quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: thezeppo

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

No we see disgusting and perverted as resorting to name calling rather than honest debate

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

On the other hand here I am free to point out that you are a reprehensible excuse for a human being with the analytical skills of my dog and a level of arrogance virtually unparalleled and totally unjustified.

This was funny yesterday when I was drunk, and its still funny now I'm hungover. Without even getting into you calling someone else arrogant after using the royal 'we' to extrapolate your first statement across America, these two posts were less than an hour apart! What a gobshite you are [;)]


Slightly more on topic, when I hear of a gun-related tragedy in the United States my instinctive reaction is 'why do they all have to have guns?' I don't personally like them and I don't really get it when posters argue that more guns should be introduced in the wake of a tragedy. I've come to understand that there is a cultural divide in this regard and that it would be unfair to judge one side by the standards of the other. I've also come around to the idea that I'm a hypocrite if I argue that there should be tighter gun control or a ban on guns in the wake of tragic events. Its not a perfect analogy but if someone were to play Grand Theft Auto for 24 hours straight and then drive their car into a group of people I would still fully expect to be able to keep my copy of the game. I don't think people like MasterCaneman and DaddySatyr should have their guns taken away because someone else miles away committed an atrocity. I suppose I'm coming around to the personal responsibility argument - with the proviso that anyone whose gun is used to commit murder should be tried for the same crime, if they aren't already.

In the first post I was not using the royal we.
That was the we as in those of us who think we are being talked down to think so because.
I used we because I was speaking for a group.
The second post was because he had spent 6 pages insulting me on a moderated thread and has a history of doing so until I respond in kind.
Then he denies being the person who reports me for doing so.
I was catching up in one post for the better part of a week of abusive posts from him.

Six pages correcting your errors is not the same as six pages insulting you. You should get your facts right before making dubious claims. If you think I am insulting you then fucking report me, if you think I am trying to get the thread closed, then fucking report me. The mods will warn me soon enough. It is beyond your capability to work out anyone can report any post, the mods will then read the thread in question and clean up anything they see fit, be it your errors, or my errors. Unless you are special, and not just special needs, the mods will also send you gold letters, as they do me. Each one explains why a post has been pulled. Stop bleating about it, man up and accept your gold letters like everyone else does, including me. You dont get gold letters for something someone else has written.

I will also state clearly I have never reported you before this thread, you are just making shit up in order to look good. Admin have my permission to tell you if I am lying or not.

I did report your post Zeppo quoted though, but even then I asked if I was able to reply in kind without breaking the TOS as per the OP.

As for pointing out your errors, I am at liberty, as per the TOS to question content. If it`s dubious I will say so, likewise if its nonsense or just.......well just fucking laughable. If you cant handle that, then get your facts right before you post, like most people try and do.

You should note I am not the only one able to spot the hypocrisy of your posts, I am just the one who can normally be arsed to point it out.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

Both were done by Christians to save the souls of those they believed needed saving.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
I will also state clearly I have never reported you before this thread, you are just making shit up in order to look good. Admin have my permission to tell you if I am lying or not.

I did report your post Zeppo quoted though, but even then I asked if I was able to reply in kind without breaking the TOS as per the OP.

I have never reported you but I reported you. Yep that builds your credibility.
Telling a person you disagree with them is not insulting.
Insisting they are an idiot is.
Your every comment drips with arrogance.
Your conclusions are absurd.
You want me to Think that people just feel sorry for you so thy report me.
Cause if you didn't do it someone did.
When I see a ticket my response is ok I got carried away that time.
Besides I was complaining that the thread could be shut down, and you know it. Besides I was complaining that the thread could be shut down, and you know it.
Your final defense when Lovmuffin pointed out that the citizen/subject thing is a common American viewpoint you stated , and I quote, he wasn't talking to an American.
That would mean that by your standard any view that you spout here that doesn't fit the American view is stupid unless spoken to another American or with American approval. Now that is of questionable logic.

quote:

The Spanish Inquisition was established independently

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Well I must say, I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition to come up in this thread.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Once again I can only point to Americans' lack of culture. You were supposed to say Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

Does this mean you don't want to buy any vegetables?

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

Does this mean you don't want to buy any vegetables?

No thanks. It'd feel a bit unfair. You need them your side of the Pond to continue putting the pro-gun case.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

tomato-tomato . . .

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
I will also state clearly I have never reported you before this thread, you are just making shit up in order to look good. Admin have my permission to tell you if I am lying or not.

I did report your post Zeppo quoted though, but even then I asked if I was able to reply in kind without breaking the TOS as per the OP.

I have never reported you but I reported you. Yep that builds your credibility.
Telling a person you disagree with them is not insulting.
Insisting they are an idiot is.
Your every comment drips with arrogance.
Your conclusions are absurd.
You want me to Think that people just feel sorry for you so thy report me.
Cause if you didn't do it someone did.
When I see a ticket my response is ok I got carried away that time.
Besides I was complaining that the thread could be shut down, and you know it. Besides I was complaining that the thread could be shut down, and you know it.
Your final defense when Lovmuffin pointed out that the citizen/subject thing is a common American viewpoint you stated , and I quote, he wasn't talking to an American.
That would mean that by your standard any view that you spout here that doesn't fit the American view is stupid unless spoken to another American or with American approval. Now that is of questionable logic.

Firstly, if you think the bolded part of what you quoted hurts my credibility, then you really are stupid. Which bit of BEFORE THIS THREAD didnt you understand ?

Secondly, I dont need to report your post to get them pulled, as you pointed out others can also object to them. Anyhow, as I said previously, your posts can get pulled just because they are caught up in a thread clean up, something you dont understand.

Thirdly, The part about citizens and subjects was a result of you using it as an insult. You even made some remark to me about "I am a citizen while you are a subject" So excuse me for pointing out that while I was indeed born a UK citizen, US citizens in the south were subjected to apartheid, how short your memory is huh.

As for getting thereads closed, the comment above about "Besides I was complaining that the thread could be shut down, and you know it. " is a bare faced lie. You have clearly accused me several times of trying to get threads closed by insulting you. Deny this if you like but others can read for themselves.

Am I guilty of calling people who make idiotic posts idiots ?....... Yes probably, just shoot the messenger. [8|]

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
...were subjected to Jim crow and segregation wrong but not apartheid which was much worse...
<snip>

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

Just being picky...

Merriam Webster defines Apartheid as being racial segregation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
...were subjected to Jim crow and segregation wrong but not apartheid which was much worse...
<snip>

Just being picky...
Merriam Webster defines Apartheid as being racial segregation.

Did I miss something??
The blacks being segregated because of their colour... same appalling treatment... but in different countries??

Seems to be one and the same candy bar to me [:D]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

Both were done by Christians to save the souls of those they believed needed saving.

The Inquisitions had nothing to do with "saving souls". The sole and exclusive purpose of the Medieval Inquisition was the eradication of heresy. The Spanish Inquisition was established independently, with only the reluctant approval of Sixtus IV, mainly for the purpose of uniting Spain under the Catholic rule of Ferdinand and Isabella.

With that as a hint that you don't know what you're talking about, I'll leave you to redo your homework on the Witch Trials.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

The Inquisition was created through papal bull, Ad Abolendam, issued at the end of the 12th century by Pope Lucius III [...]

However in Spain [During the Middle Ages, in Castile,] little attention was paid to heresy by the Catholic ruling class. Jews and Muslims [were tolerated and generally allowed to follow their traditional laws and customs in domestic matters. However, by law, they] were considered inferior to Catholics and were subject to discriminatory legislation.

>Taken from Para 1 and 2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_inquisition#Previous_Inquisitions

The Inquisition was originally intended in large part to ensure the orthodoxy of those who converted from Judaism and Islam. This regulation of the faith of the newly converted was intensified after the royal decrees issued in 1492 and 1501 ordering Jews and Muslims to convert or leave.

>Taken from Para 2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_inquisition

Nevertheless, in some parts of Spain towards the end of the 14th century, there was a wave of violent anti-Judaism, encouraged by the preaching of Ferrand Martinez, Archdeacon of Ecija. The pogroms of June 1391 were especially bloody: in Seville, hundreds of Jews were killed, and the synagogue was completely destroyed. The number of people killed was also high in other cities, such as Córdoba, Valencia and Barcelona.

A [One of the] consequences of these programs was the mass conversion of Jews. Forced baptism was contrary to the law of the Catholic Church, and theoretically anybody who had been forcibly baptized could legally return to Judaism; this however was very narrowly interpreted. Legal definitions of the time theoretically acknowledged that a forced baptism was not a valid sacrament, but confined this to cases where it was literally administered by physical force: a person who had consented to baptism under threat of death or serious injury was still regarded as a voluntary convert, and accordingly forbidden to revert to Judaism.

>Taken from Para 5 and 6: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_inquisition#Previous_Inquisitions

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

The Inquisition was created through papal bull, Ad Abolendam, issued at the end of the 12th century by Pope Lucius III [...]

However in Spain [During the Middle Ages, in Castile,] little attention was paid to heresy by the Catholic ruling class. Jews and Muslims [were tolerated and generally allowed to follow their traditional laws and customs in domestic matters. However, by law, they] were considered inferior to Catholics and were subject to discriminatory legislation.

>Taken from Para 1 and 2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_inquisition#Previous_Inquisitions

The Inquisition was originally intended in large part to ensure the orthodoxy of those who converted from Judaism and Islam. This regulation of the faith of the newly converted was intensified after the royal decrees issued in 1492 and 1501 ordering Jews and Muslims to convert or leave.

>Taken from Para 2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_inquisition

Nevertheless, in some parts of Spain towards the end of the 14th century, there was a wave of violent anti-Judaism, encouraged by the preaching of Ferrand Martinez, Archdeacon of Ecija. The pogroms of June 1391 were especially bloody: in Seville, hundreds of Jews were killed, and the synagogue was completely destroyed. The number of people killed was also high in other cities, such as Córdoba, Valencia and Barcelona.

A [One of the] consequences of these programs was the mass conversion of Jews. Forced baptism was contrary to the law of the Catholic Church, and theoretically anybody who had been forcibly baptized could legally return to Judaism; this however was very narrowly interpreted. Legal definitions of the time theoretically acknowledged that a forced baptism was not a valid sacrament, but confined this to cases where it was literally administered by physical force: a person who had consented to baptism under threat of death or serious injury was still regarded as a voluntary convert, and accordingly forbidden to revert to Judaism.

>Taken from Para 5 and 6: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_inquisition#Previous_Inquisitions

The words in red are the only parts of that entire performance that are your own. The parts in blue show what you changed or omitted. I've broken out the paragraphs and noted their locations in the original text. You plagiarized the whole thing. You made some rearrangements for cover, ran the paragraphs together for good measure, and then posted it under your own name without attribution.

Not that anybody who knows you will be surprised, of course, or fail to note that it says nothing, anywhere, about "saving souls."

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Here we know there is a big difference between our misconduct and that of the South Africans.
I understand that Europeans may not see the difference.
I also understand that some (not you or anyone else in particular) may not want to see the difference.