Sign on to call for an end to Trump's family separation. PROGRESSIVE MAJORITY PAC.

David -- One year ago, President Trump and his administration publicly admitted the most inhumane policy of his presidency: ripping children from their families and putting them in cages. And last month, Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen resigned from her post. Slate reported that she “wasn’t cruel and lawless enough for Trump.” Nielsen, who played a major role in locking children in cages -- a policy that will leave an immoral stain on our nation's history forever -- was not extreme enough for President Trump. Now, we’re at risk of Trump appointing another extremist to DHS, and we need to put pressure on Democrats in Congress to act on truly ending family separations. Family separations do not just happen at the border. DREAMers, asylum seekers, and those affected by the Muslim ban are all impacted by family separation policies.  David, we CANNOT let Trump and his administration rip more families apart -- so we’re sending them a message that America condemns these policies.  Will you sign on to urge Congress to end family separation practices of all kinds? Please, add your name to help us stop this atrocity NOW. Thank you for standing with us, Progressive Majority PAC   SIGN THE PETITION

Progressive Majority PAC is leading the fight against Trump's dangerous and divisive agenda by helping elect progressive Democrats to Congress and protecting the gains we made in the midterms. This movement is powered by progressives like you. Progressive Majority PAC 410 1st St, SE Suite 310 Washington, DC 20003 Paid for by Progressive Majority PAC

WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM THE ARTICLE "THE IRAN NUCLEAR TREATY- AVOIDING REALITY" THAT WILL HELP US MAINTAIN THE PEACE BETWEEN THE U.S. AND IRAN. PT 2.

WITH AN INTERNATIONAL ARMED CONLICT BETWEEN THE U.S. AND IRAN A REAL POSSIBILITY, MY 3 PART ARTICLE TITLED:

"THE IRAN NUCLEAR TREATY- AVOIDING REALITY."

MAY PROVIDE INFORMATION THAT WILL HELP US

AVERT SUCH AN EVENTUALITY.

PART 2.

So now we have Two or more Governments sitting at the Negotiation Table, each

One Probably Aware to a Certain Extent of Why the Others are there. Before going on

with Further Analysis, it is Important to remember the Following:

-  THIS IS AN ADVERSARIAL RELATIONSHIP, AND THE HOSTILITY BETWEEN THOSE INVOLVED IN NEGOTIATIONS IS GOING TO SHAPE THE MANNER IN WHICH THEY ARE CONDUCTED.

Each Side can CREATE AN IMMEDIATE TONE FOR THE NEGOTIATIONS, BY SIMPLY TREATING THE OPPOSING SIDE AS:

-  A PERENNIAL ENEMY WHO CAN NEVER BE TRUSTED.

                                            OR

-  AN OPPONENT ON THE WORLD STAGE, WHO MUST 

EARN TRUST BY SHOWING GOOD FAITH AND FLEXIBILITY.  ALSO,

ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THEIR MOTIVATIONS MAY BE DIFFERENT,  

BUT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED VALID ENOUGH TO HAVE AN OPEN

DIALOGUE.

                                             OR 

-   A POSSIBLE FUTURE ALLY OR FRIEND, GIVEN A CHANGE IN

CIRCUMSTANCES.  ALSO, UNDERSTANDING THAT THE PERSON OR 

PERSONS YOU ARE NEGOTIATING WITH NOW, MAY BE THOSE WHO

HOLD THE REIGNS OF POWER IN THE FUTURE.

WHILE MANY WILL NAIVELY CLAIM THAT COUNTRIES LIKE IRAN 

WILL NEVER BE A FRIEND OR ALLY FORGET THAT THE ART 

OF DIPLOMACY IS TO DO WHAT IS IN YOUR COUNTRIES BEST 

INTEREST, NOW AND IN THE FUTURE.  THIS DOESN'T MEAN 

GIVING UP YOUR IDEALS, AND BECOMING WHAT YOU FEAR AND 

HATE.  IT'S ADAPTING TODAYS SITUATION, TO LESSONS FROM THE 

PAST, BOTH GOOD AND BAD.  

Just in the 20th Century, think of the COUNTRIES WHO WERE AT ONE TIME ALLIES OF THE U.S. WHO BECAME FOES, OR VICE- VERSA, FOES WHO LATER BECAME ALLIES.

SEE PART 3.

BLAST FROM THE PAST: IN HONOR OF "THE BIG BANG THEORY" FINAL EPISODE, I OFFER THIS POPULAR POST.

Since Logic now how has its own page and category, I thought it might be appropriate if we took an example of a Logical Fallacy from "THE BIG BANG THEORY."  This one is called POST HOC, ERGO PROPTER HOC.  

Also, this article will expand this example to include the Fallacy of TRUTH BY ASSOCIATION.

