"I would politely ask you to remain respectful and adult in your comments. On topic comments that are refreshingly intelligent would be welcome. (and surprising, but that's an aside)."
Coming from someone who so rarely offers comments that are "respectful", "adult" (although some do stray into "adult" as in inappropriate territory) or "of topic", it seems excessive to demand that other must always be all three of those simultaneously.
More "Do as I say, not as I do."
Dan: ""You throw a ball like a girl" is stupid for an 8th grade boy to say. It's sexist and misogynist for an adult man to say. Your attack words are like that."
The problem with this statement is that it ignores the biological fact that women and girls do throw differently then men/boys. The physiology and muscle makeup of women/girls is different from men/boys, which means that throwing differently is not an insult (although it can be), but a statement of fact. The hips play an important role in throwing, and women's hip structure is different than men's.
This isn't to say that there aren't some women/girls who can't throw in a similar manner to men/boys, but we don't base things on exceptions. I went to the Google to check this out, and like so much, it seems clear from the results that the difference in throwing is pretty much just accepted as reality.
Dan: "3. When I cite commonly known data (the number of women who've been sexually assaulted, the huge number of women who've been sexually harassed, the age of the universe, that rain is wet, that snow is cold, etc), I will probably not provide a source for it. It's commonly known. It's easily discovered and is something that you, as an adult, should know."
Here we have Dan using one of his "cheat codes". He declares something "commonly known" and it therefore exempts him from having to actually back up his claims. It's his get out of jail free card to say anything he wants without having to provide proof. I'd point out that it is literally impossible for him to provide an accurate "age of the universe" within, say, 100,000 years.
"4. On the other hand, because of your (Marshal) history of
citing "facts" and "data" that is not widely known or accepted OR that
is just flatly wrong, YOU have to provide a source. It's the cost for
you to post here because of your history of referring to conspiracy
theories and false claims. You don't have to like it, but it's just the
reality."
Now we see the blatant "Do as I demand, not as I do." strategy. I'll note that "commonly known" is not a measure of Truth or accuracy. So, when Dan applies this subjective standard (Which really means "What Dan "knows or has heard") it's not about accuracy or Truth it's about hiding from having to do what he demands of others. I appreciate him stating this double standard with such clarity.
"Now, if you post something that's commonly known, I may
not demand that of you. If you cite that cars produce pollution, for
instance, well, of course, that's a known thing. BUT if you want to make
claims about disputable theories, YOU will have to support your claim.'
This bit of condescending bullshit simply means that Dan can demand that you prove things at will (hostage taking?), while he'll never do the same.
"That's the same when you make stupidly false claims like "Dan is lying..." when it's not a case of me lying."
Even when Dan's lies or falsehoods are demonstrated, Dan still won't acknowledge his falsehoods/lies/misstatements.
"5.
Disrespectful, rude and unsupported or simply false claims will not
remain on my blog. Speaking of women in demeaning, condescending or
vulgar ways will NOT remain here. Making off topic commentary will not
likely remain."
"Disrespectful (subjective) rude, and unsupported or simply false claims" will remain on Dan's blog as long as they come from the protected class. Given Dan's history of making "condescending and vulgar: comments aimed at me (among others), it's freaking hilarious that he flies his double standard flag so high. Finally, I should apply Dan's standards for "off topic" comments at my blog. It would save me a lot of time.
9 comments:
By all means, if you can point to some place where I'm not being respectful or rational or adult, point SOMETHING SPECIFIC out. I can be taught and you'd be helping me. But empty, unsupported, vague allegations "he's irrational... He's not being adult...," etc are just that.
I do not pop out of nowhere and make empty and unsupported charges, that would be one instance of me being respectful, rational and adult.
I do ask questions regularly, but that isn't be disrespectful, irrational or un-adult. So, if you have something specific to address, cite the case and we can engage like respectful adults. Fair enough?
"Coming from someone who
My most recent published comment on your blog, in response to your comment:
For all of those whining about genocide in Gaza, and uncritically parroting the Hamas casualty figures, you should probably stop now.
I responded respectfully by pointing out that it's not like we're ONLY getting our reports on the ground from Hamas by asking a reasonable question and making the rational follow up comment:
Y'all DO know that Doctors without Borders and
other aid organizations
are reporting on the widespread slaughter of innocents, right?
This is happening in public view for those not burying their heads in the sand.
As a point of fact, seasoned journalists, aid groups, UN and human rights groups are all seeing what's happening in Gaza. We're all seeing the thousands that are being killed, including women and other innocents. Actual innocent people. Now, that number may be 35,000 or it may be 25,000 - Hamas is NOT a reliable source, but the videos are, the other first hand reports, the camera shots are - but clearly, there is a huge amount of death and destruction of innocents happening alongside the killing of Hamas warriors.
