10:30pm Sunday Night President's Having a Press Conference?

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Yes because he was protected by the military. It was no big suprise he was found in Pakistan. Even Hillary said so while handing over a fat check last year.

Well, if Hillary said so, I take everything back.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

I'd be equally as interested in trying to seriously join a conversation where you condescendingly told everyone that it's pretty much common knowledge that R Heat Lightning is a unicorn, and that there's tons of evidence that is out there (while not showing us any of it), and that she was withdrawn from the Oaks because it was found out (which is a statement somewhere on par with your specious Bhutto statement).

There will be evidence. And my guess is very soon. So I'm hoping you enjoy the time up until then. And my next guess is that you'll still carry on with this line of argument, and you'll be DT's resident "Deather," because your distrust of the government will not allow you to accept any evidence that contradicts your wild theory.

Looking forward to it!

I could have sworn all I said about R Heat Lightning was that she'd have no shot in the Derby, and maybe that she isn't as good as people think. But, okaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay.

Did I say a single thing about her being withdrawn from the Oaks, other than that I felt she was going to burn a lot of money? Somehow, you are crediting me with a statement I never made, that is on par with my Bhutto comment???

You are just making stuff up.

And it looks like you, among others, have a blind trust in the government that will not allow you to accept any evidence that contradicts the theory that he was just killed.

Have you even given this any honest consideration, or are you just dismissing what I say because the implications are ugly?

[Indian Charlie]

One other thing Hossy and Spence. If I were to provide said links, what would come of it?

You'd dismiss them just as easily as you dismiss the Bhutto interview, or better yet, just as easily as you accept the 'official' version of things.

Judging by the lack of an honest attempt to refute what I'm saying, I have no reason to post more evidence that counters your belief.

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

There was no intended implication. I am familiar with her history and am fully aware that she knew she was on borrowed time. Hell, even if I'd never had heard of her, that much was clear just from watching the video. You cannot possibly be that stupid to think I missed that, could you?

I can provide you plenty of evidence. Instead of that though, I am asking you to provide me evidence that he was just killed. Why is there a complete lack of evidence? There is precedence for this situation!

I'd like to know why anything I said is stupid. I do kid around a lot, and maybe you often misread me, but hey, I'm not the one who's a ***** and copped out of the handicapping contest with PG1985, and then offered up a bunch of really lame excuses after the fact.

I'm glad I'm not fooling anyone, except for you.

Seriously, all this conspiracy crap is way past old (not pointing these remarks at one specific person), first it was FDR having advanced knowledge of the Japanese attack on Pearl, then the second gunman on the grassy knoll, then the moon walk that took place in the south west somewhere, then 9-11 being known beforehand by Bush and actually done by the Jews, then Obama's place of birth, and now....OBL was killed by brave Navy Seals and his worthless carcass dumped into the ocean, it's only been a couple days, the government will produce the evidence they see fit, neither I or anyone else has to produce evidence...attempts by conspiracy nuts to put folks on the defensive by demanding "proof" has been tried for decades...you all are free to think what you want, and so is the vast majority of Americans!

[Dahoss]

It happened 2 days ago. As Brian said, more and more will continue to come out. That is why there is little of the evidence you are looking for.

However, it doesn't change that you are the one disputing it and claiming you have the evidence. You could end this discussion by just presenting the evidence. But you can't/won't.

It's a move I see everyday on the internet, not just by you. Your bulls.hit has been called and you can't back it up. So you want to keep going back and forth about nothing, in hopes it all just goes away. It will eventually, but you'll still be a big giant douche.

Oh and you're much worse than Betsy when it comes to idolizing your favorite horsey. Pretending you aren't doesn't make you clever. It makes you look like a 15 year old trying to fit in.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Judging by the lack of an honest attempt to refute what I'm saying, I have no reason to post more evidence that counters your belief.

You haven't provided any evidence. Zero.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

I could have sworn all I said about R Heat Lightning was that she'd have no shot in the Derby, and maybe that she isn't as good as people think. But, okaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay.

