News of the day

rushfan4 wrote: I've never once said that it was justified.  How many types do I have to type that????  What I continuously have been saying is that everyone and their brothers would know that something like this would happen by making such a film and yet they made it anyways and gee big surprise it happened.  It doesn't mean that it was the right reaction but unfortunately it was the known reaction.

Fear of reprisal should define our political discourse?

Holy f**k. I just. Holy f**k.

Gamemako wrote: rushfan4 wrote: I've never once said that it was justified.  How many types do I have to type that????  What I continuously have been saying is that everyone and their brothers would know that something like this would happen by making such a film and yet they made it anyways and gee big surprise it happened.  It doesn't mean that it was the right reaction but unfortunately it was the known reaction.  Fear of reprisal should define our political discourse? Holy f**k. I just. Holy f**k.

No.  It is called use common sense and treat other people the way you would like to be treated.  I think that these used to be pretty common American values.  If you don't want people insulting your God and your religion, then maybe you shouldn't be insulting theirs. 

rushfan4 wrote: The T wrote: Dean wrote: The T wrote: The justification applies even less now it seems.  How? Scott said the attacks were a response to the stupid video. And then:  "The Obama administration suspects that the fiery attack in Libya that killed the American ambassador and three other diplomats may have been planned rather than a spontaneous mob getting out of control, American officials said Wednesday." It was never justified but even that explanation loses ground.  Is it so difficult to see?  I've never once said that it was justified.  How many types do I have to type that????  What I continuously have been saying is that everyone and their brothers would know that something like this would happen by making such a film and yet they made it anyways and gee big surprise it happened.  It doesn't mean that it was the right reaction but unfortunately it was the known reaction.

The T wrote: Dean wrote: The T wrote: You're just becoming a trolling admin with me lately Dean see what you want.  Unacceptable answer. My admin title has no bearing on this, call it trolling if you like, but if youi don't want people to reposnd to your posts then don't make them... oh, wait... oh wait what?

I think he sees what you did there.

The T wrote: rushfan4 wrote: The T wrote: Dean wrote: The T wrote: The justification applies even less now it seems.  How? Scott said the attacks were a response to the stupid video. And then:  "The Obama administration suspects that the fiery attack in Libya that killed the American ambassador and three other diplomats may have been planned rather than a spontaneous mob getting out of control, American officials said Wednesday." It was never justified but even that explanation loses ground.  Is it so difficult to see?  I've never once said that it was justified.  How many types do I have to type that????  What I continuously have been saying is that everyone and their brothers would know that something like this would happen by making such a film and yet they made it anyways and gee big surprise it happened.  It doesn't mean that it was the right reaction but unfortunately it was the known reaction.  The T wrote: Scott said the attacks were a response to the stupid video. The T wrote: It was never justified but even that explanation loses ground. I understand you didn't justify it.

Fair enough.  I must have misread/misinterpeted your post.

Dean wrote: The T wrote: Dean wrote: The T wrote: You're just becoming a trolling admin with me lately Dean see what you want.  Unacceptable answer. My admin title has no bearing on this, call it trolling if you like, but if youi don't want people to reposnd to your posts then don't make them... oh, wait... oh wait what?  Oh wait, you are allowed to post whatever you like regardless of what responses that provokes.

No. But I haven't posted anything insulting anybody or something of the sort which would compel an admin to start working towards my self-inflicted exile, which as of lately seems to be your behavior towards my posts. 

I find this mind boggling.

1) Violent intolerant people create a situation wherein they will react violent to any criticism.
2) Someone levies a criticism or irreverent depiction where irreverent is defined by those in (1)
3) People in (1) commit violence to someone not even associated with the people in (2).
4) People in (2) share the blame for the actions of people in committing violence in (3).

It's absurd. Look at the proximate, and second order proximate causes of the death resulting. The closest obviously being the people murdering, but even the second most important act in the causal chain would be the same people who set up the conditions described in (1). Those "inciting"  could be argued to be fourth order even because the very terms and conditions of what constitutes an incitement gets defined by the people committing the murderous acts.

The Avro Arrow shall return. Wish i could have flown her.

Well that escalated quickly. 

^ how do you know what others might want? Dean is a fine admin.........