From the sublime to the ludicrous

[Xavier_Onassis]

Time will tell which of us is right, though XO hedged his bet so he can't lose.
========================================================
I am not betting.

Nor do I consider this to be any sort of competition. It is not about winning or losing for me.
There are no prizes.

I just do not know. There appears to be smoke, there could be fire, and there is clearly secrecy involved.

No ambassadors were assassinated. That is a good thing.

[BT]

Where do you get off claiming I think he shouldn't be able to say......anything??

Your warning about using the L word. and your admission after my post that you erroneously assumed he was referring to you concerning prevarication. Not sure how you got that when it was OBVIOUS he was referring to President Hypocrite.

[sirs]

Hopefully then, now that we're both enlightened, that you'll grasp, that I'd never say to anyone that they can't say X, about anyone or anything else. 

[BT]

So your warning about using the L word was non specific.

Ok if you say so.

[sirs]

No, but twist it anyway you wish

[BT]

I think i'll let sleeping dogs lay.

You admitted the warning was in error, a mistaken reading of what Mikey was saying and to whom he was referring.

 

[sirs]

In other words, hardly non-specific

[BT]

No you were just wrong in issuing the warning.

[sirs]

So much for letting sleeping dogs lie, and again hardly non-specific.

[Xavier_Onassis]

The above is why discussing anything with sirs is a total waste of time. All discussions end in some silly and  obscure nonsense that has nothing to do with anything

[Michael Tee]

<<I am not betting.>>

Of course not.  I was using "hedging the bet" as a metaphor to indicate that you weren't committed to either possibility while I was favouring the possibility of the administration's story just being one more lie to justify one more aggression.  Bad metaphor, I guess, because even a hedged bet is still a bet, which is different from any kind of commitment, however loose, to one side.  Sloppy  phrasing.  Sorry that I inadvertently misrepresented your position.

[Xavier_Onassis]

The US administration and the CIA have clearly lied about all sorts of things in the past.

The President has only secondhand information in any case.

On the other hand, the Iranian government are also noted liars.

So one or both sides are lying about this.

Information is classified and certainly not thorough. Some day we may know what the truth is, but not now.

[sirs]

The above is why discussing anything with sirs is a total waste of time. All discussions end in some silly and  obscure nonsense that has nothing to do with anything

And yet you continue to respond with typical rhetorical bisquick, devoid of any substance to the debate at hand.  Are you a masochist?  Your beef, I'm afraid, is with Bt apparently, since he's the one that brought up sleeping dogs and non-specific references

[BT]

And yet it was you who pulled a Carly Simon on us thinking Mikey's post was about you, forcing you to issue your famous specific L word warning, which later you admitted your were woefully wrong in doing.

[Xavier_Onassis]

More silly and useless blather from sirs. He is surely loaded with the stuff.