|
|
|
dglas
Skeptic Friend
Canada
397 Posts |
 Posted - 06/07/2010 : 08:37:57 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
You're right. I assumed that you were not ignorant of the situation, which is fine, but one would assume that you'd stay out of a discussion of the situation if you were. My mistake. If you're not ignorant of the situation, and you're not taking sides, then you side with the aggressor. Not a judgment, plenty do it. Just sayin'.
|
And I assumed you warranted consideration as possibly having potential credibility. Thank you for correcting me on that. |
--------------------------------------------------
- dglas (In the hell of 1000 unresolved subplots...)
--------------------------------------------------
The Presupposition of Intrinsic Evil
+ A Self-Justificatory Framework
= The "Heart of Darkness"
--------------------------------------------------
|
 |
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2010 : 08:54:17 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
Good for you. You're paying attention, and you're addressing what's on the page. |
Sorry, but up to now exactly this has been your problem, has it not? You have, in this thread, continuously twisted what other people have said without any good justification for doing so. You have not asked for clarification, instead preferring to put words into other people's mouths without listening to their clarification.
My problem with Dave's (and others) insults is that he assumes because he doesn't understand something, it's because someone else is stupid, or irrational, or disingenuous. If he takes what I say as an insult, he only needs to clarify what he says so that I understand better. If you blame the victim, you support the crime. Why is that wrong? You don't tell me why that's wrong, you impugn my motives and insult. You have nothing to say.
|
It is wrong because pointing out people's own responsibility in occurrences is not à priori "blaming the victim" in the sense you are talking about. And even in the sense that you are talking about it, still doesn't absolve the perpetrator of the crime.
People here have very clearly indicated that Israel's actions are not justified. They have very clearly indicated that they did not support Israel's actions, nor did they support Israel's blockade.
What they did indicate was that the flotilla went to breach the blockade knowing full well what the consequences might be. This is examplified by the statements made by the IHH on their website. This is examplified by the statements of Gretta Duysenberg in the Netherlands who said she stayed at home because it might get dangerous and her kids had asked her not to go.
They knew their was a risk involved and they were willing to take that risk. This is not equivalent to standard "blame the victim" rhetoric as is usually applied to rape victims, because no victim goes out in a sexy dress taking the calculated risk that she might have a higher chance of getting raped. It is more equivalent (as has been pointed out) to protesters like the civil rights activists who took a calculated risk in protesting for a certain cause, knowing that this might have dire consequences. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2010 : 08:57:39 [Permalink]
|
Gorgo:
You're blaming the victims, therefore you're supporting the aggressors. |
What's missing in this assessment is any sign of nuance. It simply doesn't follow that suggesting the victim had a tactic is the same as supporting the aggressor. I have made clear, over and over again that I consider Israels reaction criminal.
Also, I'm not blaming the victims and never have in this thread. I'm giving the protesters credit for a plan that worked. I don't see how that means that I support what Israel did. I don't.
I don't feel I have anything left to say about this. If new evidence turns up I will be interested in reviewing it.
My hope is that this whole fucked up affair will lead to an easing of restrictions and even better, a lifting of the blockade on Gaza.
That's what I support. Sometimes progress comes at a price. Sometimes the price is tragic. But if progress is made, then those who died will not have died in vain.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2010 : 09:08:55 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by tomk80
Originally posted by Gorgo
Good for you. You're paying attention, and you're addressing what's on the page. |
Sorry, but up to now exactly this has been your problem, has it not? You have, in this thread, continuously twisted what other people have said without any good justification for doing so. You have not asked for clarification, instead preferring to put words into other people's mouths without listening to their clarification.
My problem with Dave's (and others) insults is that he assumes because he doesn't understand something, it's because someone else is stupid, or irrational, or disingenuous. If he takes what I say as an insult, he only needs to clarify what he says so that I understand better. If you blame the victim, you support the crime. Why is that wrong? You don't tell me why that's wrong, you impugn my motives and insult. You have nothing to say.
|
It is wrong because pointing out people's own responsibility in occurrences is not à priori "blaming the victim" in the sense you are talking about. And even in the sense that you are talking about it, still doesn't absolve the perpetrator of the crime.
