Welcome back, the left

[billc]

Yes, I do believe that some of the posters here are misguided, but that doesn't mean I don't want them to post their ideas on the study. I wouldn't in any way want them stopped from posting their thoughts and ideas, which is why I said it was good to see some of them back. I do not want to silence speach in any way. Speech is a way to clarify and challenge existing ideas and a way to broach new ideas. Having one side only in an argument is pretty pointless. You won't find any post where I ask someone to be silenced, or that they shouldn't be allowed to post their thoughts and ideas. Can all of you say the same thing?

 

[Steve]

So..it's "don't post stuff that I don't agree with"???

Haha. That's what you got out of it? Wow.

Okay, here's the way I see it. MT is a community that I've become a part of. Most of the people here are great, and the community is one I was gladly associated with. Over years, the rhetoric of the site has shifted further and further away from me. Now, I could leave the site, but there are people here I like. There are conversations I enjoy. And for what it's worth, I believe that I am associated with the site. And it's largely one person (not you, billcihak) who represents to me a frighteningly radical and crazy position.

I'm not saying he shouldn't post. What I'm saying is that I feel obligated to respond in order to be on record as opposing his craziness.

 

[billc]

Archangel, well said.

 

[Tez3]

Always amusing when people deliberately misunderstand you. It's not a case of stopping people posting, more a case of please don't say that whole groups of people are better dead.
Misguided? Billcihak, When you label people and you decide what they believe in I don't think that comes under 'misguided'. You have decided certain people her are what you call 'lefties', incorrectly as it happens, at least one person has told you they are conservative but you insist that you know better than the posters what their beliefs and politcal persuasions are then brow beat everyone with your infomercials which everyone has stopped reading as the facts in most of them have been proved wrong so many times now.

Exactly who were you addressing when you siad welcome back to the left? I bet the people you name aren't 'left' at all. i know I', not and if you insist I am you will prove my point!

 

[billc]

Hmm...I used that title because it was more concise than "welcome back to all the people who disagree with me." In the posts, I usually say, "people who are on the other side of the issue than I am," because, to be fair, some here call themselves conservative. I use the term "left" in more of a general sense than against the people on the study in particular. At least I try to, and I am sure if I did call someone on the study a lefty it will be found. I will call public figures lefty, in particular when it seems appropriate, like Matt Damon and others like him.

 

[Tez3]

So amusing when people deliberately misunderstand. I suggested a moratorium because I don't like to see Bob upset about what is going on on HIS site, it's not fair on him after all the time, effort and money he puts into this place. I wasn't suggesting we shut up shop just that some people needed a little time from wishing a whole group of people dead to reflect that is not the best way to sort out problems.

Billcihak, who were you addressing when you posted you OP? At least one poster has told you he's not left he's a conservative. You have acquired a habit of telling people where they stand politically and posting these infomercials that espouse one point of view while not allowing any other. I'm sure as hell not on the left so who was it you were welcoming back?

 

[billc]

I believe in the first post I stated it was people who disagreed with me, and that would be a general statement. As many point out, they don't consider themselves left and yet they disagree with me, so, if they haven't been posting in a while and they started posting again, I welcomed them back. Of all the people here, I don't think you can say that I don't allow other points of view. One, I have no control over who posts here on the threads, this site or what they post. I also have made very clear in the various threads, that I am not a supporter of censorship, I could care less about thread and posts drifting off topic, and that I welcome the debate, which was also in the original post. I believe in the Bill of Rights of the U.S. and that Freedom of speech is vital to a free society. I have said if people are upset by what I post they shouldn't read them, but that is less telling them they can't and just acknowledging that they should take responsibility for their actions.


Also, there are over 90 non-study threads here at martail talk. yOu have to actively seek out the study, and actively seek out specific threads and then use your fingers to activate the thread so you can read it. If you don't want to be upset, whose fault is that? (The only exception to that is Bob, whose site it is, he can react anyway he wants because...this is his site. I respect him for his efforts on our part.)

Which group of people did who wish dead, I don't recall seeing that post anywhere.

 

[Twin Fist]

No one has said this

'dead arabs are good Arabs',

or this

don't post that 'all Muslims are evil'

so, since both your examples are false, i can only assume you mean "dont post things i dont like or things i disagree with"


that might fly over in your neck of the woods, but you see, we faught and kicked your asses so we could say whatever we want.

but when we gets things that are clearly inflammatory people should think before they write.

you either believe in freedom of speech or you dont, you pretty clearly dont.

