:
BETTERING BOT

We wrote, as quoted by Greg Kennedy: "I was
right to condemn a few days back the ready habit to
employ a U.S. court action to condemn automatically
parents for what they may or may not be doing. In
this instance, Sam probably unwittingly adopted the
same tactic that several people on this and other forums
employed against him when he 'kidnapped' his daughter."

That adds up to: TWO WRONGS ARE TWO WRONGS.

Responds our Greg, "The old two-wrongs-make-a-right fallacy.
If Mr. Sloan was [sic] wrong, let's just own up to it." (Greg needs
to learn the subjunctive.)

Our claim was the precise opposite of Greg's
mendacious assertion, though it's possible he could
not think his way through the disputation and wasn't lying.

In our exchanges with Taylor Kingston, we have
been citing several historical works. The purpose was
less to inform Kingston than to provide the beginnings
of a reading list for Greg Kennedy. Thus far, of the
many book titles that we adduced, the work that he
might turn to is Vera Brittain's "Testament of Youth"
for a beginning of his education about the 20th century.
A while back we mentioned Max Beerbohm's "Zuleika
Dobson" an elegantly penned novel that appeared
in 1911, the same year as the Britannica's famous
11th edition.

Our first assignment to Greg, if he were of a
mind to improve himself, would be to compare and
contrast the civilizational assumptions to be found in
Brittain's memoir and Beerbohm's novel -- thence to
read the entry on civilization and progress in the
Britannica's 11th edition. That would constitute a
beginning for understanding the intellectual
consequences of World War I -- consequencs that would
work themselves out in politics and concrete human
suffering over the next seven or so decades.

Someone suggested that we begin first with
Barbara Tuchman's "Proud Tower" before assigning
primary source material to Greg. We respectfully
disagree. Give him an initial dip in primary
materials, and he will be better equipped to handle
Tuchman's synthesizing history. Whereupon, we
immerse the man once again in primary sources.

Agreed?

Yours, Larry Parr





help bot wrote:
On Apr 23, 12:06 am, " wrote:

If Paul Truong's statement is accurate -- and I
think the chances are high that it is

Note the lies, fabrications and misrepresentations
on the SP Web site-- could these be the handiwork
of the same man upon whose testimony LP is now
relying?


-- then I was
right to condemn a few days back the ready habit to
employ a U.S. court action to condemn automatically
parents for what they may or may not be doing.

In this instance, Sam probably unwittingly
adopted the same tactic that several people on this
and other forums employed against him when he
"kidnapped" his daughter.

The old two-wrongs-make-a-right fallacy. If Mr.
Sloan was wrong, let's just own up to it.


My point earlier was that it was morally
dangerous to pry through the written word into the
lives of families without a full knowledge of
circumstances and hard facts. I noted that EVEN IF
the Tabasco charge were true and acted upon by an
American court, there was likely far more to the story.

That's not what I read; what I read was a sort of
dissertation on Libertarian values, with an extra bit
thrown in for good measure, about how it was okay
to hot-sauce children because after all, they do it
in Asia.


In this instance, it appears that the basic
charge, regardless of familial circumstances, was
untrue. That Mr. Truong waited until he had his ducks
properly lined up to respond suggests both a strong
human spirit on his and Susan Polgar's part and a
surprising degree of professionalism.

It would greatly surprise me if the creators of the
horror that is SP's Web site could somehow manage
to get even two ducks in a row.


I am not at all sure that I could have kept my cool
and my keyboard quiet until the correct moment, had I
been in his position.

I would say that it is a near certainty that LP could
not keep his cool; instead, he would very likely fire
off some ad hominem "hot sauce" fireballs.


-- help bot