--- Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Disagree with the stand that you say I'm not taking?
Your side of the political spectrum, perhaps. I'm sure you have _some_ sort of an opinion. > It's hard to have an actual debate with people who > are already decided they > are right. Where, in all that you're written about > the decision about the > war, have you expressed any suggestion that your > mind isn't already made up? > If it is, then there's nothing to debate. Plenty, if you were paying attention. But, oddly enough, most debates are, in fact, conducted between people who think that they are right. It's hard to imagine one conducted by two people who think they are _wrong_. > > > But shame on you for implying that I'm a > > fascist for examining the motives of people whose > > arguments are so nonsensical that their motives > need > > to be examined. > > I still don't even know what motives you are > inferring. And if I've implied > that you are a fascist, then I must have implied > that the similarly behaving > anti-war folks are also fascists. Interest concept, > the fascist > peacemonger. > > Nick Fascist appeaser, actually. It's not hard to imagine, if you aren't fixed on the idea that the protesters are righteous. If I could only see the negative actions on one side of the debate I'd be, well, you. There are bad people on the pro-liberation front - but the most prominent people on that side are, in my opinion, of good intent. I don't feel the same way about the war's opponents, but I have made arguments as to why they are insincere, arguments which you have not challeneged. Instead you've resorted to vague, specious, and mendacious ad hominem attacks - and you don't even have the forthrightness to be _explicit_ about it, you just imply it so you can maintain your "holier than thou" pose above the fray. I'm not buying it, and I _will_ call you on it. Your argument would be more credible if you, you know, actually _did_ imply anything negative about the similarly behaving anti-war folks. What you did do was, quite explicitly, argue that people who criticize the anti-war folks - myself in particular - want to eliminate those anti-war people from the discussion. Someone who does that is in a poor position to preach sanctimoniously about ad hominem attacks, and a poorer one to proclaim his devotion to debate. There's only one person in this discussion, so far as I can see, who does think that some of the people in the discussion should be silent - and that's you. Gautam __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online http://webhosting.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
