The most absurd moderation in Sci history

[S.A.M.]

meaning when anybody says

Who is anybody here James? You banned Norsefire and we are discussing him here and he did not say it.

It is, however, quite obvious that the implication of what he did write was that the Jews, being responsible in his opinion for all the conditions leading to World War II, were also consequently responsible for their own holocaust.

So you banned him for what you thought he implied? Read Stryders post carefully, James, not all of us read minds here.

 

[James R]

I banned him for what he wrote, SAM. :facepalm:

 

[S.A.M.]

Which would not be hate speech if it was said about WASPs. It would be trolling. You have a real problem with objectivity when it comes to anything about Jews.

 

[James R]

Which would not be hate speech if it was said about WASPs. It would be trolling.

I answered this question in full earlier. Nothing new to add, SAM?

You have a real problem with objectivity when it comes to anything about Jews.

How ironic. You actually made me shake my head and chuckle in semi-disbelief.

This is you saying that, SAM. You - the person so obsessed about Jews that every second post of yours mentions them in one way or another - usually to say what evil people they all are. You - the person so obsessed that you'll carry on a two-day "debate" about somebody else's ban for antisemitism.

And you think I'm the one with the "objectivity" problem.

Why not just face up to the fact that you hate that stereotyped conglomerate you call "The Jews". Admit it. The next step is to face the fact that it's irrational prejudice. Know thyself, SAM.

 

[S.A.M.]

Why not just face up to the fact that you hate that stereotyped conglomerate you call "The Jews". Admit it. The next step is to face the fact that it's irrational prejudice. Know thyself, SAM.

Let me know when you can actually find a post which does not report a fact, but states an irrational opinion James. Seeing how you paraphrased Norse's post, that should be a real challenge

In fact, make that a requisite for judging hate speech, ie it does not report a fact which can be confirmed, but states an irrational opinion

 

[James R]

In fact, make that a requisite for judging hate speech, ie it does not report a fact which can be confirmed, but states an irrational opinion

You know, that's exactly what we do now. You're catching on.

 

[S.A.M.]

Nope, read the post for which you red carded me. Every sentence in there is a fact which can be independently confirmed.

Try reading it without seeing the word Holocaust flashing on your brain

If a fasting Muslim refused to eat at a birthday party or even to attend it, it would be a parallel comparison.

I'm not responsible for the "spitting at the reporter" phenomenon.


The spitting thing is something that Jews have come up with as a form of expressing intolerance for idol worship [you must have read Cheski's comments on Hindu idols]


It has its basis in spitting at the crucifix or near a church, with hasidic Jews teaching young children that if it is dangerous to spit openly then they should do so covertly.

You'll not find Rahm Emmanuel spitting at many crucifixes. At least not openly.

Strangely enough, I do not think Jews in India or even Arab Jews, spit at crucifixes or idols, so this looks like an evolution which took place within the European diaspora, as did most of the laws of Jewish communities.

Its why Ashkenazi Haredim do not consider the Mizrahi as "religious enough" - they do not have all these laws.

The way I see this going, people can say anything about Muslims or Christians and its just "trolling" which may or may not warrant a yellow card but definitely will not accrue infraction points. Say anything about Jews and James will jump in with red cards, collect enough infractions from them to justify long bans or perma bans. Superstring sees the US in posts where I don't mention them, you see the holocaust in posts where no one mentions it. Between the two of you, it would be easy to accrue 4 infractions.

I think infraction points should be visible to all, so everyone can see how the system works.

 

[birch]

Actually, you know what?

I refuse to retract my statement. I'm not going to be made to support Zionism just 'cause scary ol' James is going to ban me.

Go ahead and be a bigot and silence those that disagree with you. In fact, I want you to permaban me.


And you can go on knowing that I still oppose Israel and the Zionist movement that had origins well before that, which the Jews are responsible for. Go ahead and ban me. And while you're at it, I want you to ban spidergoat, who has criticized Arabs before; and ban so many others that have criticized the Chinese, the Communists, the Americans, the Europeans, everyone else.

I really couldn't care less. I don't live in order to satisfy that communist parasitic scumbag entitled brat called James R.

By the way, your post in the other thread regarding rights is a fallacy; you say you are entitled to things because you pay for them. That's exactly what I'm arguing for: modern society is built upon VOLUNTARY, individual transactions, and if an individual agrees voluntarily to accept your payment in order for a service in return, THEN you are entitled, because you have paid for it.

What are you are arguing for is not transactions, but mere entitlements simply because you exist; and that requires that others work whether they like it or not, and that they do not demand payment; because if they do, and they quit, then they deny you your rights.


Get some logic, get some back bone, and grow a pair.

Zionist scumbag.

lol, besides this, are you really an arab?

you've made pro-hitler posts before or even threads, but you are an arab? lmao

 

[pjdude1219]

lol, besides this, are you really an arab?

you've made pro-hitler posts before or even threads, but you are an arab? lmao

no one has accused him of being consistent and few have accused him of intelligence.

 

[GeoffP]

Nope, read the post for which you red carded me. Every sentence in there is a fact which can be independently confirmed.

Try reading it without seeing the word Holocaust flashing on your brain

It was weasely language about Jews, Sam. The insinuation was clear.

 

[S.A.M.]

Which part was weasly? What was the insinuation? I find it very absurd that red cards and bans are being issued on implications and insinuations by those who interpret posts rather than actually read them.

 

[GeoffP]

That Jews like spitting on 'idols'.

 

[Gustav]

Its easy to agree about freedom of expression when its people you agree with, its when you accept that even people you disagree with have a right to it, that you can claim you believe in it.

i dont understand. while we theoretically have the right to opine about anything in a free society. there are restrictions on what and where you get to exercise this right. in sci the tos defines what is acceptable or not. it is also obvious there are many gray areas and biases in interpretation but that is something we can hash out in sfog. incompetent moderation can also be a problem but that too can be challenged and arbitrated to a hopefully. amicable and mutually satifactory resolution.

