Total Posts:18|Showing Posts:1-18
Jump to topic:

liberals and thier lies

banker
Posts: 1,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2010 5:32:24 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
While building arguments against culture religion and everything standing for morality ..! Libs are tired to base their afgumants on facts and truth..! Supply is limited and its working against them.!!
So liberals turned to fiction..!
Here is a great peace a writer describes his own expiriance with a liberal reporter who used lies and how liberals lie to us here is wnd.com reporter:

"The epidemic of lying in the media is so fascinating, I thought it would make for another column (or 40). When someone like Bill Clinton claims that he would get in a ditch with a rifle and fight and die for Israel if necessary (as he claimed a few years ago), we all know the Boy from Hope is funnin' us. Nobody takes that seriously; we know it isn't true. But it gets reported because a former president said it. The reporter was merely quoting a public figure. But it's much harder to discern a falsehood when it's dropped into a news story (or a book, like any written by Jimmy Carter in the last 30 years, particularly "Palestine or Apartheid?"). A recent piece describing the carnage in Nigeria, when Muslim jihadists butchered 500 Christian men, women and children, is a case in point. The lie came not in the reporter's blatant bias, but in the selection of a quote. In the northern city of Jos last week, members of the ("mainly") Muslim Fulani ethnic group took axes and machetes to defenseless villagers and for good measure, burned a good number of the straw-and-mud huts in their way. Mind you, this story is very straightforward; it would be similar to a story about a Civil War battle, in the sense that certain undeniable facts are obvious: two opposing armies met at Gettysburg during three days in early July and the Union Army was able to fend-off the Confederates' deepest penetration yet into enemy territory. For the Jos massacre story, same deal, except now we are living in an era of disinformation and misinformation. Oh, the reporter did record the obvious, that after the attackers broke into homes shouting "Allah Akhbar," the sing-song of jihadists, a statement was issued by the Plateau State Christian Elders Consulatative Forum (PSCEF): "The attack is yet another jihad and provocation." So far, all this falls into the "two opposing armies met at Gettysburg" realm. (Column continues below)     But unfortunately, the reporter felt the need to include a quote from the archbishop of Abuja. The "good" bishop claimed that the violence was "rooted not in religion, but in social, economic and tribal differences." Now we have a blatant lie masquerading as a credible statement from a religious official. No doubt said archbishop doesn't want to sleep in a suit of armor, so he thinks pacifying the jihadists is the way to go. The quote is very unfortunate, because it takes a story from the realm of straightforward reporting to fuzziness. Amazingly, many who read it will assume the archbishop might be right, that perhaps one group of villagers was just mad because the neighboring villagers grew better vegetables. Please, this kind of journalism makes the struggle against jihadists easier to lose, because they love nothing better than to blur the lines with propaganda, something jihadists like Yasser Arafat learned from his Marxist buddies. Continuing with the "Middle East" tone of today's column, let me give you another nugget from more than a decade ago. This is another gem from the syndicated columnist I mentioned last week, the one who accused Israel of burrowing under the Temple Mount. Around the same time, she wrote a piece about Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu and his American counterpart, the ditch-hugging, Alvin York-wannabe Bill Clinton. The writer compared them in various ways — some similarities and some differences — before making the following mind-boggling statement: In neither does one find experience in their respective militaries. Cue laugh track. I think most of us are aware that Bill Clinton spent the Vietnam War years parked with his El Camino down at the duck pond. But Bibi Netanyahu spent the same years in savage combat against jihadists. A member of the elite counter-terrorism unit, Sayaret Matkal (as were his brothers, Jonathan and Iddo), Netanyahu also distinguished himself during fighting in the Yom Kippur War. See, while Clinton was tomcatting and attending Marxist film festivals, Netanyahu, upon hearing of the outbreak of fighting on October 6, 1973, immediately left his studies at MIT and got on a plane. Three weeks later, he had been part of the almost-biblical effort to turn the tide against Syria and Egypt. I called the columnist and pointed all this out. I said, "You know, after covering the Middle East for 35 years, that military service is mandatory for Israelis, right?" She hemmed and hawed, and claimed that while at a cocktail party for the Israeli ambassador, she heard that Netanyahu had not served. I asked if I could quote her. "I'd rather you didn't," she said. You see, we both knew that I knew that she was lying. She had wanted to portray Netanyau, at the time a wildly hated prime minister internationally, as an empty-suit pretty boy who just wouldn't get with the program and give a Palestinian state to the serial-killer Arafat. This is one of the problems in publishing; people willingly lie. They do it every day. The lies distort real events and cause many people to make wrong decisions. For example, enough columns like the one I cited above and all of a sudden, millions are demanding that compromise with killers like Arafat is a good thing. It is a bedrock truth in our world today that the Palestinians have found favor with the international community in peddling their narrative. The rest of us have been damaged because of it. I'll conclude with a story that is seemingly harmless, but I argue that it is not. Again, it portrays a conservative politician in a negative light. Yahoo News! Reported recently on the Sarah Palin stand-up appearance on whatever show Jay Leno is hosting now. One can YouTube the performance, and it appears to be a pretty funny routine by a media-savvy politician, Palin. The reporter for Yahoo, however, no doubt is a left-leaning Democrat. Note the following statement, after some description of Palin's performance: "Still, there are some who suspect that Jay Leno's staff 'added both applause and laughter in postproduction' to make the appearance look like more of a success." You're ahead of me, I hope. You get it, don't you? The phrase "some who suspect" is probably as old in journalism as the first Sumerian cuneiform broadsheets. The phrase really means, "I'm making this part up to justify my criticism of this individual." "Some who suspect" is a magic bullet, because those "anonymous" sources can't be tracked down to see in fact if anyone did this. Palin goes from a fairly funny public figure to just another phony right-winger. It's an effective tactic used by leftists in the media. And it's still wrong. "
the most important source for muslim Arabs:

