Friday, June 27, 2014

to reject as untrue or of questionable accuracy

Hide All / Expand All


x89 Señor El Once : The "challenged" aren't going to come.

2014-06-26

{mcb: This is in reference to the x88 comments.}

Meaningful comments on the Pentagon topic have petered out. The "challenged" aren't going to come.

*Sigh.* With Mr. OSS's stellar work off-list and targeted URL bullets, the Pentagon debate was wrapped up four or more times over in as many or more other T&S threads. Somewhat *yawn* to see the two or three A.Wright carousel spins in this very thread necessitating a dizzying dive into "SOC/NOC" witness nuances, before GOTO links are applied to handle the heavy-lifting. *Snore.* But now a new crank to the merry-go-round with a "challenge to cowards." *Snooze.*

Mr. Adam Ruff brags about skipping my comments unread. More power to him! He and a few others should not read any further. Get a head start on ignoring me right now! Certainly don't bother writing a jejune response, because it'll only engage me and allow me to make more nookiedoo-ish comments!

Simply let this comment pass, unaddressed. Win-Win!

Wednesday, June 11, 2014

to destroy confidence in the reliability of

Hide All / Expand All


x43 Señor El Once : Damn if this doesn't look like a familiar argument

2014-04-28

Mr. Rogue wrote:

If you can't "recall correctly" because you have never actually read {--redacted--}, then do not speak to them until you have. I am sick of listening to arguments from ignorance here... Until you are prepared to make an argument here of more substance than the hot gas passing through the seat of your trousers Mr. {--redacted--}, you are going to find it hard going here.

El-oh-el! Damn if this doesn't look like a familiar argument and something that I might have written myself about a different {--redacted--} theme, minus the "trouser gas" of course.

I am most curious as to what Mr. Rogue's response will be if his debate opponent impulsively and violently rips up a printed version of {--redacted--} and uses it for bird cage liner, as opposed to rationally and objectively considering them one-by-one and as a whole. Even if deemed disinformation, nuggets of truth persist.

What is good for the goose, is good for the gander.