Forum for discussing local and world politics and issues. All views are welcomed. Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics.
All standard guidelines apply to this board, No Flaming, No Taunting, No Foul Language,No sexual innuendos,etc..
As politics can be a volatile subject, please consider how you would feel if your comment were directed toward yourself.
Any post deemed to be in violation of guidelines will be deleted or edited without warning or notification. Any continued misbehavior will result in a ban or hidden status, so please play nice!!!
*"Moderators are here for a reason. If a moderator (or Global Moderator or Fencer) requests that a discussion on a certain subject to cease - for whatever reason - please respect these wishes. Failure to do so may result in being hidden, or banned."
Lista de Fóruns
Não pode escrever mensagens neste fórum. O nível mínimo de inscrição para o fazer neste fórum é Nível Peão.
Czuch: At least you are consistent. Ignore the questions/comments that challenge your worldview, especially the ones providing evidence...i.e., all those points I make that you can't answer. Instead, misrepresent something I have said, juxtapose it with something else I have said so as to seemingly provide a valid contradiction, etc. You aren't a serious debater. You don't seriously stand on "logic" in your so-called counterpoints. I still enjoy your posts, since they often provide me a "pretext" for discussing things that do matter, and that others will understand. :o)
The Usurper:You aren't a serious debater. You don't seriously stand on "logic" in your so-called counterpoints.
I thought you were against ad hominem arguments. I also thought you were the one that called for letting the arguments speak for themselves.
BTW, having evidence is meaningless if it's not credible or acceptable. In a trial, lawyers are always trying to discredit the other's submitted evidence. Some evidence stands up to close scrutiny, some does not. So simply claiming you provided "evidence" isn't enough. It has to take us some where. And spare me the repeat; I know the evidence takes you somewhere. But it's got to do more than that. How long have you looked into this 911 stuff? If a long time, then why do you expect people to "take your word for it" and accept everything you say on face value?
If you've only looked at it a short time, that is worse. That simply shows that you fall for something without really checking into it in a deep and meaningful way.
Keep the facts coming. Keep the questions coming. Challenge assumptions. But don't do the very thing you have criticized in others: "to the man" attacks.
The Usurper: All I am saying is that you believe the US government is complicit in 9/11 including congress and Obama now and everyone else... but you also support a liberal agenda that includes socializing everything (socializing means making the government more responsible for everything)
Assunto: Re: "Dont you see any kind of contradiction here?"
Czuch: My reply to your question seems to be missing from this board. I posted & read my post. I'm not saying Art removed it. But it isn't here...unless I've overlooked it (don't think so). I find this very curious. Perhaps some political topics are too sensitive.....
(esconder) Para mandar uma mensagem aos seus amigos apenas com apenas um clique adicione-os à sua lista de Amigos e clique no pequeno envelopeao lado do nome deles. (pauloaguia) (mostrar todas as dicas)