He is importing some Goebbels arguments, this is only one of the reasons i'v made an allusion on the Stadler and Waldorff -approach, like in , "throwing some one-liners from the balcony in the muppet show" , nobody payed attention to the fact that Stadler and Waldorff were Germans, imported after ww2. (as in Werner von Braun) This was the model.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Goebbels some clarifications on Goebbels and his tactice's, paye special attention to the presence in the material of the "kristallnacht", or "pogrom" Follow some blue links folks. note, i'm German from origine, do not fake me until faked upon. 2010/9/15 david buchanan <[email protected]> > > > Platt said to dmb: > Excellent use of the Alinsky tactic of demonizing those you disagree with > by using ridicule in order to avoid serious debate. > > > dmb says: > > I'm demonizing my opponents? Look in the mirror, Mister. You've the one > talking about murderous socialism and then you construed my efforts to > provide context as a form of deception. And now you're characterizing my > criticism of your bad "logic" as ridicule, demonization, and as an evasion > of serious debate. > > There is no serious debate to evade. The whole thing is predicated on a > fiction. As I explained in the propaganda thread, your central premise was > manufactured by a public relations agency on behalf of Republican > operatives. The falsity of it is a matter of public record now and so the > right-wing spin on that New York Times editorial is an attempt to resurrect > the issue. Even though the editorial explicitly said the so-called "death > panels" were a fiction used by demagogues, you and the right-wing bloggers > used that editorial to do exactly that. > > This is not demonization. This is a deconstruction of your case. So what if > I use a little humor to make the point? > > You really don't see how absurd it is to accuse someone of trying to "hide" > something by putting it back in its original context? If you want to hide > the original meaning of somebody's statement, you take it out of its > original context. Everyone knows that putting a statement in context is > exactly how one would NOT hide the truth. That's why it's funny just to hear > the phrase, "hide it with context". Don't you want to correct your statement > or something? Do you think such an irrational accusation will stand if you > paint me as the bad guy for saying how illogical it is? I don't. > > > > > > > On 15 Sep 2010 at 12:34, david buchanan wrote: > > > > > > > > Platt said to dmb: > > > No matter how you or the leftist editorial writer at the Times want to > hide it with "context," the fact of government control of life and death > decisions stands out like a sore thumb. > > > > > > > > > dmb says: > > > The writer and I are hiding the "fact" with context? > > > > > > Hilarious. > > > > > > Sounds like Stephan Colbert doing a parody of a right-winger's "logic". > > > > > > Hide it with context. That is truly funny. > > > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > > Archives: > > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > > http://moq.org/md/archives.html > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org/md/archives.html > -- parser Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
