He is an imperfect human being. You cannot say you would have done better in his shoes, as you never have been or will be in his
By that same token, there is no way you can say I wouldn’t do better because according to you, he is imperfect, and you don’t know if I would or
wouldn’t do a better job.
It doesn't matter why he should be afforded well wishes. Life doesn't work that way. You can ask that question for almost anything; there is
no answer for it. You haven't been in the man's head; neither have I.
How can you say the “why” doesn’t matter when your version of “why” is linked to Karma and other ideologies you hold? Moreover, you are
correct, I’m not in the mans head just as you aren’t in my head nor anyone else’s head, yet you judge us by our words and falsely attribute our
difference of opinions to hate, aggression and whatever it is you conjure up. This man, Bill Clinton, was being judged by his actions and truth be
told, many people here have a valid point when it comes to his actions and how they led to unjustified death and not deserving any sympathy or well
Why shouldn't he be afforded well wishes?
Read some of the replies by other posters. There are many compelling reasons as to why he shouldn’t but not one compelling reason, other than
previously held ideologies, as to why he should.
I am a schizophrenic. Whenever I start thinking negatively, my mind begins to wander, and I end up having to catch myself before it goes too
I have no comment.
Psychologists will be the first ones to AGREE that your mindset throughout the day creates your mood and how you live your life.
Nothing I’ve said has to do with your mindset throughout the day and how it may create a certain mood. Therefore, telling me psychologist may agree
about it is highly irrelevant and completely off topic. Again, you said what you wish upon others you wish upon yourself. Do you have any evidence to
support this claim? If no we can move on, if yes, post the information for all to examine.
Why think negatively when positive thinking is proven to be healthy for you?
What is positive or negative is a matter of personal experience, opinion, preference, bias or predisposition. You may feel it is negative to wish
death, however, one may feel it is a positive thing to wish death. For example, in the debate forum there is a debate about assassinating dictators. I
suggest you read the debate as it may be of use to you.
It doesn't matter if people force something on you or not; it is your decision to let it be forced even more, or to walk away.
It does matter, especially when people are saying I’m wrong and accusing myself and others of behaving in a certain fashion yet offering no
substantial evidence to validate their claims.
If it means nothing to you, treat it as if it were nothing. To spend the time to address it only makes others see a weakness in your side of
the debate, and they will continue to use it to try and undermine your position.
You know nothing of debate. Here I’ll prove it: what is my premise?
And yes. Everything goes back to beliefs that others wished to force feed on those with opposing views. That is how the world goes
You’ve just lost your premise and contradict what you’ve previously typed!
I don't think you understand this completely. You may have responded before you were able to think it through. He didn't say "if something
happens, you wished it upon yourself." He said, "What you wish on someone else, you are inevitably wising upon your self."
No, I thought it through completely you just don’t want to address it. There is no evidence to suggest that wishing something on others is
inevitably wishing something on yourself, and with all the karma talk going on in this thread, it is only natural to assume the person implied it
would inevitably happen. If it is not a case of it inevitably happening, there is no need to warn anyone period and no need to mention karma.
If you have a son who gets hit by a car, it would only be relevant if you had wished for anothers' child to get hit by a car. Otherwise, it is
off topic of his original point, whether it be opinion or not.
No, it is relevant because we’re now talking about karma (something I never introduced) and it was cited as an example of how one can experience
misfortune yet be totally innocent when it comes to wrong doing or ill will.
Do you see where you twisted his words around yet? You are aggressive with how you approach things
His words were never twisted, you simply don’t know how to read critically. There is nothing in my posts that signal aggression, hostility, malice
or anything remotely negative. Most of my posts have been questions, questions yourself and others either misinterpret or completely avoid because you
lack the capacity to address them.
You say others force their beliefs on you, yet you stampede through threads with YOUR OWN BELIEFS, and then berate anyone who says
More lies. If I ever did such a thing I’d have warnings next to my name and be in the red when it comes to ATS points. I’m not even going to ask
you to post proof because you’re incapable of doing it so I’ll move on.
