[ExI] riots again
F. C. Moulton
moulton at moulton.com
Fri Oct 5 16:09:05 UTC 2012
John Clark you are misrepresenting me yet again. See below
On 10/05/2012 08:03 AM, John Clark wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 F. C. Moulton <moulton at moulton.com
> <mailto:moulton at moulton.com>> wrote:
> > >> Decade after decade the USA has gone messing around
> in that part of the world causing all kinds of problems and
> getting a lot of people angry. Then the politicians are
> shocked, shocked that a few people decide that terrorism is
> the best path.
> >> So you believe that if you're nice to moronic religious
> terrorists then moronic religious terrorists will be nice to
> you. I disagree.
> > I never said nor did I imply that being "nice to moronic religious
> terrorists then moronic religious terrorists will be nice to you".
> LIKE HELL YOU DIDN'T!! Just look at your quotation above, you said
> clear as day "that the reason a few people decide that terrorism is the
> best path"
You put that phrase in quotes as if I wrote it yet are misquoting me.
You have removed the first words of my sentence and substituted your own
words ('that the reason') and attempted to palm it off as a quote from
me. These sorts of misrepresentations and falsehoods are totally
unacceptable and are a perfect example of the issue of 'intellectual
I see no reason to engage with you further on this Afghanistan thread
since you continue to misquote and misrepresent me. And do not state or
imply that I can not support my views because you would be stating yet
another falsehood, hopefully you will have enough integrity to not try
Fortunately there are others on this list who can engage in a civilized
and honest discussion of Afghanistan and other matters.
> is " that the USA has gone messing around in that part of the
> world causing all kinds of problems and getting a lot of people angry"
> and therefore it's foolish that "politicians are shocked" at the
> occurrence of terrorism. I'm not putting words in your mouth that's what
> you said in black and white and the implications of that load of
> stinking Bullshit are crystal clear, terrorism is cause by the USA not
> being nice enough to terrorists. What other conclusions can one draw
> from that? Obviously you would prefer not to state it in those words,
> but dressing it up with pretty language won't change the fact that
> you're trying to polish a turd.
> > I am calling you on it.
> Fine, call me out on it. I can defend my words but you can't defend
> yours without looking even more foolish. I'm just using logic to see
> where you're argument leads and if that is not a place you want to go
> that must be because it's not your policy to use reason before you
> speak. So don't be shocked if sometimes that policy causes you
> John K Clark
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
More information about the extropy-chat