Your argument will be more persuasive with even more punctuation. I would suggest that sentences end with no fewer than seven exclamation points. 10 exclamation points is probably safest however.
By the way, you may try shocking the porcupine(s) with an amperage low enough to really, really sting but not enough to do any major damage let alone kill them. You may find that they’re positively spoilin’ to do some good ol’ anal lacerating once you give 'em a few good shocks and then try to cram 'em up your ass.
Look, detour1111, you’re not the only one around here who doubts the honesty of some American elections recently; but everybody else who suspects foul play – in the form of rigged machines, or pre-election voter-roll purges, or any form of voter suppression – regards such as strictly an American conspiracy, and postulates no Powers That Be beyond those powers which quite obviously be, in America.
In a nutshell: the moon landings were fake, UFO abductions are real, the holocaust is propaganda, the US election process is bullshit, and so is religion.
That it was Booth who assassinated Lincoln is well testamented, both by eyewitness testimony and by the testimony of his co-conspirators. Why do you not believe this, and who did assassinate Lincoln in your view?
(“Just because”, and, “the international bankers” are not valid answers, by the way. Give details.)
JFK was assassinated by Peter Canvera of Chicago. But only because he got off his shot before the CIA guy (Oswald), the Mob guy, the Illuminati guy (Harry Coin), and John Dillinger.
Your choice where to start:
[ol][li]Your racism[/li][li]Your lack of facts[/li][li]Your falsehoods[/li][li]Your ridiculous belief in conspiracy theories.*[/ol][/li]
Choose one.
*Let’s face it, WONJCTs don’t ever just believe in one whacked-out nut-job conspiracy theory.
Um, guys? Some of you really are sounding a bit naive. Do you really believe that there is more competition than collusion in lobbying governments on banking issues? Nationally or internationally? Don’t get me wrong - I don’t believe truly powerful people resort to murder, they have other options - but you can’t believe that “we” have any real power beyond the threat of rebellion.
Now, this person may be a nut, but that doesn’t mean we have to be idiots.
Lots of people don’t approve of current monetary policy, lots of people think the people and organizations who control money (surprise) to not have the health of the economy as their primary concern, and lots of people don’t believe the voice of the ‘little person’ is heard with out the threat of violent economic upheaval.
So, I don’t think “You’re nuts” is a very effective response. I think you are reacting primarily to the implied anti-semitism more than anything else.
Lots of people don’t approve of our current economic policies. Anyone who doesn’t approve of our monetary policy is either an economist of some school currently out of favor (whose technical objections a layperson could not understand without explanation), or a crank. Goldbugs are cranks. Anyone who wants to abolish the Fed is a crank.
Hmmm … okay, I see, but my point is that it makes YOU look like a deceitful debater.
You are not addressing the issue in the post, but apparently accusing the poster of being a wide-ranging Conspiracy Theorists, with no obvious basis.
Why do you assume no-one here can grasp monetary policy? For that matter, why do you imply schools of thought currently out of favor are correctly so? Or that the Federal Reserve is beyond criticism?