Missing sial, iron, and nickel explains Fermi paradox

Fred J. McCall wrote:
Einar wrote:


:CO2 trading is allowed for industrial countries that have joined and
:ratified the Kyoto Protocol. That means that, to name an example
utside Europe that Japan can participate in the CO2 sceme. So would
:USA have been able to, if it had joined.
:

And yet nobody else has, even when they're not meeting Kyoto targets.
Why is that, Einar?

If that is true, that is theyr business. However, I really doubt that
what you are saying is true.

So cough up some citation supporting that claim.

:The keyword is the defination, industrial country. As you remember
:third world countries and rapidly growing industrializing countries
:have been exempted from many burdens of the Kyoto. Those countries can
:´t purchase CO2 quotas, yet.
:

Those countries DON'T NEED TO purchase CO2 quotas, since they have no
'ceilings' in the first place.

It proved not possible at the time to make them accept any ceiling,
which later was used by the USA as an excuse to reject the Kyoto
Protocol.


: Einar, a majority of Americans distrust your 'international'
: organizations. Why do you think that is?
:
:
:Common misconceptions about international organizations.
:

That's not a "why", Einar. That's a "what". The question wasn't what
you want to characterize the opinion as. The question was WHY DO YOU

It´s baffling, that´s sure.

One of the American mysteries, that nobody except an American does
get.



: :LOL, so somehow what Europe planned to undergo itself, and in the end
: :did, was to unfairly tough for the USA. Go figure.
: :
:
: Yes, go figure, indeed. Debating tactics don't change the facts,
: Einar. So you continue to "LOL" and such. It's just another
: demonstration of your intellectual dishonesty.
:
:
:This time, you are right, "Debating tactics don't change the facts."
:The fact being that 'somehow what Europe planned to undergo itself,
:and in the end did, was too unfairly tough for the USA,' according to
:USA.
:

I see you're a fan of the Joseph Goebbels School. Saying something
false over and over doesn't make it true, Einar.

No, the problem is that you appear to believe the truth is false, and
what is false is truth.

Basigly you are full of believes based on propaganda lyes. That does
not mean you are lying on purpose. You probably believe those lyes,
quite honestly.


:...and USA will then, if that proves true, continue the trend of
:becoming ever more despised.
:

We don't think much of you, either. I rather suspect we're less upset
about your opinion than you are about ours.

I really don´t believe majority of Americans think like that.


:I suggest you open up your mind, just a litle.
:

I suggest you stop your personal smears and lies, and not just a
little.

I suggest you stop believing probaganda.


: : :The Bush administration at the time insisted on seeing jihadist
: : :terrorism as dependent on rogue states such as Iraq, fact not
: : :insanity,
: : :
: :
: : If it's such a fact, you can presumably prove it. I shan't hold my
: : breath waiting for that...
: :
: : :
: : : ...though perhaps you are ironically right about the
: : :insanity charge, but pointing at the wrong target
: : :
: : :"Terrorist organizations cannot be effective in sustaining themselves
: : ver long periods of time to do large-scale operations if they don't
: : :have support from states," former Undersecretary of Defense Douglas
: : :Feith told The New Yorker in 2003, adding that this belief was "one of
: : :the principal strategic thoughts underlying our strategy in the war on
: : :terrorism.""
: : :
: :
: : Which is not quite the same thing you claimed. Perhaps the nuances of
: : the English language are escaping you?
: :
: :Faith tells the world in plane language that they hold to the old
: :model of state supported terrorism. That created an expectation that
: :al-Qaeda had state support. Now, what is unclear here?
: :
:
: Nothing at all, except perhaps to you.
:
:
:You can´t see what is in plane sight.
:

You mean I don't agree with your claims, right?

No, you simply are blind to the truth.

Einar

More 'no context' from Ian.

Ian, if you want to start a new thread, change the title. If you
don't want to start a new thread, leave the context.

