FAIR, McCue, and the Law

[_the road to hana]

Yea, we are going back to Germany in the name of "free speech"

Nothing like Godwin overkill.

[_Ray A]

Would you like me to make it even clearer?

The real Nazis (according to those who advocate "free speech") are those who oppose free speech: http://members.ozemail.com.au/~natinfo/rvlaws.htm

Want it even clearer?: If you are black, Jew, Asian, or don't fit into "social norms" - you stink. You're a pariah. That's "free speech"! You are fat? Then you're really a fat, ugly bastard! Free speech and all that.....

Mormonism stinks. It's a "fraud". We ALL know that!

Let the "fraud-fest" continue. Tell the world how you were "duped", and warn them to avoid the religion you once loved and honoured. Then explain why you flip-flopped. You, obviously, "know the truth". We can trust you. And Mormonism is evil!

Sieg heil!!!!

[_Jersey Girl]

Would you like me to make it even clearer?

The real Nazis (according to those who advocate "free speech") are those who oppose free speech: http://members.ozemail.com.au/~natinfo/rvlaws.htm

Want it even clearer?: If you are black, Jew, Asian, or don't fit into "social norms" - you stink. You're a pariah. That's "free speech"! You are fat? Then you're really a fat, ugly bastard! Free speech and all that.....

Mormonism stinks. It's a "fraud". We ALL know that!

Let the "fraud-fest" continue. Tell the world how you were "duped", and warn them to avoid the religion you once loved and honoured. Then explain why you flip-flopped. You, obviously, "know the truth". We can trust you. And Mormonism is evil!

Sieg heil!!!!

So where do the Jersey Girl's rank in this? Are we fat ugly stinking bastards too?

[_harmony]

So, Scratch and others think my analogies to a "holocaust" is a "joke"?

Keep attacking Mormons. No harm done, only "entertainment"?

"Free speech." Whch conquers all. And it's all here on this board.

I recommend primal scream therapy, for moments like this.

[_harmony]

So where do the Jersey Girl's rank in this? Are we fat ugly stinking bastards too?

Jersey Girls are beyond words (and I can't find my thesaurus).

[_harmony]

Harmony, Charity's insistence on defending her erroneous statement, even if it were made unknowingly, is in itself a form of lying. The truth is obvious, yet she is determined not to recognize it, lying to both herself and others.

Her initial statement was a lie, of which I believe she was and is well aware, by her own admission of knowing there was a closed thread on MA&D. She knew there was indeed something there about the article, yet she said there was "nothing". How is that not a lie?

KA

I'm just saying... I've been wrong before, and people on MAD called me a liar. I wasn't lying; I was just wrong. I don't know what charity knows now about what she wrote earlier or even what she knew when she wrote what she wrote; I just know that sometimes people are just wrong. And it's not always accurate when someone is just wrong to call them a liar.

So I prefer to say "charity, you're wrong" instead of "charity, you're a damned liar.". That's just me. Maybe things look different from your piece of the world.

[_charity]

Charity was wrong. That's evident. I'm not sure you can prove she lied. There's a difference between being wrong and lying.

Harmony, Charity's insistence on defending her erroneous statement, even if it were made unknowingly, is in itself a form of lying. The truth is obvious, yet she is determined not to recognize it, lying to both herself and others.

Her initial statement was a lie, of which I believe she was and is well aware, by her own admission of knowing there was a closed thread on MA&D. She knew there was indeed something there about the article, yet she said there was "nothing". How is that not a lie?

KA[/quote]

Harmony, thanks for trying to bring back a trace of sanity here.

When I made my post, I had gone to the MA&D board. There was no such thread on page 1, and the last few entries on page one had been made the day before and were obviously not active any more. To me that says no such thread. Later, when CKS said there had been one but it had been locked, that proved it. Locked threads are gone. No discussion.

You can say once there always there, even if locked. I think I can say there is no discussion going on about this on MA&D while the debate was going hot and heavy on this one, and be perfectly accurate.

If we have a difference of opinion, we have a difference of opinion.

But this shows the anti-Mormon mentality. If an anti-Mormon disagrees with a Mormon, the Mormon is lying. This is sick. Okay, to be more politicallh correct, unhealthy. It shows a definite paranoia and defensiveness. You can't admit to honest differences, so you have to strike out.

[Tator]

For what it's worth, I don't think Charity was deliberately lying. Instead, she has demonstrated extreme difficulties admitting her own errors and insults and goes to great extent to deny the same. This isn't quite lying to others so much as lying to oneself.

So far, this thread seems to consist of two subgroups of posters:

a - posters who find the article on mccue to be an outrageous act of libel and are commenting on this fact as an observation of the over-all tendency of FARMists to engage in ad-hom attacks

b - posters who believe that commenting on the libelous article is an immoral act in and of itself, and insist that real friends of mccue would ignore it completely, and that commenting on the libelous article consitutes rumor-mongering

Both subgroups are actually engaging in the same behavior: criticiquing and noting the bad behavior of a member of the "other" group. Both groups keep the discussion alive. Hypocritically, group b chooses to ignore that inconvenient fact. If group b were genuinely concerned about "rumor mongering" and actually believed their criticism of group a, they would not post AT ALL on this thread. I conclude that since they continue to post (charity at an even higher rate than group a) either they really WANT to continue the "rumor mongering", or they simply want an opportunity to attack the "other" group in order to distract attention from the serious wrong-doing of their own group.

[_the road to hana]

If group b were genuinely concerned about "rumor mongering" and actually believed their criticism of group a, they would not post AT ALL on this thread. I conclude that since they continue to post (charity at an even higher rate than group a) either they really WANT to continue the "rumor mongering", or they simply want an opportunity to attack the "other" group in order to distract attention from the serious wrong-doing of their own group.

I'd vote for the latter.

Most of those group b people seem also to be overlooking the fact that it was Bob McCue himself who cross posted to other boards in order to counter the FAIR Wiki article. Their primary argument seems to be that "friends of Bob McCue" wouldn't post about it, as if they really gave a flying flip about anyone trounced in a FAIR Wiki.

[_charity]

I'm just saying... I've been wrong before, and people on MAD called me a liar. I wasn't lying; I was just wrong. I don't know what charity knows now about what she wrote earlier or even what she knew when she wrote what she wrote; I just know that sometimes people are just wrong. And it's not always accurate when someone is just wrong to call them a liar.

So I prefer to say "charity, you're wrong" instead of "charity, you're a damned liar.". That's just me. Maybe things look different from your piece of the world.

Nobody overt there should have called you a liar. It is such a petty endeavor to call people names. I think that is pretty general no matter what piece of the world we inhabit. The Thumper Rule.