DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Kramer on February 18, 2010, 10:14:05 PM
-
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/7068705/ (http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/7068705/)
Durham police late Wednesday arrested the woman who four years ago falsely accused three Duke University lacrosse players of raping her.
Crystal Mangum assaulted her boyfriend, set his clothes on fire in a bathtub and threatened to stab him, investigators said.
-
Yeah, I remember that ho.
I also remembered those guys she accused of rape. One of them had a criminal record, he and three or four other of his pals bravely accosted a gay man leaving a bar and assaulted him for no reason other than the sheer joy of gay-bashing. Nice guy. Shame his good name had to be blackened by that ho's heinous accusations. What's he up to these days? Coaching a girls' lacrosse team in another city? Hiring other strippers for other parties and beating rape charges from them too? I'll bet he feels good every time he beats a charge. Sucks to be found guilty, I bet.
-
Yeah, I remember that ho.
I also remembered those guys she accused of rape. One of them had a criminal record, he and three or four other of his pals bravely accosted a gay man leaving a bar and assaulted him for no reason other than the sheer joy of gay-bashing. Nice guy. Shame his good name had to be blackened by that ho's heinous accusations. What's he up to these days? Coaching a girls' lacrosse team in another city? Hiring other strippers for other parties and beating rape charges from them too? I'll bet he feels good every time he beats a charge. Sucks to be found guilty, I bet.
help me remember with a link or some proof.
-
Mikey probably remembers some of the various accusations swirling around about the case, most of which have been proven to be false or hyped up.
I'm sure he's forgotten that the NC Bar slapped down the DA in the case hard, mostly for covering up evidence that several of the accused could not possibly have done the deed - one of them wasn't even there when the rape supposedly happened, and the DA tried to hide the photographic evidence of the alibi.
But of course, Mikey takes the side of the DA and the stripper - they were guilty of SOMETHING, just had to be, even if we couldn't get 'em THIS TIME.
-
Mikey probably remembers some of the various accusations swirling around about the case, most of which have been proven to be false or hyped up.
I'm sure he's forgotten that the NC Bar slapped down the DA in the case hard, mostly for covering up evidence that several of the accused could not possibly have done the deed - one of them wasn't even there when the rape supposedly happened, and the DA tried to hide the photographic evidence of the alibi.
But of course, Mikey takes the side of the DA and the stripper - they were guilty of SOMETHING, just had to be, even if we couldn't get 'em THIS TIME.
go figure
-
<<I'm sure he's forgotten that the NC Bar slapped down the DA in the case hard, mostly for covering up evidence that several of the accused could not possibly have done the deed - one of them wasn't even there when the rape supposedly happened, and the DA tried to hide the photographic evidence of the alibi.>>
Nope. Did NOT forget. What you forgot was that one of the "innocent" accused was a gay-bashing thug, convicted IIRC.
<<But of course, Mikey takes the side of the DA and the stripper - they were guilty of SOMETHING, just had to be, even if we couldn't get 'em THIS TIME.>>
Wrong again. I'd never take the side of a DA who suppresses evidence - - that is outrageous. I think the stripper must have had some kind of beef with those ass-holes or she wouldn't have gone to the cops and cried rape. It's the weapon of the poor and uneducated sex worker who is ripped off one way or another by a john and these guys were pretty thuggish assholes. One of them was fantasizing on the internet about skinning black hos alive, the other was a gay-bashing piece of shit. This was class war pure and simple, they exploited the babe sexually for money and somehow fucked her over. She took revenge the only way she knew how. More power to her.
-
Nope. Did NOT forget. What you forgot was that one of the "innocent" accused was a gay-bashing thug, convicted IIRC.
Got a source for that?
-
<<Got a source for that?>>
Tell me first, do YOU remember it any differently? Do you deny that one of those guys was arrested and/or convicted in an earlier gay-bashing incident? Do you remember the guy from their dorm who wanted to skin a black ho in an e-mail posting?
Not gonna waste time researching what everyone agrees is fact.
-
Tell me first, do YOU remember it any differently? Do you deny that one of those guys was arrested and/or convicted in an earlier gay-bashing incident? Do you remember the guy from their dorm who wanted to skin a black ho in an e-mail posting?
I remember a lot of claims, most of which were later proven to be untrue.
-
On April 5th, the New York Times reported this:
He [Finnerty] and two of his teammates from high school lacrosse were arrested on Nov. 5 in Washington. At 2:30 a.m. that day, Jeffrey O. Bloxgom told the police that the men had ''punched him in the face and body, because he told them to stop calling him gay and other derogatory names,'' according to records at the Superior Court of the District of Columbia.
