Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2019 12:24:37 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2019 11:46:43 GMT -5
What do you guys think? Is it a good thing for American media to use white supremacist rhetoric that frames immigration as a military invasion?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 7, 2019 11:57:51 GMT -5
What do you guys think? Is it a good thing for American media to use white supremacist rhetoric that frames immigration as a military invasion?
Complex Question Fallacy.
The article you posted is only about Fox. Fox is not "American Media." It is only one small part of American Media.
Please note that the article you posted criticizing Fox was from Vox, which is also a part of American Media.
Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2019 12:06:37 GMT -5
Do you agree with their stance, yes or no?
Do you think framing immigrants as an invasion force is accurate and correct?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 7, 2019 14:38:17 GMT -5
Do you agree with their stance, yes or no? I have no idea what their stance actually is. All you have posted is a short clip from a competing media company. Did you check out what Fox actually said to see if this article is correct. Doesn't that depend on how you define "invasion force?" Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2019 15:59:10 GMT -5
Do you agree with their stance, yes or no? I have no idea what their stance actually is. All you have posted is a short clip from a competing media company. Did you check out what Fox actually said to see if this article is correct. Why do you need me to do your own research for you? If you believe that words mean whatever you personally want them to mean.
How do you define it?
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 7, 2019 18:17:37 GMT -5
I have no idea what their stance actually is. All you have posted is a short clip from a competing media company. Did you check out what Fox actually said to see if this article is correct. Why do you need me to do your own research for you? MY RESEARCH? You are the one that originally posted. The Research is your job. Of course I don't believe that words mean whatever I personally want them to mean. I'm not a Postmodernist. Again, you are the one who made the original post so it's your responsibility to communicate clearly and tell your readers what you mean. Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2019 21:11:19 GMT -5
Very well, I will try to be more clear.
I have asked you a question. A question is an utterance which typically functions as a request for information.
The question was: "Do you think framing immigrants as an invasion force is accurate and correct?"
I am posing this question in expectation of an answer. An answer is a statement that is being made in response to a question that provides the information indicated as being sought by the questioner.
What is your answer to the question "Do you think framing immigrants as an invasion force is accurate and correct?"
|
|
|
Post by debutante on Aug 7, 2019 23:52:59 GMT -5
When unauthorized and unidentified masssed forces illegally cross the Southern border in a frontal assault -- that qualifies as an "invasion". One can not make assumptions in terms of intent -- so from a purely pragmatic standpoint, you'd be a piss poor commander to assume they are unarmed and without an objective.
All unauthorized incursions should be considered an "invasion" until such time reconnaissance proves otherwise.
Only a damn fool would assume unauthorized and unidentified massed forces are "migrants" without full vetting.
Good Lord --It doesn't take Holmes and Watson to figure this out.
--Debutante
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2019 15:28:55 GMT -5
When unauthorized and unidentified masssed forces illegally cross the Southern border in a frontal assault -- that qualifies as an "invasion". So what you're saying is that there is no 'invasion'.
|
|
|
Post by debutante on Aug 8, 2019 17:11:54 GMT -5
I said the exact opposite and you know it. I refuse to play silly games with you. My statement has perfect clarity. I find you like to quibble about language and ascribe your own meanings to words as if that somehow will invalidate their actual meaning.
If anyone other than you says they have difficulty understanding what I said I will rephrase it -- but I sincerely doubt anyone will.
--Debutante
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2019 15:08:55 GMT -5
So Bob, what's your answer to the question "Do you think framing immigrants as an invasion force is accurate and correct?"
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 9, 2019 15:54:42 GMT -5
So Bob, what's your answer to the question "Do you think framing immigrants as an invasion force is accurate and correct?"
Complex Question Fallacy.
You haven't demonstrated that any "framing" has been done.
Bob
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 9, 2019 16:01:22 GMT -5
Very well, I will try to be more clear.
I have asked you a question. A question is an utterance which typically functions as a request for information.
The question was: "Do you think framing immigrants as an invasion force is accurate and correct?"
I am posing this question in expectation of an answer. An answer is a statement that is being made in response to a question that provides the information indicated as being sought by the questioner.
What is your answer to the question "Do you think framing immigrants as an invasion force is accurate and correct?"
Definition of "Invasion":
"an occasion when a large number of people or things come to a place in an annoying and unwanted way:"
So yes. That definition seems to describe the situation quite well.
Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 9, 2019 20:05:23 GMT -5
Thank you for your reply. Looks like you do agree with the white supremacist rhetoric distributed by Fox et al.
Not surprising, but still saddening.