"And thereafter We [Allah] said to the Children of Israel: 'Dwell securely in the Promised Land. And when the last warning will come to pass, we will gather you together in a mingled crowd'.".

- Qur'an 17:104 -

Any sincere muslim must recognize the Land they call "Palestine" as the Jewish Homeland, according to the book considered by muslims to be the most sacred word and Allah's ultimate revelation.

Ibn Khaldun, one of the most creditable
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2010 6:19:48 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/16/2010 5:32:24 AM, banker wrote:
While building arguments against culture religion and everything standing for morality ..!

When do liberals argue against culture, religion and morality?
Most liberals are educated, into culture, many of them are religious, very few of them would be opposed to freedom of religion and liberalism pretty much relies on extensive, indeed exaggerated moralism.

Libs are tired to base their afgumants on facts and truth..!

All the best afgumants are based on facts and truth.

Supply is limited and its working against them.!!
So liberals turned to fiction..!
Here is a great peace a writer describes his own expiriance with a liberal reporter who used lies and how liberals lie to us here is wnd.com reporter:

Jeepers batman! A politically biased JOURNALIST that lied... even though it's their job to do so! That must mean that anyone with similar views is a liar! Because that is what we do in bankers world, judge people by a label not by actually what they believe in or do!


"The epidemic of lying in the media is so fascinating, I thought it would make for another column (or 40). When someone like Bill Clinton claims that he would get in a ditch with a rifle and fight and die for Israel if necessary (as he claimed a few years ago), we all know the Boy from Hope is funnin' us. Nobody takes that seriously; we know it isn't true. But it gets reported because a former president said it. The reporter was merely quoting a public figure. But it's much harder to discern a falsehood when it's dropped into a news story (or a book, like any written by Jimmy Carter in the last 30 years, particularly "Palestine or Apartheid?"). A recent piece describing the carnage in Nigeria, when Muslim jihadists butchered 500 Christian men, women and children, is a case in point. The lie came not in the reporter's blatant bias, but in the selection of a quote. In the northern city of Jos last week, members of the ("mainly") Muslim Fulani ethnic group took axes and machetes to defenseless villagers and for good measure, burned a good number of the straw-and-mud huts in their way. Mind you, this story is very straightforward; it would be similar to a story about a Civil War battle, in the sense that certain undeniable facts are obvious: two opposing armies met at Gettysburg during three days in early July and the Union Army was able to fend-off the Confederates' deepest penetration yet into enemy territory. For the Jos massacre story, same deal, except now we are living in an era of disinformation and misinformation. Oh, the reporter did record the obvious, that after the attackers broke into homes shouting "Allah Akhbar," the sing-song of jihadists, a statement was issued by the Plateau State Christian Elders Consulatative Forum (PSCEF): "The attack is yet another jihad and provocation." So far, all this falls into the "two opposing armies met at Gettysburg" realm. (Column continues below)     But unfortunately, the reporter felt the need to include a quote from the archbishop of Abuja. The "good" bishop claimed that the violence was "rooted not in religion, but in social, economic and tribal differences."

The above is poorly written, are you sure this man is a journalist?

Now we have a blatant lie masquerading as a credible statement from a religious official.

What lie?

No doubt said archbishop doesn't want to sleep in a suit of armor, so he thinks pacifying the jihadists is the way to go

Pure speculation and irrelevant. A journalist is meant to report events, and commetary by relevant people.

You are retarded... so are your sources.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
banker
Posts: 1,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2010 6:43:37 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/16/2010 6:19:48 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 3/16/2010 5:32:24 AM, banker wrote:
While building arguments against culture religion and everything standing for morality ..!

When do liberals argue against culture, religion and morality?
how about indifferanse to hanging kids in iran.? it apears your not aware of holywood.!! how about sex education to minors? or heather had 2 momies education? now are you sarcastic or stupid.? YOU REALY are not aware why libs prefer islam above christianity?

Most liberals are educated, into culture,

culture? which one michal jackson? the only thing about culture of libs is if raping 9 year olds turns you into a prphet...!!

many of them are religious,

lol since when do you respect religous mor then athiest please elaberate...!!

very few of them would be opposed to freedom of religion and liberalism pretty much relies on extensive, indeed exaggerated moralism.

Libs are tired to base their afgumants on facts and truth..!

All the best afgumants are based on facts and truth.

like?
Supply is limited and its working against them.!!
So liberals turned to fiction..!
Here is a great peace a writer describes his own expiriance with a liberal reporter who used lies and how liberals lie to us here is wnd.com reporter:

Jeepers batman! A politically biased JOURNALIST that lied... even though it's their job to do so! That must mean that anyone with similar views is a liar! Because that is what we do in bankers world, judge people by a label not by actually what they believe in or do!

its thier job to lie and be biased..? good excuse..!!

"The epidemic of lying in the media is so fascinating, I thought it would make for another column (or 40). When someone like Bill Clinton claims that he would get in a ditch with a rifle and fight and die for Israel if necessary (as he claimed a few years ago), we all know the Boy from Hope is funnin' us. Nobody takes that seriously; we know it isn't true. But it gets reported because a former president said it. The reporter was merely quoting a public figure. But it's much harder to discern a falsehood when it's dropped into a news story (or a book, like any written by Jimmy Carter in the last 30 years, particularly "Palestine or Apartheid?"). A recent piece describing the carnage in Nigeria, when Muslim jihadists butchered 500 Christian men, women and children, is a case in point. The lie came not in the reporter's blatant bias, but in the selection of a quote. In the northern city of Jos last week, members of the ("mainly") Muslim Fulani ethnic group took axes and machetes to defenseless villagers and for good measure, burned a good number of the straw-and-mud huts in their way. Mind you, this story is very straightforward; it would be similar to a story about a Civil War battle, in the sense that certain undeniable facts are obvious: two opposing armies met at Gettysburg during three days in early July and the Union Army was able to fend-off the Confederates' deepest penetration yet into enemy territory. For the Jos massacre story, same deal, except now we are living in an era of disinformation and misinformation. Oh, the reporter did record the obvious, that after the attackers broke into homes shouting "Allah Akhbar," the sing-song of jihadists, a statement was issued by the Plateau State Christian Elders Consulatative Forum (PSCEF): "The attack is yet another jihad and provocation." So far, all this falls into the "two opposing armies met at Gettysburg" realm. (Column continues below)     But unfortunately, the reporter felt the need to include a quote from the archbishop of Abuja. The "good" bishop claimed that the violence was "rooted not in religion, but in social, economic and tribal differences."

The above is poorly written, are you sure this man is a journalist?

cereb get your article in i am sure its going to be in headlines...!!
Now we have a blatant lie masquerading as a credible statement from a religious official.

What lie?

the one you said its quote.." politically biased JOURNALIST that lied... even though it's their job to do so! " which lie where you talking about? or did you lie yourself?

No doubt said archbishop doesn't want to sleep in a suit of armor, so he thinks pacifying the jihadists is the way to go

Pure speculation and irrelevant. A journalist is meant to report events, and commetary by relevant people.

so lies is a job of a reporter but speculation isnt?

You are retarded... so are your sources.
the most important source for muslim Arabs:

"And thereafter We [Allah] said to the Children of Israel: 'Dwell securely in the Promised Land. And when the last warning will come to pass, we will gather you together in a mingled crowd'.".

- Qur'an 17:104 -

Any sincere muslim must recognize the Land they call "Palestine" as the Jewish Homeland, according to the book considered by muslims to be the most sacred word and Allah's ultimate revelation.

Ibn Khaldun, one of the most creditable
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2010 6:57:53 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/16/2010 6:43:37 AM, banker wrote:
At 3/16/2010 6:19:48 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 3/16/2010 5:32:24 AM, banker wrote:
While building arguments against culture religion and everything standing for morality ..!

When do liberals argue against culture, religion and morality?
how about indifferanse to hanging kids in iran.?

