mhaze Quote "Really, why am I even bothering with you?"

Exactly the statement one would expect from a person with nothing to add.

** It is more apparent you are the one with a lack of comprehension. **
Here is the whole statement not just part of it.
** When you can't attack the content attack the source of the content. Simple question can you provide evidence the information is false, if not your whole statement is irrelevant. **

I am simply asking you if you can provide evidence the article is false, I did not say or imply you said it was false.

So mhaze you come out with this stupid comment.
"Did I say it was false? Your comprehension skills seem somewhat stretched here."
______________________________________________
If a person is talking about a subject and another person does not agree with the first person a valid question could be do you have evidence that it is false, just as the second person could say to the first person do you have evidence it is true.

If you agree with the above statement then you are the one in this instance with a lack of comprehension.
_______________________________________________

You original comment is your problem, just to remind you.
"I'm no fan of FDR and think he's massively over-rated as a president and especially as a wartime leader. But I wouldn't for a moment think so little of him or think that he was so callous and Machiavellian as to simply not lift a finger to save lives just so he could get the war he wanted.
Additionally, I'm not prepared to believe that the dozens of other members of the government who would have know if they had advanced warning of the attack, would have sat back and let it happen and/or then stayed quiet about it for the rest of their lives and into their deaths."

They did know beforehand.
The Lusitania was introduced to provide evidence that people will sit back and watch people getting killed needlessly if it furthers their agenda.

As the thread is dragged away from its intended path I am no longer sure what it is about
AH any chance the poster talking to me here can see I am actively avoiding him
Quite prepared for posts in my links to drop off, but not wading in to the increasingly MANIC Dads arm ones
Governments of every shade lie/omit to tell us the truth.
I repeat the toxic far right is the biggest danger to the world right now
Post election a true Liberalism will begin the hard task of repairing the damage done by the demented right

mhaze Quote "But going to a fantasist like Corbett!! ! oh dear. A man who hasn't seen a conspiracy he doesn't like and won't fall for.
Remember, this is one of the chem-trail lunatics."

I have not looked into chem-trails, assuming you are correct and it is fake, we will mark him for one fake story.

One fake story out of more than 100 covered is a good reputation, so you give me one MSM or other media outlet with a 100% accuracy rating.

If you can't try not casting aspersions on someone when you can only point to one error.
If someone was to look at your comments on here I am confident they would find at least one error you made.

I am listening to the video now and will see, so far he has not said it is 100% true he is only interviewing someone who does believe in chem-trails.

Philip S,

If I thought the data was wrong I had plenty of opportunity to say so. Instead I supported the report. The only thing wrong was your understanding (actually misunderstanding) of the report and tantrums that the report didn't tell you what you wanted to hear. Actually I got upset this morning when the ABC told me what time the sun will set but not which direction - they are obviously trying to hide that data.

"when you can only point to one error. "

Actually I pointed out two - he also screwed up on the US entry in WW1 but you'd already missed that as well so you probably din't notice the error. That I only mentioned one bit of Corbett's idiocy doesn't mean that there aren't plenty of others. I just pointed out the most egregious and hilarious.

"They did know beforehand." (that the Lusitania was going to be sunk).

Any evidence? Thought not.

Earlier I responded to your infantile attempts to show me in error with "Normally I'd just let your ignorance flow by but "egg you now wear on your face" and all that requires that you put in your place."

Mission accomplished.

Foxy,

I meant to post this earlier but what with all the fun with Philip I missed it....

You wrote: "Thank You for taking the time to read the link from Britannia."

Take it as given Foxy that I read all your links. Please keep 'em coming.

I'd given up on www.britannica.com a few years back as they went totally PC. But they seem to have lifted their game and I'll be giving them a second go. So I enjoyed the link for several reasons.

mhaze Your reply just provides more evidence of your ignorance.

Quote "Mission accomplished." President Bush said the same in 2003, did not go well for him as the war is still ongoing thus making it a LIE by a deluded person, now we have you saying it.

Also Quote "I meant to post this earlier but what with all the fun with Philip I missed it...."

** I guess the fact you loose so many times you do have to delude yourself in some manner, if this is fun you must live a very boring lifestyle.
_______________________________________________
The German authorities had made it plain that they considered the Lusitania an enemy ship; a legitimate target.
Notices to that effect were published in all major American newspapers on 30 April 1915, specifically warning that the Imperial German Government considered any vessel flying the British flag as ‘liable to destruction’ and that travellers did so ‘at their own risk’.
Like many other papers, The Washington Times splashed a warning from the German Ambassador to the United States, Count Bernstorff, across their front page with an account of ‘scores of prominent passengers receiving anonymous telegrams’ warning that the Lusitania would be sunk.
_______________________________________
Historians wonder if the ship may have been deliberately placed in danger by British authorities. This is backed up by a letter Winston Churchill wrote, which said that it was “most important to attract neutral shipping to our shores, in the hope especially of embroiling the United States with Germany.” On top of that, although British authorities knew of the presence of a U-boat, they did not divert the Lusitania, nor did they move to protect it as it approached the location.
_______________________________________
Between the time of the ship’s departure from New York and its sinking on the coast of Ireland, there were a total of 23 sunken ships off the coast of Ireland. The Lusitania received directives to stay away from the coast of Ireland in the days leading up to its sinking, but they did not receive any news about the sinking of any other ships.