Quote:
Originally posted by _Opi_
See here is what I figured. From here on out, I know that I will have my posts dissected into itty bitty pieces. In my first post, I really wasn't thinking about that. My fault, My bad.
I will break it down for you, RC. No more pissing in the rain.
Van Gogh, a controversial artist is murdered. I say I do not care for this man, my day has not changed, because he insulted my religion. You imply that the lunatic who killed him is justified in doing so. What I actually said was a crime is a crime and justice should prevail (I mean justice for that specific country in which the crime i committed). You say I believe his death is justified. I did not in fact make such statement, nor imply, but you can take it as an implication even though you would be wrong if you did. You then go on and on about who is responsible for this death..the community, the terror org, or the entire religion for being so vunerable to manipulation. Well, I say that this conversation is taking a different direction than my first statement. Which has nothing to do with terrorist, and accountability for the murder, or the valuableness of one's life. You can make all the assumptions you can about what I have said previously......but that's all that it will ever be..assumptions. Not convincing enough, even after connatations and detonations.
I understand that hypocrisy runs very deep in GC News and Politics..and that my posts will be subjected to manipulations to fit someone's (perhaps Rudey...or Russ) predesposed prejudices. That's fine. I could not care less.
lol and Thnx for that high five and that very long post.
|
I'm really not being a dick here, buddy, I'm pointing out that your somewhat bizarre initial reactions (and later non sequitur defense) have helped to derail the thread into that different direction you mentioned.
I'm not picking your post apart unnecessarily, unless you'd only like some of our words to count.
Again - I'm not insulting you, or jacking w/ you needlessly, nor do I want to question the valueableness[sic, for laughs] of your input . . . I'm making a point. Do you see it?