When should you begin distrusting someone, generally?

 

Answer...

The very moment you learn of their existence -_-

But physical evidence can easily be faked, so what exactly is "solid" about the Osama confession tape from 2001?  Do you seriously think this couldn't be faked?  If it's possible to fake it, then the question becomes how probable that it is faked.  It came from an administration that would obviously have the capability of Hollywood to manufacture fake video evidence, and who is plagued with copious amounts of greivous lies.

I honestly don't understand where you people got your ridiculous belief that ANYTHING used as "evidence" from the Bush administration, should first be trusted until proven fraudulent.

How many more lies and deciet and corruption must Bush engage in, before you finally start suspecting him of manufacturing false evidence?

Can you give an argument that Bushian evidence SHOULD be trusted until proved false?

I'm willing to discuss any argument that Bush SHOULD be trusted, given our general agreement that Bush is a liar and murderer, and has manufactured false evidence before.  If I'm not irrational to be skeptical of Bushian evidence, then quit pretending the problem is with my lack of open-mindedness.  I don't trust people after they use manufactured false evidence and lies to send American people to their deaths.  But the rest of you seem determined to believe Bush is innocent till proven guilty.  Sorry dudes, Bush's record of past actions doesn't justify giving him the benefit of the doubt in a controversy over his "evidence."

Unfortunately, your reasons for quitting the debate don't wash, there is all the possibility and probability of logical discourse. 

But I have a lot of practice with people who support Bushian evidence, who then "wash their hands" of talking with me.  Smoke and mirrors doesn't last long in a debate.

 

skepticdudeI do not believe that Bush   manufactured evidence for the 9/11 attack.Al Qaeda is real. I can speak from experience. They do exist and they do want to kill every non-Muslim and even Muslims who get in their way off trying to spread Islam to every part of the Earth they can.   These terrorists are the murderers. They are coming into their own the same way the Catholic Church did 600b years ago…they are really pushing their fundamentalist view of Islam  across the Muslim world and beyond.As to why our government made decisions to go into Iraq and the mess they made once we got there…well, that is a another story and yes, facts have most definitely been distorted about our blunders there.Do not always assume that the evidence, or what is reported to be evidence, is accurate. Do not assume that you or I, or anyone for that matter could even begin to know what our intelligence communities know or have at least learn over the last seven years, and if they even can figure it out for themselves.9/11 occurred because, we became apathetic and were not paying attention to the jackasses who we alienated, after we trained them in Afghanistan (mujahedeen), they had no war to fight…so they took the fight to us…the infidels…because we are a “Christian nation”….even if we were an “Atheist nation”…now there is a funny thought…they would still be after us… Anyway …HeyZeusCreaseToe,Back to the original thought about trusting people…Can a person ever truly trust themselves?I agree with you…trust no one else…but can we even trust ourselves?Just wanted to see what you thought? "This is Louisiana, Chief! I mean, how do you know who your daddy is? Because your momma told you so." -- Bill Brousard

 

Why weren't the Taliban trying to kill things all non-Muslim, when they met with U.S. oil interests in Washington D.C., months before 911, to discuss a pipeline deal through Afghanistan?  The deal was not sweet enough for the Taliban, and they rejected it.  John O'Neil discovered a memo in 1998 from Atef showing that Osama had detailed knowledge of the Taliban/U.S. pipeline negotiations. http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:aYlC5XKJVJYJ:dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2002/06/05/memo/+Taliban+pipeline&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us Obviously, something is seriously wrong with your idea that Al Qaeda are trying to kill all things non-Muslim.  They weren't firing any weapons on Bush and his clan, the alleged object of supreme hatred by extremist Muslims, when they met with them to discuss this pipeline deal.  The deal fell through, and now, suddenly, 911 happens, and it's all the Taliban's fault.  Do a little research before you respond.  Brisard is a qualified expert in terrorism financing, and wrote a book entitlted "Bin Laden: the Forbidden truth", a best-seller in Europe, but banned in America for a while.  That's where it is alleged that the U.S., months before 911, tried to negotiate a pipeline deal with the Taliban through Afghanistan, the Taliban didn't like the deal, and the U.S. then said "accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we'll bury you under a carpet of bombs." Richard Butler is the former chief U.N. weapons inspector. He is now on the Council on Foreign Relations, and he used the "carpet of bombs" quotation in a CNN interview.  He was still in the process of verifying the claim.  And Clinton, of course, allowed Osama to slip away, refusing offers from Sudan to capture and deliver Osama to the U.S.   (Washington Post, 10/3/2001).  See also: http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Prior_Knowledge/Clinton_let_bin_laden.htm So if you really think about it, capturing Osama would then make America cry out even louder "what the hell are we still doing in Iraq?".  Bush NEEDS Osama to keep escaping after being cornered by US military forces, like he has 4 times previously. Brisard's MO is here:http://www.terrorfinance.org/the_terror_finance_blog/jeancharles-brisard-contr.html He was the lead attorney for the 911 victims lawsuit, and was sued for "libel" in various courts several times by Khaled bin Mahfouz, among other billionare Muslim oilmen.  KBM was former investor in the terrorist financing "Bank of Credit and Commerce International", which laundered money for drug trafficking, terrorists and illegal arms dealers. He was indicted for fraud but the case was dropped after he paid $225m in a civil settlement with New York state and the Federal Reserve. KBM is a multi-billionaire oil-businessman.  Don't think money doesn't talk in a court of law. Brisard eventually signed a full confession stating he exaggerrated KBM's role in financing Osama, but there is plenty of evidence that Brisard's confession was insincere and only made due to threats. One French court gave the win to Brisard, ordering KBM to pay Brisard costs and damages, and overruling a previous court ruling in KBM's favor. I guess Brisard got a little too close to the truth. But no, you aren't really understanding geopolitics if you think it's fundamentalist Muslims against the U.S.  Go learn a little more about counter-intelligence and war propaganda, used effectively for centuries before you were born, then ask yourself how stupid it is to think that the USA is NOT doing the same regarding this Osama "problem".