[Avoiding_Sulla]

(Continuing my analysis of NL's tactics as he teaches us all what we are up against.)

Also in post #63, NL's second & third errors are compound ones. Here NL asserts that 1) Terri is in misery, and that 2) we who defend her life delight in her misery.

"It seems that many here take great delight in trying to sustain Terri Schiavo's misery. "

This is NL's tribute to the smarminess of our opponents. You must congratulate him in his verisimilitude of their performance.

Several of you protested the misery, but as far as I saw, didn't contest his assertion of sadistic behavior. Then NL repeated it at #93, and complained of you all calling him names. Now, wasn't that precious? He assigns sadism to our motives from his very first appearance (#63) and then complains of him being labeled himself -- he has got the trolling pattern of our opponents down pat. He's trying his hardest to get you to notice by repeating it, silly people. So? Notice already!

At 99, tigerseye call NL on the misery question in #93, but adds the term "know" -- and then at #103 NL takes advantage of this addition to deny his two previous assertions (at 63 & 93). Yes, we know he did assert that Terri is in misery, but no, he didn't assert that he "knows Terri is in misery."

Also at #93, he throws in a second ad hominem in addition to the sadism charge -- seeing us as the reverse of "kind souls." Great job NL. Very hard to distinguish these words from Barbara Boxer's.

NL did this for our benefit tigerseye. Please thank NL appropriately. (To be continued)--- regarding the way at #123 NL dismissed concern over Michael's motives while accepting from the start his unconfirmed witnessing of Terri's choice of treatment under these circumstances. Stay tuned.

NL is simply a goldmine. Keep digging.

[Normally a Lurker]

Most of the things you've addressed in your "complex analyis" of my various comments deal with comments made by me in response to irrelevant issues raise by those on your side of thgis issue.

Yet you have avoided the central/main issue.

If I, having expressed that I don't want to exist in circumstances such as Terri is in, found myself in such circumstances, whould you seek to artifically keep me alive?

That is, would you consider that your views, opinions, beliefs, wishes etc. should override my wishes regarding myself?

[TigersEye]

At 99, tigerseye call NL on the misery question in #93, but adds the term "know" -- and then at #103 NL takes advantage of this addition to deny his two previous assertions (at 63 & 93). Yes, we know he did assert that Terri is in misery, but no, he didn't assert that he "knows Terri is in misery."

Excellent work, my FRiend!