Join John Adams, world renowned Intl Matchmaker, Thurs nights 8:30 EST for Live Webcasts with FREE Prizes!
And check out Five Reasons why you should attend a FREE Live AFA Seminar! See locations and details.


Scam free! Check out Christian Filipina - Meet Asian women with Christian values! Members screened.
Exclusive book offer! 75% off! How to Meet, Date and Marry Your Filipina Wife



View Active Topics       Latest 100 Topics       View Your Posts       FAQ Topics       Switch to Mobile


Email from a concerned American in Moscow

Discuss and talk about any general topic.

Moderators: jamesbond, fschmidt

Postby icarus » Mon May 04, 2009 6:09 pm

You can cite sources from various authors (many of whom are less than intellectually honest wing-nuts ) but you seem to be drawing your own conclusion and are more focused on the (mis)deeds of the US. This is natural I suppose as you spent most of your life in the US, but I think you need to spend an equal amount of time and energy studying Russia's historical hegemonic tendencies and then get back to us.
"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." -- Albert Einstein
icarus
Freshman Poster
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:12 pm







Postby Winston » Tue May 05, 2009 10:48 am

icarus wrote:You can cite sources from various authors (many of whom are less than intellectually honest wing-nuts ) but you seem to be drawing your own conclusion and are more focused on the (mis)deeds of the US. This is natural I suppose as you spent most of your life in the US, but I think you need to spend an equal amount of time and energy studying Russia's historical hegemonic tendencies and then get back to us.


W: Calling them "less than intellectually honest and nuts" is a pure ad homineum attack to try to discredit them. It doesn't address what they say. They are not nuts. If you listen to them talk, you would see that they are scholarly and know their stuff.

Even Noam Chomsky, who is very well respected for his rationality and intellect even by those who don't agree with him, talks about CIA assassinations and covert operations, and economic enslavements, as being well documented. One girl told me, "If Chomsky is wrong, then he's wrong in a rationally well thought out way, not in a clumsy way."

If you go overseas and talk to intellectuals, they'll explain the same things to you.

No one is claiming that Russia isn't corrupt.
Check out the latest posts in our blog The Happier Abroaders.

Don't forget my HA Grand Ebook and Dating Sites!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World
User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
 
Posts: 23612
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 1:16 pm

Postby icarus » Tue May 05, 2009 9:43 pm

WWu777 wrote:
icarus wrote:You can cite sources from various authors (many of whom are less than intellectually honest wing-nuts ) but you seem to be drawing your own conclusion and are more focused on the (mis)deeds of the US. This is natural I suppose as you spent most of your life in the US, but I think you need to spend an equal amount of time and energy studying Russia's historical hegemonic tendencies and then get back to us.


W: Calling them "less than intellectually honest and nuts" is a pure ad homineum attack to try to discredit them. It doesn't address what they say. They are not nuts. If you listen to them talk, you would see that they are scholarly and know their stuff.

Even Noam Chomsky, who is very well respected for his rationality and intellect even by those who don't agree with him, talks about CIA assassinations and covert operations, and economic enslavements, as being well documented. One girl told me, "If Chomsky is wrong, then he's wrong in a rationally well thought out way, not in a clumsy way."

If you go overseas and talk to intellectuals, they'll explain the same things to you.

No one is claiming that Russia isn't corrupt.


You seem overly impressed by how people come off either in speaking or writing. The problem with these guys is that it's very easy to mislead the audience by taking things out of context and leaving out certain operative facts. Not telling the WHOLE truth is often times just as misleading as flat-out lying. Guys like Zinn and Chomsky are notorious for this. Zinn even admits that his writings are slanted, claiming that it's impossible to write history objectively. I suppose there is some truth to this but if anything it would be only a further admonition against swallowing and repeating their assertions uncritically and without hearing other opposing viewpoints. Hell, many fuckwit young-Earth creationists can put on a good show and dazzle impressionable people who don't have much background in science.

As for Russia- I never said that you said Russia was not corrupt, only that you need to back up your assertion that the US has committed more international misdeeds than Russia. Merely saying "talk to other people", "read this book", "watch this movie" isn't a valid way to back up your argument. Many religious proselytizers use similar tactics: You don't believe? Well read the bible, read this other book and haven't you hear of so-and-so and his amazing story of coming to God? Oh- you have done all of this and you still don't believe? Well that just means you need to do more "research" until you come to the same conclusion as I have.
"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." -- Albert Einstein
icarus
Freshman Poster
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:12 pm

Postby Winston » Wed May 06, 2009 8:23 am

icarus wrote:
WWu777 wrote:
icarus wrote:You can cite sources from various authors (many of whom are less than intellectually honest wing-nuts ) but you seem to be drawing your own conclusion and are more focused on the (mis)deeds of the US. This is natural I suppose as you spent most of your life in the US, but I think you need to spend an equal amount of time and energy studying Russia's historical hegemonic tendencies and then get back to us.


W: Calling them "less than intellectually honest and nuts" is a pure ad homineum attack to try to discredit them. It doesn't address what they say. They are not nuts. If you listen to them talk, you would see that they are scholarly and know their stuff.

Even Noam Chomsky, who is very well respected for his rationality and intellect even by those who don't agree with him, talks about CIA assassinations and covert operations, and economic enslavements, as being well documented. One girl told me, "If Chomsky is wrong, then he's wrong in a rationally well thought out way, not in a clumsy way."

If you go overseas and talk to intellectuals, they'll explain the same things to you.

No one is claiming that Russia isn't corrupt.


You seem overly impressed by how people come off either in speaking or writing. The problem with these guys is that it's very easy to mislead the audience by taking things out of context and leaving out certain operative facts. Not telling the WHOLE truth is often times just as misleading as flat-out lying. Guys like Zinn and Chomsky are notorious for this. Zinn even admits that his writings are slanted, claiming that it's impossible to write history objectively. I suppose there is some truth to this but if anything it would be only a further admonition against swallowing and repeating their assertions uncritically and without hearing other opposing viewpoints. Hell, many fuckwit young-Earth creationists can put on a good show and dazzle impressionable people who don't have much background in science.

As for Russia- I never said that you said Russia was not corrupt, only that you need to back up your assertion that the US has committed more international misdeeds than Russia. Merely saying "talk to other people", "read this book", "watch this movie" isn't a valid way to back up your argument. Many religious proselytizers use similar tactics: You don't believe? Well read the bible, read this other book and haven't you hear of so-and-so and his amazing story of coming to God? Oh- you have done all of this and you still don't believe? Well that just means you need to do more "research" until you come to the same conclusion as I have.


W: Well if that's the case, then it applies to those who write official history too. How then are we going to know which version of history is true? Do you take everything official at its word?

All we can do is speculate.

However, Zinn and Chomsky do have well documented solid sources to back up their claims. Did you ever read their books?

BTW, on the CIA's website, they claim that it is against their policy to assassinate people unless the President of the United States orders it. Do you believe that and consider it to be the final word on the matter?

How do you know who to trust?
Check out the latest posts in our blog The Happier Abroaders.

Don't forget my HA Grand Ebook and Dating Sites!

"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World
User avatar
Winston
Site Admin
 
Posts: 23612
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 1:16 pm

Previous

Return to General Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 11 guests