LIB-ertarian Johnson has Lib Meltdown

[Solar]

Thank you. 

I never cared that his opinion was twisted and wrong on every level, or that what little history he gleaned came from leftist opinion pieces, what bugged me, was his myopic view of libertarianism and HIS focus on America being the problem, to an issue that's plagued man for nearly a millenia, Muscum.
But to derail every thread he enters and deflect for the Muscum and blame the US, was the final straw.

[tac]

I never cared that his opinion was twisted and wrong on every level, or that what little history he gleaned came from leftist opinion pieces, what bugged me, was his myopic view of libertarianism and HIS focus on America being the problem, to an issue that's plagued man for nearly a millenia, Muscum.
But to derail every thread he enters and deflect for the Muscum and blame the US, was the final straw.

He was good at derailing threads with his ME message.

[quiller]

You stupid Fuck! I just gave you a final warning and you continue on derailing, so consider that your last post.
You're out of here!

[Possum]

I never cared that his opinion was twisted and wrong on every level, or that what little history he gleaned came from leftist opinion pieces, what bugged me, was his myopic view of libertarianism and HIS focus on America being the problem, to an issue that's plagued man for nearly a millenia, Muscum.
But to derail every thread he enters and deflect for the Muscum and blame the US, was the final straw.

I never could understand how he could read what Billy's bayonet had to say and still would blame America first. Billy had it laid out so anyone could understand what the problem was and jrodefeld could not get it. His professer must have had the strong koolaid that day.

[supsalemgr]

I never could understand how he could read what Billy's bayonet had to say and still would blame America first. Billy had it laid out so anyone could understand what the problem was and jrodefeld could not get it. His professer must have had the strong koolaid that day.

He is a typical lib "blame America first" advocate. Unfortuntely, I don't think he even recognizes that.

[Solar]

I never could understand how he could read what Billy's bayonet had to say and still would blame America first. Billy had it laid out so anyone could understand what the problem was and jrodefeld could not get it. His professer must have had the strong koolaid that day.

I'm guessing he has latent hippy running through his blood, Marxist with a hint Libertarianism coated in essence of modern day snowflakeism.

[walkstall]

I'm guessing he has latent hippy running through his blood, Marxist with a hint Libertarianism coated in essence of modern day snowflakeism.

So I take it this is now a jrodefeld free safety zone. 

[Solar]

So I take it this is now a jrodefeld free safety zone.

The Creepy Clown has leftist the building.

[walkstall]

The Creepy Clown has leftist the building.

I hope he took his med with him.  A day without pot will be a day without sunshine for him. 

[Billy's bayonet]

Prototypical of the left. Close minded, keeps repeating the same old rhetoric with the same old buzzwords refuses to look at the facts and goes with emotion. Then the guy admits to selling pot....that explains a lot.

[jrodefeld]

Prototypical of the left. Close minded, keeps repeating the same old rhetoric with the same old buzzwords refuses to look at the facts and goes with emotion. Then the guy admits to selling pot....that explains a lot.

What's so fascinating is how much you lack in self-awareness.  Far from "going with emotion", my opinions are based on empirical studies (see Robert Pape), expert testimony (see former CIA Bin Laden expert Michael Scheuer) and a great deal of reading on both history and political philosophy.  I'm quite sure I've posted more articles, peer-reviewed studies, lectures by experts and hard data points than everyone else on this forum combined.  And not one of the links and sources I've used to defend my positions has been even addressed. 

You may not agree with my views, but you can't in good faith claim that my views are based on "emotion" and that I'm ignoring facts.  I'm the one who has been attempting to provide hard evidence for my views, while you are relying on anecdotes and buzzwords.

If you ever actually provide a link to an article by an actual journalist that corroborates your claims, or to a peer-reviewed study of any kind, I WILL read it and critique it fully.  This is what I usually try to do.

Let me ask an honest question.  Have any of you actually clicked on any the links I've posted, watched any of the YouTube videos or looked at any of the PDF files and research papers I've cited?

Why don't you go back to my last post where I posted several links and respond to my specific claims?  I will reciprocate if you provide me with anything that you can find to support your positions.

What I've heard from y'all is that you don't trust articles, empirical studies and journalism and you're telling me that in lieu of this your personal experience and anecdotal experiences in foreign lands and in the military are an adequate substitute.

One person even said "People like Pape should be listening to me and people like me" (paraphrase), which rather incredibly implies that he hasn't spoken to people who hold your views. 

The claim is that actual hard science can be substituted for anecdotal experience.  I am telling you that this is absolutely false.  You may feel one way about the nature of Islam as a religion, about terrorism and the motivations for terrorist attacks but you have to yield to hard science and exhaustive studies which, frankly, prove your central claims completely wrong.

I've rarely seen such substance-less posts on a forum.  Why not try this again?

You all can go back to the previous page and disprove what I claimed, read the links I posted and explain why this evidence is not correct and why my arguments are fallacious.

Then you can post some links to articles and empirical studies that prove your assertions correct.

Okay?  This is how an exchange of ideas is supposed to work.

