Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #451  
Old 09-07-2019, 01:05 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
They already did fail. The longer the anonymous ones that made the claim on the internet don't come forward with how they came with the images and the dubious interpretations of them the more one has to dismiss their "evidence"
I've been in climate change debates with you. A statement that I have made in those debates is, "If you do not trust the Michael Mann hockey puck graph, then throw that information away. It doesn't matter, because there's the hockey puck graph created by China and Brazil and Canada and NASA and various other groups, based on other data and other models. Whether Michael Mann is reliable or not is irrelevant."

I say the same here. Discount the images. Throw them away. It does not affect anything.

Quote:
That is what you need to do.
I did [move on]. As said, people kept calling me to come back and were derailing other threads.
  #452  
Old 09-07-2019, 01:13 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,348
One more thing, when I said "can you go to the Antiques Road show and use copies of a post on the internet and demand that an appraiser declare you have a real Rembrandt?" the point was not that the images were fake. (that could be found later after getting the originals and the contextual testimony of the ones who took the images)

The point was that anyone can say the picture shows a real event, or a real Rembrandt, and it would be meaningless unless an intrepid guy can lead the authorities to the place this Rembrandt is located as he would then report when and where a shot of that was taken.

So it is crucial to get context, as in: original images together with a testimony from the owners/the ones that took the pictures telling us the status of the people who had their picture taken, when the images where taken, etc; to see if the dubious affirmations from an internet poster that refuses now to show how he got the images or source has any value.
  #453  
Old 09-07-2019, 01:19 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
I've been in climate change debates with you. A statement that I have made in those debates is, "If you do not trust the Michael Mann hockey puck graph, then throw that information away. It doesn't matter, because there's the hockey puck graph created by China and Brazil and Canada and NASA and various other groups, based on other data and other models. Whether Michael Mann is reliable or not is irrelevant."

I say the same here. Discount the images. Throw them away. It does not affect anything.
Tell me about it, the sealioning never ends. And neither your childishness.


Actually this shows that you do not know jack about how evidence works, one factor is that the less evidence is there then one has to give a theory like the Omar one you posted even less value.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
I did [move on]. As said, people kept calling me to come back and were derailing other threads.
As it was clear, you are willing to ignore that when procedures, like the chain of possession and context from witnesses are missing, the Omar conspiracy theory is dumber than the moon hoax.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 09-07-2019 at 01:22 AM.
  #454  
Old 09-07-2019, 01:23 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
One more thing, when I said "can you go to the Antiques Road show and use copies of a post on the internet and demand that an appraiser declare you have a real Rembrandt?" the point was not that the images were fake. (that could be found later after getting the originals and the contextual testimony of the ones who took the images)

The point was that anyone can say the picture shows a real event, or a real Rembrandt, and it would be meaningless unless an intrepid guy can lead the authorities to the place this Rembrandt is located as he would then report when and where a shot of that was taken.

So it is crucial to get context, as in: original images together with a testimony from the owners/the ones that took the pictures telling us the status of the people who had their picture taken, when the images where taken, etc; to see if the dubious affirmations from an internet poster that refuses now to show how he got the images or source has any value.
As I have said, if you read through what I actually did and said, rather than stopping at the first thing that you can think of to object to, you will find that my conclusions are based on things which can be independently verified.

I largely agree with what you say, but it is better addressed to the same people that I am addressing.

My position was to take the things that I could not independently verify with a grain of salt. I made no claim that anything was real nor faked (though I did say that I could not detect any fakery in the images and that it seemed to beyond the capabilities of the people being discussed). Importantly, though, I based my conclusions on things that I was able to independently verify through sources free of AhbdiJohnson, Powerline, and Alpha News' reach.

Last edited by Sage Rat; 09-07-2019 at 01:24 AM.
  #455  
Old 09-07-2019, 01:28 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
As I have said, if you read through what I actually did and said, rather than stopping at the first thing that you can think of to object to, you will find that my conclusions are based on things which can be independently verified.
Nope, because they are not coming from direct evidence nor direct testimony.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
I largely agree with what you say, but it is better addressed to the same people that I am addressing.

My position was to take the things that I could not independently verify with a grain of salt. I made no claim that anything was real nor faked. I based my conclusions on things that I was able to independently verify through sources free of AhbdiJohnson, Powerline, and Alpha News' reach.
And still missing the point painfully, you have worthless evidence, regardless of how you did "verify it", because in the end, you really did ignore proper procedure. You only verified that you took the bait from dubious sources, hook line and sinker.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 09-07-2019 at 01:31 AM.
  #456  
Old 09-07-2019, 01:35 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
Nope, because they are not coming from direct evidence nor direct testimony.
https://m.facebook.com/nur.said.3386?fref=nf
  #457  
Old 09-07-2019, 01:39 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
Same reply to that, where is his original image, his testimony from a credible source, location when the picture was taken and what was the status of the persons then that appeared in the picture?

Not to mention that now you are falling for the same tactic of the ones that ensnared you by not providing proper context.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 09-07-2019 at 01:41 AM.
  #458  
Old 09-07-2019, 01:45 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
Same reply to that, where is his original image, his testimony from a credible source, location when the picture was taken and what was the status of the persons then that appeared in the picture?
I presume that you mean the profile photo. The one with a like on it from Omar's husband. As said, I did independently verify this and it is not difficult to do so.

https://mblsportal.sos.state.mn.us/B...6-001ec94ffe7f
  #459  
Old 09-07-2019, 01:52 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
I presume that you mean the profile photo. The one with a like on it from Omar's husband. As said, I did independently verify this and it is not difficult to do so.

https://mblsportal.sos.state.mn.us/B...6-001ec94ffe7f


As pointed with the Rembrandt example, that is meaningless evidence.

