• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166]

Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

Google is your friend...

He already decided it's not relevant, nothing is that might contradict the OCT or even bring it into question. In fact, there are no questions, everything is 100% fact and believable. That's why he has to defend it 24/7.
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

Google is your friend...

Ability to form a clearly stated hypothesis with supporting evidence is not yours.

It is not my job to do your thinking for you. If the point is so grossly unimportant you can't even be bothered then why should I?
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

Not to mention, one SEAL admitted he didn't recognize him as OBL and no one on the carrier claims to have seen the "burial at sea".

Kinda reminds me of the story of Steve Rannazzisi, or Tania Head or the guy in the Harley T-shirt. ;)
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

Ability to form a clearly stated hypothesis with supporting evidence is not yours.

It is not my job to do your thinking for you. If the point is so grossly unimportant you can't even be bothered then why should I?

I wasn't suggesting you do thinking for me... I was suggesting you do the thinking for yourself.

Navy discharging 64 sailors for drug use, distribution | Reuters

you weren't even asking for a hypothesis.. you were asking for the link, as though I was lying and you couldn't have taken my description and found it for yourself.

A little melodramatic?
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

I wasn't suggesting you do thinking for me... I was suggesting you do the thinking for yourself.

Navy discharging 64 sailors for drug use, distribution | Reuters

you weren't even asking for a hypothesis.. you were asking for the link, as though I was lying and you couldn't have taken my description and found it for yourself.

A little melodramatic?

I was suggesting - no stating - that doing the thinking is the responsibility of the person making the claim. CT's such as yourself seem perpetually incapable of doing so.

Right now there is no claim, no hypothesis, just a lie by innuendo of implied relevance. A total waste of time.
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

I was suggesting - no stating - that doing the thinking is the responsibility of the person making the claim.

I thought about the claim before I made it... so, by your statement I had fulfilled my end of responsibility.

And then I put up the link, and once again you show your "honesty" by ignoring it.

CT's such as yourself seem perpetually incapable of doing so.

I assure you that I am not a conspiracy theory, I am a real person.



Right now there is no claim, no hypothesis, just a lie by innuendo of implied relevance. A total waste of time.

Yes, there was a claim... 64 dishonorable discharges from the ship that allegedly buried bin Laden at sea. 64 "drug dealers" according to the link you clearly ignored.
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

I wasn't suggesting you do thinking for me... I was suggesting you do the thinking for yourself.

Navy discharging 64 sailors for drug use, distribution | Reuters

you weren't even asking for a hypothesis.. you were asking for the link, as though I was lying and you couldn't have taken my description and found it for yourself.

A little melodramatic?

That is an interesting little story about the sailors aboard the Carl Vinson. That "spice" stuff is bad news. Maybe they were so stoned they thought they saw old Osama Yo Mama being tossed overboard. :lol:
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

Reuters - 64 men on that ship dishonorable discharges after the funeral that nobody saw. All of the for selling drugs... Of course, every navy ship has more drug dealers than crew.



Looks like he's hunched over doing something else... But maybe that's just my mind in the gutter.

Couple things here. First you didn't even get the numbers right. It seems that only reading the headlines is a common issue with you. Leads to making silly claims. We saw previous examples of this on your US arming Isis thread.

Next nothing in that article says anything about that number being record setting. So care to back that claim up.

Next you claiming that an aircraft carrier has less then 64 sailors on it shows how little you care about making dishonest claims to support your silliness
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

I thought about the claim before I made it... so, by your statement I had fulfilled my end of responsibility.

And then I put up the link, and once again you show your "honesty" by ignoring it.

I assure you that I am not a conspiracy theory, I am a real person.

Yes, there was a claim... 64 dishonorable discharges from the ship that allegedly buried bin Laden at sea. 64 "drug dealers" according to the link you clearly ignored.

