yk-
you said to me in a previous thread (and ill go back and quote it if you like) that there has never been an "apostate" that posed a question you ignored because you were unable to answer, and that you never sidestep issues. ive just sat down and read this thread for the first time today, and i find it a prime example of how this statement of yours was completely false. i will show this with quotes (issues that you sidestepped).
first off, lets get one part straight....larouche is crazy, this we all know.....and you will never admit this, which we all know as well. you are blinded by your own arrogance.
now you say that the larouche quotes on the first post were "taken out of context"....and i say: you have got to be kidding, right? he specifically says that he believes ashcroft to be involved in this conspiracy behind the wtc attacks! how can you take that out of context? but you failed to comment on that one didnt you? you were much more intent on debunking the beatles statement.....like who really gives a shit what he said about the beatles anyway? you make it sound like these quotes were taken from years and years ago.....but the 9-11 quotes were obviously very recent....and the man is obviously very disturbed/paranoid/insane.
from hs:
I actually see no disconnect here, as surely some of the most brilliant thinkers throughout mans history also have their fatal flaws. I think it is possible to have the 'crazy' and 'brilliant' connected in one man and often at one moment. Do you not agree?
excellent point by hs, which you ignored, as per normal.
from cynicus:
Had he used a simple searchengine query he would have found out that Jesse Ventura's (actually James Janos) career not only consisted of 'smack down' wrestling. In fact he would have found out that the man was a Navy SEAL for six years, a Vietnam veteran, that he attended college, and that he was mayor of the 6th city in Minnesota for several years before becoming governor. Compare that with YK's selfprojection about Jesse Ventura --- a 'degenerated' wrestler --- used as a sneering defense for a nutters' lack of media attention.
that quote you didnt ignore, completely that is. you did play it off nicely though, what choice did you have? this ventura thing is a prime example of what you do best....speak first, with smokescreen, and hope no one realizes that you dont know what youre talking about. for the most part, you speak in proclamations, but your facts are entirely paper thin. its just like the whole "oversold" argument we had......you thought "oversold" was a term used to describe a buyers market, when in actuality it was a scientific number spit out by a scientific formula. most of the time you really dont have the slighest clue what youre talking about, you just cut and paste your links from all the "bear" and "larouche" websites......never taking into consideration the opposing side of your so-called "evidence".
from cynicus:
Comment on the words of his wife in their own newspaper of which Lyndon is the responsible editor. Please explain what scheinheiliger Holocaust-schwindel means in your book.
again, no response from you. you respond
selectively as you always have, picking and choosing which statements to reply to without having to
ever admit error. why no response about the newspaper article quoted? do you deny its authenticity? if so, then say so. is it not relevant because his wife (who he supports) said it and not him? if thats what you think, then at least say so. by not responding, by ignoring, you continue to show that you are in fact
unable to respond, as you have been so many times in the past. this is par for the course.....and i really wouldnt be surprised if you did not respond to this post either, as you very well may be unable.
aa