Bloxgom also said that the three men ''without provocation had attacked him, busting his lip and bruising his chin.'' He was treated for minor injuries.
Finnerty has entered a diversion program, and the simple assault charge against him will be dismissed upon completion of 25 hours community service, said his lawyer for that case, Steven J. McCool.
Under the diversion program in Washington, the charges are dropped if the defendant completes community service there and stays out of trouble, said O. Benton Curtis III, an assistant United States attorney assigned to Finnerty's case.
McCool said Finnerty did not use any slurs during the confrontation. Requests through McCool to interview Finnerty were denied.
''This assault was a minor scuffle and in no way related to any inappropriate comment,'' he said. ''If this was anything more than a minor assault, the U.S. attorney would have brought appropriate charges.''
http://www.newshounds.us/2006/04/19/the_duke_university_rape_case_what_to_do_when_white_boys_misbehave.php (http://www.newshounds.us/2006/04/19/the_duke_university_rape_case_what_to_do_when_white_boys_misbehave.php)
-
So, the charges were dropped. No conviction.
Do you care to substantiate your claim of "What you forgot was that one of the 'innocent' accused was a gay-bashing thug, convicted IIRC."
-
I think the stripper must have had some kind of beef with those ass-holes or she wouldn't have gone to the cops and cried rape.
And besides, the state prosecutors did not just say that the three guys were "not guilty", they said that they were "innocent" and that there was no possibility that a crime had been committed.
"The players - Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and Dave Evans - were declared innocent earlier this year by state prosecutors, who concluded no crime could have occurred. North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper said the students were victims of Nifong's 'tragic rush to accuse.' "
Nifong jailed, ex-Duke players want $30 million (http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/20634785/)
-
<<So, the charges were dropped. >>
Yes on condition that the offender serve the community for a stated number of hours and remain out of trouble with the law for a stated period of time.
<<No conviction.>>
Meaningless observation. "No conviction" simply means no criminal record - - it does NOT mean that the gay complainant was not assaulted without provocation by Finnerty and his two team-mates and it does not mean that Finnerty and his two team-mates did not commit the assault.
<<Do you care to substantiate your claim of "What you forgot was that one of the 'innocent' accused was a gay-bashing thug, convicted IIRC.">>
Sure - - the essence of my statement - - which I recalled fairly accurately, was that the guy was a gay-bashing thug. He escaped conviction by entering into a diversionary program and performing 25 hours of community service and staying "clean" for a stated period of time thereafter, NONE of which means that he is NOT a gay-bashing thug. What I accused him of doing, he did. That he escaped conviction for his criminal act by entering a diversionary program is a mere technicality. (Which is why I qualified my recollection with "IIRC" - - I was not sure of all the details. YOU, by contrast, would not even admit to remembering the story.) The guy is what he is, and what he is, is a worthless piece of shit.
-
One of them had a criminal record, he and three or four other of his pals bravely accosted a gay man leaving a bar and assaulted him for no reason other than the sheer joy of gay-bashing. Nice guy. Shame his good name had to be blackened by that ho's heinous accusations. What's he up to these days? Coaching a girls' lacrosse team in another city? Hiring other strippers for other parties and beating rape charges from them too? I'll bet he feels good every time he beats a charge. Sucks to be found guilty, I bet.
So because he allegedly beat up a gay, he must really be a secret serial rapist? Nonsense.
-
Meaningless observation. "No conviction" simply means no criminal record - - it does NOT mean that the gay complainant was not assaulted without provocation by Finnerty and his two team-mates and it does not mean that Finnerty and his two team-mates did not commit the assault.
Doesn't mean that it happened, either. If there was evidence that could have led to a conviction, I'm sure they would have tried for one.
-
<<So because he allegedly beat up a gay, he must really be a secret serial rapist? Nonsense.>>
Participated in a three-on-one unprovoked attack on a gay man, sexually exploited a crack ho, escaped serious consequences in both cases, I dunno, what do you think, he found Jesus and became a saint? Nine times out of ten, a piece of shit is a piece of shit is a piece of shit. Leopards DON'T change their spots. When it happens, it's a rarity.
I don't have any friends who beat up gay people, and I don't have any friends who got accused of rape by a crack ho. Don't know anyone who does.
If you are going to argue that the most likely outcome is that this guy finally cleaned up his act and became a model citizen, I am going to have to laugh in your face.
