Re: ChimpzillAhmadinejad Is a leftist Moron

"Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
EWSKi.2971$Hv4.2305@amstwist00:">news:EWSKi.2971$Hv4.2305@amstwist00:


"Shogun" <shogun@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Xns99B8549BC210BShogun@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
0YKKi.2847$Hv4.673@amstwist00:">news:0YKKi.2847$Hv4.673@amstwist00:


"Shogun" <shogun@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Xns99B7E32CB445AShogun@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
FEzKi.2816$Hv4.2497@amstwist00:">news:FEzKi.2816$Hv4.2497@amstwist00:


"Merlin" <johndoe99@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1190836187.981344.200290@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Sep 26, 1:31 pm, Shogun <sho...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbea...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
inG%uKi.2767$Hv4.2108@amstwist00:">news:G%uKi.2767$Hv4.2108@amstwist00:


Just as you never answer any questions.


Really? Care to cite three examples of questions I haven't
answered? I don't expect you will even provide ONE!
I rarely make claims! When I do I support them with evidence or
I withdraw them.


Really? Can you cite three examples of questions that you have
answered?

Yes. That's ONE. Actually given by you question marks it two but
nevertheless show me three proper questions you asked me adn if i
didn't answer them I will apologise and answer them. I won't answer
questions which are personal e.g. "what colour/breed is your dog".
In this thread I can't find a proper question by you.

Really? You have just proved you can't.

reALLY? HOW SO?

The reason you can't find a
proper question is because I am imitating your form. After all,
imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Aren't you flattered?

I noticed you were just answering questions with questions but as you
can see that is NOT what I do.

Oh really? Look 2 paragraphs up. Why do you lie? Is it because you know
no better?


I don't expect you well provide even one. You rarely make claims
because you are an uninformed leftist apologist and all you can do
is regurgitate the same crap that leftists spew day after day
after day.

Nope. I rerely make claims because I don't want my OPINION touted
as FACT and I am VERY carefull to actually check out something
before I claim it. Otherwise I make it clear that is is just my
unsupported opinion or my belief.

I still don't know what you mean by "leftist". What do you mean?


you don't make claims because you are a coward and don't have the
courage to stand behind your convictions. Why are you a coward?

thats meant to be an answer is it?

Do you mean you cannot answer it?

Again you seem to have comprehension problems. I didnt say I NEVER
made claims. I stated I RARELY make claims. One claim I made was in
reply to the claims about the threat of fundamentalists. I claimed
Bush was a big pal of the Saud and Bin Laden family.

I SUPPORTED that claim with evidence.


Oh really? Evidence or propaganda? More like leftist spiteful hate-
filled propaganda.

And where is your evidence to support your claim that I am
a hypocrit or a liar?

Just read your own posts.

this is just more unsupported allegation. where is the evidence?
And who is the one not answering questions now?

Is it?

Yes.

No.
Why is it?

Becsuse you make an allegation that I am a liar and you provide no
supporting evidence.

You are.

Thats just gainsaying.


Gainsaying? Is that the only word you know? Can't you be more original?

[snip]


Can you support that with
documentation?

I don't need to you already have by doccumenting your own
unsupported allegation.

What?

It is above . You doccumented it yourself when you made unsupported
allegations about me being a liar. that is the supporting
doccumentation!

You are a liar. Why do you lie about that?


Why do you answer a question with a question?

I don't always but it appears you are doing so to try avoiding
supporting you own claims!


I am doing as you do. Why don't you like it?

Who says I don't like it? And you are not doding as I do! I asked you
a question in order for you to provide to support YOUR claims about
fundamentalists. You resorted to ad hominem. I asked you to poroviede
evidence for the ad hominem (even though it is off topic). YOU Failed
on both counts.
And I don't ONLY ask questions. I also make statements.

You do? Why is your vocabulary limited to ad hominem, gainsaying,
evidence, burden of proof? You ask a question only when responding to a
question.

Why are you a liar?

I'm not!. This is just unsupported allegation again.

You are.

Can't you at least try to support your allegations in some way? You
are inept at debating if you can't supply ONE piece of evidence to
support your posiution.


You are lying again. Why do you consistently have to lie?

Why do you support the ideals of dictators like Ahmadinejab?

I don't! where have I?

You do!

No i don't! But again YOU are the one claiming I do. It isnt for me to
prove the negative.

You: There are Pixies and unicorns on the Whitehouse lawn
Me: Are there? Can you prove it?
You: Can you prove there aren't?

