OT: Innocent?

Jul 25, 2005 320 Replies

A convenient claim, Mirjam. How should I read your posts?

This is simply false Mirjam. In East Germany, they were taught far LESS than in West Germany. I defy you to find any valid scholar who claims otherwise and cite that person here in a form that can be verified.

You have read my

You've used it about me, many a time. In fact you've used it about me within the last few weeks.

I don't jump on your words, I simply disagree with you and I have a right to do so, just as you have a right to your feelings.

I really don't care whether you research or not. It makes no difference to me. I don't usually ask people for their research on matters of opinion. It is only when people state as fact things I know to be untrue that I ask for their sources, so that I can see where they got their ideas or correct my own.

As an academic, Mirjam, I understand that having done research does not always make ones conclusions correct. You still don't seem to have grasped that concept.

What ARE you talking about? You have completely lost me here, Mirjam. You claim that I am incapable of understanding a discussion between a German and a Jew and now you claim that I don't want to, without ever providing any evidence that I don't. We're not talking about Dutch Jewery and we're not talking about propaganda. We were talking about whether it is possible to have a discussion with you without you calling someone a liar. It is my experience that it is not possible and no book in Dutch (which I don't read easily) is going to change my mind about that. You could change my mind by trying to be more reasonable in your discussions, but I won't hold my breath.

I wouldn't know. I'm not a Christian. And since you're the only Jew or Israeli that I've ever had this kind of difficulty with, I prefer not to generalize.

No, it's true, you never came out and called Nicole a liar, that I can see. But you did imply it at least once.

See, and I wasn't jumping on you. Isn't that better?

No, Mirjam, it's not. I'm generally very polite to people. I am occasionally brusque in my posts, but I am not the only one with that characteristic and I try to be understanding when others are.

Mirjam, you are rarely polite to me, unless repeatedly calling someone a liar and an anti-semite falls within your definition of polite.

And why is it that other people "respond" but I "jump?" How could you possibly know what I am doing when I respond to you? At least I have never put your name in the subject header of a post, nor called you to task for not sending me condolences.

And I am entitled to my interpretation, yes?

In this case, Mirjam, you are mistaken. You did indeed change your claims about the teaching of Holocaust history in German schools. And in changing your wording, changed your claim.

You may think it was stupid and uncalled for, but at the time, I was very angry and just as you are entitled to express your feelings, I am entitled to express mine. I still stand by that statement, as I made it, not as you claim I made it.

But you obviously deleted it without reading it, since you misquote it every time you remember it. I never claimed to know what your dead ancestors think. I never claimed that they were ashamed of you. I said that I felt shame for you. There's a difference. And every time you repeat that I claimed to know what your ancestors are thinking, you are telling a lie.

Elizabeth

Ok. At this point I shall killfile you. It's just come to a point where I'm no longer able to "discuss" things with you. I don't want to read your accusations anymore. You keep trying to make me say something stupid and I'm just tired of keeping my guard up, of looking up words in my dictionary just to make sure I'm not using a word wrong and being accused of things I didn't mean to say. It's not worth my time. You twist my words every way you can and try to get your point across that all germans are still evil and that you are some kind of angelic creature that had to suffer for centuries. I'm sorry you feel this way but there's nothing I'm willing to do for you anymore.

cu nicole

x?U?ÍNä0?ï~?âZi?¹ ?AÚåÂeMÒÄfw°;D?ßvfµ??%ÿT]Õ~È-î3)?,Êwn/½Æ]%PG=¡ÛágÈï4îp?zÎE)õPo??>CÐKbd.L¹óvâ?$??}¸ý¥¸ÐZ0?aò?NRç$Õ}ÎÜi ü?EC?z¥(Ì#Tj'þ2??ÿ©0?´ÝîÙïð*«á^êãBEFV_ÍÍgÚ*?¹7Áz?V v zZáLdkâ?ÑI ÏiÖØ??9%Y"÷ã5ÊRà%Úm°)Z?ÊùÏñ?lS9??$$­b #·?ç¥ÄÎ5 ÜåÇ,zýb?'?s¢yÃ/æ>ò"ùt~F?ªxlþc¿I?õþRÙÇ9¯:öû÷3¥µxAiàâe?¸ídtî/ÿ?Ü

Good.

I will agree to A if you will tell me how you got there, but you never will. Instead, you go off on a tangent about how I just don't understand and I always critize you. And in this last round, it was you who corrected me to begin with, not the other way around, please remember. You didn't like my reaction to the death of a possibly innocent man.

Good, then be sure not to put my name in any more subject headers, will you?

Ok.

Ah, you can't just agree to disagree, can you, Mirjam? You have to sign off with this load of dreck. I have said I don't trust you and I have asked you to stop sending me email and snail mail, but I don't think I have ever unloaded this kind of personal invective on you. So there you go, Mirjam. You are better at being nasty than I am. There's a victory for you.

