Every single time? Every time you’ve screeched that your opponent is a “jackass” or a “moron” or “insane” in this thread, you were just "asking that poster what he meant by “justified killing being just as bad”?
I think you’ve been trying to discredit your opponents rather than discrediting your opponents’ arguments. There’s a term for that.
It doesn’t matter to me. But if you intend to make MrDibble look better, you’re succeeding famously.
You really do have reading comprehension problems, don’t you?
And weeeeee’re off!
I’ve read the whole thread. You don’t address the issues, you call the posters names. It doesn’t work.
You can call me names, though. I like the jackass one, but I’d prefer something a little more tailored. How about “Intellectual Oompa Loompa”? That’d be sweet.
See if you can get this straight: In the ONE POST you quoted above, I wasn’t asking MrDibble about Iraq. I was asking what he or she meant by justified killings, say in self defense, being just as bad as any other killings. It’s right there in what you quoted. How can a killing in self defense be wrong?
You accuse me of not reading?
I said:
You come back with some explanation about what you were asking, but I didn’t ask, did I? I said that you are being a one-trick-pony in this thread, and I gave examples. I can give more examples. I can give examples all day! When someone disagrees with you, you call them names. Feel free to show in this thread where you have disagreed with someone without calling them names, implying they can’t read or can’t speak English, or must be joking. Perhaps I overlooked all those examples of you arguing honestly for your position. Or, of course, this being the pit, perhaps you didn’t ever intend to argue honestly for your position. But a one-trick-pony? Absolutely. I have no associations with your name, so I don’t know if this is your standard posting style; but in this thread, if the horseshoe fits, wear it.
Oh, and no. It isn’t. What I quoted was this:
Nowhere in what I quoted was anything about justified killings. What I quoted is all about your claims not to be a one-trick pony, and that is all I commented on.
Of course you didn’t ask. You merely ignored it, even while quoting it. That’s why I attempted to bring it to your attention. Why I wasted my time, I’ve no idea. I have had zero interaction with you outside of this thread. Apparently, that was a good idea. Enjoy your lame flaming and false assignment of motive to me. :rolleyes:
My mistake: calm kiwi quoted it. You, although you assert you’ve read the entire thread, ignored it.
Which post are you talking about? What, exactly, did I quote?
I refer you to post #268. Good day.
I think you need to go back to what I originally wrote and start over. Or not. Your choice, of course.
Monty’s confusng your post #258 with the one by calm kiwi that quoted him.
Of course, this didn’t stop him from jumping right in and insulting yor reading comprehension. He’s just a wacky fun guy like that…