|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
   |
Posted - 2007.04.04 16:29:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: Rodj Blake
I take it that you don't like having your hypocrisy exposed to the world then?
Given that your own exposition shows very clearly that there is no hypocrisy involved in the present arrangements between the Sani Sabik alliance and the Star Fraction, I think that is a remarkably silly question.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 12:15:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
If you say that there's no hypocrisy in declaring war on an organisation because of it's imperialist philosophy whilst allied with an organisation devoted to a more centralised, more brutal form of imperialism, then I guess that we'll have to take your word for it.
I have not said that. Once again you are putting words in my mouth and showing yourself to be a deceiver.
Your attempts to paint us as hypocrites fail at every turn because you refuse to factor time and probability in to your assessment of our actions and how they mesh with our stated philosophy. Either that or you adopt a simpleton's approach of telescoping together all objectives whether they be short-, medium- or long-term and jumping up and down, pointing and hooting like the class clown who thinks he has discovered a new means of travelling faster-than-light while dozing through basic astrophysics.
Our view is that the Amarrian Empire and its capsuleer lickspittles are a threat to our future in the present and will continue to be so unless we take action. We are therefore taking action.
It is not our view that the Bloodveil cult is a threat to us and our future or likely to be such at any time in the foreseeable future.
Furthermore, at this time, the interests of the two organisations coincide sufficiently that it is mutually beneficial for us to co-operate on certain matters.
This is all perfectly consonant with our philosophy. There is no hypocrisy.
The remainder of your remarks, amusing as they might be, are rendered moot if you can but understand this simple explanation.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 13:52:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
Refusing to factor in time? Are you suggesting that it's just a matter of time before SF and the Bloodveil cult fall upon each other like hyenas?
No.
Quote:
Refusing to factor in probability? Are you suggesting that your assessment of the situation is that it's acceptable to ally yourselves with your ideological opposites if their threat level is insignificant?
No.
First of all, your characterisation of the Bloodveil cult as our ideological opposites is in my view flawed. There are points of Bloodveil philosophy we might agree with and some points we might not agree with. I suggest you study more carefully the two philosophies with a view to understanding them rather than trying to find points of apparent dissonance to construct your nit-picking arguments upon.
Second, the issues of time and probability are intertwined and relate to the ideologies in question. I have stated my assessment based on those factors and my personal understanding of the respective ideologies of the Star Fraction and the Bloodveil. That assessment in no way implies or suggests the nonsense you have tried, once more, to place in my mouth.
Finally, a word to Archbishop, you regularly pop up to unfavourably contrast PIE's 'consistency' with the views and actions of the Star Fraction. I have come to believe that this is a deliberate policy of telling lies or, to be moderately generous, twisting the facts. The Star Fraction has remained true to its founding ideology throughout its existence and has always acted in terms of that ideology. You may not understand it, or care to, but you are simply wrong when you imply that we are not consistent and that our actions cannot be understood with a little study and thought.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 14:32:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
I can assure that I make it a priority to carefully study the ideologies of a wide variety of organisations. I think that I have laid out the areas where SF and Bloodveil have opposite opinions by using the words of members of both.
In fact, all you have actually done is link to statements by Lady Revan and my comrade Tatsue Nuko and make the leap of asserting that they are in direct contradiction to one another. I would observe that, in particular, you are not paying sufficiently close attention to the remarks of Lady Revan.
Quote:
To date, I have not found a major overlap in the philosophies of both organisations except for their pathological hatred of the Amarr Empire.
Perhaps you would care to enlighten us where these other convergences lie?
I will do so.
Originally by: "Lady Revan"
Bloodveil endorses the free will of each individual to fight for its right to ascend. At the end, the will of the strong shall prevail. May a slave fight his Master and suceed, or May a Master achieve dominance over a slave, Bloodveil will always support the most Fit.
The Star Fraction would endorse that view.
Originally by: "Lady Revan"
Yes, the Cult of the Order Bloodveil is against all what you call " Loyalist Authorities". Why? Because we create our own morality and ethics. Cultists are admittedly selfish beings, all humans are. The Will To Freedom and Power is a singular philosophy which drives us.
The Star Fraction would endorse that view and, to anticipate you, consider it to have far wider application than the Amarrian Empire and, for the record, so it has transpired in Bloodveil and Star Fraction activities.