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 9, 2019 22:30:31 GMT -5
Thank you for your reply. Looks like you do agree with the white supremacist rhetoric distributed by Fox et al. Not surprising, but still saddening.
By that line of reasoning, since Hitler was a vegetarian and loved dogs, all vegetarians and dog lovers are Nazis.
And the dictionary also agrees with white supremacist rhetoric.
What you are doing here is Guilt by Association.
Not surprising, but still saddening.
Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2019 7:50:33 GMT -5
Thank you for your reply. Looks like you do agree with the white supremacist rhetoric distributed by Fox et al. Not surprising, but still saddening. By that line of reasoning, since Hitler was a vegetarian and loved dogs, all vegetarians and dog lovers are Nazis. What you are argueing here is analogous to claiming that antisemitism is not a crucial element of Nazi rhetoric because there are antisemites who aren't Nazis. Or is that your actual position? The idea that migration into predominantly white countries are a genocidal invasion force is an important element of white supremacist rhetoric: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_ReplacementFrom that communist rag, the NYT: Are you sure? There is nothing in the dictionary entry of invasion about immigration. 'Invasion' implies force and threat. And claiming that immigration is a national threat is white supremacist rhetoric, plain and simple. No, simply pointing out what ideas you are agreeing with. And you apparently are agreeing with the idea that immigrants from Latin America are a threat that needs to be contained, preferably by force of arms.
|
|
|
Post by debutante on Aug 10, 2019 8:20:43 GMT -5
I don't know about Bob, but I can't be a white supremacist because I have identified as "Peach" since 1989. For all you know, Bob could be peach too.
That would make us "people of color" wouldn't it? Because most liberals like to refer to "people of color" as if "white" was not a color and therefore not included in the term.
We peaches are not that discriminatory and include "whites" within our definition parameters if they care to join us. We are that open minded!
Why are YOU such a bigot that you refer to white people as being "colorless"? Logic dictates that if they are not included as "people of color" then they have no color at all. HOW OFFENSIVE CAN YOU BE!!!
It is wonderful that we peaches have no such prejudices that anyone can point to -- just try I dare you.
Considering the multiple times other racial groups have changed what they wanted to be called without objection -- I dare you to try saying a more contemporary and accurate depiction isn't due others. LOL!
--Debutante #IDENTIFY AS "PEACH"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2019 8:49:36 GMT -5
Hey Deb, I'm really glad that you are distancing yourself from the idea that immigrants are a threat to your country!
|
|
|
Post by debutante on Aug 10, 2019 8:57:37 GMT -5
Do you think we are stupid, comrade? You communists keep trying to ignore the fact that this border jumping is a violation of our laws.
It is no secret that the United States has announced that ILLEGAL ENTRANCE into our sovereign space is unwelcome. These people can not claim ignorance. It is a willful act on their part.
We are far kinder to these criminals than many other countries would be under such circumstances. So don't even try to drum up guilt. It won't work. There is a proper process for applying to enter the United States and acquiring legal citizenship.
People who knowingly and willfully break our laws do not deserve our sympathy. In fact, these people should be barred from ever receiving citizenship. People who flaunt the law in one area can't be trusted to adhere to the law in other areas because they've proven a willingness to disregard laws at their convenience.
Only people who have a disregard for our laws themselves would find sympathy with criminals.
-- Debutante
|
|
|
Post by debutante on Aug 10, 2019 9:01:59 GMT -5
Hey Deb, I'm really glad that you are distancing yourself from the idea that immigrants are a threat to your country! Not at all comrade! We are not communists! Peaches are followers of the law. It is ILLEGAL to violate the sovereign borders of the United States. Tough isn't it? I won't let you pretend that crossing the border without permission isn't a criminal act. --Debutante
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2019 9:03:38 GMT -5
I don't let you pretend that crossing the border without permission isn't a criminal act. Like jaywalking.
|
|
|
Post by debutante on Aug 10, 2019 9:19:09 GMT -5
That is your opinion. And we already know that the goal of communists is to destroy America.
So, why on earth would we Peaches pay the least bit of attention to anything which we know does not have the best interests of our country at heart?
You see comrade, I grew up during the cold war. I had history classes which taught all about your philosophy and it's effect on the societies it contaminates.
I know how communists think. I know how they attempt to twist the truth, and rely on inciting hate in some, and eliciting guilt in others. And all of this is put into play for their own purposes which, usually have nothing to do with whatever "cause" they are promoting. It's all about attaining power for yourselves. You know it and I know it.