What do you think? Am I being overzealous?

in this particular venue, yes.
in principle, perhaps conditionally tho i lean towards no (bit confused)

And Jews sabotaged Europe, manipulate world banks, and created the conditions necessary for both World Wars.

i support the right of norse to make those statements. he can stand ouside my house with swastikas and a megaphone. shit, i'd bring out the deck chairs, some beer and enjoy the show. he can orate his shit down at the local park for all i care. however as parmalee pointed out....

would i throw Norse out of my living room? hell yeah. perhaps not after the first or second time he exhibited such behavior, but after the dozenth...

...sci is the cyber equivalent of a semi private living room and this is why he can be thrown out for violating sci's code of conduct that had been instituted by porfiry and refined over the years. bigots will never find this a hospitable place and if anyone wants to be or remain a member, they better shape up or ship out

sci is not obliged to have responsibilities but has taken it upon herself to have some. this is a fairly well browsed site on the internet for those partial to an intellectual spin on shit and when one is in a position to influence the larger dialog, it is far better to present the sort of rhetoric that lends itself towards the advancement of society rather than its goddamn retardation. all opinions are not given equal weight here in the name of free speech. sci is proudly partisan and quite unapologetic about it too.

decent readership, ja?

i can imagine some budding nazi skinhead eagerly following norse thru sci and taking all those ludicrous statements to heart. why the fuck would we plot our own downfall either as forum or as a civ? it does not make sense. are we $tormfronts lackeys?

I am no fan of norse, he's mostly ridiculous. That does not mean he should be banned for an opinion or forced to respond to posts.

you are simply being myopic. try looking at the larger picture. make inferences and extrapolate from these opinions into their logical and probable conclusions

It is of a vision, a unity between all Semites: Arabs, Jews, Phoenicians, Assyrians, and whoever else I left out. A grand alliance, including Israel as well (our Brothers). For we are Semites, and foreign forces cannot destroy us. No, foreign forces may attempt to turn us against each other, but both domestic AND foreign enemies must be realized and eliminated to have a true SEMITIC ALLIANCE! (link)

I'm no expert on British politics, but I do know the usual about the mainstream political parties (Lib Dems, Labour, and Conservatives); however, it seems to me like Britain has gone to hell. Everything that made the country great once before, is basically dying. Patriotism, family values, etc, not to mention the laughable British police system

The BNP seems like a good party in my book. The problem is their past and some of their policies make them seem racist, but they really aren't. Being against immigration isn't racism.

For all you Brits on this forum, what parties do you support?

they are racist,do a little research.

I have, as well as gone on their website. They seem to the the only guys with a clue.

(link)

oh i like to congratulate all sciforumers that enabled norse and his 11,000 posts by giving him a goddamn audience. are you guys really that starved for attention?

morons like that are a clear and present danger and sci has no obligation to provide a platform for his rhetoric. if he is indeed syrian......

Syria has been under Emergency Law since 1962, effectively suspending most constitutional protections for citizens, and its system of government is considered non-democratic.

The country has been governed by the Baath Party since 1963, although actual power is concentrated to the presidency and a narrow grouping of military and political strongmen. Syria's current president is Bashar al-Assad, who won a referendum on extending his presidency for second term, garnering 97.62 percent of votes in 2007 and is the son of Hafez al-Assad, who held office from 1970 until his death in 2000

.../snort

no wonder the tard heils his ass thru sci

now
the manner of his ousting may have been a bit confusing in the sense that bells could have let james handle it since he was first on the scene. still tho, she is well within her prerogative. it was unfortunate to see the discordance b/w both their approaches but neither was wrong. as james more or less indicated, norse's intransigence over the years probably qualifies him for a permaban. sci owes him nothing

 

[Gustav]

Let me know when you can actually find a post which does not report a fact, but states an irrational opinion James. Seeing how you paraphrased Norse's post, that should be a real challenge

In fact, make that a requisite for judging hate speech, ie it does not report a fact which can be confirmed, but states an irrational opinion

/chuckle

while james is infamous for putting his foot in his mouth where your pronouncements are concerned, it does not have to follow he is doing the same with the nazi, norse

 

[S.A.M.]

now
the manner of his ousting may have been a bit confusing in the sense that bells could have let james handle it since he was first on the scene. still tho, she is well within her prerogative. it was unfortunate to see the discordance b/w both their approaches but neither was wrong. as james more or less indicated, norse's intransigence over the years probably qualifies him for a permaban. sci owes him nothing

But this is not the only instance of the subpoena ban and the ends do not justify the means. If there is a problem with his posting history, then address the problem. Address the issues which are directly relevant. Why use a method which is unethical simply to oust him? James himself accepts that one is not obliged to comply with anyone demanding a response, then why use bullying tactics to force one?

As for Norse, he's an adolescent Syrian Texan. Thats a triple whammy

 

[Gustav]

as for this countdown clock...timezones, accidents, sick grandma, unpaid internet bill........
do you get the goddamn picture? why do you mods insist on embarrassing my forum like this?


i do understand why sometimes we feel the need to force a response

eyeball phlog.....

his assertion,shown to be false 2 fucking years ago is once again paraded as the gospel truth. he refuses to acknowledge the refutation or show it to be in error. what would one do with tards like this? let them parade their shit all over sci? i did not however make this an issue since i find him fairly useful to sci

so ahh
here an alternative. rather tick tocking some schumks ass, demand the substantiation be contained in a subsequent post...the very next one perhaps

 

[hypewaders]

I won't be so cruel as to link to the "music", but que (cringe)

the final countdown uke: