Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bingo
Well ... I don't honestly see the need to defend anyone that I find interesting to listen too. I like Carver on CNN too ... very opposing views, but a spitfire delivery to today's topics of interest. Both are fun to watch. I can't stand Limbaugh, and I really can't stand Al Franken and Ann Coulter.
But unlike yourself I don't feel the need to defend something to the extent that you and others held a vigil over Chomsky. O'Reilly is a guy that has captured some interest in the US because he comes at things directly which I find refreshing in today's politically correct white wash.
I'm not holding him up to be a scholar, but I'm also aware that he's nowhere near the demon that people on the left (and you too I guess) make him out to be.
But once again ... the insults.
|
and once again, you do absolutely nothing but reiterate your original position as if it is some kind self-reinforcing proof. The fact that you apparently don't watch limbaugh, franken or coulter does nothing to disprove that O'Reilly is just as bad or worse as those listed. I wouldn't defend watching phil donahue by saying I don't watch Keith Olbermann. There's no correlation. I present you with the argument that O'Reilly lacks any form of crediblity, is a known and repeated liar, a plagiarist and unapologetic racist, and you respond with "he's nowhere near the demon that people on the left (and you too I guess) make him out to be." Excellent rebuttal, I'm so glad you're coming 'right at' this discussion.
"held a vigil over chomsky". That is so rich. It's akin to your previous statements that he was somehow my (or the 'lefts') hero. Pretty sad tactic, really.
Quote:
|
Did you not find the 4000 inflated based on two things ... 1. people somehow surviving 2. planes not being full ... and then go on to say said terrorists were never really a threat because they hadn't bought tickets and these routes were so busy that they might find them sold out?
|
I found the 4000 inflated based on more than 2 things. First, it is not without precedent that a plane crash over water yields survivors. Second, it is not without precedent that transatlantic flights do not often carry the very ceiling amount of the largest capacity airliner in the world. Third, it is not without precedent that every transatlantic flight is not solely on the largest capacity airliner in the world.
Why is it such a leap in logic that a 10 aircraft, 50 person operation would need to have a bit more organization to pull off a COORDINATED attack than is possible through stand-by ticket purchase, by persons without (real or fake) passports?