[Ghoulardi]

What's so fascinating is how much you lack in self-awareness.  Far from "going with emotion", my opinions are based on empirical studies (see Robert Pape)

Doesn't evidence have to be corroberated to be empirical? Who corroberated Pape? People who read Pape? Isn't that how we got cold fusion?

, expert testimony (see former CIA Bin Laden expert Michael Scheuer)

Did he read Pape? Bet he did.

He's such an expert at Bin Laden that Bin Laden still wasn't captured when he left the CIA in 2004. Some expert!

and a great deal of reading on both history and political philosophy.  I'm quite sure I've posted more articles, peer-reviewed studies, lectures by experts and hard data points than everyone else on this forum combined.  And not one of the links and sources I've used to defend my positions has been even addressed.

Translation: I've posted on a lot of sites that agree with my point of view

You may not agree with my views, but you can't in good faith claim that my views are based on "emotion" and that I'm ignoring facts.  I'm the one who has been attempting to provide hard evidence for my views, while you are relying on anecdotes and buzzwords.

Providing hard evidence based on people like Pape and Scheuer who rely on anecdotes and buzzwords.

If you ever actually provide a link to an article by an actual journalist that corroborates your claims, or to a peer-reviewed study of any kind, I WILL read it and critique it fully.  This is what I usually try to do.

Translation: I'll tell you your links are bull, because only Pape, Scheuer, and their minions know the facts.

Let me ask an honest question.  Have any of you actually clicked on any the links I've posted, watched any of the YouTube videos or looked at any of the PDF files and research papers I've cited?

An honest question deserves an honest question? Have you considered any of the answers you gotten? Have you even thought about what others have said, rather than reciting what you've been told? Didn't think so, I can tell by the lenth of your post you just spew talking points on command.

Why don't you go back to my last post where I posted several links and respond to my specific claims?  I will reciprocate if you provide me with anything that you can find to support your positions.

Why don't you consider your being conned?

What I've heard from y'all is that you don't trust articles, empirical studies and journalism

You mean the same articles, empiricals studies, and journalism that tells us global warming causes terrorism and all terrorist need is jobs? Yah, lot to trust there.

and you're telling me that in lieu of this your personal experience and anecdotal experiences in foreign lands and in the military are an adequate substitute.

Isn't that what your telling us? Pape and Scheuer experiences trump everyone elses

One person even said "People like Pape should be listening to me and people like me" (paraphrase), which rather incredibly implies that he hasn't spoken to people who hold your views.

And the empirical evidence of that is where?

The claim is that actual hard science can be substituted for anecdotal experience.  I am telling you that this is absolutely false.  You may feel one way about the nature of Islam as a religion, about terrorism and the motivations for terrorist attacks but you have to yield to hard science and exhaustive studies which, frankly, prove your central claims completely wrong.

No the claim is anyone who blames this country for the problems of another country is full of it.

I've rarely seen such substance-less posts on a forum.  Why not try this again?

You all can go back to the previous page and disprove what I claimed, read the links I posted and explain why this evidence is not correct and why my arguments are fallacious.

Then you can post some links to articles and empirical studies that prove your assertions correct.

Okay?  This is how an exchange of ideas is supposed to work.

You mean substance less because they don't agree with your point of view.

Exchange of ideas? So far we've presented our point of view which you promptly ignore and continue posting your point of view.

Why don't you go back over the past few pages and disprove what others have resonded to you?

[Possum]

What's so fascinating is how much you lack in self-awareness.

Pretty much what we think of you. You sure use a lot of words to say the same thing over and over. You think the U.S. is to blame for terrorist acts against it. We get it. You think the blood of our victims is on our hands. We get it. You have your savior pape who reinforces your beliefs and gives you self-righteousness. We get it. You ignore every view point presented and all the facts that were presented because you do not agree with them. We get it. We have pretty much heard everything you have and we get it. It is you who does not get it.

[Solar]

Pretty much what we think of you. You sure use a lot of words to say the same thing over and over. You think the U.S. is to blame for terrorist acts against it. We get it. You think the blood of our victims is on our hands. We get it. You have your savior pape who reinforces your beliefs and gives you self-righteousness. We get it. You ignore every view point presented and all the facts that were presented because you do not agree with them. We get it. We have pretty much heard everything you have and we get it. It is you who does not get it.

He's working on the same intellectual level that gun free zones are effective.
No reasoning involved, solely based on emotional conjecture.

[Billy's bayonet]

1.)What's so fascinating is how much you lack in self-awareness.  Far from "going with emotion", my opinions are based on empirical studies (see Robert Pape), expert testimony (see former CIA Bin Laden expert Michael Scheuer) and a great deal of reading on both history and political philosophy. 

2.)You may not agree with my views, but you can't in good faith claim that my views are based on "emotion" and that I'm ignoring facts.

3.)Let me ask an honest question.  Have any of you actually clicked on any the links I've posted, watched any of the YouTube videos or looked at any of the PDF files and research papers I've cited?

4.)Why don't you go back to my last post where I posted several links and respond to my specific claims?  I will reciprocate if you provide me with anything that you can find to support your positions.

