I'm not afraid of terrorists.

Status
Not open for further replies.
ruger, he was only mentioning hitler as an example of perhaps the most detestable person conceivable that could count on at least a 1/3rd of the vote simply due to being a pro gun republican...on the other end of the spectrum, he could have made the same example as hitler being an anti gun socialist democrat (which I think was a little closer to hitler's political preferences). Now I've he'd made any parallels between the rise of the reich and how bush's has used 9/11 to further his agenda...Well, that simply woulda just been silly...(now lawrence of arabia, THERE'S some repeating history in action!)
 
mthalo...

if you could, please repeat any part of that post that was a personal attack. If it truly was a personal attack then I'm sure I would have some mail by now. Someone once told me, if you can't come up with a response then keep the reply to yourself. It sounds like good advice. Maybe you should take it. Anyways, seeing how everybody on here (including me) is off topic, this thread should probably get closed now anyways.
 
I quoted what I thought was a personal attack in my last post.

Before that, you posted this.
It looks to me like you need to spend more time learning how to spell and less time worrying about the government. You spell like the Beverly Hillbillies
Click to expand...

It doesn't address the topic in any way, does it?
 
..I suppose if a nuclear bomb or a bio-weapon is set off in a city, you will then reverse suddenly and blame the government for not getting involved enough in the suspected terrorist's lives....are you sure you have a position on this?.. or is it the wind you are riding(north:confused: , south:confused: , east:confused: or west???):confused:
 
NedreckSavant, Godwin doesn't allow for a contextual use of Hitler or Nazis if it is not the subject of the thread.:)

Godwin's Law There is a tradition in many Usenet newsgroups that once such a comparison is made the thread in which the comment was posted is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever debate was in progress.
Click to expand...

:cool: :D
 
I think that this skirts the godwin law, he didn't make a direct reference to anyone, was simply pointing out the FACT that 1/3 of the voting public would vote for a pro-gun adolf, regardless of the shadly looking emperor palpatine/dick cheney figure behind him.

Aspen, on the other end of the spectrum, if we pre-empted iran and suddenly there were alot more terrorist attacks stateside...would be any more preferable? Furthermore, isn't being 'involved' in terrorist's lives kinda what got us into this mess to begin with? Are these not the fruits of occupation?
 
Last edited:
Godwin's Law was invoked? Where was I?

Hmmm, checking...

Here's the results folks.

kennybs plbg in post #2: Ad Hominem
NedrickSavant #27: attacked everyone!
GoSlash 27 & Savage10FP308 #31, #32, #33 and #34: Ad Homs
Tomsriv #64: Adolf Hitler
carbiner #65: Hitler
Savage10FP308 #66: Ad Hom
GoSlash27 #68: Ad Hom in response to Ad Hom
Glenn E. Meyer #72: Hitler; Fascist
Savage10Fp308 #73: Ad Hom
Big Ruger #76: hitler
pipoman #77: quoted Big Ruger (hitler)
NedrickSavant #81: hitler (twice)
Savage1-FP308 #82: Ad Hom - veiled, but there that is.
aspen1964 #84: another veiled Ad Hom.
pipoman #85: Godwins Law definition and exceptions

According to the results, someone shoulda closed this thread some time ago for all the insults. Since my time machine is broke, I'll just hafta do it now and hope y'all consider it done... Way back then! :D
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top