Osterwelle
Scholar
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2011
- Messages
- 90
Well, they translated the Massei report so we all could have a laugh...
-
Osterwelle
Continuation Part 3 - Discussion of the Amanda Knox case
- Thread starter Chris_Halkides
- Start date
- Status
Well, they translated the Massei report so we all could have a laugh...
-
Osterwelle
RoseMontague
Published Author
I answered this one already.
Yes I have seen some very personal attacks by PMF and I have seen a few very personal attacks from the side of innocence. I don't agree with any of this from either side.
I have not given up on PMF, I feel a second resurrection coming on. I am still in touch with and associate with a couple of members of that board, and we do continue some discussion of the case. You are labeling an entire membership as a hate group. I simply don't agree with you.
Antony
Graduate Poster
I was just pondering...
Did the missing evidence of Amanda's and Raffaele's involvment in the murder lead to the conclusion that the staged break-in "doesn't exist" or was it clear that there was no staged break-in which then supported the acquittal for the murder?
I mean, without the break-in being staged the already completely moronic theory of the murderer involving Amanda and Raffaele becomes even more absurd. Although I bet some would believe they teamed up with a burglar they just found on the loo while trying to start a sex orgy with Meredith...
Opinions?
-
Osterwelle
AFAICS, the "staged" break-in was just a story used to rationalise the evidence of a break-in with the accusation against Amanda and Raff. The pro-guilt supporters are long on assertions about "evidence" of the staging and short on specifics - just as they are long on assertions about Amanda's "lies", without any genuine details.
The thinking is: we've caught the murderers, and we know that it was a sex game gone wrong. The trouble is that it looks a lot like a burglary and an attack by a single culprit, but we're sophisticated enough to realise that the 2 culprits broke the window themselves and got rid of the evidence showing that they did it.
The guilter meme is completely conclusion-driven - everything starts from the "fact" that Meredith was killed by Amanda, Raff and Rudy Guede, so all the evidence is made to fit. Anything that doesn't is because the 2 of them altered the crime scene (or because the PR supertanker managed to influence all of the reporting of the case).
It's a bit like young-Earth creationists: all the evidence of dinosaurs and an early Earth that was very different from what it is now, were just placed here by the Devil to deceive gullible scientists.
Grinder
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 10,033
It would seem that it would be the latter. I am under the impression that Hellman said there was no staged break in, which would in fact take away a key piece of circumstantial evidence that now doesn't need explaining in the motivations report.I was just pondering...
Did the missing evidence of Amanda's and Raffaele's involvment in the murder lead to the conclusion that the staged break-in "doesn't exist" or was it clear that there was no staged break-in which then supported the acquittal for the murder?
I mean, without the break-in being staged the already completely moronic theory of the murderer involving Amanda and Raffaele becomes even more absurd. Although I bet some would believe they teamed up with a burglar they just found on the loo while trying to start a sex orgy with Meredith...
Opinions?
-
Osterwelle
Draca
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- May 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,222
Rose,
To me the term 'Hate Site' is completely on target. The efforts of the sites are to hate on someone.
The sites are also made up of complex humans. I had a discussion with Kaosium about guilters who wrote letters to Pepperdine, schools and editors of journalists complaining about their articles. It is important to remember that they are still human and can be hurt, embarrassed. They are wrong, but most of them aren't filled with hate. Some are though. What they have produced together as a group of normal and flawed people who have come together are hate sites. Hate sites with perfect grammar and great translating efforts.
I value that you see the best side of people. You have well maintained their humanity in your eyes. I think you are right that labels completely lose that complexity and are used by both sides. Those labels are also useful though to quickly state what position someone has. They are a huge part of language and are a natural development. Discussion isn't really possible with most of them because they have enclosed themselves in the hate sites. I'm glad you continue to build bridges though.
Grinder
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 10,033
Rose et al. the reason that from joining this board i have attempted to not use guilter or hater is that I didn't think those pejorative terms were helpful. Having said that, I must say that the owner of .org and many of her main posters have been vicious towards people that didn't agree with them or even worse that insisted the kids were innocent.
I remember them publishing the location of a person they thought was the someone associated with FOA. As it turned out they published this woman's work place and picture in complete error. I don't believe they ever apologized to her and it is difficult to undo this kind of behavior.
Their behavior has often been vile. Their vindictiveness is one reason I have never posted there or revealed much about myself. They have by their behavior limited discussion. They have attacked people at their workplaces and attempted and sometimes succeeded in causing people difficulty in employment. I'm betting that those of them reading here enjoyed the preceding two sentences and that's why I think they are vile.
