Zionism

[Attalus]

Er, somebody stop me if I'm wrong, but I think LoA's quote is from The Manchurian Candidate. And, yes, Davros and Caleb, I do scent more than a hint of ad hominem in your posts.

[Lord of Alcohol]

Originally posted by Attalus: Er, somebody stop me if I'm wrong, but I think LoA's quote is from The Manchurian Candidate. And, yes, Davros and Caleb, I do scent more than a hint of ad hominem in your posts.

Ha! Your the man Attalus! One of my all time favorite movies! [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 10-29-2002, 07:53 PM: Message edited by: Lord of Alcohol ]

[Downunda]

Nice edit Pauly

[Night Stalker]

Originally posted by Attalus: Er, somebody stop me if I'm wrong, but I think LoA's quote is from The Manchurian Candidate. And, yes, Davros and Caleb, I do scent more than a hint of ad hominem in your posts.

Fallacies of debate - From

Description of Ad Hominem
Translated from Latin to English, "Ad Hominem" means "against the man" or "against the person."

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:

Person A makes claim X.
Person B makes an attack on person A.
Therefore A's claim is false.

The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).

Example of Ad Hominem

Bill: "I believe that abortion is morally wrong."
Dave: "Of course you would say that, you're a priest."
Bill: "What about the arguments I gave to support my position?"
Dave: "Those don't count. Like I said, you're a priest, so you have to say that abortion is wrong. Further, you are just a lackey to the Pope, so I can't believe what you say."


And on that note ...... Bbbbuuuurrrr .... getting little chilly in here. Could we retract the claws and get back to debating FACTS? I would love to see opposing supported ideas on this one. Cuz right now, my current opinion is the world would me much better if a)the Middle East was converted into a glass parking lot; or b) we found a different energy source and made the Desert Kings impotent both economically and politicaly so we could ignore them while they killed each other. Choise a is too fatalistic for me and b is just NOT going to happen any time soon. So I would love anything that could possibly sway my outlook. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[The Hunter of Jahanna]

Look on the bright side, Nightstalker, If we just ignore them and let them kill each other we can get all the yummy oil for FREE!! After all after each side commits genocide on every other side there will be no one left to offer up any complaints. Then again we could just stop tradeing food for oil. Let them drink oil and eat sand.

Oh, and if you go back one page I was trying to add to a debate.

[ 10-29-2002, 08:40 PM: Message edited by: The Hunter of Jahanna ]

[Night Stalker]

Ahh Hunter,

That you were. And you make some very good points that hint to the errors of "Nation Building". Not caring one way or another about the situation, I do have to give Israel credit for staking out some territory and defending it against incredible odds. Ignoring the politics and legal issues about that, there is a rugged naturalistic beauty to that.

[Lord of Alcohol]

Originally posted by Downunda: Nice edit Pauly

Thanks lol, after I posted I realised what I said could be taken in a direction that I have no intentions of going to LOL Oh, and please send me some New Zealand beer. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Originally posted by Davros: M, I see a debate on the openness or closedness of minds. In a debate, you rely on information to supply some support for your side of the discussion. I took was was readily at hand. Is there some particular detail that you object to, or just my using you as a case study? You bet. Not only is it against the TOS to turn the debates into personal attacks, you actually misquoted me on a couple of those points (I think cut and paste would have saved you). Also, It is rude to take quotes out of context, when a person is in a discussion where people blythely ignore facts posted from reputable sources and misquote or misrepresent what a person has said, you will likely see many such quotes as you posted. That aside, you didn't do make any effort at all to add to the thread on topic and as I searched back through some of your posts, I see that you apparently have no opinions of your own nor facts to lend to many of the threads you post to. All I came up with on a quick look see were many posts criticizing this person or that, and in no way contributing to the discussion at hand. So just leave me out of your "case studies" but feel free to dispute the subject matter to your hearts content. Your argument of thread contamination is rather vague to me, because it would seem "par for the course" for threads in IW to be taken in many directions. On this comment, the words Pot Kettle and Black spring to mind. I never used the word contamination nor did I imply that your ruined the thread, I did however make one mistake, I called it my thread, it is not. It belongs to the IW community, it was a simple mistake in my wording. I must be about the 6th or 7th member (this is a blatant lie or exageration Im leaning toward lie) that you have made that TOS threat to - is that something that you resort to when you want to guillotine debate on the topic? Tell you what - to be on the safe side, I will ask some of the moderators to go through this thread and see if I'm crossing any lines. Will let them give me some personal feedback via email such that I can use that information for personal development [img]smile.gif[/img] . There, does that make you feel more comfortable. You are the very first person on here I ever said that I would report. So accept your prize. I have mentioned the TOS in months previous (actually quite a few months ago now) I was justified in making my comments then and I am well within my rights that you refrain from attacking me personally. I see you are once again accusing me of stopping a debate when you are not contributing at all. When you talk to the Mods make sure you point out your little personal vendetta here in this topic for me. Damn - out of time - nice rebuttal JD [img]smile.gif[/img] - I will be back to explore your answer further when I get home from work.

Oh were you ever going to get around to the actual topic of the thread? Im still waiting to see something pertinent.

[ 10-29-2002, 10:45 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

Originally posted by caleb: quote: Originally posted by MagiK: Exquisitly researched and well thought out argument there Caleb, how could anyone refute your studies and researched facts. I salute your Historical and political acumen! PS. can you spell S. A. R. C. A. S. M. ?

Glad you liked it [img]smile.gif[/img] Heres another one.

[/QUOTE]But do you have anything at all relevant to the topic to add?

[Attalus]

Originally posted by Night Stalker: [QB:p[/QB]

They were attacking MagiK for his form of debate, so you are wrong. [img]tongue.gif[/img]