# Ignorance fights back; or, december, please EXPLAIN yourself? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 7, 2003, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808 "2003-03-07T22:17:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![Mtgman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5a626/32.png) [@Mtgman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mtgman)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2003, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/241 "2003-03-12T16:42:21Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by december_ > **First of all my statement is the literal truth. The Vatican has been giving legitimacy and moral support to the Ba’athist regime in Iraq and the Arafat regime. These regimes do murder Jews.** The last sentence, sure. The rest? Your position. Claiming it is “literal truth” doesn’t make it so. Enjoy, Steven ---
**Author:** ![TwistofFate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/cdc98d/32.png) [@TwistofFate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TwistofFate)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2003, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/242 "2003-03-12T17:54:36Z")
> [@](#): > > “The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.” thats bullshit. And the vatican has NOT given moral support to either the PA or Iraq. You keep saying this but do not give any evidence, other than bloggers who you agree with. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2003, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/243 "2003-03-12T17:57:11Z")
which completes the **december** plan, after weasling back and forth and getting into semantical quibbles, he wanders back restates his original position as if nothing else had occured. IOW, **Mtgman** is correct. You are again asserting as ‘literal truth’ your personal opinion, which is what gets you all this attention in the pit. you’ve failed to demonstrate how meeting with someone offers ‘moral support’ for their position of killing Jews. ---
**Author:** ![Coldfire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a587f6/32.png) [@Coldfire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Coldfire)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2003, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/244 "2003-03-12T18:04:05Z")
**december** , I’ll reiterate my point made on page one of this very thread: you are an _idiot_. That is all. ---
**Author:** ![Avalonian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ee7513/32.png) [@Avalonian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Avalonian)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2003, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/245 "2003-03-12T18:05:39Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*\*My point is that the Vatican’s actual actions have had consequences different from what it intended. “The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.” \*\* Funny, that last sentence could be accurately applied to the Bush Administration’s push for war as well. But I digress. You mention consequences, **december**. Specifically what consequences has the Pope’s meeting with Aziz actually had? Your argument essentially rests on this point; you say that this meeting “proves” the Pope is supporting Iraq, and yet you’ve provided no hard evidence. The _consequences_ are at issue here. I ask you now, what have those consequences been? Citing opinions or blogs here will not suffice, you’d better be able to define specific consequences in the form of hard evidence, or get off the box. Saying your statement is “literal truth” doesn’t make it so, **december** , but in saying so you do much to prove **Guin** ’s opinion of you. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2003, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/246 "2003-03-12T18:19:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Coldfire \* > \*\ ***december** , I’ll reiterate my point made on page one of this very thread: you are an _idiot_. > > That is all. \*\* I just wanted to say that I didn’t use to think this. Ideologically-challenged, certainly, but an idiot? No. But to follow the same familiar pattern of unsupported assertions and obfuscations after it’s been pointed out that that’s what you’re doing is hardly likely to strengthen your position. And to persist in the same assertions after they’ve been shown to be based on assumptions so flimsy that even Rush Limbaugh wouldn’t touch them with a ten-foot barge pole…well, it’s starting to look a lot like idiocy to me. ---
**Author:** ![Eva\_Luna](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e495f1/32.png) [@Eva\_Luna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eva_Luna)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2003, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/247 "2003-03-12T18:29:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*\*First of all my statement is the literal truth. The Vatican has been giving legitimacy and moral support to the Ba’athist regime in Iraq and the Arafat regime. These regimes do murder Jews. > > \*\* Ummmm, so are we to assume that your personal representatives were in the room with the Pope, and that you know everything that was said in the audience? Or even better, that you have personally discussed the issue with His Holiness and kow what he thinks? If so, then perhaps you’d deign to share the content of said “moral support.” ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2003, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/248 "2003-03-12T18:30:01Z")
and may I take a moment to ask of all the **december** appoligists - do you still not understand why he gets pitted? It’s entirely possible that we don’t wait for the 15th weaseling/flat out contradiction again, since we’ve seen this same exact pattern often enough that it can be charted. But should we bother waiting? the first several thousand times he did this, we all were patient, but by this time, we’ve been down this road over and over again and get tired of the bs. specifically, **weirddave** you see what happened when he was taken to task for the specifics - he qualified and weaseld and re-defined commonly used words to achieve his goals, and finally, simply again restated his unsupported opinion as if it had been fact. Had that statement appeared in GQ, would it have flown? hell no. It’s quite obviously an opinion, which he again literally displays as ‘truth’. Do you ( **WD** ) see why some of us decide to not bother with ‘answering’ his points? why the fuck should we, since when his back is to the wall, he does the equivalent of sticking his fingers in his ears and chanting nana-boo boo? ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2003, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/249 "2003-03-12T18:41:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Avalonian \* > you say that this meeting “proves” the Pope is supporting Iraq Not quite. I’m saying the meeting itself had the effect of supporting and legitimizing the Ba’ath regime, although I don’t believe that was its intent. The meeting _was_ the support. Ask yourself this: Would the Pope meet with Timothy McVeigh in order to encourage a negotiated compromise between him and the US? Of course not. If he did, that would covey some legitimacy to McVeigh. Well, the Ba’athists have killed and tortured thousands. They have consistently lied to the UN and the civilized world. But, the Pope’s meeting conveyed the impression that this regime could be treated as reasonable, that it could be trusted as a negotiating partner. It gave an impression of the Ba’athists continuing to rule Iraq indefinitely. > [@](#): > > You mention consequences, **december**. Specifically what consequences has the Pope’s meeting with Aziz actually had? Your argument essentially rests on this point; and yet you’ve provided no hard evidence. The Pope is a world leader. When he treats Saddam with undue respect, his followers are apt to do the same. Look at the anti-social behavior of France, Germany and other Security Council members, who are failing in their duty to world peace. I think the Pope’s stand has contributed to some degree. **wring** , I didn’t say that meeting with Aziz “offers ‘moral support’ for their position of killing Jews.” I said it offers moral support for the Ba’ath regime. And, separately I said that the Ba’ath regime kills Jews. Of course, the Ba’ath regime commits so many atrocities that killing Jews is minor for them. It’s more major to us Jews, of course. My friend Don Louria got into a somewhat parallel situation a few years ago. Don, a noted research physician, opposed food irradiation, because the process tends to destroy some nutrients. His point is scientifically valid, although I don’t think that’s enough reason to ban a valuable preserving process. Anyhow, most food irradiation opponents are crackpots, with scientifically invalid reasons. Don wound up getting associated with them. As a result, he was blasted in a lead editorial in the Wall Street Journal. They argued that by standing with them, he conveyed an underserved respectability to these crackpots, even though his reasons differed from theirs. The saying that covers this is, “When you lie down with the dogs, you get up with the fleas.” \*\*Coldfire[/]b, you’re so cute when you’re angry. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Truth\_Seeker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5fc32e/32.png) [@Truth\_Seeker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Truth_Seeker)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2003, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/250 "2003-03-12T19:01:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*\* They argued that by standing with them, he conveyed an underserved respectability to these crackpots, even though his reasons differed from theirs. The saying that covers this is, “When you lie down with the dogs, you get up with the fleas.” > \*\* Good point and something your apologists would do well to remember. It is unfortunate that even your occasionally interesting point inevitably goes down in a hail of bullets. But your standard operating procedure is so well known that the messenger has become the message. ---
**Author:** ![Avalonian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ee7513/32.png) [@Avalonian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Avalonian)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2003, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/251 "2003-03-12T19:02:23Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > **Ask yourself this: Would the Pope meet with Timothy McVeigh in order to encourage a negotiated compromise between him and the US? Of course not.** _Bad_ analogy (again!). Tim McVeigh is one man, not a representative of a nation. However, if the Pope were in a position to “talk down” a lone nut before he took violent action that killed hundreds or thousands, you don’t think he’d take that opportunity? I think you don’t understand the Pope very well. What is _with_ you and your crap analogies, **december**? > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > **If he did, that would covey some legitimacy to McVeigh.** So you say. You’ve yet to prove this assertion, anymore than you’ve proven it as regards Aziz/Iraq. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > **The Pope is a world leader. When he treats Saddam with undue respect, his followers are apt to do the same.** Here you make your assertion again. We know this is what you think, but you can’t seem to prove it. Oh wait… > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > **Look at the anti-social behavior of France, Germany and other Security Council members, who are failing in their duty to world peace. I think the Pope’s stand has contributed to some degree.