1
   

Israel's Policies Feed the Cancer of Anti-Semitism

 
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Mar, 2006 01:56 am
Sorry Pachelbel, but a rose by any other name is still another personal attack on me.
pachelbel wrote:
No, not an attack on you
Yes, in fact that is exactly what they were, and exactly as I have outlined it.
pachelbel wrote:
- an observation that you, as a Canadian,
Here comes another of your personal attacks, this time you try and disguise it as a so-called "observation", as if somehow you are acting as a reasonable unbiased observer, it comes across as disingenuous instead.
pachelbel wrote:
could be so blind as to support someone like Bush,
Here is another personal attack calling me "blind", then you go on to say that I "support someone like Bush" which is not something I have stated, and is false, and is an overt logical fallacy derailing to any semblance of a congruent logical dialogue.
pachelbel wrote:
Since you seem so pro-American, would you not be happier in that wondrous land of the free?
Another overt logical fallacy, derailing to any semblance of a congruent logical dialogue.
pachelbel wrote:
I'm ashamed that you call yourself a Canadian.
here is another classic example of your personal attacks, this time saying you are "ashamed" of me.

Good luck trying to get anyone to take you as sincere and rational.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Mar, 2006 02:34 am
Chumly wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
A terrorist is someone who deliberately aims his weapons at non-combatants, as the primary, intended target.
It is not quite so simple! Even though I support your views, I must point out that taken out of context of a justifiable war, and taken out of context of the war period, and taken out of context of the mindset and circumstances of the time, certain past actions meet your criteria, yet are not terrorism.

WW II and some of the Allied non strategic bombings are an examples, as are Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Actually, Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not exempt from my analysis, and are terrorism.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Mar, 2006 02:42 am
Hi Brandon9000,

Explain how, in the context of the Allies in WW II and the mindset of the time.

I will not argue with you, if you attempt to apply today's mindsets and values (or for that matter any other time period and/or mindset) unless you can prove to me that others have congruence.

I would first ask your age.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 08:12 pm
pachelbel wrote:
Georgie liked Saddam well enough in the 1990's to give him weapons. When the Kurds were gassed, Saddam got the gas from the US.

It is generally useful to get your facts right.

G.W. Bush wasn't President during the 1990's. The gas was not provided by the U.S. A. and it was not made here.
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Mar, 2006 08:22 pm
It was Reagan in the 80s and Rumsfelds hook Saddam's hand.
0 Replies
 
pachelbel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 02:38 pm
Did you forget that George Bush Sr was Pres. too? And EMBEDDED with the Taliban....

Remember Dubya's (the current idiot) 'they wanted to kill my daddy' as his premise for invading.
0 Replies
 
pachelbel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 02:57 pm
Chumly:
'Bush is an elected politician of one the most enlightened and progressive and freest countries in the world despite it's faults.'

Pachelbel:
How was he elected? Hanging chads? Total setup. Check it out online. If you make ballots disappear, I guess you win?
Enlightened and progressive? How?

Free? You have a disneyland perception of America. Nothing is free there -especially their medical care - and having No Free Speech Zones isn't free, 'disappearing' people into holes without a trial and holding them for years isn't an 'enlightened' or FREE society. Pre-emptive war is not 'enlightened'. What makes America different from Hitler's Germany? It harks back to the Dark Ages. I can only assume that you are in jest when you make such naive remarks.

Pachelbel:
'......could be so blind as to support someone like Bush, '

Chumly:
Here is another personal attack calling me "blind", then you go on to say that I "support someone like Bush" which is not something I have stated, and is false, and is an overt logical fallacy derailing to any semblance of a congruent logical dialogue.
*********************************

???????????
Would you prefer another word? I thought blind was kinder, but if you prefer ignorant, so be it. Bush has made America into an Orwellian world where free speech IS allowed, just not where HE can hear it. You support America and Bush by saying it is the 'freest' in the world!! By whose standards? The Gestapo? The troops (72%) want to leave Iraq, Bush's ratings have dropped to - what - below 30% and you think America is great.

I'll take Canada anyday over the paranoid, war mongering and overt cupidity of the US.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Mar, 2006 03:34 pm
Let me know if you ever turn off the flaming politicized rhetoric, and extricate yourself from the logical fallacies, we might then be able to have a dialogue.

Cheers,

Chum
0 Replies
 
pachelbel
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Mar, 2006 12:49 am
I don't converse with blatant American lovers who refuse to acknowledge the truth.

You'd make a good American.

Ciao
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 05/11/2024 at 07:30:26