Originally by: "Lady Revan
I always had this feeling that there were certain barriers and obstacles which didn't necessarily have to be there. I've always disliked pre-concepts, and I see the generally accepted views of "reality" as the greatest stupidity of all. And I laugh in its face. It only has power because everyone, more or less, agrees with it. There is no good and no evil. There is every human assuming its rightfull place among the stars.
The Star Fraction would support that conclusion.
Originally by: "Lady Revan"
We give no respect for Concord rules and we will engage pilots which are not set as positive alligned with our Organization.
The Star Fraction commends the lack of respect for CONCORD and recognises that the Sani Sabik organisation has the sovereignty to choose its targets as it wishes.
Originally by: "Lady Revan"
No. Bloodveil recognises the Elite of all races, fit to their development and despises the weak of all races, equally.
While rather less passionate as to disregard for those that allow themselves to be weak, the Star Fraction clearly would have no difficulty with a view that recognises that all, no matter their origin, are capable of development.
Originally by: "Lady Revan"
In essence The Sani Sabik is a call to Responsibility. You succeed or you're not worth the gift of life.
The Star Fration has long emphasised personal responsibility and success as a key element of its philosophy.
In closing, there are differences in emphasis between our respective ideologies, differences of assessment of long-range objectives and likely outcomes and differences of method and implementation. This is true. However, the differences are not so great as some would like to paint them and the agreements exist despite the assertions of some who deliberately ignore them.
Moreover, someone who is versed in Scripture should know quite well that a simplistic, face-value interpretation of a theological text is not by any means always the true one. I have my own view on the meaning of the verses of the Apocrypha that Lady Revan quotes. I quite understand that it is 'convenient' for propaganda purposes for the paramilitary Blake to adopt an unthinking regurgitation policy of adducing meaning from the text but I don't agree with it.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 15:48:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
So you now endorse the view that it was up to the Mamet 500 to fight for their freedom rather than have SF (which had slavers in it at the time) do it for them?
We endorse the view that the Mamet 500 were entitled to fight for their freedom.
The Star Fraction fought at that time against CVA expansionism and made the status of the Mamet 500 a war objective because of their symbolic value as a reward to the CVA for its expansionist policies. You can drag up the issues of the CVA-SF War if you really wish but we will be arguing at great length that I really think would be wasting a lot of energy given that all the issues have been gone into in detail at the time and several times since.
Quote:
I've already said that your common hatred of the Empire is a shared feature of your philosophies.
No, you've tried to say it is the only shared feature. That is incorrect. Our shared desire to see the Amarrian Empire fall is but one shared objective, deriving from overlapping points of our philosophy, amongst many.
Quote:
Whilst it is true that you both disapprove of accepted views of reality, it doesn't follow that you are both working with the same axioms.
Neither does it follow that our axioms are in total contradiction.
Quote:
OK, I'll hand that one to you as an area of overlap. You are indeed both groups of pirates.
We are not pirates and you simply reduce the term to a casual and meaningless insult when you label us as such. If the Star Fraction are 'pirates' then we are the only 'pirates' in the cluster who do not shoot neutrals. Indeed, if we are 'pirates' then you are saying that the CVA are 'pirates' or you are simply mouthing incoherent phlegm-specked nonsenses. For the record, I do not consider the CVA pirates and I assert that we are not pirates.
Quote:
So you're saying that a society divided into "Elites" and despised weaklings is the same as one which promotes egalitarian development?
No. To repeat, the Star Fraction considers that all, no matter their origin, are capable of self-development if they have the will to tread that path. The Star Fraction believes that only those who allow themselves to be so are truly weak.
Originally by: "Rodj Blake"
Originally by: "The Cosmopolite"
Originally by: "Lady Revan"
In essence The Sani Sabik is a call to Responsibility. You succeed or you're not worth the gift of life.
The Star Fration has long emphasised personal responsibility and success as a key element of its philosophy.
Ah, so the Star Fraction is for the compulsory euthanisation of the poor and weak after all, despite Tatsue's denial. Thanks for clearing that up.
I have not said that at any point.
I think any objective observer will note that you repeatedly seek to put words in my mouth and tell outright lies about Star Fraction philosophy. I am quite satisfied with your performance as it simply shows you up for the deceitful individual you are. I simply do not believe any capsuleer could be so stupid as to make such remarks from simple inability to understand rather easily understood positions. You are just being mischievous and rather obvious.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 15:52:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
Well done on removing context by deleting the Revan comment.
A comment that I did not delete and which Tatsue can't really be blamed for not including as the comment itself does not in any way mention compulsory euthanasia. If it had, I would have specifically noted that we do not agree with compulsory euthanasia but, be it noted once again, it did not.
