Re: That's what I gave you.

Post #92,724 by cybermace5 3/29/03 12:02:15 AM Reply	Re: That's what I gave you. Excellent system you got there, try it with some of the other stories you seem to relish.
Post #92,726 by Brandioch 3/29/03 12:02:56 AM Reply	Nice, you can't refute it so you'll dismiss it. :D hahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Post #92,727 by cybermace5 3/29/03 12:06:45 AM Reply	Re: Nice, you can't refute it so you'll dismiss it. :D How can I refute your system of fact checking? Am I supposed to say that you do not, in fact, ever follow that particular plan of action? I merely suggested that you should apply it to some of the articles, for example, blaming the CIA for spreading anthrax.
Post #92,812 by Brandioch 3/29/03 12:12:44 PM Reply	And I said that where? I merely suggested that you should apply it to some of the articles, for example, blaming the CIA for spreading anthrax. And I made that claim where? Okay, so you're in a full retreat into fantasy. Understandable.
Post #92,836 by cybermace5 3/29/03 1:46:07 PM 3/29/03 1:47:31 PM Reply	Thanks for the free one. Never thought you would lose your grip so fast. [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=92655\|http://z.iwethey.org...w?contentid=92655] (I would like to add...OUCH! THAT'S GONNA STING!) Edited by cybermace5 March 29, 2003, 01:47:31 PM EST Expand All History
Post #92,855 by Brandioch 3/29/03 3:05:03 PM Reply	And I deliver ANOTHER SMACKDOWN!!! You claim that I had stated that the CIA was behind the anthrax mailings. To "support" your claim, you link to a post of mine that has a link to a post from dmarker that has a link to an article about a book reviewed by ABC news about how our government discussed plans to fake terrorist attacks on the US. hahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahaahaaaaa !!!SMACKDOWN!!! hahahahahahahahahahahhaha
Post #92,865 by cybermace5 3/29/03 3:29:55 PM 3/29/03 3:31:15 PM Reply	Directly upon yourself. I stated: Your examples are, at best, rooted in the words of one or a few people. Their actions can hardly be attributed to "the government" as a whole. You replied: Marlowe REALLY needs to brief you better. :D You know, the ones that point out how our government has ALREADY done so. What about this link []? :D Seems that you are rather naive when it comes to what our government will do to advance its cause. Now, let's see. The link you referred to was a post by dmarker. It contained links to several stories. Four* out of the five links discussed the CIA and allegations of anthrax involvement. dmarker's commentary also inextricably tangled the non-anthrax article with the others. Your verbiage was "the ones that point out how our government has ALREADY done so" referring to examples counter to what I was discussing. You obviously endorsed more than one example listed in that post. There is no possible way you could have endorsed more than one, and miss the CIA and anthrax articles. What are you trying to say here? That you don't believe the CIA had anything to do with anthrax? That dmarker is a total loon for suggesting it? Or that you made a mistake in linking to dmarker's post, having not practiced the journalistic critique methods you purport to use on every story? Why did you link to dmarker's post, if you do not subscribe to the notion that the CIA distributed anthrax? Edited by cybermace5 March 29, 2003, 03:31:15 PM EST Expand All History
Post #92,901 by Ashton 3/29/03 7:20:18 PM Reply	Interesting triage, given the context. A ref'd link suggesting the mindset of the early '60s US Advisors [link\|http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/jointchiefs_010501.html\| at ABC News] amidst speculations in another handful of links -- about a topic which has been in no way resolved: Means, you may ignore the earlier analogous need for war-fever, and the methods then entertained - and concentrate upon the obvious mere speculations on the Odd Case of the Instant Anthrax. Safe that. It's a safer bet that, whoever was responsible and with whichever accomplices - will not be selling the story to newsfotainment. Well, not for awhile. (After all, the above book seems to have come out in 2001. Oh well.) Back then to the Details of the plans are described in Body of Secrets (Doubleday), a new book by investigative reporter James Bamford about the history of America's largest spy agency, the National Security Agency. However, the plans were not connected to the agency, he notes. The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years. "These were Joint Chiefs of Staff documents. The reason these were held secret for so long is the Joint Chiefs never wanted