Christ on a pogo stick. Monty and I end up on the same side of an issue and everybody thinks Monty’s an asshole. That’s just swell.
Otto: It’s because I keep clamoring for, dare I say it, facts instead of emotional reaction. Apparently, it’s better, in some folks’ minds, to toss one’s thinking out the window than to actually approach the issue with, dare I say it, facts.
Thank you, Monty, for being the only one to approach this issue with your level of fact and decorum.
What the hell? I’ve seen nothing but facts cited thoughout this thread.
Yes, your responses have been practically vulcan-like in their rationality and lack of emotion. Oh wait, I seem to recall a certain poster saying things like ‘small words suit you’, ‘bitch’, and ‘go to hell’. Who would that be, Monty? You’re hardly on the side of the angels here, you Paragon of Emotionlessness. Of course, neither am I but you don’t see me running around crowing about rational I’ve been.
I’m still waiting for Otto and kevja to apologize to poor Astorian for jumping all over him, accusing him of being a fucktard homophobe, and the like, because they failed to recognize the Monty Python quote he posted. They can be forgiven for not recognizing it, but once it was pointed out to them, I think some apologies were in order, no?
Don’t jump to conclusions, here, I’m not so sure they can be forgiven for not recognizing Monty Python. They may be so ashamed they can’t address the issue just yet.
This raises an interesting question. Does sincerely uttering the phrase “Monty Who?” warrant banishment to a dark dungeon somewhere? (“Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.”)
Yes, clearly.
Apparently, some folks are confusing “clamoring” with something else.
An additional question for UncleBill: On which Hadith did y’all rely to declare the self-identified Muslim isn’t Muslim?
That decision was left up to those who were assigned to investigate his C.O. Package, I have no clue what their specific criteria was. I spoke to him, conducted an interview, reviewed his package at my level, wrote my observations and recommendations, and forwarded the package up the chain of command. My role was not to decide whether or not it was legit.
I could guess, based on my interviews with him, that since he was generally unaware of basic Muslim beliefs (5 Pillars of Islam, birthplace of Mohammed, etc…), he was unable to provide sufficient evidence of his reasons for the package.
QUOTE]*Originally posted by Wabbit *
Sure, we could do that as long as you agree that you’re a pie-in-the-sky idiot with his head so far up his ass that you’ve evolved to breath methane. Alternatively, we could can the name-calling and act polite–your call. Also note in your article that he says it’s ultimately his fault. This is the first thing this guy has said that makes sense. Now all he has to do is own up to his mistake and all will be well in Wabbitland once again.
[/QUOTE]
Hmm…let’s review the thread and see who started the name-calling between you and me. Oh, it was you. And if you want to can the name-calling, try canning it in relation to LCpl Funk as well. How about that. And hey, the guy has said from the get-go that this is his fault and his responsibility and what do you know, has turned himself in to face the consequenses of his actions. I’m sure he’s sleeping better at night knowing that he’s OK in your book.
Jackass.
I don’t think any apologiy is in order, no. Quoting homophobic shit is still quoting homophobic shit. How about an apology from astorian for the misunderstanding? astorian is the one who should be seeking “forgiveness.”
How is the quote homophobic? Homophobic and using stereotypes aren’t interchangeable ya know.
Otto: apparently, nothing more than a humorless asshole.
Oh, and by the way, Otto, the part of the “Mary” recruiter in the sketch was played by Graham Chapman, a gay man. Some homophobe, that one!
Obscure Monty Python skit recognition used to be a prerequisite to get into this place, it was on the entrance exam and everything. Nowadays, they’ll just let anyone in here.
I’ll go out on a limb here and say the Monty Python bunch weren’t actually afraid of homosexuals.
Gosh, how could I have been so foolish as to think that a message on a message board posted utterly bereft of context and without the benefit of even a fucking set of quotation marks might be a quote from a Python sketch I never heard of as opposed to the actual opinion of the poster? How could I have expected that, in accordance with what appears to be fairly standard practice here, astorian maybe should have done the [Monty Python] [/Monty Python] thing or at the very least put quotation marks around his comment? How could I possibly have interpreted a comment listing off several gay stereotypes in a thread about a gay Marine as perhaps being the slightest bit homophobic? What was I thinking, expecting that maybe the person who posted it (and who has not posted a follow-up in response to the minor shitstorm kicked up by it) would have the decency to apologize for making a comment that more than one person has taken as being anti-gay?
IOW, Early Out, fuck you.
Well, if you’re referring to the post where I said that (hypothetically) I could call you some ridiculous names and you could respond with equally ridiculous names, it was meant to show how how silly this whole exercise could become. Sorry you missed the inference, but you sure are proving my point here. Thanks (I guess).
And I’m not going to stop giving my opinions just because they don’t fit with your worldview. From my reading of the facts, this guy is a malingerer and nothing I’ve seen to this point with the possible exception of him actually accepting that it’s his fault has convinced me he is anything but. Sorry that doesn’t fit with your viewpoint there Otto, but them’s the breaks.
Oh, and since we’re in “silly-name-calling” mode now, how’s about this one:
syphilic whoremongering putz.
No, no, no. Silly namecalling!
Schnazzeling uppigidious frazzalacious nerd swergler!