New Pentagon video

[Charles Drago]

Yes he will Lauren, but with unnecessary sarcasm. I'm sorry but sometimes that sarcasm is the result of cognitive dissonance at work when someone won't accept better info., i.e. JJ & T. Carter's experiences. It goes without saying there are alternative possibilities for this event. If one can't share info. here without qualifying it from every angle to avoid getting criticized it doesn't make for a friendly environment.

Thank you, Lauren.

Gary,

The necessity of sarcasm arises in the mind of he or she who commits it. In my mind, you regularly and urgently invite it.

What makes the Judge and Carter information "better" for you? The fact that it is offered as an argument from authority?

When you suggest that I should not "be so literal minded," and that "[a]n upholstered seat that looks like an airliner seat Carter recognized indicates it is an airliner seat," you reveal your own perspective -- one that is wholly uninformed by deep political instinct, experience, and study.

WHAT upholstered seat? You admit that your "comment says nothing about its provenance," yet you implicitly argue for its evidentiary significance.

"Evidence" for WHAT? The government's conspiracy theory, or a cover-up? Provenance is EVERYTHING in this sort of situation. Please learn this lesson.

You accuse me of fostering and/or suffering from "cognitive dissonance" -- a term first applied to deep political analysis by George Michael Evica and me, by the way -- simply because I've applied my own considerable deep political experience and study (powered by instinct) to this story.

You would have us do WHAT, exactly? Accept arguments from authority? Suspend all critical functions? Make simple-minded, flawed judgments and bow from the waist as we do so?

My intention is not to quarrel, but rather to argue. You prefer WHAT, exactly?

Finally, your reference to John Simkin's Disinformation Forum was just too soft a slap. Weak, ineffectual, laughable ... much like your criticisms of my arguments.

I must reiterate: To admit that your "comment says nothing about [the alleged seat's] provenance" is to admit that your comment is of no relevance or value to deep political inquiry.