Amusing Freeper attempt at intellectual jujitsu

[Mizmoon]

This was so ridiculous, I just had to share it. This is a Freeper attempt at "explaining" why no WMDs were found and why it's no big deal. I swear, Bush could lead them into invading Canada if he told them the WMDs were in Quebec. "Look, they're over there! No, now they're over here!"
----------------------------------------------------------
A police department receives tips from 20 different people that the residents of a house on their street are in the business of manufacturing, selling and using drugs.

Well over a decade ago, the same occupants of that same home were found to be involved in all aspects of the drug trade. They were arrested, fined and placed on probation. Conditions of their probation included allowing law enforcement to search their home for more illegal drugs, mandatory drug testing and that the home would be under constant surveillance to prevent future drug manufacturing.

Over time, the occupants of the house have violated the terms of their probation. For the last few years, they have refused to cooperate at all with their probation officers and have taken to shooting at the officers when they come by to check on the home. Using the newly received tips, prior knowledge of drug activity in the home, and the refusal to cooperate with probation officers, law enforcement believes that these people are once again in the drug business.

Law enforcement brings evidence of prior and current drug activity to two different courts requesting a warrant to raid the home. Surprisingly, two probation officers are against the raid and refuse to cooperate in anyway. Yet the evidence is overwhelming and a warrant is secured from two separate judicial bodies. The occupants are given warning that they have 30 days to fully cooperate with law enforcement or the raid will commence. After 30 days of no cooperation, law enforcement carries out the raid.

Inside the house they find drug-manufacturing facilities, people who are known to have drug-making knowledge and experience, and vast amounts of money received from customers of the drug trade. Yet no large stockpiles of drugs are found, only small amounts scattered in various parts of the home.

Officials find evidence of bribes given to the two probation officers who refused to cooperate with the raid. Witnesses tell law enforcement that the occupants of the house, prior to the raid, were moving drugs out of the house yet they are not sure where they went.

Does this mean drugs never existed?

Does this mean the raid was based on lies?

Does this mean that all 20 residents of the street were wrong in their statements?

Should law enforcement not question the motivation of the two dissenting probation officers?

Should we not conclude that drugs indeed existed but were removed prior to the raid?
------------------------
These are comments submitted by the moran gallery:
To: Brytani

Too much logic for a liberal in your case. Use feelings like this.

"Weapons of Mass Destruction are bad for children and the environment. We should ask all possessors of WMDs to put them in a safe place and never use them. Then toast marshmellows and sing nice songs. I know it sounds like a tough stance but if it saves just one baby seal, it is worth it."

Got it!

8 posted on 10/13/2004 7:05:09 AM PDT by Conspiracy Guy (Dan Rather, "I lied, but I lied about the truth".)
--------
To: SlowBoat407
You're assuming that the liberals are going to agree with laws against making, selling, and using drugs. Now, if they were raiding a pharmeceutical company....

No, not a pharmeceutical company raid. Even that is not enough to get a Liberal's panties into a bunch. It should be an animal "rights" violation. After all, Liberals think your pet is worth more than your unborn child.
9 posted on 10/13/2004 7:08:22 AM PDT by Kidan (www.krashpad.com)
-------------------
To: Brytani
You hit the nail on the head with this analogy. The problem is that Liberal are either too stupid, or too full of pride to understand this comparison.

I have no doubt there are WMDs. Perhaps it will be the October surprise. To further support your point that the WMDs have been moved is the following.

What the common folk does not understand about nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons is that they cannot be destroyed. They must be stored for years in containers. I believe its in the area of around at least 50 to 100 years. I know this from the Marine Corps.

Now given that knowledge. Remember the WMDs Saddam used on the Kurds in the late 80's? Where are these WMDs being stored? No one can find them. Saddam said he disposed of them, but he has no evidence of storage, etc....

I believe some of the WMDs were moved to Syria and others were buried. After all did we not find some fighter jets that were buried in the Sand?

The MSM will never use this logic because they are doing their best to get Bush out of office. I hope they fail.
13 posted on 10/13/2004 7:26:22 AM PDT by Sprite518
-------------
To: Brytani

I've been arguing with a Liberal collegue lately about Iraq's WMD's and how they were likely shipped to Syria and or Lebanon. I've tried unsuccessfully for several days to locate the satellite pictures we have of the convoy of trucks that went to Syria just prior to our invasion. I also seem to remember Powell showing pictures of a SCUD variant on a truck headed for Syria, but so far I can't seem to find anything but a reference to the pictures. Does anybody know of a link to these photographs?

