Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Fanatics
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

EFLtrainer

Joined: 04 May 2005

Posted: Sat Nov 19, 2005 1:37 am Post subject:

Doutdes wrote:

EFLtrainer wrote:

Doutdes wrote:

It doesn��t clarify, it confuses.

Wow. Never thought I'd see anyone argue against basic mathemetical realities of the universe.

I��m saying that extremes shouldn��t exist or shouldn��t be known. I��m saying that focusing on the extremes doesn��t clarify the moderate view.

That was not clear from what you posted before. But still not correct. You analogy also is not relevant because it requires a complete lack of knowledge to be useful.

Quote:

This analogy does not work because Creationists are debating apples and oranges. Their perspective is simply wrong because religion is simply not science. The vast majority of school boards recognize this as tripe. It is ignorance that gets Creationism or ID in the curriculum, not extremism.

You��re missing the point. Creationists are framing the argument as polar opposites and that makes people think the answer is somewhere in the middle. Hence, teach the controversy.

I understand the point; I think you are incorrect. I personally know noone that thinks some mix of religion and Creation is a good solution. The view of other Americans seems to be almost exclusively with me as the numbe of boards adopting ID is very, very small. But those that do get a lot of press.

Quote:

You are making an absolute statement yourself. Sometimes the answer is one of the extremes, sometimes - usually - it's not. But if you cut of the extremes you remove the best answer a times. And what is extreme does change. A majority position is no longer an extreme position, by definition. However, the beliefs or policies may still be extreme by other measures. For example, interracial marriage. It is still extreme in terms of frequency, but in terms of societal taboos. Things change.

I miswrote that. What I meant to say is that the correct answer doesn��t always fall in the moderate view, it sometimes falls with one of the extreme views.

Agreed.

Quote:

Now, what I find interesting is that you��re proving my point with your last statement. In your previous points you��ve stated that we need the poles to determine the moderates. We have to look ��at all levels of the spectrum.�� But if majority position is by definition not extreme, then moderates define the extreme, not the extremes defining the moderates.

You're cherry picking. I also said an extreme position becoming the norm does not mean it is correct or right.

Quote:

Lastly, it prevents self-examination for liberals.

Your first statement has no basis that I can see.

I hope you can see the humor in this.[/quote]

No, I don't. The only thing that's going to prevent self-examination for anyone is a closed mind. Self-examination is not dependent upon any factor other than the existence of the person. It is an innate process.

Last edited by EFLtrainer on Sun Nov 20, 2005 2:46 am; edited 1 time in total

TheUrbanMyth

Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired

Posted: Sat Nov 19, 2005 9:07 pm Post subject:

The Bobster wrote:

The UrbanMyth wrote:

It's The Bobster's trademark. If it's a site he doesn't agree with, it's racist or nuts. As far as being "hateful" and "intolerant" goes I would say that someone who calls for the death of fellow ESL teachers simply because he doesn't agree with their political philosophy fits that definition nicely.

Well, this is a lie. (1)

Time was, I was just about the only one around here who bothered to take the trouble to refute the racists who come around here, and we both know the sort of weasels I'm talkling about. I'm glad others lately seem to take the trouble, cuz god knws I have a life and there are other things I'd rather do once in a while, but the phenomenon seems to grow daily, regardless ...

You seem to find it threatening that people would oppose hate speech by means of clear and rational debate. Not hard to see why you might feel that way ...

Quote:

You derailed this thread already when you decided to make personal attacks on me.

I went back in this thread to see just what it was I said about you that was such a personal attack that you wished to come back only to accuse me of wishing murder upon my colleagues(2)

I think this is it ...

I love when TUM tries to talk about Cindy Sheehan. Let's note how he and EFLtrainer have decided to talk about her on a thread designed for that purpose - which is not to mention her once.

By the way, TUM, nice to see you back. Been waiting patiently for you to return to the thread about Lynne Stewart and explain and show the evidence that Osama bin Laden knows or cares who that person is, let alone counted her as a fan ... it is something you said, TUM, and it made me laugh real hard when I followed the link you gave and found a vaguely racist site that made the assertion and gave a link to a page that talked about Martha Stewart instead ...

