Science > Abortion > Re: Study Finds Fox News Viewers Most Likely To Have Misperceptions About Iraq Invasion
| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Adam H." |
| Date: |
14 Oct 2003 12:55:19 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Study Finds Fox News Viewers Most Likely To Have Misperceptions About Iraq Invasion |
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:38:57 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:437oov0u7ipqr7peb31jvn1aaggai5296b@4ax.com...
On 10 Oct 2003 23:32:04 -0700, (osprey) wrote:
David Barnes <dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<101020031938036066%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>...
In article <4lccov04jgtonpn5v2i3brpj8s3l1k181h@4ax.com>, Adam H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 21:05:15 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
In article <p39covk3j0eh5n3ufjee33iovhd04el2in@4ax.com>, Adam H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 20:15:21 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
Here's a shock:
"A new study finds that a majority of Americans have had
significant
misperceptions highly related to support for the war with Iraq.
The
frequency of these misperceptions varies significantly according
to
individualsą primary source of news with FoxNews viewers having
the
most misperceptions and NPR/PBS viewers the least."
So much for that fair and balanced "news."
<http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/08/1554236
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
I already posted that story. Bobby immediately followed my post
with a
demand that I 'prove it'. Apparently going to the authors of the
study
(or examining the methodology involved before whining) didn't
occur to
him.
---
Militant Agnostic:
I don't know and you don't either.
Sorry - I didn't see this. As for Osprey, when he says "prove it"
he
means he has no better reply. Not unusual for the dim bulb.
But it is funny to watch him twist in the wind. He tried to pull the
"no conviction, no crime" routine. Apparently he hasn't come up with
anything better.
Lets not forget "men should make the decision about whether a woman
gets an abortion because they are not as emotional."
If you are trying to suggest for one minute I ever said that, then you
better have something to back it up. Or this goes down as yet another
one of your lies. Which by the way is adding up to almost the same
amount as the list of Bill Clinton lies. Which is SEVERAL pages.
Just like your lie about the no conviction no crime line. I never
said that. Which by the way, neither you nor Adam has ever been able
to produce a quote.
You claimed that if Bush had not been charged and convicted, he could
not have commited the crime of being AWOL, correct?
No, I said he was never charged with AWOL
I never said he didn't do anything wrong.
Learn Adam...learn
Yes, you did. You're just too cowardly to admit to what you said.
Show the quote
"Bush did not go AWOL because AWOL is a official charge, and he was
never charged."
Message-ID: <BX6dnVgNMsqShkmgXTWcqw@comcast.com>
Which is exactly the same as saying that a murderer who is never
charged isn't a murderer. Your words. Choke on them.
---
Militant Agnostic:
I don't know and you don't either.
.
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Finds Fox News Viewers Most Likely To Have Misperceptions About Iraq Invasion |
14 Oct 2003 01:58:43 PM |
|
|
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:51eoovc9essisf90huejjso2m6hlksnsa2@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:38:57 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:437oov0u7ipqr7peb31jvn1aaggai5296b@4ax.com...
On 10 Oct 2003 23:32:04 -0700, (osprey) wrote:
David Barnes <dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<101020031938036066%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>...
In article <4lccov04jgtonpn5v2i3brpj8s3l1k181h@4ax.com>, Adam H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 21:05:15 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
In article <p39covk3j0eh5n3ufjee33iovhd04el2in@4ax.com>, Adam H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 20:15:21 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
Here's a shock:
"A new study finds that a majority of Americans have had
significant
misperceptions highly related to support for the war with
Iraq.
The
frequency of these misperceptions varies significantly
according
to
individualsą primary source of news with FoxNews viewers
having
the
most misperceptions and NPR/PBS viewers the least."
So much for that fair and balanced "news."
<http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/08/1554236
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
I already posted that story. Bobby immediately followed my post
with a
demand that I 'prove it'. Apparently going to the authors of
the
study
(or examining the methodology involved before whining) didn't
occur to
him.
---
Militant Agnostic:
I don't know and you don't either.
Sorry - I didn't see this. As for Osprey, when he says "prove
it"
he
means he has no better reply. Not unusual for the dim bulb.
But it is funny to watch him twist in the wind. He tried to pull
the
"no conviction, no crime" routine. Apparently he hasn't come up
with
anything better.
Lets not forget "men should make the decision about whether a woman
gets an abortion because they are not as emotional."
If you are trying to suggest for one minute I ever said that, then you
better have something to back it up. Or this goes down as yet another
one of your lies. Which by the way is adding up to almost the same
amount as the list of Bill Clinton lies. Which is SEVERAL pages.
Just like your lie about the no conviction no crime line. I never
said that. Which by the way, neither you nor Adam has ever been able
to produce a quote.
You claimed that if Bush had not been charged and convicted, he could
not have commited the crime of being AWOL, correct?
No, I said he was never charged with AWOL
I never said he didn't do anything wrong.
Learn Adam...learn
Yes, you did. You're just too cowardly to admit to what you said.
Show the quote
"Bush did not go AWOL because AWOL is a official charge, and he was
never charged."
Duh
that is what I said idiot. That doesn't mean he didn't do anything wrong
Military Record
Bill Clinton registers for the draft on September 08, 1964, accepting all
contractual conditions of registering for the draft. Given Selective Service
Number 3 26 46 228.
Bill Clinton classified 2-S on November 17, 1964.
Bill Clinton reclassified 1-A on March 20, 1968.
Bill Clinton ordered to report for induction on July 28, 1969.
Bill Clinton dishonors order to report and is not inducted into the
military.
Bill Clinton reclassified 1-D after enlisting in the United States Army
Reserves on August 07,1969 under authority of Col.E.Holmes.
Clinton signs enlistment papers and takes oath of enlistment.
Bill Clinton fails to report to his duty station at the University of
Arkansas ROTC, September 1969.
Bill Clinton reclassified 1-A on October 30, 1969, as enlistment with Army
Reserves is revoked by Colonel E. Holmes and Clinton now AWOL and subject to
arrest under Public Law 90-40 (2)(a) "registrant who has failed to
report....remain liable for induction".
Bill Clinton's birth date lottery number is 311, drawn December 1,1969, but
anyone who has already been ordered to report for induction is INELIGIBLE!
Bill Clinton runs for Congress (1974), while a fugitive from justice under
Public Law 90-40.
Bill Clinton runs for Arkansas Attorney General (1976), while a fugitive
from justice.
Bill Clinton receives pardon on January 21, 1977, from President Jimmy
Carter.
Bill Clinton is the (FIRST PARDONED FEDERAL FELON) ever to serve as
President.
All these facts come from Freedom of Information requests, public laws, and
various books that have been published, and have not been refuted by
Clinton.
After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured
1,000; President Clinton promised that those responsible would b e hunted
down and punished.
After the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed five U.S. military
personnel; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and
punished.
After the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 and
injured 200 U.S. military personnel; Clinton promised that those responsible
would be hunted down and punished.
After the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed 224 and
injured 5,000; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down
and punished.
After the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and injured 39 U.S.
sailors; Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and
punished.
Maybe if Clinton had kept those promises, an estimated 3,000 people in New
York and Washington, D.C. that are now dead would be alive today.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Adam H." |
|
| Title: Re: Study Finds Fox News Viewers Most Likely To Have Misperceptions About Iraq Invasion |
14 Oct 2003 02:35:05 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 14:58:43 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:51eoovc9essisf90huejjso2m6hlksnsa2@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:38:57 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:437oov0u7ipqr7peb31jvn1aaggai5296b@4ax.com...
On 10 Oct 2003 23:32:04 -0700, (osprey) wrote:
David Barnes <dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<101020031938036066%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>...
In article <4lccov04jgtonpn5v2i3brpj8s3l1k181h@4ax.com>, Adam H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 21:05:15 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
In article <p39covk3j0eh5n3ufjee33iovhd04el2in@4ax.com>, Adam H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 20:15:21 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
Here's a shock:
"A new study finds that a majority of Americans have had
significant
misperceptions highly related to support for the war with
Iraq.
The
frequency of these misperceptions varies significantly
according
to
individualsą primary source of news with FoxNews viewers
having
the
most misperceptions and NPR/PBS viewers the least."
So much for that fair and balanced "news."
<http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/08/1554236
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
I already posted that story. Bobby immediately followed my post
with a
demand that I 'prove it'. Apparently going to the authors of
the
study
(or examining the methodology involved before whining) didn't
occur to
him.
---
Militant Agnostic:
I don't know and you don't either.
Sorry - I didn't see this. As for Osprey, when he says "prove
it"
he
means he has no better reply. Not unusual for the dim bulb.
But it is funny to watch him twist in the wind. He tried to pull
the
"no conviction, no crime" routine. Apparently he hasn't come up
with
anything better.
Lets not forget "men should make the decision about whether a woman
gets an abortion because they are not as emotional."
If you are trying to suggest for one minute I ever said that, then you
better have something to back it up. Or this goes down as yet another
one of your lies. Which by the way is adding up to almost the same
amount as the list of Bill Clinton lies. Which is SEVERAL pages.
Just like your lie about the no conviction no crime line. I never
said that. Which by the way, neither you nor Adam has ever been able
to produce a quote.
You claimed that if Bush had not been charged and convicted, he could
not have commited the crime of being AWOL, correct?
No, I said he was never charged with AWOL
I never said he didn't do anything wrong.
Learn Adam...learn
Yes, you did. You're just too cowardly to admit to what you said.
Show the quote
"Bush did not go AWOL because AWOL is a official charge, and he was
never charged."
Duh
that is what I said idiot. That doesn't mean he didn't do anything wrong
Your statement is the rankest *****. You are saying that killing
somebody unjustly doesn't make you a murderer unless you are charged
with murder.
More evidence that you are not involved in any way with law
enforcement - your ignorance is certainly working against you.
[snip clinton bashing}
---
Militant Agnostic:
I don't know and you don't either.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Finds Fox News Viewers Most Likely To Have Misperceptions About Iraq Invasion |
14 Oct 2003 02:58:46 PM |
|
|
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:nbioovse8clqqc6oa3173l3onaj73tlhdh@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 14:58:43 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:51eoovc9essisf90huejjso2m6hlksnsa2@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:38:57 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:437oov0u7ipqr7peb31jvn1aaggai5296b@4ax.com...
On 10 Oct 2003 23:32:04 -0700, (osprey) wrote:
David Barnes <dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<101020031938036066%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>...
In article <4lccov04jgtonpn5v2i3brpj8s3l1k181h@4ax.com>, Adam H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 21:05:15 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
In article <p39covk3j0eh5n3ufjee33iovhd04el2in@4ax.com>, Adam
H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 20:15:21 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
Here's a shock:
"A new study finds that a majority of Americans have had
significant
misperceptions highly related to support for the war with
Iraq.
The
frequency of these misperceptions varies significantly
according
to
individualsą primary source of news with FoxNews viewers
having
the
most misperceptions and NPR/PBS viewers the least."
So much for that fair and balanced "news."
<http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/08/1554236
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
I already posted that story. Bobby immediately followed my
post
with a
demand that I 'prove it'. Apparently going to the authors of
the
study
(or examining the methodology involved before whining)
didn't
occur to
him.
---
Militant Agnostic:
I don't know and you don't either.
Sorry - I didn't see this. As for Osprey, when he says "prove
it"
he
means he has no better reply. Not unusual for the dim bulb.
But it is funny to watch him twist in the wind. He tried to
pull
the
"no conviction, no crime" routine. Apparently he hasn't come up
with
anything better.
Lets not forget "men should make the decision about whether a
woman
gets an abortion because they are not as emotional."
If you are trying to suggest for one minute I ever said that, then
you
better have something to back it up. Or this goes down as yet
another
one of your lies. Which by the way is adding up to almost the same
amount as the list of Bill Clinton lies. Which is SEVERAL pages.
Just like your lie about the no conviction no crime line. I never
said that. Which by the way, neither you nor Adam has ever been
able
to produce a quote.
You claimed that if Bush had not been charged and convicted, he
could
not have commited the crime of being AWOL, correct?
No, I said he was never charged with AWOL
I never said he didn't do anything wrong.
Learn Adam...learn
Yes, you did. You're just too cowardly to admit to what you said.
Show the quote
"Bush did not go AWOL because AWOL is a official charge, and he was
never charged."
Duh
that is what I said idiot. That doesn't mean he didn't do anything wrong
Your statement is the rankest *****.
No, your distortion and attempt to twist it is of the rankest BS
I never once said that if a person is not convicted he or she did not do the
crime. As you and pathetic David like to claim.
I said Bush was not guilty of AWOL because
a) he was never charged
b) he was never found guilty of AWOL
That does NOT mean though there is not reason to question his activities.
And that does NOT mean that he didn't do anything wrong.
You are saying that killing
somebody unjustly doesn't make you a murderer unless you are charged
with murder.
No, you are saying that, not me
More evidence that you are not involved in any way with law
enforcement - your ignorance is certainly working against you.
No, more ignorance you don't know how to read and because of that you have
to lie
.
|
|
|
| User: "Adam H." |
|
| Title: Re: Study Finds Fox News Viewers Most Likely To Have Misperceptions About Iraq Invasion |
14 Oct 2003 03:33:38 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 15:58:46 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:nbioovse8clqqc6oa3173l3onaj73tlhdh@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 14:58:43 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:51eoovc9essisf90huejjso2m6hlksnsa2@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:38:57 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:437oov0u7ipqr7peb31jvn1aaggai5296b@4ax.com...
On 10 Oct 2003 23:32:04 -0700, (osprey) wrote:
David Barnes <dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<101020031938036066%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>...
In article <4lccov04jgtonpn5v2i3brpj8s3l1k181h@4ax.com>, Adam H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 21:05:15 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
In article <p39covk3j0eh5n3ufjee33iovhd04el2in@4ax.com>, Adam
H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 20:15:21 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
Here's a shock:
"A new study finds that a majority of Americans have had
significant
misperceptions highly related to support for the war with
Iraq.
The
frequency of these misperceptions varies significantly
according
to
individualsą primary source of news with FoxNews viewers
having
the
most misperceptions and NPR/PBS viewers the least."
So much for that fair and balanced "news."
<http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/08/1554236
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
I already posted that story. Bobby immediately followed my
post
with a
demand that I 'prove it'. Apparently going to the authors of
the
study
(or examining the methodology involved before whining)
didn't
occur to
him.
---
Militant Agnostic:
I don't know and you don't either.
Sorry - I didn't see this. As for Osprey, when he says "prove
it"
he
means he has no better reply. Not unusual for the dim bulb.
But it is funny to watch him twist in the wind. He tried to
pull
the
"no conviction, no crime" routine. Apparently he hasn't come up
with
anything better.
Lets not forget "men should make the decision about whether a
woman
gets an abortion because they are not as emotional."
If you are trying to suggest for one minute I ever said that, then
you
better have something to back it up. Or this goes down as yet
another
one of your lies. Which by the way is adding up to almost the same
amount as the list of Bill Clinton lies. Which is SEVERAL pages.
Just like your lie about the no conviction no crime line. I never
said that. Which by the way, neither you nor Adam has ever been
able
to produce a quote.
You claimed that if Bush had not been charged and convicted, he
could
not have commited the crime of being AWOL, correct?
No, I said he was never charged with AWOL
I never said he didn't do anything wrong.
Learn Adam...learn
Yes, you did. You're just too cowardly to admit to what you said.
Show the quote
"Bush did not go AWOL because AWOL is a official charge, and he was
never charged."
Duh
that is what I said idiot. That doesn't mean he didn't do anything wrong
Your statement is the rankest *****.
No, your distortion and attempt to twist it is of the rankest BS
I never once said that if a person is not convicted he or she did not do the
crime. As you and pathetic David like to claim.
I said Bush was not guilty of AWOL because
a) he was never charged
b) he was never found guilty of AWOL
Thus confirming what I've said above. Tell us, Bobby, seeing as Jack
the Ripper was never charged or convicted, does that mean that the
person who was Jack the Ripper wasn't actually guilty of murder?
That's exactly what you're saying with your 'logic' above.
That does NOT mean though there is not reason to question his activities.
And that does NOT mean that he didn't do anything wrong.
You are saying that killing
somebody unjustly doesn't make you a murderer unless you are charged
with murder.
No, you are saying that, not me
No, Bobby, that's what you're saying.
More evidence that you are not involved in any way with law
enforcement - your ignorance is certainly working against you.
No, more ignorance you don't know how to read and because of that you have
to lie
Aw, Bobby's getting pissy. That's his typical 'defense'.
---
Militant Agnostic:
I don't know and you don't either.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Finds Fox News Viewers Most Likely To Have Misperceptions About Iraq Invasion |
14 Oct 2003 04:01:39 PM |
|
|
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:p7noovce81j2t1t46socj56lkbmfdjgsof@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 15:58:46 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:nbioovse8clqqc6oa3173l3onaj73tlhdh@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 14:58:43 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:51eoovc9essisf90huejjso2m6hlksnsa2@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:38:57 -0400, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:437oov0u7ipqr7peb31jvn1aaggai5296b@4ax.com...
On 10 Oct 2003 23:32:04 -0700, (osprey)
wrote:
David Barnes <dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<101020031938036066%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>...
In article <4lccov04jgtonpn5v2i3brpj8s3l1k181h@4ax.com>, Adam
H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 21:05:15 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
In article <p39covk3j0eh5n3ufjee33iovhd04el2in@4ax.com>,
Adam
H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 20:15:21 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
Here's a shock:
"A new study finds that a majority of Americans have had
significant
misperceptions highly related to support for the war
with
Iraq.
The
frequency of these misperceptions varies significantly
according
to
individualsą primary source of news with FoxNews viewers
having
the
most misperceptions and NPR/PBS viewers the least."
So much for that fair and balanced "news."
<http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/08/1554236
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
I already posted that story. Bobby immediately followed
my
post
with a
demand that I 'prove it'. Apparently going to the authors
of
the
study
(or examining the methodology involved before whining)
didn't
occur to
him.
---
Militant Agnostic:
I don't know and you don't either.
Sorry - I didn't see this. As for Osprey, when he says
"prove
it"
he
means he has no better reply. Not unusual for the dim
bulb.
But it is funny to watch him twist in the wind. He tried to
pull
the
"no conviction, no crime" routine. Apparently he hasn't come
up
with
anything better.
Lets not forget "men should make the decision about whether a
woman
gets an abortion because they are not as emotional."
If you are trying to suggest for one minute I ever said that,
then
you
better have something to back it up. Or this goes down as yet
another
one of your lies. Which by the way is adding up to almost the
same
amount as the list of Bill Clinton lies. Which is SEVERAL
pages.
Just like your lie about the no conviction no crime line. I
never
said that. Which by the way, neither you nor Adam has ever been
able
to produce a quote.
You claimed that if Bush had not been charged and convicted, he
could
not have commited the crime of being AWOL, correct?
No, I said he was never charged with AWOL
I never said he didn't do anything wrong.
Learn Adam...learn
Yes, you did. You're just too cowardly to admit to what you said.
Show the quote
"Bush did not go AWOL because AWOL is a official charge, and he was
never charged."
Duh
that is what I said idiot. That doesn't mean he didn't do anything
wrong
Your statement is the rankest *****.
No, your distortion and attempt to twist it is of the rankest BS
I never once said that if a person is not convicted he or she did not do
the
crime. As you and pathetic David like to claim.
I said Bush was not guilty of AWOL because
a) he was never charged
b) he was never found guilty of AWOL
Thus confirming what I've said above. Tell us, Bobby, seeing as Jack
the Ripper was never charged or convicted, does that mean that the
person who was Jack the Ripper wasn't actually guilty of murder?
Thus confirming nothing of what you said.
Thus confirming that you want things to read differently even when people
state their case.
That's exactly what you're saying with your 'logic' above.
That does NOT mean though there is not reason to question his activities.
And that does NOT mean that he didn't do anything wrong.
You are saying that killing
somebody unjustly doesn't make you a murderer unless you are charged
with murder.
No, you are saying that, not me
No, Bobby, that's what you're saying.
No Adam, that is what YOU said. I never said that.
Bill Clinton was a fugitive, and had to be pardoned. Do you support
presidents that were on the run?
More evidence that you are not involved in any way with law
enforcement - your ignorance is certainly working against you.
No, more ignorance you don't know how to read and because of that you
have
to lie
Aw, Bobby's getting pissy. That's his typical 'defense'.