Noting that is not disrespectful, nor is it lacking in adult reasoning.
Some might say blindly condemning only ONE side when both sides are taking bad, deadly actions... that this one-sidedness is a less than respectful or adult approach to the situation at hand. But noting the very real death and destruction is not.
Do you think that if 10,000 children and babies have been killed, it's okay, but if it turns out to be actually 14,000, THEN it's crossed a line? I don't.
Likewise, I don't think it is good or moral for Hamas to hide behind civilians and hospitals, children and aid workers AND at the same time, I don't think it's good or moral for Israeli to willingly target Hamas when they're hiding behind those innocents. Both are bad actions.
That is adult and respectful, is it not?
Or is it the case that you think disagreeing with your preferences is what is not adult or respectful?
I do exactly that, regularly. You simply ignore it when I point it out and move on.
To now come back and demand specific examples when you've ignored them when I gave them is mildly amusing. Well, fortunately, you provided such an example just this morning.
"Y'all DO know that Doctors without Borders and other aid organizations are reporting on the widespread slaughter of innocents, right? This is happening in public view for those mot burying their heads in the sand."
You literally popped out of nowhere, and made an unsupported charge. Whether or not the unsupported charge is empty remains to be seen.
Again, you demanding that others do what you won't is kind of cute.
"I responded respectfully by pointing out that it's not like we're ONLY getting our reports on the ground from Hamas by asking a reasonable question and making the rational follow up comment:"
Yet you keep repeating the 30-40K GMOH numbers that have been discredited.
"Y'all DO know that Doctors without Borders and
other aid organizations
are reporting on the widespread slaughter of innocents, right?
This is happening in public view for those not burying their heads in the sand."
Yes, you did make that unsupported claim. I didn't take it seriously since your failed to offer support from a real, official, journalistic source.
"As a point of fact, seasoned journalists, aid groups, UN and human rights groups are all seeing what's happening in Gaza. We're all seeing the thousands that are being killed, including women and other innocents. Actual innocent people. Now, that number may be 35,000 or it may be 25,000 - Hamas is NOT a reliable source, but the videos are, the other first hand reports, the camera shots are - but clearly, there is a huge amount of death and destruction of innocents happening alongside the killing of Hamas warriors."
In the absence of any sort of factual support for this claim, I have no option but to assume it's made up bullshit.
What's amazing is that you've parroted the GMOH/Hamas numbers for months as if they were the gospel Truth, now you finally change your tune. The problem with the rest of your bullshit is that it lacks context.
1. International law/GCs have very specific guidelines regarding the killing of "civilians" collateral to eradicating combatants. It is well documented that Israel is well within those guidelines.
2. It is a violation of international law/GCs to use human shields, or to place military facilities in/near/under things like hospitals and schools. It's also a violation of international law to take and hold hostages. Yet Israel has done neither of those things.
3. You also presume that the "civilians" of Gaza are "innocent", despite an overwhelming majority of Gazans supporting Hamas and the atrocities that Hamas perpetrated on 10/7.
4. The billionaires that lead Hamas have been quite clear that their strategy is to force Israel to kill as many of their own subjects as possible, for the express purpose of getting liberals like you to force Israel to give Hamas a victory.
5. Your entire complaint boils down to your hunch that Israel is killing "too many" "innocent" "civilians", when you acknowledge that you have no earthly idea exactly how many have been killed, how many of them were "innocent", how many were "civilians" (as opposed to Hamas in civilian clothes), nor any idea what international law says on the matter. Sounds like intentional ignorance to me.
"Noting that is not disrespectful, nor is it lacking in adult reasoning."
Making an unproven, unsupported claim violates your dictates, I merely pointed out your double standard.
"Some might say blindly condemning only ONE side when both sides are taking bad, deadly actions... that this one-sidedness is a less than respectful or adult approach to the situation at hand. But noting the very real death and destruction is not."
By "some" you obviously mean you. And by spending 90% or your energy excoriating one side, you demonstrate how much you've been doing exactly what the billionaire Hamas leaders want you to do. I can't help the fact that you've chosen ignorance and propaganda.
"Do you think that if 10,000 children and babies have been killed, it's okay, but if it turns out to be actually 14,000, THEN it's crossed a line? I don't."
No, and not the point at all. If Hamas chooses to sacrifice their children to sway people like you against Israel, does that cross a line?
"Likewise, I don't think it is good or moral for Hamas to hide behind civilians and hospitals, children and aid workers AND at the same time, I don't think it's good or moral for Israeli to willingly target Hamas when they're hiding behind those innocents. Both are bad actions."
