[quote]arnoldseven wrote:
…Monsanto had apparently gone a step further by using fake people on the internet on some listserves that discussed science issues. (This itself is not really a new tactic, as it appears that a number of companies in various industries have been doing this.)
[/quote]
I have heard that supporters of certain candidates even spam websites promoting their boy.
Me too.
And the best way to spot them is they keep making the same arguments over and over again.
[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
Whoa, hold on. I do buy this argument, though not as heavily as most. But have you watched NBC? MSNBC? This is one of the most anti-war stations you can imagine. [/quote]
Did you watch NBC back in early 2003? Were they anti-war back then? No! They did more than their fair share to relay the WMD scam and the Saddam-AlQaeda connection lies. Now that the war has gained momentum, it doesn’t matter so much. As demonstrated by last year’s elections, no matter who holds the houses, the war will continue. Heck, the US created a terrorist nest in Iraq and now has a good reason for staying there.
Don’t kid yourself. None of the mainstream US media did their role of questioning the motives and allegations when it mattered the most. When Spanish and Italian newspapers were dismantling the charade, NBC along with every other news group in America, were going heavy on the war drums.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
… But seeing as how you’re already a Paul supporter under a different name that would but pointless.
You’re not making any sense under either of your names.
LOL
I wager he has at least six other names.[/quote]
ChuckyT? JeffR?
Ooops, you mean the other one…
[quote]orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
… But seeing as how you’re already a Paul supporter under a different name that would but pointless.
You’re not making any sense under either of your names.
LOL
I wager he has at least six other names.
ChuckyT? JeffR?
Ooops, you mean the other one…
[/quote]
bota,
I use one name.
Write the administrators and ask them directly if any other members send posts from my IP address.
If you don’t bother or if you sack up and they tell you that I am correct, then I will be awaiting your apology.
If you can’t bring yourself to take it back or apologize, then you can kiss my superior ass.
JeffR
[quote]JeffR wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
… But seeing as how you’re already a Paul supporter under a different name that would but pointless.
You’re not making any sense under either of your names.
LOL
I wager he has at least six other names.
ChuckyT? JeffR?
Ooops, you mean the other one…
bota,
I use one name.
Write the administrators and ask them directly if any other members send posts from my IP address.
If you don’t bother or if you sack up and they tell you that I am correct, then I will be awaiting your apology.
If you can’t bring yourself to take it back or apologize, then you can kiss my superior ass.
JeffR
[/quote]
What about the other networks you post from, Mick?
[quote]JeffR wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
… But seeing as how you’re already a Paul supporter under a different name that would but pointless.
You’re not making any sense under either of your names.
LOL
I wager he has at least six other names.
ChuckyT? JeffR?
Ooops, you mean the other one…
bota,
I use one name.
Write the administrators and ask them directly if any other members send posts from my IP address.
If you don’t bother or if you sack up and they tell you that I am correct, then I will be awaiting your apology.
If you can’t bring yourself to take it back or apologize, then you can kiss my superior ass.
JeffR
[/quote]
I do not think that you and Mick28 are the same, but ChuckyT is most definitely your other nom de guerre…
[quote]arnoldseven wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:I have heard that supporters of certain candidates even spam websites promoting their boy.
Me too.
And the best way to spot them is they keep making the same arguments over and over again.
[/quote]
You are right, Mr 12 Posts All About Ron Paul.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
arnoldseven wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:I have heard that supporters of certain candidates even spam websites promoting their boy.
Me too.
And the best way to spot them is they keep making the same arguments over and over again.
You are right, Mr 12 Posts All About Ron Paul.[/quote]
Check the title of the thread.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
arnoldseven wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:I have heard that supporters of certain candidates even spam websites promoting their boy.
Me too.
And the best way to spot them is they keep making the same arguments over and over again.
You are right, Mr 12 Posts All About Ron Paul.
Check the title of the thread.[/quote]
His every post on this website is about Ron Paul. Hard for me to take him seriously.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
His every post on this website is about Ron Paul. Hard for me to take him seriously.[/quote]
Maybe he is serious about supporting Paul. Freedom is popular.
[quote]orion wrote:
I do not think that you and Mick28 are the same, but ChuckyT is most definitely your other nom de guerre…
[/quote]
bota,
I threw down the gauntlet. I also challenged you to man up and admit you were wrong.
I post under one name only. This can be confirmed.
If you throw out a baseless allegation and fail to prove it’s veracity you can kiss my ass.
You have no credibility on any issue. This is just another example that you are as cowardly as you are clueless.
More bicycling less posting does would do your body good.
