posted
Tom, that's a different discussion entirely. I don't really know if the distinction would be possibly outside the abstract, of course.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
When Lebanon was partitioned off from Syria, all Christians in Syria were forced to leave and go to Syria. Of course, not all Muslims were forced to leave Lebanon, which is why Lebanon became such a mess. But the Christians weren't killed. It wasn't genocide, despite the fact that "Christian Syrian" became a null set.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Which is why I prefer to say that Lisa believes the Palestinians should be removed or killed.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Which is a really annoying tendency you have - to apply your beliefs about likely consequences to someone else's policy preferences and then say that that person supports the outcome you think likely.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Which is why I prefer to say that Lisa believes the Palestinians should be removed or killed.
Or you could say that Lisa believes the Palestinian Arabs (important qualification, btw, because "Palestinian" includes all the Jews living there as well) should be abducted by aliens, or tickled with feather boas until they wet themselves, or any other thing that you might make up that I've never said and that I've denied supporting.
I mean, as long as you want to be an idiot about it, that is.
Or you could, you know, just take what I say about what I believe at face value, and stop attributing your beliefs about my beliefs to me.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am with Dags on this issue, at least as far as I have heard so far. I don't think it is wrong to withhold support for people trying to kill you, nor do I think they usually target civilians.
But I do understand why this is such a hard topic to discuss.....because neither side is willing to grant the others an inch. Israel has tried that, and it usually has been a bad idea, and the Arabs (the specific ones we are talking about, however you want to name them) are only looking for a better base from which to attack.
If the same situation happened here in the US, we probably wouldn't have any better way of dealing with it, as it seems to be a true catch-22.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
your wrong there if soemthing similar happened to Fortress Americana the US would've responded with as much force as deemed necessary to eliminate the threat regradless of how it would have looks or what the world would have thought.
Israel is in a harder position, it is in a position where it is at least trying to have good foreign relations with people and not be the target of the umpteenth UN sanction correspondingly vetoed by the US.
IP: Logged |
quote:Or you could say that Lisa believes the Palestinian Arabs (important qualification, btw, because "Palestinian" includes all the Jews living there as well) should be abducted by aliens, or tickled with feather boas until they wet themselves, or any other thing that you might make up that I've never said and that I've denied supporting.
Abducted by aliens, of course, constitutes removal. Torturing them as a matter of policy -- with feather boas or otherwise -- until they "voluntarily" leave, given that you're a Randian, would also constitute a form of removal.
quote:Or you could, you know, just take what I say about what I believe at face value...
I do. Frankly, you're being very disingenuous here about what you have in the past said "at face value."
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Abducted by aliens, of course, constitutes removal. Torturing them as a matter of policy -- with feather boas or otherwise -- until they "voluntarily" leave, given that you're a Randian, would also constitute a form of removal.
Yes, Tom, but someone saying that the want a particular thing to happen does not mean that they support all ways of achieving that thing.
It'd be like accusing someone who wants to see more kidneys available for transplant of favoring mandatory harvesting of kidneys of unwilling donors.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Or you could say that Lisa believes the Palestinian Arabs (important qualification, btw, because "Palestinian" includes all the Jews living there as well) should be abducted by aliens, or tickled with feather boas until they wet themselves, or any other thing that you might make up that I've never said and that I've denied supporting.
Abducted by aliens, of course, constitutes removal. Torturing them as a matter of policy -- with feather boas or otherwise -- until they "voluntarily" leave, given that you're a Randian, would also constitute a form of removal.
I said until they wet themselves. Not until they leave. Read what I wrote, Tom, and not what you invent.
Also, I'm an Objectivist. I'm most certainly not a Randian.
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:Or you could, you know, just take what I say about what I believe at face value...
I do. Frankly, you're being very disingenuous here about what you have in the past said "at face value."
Cite it or admit that you're lying.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: your wrong there if soemthing similar happened to Fortress Americana the US would've responded with as much force as deemed necessary to eliminate the threat regradless of how it would have looks or what the world would have thought.
Israel is in a harder position, it is in a position where it is at least trying to have good foreign relations with people and not be the target of the umpteenth UN sanction correspondingly vetoed by the US.
Perhaps, perhaps not. I would think it likely, but then again the situations would be a little different.
Flip it around though...put the US in the Palestinians situation....would we allow someone, regardless of their (far) past claim to any plot of land, to establish a country we laid claim to?
I don't think so, even if they paid for the land.
Of course that is a VERY lopsided analogy to say the least, but it does show that there is more than one side to this conflict, and that perhaps BOTH sides feel they are in the right at times, which is why this is such a hard situation to resolve peacefully.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pretty sure the US DOES have a somewhat analagous situation, and they're living in poverty on reservations all over the US right now after centuries of forced marches and slaughter.
It's not totally the same I know, for a lot of reasons, but we have our own terrible legacy to deal with. Marching the American natives around the country whenever we wanted their lands took a massive toll on their way of life and their population count. While it's a much smaller scale in Israel, I think it's impossible to imagine that an Arab Trail of Tears, forcibly removing people who do not want to leave, who are fighting to stay independently, will happen peacefully. This to say nothing of the fact that they have nowhere to go. Israel marches them into the Sinai or Jodan, closes the door behind them and then what? Thousands more will die in camps on Israel's borders while Israel sends bulldozers and settellers into Gaza and the West Bank.
Academically I can make the distinction between a forced exodus and genocide. But specific to this discussion? Such a distinction doesn't exist. We aren't talking academically about the different between cleansing and genocide, we're talking about actual solutions to this problem, aren't we?
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I think it's impossible to imagine that an Arab Trail of Tears, forcibly removing people who do not want to leave, who are fighting to stay independently, will happen peacefully. This to say nothing of the fact that they have nowhere to go. Israel marches them into the Sinai or Jodan, closes the door behind them and then what? Thousands more will die in camps on Israel's borders while Israel sends bulldozers and settellers into Gaza and the West Bank.
Academically I can make the distinction between a forced exodus and genocide. But specific to this discussion? Such a distinction doesn't exist. We aren't talking academically about the different between cleansing and genocide, we're talking about actual solutions to this problem, aren't we?
It's one thing to argue that this is what will happen, therefore Israel should not embark upon this project. That happens to be my reason for thinking it's a horrible idea.
It's another to say that those who disagree with us about the possibility of removing them without having a de facto genocide desire that de facto genocide to happen, which is essentially what Tom has done.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
But with Lisa it's hard to give her the benefit of the doubt. Given her comments in the past, and her view of Palestinian Arabs, I really have to wonder if she wouldn't be okay with the price that'd have to be paid to implement such a move. I won't go so far as to actually assign beliefs upon her, I think academically you're right about assigning beliefs based on what will probably happen even if something seems like a good idea without the consequences, but I'm also extremely skeptical of much of what Lisa says; it has to be reconciled with past statements.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: Pretty sure the US DOES have a somewhat analagous situation, and they're living in poverty on reservations all over the US right now after centuries of forced marches and slaughter.
It's both unjust and plain incorrect to compare the Palestinian Arabs to the American Indians. The Europeans who conquered America were not the people who were kicked out of it prior to a bloody Indian conquest.
That said, if the Indians had committed the sort of atrocities against the US that the Palestinian Arabs have against Israel, there probably wouldn't be an Indian left to tell the story. And I'm not talking about expulsion, either.
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: This to say nothing of the fact that they have nowhere to go.
Yes, they do. There's plenty of room in the Sinai. Hell, have you looked at the population densities in either Egypt or Jordan?
Far as I'm concerned, they can go back to Arabia.
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: Israel marches them into the Sinai or Jodan, closes the door behind them and then what? Thousands more will die in camps on Israel's borders while Israel sends bulldozers and settellers into Gaza and the West Bank.
Nope. No "settlers". Just Israelis, living in Israel. No having to install iron grates over our windshields to protect us from cinderblocks thrown at our cars. No need any more to install bulletproof windows on our cars and buses. No expensive bypass roads to take us around hostile areas. We can have normal trashcans in public areas, instead of the incredibly expensive bomb-proof ones that don't hold very much. If we forget a bag at a busstop, we can go back for it without worrying that the bomb squad is already there. We can go into an air conditioned mall on a brutally hot day without having to spend 20 minutes waiting in line at the door as guards check our bags for bombs.
