Rocky

T-Bone, I respect your intellectual vigor and mostly enjoy your posts. But on this I'm wondering why you find any value in Mike's vain babblings?

For example, "... verbal attacks contain bait. Just like the fisherman, the attacker presents you with bait in the hope that you will swallow it and be hooked. Bait is often unsaid, or pre-supposed. What this means is that the attacker need not attack you directly, but need only imply certain things, without really saying anything."

In the mid-1990s, I went through two years of high-conflict divorce litigation. During that time, I met a former politician who was working on developing a conflict resolution model/class based on the martial art known as Aikido. The one thing from his class that has stuck with me is to beware of getting hooked on bait that someone may dangle in front of you to foster (or escalate) rather than resolve conflict. At GSC, especially lately, Mike has played the role of offering bait. While he says he's friendly opposition, does he give any genuine consideration to sound, valid arguments that have been made about Wierwille and PFLAP or does he just dismiss them out of hand by falsely claiming that people who disagree with him about Dictor refuse to consider his (Mike's) reality because we hold a "pure evil model" mindset about Dictor, PFLAP and twi? After (many people, including me) calling Mike out repeatedly (constraining him), it has become painfully obvious his discourse here is disingenuous. If Mike does not begin to engage constructively (acknowledge and consider arguments he has heretofore dismissed), I recommend people stop taking his bait.

How quaint. Make an argument, not just a claim. "We had good delivered to us..." Make an argument to back up that claim or just stop toying with people here.

You speak of well-rounded education (in some of your comments). The problem to which you referred is a cultural problem. Widespread behaviors are based on societal mores (unwritten rules). A person with a well-rounded education might be able to articulate that changing cultures and mores is never done quickly or easily. It's not a matter of fear... even though you probably used that expression as an idiom (or as bait).

One might think that after all these years, YOU would get the point that essentially everyone here misses your point.

And therefore not reasonable upon which to base claims thereof. Again, you make claims but you don't back them up with any kind of reasonable argument. Quasi-intellectual bull$hit. I don't know that anyone here has any expectation that they could possibly cause you to reevaluate your Wierwille worship. Why do you think you can change reality for anyone here? Or are you just toying with people here?

Exactly. What YOU SEE here. That doesn't mean anyone else sees it the way you do. You don't make an argument to support the claim that everyone here is adopting the model that VPW was pure evil. You have not made any argument to support that claim. Didn't twi teach that a counterfeit must to some degree resemble the genuine?

This is what I think of when the year 1942 is mentioned. Wierwille's story is not necessarily as attractive.

Mike, We're not going to change YOUR reality and YOU are not going to change OUR reality.

Again, quasi-intellectual bull$hit. What it really boils down to is that you make a strong case that YOU BELIEVE Pflap is God-breathed. OTOH, you don't necessarily make a strong case for PFLAP actually being God-breathed. You don't even make a strong case that anyone else considers PFLAP to be "pure evil."

I wonder, what has twi done when some interloper tries to breech their copyrights? Anyone know?

Right! At least that's the façade they try to project. Fortunately, we've pierced their balloon.

You're right, Mike, we don't see anything about you but your words. I don't attempt to read between the lines. Just your words. You haven't conveyed with your words any such "rich sense of balance" here anyway.

I know what it means. I was remarking on your unconscionable sycophancy.

1) Constantly show you... gimme a break. Do you think you're still addressing twentysomethings? 2) You posted an explanation of known events? No you didn't. You made claims about the sources and connections of things. You didn't even make arguments, let alone valid, sound arguments demonstrating the alleged items are "known events." You may have tried to explain what you understand those items to mean but you fell far short of an explanation of known events. You may not be required to "show proof" but you ought to at least make an argument that makes sense.

Good grief... written PFLAP? really?

That looks awfully like an unreasonable supposition (aka assumption). OTOH, it seems too bad you don't see anything outside of the box of dictor's supposed godly inspiration.

Sigh... Mike, you seem to overestimate yourself. I suppose that's not necessarily a bad thing, but really... how do you know you're not doing some serious projecting yourself?

Not playing in Arizona until January 11. I fully intend to see it the first weekend it's available here.

Me too!