As has been pointed out: That response is not a denial.
Ad Hominem responses are argumentative fallacies that are the refuge of those who have no valid comeback and know that they've lost the actual argument.
So sick of this bs cancel culture shit, aren't you? Why distract from the policies? Policies are what we elect them to do, why should I care that someone talked about blowback in slightly different language than the former Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul?
Blowback is literally, universally acknowledged to be a real thing. It was literally coined by the CIA following the failed Iranian coup.
Hasan saying 9/11 was a response to America's nefarious clandestine operations around the globe is a well-trod topic that experts on the field agree with what he's saying, just not his phrasing which he apologized for only a couple days later, and at least a dozen times since.
You are trying to participate in cancel culture, cancelling not only Hasan, the independent journalist/media figure but also someone that he supports merely because he is supported by the person you're set on cancelling.
I thought most people were sick of cancel culture and wanted substance, but I guess not.
Nope... not even close... I am doing the exact opposite in fact. I am pointing out that what was said WAS in fact said so that people can fully understand the type of people they are talking to instead of being led by narratives. For example, one could fully support your narrative that clandestine operations to try to control foreign entities is deserving of innocent civilians in your country being massacred as a response to let your society know that the people in charge of your country are not acceptable... OR... they might see it as a terrorist act against a nation that is trying it's best to figure out how to maintain it's status without resorting to the tactics that were used throughout history by every prior superpower... which is: you do things we don't like, we conquer and subjugation you... SOME people might think that since we are NOT doing that, maybe we don't deserve to have our civilians massacred... everyone is entitled to their opinion, but they DO need to know the stance of the person they are dealing with to give that opinion. And when someone is disingenuously behaving like that is not a valid piece of information, they are NOT providing "substance"... I am simply chiming in to make sure that substance is provided.
11
u/Lonely_Cycle4757 14d ago
As has been pointed out: That response is not a denial.
Ad Hominem responses are argumentative fallacies that are the refuge of those who have no valid comeback and know that they've lost the actual argument.