RoR: Forum

Celeste,

What does integrity mean to you? Total agreement with your position?

Sarah

Post 21

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 1:39pm

Sorry, Jody.

Knowing where I'm from will only cause you to focus on that instead of the content of my posts. If you have a prejudicial agenda to dismiss or accept my posts, then you might very likely twist such information as ammunition towards that agenda.

Much as you seem to dislike it, I'm going to stick to the content of my arguments, which are all the information a fair-minded person really needs.

If you're fair-minded, that is.

Post 22

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 1:45pm

What does integrity mean to you? Total agreement with your position?

Integrity means embracing reality instead of delusions, wishful thinking, and what others tell you to think.

Integrity would mean your actually reading any of the information I've posted, and especially books like The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades, before making all the snotty comments you first greeted me with... comments which you charged me with having made first, but which I have just pointed out you made first, and for which you still haven't acknowledged or apologized for.

You're trying to paint me as the "egomaniac" here, when you're the one who is dead-set against anyone else being 100% right but you.

That's what I mean by integrity.

Post 23

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 1:45pm

Celeste,

Knowing where I'm from will only cause you to focus on that instead of the content of my posts. If you have a prejudicial agenda to dismiss or accept my posts, then you might very likely twist such information as ammunition towards that agenda.

Or we could be showing genuine interest in you.

As to you not knowing me before I posted to you, am I mistaken or did not your reply include you watching the blowing of my nose.

Sarah

Post 24

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 1:50pm

<meanwhile terrorists plot their demise>

Let's hope the counter terrorist agencies aren't bickering so much.

Post 25

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 1:54pm

Celeste,

My first post to you was about your argument against Muslims and you returned with ad hominems.

I'm not trying to paint you as an egomaniac, I'm trying to get you to come down from red alert and get to know some people.

Sarah

Post 26

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 2:00pm

Sarah,

Of course I remember my "nose blowing" comment... which, as I recall, came as a result of this first post that you made to me, before I had ever spoken word one to you:

If you like, continue with the inane anecdotes that supposedly "enlighten" us all about the "true" nature of Islamists. I'll be glad to counter as many as I can until I get bored with you

You conveniently "forgot" that you said this, I'll bet.

By the way, why would you then go on to say this

Or we could be showing genuine interest in you.

when it's obvious that you have nothing but contempt for me? Your wording here is interestingly vague. Could your "genuine interest" towards me be less like that of kindred spirits, and more like that of a bow hunter toward a doe?

Next time, stick to the tall grass and wait until I'm closer.

Post 27

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 2:05pm

My first post to you was about your argument against Muslims and you returned with ad hominems.

Actually... no. Your first post to me simply referred to my "inane anecdotes" and gave them no credence whatsoever or serious analysis.

Because you unfairly treated me and my sincerity as so beneath you as to not be taken seriously and merely insulted, I threw it right back in your face, as well you deserved.

Integrity would mean your having kept track of your initiation of things, especially hostility... a practice which you do not engage in, obviously.

(Edited by Celeste Norcross on 8/23, 2:16pm)

Post 28

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 2:32pm

Celeste,

They're anecdotes! There's nothing to analyze! Which was exactly my point.

Out of curiosity, what do you think my position is regarding Islam?

Edit: You remember your nose blowing comment, which implied that you had followed my posts, yet you now say you never knew of me before my post to you. What?

Sarah
(Edited by Sarah House
on 8/23, 2:36pm)

Post 29

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 2:37pm

Celeste,

I'm trying to figure out what message you're ultimately trying to get across. Obviously, you're trying to give a wake-up call to those who don't take the Islamist threat as seriously as you think they should. That much is obvious. The problem is, though, that most people on this site are already quite hawkish in their views on the War on Terror - including many of those who've sparred with you on Islam-related topics.

Your general thesis seems to be that Islam is inherently vile and dangerous.  Ok. So how can we apply this knowledge you're trying to impart.   Specifically, can you translate the implications of your thesis into support and/or opposition of specific policies? Doing so would greatly increase the chance of these threads actually becoming a discussion and not a pissing contest.

So I will ask the four questions I asked previously which you chose not to answer. And don't give me any crap about not thinking we're "worthy" of your response or how it won't change our minds anyway.  After all, are you here to preach to the choir or to change minds?

Here are the questions again:

Do you believe that all Muslims are evil and not to be trusted?

Are you trying to get us to support more aggressive military action against Islamists?

What is your prescription for positive cultural change in the Islamic world? (Do you even believe it's possible?)

What specific policies should Western governments pursue with respect to ending the Islamic threat that are not currently being pursued?

Post 30

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 2:41pm

Richard Maybury has written on this topic here and here.

Post 31

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 2:45pm

Celeste,

They're anecdotes! There's nothing to analyze! Which was exactly my point.

Out of curiosity, what do you think my position is regarding Islam?

Sarah

You say that about anecdotes as though it's truth. When it's not.

You can always analyze an anecdote. There is always some philosophy being promoted through its telling, and a logical flow of events that can be analyzed and debated for significance and implication.

Your point, therefore, is wrong.

And as far as your opinion towards Islam, I'm not sure you even have one. One thing I do know for sure is that you have issues admitting error and acknowledging the correctness of other people.