Not all of them are like the above description. Thoughtful is not like that. I don't think Fiona is like that and it would seem Greggy did the right thing in the end and quit.
It is a shame that they won't come here. Some people here are harsher on Mach than I think they should be, but he does seem more than able to take it.
It is not that they think she is guilty, it's the way they do it.
ETA - Their posting of articles with the comment "comments taken" encouraging the troops to post and often post tripe that they knew was tripe.
I remember them publishing the location of a person they thought was the someone associated with FOA. As it turned out they published this woman's work place and picture in complete error. I don't believe they ever apologized to her and it is difficult to undo this kind of behavior.
Their behavior has often been vile. Their vindictiveness is one reason I have never posted there or revealed much about myself. They have by their behavior limited discussion. They have attacked people at their workplaces and attempted and sometimes succeeded in causing people difficulty in employment. I'm betting that those of them reading here enjoyed the preceding two sentences and that's why I think they are vile.
Not all of them are like the above description. Thoughtful is not like that. I don't think Fiona is like that and it would seem Greggy did the right thing in the end and quit.
It is a shame that they won't come here. Some people here are harsher on Mach than I think they should be, but he does seem more than able to take it.
It is not that they think she is guilty, it's the way they do it.
ETA - Their posting of articles with the comment "comments taken" encouraging the troops to post and often post tripe that they knew was tripe.
Last edited:
HumanityBlues
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 1,741
Rose,
We're not going to agree obviously on the "hate blog" thing. Personally I think the term is awesome, but I probably would have come up with something a little different.
Taking the group aside, you would admit that Peter Quennell is a hate blogger right? Cmmmmoooooon, you know it's true.
We're not going to agree obviously on the "hate blog" thing. Personally I think the term is awesome, but I probably would have come up with something a little different.
Taking the group aside, you would admit that Peter Quennell is a hate blogger right? Cmmmmoooooon, you know it's true.
I would just like for someone from .net or .org that posts here to explain something to me. Why is it that anyone believing in guilt is free to post here, but no one believing in innocense is permitted to post there. I think if their home site will not allow both sides of the argument there, then they should not come here to post . Just my opinion.
I would just like for someone from .net or .org that posts here to explain something to me. Why is it that anyone believing in guilt is free to post here, but no one believing in innocense is permitted to post there. I think if their home site will not allow both sides of the argument there, then they should not come here to post . Just my opinion.
Actually, the correct scenario would be anyone free to post on any site.
My appologies for the double post
Actually, the correct scenario would be anyone free to post on any site.
My appologies for the double post
Last edited:
Bruce Fischer
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2010
- Messages
- 1,584
I said that the people that run PMF are bad people. I talk to a couple people from that site also. I am not saying everyone there is hateful but they are supporting a hate site.
There are many people at Penn State that were aware of the fact that a boy was sodomized in the school shower. They chose to cover it up. They didn't all commit the horrible act but their silence allowed other children to be abused. Anyone that knew what was going on and said nothing bears some responsibility in what happened to all of those kids.
The people that sit on PMF everyday witnessing acts of hate, too afraid to speak up because their PMF membership means more to them than life itself, share the blame for those acts.
It is disappointing to see that you are looking forward to a "second resurrection" of PMF. Why on earth would you support that group after everything they have done?
I disagree with you that PMF will build up popularity again. The site consists of a few fanatics now, the rest have all disappeared.
Right minded people will soon see that it is time to move on. The debate is over. Amanda and Raffaele are free.
davefoc
Philosopher
Hi razOrama and welcome to the forum. I think that this might be one issue where people on both sides of the debate here* would agree. As a practical issue a request for extradition is wildly unlikely. And even in the wildly unlikely event that there was an extradition request it is wildly unlikely that it would be complied with for multiple reasons of which the US prohibition against double jeopardy prosecutions might be one.
* I have seen reference to the idea that some people that post on other forums might think it might happen, but I'm guessing even among the few people posting here that believe that guilt is somewhat or more likely (Machiavelli has stated that he is certain of RS/AK guilt) that they don't think extradition is likely at all.
Last edited:
I think this is exactly right. I can only speak for myself, but I enjoy talking about this issue because I'm a law nerd. It isn't as if there is much else to discuss until Hellman's motivation report is published.
Mary_H
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2010
- Messages
- 5,253
Rose,
To me the term 'Hate Site' is completely on target. The efforts of the sites are to hate on someone.
