HM Re: [extropy-chat]TheNeoConMind-Trick(wasletterconcerningpresidential growth)

[Herb Martin]

> From: > Brett Paatsch
> Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2005 5:12 PM
> To: ExI chat list
> Subject: Re: HM Re: 
> [extropy-chat]TheNeoConMind-Trick(wasletterconcerningpresident
> ial growth)
> 
> [A lot of additional words from Mr Martin snipped out
>  and still available in his post ]
> 
> > That it authorized war is open to discussion ...
> 
> No longer between you and I Mr Herb Martin as the above 
> statement you've made and which I have challenged you on
> is false, resolution 1441 was not understood by all who signed
> it to authorise force and I think your above comment about
> it being "open to discussion" shows that you know that.

So you answer facts and logic and an honest statement
of where discussion might make sense by stomping your
(metaphorical) foot and declaring your own victory --
such is intellectual dishonesty on your part.

> I will credit no further words from you as being true when
> you are unwilling to stand behind the statements you have 
> already made.  Whether others do is a matter for them. 

Thank you -- your failure to listen, to work through facts
and logic and your unwillingness to consider arguments
is it's own reward when dealing with human fly paper such
as yourself.

Your impotence to erect even a simple argument using such
facts and logic is reason enough to be shed of your but
your unilateral declarations of victory are the act of
a "bully" who finds someone stands up to him and then
stomps that little foot and says "No fair, facts and logic
do not count."

> For others I offer this refute to your false statement. 
> 
> 1441 was unanimous in its entirety. It unanimously granted
> Iraq "one final opportunity", the duration and expiration of 
> which was not the US President's right to unilaterally 
> determine. The Security Council was "seized of the matter". 

Yes, one final opportunity which Saddam failed to take.

One final opportunity before "serious consequences".

Saddam made his choice and received those serious 
consequences.  Thank you for admitting it was unanimous
and that is was the FINAL OPPORTUNITY.

The US brought truth to that resolution -- it was in
fact the FINAL OPPORTUNITY.

> Under the operative provisions of the UN Charter signed 
> and ratified by the US Senate and therefore under the 
> provisions of the US Constitution and by his oath of office
> President Bush, was obliged NOT to instigate the use of
> military force on that same matter without the Security Council
> determining the end of that final opportunity.    

No, he was required (requested I believe but required is ok)
to take the matter to the UN, which he did and received a
UNANIMOUS resolution to the surprise of practically everyone.

Had he not received 1441 he still would have been authorized
to remove Saddam.

> That a further resolution was required was the reason why 
> a further resolution was sought by the United States and the
> United Kingdom. 

No, such attempts by the dishonest such as you to "change 
history" will not be accepted by those who know and remember
that in truth the reason for attempting another resolution
was because Tony Blair and the British that that such an
ATTEMPT was important.

The final outcome was however that no such resolution was
ever formally offered and 1441 remained the controlling
resolution.

> Brett Paatsch

That you have rejected all future facts that I may offer
thankfully gives me leave to give your messages the 
attention that all such messages from the intellectually
dishonest such as yourself deserve:  nothing unless I
choose to refute such lies for the benefits of others
who may otherwise be taken in.

Thank you.