-
<<So because he allegedly beat up a gay, he must really be a secret serial rapist? Nonsense.>>
Participated in a three-on-one unprovoked attack on a gay man, sexually exploited a crack ho, escaped serious consequences in both cases, I dunno, what do you think, he found Jesus and became a saint? Nine times out of ten, a piece of shit is a piece of shit is a piece of shit. Leopards DON'T change their spots. When it happens, it's a rarity.
I don't have any friends who beat up gay people, and I don't have any friends who got accused of rape by a crack ho. Don't know anyone who does.
If you are going to argue that the most likely outcome is that this guy finally cleaned up his act and became a model citizen, I am going to have to laugh in your face.
What keeps yourself from being accused falsely of these or any other sort of crime?
-
Participated in a three-on-one unprovoked attack on a gay man, sexually exploited a crack ho, escaped serious consequences in both cases, I dunno, what do you think, he found Jesus and became a saint?
There was no sexual exploitation of a "crack ho" and there was no attack on a "gay man". The "crack ho" voluntarily danced for pay (indeed, it was her occupation) and Jeffrey O. Bloxgom is not gay.
-
Participated in a three-on-one unprovoked attack on a gay man,
A "minor scuffle" according to the evidence you provided.
sexually exploited a crack ho,
If they had coerced her into stripping, you might have a point. They didn't.
escaped serious consequences in both cases, I dunno, what do you think, he found Jesus and became a saint? Nine times out of ten, a piece of shit is a piece of shit is a piece of shit. Leopards DON'T change their spots. When it happens, it's a rarity.
That he did two apparently minor bad things that are not rape is hardly grounds to assume he must be a serial rapist.
I don't have any friends who beat up gay people, and I don't have any friends who got accused of rape by a crack ho. Don't know anyone who does.
If you are going to argue that the most likely outcome is that this guy finally cleaned up his act and became a model citizen, I am going to have to laugh in your face.
You've never known anyone who was falsely accused? I have. And no, no one is arguing the guy became a model citizen. But I am arguing that there is plenty of ground between model citizen and serial rapist. Your assumptions about the guy based on two incidents in his life, incidents about which you and I have limited information, is not even remotely close to grounds to accuse the guy of being a serial rapist.
-
<<[Entry into a diversionary program to escape prosecution doesn't] mean that it happened, either. >>
Excuse me, but it most likely does. Persons entering a diversionary program have to admit responsibility for their actions.
<<If there was evidence that could have led to a conviction, I'm sure they would have tried for one.>>
Sounds like you never heard of a nolle prosequi ("nolle pros") plea - - a prosecutor who doesn't believe he has a reasonable chance of getting a conviction on the evidence available is obligated to plead nolle pros and the charges will be dismissed. In your twisted scenario, an unethical prosecutor is forcing an innocent man (i.e., a man against whom there is not enough evidence to secure a conviction) to admit responsibility for an act which in fact is a crime, to serve 25 hours in community service and to stay out of trouble for 18 months or face further additional penalties. THAT would truly be a perversion of justice. No ethical prosecutor would stoop to it.
On the theory that there are more honest prosecutors than dishonest ones, I'd say that Finnerty's choice to enter into the diversionary program rather than go to trial on the gay-bashing charges indicates that he clearly DID commit the criminal acts more or less as charged. Particularly given the high level of legal representation that his family's wealth provided to him.
-
<<A "minor scuffle" according to the evidence you provided.>>
Read through what I provided to you. It was a "minor scuffle" in the words of this creep's lawyers, not in the words of anyone else, certainly not in the eyes of the victim.
<<If they had coerced her into stripping, you might have a point [that they sexually exploited a crack ho.] They didn't.>>
They sexually exploited her the same way the mine owners exploited the children who worked in their mines. They did not coerce those children into working the mines any more than the lacrosse team coerced the crack ho into stripping. Economic necessity did the coercion and the exploiters just offered the money. Your cock-eyed concept of "exploitation" makes coercion by the exploiter a necessary element, but that is just so much horse manure.
<<That he did two apparently minor bad things that are not rape is hardly grounds to assume he must be a serial rapist.>>
Gay-bashing is not "minor" to anyone but a confirmed homophobe, nor is sexual exploitation, and what they DO indicate is that his family's money and his related successes at avoiding serious consequences for actions that would have seen less privileged youth doing jail time will very likely lead to a repetition of those and similar offences, probably of an escalating nature, which will continue as long as he's able to avoid serious consequences arising out of them.
<<You've never known anyone who was falsely accused? I have. And no, no one is arguing the guy became a model citizen. But I am arguing that there is plenty of ground between model citizen and serial rapist. Your assumptions about the guy based on two incidents in his life, incidents about which you and I have limited information, is not even remotely close to grounds to accuse the guy of being a serial rapist.>>
I don't recall accusing the guy of becoming a serial rapist, although it certainly would not surprise me much if he did. Falsely accused of one sordid deed might - - might - - just happen to be pure misfortune, but TWICE in the span of a year or two?? in different jurisdictions?? of different offences?? Give me a fuckin break!
-
http://hackedbannedandlockeddown.yuku.com/forum/viewtopic/id/688 (http://hackedbannedandlockeddown.yuku.com/forum/viewtopic/id/688)
-
Excuse me, but it most likely does. Persons entering a diversionary program have to admit responsibility for their actions.
Did he admit to assault or a lesser charge? Also, how do you "gay bash" a heterosexual?
-
This guy's a bigger piece of shit than I thought. Six-three and he throws fake punches at some inoffensive guy's head that he and his two team-mates are repeatedly terrorizing because they think he's gay. He enters into a diversion agreement and admits responsibility for his actions, then he tears up his agreement and goes back on his own word. Cowardly piece of shit.
I knew it as soon as I read the story the first time. I don't know how or why he fucked over that crack ho, but he's a piece of work, make no mistake about it. That's the difference between a guy like me who knows life and knows people, and a guy like, say, Ami, who knows a lot of arguments and theories but not knowing people doesn't recognize a piece of shit for what it is. In two seconds, I heard - Duke - lacrosse team - stripper - crack ho - racist insults . . . wow, that is literally all it took. TWO FUCKING SECONDS and I had that racist prick's number. All the "source?" and "convicted/diversion" distinctions don't mean shit. You really have to know the world and know people. If you don't, you're fucked.
[explanatory note: this above posted in response to BT's posted account of the trial, not in response to Ami's comment that followed.]
-
<<Did he admit to assault or a lesser charge? >>
The admission is of responsibility for one's actions, not of any specific crime, so he would not have admitted to any specific charge, such as "assault" or blocking a sidewalk.
<<Also, how do you "gay bash" a heterosexual?>>
Easy - - you mistake a straight guy for a gay guy and bash him accordingly.
-
So we have a man accused of beating gays who aren't gays with punches that don't land.
What it really sounds like is the kid has problems with alcohol.
-
It was a "minor scuffle" in the words of this creep's lawyers, not in the words of anyone else, certainly not in the eyes of the victim.
The victim who apparently lied about being beat up.
<<If they had coerced her into stripping, you might have a point [that they sexually exploited a crack ho.] They didn't.>>
They sexually exploited her the same way the mine owners exploited the children who worked in their mines. They did not coerce those children into working the mines any more than the lacrosse team coerced the crack ho into stripping. Economic necessity did the coercion and the exploiters just offered the money. Your cock-eyed concept of "exploitation" makes coercion by the exploiter a necessary element, but that is just so much horse manure.
So now an adult choosing to take her clothes off for money is the same as allowing children to work as miners? You seem to be the only peddling manure here.
Gay-bashing is not "minor" to anyone but a confirmed homophobe, nor is sexual exploitation, and what they DO indicate is that his family's money and his related successes at avoiding serious consequences for actions that would have seen less privileged youth doing jail time will very likely lead to a repetition of those and similar offences, probably of an escalating nature, which will continue as long as he's able to avoid serious consequences arising out of them.
You're an expert on the guy, his family and his mental state are you? or is this just read-it-in-a-book-so-it-must-be-true pop psychology?
I don't recall accusing the guy of becoming a serial rapist,
Yes, my mistake. You just wondered if he was hiring more strippers and beating rape charges from them too.
Falsely accused of one sordid deed might - - might - - just happen to be pure misfortune, but TWICE in the span of a year or two?? in different jurisdictions?? of different offences?? Give me a fuckin break!
Sometimes, Michael, shit just happens. No one is arguing the guy is a saint. But falsely accused is still falsely accused, no matter how many times it happens.
-
<<So we have a man accused of beating gays who aren't gays with punches that don't land. >>
No, you have a man accused of participating in a group assault on another man whose lip was burst and chin bruised in the assault. FYI, a pulled punch is an assault.
