Heidegger

—– Original Message —–
From: “Malcolm Riddoch”

> On 03/06/2006, at 1:36 AM, Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>
>> If someone denies that the sky is blue, is the problem the lack of
>> explanation of what one means by “blue”?
>
> And this is a metaphor of … what exactly?

Exactly.

> We were discussing
> something of the nature of nationalist necessities and the use
> terror, from the Nazi holocausts through the Stern gang and Freedom
> Party and on to today’s Palestinian terror against Israeli state
> terror in a world transfixed by the US Neoconservative use of a
> global terror war, and all of this prescribed by the practical
> logistics of power.

Since you have done it yet again in the above paragraph, and will probably
express wide-eyed wonder yet again when I point that out, I’m going to give
you a break and actually explain how you could have said the above in a
manner befitting dialogue between two sides:

“We were discussing something of the nature of nationalist necessities, the
logistics of power, and the use of terror, from the Nazi holocausts through
the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, in the global context of
the US war.”

- a neutral way of saying it which doesn’t prejudge either of our positions.
Try it.

> It’s an amoral situation Anthony,

“murder”
“war crimes”
“slaughter”

> no matter how
> you might feel justified in whatever moral outrage you may feel, when
> it comes down to business relations non-profitability is simply not
> an option. The universal moral principle that seems to rule our
> international relations at the moment is - “By whatever means
> necessary”.

Unless, of course, your completely wrong about it being all about profit …
which possibility you didn’t even bother to mention in framing the question.

Comprehende?

>> As you can see from my thread with Eskandar, that is entirely
>> false, so take
>> a hint and try to see the difference between how he engages and how
>> you do.
>> He doesn’t load the question, but only his answers, where the loading
>> belongs, and where the point can then be fairly argued.
>
> Please don’t tell me how to read, write and argue on this list. If
> you are interested in a discussion then join it but I’d prefer you
> not direct me as to how I should properly respond to you.

>From one who directs “questions” in a chronically one-sided and unfair
manner from the start, you sure do complain about being “directed” a lot.

Posted on Friday, June 2nd, 2006 at 8:15 pm
comment | rss 2.0 | trackback