If we find out that, indeed, Saddam was bribing Russia and France, then it would appear to me that the "world opinion" argument evaporates. After all, the mass of humanity are sheep whose passions are easily directed. An appropriate UN vote, the appropriate encouragement of the press on the part of these and other governments and we have a popular war of liberation.
rikzilla
Ninja wave: Atomic fire-breath ninja
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2001
- Messages
- 5,009
The Fool said:
Shut yer pie-hole Fool. There are lots of use for quotations...sometimes they are used merely as a tool to highlight a word or phrase. Skeptic never once said that those were your exact words, nor did he use the Originally posted by The Fool tag. You are full of bluster and crap. I'm no psychic, but my Quija board tells me quite clearly that the mods will take no positive action against Skeptic. He has done nothing more than point up the gist of all your earlier Iraq posts. Or is it that you deny supporting Saddam's right to remain sovereign of Iraq?
The fact is, your post of heart-rending support for the Iraqi people was so out of character for you that it amounted to a level of naked hypocracy rarely seen on ANY JREF forum.
Let us just be clear here,...Skeptic was not making this stuff up. You have been one of the most active apologists for terrorism of all kinds on this forum for so long that even if you did not say the words that Skeptic placed in quotation marks, you've certainly inferred such sentiments. For you to now cry about being "libelled" on the issue of inferences gleaned from your unwavering support for Saddam's right to rule Iraq is just another facet of your astonishing penchant for hypocracy.
Let me give you a little piece of advice Fool....running to moderators because someone read your posts and baldly called a spade a spade doesn't make you look like an injured party. These mods know you, they've read your posts...I have no doubt that some of them are as stunned by your "I'll have my cake and eat it too" approach to the Iraqi situation as the rest of us are.
Boo-hoo. Take your toys and go home. Skeptic could have gone one further and called you an "antisemite" based on your posting history. He and I didn't because you have yet to make your stunning "support for the people of Israel" post. When/if you do, don't worry...someone will be there to remind you of your past posting of antisemitic myths.
<iframe width="100%" height="400" src="http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&action=showpost&postid=1870355965"></iframe>
If you were so concerned as you say with Jewish "dehumanising and belittling people outside of the sect, describing them as subhuman, pigs and dog etc is still regarded as acceptable material to be teaching to young people as "religious law". <------------Notice the direct quote
Then when you are challenged, instead of staying and admitting you were wrong, you merely fled and pulled a Shemp/Baghdad Bob. This is the act of an antisemite Fool. Therefore I infer the THE FOOL IS AN ANTISEMITE. Please feel free to report me to a moderator, it would be interesting to see if you possess the cojones to examine my conclusion in the presence of moderators. Perhaps we could also get Cleo and Renata to offer their thoughts?
No it's not. This forum has unfailingly supported the concept of free speech...only when something has been plainly against the rules has it been removed. You yourself got JK ejected for cause. He deserved it. This time you're in the wrong, not Skeptic.
-z
Tell me, "Fool": remember when--a few months ago--"A Unique Person" claimed, quite literally, that I am a murderer (or at least an accessory to it)? That was the one and only post I ever reported to a moderator, and I posted as much in my reply to him. You replied to my protest in that thread.
As usual, you took the "moral high ground", your favorite place in the world, and told me to shut up and not complain;claimed that I am just being "hysterical", that I am trying to quash AUP's "freedom of speech", that I should respect freedom of speech just like you do, blah blah blah. Now, all of a sudden, you are shocked--SHOCKED!--that such language as "'The Fool' is a Hypocrite who couldn't care less if Iraqis die as long as he could blame Bush for it" is allowed on the forum, a statement richly supported by the evidence.
Way to go, "Fool": you reply to my criticism that--given your past record--you are a hypocrite about Iraq, with a complaint to the moderators, which merely exposes you--given your past record--as a hypocrite about free speech, as well.
Well, sorry about that, "Fool"; I keep forgetting you came to this forum to DISPENSE criticism, like a good "liberal" should, not, God forbid, to RECIEVE criticism. That is a no-no; it implies you might not know everything, which is not allowed. Your job here, after all, is to show us all how wrong we are about everything, how racist and evil we are, in your exalted position as a "fighter for human rights and against racism" (from behind your computer screen in comfortable Australia, of course). Whatever gave plebians like US, who are not even formally liberal, a right to criticize YOU?
P.S.
I cannot speak for the moderators, but they allowed AUP's post to stand, and, in retrospect, perhaps they're right--under the view that even extremely heated political discussion should not be censored on this forum, short of actual threats or the like. I doubt very much that they'd take any action here.
That said, "Fool", perhaps you would have had a better chance convincing the moderators of your point if you had ASKED them politely to remove my post, and have not ORDERED them to do so under the threat that otherwise they "are supporting libel", as you posted on this thread. Are you sure you're not call them "racists", too, if they refuse to act on your demand?