---
Militant Agnostic:
I don't know and you don't either.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Adam H." |
|
| Title: Re: Study Finds Fox News Viewers Most Likely To Have Misperceptions About Iraq Invasion |
14 Oct 2003 04:07:29 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:01:39 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:p7noovce81j2t1t46socj56lkbmfdjgsof@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 15:58:46 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:nbioovse8clqqc6oa3173l3onaj73tlhdh@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 14:58:43 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:51eoovc9essisf90huejjso2m6hlksnsa2@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:38:57 -0400, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:437oov0u7ipqr7peb31jvn1aaggai5296b@4ax.com...
On 10 Oct 2003 23:32:04 -0700, (osprey)
wrote:
David Barnes <dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<101020031938036066%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>...
In article <4lccov04jgtonpn5v2i3brpj8s3l1k181h@4ax.com>, Adam
H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 21:05:15 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
In article <p39covk3j0eh5n3ufjee33iovhd04el2in@4ax.com>,
Adam
H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 20:15:21 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
Here's a shock:
"A new study finds that a majority of Americans have had
significant
misperceptions highly related to support for the war
with
Iraq.
The
frequency of these misperceptions varies significantly
according
to
individualsą primary source of news with FoxNews viewers
having
the
most misperceptions and NPR/PBS viewers the least."
So much for that fair and balanced "news."
<http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/08/1554236
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
I already posted that story. Bobby immediately followed
my
post
with a
demand that I 'prove it'. Apparently going to the authors
of
the
study
(or examining the methodology involved before whining)
didn't
occur to
him.
---
Militant Agnostic:
I don't know and you don't either.
Sorry - I didn't see this. As for Osprey, when he says
"prove
it"
he
means he has no better reply. Not unusual for the dim
bulb.
But it is funny to watch him twist in the wind. He tried to
pull
the
"no conviction, no crime" routine. Apparently he hasn't come
up
with
anything better.
Lets not forget "men should make the decision about whether a
woman
gets an abortion because they are not as emotional."
If you are trying to suggest for one minute I ever said that,
then
you
better have something to back it up. Or this goes down as yet
another
one of your lies. Which by the way is adding up to almost the
same
amount as the list of Bill Clinton lies. Which is SEVERAL
pages.
Just like your lie about the no conviction no crime line. I
never
said that. Which by the way, neither you nor Adam has ever been
able
to produce a quote.
You claimed that if Bush had not been charged and convicted, he
could
not have commited the crime of being AWOL, correct?
No, I said he was never charged with AWOL
I never said he didn't do anything wrong.
Learn Adam...learn
Yes, you did. You're just too cowardly to admit to what you said.
Show the quote
"Bush did not go AWOL because AWOL is a official charge, and he was
never charged."
Duh
that is what I said idiot. That doesn't mean he didn't do anything
wrong
Your statement is the rankest *****.
No, your distortion and attempt to twist it is of the rankest BS
I never once said that if a person is not convicted he or she did not do
the
crime. As you and pathetic David like to claim.
I said Bush was not guilty of AWOL because
a) he was never charged
b) he was never found guilty of AWOL
Thus confirming what I've said above. Tell us, Bobby, seeing as Jack
the Ripper was never charged or convicted, does that mean that the
person who was Jack the Ripper wasn't actually guilty of murder?
Thus confirming nothing of what you said.
Thus confirming that you want things to read differently even when people
state their case.
Answer the question, Bobby. Was Jack the Ripper a murderer even if he
was never charged?
[snip clinton-bashing, Bobby's favourite distraction tactic]
---
Militant Agnostic:
I don't know and you don't either.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Finds Fox News Viewers Most Likely To Have Misperceptions About Iraq Invasion |
14 Oct 2003 04:51:00 PM |
|
|
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:7bpoovcmshk4a5n7ujjpec2c4sst0cnn3c@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:01:39 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:p7noovce81j2t1t46socj56lkbmfdjgsof@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 15:58:46 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:nbioovse8clqqc6oa3173l3onaj73tlhdh@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 14:58:43 -0400, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:51eoovc9essisf90huejjso2m6hlksnsa2@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:38:57 -0400, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:437oov0u7ipqr7peb31jvn1aaggai5296b@4ax.com...
On 10 Oct 2003 23:32:04 -0700, (osprey)
wrote:
David Barnes <dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<101020031938036066%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>...
In article <4lccov04jgtonpn5v2i3brpj8s3l1k181h@4ax.com>,
Adam
H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 21:05:15 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
In article <p39covk3j0eh5n3ufjee33iovhd04el2in@4ax.com>,
Adam
H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 20:15:21 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
Here's a shock:
"A new study finds that a majority of Americans have
had
significant
misperceptions highly related to support for the war
with
Iraq.
The
frequency of these misperceptions varies
significantly
according
to
individualsą primary source of news with FoxNews
viewers
having
the
most misperceptions and NPR/PBS viewers the least."
So much for that fair and balanced "news."
<http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/08/1554236
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
I already posted that story. Bobby immediately
followed
my
post
with a
demand that I 'prove it'. Apparently going to the
authors
of
the
study
(or examining the methodology involved before whining)
didn't
occur to
him.
---
Militant Agnostic:
I don't know and you don't either.
Sorry - I didn't see this. As for Osprey, when he says
"prove
it"
he
means he has no better reply. Not unusual for the dim
bulb.
But it is funny to watch him twist in the wind. He tried
to
pull
the
"no conviction, no crime" routine. Apparently he hasn't
come
up
with
anything better.
Lets not forget "men should make the decision about whether
a
woman
gets an abortion because they are not as emotional."
If you are trying to suggest for one minute I ever said that,
then
you
better have something to back it up. Or this goes down as
yet
another
one of your lies. Which by the way is adding up to almost
the
same
amount as the list of Bill Clinton lies. Which is SEVERAL
pages.
Just like your lie about the no conviction no crime line. I
never
said that. Which by the way, neither you nor Adam has ever
been
able
to produce a quote.
You claimed that if Bush had not been charged and convicted,
he
could
not have commited the crime of being AWOL, correct?
No, I said he was never charged with AWOL
I never said he didn't do anything wrong.
Learn Adam...learn
Yes, you did. You're just too cowardly to admit to what you
said.
Show the quote
"Bush did not go AWOL because AWOL is a official charge, and he
was
never charged."
Duh
that is what I said idiot. That doesn't mean he didn't do anything
wrong
Your statement is the rankest *****.
No, your distortion and attempt to twist it is of the rankest BS
I never once said that if a person is not convicted he or she did not
do
the
crime. As you and pathetic David like to claim.
I said Bush was not guilty of AWOL because
a) he was never charged
b) he was never found guilty of AWOL
Thus confirming what I've said above. Tell us, Bobby, seeing as Jack
the Ripper was never charged or convicted, does that mean that the
person who was Jack the Ripper wasn't actually guilty of murder?
Thus confirming nothing of what you said.
Thus confirming that you want things to read differently even when people
state their case.
Answer the question, Bobby. Was Jack the Ripper a murderer even if he
was never charged?
You never answered my question
Why are you defending Saddam Hussein?
