Quote:
Originally Posted by Sigaba
Please do not take offense but I decline what appears to be an invitation. It is my observation that you frequently use this rhetorical tactic when you respond to viewpoints that disagree or question yours. The logic appears to be if I've read what you've read, I'll interpret it as you do.
|
Sigaba, if I may know, why decline?
Rhetorical tactic or not, this response may suggest that you fear you'd actually share the LTC's interpretation if you do read his reading-list recommendations?
To compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges, wouldn't one first need to "read" much about apples' and oranges' structure, look, taste, etc. in order to properly differentiate?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sigaba
Unfortunately, on those occasions where I've taken a look at some of the sources you cite, not only do I disagree with you but the sources themselves do not support your position or they contradict other sources that you site or positions you've taken elsewhere or the sources just are not reliable. Or all of the above. And these are sources that are in English. The most convenient, if not recent, examples are your discussion of 'Stockholm Syndrome' and the historiography of Nazism, which I addressed above.
|
Would you please elaborate more on this. Point out any logical inconsistencies.Lay all the cards out, as I do wish to learn and seek clarity.
__________________
"we also rejoice in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope" Rom. 5:3-4
"So we can suffer, and in suffering we know who we are" David Goggins
"Aide-toi, Dieu t'aidera " Jehanne, la Pucelle
Der, der Geld verliert, verliert einiges;
Der, der einen Freund verliert, verliert viel mehr;
Der, der das Vertrauen verliert, verliert alles.
INDNJC
|