03-28-2005, 03:29 AM
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Tahoma, Arial" id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by abdulmajid</i>
<br />this person, desert sleet, is trying to present himself as mr. clean, but see what he has written for me
using the word **** 3 times. i admit i have rediculed his way of writting but never used dirty language for him. because that's not my way, some other members on this forum have also used quite unacceptable words for me, <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Instead of idiot would a make a bit of difference if I said, 'a foolish or stupid person', or ignoramus, or clueless, or uninformed. For some reason you think that the intent of the words has changed if a seemingly more "civilized" version is used. The vulgar forms of the intended idea just happens to be more expressive, but they are still evaluative. If the person knows what they are talking about and can back it up then it will not matter what I call them. It will be trivial for them to show me up as the idiot. In the case of Abdul I gave him several opportunities to show me up with out the more expressive evaluative comments. It didn't matter in his case because he was as I claimed. He was an idiot for persisting in pretending to know something about Islam when he knew very little at all. This was dishonest and his persistence made him compulsively dishonest and my expressive use of lying sack of **** in no way changed the facts. Again, you do not seem to object to what I have said, just the way I said it. I don't see why it is germane that you do not like my means of expression when you agree with what is expressed. My expression is my own. You may do it as you wish.
---------------------------------------------
âLittle minds are tamed and subdued by misfortune; but great minds rise above it.â
<br />this person, desert sleet, is trying to present himself as mr. clean, but see what he has written for me
using the word **** 3 times. i admit i have rediculed his way of writting but never used dirty language for him. because that's not my way, some other members on this forum have also used quite unacceptable words for me, <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Instead of idiot would a make a bit of difference if I said, 'a foolish or stupid person', or ignoramus, or clueless, or uninformed. For some reason you think that the intent of the words has changed if a seemingly more "civilized" version is used. The vulgar forms of the intended idea just happens to be more expressive, but they are still evaluative. If the person knows what they are talking about and can back it up then it will not matter what I call them. It will be trivial for them to show me up as the idiot. In the case of Abdul I gave him several opportunities to show me up with out the more expressive evaluative comments. It didn't matter in his case because he was as I claimed. He was an idiot for persisting in pretending to know something about Islam when he knew very little at all. This was dishonest and his persistence made him compulsively dishonest and my expressive use of lying sack of **** in no way changed the facts. Again, you do not seem to object to what I have said, just the way I said it. I don't see why it is germane that you do not like my means of expression when you agree with what is expressed. My expression is my own. You may do it as you wish.
---------------------------------------------
âLittle minds are tamed and subdued by misfortune; but great minds rise above it.â