Ian Parker wrote:

Nothing I'm going to bother reading until Ian figures out standard
Usenet etiquette.


--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson

Einar wrote:

:
:Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Einar wrote:
: --G. Behn
: :
: :What large conspiracy? Iraqi officials were stealing all of the time,
: :that has been proven true. She could easilly enough have done that all
: :by herself. Very simple, she did that part of the paperwork all by
: :herself. Alternativelly she bribed someone.
: :
:
: You keep forgetting the "her staff" bit.
:
:So what, I´ve told you how she might have done it. She was in charge
:after all of that project. This was not like USA where you´ll expect
:all kinds of oversight being present.
:

It is, however, just as impossible to maintain a 'conspiracy theory',
which is what you're building here.

EVERYONE involved has to be lying, Einar.

:
:
: :
: :I can also repeatedly remind you about the words of someone who really
: :was there, and interviewed these people:
: :
: :"But David Albright, a former UN weapons inspector in regular contact
: :with Iraqi scientists, said the system in which those scientists
: :worked was guaranteed to produce misleading information. "Scientists
: :would hoodwink their own bosses with all sorts of exaggerations of
: :their achievements," said Mr Albright, who heads the Washington-based
: :Institute for Science and International Security."
: :
: :Sounds pretty reasonable to me, as an alternate explanation.
: :
:
: Lots of screwball things seem "pretty reasonable" to you, it seems.
:
:
:You probably are still convinched the missing poison gas is there
:underneath some rock or some sandy dune.
:

You probably are still convinced that nuclear weapons don't really
exist and will remain so until someone empties a bucket of instant
sunshine up your ass.

After all, it could really all just be a couple of people lying about
things, right? Everyone is afraid to admit that they can't make
THEIRS work because they think everyone else's do.

As for Hiroshima and Nagasaki, those were really alien weapons out of
Area 51...


--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine

Einar wrote:

:
:Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Einar wrote:
:
:
: :I´ve seen this kind of a thing before, i.e. that no matter what how
: ften it's shown to be false, you simply ignore the counterarguments
: :and reassert the position whichs flaws already have been repeatedly
: :explained to you. It´s not my problem that you display every
: :appearance of being narrow minded
: :
:
: Except you've never shown anything to be false. You're the one
: pretending the reports and facts don't exist. You're the one ignoring
: things. It is your problem that you're a liar.
:
:
:You appear to have got the mental flexibility of a brickwall.
:

You appear to have all the intellectual integrity of Joseph Goebbels.


--
"You take the lies out of him, and he'll shrink to the size of
your hat; you take the malice out of him, and he'll disappear."
-- Mark Twain

Einar wrote:

:
:Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Einar wrote:
:
:
: :CO2 trading is allowed for industrial countries that have joined and
: :ratified the Kyoto Protocol. That means that, to name an example
: utside Europe that Japan can participate in the CO2 sceme. So would
: :USA have been able to, if it had joined.
: :
:
: And yet nobody else has, even when they're not meeting Kyoto targets.
: Why is that, Einar?
:
:If that is true, that is theyr business. However, I really doubt that
:what you are saying is true.
:
:So cough up some citation supporting that claim.
:

So I need a citation to prove a negative, Einar?

Obviously they don't require Political Science majors to take any
logic courses where you come from.

:
:
: :
: :The keyword is the defination, industrial country. As you remember
: :third world countries and rapidly growing industrializing countries
: :have been exempted from many burdens of the Kyoto. Those countries can
: :´t purchase CO2 quotas, yet.
: :
:
: Those countries DON'T NEED TO purchase CO2 quotas, since they have no
: 'ceilings' in the first place.
:
:
:It proved not possible at the time to make them accept any ceiling,
:which later was used by the USA as an excuse to reject the Kyoto
:Protocol.
:

It proved not possible at the time to make the US accept any ceiling,
either, given European intransigence. And now China produces more CO2
than anyone.

So tell me, Einar, just who was right about that one, Europe or the
US?

:
:
: :
: :
: : Einar, a majority of Americans distrust your 'international'
: : organizations. Why do you think that is?
: :
: :
: :Common misconceptions about international organizations.
: :
:
: That's not a "why", Einar. That's a "what". The question wasn't what
: you want to characterize the opinion as. The question was WHY DO YOU
:
:
:It´s baffling, that´s sure.
:

Not to anyone with a couple of brain cells to their name, it isn't.

:
:One of the American mysteries, that nobody except an American does
:get.
:

If true, I guess that says a lot about you lot. I just chalk it up to
more intellectual dishonestly on your part, though.

:
:
: :
: :
: : :
: : :LOL, so somehow what Europe planned to undergo itself, and in the end
: : :did, was to unfairly tough for the USA. Go figure.
: : :
: :
: : Yes, go figure, indeed. Debating tactics don't change the facts,
: : Einar. So you continue to "LOL" and such. It's just another
: : demonstration of your intellectual dishonesty.
: :
: :
: :This time, you are right, "Debating tactics don't change the facts."
: :The fact being that 'somehow what Europe planned to undergo itself,
: :and in the end did, was too unfairly tough for the USA,' according to
: :USA.
: :
:
: I see you're a fan of the Joseph Goebbels School. Saying something
: false over and over doesn't make it true, Einar.
:
:
:No, the problem is that you appear to believe the truth is false, and
:what is false is truth.
:

No, the problem is that you appear to believe you merely asserting
something establishes "the truth". It doesn't.

:
:Basigly you are full of believes based on propaganda lyes. That does
:not mean you are lying on purpose. You probably believe those lyes,
:quite honestly.
:

As usual, you have it all turned around.

:
:
: :
: :...and USA will then, if that proves true, continue the trend of
: :becoming ever more despised.
: :
:
: We don't think much of you, either. I rather suspect we're less upset
: about your opinion than you are about ours.
:
:
:I really don´t believe majority of Americans think like that.
:

Then you're in denial. Do you seriously believe you can "despise" us
and have more than an insecure minority coming and licking your boots
over it?

:
:
: :
: :I suggest you open up your mind, just a litle.
: :
:
: I suggest you stop your personal smears and lies, and not just a
: little.
:
:
:I suggest you stop believing probaganda.
:

I'll stick with advising you to stop lying. I'll add that you
probably need to actually engage your brain just once in a while.

:
:
: :
: :
: : :
: : : :
: : : :The Bush administration at the time insisted on seeing jihadist
: : : :terrorism as dependent on rogue states such as Iraq, fact not
: : : :insanity,
: : : :
: : :
: : : If it's such a fact, you can presumably prove it. I shan't hold my
: : : breath waiting for that...
: : :
: : : :
: : : : ...though perhaps you are ironically right about the
: : : :insanity charge, but pointing at the wrong target
: : : :
: : : :"Terrorist organizations cannot be effective in sustaining themselves
: : : ver long periods of time to do large-scale operations if they don't
: : : :have support from states," former Undersecretary of Defense Douglas
: : : :Feith told The New Yorker in 2003, adding that this belief was "one of
: : : :the principal strategic thoughts underlying our strategy in the war on
: : : :terrorism.""
: : : :
: : :
: : : Which is not quite the same thing you claimed. Perhaps the nuances of
: : : the English language are escaping you?
: : :
: : :Faith tells the world in plane language that they hold to the old
: : :model of state supported terrorism. That created an expectation that
: : :al-Qaeda had state support. Now, what is unclear here?
: : :
: :
: : Nothing at all, except perhaps to you.
: :
: :
: :You can´t see what is in plane sight.
: :
:
: You mean I don't agree with your claims, right?
:
:
:No, you simply are blind to the truth.
:

Sure I am, Einar.

You're such an inveterate liar that you wouldn't recognize the truth
if someone jammed it up your ass sideways.