(3) Is there something here I said that is untrue, even close to the extent of untrue that your statement above about me wishing death upon people who disagree with me? You know better, or you'd have supplied a link - no, I take that back, you've supplied links maybe a dozen times in the past couple of years and just like the Lynne vs Martha Stewart fiasco above they usually show things quite different from what you claim.

(4) And you have the GALL to complain about what I say to you, after accusing me of harboring homicide in my heart? You are the stuff of laughter, sir, pure giggles.

Quote:

And don't go complaining about being off topic Mr. Bobster.

(5) In my first post here, I quoited a rightwing blogger who asserted that all on the Left owe their origins to terrorists, and siad there was no room for any points of view anywhere near this realm, and I asked if you would care to comment on whether that counts as fanaticism. I'm stilll interested in your views about this. You are free to return to the topic at any time, sir.

Numbers are mine

1. As the link shows this is true. Care to explain yourself? You have denied saying this

2. As the link shows this is true. Care to explain yourself? You have denied saying this

3. As the link shows this is true. Care to explain yourself? Again you deny saying this

4. And as the link shows, this is true. Care to explain yourself?

5. This has been answered. Now explain yourself.

The Bobster

Joined: 15 Jan 2003

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2005 12:47 am Post subject:

Quote:

As the link shows this is true. Care to explain yourself? You have denied saying this

The link shows that I oppose racism. I think racists should be oppposed and yes, "put down" at every opportunity. To do less makes the community of ideas far too safe for the kind of dangerous hate they spread.

I think that you are lying, Tum, and that's because I don't consider racism to be a political philosophy - and what you said, quoted above is that I am someone "who calls for the death of fellow ESL teachers simply because he doesn't agree with their political philosophy."

Is it true that you consider racism to be a political philosophy, TUM? Do you REALLY think The Bobster wants to kill people who disagree with him? Do you ACTUALLY think that Osama ever made any public statements that referenced Lynne Stewart?

Finally, don't you think that telling lies in a public forum about other posters and public figures is perhaps just a little bit ... fanatical?

As you say, sir :

Quote:

Now explain yourself.

TheUrbanMyth

Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2005 3:34 am Post subject:

The Bobster wrote:

Quote:

As the link shows this is true. Care to explain yourself? You have denied saying this

(1) The link shows that I oppose racism. I think racists should be oppposed and yes, "put down" at every opportunity. To do less makes the community of ideas far too safe for the kind of dangerous hate they spread.

(2) I think that you are lying, Tum, and that's because I don't consider racism to be a political philosophy - and what you said, quoted above is that I am someone "who calls for the death of fellow ESL teachers simply because he doesn't agree with their political philosophy."

(3) Is it true that you consider racism to be a political philosophy, TUM? Do you REALLY think The Bobster wants to kill people who disagree with him? Do you ACTUALLY think that Osama ever made any public statements that referenced Lynne Stewart?

(4) Finally, don't you think that telling lies in a public forum about other posters and public figures is perhaps just a little bit ... fanatical?

(5) As you say, sir :

Quote:

Now explain yourself.

(numbers are mine)

1. Mr. Bobster the link I gave does not talk about racism or racists. Nor do you for that matter. Here is your quote from PAGE 13 of the link Post Number 3 on that page by Mr. Thunndarr who quoted you as saying (italics are mine) " A few too many bigots around for my taste lately, not only Wannago and The Urban Myth but most recently bigverne and Leslie Cheswick. In My Very Humble Opinion rabid animals such as these need to be put down as quickly as possible, with as little compunction about humane methods as they are a severe threat to the larger body of humanity.

2. I find it amusing that you accuse me of lying, when you are the one that is obviously fibbing. All anyone has to do is look at this thread where you deny saying what you said and then check the link.

3. Racism was not the topic. Not in this thread and not in the link. As for what I think The Bobster wants, it's pretty clear in the above quote.

4. I have told no lies. You on the other hand are attempting to claim that you were opposing racists in the above link, when the quote I referenced clearly shows you said nothing about racists.

5. I checked all your posts in the above link and you know what? You didn't mention the word racist once. Or for that matter racism. Kind of hard to oppose racists and racism if you don't even talk about it. Or were you misrepresenting the facts again? This also needs explaining.

desultude

Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: Dangling my toes in the Persian Gulf

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2005 5:38 am Post subject:

Does this board need a fight club forum?

