have copies of his pay records that show Bush DID NOT ATTEND drills in the second half of 1972. I also have a copy of the order that grounded him for not taking the required physical. I have E-Mails and letters from George Bush's Economics Prof at Harvard who he told that his fathers friends got him in and out of the National Guard. You are the one that does not know what you are talking about. The story about Bush on CBS was ALL true even though they used fake documents. The documents I have copies of were released by DoD and are the REAL THING



--Hmmm, where exactly did you get those documents COL ?

These are people that think they will get 72 virgins when they blow up a busload of children. You don't think that's crazy?

Is it any crazier than the millions of supposedly sane people that believe you go to heaven or hell when you die?

"Is it any crazier than the millions of supposedly sane people that believe you go to heaven or hell when you die?"

mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.... yep.

How? Both beliefs are qualitatively the same it is only the content that is different.

How? Both beliefs are qualitatively the same it is only the content that is different

--Because you have one that involves rewarding those who murder innocent people...the other, does not involve anyone but the specific person who believes that having to die... ya see?

--Because you have one that involves rewarding those who murder innocent people...the other, does not involve anyone but the specific person who believes that having to die... ya see?

No I don't see. How is believing you go to heaven for doing good things a more sensible belief than believing you get rewarded for things that are bad to us, but good from their perspective? They are just different beliefs, one no better than the other, from the standpoint of whether they are true or not. Neither belief has any scientific basis. I personally believe that both beliefs are wrong but I don't think people are crazy for believing them. I've never died so how would I know.

No I don't see. How is believing you go to heaven for doing good things a more sensible belief than believing you get rewarded for things that are bad to us, but good from their perspective? They are just different beliefs, one no better than the other, from the standpoint if whether they ar true or not. Neither belief has any scientific basis. I personally believe that both beliefs are wrong but I don't think people are crazy for believing them. I've never died so how would I know.

--Being rewarded and going to a heavan is much more peaceful, "perfecting" ones self/being honest,caring, true to god (when referring to christianity) you go to heaven, or a place/thing similar...like what i've learned along my path to enlightenment (I'm a Buddhist)The killing and being rewarded is a fanatical blotch on Islam,which they are supposse to be Muslims and would therefore follow the Qur'an, which forbids killing.....those who suicide bomb,etc... are heretics of a fairly peaceful religion...i have learned the other know...my soon to be wife is moslem...

--Being rewarded and going to a heavan is much more peaceful, "perfecting" ones self/being honest,caring, true to god (when referring to christianity) you go to heaven, or a place/thing similar...like what i've learned along my path to enlightenment (I'm a Buddhist)The killing and being rewarded is a fanatical blotch on Islam,which they are supposse to be Muslims and would therefore follow the Qur'an, which forbids killing.....those who suicide bomb,etc... are heretics of a fairly peaceful religion...i have learned the other know...my soon to be wife is moslem...

I'm not denying that it is a much nicer philsophy that you should get rewarded for doing peaceful good things. I'm just saying that what we believe SHOULD happen in the after life has no bearing on whether it what we believe IS more valid than other opposing beliefs. Some people would argue that finding paradise for performing good deeds in the after life is equally as fanciful as finding 72 virgins waiting for you for blowing people up. Life isn't always fair why should the after life be?

However, my point is NOT really about the nature of the afterlife, if such a thing exists, itself but rather the objective validity of the terrorist's beliefs with regards to opposing beliefs and consequently what that would say about their respective sanities. If you think someone is crazy for believing they will be rewarded with 72 virgins you are just as justified in saying that people that believe in heaven, nirvana or whatever else are crazy too.

Whether these people are true moslems or not has no bearing on the above arguement either. I certainly agree that their beliefs have no resemblance to their supposed religion, but then most religions have different interpretations simply because the mind is subjective. People believe what they want to believe, that isn't insanity, that is human nature.

I'm just saying that what we believe SHOULD happen in the after life has no bearing on whether it what we believe IS more valid than other opposing beliefs.

--ehhh...ok, granted, that would be religious Supremacy on ones part...

Life isn't always fair why should the after life be?

--because according to these faiths, after you steadfast faith you should be rewarded, just like they both have places for non-believers...

