Final-Fan said:
You said Phendrana was only interpreting/opining and asked him to provide proof otherwise, i.e. that he was stating facts instead of opinion or interpretation. When he did you ignored it. When I asked you to stop ignoring it you found a quote that you decided to use to turn the conversation yet again to UNRELATED things like what some other dude implied you did in your spare time. You declined to respond to the specific damning evidence I mentioned, either to agree that the CoS is in all likelihood guilty or to attempt to defend it, instead falling back on two personal defenses of yourself, both of which fail for one reason or another: 1. Everyone has the right to question their accuser in a court of law. Which street protests are not. And for the record (again!), just because a large group of people participate in a protest does not mean that all of them are safe from a ruthless organization such as the CoS; it could decide to make a brutal example of a few people via harassment, frivolous suits, poisonous accusations or whispering campaigns in the victims' neighborhoods/businesses, etc. -- standard CoS protocol against "SPs". The CoS's goal might be to make protesters fearful of being the unlucky victim just like a single sniper can stop hundreds of soldiers by killing only a few of them. 2. Actually it IS official CoS policy last we heard to "trick, sue, lie to or destroy" anyone critical of it. They just filed the serial numbers off of the "Fair Game" label it originally had. That continuing policy easily covers such things as extortion and could be interpreted without difficulty as including murder. You have FAILED UTTERLY to address this point and the documents supporting it and the way they contradict your claims that we don't have any reason to think the CoS might condone such acts. Whether or not PooperScooper had any basis for what he said. As for Sqrl's posts, despite his voicing his suspicions about you, the vast majority of his post was clearly to present the well-documented alleged and proven crimes of the CoS and ask you to finally discuss that instead of specific individuals and tactics of the CoS's detractors. Which you declined to do. In the end, my only question is whether you truly suffer from the delusion that your post even began to respond to Phendrana's. |
I think it is time for us to start agreeing to disagree on some things, but I'll take your post in order.
Firstly, I'm am not steering the conversation away from ANYTHING. Not one person in this entire thread, least of all me, is arguing the toss over what CoS has done. What I have argued about is whether it is fair to apply the misdeeds of a few to the whole organization and all it's followers. Of course I haven't discussed what CoS has done as my primary issue because it was my understanding that their past misdeeds were not in dispute?
Your arguing against an opposition that doesn't exist on that point, because I am not opposing you on the vast majority of the links that have been posted here. Please, PLEASE read what I'm typing. I'm NOT supporting the CoS or trying to downplay what they HAVE done wrong. I'm arguing against what you consider to be the justified generalization of these misdeeds and application of guilt to the entire organization and all of it's followers. A few people have come into this thread, thoroughly read my posts and immediately understood what I have said. why is it you cannot? Have you read the thread from start to finish. As for why I didn't immediately respond to Phendrana's post (the one with the clambake link), it is simply a case of my not seeing it. When I did respond, I based it on the actual topic we are discussing, rather than CoS's specific misdeeds because NOONE INCLUDING MYSELF IS ARGUING THAT THEY DID NOT HAPPEN!!!!
1. In response to this I direct you too one of my earlier posts. The first scenario is the one we currently have. Anonymous protests in masks which has two problems. One, it limits their credibility as they are not accountable for their own opinions. Two, if CoS finds out who one of them is, it can kill them and say "it wasn't us, they wear masks, we didn't even know they were in the group. In the second scenario, they could not wear masks. One, this would increase their credibility as they would now be accountable. Two, if any of them turn up dead, the finger IMMEDIATELY points at the CoS. It would be an absolutely monumental DISASTER for CoS PR. That is why the whole "staying masked for our own safety" argument falls through.
2. The link you refer too is from the 1980's. It is an internal memo. What I'm asking is this. If you ask a senior CoS member if it is official policy to murder detractors, what do you think they will say? Seriously? Thats my point. I don't know how that argument ever got so big in this thread. I simply pointed out the difference between official and unofficial. If you want to stand unmasked in the middle of Times Square and scream at the top of your lungs that it is unofficial CoS policy to take any means necessary to try and quell dissent, be my guest. I would stand up for your right to say it, so long as you were willing to back it up.
As for Sqrl's post? Once again, he like you has completely (and perhaps deliberately) misunderstood what I have said. I have not once defended CoS's past actions. The reason I didn't argue the toss over the links he provided is precisely because I agree that each one highlights abhorrent events. What the argument in this thread has moved into is a debate about due process and natural justice, which I believe should be accorded to everyone in and out of the courtroom.
But I'm sure, despite the fact that I haven't denied the truthfulness of a single event in a single link in this thread, you or Sqrl will find a way to paint me as a Hubbard-humping Scientology defender that is desperately trying to change the subject and defend myself by means of aggression.
starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS
