Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (2665)	3/15/2002 9:05:32 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 21057

I would probably fall into a faint if you ever accurately addressed a post of mine. The problem is not atheism, it is having atheists spew their prejudice and contempt. I find it as offensive as I do Chris Land. The problem is not disagreements on policy, it is the shallowness of some of the perspectives that are common enough around here. The problem is not "inconsistent enforcement", but the fact that the same person, within a couple of days, blew off a complaint about classic anti- semitic canards and then came down much too heavily on jla.......Do you ever get the point?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (2665)	3/19/2002 6:10:39 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

I thought I would go back and address the idea of "taking non sequitur to the level of a new art form". First, I am not sure how mentioning why the Holocaust might have a personal dimension can be a non- sequitur in response to the suggestion that I take someone like EV too seriously. I do not say that it proves that I am NOT too serious, I am saying that there is obviously a logical connection, and therefore it is NOT a non- sequitur. The next significant transition has to do with how I view the United States and its role in the world, in the light of this, which bears on my remarks in the earlier post about people who despise the United States foreign policy posture since at least the War. The final transition is to notice how my feelings about all of this dovetail with current circumstances, where Israel is more threatened in its existence than it has been in years, and the United States is leading a campaign to deal with terrorism decisively. This also connects with my mention of the 6 month observation of 911 and the fact that my wife was about to take a trip to LA. So far, I am failing to find a non- sequitur in there. It all relates. As for your list of my points in the original post: The issue is not the abstract inconsistency of the enforcement of TOU, which is explicable by such things as oversight, but the fact that Jeff was involved within a short space of time in both matters. I am sorry, I found the juxtaposition offensive. A chacun son gout, I guess. I did not complain about some people being irreligious and honest, but such people pretending to have no bias in the matter, and sometimes showing a contempt for belief which seems to lack elementary empathy, and that seems to me to lapse, in some cases, into sheer bigotry towards the religious. I refused to get caught in a long argument with E, because it is futile, and I do not want to get into it in detail or personally. I was expressing how it seems to me, take it or leave it. I did not complain about differences of opinion, except in a generic sense that makes what I said meaningless. I complained about certain perspectives: one, that started with the most startlingly nasty assumptions about Bush and his crowd, and that builds from there while begging any question of substantiation; and the other, that started with the most incredible blanket contempt for the foreign policy establishment of the United States, at least in the second half of the 20th century. I am sick unto death of being misrepresented and then kicked for what I allegedly said........