27 Jan 12
Originally posted by FMFYou clearly do. These posts weren't directed at you and you have said nothing hypocritical in this thread.
But I do support rvsakhadeo's freedom of expression. Clearly. I just don't agree with him when he expresses support, as he does in this case, for the curtailment of someone else's freedom of expression and, as we can see from many of his other comments on this topic, an undermining of the right to free speech in general.
27 Jan 12
3 edits
Originally posted by rvsakhadeoGet a SoH and come back.
No but to ridicule, yes ! After all the Golden temple is the holiest shrine of Sikhs.
I'm a Christian, there are things that are precious and holy to me but I recognise that other people find them silly, humorous or an object for ridicule.
It's life, it's humanity and what all you "precious" types need to wake up to and realise is that what will keep us together is recognising and embracing our differences, not getting pathetically bent out of shape just because someone sees humour in our beliefs.
28 Jan 12
Originally posted by FMFAre you so shallow?
Originally posted by FMF
[b]I don't think anybody has proposed taking Dhillon's right to file a lawsuit away. It's a red herring. The OP was pretty clear. So you think the joke has promoted "hatred" of Sikhs?
Originally posted by josephw
Only amongst the bigoted.
Originally posted by FMF
Really? Have you actually seen ...[text shortened]... iginally posted by josephw[/i]
[b]Slithering, twisting and turning.
How so?[/b]
I don't believe a joke can promote hatred. But a bigot might not see it that way.
I'm only replying because there's an outside chance that you are not aware of how you manipulated the words to make it sound like I contradicted myself. If that was your intention, then you have a bigger problem.
28 Jan 12
Originally posted by josephwI simply quoted our exchange verbatim. One post after another. Every word. How do you claim have they been "manipulated"?
Are you so shallow?
I don't believe a joke can promote hatred. But a bigot might not see it that way.
I'm only replying because there's an outside chance that you are not aware of how you manipulated the words to make it sound like I contradicted myself. If that was your intention, then you have a bigger problem.
28 Jan 12
Originally posted by FMF"Because I asked you if you thought the joke had promoted "hatred" of Sikhs? And you said it had. And then when I asked you how you figure it promoted "hatred",.."
I simply quoted our exchange verbatim. One post after another. Every word. How do you claim have they been "manipulated"?
I never said I thought a joke promoted hatred. You said I said that, but I didn't.
You are adding things to what I say that I didn't say. You are making inferences. If you are not aware that you're doing that, then I'm telling you so that you can be more cautious.
28 Jan 12
Originally posted by josephwYou did. I quoted you verbatim. You do realize the gag was about Romney, don't you? You have claimed it does promote "hatred" for Sikhs in certain quarters. How so?
I never said I thought a joke promoted hatred. You said I said that, but I didn't.
28 Jan 12
Originally posted by FMFYou have it jumbled up in your mind, because you want it to read that way. You took what I said out of its context, and then said I said things I didn't say.
I quoted you verbatim. If you want to distance yourself from what you said, fine. You could do it with more grace, I think, to put it mildly.
28 Jan 12
1 edit
Originally posted by josephwI quoted our exchange verbatim. I added nothing. I left nothing out. The context and the content is all there, intact. I did not manipulate it in any way. If you regret claiming that the gag about Romney promoted "hatred" for Sikhs in certain quarters, then you should just withdraw the claim instead of all this deflection. People can go and read what you said for themselves.
You have it jumbled up in your mind, because you want it to read that way. You took what I said out of its context, and then said I said things I didn't say.
28 Jan 12
Originally posted by FMFYes you did add to what I said. Not only did you say I said something I didn't, but you inferred I meant something else by what I did say as well.
I quoted our exchange verbatim. I added nothing. I left nothing out. The context and the content is all there, intact. I did not manipulate it in any way. If you regret claiming that the gag about Romney promoted "hatred" for Sikhs in certain quarters, then you should just withdraw the claim instead of all this deflection. People can go and read what you said for themselves.
"Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practise to deceive!"
28 Jan 12
1 edit
Originally posted by josephwHo hum. Well. You posted what you posted. It's still there for others to read. Frame it how you will. But, for what it's worth, I reckon you should have just corrected yourself once you realised you did not want to stand by what you'd claimed rather than frame it as someone somehow for some reason seeking to deceive people about you.
Yes you did add to what I said. Not only did you say I said something I didn't, but you inferred I meant something else by what I did say as well.
28 Jan 12
Originally posted by FMFI am not near as good at OTB chess as I am here. But on the 4th of July
Ho hum. Well. You posted what you posted. It's still there for others to read. Frame it how you will. But, for what it's worth, I reckon you should have just corrected yourself once you realised you did not want to stand by what you'd claimed rather than frame it as someone somehow for some reason seeking to deceive people about you.
Holiday weekend in 1982 I went to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania where the
World Open Chess Tournament was being held. I believe I walked away
with $4,500 in prize money. Have you ever won that much money
playing chess? I doubt if you have and I doubt if you have the right
to bear false witness against me.
28 Jan 12
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsIt's not about me. It's about the engine matchup rates data, RJHinds. It's about the analysis that has been done on your moves in numerous games of yours. It's about the evidence that has been assembled. It's not about your story about $4,500 in prize money 30 years ago. Or about our theism and others atheism. It's about the engine matchup rates. It's not about me.
I am not near as good at OTB chess as I am here. But on the 4th of July
Holiday weekend in 1982 I went to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania where the
World Open Chess Tournament was being held. I believe I walked away
with $4,500 in prize money. Have you ever won that much money
playing chess? I doubt if you have and I doubt if you have the right
to bear false witness against me.