|
Thyestean feast in Iraq? | by DesertRat66 | 2007-07-10 07:23:48 |
|
How DARE we ignore all this by | by hadji | 2007-07-10 07:33:05 |
|
Don't get the news much? (n/t) | by DesertRat66 | 2007-07-10 07:34:48 |
|
Don't clarify your points much? (n/t) | by hadji | 2007-07-10 07:36:30 |
|
Nevermind, it's not worth it. | by hadji | 2007-07-10 07:43:01 |
|
I figured you at least skimmed headlines | by DesertRat66 | 2007-07-10 08:25:01 |
|
That post is useless. | by hadji | 2007-07-10 08:36:21 |
|
Am thinking the "absolute silence..." | by esbita | 2007-07-10 09:33:08 |
|
The article says | by jeff_uk | 2007-07-10 09:52:05 |
|
Not that hadji would've known. | by esbita | 2007-07-10 10:02:57 |
|
Yes he could, DR66 quoted that part here..... (n/t) | by jeff_uk | 2007-07-10 10:05:00 |
|
Quoted what, where? (n/t) | by esbita | 2007-07-10 10:09:01 |
|
In the TLP | by hadji | 2007-07-10 10:21:18 |
|
Nice cherry-picking. | by esbita | 2007-07-10 10:32:52 |
|
There are times when cherry-picking is valid. | by hadji | 2007-07-10 11:33:42 |
|
Did you apply your skills of scrutiny | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-10 12:23:37 |
|
My agenda is to argue the following points. | by hadji | 2007-07-10 12:39:17 |
| So, you are after DR66, and not after the article |
by CynicalRyan |
2007-07-10 12:43:40 |
after all.
Since, if you had read the article, you'll quickly notice that the article and the paragraph are not related to points 1) and 2) of yours, in fact, deals only with specific incidents mentioned in the article, one of which has not been reported by news, as esbita has pointed out. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
To be more precise, I'm after the TLP. | by hadji | 2007-07-10 12:50:08 |
|
You didn't even read the article you criticize. | by CynicalRyan | 2007-07-10 12:56:48 |
|
I've read both, and I've replied accordingly. (n/t | by hadji | 2007-07-10 13:10:25 |