See the difference?


Certainly! You are an imbecile. I never mentioned pixies, unicorns,
space aliens or any other sort of imaginary creatures. Do the staff at
the Home for the Unnecessary know that you are using their computer? Why
do you lie in asserting that I asked you about pixies and unicorns? Do
you have these bizarre revelations often?



Are
you also a nazi sympathizer?

Nope.

Opinion is otherwise.

Whatever that means it isn't proof they i am a NAZI sympathiser as you
claim.

Why are you ashamed of being a nazi sympathizer? Why do you give
recognition to nazi's by capitalizing the word nazi? Surely you are!


Do you believe the holocaust happened?

Depends on what you mean by the "holocaust". I can think of four
historical events which are referred to as a holocaust.


Why are you lying again? Why are you a Jew hater? Why are you a
bigot?

I'm not. there are at least four which are historical and to which
historians refer.


Why do you evade the question?

Why can't you answer yes or no? Why do you shy away from the
holocaust of WW2, which you know damn well is what I was referring
to?

Well I don't! If you bothered to read my postings you would note reams
of material on the WWII holocaust. Your attempts to link me with
holocaust deniers are pathetic . i have a record of opposing them.
Indeed the vitriol and hatred they spew against jews
is rivalled by the likes of your attitude to Muslims.


Yes you do. Why don't you answer yes or no. It is that simple. You are
like Ahmadinejab evading Bollinger's questions.

Why are you
a prejudiced? Why are you a hypocrite?

When did you last stop beating your wife?
When you eventually get around to learning aboput logical fallacies
please look up "loaded questions" and "leading questions"


You are still beating your wife? Doesn't she get upset? Why do you beat
her then? Who said anything about wife beating? Why do you walk the
tightrope between lunacy and stupidity?

The fact that you remain clueless about argument suggests you are not
prepared to actually learn anything about it because I have referred
you to several sources which you can actually read and from which you
can learn and prevent yourself falling into the same errors in the
future. But you do not seem to be capable of doing this.


Why do you attack the person? Aren't you against attacking the
messenger? You said you were. Why are you posting self-serving leftist
gobbledygook about your benevolence towards others? Can't you see how
self-serving you are? It is nothing more than gainsaying.



>


You spew out the same crap
that comes out of the mouth of Ahmadinejab

Really? Can you show where ANYWHERE that I agreed with
ANYTHING Ahmadinejab stated?

Whether you agree with him or not is insignificant.

Actauallly it is THE whole point you are making! Now you are
only contradicting yourself! On the one hand you state I say the
same thing and on the other you say I don't! How can Iu state
sometihing that I support if I don't actually believe it and say
i don't believe it?


So then you do agree with the Chimp of Tehran.

I don't know what you are getting at. Why don't you actually state
each point he stated one by one and ask me if I agree with any?
Im not aware what you are saying I agree with.


Why are you lying again?

Yoyu can't show ANYWHERE where I agreed with anything he siad. That
isnt a lie.



> By the way please look up "guilt by association" . If I happen
> to
like
a portrait or music Hitler liked that doesnt mean I am a NAZI


Why do you make such foolish statements? Is it because you are a
fool?

Again you presuppose and laod the question. Please look up @guilt by
association@


Why are you getting upset?


Why do you support the
execution of Iranian homosexuals?

I never stated tha anywhere and you can't show I did. That makes you a
liar!


A liar calling me a liar?



Where did I ever state I supported that? i fact I suspect that YOU
support the death penalty. Do you?


Why are you shifting the focus of the topic? Is it because you know
you are a liar?

Because I never stated it and you refused to deal with that! And you
agree with the death penalty don't you. I however would not agree with
it for homosexuals or anyone else for that matter.


Why are you talking about the death penalty? Who said anything about the
death penalty? Now you believe that the Iranian homosexuals should
receive the death penalty? Why would you want that? Didn't Ahmadinejab
already kill them?


Why do you want Iran to have nuclear
weapons. Are you a war monger?

where did I state Iran should have nukes? I cant recall stating it
anywhere.How can I answer a question based on a false premise of
something I didnt state?


Why do you deny the fact that you are a muslim apologist? This is
only more gainsaying on your part.

No it isnt! In order to be a Muslim apologist one would have to accept
that Muslims are bad people that do bad things only because they are
muslims. I do not believe this for Jews Blacks Germans Irish
Christians Africans or any other similar religious or racial or ethnic
or cultural group. Why do you believe it only for Muslims? And given
that you do what do you think of Bush being big pals of dictator
Muslim fanatics?