Did I say a single thing about her being withdrawn from the Oaks, other than that I felt she was going to burn a lot of money? Somehow, you are crediting me with a statement I never made, that is on par with my Bhutto comment???

You are just making stuff up.

And it looks like you, among others, have a blind trust in the government that will not allow you to accept any evidence that contradicts the theory that he was just killed.

Have you even given this any honest consideration, or are you just dismissing what I say because the implications are ugly?

Of course I'm making stuff up. I never said that you said any of that about R Heat Lightning. Point was, it would be a ridiculous conversation to try to have seriously, so I came up with a wild idea that would be nearly impossible to believe. It would be the same thing. Someone claiming something wild is "common knowledge," and stating that there is tons of evidence (while providing none) to back up a theory that is clearly more far-fetched than the official version of events.

R Heat Lightning is a unicorn vs. she has a bad knee = Common knowledge that Osama has been dead for years vs. he was killed this weekend.

I'm dismissing what you say because you're just saying it, saying it's common knowledge, saying there's evidence, like anyone who doesn't see how simple that is to understand is some kind of fool. While there is not (yet) evidence of Osama being killed this weekend, there will be.

I just find it more than a little ridiculous that you're acting as though believing this official version of (unfounded, taking someone's word for it for the time being) events is somehow stupid, or the result of everyone just being too f*cking dumb to consider it "because the implications are ugly," when they should totes just be believing your (unfounded, taking someone's word for it for the time being -- er, "time being = years" since you claimed this happened years ago, and nobody's Scooby-Doo'ed to the bottom of it yet, miraculously enough!) version of events.

Yes, one of those sounds completely crazy, for peon idiots who have blind faith in their government, and one of those sounds completely reasonable and rational.

You win, I guess.

[jms62]

So in the end we got our man but at what cost? Thousands of soldiers, trillions in costs for 2 unfunded wars. The cost of our economy. In the end we got him due to good intellegence and a well trained small strike force... We got him because we didn't let his protectors (Pakistan) in on it.
The question I have is couldn't we simply have focused on that in the first place??? Why wasn't it so blatantly obvious that you don't broadcast your intentions and your plans to the whole world. Hey Afghanistan we are looking for Bin-Laden here and will spend anything to find him here and expect him to stay there if he was. War like poker is deception and no one in his right mind would bet with a weak hand and his cards turned over face up.

Maybe Halliburton et all wouldnt have fared as well. Maybe GWB would have had a harder time getting elected in round 2 but the economy/country would be in a much better place. Just my 2 cents

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

Seriously, all this conspiracy crap is way past old (not pointing these remarks at one specific person), first it was FDR having advanced knowledge of the Japanese attack on Pearl, then the second gunman on the grassy knoll, then the moon walk that took place in the south west somewhere, then 9-11 being known beforehand by Bush and actually done by the Jews, then Obama's place of birth, and now....OBL was killed by brave Navy Seals and his worthless carcass dumped into the ocean, it's only been a couple days, the government will produce the evidence they see fit, neither I or anyone else has to produce evidence...attempts by conspiracy nuts to put folks on the defensive by demanding "proof" has been tried for decades...you all are free to think what you want, and so is the vast majority of Americans!

Yeah, I forgot, conspiracies never happen, especially in government. Even when top level government officials later on admit it, conspiracies never happen, or happened.

Let me guess, the US Govt. never condoned slavery.

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by jms62

So in the end we got our man but at what cost? Thousands of soldiers, trillions in costs for 2 unfunded wars. The cost of our economy. In the end we got him due to good intellegence and a well trained small strike force... We got him because we didn't let his protectors (Pakistan) in on it.
The question I have is couldn't we simply have focused on that in the first place??? Why wasn't it so blatantly obvious that you don't broadcast your intentions and your plans to the whole world. Hey Afghanistan we are looking for Bin-Laden here and will spend anything to find him here and expect him to stay there if he was. War like poker is deception and no one in his right mind would bet with a weak hand and his cards turned over face up.

