Challenge to William Rodriguez

[T.A.M.]

Fear of banning perhaps...lol

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

....somewhat playful analogy comparing the stopping of Loose Change screenings with birth control being handed out in low-income area schools - I was labelled a bigot by TC329

I think the link, that you infer, between low income and sexual promiscuity, could be percieved as a comment one would expect from someone who felt that low income was responsible for promiscuity...this could be percieved as a bigoted point of view.

But as far as you being a bigot, obviously you are not, with the exception of the same bigotry most of us here are guilty of...bigotry against the collection of mistruths known as the "9/11 truth" movement.

TAM

 

[Civilized Worm]

My apologies to Lash, I'm sure you didn't mean to cause offense.



ETA: I didn't accuse Lash of being a bigot, I was just annoyed that that was how it would look to the twoofers.

 

[apathoid]

I think the link, that you infer, between low income and sexual promiscuity, could be percieved as a comment one would expect from someone who felt that low income was responsible for promiscuity...this could be percieved as a bigoted point of view.

TAM

That's not what I was inferring, but, yeah - some topics are sensitive and if you don't have your PC cap on when talking about them, you'll likely be called....something.

 

[Furcifer]

except for the fact that enigma came back with the "eh?" comment, and i've seen the teasing tabouere has taken for his manner of speaking as well. if enigma had responded that they were just trying to quote phonetically this issue would have been dropped. instead he makes another deliberately insulting comment, showing his true intention. and if you think this will be transparent to William Rodriguez when he inevitably returns to this thread i suggest you think again. but i guess it all depends on the number of posts you have.

 

[~enigma~]

except for the fact that enigma came back with the "eh?" comment, and i've seen the teasing tabouere has taken for his manner of speaking as well. if enigma had responded that they were just trying to quote phonetically this issue would have been dropped. instead he makes another deliberately insulting comment, showing his true intention. and if you think this will be transparent to William Rodriguez when he inevitably returns to this thread i suggest you think again. but i guess it all depends on the number of posts you have.

Eh??

 

[gumboot]

Frankly, people need to harden up.

How do these people think they're going to overthrow the ebil government (peacefully or with force) if they can't even handle a bit of light mockery from an anonymous internet poster?

You guys don't even need the US Army to beat the revolution. Just call them names.

-Gumboot

 

[T.A.M.]

That's not what I was inferring, but, yeah - some topics are sensitive and if you don't have your PC cap on when talking about them, you'll likely be called....something.

I think that is how it was taken though. I am assuming you meant that low income meant unable to afford condoms, and hence, the need to provide them in the schools?

regardless, as you have said, especially as of late, the PC hat needs to be worn, or the wrath of mod might be upon you...lol

TAM

 

[gumboot]

regardless, as you have said, especially as of late, the PC hat needs to be worn, or the wrath of mod might be upon you...lol

Not necessarily... I'm pretty un-PC, but I seldom have trouble with the Mods.

-Gumboot

 

[LashL]

Wow. It appears that I missed a lot of drama today - some of which I was, apparently, the cause of.

For the record, my quoting of William Rodriguez was not in any way, shape, or form, written to mock him; nor was it in any way a slur. It was simply accurate quoting. As some of you know, I am a bit of a stickler for accurate quoting.

It would be inaccurate for me to quote William Rodriguez as saying "explosion, explosion, explosion" in quotation marks unless I were to cite it as "[ex]splosion, [ex]spolsion, [ex]spolsion" and given what I have read in a few posts above, that would have had the same effect to those who interpreted completely incorrectly.

However, the fact is that I was simply quoting him accurately. There was no malice, no mocking, and no slur whatsoever.

It is unfortunate, indeed, that Rodriguez has chosen to use an accurate quote as a (lame) excuse to avoid legitimate questions and honest, open discussion.

Civilized Worm - as I did not see you wrote, I have no idea what you are apologizing for but I will guess that since your entire post was "edited for civility," it must have been a doozy Whatever it was, apology accepted.

 

[~enigma~]

Wow. It appears that I missed a lot of drama today - some of which I was, apparently, the cause of.

For the record, my quoting of William Rodriguez was not in any way, shape, or form, written to mock him; nor was it in any way a slur. It was simply accurate quoting. As some of you know, I am a bit of a stickler for accurate quoting.

It would be inaccurate for me to quote William Rodriguez as saying "explosion, explosion, explosion" in quotation marks unless I were to cite it as "[ex]splosion, [ex]spolsion, [ex]spolsion" and given what I have read in a few posts above, that would have had the same effect to those who interpreted completely incorrectly.

However, the fact is that I was simply quoting him accurately. There was no malice, no mocking, and no slur whatsoever.

It is unfortunate, indeed, that Rodriguez has chosen to use an accurate quote as a (lame) excuse to avoid legitimate questions and honest, open discussion.