If you think someone is crazy for believing they will be rewarded with 72 virgins you are just as justified in saying that people that believe in heaven, nirvana or whatever else are crazy too.

--But whydo you think they are crazy...I don't, i am saying that according to their faith, what they are doing is wrong, that they are being led down the "wrong" path in islam...where they would not receive the 72 virgins...

--You said:

If you think someone is crazy for believing they will be rewarded with 72 virgins you are just as justified in saying that people that believe in heaven, nirvana or whatever else are crazy too.

--No, they are not "crazy", but mis-led...according to islam,which is what they are suppose to be following...

People believe what they want to believe, that isn't insanity, that is human nature.

--hmmm? i don't know...

--No, they are not "crazy", but mis-led...according to islam,which is what they are suppose to be following...

Dr. Bailey I'm sorry I think I have attributed a few opinions of Bakerstreets to you since he was the one who started the discussion. He was saying that they are crazy. As long as you aren't saying they are crazy I agree with you.

--hmmm? i don't know...

Yeah, maybe human nature IS insanity. That is a whole other thread though...

Hitler was a vegetarian. Therefore, all vegetarians are Nazis.

Hitler was a vegetarian. Therefore, all vegetarians are Nazis.

No comment.

"Hitler was a vegetarian. Therefore, all vegetarians are Nazis."

I agree! (I'm a vegetarian). I also wear socks. Hitler wore socks too. Do you wear socks? If so, you may as well draw a swastika on them.

By the way did anyone else notice that the title of this article finishes with a question mark, not an exclamation mark? Did those same people happen to notice the words "students of", not "users of"? And what about that word in between Nazi and tactics...did you notice it? Not many, if any, not many, if any.

By the way did anyone else notice that the title of this article finishes with a question mark, not an exclamation mark? Did those same people happen to notice the words "students of", not "users of"? And what about that word in between Nazi and tactics...did you notice it? Not many, if any, not many, if any.

Oh, so Toblerone was asking a yes or no question and was in no way implying that Bush was a student of Nazi propaganda. That changes everything, so here's my new response: No.
I'll also fix my previous comment: "Hitler was a vegetarian. Therefore, are all vegetarians students of National Socialism? The shared trait between Hitler and all other vegetarians speaks for itself."

"By the way did anyone else notice that the title of this article finishes with a question mark, not an exclamation mark? Did those same people happen to notice the words "students of", not "users of"? And what about that word in between Nazi and tactics...did you notice it? Not many, if any, not many, if any."

Please, stop banging that naive little drum. You can add 50 question marks, and it will STILL be patently obvious that this is just another way to get Bush and Nazi in the same sentence.

As has been pointed out, the rhetorical tactic in question has been used over and over. Toblerone's feelings on Iraq are pretty obvious. You REALLY expect us to believe this is just an objective discussion of two apparently dissimilar groups who HAPPEN to use the same tactics?

Pfft. And Al Gore just snatched the phrase "Brown Shirts" off the top of his head randomly when refering to Republicans. This happens way too often to be coincidence from either side.

#163 by Champas Socialist Sunday, June 26, 2005 Hitler was a vegetarian. Therefore, all vegetarians are Nazis." I agree! (I'm a vegetarian). I also wear socks. Hitler wore socks too. Do you wear socks? If so, you may as well draw a swastika on them. By the way did anyone else notice that the title of this article finishes with a question mark, not an exclamation mark? Did those same people happen to notice the words "students of", not "users of"? And what about that word in between Nazi and tactics...did you notice it? Not many, if any, not many, if any.

Try looking at the "subtitle" and tell me again that this article is just asking questions!

Bush Admin. students of Nazi propaganda tactics? all systems are the same, they just use a different name

Excellent point Dr. M.

Excellent point Dr. M.

Thank you. Occasionally I do have a point to get across. Just not all the time.

Or maybe you could take note of the fact I explained about 50 thousand times what the actual intention of my article was.

The all systems are the same, they just use a different name bit I put in because it rhymed. It meant that all systems use the same techniques to sway the public, you have to take it in the context of the headline, duh.

I just love how everyone (well almost) is caught up on telling me what my intentions are, but fail to actually debate me on the points I have raised.

I just love how everyone is caught up telling me what me intentions are that that fail to actually debate me on the points I have raised.