to give these up because they were so embarrassing," Bamford told ABCNEWS.com. "The whole point of a democracy is to have leaders responding to the public will, and here this is the complete reverse, the military trying to trick the American people into a war that they want but that nobody else wants." Gunning for War The documents show "the Joint Chiefs of Staff drew up and approved plans for what may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government," writes Bamford. The Joint Chiefs even proposed using the potential death of astronaut John Glenn during the first attempt to put an American into orbit as a false pretext for war with Cuba, the documents show. Should the rocket explode and kill Glenn, they wrote, "the objective is to provide irrevocable proof \ufffd that the fault lies with the Communists et all Cuba [sic]." Now I haven't read Bamford's book, yet. And I'd suppose that he lacks videotape of the parties alleged to this little bit of Muricanized-NKVD fantasizing. So, without [links] OR vieotape, well - let's just ignore the thought, shall we? It may be a credit to the Kennedy Admin that they disdained such madness - but to me the factoid that Such Measures were even deemed worthy of suggestion without demotion is quite enough to gauge the range of mindsets as much within Our government as in any other we love to diss. But let's flay the wonderfully evanescent Anthrax Plan?/Scam?/Red Herring? - whatever. The other is just soooo uncomfortable to pay any attention to, In These War Times When We Must Shut Up And Support Our ___ Carry-on; digital analysis is so fascinating, Ashton Undiluted Goodness LLC Banana Republic - it's not just for them any more..
Post #92,907 by cybermace5 3/29/03 7:43:32 PM Reply	Re: Interesting triage, given the context. Nothing you said made any sense. Focus! I was saying that it was ridiculous to say that the military could manufacture banned weapons and facilities in Iraq, without anyone finding out. Brandioch then linked to a post discussing, in majority, CIA and anthrax, claiming it as an example of government manufacturing of evidence. Later on he said he'd made no such claim. I refuted that quite crushingly. Now, you want to focus on the 1960's article and ignore the CIA/anthrax, even though that was a major part of dmarker's post? Do you, too, think the CIA/anthrax rumor is false and ridiculous?
Post #92,912 by rcareaga 3/29/03 8:00:54 PM Reply	Re: Interesting triage, given the context. I refuted that quite crushingly Like a cubic meter of aerogel dropped from ten feet. --delivered with, as you would have it, "a suffocating, revolting style of self-importance, arrogance, disdain, and pride"...? Well, importance is something that, like popularity, can only be assigned from the outside. The most important people in the corners of iwethey that I routinely visit (if importance be defined as those who either stir the pot--or piss in the soup, in one case--most vigorously, or whose contributions are the most thought-provoking) would be ashton, marlowe, boxley, dmarker, inthane_chan, simon_jester and several others far more significant, for good or for ill, than I am (we two are just a couple of dueling mosquitoes by comparison). As to "arrogance, disdain and pride" --what can I say? You bring out the best in me. cordially, "Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist."
Post #92,918 by cybermace5 3/29/03 8:26:38 PM Reply	Let us all hope no one brings out the worst.
Post #92,920 by rcareaga 3/29/03 8:44:05 PM Reply	be afraid. be very afraid. "Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist."
Post #92,915 by Ashton 3/29/03 8:15:37 PM Reply	Sorry, Bub Unwilling to break down the world into handy funnel-sort chunks for processing by the determinedly pig-headed. Brandioch is often willing to dismember such theses, byte by byte. Hell, I do crosswords sometimes, too.. If you find my prose unintelligible, or just indigestible - feel free to ignore. That's the only EULA. Ashton PS - as to your actual query: Proof exists only in mathematics, and then only within the rarefied environment / class of a series of stated axia. In ANY other area of human involvement: logic alone, is never enough. Except for slogans, of course. They don't teach debate anymore, do they?
Post #92,916 by cybermace5 3/29/03 8:18:34 PM Reply	Prose....HA! I never saw such beauty, not even in the mumblings of the terminally insane.
Post #92,917 by rcareaga 3/29/03 8:23:53 PM Reply	Re: Prose....HA! I never saw such beauty, not even in the mumblings of the terminally insane. Spend a lot of time with that set, do you? "Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist."