Bulsajo

Joined: 16 Jan 2003

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2005 7:35 am Post subject:

This board would end up being nothing but a Fight Club forum and the mantenance thereof.

The Bobster

Joined: 15 Jan 2003

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2005 9:10 am Post subject:

TheUrbanMyth wrote:

Mr. Bobster the link I gave does not talk about racism or racists. Nor do you for that matter. Here is your quote from PAGE 13 of the link Post Number 3 on that page by Mr. Thunndarr who quoted you as saying (italics are mine) " A few too many bigots around for my taste lately, not only Wannago and The Urban Myth but most recently bigverne and Leslie Cheswick. In My Very Humble Opinion rabid animals such as these need to be put down as quickly as possible, with as little compunction about humane methods as they are a severe threat to the larger body of humanity.

I see then ... your "evidence" is a quotation of my words from another poster, not from me directly, and neither you nor the other poster care to provide any link to that original discussion or any context regarding it. Nor do you - either of you, either now or at that long-ago time - deign to address the actual substance : whether these forums are perhaps too free as a place to vent hate, bigotry and racism. (I've stated my opinion on that before, though - hate speech ought to be allowed everywhere, as long as the rest of us can point to it and tell people that is what it is.)

Nor do I expect you will address the substance of that remark, TUM, or at least I strongly doubt it. You are the fella who made the famous statement, in reference to explaining why African-Americans are under-represented in the professional fields, to the effect that not everyone can be a doctor or a lawyer, and "there are other jobs that blacks can do." (I later came across the same phrase in an article from David Horowitz, a right-wing demogogue and racist, and it seemed obvious that you had lifted it completely without any attempt at attribution, adding plagiarism to your life of crime. What a surprise.)

It's pretty easy to see why you feel threatened by people who stand up to hate speech and call it what it is. Did the above quote REALLY make you afraid, TUM? Did you really fear The Big Bad Bobster would come to your house, throw a bag over your head and drown you in the lake, as if you were some Satanic kitten? REALLY?

Quote:

I find it amusing that you accuse me of lying, when you are the one that is obviously fibbing. All anyone has to do is look at this thread where you deny saying what you said and then check the link.

The link and what you quoted above do not, as I stated before, say what you claim, which is that I have called for "the death of fellow ESL teachers simply because he doesn't agree with their political philosophy."

Unless, okay, bigotry is a political philosophy ... is it? Is it, TUM? Really?

Quote:

Racism was not the topic. Not in this thread and not in the link. As for what I think The Bobster wants, it's pretty clear in the above quote.

Racism is often a root cause of fanaticism, I'd say, so I don't know just why it is off-topic on this thread ... any particular reason you would like to exclude racism from a discussion about fanatical speech and behavior?

I have to say, though, positing your entire case on a distinction between the words racism and bigotry is a little lame, even for you, and yes, I know they mean different things ... regardless, unless you are seriously trying to make a case that bigotry represents a political philosophy, then it is clear that you are lying.

I'll ask it again, and you can wiggle and squirm all you want but the more you do, the more it is clear that it is you who have lied - Clue : I have not denied saying what you quoted me as saying, and I see no reason to retract, but it was YOU who lied right here when you said that I called for "the death of fellow ESL teachers simply because" I don't "agree with their political philosophy."

And again : Do you REALLY think The Bobster wants to kill people who disagree with him? Do you ACTUALLY think that Osama ever made any public statements that referenced Lynne Stewart?

Quote:

I have told no lies.

This is the funniest thing I have heard all day. See above.

Quote:

You on the other hand are attempting to claim that you were opposing racists in the above link, when the quote I referenced clearly shows you said nothing about racists.

Racism is a subset of bigotry - all racists are bigots, but theoretically at least, not all bigots are racists, since bogotry also include hate against people based on gender, faith and sexual orientation. Regardless of theory, it's very common to see them all sitting right up next to each other in the same people's heads ...

The distinction you are making in order to call me a liar is, I think, pretty spurious. You might want to try another tack. How about if you try to explain how it is that bigotry = political philosophy? I'm very curious about that.

Quote:

I checked all your posts in the above link and you know what? You didn't mention the word racist once. Or for that matter racism. Kind of hard to oppose racists and racism if you don't even talk about it. Or were you misrepresenting the facts again? This also needs explaining.

