Add new comment

Submitted by guenter on Sat, 06/11/2010 - 19:53

As for me not replying to you, the rest of my life does not come to a halt every time you post something on this site. (bruce)

the sentence includes the suggestion, i might be an person who suspects the world 2 stand still, when he appears. thats again insensitive nonsense beside the point.
u choosed to reply 2me, knowing, that it will become more than 1 reply, and u was able 2 reply within minutes 2 my critic above. so simply make up ur mind, if u have the time and interest, to have an continued discussion.
i think u know, that i started here as an new sympathisant, after i did come 2 know sacha in an debate of another website. quickly i read most of the stuff here and started 2 write 2 him bout the points i disagreed with. (there was much i agreed with, but this we dont need 2 discuss, right?)but he replied only once bout this points; iam still waiting his reply 2my reply; since many weeks he promised that weekly 4 each coming week, b4 he didnt reply at all since 2 weeks or so, what is mighty disapointing. i thought, maybe he told u, to continue the discussion with me. i guess, i was wrong. anyway i think, its no way 2 handle new people, to tell "this we all discussed b4". i studied almost all of ur stuff and did, 4 example, not find an article bout ramboillet. if i may have overlooked something, than thats no scandal. i think, if the AWL has no one to have an concentrated debate 4 some weeks with some1 new, than my "hysterical" future-prognosis above may become very valid.

@carolan: i simply overlooked, that the lenght of an article can also be an reason 4 removing (but nowhere its said, how long it exactly can be; i saw some very long replies!) and u make an whole "repertoire" of wrong accusings out of it, which i seem 2 have and fire it up whenever i like. so, the hysteria is all urs. cause i dont have any fixed repertoire, my reply was obvious very quick and spomtaneus- as usual. and from my experience with other groups i had any right, to suspect what i did suspect (censorship), AND ALSO because my first small critic was removed too without any explaination. only after i wrote the sharp, "hysterical" critic, i earned an reply. so obviously it was necessary! (just a little logic). AND, if it was bout lenght only and not about content, u cud also have offered me, to post only an excerpt from the article, isnt it?

3. about b. being so annoyed, that i saw no omnipotence here, 2reply everything:
on many an article here, i posted an short, simple and kind quest, which never was answered. for example: at the article bout "the pope&the red army", where it was said, that the soldiers of the red army had a "license" to rape and act like conquerors, while the nice americans hanged their raping soldiers, i posted the following comment:
a) the red army, however stalinist, did free europe from the nazis, arrived in berlin few days b4 the americans &opened the concentration camps
b) i guess, soldiers of all armys does rape
c) as far as i know, the red army also had an law, to execute raping soldiers
-so i kindly asked the author, where he has the information from, that they had a licence to rape
he never replied. so, is it nasty 2 assume, that the author might be unable, to back it up, what he said? just a little logic! if this is annoying, than i cant help it.

This website uses cookies, you can find out more and set your preferences here.
By continuing to use this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms & Conditions.