You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
0

[–] DawnPendraig ago 

I knew that Wictor dude bothers me and it wasn't just his Q rants. He seems false somehow

0
0

[–] MrMysterious ago  (edited ago)

Do you know/understand logical fallacies? Look at the piece, while knowing ad hominem, ad hominem (guilt by association), appeal to ignorance (famine part) He then goes into the historical aspect which is just one big ad hominem (guilt by association) and the ONLY thing that ties Paul to Norris is Wictor's own label of Paul as an isolationist... (basically the entire argument he makes up til near the end is based on fallacy/slander and not actual evidence... wtf?) Near the end he gets into the Shia stuff which is not necessarily wrong... but what he doesn't say (because he is a Saudi/Sunni apologist and promoter to the extent I think he may be on their payroll...) is that Sunni islam is responsible for the vast majority of terrorism, of which the Saudi Royal family has been a HUGE supporter. They helped ISIS on the down low too... The important part you may be more interested in is that he seems to be using a pattern almost like John Oliver does with his shows... that's probably why you get bothered...the pattern he uses basically pulls you along without giving you unbiased information so by the time you get to the end you have maybe 3-4 different areas he gave you 1 specific interpretation on the entire way but you only end up questioning maybe 1 of them.. (because the others werent obvious) Idk about you but I could feel it was off anytime I read stuff he wrote. There was that pattern that was weird... but this little piece actually exposed it all for me.