[eDebate] ans gerbil on iran

Old Strega oldstrega
Thu Jul 2 18:00:40 CDT 2009

pent-up anger doesn't answer CIA involvement.   both are possible.  anger is necessary to be manipulated.  if there was no problems with the current regime, it would be difficult to turn an uprising into a soft coup.  the snippet is totally non-responsive and, frankly, stupid after going 6 or 7 lines deep with hester.
no response to tracing of twitter accounts to israel.
no response to on balance hammond evidence saying that CIA involvement likely -- there is no proof obama suspended bush's CIA iran destabilization plans.
there are so many facets of the CIA involvement already presented from multiple sources that "paranoiac" would need a case by case analysis to have any credibility.
to me, non-responses are drops.    gerbil's first line was mousavi good with no defense of his orchestration of the beirut attacks or the executions inside iran when he ran the bloodiest administration post-shah.   that kind of debating is rather slimy -- to enter a conversation where certain arguments have already been made and make an entry you can't even defend.

Subject: Re: [eDebate] ans gerbil on iran
From: james.farr at richmond.edu
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 02:46:25 -0400
CC: oldstrega at hotmail.com
To: edebate at www.ndtceda.com

point in fact, kevin explicitly responded to the argument in question approximately three days ago in an e-mail entitled "for the unnoteworthy 35%": 
"where we may disagree is that i don't think this *whole* thing is just a smoke-and-mirrors western media production. even if the CIA and its ilk have been instigating protests (and i agree that's fairly easy to assume based on the historical record), that doesn't mean there isn't *also *a LOT of pent up anger with the current regime (or whatever the hell else teen angst and rising expextations are directed against) that is part of this too. while it has to be 51% to win an election, if 35% of the populace is upset, that can still cause a regime serious headaches. the unrest may have catalyzed around the elections (or been lit afire by western propagandistic efforts to foment revolt), but the longer it goes on, the more it becomes about issues larger than one election." 
additionally, in addressing the specific evidence you selected to make the "CIA psychologically meddling" claim, i believe kevin explicitly addressed it (even if only dismissive in tone) as "a bit paranoiac". 
you've had three (or 2.5) days to catch his succinct rebut (however pathetic you may think it to be) to your conspiracy theory which makes non-falsifiable claims. after all, the key warrant for the CIA-Mossad-destabilization link evidence is that Obama hasn't publicaly declared the end to a program which is a) 'covert' (whatever that means) or b) would merely vindicate the paranoiac claims by the Iranian President that the West is 'out to get them.' 
but i suppose your right; nobody died, 35% of the iranian population was duped by an ingenious plot by the U.S. government and the lunar landing was staged. 
fucking crackpots, seriously. grow up, you're supposed to be a role model for me. 

On Jun 30, 2009, at 1:21 AM, Old Strega wrote:you're impossible to debate.  you're slimy.  you're a prick.  you have fun being one.    you cry when you get called names for being evasive.   you're prick for the sake of being a prick.
you refuse to answer arguments.  you appear incapable.   
you're going to push this on and on with evasion after evasion but i'm done because you're terrible and wasting my time.    
after many posts demanding WHY CAN'T YOU ANSWER A BASIC QUESTION you finally try to answer.    that's an asshole.   you don't know how to debate well.  that's why you didn't do well at any tournaments.
i don't care about being friendly to people like you.  
i have no respect for your intelligence.   why should i?   not only can you not debate but you refuse to learn.
how many lines of argumentation are we going to go through on iran where YOU DROP COMPLETELY THE ROLE OF THE CIA AND THE MOSSAD?
only a really stupid person would keep "debating" without answering that.
every statement you just made has already been defeated 10 times over by the US imperialism turns on psychologically manipulating the protesters.   all you are doing is adding confusion.  that's annoying beyond.
you do have a chance to answer the CIA involvement in the coup.  i've tried 10 times now to get you to but if you chose to do so, then either your sincerity or your intelligence must be in serious question.   i've tried every time but you refuse to answer and you just spew irrelevant arguments that are all completely SUBSUMED.

Hotmail? has ever-growing storage! Don?t worry about storage limits. Check it out._______________________________________________
eDebate mailing list
eDebate at www.ndtceda.com

Windows Live? SkyDrive?: Get 25 GB of free online storage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20090702/a710d47c/attachment.htm 

More information about the Mailman mailing list