Originally posted by PA 3L SVT:
To think that only agreeing with your views serves the betterment of mankind is pompous. To think that anyone who disagrees with your views should be dead for the betterment of mankind is completely self-centered and despicable. To think that you are in any position to determine who should live and die for the betterment of mankind is frightening, actually.



Find where I said people should die because they disagree with me. I'm not going to try to kill Michael Moore. I just said if his arteries turned to cement and he was staring at the roof of the church, I wouldn't care too much.

Originally posted by PA 3L SVT:
Wow, you are terribly ignorant. The 9/11 commission has been charged with directly investigating ties between al-Queda and Iraq and found none. Iraq's ties to A-Q was a central point in Bush's argument for war now and it seems there aren't any credible ties at all besides A-Q trying to establish some relationship and Iraq ignoring them.



Part of the 9/11 Commission's investigations may have included al-Qaeda's ties to Iraq, but that was not the purpose of the Commission. I suggest a fact check.

Bush's argument for war involved the terrorist environment that exists in Iraq, and the chances that they will try to strike us. We have some shady evidence that al-Qaeda and Iraq were connected, but that wasn't our reason for going to war with them.

Originally posted by PA 3L SVT:
Originally posted by Davo7SVT:
2) We didn't go to war based on the faulty intelligence, again, even though the media is trying to make you believe we did.



So, what, Tenet and Clark are making this up? And Tenet lied to a congressional committee? I guess the fact that Clark isn't a Bush yes-man anymore makes him less credible in your book.



I say again: We didn't go to war based on the faulty intelligence. I'm not saying there was no faulty intelligence, I'm just saying we didn't go to war based on information we had from that intelligence.

Clark is less credible because the things he said under oath and the things he said in his book do not match, not because he no longer works for Bush.


Originally posted by PA 3L SVT:
Wow, oh wow. You don't think that O'Reilly and Limbaugh (and Tony Blair and Pres. Bush) would be shouting it from the rooftops if we had found some? I seem to remember that when the troops found 'suspected' WMD sites, it was all over the news, until tests showed they weren't what they first appeared to be.



Everyone makes excuses as to why the WMDs we find don't "count". We found Sarin gas-tipped artillery shells in Baghdad not too long ago. Do those count?

Originally posted by PA 3L SVT:
And here's a problem with your argument that Moore should have released Abu Gharib abuse photos as soon as he had them: You damn him for not releasing them. You damn the media for covering the scandal. So, if holding the images is wrong, and releasing the images is wrong, what exactly should be done?



I never said he should have released the photos. I'm saying if he really cared about the Iraqis in that prison (like he says he does) then he would have released the pictures to the authorities long ago instead of waiting for the extra publicity he could generate for his movie by releasing them now. If he would have released the pictures earlier, then maybe fewer people would have been abused. My hunch is that he really doesn't care.

Originally posted by PA 3L SVT:
Nobody should hold views that cannot stand in the presence of dissent. Fortunately for you, this country is founded on the premise that all people are free to believe what they want, and free to present their views in an open and fair forum. So continue to believe what you want to believe, but to become a more complete person you really should allow yourself to let those views be tempered with those that are in opposition to them.



I don't really know what that last line means. It doesn't make any sense. But I think what you're saying is that to be a more complete person I have to "open my mind". My mind is open. Because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I'm closed-minded. I'm not going to go see Moore's movie, because I've already heard what he has to say. The "mainstream" media has done a good job of making sure I know where he stands.