In order to progress important debates such as this, one needs to make some unilateral assumptions, such as: the majority of the "gumut of horrors of the C20th" would be even worse (horror) than the shootings mentioned in the OP and therefore bring them into the discussion is moot. Furthermore, as the OP only specifically mentions "shootings" it is incumbent upon the challenger, in this case myself, to demonstrate that the OP intended not only to compare himself being frivolously castigated for taking a chess timeout with "shootings" but was also, by incidental implication, was comparing the said frivolity with a broader range of even worse contemporary horrors. I felt that to attempt this would have been presumptive and provocative on my part.
Still no explicit condemnation of Hitler, Stalin or Mao from you, I notice.
Originally posted by FMF [b]In order to progress important debates such as this, one needs to make some unilateral assumptions, such as: the majority of the "gumut of horrors of the C20th" would be even worse (horror) than the shootings mentioned in the OP and therefore bring them into the discussion is moot. Furthermore, as the OP only specifically mentions "shootings" it is incumbent ...[text shortened]... e on my part.
Still no explicit condemnation of Hitler, Stalin or Mao from you, I notice.[/b]
Your choosing to ignore my explanation and your subsequent introduction of "hitler" as a debating tactic into this Internet discussion...noted.
Originally posted by divegeester Your choosing to ignore my explanation and your subsequent introduction of "hitler" as a debating tactic into this Internet discussion...noted.
I note without need for further comment that you have used a small 'h' for Hitler.
But I notice you didn't tackle me for not mentioning Mao when I mentioned Stalin in response to the way divegeester mentioned Hitler. People will make of it what they will.
Originally posted by FMF But I notice you didn't tackle me for not mentioning Mao when I mentioned Stalin in response to the way divegeester mentioned Hitler. People will make of it what they will.
I note that your introduction of "hitler" into the this thread has triggered the phantom down-thumber into action.
Originally posted by FMF But I notice you didn't tackle me for not mentioning Mao when I mentioned Stalin in response to the way divegeester mentioned Hitler. People will make of it what they will.
Originally posted by divegeester Your ability to get a member of the opposite sex to co-habit with you remains a rumour.
Just because he claims to have had an ex-wife doesn't mean anyone ever co-habited with him. He could have been married by Sun Myung Moon in a football stadium along with 4,000 other Moonies and never gotten within 100 yards of his alleged Korean spouse.
You know the rules here, Freaky: pix, or it never happened!
Originally posted by moonbus Just because he claims to have had an ex-wife doesn't mean anyone ever co-habited with him. He could have been married by Sun Myung Moon in a football stadium along with 4,000 other Moonies and never gotten within 100 yards of his alleged Korean spouse.
You know the rules here, Freaky: pix, or it never happened!
I believe he did have a pic, but alas, it was heavily edited by NASA.
Timeout whining
12 Jul '16 16:04
Back to Top