--
"You take the lies out of him, and he'll shrink to the size of
your hat; you take the malice out of him, and he'll disappear."
-- Mark Twain

Fred J. McCall wrote:
Einar wrote:

:
:Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Einar wrote:
: --G. Behn
: :
: :What large conspiracy? Iraqi officials were stealing all of the time,
: :that has been proven true. She could easilly enough have done that all
: :by herself. Very simple, she did that part of the paperwork all by
: :herself. Alternativelly she bribed someone.
: :
:
: You keep forgetting the "her staff" bit.
:
:So what, I´ve told you how she might have done it. She was in charge
:after all of that project. This was not like USA where you´ll expect
:all kinds of oversight being present.
:

It is, however, just as impossible to maintain a 'conspiracy theory',
which is what you're building here.

EVERYONE involved has to be lying, Einar.

Only a single person.

:
:
: :
: :I can also repeatedly remind you about the words of someone who really
: :was there, and interviewed these people:
: :
: :"But David Albright, a former UN weapons inspector in regular contact
: :with Iraqi scientists, said the system in which those scientists
: :worked was guaranteed to produce misleading information. "Scientists
: :would hoodwink their own bosses with all sorts of exaggerations of
: :their achievements," said Mr Albright, who heads the Washington-based
: :Institute for Science and International Security."
: :
: :Sounds pretty reasonable to me, as an alternate explanation.
: :
:
: Lots of screwball things seem "pretty reasonable" to you, it seems.
:
:
:You probably are still convinched the missing poison gas is there
:underneath some rock or some sandy dune.
:

You probably are still convinced that nuclear weapons don't really
exist and will remain so until someone empties a bucket of instant
sunshine up your ass.

After all, it could really all just be a couple of people lying about
things, right? Everyone is afraid to admit that they can't make
THEIRS work because they think everyone else's do.

As for Hiroshima and Nagasaki, those were really alien weapons out of
Area 51...


--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine

This might even be funny, if it didn´t look like you might actually
believe this.

Einar

Fred J. McCall wrote:
Einar wrote:

:
:Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Einar wrote:
:
:
: :CO2 trading is allowed for industrial countries that have joined and
: :ratified the Kyoto Protocol. That means that, to name an example
: utside Europe that Japan can participate in the CO2 sceme. So would
: :USA have been able to, if it had joined.
: :
:
: And yet nobody else has, even when they're not meeting Kyoto targets.
: Why is that, Einar?
:
:If that is true, that is theyr business. However, I really doubt that
:what you are saying is true.
:
:So cough up some citation supporting that claim.
:

So I need a citation to prove a negative, Einar?

Obviously they don't require Political Science majors to take any
logic courses where you come from.

You really are quite incredible, and I don´t mean that in a positive
way.

:
:
: :
: :The keyword is the defination, industrial country. As you remember
: :third world countries and rapidly growing industrializing countries
: :have been exempted from many burdens of the Kyoto. Those countries can
: :´t purchase CO2 quotas, yet.
: :
:
: Those countries DON'T NEED TO purchase CO2 quotas, since they have no
: 'ceilings' in the first place.
:
:
:It proved not possible at the time to make them accept any ceiling,
:which later was used by the USA as an excuse to reject the Kyoto
:Protocol.
:

It proved not possible at the time to make the US accept any ceiling,
either, given European intransigence. And now China produces more CO2
than anyone.

So tell me, Einar, just who was right about that one, Europe or the
US?

Clearly Europe.

:
:
: :
: :
: : Einar, a majority of Americans distrust your 'international'
: : organizations. Why do you think that is?
: :
: :
: :Common misconceptions about international organizations.
: :
:
: That's not a "why", Einar. That's a "what". The question wasn't what
: you want to characterize the opinion as. The question was WHY DO YOU
:
:
:It´s baffling, that´s sure.
:

Not to anyone with a couple of brain cells to their name, it isn't.

