EC>> Look at the funny bob spinning around and around.  You
  EC>> ignore the Jake Tapper column because he refers to an
  EC>> article in the New York Sun.

 ->> Now that's a new lie from Earl. I don't even much recall the Tapper
 ->> blog, but I do know it was not because of the NY Sun that I ignored
 ->> it.

 EC> That was the "reason" you gave.  So once again you try to
 EC> rob the word "lie" of any meaning by calling a true
 EC> statement a "lie."  That is an interesting way to try to
 EC> cover your own false statements.  Wilson will be impressed.

 Well, I had to go back and check my archive. And I was right, it
 was not because it was the NY Sun that I waved it off. I did
 mention that it was a right wing mouthpiece, but you deleted the
 part where I said their sources were Iraqis and Kurds who had
 something to gain by leading us to believe what they wanted.
 IOW, the would profit from us buying their story.

 IOW, you are blowing smoke again.

 EC>> You ignore the New York Sun
 EC>> news stories because you don't like the Daily News.  Then,
 EC>> when you find out it was a different New York newspaper,
 EC>> you announce that you don't like it either.

->> Another lie from Earl.

 EC> You called it a rightwing mouthpiece, and you said you felt
 EC> justified in ignoring whatever the paper said because it
 EC> was biased.

 Is that what I said? I don't recall saying I felt justified in
 ignoring it for that reason. If so, why did I bother to go
 further to read the article and post that their sources were the
 least reliable you can think of, someone who stands to gain by
 leading us down their path. Be sure to post the quote where I
 said I felt justified in ignoring it because it is biased. Those
 words, don't forget.

 Oh, and I do recall reading the article linked by the Tapper
 blog. IIRC there was not one US govt official backing up any of
 his claims. All Iraqis or Kurds whose interests have no reason
 to parallel ours. Why, with an administration desperate for a
 reason to attack Iran, don't they have one American Govt offical
 supporting Tapper's theme?

 Oh, I saved the blog to my Iran subdirectory.

 EC> Is this really all you have left -- a sad and
 EC> pathetic strategy of calling all truthful statements "lies?"

 When you actually post a truthful statement the shock may cause
 my computer to melt down.

 Again, I did call the Sun a right wing mouthpiece, but I also
 read the article and noted it's sources.

 Remember, though, the Familysecurity website did not reference a
 particular article, so I can't tell if it's the same article.

 EC> So to recap the thread, Sauer said it couldn't possibly be
 EC> true that Iran was giving assistance to Al Qaeda.  I

 I only saw where he said something on the order of it wasn't
 happening. Didn't see him say it was impossible.

 EC> pointed out that there was ample evidence that Iran has
 EC> done exactly that.  You jumped in babbling nonsense, lying
 EC> about sources, misattributing sources, ignoring news

 Uh... you are the on leading this all around in a circle to
 disguise your deceptions. Oh, and it is notable that you deleted
 the part where I pointed out that Al Qaeda is not just Sunni,
 but Wahabi. The Wahabi are about the most extreme sunnis you
 will find, and hate Iran probably more than they hate us.

 So, the question is not whether Iran will work with Sunnis, but
 whether Iran will work with Wahabis.

 EC> reports because you felt the paper was a "rightwing
 EC> mouthpiece,"

 That used sources we have no reason to believe. And did not use
 sources we have any reason at all to trust, like any US sources.

 EC> and making pathetically meaningless comments
 EC> that you pretended was refutation, and in the end never
 EC> established that the reports of Iran assisting Al Qaeda
 EC> were false.

 And you have never established that they are true. I am far more
 convinced Saudi Arabia is aiding Al Qaeda. Do we invade them?

 To make war you have to establish your cause, I don't have to
 disprove it.

 EC> But you did make a fool of yourself several
 EC> times in the process, and that is always entertaining to
 EC> watch.

 And you have lied and decieved repeatedly. But that's par for
 the course.


BOB KLAHN bob.klahn{at}sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

 * Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a