|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 10:42 AM Original message |
Questions for OCTers and observations about inductive vs deductive thinking on 9/11 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MervinFerd (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 11:29 AM Response to Original message |
1. Hamden, buddy, this is nonsense. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 12:13 PM Response to Reply #1 |
2. Your refutation seems to be simply ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wildbilln864 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 12:16 PM Response to Reply #2 |
3. Yes you've nailed him, Hamden! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 12:28 PM Response to Reply #3 |
4. I really think it is how some people process information |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 12:32 PM Response to Reply #4 |
6. Don't forget those who for one reason or another only use induction. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MervinFerd (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 12:31 PM Response to Reply #2 |
5. The methods of epidemiological research are well-established and valid. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 12:46 PM Response to Reply #5 |
7. There is no "one" method of induction |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MervinFerd (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 01:04 PM Response to Reply #7 |
12. "Legal Logic"? OK, but the Truther evidence is invalid there, too. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Grateful for Hope (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 12:49 PM Response to Original message |
8. Excellent analysis, HR |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 12:50 PM Response to Original message |
9. Very articulate |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 12:51 PM Response to Reply #9 |
10. I knew you would show up name calling |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 06:54 PM Response to Reply #10 |
56. You have to know that wasn't name calling. You're making it up. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MervinFerd (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 01:05 PM Response to Reply #9 |
13. You have greatly improved on my responses. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bolo Boffin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 01:13 PM Response to Reply #9 |
14. And by inductive reasoning, I deduce... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RedSock (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 03:17 PM Response to Reply #14 |
27. debunked???? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 03:22 PM Response to Reply #27 |
29. I hadn't even caught that -- it perfectly represents the attitude |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bolo Boffin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 04:54 PM Response to Reply #29 |
39. I repeat. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AZCat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 03:23 PM Response to Reply #27 |
30. Are you giving up on the rest of the items in the list? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bolo Boffin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 04:51 PM Response to Reply #27 |
38. Debunked is not the only option I offered. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RedSock (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 05:55 PM Response to Reply #38 |
46. which have been debunked? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bolo Boffin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 06:18 PM Response to Reply #46 |
49. LOLOLOLOLOLOL |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RedSock (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 06:29 PM Original message |
why not back up your claim? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bolo Boffin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 08:00 PM Response to Original message |
60. Honest debate? Bwha! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RedSock (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 09:32 PM Response to Reply #60 |
64. forget HR then |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rman (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 05:48 AM Response to Reply #27 |
81. - the refusal of Bush and Cheney to testify under oath |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 01:34 PM Response to Reply #9 |
18. OCTer modus operandi: 1. Post irrelevant name calling |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 01:49 PM Response to Reply #18 |
21. Not really |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 02:35 PM Response to Reply #21 |
25. "Almost everything on the list you posted is not material " |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 02:54 PM Response to Reply #25 |
26. It's breathtaking, isn't it? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 04:26 PM Response to Reply #26 |
36. What's really breathtaking is the |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 10:14 PM Response to Reply #36 |
65. So now the criticism that "the movement" can not formulate a |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 10:19 PM Response to Reply #65 |
66. How about a coherent |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bryan Sacks (732 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 12:54 PM Response to Original message |
11. Like this approach, Hamden, but one question |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 01:30 PM Response to Reply #11 |
17. The deductive part of the smoking issue ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mirandapriestly (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 01:19 PM Response to Original message |
15. "Many hard core OCTers seem to be incapable of inductive thinking" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 01:22 PM Response to Reply #15 |
16. Personally I suspect it's the latter. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mirandapriestly (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 02:13 AM Response to Reply #16 |
77. me too, especially after a recent discovery....eom |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bolo Boffin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 02:38 AM Response to Reply #77 |
78. Oh, do tell. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 01:39 PM Response to Reply #15 |
19. It's quite a limitation and you see it on display here |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 01:53 PM Response to Reply #19 |
22. Good thing you have taken the high |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 02:27 PM Response to Reply #22 |
24. This is why you are impossible to take seriously |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 03:21 PM Response to Reply #24 |
28. Actually I am now questioning your |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AZCat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 03:24 PM Response to Reply #28 |
31. Several individuals actually, but I get your point. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 03:27 PM Response to Reply #28 |
32. Did you read the OP? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AZCat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 03:34 PM Response to Reply #32 |
33. So let me get this straight... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 04:23 PM Response to Reply #33 |
35. Did you read the OP? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 04:20 PM Response to Reply #32 |
34. Your OP was about OCT'ers not engineers |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 04:28 PM Response to Reply #34 |
37. That's just the point about inductive method |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hack89 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 04:59 PM Response to Reply #37 |
40. A very self serving idea .. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 05:12 PM Response to Reply #40 |
42. Well you've confirmed the OP -- thanks |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
William Seger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 12:42 PM Response to Reply #42 |
87. WTF is this babble, Hamden? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hack89 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 05:06 PM Response to Reply #37 |
41. Does that mean then .. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 05:14 PM Response to Reply #41 |
43. CD is just a hypothesis, of course |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hack89 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 05:22 PM Response to Reply #43 |
44. You realize, don't you .. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 05:54 PM Response to Reply #44 |
45. That's just not correct |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 06:13 PM Response to Reply #45 |
48. Absolute utter bull |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 06:35 PM Response to Reply #43 |
