[tied] Re: Also an Austro-Asiatic Disconnect

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Ryan" <proto-language@...>
wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "david_russell_watson"

<liberty@...> wrote:

>
> You must be intelligent enough to know the truth before you can
> tell it.
>
> You are not.

Besides three or four spelling errors, when have you ever
managed to prove that my intelligence is inferior to yours?
In every dispute with you I have been able to show that I
was right and you were wrong, and which is the true purpose
of your rant against me and my supposed lack of breeding:

You wish to throw up a smokescreen to cover your failure to
address http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/41998
and acknowledge your errors.

> It is a persistent characteristic of low-bred people
> like yourself to not be able to recognize and appreciate
> superior qualities in other people.

I'm quite capable of recognizing and appreciating superior
qualities in others, when there truly is something to
appreciate.

> Your knowledge of your own worthlessness makes anyone
> superior a threat to your self-image, which is already low.

You're no more than rephrasing and giving back to me what
I've already said to you, which not only reveals much about
you, but is also very amusing to watch!

> You questioned whether the Irish _could_ even have a noble
> class, implying that no Irish could be noble. That is an
> insult to all Irishmen - me, those on this list, and those
> who have never heard and never will hear of you.

No, I never questioned whether they _could_, I questioned
whether they _did_, and really, I was questioning how an
Irishman, given the very history that you admitted, could
be so enamored of such things as class, nobility, etc.

> Nobles, and leaders generally, arise from their superior
> abilities to lead and plan for their people - abilities
> that are so manifest that others willingly follow them.

You're a dreamer. It has almost never worked like that in
the real world. The closest it has ever come is when a
"leader" was able to attract followers in the form of other
butchers... uh, excuse me, "warriors", to assist him in
subduing others to become his peasants, serfs, or whatever
else you want to call them. The latter were by no means
the willing "followers" of our "noble" and his supporters,
except in so far as a parasite is to be preferred to a
predator.

(You really can't learn history just by watching movies.)

Anyway, you well know this, as you lamented how exactly
the same thing was done to our ancestors by the English,
and which was my sole purpose in mentioning the Irish.

> No noble or leader has large enough force to defend
> against a general uprising.

No, of course not. The Irish willingly submitted to the
English out of respect for their superiority. Is that
what you're trying to tell us?

> I would not join you if you were the only inhabitant of an
> oasis in a waterless desert.

That's good, because I wouldn't have you.

> No person has intrinsic value.

Value is a subjective thing and we each have our own.
Personally I recognize the intrinsic value, the right
to live and pursue his own life, of _every_ human being,
regardless of his performance, which is entirely his own
concern not mine.

> His value, high or low, is determined by his performance in the
> world. His performance, in turn, is determined by his genetic
> background and his experiences, of which genetics plays the
> deciding role.

Well there we go: you've admitted still again that you are
a racist.

> This is a simple fact known to every animal breeder.

Some of us think it fit to treat human beings differently
from animals.

> And it has not escaped your notice either! You refuse to
> acknowledge what you know is true simply because it would
> certify your own low self-image.

Well according to your mode of thinking (if it can really
be called "thinking") I am such a lowly creature due to
my breeding, which of course I am helpless to control, so
then are you not beating up on others for no more than not
having the same good luck that you did when supposedly
born with superior genes?

I don't really think luck or random chance is something to
brag about, not that I really think you were born with
superior genes either.

There's a thing called "morality" that you would have to
consider here too, which is at odds with "breeding" human
beings for supposedly "superior" traits. I think that my
possession of that makes me superior to you, regardless of
whatever breeding I may or may not have.

> My name was inherited not picked out of a garbage can.

Well my name was inherited too. What makes you otherwise?

> What did Wat do besides have a son? Or perhaps, that is all he
> did!

Well there may well never have even been a man named "Wat",
even though "McWhatty" does supposedly mean something like
"Son of Wat", but then who cares? I don't need to point to
the achievements of any ancestor, as I'm quite proud of the
person I am myself.

> > Of course you know nothing at all about my breeding.
>
> Oh yes, I do. Your low birth oozes from every line you write.

Well it certainly oozes from yours, especially yours below
where you attack my female relatives.

> Typo. Two e's in exceedingly!
>
> I have never admitted any such attraction.

You specifically mentioned Marilyn Monroe before.

>Are you thinking of a female relation?

Oh what noble manners, what high-born etiquette, what well-
bred behavior you display when attacking another's female
relatives!

Has my supposed low class or lack of breeding ever once led
me to stoop so low as you have done here? No, because I was
raised to regard the like as anything but noble or cultured
behavior.

I think you'd do much better to have my superior training
instead of your own supposedly superior breeding!

> It is obvious that you do _not_ know - so much.

It's obvious that you're the last person able to judge that.

> Aha! Not a typo! You ignorantly spell exceedingly excedingly
> (sic!) on a regular basis.

Oh there goes our high-born spellchecker again.

I guess you have some purpose after all, if only that of
spellchecker. Oh, but wait, haven't you heard? We have
machines to do that for us nowadays, so I guess...

Besides, as I've already told you: you can't hurt me by
pointing out my spelling errors, because my spelling is
better than most, and more than adequate for our purposes
here, and beyond that I simply don't care. Moreover, the
fact that you can find absolutely no other substantive
flaw to criticize besides my spelling, speaks most highly
of me!

> > Well then, just in case nobody's told you so in awhile:
> >
> > Good boy, Pat, good boy!
>
> Your second thought is far too late to counteract the impression
> your previous expression of contempt for spelling and standards
> in general has made.

Well in case you didn't pick up on it, it wasn't my second
thought. I was merely ridiculing you for your pettiness.

> You have revealed yourself as a true Lumpenmensch.

And you reveal yourself as a true Nazi (if German is to be
the language we use for this) with your own little eugenics
theories and all to complete the match.

> Please, do not express your approval or admiration of me or
> anything I write. It makes me ill.

Well again, since you seem to have a comprehension problem:
I wasn't really expressing approval or admiration for you,
but only pure contempt.

> I am leaving your name on this for others to easily identify who
> wrote such hateful *gWouso.

Very good! It's amazing how easily that stuff rolls off your
tongue.

David