On Apr 23, 12:06 am, "parrthe...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <parrthe...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 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
|