This (sort-of) "real world" behavior on your part ("Do as I say or I'll call you names!") is rather indicative of your true character. In real life, you are an annoying, self-important little twerp who imagines himself infinitely more "morally sensitive" than everybody else, and who thinks this clear "moral superiority" should get everybody to do as he says.
Got it about right, "Fool"?
As usual, you took the "moral high ground", your favorite place in the world, and told me to shut up and not complain;claimed that I am just being "hysterical", that I am trying to quash AUP's "freedom of speech", that I should respect freedom of speech just like you do, blah blah blah. Now, all of a sudden, you are shocked--SHOCKED!--that such language as "'The Fool' is a Hypocrite who couldn't care less if Iraqis die as long as he could blame Bush for it" is allowed on the forum, a statement richly supported by the evidence.
Way to go, "Fool": you reply to my criticism that--given your past record--you are a hypocrite about Iraq, with a complaint to the moderators, which merely exposes you--given your past record--as a hypocrite about free speech, as well.
Well, sorry about that, "Fool"; I keep forgetting you came to this forum to DISPENSE criticism, like a good "liberal" should, not, God forbid, to RECIEVE criticism. That is a no-no; it implies you might not know everything, which is not allowed. Your job here, after all, is to show us all how wrong we are about everything, how racist and evil we are, in your exalted position as a "fighter for human rights and against racism" (from behind your computer screen in comfortable Australia, of course). Whatever gave plebians like US, who are not even formally liberal, a right to criticize YOU?
P.S.
I cannot speak for the moderators, but they allowed AUP's post to stand, and, in retrospect, perhaps they're right--under the view that even extremely heated political discussion should not be censored on this forum, short of actual threats or the like. I doubt very much that they'd take any action here.
That said, "Fool", perhaps you would have had a better chance convincing the moderators of your point if you had ASKED them politely to remove my post, and have not ORDERED them to do so under the threat that otherwise they "are supporting libel", as you posted on this thread. Are you sure you're not call them "racists", too, if they refuse to act on your demand?
This (sort-of) "real world" behavior on your part ("Do as I say or I'll call you names!") is rather indicative of your true character. In real life, you are an annoying, self-important little twerp who imagines himself infinitely more "morally sensitive" than everybody else, and who thinks this clear "moral superiority" should get everybody to do as he says.
Got it about right, "Fool"?
The Fool
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2002
- Messages
- 16,508
rik...rikzilla said:
Than you for your valued contribution....Now that you have got that off your chest I wonder if you could answer the simple question, do you feel it is acceptable to fabricate quotes and attribute them to other posters?
I do not recall the thread in question...
Why am I not suprised?
Well, it was in the thread "It's all israel's fault". AUP accused me of murder. I wrote in reply, among other things:
By the way, for once, I reported AUP's post to a moderator.
Whatever y'all think of me, you at least know that I never reported a post to a moderator before--I prefer to hit back myself, if so inclined (figuratively, that is).
But hotly debating politics is one thing, accusing me of being an accessory to war crimes quite another.
Your reply to my complaint? Of course, first you attack me:
I find it amazing that you would get all precious after you have made an art of accusing entire races and religions of mass murder.
Well anyway, that should take up some of hals time in typing "I see no breach of the rules" and "Skeptic" can go back to bashing muslims and arabs and A_U_P can go back to bashing "skeptic" and it all starts again tomorrow........
Quite apart that you knowingly lie about me "accusing entire races of mass murder", you do not even bother to deny AUP accuse me of murder. Instead you accuse me of "getting all precious" about it. So, you respond to AUP's lie about me by claiming I deserve it, and as "proof" make up another lie about me.
My next post in the thread was:
I can't decide for Hal, of course, but it seems to me that insinuating I am a war criminal is quite against the rules, being rather obviously libel.
And your reply? Of course, again, nothing about AUP accusing me of murder; instead, you merely lie about me again and claim my complaint is totally unjustified:
[B}Yet any Arab posters would have to accept being described by you as bloodthirsty killers? Lol...... maybe you should report yourself for 150,000,000 offences of accusing someone of warcrimes....Hypocrite[/B]
So, I'm a "hypocrite" for complaining when someone accuses me of murder; third, I deserve it, anyway.
In sum, when someone ACCUSES ME OF MURDER, I am "Acting all precious" for complaining, while if I use quotation marks in a way you don't approve, you are all sober and deserving.
Hypocrite.
Why am I not suprised?
Well, it was in the thread "It's all israel's fault". AUP accused me of murder. I wrote in reply, among other things:
By the way, for once, I reported AUP's post to a moderator.
Whatever y'all think of me, you at least know that I never reported a post to a moderator before--I prefer to hit back myself, if so inclined (figuratively, that is).
But hotly debating politics is one thing, accusing me of being an accessory to war crimes quite another.
Your reply to my complaint? Of course, first you attack me:
I find it amazing that you would get all precious after you have made an art of accusing entire races and religions of mass murder.
