How do you get from that tweet to the words I quoted? They are not even remotely the same thing.

If you can't hold an honest discussion then why are we here?

I asked you explicitly in Twitter "@mikeash two questions: 1) will you give your friends/family to the police if they don't file taxes? 2) did I threaten you for your beliefs?" https://twitter.com/oleganza/status/362954987661295616

You answered: "No, I wouldn't turn them in, but I believe such enforcement is necessary and overall good."

Before, in this thread I asked if you will turn me in, you answered:

"Yes, I would justify someone forcing you to pay taxes to fund the NSA in that case."

So my question was (quoting from above):

"why would you turn in police some people, but not your friends and family? It sounds to me that your morality is not universal at all, but just a whim."

How am I being dishonest here? Please answer what's the moral difference between turning me into police and not your family?

You never asked me if I would turn you in.

What does that mean, then:

"Yes, I would justify someone forcing you to pay taxes to fund the NSA in that case."

I simply don't understand how "justifying forcing me" is not the same as telling the police. If it is not, what's the moral difference for you?

Policing is, in general, justified. That doesn't mean I help them do it.

So you would be satisfied if police finds about unpaid taxes, but would not help them find out? Is that right?

What would "maximize your pleasure"? Not telling police and they don't extract taxes, or telling police and they do?

Yes, that's right.

You speak and comprehend English much better than I speak Russian. But I have to say that I don't speak Russian at all.