Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
....host is ignored because when someone takes the time to tear him appart point by point he ignores it and quite frankly many of us think he has 'issues' that need professional help. <b>This is the same guy that thinks the government is posting in these forums and that GWB was involved with human sacrifice. You can't expect me or anyone else to waste time going over link after link, often which have almost nothing to do with the topic at hand, are quoted out of context, or come from sources with a known and proven bias and expect us to take 'their' word for it.</b>
|
Another way to look at it is that the OP's of some threads that you author, are anchored by citations and accompanying arguments, that in hindsight, don't bear up well in a competition of ideas and other reporting.
The effect of my post on the premise for this thread, documenting the partisan political bias and admitted pro-Israeli sentiment of the "discoverer" and promoter of the video that impressed you enough to anchor this thread with; the fact that the domain where the video originated on the internet is registered to this same individual, and that he exhibits a bias that is uncharacteristic of what I would expect from a university professor of history,
is to call into question whether you have provided enough substance to merit
a discussion, since there is no thread without the video.
I see no linked examples offered in support of anything that followed your, <b>"This is the same guy......."</b>, comments.
There is a pattern here.....easily observed in two other threads that you authored recently:
If you look at my posts in this thread, and in the other two threads that I've
linked, I do not "shoot the messenger". I expend the time and the effort to discredit the messenger's argument.