Yes, of course manny fucked up big time, was more aggressive, and so on; your criticisms of him are spot on. Unfortunately, he, to all appearances, is paying no attention to this thread at this point, and beyond pitting him myself, how would you suggest I engage him?
You, on the other hand, are still an active participant, and I hold out high hopes that I can convince you that taking an approach that may be seen as initiating hostilities is not the most productive way to approach a debate. Maybe the “lie, lie, blatant lie, lie” post wasn’t intended to be seen in this light, but I think most people would see it as an accusation of dishonesty. I certainly did.
I took sailor’s words to mean that he was accusing manhattan of uncritically repeating the lies of the Bush administration. The administration is lying; manhattan isn’t a liar, he’s just a parrot.
It was abundantly clear that manhattan wasn’t producing these charges about Cuban government policy based on his own research. If he were, then I would have read the “lies” epithet differently.
Depends on what kind of liar and what kind of parrot. This is a complex subject which still keeps scientists busy. It doesn’t matter though because although manhattan *did * call me a liar repeatedly, he naver called me a parrot. He did say I was pro-child-prostitution and we can all agree that is worse than being called a liar or a parrot.
Note that Manhattan has called me a liarrepeatedly and has accused me of being pro child prostitution repeatedly.
and further down in the same post
It is ridiculous to think he was offended by my words which do not come close to being as caustic as he routinely uses. The fact is that he was frustrated by my questioning of his assertions. Sorry but that is what GD is for. You assert something in GD and it will be questioned. His frustration comes from cognitive dissonance: he believes one thing. He believes president Bush and the US government are not liars. He really wants to believe it. And yet here is sailor questioning those beliefs. That is frustrating. Rather than re-examine the facts and his beliefs he blasts sailor.
I have presented evidence that manhattan routinely uses stronger language than I do. There is just no excuse for what he did.
No, it’s not, Badtz. Knock it off. You may think Manhattan was warned too lightly, but he was warned. I don’t know where you get the idea that calling people child molestors is somehow OK.
I’m glad to see I’m not the only one who had that reaction to the warning.
I have mixed feelings about it, however. While accusing someone of being a child molester seems out of line in any forum, it’s tough to define the lines of propriety in the Pit, and it may be a good thing to have one forum where almost anything goes. I suppose the line’s got to be drawn somewhere, but it’s hard to say where that line is these days.
wherein you claim to know what “most people” would think. Technically, you’re correct - you prefaced it by “I think.” Still, you were trying to buttress your argument by asserting that many others would agree with you, without being able to demonstrate that fact.
Why not just stick to saying that you took sailor’s statements to be an accusation of dishonesty (which you ultimately did)? Your opinion is just as valid as anyone else’s.