Harvey Weinstein: Another Good Liberal...

[JimL]

That is a flat out lie.

No, it isn't a lie, it is exactly what you and your buddy rogue are doing, i.e. insinuating that homosexuals are pedophiles, else there would be no reason for you to be trying so hard to argue such a connection.

[rogue06]

No, it isn't a lie, it is exactly what you and your buddy rogue are doing, i.e. insinuating that homosexuals are pedophiles, else there would be no reason for you to be trying so hard to argue such a connection.

No we aren't. I'm pointing out that it was the gay right's organizations were in bed with NAMBLA and willingly so. That might say something about the leadership of the groups in IGLA but not the average gay or lesbian.

In fact it appears to be almost always the case that those leading various groups demanding this or that have more extreme views than the majority of those they say they're representing. That is why I've said from the beginning that if IGLA ever starts reaching out to NAMBLA once they consider their own position secure they will find that their supporters won't be happy about such a move.

[JimL]

First of all, you can't seem to answer the question - which of the following facts do you dispute?

FACT: NAMBLA was, indeed, a member of ILGA for a decade.
FACT: ILGA didn't do anything about it until (according to ILGA's own website) "the US right publicized that the NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association) is a member of ILGA."
FACT: ILGA did not deny that NAMBLA was a member.
FACT: Following the FACT that they were called out on NAMBLA, ILGA decided to oust NAMBLA
FACT: The vote was not 100% - obviously 12% voted no, and it's reasonable to assume that others (given your data) abstained.

Why can't you answer that simple question?

He did answer the question you idiot. ILGA for whatever reason was obviously wrong to have allowed NAMBLA as a member. Okay dumbass! Now what. What was the point of rogue bringing up ILGA's past, and your continuing to harp on it. Please get to the point!

[Cow Poke]

No, it isn't a lie,

Yup, it is.

it is exactly what you and your buddy rogue are doing,

Nope. Just trying to get you guys to acknowledge facts.

i.e. insinuating that homosexuals are pedophiles,

Jimmy, half the time you don't even know what YOU think, let alone what others think.

else there would be no reason for you to be trying so hard to argue such a connection.

I'm not "trying so hard", Jimmy - I'm posting information directly from ILGA's own website that shows your buddy, Tassy, is full of crap when he declares "end of story". And there actually WAS a connection, and that is not in dispute.

[Cow Poke]

He did answer the question you idiot.

Ah, back to the childish name calling. And, no, he has not yet pointed out which facts he disputes.

ILGA for whatever reason was obviously wrong to have allowed NAMBLA as a member.

Ya THINK?!?!?!!

Okay dumbass! Now what. What was the point of rogue bringing up ILGA's past, and your continuing to harp on it. Please get to the point!

ONCE AGAIN, the point is that Tassy was incorrect when he presented half truths and then declared "end of story".

But, please do continue your little childish temper tantrum - that always works so well.

[Cow Poke]

He did answer the question you idiot.

Jimmy, when you sober up and calm down a bit, can you please show me where Tassy answered 'the question'?

Here is the relevant post of mine...

First of all, you can't seem to answer the question - which of the following facts do you dispute?

FACT: NAMBLA was, indeed, a member of ILGA for a decade.
FACT: ILGA didn't do anything about it until (according to ILGA's own website) "the US right publicized that the NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association) is a member of ILGA."
FACT: ILGA did not deny that NAMBLA was a member.
FACT: Following the FACT that they were called out on NAMBLA, ILGA decided to oust NAMBLA
FACT: The vote was not 100% - obviously 12% voted no, and it's reasonable to assume that others (given your data) abstained.

Why can't you answer that simple question?

Now, note that 'the question' was "which of the following facts do you dispute?"

Show me where he actually answered that question.

Thanks

[JimL]

Jimmy, when you sober up and calm down a bit, can you please show me where Tassy answered 'the question'?

Here is the relevant post of mine...



Now, note that 'the question' was "which of the following facts do you dispute?"

Show me where he actually answered that question.

Thanks

He never denied any of them, he never argued those facts, he merely asked whats your point, which is the question that you continue to avoid answering. We both know what you're up to, you're both just dishonest homophobes who want to associate LGBT people with pedophilia by associating ILGA with NAMBLA.

[Cow Poke]

He never denied any of them, he never argued those facts,

Good job, Jimmy. You seem calmer now. Correct - he never answered the question.

he merely asked whats your point, which is the question that you continue to avoid answering.

Actually, I've answered it repeatedly. Here we go AGAIN --- I was pointing out the fact that his "end of story" version was a load of crap.

We both know what you're up to,

Jimmy, honey, you don't even know what YOU'RE up to most of the time.

you're both just dishonest homophobes

That would be an outright lie, but this does not surprise me at all, coming from you.

who want to associate LGBT people with pedophilia by associating ILGA with NAMBLA.

