Re: Waco Test Shows "OBVIOUS GUNFIRE"

From: Ian Goddard (Ian@Goddard.net)
Date: Mon Mar 20 2000 - 21:00:22 MST


At 06:38 PM 03/20/2000 -0800, Joe Dees wrote:

>Yeah, the conspiracy grows: now it's that commie CNN, the creation of that
arch-villain Ted Turncoat, fornicator of Hanoi Jane, that is spinning this
in the fascist jackbooted thug direction. Self-contradictory piffle!
Objectivity is not something that anyone on this list can reasonably expect
from you on this issue, Ian. Your entire study of it has been for the
express purpose of advocating your preinvested position.

  IAN: When facts and physics fail to support your
  preconceived notions, go for the personal attacks.
  Just because I oppose the initiation of aggression
  doesn't mean I'm incapable of accurate observation,
  in fact, the facts unfolding before us confirm that
  what I've been posting for years on Waco is accurate.

  Contrary to the nature of your argumentation, the
  test of the accuracy of a person's claims is not
  based on a person's concept of ethical association,
  but on the correlation of that person's claims to
  the physical world. In that venue, you've completely
  failed to support your implication of inaccuracy.

  It's not a surprise then that you appear to think
  that simply framing the claim that CNN supports the
  Govt as an inherently crazy claim constitutes a
  meaningful statement about the subject. Ridicule
  is not argument and shouldn't be confused with it.
 
========================================================
WACO PROTEST: http://users.erols.com/igoddard/waco-1.htm
========================================================

   "There are times when you cannot keep your job and
  put alternative explanations for data on the table."
   Former FBI Special Agent Dr. Frederic Whitehurst

  



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:27:33 MST