53. Right. Try to get a conviction on "the totality of anomalies." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 06:10 PM Response to Reply #37 |
47. Over generalization is a symptom of a bias toward |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-02-07 04:28 PM Response to Reply #47 |
108. It sure is. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MervinFerd (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 01:43 PM Response to Original message |
20. Could you convince a jury? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 01:57 PM Response to Reply #20 |
23. Please point out which ones have been disproven |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MervinFerd (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 06:38 PM Response to Reply #23 |
54. Good Grief! Point out the claims that have NOT been demolished right here. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Grateful for Hope (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 06:43 PM Response to Reply #54 |
55. Funny. I didn't see these three items on the OP's list. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MervinFerd (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 10:36 PM Response to Reply #55 |
68. You're partly right. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 09:22 AM Response to Reply #68 |
83. You have added your own gloss to each point |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MervinFerd (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 09:55 AM Response to Reply #83 |
84. No gloss, just a deduction. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Grateful for Hope (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 06:20 PM Response to Original message |
50. This thread is becoming more and more interesting |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 06:29 PM Response to Reply #50 |
51. The closer it comes to the official story? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Grateful for Hope (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 07:07 PM Response to Reply #51 |
57. I don't see that at all |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 07:23 PM Response to Reply #57 |
58. Hamden is basically defending the OCT, and it's already been investigated. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Grateful for Hope (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 07:32 PM Response to Reply #58 |
59. I disagree |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 08:40 PM Response to Reply #59 |
61. Oh I know, Hope |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Grateful for Hope (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 08:44 PM Response to Reply #61 |
62. There is nothing I would like to see more than this. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AZCat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 03:07 AM Response to Reply #61 |
79. ..."I happen to have a little training and experience in this area..." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 06:09 PM Response to Reply #79 |
98. I think |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AZCat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 08:20 PM Response to Reply #98 |
99. I have yet to see... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 06:33 PM Response to Original message |
52. Hamden, does it ever occur to you that Hopsicker et al. are wrong? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wildbilln864 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 09:32 PM Response to Reply #52 |
63. Praytell.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 10:54 PM Response to Reply #63 |
69. LOL, I would have thought it was obvious by now! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
William Seger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 11:03 PM Response to Reply #69 |
71. I'll tell you what's obvious |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
William Seger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 11:01 PM Response to Reply #52 |
70. Jeeezz! Here we go again |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
William Seger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 10:24 PM Response to Original message |
67. HamdenBaloney |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 11:17 PM Response to Reply #67 |
74. "stop simply implying that you have an argument somewhere" lol :) nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 11:07 PM Response to Original message |
72. You're mistaking hasty conclusions for solid reasoning, while |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MervinFerd (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 11:08 PM Response to Original message |
73. Yes. State your hypothesis. State your argument. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MervinFerd (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 11:20 PM Response to Original message |
75. The Clinton Lists---remember those? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bolo Boffin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Dec-17-06 11:57 PM Response to Reply #75 |
76. Thank you. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rman (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 05:41 AM Response to Original message |
80. Conclusions/suspicions based on inductive reasoning |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MervinFerd (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 07:24 AM Response to Reply #80 |
82. Circumstantial evidence can be -very- convincing. Many a man.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 11:23 AM Response to Original message |
85. HR's "Inductive" Reasoning in action |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 12:39 PM Response to Reply #85 |
86. Wow, just wow. That's absolutely breathtaking, isn't it? ;) nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 12:46 PM Response to Reply #85 |
88. OCTer bullshit in action -- but I don't have to make up Vincent's "liberal" beliefs |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 01:19 PM Response to Reply #88 |
89. Lets take it one by one, as I have obviously touched a nerve |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 01:30 PM Response to Reply #89 |
90. Using inductive reasoning, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 01:46 PM Response to Reply #89 |
91. No raw nerve on my part |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 02:31 PM Response to Reply #91 |
92. Do you understand what "ad hominem" means? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HamdenRice (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 02:37 PM Response to Reply #92 |
93. You obviously don't |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 02:47 PM Response to Reply #93 |
95. Totally wrong. It's not a means of attacking ideas at all. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Anarcho-Socialist (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 10:19 PM Response to Reply #91 |
100. You ought to be ashamed of yourself |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-19-06 08:36 AM Response to Reply #100 |
102. Holy Crap |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-19-06 06:49 PM Response to Reply #100 |
107. Lets not be hasty |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-19-06 08:33 AM Response to Reply #91 |
101. This post is pretty telling about yourself |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-19-06 12:49 PM Response to Reply #91 |
105. I need to thank you BTW |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
William Seger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 02:46 PM Response to Reply #88 |
94. After the pile of poo you've stepped in on this thread... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
greyl (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 02:49 PM Response to Reply #94 |
96. nobody's mentioned abductive reasoning yet, eh? ;) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
William Seger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Dec-18-06 04:41 PM Response to Reply #96 |
97. I think Hamden was trying distractive reasoning |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-19-06 08:38 AM Response to Reply #96 |
103. Conductive Reasoning? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
William Seger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-19-06 09:10 AM Response to Reply #103 |
104. I think he sat on it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mhatrw (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Dec-19-06 06:44 PM Response to Reply #96 |
106. Obstructive "reasoning"? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kingshakabobo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-23-07 05:48 PM Response to Reply #94 |
109. WTF? Indeed. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Anarcho-Socialist (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat Jan-27-07 07:12 PM Response to Reply #109 |
110. Indeed sir |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Tue May 28th 2024, 10:07 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC