The US Sedition Act Appropriate Today?
"Yawn, once again, the bushtonian, has nothing better to add or debate, "
Double standards? You take cheap shots at our Commander n Chief, you insult, and then you accuse me of not debating! Words mean things TH! Your misinformation, putting issues out of context and poor debating tactics are very telling. You can dish it out, but you can’t take it?
Yes, 49 nations are now publicly on our side. And it is growing (there are a number of nations that have asked the US not to make it public).
Some nations, like Hungry, are hosting a camp for training exiled Iraq’s. Other nations are helping in other ways. So, once more, your reasoning is shallow. No Arabs helping? What is Kuwait? And OPEC has increased oil production to help stabilize our supply.
You are either uninformed, can’t read, or both.....As long as you misrepresent the facts, insult, or just continue to spread your fallacies, a rebuttal is in order.
Well, these are not contradictory: he may report the truth of what is happening and doing that may be a misjudgement as the American people obviously do not want to hear it or else the powers that be don't want them to.
oh simon, i just thought it was funny that he specifically said he would not apologize, and followed up by apologizing.....it really just struck me as humorous, and obviously this has nothing to do with him being fired....it was only sarcasm on my part.
And again ... how are these contradictory? If I am pro-war or anti-war, does this affect what the truth is? Are only "anti-war reporters" (whatever they are) allowed to report for a newspaper that has voiced some opposition of the war?
they arent contradictory.......if you look back on my post, youll see that i labeled that particular segment "interesting". i found it interesting that shortly after affirming that he was not antiwar, he joined up with a tabloid that is "strongly opposed" to the war. i still find it interesting, but no, it isnt neccesarily contradictory, and really i just once again found it funny....but i certainly wasnt trying to base any real argument on either of these examples, and i hardly thought you would take my post as a serious rebuttal.
Of course you have avoided the real issue here and done your usual trick of picking up on odd words and sentances and trying to fashion an argument around them:
again, sorry for the confusion, as i wasnt meaning to "fashion" any real argument here, and you have made valid points about the firing being a form of censorship. i have to agree with you on that one, as it looked pretty suspect to me as well......i just thought some of the inconsistencies in the article were funny.
i do find it extremely interesting that you once again publicly accuse me of "picking up odd words and sentences" after i completely blasted that argument to shreds the last time you attempted to make it. maybe you forgot about that one....or maybe my points finally sunk in, and you felt you needed to slink away and once again ignore them.?. just as a reminder, since you felt the need to make this accusation again, heres the last thread you made it on, complete with my replies: