Skip to content

ExpatSingapore

Home Message Board Contact Us Search

ExpatSingapore Message Board 25 May 2012, 23:34:08 pm *
Username: Password: (or Register)
 
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
Author Topic: Everyone loves U.S.  (Read 544 times)
Dolemite
Full Member
***
Posts: 222


View Profile WWW
« Reply #15 on: 28 February 2003, 16:45:00 pm »

This a$$ clown gets funnier with each posting.  I really missed him.
Logged
ExpatSingapore Message Board
« Reply #15 on: 28 February 2003, 16:45:00 pm »



 Logged
Fresh Mint
Full Member
***
Posts: 203


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: 28 February 2003, 16:52:00 pm »


Antonie


To quote you:

“Personally, I do not need credibility in this community…”.

Well, posting conspiracy theories is certainly not going to win you any credibility, so no fears there.

“...no one on this board has ever proven any of my posts factually wrong”.

The onus is on you is to prove them right, which you have failed to do. You posted that U.S. troops torched Kuwait’s oilfields and blamed it on Saddam Hussein. As proof, you cited a self-confessed conspiracy theorist quoting an organisation obsessed with conspiracy theories. The bedrock of science, law and human nature is that if you claim something, you must make its case. If I claim you stole my wallet, it is up to me to show you did it. If I claim the planets circle the sun, it is up to me to prove it. If I claim the U.S. torched Kuwait’s oilfields, it would be up to me to prove it.

“Anytime anyone does, I will be happy to make it worth his/her while, give a fulsome and sincere admission, plus a public apology to boot.”

Well hence the request for a dollar to charity. Make it worth my while. And is “I rid myself of thee” what passes for a fulsome admission and apology in your neck of the woods? Dolemite appears to be right when writing “Typical Antoine behavior is to post some inflamatory nonsense, and then run away from it. He's a total coward.”

QED

Logged
antoine
Full Member
***
Posts: 139


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: 28 February 2003, 17:38:00 pm »

Physician, with thy bedrock of science and indeed law, that thou hast no knowledge of, heal thyself.

Apply thine own balm as salve to thine own wound, and give thy crusading malady flight.

You are so  blinded by your sense of rightness, that you cannot see that neither on your own, nor with your logic, nor with your sources prove the topical claim in  the article negative.
You cannot prove what you rely on as true, therefore you should understand, nothing under stands proof.

Other Lilliputian blows in your post, goes unparried. Not only are you on the wrong tree, you are in the wrong jungle.

You have good company in Dolemite.
Firm as inconstancy and solid as a sprite
You only need another to sing "we three"
Methinks I'll choose him for thee. P!!!!

This is indeed at an end.  
Peace...be well in Sg. where you can be as brave as you fear.

Logged
antoine
Full Member
***
Posts: 139


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: 28 February 2003, 17:42:00 pm »

Analyse this....

February19 ,2003
Tell the Truth
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

As I was listening to the French foreign minister make his case at the U.N. for giving Saddam Hussein more time to comply, I was struck by the number of people in the Security Council chamber who applauded. I wish there were someone I could applaud for.

Sorry, I can't applaud the French foreign minister, because I don't believe that France, which sold Saddam his first nuclear reactor, the one Israel blew up, comes to this story with the lofty principles it claims. The French foreign minister, after basking in the applause at the U.N., might ask himself who was clapping for his speech back in Baghdad and who was crying. Saddam was clapping, and all his political prisoners — i.e., most Iraqis — were crying.

But I don't have much applause in me for China, Russia — or the Bush team either. I feel lately as if there are no adults in this room (except Tony Blair). No, this is not a plague-on-all-your-houses column. I side with those who believe we need to confront Saddam — but we have to do it right, with allies and staying power, and the Bush team has bungled that.

The Bush folks are big on attitude, weak on strategy and terrible at diplomacy. I covered the first gulf war, in1990 -91. What I remember most are the seven trips I took with Secretary of State James A. Baker III around the world to watch him build — face-to-face — the coalition and public support for that war, before a shot was fired. Going to someone else's country is a sign you respect his opinion. This Bush team has done no such hands-on spade work. Its members think diplomacy is a phone call.

They don't like to travel. Seeing senior Bush officials abroad for any length of time has become like rare-bird sightings. It's probably because they spend so much time infighting in Washington over policy, they're each afraid that if they leave town their opponents will change the locks on their office doors.

Also, you would think that if Iraq were the focus of your whole foreign policy, maybe you would have handled North Korea with a little less attitude, so as not to trigger two wars at once. Maybe you would have come up with that alternative — which President Bush promised — to the Kyoto treaty, a treaty he trashed to the great anger of Europe. You're not going to get much support in Europe telling people, "You are either with us or against us in a war on terrorism, but in the war you care about — for a greener planet — America will do whatever it wants."

I am also very troubled by the way Bush officials have tried to justify this war on the grounds that Saddam is allied with Osama bin Laden or will be soon. There is simply no proof of that, and every time I hear them repeat it I think of the Gulf of Tonkin resolution. You don't take the country to war on the wings of a lie.

