Ok, let's go:
1) I said "even if it weren't completely economic" it would create a large impact.
2) I'm not peddling any conspiracies. Nor am I writing articles to sell any particular agenda that I think will sell.
3) I am just raising questions. They are uncomfortable to some. Regardless of speculation, the facts are the issue. To say otherwise is avoidance, and lacks the intellectual honest to face these questions, but instead attempts to dismiss them. They won't be dismissed.
4) Yes, I would love to spend more time studying, but we have a little thing called Terrorist Politics that keeps me busy with communicating issues of more current import with those that agree, and disagree. I've got other important activities, as well, so time, as always, must be used not abused.
I like responding to you, because you're the perfect foil for the arguments that get murky with invective, and you respond with dismissiveness, which gives a chance to clarify further. Even if its frustrating when you avoid the issues...
Thanks, even if we disagree, and even if I consider your style less than intellectually rigorous, there is a silver lining. |
