View Single Post
Old 06-20-2019, 11:10 PM
Tripler is offline
Charter Member
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 7,305
Originally Posted by TroutMan View Post
No, this is the response when racists get called on their bullshit and vainly try to backpedal.
I could not have put it better myself.

Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
Sure. I was frankly just looking for a similar word to riffraff for a nice turn of phrase. I'm happy with the way it turned out, though of course I wouldn't use such a word in a corporate email, the consequences around here are much lighter...
So. . . just how did that whole thing turn out for you?

Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
So you have just admitted that you were in the military 25 years earlier. And thus your experience is invalid, you weren't in during a time when the USA was engaged in fairly vicious fighting with insurgents of a particular name. (there's another equivalent slur word starting with H--- that is more common)
There's two things at work here. Allow me to address them:
1) I joined the military in 2000, deployed overseas to the Middle East four times, and retired in 2015. Your time in service is a mere blip on the radar compared to Monty, me, and others. I have sparingly heard an ethnic slur, and even then it was quickly and violently smacked down by good NCOs. Your authority to criticize is invalid. Your conclusion is centering on nothing more than an "Everyone else is doing it, so it must be okay" defense in using a racial slur. But you must have hung with a very special crowd on your deployments.
2) You think the post-Vietnam military (1979) wasn't fresh off a loss from engaging in a fairly vicious fight with insurgents of a particular name? Does "Viet Cong" or a racial slur involving the letters "g--k" happen to ring any bells?

That's neither here nor there for the main point I'd like to illustrate. There's a serious lack of rhetorical segues, and I'd like to point it out for clarification. Let's go back to the sentence structure SamuelA originally posted:

Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
That's what I meant. So you aren't arguing with me, you're arguing with the position of the national nanotechnology initiative, the entire staff at Google Brain, the MIT media lab - those random riffraff and ragheads.
If I apply his definition of "ragheads" to the sentence--as constructed--then am I to understand you consider the entire staff at Google Brain and the MIT media are "un-credible" and "members of the insurgency of Iraq/Afghanistan and ISIS"? Are you aware of the paradox in logic your backpedalling has achieved? Where did the leap from MIT staff to Muslim terrorists occur? The end of your histrionics, concluding with "They are just academics..." only cements my impression.

Listen, I know you got this $5 word salad from the Cafe du Irrelevánce, but this jump without any segues or reference only belies your racism and xenophobia to me. Your backpedalling and whataboutisms are catching you in your own web of lies. JohnT, you're probably right--I might be thinking about this too hard, but Goddamn. . . what a filthy, vulgar, stupid little troll!

Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
And now I just noticed this thread, started by a new poster experiencing hopelessness and deep depression and having suicidal thoughts.
Thanks, wolfpup, I was wondering just where the hell the "homeless bums" had a place in the discussion.

Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
Btw, Tripler, I'm warming to your theory in post 883.
Thanks. See what I mean now?

SamuelA, please don't stop posting. We want to get to know the real you.