http://www.forwardprogressives.com/alex … o-go-away/
I'm a liberal. Read anything I've written, and it's obvious.
However, I have a problem with this. The author of this piece claims:
"This pile of crap is going around promoting the idea that the Boston Marathon bombing is some government conspiracy.
He's saying that the bombing at the Boston Marathon has been conducted under a "false flag." You see, the term false flag is a naval term from long ago where naval ships would fly flags not of their origin to avoid attack. They flew these "false flags" to cover up the truth about what kinds of ships they actually were."
The author never, at any point, addresses any of Jones's actual claims. There is an attempt at guilt by association with a list of alleged "ridiculous beliefs" he has floated in the past, but there is not one argument against his claim about the Boston bombings.
I'm not defending Jones at all. But this is a perfect illustration of the WRONG way to argue against a position. Instead of being specific and showing where the disagreement with Jones is, the author engages in ad hominem attacks and guilt by association (even assuming the entire list the author provided is nonsense, it does not necessarily follow that this claim Jones makes is wrong. For example, if I claim the moon landing was a hoax, and that George Bush is the worst president in recent history, does my claim about Bush become nullified simply because I claim the moon landing was a hoax? Clearly not!)
This author begs the question at the beginning (by assuming what authorities have said about the Boston bombing is true), and then says Jones is crazy for not believing. The correct procedure would have been to explain the absurdity of Jones's position as the author sees it, rather than trying to argue by royal decree. To extend the moon landing example, it would be similar to me claiming people who question the official story are nut jobs because they don't accept the official story. See how ridiculous of an argument that is? There is no real engagement at all.
We can all learn and be more vigilant when it comes to addressing people's arguments that are a different political persuasion than our own.
And this person is writing for a website called 'Forward progressives'?? Is vile ad-hominem the 'progressive' thing to do now?
Other headlines by this website:
"Voted for George W Bush? Then just stop talking"
"Who said it? A Republican or an insane person?"
This is not to be taken seriously. Moving on.
I wouldn't recommend visiting this site my computer just started behaving very odd.
Firefox + NoScript + AdBlocker = lol what problems?
Sounds like someone's bitter at the fact that avoiding computer mishaps is simple and easy.
Says the guy who uses magicians and fake news hosts as stellar commentary on important matters.
Anyone can comment on any issue, as long as they do good research.
I often seek out entertainers for their opinions they are always so grounded in reality.
Belittling someone's opinion because of their profession?
Sounds like good ol' classic ad hominem to me, which is conveniently what this thread is about!
by Ron Montgomery 9 years ago
Can we open a forum specifically for personal attacks like we did for one word posts? (sand pit)We can call it "Thunderdome"Two hubbers enterOne comes out
by Marcy Goodfleisch 2 years ago
Do you think people will vote for candidates who launch personal attacks against their opponents?Without commenting on specific candidates, how successful do you think that tactic is in election campaigns? Again - please don't name names.
by G. Diane Nelson Trotter 5 years ago
Why can't people on Hubpages disagree without attacking others?Opposing positions can lead to a better understanding. Personal attacks say a lot about the commenters' inability to discuss a matter intelligently.
by PrettyPanther 8 years ago
I'm asking this question because I am genuinely curious. I have never reported anyone on any forum for personally attacking me, even though it has happened. I never will report a personal attack, unless it rises to the level of something scary, like a threat, as in "when I find out where...
by doodleplum 8 years ago
Unfortunately there is no way to substantiate your claims so I doubt anything will be done. For all anyone here, including the moderators know, everything she posted is true. Unless the attacks are personal I don't think you'll be successful in getting her removed and that is ho it should be.
by G. Diane Nelson Trotter 2 years ago
How do you respond when commenters make personal attacks on you about your faith or your comments?Do you argue? Is that profitable? Do you report the offender? Is that loving?This relates to Hubs that are decidely about Christianity.
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|