Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

William Seger

(11,031 posts)
25. I'll take that as a "No" to both questions
Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:31 PM
Sep 2012

... and let's add not understanding the distinction between an assertion and a fact to the list.

That's a wrap.


911: Window of Exposure [View all] . . Sep 2012 OP
Brilliantly LARED Sep 2012 #1
"Brilliantly ridiculous notion," eh wot? AlwaysQuestion Oct 2012 #76
. . . freshwest Sep 2012 #2
Link to where? . . Sep 2012 #3
Let's not forget the Politicalboi Sep 2012 #4
I don't expect much outcry when attempts are made to steal this election, either. dixiegrrrrl Sep 2012 #5
O.K. As requested by the OP, I am here at this gathering of loons. MercutioATC Sep 2012 #6
Please read the original post. . . Sep 2012 #7
So, your proof of conspiracy is that Rumsfeld adhered to a course of action that YOU determine MercutioATC Sep 2012 #8
MercutioATC, I asked you to . . Sep 2012 #9
MercutioATC, I asked you to please make sure you understand the post... . . Sep 2012 #10
"Acceptable"? By what standards? MercutioATC Sep 2012 #11
So by sharply increasing the probability for murder... . . Sep 2012 #12
You do realize that "murder" has a legal definition... MercutioATC Sep 2012 #13
So why do you suppose a person... . . Sep 2012 #14
. JosAle Sep 2012 #37
Bump for the ATC's answer JosAle Sep 2012 #38
Of course I know there were exercises that day. MercutioATC Sep 2012 #39
So why did you say that? JosAle Sep 2012 #40
Yep, when you look at Rumsfeld like this, it looks real bad JosAle Sep 2012 #41
Did you not read the body of my post? MercutioATC Sep 2012 #42
What does that have to do with Rumsfeld?? JosAle Sep 2012 #43
Absolutely nothing. MercutioATC Sep 2012 #44
You just proved my point. JosAle Sep 2012 #45
If your point is that we were unprepared, yes, I'm agreeing. MercutioATC Sep 2012 #46
My point is there were drills for hijacked planes into buildings JosAle Sep 2012 #47
As I said, you don't understand the mechanics of the system. MercutioATC Sep 2012 #48
Did they think the hijackers may take the passengers out to breakfast? JosAle Sep 2012 #49
4,500 other planes in the air at the time, roughly. MercutioATC Sep 2012 #50
You're only making the case stronger JosAle Sep 2012 #51
To be clear... . . Sep 2012 #15
Calling out William Seger: I am responding to your post, here. . . Sep 2012 #16
Debates with "truthers" usually devolve into pointless repetition William Seger Sep 2012 #17
So you cannot argue against it. There's a very good reason for that. . . Sep 2012 #18
But I did "argue against it" and all you could do was reassert the same dubious premise William Seger Sep 2012 #19
Please look upward in the thread. . . Sep 2012 #20
Why? William Seger Sep 2012 #21
Let's go... . . Sep 2012 #22
No, if you're just going to keep repeating the same faulty argument, let's stop William Seger Sep 2012 #23
If you're unable to argue, please say so. . . Sep 2012 #24
I'll take that as a "No" to both questions William Seger Sep 2012 #25
So once again, you're unable to argue . . Sep 2012 #26
But if I'm the last one to post, then I win? William Seger Sep 2012 #27
The record will stand, friend. Our words are here to be read. . . Sep 2012 #28
A variation of "affirming the consequent" William Seger Sep 2012 #29
So... . . Sep 2012 #31
You are one funny guy/girl. I appreciate the humor. nt LARED Sep 2012 #30
I too find this guy funny! zappaman Sep 2012 #32
So resume from where William Seger fled . . Sep 2012 #33
"Argumentum ad nauseam" William Seger Sep 2012 #34
"Argumentum ad nauseam" zappaman Sep 2012 #35
Seger fled? zappaman Sep 2012 #36
Every single point you raise is speculative, "I think this is what would have happened" stevenleser Oct 2012 #52
Please do the homework required to understand this subject . . Oct 2012 #53
Not only have I done the homework, I'm former military (US Air Force) I understand this a lot better stevenleser Oct 2012 #54
Our words are right here. Anyone may read them. . . Oct 2012 #55
No care necessary. All of my opinions are very public. Just google me. nt stevenleser Oct 2012 #56
Further notes... . . Oct 2012 #57
Looks like further nonsense William Seger Oct 2012 #58
Post 22 remains unanswered. . . Oct 2012 #59
LOL, post 23 remains unanswered William Seger Oct 2012 #60
and... . . Oct 2012 #61
Say what? William Seger Oct 2012 #62
And by the way... . . Oct 2012 #63
WTF? William Seger Oct 2012 #64
"had any impact whatsoever" was bolded... . . Oct 2012 #65
Are you even reading what I write? William Seger Oct 2012 #66
Yes, and it turns out we agree. . . Oct 2012 #67
You flatter yourself to claim this thread has a point, but... William Seger Oct 2012 #68
Come on... . . Oct 2012 #69
Once more round the Truther Merry-Go-Round William Seger Oct 2012 #70
Let me get this straight. . . Oct 2012 #72
"such an arrangement"? William Seger Oct 2012 #73
Specially for you: . . Oct 2012 #74
And your point is... ? (n/m) William Seger Oct 2012 #75
"The scope of possibility is exactly what it is. Logic will lead any person to the same conclusion." zappaman Oct 2012 #71
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Creative Speculation»911: Window of Exposure»Reply #25