Re: PING DAVID G: Re: OT Fox Noise Hypocracy

David Goldberg wrote:

"theBZA" <dewey3kNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:Xns99B76606FE5CBdewey3kNOSPAMgmailco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"David Goldberg" <daagoldberg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in
ikiKi.3800$Wo4.800@trnddc03:">news:ikiKi.3800$Wo4.800@trnddc03:


"Frank Rizzo" <champ91917@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1190751723.916902.93940@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Sep 25, 12:30 pm, theBZA <dewey3kNOS...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"David Goldberg" <daagoldb...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote
in8UcKi.1090$kk4.824@trnddc08:">news:8UcKi.1090$kk4.824@trnddc08:






"Frank Rizzo" <champ91...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1190688845.429207.140980@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Sep 24, 12:07 pm, "Terraholm" <TerraholmSPAM...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Rant over Columbia allowing Ahmadinejad to speak and give him a
forum...and
then broadcasting the whole thing live....

--
Laurel T
"The lives of cadis, scholars, shaykhs, Alids,
and Nestorian priests, and persons who do not
combat against us are safe from us."
Hulagu Khan's arrow message at the sack of Baghdad

That is kind of ironic. I don't have a problem with allowing
Amen to the Jihad to have a speaking engagement except, the same
school who touts freedom of speech here, didn't allow Jim
Gilchrest of the Minuteman group to speak there. He was recently
cancelled because he's too controversial.

Frankly, I know we have to allow this jackass holocaust denier to
go to the UN in NY. We don't have to allow him access to
anything else. Let him fly in, escort him to the UN, let him say
his little anti- Israel rant, and escort him out back to the
airport etc.. That's the way to do it. There is nothing in the
law that says he's authorized to do anything else.

However, since we're trying to prove that we're going to have
open dialogue, why not allow open dialogue for all? Why not
Gilchrest?

Rizzo

Liberals only support "diversity" when it suits their purposes.
If you disagree with them, suddenly "diversity", "freedom of
expression", and all their other favorite buzzwords suddenly fly
out the window.

Yet another broad-stroked generalization based on nothing more than
Fox Noise talking points. Cite some examples or shut up you lying
coward. --
Crippled but free
I was blind all the time
I was learning to see.

David,

Does this not just prove your point? More unsolicited name calling
yet no substance.

Yes. I always know I'm right when the other guy is reduced to
childish name calling.


Since you always call people names, you must always be wrong.


I have never resorted to personal attacks in this newsgroup.



Goldberg, you call people "liberals" as if it were an dirty name. When you disagree with someone's opinion or allegations of facts, why not just say, "your opinion/allegations are unsound," and explain why instead of saying, "You liberals always . . . ." You see, there are ways of attacking personally other than the use of pejorative name calling; and your dissembling cop-out above, indeed your constant weaseling in general, is despicable. But as far as you and I are concerned, I explained to GOP in another thread why between you, among others named there, and me our political differences are so dangerously opposed that they are now on a personal, emotional level. I don't like you, personally.

.