Maybe Halliburton et all wouldnt have fared as well. Maybe GWB would have had a harder time getting elected in round 2 but the economy/country would be in a much better place. Just my 2 cents

Supposedly that was Bin Laden's real mission/goal. To cripple the U.S. economy. While it's great that we got the guy, there is really no reason to celebrate. I'm sure that some people got the closure that they needed. But, Bin Laden accomplished his mission as far as the economy goes and realistically we are no safer today than we were the other day. The world changed permanently that day and there will always be that risk factor going forward.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

Supposedly that was Bin Laden's real mission/goal. To cripple the U.S. economy. While it's great that we got the guy, there is really no reason to celebrate. I'm sure that some people got the closure that they needed. But, Bin Laden accomplished his mission as far as the economy goes and realistically we are no safer today than we were the other day. The world changed permanently that day and there will always be that risk factor going forward.

And what he did really is the ONLY way to beat this country. Destroy the economy and the country will eventually be torn apart from the inside as the masses revolt. Laugh but it is an eventuality if things continue on the course. We should learn from the riots in other countries.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

It happened 2 days ago. As Brian said, more and more will continue to come out. That is why there is little of the evidence you are looking for.

However, it doesn't change that you are the one disputing it and claiming you have the evidence. You could end this discussion by just presenting the evidence. But you can't/won't.

It's a move I see everyday on the internet, not just by you. Your bulls.hit has been called and you can't back it up. So you want to keep going back and forth about nothing, in hopes it all just goes away. It will eventually, but you'll still be a big giant douche.

Oh and you're much worse than Betsy when it comes to idolizing your favorite horsey. Pretending you aren't doesn't make you clever. It makes you look like a 15 year old trying to fit in.

As Brian said, more and more evidence will come out? When does the first bit come out?

I've already posted the Bhutto video, but apparently the direct words of a well connected and former Prime Minister of the country in question, Pakistan, does not count as evidence in Hossy land.

You can believe me or not, but I have plenty of other avenues to further what I'm saying, I just do not see a reason to post them, because the will be either ignored, or belittled. What's the freakin point man?

Maybe you could try looking into this with an open mind, but that won't happen, will it?

You are right about Indian Charlie. I think he's the greatest animal that ever lived, of any species. I have proof that he's actually the second coming of Jesus, but he was so eager to appear on the scene, he was reborn five years prematurely (the millennium thing).

After he sires the Derby winner, he will next have his own evangelical show on cable, and I'm already lined up to be the producer of the show.

My first major goal on this show will be to have Indian Charlie damn you to hell for being a non believer, and for daring to have made fun of me in a mean spirited way. The next episode, he will fly to England and then swim across the channel to prep for the Arc.

As for fitting in? It's never been a big concern of mine. You, on the other hand, have repeatedly exhibited this behavior, despite your gruff attempts to appear otherwise.

Obviously my stating things like OBL was already dead would contribute to your belief that I'm just trying to fit in!

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

One other thing Hossy and Spence. If I were to provide said links, what would come of it?

You'd dismiss them just as easily as you dismiss the Bhutto interview, or better yet, just as easily as you accept the 'official' version of things.

Judging by the lack of an honest attempt to refute what I'm saying, I have no reason to post more evidence that counters your belief.

let me guess... Hitler didnt kill himself and he lived happily ever after in Argentina?

what evidence did Bhutto provide other than a few words in an interview, and what makes her words more believable than the US military?

[dellinger63]

The locals' response. Sickening and to think we are providing aid to some of these animals?


http://www.trust.org/alertnet/multim...9-1b0326309bc7

[Dahoss]

I have an open mind. I'm asking for the evidence so I can look at it. Maybe I'll agree with you.

But you won't provide it. Why exactly? For someone who doesn't care (no one believes that) why would you care who ignores it or belittles it? Don't tell me you actually care, because you just said you don't. Which one is it?

