Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [LeftLibertarian2] A sad but humorous Tweet.....

Expand Messages
  • Bruce Majors
    again Mike your remarks are idiotic and eristic I am responding to your lame defenses of censorship; I am not specifically defending Geller you are in the same
    Message 1 of 143 , Nov 1, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      again Mike your remarks are idiotic and eristic

      I am responding to your lame defenses of censorship; I am not specifically defending Geller

      you are in the same position as the various spats of moral slime who tell rape jokes about Palin and her children.  to point out how slimy these people are is not to agree with Palin on everything



      On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 7:53 PM, <MikeHolmesTX@...> wrote:
       

      In a message dated 10/31/2011 1:59:57 PM Central Daylight Time,
      majors.bruce@... writes:

      >
      > The content of Geller's speech seems irrelevant. And the earlier claim
      > here was that she lies. Holding positions you disagree with is not the
      > same as being a liar.
      >
      > And her positions on Iran and Israel no more mean that people should be
      > able to threaten violence to close down her conference than that every
      > newspaper, straw poll and political convention in the US should be closed down by
      > threats that there will be disturbances. Almost every conference that
      > occurs has people advocated taxes, regulations or some other rights violating
      > policy.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >

      Why the special pleading for this nutso Geller? What is she to you?

      You waste everyone's time here espousing her "cause" while providing zero
      basis for why anyone should care about her contractual problems. There are
      plenty of lawyers available if Geller believes her contractual rights w/ the
      hotel have been breached.

      Do you bombard libertarian lists when neo nazis and Klanners are forced to
      change venues? Or radical communist outfits? Or Islamic speakers? Somehow I
      think not.

      Don't pretend you are some kind of ACLU type worrying about her rights.

      No, this is some sort of bigoted anti Muslim cause you have introduced
      here.

      One thing about this list is pretty clear. Muslims are not treated any
      better or worse than other folks qua their religion. And most religious special
      pleaders here don't receive much sympathy.

      So go find Eric Rittberg (or Dondero, or whatever he calls himself now) and
      join hands in your Muslim hatemongering with someone who cares.

      BTW, the same would be true (and has been) for anti Jewish stuff and
      similar cropping up here.

      Religion per se isn't very popular here either, but in that, there is no
      particular bias for or against any particular flavor.

      Juan will expand on that subject if you need further enlightenment.

      MH</HTML>


    • Bruce Majors
      You know I see now you three were right Geller had to be a liar. She probably even hacked into the wnd website and posted a fabricated quote from the hotel
      Message 143 of 143 , Nov 2, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        You know I see now you three were right

        Geller had to be a liar.  She probably even hacked into the wnd website and posted a fabricated quote from the hotel executive claiming he had been threatened, besides being the one who called in the threat in the first place.

        It's the most likely and simplest explanation.

        She is a Jew after all, and besides the hooves and the smell and the poisoning wells and eating babies, they are all liars.  Just like our heroes at Occupy rallies say.