Basically, we can live normal lives. Not lives under siege. Not lives lived in fear. Sounds like an excellent situation to me.
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: Academically I can make the distinction between a forced exodus and genocide. But specific to this discussion? Such a distinction doesn't exist. We aren't talking academically about the different between cleansing and genocide, we're talking about actual solutions to this problem, aren't we?
We're talking about the difference between amputation, which has risk associated with it, and dying painfully of drawn out gangrene. And note that the risk diminishes according to the behavior of the Palestinian Arabs.
You know, I'm actually even willing to pay them. Granted, that might be a very bad idea, because even suggesting it might indicate to them that it's an acknowledgement that we're wronging them, rather than a gift given out of good will, and in hopes that they'll be able to use the money to live good lives.
This article points out that Israel spends about $150 billion every 10 years to counter internal Arab threats. As Feiglin points out, "That money is enough to give every Arab family in Yesha $250,000". Note, btw, that the article mistakenly translates "Yesha" as "Gaza". It's actually a Hebrew acronym for "Judea, Samaria and Gaza".
So, we give them a choice: leave voluntarily for a quarter of a million dollars cash, tax free, or leave involuntarily and get nothing.
Now that sounds like a peace plan to me.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I agree mostly.
But with Lisa it's hard to give her the benefit of the doubt. Given her comments in the past, and her view of Palestinian Arabs, I really have to wonder if she wouldn't be okay with the price that'd have to be paid to implement such a move. I won't go so far as to actually assign beliefs upon her, I think academically you're right about assigning beliefs based on what will probably happen even if something seems like a good idea without the consequences, but I'm also extremely skeptical of much of what Lisa says; it has to be reconciled with past statements.
The last time you made a claim about my "past statements" and I challenged you to cite it or retract it, you basically retracted it, though extremely grudgingly. Should we do that again?
No, I think this time you'll probably stick to vagueness about "past statements" without making any explicitly false claims that you'll only have to eat. Wise move. Not as good as avoiding the vague implications, which are false as well, but better than out and out lies.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
No genocide. No ethnic cleansing. Isaac and Ishmael, no one's leaving camp this time. I'm not concerned about how long it takes.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
How much money would it take for all the Israelis to leave? Couldn't they also just take the money and walk away?
For some reason, everybody would prefer to stay and kill each other.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Its because israel is the rightful land of the Jewish people, why should they leave? They were already forced out by Romans, they came back after the world tried to purge them from existence why should they leave?
IP: Logged |
quote:It's both unjust and plain incorrect to compare the Palestinian Arabs to the American Indians. The Europeans who conquered America were not the people who were kicked out of it prior to a bloody Indian conquest.
That said, if the Indians had committed the sort of atrocities against the US that the Palestinian Arabs have against Israel, there probably wouldn't be an Indian left to tell the story. And I'm not talking about expulsion, either.
I'm going to ignore the whole Israel being the land of god's chosen people bit, because it's something you'll never, ever convince me with, and it's something I'll never talk you out of, so why waste our breath?
I'm talking about the situation involving a forced march and displacing internal populations of people, I'm not comparing the entire US/Indian relationship to the entire Arab/Israeli situation throughout history and today.
quote:Yes, they do. There's plenty of room in the Sinai. Hell, have you looked at the population densities in either Egypt or Jordan?
Far as I'm concerned, they can go back to Arabia.
Yeah that's my point, you don't really care where they go, so long as they aren't in your way. Would you care if they all died in the desert? No one would take them all in. They'd either have to force their way in, visiting a massive crisis upon whichever country they more or less invade, or they'd have to start somewhere from scratch. There's plenty of room in Israel too, it's not a matter of space.
quote:Nope. No "settlers". Just Israelis, living in Israel.
Parse the words whatever way you want, you'll boot them out the back door and then move right in on your new digs. It'll look horribly callous.
quote:You know, I'm actually even willing to pay them. Granted, that might be a very bad idea, because even suggesting it might indicate to them that it's an acknowledgement that we're wronging them, rather than a gift given out of good will, and in hopes that they'll be able to use the money to live good lives.