JeffR
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
His every post on this website is about Ron Paul. Hard for me to take him seriously.
Maybe he is serious about supporting Paul. Freedom is popular.[/quote]
News flash: ron paul is more concerned with ron paul than he is with any other consideration.
He dismisses other viewpoints as nonsense. He refuses to acknowledge or address the dangers in his positions.
In short, he is a demagogue that offers the shallow a vessel to rebel against their fathers.
JeffR
[quote]JeffR wrote:
In short, he is a demagogue that offers the shallow a vessel to rebel against their fathers.
JeffR[/quote]
Wonder who let these shallow soldiers enter the military?
Oh wait.
Weren’t they too the ones who let criminals enlist??
“Then there’s the still-astonishing “moral waiver” – employed to produce more cannon fodder. In 2005, already desperate for fresh recruits, the Army started increasing, by nearly half, the rate at which it grants what it terms “moral waivers,” permitting recruits with criminal records, emotional problems, and weak educational backgrounds to serve.”
[quote]arnoldseven wrote:
JeffR wrote:
In short, he is a demagogue that offers the shallow a vessel to rebel against their fathers.
JeffR
Wonder who let these shallow soldiers enter the military?
Oh wait.
Weren’t they too the ones who let criminals enlist??
“Then there’s the still-astonishing “moral waiver” – employed to produce more cannon fodder. In 2005, already desperate for fresh recruits, the Army started increasing, by nearly half, the rate at which it grants what it terms “moral waivers,” permitting recruits with criminal records, emotional problems, and weak educational backgrounds to serve.”
[/quote]
What are you blathering about?
I’d say it’s a nice change in discussion. However, it wasn’t “nice.” It was lame.
The majority of ron paul supporters are exactly that: shallow.
I said nothing about the military in an sense.
Go spin elsewhere.
JeffR
[quote]JeffR wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
His every post on this website is about Ron Paul. Hard for me to take him seriously.
Maybe he is serious about supporting Paul. Freedom is popular.
News flash: ron paul is more concerned with ron paul than he is with any other consideration.
He dismisses other viewpoints as nonsense. He refuses to acknowledge or address the dangers in his positions.
In short, he is a demagogue that offers the shallow a vessel to rebel against their fathers.
JeffR[/quote]
Sorry dude, I just don’t buy into it. You just described every candidate but Paul.
If Paul thinks he is correct why would he think his opinions are dangerous?
Paul does not support the neocon position of aggression so therefore you do not support him. That is your right but don’t think for a moment the rest of the country supports your ideas or the neocons’ any more than they support Ron Paul.
You know how you like to blow the patriot horn? well in my book people like Paul are the patriots who dissent against the tyranny of convenience. It requires an actual ability to understand certain precepts about reality:
I think Jesus tried to teach these principles to his disciples but then again I am not a Christian.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
arnoldseven wrote:
JeffR wrote:
In short, he is a demagogue that offers the shallow a vessel to rebel against their fathers.
JeffR
Wonder who let these shallow soldiers enter the military?
Oh wait.
Weren’t they too the ones who let criminals enlist??
“Then there’s the still-astonishing “moral waiver” – employed to produce more cannon fodder. In 2005, already desperate for fresh recruits, the Army started increasing, by nearly half, the rate at which it grants what it terms “moral waivers,” permitting recruits with criminal records, emotional problems, and weak educational backgrounds to serve.”
What are you blathering about?
I’d say it’s a nice change in discussion. However, it wasn’t “nice.” It was lame.
The majority of ron paul supporters are exactly that: shallow.
I said nothing about the military in an sense.
Go spin elsewhere.
JeffR
[/quote]
Who’s the one spinning here, buddy?
The military are among the biggest supporters of Paul ( i know, it’s damn hard to defend against this kind of fact), see the donations tables.
So, do you like to tell us how the military are shallow ?
Tell us , buddy.
Ron Paul on an Arab-American Radio Program:
It’s only about 15 min and he answers questions about national security.
[quote]arnoldseven wrote:
JeffR wrote:
In short, he is a demagogue that offers the shallow a vessel to rebel against their fathers.
JeffR
Wonder who let these shallow soldiers enter the military?
[/quote]
http://www.mudvillegazette.com/milblogs/archives/2007/10/19/#009544
Soldiers or their mothers hairdressers?
[quote]arnoldseven wrote:
…The military are among the biggest supporters of Paul ( i know, it’s damn hard to defend against this kind of fact), see the donations tables.
…
[/quote]
See my link above. I suspect that this claim of Paul’s is bogus.