Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: T Wake on 26 Jan 2007 15:32 "unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message news:89d5b$45ba511c$4fe7256$14429(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >T Wake wrote: > >> "unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message >> news:2cda2$45b94c58$49ecf8f$1275(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >> >>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>> >>> >>>>In article <45B8C4A5.BCD7F27C(a)hotmail.com>, >>>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>They [Europeans] can afford to make >>>>>>these errors because their governments assume the US will >>>>>>save them with its military might. >>>>> >>>>>What do we need your military might for ? >>>> >>>> >>>>I don't know. I suspect so the politicians can point at the >>>>US and call us the bad people when things don't go perfectly. Smoke and >>>>mirrors. >>> >>>We saved them twice in the last century. They've done nothing >>>to improve their security situation since then, so eventually >>>we'll probably have to save them again. >>> >> >> >> In the past, I'd have expected better from you. Obviously I was wrong. > > Your judgment is, in fact, impaired, more now than ever. Obviously so.
From: T Wake on 26 Jan 2007 15:33 "unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message news:6a00f$45ba535b$4fe7256$14522(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >T Wake wrote: > >> "unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message >> news:b50cb$45b95dc0$4fe73cc$1598(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >> >>>T Wake wrote: >>> >>> >>>>I am intrigued as to the value of the question though. If I had said >>>>"Yes" would that have made my comments *more* authorative >>> >>>Yes, because you would actually have a grounding on which to >>>base what are, without being Muslim, merely another westerner's >>>opinions. >> >> >> If I was a Muslim all you would get is merely another Muslims opinions. >> There is no priveledged knowlege about the topic that can only be >> gathered by being a member of a broad spectrum religion. > > When the initial premise is false, what grows out of it fares no better. So you say that if I was a Muslim you would get something other than another Muslim's opinions? Amazing. <snip nonsense>
From: Eeyore on 26 Jan 2007 15:34 unsettled wrote: > Eeyore wrote: > > unsettled wrote: > >>T Wake wrote: > >>>"unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message > >>> > >>>>The never have gotten over Ghandi and their guilt for > >>>>their wholesale mistrating of all their colonials for > >>>>centuries. There appears to be some British sense that > >>>>if they spoil their criminals the government will > >>>>finally be better loved around the world. LOL > >>> > >>> > >>>Nonsense. > >> > >>I didn't actually think you'd get it. > > > > > > There isn't anything to 'get'. > > > > Graham > > Asperger's spectrum as well, eh? You *are* a mess, boy. Hey, you're not supposed to be reading my posts ! Graham
From: unsettled on 26 Jan 2007 15:55 T Wake wrote: > "unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message > news:6a00f$45ba535b$4fe7256$14522(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... > >>T Wake wrote: >> >> >>>"unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message >>>news:b50cb$45b95dc0$4fe73cc$1598(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >>> >>> >>>>T Wake wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>I am intrigued as to the value of the question though. If I had said >>>>>"Yes" would that have made my comments *more* authorative >>>> >>>>Yes, because you would actually have a grounding on which to >>>>base what are, without being Muslim, merely another westerner's >>>>opinions. >>> >>> >>>If I was a Muslim all you would get is merely another Muslims opinions. >>>There is no priveledged knowlege about the topic that can only be >>>gathered by being a member of a broad spectrum religion. >> >>When the initial premise is false, what grows out of it fares no better. > > > So you say that if I was a Muslim you would get something other than another > Muslim's opinions? Does being a jackass come naturally or do you have to work at this? > Amazing. > > <snip nonsense> Once again with the flawed logic. You have to take the entire statement, not select some little part in order to play some stupid little game in an attempt to make the other person in the discussion appear a fool. Perhaps that plays well in the UK? Go to soc.women and post the second sentence of your thesis above. I expect they'll roast your chestnuts for you very well. You don't begin to comprehend the absurdity of the second sentence. BTW, your second sentence does *not* logically grow out of the first.
From: T Wake on 26 Jan 2007 17:24
"unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message news:c708d$45ba6acc$49ecf19$15249(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >T Wake wrote: >> "unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message >> news:6a00f$45ba535b$4fe7256$14522(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >> >>>T Wake wrote: >>> >>> >>>>"unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message >>>>news:b50cb$45b95dc0$4fe73cc$1598(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >>>> >>>> >>>>>T Wake wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>I am intrigued as to the value of the question though. If I had said >>>>>>"Yes" would that have made my comments *more* authorative >>>>> >>>>>Yes, because you would actually have a grounding on which to >>>>>base what are, without being Muslim, merely another westerner's >>>>>opinions. >>>> >>>> >>>>If I was a Muslim all you would get is merely another Muslims opinions. >>>>There is no priveledged knowlege about the topic that can only be >>>>gathered by being a member of a broad spectrum religion. >>> >>>When the initial premise is false, what grows out of it fares no better. >> >> >> So you say that if I was a Muslim you would get something other than >> another Muslim's opinions? > > Does being a jackass come naturally or do you have to work at this? I've been studing your posts for examples. I am trying my best. >> Amazing. >> >> <snip nonsense> > > Once again with the flawed logic. It is not flawed. You dismiss my comments as they are just my opinion, yet some one who professes to be a Muslim would be able to make comments about the religion which would carry more weight with you. You think that is not flawed? > You have to take the > entire statement, not select some little part in order to > play some stupid little game in an attempt to make the other > person in the discussion appear a fool. Perhaps that plays > well in the UK? Once again, you seem to be projecting. You regularly cut my (and other peoples) comments out of context. You regularly attemtp to make the person you are "debating" with look foolish, not to mention the resort to ad hominem. > Go to soc.women and post the second sentence of your thesis > above. I expect they'll roast your chestnuts for you very > well. Ah, so that makes your reasoning logically sound. I see. Considering how much you accuse me of mis-using reductio ad absurdum (and other fallacies), you are very prone to logical fallacies yourself. The fact that the posters in any newsgroup would be offended by a post does not pass any value judgement on the logic of the post. > You don't begin to comprehend the absurdity of the > second sentence. BTW, your second sentence does *not* > logically grow out of the first. They don't need to. They both make sense when taken on their own and are able of standing on their own. If you feel that a Muslim has a special privileged insight into Islam that no none Muslim can have, then fair enough. I disagree. As an example, when I was at university I was friends with a professor of comparative religion who was not a Muslim himself but was highly regarded, by Muslims, for his knowledge of the subject. I do not think a Shi'a from Birmingham has any reason to understand the doctrine and practices of an Uzbekistani Sufi. I suspect your apparent desire to generalise Muslims and Arabs into an entity with much more shared goals and ideals is confusing the issue. I may be wrong, but it doesn't matter any more. You no longer wish to debate and appear to have reverted to argumentative combinations of insults and sarcasm. |