[MD] Intellect battles the[historical] barbarians

Platt Holden pholden at davtv.com
Thu Nov 2 14:35:58 PST 2006


> [Platt]
> I don't accept that blame is due. But, of course, like you said, you
> don't want to point blame, do you?
> 
> [Arlo]
> Blame is never due us, Platt. We're the Holy U.S. of A.!

If you say so. 

> [Platt]
> So hypocrisy has something to do with rational thinking? Pray tell,
> what?
> 
> [Arlo]
> Give me an example of a hypocritical position justified by rational
> thinking. Can you do it?

Do as I say, not as I do. (Gambler to his son.) What's your point?

> [Arlo previously]
> A real MOQ sin is attempting to justify everything the US has done with
> some blanket cry to "social over biological".
> 
> [Platt]
> "Everything the US has done." Talk about distortion!
> 
> [Arlo]
> Give me an example of something the US has done you consider immoral.

Made the income tax constitutional. Shall I go on?

> [Platt]
> You mean none of those things would have happened if we had stayed on
> the sidelines?
> 
> [Arlo]
> I mean I reject both your claim that it was "noble intentions" that
> guided these actions, and that there was not a moral path to choose from
> (which we did not).

What "moral path" should we have taken? (If you say "negotiate" I'll 
throw up.) 

> [Platt]
> So the attack on the twin towers was justified because we got involved
> in the war between Iraq and Iran? Is that where you're going with this
> cockamamie scenario?
> 
> [Arlo]
> Immoral behavior cannot be based on immoral behavior. They have no
> justification for committing evil to counter a perceived evil. And
> neither do we. What we did historically was wrong. What they did was
> wrong. The hatred and unrest and morass of the present situation is the
> result of two sides more interested in a Holier-Than-Thou pissing match.
> But we've been down that road too.

So we were partly to blame after all?

> [Platt]
> Right. And we should have surrendered in WW II to the Germans and the
> Japs, and to the Chinese in Korea because intellectual values just
> aren't worth fighting and dying for. Why am I not surprised?
> 
> [Arlo]
> Kindly point out in my words where I said this.
 
Implied by your condemnation of my using preserving and extending 
intellectual values to justify American war actions.


 



More information about the Moq_Discuss mailing list