Originally Posted by dorfman24
See, this is where you lose me. I didn't reason anything. I merely expressed an observation. Here is what I wrote:
"Actually, the U.S. has been cracking down on Al Sadre's militia for over a month now and his supporters are rumored to be a bit fractured. It's entirely possible that he's feeling the heat and sounding a rallying cry."
The first part of this post is fact - the U.S. is doing this. The second is my pointing out a rumor that is, in fact, a rumor. It could be true or not true. The last part is an observation - there are many who believe Sadre's position has been weakened. It might not have been, or it might have been.
I think where Old300d and many of us get confused with your approach to posting is, we assume when you post something you are posting something you think is valid. Something you personally think is valid. That implies, even if you qualify the statement with "rumored to be" or "entirely possible that" you subscribe to the gist if not the verbatim meaning of the words you used to describe the rumor and/or the possibility. Which is what was being questioned.
If you are merely posting words you happened upon while perusing the internet, and have no specific feelings they may or may not be true, why bother yourself and the rest of us? WE can and do peruse the internet for rumors and potential activities. We are hardly in need of someone to peruse it for us and then post random sound bites that they don't feel are any more than random sound bites. Jim