Now we have King George in the USA..proof

No, because it would waste my time. I'd rather waste it here. With you.

Kendra just likes to here her self argue I guess. I would like to think she isn't this stupid but it's hard. I think she knows the answers to her own moronic question but uses this tactic of trying to wear the other person out or something. It really is painful to watch.

I'm sure my spelling is fucked up, why don’t you fix that while you’re at it. At least it sounds more intelligent than most of the other musing from your finger tips.

----

Many King Bush haters loath him so much they think Al Queada personally attacked him and not the US. They seem to think that because they attacked him and not the US there should be not punishment or repercussions.

I hate the fucker also but I don't let it cloud my common sense.

No because it's fiction.

Ahh, so if anyone theorizes that anyone has conspired against the populace in any manner, they must be a fiction-spouting tinfoil-hatter?

We should just get started on repealing all those anti-trust laws, write the Masons right out of history, put all dictators in the mideast back into power, get to manufacturing all those Magic Bullets that were used to kill JFK to get a technological advantage, send Big Tobacco an open letter of apology and tell all the cancer patients they have something called "zephyr" instead, and erase that damnable Freedom of Information Act off the books. After all, noone ever really conspires to do anything!

I can't wait to get home and book a flight to the U.S.S.R., because if there are no valid conspiracies on governmental scales, that place must still be one massive country. That is, if I'm not considered a traitor...wait...traitors don't exist, because they would create nonexistant conspiracies!

Dude, seriously, is there any conspiracy theory you won't believe?

Of course.

An intelligent mind is capable of choice.

I believe in some and think others are crap, but the advances mentioned above would never have come about if those conspiracies tied to them had not existed.

IMHO anyone who thinks that the NeoCons are working to do anything other than fleece the world for their own benefit has their head buried so far in the sand they're sniffing oil.

But that's any politician, anywhere, anytime. You don't need a conspiracy theory for that one, just a crusty coating of cynicism.

you do know that conspiracies can and do exist right?

I'd like to think you're an asshat who knows absolutely nothing but the contents of your own naval.

Then why trust Bush on anything he says or does?

it is? really? I guess I have more faith in mankind than you.

Yeah, I guess. Whatever. But then, you're including politicians in the human race, which is rather generous.

I don't know that I ever said I did.

Lint, just like your brain.

I'm not sure how you get all of that that from my comment. Must me another conspiracy!!

Then why do you defend what he says and does that is so obviously resulting in lost American lives?

You said conspiracies are fiction.

Those events would never have happened without the conspiracies that either led to or facilitated them.

So are you just saying you've no method to argue your erroneous point?

... and I don't know that I've defended anything he's said or done. I may have agreed with some of them. I do think getting rid of Saddam was the right thing to do. But my reason for thinking it was right had nothing to do with thim.

Don't fall prey to the mental defect of extremists: If I don't agree with you, I must agree with your enemy. I mean, isn't that one of the reasons you folks don't like Bush to begin with?

I wouldn't say I don't like him. I don't know him.

I think he's a total fuck-up of a President though.

Ahh, so you're defending his actions because the means led to an end to which you approve, not because you approve of him as a President in general or a human being. It makes sense, but it's very Machiavellian of you. I do have a renewed respect for you on that level, though, because it means you retain the right to think the man is a douchebag if given sufficient reason.

If you say so.

Do those tinfoil hats really work?

Actually a study was done on that:

http://people.csail.mit.edu/rahimi/helmet/


But pretty much, that's how argument works. I say so, and can back it up with evidence. That leaves the burden of counterargument on you. Can you debunk my argument using empirical evidence, or are you forced to fall back on sophistry?

Discussions move much more smoothly when verbal assaults are not made on participants; and nobody likes it.

That article on aluminum foil hats is fascinating, i wonder if tin or steal hats have similar effects. Do pots work have any effect?

Arguing with you about conspierency theroies is like telling a child they shouldn't eat cotton candy because it's bad for their teeth. Waste of time.

Thanks for the link. Here is one I find amusing: Bush Conspiracy Generator

enjoy

(edit: typos and spelling and stuff)

You're damn skippy. Cotton candy isn't bad for the teeth, it's the not brushing afterward that causes problems. Similarly, conspiracy theories are not inherently wrong, you just have to be able to seperate the wheat from the chaff. Beyond that, it's a waste of time because you obviously are unable to argue your point effectively and provide evidence to support it.