Again, as you miss it: you can get a real Rembrandt on a picture and any armchair detective can verify it, but it is meaningless unless the picture taker is willing to declare where that picture was taken and if the picture actually shows a changed status (if there is no frame and the edges look torn in the picture showing the real Rembrandt, then together with the testimony of the picture taker, that is plenty of evidence for real detectives to get a warrant).

You are therefore still using worthless evidence.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 09-07-2019 at 01:54 AM.
  #460  
Old 09-07-2019, 01:52 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,145
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.p...40113039726399
  #461  
Old 09-07-2019, 01:59 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
And it seems that you will not finish until you get a picture showing that water is wet.

Showing pictures of the real Rembrandt is equally meaningless unless there is direct testimony together with the original pictures and sources pointing at the one related to the crime.

Again, show us the original pictures and the testimony of the original picture takers, about the alleged brother being married to Omar, showing pictures from Facebook does not cut it.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 09-07-2019 at 02:03 AM.
  #462  
Old 09-07-2019, 02:37 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimstu View Post
That's what you call "making it go away"? Not so much.

In any case, why would supposedly sensible people be "listening to the crazies" in the first place, if the crazies have not managed to provide any evidence in support of their allegations?

That’s a perfectly fair position as regards a private citizen. But Omar is not only a public figure but a public servant, and when her mainstream hometown newspaper asks these questions, she should answer them. If she doesn’t, she creates the impression that she is hiding things and stonewalling. That’s just the way it is. There are a lot of people who will read something like that and think she seems to be acting guilty, whereas if she did answer the questions and allow her family members to be interviewed and there was “no there there”, the same Strib readers would come to the conclusion that the people still insisting on some kind of conspiracy were full of crap and should be ignored.

You seem to want to stubbornly insist that it would make no difference because everyone has already made up their minds, and I think that is quite clearly wrong.

You guys think this is just like birtherism and the demand for Obama to release his long form birth certificate? Then Gallup flatly disproves the notion that giving into such demands doesn’t change anything:

https://news.gallup.com/poll/147530/...-skeptics.aspx

Right before he released his long form birth certificate, 56 percent of Americans believed he was definitely or probably born in this country, and 24 percent believed he was definitely or probably born outside the country—a spread of 32 points. Just a couple weeks later after he released it, that spread had expanded to 52 points.

And if anything, that kind of comparison underestimates the impact. In reality, there were clearly a large number of people who were going to say he was born outside the country as a proxy for just hating him no matter what evidence came in. And there was also a large contingent who were going to stand by him regardless. So among the persuadables in the middle, where elections are decided, the impact was enormous—and it’s really an open question as to whether he could have beaten Romney without doing this. (It’s clear that Axelrod and Obama did not believe he could.)
  #463  
Old 09-07-2019, 02:45 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
And it seems that you will not finish until you get a picture showing that water is wet.

Showing pictures of the real Rembrandt is equally meaningless unless there is direct testimony together with the original pictures and sources pointing at the one related to the crime.

Again, show us the original pictures and the testimony of the original picture takers, about the alleged brother being married to Omar, showing pictures from Facebook does not cut it.
https://www.instagram.com/p/Byxr1LtDWAA/
http://www.citypages.com/news/ilhan-...arts/503858391
https://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Ilhan...se-Jews-576365
https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nat...229362849.html

What crime and what argument do you believe I made?

Last edited by Sage Rat; 09-07-2019 at 02:47 AM.
  #464  
Old 09-07-2019, 03:15 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,348
Well the crime of being stupid as you demonstrated there.

Read it again for the evidence of your dumbness: nowhere I did say that that is not her father, only that you are trying to childishly point at your "powers of deduction" like demanding your candy award. So I did say that indeed: you just showed that water is wet there. And I can post more sources of Jesus at the sea of Galilee" from Rembrandt and they would be meaningless like the pictures of the father of Omar because they do not point to any crime or malfeasance, hence the point that you need to show us the original pictures and testimony from the picture takers about the issue at hand, and not a stupid distraction.

If you ever bother to get to the point: to show us the original sources of the stupid accusation against Omar, together with testimony from the original picture takers with the context of the pictures I would had been impressed, but instead you decided to show that you prefer to think that others are not paying attention to your red herrings.
  #465  
Old 09-07-2019, 03:26 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
That’s a perfectly fair position as regards a private citizen. But Omar is not only a public figure but a public servant, and when her mainstream hometown newspaper asks these questions, she should answer them. If she doesn’t, she creates the impression that she is hiding things and stonewalling. That’s just the way it is. There are a lot of people who will read something like that and think she seems to be acting guilty, whereas if she did answer the questions and allow her family members to be interviewed and there was “no there there”, the same Strib readers would come to the conclusion that the people still insisting on some kind of conspiracy were full of crap and should be ignored.

You seem to want to stubbornly insist that it would make no difference because everyone has already made up their minds, and I think that is quite clearly wrong.

You guys think this is just like birtherism and the demand for Obama to release his long form birth certificate? Then Gallup flatly disproves the notion that giving into such demands doesn’t change anything:

https://news.gallup.com/poll/147530/...-skeptics.aspx

Right before he released his long form birth certificate, 56 percent of Americans believed he was definitely or probably born in this country, and 24 percent believed he was definitely or probably born outside the country—a spread of 32 points. Just a couple weeks later after he released it, that spread had expanded to 52 points.