People here have very clearly indicated that Israel's actions are not justified. They have very clearly indicated that they did not support Israel's actions, nor did they support Israel's blockade.
What they did indicate was that the flotilla went to breach the blockade knowing full well what the consequences might be. This is examplified by the statements made by the IHH on their website. This is examplified by the statements of Gretta Duysenberg in the Netherlands who said she stayed at home because it might get dangerous and her kids had asked her not to go.
They knew their was a risk involved and they were willing to take that risk. This is not equivalent to standard "blame the victim" rhetoric as is usually applied to rape victims, because no victim goes out in a sexy dress taking the calculated risk that she might have a higher chance of getting raped. It is more equivalent (as has been pointed out) to protesters like the civil rights activists who took a calculated risk in protesting for a certain cause, knowing that this might have dire consequences.
|
I think it's clear they understood the possibilities. That doesn't mean that they provoked what happened. So, what is it you are dissagreeing with me on again? Dave is sticking up for Kil, and they seem to be in agreement. Dave has said that the victims are to blame. Kil has said they're not to blame, but... Then he goes on to describe how they are to blame.
Where am I wrong? He uses the same words and phrases as the right-wing Israeli, but he really means something different. What is it that he means? We don't know. He gives up. Gorgo is irrational. Fine.
Let's all give up and drive everyone away with this fuck you kind of adolescent fuck you attitude that this kind of forum draws. Here's an idiotic smiley face to make you feel like you're back home years ago on an AOL board.  |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2010 : 09:10:24 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Gorgo:
You're blaming the victims, therefore you're supporting the aggressors. |
What's missing in this assessment is any sign of nuance. It simply doesn't follow that suggesting the victim had a tactic is the same as supporting the aggressor. I have made clear, over and over again that I consider Israels reaction criminal.
Also, I'm not blaming the victims and never have in this thread. I'm giving the protesters credit for a plan that worked. I don't see how that means that I support what Israel did. I don't.
I don't feel I have anything left to say about this. If new evidence turns up I will be interested in reviewing it.
My hope is that this whole fucked up affair will lead to an easing of restrictions and even better, a lifting of the blockade on Gaza.
That's what I support. Sometimes progress comes at a price. Sometimes the price is tragic. But if progress is made, then those who died will not have died in vain.
|
Again, I'm not blaming the victim, but they had a plan that worked. They got their heads beat in, and their comrades killed, and that's what they wanted.
You continue to repeat this kind of thing and tell me I'm the one with the problem. As Kil would say, bite me, I give up. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2010 : 09:12:00 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
If you think a request for clarification is insulting... |
You didn't request a clarification, you simply asserted that Kil meant the opposite of what he wrote, and by doing so painted Kil in the worst possible light that you could.| I have said that I don't think Kil means to sound like he's smearing the victims, but he keeps saying the same things and hedging his bets. They're not to blame, but. You are saying the same things. |
Because it's correct. The victims intended to provoke a response, and they got one. They should not be considered to be blameless.| These people were murdered. That's all you need to say about it. |
No, there's quite a bit more that needs to be said. You are lying by omission. Why would you want to white-wash the story like that?
Do we "need" to say nothing more than "Martin Luther King, Jr., was murdered" to really understand his story? It seems that according to your logic, merely mentioning the fact that King provoked a lot of people is a "smear" which would "support" white racists.Lying by omission.| You're blaming the victims, therefore you're supporting the aggressors. |
I reject the false dichotomy you have insultingly provided.| My problem with Dave's (and others) insults is that he assumes because he doesn't understand something, it's because someone else is stupid, or irrational, or disingenuous. |
That's just another insult. And now you are blaming me, the victim of your insults. Hypocrite.| If he takes what I say as an insult, he only needs to clarify what he says so that I understand better. |
You are quite incorrect about being so easy to educate. I've clarified my position a half-dozen times already in this thread, and you keep repeating the same insults without even a hint that you're trying to understand anything.