As I say, you continually rely on making words mean what you want them to mean and pretending that people are saying things that they are not.
It's very disreputable and doesn't fool anyone.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 16:36:00 -
[7]
Edited by: The Cosmopolite on 05/04/2007 16:33:34
Originally by: Rodj Blake
We could go on saying Does! Does not! Does so! for ever about this. I think that I've demonstrated that that there a significant and fundamental differences in the paradigms employed by SF and Bloodveil. You're welcome to disagree with me though.
That's more your style, Blake. I've shown the points of overlap and accepted there are points of difference. I am the one who has honestly stated my position, you are the one who insists, ineptly, on trying to demonstrate something that is simply not true.
We do indeed disagree, if you wish to leave it at that, I am content.
Quote:
Casual and meaningless insult? What about "bogus little troll"? Would you class that as a casual and meaningless insult?
You'd have to take that up with Tatsue. I am merely stating that your use of the term 'pirate' is empty in this context. Changing the subject doesn't serve to change that.
Originally by: "Rodj Blake"
Quote:
No. To repeat, the Star Fraction considers that all, no matter their origin, are capable of self-development if they have the will to tread that path. The Star Fraction believes that only those who allow themselves to be so are truly weak.
Which is the opposite view of Bloodveil, who willingly dispose of those considered weak before they have the chance to tread this path you mention.
That is your interpretation and I disagree with it.
Quote:
Originally by: "The Cosmopolite"
Originally by: "Rodj Blake"
Ah, so the Star Fraction is for the compulsory euthanisation of the poor and weak after all, despite Tatsue's denial. Thanks for clearing that up.
I have not said that at any point.
I think any objective observer will note that you repeatedly seek to put words in my mouth and tell outright lies about Star Fraction philosophy. I am quite satisfied with your performance as it simply shows you up for the deceitful individual you are. I simply do not believe any capsuleer could be so stupid as to make such remarks from simple inability to understand rather easily understood positions. You are just being mischievous and rather obvious.
I refer you to my reply to Nuko above.
The one where you accuse her of quoting out of context?
Doesn't quite work as I didn't do so, nor really do I think Tatsue did by simply omitting a statement that does not speak of 'compulsory euthanasia'.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 16:47:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
If "you succeed or you're not worth the gift of life" isn't a reference to euthanasia, what is it a reference to?
I suggest you re-read Neferis' article on Bloodveil to see just what their views on this are.
I've read it very carefully. There is no reference to 'compulsory euthanasia'. You may be interpreting certain passages of theological text and other remarks in that vein but I don't agree with your interpretation.
You are being mischievous in conflating the view that someone who does not succeed is 'not worth the gift of life' with the view that one should always use the technique of euthanasia, compulsory or otherwise, in the case of someone of that kind.
As usual, you twist the words of others and when found out you twist them further and further from the original meaning.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 17:25:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
And just what do you think Neferis meant when she wrote the following:
Quote:
The unfit to produce wealth will be eliminated... ...The unfit to sustain himself will be eliminated... ...The unfit to use life as it is given will be eliminated...
...The unfit to use his body and mind to the greater development of mankind will be eliminated.
I think that when Lady Revan reproduced the theological text that you partially quote, she was quoting prophecy from a particular source of scripture.
It is, more prosaically, an assessment of what will come to pass in the future devoid of any specific statement as to how this will be achieved beyond emphasis on personal responsibility. I note in particular that the term 'compulsory euthanasia' is not mentioned.
Quote:
Why is it so hard for you to accept that this is an area upon which SF and Bloodveil disagree on?
I have no difficulty with the Star Fraction and Bloodveil disagreeing on certain matters and have not said that I do.
The Star Fraction does not endorse compulsory euthanasia and no remarks made by myself or Tatsue can be twisted to make it seem that we do.
That is the issue you have chosen to discuss and that is what you have failed to show.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 17:29:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Tomahawk Bliss
don't drag us into it, you wouldn't like it.
The Star Fraction is not doing so. You may disregard any statements concerning you as simply personal remarks.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
|
|
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 17:49:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
Yes, the scripture forms the basis of her religion. Do you honestly believe that Neferis does not approve of euthanasia?
In point of fact, I don't know Lady Revan's personal view on euthanasia. It is a matter for her to answer and not me. I do not believe, for clarity, that Bloodveil philosophy implies the use of 'compulsory euthanasia' at every opportunity.
