Oil for Food humanitarian aid?

It really is quite simple, we will all get along as soon as you realize I'm right :D
 
as long as i can reserve the right to convince myself you are also wrong.

i think that made sense :nuts2:
 
as soon as you convince yourself, share. I've seen no concrete evidence to disprove what I've been arguing.
 
the oil for food wotsit has been going for years. wrong people been getting the food though, which is hardly a surprise because rarely do the right people get it with those deals.
 
yeah but you said you aren't debating the reasoning anymore so whether or not i am convinced is a moot point. you are and have made it clear that discussion of it will not move your position so my sharing is of little importance.
 
I ran out of mud....

I have this other substance though...not sure what it is....it looks like mud...but it isn't....

hmmmm...


I'll get back to you on this....

MADrin
 
always best to check before you sling, some people just don't like chocolate being thrown at them :shrug:
 
thank you gonz for an interesting discussion. i have family near london to see tomorrow and its nearly 1am here so i take my leave

night :)
 
Professur said:
Pard'n me. Just passing through.

Oh, here's a little reading material on the subject, if anyone want's to continue an informed discussion on the subject.
Click to expand...

So now the Washington Times is considered an unbiased source all of the sudden?

Geezus, it's even an opinion piece like Gonz was complaining about.

What's going on here? :confuse3:
 
So which of my sources are in question here exactly?

BBC?

Guardian?

Sfgate?

Amnesty International?
Click to expand...


Unbiased? You read Amnesty International, SFGate, and liberal shit like that and consider it unbiased.

What in the fuck is the difference?
 
PostCode said:
So which of my sources are in question here exactly?

BBC?

Guardian?

Sfgate?

Amnesty International?
Click to expand...


Unbiased? You read Amnesty International, SFGate, and liberal shit like that and consider it unbiased.

What in the fuck is the difference?
Click to expand...

I didn't say they were unbiased, I did however ask which ones were in question. Especially since Putor used info from Amnesty to make his point and it was the only reason I was even on their site.

What do you read?
 
prof never said it was unbaised, just interesting reading material for those wanting to be informed on the subject. that subject could be washington post news articles ;)
 
ris said:
prof never said it was unbaised, just interesting reading material for those wanting to be informed on the subject. that subject could be washington post news articles ;)
Click to expand...

Prof didn't claim it was unbiased. Just relating thiings back to earlier in the thread really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top