Where do you get the idea that in order to be an apologist for muslims
one would have to accept that muslims are bad people? Do you know the
meaning of the word apologist? Perhaps you should look up the definition
of the word before you use it and confuse it. An apologist is one who
speaks or writes in defense of someone or something. That someone or
something does not have to be bad. Can you not defend what it right and
good? Do you only defend what is bad? Is that why your logic is
consistently flawed, because you believe that you can only accept and
defend that which you believe is bad? Have you lost any shred of
responsibility and human decency that you may have ever had because of
your leftist defeatist attitudes??



What purpose does it serve to expand the
number of nuclear weapons in the world?

Not much really. Unless it is in fighting aliens form Space. In
fact it serves those who have them not to allow others have them
but I would like the US and Russia Israel South Africa Pakistan and
North Korea all to disarm nuclear weapons.


Space Aliens? Why are you making up fantasies?

I'm not. You asked wht they could be used for. Apart from being
invaded from space they are of little use as far as I can see. Which
begs the question why does the US have so many?


I asked you for space aliens and fantasies?

Are you mentally
deficient? Who mentioned space aliens? Why are you shifting the focus
again? Are you an idiot or just attempting to call attention to
yourself?

It is a valid answer to your question.


Is it?



Why are you in favor of placing
nuclear weapons in the hands of dictators and fanatical islamic
mullahs?

Where did I state I was?

Where did you state that you didn't?

You are falling into the fallacy of @proving the negative" again and
of @shifting the burden@ . Please don't try to replicate the writing
style of someione who actually knows how to logically argue when you
seem so deficient in actually learning from you continuous mistakes
and contradictions.


One who speaks of space aliens, pixies, unicorns and beating his wife is
now trying to make a statement on logic? I can understand you beating
your wife, as that is acceptable in islamic culture, but pixies and
space aliens?


You spew out many of
the same slogans and propaganda.

Which ones? Have you ANY examples?


Don't you know what you post?

Cant you support your own allegations? It isnt for me to prove
myself guilty of something I didnt commit? It is for YOU to support
your own accusations!


Why don't you have to prove your statements and expect everyone else
to prove theirs?

I do but note again ***Shifting the burden*** and ***Proving a
negative***

YOU made the claim that I posted something. I didnt post it but it is
NOT for me to show I didnt and you cant shift the burden on to my
shoulders. It is for you to show I did post what you claimed was
propaganda. Otherwise you can be asking me to prove unicorns and space
aliens are not meeting the President right now.

You made the claim about space aliens and unicorns and pixies, can you
prove they exist? The burden of proof is on your shoulders. Are they
real, or did you make it up, i.e. another lie?

Don't you read what you place here?

That is supposed to be supporting evidence is it?

Then you admit that you do not read what you post?

No. \I submit that you have not supported the suggestion that i post
propaganda.

Ok, then you agree that you do not read the propaganda that you post,
whether you wrote it or not?

[snip]



Where is your dictionary? Did you look up the definition? Do you
even know what a dictionary is? Do you get all of your information
from Wikipedia? Do you have any real books?

It seems to me I am more widely read than you but it isnt for me to
provide a definition for you. In fact I dont think @leftie@ is a
dictionary word. And if it is then I don't know if you subscribe to
that definition.


Why don't you think it is a word? Do you think Webster is a liar too?
Do you think all publishers of dictionaries are liars? Did you look
it up? Why didn't you look it up? Are you to lazy to look it up? Are
you fearful that you are a leftist? Why are you afraid of the truth?


Note I stated "leftie" not "leftist". But it isnt for me to look it up
since I didnt claim I was one.

When did I call you a leftie? I never called you a leftie, so there is
another lie! Why must you always tell lies?/

What according to you for example is the "political left"? do we
even know wto what you are referring? People claimed for example
that John Paul II was a "right wing" Pope. But one can argue that
the Pope is the centre and people are right or left of him. So we
should be clear about what we mean.


Who mentioned the Pope?

I did in realtion to demarking the definition of a political mileau.

Who mentioned space aliens?

I did as an example of proving the negative.

Why do you shift the
focus of the topic and gainsay with your space people and other
oddities?

It isnt shifting the focus. It is giving an example of your inept
argument style!1 You claim I post prropaganda. I say I didnt and ask
you for proof . You say prove I diodnt post it. One may as well say
"prove aliens do not exist" or "prove tarot or astrology does not
work"


There you go again, way out in left field. Do you know what that meaning
of the phrase "out in left field" means? Why do you constantly post such
foolishness?

