a plan to destroy autism speaks

Post Reply New Topic

My reading comprehension is fine, thank you very much. I guess you have to say that part to yourself, because I am exposing that contradiction of aghogday, where he doesn't claim to work for the Mafia in one instance, but swallowed his words and claim that he volunteers for them. And sorry, I don't volunteer for those evil bastards.

Prenatal testing (and encouraging parents to abort babies with autism and other "defects"), removing autism from the human genome, inciting to murder autistics, and massive deception and fraud -- doesn't these moves of the criminal group known as Autism Speaks remind you of the Nazi regime?

What is innately evil will remain evil. And unfortunate for some but fortunate for others, the Aktion-T4 proponents known as Autism Speaks is innately evil. And no matter what lies their minions or their brainwashed supporters tell, their intention is evil as it was in the first place.

Last edited by theimperiousdork on 18 Jun 2012, 1:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Then why are you giving them free advertising?

Don't give me that bull-crap. That reasoning is so illogical and won't work.

your one to talk

Yes, as a matter of fact, I am one to talk. Did you ever study Logic and have tackled "irrelevant conclusions," "ad hominem," "well poisoning," and "argumentum ad consequentiam," among others? Based on your reasoning on "free advertising," in addition to your previous statements, clearly your argument passes all of these illogical reasonings.

And please, check the grammar. What nationality are you? If you are an American, a Briton, or an Indian, you are expected to write in grammatically-correct English, and that alone destroys your credibility.

Bottom line is, it is a special interest of mine. I have no association with the organization. My statement above was taken out of context, as I was talking about marketing, and how these threads on autism speaks, provide the opportunity for others to see the Brand Name Autism Speaks and do their own research to determine if the organization is a reputable one.

The statement above was an analogy that individuals in all of these threads are unwitting volunteers of autism speaks, in continuing the threads that allow greater visibility for the brand name for public recognition of the thousands everyday that browse through these forums here at WP, and see highlighted green topics, whether they open them up to look at them or not.

I didn't come up with that opinion on my own; it was the source of an opinion provided by Lotuspuppy, who did not describe himself as supportive of Autism Speaks, that started an Op "Stop Bashing Autism Speaks", that lasted 45 pages, that I quoted and linked earlier in this thread.

Every time it is brought up I try to mention the guidestar.org website that provides information on the other 2000plus non-profit organizations associated with support for autistic individuals, that many, also like Autism Speaks, have missions that are sourced as reputable ones, worthwhile of supporting for those that have the inclination to support them.

Meanwhile autism speaks continues to get all of the free advertising on this website through attention in threads, while most of the other 2000plus organizations never get a mention.

There is really no significant attention drawn to the organization in the autism talk TV videos provided here. The support provided by the organization is almost invisible unless someone points it out in a thread.

The real marketing provided to the organization, is through the topic threads, and brand name recognition. Obviously an unwitting effort among those that participate in the thread, but never the less, per marketing 101, an effective means of spreading Brand name recognition for the organization Autism Speaks.

The net impact for the organization, of these negative tinted threads, is likely positive for the organization, through the marketing phenomenon of brand name recognition.

Per that scenario, as a participant in the thread that continues the life of the green highlighted autism speaks topic, wittingly or unwittingly, you as all others that participate, are part of an effort that continues to promote the Brand Name recognition of Autism Speaks, among the general public, who visits this website out of general interest or curiosity.

Lotuspuppy made an intelligent unbiased observation, and shared it with others; the observation is an ironic one, but it does fall within the principles of marketing 101.

And as quoted earlier, in this thread, Autism Speaks continues approximately one charitable walk for fundraising every other day throughout the US, funding millions of dollars for the organization's mission, through over 300,000 volunteers that walk, as well as the millions of others that support the mission and the volunteer effort. It's not possible to volunteer unless one comes across the brand name Autism Speaks somewhere at sometime or another. The threads in this site, provide another opportunity for that brand name recognition.

You mean this? No, all of that is factual. None of it is official.

As for the second part of my reply, I've already suggested you take up the "who funds what now?" issue with theimperiousdork.
That should really give you some unsupported speculation to quibble about.

