Author Topic: GetBig Politics board has a new standard for evidence requirements! (Read 5787 times)

My life experience and your life experience tells us both the same thing. Only that, in one of our cases, our passion is clouding objective thinking.

Off the top of my head i can give you a few examples:

The pentagon's top brass...........

The ring leader.........

I've been watching the news for 2 months on this story and i have enough information on the case to say it was let go for reasons they didn't state.

I know enough about structural engineering to .............

Hedgehog · « **Reply #6 on:** December 16, 2006, 01:49:47 AM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on December 15, 2006, 04:04:38 PM

"Life Experience" can now be used as a source when making a case during any debate or discussion.

Why do you start new threads on things like this?

It just leads to excess bickering IMO.

Why not make the argument in the existing thread?

-Hedge

Dos Equis · « **Reply #7 on:** December 16, 2006, 09:10:19 AM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on December 16, 2006, 06:40:19 AM

I spent a lot of time researching points, and BB wants to continue to derail these points with calling me gay or starting personal beefs. I was hoping that Beach Bum would come here for the bullshit talk and let the threads be about the issues. Or, if the mods want to scoot the personal attacks (which detract from debates) into one thread, that'd be cool too.

You don't research squat. You quote from web sites that conspiracy nuts put together. You attack anyone who disagrees with you. You invent and distort facts. That's about it.

You have a lot to learn son. It is possible to debate an issue without attacking people (which I admittedly did in the previous paragraph; but it's all true). You're not there yet. But you keep trying. Time is one your side.

xpac2 · « **Reply #8 on:** December 16, 2006, 10:01:58 AM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on December 15, 2006, 04:04:38 PM

"Life Experience" can now be used as a source when making a case during any debate or discussion.

Light years ahead of some of those sources you quote

Dos Equis · « **Reply #9 on:** December 16, 2006, 10:21:51 AM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on December 16, 2006, 09:58:29 AM

when you call someone 'son' in a post it shows you are pissed off. Nice to see that from you.

WOuld you like to choose a topic and debate it point-by=point using mainsteam media sources only? I would be happy to prove NORAD lied on the stand about their 9/11 actions if you're game.

(this is where you roll your eyes

Ding!

Dos Equis · « **Reply #10 on:** December 16, 2006, 10:23:07 AM »

Quote from: xpac2 on December 16, 2006, 10:01:58 AM

Light years ahead of some of those sources you quote

Tell me about it.

OzmO · « **Reply #11 on:** December 16, 2006, 10:29:39 AM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on December 16, 2006, 10:25:00 AM

xpac,

my sources are collections of mainstream media stories which show either the use of revisionist history (eg. condi says one thing right after 911 then denies ever saying it later), or point out lies in statements made by people, or point out problems in timelines.

It's a shame when people refuse to click and see what CBS or FOX said. but hey, I guess when CBS or FOX start covering the Second 911 Investigation, you'll watch them.

Your sources are straight from 9/11 CT sties..... stop trying to spin it.

Dos Equis · « **Reply #12 on:** December 16, 2006, 10:30:36 AM »

Quote from: OzmO on December 16, 2006, 10:29:39 AM

Your sources are straight from 9/11 CT sties..... stop trying to spin it.

You beat me to it. Talk about a load of horse manure.

Delusional Liberal · « **Reply #13 on:** December 16, 2006, 10:37:52 AM »

Quote from: xpac2 on December 16, 2006, 10:01:58 AM

Light years ahead of some of those sources you quote

lol!

Quote from: 240 is Back on December 16, 2006, 10:25:00 AM

xpac,

my sources are collections of mainstream media stories which show either the use of revisionist history (eg. condi says one thing right after 911 then denies ever saying it later), or point out lies in statements made by people, or point out problems in timelines.

It's a shame when people refuse to click and see what CBS or FOX said. but hey, I guess when CBS or FOX start covering the Second 911 Investigation, you'll watch them.

lol!!

Dos Equis · « **Reply #14 on:** December 16, 2006, 10:45:29 AM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on December 16, 2006, 10:44:26 AM

ignorant, dude.

Please list the last ten sites i've listed, and then show the class how that page isn't built upon MSM sites.

I am annoyed cause you're just lying now. Shit man. argue like a fucking grownup.

lol. He was probably poking his lip out as he typed this.

Delusional Liberal · « **Reply #15 on:** December 16, 2006, 10:51:12 AM »

Quote from: Beach Bum on December 16, 2006, 10:45:29 AM

lol. He was probably poking his lip out as he typed this.

lol!!!!!!

Dos Equis · « **Reply #16 on:** December 16, 2006, 10:55:01 AM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on December 16, 2006, 10:48:09 AM

yawn. i love to argue, but you're just wasting time here. go watch your portfolio collapse with the dollar. I'm off to speak to people who can debate without making up lies and the gay bullshit.

240 to Ozmo: "ignorant, dude. . . . I am annoyed cause you're just lying now. Shit man. argue like a fucking grownup."

Dos Equis · « **Reply #17 on:** December 16, 2006, 10:55:49 AM »

Quote from: Delusional Liberal on December 16, 2006, 10:51:12 AM

lol!!!!!!

xpac2 · « **Reply #18 on:** December 16, 2006, 02:00:58 PM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on December 16, 2006, 10:25:00 AM

xpac,

my sources are collections of mainstream media stories which show either the use of revisionist history (eg. condi says one thing right after 911 then denies ever saying it later), or point out lies in statements made by people, or point out problems in timelines.

It's a shame when people refuse to click and see what CBS or FOX said. but hey, I guess when CBS or FOX start covering the Second 911 Investigation, you'll watch them.

The scary part is you might actually believe that

Hedgehog · « **Reply #19 on:** December 16, 2006, 02:45:31 PM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on December 16, 2006, 10:25:00 AM

xpac,

my sources are collections of mainstream media stories which show either the use of revisionist history (eg. condi says one thing right after 911 then denies ever saying it later), or point out lies in statements made by people, or point out problems in timelines.

It's a shame when people refuse to click and see what CBS or FOX said. but hey, I guess when CBS or FOX start covering the Second 911 Investigation, you'll watch them.

I vaguely recall a link you provided to either a google clip or a youtubeclip with a long video, where there were lots of questions made, nicely edited.

Didn't look mainstream media IMO.

Another clip was some kind of lecturer in front of a group, talking about how he had been around USA talking about "these issues", very underground feeling to that clip IMO.

It didn't look CBS.

Noticed that you've been using a lot of different media sources as of late though.

-Hedge

xpac2 · « **Reply #20 on:** December 16, 2006, 03:32:42 PM »

Quote from: Hedgehog on December 16, 2006, 02:45:31 PM

I vaguely recall a link you provided to either a google clip or a youtubeclip with a long video, where there were lots of questions made, nicely edited.

Didn't look mainstream media IMO.

Another clip was some kind of lecturer in front of a group, talking about how he had been around USA talking about "these issues", very underground feeling to that clip IMO.

It didn't look CBS.

Noticed that you've been using a lot of different media sources as of late though.

-Hedge

Don't forget all the quotes from people like " a guy who once took a flying lesson" or the old receptionist at the FBI in 1952. Or all the quotes taken out of context.