The first episode of the third season, entitled "THE ELECTRIC CAN OPENER FLUCTUATION", Sheldon, Leonard, Howard and Raj return from their trip to the Magnetic North Pole.  As he is walking through the door into the apartment, Sheldon has the following exchange with his mother while on the phone:

"No mother, I could not feel your church group praying for my safety.  The fact that 

I'm home safe does not prove that it worked. That logic is Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc."

Translated from Latin, it means, "After this, therefore because of this."  It is the Logical Fallacy of assuming a causal relationship between two events, and excluding everything else without justification.

To make this easier to understand here is the breakdown;

                            Sheldon goes on his trip,

                                          

                                          Then,

                    Sheldons mom, and her church group pray 

                                      for his safety,

                                           Then,

                            Sheldon returns home safely,

                                         Therefore,

                          The prayer ensured his safety. 

What Sheldon could have pointed out, to his mother, is that his safe return could be the result of one, or  more of the following: 

1)  Proper planning.

2)  Safety procedures that were followed while en route, or on the way home.

3)  Adequate Water, Food, Clothes etc, to amply supply their needs. 

4)  Communications that allowed access to emergency aid from the outside world.

5)  The mental discipline and knowledge to meet any difficulty calmly and intellectually.

In other words, Sheldons mom concluded that the prayer was the reason for a safe

return, when in fact there may have been other reasons.

Before any of my readers, who believe in the power of prayer, say that I can't rule out Divine Intervention, my reply is simple;  

I AM NOT TRYING TO.

END PT 1.

WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM THE ARTICLE "THE IRAN NUCLEAR TREATY- AVOIDING REALITY" THAT WILL HELP US MAINTAIN THE PEACE BETWEEN THE U.S. AND IRAN.

WITH AN INTERNATIONAL ARMED CONLICT BETWEEN THE U.S. AND IRAN A REAL POSSIBILITY, MY 3 PART ARTICLE TITLED:

"THE IRAN NUCLEAR TREATY- AVOIDING REALITY."

MAY PROVIDE INFORMATION THAT WILL HELP US

AVERT SUCH AN EVENTUALITY.

HERE IS PART 1. 

(*IN THIS ARTICLE I USE THE WORD "TREATY" TO DESCRIBE

THE RESULTS OF THE NEGOTIATIONS.  HOWEVER, TERMS SUCH

AS "DEAL" OR "AGREEMENT" COULD REPLACE "TREATY" WITH

NO LOSS IN MEANING OR UNDERSTANDING.

As the Debate over the Nuclear Treaty with Iran is still being Discussed in Congress, and the Media, we find that one thing Remains True:

SOME POLITICIANS STILL AVOID ANY REAL DEBATE THAT MIGHT RESOLVE THE CONTROVERSY.

WHY?  IT WOULD INVOLVE INSIGHT AND THE ABILITY TO THINK BEYOND SIMPLISTIC SOLUTIONS THAT WILL ADDRESS THE REALITY OF THE SITUATION, INSTEAD OF REPEATING MEANINGLESS RHETORIC THAT PLEASES YOUR SUPPORTERS.

So, let us Step Back, Ignore everything that has been said, and look Beyond Bombastic One-Liners to see where the TRUTH MAY LIE.

First Question- WHAT IS A TREATY?

A TREATY IS BASICALLY A CONTRACT BETWEEN TWO OR MORE PARTIES;

THAT ARE USUALLY DIFFERENT GOVERNMENTS OR NATIONS, WHO ARE RECOGNIZED AS THE LEGITIMATE SOURCES OF AUTHORITY FOR A GIVEN GEOGRAPHICAL AREA OR POPULATION, THAT HAVE THE POWER TO CREATE AND ENFORCE ANY POLICIES, FOREIGN OR DOMESTIC.

A TREATY IS JUST LIKE A SIGNED BUSINESS DEAL. THE GOALS AND PARTIES TO IT MAY BE DIFFERENT, BUT THE PRINCIPLES ARE THE SAME.

What can we Safely Infer if Two or More Parties are Entering into Diplomatic Talks,

with the Outcome Eventually being a SIGNED TREATY FOR ALL PARTIES?

#1-  EACH PARTICIPANT IN THE NEGOTIATIONS HAS SOMETHING THE OTHER WANTS.-  No One Enters into These Negotiations Insisting that the Opposing Side Give Up Something, but will get nothing in return. Turning it around, No Side enters such Talks with the Idea of Giving Into Certain Demands, and Anticipating No Concessions From the Opposition. 

That would be Unrealistic and Foolish.

#2-  WHILE THERE MAY BE MANY POINTS OF CONFLICT OR DISAGREEMENT, ALL PARTICIPANTS HAVE ONE OR TWO MAIN GOALS THEY WANT THE TREATY TO ACHIEVE. These are Usually So Prominent that They are Generally Apparent at the Outset of the Talks, and are in some cases THE ONLY REASON(S) THAT BROUGHT THE OPPOSING SIDES TO THE NEGOTIATION TABLE.
SEE PART 2.