[IronJack]

Look up the tu quoque fallacy in a book on logic.

[Old Sarge]

You beat me by a second or two: I was going to reference the same thing.

All the logic of a six-year-old at daycare: “HE STARTED IT!”

[stormhill]

That aside, Obama’s argument is based on the lie that the Western world was wrong in launching the Crusades. In fact, the aggressor was Islam and the Crusaders simply responded to the attacks perpetrated against Christians.

[MrB]

That’s pretty common on the left.
What they really want to “prove” is that the standard by which their opponents are judging their behavior is invalid.

And they “prove” that the standard is invalid because those who hold that standard often fail to live up to it.

It’s a rejection of objective truth, and this is a deeply engrained assumption in the leftist worldview - that there is no objective truth or standard.

(Because if such an objective standard exists, it has to be outside of human definition, and therefore God exists and will judge everyone by that standard.)

[Nifster]

et tu?

[ThunderSleeps]

Bravo. Also, he - and other Muslims - cannot reasonably claim that ISIS committing this atrocity or that is ok because some other group did something in the past. If they do claim "Well, X isn't so bad because Y did Z..." Then they are legitimizing Z. In other words an atrocity is an atrocity. If it was wrong then, it is wrong now. If you try to claim it is excusable now, then you are also excusing, some might say even supporting and promoting it in the past too.

I'm sure bammy didn't really want to say he thinks slavery and the crusades and such were ok. You would expect someone versed in law and argument to do better. Maybe bammy should stop letting his ignorant a**-clown sycophants write his speeches for him.