> I'm thoroughly confused. You are indeed. > Drawing parallels between the way you attack the character I didn't attack the character, I only portayed the c

> I'm thoroughly confused. You are indeed. > Drawing parallels between the way you attack the character I didn't attack the character, I only portayed the character for who she is. No judgment attached, just the crude reality: she builds weapons for US military and uses a very aggressive and dehumanizing vocabulary. I would never use "remove" when referring to another human being, alive or dead. > It was my understanding that Stallman was imploring people to use a more accurate term in describing his friend's actions because he felt the other term invoked harsher connotations He was concerned that the term "sexual assault" would be disputable by critics. because legally and in layman's terms has a completely different connotations (people associate assault with physical violence, the law doesn't) > What does any of that have to do with what she said? I think it's interesting that a person who would like to "remove" other people ends up building weapons instead of schools for refugee kids.