polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 20^th, 2015 at 7:57am:


These are your exact words Gandalf. I quoted them in the opening post and you have spent the entire thread backpedaling and pretending you said something completely different. I can quote you making even more direct calls for self censorship if you would like.

Quote:


So when did you decide to start putting a different spin on this agenda that you just happen to share in common with the offended, genuinely aggrieved terrorists? BTW, are these the same terrorists you later insisted were the only Muslims who were not actually offended?

When did it occur to you that self censorship is a bad thing? Was it only after you decided to spin yourself into a standard bearer for western liberal morals and 'true' freedom of speech?

Or am I just missing the 'relevant points', which I presume is a reference to your latest efforts to spin the same old agenda?

Good job FD - congratulations on quoting me *NOT* saying that we should deal with the terrorists grievances.

I have spelled out in at least two separate posts how I am *NOT* talking about the terrorists grievances, pointing out that they are just an opportunists who try and exploit the tensions created. I couldn't have been more clear on whose grievances I meant. I know you didn't miss them because you directly addressed them each time. What motivates you to go and so willfully misrepresent what I wrote is beyond me.

Quote:


Are they not offended? Is this not the grievance you said we should address? Or should we exclude Muslims we know to be future terrorists from your grievance addressing process?

In any case, what is the difference between addressing these grievances and getting people to stop drawing pictures of Muhammed? Just pretend I have correctly identified the precise non-terroristy group of Muslims you have in mind if it helps you comprehend the question.

Quote:


I recall you saying that the terrorists were probably the only Muslims who were not actually offended by the cartoons, which is a bit hard to make sense of given you said the exact opposite in the passage I quoted. It is almost as confusing as you promoting self censorship then later insisting you do not do this.

Quote:


Actually you were a bit vague. Can you point out all your terrorist mates for me so I can tell which Muslims I should ignore the grievances of by failing to appropriately 'address' them?

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 21^st, 2015 at 4:29pm:


Not at all. It’s FD getting to the bottom of things, once and for all.

He can keep this subject going for another year if you want. Daily posts about what you think of self censorship and being a standard bearer of modern liberal morals/values.

It you don’t think you can keep it up, no problem. Just confess

I’ve forgotten what FD wants you to confess to, but I’m sure he can think of something.

polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2015 at 4:42pm:


Yes, but FD’s forgotten what he thought back then. It was a long time ago, after all. He’s finding it really hard to understand what you’re saying.

If you don’t keep answering his questions, he might accidentally mix up your words when he’s starting threads on them and putting them in the Wiki.

No, G, there’s no other option. You must confess.

You’re Abu, yes?

wonderful to see you back FD.

I didn't.

But please feel free to once again twist yourself into knots trying to prove I said something I didn't. Perhaps you can quote yourself again accusing me of saying something - and somehow think its a great piece of proof.

freediver wrote on Sep 30^th, 2015 at 1:18pm:


How do you speak against self censorship?

Why would you speak about self censorship?