Hello Gilbert, Sometimes I wonder whether our professional researchers really think they can pull the wool over our eyes with their total distortions of commonse positions and ad hominem attacks against our sources.
Santosh Helekar is convincing no one, I suspect, by throwing mud on my source (answers.org) or me (by suggesting that I have not read the sources that I refer to). He could have simply refuted the actual quotes from Hitler, if he knew them to be false, but his ostensible obsession for facts hasn't yet make a perfunctory appearance in the Hitler debate. I suppose that when Santosh alludes to "fundamentalist" sources, we're all supposed to step back and discard any facts presented by such sources. Gilbert, one of the things I have learned via debate on the Internet is that facts are all too often secondary, and sometimes immaterial. A nice read for those Goanet spectators who feel like they get tugged in opposite directions in a debate would be from a Wikipedia search of the terms "argumentum ad hominem" and "argumentum ad verecundiam". Once you recognise these forms of logic at work, you will quickly be able to filter facts from hype and be able to take a stand for the right. Regards, Peter D'Souza Gilbert Lawrence wrote: Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hi Peter, If I fall off my chair (laughing), and I break a bone, I will certainly blame you (for the following post). You mean to say the professional researchers and College Professors on Hitler overlooked these speeches of the Nazi leader? Thanks for enlightening us with your short and pointed post. Those who cannot produce quotes of Hitler to contradict what you have posted, will try the usual subterfuge of questioning your sources. They of course will not challenge your verbatim quotes. They should post the right quotes, if they disagree with your post. Anything less is just intellectual baloney. I think, some may even expect you to have been there when Hitler made those speeches. You make my point that some researchers (especially those who claim to be one) and writers have an agenda. And they selectively quote publications including from the web, or look at very selected data, based on their agenda. And as your post shows again, that some love to distort the facts to try to make their case. Kind Regards, GL _______________________________________________ Goanet mailing list [email protected] http://lists.goanet.org/listinfo.cgi/goanet-goanet.org