However, we could look at the actions of this little angel in pure factual detail. He (standing 6-3) and two other team-mates accost a pair of inoffensive men leaving a bar, complete strangers, and demand that one of them admit he's gay, throw punches, at least two of which land on the guy's face and voice numerous other homophobic insults.
Now, I dunno. Maybe I don't know America as well as I think I do. Let me ask someone who lives there. How would you characterize this guy's behaviour? Normal boisterous fun? Is this the way you yourself like to act when you go out for the evening? Is this how you'd like to see your own son act?
Why are we beating around the bush with this guy? It is as obvious as obvious can be, this guy is a low-life piece of shit, a coward, a bully and a scum-bag. What else can he be, to act like that? Who can possibly defend him?
Then, as if that's not bad enough, he and his pals hire a crack ho to strip for them at a party - - OK, fair enough, who are they going to get to strip for their party, Scarlett Johannson? - - and then they rip her off, insult her, or otherwise piss her off to the point where she's gonna cry rape on them. Again, a little understanding of human nature and life comes in handy sometimes. In my general experience, which includes frat parties, which includes pre-wedding stag parties, etc., you treat the girls right, with respect, and like decent human beings, and you will never, ever have a problem with them, because this is their livelihood. As I've said, I don't know anyone who has ever been charged with rape by an entertainer, rightly or wrongly, and if rape charges followed stag parties even once in a thousand times, there just wouldn't be stag parties. These guys, to merit a rape charge from their own stripper, either raped her or did something else to majorly piss her off, although since the boys seem like such modest, reticent young men, we'll probably never know what. All we can surmise is that probably (as in 90% likely) they did something really bad to merit this woman's ire, with a 10% chance that maybe this is just one crazy, angry crack ho. However, given the team's previous performance in the gay-bashing arena, I would say that the odds of them treating a crack ho properly and fairly are slim to nonexistent.
-
In my general experience, which includes frat parties, which includes pre-wedding stag parties, etc., you treat the girls right, with respect, and like decent human beings, and you will never, ever have a problem with them, because this is their livelihood.
I guess this girl just gets mixed up with the wrong sort all the time. After all, that was the *second* time that she accused a group of men of raping her - and the first time was discovered to have been a lie as well.
What are the chances of her being gang-raped by three white guys twice? Yes, the first time around she even specified three white men as well, it was pretty much the same story as she told with the Duke lacrosse players.
-
<<The victim who apparently lied about being beat up.>>
He lied, huh? So his lip just burst spontaneously in the course of a heated discussion and his chin spontaneously bruised in sympathy? But why . . . oh, I get it. Blame the victim. Of course. Sorry, I'm a little slow this morning.
<<So now an adult choosing to take her clothes off for money is the same as allowing children to work as miners?>>
No, that is not what I said. I said that both were examples of exploitation.
<<You seem to be the only peddling manure here.>>
Why, falsifying my words doesn't count as manure? Sure does in my book. Don't be so modest.
<<You're an expert on the guy, his family and his mental state are you? or is this just read-it-in-a-book-so-it-must-be-true pop psychology?>>
When I see shit that looks like shit and smells like shit, I know it's shit. If that makes me an "expert" on shit and its antecedents, so be it. That was your claim to my "expertise" and not mine.
<<Sometimes, Michael, shit just happens. No one is arguing the guy is a saint. But falsely accused is still falsely accused, no matter how many times it happens.>>
Well, Prince, you obviously have your rose-coloured glasses and you seem to love looking through them. Maybe the guy really is doubly unfortunate to be beset by so many false accusations. You go on looking on him as you please, and as for myself, I know a piece of shit when I see on and Colin Finnerty is nothing if not an egregiously stinking piece of lousy shit. His team-mates, too. Especially the guy who wants to skin and eat a black stripper. Although I guess to you he's just a healthy normal good-natured young fella with an outlandish sense of humour. Ah well, to each his own.
-
<<I guess this girl just gets mixed up with the wrong sort all the time. After all, that was the *second* time that she accused a group of men of raping her - and the first time was discovered to have been a lie as well.
<<What are the chances of her being gang-raped by three white guys twice? Yes, the first time around she even specified three white men as well, it was pretty much the same story as she told with the Duke lacrosse players.>>
Well, I admit I didn't know about the first rape accusation. That's a potential game-changer, depending on the circumstances. Unless there's a frat culture/team culture of rape and she's just forced to work in an unhealthy environment where rape is one of the hazards of the job. Which wouldn't surprise me.
-
Well, I admit I didn't know about the first rape accusation. That's a potential game-changer, depending on the circumstances. Unless there's a frat culture/team culture of rape and she's just forced to work in an unhealthy environment where rape is one of the hazards of the job. Which wouldn't surprise me.