That counts you out then.

:
:One of the American mysteries, that nobody except an American does
:get.
:

If true, I guess that says a lot about you lot. I just chalk it up to
more intellectual dishonestly on your part, though.

You should have a tv show of your own. Might just replase some of the
big comedians out there.

:
:
: :
: :
: : :
: : :LOL, so somehow what Europe planned to undergo itself, and in the end
: : :did, was to unfairly tough for the USA. Go figure.
: : :
: :
: : Yes, go figure, indeed. Debating tactics don't change the facts,
: : Einar. So you continue to "LOL" and such. It's just another
: : demonstration of your intellectual dishonesty.
: :
: :
: :This time, you are right, "Debating tactics don't change the facts."
: :The fact being that 'somehow what Europe planned to undergo itself,
: :and in the end did, was too unfairly tough for the USA,' according to
: :USA.
: :
:
: I see you're a fan of the Joseph Goebbels School. Saying something
: false over and over doesn't make it true, Einar.
:
:
:No, the problem is that you appear to believe the truth is false, and
:what is false is truth.
:

No, the problem is that you appear to believe you merely asserting
something establishes "the truth". It doesn't.

Perfect analyzis of your own problem.

:
:Basigly you are full of believes based on propaganda lyes. That does
:not mean you are lying on purpose. You probably believe those lyes,
:quite honestly.
:

As usual, you have it all turned around.

Ditto.

:
:
: :
: :...and USA will then, if that proves true, continue the trend of
: :becoming ever more despised.
: :
:
: We don't think much of you, either. I rather suspect we're less upset
: about your opinion than you are about ours.
:
:
:I really don´t believe majority of Americans think like that.
:

Then you're in denial. Do you seriously believe you can "despise" us
and have more than an insecure minority coming and licking your boots
over it?

It´s you who appear to despise the world outside of the USA, utter
strange as it seems.

:
:
: :
: :I suggest you open up your mind, just a litle.
: :
:
: I suggest you stop your personal smears and lies, and not just a
: little.
:
:
:I suggest you stop believing probaganda.
:

I'll stick with advising you to stop lying. I'll add that you
probably need to actually engage your brain just once in a while.

You appear to have a cronic problem.

:
:
: :
: :
: : :
: : : :
: : : :The Bush administration at the time insisted on seeing jihadist
: : : :terrorism as dependent on rogue states such as Iraq, fact not
: : : :insanity,
: : : :
: : :
: : : If it's such a fact, you can presumably prove it. I shan't hold my
: : : breath waiting for that...
: : :
: : : :
: : : : ...though perhaps you are ironically right about the
: : : :insanity charge, but pointing at the wrong target
: : : :
: : : :"Terrorist organizations cannot be effective in sustaining themselves
: : : ver long periods of time to do large-scale operations if they don't
: : : :have support from states," former Undersecretary of Defense Douglas
: : : :Feith told The New Yorker in 2003, adding that this belief was "one of
: : : :the principal strategic thoughts underlying our strategy in the war on
: : : :terrorism.""
: : : :
: : :
: : : Which is not quite the same thing you claimed. Perhaps the nuances of
: : : the English language are escaping you?
: : :
: : :Faith tells the world in plane language that they hold to the old
: : :model of state supported terrorism. That created an expectation that
: : :al-Qaeda had state support. Now, what is unclear here?
: : :
: :
: : Nothing at all, except perhaps to you.
: :
: :
: :You can´t see what is in plane sight.
: :
:
: You mean I don't agree with your claims, right?
:
:
:No, you simply are blind to the truth.
:

Sure I am, Einar.

You´ve begun to notice, finally?

You're such an inveterate liar that you wouldn't recognize the truth
if someone jammed it up your ass sideways.

A perfect self analyzis.

--
"You take the lies out of him, and he'll shrink to the size of
your hat; you take the malice out of him, and he'll disappear."