Or is it me? Do you perceive me as a rival, to be chipped away at?

Frankly, I wish you'd put aside these petty things such as who's in charge here and where I'm from and blah, blah, blah, and focus on the greater issues instead.

Some things truly are more important than our short-term vanity. Nuclear annihilation by Islam is one of them.

If you can't disregard your short-range obsession with splendidness and gloriosity long enough to care about your own survival, then you may very well end up extinct, and with nothing to admire in the mirror.

Post 32

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 2:58pm

Pete has once again asked me the same four questions he asked me in private email, and which I already answered directly to him.

Why he is asking them again -- this time openly, as if it's supposed to have some greater significance this time -- is either a result of mental malfunction or is some sort of ploy.

Whatever his reasons, here are my answers:

1) I answered this once already, and I will not go through the trouble of typing it again. You are arrogant to think that my place is so beneath you as to not read -- or claim to not have read -- what I so thoughtfully typed the first time.

Did you like that answer? I hope so, because here is my answer to your second question:

2) I answered this once already, and I will not go through the trouble of typing it again. You are arrogant to think that my place is so beneath you as to not read -- or claim to not have read -- what I so thoughtfully typed the first time.

Hmmm. You know, that response sounds vaguely familiar to the first one somehow. Just for kicks, let's see what response number three is.

3) I answered this once already, and I will not go through the trouble of typing it again. You are arrogant to think that my place is so beneath you as to not read -- or claim to not have read -- what I so thoughtfully typed the first time.

Hey; you know... I think I'm starting to notice a trend here. You know, if I had to guess, I would guess that response number four would be the exact same thing! Let's see:

4) I answered this once already, and I will not go through the trouble of typing it again. You are arrogant to think that my place is so beneath you as to not read -- or claim to not have read -- what I so thoughtfully typed the first time.

Wow! That was so cool. It was like an echo!

Now please, Pete... Go from here and intentionally spread the lie that you asked me these questions and never got anything but a refusal to answer.

You can lie like that, can't you, Pete?

(Edited by Celeste Norcross on 8/23, 3:14pm)

Post 33

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 3:03pm

Richard Maybury has written on this topic here and here.

Yes, and Richard Maybury has falsely blamed the United States and the entire Western world here and here.

Post 34

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 3:25pm

Celeste, I did not ask you these questions in a private email. Ever. I asked them publicly on the "New Arabian Dream" article discussion here. And in reading through that thread again, I do not see an answer to the question. In fact, you're on record as saying that we're not "worthy" of your answer. Evasion, thy name is Celeste.

Post 35

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 3:36pm

Hoy Norcross,-

A sense of humor is a luxury for those who feel sufficiently safe. As our reality is not currently a remotely safe one, why you're pushing humor over the dissemination of important truths, and the taking of those truths seriously, is troubling.

Garn, but that's a hellofathing to say! Pulling the leg off danger, in all forms, ain't no "luxury"- it's an indispensable munition of war! Not only does giving the Bastiat to the protectionists or the Twisted Tunes to the badies help win the war for us, this sort of thing lets us relase our tensions when we're in a tight spot and retain our "humanity".

But you knew that din'cha?

Post 36

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 3:53pm

Maybe Celeste and Orion Reasoner should shack up together? ;-)

Sorry Celeste, these hostile altercations over Islam just feel like Deja Vu.

(Edited by Marcus Bachler on 8/23, 3:57pm)

Post 37

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 3:53pm

On another forum that I frequent, the moderators have the ability to "lock" a thread, preventing further posting, when it gets bogged down. This capability would sure be welcome on this thread, and a few others...

Post 38

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 4:15pm

Celeste-

A sense of humor is a luxury for those who feel sufficiently safe. As our reality is not currently a remotely safe one

Where are you from?

Your reply to this:Sorry, Jody.

Knowing where I'm from will only cause you to focus on that instead of the content of my posts. If you have a prejudicial agenda to dismiss or accept my posts, then you might very likely twist such information as ammunition towards that agenda.

Much as you seem to dislike it, I'm going to stick to the content of my arguments, which are all the information a fair-minded person really needs.

Context is another important thing Celeste.

I think you need to understand two things; (1)this is an objectivist site and (2) it's Sense of Life Objectivists. This means that (1)we share common goals and ground here and keeping that in mind, ideally we keep things constructive. If you want a good example of a constructive thread that is currently in play then take a look at what Jason started here. (2)We try to celebrate life. The highest passion...If you want to see a good sense-of-life article then take a look at what Michael wrote here. Or take a look at some of Jennifer Iannolos old articles. Hell, just step away from the computer for a while and savor a good glass of Sangiovese.

You are acting like a wet and wounded cat. If this is your general sense of life, then you might wish to look elsewhere. Am I casting the first stone? No. With the exception of Lindsay, there isn't a single one of us who has not lost their temper. However, with EVERY post of yours that I have read so far, you illustrate proof-positive that one can hold to certain of objectivisms tenets and still have a sense of life that makes Sylvia Plath look like Dr. fucking Pangloss. Objectivism may at times call for rage, but a bleak and bitter sense of life it does not call for.

(Edited by Jody Allen Gomez on 8/23, 6:41pm)

Post 39

Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 4:46pm