And if anything, that kind of comparison underestimates the impact. In reality, there were clearly a large number of people who were going to say he was born outside the country as a proxy for just hating him no matter what evidence came in. And there was also a large contingent who were going to stand by him regardless. So among the persuadables in the middle, where elections are decided, the impact was enormous—and it’s really an open question as to whether he could have beaten Romney without doing this. (It’s clear that Axelrod and Obama did not believe he could.)
Too bad that after all that typing, it is a very moot point, Omar won the election while that conspiracy was already in the news:

https://www.apnews.com/cc2ccd70de56405098d2f259bf0e46c5
Quote:
October 17, 2018

MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — A Minnesota Democratic candidate for Congress who is poised to become the first Somali-American elected to the U.S. House has denounced claims that she married her brother and committed immigration fraud as “disgusting lies,” and says allegations of campaign finance violations are politically motivated.
  #466  
Old 09-07-2019, 03:26 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
nowhere I did say that that is not her father
I was responding to "Nope, because they are not coming from direct evidence nor direct testimony."

I just gave you an example of the sorts of sources that I looked at. You appear to agree with me, based on those sources, that we have successfully identified Omar's dad.

Which is it? You can't claim that I couldn't have possibly independently verified anything at the same time as saying that yes, clearly, that's Omar's dad.

Quote:
If you ever bother to get to the point: to show us the original sources of the stupid accusation against Omar, together with testimony from the original picture takers with the context of the pictures I would had been impressed, but instead you decided to show that you prefer to think that others are not paying attention to your red herrings.
I made no specific accusation against Omar and I just told you on the previous page that I didn't use any pictures that couldn't be independently verified. If you want someone to defend the brother marriage thing, ask SlackerInc or someone.

My argument was this:

Quote:
Omar's husband, Hirsi, is bisexual and polyamorous. He meets a handsome, British Somali lad online and tells Omar that he's debating to leave her and go to England. They talk it out and decide that she's okay with him having a boyfriend.

The most practical way for them to all be together, they decide, is for Omar to marry Elmi.

They bring Elmi into the US as Omar's husband and all start to live together. They call Elmi an 'Uncle' to their children and he calls them his nieces.

Pretty quickly, the family determines that this was all a bad idea and Elmi leaves to go live on his own. Eventually, he returns to England after he's done studying at University. Omar and him are still friendly, it's more the Hirsi/Elmi relationship that's off.

The social media links between Omar and Elmi, with him calling her kids "niece" and her dad (for whatever reason) going by a similar name to Elmi kicks off a brother/sister theory among the Somali community, which eventually leads to Omar being investigated and her tax history being discovered.

As a politician, she decides that the whole bisexual + polyamorous husband thing is a bridge too far for her to maintain her political base, regardless of whether they generally vote Democratic. As such, she scrubs all social media connection between herself and Elmi and denies having any relationship with him anymore.

Through this, she'll have generated some false testimony to USCIS during her marriage to Elmi and then further perjured herself during the divorce proceedings but, ultimately, this was all just a load of nonsense brought on by the father of her children and trying to keep their relationship going while the children are young.

Last edited by Sage Rat; 09-07-2019 at 03:27 AM.
  #467  
Old 09-07-2019, 03:51 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
I was responding to "Nope, because they are not coming from direct evidence nor direct testimony."

I just gave you an example of the sorts of sources that I looked at. You appear to agree with me, based on those sources, that we have successfully identified Omar's dad.

Which is it? You can't claim that I couldn't have possibly independently verified anything at the same time as saying that yes, clearly, that's Omar's dad just as I had stated and as AhbdiJohnson stated.
[Spock] Captain, the density anomaly is stronger here![/S]

That is because others indeed can confirm and testify about that fact, the ones that anonymously posted the Omar conspiracy, with images that can not be examined, nor a way to examine the original picture takers or to obtain testimony from them; leads one to conclude that no, you don't know about the proper way to check for evidence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
I made no specific accusation against Omar and I just told you on the previous page that I didn't use any pictures that couldn't be independently verified. If you want someone to defend the brother marriage thing, ask SlackerInc or someone.

My argument was this:
And as pointed before, an argument based on anonymous evidence and non vetted sources, as worthless as a picture of a real Rembrandt posted on the internet from an anonymous would be "hero" that claims to expose a wealthy thief of the painting by posting evidence anonymously and then does not come forward to report when the picture was taken, nor to point at the original picture takers that can provide context.

That actually leads to a better argument: Most would dismiss that kind of malarkey, but you swallow the trolls bait, hook line and sinker.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 09-07-2019 at 03:53 AM.
  #468  
Old 09-07-2019, 04:06 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
That is because others indeed can confirm and testify about that fact
Quote from me, post 447: "My [position] is based on things that I was able to independently verify. I stated what those things were. Everyone is free to repeat what I did and they will find the things that I said are there, assuming that they have not been deleted."

