This is brilliant. Jojo tells a self-justifing story about the
history here, and it certainly doesn't match my memory, and I've gone
over the history to write some of the posts in recent threads. But I
can make mistakes and my memory can be faulty. I'm not going to
reseach it again unless someone asks, because I've already spent too
much time on this to do that *again.*
Notice, below, allegedely I commented on his behavior here. I did not
attack his religion, but I alleged that certain *relevant* claims
here -- about his behavior here, affecting the list -- were "lies" (I
don't recall if I was yet calling him a liar, except in the sense
that we use the word when someone promises something and then does
the opposite). He acknowledges here bringing up the material about
Islam, he says that insult "has to be answered with the same level of
nastiness." But he went way beyond the "same level." He went into
deliberate insult, designed and known to him to be such.
He claims it is the "truth," hut he's not limited himself to truth,
he goes way beyond it, and repeats it here with "barely out of
diapers," which is a gross untruth and he's actually admitted it.
It's something said to create a desired impression, that's what he
acknowledged. When we create desired impressions by saying something
that we know is not true, that's "lying."
At 06:51 PM 12/25/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote:
Dave, I honestly respect the amount of thought and consideration you
have given to your response. But, let me clarify a few more things with you.
First, I did try what you are saying. I did try to start an
off-topic posts regarding a subject matter that seems to be of
interest to a lot of people here. After I started the "New
Data ....." thread, a few of us were exchanging thoughts and I
thoroughly found that enjoyable. Although one individual started a
single insult, I actually let that pass and did not
retalitate. After telling him to stop insulting me, he did stop and
the discussion continued in a civilized manner with no one able to
convince the other. That was expected. The point is, it was a
civilized exchange of opinions. Exactly what Vortex-L was meant to
be, except that the topic was a little off-topic.
But then, Lomax started his new round of insults out of the
blue. What he posted has absolutely nothing about the "New Data
...." thread, but instead was a renewal of him calling me a troll
and a liar and called for my banning. That level of bullying has to
be answered with the same level of nastiness. Hence, I started
calling his god a moon god, which of course is true, but is quite
offensive to muslims; simply because they like to pretend that their
god is the same as the universal God of Judaism and
Christianity. Of course, that insult involve identifying his great
prophet as a sexual pervert with dozens of wives and a child
molester molesting a 9 year old little girl barely out of
diapers. All of which is true. No lies, just truth intended to
insult. Most muslims find these truths embarassing, so I used these
to retaliate. Everyone can see that and it did have the intended
effect on Lomax. He was insulted. Of course he was, it was
intended to be more an insult than an openning of the discussion
about religion. Mind you, this was intended to be a response to his
blatant insult out of the blue. And the rest is what you see here
in this thread.
Of course, this all stated a long time ago when he and a couple of
other bullies here started their round of insults, when I started
the Darwinian Evolution series of posts, to try to highlight the
problem of Off-topic trolling here. These bullies feel that my
Darwinian Evolution fallacies threads were inappropriate. Of
course, they were inappropriate, they were off-topic intended to
highlight a problem here. I believe you are seasoned enough to see
the truth as I believe you have been following this saga from the
beginning. Me and Terry even had a friendly bet as to the outcome
of this ( which I lost, so I'll be buying Terry, and he said Jed,
lunch at the Officer's club, when I get back there.) But to me,
this was all about trying to fix a problem. But instead of being
more sensitive to how they are destroying this forum, these chronic
off-topic posters and gang of bullies started insulting and calling
for my banning. This of course I found to be an insult and started
retaliating.
That my friend is the problem. And my friend, I am not the
problem.. Just that a gang of bullies have started coming out of
the woodwork and team up to gang up of me.
I have said it before, have said it for close to a year now, and
will say it again. My off-topic posts will stop as soon as the
blatant off-topic posts destroying this forum stops. And while I'm
at it, I will respond to insults, with insults equally insulting.
I hope you are honest enough to acknowledge that what I am saying is
true. But as for Lomax, I did not really expect him to be
honest. What I am about to say is also true. Muslims will lie, can
lie according to their religion, if their lie will serve the good of
muhammed or islam. This my friend is the truth.