Even if some think it does, that is not a particular problem as no element of Bloodveil philosophy that overlaps with the Star Fraction's philosophy implies the use or support of 'compulsory euthanasia'.
Quote:
My intention was not show that SF supports euthanasia. Just the opposite in fact. I think that perhaps you need to look up the meanings of irony and sarcasm.
Backpeddle.
I know your intent. You've failed. You have not shown that Bloodveil philosophy necessarily implies 'compulsory euthanasia'. Nor have you succeeded in trying to portrary the Star Fraction as either in fundamental ideological opposition to Bloodveil philosophy or in agreement with all parts of it because we happen to agree on some points and disagree on others.
The discussion is over. You accept that we do not support compulsory euthanasia and you have failed to show that the philosophies of the Star Fraction and Bloodveil are diametrically opposed to one another. The earlier accusation of hypocrisy is shown to be nonsense.
From this point on the discussion will inevitably go in ever distorting and decreasing circles. We have established only that we each disagree on the interpretation of Bloodveil philosophy and the basis on which the Star Fraction can work with the Bloodveil while maintaining the integrity of its own ideology.
I suggest we leave it at that.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 17:54:00 -
[12]
Edited by: The Cosmopolite on 05/04/2007 17:51:08
Originally by: Rodj Blake
Originally by: Ituralde
We have one important thing to agree on. That, is a common enemy.
At last!
My whole point was that the only important thing that SF and Bloodveil have in common is their current enemy
Which is not so. It is but one thing among many other points of agreement.
Ituralde does not say it is the only thing we agree on and while he may find it the only important matter, the Star Fraction as an entity does not regard it as the only important issue. He is entitled to his view but it gives you no succour.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 18:24:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
And you've still not shown what these other points are.
Things that everyone in the cluster agree on do not really count.
You agree that a slave should be entitled to fight for its freedom?
Now, I know you don't but it does illustrate that you are talking nonsense when you say I have not shown the areas of overlap between Bloodveil and Star Fraction philosophy.
I showed the points of agreement here.
To say, I haven't shown the points of agreement and that they are all matters that 'everyone in the cluster agree on' is a straightforward falsehood.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 18:43:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
Whilst the actual word isn't used, I would have thought that even you would have noticed that euthanasia is a part of the Bloodveil dogma. Stories of Revan's contempt for those weaker than herself are evident everywhere.
See here for an example. Tell me - what is the usual thing that one does to roaches? If that comment isn't a description of euthanasia, I don't know what is.
I am quite aware of Lady Revan's attitude to the weak. I've already made it clear that the Star Fraction does not have quite the same view.
Bringing in statements by Lady Revan that the Star Fraction does not agree with does nothing more than allow us to say that we do not entirely agree with the particular statement that has been made.
Moreover, if you bothered to read the whole thread you would note that Lady Revan concedes that killing all the 'cockroaches' may not be the best policy. This does not strike me as advocating compulsory euthanasia in all circumstances.
However, it's been stated several times that the Star Fraction does not agree with every jot and tittle of Bloodveil philosophy. Whether Lady Revan believes in euthanasia per se or not is for her to say. I still do not see a necessary connection between Bloodveil philosophy and 'compulsory euthanasia'.
You've provided ample opportunity for the differences of emphasis between the Star Fraction and Bloodveil on the question of those who allow themselves to be weak to be highlighted. That's fine.
It does not change the fact that we agree on many points and are not diametrically opposed in ideological terms.
You can keep on saying we are for as long as you want but your view, actually, counts for little. I prefer others to make up their own minds and I am content for them to do so.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 18:53:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
And I later pointed out that they weren't really points of agreement, or that they were things that most people agree on.
Do you agree that slaves should be able to fight for their own freedom?
Do you agree that the will to freedom and power is a philosophy which drives us all?
Do you agree that all individuals, no matter their origin, are capable of developing beyond dependency on others if they have the will to do so?
I doubt you agree with any of these but just possibly you might in one or other case. I myself, strongly doubt that 'most people agree on' all of them or the other points of agreement I demonstrated here.
At this point you have reduced yourself to telling lies. The points of agreement I showed are real and no amount of you screeching that they are not will show the reverse.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.04.05 19:10:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
OK then, to try and get this discussion back on topic, what would you say is the single most important objective of the SF?
I know you are asking this as a serpent waiting to strike but I will answer for the benefit of others.
The aim of the Star Fraction is to achieve a future where all those with the will to seize their own destiny can do so without having to overcome artificial limitations imposed by others.
