More From The Religion Of Peace!

[Cow Poke]

Given that I've relied almost completely on formal definitions of "terrorism," "torture," and "assassination," this over-used "fixed it for you" card looks downright silly here.

As you say, Sam.

[oxmixmudd]

You are being absurd Sam. I do not hold to your view of these events. And I'm not going to continue to try to discuss this rationally - you have your agenda and that is all that exists as far as you can see. Clearly if I disagree with you I'm evil. So be it.

Although I do not support the use of torture in its true sense, the people targetted for the use of torture have not one goal but the complete massacre of our entire civilization, and I for one am not interested in playing stupid while they accomplish their goals. That is, I will not be dragged into a mindset that aids them in accomplishing their goals. You can feel free to be on that side all you want. I will not join you.


I guess we are done.


Jim

[Sam]

You are being absurd Sam. I do not hold to your view of these events. And I'm not going to continue to try to discuss this rationally - you have your agenda and that is all that exists as far as you can see. Clearly if I disagree with you I'm evil. So be it.

Although I do not support the use of torture in its true sense, the people targetted for the use of torture have not one goal but the complete massacre of our entire civilization, and I for one am not interested in playing stupid while they accomplish their goals. You can feel free to be on that side all you want. I will not join you.


I guess we are done.


Jim

You can't bitterly complain that I'm misinterpreting you based on my "agenda" while twisting around to claim that I've said you're evil, let alone evil for merely disagreeing with me.

Your second paragraph reads explicitly as a way to excuse torture for security reasons while trying to maintain that you are opposed to "torture in its true sense." In any event, it's not a coherent articulation for what you do support and why what you support is not, in truth, torture.

Using your words from before, that's muddled thinking.

[oxmixmudd]

You can't bitterly complain that I'm misinterpreting you based on my "agenda" while twisting around to claim that I've said you're evil, let alone evil for merely disagreeing with me.

Your second paragraph reads explicitly as a way to excuse torture for security reasons while trying to maintain that you are opposed to "torture in its true sense." In any event, it's not a coherent articulation for what you do support and why what you support is not, in truth, torture.

Using your words from before, that's muddled thinking.

No, it doesn't, but you see what you want to see, and distort my words to fit your perception, and that is why the discussion is over.

[pancreasman]

I'm done with you! Over! Just ... don't.