Einar
-- Mark Twain

Einar wrote:

:
:Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Einar wrote:
:
: :
: :Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : Einar wrote:
: : --G. Behn
: : :
: : :What large conspiracy? Iraqi officials were stealing all of the time,
: : :that has been proven true. She could easilly enough have done that all
: : :by herself. Very simple, she did that part of the paperwork all by
: : :herself. Alternativelly she bribed someone.
: : :
: :
: : You keep forgetting the "her staff" bit.
: :
: :So what, I´ve told you how she might have done it. She was in charge
: :after all of that project. This was not like USA where you´ll expect
: :all kinds of oversight being present.
: :
:
: It is, however, just as impossible to maintain a 'conspiracy theory',
: which is what you're building here.
:
: EVERYONE involved has to be lying, Einar.
:
:Only a single person.
:

In what world, Einar? What about all the other folks involved?

:
:
: :
: :
: : :
: : :I can also repeatedly remind you about the words of someone who really
: : :was there, and interviewed these people:
: : :
: : :"But David Albright, a former UN weapons inspector in regular contact
: : :with Iraqi scientists, said the system in which those scientists
: : :worked was guaranteed to produce misleading information. "Scientists
: : :would hoodwink their own bosses with all sorts of exaggerations of
: : :their achievements," said Mr Albright, who heads the Washington-based
: : :Institute for Science and International Security."
: : :
: : :Sounds pretty reasonable to me, as an alternate explanation.
: : :
: :
: : Lots of screwball things seem "pretty reasonable" to you, it seems.
: :
: :
: :You probably are still convinched the missing poison gas is there
: :underneath some rock or some sandy dune.
: :
:
: You probably are still convinced that nuclear weapons don't really
: exist and will remain so until someone empties a bucket of instant
: sunshine up your ass.
:
: After all, it could really all just be a couple of people lying about
: things, right? Everyone is afraid to admit that they can't make
: THEIRS work because they think everyone else's do.
:
: As for Hiroshima and Nagasaki, those were really alien weapons out of
: Area 51...
:
:
: --
: "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
: only stupid."
: -- Heinrich Heine
:
:This might even be funny, if it didn´t look like you might actually
:believe this.
:

Actually, someone once actually wrote a fictional novel based on a
similar premise. It makes no less sense than the 'theory' you're
trying to put forward, above...


--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine

Einar wrote:

:
:Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Einar wrote:
:
: :
: :Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : Einar wrote:
: :
: :
: : :CO2 trading is allowed for industrial countries that have joined and
: : :ratified the Kyoto Protocol. That means that, to name an example
: : utside Europe that Japan can participate in the CO2 sceme. So would
: : :USA have been able to, if it had joined.
: : :
: :
: : And yet nobody else has, even when they're not meeting Kyoto targets.
: : Why is that, Einar?
: :
: :If that is true, that is theyr business. However, I really doubt that
: :what you are saying is true.
: :
: :So cough up some citation supporting that claim.
: :
:
: So I need a citation to prove a negative, Einar?
:
: Obviously they don't require Political Science majors to take any
: logic courses where you come from.
:
:
:You really are quite incredible, and I don´t mean that in a positive
:way.
:

The fact remains that you apparently think it's sane to demand that
someone prove a negative.

:
:
: :
: :
: : :
: : :The keyword is the defination, industrial country. As you remember
: : :third world countries and rapidly growing industrializing countries
: : :have been exempted from many burdens of the Kyoto. Those countries can
: : :´t purchase CO2 quotas, yet.
: : :
: :
: : Those countries DON'T NEED TO purchase CO2 quotas, since they have no
: : 'ceilings' in the first place.
: :
: :
: :It proved not possible at the time to make them accept any ceiling,
: :which later was used by the USA as an excuse to reject the Kyoto
: :Protocol.
: :
:
: It proved not possible at the time to make the US accept any ceiling,
: either, given European intransigence. And now China produces more CO2
: than anyone.
:
: So tell me, Einar, just who was right about that one, Europe or the
: US?
:
:Clearly Europe.
:

So to your thinking it made sense to exempt China from requirements
and alienate the US so that half the CO2 production is outside any
controls stemming from the protocol?