Great. So some sailors were dishonorably discharged. So what?
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

Couple things here. First you didn't even get the numbers right. It seems that only reading the headlines is a common issue with you. Leads to making silly claims. We saw previous examples of this on your US arming Isis thread.

What are the correct numbers then?

(Side note: I had made my case by providing government documents with the admission... Remember, the one that got put up multiple times and you ignored everyone... oops)



Next nothing in that article says anything about that number being record setting. So care to back that claim up.

Next you claiming that an aircraft carrier has less then 64 sailors on it shows how little you care about making dishonest claims to support your silliness

I didn't say less than 64... what was said was said jokingly, as in there were more drug dealers than not...
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

Great. So some sailors were dishonorably discharged. So what?

So, it's time to use that thinking muscle you claim to have.

But, you only give the so what response when you've lost the argument... so ill accept your concession.
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

So, it's time to use that thinking muscle you claim to have.

But, you only give the so what response when you've lost the argument... so ill accept your concession.

Think about what? You haven't given me anything to think about and the fact you don't get that tells us something.

This bit all started you may recall when, in the midst of a conversation over the death of OBL you in post #171 blurted out,...

Oh man... of course you will pretend like the seals involved in the raid were not all killed... just like you will probably deny that the bin Laden burial ship now holds the record for the most number of dishonorable discharges for a single ship EVER

A few attempts at claims here but all stated as ambiguously as possible with the relevance implied, rather than stated.

We could start off with the first bit about all the SEALS involved in the raid were killed,... which is of course patently untrue. Robert O’Neill and Matt Bissonnette for example are both very much still alive and have gone public about their roles in the raid.

Even if the claim that all of the SEALS involved in the OBL compound raid were killed were true, would it be relevant? Would their deaths in later combat mean OBL had risen from the dead like Jesus?

So why do we care? Dunno. You don't say.

But of course later on you predictably amended your original statement. From post #206

Most of the team that killed bin laden died in that crash... According to the family members as well.

Still don't know what that has to do with this discussion though.

So then we move on to another half-hearted claim, that the bin Laden burial ship now holds the record for the most number of dishonorable discharges for a single ship EVER, which you have stated more than once.

Yes, and that ship has been the ship with the record numbers of dishonourable discharges of any ship prior.

And,...

Reuters - 64 men on that ship dishonorable discharges after the funeral that nobody saw. All of the for selling drugs... Of course, every navy ship has more drug dealers than crew.

The ship in question is USS Carl Vinson, CVN-70. Actually shipS, as in addition the scandal included the USS San Francisco and the floating dry dock Argo. 49 of the 64 accused were from Carl Vinson. You claimed it was all 64. The total crew of USS Carl Vinson is around 5,000 but I am willing to forget your other bit of hyperbole for now. The claim though that USS Carl Vinson held a record for dishonorable discharges is at this point in the discussion completely unsupported. Still is in fact since the article you linked to does not even mention if the 49 discharged sailors from Carl Vinson represents an all-time record. Just more hyperbole from you I suppose.

The relevance to the death of OBL is of the wink, wink, nudge, nudge, knowwhateyemean variety - the relationship between the two events implied rather than stated. That is a point we are still at right now.

Some sailors on the Carl Vinson were bused for selling synthetic drugs, therefore OBL wasn't killed - or at least that seems to be the (non)logic process you are using. I don't know since you won't say.

Several claims, all either completely inaccurate or grossly embellished made without supported evidence or stated relevance. Pathetic.
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

Think about what? You haven't given me anything to think about and the fact you don't get that tells us something.

This bit all started you may recall when, in the midst of a conversation over the death of OBL you in post #171 blurted out,...



A few attempts at claims here but all stated as ambiguously as possible with the relevance implied, rather than stated.

We could start off with the first bit about all the SEALS involved in the raid were killed,... which is of course patently untrue. Robert O’Neill and Matt Bissonnette for example are both very much still alive and have gone public about their roles in the raid.

