Holocaust Industry = Hate Speech?

Discussion in 'Site Feedback' started by S.A.M., Dec 22, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,948
    SAM:

    I am sorry that you are so bound up in your bigotry that you will not offer a simple apology when you are so clearly in the wrong.

    I am sad that you are choosing to leave sciforums forever because your ego is too big to offer a simple apology for a relatively minor offence.

    But so be it. You have approximately 19 hours left.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. WillNever Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,594
    She just told you if you feel she is wrong (which you say you do) then she apologizes.

    Why are you making it harder for her?
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    A man, a woman, and several sick cats.
    A war of accusation and apology.

    Meets all the prerequisites for a rom com.

     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Mrs.Lucysnow Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,879
    That was not an apology. If she were going to apologize she would have done so through pm. That was more of a 'I don't know what you are on about but if it will make you feel better I apologize' :shrug: In short she is playing ignorant.
     
  8. WillNever Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,594
    Like Pride and Prejudice. This is remarkably similar, in some ways.
     
  9. WillNever Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,594
    Hmm, I didn't view it that way. You paraphrasing her is dangerously close to mispresentation... which is dangerously close to libel.

    More apologies are in order.

    Kidding.
     
  10. Mrs.Lucysnow Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,879
    What? Apologize to her for what she does to others on a regular basis? I don't think so. James dealt with her privately she chose to go about making an entire thread about what is essentially between the both of them. If she were REALLY apologetic the post would have indicated as such but have done so privately. She's just spreading her urine about like a cat marking territory.
     
  11. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,948
    I am sorry. I had to leave for a while and I didn't see SAM's post #60.

    It is not clear to me whether this is intended as the apology I requested or not.

    Any apology that starts "If I have offended..." or "If you feel that I have wronged you..." is not a true apology. Clearly you have given offence to somebody who demands an apology from you.

    A true apology involves admitting that what you did was unacceptable. The above amounts to a slap in the face: "Well, I know that you think what I did was wrong, but since I don't think there was anything wrong with it, I'll give you a two-faced apology-that-doesn't-really-apologise in order to make life easier for myself, then go on with business as usual."

    How could I be any clearer? You insulted me by stating falsely that I had made statements that I never made. I want you to admit that what you did was wrong and to apologise. What's unclear about that?

    So, to be clear and to avoid a misunderstanding with potentially heavy consequences, please clarify your post, SAM. Thankyou.
     
  12. Brian Foley REFUSE - RESIST Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,624
    How does "Holocaust industry" constitute Hate Speech? Ridiculous when the term itself was coined by a Jewish Academic.
     
  13. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,948
    Brian:

    Read the entire post. I am really not interesting in debating this topic with you.
     
  14. countezero Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,590
    Why are you sticking up for her? The lengths some people will go on this site to pretend Sam has a useful purpose continues to baffle me.
     
  15. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825

    Sure I'll clarify. It would appear that when you attributed someone elses words to me you felt that by "selectively quoting" them, I owned their views. You also accused me of "quote of mining" and when I questioned how I had misrepresented the views of the author, you said that if I were using "that" definition" of "quote mining" [apparently there is some other, with a widely different meaning, that is not apparent here] then I should reassign your words to read "selectively quoting"

    Then you said:

    Now I am no longer certain exactly what your words mean? Are you claiming that if I "selectively quoted" [whatever that means] Gandhi's antiwar stance, I would hence own Gandhi's antiwar views which would then make both Gandhi and I bigoted for having only a view that supported the victims and disregarding the perpetrators? It is a very odd position indeed that in order to be "objective" I must support [if I am understanding you in this matter] both the victim and the perpetrator. IOW, if I "selectively quote" a position which is anti war when it comes to the Holocaust by quoting the views of an antiwar German who sympathises with the plight of the Jews, we are both [the German and I] guilty of bigotry. At least that is what it sounds like.

    So since Gandhi, the antiwar American and I have put ourselves in the untenable position of being anti war this makes us anti-war propagandists bigoted in favour of the victims. I consider this position quite acceptable to me, I am bigoted against war and you clearly consider me bigoted for "selectively quoting" a position which only supports my view.

    Well yeah, if I am anti-slavery I will "selectively quote" only antislavery positions, if I am anti-racism, I will "selectibely quote" anti-racism positions.

    How could it be otherwise? And if you believe this makes me and whoever I "selectively quote" equally culpable as "bigots" then I am unsure how this is libel.

    You claimed also:

    now if you are not in the same "bigoted" boat as I, Gandhi and the anti war American, you would also simultaneously support Obamas decision on the bombing itself, while sympathising with the victims. If this is your position ie pro-war but sympathising with the victims, I am unsure why you think this "objective" position is something I should support or admire. And if I did, would I be "selectively quoting" your position to ally with mine?

    Your position seems to be exactly what I said it was. Why do we have to support for example the Nazis to be "objective" about the Jews? Or Obama to be "objective" about the Pakistanis? Or slavers to be "objective" about slaves?

    Why can't we [the anti-war American and I, who are apparently indistinguishable in our positions] simply be antiwar and support the victims? Why is this a "selective quote" what kind of strange proposition is this?


    Basically you make no sense at all so I am not clear what the libel is. You seem to be offended because I clearly stated your position which you have said over and over in this thread. But it now appears that you do not use standard definitions of terms so it may mean something else entirely.
     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2009
  16. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    Posting in an Epic Thread

    Yeah I couldn't help my self. Ever since SAM freaked out and was demoted she has not posted a new thread on the biology forum, the place were she provided the calm unbiased discussion and brought goodness to these forums, and instead has devoted her self completely to arguing about Palestinians, how much the evil west hates her and muslims, ect, and generally causing flame wars. Yes she should have gotten banished the fact others have gotten banned for less is really a travesty, at the very lest forcibly breaking her addiction would do her good (or cause her to become even more fundamentalist) heck I can go on multiple year hiatus for far far less, watch me go, bye.
     
  17. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    It was made quite clear to me that us theist freaks have no place on a science forum. So yeah I quit posting science threads, I only responded to the ones already there.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I think I stated this position somewhere when I decided on this, but I am too lazy to search.
     
  18. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    There are other theist here, but when you pick a fight you can't claim victimhood. Come on SAM come with me just head towards the light, its time to move on.
     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2009
  19. countezero Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,590
    The fact she's stretched her defense, if we can call it that, in the face of banning, into pages upon pages of rationalizations says all you need to know about her.
     
  20. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Pick a fight? There are no "real" scientists here, there is a reason for that. There are probably three or four people who could understand the discussions in biology which we could have, as serious science lovers devoted to understanding the world through experimental study. But this is not a place encouraging to science lovers. More like the opposite, you have admin that lies and misrepresents, mods that are childish, biased and threatening, I'm not certain what the idea here is, but the fact that its become an atheist forum that is hostile to theists takes precedence over all other claims here. There are many ways in which this is manifest here and it has become essentially the place where James indulges himself by encouraging the echo of his own voice and denouncing all other as bigots who have issues or are a problem and on a crusade. He seems to have become increasingly devoted to this cause, abandoning all pretence at objectiivty and making strange claims and assertions which he does not consider necessary to substantiate with evidence. This thread is a case in point.

    But, I am tired so I won't continue to whine. Suffice to say that I have no confidence in James as a person of integrity, so it makes little sense to continue posting in a place where he stalks me continually. Perhaps for a change he can stalk new posters and match their IP to mine, a practice I assure you, he excels at for other posters who he feels "do not belong" at sciforums. Its his personal domain now and too constrictive for any real thinking. See for example how he has attacked human rights activist Norman Finkelstein in this thread. Its beyond belief.

    I do wish to thank all my friends for their support and especially those who remained objective inspite of strong philosophical disagreements with my positions. I won't name anyone, since it will taint them by association. You too fetus, you've been fun to debate with although we rarely crosses tracks in biology.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2009
  21. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    I don't disagree with that, I long since gave up coming here for real scientific discussion, although that has nothing to do with picking a fight, jesus that a blatant red herring there SAM your truly losing your edge.

    no, no, this has become something of a general enthusiast forums, which is not necessarily a bad thing, scientist are often seen as snubbing and esoteric assholes, cultivating a general interest in all things helps counter that image.

    yeah, yeah, aaaah, crusade you say, arguing on the internet about issues that interest you is NOT a crusade, its more of a "time wasting" or "masturbation" than anything of worldly consequence like a crusade. Face it you been jerking it for thousands of post now, with no intention of learning, helping or imparting benefits to others, or at the very lest murdering others for what you consider holy (in literal definition of a crusade)

    Hey its James Cooking, if you don't like it you don't need to come here and eat it, why don't you go start you own forum, spuriousmonkey did it. You want to get control of your addiction (assuming you do): stop buying and start selling!

    Yet your still yapping, perhaps out of egotistical self-righteousness? James has done so very much to hold his tongue the fact he broken down now is actually something to admire, I seriously doubt you would give your opponents such opportunities for years on end on your forum.

    If you were not being banished you would be back in 48 hours, you know it, I know it we all know it. I really do hope you start your own forum, I would come, if only to test how long it would take for you to banishment me

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2009
  22. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    I would agree if there were any scientists here doing that .

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!




    Its a discussion forum, not a school.


    Agreed, I don't need to eat James cooking, but I missed the part in the FAQ where it said it was his. Frankly, I had better hopes from Plazma he showed some promise when he started here and James looked very different when he was popping in once a day to randomly ban a poster here and there for hate speech, antisemitism or racism. Over time he has banned most of the posters who were objective though, so it would seem that the aim is not to retain objectivity, but to encourage stupidity.


    Maybe we don't include you in all our squabbles, James is anything but "quiet" and he hasn't broken down, he's been at it for over a year at least.


    Of course, I don't come here to chat with James, I come here to debate with posters I like or those who challenge my POV. He's just in the way.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    And nah, I wouldn't banish you, I don't believe I've ever complained about you either. I think you're funny and a bit screwy, but then, thats a badge of honour at sciforums.

    edit: [note to admin] oh when I am banned, I'd like my social groups to be handed over to kira - I think she's the best person to decide what to do about them.
     
  23. scifes In withdrawal. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,573
    wow, someone turned out to be a spoiled child with a rich daddy.. guess it explains sam being all cool and mature all of a sudden..
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page