Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (98780)	2/5/2005 8:31:21 AM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793670

Homeland Protection: Bomb Vest and Briefcase Bomb Training Device's By fred - Israelpundit These pictures are very interesting in that the explosives can be easily concealed. Also notice the nails and hardware added to the explosive devices and the cell phone in the brief case. Pictures of bombs currently being used by suicide bombers in Israel. Below are a number of photos released by Israeli Anti-Terrorist personnel at the Worldwide Conference in Charleston, South Carolina. All photos depict the real stuff being used against Israel and through out the mid-east by terrorists. For a number of pictures of what this thing looks like see suicide vest display sftt.org scroll down for a number of photos.

To: LindyBill who wrote (98780)	2/5/2005 9:15:35 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793670

So you think that the side by side comparison of Kim L Soong and Bush was fair, then? In the context of the article it was an apt hook. Fair? Maybe not since the hook is clearly provocative and unnecessary to the point of the article. I wasn't looking at fairness, just aptness. I was looking at the cognitive disfunction that produces the logical fallacy of this particular pattern of response. Had the blogger complained about the hook being needlessly provocative, I would not have commented. But he did not. He went off on this outraged rebuttal of something imaginary and extraneous as though he were actually refuting the assertion. The pattern of response is very common here. I have pointed it out before. Someone, often yours truly <g>, asserts that oranges are like basketballs in that each is spherical and each has a bumpy skin. The pattern response to that is that my assertion is outrageous because basketballs are hollow while oranges contain tasty, edible flesh, thus more valuable. In this case, the blogger's response was all exercised about comparisons between the two heads of state that the article neither asserted nor implied. The article did not assert that basketballs and oranges are of equal value as food sources (that Soong and Bush are equally desirable as heads of state). It merely said they were round and bumpy and then went on to talk about the qualities of roundness and bumpiness (propaganda). The responder inferred out of bias and illogic something that was not asserted and attributing it to the author of the article, then attacked the irrelevant strawman he had created. Appropriate responses would have been to attack the provocative intent of the hook or to argue Bush's use of propaganda. The sideshow that we got is inapt and itself provocative, intended to feed the outrage machine. I've been following this pattern of outrage and distortion for some time and find it fascinating.