As I believe the war turkey shoot in Iraq is as unjust as things can get, I place the impetus for it on the 9/11 Bush conspiracy. That is why I have done so much investigating there. I thought there were many poignant points in the movie but the statements made by Bush, Rice and Powel as to the existing conditions in Iraq in late 2000 and early 2001was one and this little bit of info should have sufficed to prevent the war from starting. They said that the injunctions against Iraq have worked better than expected and that Saddam has not been able to repair his war machine ... that he was no threat to the Middle East or the world from a military standpoint, go figure. Hard for me to believe such drastic conditions could have reversed themselves in less than two years under those conditions. They even went so far as to state that He had made no progress at all in the WMD department and that what he had ... was seriously degraded.

1. The burden of proof is on you, you naffing idiot. YOU made the claim that you consider Moore's film to be factual, whilst I disputed that. Thus, you must provide the proof that Moore's film is indeed factually valid.

2. I have presented no facts, because the burden of proof is not on me.

My description and/or feelings regarding Moore's film and person are only relevant to the debate insofar as they provide evidence for my position that said film is factually invalid and that Moore is an incompetent moron.

My challenge is by definition unanswerable, because you can't prove I'm a simpleton for disagreeing with you. Further, that you continue to hold said opinion only illustrates just how truly naffing stupid you really are. I'm not a simpleton, you're simply an idiot.

As for the "proof" part, the burden of proof is still on you. The ball is in your court, so to speak.

You'll note that I've never actually said I trust and/or believe anything the US government says. I've said that I'd trust Bush more than Michael Moore, but I still wouldn't trust Bush that much, because I have a basic distrust of politicians in general.

BTW, the technical term for this statement of yours is "spin doctoring". It's exactly the same thing Moore does, so I'd say you did learn something from his fallacious and factually invalid film.

For one thing, there was some satirical commentary in that comment. That you fail to realize it only proves you're stupidity. For another, this thread is rapidly degenerating into uselessness because in the OP you claim that the majority of information presented in Moore's film is factually correct.

I'm disputing that, and you have, to date, provided zero information that disproves my position.

WRT the "degenerates", that would be you. For several reasons:

1. You insult people with a veneer of civility. This is drawn back to the "gutter language" comment of yours and the fact that you continue to consider those who hold the opposing viewpoint to yours to be "simpletons".

2. You're guilty of numerous logical fallacies, including:

2a. Ad Hominem Attack: you call your opposition simpletons instead of actually trying to disprove their claims.
2b. Style Over Substance: you consider my arguments invalid because of my use of "gutter language".
2c. Strawman: you're pretty much ignoring the actual debate in favor of some ridiculous one you've concocted.
2d. Hasty Generalization: you take the small group of definable events in which the USG is wrong, and use them to say "USG is always lying and wrong".

I'd say that that more than proves you're an idiot.

No, my dad really was part of the vanguard during the 2003 invasion. However, this statement is a perfect example of a dishonest debating tactic called "cherry-picking". Because, you naffing idiot, you are taking the statement out of context.

If you had bothered to read past that sentence, or actually pay attention to the context, then you would realize that at the time I had little understanding of politics in general, and hence my reason for supporting the 2003 invasion was because my father was a servicemember who was part of the invasion force.

It's not that hard to understand, you naffing idiot.

You're an idiot. On the first page alone of this thread, I count five people posting from the Elemental forums, excluding yourself. Top it off with a sixth person on the second page, and the fact that three of the five from the 1st page continued posting from the Elemental forums.

I'd also like to ask you about this comment, from earlier in the thread:

And where else have I conversed with you, hmm? TBH, I don't recall ever seeing a post by you, let alone holding a conversation or debate with you. Because AFAIK, I have never posted stuff back and forth with you, so as far as I'm concerned, you don't know jack shit about me.

I would apologize, since you've stated that your post was made in jest.

But that last sentence reeks of pomposity, and so I will wait until you prove that you aren't as pompous as that sentence makes you look.

