An uncharacteristic blunder, in the heat of the moment, Slim drops her guard Options

[Milton Roe]

Stuff about LaRouche bashing on WP

Yeah, yeah, Slim is biased as hell, and will refuse to afford LaRouche even the same semi-courtesies given living dictators. LaRouche sounds far worse as a human being than (say) Fidel Castro. Which is very bizarre, since I don't think LaRouche has killed anybody (Slim would naturally disagree).

On the other hand, I notice you didn't address the part that says:

"When leaders of the Mexico Oil Workers' Union were jailed—corrupt leaders, according to Sarmiento—LaRouche said the union had been attacked by the Anglo-American Liberal Establishment, controlled by Scottish Rite Freemasonry."

Is that true? Because it sounds exactly like something LaRouche would say. Which is so gonzo that it's impossible to properly parody. Damn those Scottish Rite Freemasons-- I hate when they get involved in stong arm tactics against Mexican oil worker unions!

Can't they just stick with the funny costumes?

[Herschelkrustofsky]

On the other hand, I notice you didn't address the part that says:

"When leaders of the Mexico Oil Workers' Union were jailed—corrupt leaders, according to Sarmiento—LaRouche said the union had been attacked by the Anglo-American Liberal Establishment, controlled by Scottish Rite Freemasonry."

Is that true? Because it sounds exactly like something LaRouche would say.

I took a look at the English-language material on the web, and I what I found was that LaRouche blamed President Salinas de Gortari for the attacks on the Oil Workers' Union. From my experience, LaRouche's opponents like to put a little "spin" on his views to make them look more eccentric.

I would also add, however, that for Mexicans, the issue of Masonry is a much more volatile one than it is up here. When we think of Masons, we think of guys on little motor scooters. In Mexico, there were years of violent clashes between Masons and Catholics, including the Cristero War.

[Silver seren]

Ugh, I don't want to have to deal with them anymore, I have better things to do.

[It's the blimp, Frank]

Ugh, I don't want to have to deal with them anymore, I have better things to do.

SlimVirgin and Will Beback successfully employ the "Shock and awe" tactic.

[Silver seren]

I can't argue against stupidity. Attempting to do so will only result in my own arguments becoming stupid and not getting anywhere.

Logic can't break a veneer of bias.

[Herschelkrustofsky]

This is great stuff. Slim 'n' Will are both getting really pissy, and totally frantic because they cannot plausibly ban Jayen as an "HK sock" (although Will is starting to make broad insinuations about Jayen "raising issues that were at one time raised by HK socks.")

The real highlight is where Slim complains:

I also object to the forest fires of discussion Jayen keeps starting about this article on multiple boards and user talk pages.

Jayen responds, of course, with a full array of diffs about Slim's recent canvassing activity. But I give two thumbs up to the "forest fires of discussion" metaphor.

[EricBarbour]

I can't argue against stupidity. Attempting to do so will only result in my own arguments becoming stupid and not getting anywhere.

So far, you haven't actually gotten anywhere.

[Silver seren]

I don't know if it's even possible to get anywhere against the two of them.

[Herschelkrustofsky]

I don't know if it's even possible to get anywhere against the two of them.

I wouldn't be so sure. It looks like at the BLP noticeboard, they are getting their butts kicked.

[Gruntled]

I don't know if it's even possible to get anywhere against the two of them.

It's quite possible if you get the full support of the WR cabal. However, they do have a nasty habit of withdrawing support at the wrong time and shooting people in the foot.

[gomi]

I don't know if it's even possible to get anywhere against the two of them.

It's quite possible if you get the full support of the WR cabal. However, they do have a nasty habit of withdrawing support at the wrong time and shooting people in the foot.

The WR Cabal, such as it is, is pretty resolutely anti-gun. We don't shoot anyone, in any appendage. We also don't have much to do with what you can or cannot post on Wikipedia.

[Cla68]

I don't know if it's even possible to get anywhere against the two of them.

It's quite possible if you get the full support of the WR cabal. However, they do have a nasty habit of withdrawing support at the wrong time and shooting people in the foot.

