• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

RE: Pardalis: "anti-semitic garbage"

Gurdur said:
*snip* Oliver, stop being so bloody silly yourself. You really don't need to take notice of Pardalis, and for hell's bells, these kind of bloody stupid exchanges make bloody painful reading.
Click to expand...



Tut mir leid, ich mag Pardalis und aus dem selben Grund necke ich ihn ja auch. Sorry, falls das nervend sein sollte. :boxedin:
 
Oliver said:
I understand your point here - but let me ask: What is biased in if a "Commie-Source" says:

"20 March 2003 - The US invaded Iraq."

Does that make the data biased or wrong just because the source was a commie-site, for example? No, it doesn't - that's my point with the list in question.
Click to expand...
There is a lot of information on the net. What is of value and what isn't? Is the fact that there is factual data to be found in a site a basis for accepting all of the information? No. (propaganda relies on disseminating truth in support of the falsehoods) On the other hand it would be ad hominem to dismiss everything from a site simply because it also contains falsehoods.

I try and avoid sites like the one you posted Oliver because it is problematic. That includes whitehouse.gov and other sites that have an obvious agenda. However I would be willing to consider arguments and data from any site but it would have to be compelling if it comes from one that gives me reason to be skeptical of it.

That is the state of the site you provide Oliver.
 
Last edited:
Pardalis said:
I don't, I just disagree with him.
Click to expand...
Whatever.
You know how to remedy that.
Click to expand...
My bloody fault for reading through these threads in search of new facts and new POV's. Meh. Yes, I bloody do know how to remedy it, and given your attitude, I bloody will. If you're more interested in continuing on a mutual mad spite war with Oliver than actually remembering that others might be interested in your POV, that's your choice, and I must simply re-align myself to suit it.
 
Gurdur, here's how this misunderstanding started:

This thread started when Oliver posted an article (without sourcing it) in another thread. When the moderator provided the link, it showed to be filled with antisemitic revisionist garbage. That's when I came in and said he should be more careful with his sources. Then Oliver took upon himself to start this thread with my last post but sourced another link, which was in fact the right one but still not the one I was referring to as being antisemitic. Then, I read the new source and found that it was from a Communist journal, and I again asked him to be careful of his sources, and said I would have to look further into these claims before I made my mind about it, that I wouldn't take it as gospel as Oliver seems to have done.

Now where's your beef in this?
 
RandFan said:
There is a lot of information on the net. What is of value and what isn't? Is the fact that there is factual data to be found in a site a basis for accepting all of the information? No. (propaganda relies on disseminating truth in support of the falsehoods) On the other hand it would be ad hominem to dismiss everything from a site simply because it also contains falsehoods.

I try and avoid sites like the one you posted Oliver because it is problematic. That includes whitehouse.gov and other sites that have an obvious agenda. However I would be willing to consider arguments and data from any site but it would have to be compelling if it comes from one that gives me reason to be skeptical of it.

That is the state of the site you provide Oliver.
Click to expand...


But don't you see? If you avoid a disliked source - what the heck is skeptical about this behavior?

Or to say it in other words: This thread is about the list I posted - nice to see you guys derailing the meaning of this thread. ;)
 
Oliver said:
But don't you see? If you avoid a disliked source - what the heck is skeptical about this behavior?
Click to expand...
It is the very definition of skepticm.

Or to say it in other words: This thread is about the list I posted - nice to see you guys derailing the meaning of this thread. ;)
Click to expand...
I don't think so. Please to explain?
 
MaGZ said:
White Nationalism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_nationalism
Click to expand...
Sorry to repeat myself.

RandFan said:
Forgive me for answering but I think there are legitimate complaints among many White Nationalists. The problem is that there is too much history of racism, bigotry and hatred and no clear demarcation between various groups. Minority groups have not been in a position to subjugate, segregate and lynch whites in large numbers the way whites have done to blacks.

There is little to be gained for whites to organize along perceived racial lines. We would be much better to seek peaceful coexistence. Any belief that there can be a change in trends of mixing of races is delusional. It's over. Pop culture, government, the military, schools, churches, etc., etc. have only moved in one direction.
Click to expand...
 
Oliver said:
Tut mir leid, ich mag Pardalis und aus dem selben Grund necke ich ihn ja auch. Sorry, falls das nervend sein sollte
Click to expand...
Pardalis said:
Quessé?
Click to expand...
Oliver said:

I am sorry, I like Pardalis and for that reason I needle him too. Sorry, in case that that is nerve-wracking.
____________


Crissakes, if you two keep on bitching at each other instead of treating each other with a TINY bit of respect, I am going to make an Official Complaint to have you both forced to marry each other. At least if you were married to each other you would then both have a halfway decent excuse for continually attacking each other.
 
RandFan said:
It is the very definition of skepticm.

I don't think so. Please to explain?
Click to expand...


Nope - skepticism is to check and disproof critical sources - not about ignoring them blindly. You know the difference.

Care to explain: Well, you avoided to check the list for major flaws concerning the time-table. That's not criticism or skepticism, it's simply ignorance.

Go ahead - check it and disproof it's timetable.
 
Oliver said:
I guess you're opposed to communism and as such, the source of the list I posted. I apologize if I missed your comment regarding the list - did you check it and do you think it's "Propaganda", too?
Click to expand...

I did not look at the entire list. But if you point is the Jews have been directing American foreign policy over the past several decades in the Middle East then I am in full agreement.
 
Gurdur said:
Oliver said:

I am sorry, I like Pardalis and for that reason I needle him too. Sorry, in case that that is nerve-wracking.
Click to expand...


"Needle" might be the wrong translation, isn't it? I was saying: "I like Pardalis, that's why I also like to tweak his nose in a lovely way." :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom