Yes, you are. Every time you say that "I imply" that is exactly what you are doing. What do you know about me?, you've got an impression based on a few posts, that's all.
I don't need to know what is going on in your mind to know that something is being implied. Implication comes from language itself. Language often has latent meanings of which the user may not even be aware. A constructed sentence may imply something not even intended by the writer. Scientific advances sometimes occur that way. It is therefore proper to say that "your statement implies" even in the absence of intent.No, that is what you imply based on your experience, on your opinion, on your knowledge. You do not know what -if- I imply. Use your imagination to create a second implication, then a third and then explain to yourself why the second is valid but not the third. You create the implication you want, the one you like, that one you are comfortable with.Yes, but...
I have had the experience of people confessing things to me after I raised questions that they took as a realization that I was on to them. In actual fact, I had no intent to reveal something of which I was genuinely ignorant. Yet, the logic I exhibited in my questioning elicited a confession.
I also had the experience of working with an attorney while drafting an ordinance. The attorney informed me that the language I used could be interpreted in a way that I did not intend, and therefore need to be changed.
Because of your use of the word "years" instead of "tears". Hence my admonition regarding proof reading.I don't have to remember, it has been written down. I haven't seen you telling us about your tears ("years" in the post) for her, you forgot to answer that one? This is a forum, I will give my opinion about what I want, I will answer what I want, as you do.First you can't remember...
Loss of any life is a tragedy. Often experienced as such by the families involved. I did not endorse or support the manner in which this story was presented..."couldn't have happened to" was actually something I privately groaned about, as in thanks (sarcastically speaking) for given Certain Russian a propaganda opening.
Still, the victim did exhibit what at least has been interpreted as a fascist ideology. Her father is also suspected of providing a theoretical framework for Putin to justify Russian aggressions.
Look. I am giving you an opportunity to explain yourself. I am also trying to make some points in logic. If you do not want to take that opportunity, it is no skin off my teeth. Certainly not worthy enough to harass you in your personal life.Did I sign any agreement to answer every question?, are you going to invade my home if you don't get what you want? Flip a coin, if you just want that y/n, flip a coin, is going to be as relevant.
At any rate, it seems to have produced a desirable response:
Exactly. On this point we agree.Yes, I do understand that to maintain a conversation we need some answers and more questions about then. Hopefully, you understand this is a forum, not a thesis and I am not here to humour you.
So, any evidence presented contrary to your opinion is therefore easily rejected because it is contrary to your opinion. So, now who is guilty of confirmation bias?An argument -opinions here- is valid on its own merit.
In the sense of what may be motivating you, perhaps. But as a foundation of your opinion. it is critical.Explaining my reasons is irrelevant -and I don't have to if you graciously allow me; us?-, what I believe -really unfortunate word you used-, my weight, the colour of my skin carry little wight; none, actually. It is valid or not, how many likes it got and if you like it is irrelevant.
It is not irrelevant. Ther is the possibility of taking credit, as terrorist organizations often do in such circumstances. There is also the possibility of a "no comment." Moreover, that they actively deny involvement is a counterargument to accusations that they are to blame. Could they be lying in their denial?There are two options -(The enemy will take the fourth)- the government is going to make no comment or deny. I expect the "I dindn't do it", because that is what they do, that is why the reference to the R. Warrior. The statement itself is irrelevant, the government is not going to acknowledge a terrorist attack; unless you are the US government but then you call it something else.
Of course.
Could Russia be lying about their claimed evidence of Ukrainian government involvement?
Of course.
To quote one and ignore the claims of the other is to exhibit bias. Possibly motivated by personal bias related to identity and life experience.
Oh yes, that there are alternate possibilities and that they are acknowledged says a "lot about...the credulity of everybody around here"Such wisdom says a lot about... the credulity of everybody around here?There is a possibility of lying, there is also the possibility of telling the truth.
Ok, I did leave the question mark off for the sake of emphasis.
I have no comments on this at this time. In my monitoring of news stories, I will keep this thesis in mind. Not to disprove it. Not to prove it. Simply for the sake of accurate historical understanding.Zelensky is an idiot.
Two days after the invasion, meaningful negotiations should have been started. After the fall of Mariupol, that was a great opportunity for meaningful negotiations, Russia won a victory but it had to pay for it. Russia has the winning hand -if you care to look at the map-, Zelensky has to use his card, he has to start negotiating so US and Turkey and whoever can start offering trinkets.
The story goes that, after the failed counterattack they called von Runsted about what to do: Make peace, you idiots!
Make peace, you idiot! This is my statement, this is my opinion. Do I imply Putin is smart?: whatever you want, honey. All the implications are yours, not mine.
Because I have not come to that conclusion. Therefore, I used a more generic less wordy formulation. The fountain of words spouted forth in trying to clarify your meaning. See also above.(If you want me to use more words, you have been using far to many words to say just that).
Edit: Made to more clearly indicate that I was quoting ibm9000
