======================================================================
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
======================================================================
DCQ: "So here you criticize Greenwald for using evidence that doesn't pass
(your) muster."
"Evidence"? No, an unsupported accusation by an anonymous "activist" does
not qualify as "evidence." There is no "passing muster" here, this doesn't
even pass "go."
"Your counter-evidence, though, is even thinner, since it's based on a mere
projection ("X" in the past has been done) of an assumption. (That is, you
assume that the Assad gov't is being honest when it states the car-bomb
attack on the military intelligence facility was done by opposition forces,
as opposed to believing the SNC, which claims it was staged."
In the case of the funeral bombing, the article states that "No one claimed
immediate responsibility for the attack," so there is no question of
"believing" the Assad govt. or anyone else as to who was responsible, nor
did I accuse anyone (although I did doubt, and still do, that a car bomb was
a weapon likely to be employed by government forces). However that's neither
here nor there; the point of my post was to criticize Greenwald giving
unquestioning credibility to the accusation by the anonymous activist,
despite its complete lack of factual support. Perpetuating such speculation
as the absolute truth to discredit an "official enemy" is something I expect
of CNN or the U.S. government, but not Greenwald.
As far as bombing a military intelligence facility, I'm not assuming
anything about the Assad government. I'm simply using common sense. If the
Assad government wanted to stage terrorist attacks to discredit the
opposition, they could easily bomb a bus, or a market, or a mosque, or a
thousand targets. The idea that they would bomb their own military
intelligence headquarters is simply beyond preposterous.
And as to my "evidence" in arguing against Richard Seymour, I believe
decades of knowledge about the operation of the U.S. government and the CIA,
combined with what we actually KNOW about what they are doing in Syria
("communications equipment" etc.) qualifies as evidence that far surpasses
ritual denials by U.S. government spokespeople. If you don't share that
opinion, perhaps you need to read a little more history.
Eli Stephens
Left I on the News
http://lefti.blogspot.com
________________________________________________
Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu
Set your options at:
http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
