Please let us know when your next book is being published and also some alerts for your TV appearances on cable news shows would be appreciated...
cabbage, even in the pointless realm of political arguments on a b-ball internet bbs, getting into one of these charades with Senor bait-y-obtuso is generally the most pointless waste of time of all. You will learn nothing other than about your own limit of patience, he will be content to look as dense as possible, no matter how plainly stupid the position he is forced to take, and always get the last word. Not worth your time, even if you can spare it.
Stop whining. How telling that your idea of proof of intellectual legitimacy is found in societal status and exposure. How very sad. It onces again proves why you think the way you do. You now have the burden of agreeing with any left leaning Democrat in Congress. If not, feel free to inform us in regards to which political office you have ever held. Unfortunately, I had to learn this the hard way.
<b>thacabbage Stop whining.</b> Stick to the topic. <b>How telling that your idea of proof of intellectual legitimacy is found in societal status and exposure. How very sad. It onces again proves why you think the way you do. You now have the burden of agreeing with any left leaning Democrat in Congress. If not, feel free to inform us in regards to which political office you have ever held.</b> Yeah, I guess I should go with a self-appointed BBS expert whom no one has heard of... <b>Unfortunately, I had to learn this the hard way.</b> Apparently you haven't learned it because you are still keeping up the assault. Why not just let a discussion flow without any of the personal attacks? If you need puffing up, go kick a dog or something.
oh my god. he appears on TV and gets books published. he must be a prophet sent from god to relieve us from terrorists. in july i attended a senate banking committee. it had your beloved emerson. needless to say he was a joke. point is when you are attempting to make an argument citing credible people would help. http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1443 http://www.counterpunch.org/emerson05192003.html http://www.cair-net.org/html/emerson.htm
Ok, how about you take a look at your esteemed friend, Emerson, the man with the book on TV, in those links provided by insane man above. This is clearly not an objective expert but a man with a bias and an agenda. Sounds familiar.
Congratulations on your fine Googling! Shall I find three affirming articles and settle for a tie or shall I go for four and the total victory?
A day after the Oklahoma City federal building was bombed in 1995, he went on television theorizing -- wrongly -- that the culprits were Arab. Attempting "to inflict as many casualties as possible -- that is a Middle Eastern trait," he said in one interview, one of many statements his enemies call reckless and biased... "The level of vitriol against Jews and Christianity within contemporary Islam, unfortunately, is something that we are not totally cognizant of, or that we don't want to accept. We don't want to accept it because to do so would be to acknowledge that one of the world's great religions -- which has more than 1.4 billion adherents -- somehow sanctions genocide, planned genocide, as part of its religious doctrine." --Steven Emerson, Jewish Monthly (3/95) Are you seriously still claiming that Steve Emerson is unbiased? How delusional are you? "He gets it wrong all the time. Emerson has no credibility left. He can't get on TV and most publications won't pick him up." (Weekly Planet newspaper, May 1998) The only person Steve Emerson still has credibility with is you, Giddyup, because you two share a common agenda. Not to mention the fact that he has written a book and appeared on tv.
I claimed nothing about Steve Emerson. I just cited him as an "expert" on terrorism whom I heard on the radio and have seen on television ever since 9/11 who was talking about something that I found compelling. If you wish to slough him and his topic off that is your choice. You called him a shill. As I recall there were initial eye witness reports of Arabs in regard to the Oklahoma City bombing; I doubt that Emerson was one of those witnesses. I mentioned in another thread last week a conversation that I had with an acquaintance who is ex-military who has worked in the Middle East for years. He says that that doctrine of deliberate lying is a huge problem in dealing with Middle Easterners.
LMAO! You crack me up giddyup. Citing Emerson? That's like citing Daniel Pipes as an unbiased "Middle East expert". Merry Christmas my friend...
No, you defended his credibility by saying "Please let us know when your next book is being published and also some alerts for your TV appearances on cable news shows would be appreciated...". Dealing with Middle Easterners? Silly me, all this time I thought only Muslims followed the Quran.
Okay, get this through your thick head: I didn't cite him as anything. I identified him as he was presented on this particular radio program (which I have seen confirmed many time on cable news shows). I'm only comforted that the cabal here knows entirely better.
