My home and native land

[_sabotage_]

Aw, BBS is being sweet, i didn't know you cared.

[BigBallinStalin]

Aw, BBS is being sweet, i didn't know you cared.

I'll assume you're being sincere.

Of course I care; otherwise, I'd have become a neocon.

[_sabotage_]

[AAFitz]

It's not surprising that the statement, "The risk of Chinese spies, yo," becomes distorted into "BBS was suggesting your wife was the terrorist in the situation" (AAFitz) or 'Sure, BBS, my child is a spy/terrorist!' (sabotage). Gentlemen, the Accidental Strawmen thread beckons y'all for more examples.

IIRC, sabotage mentioned somewhere that his wife is of Chinese ethnicity, and if the youtube videos are his actual kid and his wife talking/filming, then this further supports my recollection.


This thread is another example of unintended consequences:
Instead of focusing on the morality and policy of national security, at first I was more interested in the fact that some people become frustrated about the unintended consequences of a government's defense agencies (e.g. TSA). The risk of Chinese spies from the ongoing intelligence conflict between the US and China has induced the US government to further enact liberty-curtailing activities on US citizens and foreign nationals. Unfortunately, this imposes costs on people who do not deserve it--presumably, sabotage's family. They've become innocent victims of the USG's obtuse net-casting.

Sometimes the source of frustration stems from an incomplete picture about the causes and consequences. "The risk of Chinese spies" is but one, brief explanation--which unfortunately no one questioned, but instead filled in their own assumptions and implications without the need of my verification. From the Ministry of State Security's perspective having an agent marry a Canadian/American and having a child provides a great cover for clandestine operations. Of course, most of these samples are not spies--but there is the risk that some of them are spies, thus sabotage's family unfortunately experienced the net of US national security.

Instead of railing against each other, we should be concerned about the unintended consequences of public policy. I look forward to the day when we can all redirect our criticism from each other and toward the fundamental concerns, the US and Chinese governments. Thanks, that is all.

Total bullshit and you tried to cover it up even more than usual, as predicted, and expected. Your implications and double edged joke was obvious from the beginning, and as I even predicted, you just go on to explain how you were right as always and devoid of any bullshit.

The level of hypocricy and arrogance just gets more and more ridiculous each time.

Keep it up though. You seem to enjoy it, and I certainly revel in seeing you for what you truly are.

Maybe you should just make more holocaust jokes...at least everyone knows they are funny.

Thanks, that is all.

[BigBallinStalin]

Total bullshit and you tried to cover it up even more than usual, as predicted, and expected. Your implications and double edged joke was obvious from the beginning, and as I even predicted, you just go on to explain how you were right as always and devoid of any bullshit.

All I said was "The risk of Chinese spies, yo" and asked "you're married to a 17 month old?," so what am I supposedly covering up?
Nothing, because that's all I said at that time. Recall that your imagination has invented whatever else I allegedly am covering up.

And what implications? The ones you made up? (which amounted to over 200 words--based upon a 6-word sentence).

Your post fails to provide any support for your claims about my actual position, which is not to be mistaken for your imagined position. Any reasonable person can agree that the following is not sufficient evidence: ineffective insults, a supernatural ability to read other people's minds, and odd musings on what the other person didn't say.

Do you consider your position to be reasonable?

[AAFitz]

Total bullshit and you tried to cover it up even more than usual, as predicted, and expected. Your implications and double edged joke was obvious from the beginning, and as I even predicted, you just go on to explain how you were right as always and devoid of any bullshit.

All I said was "The risk of Chinese spies, yo" and asked "you're married to a 17 month old?," so what am I supposedly covering up?
Nothing, because that's all I said at that time. Recall that your imagination has invented whatever else I allegedly am covering up.

And what implications? The ones you made up? (which amounted to over 200 words--based upon a 6-word sentence).

Your post fails to provide any support for your claims about my actual position, which is not to be mistaken for your imagined position. Any reasonable person can reject the following as sufficient evidence: ineffective insults, a supernatural ability to read other people's mind, and odd musings on what the other person didn't say.

Do you consider your position to be reasonable?