The sites are also made up of complex humans. I had a discussion with Kaosium about guilters who wrote letters to Pepperdine, schools and editors of journalists complaining about their articles. It is important to remember that they are still human and can be hurt, embarrassed. They are wrong, but most of them aren't filled with hate. Some are though. What they have produced together as a group of normal and flawed people who have come together are hate sites. Hate sites with perfect grammar and great translating efforts.
I value that you see the best side of people. You have well maintained their humanity in your eyes. I think you are right that labels completely lose that complexity and are used by both sides. Those labels are also useful though to quickly state what position someone has. They are a huge part of language and are a natural development. Discussion isn't really possible with most of them because they have enclosed themselves in the hate sites. I'm glad you continue to build bridges though.
I agree with you, Draca. I rarely call people "bad," and I greatly admire Rose, so I have tried to talk myself out of calling PMF and TJMK hate sites. In the end, though, I do believe that's what they are. I believe Machiavelli and his Italian friends hate Amanda for what they perceive her to be (a liar, a woman, American, etc.), and I believe many of the British and Americans hate Amanda because of what they perceive her to be (spoiled, privileged, attractive, promiscuous, etc.). They don't hate Raffaele as much as they hate Amanda, and they don't hate Rudy at all.
Where is Peter's "True Justice for Myriad Other Murder Victims" website? Where is the "Washington DC Murder File?" No, it is not murder or victims they care about, it is who is the most "deserving" person they can blame -- that is their focus.
To be honest, I also call them hate sites for the shock value (for the participants) and in the hope that I will be prejudicing new readers against them.
Mary_H
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2010
- Messages
- 5,253
It reminds me of Adam Sandler's ode to his car.
RoseMontague
Published Author
You have misunderstood what I was saying. I was referring to my banning and my anticipated personal second resurrection there. At some point I will resume posting. I didn't say anything about PMF building up popularity again> I made no predictions in that regard.
I may not be right-minded in your mind but I would think that most of us still posting are doing so because we still have an interest in the case and what happens next. The list I gave you of things that still interest me are just a few examples. It may be true that some are still posting only to convince others to move on, but to me that makes no sense.
It is easy to hate on a hate group, labels are useful in that regard. Just my opinion.
RoseMontague
Published Author
Rose,
The sites are also made up of complex humans. I had a discussion with Kaosium about guilters who wrote letters to Pepperdine, schools and editors of journalists complaining about their articles. It is important to remember that they are still human and can be hurt, embarrassed. They are wrong, but most of them aren't filled with hate. Some are though. What they have produced together as a group of normal and flawed people who have come together are hate sites. Hate sites with perfect grammar and great translating efforts.
I value that you see the best side of people. You have well maintained their humanity in your eyes. I think you are right that labels completely lose that complexity and are used by both sides. Those labels are also useful though to quickly state what position someone has. They are a huge part of language and are a natural development. Discussion isn't really possible with most of them because they have enclosed themselves in the hate sites. I'm glad you continue to build bridges though.
I appreciate your comments and I value your opinion. I also wrote a letter to Pepperdine, just for a different reason than those at PMF, and it was not a very friendly letter. I have also e-mailed reporters, journalists, and bloggers on occasion. This case brings out a lot of emotion in a lot of people, including me.
This outing of people works both ways. I remember when PMF published an open letter signed with the real names of members and it was picked up at several places including the old IIP discussion blog. A lot of speculation ensued and I asked Bruce if he would put a stop to it, asking him to take the high road on that issue. He let it continue.
I have bolded part of your comment I find interesting. It's a good point. I have also been overly harsh with Machiavelli on occasion, something I need to work on.
Nope.
I appreciate your kind words as well. Sounds like I need to try harder.
pilot padron
Muse
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2010
- Messages
- 690
Rose, your position on this issue is to be admired.
Outnumbered by odds that would make you a millionaire if you won on a 2 buck bet at the Racetrack, you publicly express a view that you knew would put you at odds with most here.
Since I rarely get the opportunity to do what so many here do so often ....
A BIG "atta boy" to you and your argument.
The real "haters" expose themselves for all to see by hastening to condemn you for doing nothing more than speaking your mind on the PMF/TJMK issue.
You have often also argued, to your credit, that the level of vitriol should be turned down ...on both sides...
I am saddened that so many here now find necessary to try and find fault with even that irrefutable opinion.
Again, actions speak volumes.
Offenders are their own worst enemies.
By their own words, they also now identify themselves
Just sayin'............
Outnumbered by odds that would make you a millionaire if you won on a 2 buck bet at the Racetrack, you publicly express a view that you knew would put you at odds with most here.
