Re: Iraq update
- From: "John Phillips" <jsphillips1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2005 14:54:51 GMT
"Shawn Wilson" wrote
>
> "John Phillips" wrote
>>>> Same language, same culture, and the borders were drawn up after WWII
>>>> in Geneva.
>>>> Less foreign aggression and more an 500+ year old civil war.
>>> Different borders, different governments, different armies, different
>>> friends- different countries.
>>>
>>> Or are you arguing that Germany and Austria are the same country?
>>
>> Have Germany and Austria been involved in an on and off again civil war
>> for the past 500+ years?
> Does that make North And South Vietnam the same country?
Quite often, yes, which makes the whole claim of 'foreign aggression' a bit
dubious.
> I could truthfully answer either yes or no to your question about Austria
> and Germany.
That's because you are an "Historian", right?
>>>> That crime happens? Yes Shawn its true, rapes and murders happen in
>>>> real life all the time.
>>> Did they happen in the Superdome?
>>
>> Did anything happen at the Superdome?
> Apparently not rapes and murders.
Apparently not, but was it possible?
>> Were you there?
>
> Nope, I had to rely on the reports of people who were there.
How do you know they were even there?? How do you know there even was a
there in the first place??!?
> No we are discussing the lies those people told and whether they should
> be free to lie at will.
So you claim that being mistaken is the same as a lie?
>> How do you know that the Superdome wasn't some malicious fabrication by
>> an evil press out to destroy freedom and democracy?
> How do YOU?
How do WE know that there even is a Superdome???
>> The original question was it believable when first reported. I said yes
>> because crime happens quite often in real life. You said no, as you don't
>> seem to believe in crime.
>
>
> Would you have believed those stories if it had been middle class whites
> from Utah or Connecticut in the Superdome, instead of poor blacks for the
> South?
Yep, I would have given it the same weight, especially if the reports came
from a city with a high crime rate.
> Why did you believe that randomly selected poor blacks would turn into
> barbarians in the first place? Is it because you think blacks are less
> civilized than whites?
You seem to be the only person claiming that randomly selected poor blacks
turned into barbarians. Why do you find it hard to believe that in a city
with a high crime rate (such as N.O.) crime would continue to happen even
during a crisis?
>>>> You have proof they made it up rather than just being mistaken or
>>>> getting faulty information?
>>> Let's see... supposedly they were within 200 yards of people who had
>>> been raped or murdered, yet they didn't seek out the bodies, victims,
>>> their friends, their families, any witnesses, or indeed any evidence
>>> whatsoever to confirm those stories.
>>
>> Ah, so are you saying they just didn't check their information properly?
>
> Gross negligence and callous disregard for the truth add up to lying.
So you agree that members of the current administration are liars?
>> So is taking people at their word and reputing what they have been told,
>> no matter how dubious the source a lie, or is it just a sign of
>> incompetence?
> Since you are defending the press here, are YOU incompetent?
Never when you are around.
>> > That shows callous disregard the the truth content of those stories,
>> > and
>>> from an organization that purports to report the news and
>>
>> Ah, so not fully examining the information before reporting it to the
>> public, when said information brings an advantage to you (in the case of
>> the press, sensational story=higher ratings) is showing a callous
>> disregard for the truth?
>
>
> Fully examining? They didn't examine the stories AT ALL. They were
> within 200 yeards of the events and the people supposedly involved, but
> they didn't seek out one victim, witness, friend or family member to
> confirm them.
Ah, so you think that people who act on information they have not confirmed
should be held accountable?
>>>demands special privileges based on that, that makes it a lie.
>>
>> Special privileges?
> Yep.
Such as?
>>>> I did not believe that "poor blacks" turned into "uncivilized
>>>> barbarians" in the Superdome. I was willing to believe that among the
>>>> thousands of people there, some of them may have been criminals.
>>>> (What?! Crime happen in New Orleans!! Say it isn't so!!!)
>>>
>>> It WASN'T so, and that is precisely what is at issue...
>>
>> Yet, at the time, was crime happening in New Orleans believable? I mean,
>> if someone brings you information that is believable and you act on it as
>> if it was true, even if it later proves to be incorrect, are you
>> dishonest or just mistaken?
> When it is your JOB to actually investigate and check facts, you are
> dishonest when you report lies.
So we agree that the President and members of his administration are
dishonest and report lies?
>>> Don't the people have a right to a TRUTHFUL press?
>>
>> You still haven't answered the question, is mistake the same as a lie?
> Mistake? What mistake did the press make? They made an intentional
> choice to air those reports knowing full well there was no actual evidence
> supporting them and made no attempt to find any. That's not a mistake,
> that's a policy decision.
The policy is to be The First and to be sensational. This brings them higher
ratings and thus more money. Its capitalism at its best. You don't have a
problem with capitalism, do you?
>> So you admit that President Bush lies, and that it is his job to lie?
> It's not an admission, it is a statement of fact.
You says its a fact that President Bush and members of his administration
are liars?
John
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Iraq update
- From: Dirk Collins
- Re: Iraq update
- From: Shawn Wilson
- Re: Iraq update
- References:
- Re: Iraq update
- From: Shawn Wilson
- Re: Iraq update
- From: John Phillips
- Re: Iraq update
- From: Shawn Wilson
- Re: Iraq update
- Prev by Date: Re: Energy Substitution Based PrC
- Next by Date: Re: Iraq update
- Previous by thread: Re: Iraq update
- Next by thread: Re: Iraq update
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading