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: mph who wrote (216252)	8/20/2007 3:36:29 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793896

One example was the conclusion that posters on this thread were "cheering" First of all, I never said that or suggested that. LB claimed it an I disputed it. I said "we." "We" is hardly a word I would use when speaking of this thread, where I am clearly not part of any "we." Secondly, my use of the word was challenged and I analyzed and acknowledged my poor choice of words. I do flub every now and again, after all. You therefore accepted, without any "critical thinking", the premise of the Amanpour series and discarded my point about the meaninglessness of the term "fundamentalist" because it did not fit your construct. What premise of the Amanpour series did I accept? I don't recall making any judgment about it. I clearly said that I would have to wait until I saw it. As for the meaningless of the term, I gave you my rationale for finding it meaningful. I did not dismiss what you said, I countered it. If you want to try some critical thinking, try either analyzing my rationale and knocking it down or offering an alternative rationale of your own. Until you do that, you're just blindly disagreeing.