Quote:
the ones that anonymously posted the Omar conspiracy, with images that can not be examined, nor a way to examine the original picture takers or to obtain testimony from them leads one to conclude that no, you don't know about the proper way to check for evidence.
So...the ones that I've just told you several times that I'm not using in any way?
  #469  
Old 09-07-2019, 04:11 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
Quote from me, post 447: "My [position] is based on things that I was able to independently verify. I stated what those things were. Everyone is free to repeat what I did and they will find the things that I said are there, assuming that they have not been deleted."
Repeating that water is wet does not help you look smart. I actually did check the "water" you pointed at by looking at other news reports that identified the father.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
So...the ones that I've just told you several times that I'm not using in any way?
With obvious dumb results. Again, you are attempting to tell others that you are not using those, so who* are you using then regarding the stupid Omar accusation?



* And by who, I'm talking about what I pointed many times before, the original images with direct testimony from the ones that took the pictures with the context and when the pictures where taken.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 09-07-2019 at 04:14 AM.
  #470  
Old 09-07-2019, 04:16 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
With obvious dumb results.
You just spent two pages telling me that I was using bad evidence at the same time as also explicitly stating that you refused to read one research piece that I did because I didn't insult someone that you hate with your preferred insult. You don't know what evidence I used, what conclusion I came to, nor what my position on the topic is but came in assuming that you did.

Quote:
Again, you are attempting to tell others that you are not using those, so who are you using then regarding the stupid Omar accusation?
That would have been a good question to have asked at the start of the conversation. (When you weren't posting drunk.)

Do the work.

╭∩╮( ͡° ل͟ ͡° )╭∩╮

Last edited by Sage Rat; 09-07-2019 at 04:18 AM.
  #471  
Old 09-07-2019, 04:20 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
You just spent two pages telling me that I was using bad evidence at the same time as also explicitly stating that you refused to read one research piece that I did because I didn't insult someone that you hate with your preferred insult. You don't know what evidence I used, what conclusion I came to, nor what my position on the topic is.
pifle, using logic it is clear that you do not have a source that even approaches to what I told you regarding the stupid accusations against Omar. So you cowardly had to resort to the easiest and lamest example in your sorry deductive tool kit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
That would have been a good way to start the conversation.

Do the work.

╭∩╮( ͡° ل͟ ͡° )╭∩╮
Nope, I demonstrated that you did a lousy work and I'm not going to take out the hook that you have in your mouth there.

Point being that, there are others out there that deserve the scorn you show there, but as usual, the ones being trolled do hate more the ones that point at the error of their ways and not the ones that trolled them in the first place.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 09-07-2019 at 04:24 AM.
  #472  
Old 09-07-2019, 04:24 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
the easiest and lamest example in your sorry deductive tool kit.
This one was easier. Only one link required.

https://mblsportal.sos.state.mn.us/B...6-001ec94ffe7f
  #473  
Old 09-07-2019, 04:41 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
This one was easier. Only one link required.

https://mblsportal.sos.state.mn.us/B...6-001ec94ffe7f
The Star Tribune could not find records in Minnesota showing that the two ever married, this is not evidence of that either. So, as pointed before, you are really not trying. And that hook in your mouth really does not look better.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 09-07-2019 at 04:43 AM.
  #474  
Old 09-07-2019, 04:56 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
Too bad that after all that typing, it is a very moot point, Omar won the election while that conspiracy was already in the news:

https://www.apnews.com/cc2ccd70de56405098d2f259bf0e46c5

She has not faced voters since the publication of the Strib article I posted. Still, she is probably safe because the district is so overwhelmingly Democratic. But that doesn’t (or shouldn’t) mean it doesn’t matter. Her predecessor in that congressional seat, Keith Ellison, who was the first Muslim elected to Congress, won a statewide race (att’y general) last fall, even after he faced accusations of being a domestic abuser. Omar is charismatic and might have had some possibility of following in his footsteps—but with this article and her failure to respond, I think it’s safe to say that dream is dead. Thankfully.
  #475  
Old 09-07-2019, 05:11 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
She has not faced voters since the publication of the Strib article I posted. Still, she is probably safe because the district is so overwhelmingly Democratic. But that doesn’t (or shouldn’t) mean it doesn’t matter. Her predecessor in that congressional seat, Keith Ellison, who was the first Muslim elected to Congress, won a statewide race (att’y general) last fall, even after he faced accusations of being a domestic abuser. Omar is charismatic and might have had some possibility of following in his footsteps—but with this article and her failure to respond, I think it’s safe to say that dream is dead. Thankfully.
Another useless point then. And many of the other right wing sources like alpha news pushed that malarkey since 2016.
  #476  
Old 09-07-2019, 05:14 AM
Monty's Avatar
Monty is offline
Straight Dope Science Advisory Board
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Beijing, China
Posts: 23,644
GIGObuster: Are you not aware that conspiracy theorists do not argue honestly. They are far too invested in their pretense of intellect. Look at those two whom you're trying to enlighten. Totally incapable of admitting that they've been swindled, and are now trying to swindle others.
  #477  
Old 09-07-2019, 05:27 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty View Post
GIGObuster: Are you not aware that conspiracy theorists do not argue honestly. They are far too invested in their pretense of intellect. Look at those two whom you're trying to enlighten. Totally incapable of admitting that they've been swindled, and are now trying to swindle others.
I Know, but I also learn too about this subject and it is a pleasure to show others the hooks that the trolled accumulate. I do think that conspiracy theorists are either dumb or willful deceivers and sometimes I'm curious about what kind they are when they pop up.

