Bill, in order to arrive at the conclusion that my having brought up Tuskegee is a logical fallacy, you first needed to make assumptions about why I brought it up. You illustrated those assumptions in your post in which you described the nature of the point I was trying to make in having brought it up. You and your assumptions were wrong. (Is making assumptions about others' meanings and intentions any kind of logical fallacy, or is it just bad debating technique?)

As I have said before, Ebbie has stated on more than one occasion that it is not possible for 9/11 to have been perpetrated by the US government because for them to have done so would violate her (Ebbie's) beliefs about human nature.

It was not at all a logical fallacy for me to point out that human nature is capable of any sort of cold blooded and cruel behavior, and for me to provide an example of such behavior. Which is why I brought up Tuskegee.

And personal attacks are more than just a logical fallacy. I choose to point them out using the term "ad hominem", but I could just as easily use the term "personal attack". They are not appropriate in any kind of discussion, and they are against the rules here in the Mudcat.