, is that this is the same person who made the comment: quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic The evidence I found persuasive that Al Qaeda was operating in the area was that forces were sent in to kill them, The descriptive term for this sort of cognitive pattern is "confirmation bias." A person who can only perceive whatever reality that supports their intellectual bias. Why wouldnt Al Qaeda be there if our military were sent in to the area? Sinergy p.s. The response will probably be an attempt to accuse me of only perceiving information which supports my bias that we had no business there in the first place, and nothing we have done since then has ben able to put humpty dumpty back together again.

TheHeretic -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/7/2007 5:57:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy p.s. The response will probably be an attempt to accuse me of only perceiving information which supports my bias that we had no business there in the first place, and nothing we have done since then has ben able to put humpty dumpty back together again. Nope. I believe that fact is already well established.

Sinergy -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/7/2007 9:36:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy p.s. The response will probably be an attempt to accuse me of only perceiving information which supports my bias that we had no business there in the first place, and nothing we have done since then has ben able to put humpty dumpty back together again. Nope. I believe that fact is already well established. We know you believe that. We also know you have no empirical basis to support this belief. See this all the time with religious fundamentalists. Enjoy your evening. Sinergy

TheHeretic -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/9/2007 6:36:19 PM)
A sign of hope that this story may gain the wider exposure it deserves, Yon states in his latest dispatch that AP reporter Robert Reid was at least taking notes on it. He also addresses the same sort of attacks that have been flying in this thread. http://michaelyon-online.com/wp/second-chances.htm

Sinergy -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/9/2007 6:47:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic A sign of hope that this story may gain the wider exposure it deserves, Yon states in his latest dispatch that AP reporter Robert Reid was at least taking notes on it. He also addresses the same sort of attacks that have been flying in this thread. http://michaelyon-online.com/wp/second-chances.htm I totally agree. The article points out numerous times that the Iraqis are telling Americans that Al Qaeda was responsible. There are two possible rationales for this. 1) Al Qaeda is actually responsible. 2) The Iraqis are telling Americans what the Americans want to hear. The article does not actually provide any empirical proof that Al Qaeda was involved. Sinergy p.s. One interesting aspect of right-wing talk radio is one of them will make some outlandish statement, which then gets repeated by 3298470293487 others, and eventually becomes "Truth." I have been an engineer and a scientist and am a historian. I demand a higher burden of proof before I will accept something as true.

TheHeretic -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/9/2007 7:03:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy I demand a higher burden of proof before I will accept something as true. I think I just threw up in my mouth a little bit. (but I reserve the right to hang onto this quote.)

Sinergy -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/9/2007 7:06:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy I demand a higher burden of proof before I will accept something as true. I think I just threw up in my mouth a little bit. (but I reserve the right to hang onto this quote.) Maybe you should go to a local free clinic and get a GI study done? Concerned about your health, ya know? Sinergy

Sinergy -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/9/2007 7:08:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy I demand a higher burden of proof before I will accept something as true. I think I just threw up in my mouth a little bit. (but I reserve the right to hang onto this quote.) Hang on to the quote. I would suggest applying it to your own life. You appear to have a tendency to not apply any burdens of proof to what you choose to believe. It might work for you. Sinergy

TheHeretic -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/9/2007 7:24:32 PM)
Not true. I reject your Rolling Stone links automatically. [:D] I can understand your skepticism of the source. Let's hope that internet threads such as this one play some small role in getting more credible/mainstream journalists to seek out the truth. Besides, Mr. Historian, wasn't it the investigation of Bush the First and the October Surprise that gave us the idea that the seriousness of the charge was more important than the nature of the evidence?

Sinergy -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/9/2007 7:41:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Not true. I reject your Rolling Stone links automatically. [:D] We know. Sinergy

TheHeretic -> RE: Iraqi Village Slaughtered (7/9/2007 8:47:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Not true. I reject your Rolling Stone links automatically. [:D] We know. Sinergy It's a side-effect of having a figure like Hunter Thompson on the masthead for so many years. The lines between a news story and a 'perspective piece' seem permanently blurred in their editors. They give good writers the freedom to sometimes create brilliant work, but R.S. hardly stands for 'reliable source.' That isn't to say that they might not break a story which could cross into the mainstream, which is more than you seem to be willing accept if it comes from a freelance reporter who sometimes sells to Fox...

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875