Elizabeth

"Dawne Peterson" , blest us all with:

snip #From: "MizKrysti" #Message-ID: #MizKrysti said in another thread:

snip

I agree, totallyj In this case however the OP has it all cocked up. There is no 'grey area' for a UseNET Godwin. Posting a Godwin is more of a shorthand type gavel thump to a response that is diversionary. The benchmark of "mentioning Nazi" is simply indicative of the

*type of response* that warrants a Godwin being announced. Do not take my word for it,, go check the soc.culture groups or any of the more vitriolic file swap (binary) groups. FWIW,, Godwins have lost popularity,, the new enlightened X Gen prefers simple language. Today,, GAGF is their 'Godwin'

jLs

So you are saying that someone might have posted "godwin" as a kind of shorthand to say the argument had been diverted??. In classical logic, there are similar terms for logical fallacies--red herring, straw man argument, and several others which indicate that something has been introduced that takes the argument away from its logical development. What you say about plain language being used is encouraging--there is little point in telling someone they have screwed up without letting them know how. Dawne

Don`t ask, Mirjam - you really don`t want to know!!! I think it should have a Y at the end. LOL!

Pat P

snipped-for-privacy@actcom.co.il (Mirjam Bruck-Cohen), blest us all with:

formatting link
may not want to know Mirjam :->It is an Aussie cultural language thing and not half as bad as it sounds.Often used as an expression of saying "No thanks" ,,amongst good friends. Yep..we is a weird bunch awl-roight!

Then again,, IF in Sydney,, I would not say GAG to the Pizza Boy when he asked for his money!!

jLs

"Dawne Peterson" , blest us all with:

..exactly :-) AnD.. In circumstance it [diversion] is a strategy often employed when the response clearly punches big holes in the arguments put. I am of the belief the strategy is taught in one societys debating schools as it is just too common an occurrence to be coincidence. Does WOMD turning into "forced democracy" ring any bells?

Someone should have yelled "Godwin" at Dubbya...long ago!

..and again, exactly. Problem you have in doing so is that [often] "auto mode" of the receiver is on 'Lock". The default options available in that brainspace are: a. ignore [or] b. delve into deeper convoluted reasoning - oxymoron alert. Hence, "letting them know how", is a complete waste of effort on your [well intentioned] part.

It is refreshing when you do discover a reasoned response is not only listened to..but accepted :-)

..now who is going to yell "Godwin" on this post?

jLs

It`s not really anyone`s BUSINESS to yell "Godwin" or anything else, is it? If you`re fed up with it, just kill the thread! Simple! ;-P

Pat P

"Pat P" , blest us all with:

IF that is a question Pat then the answer is, Yes , it is. Thats How Usenet works.

..and ?

I would explain further,, usually, however you have used all your tokens up so this is all you get,, as attention. Be happy you got that as you are on *Mark Read* from your last adventure into silliness.

jLb

Where the devil did you spring for to barge in here from nowhere and start trying to run things? And just who are you to talk about silliness? You flew off half-cocked and I can tell you now, that a lot of folk put you down as a troll and a humourless one, at that.

I usually killfile trolls, but gave you a chance hoping you might prove to be older and wiser than your apparent 12 years. A mistake that`s easily rectified.

Pat P

>

I was wondering the same thing - flew in with a bird brain I would say. Like a seagull, if he's not sqawking he's s*****ng.

Perhaps he will tell us more about the needlework he does and stay on subject a bit.

Nothing changes much in your world Pat. I was not aware anyone was "trying to run things". Have you made a new rule? You most certainly do not like the Bird Boy having a say. I find the comment refreshing for a change of pace and thought

sally

Oh Please Lucrette! YOU cite "on subject" Come on! The whole kitchen cupboard is rattling in disbelief! Given the harpish and completely unwarranted response yourself and Pat have mailed I would say the Bird Boy does excellent needlework

sally

I just didn`t appreciate his previous hysterical and practically incoherent attack from someone who, like yourself on an earlier occasion, leapt in from nowhere to criticise and, in fact, I`m surprised you still deign to mix with people who might let slip the odd profanity! LOL!

I`m certainly not trying to make a rule, and don`t expect a newcomer to attempt to do so, either.

Is it a man? Not that it matters.

I`m assuming that you are Sally Swindells and not Sindells as it appears on this post.

Pat P

"Pat P" , blest us all with:

Forgive me for not accommodating your disabilities sufficiently in my response to your request for assistance.

There was no formative rule enhancement in my original post. The post was 100% pure assistance. Many many people would have been *very glad* of the information, at that time.

Here is the original post. Message-ID:

Here is the Google link to the thread resulting from your 'huffishness'.

formatting link
. And, I am *not* a newcomer, I have been lurking here for eons, posting just occasionally. The original post was one of those times. That said, no one has *_any right _* to put their expectations up as evidential or argument in Usenet circles.

*That* is something you do continually and I , for one, find it *_very irritating_*. Forgive me for using my skills and stepping out of the shadows to tell you so. I have rights too. remember that. :-/

I *would be* concerned if it did.

Assume nothing. That is what got you into hot water in the first place. That and an Email Client that does not work - for Usenet.

Certainly OutHouse Distress is not equipped with the tools to rewrite history as you would attempt to force it to do

cheerio :-Þ

jLb

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required