Marion Jones

The Real UncleB wrote:

Oh my God. This guy's ego is so fragile he cannot admit the obvious. I'm done with this guy

So when you lose the argument you attack the person you're arguing with?

Way to stay classy, Uncle B!

The Real UncleB wrote:

How can people "know' Marion Jones was a drug cheat when she never tested positive for drugs?

She did "admit" to it as part of a plea bargain, but she would not be the first innocent person to admit to a crime as part of a deal with the justice system.

The less intelligent you are the more sure you are of your opinions. And the more likely you are to be racist and/or a right winger

know

1    /noʊ/ Show Spelled [noh] Show IPA verb, knew, known, know·ing, noun

–verb (used with object)

1.

to perceive or understand as fact or truth; to apprehend clearly and with CERTAINTY: I know the situation fully.

I have to admit that there's nothing really incorrect about Uncle B's original post. We cannot be certain that Marion Jones is a drug cheat. I suppose that it would be more linguistically correct to state that there is overwhelming evidence to believe that she is, as we cannot KNOW it, using the strict definition of the word. On the other hand, Uncle B stating several posts later that something is 100% true (or whatever he said) is hilarious given the context of the thread. As has been explained already, you can't really be 100% certain about anything in life other than your own existence. As Uncle B himself says: "The less intelligent you are, the more sure you are of your opinions."

__________________________________

right, well, next time he spouts some confident claim that the congress is being held hostage, I'll remind him how sure his opinion he is.

Alright Jeff, my Uncle Bitch,

Tell me, if she was innocent, why did she sign the deal? I mean, it legally binds her to an admission of guilt. Don't give me this, "The big bad boogey many crap." You're supposed to be a smart guy. Try not to choose the obvious moronic answer of "the great white conspiracy." Aside from that completely baseless accusation, where would the, what's the word, proof be? I mean, really, OJ said he didn't do it, but, anyone with a brain knows he did. Just cause someone isn't caught doesn't mean they aren't guilty. And, when she admits she's guilty, it makes it a whole lot harder.

As far as I can recall, I don't believe anybody on this thread has stated that they believe that Marion's innocent. If you have evidence to the contrary, feel free to bring up the quote. This thread's about whether it's possible; even if that chance is 1/1,000,000,000,000.

the price is wrong wrote:

As far as I can recall, I don't believe anybody on this thread has stated that they believe that Marion's innocent. If you have evidence to the contrary, feel free to bring up the quote. This thread's about whether it's possible; even if that chance is 1/1,000,000,000,000.

Anything is possible. What's the point of arguing over "possibilities" when the person herself admits guilt? There are infinitely many more interesting hypotheticals that could be discussed.

I fully agree with you. I got trolled into this thread, but there have been some amusing responses so I'll keep it alive for a bit. If you want to discuss other hypotheticals, you could always start a new thread.

Some Coked Up Brit wrote:

The Real UncleB wrote:

Oh my God. This guy's ego is so fragile he cannot admit the obvious. I'm done with this guy

So when you lose the argument you attack the person you're arguing with?

Way to stay classy, Uncle B!

You can only talk to a wall for so long before you realize you will get no intelligent response.

The Real UncleB wrote:

Some Coked Up Brit wrote:

So when you lose the argument you attack the person you're arguing with?

Way to stay classy, Uncle B!

.

You can only talk to a wall for so long before you realize you will get no intelligent response.

Oh Jeff, you asian whore, you are so funny. Now, quit eating turds and get back to your cage.

The Real UncleB wrote:

Some Coked Up Brit wrote:

So when you lose the argument you attack the person you're arguing with?

Way to stay classy, Uncle B!

.

You can only talk to a wall for so long before you realize you will get no intelligent response.

What? I'm a wall? I've addressed every point you've made.

You mentioned you were done with me a couple of pages ago, but you don't seem able to give up on this one.

if uncle B every went to israel (god forbid!) he would realize how much everybody wants a two-state solution, how little animosity there is between jews and arabs in areas besides gaza and the west bank, etc. hell, if i hadn't grown up going there all the time, i'd probably think that too. his comment about me moving to tel-aviv just proves his ignorance. tel aviv and jaffa (an arab city) grew into each other many years ago, and i have never personally encountered a single problem there. hell, my loop along the mediterranean that i do daily takes me up through yaffo, past mosques, arab schools, etc. people are just as friendly to me there as they are in tel aviv, and i am clearly jewish.

and the fact that letsrun's biggest race-baiter, jew hater, etc. gets on here to denounce racism further proves his trolliness. i somehow cannot ignore it though, as both a runner and a jew, so props, uncle B. you are a fantastic troll, as evidenced by the litany of angry responses you never fail to generate.

and yes, your overplayed argument that you should be allowed to criticize israel without being viewed as anti-semitic is perfectly valid. there is too much sensitivity stateside about criticizing israel. HOWEVER, you, my friend, are quite anti-semitic. the fact that you think the "zionists" are pulling the strings, controlling the media, etc. is a time-honored tradition practiced by such notable groups as the soviets, the nazis, the KKK, extremist moslem governments, and so forth. you, my friend - if you are in fact real - are either extremely racist, quite misguided and unexposed to actual jewry, or all of the above. when i picture you posting, i picture a shriveled old man in a frayed bathrobe, and a tin-foil hat, living in a ted kosinski shack in rural montana, unmarried, childless and friendless, with nothing better to do than antagonize your internet "friends." i bid you shalom.

nice try at playing the rational card, but it won't work.

He will very soon cut and paste a long uncited diatribe from some radical dude using EXTREMELY confident prose about how vile and bloodthirsty Israel is.

He won't refer to your accusations of anti-semitism, unless he says something generic about how you are pulling the old trick of calling him anti-semitic when he is actually anti-zionist.

He will call you a traitor because he thinks most are.

As for his claims that all the media and governments of the world are controlled...well, what can you do. He'll believe that forever.

+1

[quote]agip wrote:

'He will call you a traitor because he thinks most are."

I don't think you are a traitor.

I "know" you are a dupe.

The Real UncleB wrote:

[quote]agip wrote:

'He will call you a traitor because he thinks most are."

I don't think you are a traitor.

I "know" you are a dupe.

Jeff, you little asian bitch. Do you know or do you "know"? Honestly, I don't think you know anything except cut and paste. Is there some website you use to insert hatred keywords?