You don't have to pay to see them at all. Any public library will have access to those journals. Go ahead and dismiss the real research that's out there, you obviously know better because you have isolated experience. Your view on Iraq and the Bush administration in general very much relies on this concept of persecution and looming liberal bias. I offered you some abstracts and conclusions, and I even offered to PM you some other materials so you could educate yourself. Amazingly enough, I never heard back. Why? Because you don't care what's real. Even if you did read those studies you'd probably just assume they were a bunch of liberals too.Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Yeah, it's not true that Reuters, AP, and CNN have all put forth complete BS that, somehow, always tends to be anti-war, anti-Bush, or anti-US in nature. Rathergate wasn't liberal in nature. The fake soldiers and real soldiers making up stories about Iraq weren't liberal either.
Why, to prove it you can even provide a couple links, out of the hundreds of studies you claim to exist that show otherwise, that one has to pay for to even see. Yeah buddy. You've been over it and showed everyone.
Edit: btw, I'm still waiting for your answers to my questions in this thread.
I'll give you a hint though: reality doesn't care what you think. Also, how many studies do I have to link before somehow that fulfills your requirements? How much of my own time do I have to spend feeding your ignorance? You should want to go learn these things for yourself, you shouldn't need me to go find things to teach you with.
I already laughed at you in that other thread enough and told you that I wasn't debating definitions with you. You were flailing and attempting to change the argument to one you could win. I've had more then my fill of those stupid arguments with you, and so I felt that reminding you that you were a 40+ year old man that was behaving that way was enough.