
Personal attacks?  


Deliberate misinterpretation of a persons statement?  (By cutting out
the part of the statement, he tries to blunt the thrust of the sentence.
He never addresses the issue of extreemist peace people not holding true
to their ideals.)


Ignoring the challenge?  (He ignores the challenge that extreemists for
peace tend to be quite insistent that everyone accept their ideals for
the world, and have even turned quite violent.  (Witness, Chicago, summer
1968)).


Paranoia?  (He assumes that anyone who argues against his viewpoint must
"masturbate over Guns'N'Ammo.")

Fire up the Oven, it isn't hot enough!