Hypocrisy doesn't dwell well here. You should know that, you've been registered for 5 years. I would think someone who's been interested in
these things for so long would be more careful with their arguments, rather than sloppy.
How is the length I’ve been here remotely related to what we’re discussing? Do you see me saying you aren’t making sense because you’re
schizophrenic? No, you see me saying you don’t make sense and providing evidence to support the claim. Does your mental condition a contributing
factor? Who knows? But is it important? No, but since you’re so interested in my time on ATS, I only made my first post in AUGUST 2009. In regards
to being sloppy, again, you simply lack the ability to use inductive and deductive reasoning to arrive at logical conclusions, so I expect you to type
the things you type.
Anything and everything can be put up to debate. What exactly is perfection? What exactly is soil? What exactly is radio waves?
If everything is up for debate why did you bring it up in the first place? If it’s up for debate why say someone is wrong yet offer no evidence to
support the claim? And contrary to what you believe, everything is not up for debate.
To say we know facts through science is ignorance. Science is based upon the idea that at any given time, something can be discovered and
changed everything. What we "know" know is only a crude understanding of our surroundings.
You aren’t making much sense right now.
Nice job avoiding the question, though.
I didn’t avoided anything. You asked me questions I gave you answers and asked you more questions. If you’re going to ask me about mistakes, it is
only logical that we first define what a mistake is because what you view as a mistake may not be a mistake to me and vice versa. You ask about living
my entire life and perfection yet these are also matters of opinion or personal experience. You posted the definition of mistake, but does the
absence of mistake mean perfection? Based on your definition my answer is yes and no. Yes because I could list something and you can call it a
mistake. No because I can list something and myself or others will either say it was the correct thing to do, or may say I was predestined (not
predisposed) to doing it anyway. Does that mean I should not be held responsible? No. Does that mean it was a mistake? Hardly.
You continue to say others are not answering your questions, and yet you avoid a few yourself. I believe I've already mentioned
Like others, you need to stop using words out of context. Moreover, I didn’t avoid anything. I answered in a way that would force you to clarify
yourself and force me into a corner.
How do you not? Have you never felt stress, failure, fear of failure? Have you never worried? It isn't something you can explain. You must
experience it for yourself to truly understand how the human mind works.
You’re answering a question with a question. You made the claim that if we put a “normal man” (whatever that is) in a position of power that he
would suffer from anxiety attacks. However, you’ve yet to define what a normal man is and are implying that Bill Clinton is an abnormal man. Now if
this is the case, when it comes to decision-making and morality, should he be held to a higher or lower standard? Moreover, how do you know what the
average man would do if we’ve yet to test things out by putting the average man in there?
I try not to rely on the "facts" the media have shown us isn't all that “reliable." Unless you were there, you cannot know what really
I said nothing of the media. I said other members and myself, i.e. your peers and ATS. If we apply your logic no one would be convicted of murder
unless their was airtight eye witness testimony and proof. In fact, conviction based on circumstantial evidence wouldn’t even exist if we apply your
train of thought. And before you say this is off topic, it isn’t as being present at an event is not a prerequisite to truth. However, what we do
know, for a fact, is Clinton had an aspirin factory bombed. That is fact. Click the link I provided and educate yourself.
After all, the government can blame anything they want on anyone. Who says they didn't undermind his authority, screw up, and then blame it on
him, knowing we would believe their story over his?
See above and refer to posts by previous members.
Simply because you are not given the answer you were looking for, does not, in any way, conclude that the answer is incorrect.
The only answer I’m looking for is a logical answer. So far, no one on your side of the fence has presented a logical answer (an answer based on
inductive and deductive reasoning and not belief and pure speculation.)
As for the "hate," I've already redefined it as "aggressive." Better?
No, it’s actually worse as your implying I’m in the wrong and absolving others for their actions. If I were “aggressive” my aggression would
be justified, yet I’m here as calm as can be and continue to expose the hypocrisy of yourself and people who think as you.
^Practice what you preach.
I am. I do it in every post and you should try it sometime.
[edit on 13-2-2010 by EMPIRE]