pics you wont see on TV

[RandomGuy]

Use of the word "likely" is the only thing that saves your statement from being totally refutable. But, as has already been shown in another thread (thinking we only discovered Schumacher-Levy 9 moments before it struck Jupiter), your ability to "keep current" on the topics of your interest is, at best, dubious.

Ok, I'll bite:

What would you rate your level of knowledge about the Middle East as?
In terms of politics, culture, language?

You're just being pissy because this liberal is better informed than you are on quite a few topics...

[RandomGuy]

Okay, again, nice googling. But, you fail to concede that it is not an Ad Hominem attack if the argument follows this template:

1. Person A makes a completely unsubstantiated claim X.
2. Person B disproves or, adequately calls into question, the veracity and legitimacy of claim X, and then calls person A and idiot for forwarding such nonsense.
3. Therefore, person A's claim X is false and they are still an idiot.

You're right, I was kind of off on my interpretation of your logic, it could also be described like this:

Fallacy: Personal Attack



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also Known as: Ad Hominem Abusive.

Description of Personal Attack
A personal attack is committed when a person subs utes abusive remarks for evidence when attacking another person's claim or claims. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because the attack is directed at the person making the claim and not the claim itself. The truth value of a claim is independent of the person making the claim. After all, no matter how repugnant an individual might be, he or she can still make true claims.

Not all ad Hominems are fallacious. In some cases, an individual's characteristics can have a bearing on the question of the veracity of her claims. For example, if someone is shown to be a pathological liar, then what he says can be considered to be unreliable. However, such attacks are weak, since even pathological liars might speak the truth on occasion.

In general, it is best to focus one's attention on the content of the claim and not on who made the claim. It is the content that determines the truth of the claim and not the characteristics of the person making the claim.

Either interpretation of your so-called "logic" indicates an inability to form coherent, logically sound arguments.

Answer this question yes or no: Is it likely that an ex-intelligence analyst would know more about the geographic area of his former assignment than a randomly sampled individual taken from the general population?

Yes or no, it is a simple question.

[RandomGuy]

Answer this question yes or no: Is it likely that an ex-intelligence analyst would know more about the geographic area of his former assignment than a randomly sampled individual taken from the general population?

Yes or no, it is a simple question.

But I won't hold my breath that you will have the intellectual honesty to answer it.

[RandomGuy]

still waiting on this one too, R.O.

[RandomGuy]

and waiting...

[Yonivore]

But I won't hold my breath that you will have the intellectual honesty to answer it.

There's a much greater likelihood you're lying about your credentials...many on these boards do. And, given your posts on many topics, including those in which you claim expertise, you're the stupidest ing intelligence analyst I've ever encountered.

Maybe that's why it's a former occupation?

[Yonivore]

There's a much greater likelihood you're lying about your credentials...many on these boards do. And, given your posts on many topics, including those in which you claim expertise, you're the stupidest ing intelligence analyst I've ever encountered.

Maybe that's why it's a former occupation?

::bump:: Didn't want you to miss my reply since you waited so long for it.

[RandomGuy]

There's a much greater likelihood you're lying about your credentials...many on these boards do. And, given your posts on many topics, including those in which you claim expertise, you're the stupidest ing intelligence analyst I've ever encountered.

Maybe that's why it's a former occupation?

Fallacy: Poisoning the Well

Description of Poisoning the Well

This sort of "reasoning" involves trying to discredit what a person might later claim by presenting unfavorable information (be it true or false) about the person. This "argument" has the following form:

1. Unfavorable information (be it true or false) about person A is presented.
2. Therefore any claims person A makes will be false.

This sort of "reasoning" is obviously fallacious. The person making such an attack is hoping that the unfavorable information will bias listeners against the person in question and hence that they will reject any claims he might make.


"Bah" is not a logical construction. It is a retreat of somebody who just doesn't have the intellectual firepower to construct a logical argument using good critical thinking skills.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Checks out to me. Yonivore you coward.

[RandomGuy]

There's a much greater likelihood you're lying about your credentials...many on these boards do. And, given your posts on many topics, including those in which you claim expertise, you're the stupidest ing intelligence analyst I've ever encountered.

Maybe that's why it's a former occupation?

I have not lied at all. I was an intelligence analyst in the US army from the period 1989-1993. My specialization was at the tactical level, which is primarily technical in nature in terms of the nuts and bolts of military ops specific to the country.
I did gain some topical knowledge at the time about Iraq generally, and have since leaving the service made a point of reading quite a bit, almost all from open source news/periodicals/websites.
I do NOT have a degree in middle east studies.
I DO know more than most people I meet or speak with.

I DO NOT rely on unsubstantiated B.S., or the official party line, as you seem so ready to do.

My most important qualification:
Good critical thinking skills.
They have gotten me a long way, and it has made me realize how and why party hacks like you get away with the snow jobs that you do.

[RandomGuy]

There's a much greater likelihood you're lying about your credentials...many on these boards do. And, given your posts on many topics, including those in which you claim expertise, you're the stupidest ing intelligence analyst I've ever encountered.

Maybe that's why it's a former occupation?

Answer this question yes or no: Is it likely that an ex-intelligence analyst would know more about the geographic area of his former assignment than a randomly sampled individual taken from the general population?