It's called jingo spinning and twisting. God forbid you may have an actual point, particularly when it comes to points not flattering to the dubya dummy.

Or maybe you could take note of the fact I explained about 50 thousand time what the actually intention of my article was. The all systems are the same, they just use a different name bit I put in because it rhymed. It incidently mean that al system use the same techniques to sway the public, you have to take in the context of the headline, duh. I just love how everyone is caught up telling me what me intentions are that that fail to actually debate me on the points I have raised.

You can say it anyway you want to. But I'm not the only one seeing this.

You can say it anyway you want to. But I'm not the only one seeing this.

Err, I think I made that point already, I am well aware that you're not the only one that sees it that way. I wrote whole a bloody mock transcript showing that am quite aware of what people think I think . Just because lots of people see it that way doesn't make them mind readers, which is what you'd have to be to KNOW what my intentions were. At the very least you'd have to know me better to guess my intentions merely from what I've written as opposed to meeting me and dabting me in person, and guess what Champas has known me for 11 years and has actually talked to me about it on the phone. He isn't a yes man we disagree about a lot of things and if he thought I was wrong he would say so.

It's called jingo spinning and twisting. God forbid you may have an actual point, particularly when it comes to points not flattering to the dubya dummy.

No, I'd kill for it to be at the level of jingo spinning and twisting. That would assume that they actually took in anything I wrote enough to put spin on it. All they see is the words Bush and Nazi and mentally insert an equals sign between them. If I wanted to do that I would NOT have spent my time trying to say that wasn't what I wanted to say. Instead I would say "Yeah I do think Bush is a Nazi" and find evidence to back it up, of course I'd be screwed in that case because I DON'T THINK BUSH IS A NAZI AND THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO HE IS but if I did I would try to prove it anyway. I would actually, you know, argue my point ...a novel concept I know.

But no that have to argue a point I'M NOT MAKING because they can't or can't be bothered to argue the point I am making (well most of them, not all).

This is fun

P.S. I never called Papa Smurf a dirty old man and Smurfette a trannie so stop saying I did. Thankyou.

"Defending the US and our freedom is brave. The BS in Iraq has NOTHING to do with our freedom."

I was born in Germany, West-Berlin to be most precise.

I can assure you that what the US have done in Germany had also NOTHING to do with your freedom, only with mine.

But I can also assure you that had the US acted against Germany earlier, before our own moustache dictator forced everybody's hand, then your freedom would never have been threatened and mine would have been saved earlier.

If you clearly realise that the invasion of Iraq has nothing to do with your freedom, then thank your lucky stars that you live in a country where your freedom is so safe that even a fascist dictator cannot take it away from you and thank G-d that your country has decided to intervene a bit earlier this time to ensure that your freedom remains safe.

"These are people that think they will get 72 virgins when they blow up a busload of children. You don't think that's crazy?"

"Is it any crazier than the millions of supposedly sane people that believe you go to heaven or hell when you die?"

Yes, it is.

I always found delusions that are based on no scientific evidence even crazier when they are specific.

Good people go to heaven.

Fine. I can accept that. There is no evidence for that. But why not?

Good people receive 17 dollars and 12 cents as well as two Bus tickets for three stages each and also 13 pounds of bred and a can of coke, on the other hand, implies a greater level of insanity.

And if you can't see the qualitative difference between a rather un-specific belief that any representative from the religion in question will tell you they are not sure about but believe in anyway and a very specific statement that promises you a clearly defined reward for a clearly defined crime, then I'm afraid you will never understand religious people and they will never understand you.

I myself believe in G-d and some form of reward for good people when everything is over. But I am not insane enough to believe that I am able to give you details of that reward in "number of virgins" or similarly ridiculous measures.

I always found delusions that are based on no scientific evidence even crazier when they are specific.

You seem to be very specific about why you find one unfounded theory crazier than another unfounded theory. The above belief that people that believe specific unfounded claims are crazier than people that believe general unfounded claims is also unfounded. How about this for a theory: maybe you wrote the above quote because my reasoning is actually sound and you are SCRAPING THE BOTTOM OF THE ARGUEMENT BARREL to refute it OR maybe you are completely right and you are crazy by your own reasoning....your choice. *evil grin*