Terminological inexactitudes and Wakeup

What ever happened to Zanzibar? He was captain of the debate team. Originally Posted by YummyMarie

Now this is too funny. All this other shit, "YAWN"

NOBODY FUCKING CARES

NOBODY FUCKING CARES Originally Posted by looking2havefun

Not true........the limey cares..........a lot

I believe she said "White and Hispanic"...not White Hispanic
To WU, Hispanic=Mexican....so he is thinking the girl is White/Mexican therefore mixed

So like I said, it's a gray area...or in this case, light brownish/off-white area...

Y'all fight over the strangest shit.

Smh...Y'all don't have nothing else to talk about other than that jabroni?

A terminological inexactitude is a phrase first used by Winston Churchill (who had a US mother), and which has subsequently become a euphemism for a lie.

Wakeup has been proven to use a lie in a recent thread, and the subject under debate is the extent to which this has been a feature of his contributions on eccie, and the extent to which they are acceptable in these fora.

The proof his recent lie is as follows:

Quote by OP :

I'm hispanic/white. It says Caucasian because I am.

Quote by Wakeup

I did read it. It says she's Caucasian. She admits she's not.

Quote by Wakeup

My reason for propagating it is that there is no falsehood in my statement. She has admitted that she's Mixed, not Caucasian...I thought that was made clear earlier...

So Wakeup made the initial lie, and then compounded the offense by following up with a further lie.

How many lies has Wakeup can be proven, and are there any other clear, non contentious, occasions when he has been found guilty of lies?

I'm afraid I am old school, lies lead to the downfall of western civilization. I don't give a toss about Wakeup, but i do give a toss about lies. Originally Posted by essence

Essence,
WU/Everlast exists to draw attention and drive clicks. That is is his sole purpose, your point means nothing to him.
Like most STD's education is the best way to eradicate.


R Duke

What was the point of this thread ?

To point out that Wakeup won't fuck mescan whores.......not even part caucasian ones.

Everybody continues to miss the point. It is irrelevant whether or not she is Caucasian, or what the interpretation of Caucasian means.

What if the conversation went this way:

Quote by OP :

I'm a patriotic American. It says I am not a communist because I am not.

Quote by Wakeup

I did read it. It says she's not a communist. She admits she is.

Quote by Wakeup

My reason for propagating it is that there is no falsehood in my statement. She has admitted that she's a communist, not a patriot...I thought that was made clear earlier...

In short, Wakeup states she admitted something which she did not. He is a liar.

Change the word to Muslim or Jewish and it gets worse.

Does that make it clearer? We all know many politicians are liars, what I don't understand is why people accept this. Do we want to go back to McCarthism?

Yes, I do care about calling out blatant liars.

So like I said, it's a gray area...or in this case, light brownish/off-white area... Originally Posted by YummyMarie

It is not a gray area, she said X, he said she admitted saying not X. A lie.

Semantics are a bitch to discern. Originally Posted by YummyMarie

With all due respect .....

"Semantics (from Ancient Greek: σημαντικός sēmantikós, "significant") is the study of meaning."

And you actually confirmed the "singular" characteristic of THE WORD when you concluded .... "Semantics" = "a bitch"!

"terminological exactitudes" ARE a bitch!~!!!!!!

I knew LL would chime in at some point with his expert incisive legal mind....

Let me try another couple of scenarios, to demonstrate it is nothing to do with whether the OP is caucasian or not.

Quote by OP :

I'm slim.

Quote by Wakeup

I did read it. She admits she is a whale.

Quote by Wakeup

My reason for propagating it is that there is no falsehood in my statement. She has admitted that she's a whale, not slim...I thought that was made clear earlier...

The crucial wording is 'she admits'. That is when he lies. Let me try another example:

Law officer stops car.

LE: what speed were you doing madam?
madam: i was not speeding.

A few months later in court:

LE: She admitted she was speeding

LE is lying, and is guilty of perjury, which is a very serious offence. Of course, LE lie all the time, in every country, but they get away with it because their lies are infrequently proven.

Now, if the driver had recorded the conversation, it may be a different matter.