Subject:
|
Re: jumping to conclusions
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 27 Apr 2002 00:26:32 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1661 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> > > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
>
> > > I was referring to PLO *terrorists*.
> >
> > So, if it is only the PLO terrorists who are uncivilised troublemakers, why
> > are you anti-Palestinian?
>
> The Palestinians *support* the PLO
> and all of their terrorist activity.
I think the point Scott is trying to make is that not *all Palestinians*
support the PLO, just as not all Americans support Dubya. Therefore, saying
that you are against Palestinians (implying *all*) because they support the
PLO is not a logical argument.
If you were to say you are against all Palestinians that support the PLO,
that would make more sense, but would lessen your further arguments.
ROSCO
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: jumping to conclusions
|
| (...) Comparing the Palestinian "system" with ours is a stretch, and you'd be surprised how many Americans *support* Bush on certain policies (such as terrorism), but putting that aside for the moment... I thought his point was that not all (...) (23 years ago, 27-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: jumping to conclusions
|
| (...) <typing slowly so you will finally get it> The Palestinians *support* the PLO and all of their terrorist activity. The PLO murders *on behalf* of the Palestinians, *with their blessing*. *That* is why I am against them. Let them renounce the (...) (23 years ago, 26-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
88 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
