Re: [Goanet] 'parisan propaganda' and / or 'rumour mongering'
The failed attempts at deception in Marshall’s latest propaganda piece against me in this thread are: 1. He falsely implies that my short general comments on an Ingrid Albuquerque article that I posted are somehow different from a general comment that I made on a Gurumurthy article posted by someone else, and that the former constitutes a response to a writer that violates this assertion of mine: Any reasonable person would note that it is pointless to respond to writers who cannot defend themselves in this forum. It suffices for one to point out that they have a partisan bias, as I did with regard to Gurumurthy article, and as others did with regard to Gautier et al. Previously he had untruthfully stated that it was I who had posted the Gurumurthy article on the net. Please see: http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2008-October/082742.html for Santosh was enamoured by S Gurumurthy’s article which he posted on the net. .Marshall Mendonza 2. He labels me as a consummate politician simply because I did not answer some rhetorical questions that he had apparently asked with the intention of cornering me. One should note that I have already provided examples in support of my contention that Marshall has engaged in partisan propaganda and rumor mongering. In addition, he has provided unverified information and slanted opinions from the following partisan propaganda websites: http://christianpersecutionindia.blogspot.com http://freerepublic.com http://www.persecution.in http://orissaburning.blogspot.com http://www.cbcisite.com 3. He makes the absurd claim that a rumor cannot be termed as inaccurate or bogus information, and that because I do so I am intellectually dishonest and lacking in humility. Cheers, Santosh --- On Thu, 10/30/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2. Like a consumate politician he neatly skirts answering questions when he is cornered. ... . Wouldn't one call this lack of intellectual honesty and humility to accept one's mistakes? And he calls himself objective and levelheaded!!! What kind of conclusion can one derive?
[Goanet] 'parisan propaganda' and / or 'rumour mongering'
1.Santosh wrote; Any reasonable person would note that it is pointless to respond to writers who cannot defend themselves in this forum. Comment: Santosh contradicts himself as he commented on Ingrid Albuquerque's article even though she was not able to respond on this forum. Refer: http://www.goanet.org/post.php?name=Newslist=goanetinfo=2008-September/authorpost_id=080803 http://www.goanet.org/post.php?name=Newslist=goanetinfo=2008-September/authorpost_id=080957 Wouldn't one call this doublespeak and hypocrisy? 2. Like a consumate politician he neatly skirts answering questions when he is cornered. Refer: http://www.goanet.org/post.php?name=Newslist=goanetinfo=2008-September/authorpost_id=080788 http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2008-October/082779.html 3.Santosh wrote: He denies that the bogus story of the nun can be termed as a rumor, and blames me for calling it that. Comment: First he refers to the report on the burning of the girl at the orphanage as 'inaccuracy'.Refer: Quote:'Ms. Fernandes raises very good points. She also appears to have corrected an inaccuracy that was propagated in this forum, namely that a nun was burned to death. The truth is that she was a Hindu girl. In either case it is an atrocity.' http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2008-October/082277.html Then to score brownie points he terms it as 'rumour'.Refer: Quote:'When there is a communal riot it is important not to propagate rumors that might further inflame communal passions.' http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2008-October/082532.html And now he goes one step further and calls it 'bogus' Quote:' He denies that the bogus story of the nun can be termed as a rumor, and blames me for calling it that' http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2008-October/082869.html Wouldn't one call this lack of intellectual honesty and humility to accept one's mistakes? And he calls himself objective and levelheaded!!! What kind of conclusion can one derive? Meanwhile I have just read the sad news that Fr Bernard Digal who was severely beaten up by the VHP / BD goons expired due to his injuries. I have no more interest in continuing this debate with Santosh which will lead nowhere. Santosh can have the pleasure of having the last word. Regards, Marshall -- Hyundai to launch the i20 in India. Catch the exclusive preview on ZigWheels.com http://www.zigwheels.com/b2cam/newsDetails.action?name=Emb11_20080731path=/INDT/News/Emb11_20080731page=1pagecount=2utm_source=indmailutm_medium=footerutm_content=trackingutm_campaign=Nletter_07oct2008_ZW
Re: [Goanet] 'parisan propaganda' and / or 'rumour mongering'
--- On Mon, 10/27/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Finally, I must say that I am disappointed that Santosh lacks the intellectual honesty and humility to accept where he is wrong but would continue to flog and grind an issue until the other party gives up in exhaustion. Quite predictably, Marshall now passes another self-serving judgment against me based on bogus accusations and calumnies that he has manufactured against me in his last post in this thread. Let me just enumerate below the kinds of cheap political tactics he has used to malign me: 1. After initially falsely claiming that I had applauded some partisan writers who are not members of Goanet, now he is blaming me for not criticizing their writings. Any reasonable person would note that it is pointless to respond to writers who cannot defend themselves in this forum. It suffices for one to point out that they have a partisan bias, as I did with regard to Gurumurthy article, and as others did with regard to Gautier et al. 2. He faults me for suggesting that there are only some examples (not all) of partisan propaganda and rumor mongering on his part. I have provided examples that I happened to read. To any impartial person, it should be obvious that it is too much to expect somebody to read all his more than 30 or so recycled reports from the news media and partisan websites. 3. He denies that the bogus story of the nun can be termed as a rumor, and blames me for calling it that. 4. After using the words sick and prejudiced to possibly describe my mind, he blames me for not noting some commas that he used. 5. He lifts a statement of mine referring to Mario Goveia's observation, and falsely suggests that I was referring to Gurumurthy's article, asking me the following question, laced with innuendo: Could Santosh kindly enlighten us on the historical evidence that he saw? We too would like to be enlightened. And now he denies that he found the article credible. He would make a skilful politician indeed!!! 6. After asking me to post examples of partisan propaganda and rumor mongering on his part, he now accuses me of cherry picking because I called his bluff and provided a few examples. Cheers, Santosh