"They're all fools gentlemen, but the question remains - what KIND of fools are they?" - Gary Larson.
  #478  
Old 09-07-2019, 06:00 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,747
So Monty, are you claiming the Gallup numbers are fake news?
  #479  
Old 09-07-2019, 06:44 AM
DrFidelius's Avatar
DrFidelius is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Miskatonic University
Posts: 12,567
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
So Monty, are you claiming the Gallup numbers are fake news?
Gallop has proof she married her brother?
__________________
The opinions expressed here are my own, and do not represent any other persons, organizations, spirits, thinking machines, hive minds or other sentient beings on this world or any adjacent dimensions in the multiverse.
  #480  
Old 09-07-2019, 07:18 AM
Cheesesteak's Avatar
Cheesesteak is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lovely Montclair, NJ
Posts: 13,765
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Right before he released his long form birth certificate, 56 percent of Americans believed he was definitely or probably born in this country, and 24 percent believed he was definitely or probably born outside the country—a spread of 32 points. Just a couple weeks later after he released it, that spread had expanded to 52 points.
You're taking the wrong thing from this.

By this time, actually before the 2008 election, Obama had already released a birth certificate that would be regarded as proof of birth in any court in the world, AND the head of Hawaii's vital records bureau publicly stated that he personally verified the accuracy of that document with the original records AND the Republican Governor, who was campaigning at the time for Obama's opponent, certified that the document provided was genuine.

After all of that 62% of Americans didn't think Obama was "definitely" born in the USA, and 44% couldn't even say he was "probably" born in the USA.

That's completely fucking twisted.

Even after the long form was produced, which, by the way, is a level of documentation never demanded of anyone for anything in the history of this country, 35% of Americans couldn't say he was "probably" born in the USA.


These conspiracy theories are insidious diseases infecting our population, and should be given no quarter.
  #481  
Old 09-08-2019, 01:44 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak View Post
You're taking the wrong thing from this.

By this time, actually before the 2008 election, Obama had already released a birth certificate that would be regarded as proof of birth in any court in the world, AND the head of Hawaii's vital records bureau publicly stated that he personally verified the accuracy of that document with the original records AND the Republican Governor, who was campaigning at the time for Obama's opponent, certified that the document provided was genuine.

After all of that 62% of Americans didn't think Obama was "definitely" born in the USA, and 44% couldn't even say he was "probably" born in the USA.

That's completely fucking twisted.

Even after the long form was produced, which, by the way, is a level of documentation never demanded of anyone for anything in the history of this country, 35% of Americans couldn't say he was "probably" born in the USA.


These conspiracy theories are insidious diseases infecting our population, and should be given no quarter.

I figured people would react that way, but the fact remains that the earlier claim, that there would be no point in Omar and her family providing evidence because people will believe what they’re going to believe, is clearly shown by this example to be false.

And there has not been any action by Omar equivalent to Obama releasing his short form birth certificate. She won’t even answer questions, never mind providing evidence to back up the putative answers.

Going back to the Obama thing, maybe the most important stat there was not broken down in my post. The percentage who believed Obama was definitely born in the US went from 38% to 47% after he released the long form birth certificate. Given that he won with 51% of the vote the following year, that seems significant.

The point is, just because you think evidence is unnecessary and it’s beneath your contempt to imagine needing it, this is politics and swing voters don’t necessarily see things the same way as you do. But even more importantly, they aren’t necessarily locked into the opposing, Fox News/Breitbart camp either, just because they aren’t in yours.
  #482  
Old 09-08-2019, 02:16 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
The Star Tribune could not find records in Minnesota showing that the two ever married, this is not evidence of that either.
I made no claim that anyone married anyone or didn't marry anyone. Go back and look, there's no text saying anything about any marriages or anything with that link.

I was responding to criticism of the reliability of the sources I used. I said nothing about what the source said, implied, or whether it even had anything to do with Ilhan Omar. I could have just linked to the top page of the website rather than that specific page, in terms of what I was responding to. I was giving an example of a source which, as said, is free of all possible connection to right wing sources.

How did you get to the place where you forgot what you had yourself stated, invented a commentary around a link that I posted which did not exist, and somehow feel like replying to that imagined commentary was rational? And that's all ignoring that the original accusation was, to begin with, predicated on no knowledge one way or the other about what I did or did not use as sources beyond my statements that I had solely utilized things which I had been able to independently verify.

Who are you talking with?

Last edited by Sage Rat; 09-08-2019 at 02:18 AM.
  #483  
Old 09-08-2019, 04:41 AM
crowmanyclouds's Avatar
crowmanyclouds is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: ... hiding in my room ...
Posts: 4,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
{...} Thankfully.
Why 'thankfully'?

CMC fnord!
  #484  
Old 09-08-2019, 04:50 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 20,144
Who Cares? When I saw the thread had gone to a 3rd page* I clicked just to see what all the fuss was about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
I think lead exposure has a big role. But WTF does this have to do with Ilhan Omar? She’s obviously very intelligent.
(I didn't check the antecedent reference to lead exposure but) WTF does Ilhan Omar's marriage have to do with anything anyway? If some cowardly right-wing whingers want to quarrel with her politics then quarrel with her politics! If she broke the law, telephone ICE or whats-his-fuck and then shut up! (Present company excepted of course!)

In the unlikely event any of Omar's detractors has the slightest shred of morality, let's ask them what they think of Trump's alleged child rape, or that Hastert (once two heartbeats from the Presidency) had raped little boys.

Sorry to butt in — but this is the Pit! And, no, I didn't read the first 400 pages of the thread because ... Who the Fuck Cares? Just a bunch of fucking racist evangelists, I'll bet, who would happily rape Ms. Omar if they had some crooked cop friends along to hold her down.

