You have no fucking clue who’s there, and therefore no basis for that assertion.
Huh? I was talking about Debaser’s lack of knowledge of O’Reilly’s, um, phone habits. Missing news about the latest casualty figures or the financial costs of the war I can see, but a sex scandal?
I assume you are talking to somebody else, since I don’t make shit up. Why should I, when reality is so interesting?
I’m well aware of the baseless charges about phone sex and Bill O’Reilly.
I was asking for a cite for the quote that elucidator posted, you stupid fuck.
It may be extreme, but it’s no vice…right?
You’re kidding, right?
The text of the sexual harassment lawsuit. I especially liked the part about falafel.
The case not having gone to trial yet, what makes you certain that it’s “baseless”? Your own hopes?
Look again at Rove’s quote: " Liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers"
In the same sentence, he mentions the 9/11 attacks and accuses liberals of wanting go give therapy and understanding to our attackers. How silly of me that I thought that he was referring to the deceased 9/11 attackers when he was actually referring to post #110 of an SDMB thread.
Post 170:
And I’m the one who is a “stupid fuck?” :rolleyes:
Yes. You are.
And this from the estimable phone sex afficianado, Bill O’Reilly…
not
And this from the estimable phone sex afficianado, Bill O’Reilly…
elucidator hasn’t failed to mention the bullshit phone sex claims whenever he rants about O’Reilly ever since that story broke. I don’t care about that. I was questioning his quote. You know, the actual substance of what he posted. It’s obvious to anybody who isn’t a stupid fuck that that’s what I was requesting a cite for, you stupid fuck.
No. It’s the complete lack of any actual evidence or proof. All there is to it is the word of one person.
Actually, if you can show any evidence whatsoever for most of the people in Gitmo and Abu Ghraid actually being a threat to our liberty, lives and soldiers (or at least that they were a threat before we gave them an up-close, personal reason to hate us), then I’d say that Gitmo or Abu Ghraib or whatever military prison you care to name is the place for them.
But until you can do that, we’re holding people with no charges, no counsel, no rights, no human dignity, for no reason. And it’s being done in MY name. I did not authorize this to be done in my name. Therefore I’d like to see it stopped. Thanks awfully.
Wow- you say phone sex like its a bad thing.
Lighten up. You should try it. May ease the shrill sound of your voice.
I wasn’t providing that cite of post #110 to back up Rove’s claim. I was providing it as an example of the weak on terrorism “hug-a-thug” attitude of many liberals in response to your request:
Sort of like the reason most of the people in Gitmo are there, right? No proof. Lack of evidence. The word of one person (or whoever it was that sold them to our soldiers). Right? Or does this “lack of evidence” thing only make things baseless when it’s about right-wing broadcast personalities?
I already reminded you that the case hasn’t gone to trial yet, and even provided you with the text of the suit.
False. Read it.
I think you’re excluding a middle position. There’s a middle ground between hugging and torture, which is where detainees should be until tried.
Dear Lord the whiny, self serving tone of this post is like nails on a chalk board.
In MMMYYYYYYY NAAAAAMMMEEE!!! sniff.
What makes you think you have the authority to authorize the detention or release of prisoners taken from the battle field.
Do you have reason to believe that these prisoners were not engaged in conduct endangereing the mission in Iraq and Afghanistan? I know in Abu Ghraib we may have gotten some that were innocent, but they were released. Such are the misfortunes of war.
The prisoners at Gitmo are not entitled to Genva Convention protection. Perhaps they are entitled to be subject to the Military Code of Justice.
So do you think that the administration is thinking, hmmmmwe could just let these 500 prisoners go and they will never harm us, but lets keep 'em. Just for fun.
Why do you think they are being held? Because there is a credible concern that they a) have information that may be relevant to the war on terror and b) they have done and are threats to do things to harm Americans.
What other reason could you give? That they are big meanies?
You’d have much more valid of a point if jayjay wasn’t here spouting this nonsense:
I’m well aware of a middle position between torture and hugs. It’s the wacko left that doesn’t seem capable of making the distinction.
Which is precicely where they ARE !
It’s 22 pages long. It’s been debated on the boards before. All I recall is it being her word. Quote me a section that has more solid proof. If she had tape or video we would have seen it by now.
O’Reilly’s version of the story: That she was shaking him down for millions of dollars by inventing these claims sounds a lot more plausible to me.