So, just ignore the terrorists hiding behind "civilians", don't bother looking for the hostages (some American that Biden has abandoned), as long as Hamas hides behind the right people in the right places.
"That is adult and respectful, is it not?"
Since "You literally popped out of nowhere, and made an unsupported charge" (which you have labeled as not adult behavior), and doubled down on both the charge and the lack of support, I'll have to apply your standards to you and say no.
"Or is it the case that you think disagreeing with your preferences is what is not adult or respectful?"
No, I think that you demanding that others follow standards that you don;t follow is that problem.
Yet you keep repeating the 30-40K GMOH numbers that have been discredited
I get that YOU think they have been discredited. But that doesn't mean much to me. The question is, ARE they discredited and utterly disproven? Or is it the case that we don't know yet?
From yesterday:
The United Nations on Monday clarified that the overall number of fatalities in Gaza tallied by the Ministry of Health in Gaza remains unchanged, at more than 35,000, since the war broke out between Israel and Hamas on October 7.
The clarification comes after the UN humanitarian agency OCHA (United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs) published a report on May 8 with revised data regarding the number of Palestinian casualties in the war. The UN agency in its report reduced the number of women and children believed to have been killed in the war by nearly half.
The number was reduced because the UN says it is now relying on the number of deceased women and children whose names and other identifying details have been fully documented, rather than the total number of women and children killed. The ministry says bodies that arrive at hospitals get counted in the overall death count.
UN spokesperson Farhan Haq told a daily briefing at the UN that the health ministry in Gaza recently published
two separate death tolls –
an overall death toll and
a total number of identified fatalities.
In the UN report, only the total number of fatalities whose identities (such as name and date of birth) have been documented was published, leading to confusion.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/13/middleeast/death-toll-gaza-fatalities-un-intl-latam/index.html
That is: Hamas is reporting 35,000 deaths. The UN is noting that they can only confirm the identities of ~24,000 of the dead.
According to Haq, the ministry published a breakdown for 24,686 fully identified deaths out of the total 34,622 fatalities recorded in Gaza as of April 30. The fully identified death toll comprises of 7,797 children, 4,959 women, 1,924 elderly, and 10,006 men, the UN spokesperson said, citing the Gaza health ministry.
So, while it may be the case (still to be proven) that over 10,000 children, for instance, have been killed, we have identities established for ~8,000 children. There are many people still missing and buried beneath rubble, for instance. And many just not identified.
This is how it always is in war times. Exact numbers can be hard to come by. But whether it's 10,000+ children that have been killed or "only" 8,000, it's still a horror and it has still come because of TWO things: HAMAS hiding behind civilians AND Israel choosing to strike even knowing that many more civilians will be killed than actual soldier/targets.
It's not irrational or disrespectful or less-than-adult to note that reality.
Given the UN is largely anti-semitic, with a number of nations known for their anti-humanitarian issues, their "confirmations" don't really move me to believe the numbers than I did before they put their two cents in. But more importantly than that is why there are so many dead. And no, I most certainly do NOT believe it's a good idea with withhold every instance of attack on Hamas simply because they hide behind their own canon fodder. I care far more that Hamas be totally and completely annihilated so that no one need suffer any further because of them. From there, Israel can turn their attention to Fatah, Hezb'allah, Iran and every other islamic asshole group which seeks their destruction. I fully believe that the more they set aside concern for allegedly innocent civilians, the less likely those innocent civilians will turn against those who are the source of their suffering and dying. If not, and they fight against Israel, then they were never "innocent" in the first place.
And by the way, Danny-boy...you've never shown the level of respect for me that you demand of me. Constantly accusing me of racism, misogyny or the dreaded "homophobia" without the least bit of support, and deleting any comments in which you pretend such crimes have been perpetrated instead of leaving them posted so all can see these alleged crimes, is not the least bit respectful. The constant attacks by your troll aren't deleted with any regularity and I don't believe you delete his at all, if ever. You think you can promote and defend all manner of behavior which justifies rebuke by someone who tries to be a better Christian than he is, while denying opposing opinion on the basis of your subjective decision to say some line has been crossed. You don't know what "adult conversation" means or looks like.
Dan's clear attachment to any source that fits his narrative is obvious. His faith in the UN seems strange given that they've placed various nations with absolutely abysmal records in charge of committees on women's rights, as well as human rights. The UN has very little credibility at this point after decades of corruption, and failure. There is a definite anti-Israel/Semitic strain at the UN as well.
If the UN was taking this seriously, wouldn't they be advocating for the release of the hostages, justice for those who perpetrated 10/7, and an end to the indiscriminate killing of innocent Israelis? Strangely, Dan doesn't get to vocally concerned about "innocent civilians" when they're Israeli.
Dan's double standards and inconsistent demands are well documented.
Post a Comment