Civilized Worm - as I did not see you wrote, I have no idea what you are apologizing for but I will guess that since your entire post was "edited for civility," it must have been a doozy Whatever it was, apology accepted.

He said we were members of male anatomy...made me cry

 

[jhunter1163]

He said we were members of male anatomy...made me cry

I hope that's the worst thing you're called today, Enigma..

Rodriguez would have to be pretty darn touchy to be offended by someone saying " 'splosions". It does appear that he was looking for an out and Lash gave him one, however inadvertently. I've never known Lash to be anything other than civil and polite, except when in "lawyer mode".

@ TAM: In the interest of accuracy and preventing confusion, I must point out that Lash is a woman.

Carry on.

 

[~enigma~]

I hope that's the worst thing you're called today, Enigma..

I exchanged posts with Headhunter on LCF and he called me a devil clown so I guess what Wormy said wasn't that bad...

ETA - can't figure out why he was so mean..you think my avatar over there is the reason...

 

[jhunter1163]

To be honest, the level of civility here is way above what is usually found on Internet boards, Just look through LCF if you doubt me. Of course, JREF does have a pretty good bunch of mods who ensure that civility is, for the most part, maintained.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go over to LCF and call someone a doody-head.

 

[Furcifer]

Wow.
It would be inaccurate for me to quote William Rodriguez as saying "explosion, explosion, explosion" in quotation marks unless I were to cite it as "[ex]splosion, [ex]spolsion, [ex]spolsion" and given what I have read in a few posts above, that would have had the same effect to those who interpreted completely incorrectly.

However, the fact is that I was simply quoting him accurately. There was no malice, no mocking, and no slur whatsoever.

this is a response that ends the thread. thanks LashL. however, some are not so sincere and continue in their mocking. unfortunately this will be their undoing. mark my words.

 

[~enigma~]

this is a response that ends the thread. thanks LashL. however, some are not so sincere and continue in their mocking. unfortunately this will be their undoing. mark my words.

Eh?

 

[LashL]

this is a response that ends the thread. thanks LashL. however, some are not so sincere and continue in their mocking. unfortunately this will be their undoing. mark my words.

With all due respect, 3bp, my response should not "end the thread" at all. This thread is not about my post, but about William Rodriguez' unwillingness to discuss his inconsistent claims, and his unwillingness to answer questions outside of a controlled truther environment. The fact that Rodriguez may have chosen to use my innocuous post as an additional excuse to avoid legitimate questions and honest discussion does not make this thread about my post.

I, for one, still want him to answer the legitimate questions raised here about his various inconsistent statements, his ever-changing story, and his vague claims pertaining to the events of 911, all of which he has completely avoided for entirely spurious reasons.

Personally, I especially want to discuss with him the lawsuit that he started in 2004 and with which he was actively involved in 2006 when he swore an affidavit repeating all manner of conspiracy theories that were contained in his original complaint. I know that he mpw claims to have distanced himself from his own lawsuit at some point, but he does not say when that was, and the evidence is that he was fully involved it up until the time that it was dismissed last summer.

I would like him to put his cards on the table and tell people which of the myriad of accusations he made in his lawsuit that he continues to ascribe to, and which, if any, he no longer ascribes to. If you have read Rodriguez' lawsuit, you know that the breadth, depth, and number of claims and accusations made by Rodriguez is quite staggering. It would behoove him to set the record straight about which ones he still stands by and which ones he has abandoned.

I also want him to address his claim that his lawsuit was never dismissed, as I know for a fact that it was, as I noted in a prior post, and since I have copies of the court documents right in front of me as I type this.

So, no, my post explaining how my post was misinterpreted by a very few people does not and should not "end the thread" - rather, if anything, it should simply get the thread past the derail and back to Mr. Rodriguez answering some simple and straightforward questions, outside of a truther venue.

 

[gumboot]

@ TAM: In the interest of accuracy and preventing confusion, I must point out that Lash is a woman.

I say! How dare you ser! On my word, I shall defend this baseless slur in Lash's honour! Pistols at dawn ser!

-Gumboot

 

[Gravy]

I guess we won't see his Q & A, or his responds to Gravy then:

That's it , I am cancelling my involvement with the JREF forum, they are downright insukting. Now they are even insulting my accent. I think that is very demeaning, but what the heck, they are better than us, isn't? Sad, very sad indeed. While I do not engage they can spin it anyway they want. At the end I will continue getting the word out. They even tried to use the Phil Berg case, even though it is known that I sent that case to the garbage dump.
Oh well, we both lost a good oportunity.

William -splosion- Rodriguez

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=8351&view=findpost&p=13421256

Yes, much better to find refuge at the site run by people who directly disparage victims of 9/11. How sad.

 

[Furcifer]

With all due respect, 3bp, my response should not "end the thread" at all.

LashL- i meant the side thread. had enigma responded in like fashion this issue would have been dropped. your response was direct, honest and fair.