 

[Tez3]

What a load of rubbish guys, and you know it, you are twisting things around so much you'd rival Peter Mandelson. Oh dear Tez doesn't like being disagreed with, sorry wrong. I live for being disagreed with, it makes my day when people spout nonsense and I can rip it apart, I find it highly amusing. I post with a grin on my face, I sharpen up my mental claw and out they come. I don't believe in free speech? Really? No, I don't think so, I believe anyone should be able to open their mouth and make a fool of themselves by parrotting their partyline.
Carry on thinking you know what I mean, think and how I vote. Don't make the mistake of thinking I'm upset, trust me I'm not, I find it hilarious that people post up on the internet imagining it is somehow a valid way to pass on their valuable political insights. You might not like my opinions but at least they are mine lol, I don't need to follow a party line, I follow my conscience and base my judgements on my experiences.


If you chose to think I want to close discussions down because people disagree with me crack on sunshine, it seems more likely you want me to shut up roflmao!

 

[Twin Fist]

mendelson? nice, if totally BS, reference.

as to the rest? whatever makes you feel better

 

[Tez3]

mendelson? nice, if totally BS, reference.

as to the rest? whatever makes you feel better

Now I would have thought you would have heard of Peter Mandelson seeing as he was the one who passed the lies to Blair who passed them to Bush who started the war to save us from the WMD!

If I came on here to make myself feel better I'd be sadly disappointed wouldn't I now? ROFLFAO.

 

[Sukerkin]

that might fly over in your neck of the woods, but you see, we faught and kicked your asses so we could say whatever we want.

You mean the French did, in that particular area of the world, on your behalf whilst we were busy fighting everybody else who thought they had a right to Empire.

I don't mind people being proud of their independence, it just stinks when they don't give the credit where it is due. Mind you, being proud to be part of a nation founded by terrorists and traitors seems a bit odd .

Also, don't think for a second that if, in the eyes of the government of the day, the American colony had been worth keeping it wouldn't still be British. It just happened to be the traitors good luck that Britain decided that the West Indies was more worth fighting for.

 

[Ken Morgan]

that might fly over in your neck of the woods, but you see, we faught and kicked your asses so we could say whatever we want.

Funny, we left of our own free will 90 years later without killing anyone…..(could have done it earlier, but no one wanted to.)

 

[Twin Fist]

Also, don't think for a second that if, in the eyes of the government of the day, the American colony had been worth keeping it wouldn't still be British. It just happened to be the traitors good luck that Britain decided that the West Indies was more worth fighting for.

yeah, you fought, and lost for 4 years for something you didnt want anyway.............


sure thing. You might want to stop spiking your tea Partner....

 

[billc]

He might be drinking that brown stuff in the beer mug instead of tea. That stuff from the book of world records or something.

 

[Tez3]

Ah the children are being rude to their parents again. some children can never see that they should be grateful to their parents for giving them their start in life even if it was a bit rocky and they are now fractious teens.

 

[Sukerkin]

yeah, you fought, and lost for 4 years for something you didnt want anyway.............

:lol: You misread me, mate. I didn't say the British government didn't want the American colony, it was that it wasn't worth the expense at the time. You have to recall that America was still a 'hardscrabble' (is that the right term?) affair back then and the depth of it's natural resources was not properly appreciated. The West Indies were 'clearly' a better source of profit and as the British could not devote the necessary military assets to take and hold both of them (amongst various other wars and territories), the West Indies 'won' the right to fall under the Union Flag .

It was a bad political decision in hindsight - just think what the world would be like if the British had jumped the other way {sighs and dreams of the days of Empire ROFL}.

 

[Twin Fist]

Mark, yeah, check your tea, someone's emptied some vodka into it..... but what do i know, i am just a "teenager"

whatever

 

[Touch Of Death]

:lol: You misread me, mate. I didn't say the British government didn't want the American colony, it was that it wasn't worth the expense at the time. You have to recall that America was still a 'hardscrabble' (is that the right term?) affair back then and the depth of it's natural resources was not properly appreciated. The West Indies were 'clearly' a better source of profit and as the British could not devote the necessary military assets to take and hold both of them (amongst various other wars and territories), the West Indies 'won' the right to fall under the Union Flag .

It was a bad political decision in hindsight - just think what the world would be like if the British had jumped the other way {sighs and dreams of the days of Empire ROFL}.

Maybe we would have been called South Canada.

 

[Tez3]

Mark, yeah, check your tea, someone's emptied some vodka into it..... but what do i know, i am just a "teenager"

whatever

Ooo look a post of yours I can agree with! However Mark strikes me as a man you can hadle his drink, anyway in vino veritas