No, it's a lie, but he might believe it. Jojo above has said that he
is saying what he says to insult. The simple truth is never an insult.
The issue of lying in Islam is complex. What is called "taqiyya" is
allowed, by the Shi'a, sometimes considered rejected by the other
schools, but my personal opinion is that it can be legitimate, though
never desirable. It means concealing one's religion or religious
opinion when one fears personal harm or harm to others. Like if you
are with fanatic anti-Shi'a Muslims, you can conceal being Shi'a, and
they actually have to do that sometimes, there are fanatics who would
harm them, and there certainly were in history, as with any minority sect.
But misleading people, when there is no such fear, about religion, is
uttery prohibited. He has been claiming that Muslims conceal the
religion to make it look acceptable to Western eyes. He's said this
about a specific scholar, whom I happen to know, and who would *never* do this.
Yes, I've encountered lying, from the darkest and most ignorant of
Muslims. Here is the story:
I was at a mosque in the U.S. South. Some Christian seminary students
were visiting, and they heard a presentation on Islam by the imaam,
who wasn't particularly knowledgeable, he was really a political
appointee, this was a very small mosque, and he was a friend of the
man who was providing most of the money. So ... we were all sitting,
having tea, and I don't recall why I said this, but I quoted a verse
of the Qur'an, first in Arabic, and the imaam was frantically waving
his arms to me to stop (behind them, they couldn't see him at that
point), but I wasn't about to stop. I translated it.
2:62. Surely those who trust and the Jews and the Christians, and the
Sabians, any who trust in God and the Last Day, and do good, shall
have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor
shall they grieve.
After they left, the imaam yelled at me, with condemnation in his
voice: "You told them that they did not have to accept Islam!"
See, he did not really believe the Qur'an. He thinks it means
something other than the obvious. No, I did not tell them that they
did "not have to accept Islam." That's between them and God. I told
them *what God said.* And concealing what God said is an enormity in
Islam, when there is no fear of harm. I.e., someone attacking you for
your belief.
I *was* attacked, but these people were actually cowardly bullies. I
was only attacked verbally, and forbidden to speak in the mosque, and
they owned the place, legally, so I simply did not go there after
this all became clear.
Those people *did* lie, and my wife caught them in it, it was amazing
the response. We were at a meeting about the "problem" of what I'd
said. There had been a certain conversation with the imaam where he
claimed that the decision to change the keys to the mosque was made,
not by him, but by the Council. But there was a member of the
Council, a friend of mine, there.
So when I reported what he'd said, naturally, he said that I was
lying. My wife, sitting in the back spoke up. "He said it, I heard him."
"They were recording the conversation," the major supporter of the
friend exclaimed. See, their sad theory was that I was a CIA agent,
sent to disrupt the mosque. That's how people like this think.
It's really funny. They could have said, "She's lying too, she is
just supporting her husband." But they could not help but blurt out
this *confirmation* of their suspicion, because, they would think,
only a spy would record the conversations. No, there was no
recording, that was just a knee-jerk assumption. She'd picked up an
extension and had listened. And they knew that their own imaam was
lying. Right there in front of them and to them. They knew him.
See, their imaam was lying, but he was *one of them.* That was far
more important to them than any detail like lying or religious
obligations. It was politics. I actually knew more about Islam and
the Qur'an than they did, and this was really threatening to them.
They had to get rid of me.
The member of the Council who was my friend resigned. He was an
American convert and was so disgusted by the whole thing that he left
Islam, apparently.
A long-term supporter of the mosque had been one of the founders, way
back when it started as a Nation of Islam temple, decades earlier,
and he had been shoved aside when certain immigrant Muslims
(basically the imaam and his friend, for the most part) pushed their
way in, but he'd continued to attend services, asked me to lead
Friday prayers at his house, for his family, and I did, until I left the town.
Sure. there are ignorant Muslims who will lie about the religion or
other things. But that's not Islam, and it's prohibited.
(No more original material below)
Jojo
----- Original Message -----
From: <mailto:dlrober...@aol.com>David Roberson
To: <mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 12:15 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Of course you have the right to be offended by the off topic threads
that seem to show up often. I tend to be more concentrated on the
LENR subject than many, but it is refreshing to have my attention
averted on occasions. Do not consider my opinion as any more valid
than that of yours or others when seeking off topic offense
levels. I find vortex-l a location where a number of intelligent
and science minded individuals hang out that I can utilize as a
sanity check for many unusual concepts.
The recent intense concentration upon religious issues is not very
useful for several reasons. It is apparent that you have a strong
Christian faith and that others within this group favor the Muslim
faith to an equally strong degree. This in itself is a good thing
and I say nothing against the religious beliefs of you or anyone
else. The world has enough conflict over religion already and it is
of little practical use for us to continue that tradition here. As
I said, neither side to this argument appears to be capable of
giving an inch toward a common resolution. For this reason, all I
see within the arguments presented is a repetition of the same
disgusting issues. Why waste so much energy toward this type of
discussion when it is known ahead of time that nothing will change?
Most of the off topic subjects do not result in the amount of
conflict that is seen within the religious type. As you have noted,
there has been awful and unwarranted name calling engaged in and
insults which I find offensive. I would not object if you or anyone
else suggests an off topic subject that encourages discussions as
long as they do not result in that sort of behavior and they were at
least related to science. You will find me objecting if these
unrelated threads begin to become too long or cause serious personal
attacks. The recent discussions concerning global warming came
close to that threshold due to the sometimes heated exchanges that
resulted from what some perceive as a world endangering
situation. I can understand the passion since there are some
convinced that the fate of the world is in the balance unless
something is done quickly. Of course you and I fall on the same
side of this issue where we seek reasonable, cautious, and
thoughtful preparation.
I am attempting to understand the nature of the religious issues
that keep this and other threads like it alive and so
passionate. Do both sides of the argument believe that they must
prevail and have the last word? Is God watching the debate and
pushing each side forward in a manner that seems a little less than
brotherly? For some reason I do not believe so. Why don't both
parties to this discussion realize that they will never make headway
in convincing the other side and just stop the insanity? I find
both sides equally guilty and plead for each to abandon the discussion.
Forgive me if I offended anyone as that was not my intent.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Jojo Jaro <jth...@hotmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Tue, Dec 25, 2012 4:04 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Yes, you are right of course, but It would even be better if all
off-topic threads be terminated and brought to Vortex-B.
I am doing this is highlight a problem. If you call for the
termination of this thread, you need to call for the termination of
all off-topic threads. I believe that is only fair. For why should
the Vortex-L membership only be subjected to off-topic threads you
consider "interesting". In other words, why are you the arbiter of
what off-topic posts should be discuss or not? They are all
off-topic and should be banished from Vortex-L forever. Isn't that
what I've always asked for only to be insulted, ridiculed and
ignored? No offense intended, just asking your thinking process on this.
I consider this discussion with Lomax interesting. So, on that
aspect, this thread has as much right to be discussed in Vortex as
any other off-topic thread you consider "interesting". Or are you
saying that because you are an longer time member of Vortex-L, that
you opinion carries more weight than mine? Isn't that what the
chronic off-topic posters are essentially saying?
It's all or nothing my friend. No off-topic threads or ALL
off-topic threads allowed. Am I not being fair? Is what I'm saying unfair?
Jojo
PS, Of course, I am ready and prepared to stop all off-topic threads
that I participate in, but only if there is a corresponding
commitment from other chronis off-topic posters to moderate
incessant off-topic posts.
----- Original Message -----
From: <mailto:dlrober...@aol.com>David Roberson
To: <mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2012 1:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
Guys, I would very much prefer it if this thread were to be
terminated. It is apparent that there will never be agreement
between the parties involved in the dispute and highly unlikely that
one or the other will modify his beliefs. Why not just shake hands
(electronically of course) and change the subject to LENR or
something else more interesting.
I suspect that I am not the only one with this opinion.
Dave