Not just reasonable but spot on. You made a stupid joke, almost guaranteed to piss him off, with many ways of interpreting it. Even as I posted, I knew you might be making a commentary on how ridiculous the protocol was at airports, or could be commenting that his kid, or wife was a terrorist, or a spy, or really a few other possibilities. The point is, it was stupid, and I was calling you out on that, and as I said, you would claim no responsibility for it, as you did not, and still will never do. Everything you ever type in here is right, and you will never accept a simple mistake on a bullshit post like that one, which is why I spent some words pointing it out, for those who dont quite see through it as easily.

Im sorry you misunderstood the meaning of my posts though. I as you said, used lots of words, and you still missed the meaning, but clearly its your fault.

Post was bullshit, yo.

[_sabotage_]

Nah the post was sweet, because he felt the need to bullshit.

[BigBallinStalin]

Total bullshit and you tried to cover it up even more than usual, as predicted, and expected. Your implications and double edged joke was obvious from the beginning, and as I even predicted, you just go on to explain how you were right as always and devoid of any bullshit.

All I said was "The risk of Chinese spies, yo" and asked "you're married to a 17 month old?," so what am I supposedly covering up?
Nothing, because that's all I said at that time. Recall that your imagination has invented whatever else I allegedly am covering up.

And what implications? The ones you made up? (which amounted to over 200 words--based upon a 6-word sentence).

Your post fails to provide any support for your claims about my actual position, which is not to be mistaken for your imagined position. Any reasonable person can reject the following as sufficient evidence: ineffective insults, a supernatural ability to read other people's mind, and odd musings on what the other person didn't say.

Do you consider your position to be reasonable?

Not just reasonable but spot on. You made a stupid joke, almost guaranteed to piss him off, with many ways of interpreting it. Even as I posted, I knew you might be making a commentary on how ridiculous the protocol was at airports, or could be commenting that his kid, or wife was a terrorist, or a spy, or really a few other possibilities. The point is, it was stupid, and I was calling you out on that, and as I said, you would claim no responsibility for it, as you did not, and still will never do. Everything you ever type in here is right, and you will never accept a simple mistake on a bullshit post like that one, which is why I spent some words pointing it out, for those who dont quite see through it as easily.

Im sorry you misunderstood the meaning of my posts though. I as you said, used lots of words, and you still missed the meaning, but clearly its your fault.

Post was bullshit, yo.

Oh wow, you need to calm down and think about you've been saying.

You invented a position which I never held, and now you're presuming knowledge over areas to which you have no access, e.g. my mind. Are you Super Freud of the Internets?


Let's reorganize your post:

I perceive myself as reasonable without explaining why such insufficient evidence is sufficient. I'm assuming that my interpretation of your very brief sentences is absolutely correct and that no other explanation is valid because I can read BBS' mind (that's the best explanation I can think of). I perceived a 6-word sentence as a joke, and I presume that BBS' intention is to piss him off sabotage, with many ways of interpreting it.

Wait, since there are many ways to interpret it, and you only chose one way to interpret it, then how do you know that your interpretation is correct?

[BigBallinStalin]

Nah the post was sweet, because he felt the need to bullshit.

No, I am sincere in every post ITT---even my tongue-in-cheek response: "You're married to a 17 month old?" (because when I said "wife," you mentioned "baby," which makes no sense--if taken seriously).


Some people need to recognize the difference between their perception of me and the actual me. The presumption of knowledge can lead people to distorted realities. Hopefully, they can overcome that problem.

[AAFitz]

Total bullshit and you tried to cover it up even more than usual, as predicted, and expected. Your implications and double edged joke was obvious from the beginning, and as I even predicted, you just go on to explain how you were right as always and devoid of any bullshit.

All I said was "The risk of Chinese spies, yo" and asked "you're married to a 17 month old?," so what am I supposedly covering up?
Nothing, because that's all I said at that time. Recall that your imagination has invented whatever else I allegedly am covering up.

And what implications? The ones you made up? (which amounted to over 200 words--based upon a 6-word sentence).

Your post fails to provide any support for your claims about my actual position, which is not to be mistaken for your imagined position. Any reasonable person can reject the following as sufficient evidence: ineffective insults, a supernatural ability to read other people's mind, and odd musings on what the other person didn't say.

Do you consider your position to be reasonable?

