Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush approves missile defense
Washington Times ^ | 12/17/02 | Bill Gertz

Posted on 12/16/2002 10:25:11 PM PST by kattracks

Edited on 07/12/2004 3:59:40 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 last
To: goldilucky
I'm gonna respond by telling you and Poobah to get the book as I suggested.

For the fifth time: please explain how Donald Rumsfeld personally was involved in sending money and weapons to North Korea. That was your claim. It's an extraordinary one. It needs something resembling extraordinary proof.

The author, Quigley, made note of the fact that CFR members have been behind this funding of the war business for a long time.

You still haven't demonstrated how your thesis is correct.

And yes, I may include Rumsfield, because Rumsfield is a part of the foreign policy advisor known as the CFR, who advise Bush on what to do.

Then all you need do is post the evidence.

41 posted on 12/18/2002 4:27:25 PM PST by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Badger1
My biggest concern is not missiles, but nukes smuggled into the US and planted in our cities.

I think there is a NAFTA exemption to Star Wars defense.
Dubya has made a commitment that nothing will interfere with Mexican trucks crossing our borders.

42 posted on 12/18/2002 4:28:39 PM PST by Willie Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
I'm not afraid of anything! I fear God and Jesus Christ...not our so-called "leaders" who portray themselves as some god to the citizens who think they are entitled to make decisions for our "security" which indeed is false. I'm willing to die for my freedom. Now, if that makes me crazy than so be it! But, I am nobody's fool and I'm not playing the fool either. I lead with my own conscience and not follow in somebody else's shadow.
43 posted on 12/18/2002 4:31:57 PM PST by goldilucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Get the book!
44 posted on 12/18/2002 4:33:52 PM PST by goldilucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: goldilucky; VaBthang4
For the sixth time:

Please provide your evidence for your thesis that Donald Rumsfeld is or was personally tied to financing or supplying weapons to North Korea. That is your thesis. You have not supported the claim. You have asserted; you must demonstrate convincing proof. Telling me to go get a book is not demonstrating convincing proof.

45 posted on 12/18/2002 4:42:26 PM PST by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
By Rumsfield being even so much as involved as a CFR member makes him an accomplice to aiding and abetting rogue nations. He doesn't have to personally participate in the distribution of artillery to other nations. The fact is that he, along with other members of the CFR, are in "collective agreement" to support rogue nations which shows conflict of interest with the U.S.
46 posted on 12/18/2002 5:44:16 PM PST by goldilucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: goldilucky; VaBthang4
By Rumsfield being even so much as involved as a CFR member makes him an accomplice to aiding and abetting rogue nations.

Very well. You've basically conceded that you have no evidence whatsoever to back your claim, and you are basically claiming guilt by association.

He doesn't have to personally participate in the distribution of artillery to other nations.

Pray tell me which organizations you belong to, that I might have the privelege of blaming you for any misdeeds of that organization, be they real or imagined.

47 posted on 12/18/2002 5:47:29 PM PST by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
I don't belong to any association whatsoever. I read. And one of them is the book I suggested you read. BTW, that book I mentioned was also credited by Bill Clinton.
48 posted on 12/18/2002 5:53:32 PM PST by goldilucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: goldilucky; VaBthang4
I don't belong to any association whatsoever. I read.

OK, then I'll simply blame you for the misdeeds of any authors on your reading list.

BTW, you never even supported your claim that the CFR did all these bad things, let alone Mr. Rumsfeld.

And one of them is the book I suggested you read. BTW, that book I mentioned was also credited by Bill Clinton.

That is hardly an endorsement of the veracity of its content.

49 posted on 12/18/2002 6:12:36 PM PST by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Pssssst. Ask it what the KGB's new name is - it already got the acronymn wrong.
50 posted on 12/18/2002 6:27:37 PM PST by patton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: patton
You caught that one, too, I see.
51 posted on 12/18/2002 6:33:00 PM PST by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
OK, then I'll simply blame you for the misdeeds of any authors on your reading list.

Look, I refuse to waste my invaluable time pussyfooting with you who simply insist on attacking me personally. I'm used to dealing with above average intelligent minded individuals.

BTW, you never even supported your claim that the CFR did all these bad things, let alone Mr. Rumsfeld.

Read just the damn book, ok!

52 posted on 12/18/2002 8:04:50 PM PST by goldilucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: goldilucky; VaBthang4
Look, I refuse to waste my invaluable time pussyfooting with you who simply insist on attacking me personally.

Pointing out that your argument is long on emoting and very thin on demonstrating facts is not a "attacking" you. It's just pointing out that you haven't supported your line of argument.

I'm used to dealing with above average intelligent minded individuals.

But, of course, you can't substantiate your argument worth a hoot.

Read just the damn book, ok!

No, you just need to demonstrate the veracity of your argument. So far, about all you've done is point out that William Jefferson Blythe Clinton--hardly a paragon of integrity--has endorsed the book that you refer to as your one and only source.

53 posted on 12/18/2002 8:34:31 PM PST by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Noooo...what I've suggested is that you read the book for clarity measure! Since you popped up the question, I'm leading you to the source and I'm not typing it out for ya either.
54 posted on 12/18/2002 11:35:00 PM PST by goldilucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: goldilucky
Noooo...what I've suggested is that you read the book for clarity measure!

You're trying to weasel. You made the specific allegation; it is incumbent on you to offer proof. Telling someone else to "read the book" is not offering proof.

Since you popped up the question, I'm leading you to the source and I'm not typing it out for ya either.

Since you are the one who has actually made the assertions here, it's incumbent on you to either (a) support those assertions by "typing it out," or (b) admitting that you just do not have the juice to back your claims. He who asserts must prove. You have not done so.

55 posted on 12/19/2002 4:52:26 AM PST by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
"...He who asserts must prove. You have not done so."

Obviously, you're not hungry enough for knowledge or you would have taken my suggestion into consideration. Instead you waste your time time with weasly words to throw at me. Read to enrich your knowledge. Knowledge is power, my friend. I cannot force you to be led over to the horse's trough. You just not that hungry for the truth that's all.

Finally bump this post to the top!

56 posted on 12/19/2002 9:53:25 AM PST by goldilucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: goldilucky; VaBthang4
Obviously, you're not hungry enough for knowledge or you would have taken my suggestion into consideration.

Sorry, I listen to those dead white guys who formalized the rules of argument and logic.

If you are asserting A, vaguely waving your arm in the direction of a book and telling someone to read it is not proving A.

Instead you waste your time time with weasly words to throw at me.

You're the weaseling one here. Surely you can post the evidence to support your claim, right?

Or maybe you can't.

I cannot force you to be led over to the horse's trough.

No. You can merely post the proof of your assertion.

You just not that hungry for the truth that's all.

One more time: if you are directing me to read a book, it's because you want me to do YOUR work for you.

I'm easy. I'm NOT cheap. $200 an hour independent consulting rate. 80 hours minimum. Expenses extra. I will go into work when your check for 50% of the total estimated cost clears.

57 posted on 12/19/2002 10:06:55 AM PST by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
You're wasting my time. Have a nice life.
58 posted on 12/19/2002 11:30:09 AM PST by goldilucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

Comment #59 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-59 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson