Ex US Congressman that studied Quran charged in terror conspiracy

Guerilla, you will have to accept what I said, in this thread, for only one instance, or not:

and

-Or not. If you choose to believe that no matter what you do or say, I am biased, that's your call. If you choose to call my points subjective, or irrelevant, or whatever other words you'd care to use to describe them, and not based in the facts in the only way we can know them - by our own words, on the forum, that again is your call.

I take none of this personally. I take things as I see them here, and address them directly. I thought, based on you saying,

-that this is how you felt as well. I've said it, and mean it - anywhere I am wrong, on anything - I embrace being refuted on the merits and on the facts.

Your again calling things "subjective," "irrelevant" or "personalized" and the like, do not address facts. If this is how you want to debate, I agree - perhaps it is best to just avoid debate in the future.

 

NPT, the fact is, I know those comments were not meant to undermine you or to be taken personally. I might resort to that with someone I didn't respect, but that certainly does not apply to you.

This is far from what I intended with the exception of the "deep study" comment where I was truly frustrated.

However I cannot control how you interpret them, and based on your last few posts, my perception is that they have been taken personally, and not in a favorable way. They seem to be brought up across threads, where the previous comment may have been on a totally different subject matter.

Instead of discussing the topic, we're discussing how I discuss the topic, and to me this is a zero sum game, with my constant defense of how I post very much less enjoyable than actually defending a position.

So yes, I agree. Better to move past further debate. The sun is out, and there is a caucus and a primary today, as well as a few movies I haven't seen yet.

Have a nice day.

 

Guerilla, it doesn't matter where posts are made. The fact remains, if you engage in these tactics, and I regret (I truly regret) that I believe I have shown that you do, not only does it not matter where they stem from - they are independent of "context" - but it very much matters that we discuss "how topics are discussed," not just discuss the topics themselves. Otherwise, we aren't able to discuss anything.

And now again, you indicate your perception that I am taking things personally, without offering anything, other than that perception. I have said from the beginning - on anything - facts. I offer an argument, I hope, based on facts. I would ask for the same consideration in return.

To the subject of this thread, you've never addressed how you can defend the right to individual liberty, and condemn the government's intrusion on that liberty and individual privacy, yet laud the tactics, goals, and actions of the JBS and its children, such as the Western Goals Foundation. I remain utterly perplexed how one would place these two things in the same universe, because I find them flatly contradictory, with real and dire consequences for people, now, as over the past 50 years.

I agree, it isn't enjoyable, and apparently, useless. I do wish you well.

 

The Nixon administration an excellent example of how and why conspiracies never work.

Wasn't it Ben Franklin who said "Three may keep a secret, if two are dead."

 

The war on terror is far from over. Not a day goes by without innocents being killed by islamic terrorits or a new terror cell being discovered.

 

you can pretty much say that about the US too, it's just that you have better words to call it such as "collateral damage"

 

Do you beleive it is normal that terrorists kill people over cartons?

 

Manga or Anime?

 

I don't believe it's normal for people to be killed for ANYTHING. Do you think killing people over oil and influence is normal?

 

Your forgeting that #1) Iraq started the war by invading Kiuwait #2) The taliban and al Qaeda attacked the US

 

You can play this game all of the way back to the beginning of time.

I've actually read people on this forum explain that the conflict goes back to the Barbary Pirates.

Whatever justifications float your boat. In several thousand years, none of us are much smarter for the sum of our ancestors experiences.

 

Certainly doesn't look like a "no" to me.

No surprise there though. Since his first arrival, guerilla has never said a bad word about terrorists or those in that particular religion who are violent over a few cartoons.

Now, Christians, Jews and Americans...he doesn't hold back on bad words for them

 

It actually goes back to the 7th century, when Muhammad divided the world into Dar al Islam and Dar al Harb.