Sticks and stones... but really... how mature do any of you think you are once you get down to name calling? I mean really HOW OLD are we all? I assume most of us are over the age of 18-20. I don't mean to poke a stick or point fingers at anyone but when a thread melts down to just name calling and insult throwing between members that gets to a point where a thread needs to be close because now members are bashing each other. IF I were a mod of the SD forums this thread would be locked and members would be receiving infractions.

advice... KEEP IT FREAKING CIVIL.

 Right on Eternal . 

I have not seen or read anything on 911 since that 5th Estate doc I linked above which is a couple of years ago but to my amazement the truth movement has grown by leaps and bounds to include some very prominent figures and journalist worldwide are making more documentarys and writing books.

I would guess though that former hero firefighters from NY who join Firefighter for Truth are just naffing idiots? 

 One way or another that bitch that stood up on TV and said the air was safe to breath for 1st responders should be shot and pissed on.

I'm not a "dick", I'm a "troll". There's a very big difference. A "dick" is unreasonable for the purpose of being unreasonable. A "troll" is unreasonable for the purpose of self-amusement.

1. There's a couple of things that describe what I am subjecting you to: trolling, and the fact that this is a debate, in which you must prove my position wrong.

2. I fail to see how my enjoyment of fantastical entertainment has any bearing on the debate/discussion at hand. As an aside, this is a perfect description of the "Ad Hominem" fallacious attacks you are previously charged with being guilty of.

3. I'm actually homeschooled. So there goes your claim WRT the government's education system. Personally though, public school systems, are, IMO, pretty poor. But that has more to due with degradation of curriculum quality and teaching skill than government intervention, IMO.

4. Once again, Ad Hominem attacks. You cannot disprove my position, so you attack me. In actual debate circles, you would be lampooned for such dishonest tactics.

5. I'm not trying to get you to swap insults with "clueless children". I'm trying to get you to attempt to prove my position is incorrect.

So you see, everything you've just said is completely irrelevant to the goals I had, and the particulars of my person.

EDIT: Since it's pretty obvious that you're simply going to ignore my demand that you provide actual evidence, and continue with the Ad Hominem attacks, I'll switch to full-on troll mode instead.

Apparently you're such an idiot that you are incapable of properly embedding videos.

Lulzy fail is lulzy.

"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear."
Thomas Jefferson

"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent."
Thomas Jefferson

“Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
Hermann Goering

Thanks, guys. This thread makes me feel a lot better about my life.

Seriously.

Isn't it grand?

All this shows is that politicians are dogs, and people are morons.  Is a republic really the best form of government, when the people are so ill informed and easily pandered to?

"chairman will advise that the rules do care"

SO EPIC.

People generally get the governments they demand.  Sadly we either don't demand or we demand the wrong things.

We actually need (in the U.S.) education really enhanced about national policy and decision making, governmental rights and limitations, citizen activism, etc.

Kids need to start learning in grade school how they can influence their representatives and have it ingrained in them at a young age that politicians are supposed to be informed individuals serving the needs of their communities and populations.  By middle school, they need to be educated about the national economy and interests and relevant current events.  In fact it ought to be a requirement to graduate that you pass a version of a citizenship test and then required again before you can vote in each election--just like renewing your driver's license. The test shouldn't cover just history and rules but should also require a demonstrated knowledge of current issues of national importance.

I want go on about campaign finance rules and the need for a harsh change but, yeah, that too.  Constitutional requirements  and Congressional ethics rules need to be treated seriously and have dire consequences when broken.

Patriotism should not be a dirty word but neither should it be ignorant, uneducated and uninformed.  If we lose the ability to feel a sense of patriotism we have really lost our sense of being citizens.

I say we do one more big bombing raid on the Taliban--we fly B-2,s, B-52's and B-1s over in full force and drop all of our politicians on them.  The ones who are able to make it back on their own to the US can have their seats back.