No, Jimmy - we were pointing out that there WAS, INDEED, an association. It's fact. Indisputable. So, why does it make you so angry when somebody brings up FACTS?

[JimL]

Good job, Jimmy. You seem calmer now. Correct - he never answered the question.



Actually, I've answered it repeatedly. Here we go AGAIN --- I was pointing out the fact that his "end of story" version was a load of crap.



Jimmy, honey, you don't even know what YOU'RE up to most of the time.



That would be an outright lie, but this does not surprise me at all, coming from you.



No, Jimmy - we were pointing out that there WAS, INDEED, an association. It's fact. Indisputable. So, why does it make you so angry when somebody brings up FACTS?

Did we ever argue that there was no past association CP? No we didn't. So your explanation is a load of crap and you know it.

[Cow Poke]

Did we ever argue that there was no past association CP? No we didn't.

It would be silly to argue that, since it's a known fact, Jimmy. I mean, even for you!

So your explanation is a load of crap and you know it.

Actually, it's not. And, again, you don't even know what YOU know most of the time, so pretending to be a mind reader is not such a good idea.

The FACT is that the disassociation of ILGA from NAMBLA was not as cut and dried as Tassy dishonestly made it appear. THAT, Jimmy, was the load of crap.

Do you not care about FACTS, Jimmy? (I think we both know the answer to that )

[Roy]

First of all, you can't seem to answer the question - which of the following facts do you dispute?
...
FACT: The vote was not 100% - obviously 12% voted no, and it's reasonable to assume that others (given your data) abstained.

I'm going to query this one on the grounds that the 'no' votes may have included votes from the organisations being ejected.

[Cow Poke]

I'm going to query this one on the grounds that the 'no' votes may have included votes from the organisations being ejected.

Quite possibly true - but the 'explanation' as to how they became members in the first place is "dog ate my homework" stuff.

[Tassman]

No we aren't. I'm pointing out that it was the gay right's organizations were in bed with NAMBLA and willingly so. That might say something about the leadership of the groups in IGLA but not the average gay or lesbian.

In fact it appears to be almost always the case that those leading various groups demanding this or that have more extreme views than the majority of those they say they're representing. That is why I've said from the beginning that if IGLA ever starts reaching out to NAMBLA once they consider their own position secure they will find that their supporters won't be happy about such a move.

That's much too strong a statement. NAMBLA was just one of the 400+ (at that time) sell-governing members under the umbrella of ILGA. It was no more "in bed" with them than any of the members...the situation was analogous to the United Nations, which comprises many self-governing nations.

Your snide implication that ILGA has a secret yearning for "reaching out to NAMBLA once they consider their own position secure"https://web.archive.org/web/20091029...ry=10&ZoneID=7

[Tassman]

First of all, you can't seem to answer the question - which of the following facts do you dispute?

FACT: NAMBLA was, indeed, a member of ILGA for a decade.
FACT: ILGA didn't do anything about it until (according to ILGA's own website) "the US right publicized that the NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association) is a member of ILGA."
FACT: ILGA did not deny that NAMBLA was a member.
FACT: Following the FACT that they were called out on NAMBLA, ILGA decided to oust NAMBLA
FACT: The vote was not 100% - obviously 12% voted no, and it's reasonable to assume that others (given your data) abstained.

Why can't you answer that simple question?

No-one is questioning that NAMBLA was a member organisation for a time under the umbrella of ILGA. The question you are assiduously avoiding answering is "What is the significance of these "FACTS". What are you suggesting these "FACTS" tell us? Is is guilt by association...is that the ponderous point you're trying to make? Or is just the more simple point that all homosexuals are an abomination to the Lord and their temporary association with NAMBLA proves it. Is that it?

Just answer the question.

[Cow Poke]

No-one is questioning that NAMBLA was a member organisation for a time under the umbrella of ILGA. The question you are assiduously avoiding answering is "What is the significance of these "FACTS". What are you suggesting these "FACTS" tell us? Is is guilt by association...is that the ponderous point you're trying to make? Or is just the more simple point that all homosexuals are an abomination to the Lord and their temporary association with NAMBLA proves it. Is that it?

Just answer the question.

Why is it so difficult for you to just admit the facts, Tassy, without going on this wild crazed drama queen assumption tour?

You made it sound like IGLA suddenly woke up one day and - SURPRISE - they discovered that somehow NAMBLA had joined their ranks, and they immediately expelled them - "end of story".

That's not how it happened, and I shared the FACTS from ILGA's own website.

I don't have to have an ulterior motive for that - I'm just exposing you for the fraud you are. It did NOT happen like you portrayed it, and those are the facts.

Now, feel free to join your little buddy Jimmy in another emotional tirade with a bunch of goofy drama queen false accusations - that seems to be who you are.