Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...

That is exactly the opposite of what you are. You accept every statement
issued by the government as the truth and I don't remember you ever
questioning any of it.


You're a poor judge of character.

So are you.



Don't you recognize a scam when it's held so close to your nose?


Always.

Then why don't you recognize the constantly changing reasons given by our
government for going to war as the scam it is? They'll keep on doing it until
everybody says, "ah, that was it", all the while forgetting that each and every
one of the replaced reasons was phony and was floated only to see if it would be
accepted.

Gen. Wesley Clark stated during the debate in S. C. that he attended a Pentagon
briefing some two weeks after 9-11, during which they were told that our primary
target since day one was Iraq, whether or not they had anything to do with 9-11.
That's the same story that former Treas. Secy. Paul O'Neil said in his biography
that he heard during the first cabinet meeting he attended. Since it appears to
be true, coming from two disparate sources, why was Sadaam's alleged
relationship with OBL and Al Qaeda given as one of those abandoned reasons for
going to war?

Your government lies to you and you persist in denying it. If I am such a poor
judge of character in that I'd suggest that anyone who believes that
government-floated fairy tale might be naive or gullible, I don't mind resting
my case and letting anybody else reading this exchange decide how bad a judge of
character I might be.

And before you say it, your denial is noted. Anybody else out there?



You may think blind acceptance is a facet of skepticism, but I certainly
don't.


Nobody accused you of thinking.