No, Einar. Clearly the US position that countries like China needed
to be part of the controls was correct. Not only has China become the
largest single-nation source of CO2 on the planet, but their carbon
footprint per unit of production is much worse than other big
producers.

:
:
: :
: :
: : :
: : :
: : : Einar, a majority of Americans distrust your 'international'
: : : organizations. Why do you think that is?
: : :
: : :
: : :Common misconceptions about international organizations.
: : :
: :
: : That's not a "why", Einar. That's a "what". The question wasn't what
: : you want to characterize the opinion as. The question was WHY DO YOU
: :
: :
: :It´s baffling, that´s sure.
: :
:
: Not to anyone with a couple of brain cells to their name, it isn't.
:
:
:That counts you out then.
:

And there's the best you can do, isn't it? Reality is inexplicable
and anyone who understands it where you do not can only be insulted.

:
:
: :
: :One of the American mysteries, that nobody except an American does
: :get.
: :
:
: If true, I guess that says a lot about you lot. I just chalk it up to
: more intellectual dishonestly on your part, though.
:
:
:You should have a tv show of your own. Might just replase some of the
:big comedians out there.
:

And there's the best you can do, isn't it? Reality is inexplicable
and anyone who understands it where you do not can only be insulted.

:
:
: :
: :
: : :
: : :
: : : :
: : : :LOL, so somehow what Europe planned to undergo itself, and in the end
: : : :did, was to unfairly tough for the USA. Go figure.
: : : :
: : :
: : : Yes, go figure, indeed. Debating tactics don't change the facts,
: : : Einar. So you continue to "LOL" and such. It's just another
: : : demonstration of your intellectual dishonesty.
: : :
: : :
: : :This time, you are right, "Debating tactics don't change the facts."
: : :The fact being that 'somehow what Europe planned to undergo itself,
: : :and in the end did, was too unfairly tough for the USA,' according to
: : :USA.
: : :
: :
: : I see you're a fan of the Joseph Goebbels School. Saying something
: : false over and over doesn't make it true, Einar.
: :
: :
: :No, the problem is that you appear to believe the truth is false, and
: :what is false is truth.
: :
:
: No, the problem is that you appear to believe you merely asserting
: something establishes "the truth". It doesn't.
:
:Perfect analyzis of your own problem.
:

Yet here we are, you demanding that negatives must be proven, not
understanding reality and insisting it must be false, and then
insulting anyone who points out your weakness on the facts.

Yeah, Einar. It's my problem, all right...

:
:
: :
: :Basigly you are full of believes based on propaganda lyes. That does
: :not mean you are lying on purpose. You probably believe those lyes,
: :quite honestly.
: :
:
: As usual, you have it all turned around.
:
:
itto.
:

Your momma.

:
:
: :
: :
: : :
: : :...and USA will then, if that proves true, continue the trend of
: : :becoming ever more despised.
: : :
: :
: : We don't think much of you, either. I rather suspect we're less upset
: : about your opinion than you are about ours.
: :
: :
: :I really don´t believe majority of Americans think like that.
: :
:
: Then you're in denial. Do you seriously believe you can "despise" us
: and have more than an insecure minority coming and licking your boots
: over it?
:
:
:It´s you who appear to despise the world outside of the USA, utter
:strange as it seems.
:

Let me quote that great fount of wisdom on all things, Einar:

"...and USA will then ... continue the trend of becoming ever more
despised."

You're well beyond merely lacking in intellectual integrity, Einar.
You're an outright lying loon.

