rigorousintuition.ca

I don't believe that we're all in agreement across the board on "wrong" ways to disagree versus "right" ones.

That would surely be worth a dedicated thread if anybody here has some reasonable and practical proposals to bring to bear on that subject.

I find it wholly appropriate AD for you to quote from a (rather strident and unreasonable) post that got the producer a month long ban.

You gotta have your say but lack the juice to say it yourself, so you go to your defamatory cookbook, confident that in the least, your strident assertions will destroy focus for the subject.

What a lifestyle

American Dream » Tue Nov 04, 2014 3:42 pm wrote:I don't believe that we're all in agreement across the board on "wrong" ways to disagree versus "right" ones.

That would surely be worth a dedicated thread if anybody here has some reasonable and practical proposals to bring to bear on that subject.

You talkin' to me? Am I off your "ignore" list?

I briefly 'peeked" at the folks here I had on ignore- not sure if I think that was the right thing to do or not.

Given the history, I don't want to further pursue the conversations here. As indicated before, if anyone has some reasonable proposals for promoting more of a shared understanding across the board about 'right" versus "wrong" ways to disagree, then let's start a thread dedicated to that topic. You never know- I might just appreciate your (positive) contributions there and even have something meaningful to add to the mix.

WHY did you post that Jack quote out of the blue...who was it directed at? You already furthered it buddy with Jack's quote .....now you're retreating?

I'm not going to pursue a big, backward looking fight here- will strongly consider participating in a thread oriented towards broad-based understandings of how best to handle disagreement. I will simply say that it was inspired by general rumination on the spectre of "globalist" as all around slur/discounting method, and immediately spurred by Searcher's post.

American Dream » Tue Nov 04, 2014 8:42 pm wrote:I don't believe that we're all in agreement across the board on "wrong" ways to disagree versus "right" ones.

That would surely be worth a dedicated thread if anybody here has some reasonable and practical proposals to bring to bear on that subject.

My practical proposal is that in an online forum which is fundamentally about *robust questioning*, that if a person asks you a sincere clear, precise question which is extremely germane to the thread, that you have the courtesy to answer it.

You have NOT answered my question as to why you are posting dozens of posts relating to Anton S, and why you go extremely silent when challenged about him. However you DO respond with distraction, re-quoting nonsensical fluff like the JR post.

(your quote was clearly directed at me - and which as an aside you deserve to be spanked for - not playing nice)

I gave you repeatedly more detailed answers about my interest in the Annunaki until YOU were satisfied. However with you, I have not had the courtesy returned once.

Why is that?

Here are some (quite imaginary) example starting points:
Q (as posed previously)

AD Answer 1 Because I think he is a good writer and is a family relative
AD Answer 2 Because my intuition trusts him
AD Answer 3 I'm embarrassed to find he is a paid Soros shill
AD Answer 4 I am extremely ambivalent about Soros and didn't know the connection
AD Answer 5 I meant to counterbalance Putin articles but picked the wrong guy
etc etc

Personally, I find it a trifle troubling tending towards the haughtily hypocritical, that someone who plays 'Six Degrees of Icke' like a Steelers quarterback is the same person who, when presented with "One Degree of Anton" , suddenly has more err.. 'pressing engagements' to attend to - (apparently like... finding duck videos).

Here is a simple thing to say "Does that answer your question?"
You will know that you have when I say "Yes, Thank You, it does"

American Dream » Tue Nov 04, 2014 4:57 pm wrote:I briefly 'peeked" at the folks here I had on ignore- not sure if I think that was the right thing to do or not.

Still peekin'?

stillrobertpaulsen » Tue Nov 04, 2014 10:18 pm wrote:

American Dream » Tue Nov 04, 2014 4:57 pm wrote:I briefly 'peeked" at the folks here I had on ignore- not sure if I think that was the right thing to do or not.

Still peekin'?

<N'avi AD>

I.SEEEEE.YOU stillrobertpaulsen


</>

Are those guys the Real McCarthyites of RI on a Freedom Witchhunt?

Searcher-

Anton S. is an important anti-fascist writer and one of the more rigorous scholars in the field. I believe him to be conveying lots of valid information about the broader area of study, which is an important one. This does not- and never should- preclude critical thinking.

I don't buy the argument about "globalists" as I have seen it presented here- it seems very muddy and arbitrary to me. As to Soros and/or Ukrainian nationalism, I have been clear about my own critiques and values but I do agree with Jack that a writer should not be excluded out of hand just because they affiliated in some way with an entity I have disgreements with.

Also, I really do have more pressing engagements and should not be spending and/or wasting much of my time here at all- that is an ongoing fact, not to mention that when I am getting upset or otherwise triggered, I have every reason- and every right- to absent myself from the proceedings.

Speaking of which, I am under heavy deadlines and do need to focus on other things. Which is what I am doing now.




.

I gave you a very long detailed list of what globalist means.....



market globalism, jihadist globalism, justice globalism, and imperial globalism

page13

But then again, here's another silly duck video in between all my hard work!