bobbo, is there any difference between a fact and a belief says:

#40–Maricopa==let’s parse though it and see if your defense holds up? Who knows, maybe I read too fast?

1. I questioned Sam’s ethics in saying releasing the name of Plame was bad but releasing the names of our agents in Iraq and Afghanistan was okay. /// Ok, you START by using the word “ethics” but then you immediately shift to the issue of criminality. In the best of all possible worlds, there “should be” little difference between the two, but in our real world, yes there is too often a difference, sometimes a gulf, too often complete opposition. What do we have here. You imply, if I can fill in your best interpretation, that a discussion of ethics does not include recognition of FREEDOM of speech? You don’t think exposing the the lies of our government is an ethical undertaking? You equate LIES told by our Government TO the TRUTH told by Assange because both instances potentially can result in innocent people being killed? Well, unless I’m just too dull witted, I think you lose on every point.

I challenged his assertion that the same people who defended Cheney/Rove/Libby are the ones going after Assange. /// I did not address that at all. Without looking it up, I wouldn’t be “surprised” that happened – would you? Or not, doesn’t matter. The key unless you are a willing dupe is to look past the puppetheads to the puppet master. What is the Corporations position? Fox is a criminal front, CNN seems to be joining them. The entire Lame Steam is becoming Cheerleaders for the power structure. But I didn’t address that at all. Aren’t you being irrelevant?

There is no fault in my logic /// Logic? Ha, ha. Actually you commit a classical logic error. If A and B create the same result, then A and B are the same. I think its called the error of the undistributed middle, but I’m too lazy to look it up.

and there is nothing about the freedom of the press! /// Exactly. That is your factual error. Freedom of the Press is EXACTLY WHAT MAKES YOUR ANALOGY FAIL.

Jeeez. You and ECA need to learn to read. Thinking might come later. /// heh, heh. It’s one kind of foolishness to make an error all on your own. A wholly different kind of error to persist in it after the error is pointed out.

Sad.

Alfred Persson says:

The real question you loons ought to be asking…is Wikileaks covering up for Bush?

Where are the leaked documents showing he knew there were no weapons of mass destruction…

Or proving the World Trade Center was an inside job…

Or proving Bush was Cheney’s sock puppet.

Where are the documents proving AIDS was invented to kill off the Black Community…

Why is J Assuange protecting George Bush?

Why why why aren’t you loons demanding answers to these questions…

bobbo, is there any difference between a fact and a belief says:

Maricupa, sad child. I have already identified 2 arguments I made that should be “better.” In essence, I went more to an underlying assumption, but I’ll leave it vague so you can find them if you really want to.

You really are overly defensive. When I lose an argument, I really enjoy it and try to learn from it. I guess thats why I lose so few arguments these days? Do you think whining like a little child will gain you the same results? —- I don’t think so.

I named your logic error (sic). Speaking of logic errors, your entire Post #44 is ad hominem==not a single factual argument made. A child crying for his Teddy Bear.

Now really Marycupa==suck it up, learn to enjoy the learning process==go back and pick my response apart. YOU CAN DO IT. I have faith in you. I’ll wait.

Hee, hee.

bobbo, are we Men of Science, or Devo? says:

Eds–#46 hit the wrong thread. Delete if possible? Repeating it on correct thread.

bobbo, are we Men of Science, or Devo? says:

Hi Alfie. I’ll respond to your unsupported character assessment just so that Meaculpa doesn’t feel lonely. Why don’t you show him how to make a supported argument?

Please state what your definition of “hot air” is and provide an example of it? for extra credit, deflate my premise and demonstrate how it could have been done better. Is “hot air” a synonym for “just words” as you and Meaculpa have posted?

Usually, but I wait for your response, it is not a premise that is inflated by rather the argument? Maybe you mean overly wordy which really is a different issue.

Might it all be definitional?

I’m pretty loony huh?

Silly one note pony.

bobbo, are we Men of Science, or Devo? says:

Alfie – you are waste of time. A good object lesson for Meaculpa, but still a waste of time.

Alfred Persson says:

You loons are so certain Bush is responsible for so much evil…yet not one Wikileaks document proving your case, is released!

Either loons are wrong, Bush didn’t do those things…or Wikileaks is a gosh darn Bush apologist…

So which is it, loons?

bobbo, are we Men of Science, or Devo? says:

Greg Allen==good post/link. There is no damage to the USA, there is only an affront to the false pride of Government Officials. That requires a false scandal to be manufactured in order to punish those who act against the vagaries of those in Power.

Its an interesting question: how much does secrecy/lies/diplomacy ACTUALLY help run a government? The House of Saud doesn’t want its people to know that they hate Iran. Wikileaks exposes that. I have no idea which scenario–telling the truth, or telling lies–is the better position, for whom, with what consequences.

Absent a clear showing otherwise, I vote for the truth.

bobbo, are we Men of Science, or Devo? says:

Alfie–recognize how few chances you have left.

If there are no wikileaks on whatever you think there should be, I assume there simply are no wikileaks on that particular subject.

What is it Alfie, conspiracy theories all the way down?

If you google (wikileaks Iraq wmd) you come up with the notion that Iraq did have a chemical warfare development program before our invasion. Bush was all about the smoking gun of a Nuclear Explosion==the conflation of Nukes with Chemicals==you could see that one coming the day the conflation was made. The fact that wikileaks is all over the chemicals, and doesn’t mention the Nukes, is a strong inference that the evidence of a Nuke Threat from Iraq was “made up.” Contact your secret angels to figure out who was motivated to do that.

Alfie, you can disagree with me. I enjoy that. Stay stupid and this will be my last response to you, even when called out specifically.

Your move.

Alfred Persson says:

#57 PS, your minister of disinformation, Chris Matthews, is now wanting to see Obama’s Birth Certificate!

Hardee har har!