And, of course, this is just more hypocrisy. After all, Gorgo, if you find anything I say insulting, you only need to clarify what you say so that I understand better. Instead of following your own advice, you're just whining.| If you blame the victim, you support the crime. Why is that wrong? |
Because it's a false dichotomy. Logically unsupportable.| You don't tell me why that's wrong... |
You've been told why it's wrong many times already. You seem to be impervious to reason.| ...you impugn my motives and insult. |
If you find tomk80 to be insulting, then you'd better clarify what you said so that he understands better. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Fripp
SFN Regular
USA
727 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2010 : 09:13:40 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by dglas
Originally posted by Gorgo
Originally posted by dglas
I see two peoples determined to kill each other, and other interests that are helping them do just that.
Nothing more. I do not take sides.
|
Yeah. I read it right. Taking Israel's side.
|
Fuck off, you arrogant, sub-moronic jack-ass!
You do NOT ever dare to try to tell me what I am thinking! Is THAT fucking clear enough so that EVEN you understand it?
Your "with us or against us" mentality is NOT something I share and it is precisely what I am opposed to, so ram your mindless dichotomous views straight up your flabby saddlebags. If you had a hint of sniff of a reasonable hand drawn facsimile of a fucking clue you might have caught that, but you are so lost in your mindless polarizing game that you don't have two brain cells that can cooperate anymore.
If you are stupid enough to be taken in by superficial cards tricks that is your error, not mine. You do not ever try to tell me what my position is, especially when you openly display not having the basic tools to even comprehend it.
|
I know I'm late to the party on this, but dglas, don't hold back. Please, tell us how you really feel. |
"What the hell is an Aluminum Falcon?"
"Oh, I'm sorry. I thought my Dark Lord of the Sith could protect a small thermal exhaust port that's only 2-meters wide! That thing wasn't even fully paid off yet! You have any idea what this is going to do to my credit?!?!"
"What? Oh, oh, 'just rebuild it'? Oh, real [bleep]ing original. And who's gonna give me a loan, jackhole? You? You got an ATM on that torso LiteBrite?" |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2010 : 09:16:40 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
Again, I'm not blaming the victim, but they had a plan that worked. They got their heads beat in, and their comrades killed, and that's what they wanted. |
And that last sentence is nothing more than another lie. Or was it a "request for clarification?"| You continue to repeat this kind of thing and tell me I'm the one with the problem. |
You are the one with the problem, because nobody ever said that anyone wanted to be killed or beaten. You just made that up. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Fripp
SFN Regular
USA
727 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2010 : 09:17:47 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by tomk80
Originally posted by Gorgo
Stating facts. You're blaming the victims, therefore you're supporting the aggressors.
|
Ah, the game becomes clear. If Gorgo insults someone else, it is just stating facts. If someone else points out Gorgo's inability to read, they are insulting Gorgo.
Glad to have that cleared up.
|
Thanks, tomk. You stated it far more eloquently than I could've. |
"What the hell is an Aluminum Falcon?"
"Oh, I'm sorry. I thought my Dark Lord of the Sith could protect a small thermal exhaust port that's only 2-meters wide! That thing wasn't even fully paid off yet! You have any idea what this is going to do to my credit?!?!"
"What? Oh, oh, 'just rebuild it'? Oh, real [bleep]ing original. And who's gonna give me a loan, jackhole? You? You got an ATM on that torso LiteBrite?" |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2010 : 09:18:05 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
My hope is that this whole fucked up affair will lead to an easing of restrictions and even better, a lifting of the blockade on Gaza.
That's what I support. Sometimes progress comes at a price. Sometimes the price is tragic. But if progress is made, then those who died will not have died in vain.
|
Good for you, and good for all of us that things sometimes do change for the better. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2010 : 10:31:11 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
Originally posted by Dude
Kil, you can't reason with Gorgo. This is the guy (or whatever) that thinks the US has a law that makes all use of military force illegal.
He can't be reasoned with, and this thread pretty clearly demonstrates that.
|
Kil, you keep saying that this person contributes something to these boards. What has this person contributed to this thread except insults?
Okay, I'll be extremely stupid and fall into your trap, Dude. Tell me please where I've said that I think the US has a law that makes all use of military force illegal.
|
Some time ago, in a thread about Iraq, you stated that the UN charter made all use of military force outside our own borders a criminal act. The fact you can't recall your own stupidity is not my problem.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2010 : 10:39:03 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
Some time ago, in a thread about Iraq, you stated that the UN charter made all use of military force outside our own borders a criminal act. The fact you can't recall your own stupidity is not my problem.
|
I don't doubt that you're correct, my good and trusted friend, but I didn't say tell me what I said, I said tell me where I said it. Show me. Like this.
He is under the mistaken impression that the UN charter is a ratified treaty, and therefore the "law of the land" under article six of the constitution.
Even after repeatedly being informed otherwise.
|
|
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
| Edited by - Gorgo on 06/07/2010 11:07:46 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2010 : 10:55:57 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Gorgo:
You're blaming the victims, therefore you're supporting the aggressors. |
What's missing in this assessment is any sign of nuance. It simply doesn't follow that suggesting the victim had a tactic is the same as supporting the aggressor. I have made clear, over and over again that I consider Israels reaction criminal.
Also, I'm not blaming the victims and never have in this thread. I'm giving the protesters credit for a plan that worked. I don't see how
|
Okay. Some of your statements that you made at the same time you were talking about the actions of the Israelis made me tie some things together that you weren't really saying. Thanks for the clarification. I'll just mark this one up to my confusion, although there was someone else who questioned your use of the word "provoke." As far as the idea that I was twisting what you were saying, maybe it would be better if I was more clear that I was trying to rephrase what you said for clarification, not intentionally misquoting. I thought that was clear, but I guess it wasn't. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2010 : 11:03:23 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Gorgo
If you think a request for clarification is insulting... |
You didn't request a clarification, you simply asserted that Kil meant the opposite of what he wrote, and by doing so painted Kil in the worst possible light that you could. |
Okay. I see what you're saying here. Not my intention.
Do we "need" to say nothing more than "Martin Luther King, Jr., was murdered" to really understand his story? |
When we're talking about his murder, is it necessary to say that he provoked it? I'm not saying anyone here said that, it was just that the two came together in such a way that I wondered if that was what was being said. Again, I questioned that in such a way as to create another misunderstanding, but that was the problem.
You're blaming the victims, therefore you're supporting the aggressors. |
Still true. If you're saying they are to blame in any way for the aggression. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
| Edited by - Gorgo on 06/07/2010 11:05:52 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 06/07/2010 : 11:11:03 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by tomk80
It is wrong because pointing out people's own responsibility in occurrences is not à priori "blaming the victim" in the sense you are talking about. And even in the sense that you are talking about it, still doesn't absolve the perpetrator of the crime.
People here have very clearly indicated that Israel's actions are not justified. They have very clearly indicated that they did not support Israel's actions, nor did they support Israel's blockade.
What they did indicate was that the flotilla went to breach the blockade knowing full well what the consequences might be. This is examplified by the statements made by the IHH on their website. This is examplified by the statements of Gretta Duysenberg in the Netherlands who said she stayed at home because it might get dangerous and her kids had asked her not to go.
They knew their was a risk involved and they were willing to take that risk. This is not equivalent to standard "blame the victim" rhetoric as is usually applied to rape victims, because no victim goes out in a sexy dress taking the calculated risk that she might have a higher chance of getting raped. It is more equivalent (as has been pointed out) to protesters like the civil rights activists who took a calculated risk in protesting for a certain cause, knowing that this might have dire consequences.
|
Only one thing I would question in this otherwise brilliant response (no sarcasm intended). You are talking about someone's "responsiblity" for something. Are you saying that the victims of these murders have some responsiblity for their murder?
[edited for clarification] |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
| Edited by - Gorgo on 06/07/2010 12:09:46 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Israeli blockade incident