Post #92,938 by cybermace5 3/29/03 10:19:58 PM Reply	Re: Prose....HA! Having spent some number of years at the top undergraduate engineering school in the country, well, yes. There were some there who focused on one thing and did it very, very well. However, they neglected everything else. Sometimes this was not of their own choice. An example is one individual who (poorly) sewed his own costume with a long green pointed hat and misshapen nightgown, and wore it exclusively. That and singing unintelligible songs outside at night, while dragging himself along the ground with his arms alone, his legs tucked up inside his clothes (self-termed "weebling"). If we were a little far off the beaten path, he was in another galaxy. But despite all of that, he wrote programs and performed mathematics on pure intuition. His sophomore year was spent completing beyond-graduate-level studies and delving into unexplored mathematical territory. He also has 7,545 comments on Slashdot to date.
Post #92,962 by Brandioch 3/29/03 11:38:27 PM Reply	What's with Marlowe and friends? Having spent some number of years at the top undergraduate engineering school in the country, well, yes. Why do they all have such a hard time openly stating their past? Well, okay, with Marlowe I know why.
Post #93,006 by Ashton 3/30/03 2:43:13 AM Reply	Hmmm - the W.. or E.. Coast menagerie? If West, 1) What and where is Millikan's Pot? 2) What's a Brake Drum riot? As to your weebling friend - is an idiot savant a handicapped person or a well-rounded Liberally-educated University Graduate - or both? Ain't IQ a Riot? (in a CPA society, anyway) .. but can it sell things (?) Ashton Now if we attended the same funny farm..
Post #93,008 by cybermace5 3/30/03 2:49:33 AM Reply	Neither.
Post #92,959 by Brandioch 3/29/03 11:35:17 PM Reply	Oooh, ANOTHER SMACKDOWN! It's called "context". Read that thread where I specifically reference the BOOK that was reviewed by ABC news. :D And I deliver the patented DOUBLE SMACKDOWN! With context sensitive help screens provided. ahhahahahahahahhahaa
Post #92,987 by cybermace5 3/30/03 1:05:58 AM Reply	Re: Oooh, ANOTHER SMACKDOWN! Umm, you just aren't getting it, are you.
Post #92,994 by Brandioch 3/30/03 1:58:15 AM Reply	And yet ANOTHER SMACKDOWN! Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha Umm, you just aren't getting it, are you. I'm not? I reference a link about a book reviewed by ABC news. You don't understand that? hahahahahahahahahahahha
Post #93,007 by cybermace5 3/30/03 2:47:34 AM Reply	Re: And yet ANOTHER SMACKDOWN! And right above that you state that "links are provided" indicating the U.S. did such things in the past and present. You specifically said "links are." Emphasis on plural. You were referring to the CIA/anthrax stories and you know it. You cannot worm your way out of this, and everyone here knows it.
Post #93,014 by Brandioch 3/30/03 3:04:30 AM Reply	It is the feared QUADRUPAL SMACKDOWN! You specifically said "links are." [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=92655\|What about this link [*]?] You say it was PLURAL. Looks SINGULAR to me. !!!SMACKDOWN!!!
Post #93,017 by cybermace5 3/30/03 3:08:36 AM Reply	It's spelled QUADRUPLE, and IDIOT!! That link is not a link to a book! It is a link to a post where dmarker talks about CIA/anthrax involvement (4 out of 5 links) and past allegations of something that never happened, thus never can be proved. It is YOU suffering the smackdown, and all you can hope is that no one is actually reading the message bodies.
Post #93,023 by Brandioch 3/30/03 3:23:01 AM Reply	It's spelled QUINTUPLE! YOU said I posted "links" as in plural. I linked to my post and it proved that it was SINGULAR! And AGAIN you are WRONG! hahahahahahahahhahahaha Another !!!SMACKDOWN!!!
Post #93,070 by cybermace5 3/30/03 1:33:58 PM Reply	Re: It's spelled QUINTUPLE! Uh, you posted a link to some links, and said "links have been provided." It's pretty pathetic that you're so deluded, you think you ever had a snowball's chance in hell on that one.
Post #92,876 by orion 3/29/03 4:43:00 PM Reply	Own Goal! "Bill gates cannot guarantee Windows, so how are you going to guarantee my safety?" -John Crichton to the Emperor of the Scarrans on [link\|http://www.farscape.com\|FarScape]
Post #92,878 by bepatient 3/29/03 4:47:20 PM Reply	You shouldn't hit yourself so hard. If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. _{Fudd's First Law of Opposition} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]

Welcome to IWETHEY!