your claim matches BP's accusations

Post #84,474 by boxley 2/26/03 9:11:31 PM Reply	your claim matches BP's accusations [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=84310\|http://z.iwethey.org...w?contentid=84310] \|Because to do so would be an admission that his "accepted" and now admired [*] \|technique of "discussion" is dishonest at best. so since in this part of the thread we are both recycling prior thread posts, lets continue on the other portion of the thread. thanx, bill will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org] \ufffdOmni Gaul Delenda est!\ufffd Ceasar
Post #84,496 by Brandioch 2/26/03 10:12:06 PM Reply	Here's a link to your post and the quote from there. [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=84323\|heh,] I am claiming that: a cruise missile hitting a building to killing a child -is the same as- a plane hitting a building to killing a child is the same as a drunk driver killing a child My position was that there wasn't a difference between the plane and the missile. Your position was that there was. Now you say there isn't. Which is my position. But now you claim that what you posted isn't what you posted? heh heh heh. Oh, and if you have somehow managed to forget my opinion of Mr. Pathetic, he's a lying, pathetic, sack of shit.
Post #84,528 by boxley 2/26/03 11:23:34 PM Reply	you were wrong in one post, which one? [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=84002\|http://z.iwethey.org...w?contentid=84002] Except that you'll give an example of someone being drunk and accidentally hitting a child. Yet in NEITHER of the INITIAL cases was anyone drunk nor was the building hit accidentally. Like I've said before, those who support this war can only "justify" it by lies and semantic games the last sentence proved out nicely. Now is the above post wrong or this one? [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=84332\|http://z.iwethey.org...w?contentid=84332] the drunk driver made a concious decision to take that first drink under the law in America that is Intent, lots more cases where that came from so I am claiming that: a cruise missile hitting a building to killing a child -is the same as- a plane hitting a building to killing a child is the same as a drunk driver killing a child Now, my original position was that there wasn't a difference between sending a cruise missile into a building to kill a child -and- flying a plane into a building to kill a child Boxley claimed there was. He claimed one was "killing" and the other was "murder". Now he has claimed that they are identical. Which was my position. so now you totally accept the fact that drunks killing kids is the same as flying planes into buildings or targeting a cruise missile. You are either correct in post one and playing "justify" it by lies and semantic games or not. thanx, bill will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org] \ufffdOmni Gaul Delenda est!\ufffd Ceasar
Post #84,539 by Brandioch 2/27/03 12:14:40 AM Reply	Eeek! A ferocious strawman! so now you totally accept the fact that drunks killing kids is the same as flying planes into buildings or targeting a cruise missile. You are either correct in post one and playing That is what is known as a "quote". You said they were the same and I quoted you. Completely. In context. And I provided a link to your post. :) Awwww, and you thought I wouldn't recognize a strawman. That's so cute.
Post #84,565 by bepatient 2/27/03 7:18:35 AM Reply	Box...this ass is playing a game... ...which I tried to point out to you. He's not debating the same issue as you. He can't. He knows he can't. So he has created a "logical position" to attempt to obfuscate your point. Your point depends on intent. His has already assumed intent. His assumed intent is the emotionally charged statement "to kill children" The real difference is that one side really does have the intent "to kill children". The other does not. And my constant refusal to play this type of game with him has made him afraid. So he calls me names.He would actually have to state positions..not logical strawmen. He can't. So I'm pathetic. See? You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #84,585 by boxley 2/27/03 8:54:38 AM Reply	yabbut Im not bored yet :-) will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org] \ufffdOmni Gaul Delenda est!\ufffd Ceasar
Post #84,629 by bepatient 2/27/03 11:54:22 AM Reply	Oh. Ok. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #84,587 by boxley 2/27/03 8:56:17 AM Reply	so you total agree with my position, thank you will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org] \ufffdOmni Gaul Delenda est!\ufffd Ceasar
Post #84,658 by Brandioch 2/27/03 2:30:38 PM Reply	Eeeek! It's Son of Strawman! No. I am not in "total" agreement with you. But the section that you posted that says a plane and a missile are the same is in agreement with my statement that a plane and a missile are the same. Therefore, you concede the point to me that a plane and a missile are the same. But you go further and claim that a drunk driver is the same also. I claimed A == B You claimed A !== B Then you claimed A == B == C I have said that A !== C and B !== C in my previous posts. But that doesn't matter because my position was that A == B Which you now claim is CORRECT A == B == C Watching you wriggle makes me smile. :)
Post #84,670 by boxley 2/27/03 4:15:37 PM Reply	I claimed for your logic to work A=B=C you first protested no, but now you agree with me. thats ok, eat some of that chocolate. you will feel better thanx, bill will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org] \ufffdOmni Gaul Delenda est!\ufffd Ceasar
Post #84,689 by Brandioch 2/27/03 5:32:09 PM Reply	Here's a link to your post. Like I said before: Linked Quoted In context [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=84323\|heh,] I am claiming that: a cruise missile hitting a building to killing a child -is the same as- a plane hitting a building to killing a child is the same as a drunk driver killing a child So now we're back to you claiming that what you posted wasn't what you posted. Once again, I've provided the link and the quote. Complete and in context. :D
Post #84,691 by admin 2/27/03 5:39:44 PM Reply	See branch request above. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."

Welcome to IWETHEY!