The internet and Inhumanity

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So you threw out the crack about setting dogs on blacks and murdering Cherokees for no particulate reason? I brought up the Union Army and Yankee angle after you threw out the blacks and Cherokees into the mix. That stuff happened down South and you knew exactly what you doing even though none of it applied to me. If you're going the make some serious charges out of the blue you better have good reason for it and you didn't.

You are not a buff even though you match precisely the first definition I found. I don't think you know what a buff is and other than bragging using other terms just to desperately find a flaw in what I wrote.

"One who is enthusiastic and knowledgeable about a subject: a Civil War buff."

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/buff

What inaccurate profile? YOU provided all the details and I added nothing. You can't even quote me as I shred your reasoning sentence by sentence.

Your knowledge of American history is overshadowed by coming off a pompous azz giving a lecture to us poor simple natives while ignoring everything else. Your ####### at the outset painting me as someone who approved of shooting Mexicans and repeating it even though I said nothing of the kind and I went to explain why it was wrong without throwing in appeals to patriotism and religion without shame. Your knowledge American history, economics and the Constitution may exceed the average Joe but not mine so far as I've seen and that's who you're talking to. Hard to believe anyone can live here as long as you claim and still come off so badly.

You probably can't change yourself at this late date and you certainly don't have to do on my accord but could make some small contribution by talking to people without the obligatory jabs of American stupidity and your claims of superiority and truly expect any reasonable person to kowtow to you. If you want to make your point make it and at least have the common courtesy to reply to what a poster writes and not just ignore it and go on the offense. There are numerous ways to challenge people to think even they disagree with you but you've got to appeal to them beyond wrapping your arguments in a flag and using religion as a weapon against them. You may get to that point but you're doing in your first post, you're one pissed off person that should avoid loaded terms unless you're just trolling.

Trolling like suggesting gays enjoy rape and anyone who questions it must also be gay?

[Captain Oates 910]

And which angel among us is going to write these "basic decency" standards that will stand the test of reason in all times and places?

Why don't you submit yours and lets see if all agree.

So we don't get bogged down, let's stick with the one we have. When people say that Mexican families who try and swim the river to the US should be machine gunned in the water, (people on VJ don't say that), I say that is not common decency.

I understand that in the US, the population takes pride in people being able to say that and I am not arguing with their right to say it here - I am simply saying that it offends common decency and reveals much more about that person than we would get to know in face to face conversation where they might be more reticent (unless they lived round here)

Really I think that people who publish those hateful views anonymously should be taken to task and called on it and opposed, rather than simply letting it go

That isn't suppression of free speech, it is vigorous opposition to a hateful and indecent part of our lives today

[Obama 2012 1,714]

So we don't get bogged down, let's stick with the one we have. When people say that Mexican families who try and swim the river to the US should be machine gunned in the water, (people on VJ don't say that), I say that is not common decency.

I understand that in the US, the population takes pride in people being able to say that and I am not arguing with their right to say it here - I am simply saying that it offends common decency and reveals much more about that person than we would get to know in face to face conversation where they might be more reticent (unless they lived round here)

Really I think that people who publish those hateful views anonymously should be taken to task and called on it and opposed, rather than simply letting it go

That isn't suppression of free speech, it is vigorous opposition to a hateful and indecent part of our lives today

you apparently have seen my posts on here regarding illegal immigration and our borders.

[Captain Oates 910]

you apparently have seen my posts on here regarding illegal immigration and our borders.

Please explain - are you in favor of such machine gunning of illegal immigrants? I would be most relieved to hear that you are not.

[mawilson 2,133]

There aren't nuts in the UK?

Yeah, seriously.

[^_^ 5,021]

Yeah, seriously.

I find it hard to believe that the departure of two nuts (you and Alan) is enough to make a serious dent in the UK's nut population

[Captain Oates 910]

I find it hard to believe that the departure of two nuts (you and Alan) is enough to make a serious dent in the UK's nut population

If you can't think of anything to say on the subject of the thread, posting these personal insults laced with ethnic references, are just wasted pixels and unnecessary wear and tear on your keyboard

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Please explain - are you in favor of such machine gunning of illegal immigrants? I would be most relieved to hear that you are not.

machine gunning? no, of course not... nor would I want to shoot kids/families.

but I've been a proponent of sharp shooters taking shots at people trying to cross illegally. After all, they are invading a soveriegn nation.

[Danno 1,228]

So we don't get bogged down, let's stick with the one we have. When people say that Mexican families who try and swim the river to the US should be machine gunned in the water, (people on VJ don't say that), I say that is not common decency.

I understand that in the US, the population takes pride in people being able to say that and I am not arguing with their right to say it here - I am simply saying that it offends common decency and reveals much more about that person than we would get to know in face to face conversation where they might be more reticent (unless they lived round here)

Really I think that people who publish those hateful views anonymously should be taken to task and called on it and opposed, rather than simply letting it go

That isn't suppression of free speech, it is vigorous opposition to a hateful and indecent part of our lives today

Okay I'll play!

So we all agree shooting Children in the River is something we can't tolerate anyone suggesting on-line... how about if someone were to suggest shooting Adults, might be permitted if they don't heed warnings?

Is that going too far?

Hozabout if it looks like they are armed? Is suggesting we shoot down armed men entering the country going too far, ...is that past the bounds of free speech?

Some might believe

stopping illegals even with the threat of death.... would in fact save american lives, due to the crime waves many areas are now plagued with.

Sorry Dude, I find it easier to dismiss stuff I find silly... even offensive, than to let you define what "common decency" is for everyone.. and in every place.

Let websites decide for themselves.

If you don't like them, don't visit them.

[^_^ 5,021]

If you can't think of anything to say on the subject of the thread, posting these personal insults laced with ethnic references, are just wasted pixels and unnecessary wear and tear on your keyboard

Relax, old boy. I was kidding.

Okay I'll play!

Oh goodie.

[Captain Oates 910]

machine gunning? no, of course not... nor would I want to shoot kids/families.

but I've been a proponent of sharp shooters taking shots at people trying to cross illegally. After all, they are invading a soveriegn nation.

At what age would you consider the cut off point for sharpshooting an illegal immigrant/invader ?

12? 14 ? 17 ? 21 ?

Just the males or the chicas ?

[^_^ 5,021]

Preventing illegal entry at the border ought to be the job of our federal government. What you're seeing is incredulity that they can't seem to get the job done transform into frustration which is then aided and abetted by online anonymity and turns into madness.

[Captain Oates 910]

Preventing illegal entry at the border ought to be the job of our federal government. What you're seeing is incredulity that they can't seem to get the job done transform into frustration which is then aided and abetted by online anonymity and turns into madness.

So I am a British Nut (even though I am a US Citizen), and people who want to sharpshoot people swimming the river and blow their brains and guts into the rio grande which will run red with human blood - are simply frustrated citizens and must be excused because the US government made them do it by their inaction on borders...

It seems that position is considered decent and moral in the US and is more mainsteam than I thought.

My premise that the internet allows people to say horrible things that they wouldnt normally say, seems to be fading away in the light of these opinions.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

At what age would you consider the cut off point for sharpshooting an illegal immigrant/invader ?

12? 14 ? 17 ? 21 ?

Just the males or the chicas ?

Adults. No discrimination on sex.

[mawilson 2,133]

If you can't think of anything to say on the subject of the thread, posting these personal insults laced with ethnic references, are just wasted pixels and unnecessary wear and tear on your keyboard

Lighten up, Alan.

Not all Americans are nuts, you know. Sounds like you live in the wrong part of the country.

Come to the North-East and you'll see the difference.