The links I gave were not to intended to indicate that I oppose racism, but rather to show that you are clueless, and a poor liar. Your comments here have confirmed this.

desultude

Quote:

Does this board need a fight club forum?

Some would say the CE Forum IS a fight club at Daves ...

TUM and I are not fighting. Have you ever seen puppies play? They are trying to learn how it's done, though mostly in this case I am like the older sibling, trying to teach him ... he has been the greatest lesson in my career on the virtues of patience, by the way.

Mainly, even though it seems I am picking on him due to our years-long spat, I simply can't resist him as an example-case to display how bereft of mind, heart and soul the conservative wing of political thought represents as well as of its internal inconsistencies.

Thunndarr

Joined: 30 Sep 2003

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2005 5:18 pm Post subject:

Quote:

Classic Bobster. Ask for a more direct link. Maybe a videotape of you at your computer typing out the words in a drunken stupor, then, 7 hours later, waking up in a pool of your own vomit and hitting the submit button. Perhaps a sworn statement from the security guard at your apartment that you were the only drunken foreigner in your apartment at the time. Well, we don't have the tapes, and we haven't yet gotten around to finding your security ajosshi, but we do have the link you wanted. (And why do you keep asking for these links? You know what you said, we know what you said, and I'll be happy enough to put it in the proper context in a moment.)

http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/korea/viewtopic.php?t=41475&highlight=presidents

Knock yourself out there. Now, here's what you had to say one what you meant by your lovely choice of words....

Quote:

They compared themselves to terrorists by advocating the destruction of cities occupied by people who simply hold a different faith. And only a moron would decide that my metaphor about rabid dogs was literal and did not refer to verbally "putting down" someone" ...

So, when you say "In My Very Humble Opinion, rabid animals such as these need to be put down as quickly as possible, with little compunction about humane methods, as they are a severe threat to the larger body of humanity" what you mean is a verbal put down. Well, I guess if we're allowed to invent completely new meanings to commonly used euphemisms, then yes, I suppose you may have been right. Except, no, we don't get to do that, so I guess you really were saying those guys need to be killed. By the way, here's what wikipedia says about the phrase 'put down' in that context.

Quote:

Etymology

From put + down
[edit]

Noun

put-down (plural: put-downs)

1. an insult or barb; a demeaning remark

When he called you a know-it-all, he meant it as a put-down.

[edit]

Verb

put down (puts down, putting down)

1. to set down, stop carrying, or place in a low location.

Why don't you put down your suitcase and stay awhile?

2. (idiomatic) to insult, belittle, or demean

They put down their little sister for walking slowly.

3. to pay an initial amount of money on a large purchase

We put down a $1,000 deposit.

4. to halt, eliminate, stop, or squelch, often by force

The government quickly put down an insurrection

5. (euphemism) to administer euthanasia, as to an animal too old or ill to cure

Rex was in so much pain, they had to put him down.

I highlighted number 5, since, you know, that's the one that deals with killing dogs, you know, like, um, your asinine remarks? Is that enough context for you?

But hey, I'm sure you were completely ignorant of that very well known euphemism when you said what you said right?

So, really, I see it boils down to two possibilities.

1. You really are just that dumb, and had no idea what that phrase, in that context, usually means. Or...

2. You're basically just too spineless to admit what you meant and are just backpeddling everytime it's brought up. Hmm....

Well, in my view, I'm happy enough with either one, since neither is really all that flattering a look, in my opinion.

Hollywoodaction

Joined: 02 Jul 2004

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2005 5:28 pm Post subject:

Oh, that Ann Coulter is a special case. Check the clip where she tries to argue with Bob McKeown (one of the most famous and well respected reporters in Canada) that Canada did in fact send troups to Vietnam. She's so pretentious she won't even back down, continuing to insist Canada sent troups to Vietnam. I guess she thought she was being interviewed by a reporter on Fox News, which are known to get the facts wrong. http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/sticksandstones.html I love the closing comment. Like Iraq, Canada sent no troups to Vietnam. What's even funnier is how Fox News and Ann Coulter tried to do some damage control by painting the reporter as a 'bubblehead' who was less than honest by not saying that 10000 Canadians joined the US Army during the Vietnam war (well, many of these Canadians had dual citizenship or at least were born in the US, while the rest where native Canadians showing that they don't recognize the border between Canada and the US). Bill O'Reilly went as far as to compare the CBC to Nazi Germany because it claims it had been twisting the facts. The fact remains that Canada did not send any troups and that Ann Coulter, as usual, made a fool of herself on TV.