** Is this meant to be your proof? If so, it’s laughable. First of all, those nations may be _fulfilling_ their own duty to world peace as they see it. But of course, you’d never see that point of view because you don’t agree with it. Second, to what degree has the Pope’s meeting with Aziz affected these nation’s own stances? You say you “think” that there has been an effect “to some degree.” – Weasel words if ever I’ve heard them. Can you identify in what ways these nations are basing their decisions on the Pope’s meeting with Aziz? Do you have a cite that is factual, not an opinion or a blog? If this is your attempt at proof, **december** , it’s pathetic. Stating that you “think” something is not proof of anything, especially given the low quality of thought you’ve displayed here. ---
**Author:** ![Eva\_Luna](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e495f1/32.png) [@Eva\_Luna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eva_Luna)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2003, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/252 "2003-03-12T20:01:57Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*\* > > **wring** , I didn’t say that meeting with Aziz “offers ‘moral support’ for their position of killing Jews.” I said it offers moral support for the Ba’ath regime. And, separately I said that the Ba’ath regime kills Jews. Of course, the Ba’ath regime commits so many atrocities that killing Jews is minor for them. It’s more major to us Jews, of course. > > \*\* Well, perhaps then a) you should define your use of the term “moral support,” and b) IMHO you should speak for yourself when you say “[killing Jews] is more major to us Jews.” Personally, I don’t think a Jewish life is superior to a Kurdish life, or a Sunni Iraqi life, or a Shi’ite life, or any other kind of life that is categorized purely on the basis of religion/ethnicity. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2003, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/253 "2003-03-12T20:07:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*\* > I’m not Roman Catholic, but I always thought a personal audience with the Pope was an honor. ISTM that by meeting with Tarik Aziz, the Pope was giving a message that the Iraqi government has legitimacy. They don’t deserve legitimacy IMHO. > > \*\* Not necessarily. The Pope has met with dictators before-Castro comes to mind, and the Pope is NO fan of Castro. It can sometimes be a way of admonishing or castigating someone. A confrontation, if you will. ---
**Author:** ![nogginhead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5e9695/32.png) [@nogginhead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nogginhead)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2003, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/254 "2003-03-13T01:58:46Z")
* * * ## Originally posted by december It’s more major to us Jews, of course. Bullshit, as usual. I would think you would have learned not to attempt to speak for anyone else around here by now. You just can’t resist lying, can you? Even when your tactics are the focus of the conversation, you must persist in them. Either you’re truly unable to recognize them, which would be the sign of a mind so rigid it could shatter at the next doorbell, or you figure it’s the best way to draw attention away from the hollowness of your argument. ---
**Author:** ![Weirddave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/919ad9/32.png) [@Weirddave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weirddave)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2003, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/255 "2003-03-13T02:13:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by wring \* > \*\*and may I take a moment to ask of all the **december** appoligists - do you still not understand why he gets pitted? It’s entirely possible that we don’t wait for the 15th weaseling/flat out contradiction again, since we’ve seen this same exact pattern often enough that it can be charted. But should we bother waiting? the first several thousand times he did this, we all were patient, but by this time, we’ve been down this road over and over again and get tired of the bs. > > specifically, **weirddave** you see what happened when he was taken to task for the specifics - he qualified and weaseld and re-defined commonly used words to achieve his goals, and finally, simply again restated his unsupported opinion as if it had been fact. Had that statement appeared in GQ, would it have flown? hell no. It’s quite obviously an opinion, which he again literally displays as ‘truth’. Do you ( **WD** ) see why some of us decide to not bother with ‘answering’ his points? why the fuck should we, since when his back is to the wall, he does the equivalent of sticking his fingers in his ears and chanting nana-boo boo? \*\* I still maintain that dealing with the issues at hand rather than the poster in question is the entire point of “fighting ignorance”. That being said, december is doing a poor job of defending his position, I agree. There is one crutial point that I’ve been waiting for him to make, but he has thus far failed to do so. ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2003, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/256 "2003-03-13T02:18:11Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Weirddave \* > \*\* There is one crutial point that I’ve been waiting for him to make, but he has thus far failed to do so. \*\* What is it? I can use some help here. I’m out-numbered. ---
**Author:** ![Coldfire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a587f6/32.png) [@Coldfire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Coldfire)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2003, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/257 "2003-03-13T02:39:23Z")
Yes you are, but that’s the least of your worries. You’re also out-witted, out-cited, and intellectually relegated by those who _do_ prefer true facts rather than presenting their opinion as such. ---