Not just reasonable but spot on. You made a stupid joke, almost guaranteed to piss him off, with many ways of interpreting it. Even as I posted, I knew you might be making a commentary on how ridiculous the protocol was at airports, or could be commenting that his kid, or wife was a terrorist, or a spy, or really a few other possibilities. The point is, it was stupid, and I was calling you out on that, and as I said, you would claim no responsibility for it, as you did not, and still will never do. Everything you ever type in here is right, and you will never accept a simple mistake on a bullshit post like that one, which is why I spent some words pointing it out, for those who dont quite see through it as easily.

Im sorry you misunderstood the meaning of my posts though. I as you said, used lots of words, and you still missed the meaning, but clearly its your fault.

Post was bullshit, yo.

Oh wow, you need to calm down and think about you've been saying.

You invented a position which I never held, and now you're presuming knowledge over areas to which you have no access, e.g. my mind. Are you Super Freud of the Internets?


Let's reorganize your post:

I perceive myself as reasonable without explaining why such insufficient evidence is sufficient. I'm assuming that my interpretation of your very brief sentences is absolutely correct and that no other explanation is valid because I can read BBS' mind (that's the best explanation I can think of). I perceived a 6-word sentence as a joke, and I presume that BBS' intention is to piss him off sabotage, with many ways of interpreting it.

Wait, since there are many ways to interpret it, and you only chose one way to interpret it, then how do you know that your interpretation is correct?

Just keep going...lol. Actually, as I said, I guessed at one possible way of interpreting it. However, my main point was that after he wrongly interpreted it, you would take no responsibility for posting a stupid post, and would blame it on him as you did 100% and are still doing.

Its what you do in every post. Its all bullshit, and Im just pointing it out. And Id take it seriously if you ever once actually had a real conversation about it, but instead you just antagonize and pull the arrogant route, and its bullshit, pure and simple. You did the same thing after suggesting holocaust jokes could be funny.

In any case, and by all means, just point out what you actually did mean, and accept it was vague and apologize for sabotage for a perfectly valid interpretation of your stupidly phrased post...or, just keep up with the bullshit. Im happy to call you out on it till the end, and its fun watching you do exactly what I said youd do from the very beginning, however tragic.

[BigBallinStalin]

You "guessed at one possible way of interpreting it," yet without explaining why, you maintain that it is the correct interpretation.

Then you repeat your argument: "I imagine you as X; therefore, you are X, and all evidence to the contrary will be refuted because it does not sync with X."

That's not logical.

[_sabotage_]

Oh, I've overcome my perception of you, don't worry.

But the very idea that we would somehow prevent Chinese spies by denying some visas is like saying we could all stand side by side and stop a flood.

I'm just amused that you felt it was worth a defence.

Anyways, my wife will get here monday with my son and we'll post copies of all material of our spying successes here.

[AAFitz]

You "guessed at one possible way of interpreting it," yet without explaining why, you maintain that it is the correct interpretation.

Then you repeat your argument: "I imagine you as X; therefore, you are X, and all evidence to the contrary will be refuted because it does not sync with X."

That's not logical.

My point was never about what you meant. Ive repeatedly accepted that you could have meant anything, and knew as I typed you might have meant it as a joke supporting him.

My point however, that instead of accepting that, when he very innocently did misinterpret it, which he was bound to do....you simply blamed him for it, arrogantly as you always do, and as I outright predicted you would.

Further, you did it by dragging it out and going into rambling explanations of it, so I did the same to you.

It was a simple, ridiculous mistake, and you got him, and I got you.

Tit for tat.

I honestly assumed you'd get it before now....but its very satisfying to see I was able to keep it up for so long.

Again, I know you will continue with the bullshit, because thats what you do...and thats fine...but all you had do to was reasonably just say hey man, I actually was agreeing with you...instead of dragging it out as if it was he that made a ridiculous mistake, and not you, with a ridiculously poorly worded, joke...that was piss poor at best.

But like youve said before, this forum is beneath you, and theres no way you could be wrong...so dont worry, im sure that makes you right.

[BigBallinStalin]

Oh, I've overcome my perception of you, don't worry.

But the very idea that we would somehow prevent Chinese spies by denying some visas is like saying we could all stand side by side and stop a flood.

Perhaps, but I don't know that much about transnational flight security and its substitutes to comment on its effectiveness. I guess you do?

I'm just amused that you felt it was worth a defence.

Can you distinguish between "explaining X" and "defending X"?

[_sabotage_]

Ancient Chinese saying:

to explain yourself is to admit.