5.)What I've heard from y'all is that you don't trust articles, empirical studies and journalism and you're telling me that in lieu of this your personal experience and anecdotal experiences in foreign lands and in the military are an adequate substitute.

6.)One person even said "People like Pape should be listening to me and people like me" (paraphrase), which rather incredibly implies that he hasn't spoken to people who hold your views. 

7.)The claim is that actual hard science can be substituted for anecdotal experience.  I am telling you that this is absolutely false.  You may feel one way about the nature of Islam as a religion, about terrorism and the motivations for terrorist attacks but you have to yield to hard science and exhaustive studies which, frankly, prove your central claims completely wrong.

8.)I've rarely seen such substance-less posts on a forum.  Why not try this again?

9.) You all can go back to the previous page and disprove what I claimed, read the links I posted and explain why this evidence is not correct and why my arguments are fallacious. Then you can post some links to articles and empirical studies that prove your assertions correct.

10.)Okay?  This is how an exchange of ideas is supposed to work.

1. How can you say I lack self awareness when my opinions are formed by my TRAINING at the hands of REAL experts , some of the best in the world in their field, from the US Military, to the FBI to various departmental experts and LAWYERS. I have a degree in criminology, by my years and years experience as a Major crimes Investigator in Washington DC, a private security consultant who worked with and trained Police, Military and private security in 8 different countries. I learned a great deal about other cultures and peoples from my counterparts. I am a court certified EXPERT in several Law Enforcement related disciplines and have testified thus as a sworn officer and a private security operative.

2. Your constant pleading to be held relevant betrays your emotions, you come across as angry and frustrated. You are stubborn to the point of narrow mindedness by your total acceptance of Pape and the rest of the desk bound battalion of armchair experts, who quite frankly are laughed at by the "boots on the ground" types. And I'm sure Pape considers persons like myself to be uneducated, knuckle dragging,crude, rather violent, cretins or pests. More of a cause of the problem than a solution.

3. Honest answer, yes I have, I found him to be rather one dementional. Its all the US fault etc etc. Just an aside, I wonder if Obamao forms his opinion from listening to Pape or if Pape echo's Obamao's opinion because it would be economically/politically advantageous to Pape....

4. Why? you can't accept my word and dismiss my expertise that others have often PAID and PAID well for.  I have continually cited fact and what Judges would call "judicial notice" Which is a point of law or fact that doesn't have to be proven. The point about Ben Laudin and Al Q'ieda killing more muslims than the US ever did is just one of them. You want me to publish a link to every terrorist attack that takes place in Pakistan, Egypt, Yemen, Afghanistan Iraq, Indonesia, The Philippines etc etc in which  Muslims are killed by other Muslims? No, you are fond of doing research and base all on what you read and study....get up off your ass and do it, you might learn something.

5. Do you understand what the hell you are even talking about? What do you think those "emperical studies" "articles" etc etc are based on?????....THEY ARE BASED ON REPORTS FROM SUCH AS MYSELF. Someone, rather a TEAM of FIELD EXPERTS who have processed the crime scene, interviewed witnesses, suspects and gathered the FACTS or sat up for 24 hours straight listening to a wire tap or Phone intercept from the bad guys themselves. Or sat in an interview room across from some Psychopathic lunatic and tried to deduce fact from Lie, half truth and complete fabrication  then comprised it all in a report that the omnipotent Pape reads and FORMS AND OPINION ABOUT.

6. I said that, read the aforementioned again a few times, it might sink in.

7. Read number five yet again. Do you understand that conducting an investigation and gathering evidence/intelligence IS a SCIENCE all in itself? You dismiss EVIDENCE and FACTS gathered by those investigative/intelligence gathering PROFESSIONALS in favor of a DISTANCED third party such as Pape et al. When you do so you lack credibility in any rational though process.

8. Try what again? convincing your closed mind that there is something in this world besides the All Knowing Pape?

9. You can not disclaim an opinion by an "expert" its an opinion, be it Pape's or mine. Hold that thought for a few paragraph's ahead when I have a question for you, oh Champion of Pape.

10. There is no exchange of idea's here, you haven't addressed half the things I brought up or you out right refuted them by going back again to your sources I get tired of typing their names.

Now before we play 20 question any further. In one of my posts I think I said it was not so much Pape's Opinion we/I disagreed with but rather his suggested solution to the problem. A 'solution" you seem to echo in your posts about Terrorism, A subdued Military or your eagerness for a Anarchal society and Legalizing drugs will make all the problems associated with it, especially the bad guys who control it, go away.

Now I got a Question for you I WANT AN ANSWER FOR.... Mr 'exchange of Ideas'

1 a.  What Evidence DO YOU PRESENT to substantiate your belief that a cessation of hostilities toward Radical Muslim terrorists and complete withdrawal from their lands by our Military and complete isolation from Islamic affairs worldwide
will cease terrorist attacks against the US?....Show me the facts that this will make them stop. Show me how this will prevent RADICAL ISLAM's STATED GOAL of Uniting the World Under Islam, by any means necessary.