It is liberals, in and outside of Iran that whine constantly about this. The tendency is for liberals to oppose bombing civilian centres, that does not equate to supporting backward regimes or destroying culture!

it apears your not aware of holywood.!!

Relevance?

how about sex education to minors?

That is normally associated with liberals.

or heather had 2 momies education?

Again, this sort of stuff generally comes from liberals... not as a rule... conservatives.

now are you sarcastic or stupid.? YOU REALY are not aware why libs prefer islam above christianity?

Which liberals and why? Why would liberals who generally oppose homophobia favour a living homophobic movement over a dead one? Thats nonsense.


Most liberals are educated, into culture,

culture? which one michal jackson? the only thing about culture of libs is if raping 9 year olds turns you into a prphet...!!

Since when was Michael Jackson the definition of liberalism, I have no idea how he voted or what his political views were. Since when did he rape a 9 year old?


many of them are religious,

lol since when do you respect religous mor then athiest please elaberate...!!

I am an atheist, so your question makes no sense.


very few of them would be opposed to freedom of religion and liberalism pretty much relies on extensive, indeed exaggerated moralism.

Libs are tired to base their afgumants on facts and truth..!

All the best afgumants are based on facts and truth.

like?

Really? You don't agree that a good argument should be factual?

Supply is limited and its working against them.!!
So liberals turned to fiction..!
Here is a great peace a writer describes his own expiriance with a liberal reporter who used lies and how liberals lie to us here is wnd.com reporter:

Jeepers batman! A politically biased JOURNALIST that lied... even though it's their job to do so! That must mean that anyone with similar views is a liar! Because that is what we do in bankers world, judge people by a label not by actually what they believe in or do!

its thier job to lie and be biased..? good excuse..!!

It depends what level they operate at, but yes the majority of them are paid to lie. You need to grow up.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
banker
Posts: 1,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2010 7:02:25 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/16/2010 6:57:53 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 3/16/2010 6:43:37 AM, banker wrote:
At 3/16/2010 6:19:48 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 3/16/2010 5:32:24 AM, banker wrote:
While building arguments against culture religion and everything standing for morality ..!

When do liberals argue against culture, religion and morality?
how about indifferanse to hanging kids in iran.?

It is liberals, in and outside of Iran that whine constantly about this. The tendency is for liberals to oppose bombing civilian centres, that does not equate to supporting backward regimes or destroying culture!

it apears your not aware of holywood.!!

Relevance?

how about sex education to minors?

That is normally associated with liberals.

or heather had 2 momies education?

Again, this sort of stuff generally comes from liberals... not as a rule... conservatives.

now are you sarcastic or stupid.? YOU REALY are not aware why libs prefer islam above christianity?

Which liberals and why? Why would liberals who generally oppose homophobia favour a living homophobic movement over a dead one? Thats nonsense.


Most liberals are educated, into culture,

culture? which one michal jackson? the only thing about culture of libs is if raping 9 year olds turns you into a prphet...!!

Since when was Michael Jackson the definition of liberalism, I have no idea how he voted or what his political views were. Since when did he rape a 9 year old?


many of them are religious,

lol since when do you respect religous mor then athiest please elaberate...!!

I am an atheist, so your question makes no sense.


very few of them would be opposed to freedom of religion and liberalism pretty much relies on extensive, indeed exaggerated moralism.

Libs are tired to base their afgumants on facts and truth..!

All the best afgumants are based on facts and truth.

like?

Really? You don't agree that a good argument should be factual?

yes i agree but libs dont agree any proof that thay do?

Supply is limited and its working against them.!!
So liberals turned to fiction..!
Here is a great peace a writer describes his own expiriance with a liberal reporter who used lies and how liberals lie to us here is wnd.com reporter:

Jeepers batman! A politically biased JOURNALIST that lied... even though it's their job to do so! That must mean that anyone with similar views is a liar! Because that is what we do in bankers world, judge people by a label not by actually what they believe in or do!

its thier job to lie and be biased..? good excuse..!!

It depends what level they operate at, but yes the majority of them are paid to lie. You need to grow up.

as long as you agree i just like to thank you for that..!!
the most important source for muslim Arabs:

"And thereafter We [Allah] said to the Children of Israel: 'Dwell securely in the Promised Land. And when the last warning will come to pass, we will gather you together in a mingled crowd'.".

- Qur'an 17:104 -

Any sincere muslim must recognize the Land they call "Palestine" as the Jewish Homeland, according to the book considered by muslims to be the most sacred word and Allah's ultimate revelation.

Ibn Khaldun, one of the most creditable
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2010 7:07:16 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Banker... you really need to THINK.

Yes of course some liberals lie... you really think that Bush never lied... slice of nigerian yellowcake anyone?

The fact that one liberal, conservative, facist, 7th Day Adventist may utter a lie... does not mean that all liberals, conservatives, fascists and 7th Day Adventists are pathological liars.

Liberals are not more, nor less moral than conservatives... Jesus man... you are nearly 40 (apparently) you really need to grow up and ditch some of this dogmatic propaganda.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
nickthengineer
Posts: 251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2010 7:16:57 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/16/2010 5:32:24 AM, banker wrote:
While building arguments against culture religion and everything standing for morality ..! Libs are tired to base their afgumants on facts and truth..! Supply is limited and its working against them.!!
So liberals turned to fiction..!
Here is a great peace a writer describes his own expiriance with a liberal reporter who used lies and how liberals lie to us here is wnd.com reporter:

"The epidemic of lying in the media is so fascinating, I thought it would make for another column (or 40). When someone like Bill Clinton claims that he would get in a ditch with a rifle and fight and die for Israel if necessary (as he claimed a few years ago), we all know the Boy from Hope is funnin' us. Nobody takes that seriously; we know it isn't true. But it gets reported because a former president said it. The reporter was merely quoting a public figure. But it's much harder to discern a falsehood when it's dropped into a news story (or a book, like any written by Jimmy Carter in the last 30 years, particularly "Palestine or Apartheid?"). A recent piece describing the carnage in Nigeria, when Muslim jihadists butchered 500 Christian men, women and children, is a case in point. The lie came not in the reporter's blatant bias, but in the selection of a quote. In the northern city of Jos last week, members of the ("mainly") Muslim Fulani ethnic group took axes and machetes to defenseless villagers and for good measure, burned a good number of the straw-and-mud huts in their way. Mind you, this story is very straightforward; it would be similar to a story about a Civil War battle, in the sense that certain undeniable facts are obvious: two opposing armies met at Gettysburg during three days in early July and the Union Army was able to fend-off the Confederates' deepest penetration yet into enemy territory. For the Jos massacre story, same deal, except now we are living in an era of disinformation and misinformation. Oh, the reporter did record the obvious, that after the attackers broke into homes shouting "Allah Akhbar," the sing-song of jihadists, a statement was issued by the Plateau State Christian Elders Consulatative Forum (PSCEF): "The attack is yet another jihad and provocation." So far, all this falls into the "two opposing armies met at Gettysburg" realm. (Column continues below)     But unfortunately, the reporter felt the need to include a quote from the archbishop of Abuja. The "good" bishop claimed that the violence was "rooted not in religion, but in social, economic and tribal differences." Now we have a blatant lie masquerading as a credible statement from a religious official. No doubt said archbishop doesn't want to sleep in a suit of armor, so he thinks pacifying the jihadists is the way to go. The quote is very unfortunate, because it takes a story from the realm of straightforward reporting to fuzziness. Amazingly, many who read it will assume the archbishop might be right, that perhaps one group of villagers was just mad because the neighboring villagers grew better vegetables. Please, this kind of journalism makes the struggle against jihadists easier to lose, because they love nothing better than to blur the lines with propaganda, something jihadists like Yasser Arafat learned from his Marxist buddies. Continuing with the "Middle East" tone of today's column, let me give you another nugget from more than a decade ago. This is another gem from the syndicated columnist I mentioned last week, the one who accused Israel of burrowing under the Temple Mount. Around the same time, she wrote a piece about Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu and his American counterpart, the ditch-hugging, Alvin York-wannabe Bill Clinton. The writer compared them in various ways — some similarities and some differences — before making the following mind-boggling statement: In neither does one find experience in their respective militaries. Cue laugh track. I think most of us are aware that Bill Clinton spent the Vietnam War years parked with his El Camino down at the duck pond. But Bibi Netanyahu spent the same years in savage combat against jihadists. A member of the elite counter-terrorism unit, Sayaret Matkal (as were his brothers, Jonathan and Iddo), Netanyahu also distinguished himself during fighting in the Yom Kippur War. See, while Clinton was tomcatting and attending Marxist film festivals, Netanyahu, upon hearing of the outbreak of fighting on October 6, 1973, immediately left his studies at MIT and got on a plane. Three weeks later, he had been part of the almost-biblical effort to turn the tide against Syria and Egypt. I called the columnist and pointed all this out. I said, "You know, after covering the Middle East for 35 years, that military service is mandatory for Israelis, right?" She hemmed and hawed, and claimed that while at a cocktail party for the Israeli ambassador, she heard that Netanyahu had not served. I asked if I could quote her. "I'd rather you didn't," she said. You see, we both knew that I knew that she was lying. She had wanted to portray Netanyau, at the time a wildly hated prime minister internationally, as an empty-suit pretty boy who just wouldn't get with the program and give a Palestinian state to the serial-killer Arafat. This is one of the problems in publishing; people willingly lie. They do it every day. The lies distort real events and cause many people to make wrong decisions. For example, enough columns like the one I cited above and all of a sudden, millions are demanding that compromise with killers like Arafat is a good thing. It is a bedrock truth in our world today that the Palestinians have found favor with the international community in peddling their narrative. The rest of us have been damaged because of it. I'll conclude with a story that is seemingly harmless, but I argue that it is not. Again, it portrays a conservative politician in a negative light. Yahoo News! Reported recently on the Sarah Palin stand-up appearance on whatever show Jay Leno is hosting now. One can YouTube the performance, and it appears to be a pretty funny routine by a media-savvy politician, Palin. The reporter for Yahoo, however, no doubt is a left-leaning Democrat. Note the following statement, after some description of Palin's performance: "Still, there are some who suspect that Jay Leno's staff 'added both applause and laughter in postproduction' to make the appearance look like more of a success." You're ahead of me, I hope. You get it, don't you? The phrase "some who suspect" is probably as old in journalism as the first Sumerian cuneiform broadsheets. The phrase really means, "I'm making this part up to justify my criticism of this individual." "Some who suspect" is a magic bullet, because those "anonymous" sources can't be tracked down to see in fact if anyone did this. Palin goes from a fairly funny public figure to just another phony right-winger. It's an effective tactic used by leftists in the media. And it's still wrong. "

