Censorship arrives in many forms. Note the move back to the topic.
"----generate endless verbiage and stretch sophistry to the point of obscenity and, like you----say nothing."
One form of censorship involves misdirection, mischaracterization, and attempts at libel, where the target of the libel may or may not suffer in any way as a direct result of the attempt at libel.
Note the repetitive claims where the one making the claim claims that subjective opinion is not subjective opinion, which is false as it is demonstrated as being false, or self-evident, or perhaps prima facie.
The actual content of the subjective opinion claimed to be factual is itself contradictory due to the willful choice (or routine repetition) of absolute terms such as "endless" and "nothing," which logically, and reasonably, are demonstrably not possible. And end is much more certain than "endless verbiage," and so long as at least one single individual responds to what was written, or said, then obviously something was written, or said, rather than nothing being said or written. Something had to be said in order for there to be a response of character assassination, libel, as exemplified with the false statement: "-say nothing."
If there is to be censorship, reasonably there is to be something to censor.
"Your careless use of the words "projection" and "transference" constitute an obscenity."
Censoring information that constitutes knowledge, such as an awareness of the often repeated processes known as projection and transference is likely, if someone were to gain, in some way, censorship of said information that constitutes knowledge. Who is likely to gain from censoring knowledge?
"The terms "projection" and "transference" have nothing to do with your vocation or avocation or profession should you have one."
The target of libel can be accurately identified as such, and on the other hand the character assassin creates more lies that attempt to construct a false version of the target; as exemplified well in the example above.
"It's ok---if you are a lawyer-----..."
Judge, jury, and executioner, all in one, acquits his or her imaginary subject of his or her interest?
"... careless use of the word 'genocide'..."
I care enough about the massive slaughter and torture of innocent lives to speak out against it even while other people prefer to censor the free exchange of the facts.
I am intrigued-----so you admit that the people today called "Palestinians" commit genocide against jews. As for your discussion of your
use of the terms "projection" and "transference" as being of a "subjective" nature-----statements I
interpret as a claim that you "feel" I demonstrate
the ego defense "projection" or you "feel" that I have developed the phenomenon of "transference" in discussion with you is quite a leap into utter nonsense. You have, simply, demonstrated that you use words that you do not quite understand. You must have some sort of contact with practictioners of law.
To what "MASSIVE slaughter and torture of
innocent lives" do you refer? The present situation in Syria or in Yemen?----Or is it IRAQ?