17 posted on 10/13/2004 7:31:46 AM PDT by Thermalseeker

[Rick Myers]

1. I just hate it when Freepers claim they understand LOGIC

:grr:

[MnFats]

2. Oh, sorry, Dubya. I understand it all now. War COMPLETELY justified.

Yes, the brilliant unshakable logic in this analogy has made me see the error of my ways!
Wow, am I embarrassed over not supporting the war.
I will never doubt my president again.

[JuniorPlankton]

3. The words

"Freeper" and "intellectual" should not be used in the same sentence.

[trotsky]

4. Gosh that analogy would be completely accurate if only...

you mentioned that no drugs were known to have been manufactured or used in the house in the past 10 years

or that another 20 neighbors said they hadn't seen any evidence of resumed drug activity

or that the house's initial supply of drugs and drug manufacturing equipment came from "law enforcement" in the first place

etc., etc.

[HootieMcBoob]

12. and that also if

Prior to the raid 2/3rds of the house were already under the control of the police.

And - it took the vast majority of the police officers and police funds in the town to raid the house and arrest the people inside and then required that the police remain in the house for an unknown number of years into the future.

And now there aren't enough police to protect the rest of the town from any of the other drug dealers and criminals in the town resulting in anarchy and a huge increase in the crime rate.

Also, in the raid and its aftermath a significant portion of the police from the town were either killed or seriously injured.

Also, a very large number of innocent people in the town are killed or seriously injured

Plus - The infrastructure of the town (electricity/water/etc.) is severely damaged resulting in disease and horrible conditions.

And - The unemployment rate in the town shoots up to over 50%

All to arrest some people who haven't produced any drugs in at least 10 years and had no plans or ability to do so.

[trotsky]

13. HOME RUN

Well put, HootieMcBoob.

[HFishbine]

18. And also if

The homeowners did in fact allow the police to inspect the home but the district attorney pulled them out because he didn't like the reports he was getting and wanted to conduct a raid anyway.

[skygazer]

5. Idiots

This was not a drug bust at Rush Limbaugh's house - it was a pre-emptive strike against a country that did not constitute an immediate threat to us.

Why do they feel the need to make these stupid analogies? I've seen a lot of them. The facts are that the administration had plenty of intelligence showing that those WMD's did NOT exist. They suppressed that intel, used only intel that supported their desire (to invade Iraq) and went ahead and did what they wanted to do.

The "probation officers" whose motives we should question are Bush and Cheney and Condi and Rumsfeld and the rest of the gang of thieves.

[MatrixEscape]

6. biological, and chemical weapons

can be destroyed with the right equipment. They are building plants to do so in America and Russia.

Don't they know that in the Marine Corps??

I like how they spin around a subject endlessly as if they could make it real if they talk and try to think about it long enough. Oh wait, they get that from the the tactics of their Party leaders.

[louis-t]

7. And if WMD's ARE the October surprise?

Why have they been hiding it so long? I think the October surprise was leaked by Rove: "We have lots of surprises for Kerry". They will release info on a daily basis on a multitude of subjects. Today it's a mass grave in Iraq, tomorrow it's something else. IT WILL BE RELENTLESS.

[Mountainman]

8. This is like beating your head with a hammer because it feels good when

you stop.

These fools have been had by Bush yet they continue to deny the truth even when Bush now says that there were no WMDs.

[displacedtexan]

9. Spelling and subj/verb agreement aren't their strong suit.

Thwack!

[denverbill]

10. This analogy is just so ridiculous it's pathetic.

#1, Saddam wasn't doing anything illegal in the late 80's when he manufactured the chemical weapons. The US still has stockpiles of chemical weapons. Are we also on committing illegal acts worthy of deposing our leader?

#2, the WMD's were made illegal when Saddam signed a peace treaty in 91. By all accounts, all of his WMD's were destroyed, therefore, every justification claiming that he was interfering with inspections or not cooperating are baseless. He claimed all along they had been destroyed, and we claimed he was lying. We know now that he was telling the truth, so every claim we made along those lines is invalid.

Here's a better analogy.

A guy down the street owns a gun. It was perfectly legal for him to own a gun. One day, he breaks into his neighbor George's house and steals a $2000 TV. He is caught and convicted of a felony, and is forced to give up his weapon.

A couple years later, George is spying on him. He doesn't like him anymore. He thinks he has seen his neighbor handling a gun. He's heard his neighbor say things like 'shoot' and 'ammo' and has fuzzy photos of what looks like a gun. He has also seen copies of 'Guns and Ammo' magazine in his trash. George calls the police.

The police show up with a warrant to search his house. The man allows the search and the cops find no guns. George insists the guy has a gun and calls the cops worthless. He decides to take matters into his own hand. That night, George grabs his own gun, and breaks into the guys house. The man's son catches him breaking in and tries to stop him and George shoots and kills him, as well as his dog. George rips up the walls, ceilings, plumbing, and digs up the entire yard but never finds a gun.