<b>thacabbage No, you defended his credibility by saying "Please let us know when your next book is being published and also some alerts for your TV appearances on cable news shows would be appreciated...".</b> Again, let me know when one of you becomes a talking head for one of these cable news shows; I'll tune in. <b>Dealing with Middle Easterners? Silly me, all this time I thought only Muslims followed the Quran.</b> Sorry you weren't privy to this conversation, but that general criticism was leveled by my friend at BOTH Jews and Muslims in the region. Shoulda been there!
Wow, I can't believe what I'm reading. Stepping aside from this discussion, are you really telling me you assign credibility to anyone on television? That's not good for you, man. So then what's your point? You're basically just contradicting your own argument. Your point in that thread was that in this war against fundamentalist Muslims, we can't trust them because the Quran sanctions lying or deception during war. Your intention was basically a critique on Islam and the Quran as the cause of some of today's problems. Yet now you are saying that that is a charicteristic inherent to both Jews and Muslims. So what is your point? I thought we were trying to analyze Islam? You'll find many outspoken atheists on this board constantly denouncing Christianity but I have no problem with that. There is also that one fellow who floods the board with 10 anti-Muslim articles at a time - I have no problem with that either. All of these people have made it clear in some way or another that they have some sort of agenda and that's their prerogative. My issue with you is how you deceitfully operate, claiming you just want answers while at the same time feeding your prejudices and tossing in snide remarks.
<b>thacabbage Wow, I can't believe what I'm reading. Stepping aside from this discussion, are you really telling me you assign credibility to anyone on television? That's not good for you, man.</b> No, I've seen Michael Moore on television! Moore is invited on to bring controversy. Emerson doesn't seem to fit that bill, although I realize that you are trying to paint him that way. These so-called "experts" are vetted by the production staff I'm sure; yes, they have their critics but if you expect the citation of criticism to completely erase their credibility with everybody then you have another thing coming. I realize it fits your agenda, but it doesn't fit everyone's. <b>So then what's your point? You're basically just contradicting your own argument. Your point in that thread was that in this war against fundamentalist Muslims, we can't trust them because the Quran sanctions lying or deception during war. Your intention was basically a critique on Islam and the Quran as the cause of some of today's problems. Yet now you are saying that that is a charicteristic inherent to both Jews and Muslims. So what is your point? I thought we were trying to analyze Islam?</b> The point that my friend was making was that there was duplicity on both sides in the Middle East-- however formal or informal. It's motives or form need not be identical. According to some there is a formality to the Muslim version of this practice. That's what I was trying to discuss, but all it caused was hysteria. <b>You'll find many outspoken atheists on this board constantly denouncing Christianity but I have no problem with that. There is also that one fellow who floods the board with 10 anti-Muslim articles at a time - I have no problem with that either. All of these people have made it clear in some way or another that they have some sort of agenda and that's their prerogative. My issue with you is how you deceitfully operate, claiming you just want answers while at the same time feeding your prejudices and tossing in snide remarks.</b> "At least the Christians have a New Testament" was meant to draw out some new textual references that would bring a new perspective to the Muslim POV. It didn't happen because most would just rather take offense. I see no problem with analyzing the text because that is what fundamentalism does-- it sticks really close to the word of the particular holy book. Why can an atheist denounce Christianity but a Christian can't poke holes into Islam? Can't you see that denunciation is far more final? Where does your own prejudice lie?
More bullying. Oh, nevermind, you're right... that New Testament comment was a really devastating criticism. Whoopee! God I love this....
C'mon people, this is someone who will throw out baseless accusations of anti-semitism but can't handle his own logic against himself showing he has a bias against muslims. You can't debate someone who thinks he is perfect and fears being wrong more than learning the truth about himself. Now watch as the hypocrite tries to act clever by leaving his trademark, "The same could be said about you" quip.
Baseless accusations? Are you talking about the comments that I relayed from my friend who had worked in the Middle East <b>for years</b>? I knew nothing of that accusation until it crossed his lips to my ears a few weeks ago and now it is the basis of my own anti-semitism. Will you please relay that to David and Annette-- a couple friend of mine for 30 years who happen to be Jewish. Boy, they'll be surprised. <b>Your crowd just can't rise above petty name-calling, can it?</b> I didn't deny that I had a bias; in fact, I admitted it as virtually unavoidable. What I deny is the hatefulness that you gleefully assign to it. That is patently ridiculous, keyboard hero....
