Eric aka the “T” express…. You are most welcome to remove me, should you so wish - you blog is of no use. The point I was trying to make, the information is freely available on the net - you will see that some of the companies you mention in your blog do not have subsidiaries in Israel.

I have sought to bring this to you attention, yet you still ask me to “bring evidence”. It was you who made the preposterous statements about those companies operating in Israel.

Finally, I was certainly not getting personal - how can I if I do not even know you? Also, why would anyone want to debate issues that were based on falsehoods - I was asking you to verify your facts, something I guess you are not going to do?

Dick da Tick

Mr. Tick.

You are my guest. Now if you have evidence, bring it. This is not the place for
wild eyed conspiracy nuts. I will remove you like any other tick if you do not
start showing some civility.

Argue on issues, not personal attacks.

eric aka the Tygrrrr Express

Why not check your facts on this by going on to http://finance.yahoo.com and look at who the owners of the companies are that you pupport to be operating in Israel and you will see the extent of the stuff you are putting on to the web! Your credibility is at stake here so, if you’re wrong, do the right thing and publish a correction…this will test your motives!

Makes one wonder about the other topics on your blog….!

Have a nice day!

“of other rekatice facts that refute and cantradict your own position.”

Should say.
of other “relative” facts that refute and cantradict your own position.

JMJ;
“Among all programming, that puts him in a rather insignificant spot.”

WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT “ALL PROGRAMMING” !
ARE WE ???

The whole context and conversation on the previous comments were in reference to “CABLE NEWS A COMMENTARY ”
But of course, as usual, when your argument goes to pieces you try to evade to something else.
Thats why you lose debates.

That was just a stupid, stupid attempt at even trying to make a point.

Here, this is how its done.
Even a liberal rag such as the Huffington post will come to the truth quicker than deranged moonbats such as yourself.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/10/oreillys-obama-interview_n_125462.html

“So much for home field advantage. Cable news outlets shouting from opposite ends of the political spectrum both aired sit-downs with Barack Obama on Monday night. Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly aired the second part of a four-part interview (!) at 8pm against MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann, which had a live interview with Obama on “Countdown.”

Winner? O’Reilly, in a landslide. O’Reilly’s “Factor” drew 4.6 million viewers for the hour, more than twice Olbermann’s 1.9 ”

And, they even admit in another article that Olberman has only beat Oreilly once, which plainly indicates that Oreilly ratings (and FOX itself) are a force to be dealt with.

“MSNBC’s “Countdown with Keith Olbermann” beat Fox News’ “The O’Reilly Factor” in the key Adults 25-54 demographic for the first time ever last week.

“Countdown” averaged 477,000 viewers (A25-54) vs. O’Reilly’s 472,000 (excluding Tuesday’s primary coverage). This marks the first time that MSNBC has beaten Fox News in O’Reilly’s 8pm time slot since June 2001.”

Also Jersey, you kind of shot yourself in the foot on this one.
Notice the age brackets ?
Yup, thats right, “ADULTS” watch Oreilly as you said so yourself.

” most of his audience is elderly ”

Yup, I guess in a nut shell what you’re saying is that only kids watch all that other crap ? I dont know, thats what it sounds like.

And where the hell do you get 400 K and 900 K from huh ?
You got them from being the liar you are because we are taliking about ALL viewers, not just a select demographic/ age group.
Its about as honest as saying;
“if you counted all those who are wearing pink ribbons in their hair Oreilly only had 5 viwers today”
But, conveniently enough that age bracket is reflected here which is more than likely your source that you “cherry picked” you’re numbers from.

Heres the Nielsens.
THIS IS HOW ITS DONE !

O’Reilly Factor Ratings For January of 2009

Rating - 3.0
Total Viewers - 3,200,000
25-54 Demo - 849,000

O’Reilly Factor Ratings For December of 2008

Rating - 2.6
Total Viewers - 2,800,000
25-54 Demo - 740,000

O’Reilly Factor Ratings For November of 2008

Rating - 3.0
Total Viewers - 3,200,000
25-54 Demo - 842,000

O’Reilly Factor Ratings For October of 2008

Rating - 3.6
Total Viewers - 3,900,000
25-54 Demo - 982,000

O’Reilly Factor Ratings For September of 2008

Rating - 3.6
Total Viewers - 4,000,000
25-54 Demo - 970,000

O’Reilly Factor Ratings For August of 2008

Rating - 1.9
Total Viewers - 2,400,000
25-54 Demo - 496,000

O’Reilly Factor Ratings For July of 2008 (Note, all drops happen whenever Oreilly takes a vacation such as is reflected here in his 4th of July absence)

Rating - 1.6
Total Viewers - 1,700,000
25-54 Demo - 392,000

O’Reilly Factor Ratings For June of 2008

Rating - 1.8
Total Viewers - 2,200,000
25-54 Demo - 450,000

O’Reilly Factor Ratings For May of 2008

Rating - 1.8
Total Viewers - 2,150,000
25-54 Demo - 420,000

O’Reilly Factor Ratings For April of 2008

Rating - 1.9
Total Viewers - 2,350,000
25-54 Demo - 490,000

———————————————————————————–

And here is another example of your stupidity and dishonesty.

You go on to refer me to a link that somehow removes my foot from your a$$ yet in the link you supply it mmakes you out to be the disengenuous fool that you are by making claim for me and shwing that you lied by omission of other rekatice facts that refute and cantradict your own position.

In the article you referd me to at the Pew research center it plainly says;

“When asked to name their favorite and least favorite campaign journalist or commentator, Bill O’Reilly was named most frequently as the favorite – and as the least favorite.”

Above in your return you only mentioned who finds Oreilly “dispopular”
but like the liar that you are you do not honestly mention that his popularity is only one point to differ from unpopularity.
You also failed to point out thet your own source puts Oreilly and Hannity oin the top 4 that most people find appealing.

“O’Reilly was named by 5% as their favorite journalist or commentator, while 3% each named Tom Brokaw and Sean Hannity. “-

———————————————
This is why you loose debates.
You’re sloppy, you are disengenuous to point that it seems you almost blatantly lie and clearly seem to think that anyone could be dumber than you.

As far as your middle astern solutions go.

All that has been tried before but only in slightly different approachs.
Just because you gave a bum 65 bucks today and 7 yesterday doesnt really make much of difference.
The point is you’re still taking the same approach to dealing eith the problem
All that crap you mentioned got chewed up and spit out a week or two ago

Micky, I don’t know about where you are, but here on Earth lots of people think O’Reilly is joke, and most people don’t know who he even is, let alone have an opinion of him. He averages about a 1.8-3.5 rating, depending on the time of year, most of his audience is elderly, and among the most key demo (25-54) he gets from 400k to 900k viewers. Among all programming, that puts him in a rather insignificant spot. To put it in perspective, there are probably about twice as many people watching Monk than Bill O’Reilly, and that’s just on cable, let alone broadcast veiwers.

“The takes the best rating of any prime time news commentary there is for years in a row.”

Yes, Micky, among cable “news commentary” viewers. Not exactly a huge demo.

As for his dispopularity, check out this poll: http://people-press.org/report/470/favorite-campaign-journalists

Of the few people who know or care who Bill O’Reilly even is, more people dislike him than like him.

Once again, my “rump” is footprint free.

“What solutions do you have for the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians that you havent suggested that hasnt been tried yet and failed???”

1: Placing an international peacekeeping force in the Occupied Territories.

2: Completely dismantling the Jewish settlements in the Occupied Territories.

3: The US demanding the aforementioned measures against cutting off assistance and trade.

4: The US demanding the end of terrorist support from the Arabian monarchies against cutting off assistance and trade.

And on and on and on and on…

You don’t really pay attention, do you Micky?

The rest of your post is personal blather. I won’t dignify it with a further response.

JMJ

Well, only in your mind and a few rabid moonbats is he a joke.
he takes the best rating of any prime time news commentary there is for years in a row.
Yoy can sya whatever you want but there is no interview out there where Obama was cornered on the socialism and the taxation issue like he was with O Reilly.
For months they couldnt get him in until he was told that ther base watching FOX was one the Obama ought to try and tap.

“LOL! Yeah, right again. Micky, my rump is footprint free.”

Thats not what every debate I’ve had with you says.
Can you show me an example wher you shut me up or answered any question that would controvert your or put your claims to reast ?
No !
But, I can go back in the archives, or anyone reading could do the same,, and see how almost each and everytime it boils down to you having nothing but opinions and dictative assertions that your word is fact without ever having ant circumstance , documantation or example to back up your BS.
Even this topic rght here you cant offer any example to back up your print free butt.
But I can refer everyone and you to the archives to back up my claim that I am better informed because I speak from the facts where you speak from your ignorant ideas and then try to shove them down everyones throat by demeaning their intelligence or.

Just like the mosr recent example would be Israel.
I’ll ask you again, and I want an answer with a solution, not attcks, side stepping or obfuscation.

What solutions do you have for the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians that you havent suggested that hasnt been tried yet and failed ???
You cant answer that because the only solution left is something an ignorant child in denial does not want to accept.
With that attribute you lose.
You lose because you have nothing to go forward with that has been proven to work in similar instances in history.

“Take that last silliness about Israel, where you simply dismissed reality in favor of your comic-book view of human nature. ”

This is where your incredible arrogant ignorance prevails and what gets more people killed out of selfish irresposible pride than anything.

Raelity is whats happened in the past and all your ideas as I mentioned above have failed. Yet in the face of historically proven fact you keep wanting to try the same thing over and over again insisting you will get different results.
Yet, each time the same thing happens again. Just like right now.
There was a cease fire, Hamas broke it. Moonbats suggest a peace treaty, Hamas breaks it, moonbats suggest a cease fire, Hamas breaks it.Moonbats suggest a peace treaty, Hamas breaks it, moonbats suggest a cease fire, Hamas breaks it.Moonbats suggest a peace treaty, Hamas breaks it, moonbats suggest a cease fire, Hamas breaks it.Moonbats suggest a peace treaty, Hamas breaks it, moonbats suggest a cease fire, Hamas breaks it.
That buddy is called insanity.

You couldnt argue your way out of a wet paper bag if you had help.
because you never know what questions to ask, you just try to tell people that only what you see is reality.
You need your head examined, mostly because I had this conversation with you about a year ago and said that you can get family and those close to you to accept your word on trust and faith because they know you.
But you cant expect people in the public arena to just automatically see you as some authority on the future or world events when they dont even know who the hell you are.
You may win arguments with those close to you who know your character and take your word for ti.

But it doesnt work in business and political debate
A high school sophmore knows this and yet you still try to do this everytime we argue an issue.
Thats why you look like the looser in the end and never reach agreements mwith anyone.
Believe it or not, I do reach agreements with many liberals where its not importanr whos right or whos wrong but more or less we just want an answer.
That doesnt happen with you.
Because every position you take is on a foundation of hate and contempt for anyone who doesnt see things in you childish arrogant naive view.

“There are no “terrorist” states, just some states who implicitly or tacitly or covertly suppoort some terrorist groups.”

More raw stupidity.
Iran intentionally sets up and finances terrorism for the purpose of using terror in the world arena.

“if by “terrorist state” you mean a state that terrorizes it’s people or other people”

Who the hell ever said that ? And why even bring it up ?
That is just an eaxmple of the type of filler you use just to try and navigate around in an arguement to change the point.
The point is that I never said any state was a terrorist state.
But, I have called them a “state sponsors of terrorism”.
Which by the way is accurate and true.

“or for that matter make any sense in the first place.”

Idocy that can be proven by asking this.

The “first place” was almost 2 years ago and you still find it important enough every day to defend your stupid positions from me and no one else on this blog, or hardly ever.
Thats like telling the DJ a song really sucks but you ask him to play it everday and dance to it while he plays it.

Whats even more cutting to the fact is that I’ve heard you speak in person.
you have never heard me address anyone in person.
I know for a fact that you’re a verbally ostentacious bully that demands people answer questions the way you see fit and never let anyone get a word in edgewise. And you beg your way thru the conversation insyead of make educational and relevant points that will prove your claim to be right or true.
You always ask for confirmations by asking “ya know?”, come on ” and a host of other patronizing methods that make you look like nothing more than an arrogant stubborn fool
In my world when people talk to me like that the first thing they hear is “Excuse me, just who the F*** do you think you’re talking too ?”
That works sometimes in fluent phsysical conversation but not so much on line and in print where you have no choice but a well constructed volley where you actually have to shut up and wait for an answer.

“I’m sorry, but I think people who take Fox News seriously are not the brightest bulbs in the box. ”

Probably not any brighter than those who think they can do the same thing over and over each time and expect different results.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein, (attributed)
US (German-born) physicist (1879 - 1955)
( See Jersey McJones i.e. liberals, moonbats, democrats)