As far as your question goes, to show you that I am not like you and run
Did Jack the Ripper murder?
He killed, yes we know that. Was he convicted as a murderer? No
Did he wrongfully kill? Yes, as far as we know he did.
[snip clinton-bashing, Bobby's favourite distraction tactic]
Adam runs from questions on Bill Clinton
Typical
.
|
|
|
| User: "Adam H." |
|
| Title: Re: Study Finds Fox News Viewers Most Likely To Have Misperceptions About Iraq Invasion |
14 Oct 2003 05:01:10 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:51:00 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:7bpoovcmshk4a5n7ujjpec2c4sst0cnn3c@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:01:39 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:p7noovce81j2t1t46socj56lkbmfdjgsof@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 15:58:46 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:nbioovse8clqqc6oa3173l3onaj73tlhdh@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 14:58:43 -0400, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:51eoovc9essisf90huejjso2m6hlksnsa2@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:38:57 -0400, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:437oov0u7ipqr7peb31jvn1aaggai5296b@4ax.com...
On 10 Oct 2003 23:32:04 -0700, (osprey)
wrote:
David Barnes <dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<101020031938036066%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>...
In article <4lccov04jgtonpn5v2i3brpj8s3l1k181h@4ax.com>,
Adam
H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 21:05:15 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
In article <p39covk3j0eh5n3ufjee33iovhd04el2in@4ax.com>,
Adam
H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 20:15:21 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
Here's a shock:
"A new study finds that a majority of Americans have
had
significant
misperceptions highly related to support for the war
with
Iraq.
The
frequency of these misperceptions varies
significantly
according
to
individualsą primary source of news with FoxNews
viewers
having
the
most misperceptions and NPR/PBS viewers the least."
So much for that fair and balanced "news."
<http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/08/1554236
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
I already posted that story. Bobby immediately
followed
my
post
with a
demand that I 'prove it'. Apparently going to the
authors
of
the
study
(or examining the methodology involved before whining)
didn't
occur to
him.
---
Militant Agnostic:
I don't know and you don't either.
Sorry - I didn't see this. As for Osprey, when he says
"prove
it"
he
means he has no better reply. Not unusual for the dim
bulb.
But it is funny to watch him twist in the wind. He tried
to
pull
the
"no conviction, no crime" routine. Apparently he hasn't
come
up
with
anything better.
Lets not forget "men should make the decision about whether
a
woman
gets an abortion because they are not as emotional."
If you are trying to suggest for one minute I ever said that,
then
you
better have something to back it up. Or this goes down as
yet
another
one of your lies. Which by the way is adding up to almost
the
same
amount as the list of Bill Clinton lies. Which is SEVERAL
pages.
Just like your lie about the no conviction no crime line. I
never
said that. Which by the way, neither you nor Adam has ever
been
able
to produce a quote.
You claimed that if Bush had not been charged and convicted,
he
could
not have commited the crime of being AWOL, correct?
No, I said he was never charged with AWOL
I never said he didn't do anything wrong.
Learn Adam...learn
Yes, you did. You're just too cowardly to admit to what you
said.
Show the quote
"Bush did not go AWOL because AWOL is a official charge, and he
was
never charged."
Duh
that is what I said idiot. That doesn't mean he didn't do anything
wrong
Your statement is the rankest *****.
No, your distortion and attempt to twist it is of the rankest BS
I never once said that if a person is not convicted he or she did not
do
the
crime. As you and pathetic David like to claim.
I said Bush was not guilty of AWOL because
a) he was never charged
b) he was never found guilty of AWOL
Thus confirming what I've said above. Tell us, Bobby, seeing as Jack
the Ripper was never charged or convicted, does that mean that the
person who was Jack the Ripper wasn't actually guilty of murder?
Thus confirming nothing of what you said.
Thus confirming that you want things to read differently even when people
state their case.
Answer the question, Bobby. Was Jack the Ripper a murderer even if he
was never charged?
[snip Bobby's running]
Answer the question, Bobby. Was Jack the Ripper a murderer or not?
---
Militant Agnostic:
I don't know and you don't either.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Finds Fox News Viewers Most Likely To Have Misperceptions About Iraq Invasion |
14 Oct 2003 05:29:38 PM |
|
|
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:mfsoovgbor51j2n7oh74v64eon8qn9drv7@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:51:00 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:7bpoovcmshk4a5n7ujjpec2c4sst0cnn3c@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:01:39 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:p7noovce81j2t1t46socj56lkbmfdjgsof@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 15:58:46 -0400, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:nbioovse8clqqc6oa3173l3onaj73tlhdh@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 14:58:43 -0400, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:51eoovc9essisf90huejjso2m6hlksnsa2@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:38:57 -0400, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:437oov0u7ipqr7peb31jvn1aaggai5296b@4ax.com...
On 10 Oct 2003 23:32:04 -0700,
(osprey)
wrote:
David Barnes <dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<101020031938036066%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>...
In article <4lccov04jgtonpn5v2i3brpj8s3l1k181h@4ax.com>,
Adam
H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 21:05:15 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
In article
<p39covk3j0eh5n3ufjee33iovhd04el2in@4ax.com>,
Adam
H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 20:15:21 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
Here's a shock:
"A new study finds that a majority of Americans
have
had
significant
misperceptions highly related to support for the
war
with
Iraq.
The
frequency of these misperceptions varies
significantly
according
to
individualsą primary source of news with FoxNews
viewers
having
the
most misperceptions and NPR/PBS viewers the
least."
So much for that fair and balanced "news."
<http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/08/1554236
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
I already posted that story. Bobby immediately
followed
my
post
with a
demand that I 'prove it'. Apparently going to the
authors
of
the
study
(or examining the methodology involved before
whining)
didn't
occur to
him.
---
Militant Agnostic:
I don't know and you don't either.
Sorry - I didn't see this. As for Osprey, when he
says
"prove
it"
he
means he has no better reply. Not unusual for the
dim
bulb.
But it is funny to watch him twist in the wind. He
tried
to
pull
the
"no conviction, no crime" routine. Apparently he
hasn't
come
up
with
anything better.
Lets not forget "men should make the decision about
whether
a
woman
gets an abortion because they are not as emotional."
If you are trying to suggest for one minute I ever said
that,
then
you
better have something to back it up. Or this goes down as
yet
another
one of your lies. Which by the way is adding up to almost
the
same
amount as the list of Bill Clinton lies. Which is SEVERAL
pages.
Just like your lie about the no conviction no crime line.
I
never
said that. Which by the way, neither you nor Adam has
ever
been
able
to produce a quote.
You claimed that if Bush had not been charged and
convicted,
he
could
not have commited the crime of being AWOL, correct?
No, I said he was never charged with AWOL
I never said he didn't do anything wrong.
Learn Adam...learn
Yes, you did. You're just too cowardly to admit to what you
said.
Show the quote
"Bush did not go AWOL because AWOL is a official charge, and
he
was
never charged."
Duh
that is what I said idiot. That doesn't mean he didn't do
anything
wrong
Your statement is the rankest *****.
No, your distortion and attempt to twist it is of the rankest BS
I never once said that if a person is not convicted he or she did
not
do
the
crime. As you and pathetic David like to claim.
I said Bush was not guilty of AWOL because
a) he was never charged
b) he was never found guilty of AWOL
Thus confirming what I've said above. Tell us, Bobby, seeing as Jack
the Ripper was never charged or convicted, does that mean that the
person who was Jack the Ripper wasn't actually guilty of murder?
Thus confirming nothing of what you said.
Thus confirming that you want things to read differently even when
people
state their case.
Answer the question, Bobby. Was Jack the Ripper a murderer even if he
was never charged?
[snip Bobby's running]
Answer the question, Bobby. Was Jack the Ripper a murderer or not?
I answered it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Adam H." |
|
| Title: Re: Study Finds Fox News Viewers Most Likely To Have Misperceptions About Iraq Invasion |
14 Oct 2003 05:46:39 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 18:29:38 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:mfsoovgbor51j2n7oh74v64eon8qn9drv7@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:51:00 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:7bpoovcmshk4a5n7ujjpec2c4sst0cnn3c@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:01:39 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:p7noovce81j2t1t46socj56lkbmfdjgsof@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 15:58:46 -0400, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:nbioovse8clqqc6oa3173l3onaj73tlhdh@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 14:58:43 -0400, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:51eoovc9essisf90huejjso2m6hlksnsa2@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:38:57 -0400, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:437oov0u7ipqr7peb31jvn1aaggai5296b@4ax.com...
On 10 Oct 2003 23:32:04 -0700,
(osprey)
wrote:
David Barnes <dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<101020031938036066%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>...
In article <4lccov04jgtonpn5v2i3brpj8s3l1k181h@4ax.com>,
Adam
H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 21:05:15 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
In article
<p39covk3j0eh5n3ufjee33iovhd04el2in@4ax.com>,
Adam
H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 20:15:21 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
Here's a shock:
"A new study finds that a majority of Americans
have
had
significant
misperceptions highly related to support for the
war
with
Iraq.
The
frequency of these misperceptions varies
significantly
according
to
individualsą primary source of news with FoxNews
viewers
having
the
most misperceptions and NPR/PBS viewers the
least."
So much for that fair and balanced "news."
<http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/08/1554236
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
I already posted that story. Bobby immediately
followed
my
post
with a
demand that I 'prove it'. Apparently going to the
authors
of
the
study
(or examining the methodology involved before
whining)
didn't
occur to
him.
---
Militant Agnostic:
I don't know and you don't either.
Sorry - I didn't see this. As for Osprey, when he
says
"prove
it"
he
means he has no better reply. Not unusual for the
dim
bulb.
But it is funny to watch him twist in the wind. He
tried
to
pull
the
"no conviction, no crime" routine. Apparently he
hasn't
come
up
with
anything better.
Lets not forget "men should make the decision about
whether
a
woman
gets an abortion because they are not as emotional."
If you are trying to suggest for one minute I ever said
that,
then
you
better have something to back it up. Or this goes down as
yet
another
one of your lies. Which by the way is adding up to almost
the
same
amount as the list of Bill Clinton lies. Which is SEVERAL
pages.
Just like your lie about the no conviction no crime line.
I
never
said that. Which by the way, neither you nor Adam has
ever
been
able
to produce a quote.
You claimed that if Bush had not been charged and
convicted,
he
could
not have commited the crime of being AWOL, correct?
No, I said he was never charged with AWOL
I never said he didn't do anything wrong.
Learn Adam...learn
Yes, you did. You're just too cowardly to admit to what you
said.
Show the quote
"Bush did not go AWOL because AWOL is a official charge, and
he
was
never charged."
Duh
that is what I said idiot. That doesn't mean he didn't do
anything
wrong
Your statement is the rankest *****.
No, your distortion and attempt to twist it is of the rankest BS
I never once said that if a person is not convicted he or she did
not
do
the
crime. As you and pathetic David like to claim.
I said Bush was not guilty of AWOL because
a) he was never charged
b) he was never found guilty of AWOL
Thus confirming what I've said above. Tell us, Bobby, seeing as Jack
the Ripper was never charged or convicted, does that mean that the
person who was Jack the Ripper wasn't actually guilty of murder?
Thus confirming nothing of what you said.
Thus confirming that you want things to read differently even when
people
state their case.
Answer the question, Bobby. Was Jack the Ripper a murderer even if he
was never charged?
[snip Bobby's running]
Answer the question, Bobby. Was Jack the Ripper a murderer or not?
I answered it.
No, you did not. You threw around some more clinton bashing.
Evidence show conclusively that Bush went AWOL and deserted. He's a
deserter. We don't need a charge or conviction to say that. You won't
answer the question since you know that either answer makes you look
like an idiot.
Well, here's a free clue: you couldn't look like more of an idiot if
you tried.
(I go away for one weekend and return to find that Bobby's apparently
been sniffing glue, judging by his mental processes extant here. Oh,
well. Maybe it'll make him more coherent).
---
Militant Agnostic:
I don't know and you don't either.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Study Finds Fox News Viewers Most Likely To Have Misperceptions About Iraq Invasion |
14 Oct 2003 06:12:29 PM |
|
|
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:7vuoovoqloa5nq85f13ie5h2lg63b602pj@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 18:29:38 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:mfsoovgbor51j2n7oh74v64eon8qn9drv7@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:51:00 -0400, "Osprey" <noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:7bpoovcmshk4a5n7ujjpec2c4sst0cnn3c@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:01:39 -0400, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:p7noovce81j2t1t46socj56lkbmfdjgsof@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 15:58:46 -0400, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:nbioovse8clqqc6oa3173l3onaj73tlhdh@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 14:58:43 -0400, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:51eoovc9essisf90huejjso2m6hlksnsa2@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 13:38:57 -0400, "Osprey"
<noneedstoknow@mail.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:437oov0u7ipqr7peb31jvn1aaggai5296b@4ax.com...
On 10 Oct 2003 23:32:04 -0700,
(osprey)
wrote:
David Barnes <dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<101020031938036066%dbarnes111@yahoo.com>...
In article
<4lccov04jgtonpn5v2i3brpj8s3l1k181h@4ax.com>,
Adam
H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 21:05:15 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
In article
<p39covk3j0eh5n3ufjee33iovhd04el2in@4ax.com>,
Adam
H.
<adam@mailinator.com> wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 20:15:21 -0700, David Barnes
<dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote:
Here's a shock:
"A new study finds that a majority of Americans
have
had
significant
misperceptions highly related to support for
the
war
with
Iraq.
The
frequency of these misperceptions varies
significantly
according
to
individualsą primary source of news with
FoxNews
viewers
having
the
most misperceptions and NPR/PBS viewers the
least."
So much for that fair and balanced "news."
<http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/08/1554236
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
I already posted that story. Bobby immediately
followed
my
post
with a
demand that I 'prove it'. Apparently going to
the
authors
of
the
study
(or examining the methodology involved before
whining)
didn't
occur to
him.
