Who is right, Pelosi or Panetta?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cheri said:
She did do something wrong, she was told that waterboarding was being used in the year of 2003, and had said absolutely nothing about it, until now. That leaves more work for Obama to deal with, I almost felt sorry for him.
Click to expand...
Where's the evidence for that? No one knows for sure if she's been lied to or if she's lying to us.
And I for one do not think waterboarding is torure, we waterboarded terrorists. I didn't realized that you feel sorry for terrorists. eeek!!

Who's right? Doesn't matter, who to believe? neither. I don't trust Panetta or Pelosi. End of the discussion. :)
Click to expand...

I think most people would consider it torture. I am all for fair juries vs alleged terrorists and they should be dealt with according to international law and protrols if they're proven guiltly beyond a resonable doubt.
 
Jiro said:
4. "She’s a hypocrite who uses traditional American values when it suits her, but who in reality loathes those values she currently claims to represent." -Consumirist Futuristic
Click to expand...

This is the opinion of someone at the source you mentioned. Opinions are not facts.
 
Jiro said:
5. too many to list..... :roll:
Click to expand...

You could only come up with 3 examples. In the grand scheme of things, that's pretty insignificant given the span of Pelosi's career as Speaker of the House.
 
Hear Again said:
Three examples does not a strong case make.
Click to expand...

like I said - too many to list since 2007. You asked for example. I gave you a few. Too bad if that does not satisfy you but like I said - google's your friend. it's up to you to do some truth finding for yourself. If you find something that proved me wrong, please do show me.
 
Hear Again said:
This is the opinion of someone at the source you mentioned. Opinions are not facts.
Click to expand...

Yep and isn't Consumist Futuristic a consumer mag rather than a poliitcal mag?

As for addressing Jiro's other points, I will answer then when I have done some research on Pelosi.
 
Jiro said:
like I said - too many to list since 2007. You asked for example. I gave you a few. Too bad if that does not satisfy you but like I said - google's your friend. it's up to you to do some truth finding for yourself. If you find something that proved me wrong, please do show me.
Click to expand...

You're right. Three examples does not satisfy me since that isn't enough evidence to support your claim.

Please stop telling me to Google everything. I could find examples on both sides of the issue, so doing an Internet search is pointless.
 
Hear Again said:
You're right. Three examples does not satisfy me since that isn't enough evidence to support your claim.

Please stop telling me to Google everything. I could find examples on both sides of the issue, so doing an Internet search is pointless.
Click to expand...

then do it - especially Pelosi's opening speech on her first day of job.
 
No legitimate proof has been provided to substantiate the claims made in the article Reba posted. Why am I not surprised?
 
deafskeptic said:
Yep and isn't Consumist Futuristic a consumer mag rather than a poliitcal mag?

As for addressing Jiro's other points, I will answer then when I have done some research on Pelosi.
Click to expand...

woops! I made an error. the correct name is Conservative Futurist - a political blogger.
 
Hear Again said:
Bloggers have a specific agenda which are not facts.
Click to expand...

who said I'm using it as fact? In case you didn't know - the news have agenda as well. Recall the thread about Newspapers vs Blogs? They all have agenda.
 
Jiro,

Didn't you tell Dreama in her "Newspapers vs. Blogs" thread that blogs are not to be relied upon for factual information? If so, you are contradicting yourself by posting a quote from the latter.
 
Jiro said:
who said I'm using it as fact? In case you didn't know - the news have agenda as well. Recall the thread about Newspapers vs Blogs? They all have agenda.
Click to expand...

How else am I supposed to view what you posted? If you are using it as an example of opinion, again, opinions are not facts. If you're going to cite opinions to back up your assertions, you may as well say nothing at all since that's basically what an opinion amounts to.
 
Hear Again said:
Jiro,

Didn't you tell Dreama in her "Newspapers vs. Blogs" thread that blogs are not to be relied upon for factual information? If so, you are contradicting yourself by posting a quote from the latter.
Click to expand...

again - I did not state that I'm using it as fact. I'm merely using someone's quote because he said it better than me. To clarify my stance on blogs - there are a few blogs that carry with significant credibility while many blogs are worthless.
 
Hear Again said:
Even if I cited 1,000 examples to disprove your assertion, you could always come up with 1,0001. Thus, there is no point in doing so.
Click to expand...

but you cited 0 so your point is moot. You asked for mine, I came up with it. Now I'm asking for yours.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top