W/R/T the docs linked to, “… says FBI spokesman Allen. “Sometimes the training is adapted for long-term use. This particular training segment was delivered a single time and not used since.”
“Analyst” is not a position of prestige at the FBI. Some jobs with “analyst” in the title require only a high school diploma. If you have any reason to think he is a person of prestige or high rank, please share it.
There are several thousand FBI employees at Quantico.
nm
Good job on the backpedaling there. Your position, apparently, is that it’s fine for you to fill GD threads with any lie about Christians that pops into your head, up to and including false accusations of murder, but that when a someone in a government building paid with government money tells similar lies about Muslims then it’s wrong. (Incidentally I find nothing in the article backing up your claim that this presentation cost thousands of taxpayer dollars; it looks el cheapo to me.)
Has anyone done a regression of violence units against religious text length? It seems like the longer your holy text is, the more pissed off you’d be. So many rules!
You don’t think there’s a difference between bullshitting on a messageboard where lots of people can disagree with you and bullshitting to FBI agents as part of a course where you, as the teacher, are the one in authority?
No, that is not my position, and I have never done that.
I suppose that you are talking about the Ugandan homosexuality law, and your responses to my citations on it rate as the most blatant example of sticking your fingers in your ears and your head in the sand that I’ve ever seen in nearly 20 years of internet debates.
They are the reason that I don’t consider you worthy of response on most occasions, but I strongly advise you to stop direct libel if you don’t want to be reported.
Based on my previous experience with him, he really doesn’t.
So only “persons of prestige or high rank” are not “outside speakers”? :dubious:
Whether you intended to lie or not does not change the fact that some of the reasons (in the posts ITR Champion linked) for your opinion of Christianity are based on untruths.
Whether you know them to be untruths or not does not seem to change the vehemence with which you put forth your opinion though…
Which leads one to believe you may be lying. Perhaps not lying directly, but knowingly putting forth information about something which you have very little understanding.
And no, I’m not particularly interested in debating with you on which points you are in error. Someone as entrenched as yourself in your current opinion is not likely to change that opinion based on anything as simple as correct information, facts, or even alternate opinions.
Don’t go getting all huffy about “libel” and other nonsense. This is the Pit. I believe the point of this forum is to say things about other posters which they may not like. You not liking being called out on your inaccuracies is not libelous. It’s fantastic. And I love it when that happens to someone. 
I have the feeling that all this hairsplitting about the rank of the teacher and the location of the classes would not be as relevant if instead of a class teaching that Muslims were more prone to terrorism, the topic was a class that taught that Jews were more prone to money laundering.
Hey, be careful there. I’d hate to see anyone spraining their ankles jumping to conclusions and sidestepping logic.
That is quite clearly not the point he was making. The point was simply acknowledging brocks’ hypocrisy. If you can’t see that, well then…:smack:
The feeling is mutual. You’re probably ITR’s sock puppet, anyway.
Either of your personalities is welcome to show where I’ve knowingly disseminated false information, or even unknowingly disseminated it. ITR is entitled to his stupid opinion that several different reporters in major newspapers got the story wrong, but he is not entitled to say I made the story up.
Win.
You can call me a hypocrite when you see me make a post asserting that an FBI agent has no right to participate anonymously in an internet discussion group.
I thought that any idiot could see the difference between that and government-sanctioned classes at Quantico, but I guess I was mistaken.
My parents are Catholic, and I don’t debate religion with them at Christmas dinner. I guess that makes me a hypocrite, too. Because the idea of an appropriate time or place for your opinions is clearly beyond you two.
But it’s not hypocritical. It is perfectly reasonable to think it’s OK to lie on a messageboard (if that’s what he was doing - I haven’t read those threads) but also think it’s wrong when someone tells lies as a teacher to FBI agents.
Not really. The FBI higher-ups are in FBI Headquarters in DC. The FBI training academy, the BSU, and I think HRT is at Quantico. Who are the higher ups you’re thinking of?
Good point! Whichever FBI honcho signed off on this disgrace, it is crucial to know whether he is in D.C., for instance, or Quantico. Geographic distance being so crucial a factor, and all.
All of ITR’s “cites” are from the same thread, and if you read them, you will see that they do not contain lies; they just contain the same arguments against organized religion that are in half a dozen debate threads here at any given time. My sin is predictability (or as I prefer to call it, consistency), not hypocrisy.
I am an unabashed atheist, and I when I participate in debates against religion, it’s usually against Christianity, because that is the dominant religion of my culture, and it’s the religion of most Dopers who profess a religion.
While I think all organized religions are equally screwy, I tend to root for the underdog in interdenominational conflicts, probably because according to many polls, atheists are even more despised than Muslims in the US. But I would be outraged at the waste of taxpayer money on religious bigotry, even if the target were Catholics.
ITR got so thoroughly spanked in several recent debates that I can only suppose that he thinks this is some kind of revenge.
As for echo, if he’s not a sock puppet, I have no idea where he came from, since he didn’t participate in that debate. If he thought I was lying about something, that would have been the place to say it.
Not really; it all looks like lies to me. It may be more important for a government official to tell the truth than for an internet user, but it’s equally immoral for the internet user to tell lies. Would anybody try to argue that murder, rape, or theft become more ethical as long as they’re not done on government property?
Oh, right. Here’s what you said:
I then called you out on that lie. Rather than admitting that it was a lie, you then offered this Wikipedia article as a cite. (Or rather you tried to link to it and failed, and I fixed your broken link.) I responded by pointing out that the Wikipedia article offered nothing that would back up your claim in any way, shape, or form. In fact, it flatly contradicts your claim. After I pointed that out, you then linked to two articles in a British tabloid. Neither of those articles said anything that would justify your claim either, though you did make a heroic effort to mislead by taking a quote concerning Rick Warren, unrelated to the Uganda bill, out of context in order to make it look like it supported you. So, at the moment, we’re still waiting for the first shred of evidence which in any way, shape, or form supports your claim that “conservative American Christians went to Uganda and inspired them to take Leviticus literally and enact laws calling for the death penalty for homosexuals”. Until you can provide the slightest bit of evidence that this is true, it’s certainly going to look like you’re a world-class liar.
Nor is that the only instance on which you’ve lied and then run away when I called you out on it. Over here, you accused specific individuals of acting based on childhood indoctrination.
You said that everyone who disagreed with you on this was a raving racist.
And you implied that all Chinese Christians were mentally ill. (Which sure sounds like raving racism to me.
I called you out on these things and challenged you to back up your claims with cites. Needless to say, you weren’t able to do so, since everything that you said was a blatant lie and you knew it. Instead, you tried to pretend that I was twisting your words. However, you don’t seem to have realized that what you wrote was still right there, where everyone could read it and see that you said exactly what I claimed you said.
Oh, so now, in addition to lies and silly attacks, you’re also issuing empty threats.
If our FBI agents don’t have enough critical thinking skills to discern quackery we’re already fucked on this front.