[AAFitz]

Oh, I've overcome my perception of you, don't worry.

But the very idea that we would somehow prevent Chinese spies by denying some visas is like saying we could all stand side by side and stop a flood.

Perhaps, but I don't know that much about transnational flight security and its substitutes to comment on its effectiveness. I guess you do?

I'm just amused that you felt it was worth a defence.

Can you distinguish between "explaining X" and "defending X"?

As fun as all this must be for you, why dont you just stop with the usual arrogant bullshit, and just explain what you meant.

I know, I know, it would mean far less fun, but hey, it was his wife and kid he thought you were talking about, after a stressful ordeal. Maybe not being a bitch about it for once wouldnt be that hard.

Your call though. I couldnt care less, and my typing skills are more than adequate to match word for word.

[BigBallinStalin]

You "guessed at one possible way of interpreting it," yet without explaining why, you maintain that it is the correct interpretation.

Then you repeat your argument: "I imagine you as X; therefore, you are X, and all evidence to the contrary will be refuted because it does not sync with X."

That's not logical.

My point was never about what you meant. Ive repeatedly accepted that you could have meant anything, and knew as I typed you might have meant it as a joke supporting him.

My point however, that instead of accepting that, when he very innocently did misinterpret it, which he was bound to do....you simply blamed him for it, arrogantly as you always do, and as I outright predicted you would.

Further, you did it by dragging it out and going into rambling explanations of it, so I did the same to you.

It was a simple, ridiculous mistake, and you got him, and I got you.

Tit for tat.

I honestly assumed you'd get it before now....but its very satisfying to see I was able to keep it up for so long.

Again, I know you will continue with the bullshit, because thats what you do...and thats fine...but all you had do to was reasonably just say hey man, I actually was agreeing with you...instead of dragging it out as if it was he that made a ridiculous mistake, and not you, with a ridiculously poorly worded, joke...that was piss poor at best.

But like youve said before, this forum is beneath you, and theres no way you could be wrong...so dont worry, im sure that makes you right.

I supposedly blamed sabotage (for creating a stawman?) after he misinterpreted my statement ("Chinese spies refers only to babies and not his wife"?). Then he didn't clarify himself when I jokingly asked him about being married to a 17 month year old, right? Then you get upset because I joked about his interpretation being filed under the "Accidental Strawmen" thread, right?


Assuming that's more or less correct,
then here's what really happened from my perspective--not your BBS(1) perspective:
If he's gonna be snarky, then I'll respond in kind. Why? Because it's only fair to supply demanders at a price which they offer. Also, I don't mind his snarkiness; I enjoy it. The Art of Being Snarky or Trolling is a worthy craft, so +1 to sabotage.

I've nothing against him, nor do I presume to know everything --or even most of--which he knows about. Methodological Subjectivism FTW. Therefore, your claims about me being arrogant have been completely created in your own mind. You've been presuming too much about me. That's all, and I ain't even mad.

[BigBallinStalin]

Ancient Chinese saying:

to explain yourself is to admit.

Ancient Chinese saying:
Your response is unfortunate.


In order to provide useful criticism, one should be able to provide explanations from multiple positions. You should be able to demonstrate that which you want to criticize, e.g. US national security--specifically airports.

[AAFitz]

BBS. My whole point, a point that I made very clear from the beginning, was that you would go on forever claiming how right you were, pretty much no matter what.

Thats about it, to be honest.

Anyways, thanks for confirming and proving my hypothesis correct.

I suppose on some level, your willingness to argue such a ridiculous thing for quite so long unwaveringly is even admirable, but if you are serious in this endevour, and not just taking a piss, as I was(mostly) throughout...

I pity you, and urge you, to reconsider your earlier posts, about this forum being a waste of time.

If your continued posts have just been to confirm your latter posts, which just occurred to me, then all I can say is "Bravo"

Right now, I fully believe this forum is absolutely worthless after these hours of insanity.

On the other hand, if you actually do care, and wish the forum was more useful...in a future situation like this, you could just agree your post really was kind of vague, and the guy had every right and was even likely to have misunderstood your intention....

Either way though, as Jack famously said....I dont give a damn!

[BigBallinStalin]

BBS. My whole point, a point that I made very clear from the beginning, was that you would go on forever claiming how right you were, pretty much no matter what.

Thats about it, to be honest.

Anyways, thanks for confirming and proving my hypothesis correct.