Tell people the truth. Saddam does not threaten us today. He can be deterred. Taking him out is a war of choice — but it's a legitimate choice. It's because he is undermining the U.N., it's because if left alone he will seek weapons that will threaten all his neighbors, it's because you believe the people of Iraq deserve to be liberated from his tyranny, and it's because you intend to help Iraqis create a progressive state that could stimulate reform in the Arab/Muslim world, so that this region won't keep churning out angry young people who are attracted to radical Islam and are the real weapons of mass destruction.

That's the case for war — and it will require years of occupying Iraq and a simultaneous effort to defuse the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to create a regional context for success. If done right, such a war could shrink Al Qaeda's influence — but Al Qaeda is a separate enemy that will have to be fought separately, and will remain a threat even if Saddam is ousted.

It is legitimate for Europeans to oppose such a war, but not simply by sticking a thumb in our eye and their heads in the sand. It's also legitimate for the Bush folks to focus the world on Saddam, but two years of their gratuitous bullying has made many people deaf to America's arguments. Too many people today no longer accept America's strength as a good thing. That is a bad thing.

Some of this we can't control. But some we can, which is why it's time for the Bush team to shape up — dial down the attitude, start selling this war on the truth, give us a budget that prepares the nation for a war abroad, not a party at home, and start doing everything possible to create a global context where we can confront Saddam without the world applauding for him.

Peace


Logged
Fresh Mint
Full Member
***
Posts: 203


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: 28 February 2003, 22:18:00 pm »

I appreciate English is not your first language, so I will state this in simple, easy to understand, one-syllable words:

You-have-made-a-claim. It-is-up-to-you-to-prove-it.

Your reasoning that it is for to me to disprove is the argument of a spoilt child who has run out of responses.

If I tell you that Mars is populated by little green aliens, is it something that must be accepted as truth until you prove otherwise? That is what you are asking.

Prove your point.

I have already shown your sources to lack credibility. Disproving your claim would be like attempting to disprove there are little green aliens on Mars.

If you believe the outrageous claim that U.S. troops torched Kuwaiti oil rigs and blamed it on Saddam Hussein, then prove it.

Just prove this one claim that YOU have posted. Just this one. If you can, I will donate $100 to a charity of your choice and never darken your doorstep again.

Please don't be so immature as to try to turn the tables and say I must disprove the claim and you will do the same.

You made the claim. You prove it. Just once.

Now if you don't believe it, then say so and end the matter. Say "I posted this, but it is nonsense. The sourcing lacks credibility and it appears to be a lie.".

Or have you run away?

[This message has been edited by Fresh Mint (edited 28-02-2003).]

[This message has been edited by Fresh Mint (edited 01-03-2003).]

[This message has been edited by Fresh Mint (edited 01-03-2003).]

Logged
Fresh Mint
Full Member
***
Posts: 203


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: 01 March 2003, 8:36:00 am »

So, Antoine

You will not post again, because you have failed.

Know this, and know it well:

My beliefs, which you will never know, will never express your view beyond a range that you are incapable of ever yielding.

Similitude:

Because you are feeble, you bend. Because you bend, you are flexible. Because you are flexible, you think you bend, but in reality you are another word that I can't quite think of, but it is a big word. If only I could think what it starts with...

So, verily, in essence, there is a can. And that can contains the sum total of my opinion. Or it doesn't. Or it contains your opinion, or it doesn't. Your ineptitude to realise the sum of your vocabulary and opinion is superior to anyone else's is sort of lost if you keep using words and expressions that are utterly meaningless. Sucvh as this. It means that there is something deep here but I have absolutely no idea what it is. Anyway, that last paragraph sounded really clever.

Similitude ends, I think.
----
Item begins

I rest similutudely, knowing this:

Camels know what the water they drink tastes like.
Yet they drink it.
Why?
Because they have the hump.

Even you can appreciate that...

Item ends
----
As a rejoinding reminder --

Crows fly north and crows fly south.
They still have to evacuate their bowels.
If they evacuate on your head,
does it mean you were the target,
or does it mean
You were the unlucky result?

Posit that.
- - - -


Oh, here comes a smiley face   . That makes it all ok.

And I'll say peace now.

"PEACE" (and another smiley face)   .

Oh, and I'll say 'cool runnings' now, 'cos that will make me appear like a moderate, intelligent  cool person.

"COOL RUNNINGS" (and another smiley face)   .

And now I'll say something really clever ... here goes...

Pompous, verbose bufoon.


Know this well

[This message has been edited by Fresh Mint (edited 01-03-2003).]

Logged
Manc Man
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 593


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: 03 March 2003, 10:51:00 am »

Nice One Minty
Logged
Joseph27
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1506



View Profile
« Reply #22 on: 03 March 2003, 11:07:00 am »

Woh Minty you did well - no retort fron antoine is a remarkable achievment
Logged

"truth is a group of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms; a sum of human relation which is poetically and rhetorically intensified, metamorphosed and adored so that after a long time it is then codified in the binding canon."
patch900
Full Member
***
Posts: 127


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: 03 March 2003, 11:37:00 am »

Minty.....thats helped my monday get better.!!
Logged
Dolemite
Full Member
***
Posts: 222


View Profile WWW
« Reply #24 on: 03 March 2003, 12:50:00 pm »

That was good. We had a "write like Antoine" contest a while back.  Daresay you would have won hands down.
I believe he's back in the "workers Paradise", though, so unable to respond.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines