Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (127140)	4/16/2011 11:13:18 PM
From: Broken_Clock	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Not one fact in your entire post.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (127140)	4/17/2011 2:44:16 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	1 Recommendation Respond to of 132070

nadine, there is no need to be dishonest. here is what i posted... 1. a detailed exposition on the lies told by fox news and the court decision that makes lies for news perfectly legal. do you question any of the facts? if so, what do you question. if you don't question anything... well, what is your issue? 2. a fox news video explaining that al qaeda's #1 operative dined at the pentagon. you defended fox news... now fox news is demoted to "Youtubes?" -lol- 3. i posted a link to voice of san diego. are you claiming that this is a youtube? obviously not. is this a conspiracy site? well, is it? 4. i actually posted an article in the new york times that happens to be posted on what really happened. get your logical fallacies straight before hiding behind them. 5. so is the john birch society conspiracy theorist for you? i can post other links from other sources, if that will make you happy. how about the times of london? timesonline.co.uk or is that too conspiratorial for you? -lol- 6. i posted an alex jones interview confirming the 7/7 bomber was MI6. OK, alex isn't main stream, but what actual issues do you take with the interview itself? or did you even bother to listen with the idea that ignorance is bliss? ad hominem is so much easier, isn't it? 7.OK, you caught me. citizens for government accountability is off the charts conspiracy theory. or youtube. or something, anything so you can avoid the actual issues. 8. i posted another fox news report. is fox news good or just a "youtube" now - do you have a final answer? 9. the guardian is surely all conspiracy all day, now isn't it. dishonesty doesn't pay in the end - and you were extremely dishonest in your failed attempt at ad hominem logical fallacy. you do know what an ad hominem logical fallacy is? how about a straw man argument? your entire argument falls apart unless you are now claiming the new york times, the guardian, the times of london and fox news are "conspiracy spinning." no, i ascribe foreknowledge of 911 because a cia agent made big option bets, in advance, on the companies damaged badly in 911. that's called evidence. but you didn't know that, either, did you. so you are reaching conclusions based on, well, something other than actual information. en.wikipedia.org "timely wall street trades." yes, let's not tell the people what that actually meant and maybe they will assume the best. nadine will - that's for sure! so, make your case for each of those news institutions being "conspiracy websites." or admit you your post was full of chit.