TheUrbanMyth

Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired

Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2005 2:20 am Post subject:

The Bobster wrote:

TheUrbanMyth wrote:

(1) I see then ... your "evidence" is a quotation of my words from another poster, not from me directly, and neither you nor the other poster care to provide any link to that original discussion or any context regarding it. Nor do you - either of you, either now or at that long-ago time - deign to address the actual substance : whether these forums are perhaps too free as a place to vent hate, bigotry and racism. (I've stated my opinion on that before, though - hate speech ought to be allowed everywhere, as long as the rest of us can point to it and tell people that is what it is.)

(2) Nor do I expect you will address the substance of that remark, TUM, or at least I strongly doubt it. You are the fella who made the famous statement, in reference to explaining why African-Americans are under-represented in the professional fields, to the effect that not everyone can be a doctor or a lawyer, and "there are other jobs that blacks can do." (I later came across the same phrase in an article from David Horowitz, a right-wing demogogue and racist, and it seemed obvious that you had lifted it completely without any attempt at attribution, adding plagiarism to your life of crime. What a surprise.)

(3) It's pretty easy to see why you feel threatened by people who stand up to hate speech and call it what it is. Did the above quote REALLY make you afraid, TUM? Did you really fear The Big Bad Bobster would come to your house, throw a bag over your head and drown you in the lake, as if you were some Satanic kitten? REALLY?

Quote:

I find it amusing that you accuse me of lying, when you are the one that is obviously fibbing. All anyone has to do is look at this thread where you deny saying what you said and then check the link.

The link and what you quoted above do not, as I stated before, say what you claim, which is that I have called for "the death of fellow ESL teachers simply because he doesn't agree with their political philosophy."

(4) Unless, okay, bigotry is a political philosophy ... is it? Is it, TUM? Really?

Quote:

Racism was not the topic. Not in this thread and not in the link. As for what I think The Bobster wants, it's pretty clear in the above quote.

(5) Racism is often a root cause of fanaticism, I'd say, so I don't know just why it is off-topic on this thread ... any particular reason you would like to exclude racism from a discussion about fanatical speech and behavior?

(6) I have to say, though, positing your entire case on a distinction between the words racism and bigotry is a little lame, even for you, and yes, I know they mean different things ... regardless, unless you are seriously trying to make a case that bigotry represents a political philosophy, then it is clear that you are lying.

(7) I'll ask it again, and you can wiggle and squirm all you want but the more you do, the more it is clear that it is you who have lied - Clue : I have not denied saying what you quoted me as saying, and I see no reason to retract, but it was YOU who lied right here when you said that I called for "the death of fellow ESL teachers simply because" I don't "agree with their political philosophy."

And again : Do you REALLY think The Bobster wants to kill people who disagree with him? Do you ACTUALLY think that Osama ever made any public statements that referenced Lynne Stewart?

Quote:

I have told no lies.

(

This is the funniest thing I have heard all day. See above.

Quote:

You on the other hand are attempting to claim that you were opposing racists in the above link, when the quote I referenced clearly shows you said nothing about racists.

(9) Racism is a subset of bigotry - all racists are bigots, but theoretically at least, not all bigots are racists, since bogotry also include hate against people based on gender, faith and sexual orientation. Regardless of theory, it's very common to see them all sitting right up next to each other in the same people's heads ...

(10) The distinction you are making in order to call me a liar is, I think, pretty spurious. You might want to try another tack. How about if you try to explain how it is that bigotry = political philosophy? I'm very curious about that.

Quote:

(11) The links I gave were not to intended to indicate that I oppose racism, but rather to show that you are clueless, and a poor liar. Your comments here have confirmed this.

desultude

Quote:

Does this board need a fight club forum?

Numbers are mine

1. Actually not quite. If you had bothered to read on later in the link I provided, you would have seen a post from you "explaining" what you meant. In your own posts in that link you admit to making it. Pretty open and shut. And you are fibbing again. That other poster did provide the context and the name of the thread(which if you had actually read the link you would have seen) in which you made the remark. Why must you fabricate evidence when everyone can quite clearly see that it is not the case?