Even if the claim that all of the SEALS involved in the OBL compound raid were killed were true, would it be relevant? Would their deaths in later combat mean OBL had risen from the dead like Jesus?

So why do we care? Dunno. You don't say.

But of course later on you predictably amended your original statement. From post #206



Still don't know what that has to do with this discussion though.

So then we move on to another half-hearted claim, that the bin Laden burial ship now holds the record for the most number of dishonorable discharges for a single ship EVER, which you have stated more than once.



And,...



The ship in question is USS Carl Vinson, CVN-70. Actually shipS, as in addition the scandal included the USS San Francisco and the floating dry dock Argo. 49 of the 64 accused were from Carl Vinson. You claimed it was all 64. The total crew of USS Carl Vinson is around 5,000 but I am willing to forget your other bit of hyperbole for now. The claim though that USS Carl Vinson held a record for dishonorable discharges is at this point in the discussion completely unsupported. Still is in fact since the article you linked to does not even mention if the 49 discharged sailors from Carl Vinson represents an all-time record. Just more hyperbole from you I suppose.

The relevance to the death of OBL is of the wink, wink, nudge, nudge, knowwhateyemean variety - the relationship between the two events implied rather than stated. That is a point we are still at right now.

Some sailors on the Carl Vinson were bused for selling synthetic drugs, therefore OBL wasn't killed - or at least that seems to be the (non)logic process you are using. I don't know since you won't say.

Several claims, all either completely inaccurate or grossly embellished made without supported evidence or stated relevance. Pathetic.

And not one source... So, thanks for your opinions.
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

And not one source... So, thanks for your opinions.

Are you trying to miss the point completely, or does it just come naturally?
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

Are you trying to miss the point completely, or does it just come naturally?

The point that you try to hold a double standard?
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

What are the correct numbers then?

(Side note: I had made my case by providing government documents with the admission... Remember, the one that got put up multiple times and you ignored everyone... oops)





I didn't say less than 64... what was said was said jokingly, as in there were more drug dealers than not...
Go reread your own link. It's not 64.

You didn't even come close to making a case. And I addressed every single link you put up. And showed how each and every one didn't prove your claim at all. Most of them weren't even discussong topic of your claim. It's no ones fault but yours that you only read headlines and not the article
 
Last edited:
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

The point that you try to hold a double standard?

destroyers-laying-smoke.jpg
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

the compliment of the Carl Vinson is listed at 6062....
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

You were wrong there too and couldn't realize it.

Still evading. You made multiple vague and ambiguous claims all without stated relevance and which proved to be heavily embellished and largely untrue. THAT is the issue at hand and the one you are carefully avoiding.

At this point you may either refine your claims AND state their relevance to the subject of the death of OBL or retract them. I have no interest in chasing any more of your evasions.
 
Last edited:
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

Reuters - 64 men on that ship dishonorable discharges after the funeral that nobody saw.

Nope.

All of the for selling drugs... Of course, every navy ship has more drug dealers than crew..

49 out of a crew of 6,000 plus.......
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

I forgot about this thread due to one of my mandatory vacations away from this forum, but during that vacation there was a story that there apparently was insufficient evidence that Bin Laden was at the compound at Abbottabad and no evidence has ever been released since.

"'We have to do two more things to see if he's there,'" Biden recalled, though the story did not include what those two things were.
Joe Biden changes course on Osama bin Laden raid - CNNPolitics.com
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

The Legend Of Abbottabad will live forever in the minds of the gullible. We have the government we deserve. It is easier to fool a man than it is to explain to him that he has been fooled.
 
Re: CIA stooge Peter Bergen pîssed NY Times dares to claim little evidence OBL [W:166

The Legend Of Abbottabad will live forever in the minds of the gullible. We have the government we deserve. It is easier to fool a man than it is to explain to him that he has been fooled.

Henry, at some point will you contribute more to the discussions than well-rehearsed slogans?
 
Back
Top Bottom