No, it happened before she got into stripping. She accused a bunch of guys at her high school, IIRC. They also were nowhere near where she claimed that it happened at the time she said it happened (they had alibis just like the Duke Lacrosse players.)
-
However, we could look at the actions of this little angel in pure factual detail. He (standing 6-3) and two other team-mates accost a pair of inoffensive men leaving a bar, complete strangers, and demand that one of them admit he's gay, throw punches, at least two of which land on the guy's face and voice numerous other homophobic insults.
Err, "inoffensive men" might not be an accurate description. During the trial it was alleged that Bloxsom's friend Scott Herndon was a "hothead" and actually threw the first punch.
Why is so hard for you to believe that both sides were more or less equally at fault, having had some alcohol and then being hotheaded and throwing around insults, leading to fisticuffs? Sounds like normal behavior at most bars near college campuses. One of the reasons I prefer the neighborhood pubs instead - the guys there are more afraid of their wives finding out if they got into an argument while drinking...
-
true or false
I gotta say these guys were the most indignant .
I`ve never recall of any rape case were the men publicly complained about their reps being tarnished.
-
So, you woudn't have a problem with the airwaves and media falsely castigating you as a rapist?? You've got a pretty solid rep here in the saloon Kimba. Me thinks it would be severely tarnished if we were to be told by prosecuting attorneys and a racial minority victim-oriented media machine, that you were.
Not that you are of course. Just saying
-
not saying they shouldn`t be upset about this,just pointing out they`re the only ones I ever recall ever saying it in public to the media.
but about me
I`m truely surprised when something happens ,people actually have no doubts I didn`t do it.
I never would of thought that I earned that kind of rep.
I don`t know what to think of it.
I sure as hell not gonna use it.
-
not saying they shouldn`t be upset about this,just pointing out they`re the only ones I ever recall ever saying it in public to the media.
And if it were I, that was put in the same false accusation place, with it repeatedly plasted all over the media with the inferrence that I must be guilty, I'd be going public as well, when it was found out what a sham it all was
But that's just me
-
not saying they shouldn`t be upset about this,just pointing out they`re the only ones I ever recall ever saying it in public to the media.
Then again, you don't usually have the DA in the case on the TV constantly pointing the finger, either. They were defending themselves in the same media as they were being accused. The DA was using it as an election stunt, so he needed it to be very public.
-
<<So now an adult choosing to take her clothes off for money is the same as allowing children to work as miners?>>
No, that is not what I said. I said that both were examples of exploitation.
<<You seem to be the only peddling manure here.>>
Why, falsifying my words doesn't count as manure? Sure does in my book. Don't be so modest.
I did not falsify anything. You equated the woman stripping with children working in a mine. The exploitation is the same you said. Maybe the pages of your book got stuck together.
Well, Prince, you obviously have your rose-coloured glasses and you seem to love looking through them. Maybe the guy really is doubly unfortunate to be beset by so many false accusations. You go on looking on him as you please, and as for myself, I know a piece of shit when I see on and Colin Finnerty is nothing if not an egregiously stinking piece of lousy shit. His team-mates, too. Especially the guy who wants to skin and eat a black stripper. Although I guess to you he's just a healthy normal good-natured young fella with an outlandish sense of humour. Ah well, to each his own.
You want to complain about your words supposedly being falsified, but you have no problem making up a position out of thin air and ascribing it to me. You didn't ask what my take on the guy was. You apparently just assumed that if I wasn't joining you on the "he's a piece of shit" bandwagon that I must think "he's just a healthy normal good-natured young fella with an outlandish sense of humour." But this is your way, either/or, black or white. One should not expect anything anything else from you.
-
But this is your way, either/or, black or white. One should not expect anything anything else from you.
Mikey's a big fan of the "false dichotomy" fallacy.
-
Not to mention that unless you're a diehard liberal, you're a greedy capitalist bastard, or that unless you support Obama's socialist agenda, you must be a racist bastard, or that unless you oppose the U.S. military, you're a lover of low hanging unintelligent rapist military thugs :-\
-
All good examples of "false dichotomy".
-
kinda like;
Unless one supports overt draconian enviromental regulations, you want world wide pollution?
Unless one supports mandatory vaccinations, you want women to die of cancer?
Unless one supports cradle <--> grave Government intervention, you want children to starve & the elderly to die? Or is it the other way around? I always forget that one, when its used