Arnold is a Buffoon ...

[oxmixmudd]

His comparing it to Krystallnacht that was the entire basis for his lecture. When you can't even get the very basics correct nothing that comes afterwards is worth very much. You just like it because he agrees with you and for no other reason.

you are entitled to your opinion. I disagree.

[thormas]

So you are arguing that we shouldn't expect him to make sense and therefore be ignored.

No, my points he is not on par with the greats and what he intended to do was speak out about the events of 1/6 and try to make a point about lasting damage to a country and its people that was the experience of his home country and his personal experience with his father and neighbors. I can imagine that an immigrant to this country would be a bit heartbroken over what happened at the Capital - especially given their old country's history. Whether you think he did or did not do justice to the event he referenced is not the main issue, what is, is his obvious concern for the US.

[thormas]

Is that a bumblebee or a flower? Yeow, I think it's vibrating. Ok, you're getting a little too weird.

[oxmixmudd]

I find it very telling that you would be more interested in hearing something that is NOT accurate than reading about it from a book, or, perhaps, otherwise accurate sources. You know, don't you, that what you are saying is that hearsay is more valuable than facts.

That isn't what I said mossrose - though you seem at least as careless reading my words as you are accusing me of being parsing AS's worlds.

It goes to why he was moved to make the video. It tells me how those that he grew up with viewed it, and to an extent how he saw it through their eyes - and I find that interesting.
But I don't find it a substitute for the facts. And I didn't say I did.

You also are aware, are you not, that hearsay is not allowed in a court of law. Even if what is said is true (which you are admitting that AS is not in his description of Krystallnacht, it would not be allowed as testimony.

Actually - I'm not admitting anything. I'm just not engaging on the topic on that level at all. I am saying that sort of analysis in this case misses the point, is pedantic, and is likely mostly very negatively biased and not itself accurate.
I'd have to go back and listen to it again to play the game you guys are playing and offer a reasonable analysis of your complaints, if that were something I even cared to do - which I don't - at least at this time.

The rest of the message is moot.

Perhaps you should start also listening to voices that are telling things the way they really are instead of the brainwashing that the media has done for the last 4 years. They have fed the world the same inaccuracies about Trump that Arnold is saying about the Germans and you have swallowed their lies and are unable to see the facts.

This is really silly. The bottom line is you don't like what he said about Trump and who Trump is - even though it is dead on accurate. So you're just making mountains out of molehills in an attempt to justify your rage.

Honestly, reason doesn't work against responses like that - a hard lesson learned well these last 4 years.

[mossrose]

That isn't what I said mossrose - though you seem at least as careless reading my words as you are accusing me of being parsing AS's worlds.

It goes to why he was moved to make the video. It tells me how those that he grew up with viewed it, and to an extent how he saw it through their eyes - and I find that interesting.
But I don't find it a substitute for the facts. And I didn't say I did.



Actually - I'm not admitting anything. I'm just not engaging on the topic on that level at all. I am saying that sort of analysis in this case misses the point, is pedantic, and is likely mostly very negatively biased and not itself accurate.

Now you are backpedaling, again. You said:

Personally, i'd rather hear that, even if it is historically inaccurate, than an account from a book.

Which clearly says that you would rather listen to hearsay even if it is not historically accurate. You can't deny you said that.

The rest of your post is simply the same old "but what about Trump!" propaganda you've been spewing for 5 years now. And counting.

[oxmixmudd]

Now you are backpedaling, again. You said:

I did say that. But I didn't say that my preference for hearing a story sourced in real experience meant that storywould become a substitute for the facts.

You're way off the rails here just hunting for accusations to make it seems. Again, can you dial it back a notch - please?

Which clearly says that you would rather listen to hearsay even if it is not historically accurate. You can't deny you said that.

The rest of your post is simply the same old "but what about Trump!" propaganda you've been spewing for 5 years now. And counting.

well it's not propaganda. Trump has been lying about the election and sowing doubt and unrest about the election for months now with an eye towards unlawfully retaining the presidency. And he went as far last Wednesday to incite insurrection in the hopes of accomplishing that goal. I've been warning you guys where he was headed for 5 years now - yes. And I was right all along. So there is that. We will be decades recovering from the destruction and division he has sown in this 4 years - if we can ever truly recover.

[mossrose]

I did say that. But I didn't say that my preference for hearing a story sourced in real experience meant that storywould become a substitute for the facts.

You can spin it all you want to, but it's very clear what you said. I didn't use the word "substitute" btw, I said you would rather listen to hearsay than get the facts from a book or other source. You should parse my words better.

You're way off the rails here just hunting for accusations to make it seems. Again, can you dial it back a notch - please?

This isn't your thread so you can't tell me what the "thread decorum" is, ok?


The rest of your post is moot.

[oxmixmudd]

You can spin it all you want to, but it's very clear what you said. I didn't use the word "substitute" btw, I said you would rather listen to hearsay than get the facts from a book or other source. You should parse my words better.

Yes - it is clear what I said. Which makes it hard to comprehend how you misunderstood it so completely. Nevertheless, I have tried to make clear my intent. Why this bothers you so is a mystery.

This isn't your thread so you can't tell me what the "thread decorum" is, ok?


The rest of your post is moot.

Did you notice that I asked? I am quite aware I have no authority of any kind in this thread, I was just asking. Clearly the answer is 'no'.