I don’t. The clarification was for others. To show the fallcious logic in the trolls’ accusations.

Besides, this one is demented. It’s not even good enough to play with. Best to ignore it.

# 123: Take your meds,Boy.

Comment by unbelievable #122

unbelievable,

…NEVER take a ball of yarn seriously…

I’m a visual person. Therefore I called Seixon sEXXON. Suckson is an audio play on syllables – something I don’t do. I’m sure Bruce, as usual, was right and Sybil who is also Denny and E.Coli and has pretended to be Jay Randal, Sharon Cox, JPark, and now me is also Suckson…

Don’t you have anything better than childish games and vile insults Sybil?

I’m going back to skipping your posts. They aren’t worth the effort of reading them.

****Dear gNAT – How right you are!! The United States should have ignored the declaration of war by Germany and waited for them to attack us first – just like former Presidents Carter and Clinton did so magnificently!!! After terrorists first bombed the WTC (after years of bombings and hijackings) I have it on good authority that Mr. Bill is reported to have declared, “Well, Hillary and Al, I certainly hope those boys got the gunpowder out of their systems – would you pass the ribs and greens…”

Now gNAT, your assignment (to save you the humiliation of appearing so ignorant):
a.) commit to memory the date of the Iraqi acceptance of the Gulf War Cease
Fire.
b.) commit to memory the TERMS of the Cease Fire Agreement which the Iraqi government accepted and signed.
c.) A 500 word essay admitting your mistaken stance re: the phrase “illegal and unnessary invasion of Iraq”. If you attend or graduated from poorly performing public schools, your essay need not exceed 300 words….

Comment by JPark — July 8, 2006 @ 1:04 am

Ignore the moron JPark.

Comment by KMart
=================
Ignore reality.Support GW Bush.

You see the establishment of a democratic government in Iraq as “cleaning up a mess”. I wonder what Germany and Japan would think of your rhetoric.

Comment by Seixon — July 7, 2006 @ 2:20 pm

Stop trying to compare the illegal and unnessary invasion of Iraq to WW2.

…never will!

Au contraire. It is important in that you still haven’t issued a retraction of your statement that I was being intellectually dishonest (”Quit trying to take what I said out of context.”).

Acknowledging one’s mistakes is a must for any self-respecting critical thinker. You still have to do just that.

In fact, as I have stated, the invasion was illegal per the UN Charter and a little under half the Security Council at the time supported the US invasion.

In fact, I have already told you we are in agreement on this issue.

As for King, to me it seems like he meant that the UN went along with the Iraq adventure eventually, not that they approved of the invasion.

It could be read that way, but it would be wrong.

Maybe that’s because I know better, and I agree that King’s statement can be seen as confusing.

Ah, mighty Seixon -should I bow to your superior intellect?

In the end, I agree with TP’s reference to Kofi Annan who said that the invasion was illegal per the UN Charter. It’s funny that not a single person on this thread has taken notice of my saying that,

I just told you I posted a comment saying I agreed with you. Do you even read the replies to your posts?

That’s what critical thinkers do, they seek out a challenge. Most of the people here are doing exactly the opposite. Ciao!

That’s true, critical thinkers do seek out challenges. But for knowledge to sink in, you must recognize you can make mistakes, and be willing to admit you are wrong; two things you seem to still be struggling with.

My “blanket denial” was in response to someone mischaracterizing my statement, maybe it wasn’t you, it’s not important. My stance is that the UN eventually gave the invasion a rubber stamp of approval by giving a mandate to be there and asking for other member states to help out. That does not mean I am implying that the UN approved of the actual invasion. In fact, as I have stated, the invasion was illegal per the UN Charter and a little under half the Security Council at the time supported the US invasion.

As for King, to me it seems like he meant that the UN went along with the Iraq adventure eventually, not that they approved of the invasion. Maybe that’s because I know better, and I agree that King’s statement can be seen as confusing.

However, Think Progress turns this into some kind of “problem”, at makes it out as if King was helping Bush rewrite history. Instead of trying to get King to clarify what he was saying, TP just goes on the attack.

In the end, I agree with TP’s reference to Kofi Annan who said that the invasion was illegal per the UN Charter. It’s funny that not a single person on this thread has taken notice of my saying that, since it doesn’t exactly help the image of a right-wing Bush-lover they have molded for me.

But seriously, now I am definitely going to go watch that movie. I don’t like Think Progress and what they do, and that’s why I’m here to counteract them. I seek out dissent, I seek out disagreement, I seek out those who disagree with me because it enables me to find out where I am wrong, or to see where my stance on some issues might have weaknesses and that allows me to fine tune them so that I have everything right according to the facts. That’s what critical thinkers do, they seek out a challenge. Most of the people here are doing exactly the opposite. Ciao!

Mmmm… Grape Jello….

Er, no…. your blanket denial was “I never said the UN approved the invasion”, when, in fact, you had said they did (after or before is irrelevant, fact remains you did). It was in response to someone else, not me. Re-read my post at 12:27pm, your post at 11:25am, and your post at 9:28am.

Uh, yeah he did. He said the UN first, then switched to “other countries”. I read it. It’s right there in the transcript. He didn’t say “and” in between them.

Let’s try this once again: Read CNN’s full transcript here. These are two sentences, with Pres Bush interjecting between them. Mr. King did not correct himself, he was adding to what he had already said.

Why doesn’t TP seek comment from King about what he meant to say?

Ask Judd or whoever -I cannot answer that question.

See, that’s why I don’t like places like TP.

And yet, you keep coming back for more.

Instead of debating about real issues, we’re here debating what Larry King meant when he said this or that.

And instead of acknowledging you misspoke, you keep faulting others, claiming they are dishonestly taking things out of context, and coming up with rationalizations as to why Mr. King’s statement is correct. If it is such a waste of time, why keep at it?

For that reason, I’m done with this topic, and think I’ll make better use of my time watching American Dreamz.

I thought you didn’t like Think Progress…. maybe you meant “I am done with Think Progress and I will never come back”?

I never implied such a thing. I pointed out a stark contradiction between a blanket denial you issued and a prior statement of yours.

The blanket denial was in response to your out of context phrasing of my previous stance.

Mr. King did not correct himself mid-sentence. Again, read the full transcript.

Uh, yeah he did. He said the UN first, then switched to “other countries”. I read it. It’s right there in the transcript. He didn’t say “and” in between them.

Why doesn’t TP seek comment from King about what he meant to say? Oh no, that would be no good, then TP couldn’t create a controversy about King supposedly rewriting history to help Bush.

See, that’s why I don’t like places like TP. They can take any little misunderstanding, unclarity, anything and turn it into some ridiculous “problem”. It’s so unnecessary and worthless. Instead of debating about real issues, we’re here debating what Larry King meant when he said this or that.

For that reason, I’m done with this topic, and think I’ll make better use of my time watching American Dreamz.