I said:
C0ckney:
How is that fudging the question? It's a precise attack upon your presumed de-facto answer, using the basis of the very question!
I've read back over my last post three or four times trying to find something that would give you credence there, and to be honest I really can't find it. The most complicated words are "proposition", "meaning", "ad hominem"
. Besides, if you think it is bull****, then I invite you to refute it. Merely calling it so doesn't make it so.
With regards to "crossing the road", the attack upon your analogy still stands imo.
trying to link fundamentalist Islam with mainstream Islam in respect to terrorism would be like linking Ann Frank to Hitler on the grounds that they both breathed oxygen.
sorry what was that about fudging the argument?
with the 'crossing the road' is that you (and YOU positively make it into an art from) can complicate the most simple and straightforward thing with verbose, pseudo-intellectual rubbish. bovis stercus, spucatum tauri is still bull**** at the end of the day.
. Besides, if you think it is bull****, then I invite you to refute it. Merely calling it so doesn't make it so.With regards to "crossing the road", the attack upon your analogy still stands imo.

Comment