---
Militant Agnostic:
I don't know and you don't either.
Sorry - I didn't see this. As for Osprey, when he
says
"prove
it"
he
means he has no better reply. Not unusual for the
dim
bulb.
But it is funny to watch him twist in the wind. He
tried
to
pull
the
"no conviction, no crime" routine. Apparently he
hasn't
come
up
with
anything better.
Lets not forget "men should make the decision about
whether
a
woman
gets an abortion because they are not as emotional."
If you are trying to suggest for one minute I ever said
that,
then
you
better have something to back it up. Or this goes down
as
yet
another
one of your lies. Which by the way is adding up to
almost
the
same
amount as the list of Bill Clinton lies. Which is
SEVERAL
pages.
Just like your lie about the no conviction no crime
line.
I
never
said that. Which by the way, neither you nor Adam has
ever
been
able
to produce a quote.
You claimed that if Bush had not been charged and
convicted,
he
could
not have commited the crime of being AWOL, correct?
No, I said he was never charged with AWOL
I never said he didn't do anything wrong.
Learn Adam...learn
Yes, you did. You're just too cowardly to admit to what
you
said.
Show the quote
"Bush did not go AWOL because AWOL is a official charge,
and
he
was
never charged."
Duh
that is what I said idiot. That doesn't mean he didn't do
anything
wrong
Your statement is the rankest *****.
No, your distortion and attempt to twist it is of the rankest BS
I never once said that if a person is not convicted he or she
did
not
do
the
crime. As you and pathetic David like to claim.
I said Bush was not guilty of AWOL because
a) he was never charged
b) he was never found guilty of AWOL
Thus confirming what I've said above. Tell us, Bobby, seeing as
Jack
the Ripper was never charged or convicted, does that mean that
the
person who was Jack the Ripper wasn't actually guilty of murder?
Thus confirming nothing of what you said.
Thus confirming that you want things to read differently even when
people
state their case.
Answer the question, Bobby. Was Jack the Ripper a murderer even if
he
was never charged?
[snip Bobby's running]
Answer the question, Bobby. Was Jack the Ripper a murderer or not?
I answered it.
No, you did not. You threw around some more clinton bashing.
Yes I did answer your question.
What does Jack the Ripper have to do with your Bush Bashing?
Evidence show conclusively that Bush went AWOL and deserted.
Evidence YOU wish to accept.
He's a
deserter. We don't need a charge or conviction to say that.
You can think and say what you like. That doesn't mean I have to accept it,
and I will not say what YOU want me to say.
You won't
answer the question since you know that either answer makes you look
like an idiot.
You are going to say that anyways Adam. Which is why you follow me around
like a pathetic whipped puppy dog. You just want to look for a argument so
you can make up some BS. And when I don't say what you want me to say, you
go off on your little tantrum, and then say you are wasting your time.
Well go waste it somewhere else, kiss my *****, and get a life.
Can I make myself any clearer to you?
1) [May 23, 2000 Robinson, Boston Globe] Bush himself, in his 1999
autobiography, "A Charge to Keep," recounts the thrills of his pilot
training, which he completed in June 1970. "I continued flying with my unit
for the next several years," the governor wrote. [NOTE: this is untrue. GW
flew for, at most, two years after June 1970]
2) [May 23, 2000 Robinson, Boston Globe] Bush, who declined to be
interviewed on the issue, said through a spokesman that he has "some
recollection" of attending drills that year, but maybe not consistently.
3) [May 23, 2000 Robinson, Boston Globe] A Bush spokesman, Dan Bartlett,
said after talking with the governor that Bush recalls performing some duty
in Alabama and "recalls coming back to Houston and doing [Guard] duty,
though he does not recall if it was on a consistent basis." [NOTE: Bush
returned to Houston after his "lost year" so this recollection is not
relevant.]
4) [May 23, 2000 Robinson, Boston Globe] Last night [5/22/00], Mindy Tucker,
another Bush campaign aide, asserted that the governor "fulfilled all of his
requirements in the Guard." If he missed any drills, she said, he made them
up later on.
5) [May 24, 2000 Robinson, Boston Globe] "I did the duty necessary ...
That's why I was honorably discharged," Bush told reporters traveling on his
campaign plane to Ohio, according to the Associated Press. "I read the
comments from the guy who said he doesn't remember me being there, but I
remember being there," Bush said of Turnipseed's remarks, the AP reported.
6) [May 23, 2000 Chris Williams, AP] "I served my full obligation with the
Texas National Guard. That's why I was honorably discharged," Bush said.
Bush aides provided a payroll document they said indicated Bush served nine
days of active duty after returning to Houston from Alabama. [NOTE: No date
for these nine days was given but it is likely they were the days required
after Bush was found missing for the previous year.]
7) [May 24, 2000 Kevin Flower/CNN] -- Texas Gov. George W. Bush on Tuesday
dismissed a newspaper report suggesting he had not fulfilled his Texas Air
National Guard service. "I spent my time and I went to the Guard. It's just
not true. I did the duty necessary ... any allegations other than that are
simply not true," Bush said. Responding to the Globe's report that his
Alabama base commander had no recollection of Bush ever showing for drills,
the governor said "I pulled duty in Alabama and I read the comments and the
guy said he didn't remember me. That's 27 years ago, but I remember being
there." Asked about his Air National Guard attendance record, Bush told
reporters it was "spotty attendance but I did the duty necessary... I did
the time that was required in the Guard."
8) [June 24, 2000 Chris Williams AP] AUSTIN, Texas -- Gov. George W. Bush's
campaign workers have concluded that no documents exist showing he reported
for duty as ordered in Alabama with the Texas Air National Guard in 1972.
They are looking for people who served with him to verify his story that he
did.
Dan Bartlett, a spokesman for Bush's Republican presidential campaign, said
he reviewed another 200-page packet of documents last week from the National
Guard's records repository in Denver.
"I have read it, and there is nothing earth-shattering," he said. The
campaign was looking for payroll records that would show Bush reported for
duty with the Guard in Montgomery, Ala., while working on the unsuccessful
Senate campaign of former Postmaster General Winton Blount. Bush,
campaigning in Tuscaloosa, Ala., on Friday, was asked at a news conference
about his 1972 Alabama service. His commitment to the Texas Guard was
adjusted to let him serve with the Alabama Guard during Blount's campaign.
"I was there on a temporary assignment and fulfilled my weekends at one
period of time," Bush said.
"I made up some missed weekends."
"I can't remember what I did, but I wasn't flying because they didn't have
the same airplanes. I fulfilled my obligations," he said.
Expanding on Bush's remarks later, campaign spokesman Ari Fleischer quoted
Bush as saying he did "paper shuffling" in Montgomery.
"He thinks it was desk work," said Fleischer.
Bartlett said the campaign is now focusing its attention on trying to locate
people who served with Bush in late 1972 in the 187th Tactical
Reconnaissance Group in the Alabama capital.
