"Blame America First"

[qpw3141]

@Shodan

@qpw3141

On the contrary.

Your logic is to base your view on the words of an extremist who did not actually take part in the attack.

My logic is that the nineteen people who killed themselves in the attack did not do so for some reason as absurd as 'hating someone else’s lifestyle.

Your “logic” sucks almost as much as your coding. You apparently wish to deny that the words and actions of the ringleader are any kind of evidence of his motives.

On the simple basis that his motives don’t make sense for the people who actually carried out the attack.

Let me give you an example.

You have a grudge against a certain bank and spend years writing books decrying their actions. One day there is a massive robbery at this bank and the people who carried it out turn out to be your students.

Do you really think that anyone is going to be stupid enough to believe that the people who risked their freedom did it because of your views on the bank’s ethics?

Of course they’re not. They know perfectly well that the robbery took place because the perpetrators wanted the money.

Yet the only evidence you can produce is some crackpot who has his asshattery published on a Holcaust-denying, anti-fluoridation website.

Come on now - you won’t believe what the ringleader of the attacks says. Why do you believe this ex-Congressdolt? He wasn’t involved in the attacks.

Like I said, the fact that you consider this sort of thing as evidence and deny what is straight from the horse’s mouth gives much insight into how seriously to take your “logic”.

Sigh.

It wasn’t, nor was it intended to be, evidence. :rolleyes:

It was simply showing that someone with the standing of a 20+ years US congressman agreed that US involvement in the Middle East was a direct cause of 9-11.

Instead they seem to be shared by various assholes, crackpots. lunatics and shitheads who also worry about UFOs and think that The Protocol of the Elders of Zion is a documentary.

The articles is available on other sites that do not juxtapose it with nut-job views.

Your attacking the site rather than the actual page is not the most honest of tactics. I wasn’t suggesting anything about the site . It just happened to be the first place I found that hosted the article.

[Mijin]

@qpw3141

It’s simple logic that people do not deliberately sacrifice their lives just because they dislike someone’s lifestyle, no matter that people they knew may have held such views.

Again, you’re confusing your incredulity with logic.

I have provided facts to support my position. You continue to provide nothing in response.

In case you hadn’t noticed, these people were insane!

Oh right.
And yet they can’t be motivated by hatred of the west; that would be silly. And also, we can apparently make confident predictions about how they’d respond to the US pulling out of the middle east.

In the terrorist mind it’s a simple equation: "You hurt us == we hurt you.

In your mind it’s a simple equation because you seem unwilling to consider any other possibility. You’re already an expert on islamic terrorism.

Straw Man Alert

You’re rather overplaying this card.
I’m sure it’s a useful card, because it means you never have to respond to the point that’s put to you.
Let’s see why you didn’t need to respond this time:

You are pretending that where I said ‘Americans’ above, I meant ‘all Americans’. Given the nature of this site and the preponderance of people here who are prepared to consider things in an open minded manner, that’s a grotesque twisting of the real intended meaning of ‘some Americans’.

Firstly, I did not mean ‘all americans’. And I did not accuse you of saying ‘all americans’. In fact, if you look back I was the one making it clear that only a proportion of americans are pro-war.

Secondly, how is this relevant to the point here anyway? Whether we’re talking the opinions of all americans, some americans or most americans, the fact is that you implied it was the opinions of <those people> that were a significant motivation for america being attacked. That was what I was pointing out to you.

[Shodan]

@qpw3141

You have a grudge against a certain bank and spend years writing books decrying their actions. One day there is a massive robbery at this bank and the people who carried it out turn out to be your students.

Do you really think that anyone is going to be stupid enough to believe that the people who risked their freedom did it because of your views on the bank’s ethics?

Of course they’re not. They know perfectly well that the robbery took place because the perpetrators wanted the money.

So if I go on national TV and announce that I set up and planned the attack, and that I did it because I hated the bank, and that I had tried to rob that same fucking bank before, and I had a record of bank robbery in another country, and I moved to live with a bunch of bank robbers who hated the same bank, none of that is evidence of why I did it?

