Why Hypewaders Suspended Quadraphonics

indeed
he nailed the liberal kooks agenda right on the head......

absolutely brilliant!
busted!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

@Sam

Yeah? And? I read the post as well at the thread in real time. So he called you a bitch. He also told PJ or someone else to 'fuck off'. Another short and pithy to the point statement that reflects well on the thread at large and the kind of circular arguments used by those who spurt their cum all over the palestinian-israeli issue. You all know who you are and you are intelligent enough to know what he was doing.

But hey people have to rub their genitals on something right

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Indeed. I have no problem with quadraphonics making excuses for Israeli apartheid or aggression. Shouting bitch! or fucker! doesn't really add to the argument except as a demonstration of a temporary loss of control. Apartheid is still apartheid no matter how hard you press the antisemitism horn everytime it looks like there is increasing support for Palestinians. Addressing the issue of point blank shooting of civilians with the threat of the total extermination of Jews or likening a civil rights movement and equal representation with the final solution is not conducive to "productivity" either.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Now you're playing purposely naive. You know and he knows that he wasn't excusing anything. You know and he knows that he is illustrating the rigidity of those who claim that they are all in tears over the palestinians and then devise little mental boxes where they don't actually have to take a balanced realistic look at the situation.

Rhetoric isn't analysis.

 

What I am surprised at is the constant claim of rigidity being somehow a bad thing when it comes to human rights - like I've said often enough, how many apologists do you see for Nazism/apartheid/racism/slavery

Sometimes, its good to have only one point of view. Equal representation and equal opportunity happens to be a couple of them.

I'm not sure what the "other side" of apartheid is, which invites flexibility.

 

No Sam. That's not what was being suggested. Dig deeper. If they indeed claim to want this to be an 'intelligent community' then you cannot run politics and world events as if it were a high school discussion board. Do you think you find rhetoric being used on Chatham house site? No. You are not discussing or even defending human rights. Its all rhetorical banter with the black and white characterizations that people are passing off as 'analysis' and actual discussion when its not. Placards are for the front of embassies not discussion boards.

How can you speak of 'inviting flexibility'?

You can be completely inflexible on this issue. COMPLETELY INFLEXIBLE in terms of intellectual objectivity. It doesn't help the discussion it keeps it entrenched. He was simply mocking what goes on in those threads all the time and he did so brilliantly.

 

I think the rhetoric itself is a sign of the general malaise that affects discussion of this topic. We have intelligent human beings from secular societies defending discrmination based on race and religion where the victims are not even permitted the basic human right of self defense without being held responsible for their own state. Imagine a thread on rape where the discussion centers on the culpability of the victim in her own debasement/torture/dehumanisation and where those who oppose rape have to look askance at the defenders of rapists as they invoke rhetoric after rhetoric which is morally indefensible and expect the opposers of rape to accept that the victim is equally complicit in his/her own condition. Where the length of the skirt, the width of the come hither smile and the degree of moisture in the vagina is examined in greater detail than the actions and motivations of the rapist. In such discussions, the rule will be of rhetoric, because there is no rationality to impress with facts.

 

But you know what Sam it is all high school after all. I mean they are more concerned with who said 'fuck you' and the who said 'bitch' and 'polite' discussion NO MATTER WHO INANE to care in the slightest what the quality of the discussion really is.

PJ for example shouldn't even be allowed to enter such debates. He should be forced into the kiddies forum where they obliged to read about the UN, argument construction and sentence structure.

Its all a big fucking joke. Look at Morad or whatever the hell he's called, he should be sent to the kiddies room for regular spankings and 'time outs'.

But no they ban Quad for doing what the assholes do all the time.

Quad wasn't picking on you Sam, he expects you to rise to the occasion, something he KNOWS is impossible with some of the others.

 

You want to defend Human Rights then get your ass to one of these:

8 July 2002
The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, from Peace Process to Peace Settlement: What Can Others Do?

A conference organized by The Royal Institute of International Affairs and The Egyptian Council for Foreign Affairs

Monday 8 July 2002, Chatham House, London

Speakers from the Middle East, United States and Europe will analyse the current situation and discuss international involvement in a potential peace settlement.
KEYNOTE ADDRESS
HRH Prince El Hassan bin Talal Jordan
KEYNOTE ADDRESS
HE Dr Mustafa M. El Feki Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Egyptian People's Assembly

http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/news/view/-/id/51/

But don't think you can just walk in there and spew platitudes of 'jewishness' and the evil Israeli's and squatter jews and expect anyone to take you seriously. The discussion always has a waft of middle-class wannabe activists spewing 'down with the man' and all that. Having little park sit ins where they sing Kumbaya and feel all revolutionary and shit when they barely can get their minds around the issues at hand never mind decipher the complexities.

