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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lazarre who wrote (226858)	4/12/2007 2:45:07 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

histrionic? Try again. I wrote "historic". I know wonder what else you read incorrectly in my post. That can impede communication. What you did was tell us what MLK said because you thought MLK somehow has more authority, because he is who he is. He had experience with discrimination in this country, he was not a ME expert or scholar. If you are not aware of the rhetorical fallacies, there are some quite good ones. This, imo, was a classic instance. You could just have easily have told us Malcom X's views on the ME and Zionism and anti-semites, or Rosa Parks' views- they would have had the same weight. All good people, with interesting contributions to make in the struggle for civil rights in this country, but there is no reason to mention them in the context of the ME or zionism. Their opinions have no greater weight than your own. Simply because they are famous, they are not correct on everything. And at least for MLK there's a very good reason to doubt his credibility, at least if you are secular person. If you notice what you quoted shows MLK's insistence that the whole thing boils down to God's promise, and respecting that. Not a very strong logical stand to take on something- except with other people who believe in exactly the same God, and who accept that his promises have some sort of binding quality. While MLK had many good points, his argument in that note, at least for a secular person, is illogical in the extreme.