Did you learn to plagiarize in your post-doctoral program?
I evolved from stupid. (http://www.debate.org...)
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2010 8:01:16 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/17/2010 7:16:57 AM, nickthengineer wrote:
Did you learn to plagiarize in your post-doctoral program?

no no, he put it in quotes, which already implies it isnt his work. And besides, the grammar alone proves that he did not write it.

The real question to ask him, is whether he learned English in his post doctoral program?
banker
Posts: 1,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2010 3:22:50 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/17/2010 7:16:57 AM, nickthengineer wrote:
At 3/16/2010 5:32:24 AM, banker wrote:
While building arguments against culture religion and everything standing for morality ..! Libs are tired to base their afgumants on facts and truth..! Supply is limited and its working against them.!!
So liberals turned to fiction..!
Here is a great peace a writer describes his own expiriance with a liberal reporter who used lies and how liberals lie to us here is wnd.com reporter:

"The epidemic of lying in the media is so fascinating, I thought it would make for another column (or 40). When someone like Bill Clinton claims that he would get in a ditch with a rifle and fight and die for Israel if necessary (as he claimed a few years ago), we all know the Boy from Hope is funnin' us. Nobody takes that seriously; we know it isn't true. But it gets reported because a former president said it. The reporter was merely quoting a public figure. But it's much harder to discern a falsehood when it's dropped into a news story (or a book, like any written by Jimmy Carter in the last 30 years, particularly "Palestine or Apartheid?"). A recent piece describing the carnage in Nigeria, when Muslim jihadists butchered 500 Christian men, women and children, is a case in point. The lie came not in the reporter's blatant bias, but in the selection of a quote. In the northern city of Jos last week, members of the ("mainly") Muslim Fulani ethnic group took axes and machetes to defenseless villagers and for good measure, burned a good number of the straw-and-mud huts in their way. Mind you, this story is very straightforward; it would be similar to a story about a Civil War battle, in the sense that certain undeniable facts are obvious: two opposing armies met at Gettysburg during three days in early July and the Union Army was able to fend-off the Confederates' deepest penetration yet into enemy territory. For the Jos massacre story, same deal, except now we are living in an era of disinformation and misinformation. Oh, the reporter did record the obvious, that after the attackers broke into homes shouting "Allah Akhbar," the sing-song of jihadists, a statement was issued by the Plateau State Christian Elders Consulatative Forum (PSCEF): "The attack is yet another jihad and provocation." So far, all this falls into the "two opposing armies met at Gettysburg" realm. (Column continues below)     But unfortunately, the reporter felt the need to include a quote from the archbishop of Abuja. The "good" bishop claimed that the violence was "rooted not in religion, but in social, economic and tribal differences." Now we have a blatant lie masquerading as a credible statement from a religious official. No doubt said archbishop doesn't want to sleep in a suit of armor, so he thinks pacifying the jihadists is the way to go. The quote is very unfortunate, because it takes a story from the realm of straightforward reporting to fuzziness. Amazingly, many who read it will assume the archbishop might be right, that perhaps one group of villagers was just mad because the neighboring villagers grew better vegetables. Please, this kind of journalism makes the struggle against jihadists easier to lose, because they love nothing better than to blur the lines with propaganda, something jihadists like Yasser Arafat learned from his Marxist buddies. Continuing with the "Middle East" tone of today's column, let me give you another nugget from more than a decade ago. This is another gem from the syndicated columnist I mentioned last week, the one who accused Israel of burrowing under the Temple Mount. Around the same time, she wrote a piece about Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu and his American counterpart, the ditch-hugging, Alvin York-wannabe Bill Clinton. The writer compared them in various ways — some similarities and some differences — before making the following mind-boggling statement: In neither does one find experience in their respective militaries. Cue laugh track. I think most of us are aware that Bill Clinton spent the Vietnam War years parked with his El Camino down at the duck pond. But Bibi Netanyahu spent the same years in savage combat against jihadists. A