That's not what we should be aiming at here.

And yes Hype you should be ashamed of encouraging such low-rent discussion just because it satisfies your own opinions on the subject. Silencing the opposition is not the same as elevating the discussion. Remember when you started the israeli-palestinian thread and I offered three links that analyzed the issue regionally, one from the israeli side and another from the Palestinian side? Do you think anyone took the time to read them? Do you think for one second that anyone was interested in learning more about the issue, absorbing more information or taking a look at what issues the 'other side' has to work through? Do you think they did? Do you think they would have resourced it to enhance the discussion? Do you? Why would they when there's always wiki!

They prefer to sit in their comfort zone thinking what they've always thought and never challenging it nor even looking at the issue from a global perspective. Its all just bullshit that don't amount to a hill of beans under cow dung. Its all drown out your oppositions voice and repeat, repeat, repeat and never answer a direct question.

Oh the intelligence is really really growing around here...if you are deaf, dumb and blind.

 

This is a discussion forum, there shouldn't be any aim except to rationally discuss the issues. After 4 years of discussion, my highlight is having an American soldier tell me that he completely understands why Iraqis would defend themselves under occupation, after all, that is exactly what Americans would do if they were attacked. I actually felt tearful at this sign of rationality. Thats how low my expectations have become

I didn't think he was. I can tell when he's being specific he's not exactly shy.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Sam you have on many occasions failed to show the slightest rationality on this issue as well as others. You my friend are being full of shit, stop pretending as if you have your white gloves on and this is an Emily Post dinner party.

I mean never mind the soldier, you want to discuss 'toes'?:bugeye:

 

For some reason people find analogies offensive here. Its very bizarre. I always use semantic or logical arguments which can be independetly and objectively challenged.

Its a perfectly valid method of argumentation as Billy T demonstrated and quad had no reason to go berserk unless he recognised the argument as a valid one and found it subjectively offensive.

 

You do WHAT? Pull the wool over someone else's eyes why don't you! You are capable of using that and sometimes you do, but mostly on that particular issue you troll your way through. Sorry but that's the truth.

Quad has said before that he finds the entire fashion of discussion to be offensive it has nothing to do with the particular event, its not like he hasn't been there before.

You are truly delusional if you think you actually in reality 'use semantic or logical arguments which can be blah blah blah.

You won't even answer direct questions. You avoid and distract at best so don't pretend as if you are up for 'independent and objective challenges'. Its bullshit.

 

Sam, he was parodying your style. Lucy sees it. I see it. If this is a flip-out, then what have you been doing all this time?

I just wanted to isolate and cite this bit for reference: the "PJ-Geoff banning issue" was about specific statements he made regarding the protest against the Israeli ship docking at Oakland. As a comparison of fact, they actually have nothing to do with the dispute between me, PJ and the forum.

The rest is also unsubstantiated, unless you'd care to argue it again.

 

When was he parodying me? When he told Billy T to piss up a rope? When he abused hype? Or when he called me a bitch?

As Billy T put it:

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2569262&postcount=1730

Both Billy T and hype are unequivocally two of the most soft spoken and gracious posters on sciforums. They both abstain from verbal abuse of the people they debate [just like I do although I'm blunt to the point of rudeness]. To respond to them the way quad did qualifies as "flipping out"

 

Well, the personal insults are regrettable. Then again, you've called me "retarded", among other things. Bells likes "coward", "hand-wringer" and "princess" (presumably...because I like ponies??). Personal insults are hardly new here. It was more the constant weaseling around that got to his tolerance; and I sympathize whole-heartedly. Is a man really an island? (And if I'm really a princess, where's the deference?)

 

I believe I have called your arguments retarded. Subject object seems to be a weak aspect of comprehension in your reading issues.

 

It implies the same thing. And look: an allegation of executive disfunction!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Me no comprehend Sam reliance on weasely ad hominem in above post. It avoid issue of responsibility for personal attacks, while permit insulting speculation about opponent. Sam not alone in this, of course. Use of "wrong" too general? Geoff not follow rationale.

 

You missed the point, but hopefully not the lid.

Although I think I use more witticisms than gross insults, I do indeed insult people. I'm just pointing out that Sam's complaint of personal insults by quadra sort of ignores her own usage. I try not to be too offended, but I accept it's going to happen sometime for me and others.