You know dude you have a problem. What the $hit happened to you in your “urth?? You are really F$CKED UP. Be a Meme and stake a claim. So who wants complete control over you? Your mommy? Guess what ? things are really getting warmer. Why don’t you want to accept reality? Did someone Fu$k you over and you want to join Faux made up news to make it better? Give it a shot and tell us what in the hell is wrong with you.

Comment by Jericho
========================
An effective summary,imo.

Comment by Steve53

Serious. Read it.
http://www.wmd.gov/report/index.html

Funny, I don’t see any mention of “manipulation” or “cherry picking”. Where’s your evidence, the DailyKos???

Comment by Tom Kaz —
=========================
Good one!…Oh,you’re actually serious?

Comment by Steve53

Serious. Read it.
http://www.wmd.gov/report/index.html

Funny, I don’t see any mention of “manipulation” or “cherry picking”. Where’s your evidence, the DailyKos???

Comment by Tom Kaz —
=========================
I have little doubt you’re impervious to any evidence contrary to your world-view.I won’t waste my time,or yours.
But,if you are so inclined,read Seymour Hersh.

No, in fairness the comments are pretty justified. You and I banged away at it for over 4 hours yesterday, and I certainly got the better of you. So says me and every other observer. So we can’t accept your glib rebuttals as fact I’m afraid.

If you want a real discussion on climatology go to one of the science blogs, but you don’t because you’d be trashed even more throughly. It’s more fun to hang around and muddy the discussion here with long since refuted underdog theories or mere crackpottery.

Thats just bad form. Have the discussion, and move on, don’t badger the same people with the same crap. You’ll note that I’m making no attempt to engage you (again) on the science. I’ve done that and seen the outcome. I’m appealing to your sense of proportion. What you are doing is rude at best and frankly rather obsessive, and perhaps even a little creepy. Please don’t do it I guess is what I’m saying.

Have a good evening though:-)

Good one!…Oh,you’re actually serious?

Comment by Steve53

Serious. Read it.
http://www.wmd.gov/report/index.html

Funny, I don’t see any mention of “manipulation” or “cherry picking”. Where’s your evidence, the DailyKos???

I got my ass handed to me on this subject at Lambert’s blog? I can’t seem to recall that. Got a link? Who is Benny Peiser?

Brian,

I didn’t mean that you should believe me over Realclimate, but the people at Realclimate aren’t all that objective on this issue. Eric Steig was featured in a Salon.com article using Judd of TP as a source for debunking a skeptic who said largely the same thing as other scientists at the end of the article did!

Lora,

Andrew Sullivan obviously has no science credentials. Does Judd of TP?

nemo,

the doc hasn’t really engaged me at all, other than being the first person to publish my personal details on here. Then he disappeared. Interesting, eh?

As for the rest of what you said, is there any way that I could engage in a discussion with people here where you would not conclude that I was a 4-year old seeking attention? Nope. In other words, trying to have a discussion on something here at TP means that I am a “troll” or a 4-year old seeking attention. That’s pretty pathetic.

Many of you people simply cannot stand having a frank discussion on things and would rather be left alone in your little bubble.

Your basic message is: “Don’t listen to Seixon, don’t respond to Seixon, don’t look him in the eye! He’s a ‘crazy’ person! Hopefully he will go away!”

That is not the sentiments of a critical thinker, it’s the sentiments of someone who wants complete control over their little sphere of influence. If I wrote a book, would you burn it? I bet you would, and I bet you would go to the store and stand in front of it and yell at people not to look at it. You are part of the Thought Police, and it’s pretty hilarious really.

There has been on ongong thread here by some spirited – if delusional – supporters of the current administration to the effect of, “Cheney did not cherry pick the evidence on Iraqi WMD capabilities”. I especially loved the link to the commission report that cleared the politicians of influencing the intelligence (has everyone forgotten that this was the same commission that Bush would only testify before if he had Cheney sitting beside him? What will all of the multiple stories ‘Scooter’ Libby and Karl Rove were fabricating for how they didn’t reveal the name of Valerie Plame – and if they did it was only because they were authorized – I suppose I would have wanted my VP and a script editor next to me too).

But here is the short answer, as plain as it can be said:

- we know for a fact that from the beginning of the Bush 2 administration, plans were being made to attack Iraq.

- we know for a fact that before the ruins had stopped smoldering from the attacks of 11 September, Rumsfeld was seeking to pin the attacks on Saddam Hussein.

- we know for a fact that to this day, a significant % of the American people still believe that Hussein played a role in those attacks and we know that the source for that correlation is the numerous administration speeches that very artfully placed “9/11″ and “Saddam Hussein” in the same sentence.

And we know all of the above from the notes from the man the vp presented to the president as the best choice for his first Secretary of the Treasury of the United States of America.

You can call of of the posters here liberals and liars and cheats and whores – some of us will fall into those categories.

None of that will change the simple truth that this administration came into office looking to go to war with Iraq and the reason they gave us for that war has been proven false. You might be so (????) as too believe that sheer coincidence aligned a $1 trillion enterprise with their stated political goals. Me, I guess I am too cynical to believe that anyone is that lucky.

We knew about the 500 shells – the government has confirmed this.

Cheney manipulated intellgence – the CIA has confirmed this.

Read a newspaper. Or watch something other than FOX News.

Brian heavily engaged Seixon in this thread, and the Doc heavily engaged him in many earlier threads. The problem is not just one or two threads.

Seixon thrives on attention and an audience. He’s like a 4-year-old who puts all his energy into provocations to get attention. Don’t respond to him, and not just in one thread. Don’t respond to him in all threads. After a few weeks of being ignored he’ll get bored and leave for good.

Here’s one for you, Andrew Sullivan is the Joe Leiberman of political commentary. He’ll change sides whenever it suits him, and back down like a big baby when reality smacks him in the face.

Had to follow up on this forgive me all. Realclimate was recently voted 3rd best out of 50 of the top science blogs, by the magazine. I’d take the views and nature and realclimate over yours any day. No offense taken I trust.

For everyone else, this is a really useful resource, although I was unfamiliar with the site, I was able to fairly quickly rebut all the major talking points using it as a reference.

Enjoy. http://illconsidered.blogspot.com/2006/03/guides-by-category.html