Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by nonconformist, May 31, 2007.
Yes I'm sure my friend of 25 years is a CIA plant to spread misinformation.
Dangerous only to the people who uses unorthodoxic means to conduct war against the coalition by way of secrecies and terror.
No, dangerous to anyone and everyone.
You're kidding, right? If you can't manage to parse one sentence on your own, then that's obviously your problem, not some imagined fallacy on my part.
Tell you what, let's skip the whole fallacies thing, and you can just try and fail to answer noncon's quite simple two-part question put forth an hour ago. How about that?
Oh, you're going the "not made public" route. So even if we're going to run with your assumption - let's say the military has a bang-up case against these guerrilla terrorist scum - how many years does it get to sit on that case and keep them in stress positions before it finally has to step up and prove it? Hint: your answer is apparently greater than five already.
@Skadistic: Your friend [personally] has nothing to do with the information he is given and is disseminating. That was what I was talking about - I just think it is disingenuous for anyone to unthinkingly accept the information they are receiving solely from one side and simultaneously instantly discredit any contrary evidence (no offense to you personally; I just mean that as a general principle).
My mistake, they were caught in Afghanistan.
OBL did have proof that all people who were working in the Twin Towers on 911 were CIA agents making a secret plan to destroy the Kabaa. For security reasons he can't give us those proof however.
Maybe I didn't get much sleep last night, but I'm a little bit amused and a little bit scared.
The proof is in their death.
Since the US is the Good Guys, anybody picked up and sent to Gitmo must by definition be a Bad Guy. Otherwise the US wouldn't do it, right?
And if they have the temerity of killing themselves in US custody, it's such a dirty trick, intended to make the US look bad, it proves beyond all doubt that they were guilty of sin of terrorism.
I.e., pretty standard denial, that comes with the kind of bunker-mentality people at times develop in a conflict. It's done all the time in conflicts everywhere. (The weird bit is that the conflict seems mostly perpetuated by the US itself by now. Go figure...)
You know who you are - here's a little article about you (hint: replace Communism with Islamofascism):
I'd like to remind everyone of one of the popular tactics of TERRORISTS--suicide bombing. The only difference here is this guy couldn't lay his hands on a bomb.
I'm sorry, I've never heard of Islamofascism, would you care to enlighten me on what it is?
i'm sorry, what?
a convenient buzzword in the "War on Terror"
"Let's play cops and robbers."
"Bang bang, you're dead."
Only difference is that the kids aren't killing anyone.
Fairly major difference, I'd say...
So? How is this significant?
Well, according to your definition, in 2001, the United States saw 30,622 suicide bombers, with a staggering number of 83.9 per day. No wonder we're number 96 on the "Most Peaceful Nations" list.
Considering the fact that most go for crowded areas like Markets, busses or weddings, YES, I think they do.
I dont see very many suicide bombers that merely run out into the desert to make a crater all by their lonesome.....
EDIT: Thats assuming you meant suicide bombers. If not, then disregard.
What do you get when you take UNITED STATES OF ARI" from "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" and add a "C" in between the "C" and the "A"?
Suicide bomber attacking FOB in Iraq.
(BTW, liveleak is a good source of all things media from Iraq and Afghanistan; it doesn't operate under the restrictive policies of Youtube and such; be warned about mature content though)
Separate names with a comma.