:
:
: :
: :
: : :
: : :I suggest you open up your mind, just a litle.
: : :
: :
: : I suggest you stop your personal smears and lies, and not just a
: : little.
: :
: :
: :I suggest you stop believing probaganda.
: :
:
: I'll stick with advising you to stop lying. I'll add that you
: probably need to actually engage your brain just once in a while.
:
:
:You appear to have a cronic problem.
:

Yes, I'm holding a conversation with a cronic [sic] liar and that's a
problem.

:
:
: :
: :
: : :
: : :
: : : :
: : : : :
: : : : :The Bush administration at the time insisted on seeing jihadist
: : : : :terrorism as dependent on rogue states such as Iraq, fact not
: : : : :insanity,
: : : : :
: : : :
: : : : If it's such a fact, you can presumably prove it. I shan't hold my
: : : : breath waiting for that...
: : : :
: : : : :
: : : : : ...though perhaps you are ironically right about the
: : : : :insanity charge, but pointing at the wrong target
: : : : :
: : : : :"Terrorist organizations cannot be effective in sustaining themselves
: : : : ver long periods of time to do large-scale operations if they don't
: : : : :have support from states," former Undersecretary of Defense Douglas
: : : : :Feith told The New Yorker in 2003, adding that this belief was "one of
: : : : :the principal strategic thoughts underlying our strategy in the war on
: : : : :terrorism.""
: : : : :
: : : :
: : : : Which is not quite the same thing you claimed. Perhaps the nuances of
: : : : the English language are escaping you?
: : : :
: : : :Faith tells the world in plane language that they hold to the old
: : : :model of state supported terrorism. That created an expectation that
: : : :al-Qaeda had state support. Now, what is unclear here?
: : : :
: : :
: : : Nothing at all, except perhaps to you.
: : :
: : :
: : :You can´t see what is in plane sight.
: : :
: :
: : You mean I don't agree with your claims, right?
: :
: :
: :No, you simply are blind to the truth.
: :
:
: Sure I am, Einar.
:
:
:You´ve begun to notice, finally?
:

I've noticed you're a liar who cannot defend his own positions with
anything other than personal insult, yes.

You're frankly typical of what has been referred to as "Old Europe".

:
:
: You're such an inveterate liar that you wouldn't recognize the truth
: if someone jammed it up your ass sideways.
:
:
:A perfect self analyzis.
:

No, I don't believe you came to that conclusion first.

:
:
: --
: "You take the lies out of him, and he'll shrink to the size of
: your hat; you take the malice out of him, and he'll disappear."
: -- Mark Twain
:
:


--
"Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
only stupid."
-- Heinrich Heine

Fred J. McCall wrote:
Einar wrote:

:
:Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Einar wrote:
:
: :
: :Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : Einar wrote:
: : --G. Behn
: : :
: : :What large conspiracy? Iraqi officials were stealing all of the time,
: : :that has been proven true. She could easilly enough have done that all
: : :by herself. Very simple, she did that part of the paperwork all by
: : :herself. Alternativelly she bribed someone.
: : :
: :
: : You keep forgetting the "her staff" bit.
: :
: :So what, I´ve told you how she might have done it. She was in charge
: :after all of that project. This was not like USA where you´ll expect
: :all kinds of oversight being present.
: :
:
: It is, however, just as impossible to maintain a 'conspiracy theory',
: which is what you're building here.
:
: EVERYONE involved has to be lying, Einar.
:
:Only a single person.
:

In what world, Einar? What about all the other folks involved?

You appear not to be able to understand that Iraq was a state in which
bosses were not to be trifled with. People were being killed all of
the time. In such a soziety, you didn´t look over the shoulders of
your boss, especially if the boss appeared to be one of the darlings
of the ruling party and hence of the despotic ruler of that country.

There is no way that a member of the staff could have gone over theyr
boss and survived doing that, unless and that is the sole chance that
the person in question could have aquired a backing of anther powerful
boss. Working in Iraq was more like working inside a huge criminal
syndicate. You could simply kill an underling, and get away doing
that.

Einar