You are the textbook case of someone who pretends they don't care, yet care more than anyone else. This whole episode is just another chapter in it.

But, we're getting away from the topic, which I know you want. You made the statement. Own it, or crawl back in your chubby chaser hole.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

let me guess... Hitler didnt kill himself and he lived happily ever after in Argentina?

what evidence did Bhutto provide other than a few words in an interview, and what makes her words more believable than the US military?

I have no ideas on Hitler being in Argentina. As far as I know, he died in Berlin.

The Vatican did facilitate the escape of many high level Nazis to South America (as well as countless no-namers) however.

I'm sure you will find that preposterous.

Let me throw back at you your question. What makes the US military, proven liars, more believable than Bhutto? Why would Bhutto even make something like this up, in the context of how that conversation went?

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

I have an open mind. I'm asking for the evidence so I can look at it. Maybe I'll agree with you.

But you won't provide it. Why exactly? For someone who doesn't care (no one believes that) why would you care who ignores it or belittles it? Don't tell me you actually care, because you just said you don't. Which one is it?

You are the textbook case of someone who pretends they don't care, yet care more than anyone else. This whole episode is just another chapter in it.

But, we're getting away from the topic, which I know you want. You made the statement. Own it, or crawl back in your chubby chaser hole.

You won't agree with me, and to say otherwise is a disingenuous attempt at taking the high ground.

I told you why I won't provide it. You can choose to believe my reason or not. Your belief is not important to me. I've stated it and that's all I can do.

The only thing I'm really guilty of is using too strong, or forceful, phrases when disputing the claim that OBL was just killed. It was not my intent to belittle people, though I can see how I did.

[Dahoss]

So, you don't care what people think. But won't provide any evidence to your claim for fear of being ignored or belittled?

Makes sense.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

I have no ideas on Hitler being in Argentina. As far as I know, he died in Berlin.

The Vatican did facilitate the escape of many high level Nazis to South America (as well as countless no-namers) however.

I'm sure you will find that preposterous.

Let me throw back at you your question. What makes the US military, proven liars, more believable than Bhutto? Why would Bhutto even make something like this up, in the context of how that conversation went?

Nothing the Vatican does would surprise me.

I'm not buying the Bhutto thing. Maybe she mixed up her words. Didnt she imply that the guy who killed bin Laden was the same individual who decapitaded Daniel Pearl? Was he some secret double agent or something? Maybe she meant to say Omar Sheikh is the same guy who killed Daniel Pearl... wasnt she worried about being killed herself?

And how could it be possible that Omar Sheikh killed Osama bin Laden in 2007 when he was in prison since 2002 for beheading Pearl and has not been released from prison?

And Bhutto's killing doesnt make me believer her statement any more than I would if she was alive. She was a marked woman in those parts.

So yeah if your evidence is the Bhutto interview, I'm way more inclined to think she misspoke than take her words as fact.

Osama was killed in Pakistan on 5-2-11 1am Paki time by US bullets. When the government releases pictures and/or video, are you going to say they are photoshopped?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

You'd dismiss them just as easily as you dismiss the Bhutto interview, or better yet, just as easily as you accept the 'official' version of things.

Bhutto's David Frost interview, where she said bin Laden had been killed, was November 2, 2007.

Yet on November 8, 2007 Bhutto was placed under house arrest, and she told a radio station at that time, "And I was just telling one of the policemen, I said 'should you be here after us? Should not you be looking for Osama bin Laden?' And he said, 'I'm sorry, ma'am, this is our job. We're just doing what we are told.'"

So it appears Bhutto was confused as to whether bin Laden is alive or dead. She says one thing, then immediately says another later in the week.

It's ridiculous to take her at her word one day as truth, but ignore her words 6 days later as a lie. As she was apparently the only person in the world to have that information about bin Laden, and to have verified it since, with voice recognition of bin Laden talking occurring subsequently, I choose to call that claim a pile of nonsense.