I suppose on some level, your willingness to argue such a ridiculous thing for quite so long unwaveringly is even admirable, but if you are serious in this endevour, and not just taking a piss, as I was(mostly) throughout...

I pity you, and urge you, to reconsider your earlier posts, about this forum being a waste of time.

If your continued posts have just been to confirm your latter posts, which just occurred to me, then all I can say is "Bravo"

Right now, I fully believe this forum is absolutely worthless after these hours of insanity.

Some people need to recognize the difference between their perception of me and the actual me. The presumption of knowledge can lead people to distorted realities. Hopefully, they can overcome that problem.

On the other hand, if you actually do care, and wish the forum was more useful...in a future situation like this, you could just agree your post really was kind of vague, and the guy had every right and was even likely to have misunderstood your intention....

Either way though, as Jack famously said....I dont give a damn!

Well, I already explained that here, but if you refuse to read my responses so that you can maintain that your ever-changing position is correct, then whatever. Even when you don't feel like clarifying yourself, there's not much I can do.

[BigBallinStalin]

just explain what you mean.
.

Here's what I mean:

1. (read below the underlined). viewtopic.php?f=8&t=186219&start=15#p4071256
2. viewtopic.php?f=8&t=186219&p=4071521#p4071518
3. Read the following:

I usually presume no one is trolling me--except from a few enjoyable posters, because it's an easy assumption to roll with.

The fact of that matter is that I'm not covering up anything, yet you insist I do. We can label your responses ITT as either (1) as part of your mastermind plot to troll me from your very first post or (2) sincere, but none of that really matters because (1) I deal with it.jpg, (2) you're wrong on particular points but don't acknowledge it--which is expected.


Here's what I found interesting:

If you were only concerned about the injustice committed against sabotage, then you'd simply state it from the beginning. Instead, you engaged on this long-winded Troll Campaign. Gee, why is that?

Perhaps because you perceive that your most valuable means is vengeance--either to right the "wrongs" inflicted upon others like sabotage, or to get even with me for whatever (drug legalization debate?).

Maybe since you perceive me as being a dick, then you retaliate in kind. But the problem is that messing with me to produce negative emotions is ineffective, but that doesn't matter because you'll continue to insist I'm BBS(1).

It appears our PMs aren't productive because you've hit this wall where you start refusing to clarify yourself.

Shall I place you in the JB-PS-PLAYER bin?
Have I been supplying you with what you demand?

[AAFitz]

As I said in the PM. I had no idea you cared so much about this. You made an offhand joke that someone misunderstood, understandably, and I called you out on bullshit for your overly arrogant explanation of it.

I genuinely had fun doing it, though much of it, was....creative lets say.

Now however, after seeing you actually argue this point, without trying to actually resolve anything, which you've had many opportunities to do, I understand that your main objective, must only be to argue, and that you will never stop doing it no matter what the situation.

Further, I have come to believe you actually believe you always are right, whereas before this discourse, I assumed you only were doing it for effect.

In any case, while I am impressed with my prediction you would do this, I am troubled to have been so correct, and that you would take it to this level.

Ive tried being direct, pointing out the simple situation of it, but still, you carry on about what was clearly a tiny, insignificant misunderstanding of a 6 word joke of yours, by another poster, and have carried on for hours, and countless posts, in some...what I would label...narcissistic attempt to make sure that no one ever suspected you did anything wrong...maybe ever.

And now, after seeing this, my perception of you absolutely has changed, and I apologize for enabling, or contributing to this in any way. I did it because I thought you had fun with this, but now I suspect you actually take it far more seriously, than I ever imagined, and I can only apologize for toying with your emotions, and not realizing how important this was to you.

You were right. Everyone else was wrong. About everything, ever.

Good job, BBS, and thank you for all your valuable insights.

We are all better off for having heard them.

Carry on, and please forgive this slight misunderstanding and questioning of your posting prowess.

[BigBallinStalin]

[AAFitz]

Actually, I think you succeeded in trolling, to an alarming degree.

[BigBallinStalin]

Actually, I think you succeeded in trolling, to an alarming degree.

No, I was pretty sincere. Eventually, you will realize what the following means:

Some people need to recognize the difference between their perception of me and the actual me. The presumption of knowledge can lead people to distorted realities. Hopefully, they can overcome that problem.