Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2002 SLK 32 AMG, bone stock. 1987 190E 2.3-16 valve (destroyed). 2005 E320 new toy.
Location: Near Washington, DC
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Professor
Bruce you still don't get it. Yes there may be an agenda on my part but everyone here will have their own angles. I for one do not believe the Army's version, does that make my "agenda" dangerous, anti-American or distortion? We have heard many lies that with time unfolded and showed us the ugly side of humanity and worse yet, our incompetence. Am I asking too much to doubt the "official" version? I am not convinced and you will not convince me because there are two folds to this story, one is simple leadership breakdown and second is the constant distortion of events to fit perfect molds that are inline with what our administration wants us to hear. Am I wrong to think this way?
Prof, I get it, I got it from the very beginning, as long as you admit you have an agenda, and are pushing that agenda rather then something you can prove one way or the other, I have no problems with what you say. My problem comes from people saying (absolutely) this or that is what happened based on very slim or no solid evidence. You have the slim evidence of one persons testimony, and very limited camera footage. That doesn't make you un American or anti military, but it does put in question your motives. You, me, and everyone else here can question anything at any time, but I tend to object to baseless attacks on the military just to try and make the administration look bad.
"Negotiating with Obama is like playing chess with a pigeon, the pigeon knocks over all the pieces, on the board and then struts around like it won the game."
"They have gun control in Cuba. They have universal health care in Cuba. So why do they want to come here?"
Paul Harvey 8/31/94
"The only people who have quick answers don't have the responsibility of making the decisions."
Justice Clarence Thomas