member of the elite counter-terrorism unit, Sayaret Matkal (as were his brothers, Jonathan and Iddo), Netanyahu also distinguished himself during fighting in the Yom Kippur War. See, while Clinton was tomcatting and attending Marxist film festivals, Netanyahu, upon hearing of the outbreak of fighting on October 6, 1973, immediately left his studies at MIT and got on a plane. Three weeks later, he had been part of the almost-biblical effort to turn the tide against Syria and Egypt. I called the columnist and pointed all this out. I said, "You know, after covering the Middle East for 35 years, that military service is mandatory for Israelis, right?" She hemmed and hawed, and claimed that while at a cocktail party for the Israeli ambassador, she heard that Netanyahu had not served. I asked if I could quote her. "I'd rather you didn't," she said. You see, we both knew that I knew that she was lying. She had wanted to portray Netanyau, at the time a wildly hated prime minister internationally, as an empty-suit pretty boy who just wouldn't get with the program and give a Palestinian state to the serial-killer Arafat. This is one of the problems in publishing; people willingly lie. They do it every day. The lies distort real events and cause many people to make wrong decisions. For example, enough columns like the one I cited above and all of a sudden, millions are demanding that compromise with killers like Arafat is a good thing. It is a bedrock truth in our world today that the Palestinians have found favor with the international community in peddling their narrative. The rest of us have been damaged because of it. I'll conclude with a story that is seemingly harmless, but I argue that it is not. Again, it portrays a conservative politician in a negative light. Yahoo News! Reported recently on the Sarah Palin stand-up appearance on whatever show Jay Leno is hosting now. One can YouTube the performance, and it appears to be a pretty funny routine by a media-savvy politician, Palin. The reporter for Yahoo, however, no doubt is a left-leaning Democrat. Note the following statement, after some description of Palin's performance: "Still, there are some who suspect that Jay Leno's staff 'added both applause and laughter in postproduction' to make the appearance look like more of a success." You're ahead of me, I hope. You get it, don't you? The phrase "some who suspect" is probably as old in journalism as the first Sumerian cuneiform broadsheets. The phrase really means, "I'm making this part up to justify my criticism of this individual." "Some who suspect" is a magic bullet, because those "anonymous" sources can't be tracked down to see in fact if anyone did this. Palin goes from a fairly funny public figure to just another phony right-winger. It's an effective tactic used by leftists in the media. And it's still wrong. "

Did you learn to plagiarize in your post-doctoral program?

lol it apears you cought me red handed...!! i dont believe this discovery will get you any madles..!! now in all seriousness if you assume i try to be someone else you dont know me...!!
the most important source for muslim Arabs:

"And thereafter We [Allah] said to the Children of Israel: 'Dwell securely in the Promised Land. And when the last warning will come to pass, we will gather you together in a mingled crowd'.".

- Qur'an 17:104 -

Any sincere muslim must recognize the Land they call "Palestine" as the Jewish Homeland, according to the book considered by muslims to be the most sacred word and Allah's ultimate revelation.

Ibn Khaldun, one of the most creditable
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2010 3:30:16 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/17/2010 3:22:50 PM, banker wrote:
lol it apears you cought me red handed...!! i dont believe this discovery will get you any madles..!! now in all seriousness if you assume i try to be someone else you dont know me...!!
You support war in Iraq! You're a horrible person! You also support a possible war with Iran, which makes you more horrible. How can you be such a hypocrite and call Islam a violent religion when you support horrible wars? You are following a violent ideology, not me.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2010 3:32:22 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/17/2010 3:30:16 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 3/17/2010 3:22:50 PM, banker wrote:
lol it apears you cought me red handed...!! i dont believe this discovery will get you any madles..!! now in all seriousness if you assume i try to be someone else you dont know me...!!
You support war in Iraq! You're a horrible person! You also support a possible war with Iran, which makes you more horrible. How can you be such a hypocrite and call Islam a violent religion when you support horrible wars? You are following a violent ideology, not me.