Bush served as a pilot in the Texas Air National Guard from May 1968 to
October 1973, primarily flying F-102 fighter-interceptors at Ellington Air
Force Base, south of Houston. [NOTE: This is incorrect. Bush never flew
after May 1972. He was grounded for missing a required physical.] Spokesman
Bartlett said Bush remembers meeting Turnipseed and performing drills in
Montgomery sporadically during the campaign and more frequently after the
election in November and December.
"Governor Bush specifically remembers pulling duty in Alabama at the end of
the campaign," Bartlett said. [NOTE: now it's "at the end of the campaign"
which fits nicely with what the "witnesses" say in #11]
The Associated Press reviewed nearly 200 pages of Bush's military records
released by the National Guard Bureau in Arlington, Va. They contained no
evidence that Bush reported for duty in Alabama.
9) [Monday , June 26, 2000 ; Wayne Slater Dallas Morning News A06 ] AUSTIN:
After a thorough search of military records, George W. Bush's presidential
campaign has failed to find any documents proving he reported for duty
during an eight-month stint in Alabama with the Texas Air National Guard.
But a spokesman expressed confidence Saturday that inquiries will turn up
former Guard members who can corroborate Bush's having been there.
"He specifically recalls pulling duty in Alabama," spokesman Dan Bartlett
said of Bush. "He did his drills."
Bartlett said the Republican governor showed up "several" times while in
Alabama, where he transferred from his Houston Guard unit in 1972 to work
for the unsuccessful Senate campaign of Republican Winton Blount, a friend
of Bush's father.
According to Bartlett, the governor could not recall specifically how many
times he reported for duty during his months [NOTE: "months" It was a full
year] in Alabama. Bartlett said Saturday that he reviewed a 200-page packet
of documents last week from the National Guard's records repository in
Denver. He said they largely duplicated documents the campaign already had
obtained from Texas National Guard headquarters.
"What it shows is that Governor Bush met his annual requirements in order to
fulfill his military obligation but doesn't show the portion of the training
that took place in Alabama," he said. [NOTE: he met his annual requirement,
excluding the required physical examination, only by making up 36 missed
days.]
While Bush was in Alabama, "most of his work was paperwork related," said
Bartlett.
Campaigning Friday in Tuscaloosa, Ala., Bush was asked about his 1972
service in that state.
"I was there on a temporary assignment and fulfilled my weekends at one
period of time," he said. "I made up some missed weekends."
"I can't remember what I did, but I wasn't flying because they didn't have
the same airplanes. I fulfilled my obligations."
In May, retired Gen. William Turnipseed, the former commander of the Alabama
Guard unit, said Bush did not report to him, although the young airman was
required to do so. His orders, dated Sept. 15, 1972, said: "Lieutenant Bush
should report to Lt. Col. William Turnipseed, DCO, to perform equivalent
training."
"To my knowledge, he never showed up," Turnipseed said last month.
Bartlett said Bush recalls seeing then-Col. Turnipseed. The campaign aide
suggested that because Bush was not a pilot, his commander might not
remember him. [NOTE: now Bush recalls "seeing" what's his name. He was
required to report to the then-colonel.]
10) [July 2, 2000 Chris Williams, AP] Retired Gen. William Turnipseed, now
71, a commander at the base, has said he never saw Bush appear for duty.
Bush, however, says he remembers meeting Turnipseed and performing drills at
the base."I was there. I was in the unit," he said last Wednesday when asked
about it.
Bush's campaign staff has searched for records that would show he was
actually there. They have decided that none of those records survived and
they now are looking for eyewitnesses.
11) [July 5, 2000 AP] DECATUR, Ala. -- Two friends who worked with George W.
Bush in a U.S. Senate campaign in Alabama more than 28 years ago say they
remember him serving in the Alabama Air National Guard. [NOTE: this is
untrue. They remember Bush telling them he was in the Guard. They were told
by unnamed sources that he was "pulling National Guard duty" one weekend.]
"It was pretty well known that he was in the Guard while we worked on the
campaign," said Morgan County resident Joe Holcombe. He is former chairman
of the Morgan County Republican Party.
"I remember one weekend he was not at a campaign staff meeting, and we were
told that he was pulling National Guard duty."
Authorities said no documents exist that show he actually served on Guard
duty while in Alabama.
But Holcombe and Emily Martin of Key Biscayne, Fla., said they remember Bush
talking about being in the Guard. "He told us that he was having to do his
Guard duty in Alabama while he worked on the campaign," said Martin, a
former Alabama resident. She said she dated Bush during his time in Alabama.
"I remember he actually came back to Alabama for about a week to 10 days
several weeks after the campaign was over to complete his Guard duty in the
state," Martin said in a telephone interview with the Decatur (Ala.) Daily
from her Florida home. "We both were single at the time he was in Alabama,
and we went out a lot," she said. "I have fond memories of those times.
Although I never actually drove him to Guard duty, he told me that he went
and there is no reason for me to believe that he did not go."
Holcombe and Martin were paid campaign workers in the 1972 election.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
In summary, the Bush campaign maintains that:
1) George Bush did attend drills in Alabama.
2) The records that could back up this assertion are missing.
3) Bush "fulfilled his obligation and was honorably discharged."
4) The Bush campaign will find someone who remembers George reporting for
duty in Alabama.
Regarding #1: Governor Bush, who is said to have an excellent memory for
names and faces, says, "I read the comments from the guy who said he doesn't
remember me being there, but I remember being there." Later he said, "I
pulled duty in Alabama and I read the comments and the guy said he didn't
remember me. That's 27 years ago, but I remember being there."
Regarding #2: There are records that show Bush did not report for duty. Bush
missed two physicals and was officially reported as missing for a year by
senior officers. Records show that he was required to make up missed time.
In addition, the absence of attendance records in a military that is noted
for keeping such records indicates not that they were lost but that G.W. did
not report for duty.
Regarding #3: The following statement and its variations have been made in
order to deflect attention from the missing year. "I served my full
obligation with the Texas National Guard. That's why I was honorably
discharged," Bush said. You have to read carefully the claims that Bush "did
the time that was required." The Bush campaign says that since George got an
honorable discharge, he must have done what was required. The assertion is
true only if you include the 36 days of "service" that Lt. Bush had to
fulfill because he missed at least that many days in the previous year.
Regarding #4: To date, all the Bush campaign can find are two professional
Republicans who say they heard Bush say he went to drills. The campaign
ignores the four senior officers and the other evidence that says clearly
Bush did not attend drills.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
My only question is, why is the media accepting the "arguments" of the Bush
propagandists rather than the evidence that is already available? I remember
the articles about Al Gore's "bodyguard" in Vietnam and the allegations that
he really didn't "serve" there. The presence of armed soldiers who
accompanied a military reporter (Gore) is taken as dodging his obligations.
The presence of clear statements that George W. Bush blew off a year of his
military obligation is taken as "oops, we can't find the records."
And the media wonders why it isn't trusted?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