Or put another way and as was said earlier:
Originally by: "Tatsue Nuko"
The goal of the revolution is to rid ourselves of all influences trying to halt the development and evolution into a posthuman existence.
I am going to say very clearly that it remains to be seen, at this time, whether or not, in the long-term, the differences in ideology of the Bloodveil vis a vis the ideology of the Star Fraction will operate counter to this objective. Given no definite long-range assessment, there is no difficulty in working together at this time given we agree on numerous points.
You did, after all, wish to get back 'on topic' and this topic is largely you trying to drive a wedge between the various parties you discuss in the first post. So, I'll say right away, that you won't succeed on this issue either.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.04.06 21:24:00 -
[17]
Edited by: The Cosmopolite on 06/04/2007 21:20:32
The Star Fraction and Bloodveil agree on numerous matters and share similar points of view on a number of issues above and beyond our respective opposition to the Amarrian regime. This is based on our understanding of the respective ideologies. The interpretations of third-parties are irrelevent.
Which is to say, even if you think our ideologies are in total opposition, that is not enough to show that we must be united only by opposition to the Amarrian Empire. To show that, you must show that we do not agree on any other point.
That has not been shown.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.04.07 21:37:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Octavinus Augustus
Originally by: Devilish Ledoux
Pointing out ideological differences between us and our allies is totally without value. We have ideological differences with everyone, friend and foe.
So now you are willing to admit to the all too obvious differences in ideology between Star Fraction and Bloodveil. That is certainly a step in the right direction. Does this mark the beginning of a new line from Star Fraction regarding this question?
That there are differences between the ideologies of the Bloodveil and the Star Fraction has already been accepted by us. We could hardly do otherwise and it is hardly a new point. I said it in closing when I also pointed out some of the numerous points of agreement between our two groups here.
It seems I have to repeat again that it is of no great interest to us what the views of third-parties may be as to the respective ideologies. We are the ones who judge that our ideologies have sufficient points of agreement, beyond any particular shared opposition to a given entity, for us to co-operate on any number of issues.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.04.07 22:45:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Octavinus Augustus
So your basic stand is that while you have the right to question the ideology of other's (ie your thoughts on the Amarr theocratist dictatorship or whatever) you frown on anyone who put your own ideology under a similar scrutiny?
Not at all.
My stand is that I will refute claims that are false and claims that the only point of agreement between the Bloodveil and the Star Fraction is a 'shared hatred of the Amarrian Empire' are false claims.
They are false because the Star Fraction and Bloodveil agree on a number of other issues, some of which I have set out, above and beyond opposition to a single given political entity.
They are false if they rely on the interpretations of third-parties of our respective ideologies because when speaking of the question of agreements between the Bloodveil and Star Fraction what is of importance, by definition really, is the interpretations we have of our respective ideologies and where we agree and, yes, where we differ.
Quote:
You do indeed have the right to form alliances and frienships with whomever you desire. But then you make grand statements on IGS regarding "freedom" and follow it up with actions that clearly contradict your words.
Such as? I have denied no-one any freedom that they care to exercise as they are able. You are still braying your best are you not? How then have I acted in contradiction to my beliefs? Let me anticipate you, I have not.
Quote:
How can you expect that we shall not point to the inconsistencies so that those third parties you seem to disrespect so much may see you for what you really are?
I fully expect third-parties to point out what they believe to be inconsistencies based on their, in my view flawed, understanding of the issues.
Your assessment of 'disrespect' is incorrect, incidentally. I am simply pointing out that when the issue is one of the agreements and differences between two parties, with no reference to any other entity, it is of no importance whatever what the views of any third-party may be.
Keep on shouting out your theories as much as you like, by all means. It won't change the fact that they are false.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.07.22 20:30:00 -
[20]
I have said all that I need to say on the topic of this thread and as to the rather foolish attempts to draw us into the current argument, I only say that we are not the keepers of the Sani Sabik or the Ushra'Khan and that which is between them is none of our business.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
|
|
The Cosmopolite
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2007.07.24 18:00:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
Nobody from any of those three groups has provided evidence of a single overlap of substantive policies.
Simply false. I dealt with the issues at length early on in this discussion thread. There are points of overlap above and beyond opposition to the Amarrian regime and points of difference. I am not, however, going over this ground yet again when I have addressed it in detail already.
I do not intend to comment any further. This thread has degenerated into undignified prattle.
The Cosmopolite
The Star Fraction Communications Portal |
|
|
| |
|