So, we give them a choice: leave voluntarily for a quarter of a million dollars cash, tax free, or leave involuntarily and get nothing.
Now that sounds like a peace plan to me.
That on the other hand, might come closer to working. If you give them a real means with which to live their lives and build a new society in whatever place you dump them, it could make such a plan viable, and considerably less bloody.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:The last time you made a claim about my "past statements" and I challenged you to cite it or retract it, you basically retracted it, though extremely grudgingly. Should we do that again?
No, I think this time you'll probably stick to vagueness about "past statements" without making any explicitly false claims that you'll only have to eat. Wise move. Not as good as avoiding the vague implications, which are false as well, but better than out and out lies.
At least twice now, when you've called me a liar, I've contradicted that with previous statements of yours that clearly do not jive. I'm sick of you saying something, then denying it, then calling anyone a liar who calls you on it.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: ... No genocide. No ethnic cleansing. Isaac and Ishmael, no one's leaving camp this time. I'm not concerned about how long it takes.
When (or if) the situation deteriorates to the extent that genocide or ethnic cleansing are real possibilities, I'm sure that one of the last things that will be relevant to either the Palestinian Muslims or Israelis will be your concern or your fiat to behave Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: It's one thing to argue that this is what will happen, therefore Israel should not embark upon this project. That happens to be my reason for thinking it's a horrible idea.
It's another to say that those who disagree with us about the possibility of removing them without having a de facto genocide desire that de facto genocide to happen, which is essentially what Tom has done.
In fairness, Tom isn't exactly the only one suggesting there's inevitable consequences to a particular plan or course of action, here.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was thinking about the treatment of the US Indian population and our history with them when I wrote my post, but there were enough loaded statements floating around out there that I didn't feel the need to draw a direct comparison.
Blayne..should the indigenous people of Canada want their land back would you have a problem leaving your home to them? Because it WAS their land first...
When talking about claims of who lived where first, there comes a point of diminishing return regarding property rights. Almost every culture has taken their land from someone else. I know that if some Indian tribe wanted the land I owned I would fight them tooth and nail to keep it, despite the fact that my family has only been in the US for about 250 years.
The point is that we are suppose to be doing things differently these days to prevent the cycle of violence from continuing.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just find it amusing that the ad at the bottom of this page is for a Muslim-oriented dating service...
Posts: 3658 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
No genocide. No ethnic cleansing. Isaac and Ishmael, no one's leaving camp this time. I'm not concerned about how long it takes.
No offensive, Scott, but who cares what you have to say about it? You're just a bystander. And we have no obligation to wait while they learn how to get along.
You can continue with your inane position that "we" have to learn how to get along, as though we haven't bent over backwards to do just that, but it just makes you look like you're not paying attention.
They do need to learn how to get along. But they won't. So they have to leave.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Sterling: In fairness, Tom isn't exactly the only one suggesting there's inevitable consequences to a particular plan or course of action, here.
Tom is, however, the only person who has blatantly claimed that I advocate genocide, which is a bald-faced lie, but which he supports based on his belief in inevitable consequences.
If I'm mistaken, and there are others who have made this claim, they're liars as well, and I apologize for overlooking their dishonesty.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by Kwea: I was thinking about the treatment of the US Indian population and our history with them when I wrote my post, but there were enough loaded statements floating around out there that I didn't feel the need to draw a direct comparison.
Blayne..should the indigenous people of Canada want their land back would you have a problem leaving your home to them? Because it WAS their land first...
When talking about claims of who lived where first, there comes a point of diminishing return regarding property rights. Almost every culture has taken their land from someone else. I know that if some Indian tribe wanted the land I owned I would fight them tooth and nail to keep it, despite the fact that my family has only been in the US for about 250 years.
The point is that we are suppose to be doing things differently these days to prevent the cycle of violence from continuing.
There are huge differences on of them is that the Israeli's actually got their land back and are a nation state.
IP: Logged |
quote:The last time you made a claim about my "past statements" and I challenged you to cite it or retract it, you basically retracted it, though extremely grudgingly. Should we do that again?
No, I think this time you'll probably stick to vagueness about "past statements" without making any explicitly false claims that you'll only have to eat. Wise move. Not as good as avoiding the vague implications, which are false as well, but better than out and out lies.