The WR Cabal, such as it is, is pretty resolutely anti-gun. We don't shoot anyone, in any appendage. We also don't have much to do with what you can or cannot post on Wikipedia.

A WR participant, from what I've seen, usually acts on his/her conscience and has a low tolerance for nonsense, corruption, and hypocrisy.

[Gruntled]

The WR Cabal, such as it is, is pretty resolutely anti-gun. We don't shoot anyone, in any appendage.

{{fact}}

A WR participant, from what I've seen, usually acts on his/her conscience and has a low tolerance for nonsense, corruption, and hypocrisy.

Yes, no doubt there is a WR participant who meets that description. Probably you can find more than one.

[Herschelkrustofsky]

Who is Off2riorob (T-C-L-K-R-D) ? I've never seen him edit or comment on these articles before, but he seems to have quickly grasped the situation.

[Silver seren]

Rob and I are often...opposed to each other in a lot of areas (the FBI seal incident being a major one), but most of those areas have to do with policy and not content. I have seen that he is a good editor who makes rather nice contributions. And he likes to jump into a lot of disputes.

I'm glad that he was able to grasp this one so well.

[Somey]

The WR Cabal, such as it is, is pretty resolutely anti-gun. We don't shoot anyone, in any appendage.

{{fact}}

I thought Daniel (Brandt) had decided that Selina was some sort of gun aficionado?

I'm not really anti-firearms in the broad sense, though I do support gun control laws, and I wouldn't mind if they were a good deal tougher than they are now. Of course, I haven't had a friend or relative get shot, either. I also realize this is totally off-topic... sorry!

Anyway, I do think we should be realistic about this latest incident - if people are giving SV and Will Beback a hard time about their treatment of Lyndon LaRouche, it probably has more to do with SV's and Will Beback's general behavior than any desire to be nicer to LaRouche. Meanwhile, I can't imagine LaRouche living much longer - isn't he well past 90 years old now? What I mean is, SV and Will Beback are lifers at this. Why not compromise a little bit now, and wait a couple years for the guy to pass on, at which point the BLP constraints will be lifted and they can paint him they way they really want to, as Worse Than Satan, etc.? What's their hurry? Will they not feel like they've "won" sufficiently if they can't do it while he's still alive?

[Herschelkrustofsky]

Rob and I are often...opposed to each other in a lot of areas (the FBI seal incident being a major one), but most of those areas have to do with policy and not content. I have seen that he is a good editor who makes rather nice contributions. And he likes to jump into a lot of disputes.

I'm glad that he was able to grasp this one so well.

Double popcorn on this one. Rob hit a major nerve with Will Beback, who is deeply offended because as everyone knows, he is not anti-LaRouche.

Why not compromise a little bit now, and wait a couple years for the guy to pass on, at which point the BLP constraints will be lifted and they can paint him they way they really want to, as Worse Than Satan, etc.? What's their hurry? Will they not feel like they've "won" sufficiently if they can't do it while he's still alive?

That reminds me of a funny template...

[Silver seren]

Is this meant to be a jab at me? And about this thread, I suppose. It made me laugh.

And ouch, that hurt. Will is not going to be happy with that comment.

[radek]

Who is Off2riorob (T-C-L-K-R-D) ? I've never seen him edit or comment on these articles before, but he seems to have quickly grasped the situation.

Dude ran for ArbCom in the last election. I sort of appreciate his presence and often times he's in the right (haven't bothered to check in this case). But lots of folks find him... you know, not phony/butt kissing enough for Wikipedia. So he lost.

[It's the blimp, Frank]

It is truly astonishing that after two days of intensive discussion neither SV nor WB have acknowledged in any way that their preferred version has a BLP problem. They continue to shrug off every other comment from every other editor. SV has this to say:

The BLP policy was never intended to mean that we can't repeat what multiple reliable sources say about such figures, and indeed it's that sort of extreme interpretation that has caused the policy to acquire a bad reputation with some editors.

Some one should ask her to name the editors who think BLP has a bad reputation.