And yet this - and a whole stack more nonsense from you, is logical and well-reasoned? Without, as I remember, discussing or realistically countering any one of ahogday's third-party links?Nazi group? Really? You mean like the WWII German paramilitary organisation that established totalitarian control and eventually helped run the concentration camps?
I don't think you have any idea what you're talking about but one thing is certain: your emotive hyperbole knows no bounds and that is certainly something anyone seeking factual information from you should beware.
Also: including the Mafia, the Yakuza, the KKK, the WBC, "and other despicable groups that have ever existed."
Well. One would think just being likened to the Nazi party would be enough and yet somehow, in your uniquely researched way that requires you to provide no evidence because you "don't need to state what is obvious" - Autism Speaks is apparently as bad as that and all of these heaped on. Just in case, you know, someone might have formed an opinion that it wasn't all that bad.
And I bet it kicks cuddly puppies too.

Ah. Running out of what you fondly imagine to be arguments supporting your case you instead attack the writing style, and it comes as no surprise to see you once again attack the plate instead of the meal on it. It's marginally better than failing dismally to counter the arguments against you I suppose, in that you are at least addressing something instead of ranting - but still a pretty poor show. And "credibility"? It's nice to see that you can at least spell it.

Autistic individuals on this website are not expected to write in grammatically-correct English. If that is your personal expectation in life, you are welcome to it, but it is not a requirement of posting here.

And while some may make occasional typo's that aren't caught by a spell checker, there are others with autism that have actual learning disorders, that make it difficult for them to communicate in written language.

When one makes a statement like that, what it could do, is potentially influence individuals who may be reading here less likely to contribute to the discussion, in light of a statement that suggests there is grammar police lurking here.

Beyond that, if you aren't aware of the marketing factors associated with Brand Name Recognition and advertising, there is an abundance of information available on the internet that can be pursued and studied. If you like, I can source some references.

In addition, your suggestion that because Delphiki left a contraction out of a word, and misspelled another destroys his credibility, ironically, is an excellent example of an ad hominem attack, that you highlight in your post.

None of his points were unreasonable, given the evidence as it exists.

great point

Oh you really trying so hard to have an passive aggressive attitude against me when you're overlooking a few things. Under normal procedure a moderator is supposed to take an impartial stance by suggesting you can't comment on it officially and I should speak with the adminstrator; instead of attempting this rather stale argumentation style to try and dismiss or discredit a user's query. You also fail to realize that by not trying to answer the question and considering your rather partial attitude, it projects a sense that you indeed know the answer and that it's undesirable to the users. You could have told me they don't and save the trouble (providing it's true), but I guess that's not factual either otherwise you wouldn't be avoiding the question so much in WP mod's typical cover-your-a** policy.

So you're going to treat all users who ask hard questions with that same tone and risk alienating them, or are you actually going to answer the question? Do Autism Speaks or do they not partially fund WP directly? Even if you can't say it officially, surely moderators are at least briefed on this to ensure they can do their job.

I'm sure quite a few people would be most interested to hear a direct answer for once, especially if it's something like "Of course they don't, but I cannot say that officially".

By the way, I do believe Autism Speaks isn't partially funding this site directly, I doubt a secret like that would be kept for long anyway.

Wow, you sound like this professor I know:)

Wha? Oh hello skyblue, oh my yes, I have just thought I'd pop out of my I2 labs for a casual stroll in the park. Need time to let my super-atomic razorteeth roaches incubate in their host and achieve their glorious power to consume the flesh of the living. So far my previous batch only took a liking to strawberry jam, which is most unfortunate... Good news everyone, I have strawberry jam, anyone care to try some?

with raisin bread?

Of course! I have plenty of that too.

I'm not going to quote anything, as it wastes space, and I just would like to point out a few things.

Cornflake, I don't like that insolent tone of yours. Instead of rebutting my points, you are always into this ad hominem strategy, attacking the person. You never had any point to prove, anyway. Do you? And if you don't have anything substantial to say at all, why not just carry on with your "muttawa" task and stop meddling in affairs you don't have any idea on? Oh, and by the way, thank you for applauding me on how I spelled "credibility." I know it's sarcastic, but sorry, I am a bad interpreter of sarcasm, and sarcasm from other people doesn't work for me.

Aghogday, even if you bombard me or anyone else with your TL;DR lies that you claim as the "truth," I still don't trust you. And your words taken out of context? Come on, that contradiction alone is a proof that you shouldn't be trusted. Those criminals at Autism S*** are so vicious, and it is sad to know that you are one of them.