Posting Towards Gomorrah

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Do you know who committed that attack? Hint: Not bin Laden or Al Qaeda.

Iraq's secret war against America probably began with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Iraq's secret war against America probably began with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

Enough with the discredited horseshit, Penske. That piece is five years old. It's a reminder of the mendacious efforts to try to tie Al Qaeda to Saddam Hussein to justify the war ex ante. Maybe you haven't noticed, but the Administration's non-institutionalized supporters have stopped peddling that crap.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Enough with the discredited horseshit, Penske. That piece is five years old. It's a reminder of the mendacious efforts to try to tie Al Qaeda to Saddam Hussein to justify the war ex ante. Maybe you haven't noticed, but the Administration non-institutionalized members have stopped peddling that crap.

I thought if it's publically available it's a fact- like your blogs or P's article, or I don't know, maybe this movie we're fixing to watch?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Enough with the discredited horseshit, Penske. That piece is five years old. It's a reminder of the mendacious efforts to try to tie Al Qaeda to Saddam Hussein to justify the war ex ante. Maybe you haven't noticed, but the Administration non-institutionalized members have stopped peddling that crap.

Yes, but I thought you told me that they lied?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I thought if it's publically available it's a fact- like your blogs or P's article, or I don't know, maybe this movie we're fixing to watch?

This explains a lot. You were a high-school debater, I take it?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Yes, but I thought you told me that they lied?

Then why continue to trot this shit out? You disrespect the board and everyone who comes here. It's as if Hank visited your house and started to fling his own feces about.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I thought if it's publically available it's a fact- like your blogs or P's article, or I don't know, maybe this movie we're fixing to watch?

All the bs aside, I am going to watch this documentary with an open mind, just like I did with Fahrenheit 911. After I watched that one, I was able to correctly discern that it was all false.

I reserve judgment on this one, although at this point it seems fairly persuasive.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
This explains a lot. You were a high-school debater, I take it?

Yes.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Then why continue to trot this shit out? You disrespect the board and everyone who comes here. It's as if Hank visited your house and started to fling his own feces about.

Dissent. I have never seen the Iraqi connection convincingly overturned and in fact, there remains a serious difference of opinion on Atta's meetings with the Iraqis in Europe. The money in the ME flows through a finite amount of sources and at some point is undoubtedly intermingled, which is enough to tie the whole of their conspiracy against us together.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Then why continue to trot this shit out? You disrespect the board and everyone who comes here. It's as if Hank visited your house and started to fling his own feces about.

Why is it that the left always seems ready to believe the unsubstantiated (except by unreliable opinionblogs) worst about W and the patriotic Republicans, and yet is always willing to give the terrorists and our other enemies the benefit of the doubt, even in light of evidence from respected scholars?

Why do y'all hate America?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Dissent. I have never seen the Iraqi connection convincingly overturned and in fact, there remains a serious difference of opinion on Atta's meetings with the Iraqis in Europe.

Our intelligence people have hard evidence that he was in Virginia at the time he supposedly met Iraqis in Prague. But doubtless you could look at that evidence and conjure some reason to decide that it's not "convincing." You'd think the fact that we have no more evidence now that we occupy the country than we did before the war would be a sign of something, but you're willing to believe that anything that sounds like it's barking is a dog but also to ignore all the dogs that don't bark. When you make up your mind to believe this sort of crap whatever the evidence, there's really no point in continuing discuss it.

The money in the ME flows through a finite amount of sources and at some point is undoubtedly intermingled, which is enough to tie the whole of their conspiracy against us together.

For your purposes, absolutely.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Why is it that the left always seems ready to believe the unsubstantiated (except by unreliable opinionblogs) worst about W and the patriotic Republicans, and yet is always willing to give the terrorists and our other enemies the benefit of the doubt, even in light of evidence from respected scholars?

Here's a tip -- next time, don't serve Hank that Washington State boxed wine, and he probably won't fling his feces.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
This explains a lot. You were a high-school debater, I take it?

and you must be used to teaching classes- "if you don't read what I say you should read then you really can't have a voice in my classroom?"

Ty, here's the point: Americans like TV. A TV show will say that all of this is true. It doesn't matter whether it was true, if the show is done well, it will become true. Like if someone with the ability to tell a coherent story had been on Moore's payroll maybe that hatchet job would have been bought. Maybe Berger can do mea culpa speaking engagements?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Our intelligence people have hard evidence that he was in Virginia at the time he supposedly met Iraqis in Prague. But doubtless you could look at that evidence and conjure some reason to decide that it's not "convincing." You'd think the fact that we have no more evidence now that we occupy the country than we did before the war would be a sign of something, but you're willing to believe that anything that sounds like it's barking is a dog but also to ignore all the dogs that don't bark. When you make up your mind to believe this sort of crap whatever the evidence, there's really no point in continuing discuss it.

I keep an open mind and am open to a coherent presentation of the facts, which is why the Iraqi al Qaeda connection still interests me, as I have not seen the facts convincingly disputed.

That said, I am also wary of both our intelligence and administration because you keep telling me that they lie. I know you believe Clinton, and I remember him telling me that Iraq was the greatest threat to ME stability and also, that they had WMDs.....2+2.......Fore!

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I keep an open mind and am open to a coherent presentation of the facts, which is why the Iraqi al Qaeda connection still interests me, as I have not seen the facts convincingly disputed.

That said, I am also wary of both our intelligence and administration because you keep telling me that they lie. I know you believe Clinton, and I remember him telling me that Iraq was the greatest threat to ME stability and also, that they had WMDs.....2+2.......Fore!

didn't Jimmy Carter decide that invading Iran ( a limited invasion, but still) was a good idea?