2. And you are the fellow who made the famous statements that minorities at one point in their life would either come to rely on some form of social assistance (via family, friends, state or whatever other source) or turn to crime.

3. I felt threated by what you said. Namely that I should be "put down". There are a lot of weirdos on the Internet.

4. I never said that bigotry was my "political philosphy" I am conservative and that is my political philosophy and it was what I was referring to. Bigotry was the charge that YOU attempted to claim.

As for bigotry being a political philosophy Apartheid and the "Jim Crow" laws come to mind. I would say that those laws had a good deal of bigotry in them. And just because those laws no longer exist (and quite rightly so) does not mean bigotry does not exist.

5. No one is trying to exclude it, I am simply calling you on what you claimed to have said.

6. See number 4

7. Do you disagree with conservative thought and philosophy? Do you disagree that you said we should be "put down"?

8. Bit of pot and kettle here.

9. I agree.

10. "The distinction you are making in order to call me a liar is, I think, pretty spurious" I could say the same about you. See the one about my political philosophy. As I have said before neither bigotry nor racism is my philosphy nor are they ones I agree with. I have called people to account here many times for espousing these views.
This is quite well-known. Of late I have wearied of it, since every time I smack one down it seems another two pop up. Besides which posting on a message board does not do much to combat such ideas. But given my circumstances it is pretty much all I can do at present.

11. Then why did you even bring it up? Glad we sorted that out.

As for Ms. D we are not fighting. I simply like to demonstrate (using the Bobster as a test subject) how the Left is utterly devoid of rational thought, logic and reliance on fact. As I showed in #1 they can't get it right even when it is written out in black and white for them.

desultude

Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: Dangling my toes in the Persian Gulf

Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2005 2:48 am Post subject:

As for Ms. D we are not fighting. I simply like to demonstrate (using the Bobster as a test subject) how the Left is utterly devoid of rational thought, logic and reliance on fact. As I showed in #1 they can't get it right even when it is written out in black and white for them. That's a damned big brush you are using there. But I am not getting sucked into this one.

The Bobster

Joined: 15 Jan 2003

Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2005 9:13 am Post subject:

TheUrbanMyth wrote:

I felt threated by what you said. Namely that I should be "put down". There are a lot of weirdos on the Internet.

If this is true, then you and the other people I mentioned in that post ought to have pmd the moderators and said as much. I sympathize with the notion that people can feel physically threatened by messages on an internet forum. It has happened to me, so I know the feeling.

And as a former moderator myself, I can tell you that feelings like these are something the mods DO take very seriously, as they should. If you had made a case for this, I'm sure I would have been banned from here long ago.

But you never did send any such message, or if you did, I never got any flack from it, which makes me think that no such communication ever happened. (Despite having been one, I don't consider the mods to be my friends any more than any other remember, and I have been threatened with bans several timessince I left their ranks, and I deserved the admonishment each time - though I don't think the incident under discussion now counts as one.)

Since you didn't think it important to mention to the mods (and neither did the others I mentioned) I somehow doubt your assertion now that you or anyone else felt threatened, as you say now.

Quote:

I never said that bigotry was my "political philosphy" I am conservative and that is my political philosophy and it was what I was referring to. Bigotry was the charge that YOU attempted to claim.

Let's be clear.

YOU said that I wanted to see the death of people who hold different political philosophies from my own. The link you provided had me opposing people involved in hate speech.

It was YOU who equated "political philosophy" (your term) and "bigotry" (mine). You need to defend this. You need to look at what you said tell us wheteher you were lying or whether you were clueless. I know rthat neither is a good choice for you, but ratherlike the Dubya witgh regards to WMDs, this is the corner you have painted yourself into.

Quote:

As for bigotry being a political philosophy Apartheid and the "Jim Crow" laws come to mind. I would say that those laws had a good deal of bigotry in them. And just because those laws no longer exist (and quite rightly so) does not mean bigotry does not exist.

If you are saying here clearly and for the record that bigotry amounts to a political philosophy, then I will claim myslef guilty of Thundaar's defn as posted - defn #2 under verb : "insult, belittle, or demean."

