Oh, you find it a waste of time to respond to a logical argument?
You are the one who made an argument to support your position and it
failed. Your ultimate
argument turned out to be circular reasoning and you still have neither
refuted that it was circular reasoning nor have you shown how it was not
circular
reasoning. Instead you engage in personal attacks. Now you say that it
is a waste of time to defend your position. It seems to me that you
again validate
my position.
---
Carl Sagan
“ The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It
may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It
may not be
consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences
do not determine what's true. ”
― Carl Sagan
On 3/5/2019 10:52 PM, Mostafa Almahdy wrote:
block quote
Look, I have no more time to waste with you. It's the last time I will
open the trash folder. Bye-bye.
On 3/5/19, Roger Loran Bailey
<rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
block quote
Mostafa, I am not baffled. I pointed out a logical fallacy of yours. You
never did show that it was not a logical fallacy. You never did admit
that it was a logical fallacy and so revised your argument. You just
started throwing tantrums, name calling, insults, threats and started
impugning my education. This is adding another logical fallacy called
the adhomenem argument. It seems that you are the one who is baffled. As
for that flying horse, frankly, I find the claim of an invisible man in
the sky who has magical powers and who created us all to be an even more
absurd claim than the claim of the flying horse, but there are others
who actually believe in the existence of that invisible magical man who
will see the absurdity of the flying horse. So I keep returning to it
for their benefit.
---
Carl Sagan
“ The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may
be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may
not be
consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do
not determine what's true. ”
― Carl Sagan
On 3/5/2019 2:07 AM, Mostafa Almahdy wrote:
block quote
To both Carl and Roger, I volitionally opted to talk about politics.
Nonetheless, I didn't do so out of disheartenment or deterrence.
However, I may concisely summarise what I caught in this list. When
the subject of religion is brought, I typically encounter tempestuous
and baffled people. As we went along in our debate, Roger and Carl
turned out to be quite scattered, pretentious and potentially, rather
ungracious. There is tremendous nescience in their follow-up threds.
This situation vividly reflects the low rate of education in the
United States. Even back then, when they were pupils, they failed to
understand much about various cultures that are settled abroad. I'm
not surprised, because this is typical in America. Both are shattered
about science and philosophy. As for Roger, he purposelessly
altercated. He stereotypically declined to click on a video, didn't
cite one reliable or unreliable reference to prove his claims about
the Koran being allegedly authored by the prophet and repeatedly
failed to produce his alleged qualification in Biology. Therefore,
he's technically dead for me, just totally extinct. If someone
splurges or maliciously lashes out, I have sufficient courage to
respond properly. Miriam replied to my political thread. Thence, I
interacted positively with her. She doesn't agree with my religious
belief nor I agree with her views on the subject. But at least, she
respects me, so why would I get in fight with her? That is not my
fate. Roger, however, continuously attempted to deliberately
condescend me through deriding the prophet's night journey. If this is
his first amendment right, I equally have the right to get my religion
respected. In furtherance to that, I chose to never post anything
about religion to the list. I reached the conclusion to do so based on
two major convictions. First, people therein are not going to respect
the subject. Second, they provably have zero credibility to contribute
to the subject, either as affirmitive or refuter. I didn't do so based
on endangerment, membership suspension or even admonition. I usually
make decisions based on my personal persuasions. The implication of
first amendment rights merits substantial condemnation because it
doesn't bond to ethical boundries as to honour beliefs, perceptions
and convictions held by others. The subject of first amendment is
complicated. So, let us agree on this, don't talk about my belief and
I shall not talk about yours in return. So, if we may now return to
politics, what if Trump has been declared guilty by the special
council of committing fiscal crimes as of forging financial reports,
bank statements or lying to Internal Revenue Service?
Constitutionally, what is that going to affect regarding Trump's
commercial enterprises that are vastly dispensed across the nation and
beyond? And, as he has been convicted felon, illicitly gaining out of
operating as president of the United States, shall that consequently
ban him from participating in upcoming presidential elections?
Constitutionally, is the president able to fire special council during
probation period? If he does, shall the probation be closed as a
result? Carl was right that American politics is complicated. I'm
trying to understand how it works. A substantial portion of it though
is based on greed superceding law enforcement. We've seen that proven
in how pro gun activists and congressional staff have misconstrued the
second amendment as to keep their business going. Similarly, this is
how American politics operate concerning racial disparity, anti Islam
sentiment and human rights. Basically, this is how it works. The one
who has the money bribes legislature to sprain the situation, so it's
suiting his private interest. This is in a not shall, the practice of
lobbyism in the United States, where opinion is promoted based on how
much is paid.
On 3/4/19, Roger Loran Bailey
<rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
block quote
Good grief, Carl! If he gets off the religion topic for a change don't
discourage him.
---
Carl Sagan
“ The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It
may
be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not
be
consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences
do
not determine what's true. ”
― Carl Sagan
On 3/4/2019 11:09 AM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
block quote
Greetings,
I did not respond to Mostafa's last post because he frustrates me.
Mostafa is obviously a bright young man. But he is also a fixated
man. You, Miriam, and to some extent I, and others, have posted piles
and piles of materials and links providing far different positions
than those which the Corporate Mass Media shoves down our throats
daily.
While I do not expect Mostafa to understand the political complexities
of the American Empire, anymore than I understand the complexities of
Egyptian politics, I feel that we are not dealing with a man who wants
to expand his knowledge, or carry on any sort of discussion. I do
believe however, that the many posts by Mostafa have provided insight
into why the planet is divided into so many pieces, like a giant
jigsaw puzzle consisting of puzzle pieces that do not fit.
As long as we talk past one another, as long as we shut out the views
of others, as long as we focus upon defending our beliefs as being the
right and true beliefs, then our fate is sealed. We are condemned to
self destruction.
Cheerfully,
Carl Jarvis
On 3/3/19, Miriam Vieni
<miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
block quote
Mustafa,
This deserves a response, except there's just too much to respond to.
The reason that what you hear from the US mainstream media right now
is
so
focused on Trump's utterances and trivial observations regarding what
is
happening in the world, is that most people in the US are as outraged
by
what Mr. Trump says and how he behaves, as you are. He doesn't
represent
the
majority of Americans, nor the majority of white people, nor the
majority
of
white Protestant people. However, there are enough people who think
like
he
does, to have given him a majority of votes in the electoral college.
That
isn't a majority of the popular vote. There is something wrong with
his
mental processes which is why he talks as he does. And it is why he is
so
easily manipulated by the members of the US surveillance, military,
and
security establishment. The fact is that most of our presidents have
given
in, to some extent, to what the Military and the CIA want them to do.
Trump
is, according to all the psychiatrists and psychologists who've
written
about him, a "malignant marcassist so he really believes that his
needs
are
most important and he'll do whatever he thinks will show his power and
importance. He is a tool of the wealthiest and most corrupt elements
in
this
country.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From:
blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Behalf Of Mostafa Almahdy
Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2019 8:38 PM
To: undisclosed-recipients:
Subject: [blind-democracy] Trump's last speech, unbelievable
After he was bore witness against by his ex special attorney at a
publicised
congressional hearing, Trump callously assaults his opponents in
Maryland
speech. Trump has launched a furious assault on Special Counsel
Robert
Mueller and on his critics at a conservative summit. In the longest
and
yet
the most disdainful speech of his unendowed presidency, Mr Trump
railed
against the inquiry into alleged collusion between his campaign and
Russia.
"We're waiting for a report by people who weren't elected," he told a
crowd
of cheering conservatives. Mr Mueller is expected to hand in his
report
to
the attorney general shortly. "Unfortunately, you put the wrong people
in
a
couple of positions and they leave people for a long time that
shouldn't
be
there and all of a sudden they are trying to take you out with
bullshit,
okay?" the president said. The speech - clocking in at more than two
hours -
also included sharp attacks on former Attorney General Jeff Sessions,
former
FBI head James Comey, the Democratic Party and those critical of his
approach to North Korea.
Whom did the president attack? Speaking at the Conservative Political
Action
Conference in Maryland, Mr Trump lashed out at his detractors in a
wide-ranging speech.
