Cryptomaniac and also realityman, beginning with the original post, neither of you have posted anything other than your personal opinions on this thread and argued, debated or insisted, (take your pick) that your posts amount to fact.
Really Cass, Exactly WHERE have I or Crypto "debated or insisted" that our posts (overall)
amount to "fact"??
...Since you both insist your opinions, actually based on supposition are the only possible correct possibility
And exactly WHERE Cass did Crypto or myself "insist" that our opinions "
are the only possible correct possibility"??
YOU Cass made those accusations... now back them up.
Both myself and Crypto have presented both facts and opinions... and backed them up ("well", in my opinion)... Something you Cass have failed to do on many of the issues raised as
you've clearly avoided and ignored several issues which you clearly prefer not to see.
Cass, if you think there's been nothing presented here other than
"personal opinions"(as you stated above)..
then possibly it's YOU who should read your definitions and maybe
open your eyes . This has been addressed before...
YOU didn't contest even one of the FACTS from the article I clearly pointed out... YET here you are again with the same tired accusations.
The article, as with most articles, contains both facts and opinions.[/size].. The article contains several direct quotes... The quotes of Hamas leaders are of course "opinions" of those leaders, but that those are quotes of the said Terrorist leaders is fact (UNLESS you can provide this forum with reasonable evidence to believe fraud by the author... And you've clearly been able to provide no such evidence.
Cass, How about a sampling of some FACTS the article stated??:
"They (Israel) kept threatening to make a huge operation in Gaza"... FACT, easily verifiable from many sources
"Along with Hamas, the Committees took responsibility for firing nearly 30 mortars and rockets from Gaza into nearby Jewish communities Wednesday"... FACT, easily verifiable from numerous sources.
"The term "hudna," dates back to Islam's founding in the 7th century, when Muhammad declared a 10-year hudna with the tribe that controlled Mecca"... FACT, easily verifiable from many sources.
"Israeli security officials have warned in briefings to the Knesset that Hamas would use the truce to rearm itself...."...FACT, easily verifiable
"Hamas, for its part, reportedly instructed its members to refrain from carrying out any attacks"... FACT, easily verifiable...
Need I go on Cass?? Clearly the article references several facts.. That YOU may not like the facts, doesn't change them.
As you chose to ignor the above... and not to contest even one of the points raised, I'm left to assume that
you've purposely chosen to ignor that which you don't want to see...YOU might note Cass... I titled this topic "A Terrorist's Perspective"... I posted an article which contained excerpts from interviews. I included my "take" on what was stated and the "situation", and asked several questions to "kick-start" a discussion. YOU apparently didn't particularly like the topic or what was presented, but chose to address it by anyway, starting by
criticizing the source.
///my participation on this forum is not based in an attempt to debate and destroy other's opinions, but to express mine. It would appear that is an unsatisfactory stance and when it conflicts with the poster of this thread and others who agree with the opinions stated.
Ahhh... How nice and sweet that sounds...
That must explain why in the FIRST SENTENCE of your
FIRST response to this topic ,
YOU ATTEMPTED to DISCREDIT THE SOURCE OF THE ARTICLE... (unsuccessfully I might add)
... That wouldn't/couldn't have been an attempt by you to
"debate and destroy other's opinions"... Right Cass?? lol ..... As you took it upon yourself to attack the source, and have been invited on numerous occasions since to back up/support many of the statements you've made,
maybe it's YOU Cass who views it as an "unsatisfactory stance" (your words) when others don't agree with the opinions you've stated.... Think about it
First sentence of your first post on this topic:
....but we in Sacramento, don't typically consider Joe Farah's "World Net Daily" a credible nor reliable source having experienced his destruction of the long running and historically valuable "Sacramento Union" until he was almost literally run out of town on a rail.
As to the issues Cass you continually seem to want to ignor... and to the points made which apparently you have no ability or means to contest... Rather than reiterate the same points over again (which you apparently don't want to see or recognize), I defer to
Crypto's post above which does an excellent job of bringing many of those issues to light once again...
If one has an opinion, but can't support that opinion against basic facts, history, and/or logic to the contrary... OF WHAT VALUE IS THAT OPINION??
Cass, maybe you should have one of your "neutral" friends read though this topic and the banter back and forth and tell you what they think as to who's presenting issues/points and backing them up, versus who's attempting to change the topic without even contesting or dealing directly with points to the contrary... Hmmmm..
I suppose Cass, that next time you start a topic and/or express an opinion on a topic forum,
you wouldn't have a problem with me (or anyone else) expressing a
radical and/or unsupported opinion to the contrary... Right?? You Cass,
wouldn't question how I (or anyone else) came to that conclusion/opinion or call in question how I support that conclusion... Right Cass?? You'd just let me (or anyone else) express that opinion, however unfounded it might be, and accept it at face value without even questioning it...right??
