From: Ira Brodsky (ibrodsky@ix23.ix.netcom.com)
Date: Wed Nov 13 1996 - 10:51:47 MST
Ian Goddard wrote:
> At 01:11 PM 11/12/96 -0600, Ira Brodsky wrote:
>
> > It is also possible to be skeptical about some things and optimistic about
> > others. I tend to be skeptical about suggestive "here's what really
> > happened" stories, and optimistic about the future. IMO, not such a bad
> > philosophy.
>
>IAN: Let's be optimistic: we're getting heaps of more govt, but heck,
>govt is great, let's have more, why be such a anti-govt pessimistic
>party pooper, join the happy govt club.
Two days ago you asked me not to "reply or bother to draw me into further
debate." Please note the above was not addressed to you.
Since you previously accused me of using ad hominem arguments, I think it
is fair for me to point out that you are now resorting to "straw man"
tactics. I have never advocated "more government." In fact, my advocacy
of significantly less government is documented in two books and dozens of
articles.
>It seems to be a universal tactic all over the internet that those who
>want to pooh-pooh the Navy TWA 800 theory are actually assuming to score
>points against the theory by suggesting that those who broach the theory
>are saying "here's what really happened." Yet in fact I've yet to see
>someone, with perhaps the exception of Salinger, say that.
Nonsense. The message "forwarded by Peter James" and posted to this forum
stated "TWA flight 800 was SHOT DOWN by a US NAVY AEGIS MISSILE." When I
expressed skepticism about this statement, you accused me of denying that
TWA Flight 800 could have been downed by a *missile*, which is also not
what I said.
Have a nice day :-)
Ira Brodsky
Datacomm Research Company
Wilmette, Illinois
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:35:50 MST