        On Tuesday, November 1, 2011, Nathan Byrd <nfactor13@...> wrote:
        >  
        >
        > M: Oh look, this isn't an argument.
        > A: Yes it is.
        > M: No it isn't. It's just contradiction.
        > A: No it isn't.
        > M: It is!
        > A: It is not.
        > M: Look, you just contradicted me.
        > A: I did not.
        > M: Oh you did!!
        > A: No, no, no.
        > M: You did just then.
        > A: Nonsense!
        > M: Oh, this is futile!
        > A: No it isn't.
        > M: I came here for a good argument.
        > A: No you didn't; no, you came here for an argument.
        > M: An argument isn't just contradiction.
        > A: It can be.
        > M: No it can't. An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.
        > A: No it isn't.
        > M: Yes it is! It's not just contradiction.
        > A: Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.
        > M: Yes, but that's not just saying 'No it isn't.'
        > A: Yes it is!
        > M: No it isn't!
        >
        > A: Yes it is!
        > M: Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes.
        > (short pause)
        > A: No it isn't.
        >
        > --- In LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com, "jeff_riggenbach" <haljam@...> wrote:
        >>
        >> "If you could be accurate and honest in your attempts at counter-argument they would be more worth reading"
        >>
        >> What gave you the impression that I was making an attempt at "counter-argument"? What I said didn't in any way resemble an argument, nor was it intended to do so. All the time on these lists, people make this or that "point" about the supposed deficiencies of my "arguments." What all these people seemingly miss is that I make no arguments. I'm utterly uninterested in arguing with anybody, least of all with the fatuous asses who make up the principle population of these lists. I read the lists selectively, for various reasons of my own, and occasionally I chime in, usually to correct an error of fact, less frequently to make an (often mordant) observation on something someone else has said. Now and then, I attempt a parody of one of the other participants on a list whose contributions have begun to seem tiresome to me. Anyone is free to ignore these little contributions of mine, and most do. Those who respond by harping on their defects as "arguments" are only proving conclusively how little they know or understand about argumentation.
        >>
        >> JR
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >> --- In LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Majors <majors.bruce@> wrote:
        >> >
        >> > Widespread jokes about Moslems on national TV are rare, except on recherche
        >> > cable comedy stand up dedicated to politically incorrect stand up sets
        >> >
        >> > Jokes about raping Moslems and their 11 year old daughters are non-existent
        >> >
        >> > Constant jokes about raping Palin or her daughters have been told on
        >> > national broadcast shows like Letterman or from the stage of Jewish
        >> > Community Centers
        >> >
        >> > Most jokes "about" "Moslems" are actually about terrorists and people who
        >> > would kill their own children, like the suicide bomber joke that ends in
        >> > "they blow up so fast"
        >> >
        >> > If you could be accurate and honest in your attempts at counter-argument
        >> > they would be more worth reading
        >> >
        >> > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 10:47 AM, jeff_riggenbach <haljam@>wrote:
        >> >
        >> > > **
        >> > >
        >> > >
        >> > > Jokes about Sarah Palin are "slimy." Jokes about "Moslems," on the other
        >> > > hand, are hysterically funny.
        >> > >
        >> > > JR
        >> > >
        >> > >
        >> > > --- In LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Majors <majors.bruce@>
        >> > > wrote:
        >> > > >
        >> > > > again Mike your remarks are idiotic and eristic
        >> > > >
        >> > > > I am responding to your lame defenses of censorship; I am not
        >> > > specifically
        >> > > > defending Geller
        >> > > >
        >> > > > you are in the same position as the various spats of moral slime who tell
        >> > > > rape jokes about Palin and her children. to point out how slimy these
        >> > > > people are is not to agree with Palin on everything
        >> > > >
        >> > > >
        >> > > >
        >> > > > On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 7:53 PM, <MikeHolmesTX@> wrote:
        >> > > >
        >> > > > > **
        >> > >
        >> > > > >
        >> > > > >
        >> > > > > In a message dated 10/31/2011 1:59:57 PM Central Daylight Time,
        >> > > > > majors.bruce@ writes:
        >> > > > >
        >> > > > > >
        >> > > > > > The content of Geller's speech seems irrelevant. And the earlier
        >> > > claim
        >> > > > > > here was that she lies. Holding positions you disagree with is not
        >> > > the
        >> > > > > > same as being a liar.
        >> > > > > >
        >> > > > > > And her positions on Iran and Israel no more mean that people should
        >> > > be
        >> > > > > > able to threaten violence to close down her conference than that
        >> > > every
        >> > > > > > newspaper, straw poll and political convention in the US should be
        >> > > > > closed down by
        >> > > > > > threats that there will be disturbances. Almost every conference that
        >> > > > > > occurs has people advocated taxes, regulations or some other rights
        >> > > > > violating
        >> > > > > > policy.
        >> > > > > >
        >> > > > > >
        >> > > > > >
        >> > > > > >
        >> > > > > >
        >> > > > > >
        >> > > > >
        >> > > > > Why the special pleading for this nutso Geller? What is she to you?
        >> > > > >
        >> > > > > You waste everyone's time here espousing her "cause" while providing
        >> > > zero
        >> > > > > basis for why anyone should care about her contractual problems. There
        >> > > are
        >> > > > > plenty of lawyers available if Geller believes her contractual rights
        >> > > w/
        >> > > > > the
        >> > > > > hotel have been breached.
        >> > > > >
        >> > > > > Do you bombard libertarian lists when neo nazis and Klanners are
        >> > > forced to
        >> > > > > change venues? Or radical communist outfits? Or Islamic speakers?
        >> > > Somehow
        >> > > > > I
        >> > > > > think not.
        >> > > > >
        >> > > > > Don't pretend you are some kind of ACLU type worrying about her rights.
        >> > > > >
        >> > > > > No, this is some sort of bigoted anti Muslim cause you have introduced
        >> > > > > here.
        >> > > > >
        >> > > > > One thing about this list is pretty clear. Muslims are not treated any
        >> > > > > better or worse than other folks qua their religion. And most religious
        >> > > > > special
        >> > > > > pleaders here don't receive much sympathy.
        >> > > > >
        >> > > > > So go find Eric Rittberg (or Dondero, or whatever he calls himself now)
        >> > > > > and
        >> > > > > join hands in your Muslim hatemongering with someone who cares.
        >> > > > >
        >> > > > > BTW, the same would be true (and has been) for anti Jewish stuff and
        >> > > > > similar cropping up here.
        >> > > > >
        >> > > > > Religion per se isn't very popular here either, but in that, there is
        >> > > no
        >> > > > > particular bias for or against any partic
        >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.