Posted by Lou Pilder on June 27, 2014, at 8:49:39 [reposted on June 28, 2014, at 22:07:08 | original URL]
In reply to Re: The Hsiung-Pilder discussion » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on June 26, 2014, at 21:02:59
> Please do block me, dr bob. If you don't this will probably be brought up for years. Block me a week for every one of my posts Lou objects to. Double it if you wish. Don't worry about the one year cap. Don't hesitate to go all the way back to 2001.
>
> It would be nice if once you appeased Lou with my blocks, you asked Lou not to ever mention me again in terms of fostering anti semetism. Or in any other negative way.
>
> That would make me far happier than being able to post and having to read over and over again Lou's charges towards me.Friends,
How is anti-Semitism fostered in a community? And how can the arm of hate be revealed?
It is plainly visible here right now that defamation posted toward me is agreed by Mr. Hsiung to be uncivil. But the issue now is why is it allowed to stand without Mr. Hsiung posting his tag-line, "Please be civil", or go to a block, to those defamatory statements against me.
The distinction between him posting his tag-line and him saying that I can post a link to his agreeing that the defamation toward me is uncivil, could lead a subset of readers to think that there are two standards here. One to be used toward me, and another to be used toward his previous deputies and other posters that post defamation against me. The one used against me blocks me from posting, and the other allows the previous deputies and those posters posting defamation against me that is allowed to stand without the tag-line to be civil from Mr. Hsuing, to continue to post here as can be seen now as no warning to be civil is posted *by Mr. Hsiung* linking to those statements in question. He says that he posted that the defamation against me is uncivil but not to the statement in the thread where it appears. That he agrees to, could allow a subset of readers that do not read this thread to consider the defamatory charge against my character to be not against the rules because there is no sanction posted to the statement in question in the thread where it is originally posted and Mr. Hsiung says that if a statement is not sanctioned, it is not against his rules.
Friends, I am not a disturbed person. That accusation is not only false, it is defamatory per se and is allowed to stand without the tag-line from Mr. Hsiung to be civil. What this could mean to a subset of jurists, is that by Mr. Hsiung not using his standard to sanction that statement against my character, he could be seen as validating the libel against me as if he posted the defamation himself. And those jurists could have a rational basis to think such because I am trying to stop anti-Semitic statements here from being seen as civil, so if there are posters being allowed to decrease the respect regard and confidence in which I am held by being allowed to post defamation toward me being allowed to be seen as civil, then that could increase the idea here that anti-Semitism posted here without sanction Will Be Good For This Community As a Whole, for Mr. Hsiung says that his overriding rationale for anything here is that whatever it is being allowed, it will be good for this community as a whole And To Try To Trust Him At That. Friends, that statement is nothing new. It can be seen in a document against the Jews that I am prevented from posting here due to the prohibitions posted to me here by Mr. Hsiung. This keeps readers from being informed by me of the content of that document and could persuade readers to think that anti-Semitism posted here, and defamation posted against me as a Jew here trying to stop anti-Semitic statements from being seen as supportive here, will be good for this community as a whole. A subset of readers, such as those whose minds are altered by the drugs advocated here by psychiatry, and those drugs could induce hostility and aggression and suicide, could act out in murdering those that Mr. Hsiung and his deputies of record allowed to be seen as scapegaots and being allowed to have their character defamed without Mr. Hsiung or a deputy posting their tag-line to be civil. The statement, {No non-Christian will enter heaven} that can be seen as civil here because there is not the tag-line to be civil posted to it, can go on and on to induce hatred toward the Jews and others as the statement puts down Jews and others that are not Christians. For the statement is analogous to {No Jew will enter heaven} or, {Only Christians will enter heaven}. The deputies of record as far as I can see, could have sanctioned that statement if they wanted to because it is listed as a function by them in the TOS here.
My friends, the statement that says that no Jew will enter heaven being allowed to stand without a sanction posted to it to be civil, is a claim that has for centuries to foster anti-Semitic hate and cause millions of deaths to Jews and others. But I am Jew and have been brought up to the top of the mountain and I overlooked the Promised Land. And I saw the Glory of the Lord and I saw those that were tortured and murdered by those that said that they were the only ones that will enter heaven. And a Rider on a white horse appeared and said to me, "Go seek the lost sheep that are led astray and I will be with you always, even to the end. Many will try to stop you but be of good cheer, for as I have overcome the world and death, and so shall you also overcome and enter The Promised Land. And take no thought for those that say that they have a free pass to enter the Promised Land because they were in a group that said that only them can enter heaven. For I will say to them, depart from me, you workers of inequity."
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:1067567
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20140304/msgs/1067569.html