I can’t believe you really think that - if you do, I hope you aren’t a detective or anything like that.

Sigh.

It wasn’t, nor was it intended to be, evidence. :rolleyes:

So you have no evidence for your assertions at all?

It was simply showing that someone with the standing of a 20+ years US congressman agreed that US involvement in the Middle East was a direct cause of 9-11.

You have left unanswered a key question - you refuse to believe what the person behind the attacks says. Why do you believe what this ex-Congressman says? You won’t believe it when bin Laden tells you why he did it, because bin Laden wasn’t on the planes. Was the Congressman?

Your attacking the site rather than the actual page is not the most honest of tactics. I wasn’t suggesting anything about the site . It just happened to be the first place I found that hosted the article.

Not the most honest of tactics? Dude, you linked to a fucking Holocaust denial site. Do you really think you’ve any credibility left after that?

You are contradicting yourself all over the place, and the first piece of evidence you can cite is in furtherance of a point of view shared by Charter Members of the Tinfoil Hat Brigade.

Oh yeah - you’re just oozing believability, ain’cha?

Regards,
Shodan

[Mijin]

@Shodan

So if I go on national TV and announce that I set up and planned the attack, and that I did it because I hated the bank, and that I had tried to rob that same fucking bank before, and I had a record of bank robbery in another country, and I moved to live with a bunch of bank robbers who hated the same bank, none of that is evidence of why I did it?

Also, qpw3141’s analogy includes missing money; something which gives us grounds to believe the motive was money and which has no equivalent in 9/11.

[Bricker]

@Jas09

@Bricker

The third of your links is from Mother Jones magazine, not exactly a hotbed of the radical right. The article does castigate the left, but hardly from the position the OP decries. In fact, the article itself defends quite admirably the very thesis of the OP: that a reasoned and nuanced response is necessary.

It’s unclear to me, then, how it’s appearance at #3 can support the inference that “Blame America First” as a phrase is used by those doing what the OP inveighs against.

Yes, I was counting the Mother Jones link as one that was not an example of “Blame America First” as a knee-jerk response to liberals in general.

So, just from the first 5 links, 4 of the 5 were used that way. I’d say that makes it the “most common use” of the phrase. We can go further down the list if you’d like.

My contention is that “Blame America First” is most commonly used as a way to shut down legitimate debate. The fact that some people do, in fact, blame America first doesn’t change the fact that the vast majority of liberals do not.

I’m sure you’d agree that accusing the person you are arguing with of hating their country is a rather unseemly ad hominem.

OK, you make a good point. Conceded: the phrase is mostly used against liberals, unjustly.

[cosmosdan]

@Bricker

OK, you make a good point. Conceded: the phrase is mostly used against liberals, unjustly.

I salute you for this honesty and reason and also salute the well formed argument that got you here.

[Tim_T-Bonham.net]

I had an uncle who did indeed blame America First, and who railed against “that damn traitor Charlie Lindberg” until his dying day.

Rather difficult, when you are living in rural Minnesota, where his family lived, and where they elected his father to Congress.

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

@GHO57

Or perhaps the involvement in the Korean war that made life a barrel of laughs to those left on the wrong side of the border.

I’m as left wing as Americans come but I don’t see how staying out of Korea would have helped anything. North Korea would have taken over the whole penninsula and life would, indeed, have been a barrel of laughs for everyone.

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

And on the question of displaced indigenous people, I’m sorry about it, I really am. But that was hundreds of years ago. Sure as shooting we can’t all go back to Europe, we’re stuck here now. So I’ll be glad if everyone except our actual indigenous people would stop hanging this one around our necks. Does Canada always get slapped around for this?

[Rune]

@Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus

And on the question of displaced indigenous people, I’m sorry about it, I really am. But that was hundreds of years ago. Sure as shooting we can’t all go back to Europe, we’re stuck here now. So I’ll be glad if everyone except our actual indigenous people would stop hanging this one around our necks. Does Canada always get slapped around for this?

They should. I sure as hell haven’t forgotten how the Danes drove away the indigenous Langobards and Heruls in the 3rd century or so.