Osama bin Laden is DEAD

[morethanpretty]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

No it has to do with the organization you are trying to legitimize. You don't get to define, "how we do things in this country". You don't get to set the bar as a faceless nameless poster on a web forum. What are your credentials that allow you to do that?

The history of the Muslim Brotherhood is well documented. Prove me wrong.

YOU have to prove yourself right. Burden of proof is on you. You can't make a statement and not back it up with documented facts, then tell someone else that burden is on them.
INNOCENT until proven guilty. Not the other way around.
Just like in a law suit, burden of proof is on the person making the accusation. You are making the accusation, therefor, it is your responsibility to provide the proof.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by morethanpretty

YOU have to prove yourself right. Burden of proof is on you. You can't make a statement and not back it up with documented facts, then tell someone else that burden is on them.
INNOCENT until proven guilty. Not the other way around.
Just like in a law suit, burden of proof is on the person making the accusation. You are making the accusation, therefor, it is your responsibility to provide the proof.

No. The burden is on the Muslim Brotherhood. They have the history. Anyone who supports them assumes the same responsibility. If you think you can defend them, go ahead.

[morethanpretty]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

No. The burden is on the Muslim Brotherhood. They have the history. Anyone who supports them assumes the same responsibility. If you think you can defend them, go ahead.

The defense does not have to prove innocence. The accuser (AKA you) has to prove guilt.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by morethanpretty

The defense does not have to prove innocence. The accuser (AKA you) has to prove guilt.

Fuck off. Bull shit. You prove the Muslim Brotherhood is a fun loving organization that only wants to promote peace and love in the Middle East, not dominate the political positions exposed by the recent vacuum.

[Uday]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Fuck off. Bull shit. You prove the Muslim Brotherhood is a fun loving organization that only wants to promote peace and love in the Middle East, not dominate the political positions exposed by the recent vacuum.

I count three logical fallacies, Mercenary.

Strawman argument
Appeal to ridicule
demanding proof of a negative.

But speaking from experience, the Muslim Brotherhood is no different than the Tea Party in America. Very loud, very obnoxious, and in the final analysis, not a very big deal.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Uday

But speaking from experience, the Muslim Brotherhood is no different than the Tea Party in America. Very loud, very obnoxious, and in the final analysis, not a very big deal.

I would agree.... well unless I lived in Egypt. Then I might be a bit more concerned. But these tools don't understand that, so let me have my fun!

[Uday]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

I would agree.... well unless I lived in Egypt. Then I might be a bit more concerned. But these tools don't understand that, so let me have my fun!

Egypt is my home, and nobody pays any attention to the Muslim Brotherhood, except for the people who have already joined it.

They are not a viable political force, and back in the days when they attempted violence, they were about as scary as the Basques.

[Fair&Balanced]

Originally Posted by Uday

I count three logical fallacies, Mercenary.

Strawman argument
Appeal to ridicule
demanding proof of a negative.

But speaking from experience, the Muslim Brotherhood is no different than the Tea Party in America. Very loud, very obnoxious, and in the final analysis, not a very big deal.

Just three?

Mercenary evidently does not have a problem with ludicrous and inflammatory claims that the Obama administration has been infiltrated by the Muslim Brotherhood because he appointed the two Muslims to high policy positions in the Dept of Homeland Security.

He evidently doesnt have a problem with his extremist anti-Muslims sources smearing those two individuals either and suggesting that they have to prove their innocence.

[Uday]

Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced

Just three?

Mercenary evidently does not have a problem with ludicrous claims that the Obama administration has been infiltrated by the Muslim Brotherhood because he appointed the two Muslims to high policy positions in the Dept of Homeland Security.

He evidently doesnt have a problem with his extremist anti-Muslims sources smearing those two individuals either and suggesting that they have to prove their innocence.

Wait. All Muslims are in the Muslim Brotherhood?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced

Just three?

Mercenary evidently does not have a problem with ludicrous and inflammatory claims that the Obama administration has been infiltrated by the Muslim Brotherhood because he appointed the two Muslims to high policy positions in the Dept of Homeland Security.

He evidently doesnt have a problem with his extremist anti-Muslims sources smearing those two individuals either and suggesting that they have to prove their innocence.

But yet you can not prove me wrong.... carry on.

I have nothing against Muslims and you cannot prove as such.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced

Just three?

Mercenary evidently does not have a problem with ludicrous and inflammatory claims that the Obama administration has been infiltrated by the Muslim Brotherhood because he appointed the two Muslims to high policy positions in the Dept of Homeland Security.

He evidently doesnt have a problem with his extremist anti-Muslims sources smearing those two individuals either and suggesting that they have to prove their innocence.

And Fairly Unbalanced supports union activists who use violent messages to get support from the masses?