Tweet
'Course it doesn't weaken my argument either.
-
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-Bokonon -
I'm not even sure you have an argument anymore...KH FOR OWNER!
ASHER FOR CEO!!
GUYNEMER FOR OT MOD!!!Comment
-
Right......"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
Perhaps the same democrats who took flack for supporting the wiretapping program?Originally posted by Kuciwalker
One reason is because the Bush folks did not know how the public would react. They had taken a beating on the phone tapping so they may well have been worried how the public would react to the government spying on their bank transactions.
And the Democrats trying to convince the papers not to publish thought the same?
Golfing since 67Comment
-
Nice way changing my words, I didn't say that at all. The president has independent sources of power that he derives from the Constitution like his war powers, power to make treaties, and nominate judges, etc. But I don't think president Bush is claiming that the financial program fall under any of these independent powers. Which means congress had to give him authorization.Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Point me the place in the Constitution where it says "the President can't do anything Congress hasn't explicitly authorized him to do."
I know you may have learned the "make, enforce, interpret" trichotemy in elementary school, but the actual Constitution is a bit more complex.Kids, you tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is, never try. -HomerComment
-
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
For the same reason they never want to divulge any information. They're friggan control freaks who don't think the American public have any right to know anything except what they tell us.
Your theory is descredited by the fact that it's impossible to falsify. It could come up with an explanation of anything.Comment
-
It's not science. Popper doesn't apply.
The Bush Administration isn't a black box, where everything they do is completely and totally unrelated to anything else they've ever done. Like most criminals, they have a way of operating, which they stick to. They have an ideology. Both are well known. Both inform the actions they take and they way they take them.
Why act like, this one time, maybe they aren't acting like they have 100% of the time before?Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...Comment
-
Sure does. The mark of a loony conspiracy theory is that it cannot possibly be falsified. There's no way you could ever prove it wrong. In any field except theology (I suppose communism falls under a branch of that) an unfalsifiable theory is inadmissible.Originally posted by chegitz guevara
It's not science. Popper doesn't apply.Comment
-
All Popper said was that if it can't be falsified, it's not science. He also said don't try and apply this outside of science cuz it won't work. You can't use it to impute motives, for example.
If your claim were correct, motives would not be admissible in court.Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...Comment
-
They may be tempted to use Western Union when they deploy for terror operations in more advanced countries.Originally posted by Ramo
It is now a moral support agency with random fvckwits in charge of "its" operations, many from countries with extremely poor educational institutions, low literacy levels and poor to non-existent internet connectivity.
If this is true, how would the Times article make any difference at all?He's got the Midas touch.
But he touched it too much!
Hey Goldmember, Hey Goldmember!Comment
-
Friggin Unions always sympathetic to terrorists I tells ya.
"Just puttin on the foil" - Jeff Hanson
“In a democracy, I realize you don’t need to talk to the top leader to know how the country feels. When I go to a dictatorship, I only have to talk to one person and that’s the dictator, because he speaks for all the people.” - Jimmy CarterComment
-
I do find it a bit interesting the philosophical flip flopping. On the one hand members of both political parties pleaded with the NYT's to keep their mouth shut because they apparently had better carnal knowledge of the working of the SWIFT program and its effectiveness. The NYT's decided they knew better and proceeded to publish classifeid info. When tasked with the choice of who they (some in this thread) trusted more, members of both parties of the government, or an members of an evil corporation looking to make money, our resident anarchists and commies fight their way to be first to line up on the side of evil corps.
"Just puttin on the foil" - Jeff Hanson
“In a democracy, I realize you don’t need to talk to the top leader to know how the country feels. When I go to a dictatorship, I only have to talk to one person and that’s the dictator, because he speaks for all the people.” - Jimmy CarterComment
-
1) It doesn't matter what Popper said. If there is no circumstance that could not be explained by your theory, it's worthless.Originally posted by chegitz guevara
All Popper said was that if it can't be falsified, it's not science. He also said don't try and apply this outside of science cuz it won't work. You can't use it to impute motives, for example.
If your claim were correct, motives would not be admissible in court.
2) Motives can be established scientifically.Comment
-
This made me chuckle...Attached FilesComment
-
-
I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator RubioComment
Comment