Yes, I will do that evry time I have a spare moment and happen to see it. The sad fact is that it happens far too often for me to devote the free hours of my day to ...

Quote:

No one is trying to exclude it [racism], I am simply calling you on what you claimed to have said.

You said that racism is not the topic of this thread, and now you say you are not trying to exclude it ... can you be a little more clear? Like, you know, just a little clear?

Quote:

I have called people to account here many times for espousing these views.

This is quite well-known. Of late I have wearied of it, since every time I smack one down it seems another two pop up. Besides which posting on a message board does not do much to combat such ideas. But given my circumstances it is pretty much all I can do at present.

I wish it were as well known as you seem to think. I recall much more clearly the myriad times you have cited websources faintly and often strongly steeped in hate and prejudice, and if you are sincere in your assertion of weariness then I sympathize because I have felt much the same way ... I doubt you, however, because of the many things aI have saeen you say here that just are not true.

But if what you say IS true, why do you attack me on THIS thread, now, and say I wish for the death of people on account of "political philosophies." when the record shows that I was really seeking to refute, "insult, belittle, or demean" people who display hate toward those who are different? Bigotry, in other words, the every word I used ...

Quote:

As for Ms. D we are not fighting.

I agree. I think we are performing, for the good lady's benefit, only because she has expressed an interest in this thread.

(I met her once, a very good human being, this one, and I'm more than willing to spend a half hour of my life in an effort to entertain her.)

Quote:

they can't get it right even when it is written out in black and white for them.

TUM, I'm sure you meant nothing to do with people's skin color by that remark. I'm absolutely sure. No doubt in my mind. To you, "black and white" has nothing whatsoever to do caucasian people and those whose ancestors hail from Africa.

Like Paul McCartney and Stevie Wonder once said " "Ebony and Ivory / live together in perfect harmony ..."

Right?

TheUrbanMyth

Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired

Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2005 2:14 am Post subject:

The Bobster wrote:

TheUrbanMyth wrote:

I felt threated by what you said. Namely that I should be "put down". There are a lot of weirdos on the Internet.

(1) If this is true, then you and the other people I mentioned in that post ought to have pmd the moderators and said as much. I sympathize with the notion that people can feel physically threatened by messages on an internet forum. It has happened to me, so I know the feeling.

And as a former moderator myself, I can tell you that feelings like these are something the mods DO take very seriously, as they should. If you had made a case for this, I'm sure I would have been banned from here long ago.

But you never did send any such message, or if you did, I never got any flack from it, which makes me think that no such communication ever happened. (Despite having been one, I don't consider the mods to be my friends any more than any other remember, and I have been threatened with bans several timessince I left their ranks, and I deserved the admonishment each time - though I don't think the incident under discussion now counts as one.)

Since you didn't think it important to mention to the mods (and neither did the others I mentioned) I somehow doubt your assertion now that you or anyone else felt threatened, as you say now.

Quote:

I never said that bigotry was my "political philosphy" I am conservative and that is my political philosophy and it was what I was referring to. Bigotry was the charge that YOU attempted to claim.

Let's be clear.

(2) YOU said that I wanted to see the death of people who hold different political philosophies from my own. The link you provided had me opposing people involved in hate speech.

It was YOU who equated "political philosophy" (your term) and "bigotry" (mine). You need to defend this. You need to look at what you said tell us wheteher you were lying or whether you were clueless. I know rthat neither is a good choice for you, but ratherlike the Dubya witgh regards to WMDs, this is the corner you have painted yourself into.

Quote:

(3) If you are saying here clearly and for the record that bigotry amounts to a political philosophy, then I will claim myslef guilty of Thundaar's defn as posted - defn #2 under verb : "insult, belittle, or demean."

Yes, I will do that evry time I have a spare moment and happen to see it. The sad fact is that it happens far too often for me to devote the free hours of my day to ...

Quote:

No one is trying to exclude it [racism], I am simply calling you on what you claimed to have said.

You said that racism is not the topic of this thread, and now you say you are not trying to exclude it ... can you be a little more clear? Like, you know, just a little clear?

Quote:

(4) I wish it were as well known as you seem to think. I recall much more clearly the myriad times you have cited websources faintly and often strongly steeped in hate and prejudice, and if you are sincere in your assertion of weariness then I sympathize because I have felt much the same way ... I doubt you, however, because of the many things aI have saeen you say here that just are not true.