**Author:** ![TwistofFate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/cdc98d/32.png) [@TwistofFate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TwistofFate)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2003, 10:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/258 "2003-03-13T10:36:41Z")
> [@](#): > > The Pope is a world leader. When he treats Saddam with undue respect, his followers are apt to do the same. Look at the anti-social behavior of France, Germany and other Security Council members, who are failing in their duty to world peace. I think the Pope’s stand has contributed to some degree. You have yet to prove you assertion that he treats Saddam with “undue respect”. I would also like to see you respond to Guin’s point of the Popes meeting with Castro. Does he now “morally support” the Cuban government? ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2003, 11:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/259 "2003-03-13T11:13:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by TwistofFate \* > You have yet to prove you assertion that he treats Saddam with “undue respect”. The Pope gave a lengthy audience to Tarik Aziz, as a representative of Saddam. If the Pope had any complaints about Iraq’s torture, executions, financial support for terrorists, violations of UN obligations, acquisition of WMDs, etc., there was no public mention. From the POV of public perception, it would appear that the Vatican gave Saddam a pass on these awful acts. Tarik Aziz was accorded the unusual priviledge of holding a press conference on Vatican grounds. That was the press conference where he rudely refused to answer a question from an Israeli reporter. That press conference strengthened that impression that the Vatican was giving Saddam a pass on his atrocities. > [@](#): > > I would also like to see you respond to Guin’s point of the Popes meeting with Castro. Does he now “morally support” the Cuban government? I think his meeting with Castro had the side-effect of morally supporting Castro’s rule, although that was surely not the Pope’s intent. This is a close question. No doubt the Vatican would say they were merely recognizing the reality of Castro’s rule. They were dealing with him because he is a leader, whether he’s morally worthy or not. This is a moral dilemma for many, not just the Pope. When an evil organization has power, what do you do? Do you deal with them because they have the power? Or, do you shun them, because they’re evil? ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2003, 12:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808/260 "2003-03-13T12:09:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*\*The Pope gave a lengthy audience to Tarik Aziz, as a representative of Saddam. If the Pope had any complaints about Iraq’s torture, executions, financial support for terrorists, violations of UN obligations, acquisition of WMDs, etc., there was no public mention. From the POV of public perception, it would appear that the Vatican gave Saddam a pass on these awful acts. > \*\* Enough lies, **december**. From the [Vatican](http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/secretariat_state/2003/documents/rc_seg-st_20030219_migliore-security-council_en.htm): > [@](#): > > The Holy See is closely following the developments on the ground and expresses its support for the efforts of the international community towards resolving the crisis within the sphere of the international legality. For this purpose and with this in mind, His Holiness Pope John Paul II has recently sent a Special Envoy to Baghdad, who met with President Saddam Hussein and delivered him a Message from the Pope stressing, inter alia, the need for concrete commitments in faithful adherence to the relevant resolutions of the United Nations. A similar message has also been conveyed to Mr. Tarek Aziz, Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister, who visited the Pope on 14 February last. Moreover, in view of the devastating aftermath of a possible military intervention, the Special Envoy of the Pope made an appeal to the conscience of all those who have a role to play in determining the future of the crisis in these coming decisive days “because, in the end, it is conscience that will have the last word, stronger than all strategies, all ideologies and also all religions”. > > The Holy See is convinced that even though the process of inspections appears somewhat slow, it still remains an effective path that could lead to the building of a consensus which, if widely shared by Nations, would make it almost impossible for any Government to act otherwise, without risking international isolation. The Holy See is therefore of the view that it is also the proper path that would lead to an agreed and honorable resolution to the problem, which, in turn, could provide the basis for a real and lasting peace. > > “War is never just another means that one can choose to employ for settling differences between nations. As the Charter of the United Nations Organization and international law itself remind us, war cannot be decided upon, even when it is a matter of ensuring the common good, except as the very last option and in accordance with very strict conditions, without ignoring the consequences for the civilian population both during and after the military operations” (Address of Pope John Paul II to the Diplomatic Corps, 13 January 2003). Press releases, statements on the Vatican website, etc. _do_ constitute “public mention”. Perhaps the Pope should have sent you an e-mail. Write to him and complain. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ignorance-fights-back-or-december-please-explain-yourself/159808.md?page=14)