Subject:
|
Re: Libertarian comes through for the Terrorists
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 15 Oct 2001 07:59:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
316 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
>
> > This text questions the premis that it was an attack on freedom and liberty:
>
> > http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4266289,00.html
>
> > It is a long text, but well worth the read.
>
> You know what, Scott? You are absolutely right. That text IS worth the read
> and anyone who is wondering if the Guardian harbors fools or fellow
> travelers or not ought to go read it and carefully think about the bile that
> this author spews.
Hmm. It looks like it does not agree with you view, so you start throwing
mud. For the record, I think that is the 1st time Arundhati Roy (a booker
prize winner - so no fool) has written for the Guardian.
>
> While there are out of context true facts in it, and snippets of it that are
> worth thinking about, taken as a whole, this text evinces a disdain for the
> whole concept of freedom, peace and justice, as it goes about smearing the
> US and all of Western Civilisation.
>
> That you have beat me over the head with this text so many many times with
> it finally brings me to actually respond (I read it the first time and
> dismissed it as spew, hoping that by ignoring your own spew you'd stop).
>
> Yes, everyone should go read it.
>
> Go read it carefully.
>
> Go read this distortive filth and see what it is that Scott and his ilk hold
> up as appropriate and good and right. "down with the evil US", indeed.
Show us where the distortion is. Show us. I admit it is written with strong
words - but her argument is strong. Yours is week. So week that you have not
backed it.
>
> Expect a response from Scott along the lines of "but can you refute fact x?"
> or claiming that I don't know what freedom is, again.
>
> Scott, you're a chump. Bad manners or not, it needs saying.
Pots & kettles.
> Your actions
> demonstrate it, your lack of debating, composition and reading skills
> highlight it, and this sort of tripe really really brings it to the fore.
>
> I again call for a banishment vote, in which the other readers of .debate
> decide if they really really are interested in your spew.
Larry YOU HAVE NOT ANSWERED MY POINT!
Scott A
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
49 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