But if what you say IS true, why do you attack me on THIS thread, now, and say I wish for the death of people on account of "political philosophies." when the record shows that I was really seeking to refute, "insult, belittle, or demean" people who display hate toward those who are different? Bigotry, in other words, the every word I used ...

Quote:

As for Ms. D we are not fighting.

Quote:

they can't get it right even when it is written out in black and white for them.

(5) TUM, I'm sure you meant nothing to do with people's skin color by that remark. I'm absolutely sure. No doubt in my mind. To you, "black and white" has nothing whatsoever to do caucasian people and those whose ancestors hail from Africa.

Like Paul McCartney and Stevie Wonder once said " "Ebony and Ivory / live together in perfect harmony ..."

Right?

Numbers are mine

1. Actually I did. In fact I have sent more than one, and not only about that thread. However since no action that I know of has been taken, I have decided to take matters into my own hands. In the end it's a judgement call for them. What they decide is 'nonthreating' may be very well 'threating' for another individual.

2. What are you on? Seriously. I never equated the two. That was YOU making such a claim. I already outlined what I meant by political philosophy in my above post.

3. Not quite sure where you are coming from, I was only pointing out that bigotry can be used as a political philosophy (which YOU asked me to do)

4. Are you saying that I have NO posts on this forum that show I oppose racism? Just for the record is that what you are claiming?

5. I can't believe I am saying this...but you are absolutely right. "Black and white"(the way I meant it) refers to the written words. Was it the particular words I used "WRITTEN OUT" (capitals mine) that gave you your first clue that I didn't mean people?

TheUrbanMyth

Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired

Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2005 5:54 am Post subject:

The Bobster wrote:

[
I wish it were as well known as you seem to think. I recall much more clearly the myriad times you have cited websources faintly and often strongly steeped in hate and prejudice, and if you are sincere in your assertion of weariness then I sympathize because I have felt much the same way ... I doubt you, however, because of the many things aI have saeen you say here that just are not true.

?

You doubt me? And just a few months ago you were saying (about my humble self) "I will, however go so far as to say that some of his posts I have read recently, ONES THAT SEEK TO REFUTE AND CONFRONT RACISM AND BIGOTRY, lead me to think that my long campaign to educate him might be bearing some fruit. There is some warmth in my heart when I see that." (Italics and capitals are mine) Yep that's TUM you are referring to.

If you would like the link, just say the word.

The Bobster

Joined: 15 Jan 2003

Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2005 8:12 am Post subject:

I recall that one incident, TUM, where you seemed to be trying to do the right thing, and I did make mention of it. But as I said, I recall much more clearly the many times when your comments went in the opposite direction ... so many more times.

I've already quoted you, so I don't know why you won't respond clearly - why did you misrepresent my remarks as being opposed to people because of their political philosophies, when in fact I was opposed their - and let's be clear, YOUR - hate speech?

I've seen many things posted here at Dave's that would actionable under laws back in Canada and the US, possibly GB as well - I don't agree with anti-hate speech laws, so I don't send any letters to Mr Sperling about this kind of thing, though as far as I know he could be legally liable for it and it just might endanger the site as a whole. Instead, I prefer to simply point at it and call it what it is and explain why it is hate speech and why it represents a poor use of the human mind.

And it seems you feel threatened by that.

Quote:

Seriously. I never equated the two. That was YOU making such a claim.

No, sir. I t was you. In your first attack on me in this thread in which you stated that I "someone who calls for the death of fellow ESL teachers simply because he doesn't agree with their political philosophy" and thanks to the fact that you did eventually provide a link, we know that what The Bobster really thinks is odious is bigotry, not individuals who profess to politics that differ from mine.

From what you have said, it seems you consider racism, homophobia and gender discrimination to be legitimate "political philosophies." I don't. I consider them warped modes of thought, and whenever I have time in my day I will "put them down."

And I wonder why you don't do so as well, except in an isolated instance or two, and why you wish to defend haters instead of doing what you can to put their ideas into the dustbin of public discourse where they belong. Actually, I don't wonder about it very much - I'm pretty sure I know where your sympathies are.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Page 4 of 5

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe