Trolling garbage

[Richard Wiig]

Bob,

I find it hard to discern an intelligent thought in your posts above.

I do discern a lot of taunting, so it is probably nothing more than a Tarzan yell.

The closest meaning I can discern is that you believe Nazism does not have any leftover influence in the Islamist world and that Islam itself is the evil. But even that's not clear.

Whatever.

Michael

Talk about evasion.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I find it hard to discern an intelligent thought in your posts above.

. . .

Talk about evasion.

I find it hard to discern an intelligent thought in this post, too.

Talk about trolling...

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I peeled this off from a thread in the Glenn Beck corner where I already objected to these one-liner (or one paragraph) trolling posts.

Now I have a place to throw other similar trolling posts.

Michael

[Richard Wiig]

Well, you have evaded. That isn't a trolling comment, whatever trolling means, it's an observation of you. Another observation is that you are very selective in insults that you will or won't send to garbage. For instance, Bob gave his honest opinion of someone, and it gets dumped, because you didn't like it's insulting flavour. Scherk gives his honest opinion of someone, and it get's a free pass, because you approve of its insulting flavour. If anyone's an Aystollah around here, it would have to be you.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Richard,

People like you always equate flexibility with weakness. But you will get no adherence to your sanction of the victim mind-games from me.

You bigotry is already tolerated on OL up to a limit.

Your disrespect to me is not and it will not be. You have the entire Internet for that.

Not here.

You have two options with respect to this: accept it or leave. There is no third option. It is not negotiable.

I will start deleting if it keeps up.

Michael

[Richard Wiig]

It's got nothing to do with flexibility, it's to do with inconsistency with the application of your principles, that is, if you go by principles of justice (objectivce principles of justice, that is). If you dont go by principles of justice, then I guess there's no inconsistency.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Richard,

Justice has nothing to do with spoilers.

In cases like yours, on OL, I go by the principle of private property. My site, not yours.

I don't like pulling rank, but I do when I have to. If I let you do what you are trying to do, you will spoil this site for the majority of my guests.

I won't let you.

That's just the way it is.

Michael

[Richard Wiig]

The only lack of critical thinking I see is yours. You seriously seem to think that anti-jihadists haven't researched the subject enough to form their own conclusions, and you seem incapable of distinguishing between someone making judgements of a creed and of the followers of that creed. When someone says that Socialism is evil, at least among those who know that it is, such as Libertarians and Objectivists, it isn't controversial. The majority know that Socialism is an evil creed. No one makes charges of bigotry against Socialists, or a lack of critical thinking, or tries to disintegrate the focus by pointing out that those people over there do it to. No one does, but Islam gets a free pass. You are a useful Jihadist tool.

[Brant Gaede]

The only lack of critical thinking I see is yours. You seriously seem to think that anti-jihadists haven't researched the subject enough to form their own conclusions, and you seem incapable of distinguishing between someone making judgements of a creed and of the followers of that creed. When someone says that Socialism is evil, at least among those who know that it is, such as Libertarians and Objectivists, it isn't controversial. The majority know that Socialism is an evil creed. No one makes charges of bigotry against Socialists, or a lack of critical thinking, or tries to disintegrate the focus by pointing out that those people over there do it to. No one does, but Islam gets a free pass. You are a useful Jihadist tool.

That's a nice way--nice, I suppose--of calling him a "useful idiot."

Most Jihadists are state-sponsored and protected and that's the crux of the matter. It's a matter of resources and religious pandering by the bad guys. It wasn't Islam that was turned back at Vienna, it was the Sultan's army.

--Brant

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Brant,

You flatter this poster.

He was simply sticking his tongue out at me and going nyah nyah nyah! You're a poo-poo head!

That's the kind of crap more suited here to the Garbage Pile than to intelligent discourse.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

Brant,

You flatter this poster.

He was simply sticking his tongue out at me and going nyah nyah nyah! You're a poo-poo head!

That's the kind of crap more suited here to the Garbage Pile than to intelligent discourse.

Michael

I'm handicapped, Michael. Everything I say is intelligent.

--Brant

phew!

[Richard Wiig]

Most Jihadists are state-sponsored

No they're not.

[Brant Gaede]

Most Jihadists are state-sponsored

No they're not.

How about "effective" Jihadists?

--Brant

[Richard Wiig]

I wouldn't say that either. The likes of Hezbollah are state-sponsored, covertly, but they're also funded by your average muslim paying Zakat to Islamic charities. However those type of groups are only one form of Jihad. There are many forms of Jihad practiced by a vast array of individuals, many of which are quite effective.

Edited February 12, 2011 by Infidel

[Richard Wiig]

Here's a news flash. Identifying fundamentals doesn't mean to point at a book or the names of others. It means to isolate the concepts, fer Krisssakes.

As I've pointed out countless times now, the Mujahideen do isolate their principles and concepts, from the Qur'an and Sunnah. You ignore that in favour of saying that they fundamentally base themselves in the ideas and concepts of the nazis, and declare anyone who points that out as wrong as being bigoted and muddying the waters. I consider that to be an evasion on a monstrous level.

[Richard Wiig]

Not saying they don't preach from Mein Kampf, so there is not real Nazi stuff.

Michael

That isn't what I said. What I've consistently said is that Islamic principles came before any nazi principles. Once again, you evade. You are dishonest.

[Philip Coates]

> Once again, you evade. You are dishonest.

I don't think it's fair to say of Brant or Michael that they are evading. The key to them (and a number of other regulars) is that they 'speed read'. And then speed post.

Sloppiness, lack of careful and attentive focus, mental laziness. Not dishonesty.

Beware of using that all purpose Oist accusation: "You are evading".

[Selene]

But he is not pompous, effete and condescending.

Sped read.

Sped posted.

100 % on point.

[caroljane]

> Once again, you evade. You are dishonest.

I don't think it's fair to say of Brant or Michael that they are evading. The key to them (and a number of other regulars) is that they 'speed read'. And then speed post.

Sloppiness, lack of careful and attentive focus, mental laziness. Not dishonesty.

Beware of using that all purpose Oist accusation: "You are evading".

Very good point. Some posters (not you or Brant or Michael!) even boast of their quickness in posting and minimal editing. Speed reading for what you are looking for is an idiosyncracy, understandable in those who are corresponding with longtime acquaintances.

[Brant Gaede]

Phil does another drive-by.

--Brant

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

What I find comical about Phil's drive-by's is that he never reads the actual topics.

So he never has a clue about what the argument is over. (Probably from speed reading and speed posting or whatever... )

If he had followed this particular argument, he would have known there was an actual disagreement that has spanned several weeks and threads. And it never got any better. And even more, there was a butt-load of outside material and sources presented during the exchanges.

As to accusations of lying, evading, being dishonest, yadda yadda yadda, when this clearly isn't the case, this is the way people act when their abilities to present their case by reason collapse. It gets worse when they feel they will not be able to convert others.

It's all where it belongs here in the Garbage Pile.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

Islam is quite lumpy in its various manifestations and sects. Naziism was a big lump of coal imposed from the top down after feeding on economic distress and feelings of German humiliation and being stabbed in the back in and right after WWI. As a religion Islam is baseline reference for over a billion people. Some Germans got the Nazi religion inside out but many if not most had it imposed. They lost the war and almost all Germans shucked it. No matter how many wars the Muslims lose they'll still be Muslims afterward. No country can wage a successful overt war against a religion unless it is internal and absolutely brutal.

The seemingly inexorable insanity of oil wars and oil import dependence centered in the Middle East, especially the Persian Gulf, the refusal of hard, rational, long-term action going back 40 or more years, mean it's all going to get worse and a big war is coming involving an enfeebled United States and a lashing-out Israel, Iran, Pakistan and India. Maybe, too, some other Gulf states. Statism gone wild.

--Brant