Reply #9: Can you please clarify your point? [View All]

[greyl]

Are you talking about this section where I.D. says that Pearl Harbor was mentioned twice in PNAC, and where I.D. quotes PNAC about 30 times more thoroughly than Loose Change did?:

Pearl Harbor, as in a situation we're completely unprepared to handle with our current capabilities and technology, revealing formerly unseen shortcomings. This would make the necessities of a transformation a lot more obvious, and therefore it wouldn't take as long. Avery's quote makes a lot more sense with a little context—yet again.

If so, you'll have to come up with a better argument than the one you've offered.

j.q.c.: "PNAC mentions new Pearl Harbor, Loose Change mentions PNAC mentioning a new Pearl Harbor, and the ID site tries to use that as a problem?" 'They're jealous, nit-picking, swiftboating, mud throwing, butt pickers.'{condensed -ed}

I mean c'mon, that's a pretty damn weak 'argument'.

edit:clarity