Who do you mean by WE??

Isn't that meant to be "whom" Mr "Webster" ?


Actual usage of who and whom does not appear to be markedly different
from the usage of Shakespeare's time. But the 18th century grammarians,
propounding rules and analogies, rejecting other rules and analogies,
and usually justifying both with appeals to Latin or Greek, have
intervened between us and Shakespeare. It seems clear that the
grammarians' rules have had little effect on the traditional uses. One
thing they have accomplished is to encourage hypercorrect uses of whom
<whom shall I say is calling?>. Another is that they have made some
people unsure of themselves. Who may be used to inquire as to what or
which person or persons.


Sadly you are not since you refuse to clarify what you mean by
calling me a "leftist".


Sadly you are a leftist, and because you don't want to face it, you
attempt to use ad hominem and gainsaying to shift the burden of
proof.

LOL. You really don't learn do you.


LOL. Sadly for you, I do.





I call you a leftist because that is what you are.

That's what I claimed your definition was! You definition
of "leftist" is "anyone I call a leftist is one"

Not a very objective definition is it?

In your case, it is.

That is just gainsaying and re affirming that you can't supply a
definition other than your own OPINION as to what a leftist is
makes someone a leftist.


Do you really know what gainsaying is?

Yes.

Most likely not!


Well you are the one who says gainsaying can be employed to shift the
burden. I await how you can explain that when you cant even employ
logic.

And now you are lying again. Why do you lie?



Aren't you the one that believes
in OPINION polls as gospel truth?

Nope. They are only polls of opinion. And who said I believe the
Gospel is absolute literal truth? would that not be fundamentalist
of me?


Now you are hypocritical again!!!!! You have consistently referred
to opinion polls, and now you deny it. Why? Are you a liar?

I dont deny referring to them. But referring to them and claiming that
a poll is absolute truth are two different things. And I don't think I
constantly referred to them. I may have referred to two or three in
the last month. I would not think more than that . Ill bet you cant
cite four I referred to but I stand corrected if you do. I do not
think you will even rise to supporting your own assertion here either.
You are clearly inept.

You are the hypocrite. Why should I bother?



I believe in information which can be presented as evidence and
validated by several methods. You can ask how reliable my sources
are if you wish. Sadly you seem to supply no sources.


What methods?

Well one I referred to was the cluster sample survey. Your knowledge
of statistics is probably too weak to understand but it is reliable.
Stratifies and other sampling methods would be another. Thats just for
statistics. But ther are other methods for validating what you
claim.One woudl to be to provide supporting evidence from at least two
decent sourtces. In spite of your claiming to ape my style you
completly fail on this account! If I make a calaim I support it or
withdraw it.


No, you don't.

It meets the Beacon test? It is in agreement with your
opinion?

Nope. In agreement with several valid sources. If you care to show ANY
claims I have made I doubt you will be able to show they were
unsupported. If they were I am quite happy to withdraw thenm as I have
ocassionally for other people and if and when I located the evidence I
re entered the claim.


Wikipedia? That is your source.


Why are you a hypocrite?

havwe yu any examples of hypocracy from me? Allegations are not
examples! Please supply a quote in which I say people should
believe in something and behave in a certian way and then later
another quoite where I advocate the opposite for myself. I doubt
you will do it since it isn't true.

Why are you back-paddeling? Is it because you cannot prove your own
allegations?

Im not and it is because you cant support yours.

no, you are backpeddeling.




Saddam became President
of Iraq. And you supported him! and Suharto in
Indonesia. and Pinochet in Chile. And so on... there
is a long list.

Yes. You only know that Saddam became dictator of iraq
and you proclaim the U.S. supported him, but you don't
know why, and if you did know why, you wouldn't
understand it.

Oh so now you are watering down the principle about self
righteous dictators and fundamentalists. Saddam was self
righteous but you now add in "there were reasons to
support him nevertheless". well then educate us! And if
being self righteous or being a dictator isn't enough to
oppose someone then why do you claim it as the sole
reason for opposing Iran's president? THAT is my point!

You are obviously quite naive. Saddam wasn't supported. He
was used. Are you that dense?

You are obviously avoiding the question! When Saddam was in
charge of Iraq and usiong chemicals against tyhe Kurds the
US traded with him and shook his hand. There were no
standards with respect to being a dictator. The Us
subsequently made big pals with their fundamentalist chums
in saudi.