No, I'm not in a bad mood! Just pounding the keyboard, as now, relieves my stress!
  #485  
Old 09-08-2019, 01:03 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
I made no claim that anyone married anyone or didn't marry anyone. Go back and look, there's no text saying anything about any marriages or anything with that link.

I was responding to criticism of the reliability of the sources I used. I said nothing about what the source said, implied, or whether it even had anything to do with Ilhan Omar. I could have just linked to the top page of the website rather than that specific page, in terms of what I was responding to. I was giving an example of a source which, as said, is free of all possible connection to right wing sources.

How did you get to the place where you forgot what you had yourself stated, invented a commentary around a link that I posted which did not exist, and somehow feel like replying to that imagined commentary was rational? And that's all ignoring that the original accusation was, to begin with, predicated on no knowledge one way or the other about what I did or did not use as sources beyond my statements that I had solely utilized things which I had been able to independently verify.

Who are you talking with?
With you. A dumb guy who was trolled by people that spinned sources towards a stupid conclusion, that is all.

Again, there is very little rationality on your research, frankly you are here just adding another layer of stupid, besides thinking that how you confirmed who the father of Omar was a great feat, when it was really your dumb misunderstanding of what I said. That explains a lot of why you fall for the trolling of the detractors of Omar. Here you seem to think that I was thinking that I was saying that all the bait presented to you was false information. (OK, 2 layers of dumb from you besides. ).

The stupid now is still to miss why the examples of how they proceed in a place like The Antiques Road Show were mentioned, it was to underline that like in real life, even when you say that images or sources show real people or facts, they are presented to the mark as part of the complete bait so as to hook more like you, it is very similar to what pseudo scientists do to their followers.

So, you can have pictures of the real Buffalo Bill, but as the example showed: 2 of the pictures that were identified independently by others as being Buffalo Bill, but they were not taken by the older relative of the current owner, they were found to be promotional copies made to sell at the traveling show and hence of little value. But there was an image that showed Buffalo Bill in a business suit and together with the testimony and signature of Bill and the name of the lady that owned the pictures it was then good news for her as that picture had lots of value.

And so it was for your evidence so far, it is worthless really, and as showed, even the one you thought it was so important is still no evidence showing Omar being married to an invented brother or lover of her husband or that Omar committed any other immigration fraud.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 09-08-2019 at 01:07 PM.
  #486  
Old 09-08-2019, 02:53 PM
Skywatcher's Avatar
Skywatcher is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere in the Potomac
Posts: 35,350
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
And so it was for your evidence so far, it is worthless really, and as showed, even the one you thought it was so important is still no evidence showing Omar being married to an invented brother or lover of her husband or that Omar committed any other immigration fraud.
And the entire argument boils down to she probably did something wrong, whatever it was.
  #487  
Old 09-08-2019, 04:04 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
And so it was for your evidence so far, it is worthless really, and as showed, even the one you thought it was so important is still no evidence showing Omar being married to an invented brother or lover of her husband or that Omar committed any other immigration fraud.
Evidence for what? I've made no argument and I've presented no evidence. My statements, to date, are that one shouldn't make any assertions of anything one way or the other that isn't provable, that evidence can be and should be interpreted into as wide a set of possibilities as possible, though always within the restraints of what is provably true.

This is like if I came up to you to ask the weather and you started crying out that I was trying to murder your dog.

What did you read at any point that got you to where you are from anything that I have written?
  #488  
Old 09-08-2019, 04:16 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skywatcher View Post
And the entire argument boils down to she probably did something wrong, whatever it was.
The fallacy is that if something is likely then the person uses that to argue that it is true.

The fallacy is to ignore the probability. If the simple presence of a probability was sufficient to make something a fallacy, you would essentially be unable to talk on any subject without being fallacious.

Ignoring the probability in the other direction is also a fallacy.
  #489  
Old 09-08-2019, 04:19 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 36,076
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
The fallacy is that if something is likely then the person uses that to argue that it is true.

The fallacy is to ignore the probability. If the simple presence of a probability was sufficient to make something a fallacy, you would essentially be unable to talk on any subject without being fallacious.

Ignoring the probability in the other direction is also a fallacy.
Do you advocate "ignoring the probability" for the supposition that Omar married a space alien disguised as her brother, and she's reticent to answer questions about it because she wants to hide the upcoming invasion of the human race from alien lizard shapeshifters?
  #490  
Old 09-08-2019, 04:44 PM
Skywatcher's Avatar
Skywatcher is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere in the Potomac
Posts: 35,350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
The fallacy is that if something is likely then the person uses that to argue that it is true.

The fallacy is to ignore the probability.
The fallacy is to reach a conclusion, no matter how improbable, simply because said conclusion has not been ruled out as impossible. Your conclusion is based on scant evidence coupled with a lack of evidence to the contrary.
  #491  
Old 09-08-2019, 04:45 PM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 4,356
Do you still believe these obvious distortions of the truth?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
She is, fairly undoubtedly, racist against Jews.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
If the House votes to tell you that you're a racist - when it's lead by Democrats - you're probably a racist.
  #492  
Old 09-08-2019, 04:52 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
Evidence for what? I've made no argument and I've presented no evidence.
Sure, reach for the idiot excuse, those links must had been posted by the sheep fucker that posted impersonating a different poster once in the past.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
My statements, to date, are that one shouldn't make any assertions of anything one way or the other that isn't provable, that evidence can be and should be interpreted into as wide a set of possibilities as possible, though always within the restraints of what is provably true.
And dismissed when it is shown that they are worthless for the accusations attempted, whereas incest, or illegal immigration.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
This is like if I came up to you to ask the weather and you started crying out that I was trying to murder your dog.
Projection; you had to, even with gestures, told me to fuck off. Only because I showed how stupid you were by pointing out at the evidence about who the father of Omar was, it showed how trolls can point at neutral evidence and led you to trust them to swallow the bait that they had for later.

You are trying to evade that when you try to apply the chain of possession and direct testimony I mentioned to the pictures that you started blabbing, that show alleged relatives of Omar, is than then you should realize how dumber it was to accept the spun applied to them before.

It was time then to consider the source of other non picture evidence too, but you are too coward to accept that other "evidence" presented by them is even more suspect (regardless if it is real, you are only willfully missing the point I was making, you need original witnesses and interviews that offer context for real pictures or other evidence that is missing still) and once again: you are still pushing theories based on a peculiar interpretation that misses many other more logical interpretations than the ones you are using.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
What did you read at any point that got you to where you are from anything that I have written?
Finding how worthless the sorry evidence you have on my own *, and finding that you are still continuing with worthless evidence.

The assessors in The Antiques Road Show would also had said that they need the evidence and the witnesses of the chain of possession and context, anyone that would say that they have digital pictures of the Rembrandt (that a wealthy man is accused of having the original stolen painting) has to come forward to point at the place, time and context when the accusatory digital picture or other evidence is coming from or the proper contex.

You were (or still are, as your sorry replies showed) still demanding that worthless evidence be considered*, as I noted. In the Antiques Road Show the police would had escorted you out if you had continued to explain ad nauseam the childless ways you looked at the evidence of anonymous guys that do have a lot to hide for not coming forward.








*And again, demonstrating how you found about the father of Omar was dumb. It is not valuable evidence for the issue of finding if Omar married an invented brother or committed any other immigration fraud. Not all evidence is the same and still not noticing that real images or evidence can be spun to claim bad things. So, you swallowed the bait and it makes me think that you are not even a rat then.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 09-08-2019 at 04:55 PM.
  #493  
Old 09-08-2019, 05:02 PM
Skywatcher's Avatar
Skywatcher is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere in the Potomac
Posts: 35,350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
The fallacy is to ignore the probability.
Neglecting probability is a cognitive bias, not a logical fallacy.
  #494  
Old 09-08-2019, 05:22 PM
Atamasama's Avatar
Atamasama is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,744
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
Do you still believe these obvious distortions of the truth?
I myself don’t believe she’s racist. I haven’t heard any blatantly racist remarks. I think she has a strong dislike for Israel’s government, because she has openly and repeatedly said as much. And I think she’s said some stupid comments that sounded bad, and she was properly criticized for them. But adding those together and getting “anti-Semitic” is bad math.
  #495  
Old 09-08-2019, 05:26 PM
Cheesesteak's Avatar
Cheesesteak is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lovely Montclair, NJ
Posts: 13,765
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
IThe percentage who believed Obama was definitely born in the US went from 38% to 47% after he released the long form birth certificate.
Again... the man gave us:
1) his birth certificate - valid in every courtroom in the entire world as proof of birth
2) public statement from the head of his State's vital records bureau that the certificate was accurate
3) public statement from the Governor of his State, a person not of his party and actively campaigning for his opponent, that the certificate was accurate
4) a certified copy of the internal documentation, a level of certification never heretofore required for anyone for any purpose.

And still over 50% of the population wasn't sure where the dude was born.

All because.... some dude made up a ridiculous story of Obama's mother flying to Kenya to give birth. A story with literally zero facts supporting it.

As I said before, it's twisted. It's a plague upon our society, where actual information is ignored, and fantasies are believed. We as a society either stand up against this plague, and demand facts from these story tellers, or we feed the sickness by giving them the attention they don't deserve.
  #496  
Old 09-08-2019, 05:33 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skywatcher View Post
Neglecting probability is a cognitive bias, not a logical fallacy.
Not according to whoever wrote the particular wiki page, but I'm not strongly opinionated on which is the better classification.
  #497  
Old 09-08-2019, 05:41 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
Sure, reach for the idiot excuse, those links must had been posted by the sheep fucker that posted impersonating a different poster once in the past.


And dismissed when it is shown that they are worthless for the accusations attempted, whereas incest, or illegal immigration.


Projection; you had to, even with gestures, told me to fuck off. Only because I showed how stupid you were by pointing out at the evidence about who the father of Omar was, it showed how trolls can point at neutral evidence and led you to trust them to swallow the bait that they had for later.

You are trying to evade that when you try to apply the chain of possession and direct testimony I mentioned to the pictures that you started blabbing, that show alleged relatives of Omar, is than then you should realize how dumber it was to accept the spun applied to them before.

It was time then to consider the source of other non picture evidence too, but you are too coward to accept that other "evidence" presented by them is even more suspect (regardless if it is real, you are only willfully missing the point I was making, you need original witnesses and interviews that offer context for real pictures or other evidence that is missing still) and once again: you are still pushing theories based on a peculiar interpretation that misses many other more logical interpretations than the ones you are using.


Finding how worthless the sorry evidence you have on my own *, and finding that you are still continuing with worthless evidence.

The assessors in The Antiques Road Show would also had said that they need the evidence and the witnesses of the chain of possession and context, anyone that would say that they have digital pictures of the Rembrandt (that a wealthy man is accused of having the original stolen painting) has to come forward to point at the place, time and context when the accusatory digital picture or other evidence is coming from or the proper contex.

You were (or still are, as your sorry replies showed) still demanding that worthless evidence be considered*, as I noted. In the Antiques Road Show the police would had escorted you out if you had continued to explain ad nauseam the childless ways you looked at the evidence of anonymous guys that do have a lot to hide for not coming forward.








*And again, demonstrating how you found about the father of Omar was dumb. It is not valuable evidence for the issue of finding if Omar married an invented brother or committed any other immigration fraud. Not all evidence is the same and still not noticing that real images or evidence can be spun to claim bad things. So, you swallowed the bait and it makes me think that you are not even a rat then.
What evidence? Give an example. I've showed you two evidentiary items and your stance on one was that "water is wet" and the other was to go off on a tangent about marriage while looking at a business license. That makes no sense.

If you believe that I am using some particular piece of evidence:

a) Identify what you're talking about.
b) Ask whether or not I am.
  #498  
Old 09-08-2019, 06:04 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
Do you still believe these obvious distortions of the truth?
Unless you have some form of counter-evidence that I should consider? Asserting that I'm wrong in my assessment isn't a defense of Omar. I would completely open to swapping the direction I lean on the topic given more information. That is not a topic that I have done any particular deep dive into.

As it is, though, she made a statement that came across to many as racist. Her compatriots talked to her about the matter and, as an outcome of that, opted to perform an act of public shaming. That is an exceptional reaction on their part. The only other theory that I can think of to explain that sort of reaction is if we say that, for example, "The Democratic Party has been bought out by Israel and they will force their minions to punish anyone who speaks against than, whether it was with ill intention or not." Between one person being racist or a few hundred people being the brain washed minions of a foreign state, the former theory seems a lot more reasonable.

I do grant that I wasn't privy to whatever all discussions took place with her, I can only observe the external impacts. From that, as said, the simple explanation would be that she is racist. That could be wrong but minus counter-evidence or a third hypothesis that better explains what we can observe it's the position that I would lean to.

Maybe she wasn't intending to be racist and maybe the DNC overreacted for who knows what other reason. Perhaps the public shaming will have served its purpose, has successfully chastised her, and she's found the error in her ways and reformed.

I can't read minds, I can look at what evidence exists and go with what the evidence supports.

If your position has evidence behind it beyond, "How can you be so mean to that poor girl!" You are free to post it and I will genuinely consider it. But this is a forum for evidence-backed realism not "being kindly, loving, and trusting souls". In reality, some people are racist. There are Republican racists and Democratic racists. None of them are liable to do anything other than deny that point if you ask them and, in that sense, it's effectively impossible to ever definitively say that they're racist, but it is possible to be pretty sure if all signs point that direction.

Being a Democrat, a woman, and a person of color doesn't prevent you from being a racist. If you somehow believe that it does, you might want to ask what logic there is behind that sentiment.

Last edited by Sage Rat; 09-08-2019 at 06:07 PM.
  #499  
Old 09-08-2019, 06:37 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,145
Sorry let me follow that previous post by also pointing out what I'll call "trust in the system".

If someone has been convicted in court or exonerated, my position would be that you should stand by that judgement. That is on the basis that, ultimately, mass media is not a proper court. The "court of public opinion" is a pejorative term for a reason. It's not a system that can be trusted in its conclusions.

An actual court is good because a set of impartial jurors are given full and complete access to the underlying information and presented with both sides by talented professionals.

You're not going to get any better than that. And while it may be that the person was ruled innocent on the basis of a lack of compelling evidence, rather than cleared by some evidence, we still need to accept and trust that this conclusion is as good as it gets. It could have come to the wrong answer, but the base assumption should be, as said, that you're probably not going to somehow do better than that in coming to a conclusion.

You and I will never likely never meet, let alone talk with Ilhan Omar in any substantive way.

The people who work along side her and who are in fact her allies both have access to her and her way of thinking in private and they have strong motive to defend her and view her statements in the most positive and forgiving light.

In essence, we are talking about a jury where the jury is people that the defendant got to choose for himself.

If, in that scenario, you are publicly put to shame - that is about as trustworthy as it gets. The evidentiary side may be lower than a criminal court but, as said, the jury is your friends and allies.

The only other person who also been recently shamed in the same manner, it should be pointed out, is Steve King.

I'm quite willing to call King racist. I trust the system. Maybe the system got it wrong. Maybe they overreacted. But we're not going to be able to come to a better conclusion than they did. If the system decided that King is racist, it makes the most sense to trust it if the conclusion matters. If I'm concerned about racism influencing Congress in a negative way, I would vote for someone who was not Steve King.

Last edited by Sage Rat; 09-08-2019 at 06:41 PM.
  #500  
Old 09-08-2019, 06:51 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
What evidence? Give an example. I've showed you two evidentiary items and your stance on one was that "water is wet" and the other was to go off on a tangent about marriage while looking at a business license. That makes no sense.
That is my line, not my problem that for some stupid reason you linked to them. Are you still insisting that was not evidence you presented?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
If you believe that I am using some particular piece of evidence:

a) Identify what you're talking about.
b) Ask whether or not I am.
Nope, it is always the burden of the accuser to present the evidence, so far the one you think was important is useless for the issue at hand, or does not lead to what you concluded.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 09-08-2019 at 06:53 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:04 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017