Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.
I agree. Reality is a bitch.
I'm just noting certain admissions in your previous post that suggest your points are simply self-perpetuating opinion rather than a diligent analysis and interpretation of existing facts. For example:
"But when guys like Bin Laden, Al-Zawahiri, and Qutb were all members at one point, I have to believe that many more like them are still involved, especially now with a chance to gain power."
You "have to believe"? Why do you have to believe as such? Absent proof that there are more like this in the MB, you're simply making an assumption. Which is obviously your prerogative... but that renders this your personal opinion rather than being discursive.
As to this other point:
"I just happen to think that many in the intelligence game would also have similar views based on several different events. Just yesterday families of a bunch of the imprisoned MB overpowered guards (using violence apparently) at a prison and allowed them to escape. Just a small example, but one all the same."
What proof do you have to imply a linkage? Seems to me that you have a personal assumption (the italic part), then a fact (in bold; i didn't know it was family members facilitating but I'll give it to you). You're clearly implying a linkage between these two "facts" when you offer no such proof. That is why I said your assertion was two events that were unrelated absent proof of linkage.
I'm not saying that the Muslim Brotherhood is the next incarnation of the Red Cross. However, your reasoning is mostly a personal feeling and is not factually compelling.
|
So let me get this straight, you aren't actually offering any opinions, just critiquing logic? Seems a bit academic and frankly useless...
If you are not saying that the Muslim Brotherhood is the next incarnation of the Red Cross, what are you saying?