You are obviously a dunce.

Attacking the person rather than the argument they make is a
sure sign that you are losing the argument.

What makes you an authority on argument?

I don't claim that I am right or argue fromn authority! Thats the
whole point! I SUPPORT my position by reference to widely accepted
STANDARDS on debate and logical argument. Any search of @logical
fallacy@ and @ad hominem@ should put you straight on that.


Where have you supported your position?


Sjow me any position I have taken and I ll show you wher I supported
it!

You never support your position.

that is plainly untrue. I can cite several examples. For example Bush
being big Pals of the SAud family . Would you like me to repost the
support for that?


You never answer questions. You have no position. There you are
hypocritical again. Why do you continuously lie?

There is a big difference between accusing someone of something and
proving it. You hawever are doing a great job of proving yourself
inept at argument!



I am not asking you to believe my OPINION. It is established fact
that you can go and check.


Why would anyone believe you?

As I justy toild you you don't have to. Go and check out the
supporting evidence. Don't believe anythiong just because I state it.
go and check it out!

I have shown you poictures of Bush kissing Sauds of the business
arangenmdents between them. You are like a WWII Holocaust denier. You
keep saying it isnt true when the evidence is there in front of your
face that Bush is a pal of the Bin Laden Family and the Sauds.



Here let me help you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin:
"argument to the person", "argument against the man") consists of
replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing
to an irrelevant characteristic about the person making the
argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the
argument or producing evidence against the claim. It is most
commonly used to refer specifically to the ad hominem abusive, or
argumentum ad personam, which consists of criticizing or personally
attacking an argument's proponent in an attempt to discredit that
argument. A reductio ad Hitlerum argument can be seen as a special
case of an ad hominem argument, since these arguments are attacking
something supposedly said or supported by Adolf Hitler, who is
usually considered to have been an evil person.

[end quote]



I refer you to several examples from you posts above.

You do not know how to argue it appears.

Then you do get all of your information from Wikipedia?

No I don't I referred you to several other sites on logical argument
before.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/logic.html
http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html
http://www.philosophicalsociety.com/Logical%20Fallacies.htm







Why don't you
use a reputable source?

Wikipedia is reputable but that is off topic. you have several sources
above. Are you claiming they are all false?

The argument comes from the
person, therefor the person is as valid a target of attack as the
argument itself. Why are you so naive?

This does not logically follow. Ad hominem arguments are always
invalid in syllogistic logic, since the truth value of premises is
taken as given, and the validity of a logical inference is
independent of the person making the inference.

You do not seem to be able to seperate the argument from the person
making it!

When you dont like a message do you always think that shooting the
messenger will somehow prove the message wrong?


Is that more gainsaying on your part? Why do you constantly gainsay?


No actually you should look up "gainsaying" when you are loo0king up
fallacies. you obviously don't know what you are talking about.

[snip]
Why do you always dovetail yourself in on
anothers arguments?

I don't always do that. But I tend not to be the type of person to
claim I am right and tell others how to live. I believe that people
have individual rights. Sometimes when others and/or the State
interfere with those rights I do not like that. I am by this
definition a Liberitarian and you it appears are "statist". Under
that definition it makes you politically left of me!

Yes, you always do that.

No I don't . One counter example will prove you wrong!


then read what you post.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: ChimpzillAhmadinejad Is a leftist Moron
    ... I withdraw them. ... didn't answer them I will apologise and answer them. ... I SUPPORTED that claim with evidence. ... evidence and when I point that out you havent shown any support you resort ...
    (soc.culture.iraq)
  • Re: ChimpzillAhmadinejad Is a leftist Moron
    ... When I do I support them with evidence or I ... Can you cite three examples of questions that you have ... didn't answer them I will apologise and answer them. ...
    (soc.culture.iraq)
  • Re: Leftists, Networks, News Media SILENT about Al-Qaeda Torture Chambers
    ... NO EVIDENCE from what you have already written. ... I have a New Year's resolution for Mavisbeacon: ... AND WHICH YOU DIDNT SUPPORT EH? ... [snip more ad hominem] ...
    (soc.culture.iraq)
  • Re: Light speed in emission theory
    ... Please produce the empirical evidence to support your assertion ... Newtonian equations fail. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: the thing about NDs accomplishments.........
    ... >> direction without any evidence of consideration of said point. ... and of course you do exactly what I accused above....namely blind nonsense ... One that I did not support ... I recognize that as a Christian it is absolutely sinful to ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)
Quantcast