Since I rarely get the opportunity to do what so many here do so often ....
A BIG "atta boy" to you and your argument.
The real "haters" expose themselves for all to see by hastening to condemn you for doing nothing more than speaking your mind on the PMF/TJMK issue.
You have often also argued, to your credit, that the level of vitriol should be turned down ...on both sides...
I am saddened that so many here now find necessary to try and find fault with even that irrefutable opinion.
Again, actions speak volumes.
Offenders are their own worst enemies.
By their own words, they also now identify themselves
Just sayin'............
Last edited:
smkovalinksy
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2011
- Messages
- 1,126
I am attempting to limit my posting for the time being as I have a proclivity to get too invested and emotional, which skew's one's perspective and devalues debate. That said, I did want to remark on PMF:
Whether or not it is a hate site is debatable. However, the site has consistently displayed hostility to those who hold a different opinion. Bias is natural, and amounts to point of view, which everyone is entitled to. But to be hostile to new information, and to display an almost religious bias toward the crime's victim, while nearly demonizing Knox and Sollecito, is bad form, and reveals loss of objectivity and perspective. At the crux is the lack of respect for the court's review. They do not even make a pretense of being open to changing their minds about the defendants, no matter what new facts are brought to light.
I must admit Bruce Fisher is a man after my own heart: He repays good with good and evil with evil, and is open and robust about his loves and hates. There is something wonderful and honest about his candor. He does not hold to that tepid and insipid neutrality which is lacking in spirit.
PMF's stance is similar to the Duke professors who, once the case against the lacrosse players had collapsed, not only did not apologize, but clung to their original beliefs about guilt, voicing them even louder and more shrilly. One mother of one of the originally accused players wrote to a professor of African American studies at Duke, after the case had collapsed. She said she forgave this professor's vicious indictment, and was sure that in his heart he had only been seeking truth and justice - and said she hoped now he could open his heart to the players' innocence. His response was to tell her her email was nothing but "LIES!" and that she was, in the end, only a "mother of a farm-animal." The collective professorial overarching ideal said the lacrosse players should be guilty, regardless of the facts, because it supported their transcendent idealism; - this is exactly what you have on pmf.
This is not objectivity, and cannot be respected on a skeptical site. They will never change their minds, and have no desire to do so.
This makes me wonder what RoseMontague believes is accomplished by posting there. It would seem only to prove that "one can be accepted", as clearly it will make no difference in the end. No open debate which leads to a different conclusion is facilitated therein; hence, it is "impotent, and a misfortune", as Sartre says.
Whether or not it is a hate site is debatable. However, the site has consistently displayed hostility to those who hold a different opinion. Bias is natural, and amounts to point of view, which everyone is entitled to. But to be hostile to new information, and to display an almost religious bias toward the crime's victim, while nearly demonizing Knox and Sollecito, is bad form, and reveals loss of objectivity and perspective. At the crux is the lack of respect for the court's review. They do not even make a pretense of being open to changing their minds about the defendants, no matter what new facts are brought to light.
I must admit Bruce Fisher is a man after my own heart: He repays good with good and evil with evil, and is open and robust about his loves and hates. There is something wonderful and honest about his candor. He does not hold to that tepid and insipid neutrality which is lacking in spirit.
PMF's stance is similar to the Duke professors who, once the case against the lacrosse players had collapsed, not only did not apologize, but clung to their original beliefs about guilt, voicing them even louder and more shrilly. One mother of one of the originally accused players wrote to a professor of African American studies at Duke, after the case had collapsed. She said she forgave this professor's vicious indictment, and was sure that in his heart he had only been seeking truth and justice - and said she hoped now he could open his heart to the players' innocence. His response was to tell her her email was nothing but "LIES!" and that she was, in the end, only a "mother of a farm-animal." The collective professorial overarching ideal said the lacrosse players should be guilty, regardless of the facts, because it supported their transcendent idealism; - this is exactly what you have on pmf.
This is not objectivity, and cannot be respected on a skeptical site. They will never change their minds, and have no desire to do so.
This makes me wonder what RoseMontague believes is accomplished by posting there. It would seem only to prove that "one can be accepted", as clearly it will make no difference in the end. No open debate which leads to a different conclusion is facilitated therein; hence, it is "impotent, and a misfortune", as Sartre says.
Bruce Fischer
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2010
- Messages
- 1,584
Last edited by a moderator:
Sherlock Holmes
Muse
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2010
- Messages
- 931
I also have to say the same - way the go RoseMontague
- Status