He makes a citizen's arrest of the man anyway, claiming that the man does have a gun and probably gave it to a neighbor when he saw George coming and would have needed the weapon most. Either that, or he destroyed the weapon when the police showed up with a warrant.

But in any case, George feels he was right to break into his house, kill his son and dog, and destroy his property, because the man had a history of breaking into his neighbor's houses.

[Monte Carlo]

11. There's nothing like a strained anecdote to prop up a tired point...

... and the right wing excels at that. It's like the restaurant bill one that surfaces every once in a while.

[nickinSTL]

14. give me a f*ing break.

I should have known better than to read this :eyes:

"Liberals think your pet is worth more than your unborn child"

Right, and we're going to FORCE all you darn Conservatives to get your wives and daughters to have abortions. :mad: idiots

"The MSM will never use this logic because they are doing their best to get Bush out of office."

Ha! What!?! The mainstream media that has been trashing Kerry for nearly a year now? Giving credence to the SBVTs? And giving * a pass on all his lies? :wtf:

[zbdent]

16. Don't forget the real logic twister

Liberals are killing all the babies and having tons of babies at the same time!

(The logic that all liberals want to force abortions on you, and yet all liberals want women on welfare to have babies - go figure)

[MsUnderstood]

15. Here is some logic for you

You have an employee at your company. You don't' like him but he runs a department, same as you.

One day, you accuse him of stealing. You get him fired. You trash his name all over town so he can't get another job. Your company files criminal charges against him.

Uh-oh, evidence shows that the employee was not stealing.

Your company isn't gonna give him his job back.

He's already been thrashed, reputation is gone.

But do you still continue to pursue the criminal charges just to prove that they were right? Do you make up stuff and plant evidence to show that you were right?

[The Wielding Truth]

17. Isn't it amazing how they look past the ability of Bush to use any means

any twisted fact any nasty feeling to get his way.They are having the wool pulled over their eyes.Bush is a slimy lier a smooth used car salesman who's only goal is to prove he is right and superior to his father He has made it a point to use the Christan right and discount minorities. He plays on fear and faith. He is not one to have his finger on the nukes.I liked this post.

u know what really short circuits cons heads?
when i ask them ‘if gore lost the pop vote by
1/2 a mil, then been appointed pres by the sc,
if we’d been attacked on 911, and osama was
still @ large, if he had blown a record surplus
into a record deficit, and if a million less
people had jobs than 4 years ago…would you say
he deserved another term?’

Comment by hunter — 10/10/2004 @ 1:45 am
You can use this logic on the Freeps.

[Arkana]

19. What a bunch of pretentious asswipes.

"Shipped to Syria or Lebanon?"

Well, then I guess we should bomb those two next! Cause you know how everyone around Saddam loved him so much. Oh wait--they didn't.

"Remember the WMDs Saddam used on the Kurds in the late 80s?"

Oh, you mean the ones we gave to him?

Their intellectual jujitsu is nothing more than a bunch of blind people with swords attacking each other a la Blinken from "Robin Hood: Men In Tights."

[Mizmoon]

20. Yes, they DO want Syria and Lebanon next

right after Iran.

If it was left up to them, there wouldn't be a young man left in this country. They'd all be drafted and fighting in the M.E.

[Ravenseye]

21. I started to do a point by point response

but it's just too ludicrous.

They claimed there were 'drugs'. They claimed they knew where the 'drugs' were. They claimed the occupants of the house would be happy for us to get rid of the 'drugs' and the 'dealers'.

They 'stormed the house' and found no 'drugs'. They made claims that the 'drugs' were removed, but they don't know how or to where. They tortured and humiliated the innocent 'occupants' that had nothing to do with the 'drugs' and actually wanted the 'dealers' gone.

Now after almost 2 years, the 'police' still haven't left the 'house', and haven't found a single 'drug'. They routinely break into people's 'rooms' and arrest them, taking them 'into the basement' to torture and interogate and humiliate them. The 'police' themselves want to leave, but the 'chief of police' won't let them, and refused to admit that a mistake was made.

All the evidence gathered from the 'house' by numerous parties and individuals indicates that after the first 'arrest' that the 'dealers' had discontinued 'making, using, or dealing drugs'. The 'police' insisted that they would have gotten back into 'the drug business' if they had had the chance. All evidence though, shows that the 'probation' was in fact keeping the 'dealers' in check.

Now the neighbors of this 'house' are starting to get angry. Two of their neighbors might actually be 'dealing drugs' themselves. The police though continue to focus on the original house, and especially ignore the 'dealers' on the 'east side' of 'town' who are openly proclaiming not only their desire to aquire 'drugs' but to 'deal' them themselves.

I could go on...but whats the point. It's a ludicrous analogy.