(July 15, 2012 at 4:53 pm)Shell B Wrote:(July 15, 2012 at 4:43 pm)Hovik Wrote: You're an admin, so fucking act like it instead of resorting to emotionally-driven insults. You have every right to defend your bullshit, but don't throw a hissy fit when somebody calls you on it.
Don't presume to tell me what to do. I am first and foremost a member. I can speak to anyone however I feel like speaking if I am not doing it in an official capacity. And my insults are about insight, not emotion. You seem like a fucking kid with an agenda who is willing to whip strawmen out of thin air so you have the soapbox you so desperately seek. I don't mind saying it. That doesn't mean I am emotional. If I was as bad as you would like to paint me as, I would just ban you out of anger, wouldn't I? If I can manage to keep my position on staff out of it, you should manage as well.
Since you haven't responded to a single thing I actually said, you can't say any of it is bullshit. Thanks for more "I don't have to have an argument cuz you a meanie" post. Grow a pair.
"Odds are many of them did."
From that, you lot of monkeys with internet access have come up with, I don't believe in the right to a fair trial, I think everyone there is guilty, I am okay with the prison, etc. Am I getting this right? Shit, I didn't even say many of them did. I said that odds lean that way.
By the way, Hovik, way to stand strong for two replies after you declared yourself not talking to me anymore. Fucking typical.
Well, since you feel the need to continue to fling shit around like a toddler, I'll break this down into super simple language for you.
You made an assertion, quoted:
Quote:he's essentially bringing terrorists into U.S. prisons. Yes, some of them are not terrorists, but many of them are guilty.
Followed by another assertion, quoted:
Quote:Guilty means they did it. You and I both know that odds are that many of them did.
Do you seriously not see the issue here? You've made a valuation of these people being guilty of terrorism based on what? Probability? Whether or not they're actually guilty is beside the fucking point. What we're driving at here that you seem to be missing is that you're making a direct assessment of their guilt without them ever having stood trial.
What about this is so fundamentally difficult for you to grasp?