At least twice now, when you've called me a liar, I've contradicted that with previous statements of yours that clearly do not jive. I'm sick of you saying something, then denying it, then calling anyone a liar who calls you on it.
Jibe. Not jive. And no, you have not.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
No genocide. No ethnic cleansing. Isaac and Ishmael, no one's leaving camp this time. I'm not concerned about how long it takes.
No offensive, Scott, but who cares what you have to say about it? You're just a bystander. And we have no obligation to wait while they learn how to get along.
It doesn't matter what other people think about me, Lisa. It only matters what I think.
quote:You can continue with your inane position that "we" have to learn how to get along, as though we haven't bent over backwards to do just that, but it just makes you look like you're not paying attention.
They do need to learn how to get along. But they won't. So they have to leave.
No. They really don't. Wave your arms around, scream and cry, be insulting, lobby, do whatever you please, they do not have to leave.
Neither should Israelis be forced to leave.
I do not grant that the land belongs exclusively to the Jews. I believe they have a place there, the same way EVERYONE has a place there, or anywhere. I'm not concerned with previous claims to the land, no matter how old they are, or who the Owner was.
I don't know that Israel has handled the situation badly. I know that your demands, Lisa, are horrific and immoral.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Abducted by aliens, of course, constitutes removal. Torturing them as a matter of policy -- with feather boas or otherwise -- until they "voluntarily" leave, given that you're a Randian, would also constitute a form of removal.
Yes, Tom, but someone saying that the want a particular thing to happen does not mean that they support all ways of achieving that thing.
It'd be like accusing someone who wants to see more kidneys available for transplant of favoring mandatory harvesting of kidneys of unwilling donors.
Incidentally that's not a bad idea....
I'll let the victims know who to thank Dag.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Or you could, you know, just take what I say about what I believe at face value...
I do. Frankly, you're being very disingenuous here about what you have in the past said "at face value."
Cite it or admit that you're lying.
As if those were the only two options.
I'd just like to go on record as saying that I'm quite sure I remember Lisa saying that all Palestinians want the destruction of Israel, and that since they wouldn't change their minds, the only solution would be for them to be dead. Can I cite it? No, in part because I can't remember exactly what words she used, and in part because given the volatility of these threads, there's a good possibility that it's been deleted. What it comes down to is that it's Lisa's present word against the word of those who say they saw it. We don't need to "take it back." What a childish sentiment anyway.
In any case, I guess I view it as progress that Lisa now claims she isn't in favor of genocide.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: Heck, Mucus, they don't care now.
This is true. Although I must admit curiosity. If you know that they won't care then why issue the instructions? Was it to relieve stress? Was it a prediction (i.e. this is what is going to happen, get resigned to it)?
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: Yeah that's my point, you don't really care where they go, so long as they aren't in your way. Would you care if they all died in the desert?
Actually, believe it or not, yes, I would. So would the rest of Israel. While I'm sure there'd be some voices opposing dropping aid packages for them, I think they'd lose. On the whole, we'd care every bit as much as we'd care for any other population in distress, if they were in distress. Of course, with a quarter million bucks per family, I doubt they'd be in distress.
What? You think we're like them? You think we'd hold a grudge? Honest to God, Lyrhawn, we don't wish them ill; we just want them to leave us alone.
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
quote:Nope. No "settlers". Just Israelis, living in Israel.
Parse the words whatever way you want, you'll boot them out the back door and then move right in on your new digs. It'll look horribly callous.
There's a point at which acting for our own self-preservation is going to have to trump "looking callous". Hell, Lyrhawn, do you honestly think there's anyone out there who would be okay with us kicking them out, but not okay with us moving in afterwards? No. The people who would find it horribly callous would be so busy frothing at the mouth about the expulsion that our moving in would hardly be noticeable.
But then, you know, after a while, they might start to notice that the world was a bit calmer. The more intelligent among them might even start to draw conclusions from that.
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
quote:You know, I'm actually even willing to pay them. Granted, that might be a very bad idea, because even suggesting it might indicate to them that it's an acknowledgement that we're wronging them, rather than a gift given out of good will, and in hopes that they'll be able to use the money to live good lives.
So, we give them a choice: leave voluntarily for a quarter of a million dollars cash, tax free, or leave involuntarily and get nothing.
Now that sounds like a peace plan to me.
That on the other hand, might come closer to working. If you give them a real means with which to live their lives and build a new society in whatever place you dump them, it could make such a plan viable, and considerably less bloody.
Sounds cool to me. I'd prefer less blood and violence.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The last time you made a claim about my "past statements" and I challenged you to cite it or retract it, you basically retracted it, though extremely grudgingly. Should we do that again?
No, I think this time you'll probably stick to vagueness about "past statements" without making any explicitly false claims that you'll only have to eat. Wise move. Not as good as avoiding the vague implications, which are false as well, but better than out and out lies.
At least twice now, when you've called me a liar, I've contradicted that with previous statements of yours that clearly do not jive. I'm sick of you saying something, then denying it, then calling anyone a liar who calls you on it.
Jibe. Not jive. And no, you have not.
Really? Prove me wrong, or retract that statement.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Glenn Arnold: I'd just like to go on record as saying that I'm quite sure I remember Lisa saying that all Palestinians want the destruction of Israel, and that since they wouldn't change their minds, the only solution would be for them to be dead.
My only question, then, would be whether you are lying intentionally, or whether you're simply mistaken. Even if you're mistaken, I'd class it as intellectual laziness, because I'm quite certain that I've been accused of that enough times, and pointed out that it isn't true enough times, that only a fool or a knave would be able to continue making the claim.
So Glenn... which are you?
quote:Originally posted by Glenn Arnold: Can I cite it? No, in part because I can't remember exactly what words she used, and in part because given the volatility of these threads, there's a good possibility that it's been deleted. What it comes down to is that it's Lisa's present word against the word of those who say they saw it. We don't need to "take it back." What a childish sentiment anyway.
It's a childish sentiment to demand that a libelous and vicious lie be retracted? What about all of the threads where you defended pedophilia as a "legitimate expression of love"?
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
A wrong statement is not necessarily a lie. What do you see behind Glenn and Lyrhawn's claims that would lead you to believe that they are intentionally making false statements about you?
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Read the sentence in my previous post that starts "Even if you're mistaken". Asked and answered. You don't attribute support for genocide to someone lightly if you have the slightest moral sense.
I've been denying this lie for years here. Every time it comes up in the face of those denials, it becomes more and more obvious that the people making the claim are being less than honest.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:It's a childish sentiment to demand that a libelous and vicious lie be retracted?
Words cannot be retracted, which is exactly the problem you're having with yours.
The problem is, I never said what you're claiming.
You know, you can go back several years on Usenet and find imbeciles like Tom and Lyrhawn and yourself making the same libelous claims. And me denying them. You're suggesting that even after I was denying those claims, I was -- again -- advocating genocide here. That's stupid even for you, Glenn.
And let me add that someone like you, who has repeatedly said that "rape just isn't such a big deal" is really in no position to be casting aspersions on other people.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
I don't delete my posts, Lyrhawn. If I'd said it, you'd have been able to find it by now. You can't, because I didn't. Instead, you did exactly what Tom did. You took what I did say, reformulated it in your own mind to include what you feel are inevitable, or at least highly likely outcomes, and have attributed the result to me.
You know as well as I do that even if you're too lazy to bother searching, there are umpteen dozen other people on this forum who have already done the search since this current disagreement began, and who would have been only too happy to post a link to it had they found anything.
It may have been a misrememberance the first time. Even the second time. But now you're just a damned liar.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:You're suggesting that even after I was denying those claims, I was -- again -- advocating genocide here.
quote:In any case, I guess I view it as progress that Lisa now claims she isn't in favor of genocide.
What's your point? I was denying it on Usenet years before I even joined Hatrack. For you to honestly think I'd advocate genocide here after I'd had to deal with morons like you on Usenet before that, you're wackier than I thought.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:It's another to say that those who disagree with us about the possibility of removing them without having a de facto genocide desire that de facto genocide to happen, which is essentially what Tom has done.
Not quite. I don't for a minute think that Lisa desires that a genocide occur. I think she is willing to keep genocide on the table as a possible solution, however, should all else fail.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