"This is how I got elected, by being off script. And if we don't go
off
script, our country is in big trouble, folks," he began. The president
repeatedly said that Mr Mueller had "never received a vote", nor had
Deputy
Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who appointed Mr Mueller to his
position.
The president alleged Mr Mueller was "best friends" with former FBI
head
James Comey, and mocked the accent of former attorney general Mr
Sessions,
whom he fired in November. The president's attacks ranged widely. He
called
the Green New Deal proposal - pitched by some Democrats as a radical
bid
to
combat climate change - "the craziest plan", saying "when the wind
stops
blowing, that's the end of your electric". After a series of deadly
ardent
remarks on immigrants who, he said, must "love our country", Mr Trump
said,
"\We have people in Congress that hate our country." "And you know
that,
and
we can name every one of them if you want," he said. In short, Trump's
last
speech resembled Racism, Xenophobia, Belligerence and unjustified
Pride
in
their unbearably highest peak. As I said many times before, Trump
isn't
himself the prob. The ones who cursedly spat and wholeheartedly cheer
to
his
implausibly despicable remarks are to be utterly extinguished.
Conservative white supremacists are his mainly pro protagonists. These
people are enormously imperious. Those are the ones who damnably
brought
that hellion to oval office in Washington D.C.. I have problem with
those
who enthusiastically applaud to his intemperately intolerable remarks.
They
love him so much because he says and does what they like. Honestly, I
just
couldn't put up with this plain impudence. They never spat and cheer
but
to
something that is dreadfully racialist, xenophobic or generically
absonant.
How are those supposedly coming from the leading nation of democratic
and
multicultural descent? This alleged statement has to be redressed.
This demonic provoker is relentlessly besieged with idiots. And as to
his
language, he speaks the language of American public, which is
relevantly
colloquial but also, well, just quite crude and disgraceful. They
surely
like him speaking as they do, always rude, awless and radically
vicious.
How
is this the manner of what is suppose to be the leading entity of the
democratic world? I'm substantially incensed at the west for bearing
to
be
led and blindly pulled toward any direction that is to serve American
interest. It's if as they're attached to them with magnetic impact.
Donald
Trump isn't the problem at all. The ones who volitionally brought him
to
us
are. They indicate approval of everything he says and does. So, they
concur
with his racialist and immensely xenophobic disposal. They approvedly
cheer
Islamophobia, insolence and deliberately escalated religious
secernment.
Trump allegedly says about himself and on behalf of his supporters,
"We
believe in religious liberty". Could he dare to allow Muslims to speak
freely on his podium? I challenge him to do so. Trump's platform is
full
of
hate rhetoric, religious discrimination and xenophobic tendency. He
unprovably associates crime with immigrants, discriminatively
referring
to
them as, "illegal aliens". This man is insane. This is someone who
doesn't
respect anyone. He doesn't one to share the nation's leadership. This
is
someone who perennially displaces those who were so loyal to him
yesterday.
This is someone who shamelessly mocks accents of people.
What an awful guy. The term incompetent is absolutely the slightest to
describe him. I'm not going to tolerate the Trump like temperament
brought
by anyone therein. White Protestants have to recognise something, the
game
is wholly exposed. Seriously, the game is wholly exposed and they
won't
ever
be able to get Islam out of our hearts.
Whether they use Religious cover or the lack of to subdue us, we
remain
stiffly defiant in the face of impervious imperialism and cultural
manipulation. If they are willing to communicate respectfully, they
are
welcome. Otherwise, just go to hell. I will continue to be fiercer on
coercively imposed American conservative union. Pass this on to people
who're standing alongside this approach.
It is time to break silence and speak frankly. I'm not willing to be
submissive to this sort of de facto situation. The United States has
to
choose between Trump's intolerable belligerence and be flawlessly
ostracised, or, to dispose him and reconnect to the world. They are
going
to
determine their ultimate destiny in the next election. You may
constantly
recall this, the world isn't at your possession. Just remember this
last
sentence properly.
--
(Seeking knowledge is compulsory from cratle to grave because it is a
shoreless ocean.)
block quote end
block quote end
block quote end
block quote end
block quote end
block quote end
--
---
Carl Sagan
“ The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may be
counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not be
consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do not
determine what's true. ”
― Carl Sagan
