@failures art,
What's pretty simple is, one, that you are contradicting yourself: you here quote yourself as saying that we would do well not to assume anything (which has been what i've said all along), but in another post (EDIT: actually, in the same post), you say that your assumptions are justified. And, two, that you're fond of setting up one straw man after another. I have not said you dragged me into anything.
The entire scenario is that you alleged that these women (and you did specify a plural) were being pressured to drop their charges. So i addressed that, and only that, pointing out that of the two women, one had dropped her charges, and done so before the entire current bruhaha had started. I have since continually pointed out that we don't know what motivated her to drop those charges. Quickly abandoning the claim that charges were dropped because of pressure from Wikileaks supporters, you came up with some nebulous statement about women being intimidated in any case of an allegation of sexual misconduct, but later jumped right back on your own particular little bandwagon, implying once again that these women are being pressured by supporters of Assange and WikiLeaks. And it was at that time that you said you thought we could assume much (which was your expression of choice).
It is a straw man to throw up in my face any claims about these charges being politically motivated because of people being out to get Assange--i have not said as much, nor was that any part of the discussion i initiated to the effect that one woman had withdrawn the charges before the current flap commenced. It is a straw man to attempt to imply that i've said you dragged me in to anything. I have made no such complaint, and fully acknowledge that i initiated this particular disagreement--
because you are making assumptions for which you have no evidence, which has been the only point i have been arguing.
I don't give a rat's ass what anyone else in this thread has alleged, that's no part of my beef with the nonsense you're trying to peddle. In your post which you have linked, you say both:
Quote:We aren't privy to the circumstances, so we shouldn't assume anything about the allegations legitimacy.
AND . . .
Quote:Bottom line, we should be assuming much about either Assange or these women.
Yeah, it's simple--you need to get your story straight. In subsequent posts, you both attempt to defend your remark to the effect that we should be assuming much, and to reject the notion that we should assume anything (which has been my position right along). You're all over the road on this one.
So, as i have all along, i object that you have no basis for suggesting that these women are being intimidated by supporters of Assange and WikiLeaks. Telling me what somebody else has said to the effect that their charges were politically motivated by opponents of WikiLeaks has nothing to do with that--it's a straw man.
You're really bad at this kind of debate, you know?
), then please post it.
