Women of all ages raped/killed/enslaved by American soldiers and civilians

"attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument"
"directed against a person rather than against his arguments"
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ad+hominem

I don't think the OP fits the definition of "ad hominem" as the phrase is used in describing rhetoric. I'm pretty your response does.

 

The OP was clearly directed at me, and its intention was to mock and attack me, as Carl Herrera has unsuccessfully tried in the past. That fits the definition of "ad hominem".

 

Considering all the wars we've started, none of these is really surprising. Though I don't think it'll ever accomplish anything as long as we have Republicans in this country.

You know you're in trouble when you are someone's lackey on an internet forum

 

Two wrongs do not make a right. :grin:

 

No, because he was mocking your arguments. Sarcastic, maybe, but not ad hominem.

 

Apparently you don't know his history of ad hominem insults towards me, he has been stalking me for a bit, ever since I called him out on trying too hard to be funny. This thread is merely a continuation of his efforts in that direction.

(And his post above mine is another example of him trying too hard to be funny.)

 

Are you honestly whining about ad hominem arguments? You engage in that fallacious reasoning with every other post you make in this section. The only other thing has become apparent is that you are now a hypocrite.

 

Well, at least he hasn't called me a Nazi or Hitler yet. I think. So he has that one on you .

 

What a way to prove the point lol

"He started it!!" is coming next I assume.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_ideologies

Take away all the religions and leave only atheism, and still you will have ideology.

In fact, going to war is a direct result of an ideology which the state/leader champions.

But you keep snipping away what ever doesn't suit you.

 

Yet you feel it is perfectly acceptable to call other users "r****ded", "stupid", "Islamists", "morons", "apes", etc. You have absolutely no room to complain about personal attacks.

 

Most of the people who are obsessed with, say, gay sexual practices / fighting homosexual marriage end up years later being revealed as severely repressed homosexuals.

Have you considered the likelihood that you are, in fact, a secret Muslim?

 

I have jokingly said that a few times on here. But no, not happening .

 

In a very strange way, he seems like a non-Muslim Muslim.

IMO his approach is identical to extremist Muslims, but he applies that approach through his own beliefs in an almost inverse way.

Suppression of other people's freedoms based on alleged higher moral order, aggressive pro-semitism, usually on the very right/conservative side of political discussion, personal attacks, generalization of non-native races/ethnicities/nationalities, insisting very strongly on enshrining his own country's cultural identity, disproportionate level of outrage depending on nationality/religion in news stories, so on..

While I'm sure many of us may share some of these traits as well, the pattern with ATW has been extremely striking to me. But that's just my own observation, I'm not sure if you're referring to this pattern as well when asking your question.

 

Whose freedom am I suppressing? I am not suppressing one person's freedom in this world.

You, on the other hand...wanted someone to live in fear for the rest of his life because he drew a cartoon - "based on alleged higher moral order".

You retracted that statement like one year later, whether for "tactical reasons" or whatever, only you know.

But you are the last person who should be talking as if you could be on a moral high horse (and that is not even considering that you work for the government of a dictatorship).

 

Didn't claim a higher moral order, nor does it matter. It's not about me.

But you're right, I should have provided references.

Here's a link, I made a list of the posts I'm talking about:

http://bbs.clutchfans.com/search.php?searchid=195431

 

How ironic. Cannot argue the points so you resort to more fallacies.

 

The new "like" feature revealed that it was indeed Carl Herrera who cowardly used the anonymous rep feature to leave that comment.