02 Feb 05
3 edits
Originally posted by KneverKnightWhy?
During WWII, there was some contact between British and German intelligence agencies, none of it treasonous. Look at "Bodyguard of Lies" by Anthony Cave-Brown
Are we supposed to believe that the wet dreams of nazi wannabees is real? They are not.
This is a pet peave of mine. I once earned a thousand bucks proving that his line of fact originates "out of nowhere" and is not tracable into the past. It is tracable into the future. But we in the real world call that "research". In "reality" we call what he does... "fabrication."
02 Feb 05
Originally posted by StarValleyWyYou actually proved he was non-existant? wow I mean, I've read some pretty obscure writers before but this is the first time that I'm aware of (seeing as I'm not aware of everything) that I've read an author that has actually been proved by you to pluck his facts out of nowhere in spite of the obviously false extensive bibliography included in his work.
Why?
Are we supposed to believe that the wet dreams of nazi wannabees is real? They are not.
This is a pet peave of mine. I once earned a thousand bucks proving that his line of fact originates "out of nowhere" and is not tracable into the past. It is tracable into the future. But we in the real world call that "research". In "reality" we call what he does... "fabrication."
Carry on.
02 Feb 05
Originally posted by KneverKnight"Prove" is in the paycheck. I got paid for my research. As to whether it "proved" anything is up to those who paid me.
You actually proved he was non-existant? wow I mean, I've read some pretty obscure writers before but this is the first time that I'm aware of (seeing as I'm not aware of everything) that I've read an author that has actually been proved by you to pluck his facts out of nowhere in spite of the obviously false extensive bibliography included in his work.
Carry on.
If you want to go beyond that... research it yourself. Try to find a point before his assertion that can be documented.
That's simple. Good luck.
02 Feb 05
Originally posted by StarValleyWyWhat is the main thrust of "Bodyguard of Lies" again?
"Prove" is in the paycheck. I got paid for my research. As to whether it "proved" anything is up to those who paid me.
If you want to go beyond that... research it yourself. Try to find a point before his assertion that can be documented.
That's simple. Good luck.
02 Feb 05
Originally posted by StarValleyWyIf the arguments you used with this person are in any way
"Prove" is in the paycheck. I got paid for my research. As to whether it "proved" anything is up to those who paid me.
If you want to go beyond that... research it yourself. Try to find a point before his assertion that can be documented.
That's simple. Good luck.
similar to the arguments you used here, I'm sure he paid
you just to shut you up.
'Research it yourself' = No argument.
You may be right about this, you may be wrong. But I am
not going to take 'on faith' that your claim makes any sense
without your making some attempt to prove it.
Nemesio
02 Feb 05
Originally posted by KneverKnightLet's just say that I have a "general" feeling of revulsion for conspracy theory.
Never read the book that he "proved" that the author pulled facts from the ether for. Watta guy!
I hate it. It is what all of the Left's "Dogma" is based on. I prefer fact over conspiracy.
02 Feb 05
Originally posted by StarValleyWyYou don't like whateveritis you term "left" Horses have blinkers;men have eyes.
Let's just say that I have a "general" feeling of revulsion for conspracy theory.
I hate it. It is what all of the Left's "Dogma" is based on. I prefer fact over conspiracy.
02 Feb 05
Originally posted by KneverKnightReally. Wow. That explains why they hate the US for letting the elections of last Sunday happen. Blinkers. I would never have guessed. All the time I thought it was just your Euro conditioning that made you favor the terrorists over your friend and ally, ie, the US.
You don't like whateveritis you term "left" Horses have blinkers;men have eyes.
Silly me. I didn't realize that conditioning meant nothing. Silly me.
02 Feb 05
Originally posted by StarValleyWyYou don't know what you are talking about, so I'll leave you to it.
Really. Wow. That explains why they hate the US for letting the elections of last Sunday happen. Blinkers. I would never have guessed. All the time I thought it was just your Euro conditioning that made you favor the terrorists over your friend and ally, ie, the US.
Silly me. I didn't realize that conditioning meant nothing. Silly me.
02 Feb 05
3 edits
Originally posted by KneverKnightGee. I really appreciate your intellectual contribution here. That is a powerful argument. Or it is a vindictive accusation.
You don't know what you are talking about, so I'll leave you to it.
Why do I not know what I am about? State a few examples and support your accusation with reasoned argument. Errr... sorry. Just go to sleep. You are naught but a conditioned beast of non-thought.
I give as proof that you have never stated a self-generated thought. You are only reacting to others impressed thoughts, ie, "education".
Sorry. You can still try to become a real being. But it won't be easy. You will have to learn to turn off the lights and write down ideas and their possible solutions. Then... in the dark... decide which is right and which is wrong.
I think a good test will be when you set in the dark and see those millions of Iraqi's with the ink stained fingers march proudly to their homes, hugging their children... promising the gift of non-slave status for the first time in recorded history, knowing that with the cameras and the Ink Stained finger they have just sentenced these same children to death. Bush. That bastard. he did it.
02 Feb 05
While the interesting debate on this thread continues, its original author finds himself banned yet again. Censored and censured.
Does everyone here agree with STANG being banned yet again for what he wrote in this thread?? The man has his opinions and he should be allowed to express them however he likes (without spamming).