However, that crap only works on those who don't have a clear sense of identity. Once you know who you are, what you are capable of, and have survived the worst fate can dish out -- none of the communist little verbal games has any effect. Believe me, I've been up against far better con men in my time and lived to tell about it.
You are wasting your time.
--Debutante
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2019 11:22:38 GMT -5
No, that's not "my opinion". It's a fact that you are breaking the law when you're jaywalking.
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 10, 2019 12:03:50 GMT -5
By that line of reasoning, since Hitler was a vegetarian and loved dogs, all vegetarians and dog lovers are Nazis. What you are argueing here is analogous to claiming that antisemitism is not a crucial element of Nazi rhetoric because there are antisemites who aren't Nazis. Or is that your actual position? Nope. I never said that at all. From the fact that Hitler was a vegetarian who loved dogs, it does not follow that vegetarians and dog lovers are automatically Nazis. From the fact that the dictionary definition of "invasion" describes the heavy immigration at the Southern border, it does not follow that either I or the publishers of dictionaries are supporters of white supremacy. Unless of course you are accusing the dictionary publisher of being a white supremacist. Are you? You are Changing the Goalposts here. Neither I nor the dictionary mentioned a "Genocidal" invasion. We were talking about "invasion" and "Genocidal" never came up until now when you just injected it into the conversion. I don't agree with that at all. Once again, you are Changing the Goalposts. You asked me if the present situation on the Southern border is an "invasion." I pointed out that it clearly fits the dictionary definition of "invasion." Once again, do you think the authors of the dictionary are "white supremacists?" "Invasion" has several meanings, as I have already pointed out. "Invasion" is also used to describe a large number of noisy tourists disturbing a community. Did you ever hear about a white supremacist complaining about a bunch of noisy tourists? Or do you consider everyone who complains about and "invasion" of noisy tourists a "white supremacist?
I already pointed out that you changed the goalposts by replacing "invasion" with "genocidal invasion." I don't agree with "genocidal invasion" at all. You are making that up.
Bob
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on Aug 10, 2019 12:25:46 GMT -5
No, that's not "my opinion". It's a fact that you are breaking the law when you're jaywalking.
Yes. Jaywalking is a misdemeanor.
Illegally crossing a national border, by contrast, is a felony. So you are committing an Apples and Oranges Fallacy here by comparing things that are different.
Bob
|
|
|
Post by debutante on Aug 10, 2019 13:13:12 GMT -5
No, that's not "my opinion". It's a fact that you are breaking the law when you're jaywalking. You keep trying to play with language. You implied border jumping was equivalent to jaywalking. I replied, "That's your opinion." Meaning, I do not agree the severity of the crime is the same. You knew exactly what I meant. You're attempting to play with language again. I already told you I will call you on your game playing. Edited to add: Thank you Bob, for pointing out it is a felony to cross the border without permission. --Debutante
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2019 6:10:31 GMT -5
No, that's not "my opinion". It's a fact that you are breaking the law when you're jaywalking. Yes. Jaywalking is a misdemeanor.
Illegally crossing a national border, by contrast, is a felony. Where is your supporting evidence?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2019 6:38:26 GMT -5
What you are argueing here is analogous to claiming that antisemitism is not a crucial element of Nazi rhetoric because there are antisemites who aren't Nazis. Or is that your actual position? Nope. I never said that at all. From the fact that Hitler was a vegetarian who loved dogs, it does not follow that vegetarians and dog lovers are automatically Nazis. And from the fact that Hitler was a white supremacist, it does not follow that white supremacists are Nazis. So what? The question was never about Nazis or Hitler. This is a Red Herring. But that was not the issue. The issue was that calling immigrants an invasion force is white supremacist rhetoric . (Note the bolded part.) You have not refuted that. You have simply doubled down on your personal inclination to use white supremacist rhetoric in your speech.
|
|
|
Post by debutante on Aug 11, 2019 9:52:13 GMT -5
Says who? You? And who made you the boss?
That is what is so ridiculous about you communists. You think that because you declare something to be true -- everyone automatically has to agree it is so.
I dont agree that statement is part of white supremacist language. So what do you plan to do about it?
Two groups can have an opinion about a certain action that is similar without the groups having the same objective.
You know it. I know it. So cut the crap.
You communists do not dictate the meanings of words, the intentions of any particular person or group of people or anything else. You have no power over anyone unless they are stupid enough to capitulate to your bullshit tactics and think they have to defend themselves against whatever nonsense accusation you dream up.
You have no power to ascribe any motivations to anyone other than the ones they themselves state. That is reality. All else is Alinsky bullshit.
--Debutante
|
|