Thursday, July 13, 2006
Which side are you on?
July 13, 2006, 10:13 AM
Subject: Think with a clear head, if you can.
Message: You come across as a sad, sad person, Charles.
You accused me unfairly, you insulted me, you threatened me. And now you presume to teach me Christian values? You presume to know what Jesus would have done in Mexico?
That, my dear Charles, is vanity, worst amongst the deadly sins (the one that damned Lucifer Morningstar himself).
You speak so much of the truth yet, by reading your blog and your comments, it becomes pretty clear that you only want to push what you pereceive to be the truth and don't take the time to compare your perceptions to what is actually happening in the real world.
Again, your assumption that you and only you know what the truth is comes across as vain. Better make a trip to the confession booth soon, Charles.
All in all, it is clear why you quoted the Gospel.
You are trying (yet again) to scare me and (again) you failed.
I am no Christian, but I am pretty sure God is a clever chap who cares little for your petty concerns. The Gospel was written by men who wanted to push their own agendas (pretty much like you are trying to do now) and it is the responsibility of the thinking man to dish out the BS from the facts.
You have failed to meet that responsibility thus far, my dear Charles.
I do not presume to know The Truth. That is God's prerrogative.
But my feeble attempts to approach it are honest and well-researched whereas yours (at least in relation to Mexican Elections) are biased, prejudiced and tinged with personal issues.
I want to believe you are well-meant and honest.
I want to believe you actually think what you say and what you print on your blog is true.
But reading the way you comment and editorialize without really understanding what is it you are talking about is akin to witnessing a 5-year-old attempting to drive a Monster truck.
Good intentions pave the road to hell, Charles. Ignorance is no excuse.
If you want to address Mexican Politics, you'd better start learning more about Mexico because, if one is to judge based on what you have written so far, your knowledge and understanding of the complexities of Mexican History and society are shallow at best.
But I thank you for your insults. I thank you for calling me a "thug" and calling me "sick" and "dishonest".
Insults coming from a man who is untrue are like words of praise for him who is rightous.
I strongly suggest you take a long, hard look at yourself before passing judgment unto others.
Your behaviour does not fit that of a 61 year old.
I respect my elders. I ask you to respect yourself.
(One point I should note: Whenever websites ask for personal information, I enter whatever random numbers come into my head. To paraphrase Martin Luther, sometimes, one must sin boldly. But especially since I have called Manexpat on the issue of his citizenship, I don't want to mislead our readers--or even our trolls-- on the smallest detail.)
Here is a list of lies Charles said about me:
"to inform me that I was in violation of article 33 of the Mexican Constitution forbidding foreign interference in Mexican affairs, and to order to cease and desist."
I said I felt offended by your meddling and suggested you attended to your own business before sticking your nose in hours.
Anyone who reads our conversation in order will notice that I only mentioned Art. 33 of the Constitution after you had already insulted me and declared me "an enemy of the Truth".
Anyone who reads our conversation will notice that I questioned your blog, yes, but only spoke of "meddling" in relation to your less-than-stellar performance at the youtube forum.
Now, if anyone finds anywhere where I "order" Charles to do anything (let alone, "cease and desist") I beseech you, let me know.
I suggested restraint, yes. But that hardly qualifies as "ordering".
Lie # 2:
"He lists himself as a briton."
Big leaps you are making here, my dear Charles.
I did list my country as GB.
((Manexpat Age: 36 Country: GB
Last Login: 8 minutes ago) )
Why? Because I spend most of my time in GB. However, it is a far cry from listing myself as a "briton" which, unless you can prove otherwise, I never did.
"He says that he's glad he's not a Christian because we "sicken him." But he says that's not anti-Christian."
I said I am glad I am not a Christian because you sicken me, Charles.
You, Charles, not the whole of christendom. It is you who sicken me.
Last time I cheked, being sickened by a sel-rigthous fanatic such as yourself should not be construed as being anti-christian.
But, then again, perhaps the rules have changed and you have been appointed defender of the faith and, thus, not liking you personally equals not liking christianity.
Lie # 4:
"Having failed to make any substantive point..."
Oh, but I provided several links to news stories that confirmed my claims.
You chose to ignore them (predictably) but that does not take away from the fact that I did post them.
One last thing. I was offended by your comments in the youtube forum (something I believe I have every right in the world to be) and came to your blog because you asked us to.
I spoke my mind and you retorted in a pretty venomous way.
I sent you a private message to leave things be and stop this ridiculous internet war and you violated one of the sacred principles of the internet by publishing it here.
I am not sure what to make of it, Charles.
It sure does not speak good about your moral fibre.
I am very much afraid it is you who has dig himself a hole much too deep to fathom.
Having set the record straight, I can gladly tell you you will never hear from me again.
Not because your threats have had any effect but because it is embarassing that two grown ups can embark in such a childish argument.
Someone has to be the bigger man here, Charles.
I guess it will have to be me.
Best of lucks.
I notice that nothing factual in your posts has been successfully refuted.
PW: John! The guy who thinks that "middle class" is just a letter jumble, not meaningful words!
They never learn.
Sounds pretty bad for AMLO, but then I remember that this is the paper of Judith Miller and Jeff Gerth and Stephen Labaton. I'll wait for Charles to do an English-language overview of the latest Mexican news before I make a decision, thanks.
More blogs about politics.