The wars with Iraq and Iran were to remove already violent regimes.

You, by contrast, support a war of aggression against drug users (no other meaning is possible for "con" on legalizing drugs, i.e. not being violent against drug users).
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2010 3:32:53 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
And unlike the governments of Iran nor Iraq, there is nothing necessarily violent about a drug user.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
banker
Posts: 1,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2010 8:12:35 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Ragnar as much as I am against drugs I agree with you that the war on drugs is vicious..!!
The war on drugs is the gov mafia..!
The gov hired by ruthshild bankers use this war to steal from the poor...!
If the gov would indeed realy like to stop it they would do it a long time ago...!!
They intentionly let lots of cash to be accumilated,then they rob it along with everything..!!

Meanwhile lots of kids are poisend and get addicted..!!
the most important source for muslim Arabs:

"And thereafter We [Allah] said to the Children of Israel: 'Dwell securely in the Promised Land. And when the last warning will come to pass, we will gather you together in a mingled crowd'.".

- Qur'an 17:104 -

Any sincere muslim must recognize the Land they call "Palestine" as the Jewish Homeland, according to the book considered by muslims to be the most sacred word and Allah's ultimate revelation.

Ibn Khaldun, one of the most creditable
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2010 9:49:05 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 3/17/2010 3:32:22 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 3/17/2010 3:30:16 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 3/17/2010 3:22:50 PM, banker wrote:
lol it apears you cought me red handed...!! i dont believe this discovery will get you any madles..!! now in all seriousness if you assume i try to be someone else you dont know me...!!
You support war in Iraq! You're a horrible person! You also support a possible war with Iran, which makes you more horrible. How can you be such a hypocrite and call Islam a violent religion when you support horrible wars? You are following a violent ideology, not me.

The wars with Iraq and Iran were to remove already violent regimes.

You, by contrast, support a war of aggression against drug users (no other meaning is possible for "con" on legalizing drugs, i.e. not being violent against drug users).

Just thought I would throw in my two cents about this. While I don't support drug use myself, I do support ending the war on drugs. Why? The war on drugs just complicates things. If drugs were legal, there would be no way for drug lords to profit and take advantage if the substances they're selling and trafficking become readily available.
banker
Posts: 1,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/18/2010 5:48:28 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Mizra I respect you despite your trubling attitue that is evidently a victim of your addiction to your hate cult..!
I am sure that you otherwise would be the nice person you realy are that's why I like you and I advocate others not to hold it against you..!

Now it apears that you like to use value of life in your jihad..! I will help you now ,and show you how..!!
Before I just like to inform you that value of life is natural as a emotion,not a tool to justify hate..!
If you understand that you will be able to act as if its a real concern of yours and not mearly a jihad tool..!
Now I work on a satire book and will use this as its title.!! I thing that the notion of islam valueing life is rich as a satire topic.! But here is how you could make it apear real..!!
If you like to make it look real you have to be aware how people with real concern for life act...!
Only then you will know how to copy it..! Otherwise all the heroic stories about islamic effords to save lifes would be limited to comic books..! (Please bring us stories from other sources)..!
The first concern of those who value life is,their own life..!
That's why if islamists would like to act like those who value life have to care for their own..! Remember how some came to take headlines from infidels in haiti.?
Imagin if we get learn about islamic rescue effords in sudan.? Millions are killed in sudan..! Now I am not taking away the significance of building dubai tallest tower..! But some rescue effords to save the millions in darfur from killing is not going to make dubai poor..! Nigiria jihad could also be stoped,it would not end the oil trade..! Its still going to allow irans glorifying nukes that allah will be proud of...! How about acting as if you care about the mass graves of people killed by saddam...? How about you act as if you care about the kids who are hanged by iran..?

How about you act as if you care about your own beheaded,stoned,hanged, from your own by sharia brutal and barbaric laws.?
Only then..!!and only then.!! Will you be able to talk about value of live .!
Not that satire is of no value.! Only becuase life has more value..!!
the most important source for muslim Arabs:

"And thereafter We [Allah] said to the Children of Israel: 'Dwell securely in the Promised Land. And when the last warning will come to pass, we will gather you together in a mingled crowd'.".

- Qur'an 17:104 -

Any sincere muslim must recognize the Land they call "Palestine" as the Jewish Homeland, according to the book considered by muslims to be the most sacred word and Allah's ultimate revelation.

Ibn Khaldun, one of the most creditable