Yes or no, it is a simple question.
Yes or no?

I'm STILL waiting.

[Yonivore]

Answer this question yes or no: Is it likely that an ex-intelligence analyst would know more about the geographic area of his former assignment than a randomly sampled individual taken from the general population?

Yes or no, it is a simple question.
Yes or no?

I'm STILL waiting.

Oh please, hold your breath too...

Prove you're an ex-intelligence analyst first. Then, I'd like to talk to your former employer about their employment practices.

[RandomGuy]

Oh please, hold your breath too...

Prove you're an ex-intelligence analyst first. Then, I'd like to talk to your former employer about their employment practices.

Dodge dodge dodge.

Just answer the question.

[Yonivore]

No. It's not germain and if you don't already know the answer, you're stupid.

But, for the record, intelligence analysts have different levels of competence and so does your average American.

Your immaturity in demanding a response to this inane question suggests that you're probably on the low end of the competency scale if, indeed, you're not a liar.

I suggest you grow up. But, you're free to ignore my advice.

[RandomGuy]

No. It's not germain [sic]and if you don't already know the answer, you're stupid.

But, for the record, intelligence analysts have different levels of competence and so does your average American.

Your immaturity in demanding a response to this inane question suggests that you're probably on the low end of the competency scale if, indeed, you're not a liar.

I suggest you grow up. But, you're free to ignore my advice.

FINALLY, a direct answer.

So it is NOT reasonable for an intelligence analyst to know more than the average american about their former area of interest. I am sure you have some expertise in this matter to be able to pronounce such.

I expect no better from the right end of the political spectrum, where logic and rationality is in short supply.

It isn't immature to expect a direct answer to a direct question.

It IS immature to behave worse than a 4 year old in denying a very reasonable assumption, and then go on to call an opponent " ing stupid" and a "liar".

Your words are your own, and I didn't put them there. Anybody who reads them knows who is being immature and who is not, and deep down,

you know it too.

[Vashner]

Maybe he was crypto at lackland?

[Summers]

Actually, I can vouch for RandomGuy and tell you what he did during the first Gulf War... but then I'd have to kill you.

[RandomGuy]

Oh please, hold your breath too...

Prove you're an ex-intelligence analyst first. Then, I'd like to talk to your former employer about their employment practices.

To restate:

I have not lied at all. I was an intelligence analyst in the US army from the period 1989-1993. My specialization was at the tactical level, which is primarily technical in nature in terms of the nuts and bolts of military ops specific to the country.
I did gain some topical knowledge at the time about Iraq generally, and have since leaving the service made a point of reading quite a bit, almost all from open source news/periodicals/websites.
I do NOT have a degree in middle east studies.
I DO know more than most people I meet or speak with.

I DO NOT rely on unsubstantiated B.S., or the official party line, as you seem so ready to do.

My most important qualification:
Good critical thinking skills.
They have gotten me a long way, and continue to do so.

[RandomGuy]

I would point out that the president at that time was the elder GW Bush and the defense secretary was:

Cheney.

You can talk to "my former employer" if you wish...

[RandomGuy]

FINALLY, a direct answer.

So it is NOT reasonable for an intelligence analyst to know more than the average american about their former area of interest. I am sure you have some expertise in this matter to be able to pronounce such.

I expect no better from the right end of the political spectrum, where logic and rationality is in short supply.

It isn't immature to expect a direct answer to a direct question.

It IS immature to behave worse than a 4 year old in denying a very reasonable assumption, and then go on to call an opponent " ing stupid" and a "liar".

Your words are your own, and I didn't put them there. Anybody who reads them knows who is being immature and who is not, and deep down,

you know it too.

Bumpity bump bump....

[Marcus Bryant]

Who cares?

[RandomGuy]

Originally Posted by hussker-------The Government has fooled those who believe it that they cannot think and act for themselves. Poor refusees...

The government is where we pool our collective resources to do things that we can't do on our own.

That is the reason that corporations came into existance. Railroads can't be built without pooled capital. Supertankers can't be built without pooled capital. Billion dollar oil platforms... etc etc.

[RandomGuy]

Who cares?

Cowards...

[xrayzebra]

To restate:

I have not lied at all. I was an intelligence analyst in the US army from the period 1989-1993. My specialization was at the tactical level, which is primarily technical in nature in terms of the nuts and bolts of military ops specific to the country.
I did gain some topical knowledge at the time about Iraq generally, and have since leaving the service made a point of reading quite a bit, almost all from open source news/periodicals/websites.
I do NOT have a degree in middle east studies.
I DO know more than most people I meet or speak with.

I DO NOT rely on unsubstantiated B.S., or the official party line, as you seem so ready to do.

My most important qualification:
Good critical thinking skills.
They have gotten me a long way, and continue to do so.

Oh-boy, an intercept operator. whoooopeeee!

Like you said your specialized in nuts and bolts! Mostly nuts from some of your post.

[RandomGuy]

Oh-boy, an intercept operator. whoooopeeee!

Like you said your specialized in nuts and bolts! Mostly nuts from some of your post.

Look again, an operator would have been a 98G/H/J

I was an analyst. It was my job to take the reports operators produced, build databases, analyse data to synthesize intelligence, and begin the reporting cycle.

I was also my batallions EW Asset Manager, but that wouldn't be listed there.