Well anyway, that should take up some of hals time in typing "I see no breach of the rules" and "Skeptic" can go back to bashing muslims and arabs and A_U_P can go back to bashing "skeptic" and it all starts again tomorrow........
Quite apart that you knowingly lie about me "accusing entire races of mass murder", you do not even bother to deny AUP accuse me of murder. Instead you accuse me of "getting all precious" about it. So, you respond to AUP's lie about me by claiming I deserve it, and as "proof" make up another lie about me.
My next post in the thread was:
I can't decide for Hal, of course, but it seems to me that insinuating I am a war criminal is quite against the rules, being rather obviously libel.
And your reply? Of course, again, nothing about AUP accusing me of murder; instead, you merely lie about me again and claim my complaint is totally unjustified:
[B}Yet any Arab posters would have to accept being described by you as bloodthirsty killers? Lol...... maybe you should report yourself for 150,000,000 offences of accusing someone of warcrimes....Hypocrite[/B]
So, I'm a "hypocrite" for complaining when someone accuses me of murder; third, I deserve it, anyway.
In sum, when someone ACCUSES ME OF MURDER, I am "Acting all precious" for complaining, while if I use quotation marks in a way you don't approve, you are all sober and deserving.
Hypocrite.
The Fool
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2002
- Messages
- 16,508
Skeptic...
Did you forget to include the accusation that you are a murderer? I noticed you quoted everything else...you must have just forgotten to include the murder charge eh?
Nowhere in that thread can I find any accusation of murder from anyone directed at anyone...I can find you going off your head about this comment by AUP..
"Skeptic was kind enough to inform us once about how hard it is to drive one of those bulldozers, when we were discussing the death of Rachel Corrie. Naturally, he won't give us any details of what he might have done with that bulldozer, or what he knows is done with them.
Your complaint at the time was that this statement was inferring that you have participated in war crimes.... But Its now turned into an "accusation of murder"...whatever.....
Anyway....all the quotes from me seem accurate. Although you seem to have stopped doing it lately, at that stage you were conducting regular rants about how all arabs are bloodthirsty savages commited to the genocide of Israelis....You gave up denying that you did this when I quoted your words back to you on a regular basis...Its been some time now, are you planning to start denying it again?
I also note that in light of the fact you being unable to support your most recent batch of fabricated quotes you are now describing the fabricating of quotes as "use quotation marks in a way you don't approve" Top marks for creative language....
Did you forget to include the accusation that you are a murderer? I noticed you quoted everything else...you must have just forgotten to include the murder charge eh?
Nowhere in that thread can I find any accusation of murder from anyone directed at anyone...I can find you going off your head about this comment by AUP..
"Skeptic was kind enough to inform us once about how hard it is to drive one of those bulldozers, when we were discussing the death of Rachel Corrie. Naturally, he won't give us any details of what he might have done with that bulldozer, or what he knows is done with them.
Your complaint at the time was that this statement was inferring that you have participated in war crimes.... But Its now turned into an "accusation of murder"...whatever.....
Anyway....all the quotes from me seem accurate. Although you seem to have stopped doing it lately, at that stage you were conducting regular rants about how all arabs are bloodthirsty savages commited to the genocide of Israelis....You gave up denying that you did this when I quoted your words back to you on a regular basis...Its been some time now, are you planning to start denying it again?
I also note that in light of the fact you being unable to support your most recent batch of fabricated quotes you are now describing the fabricating of quotes as "use quotation marks in a way you don't approve" Top marks for creative language....
The Fool
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2002
- Messages
- 16,508
Skeppers...
Something that amused me when I was reading through that thread you refered to...
you said.
"I can't decide for Hal, of course, but it seems to me that insinuating I am a war criminal is quite against the rules, being rather obviously libel."
so you feel that insinuating that someone is a war criminal is libel but you feel that straight out statement ( no insinuation needed) that I want to see as many Iraqis as possible dead is not......Highly amusing.
pot? kettle?
Something that amused me when I was reading through that thread you refered to...
you said.
"I can't decide for Hal, of course, but it seems to me that insinuating I am a war criminal is quite against the rules, being rather obviously libel."
so you feel that insinuating that someone is a war criminal is libel but you feel that straight out statement ( no insinuation needed) that I want to see as many Iraqis as possible dead is not......Highly amusing.
pot? kettle?
gnome
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2001
- Messages
- 14,862
Personally I don't condone any of the argumentative statements that seem to have derailed this thread... but nothing I have read rises to the level of libel.
To be libel, it has to ACTUALLY harm one's reputation, as opposed to being insulting or offensive. Since we're all pretty much anonymous here, I don't think we're staking our reputation at all.
To be libel, it has to ACTUALLY harm one's reputation, as opposed to being insulting or offensive. Since we're all pretty much anonymous here, I don't think we're staking our reputation at all.