T W A U ... The Chase....today's...
Film, Media & TV1 min ago
What Do You Think?
Answers
Perhaps saying "All we need is love" is why John Lennon was shot.
21:35 Sun 23rd Aug 2015
Naomi - "andy-hughes, you may not want to hear it, but I'll say it anyway. Your attitude invites it."
I hear it - but I don't agree with it.
I am not the one who has been suspended for nasty remarks, I am not the one who has had threads pulled because they disintegrate.
I was here before retrocop arrived, and I'll be here after he has gone - I've dealt with far worse. The attitude of him and his posse are water off the proverbial duck's back - so I am glad to be free of his constant digging.
Onwards ...
I hear it - but I don't agree with it.
I am not the one who has been suspended for nasty remarks, I am not the one who has had threads pulled because they disintegrate.
I was here before retrocop arrived, and I'll be here after he has gone - I've dealt with far worse. The attitude of him and his posse are water off the proverbial duck's back - so I am glad to be free of his constant digging.
Onwards ...
Naomi - "You need to listen to other people - seriously. "
If by 'other people' you mean the two or three who are obsessed with personal attacks, digs, and overall nastiness - I'll pass thanks.
These two or three represent a vocal, but tiny minority of the AB as a whole - the rest of whom I have no trouble with, and they have no troube with me.
It cannot be coincidence that I have not seen anything like as many threads pulled as have been since this little group arrived - but since I am removing myself from their theatre of malice, they will hopefully fade away - although I notice that SP1814 is robustly echoing my sentiments exactly on the 'Transgender' thread - maybe he is also at fault?
If by 'other people' you mean the two or three who are obsessed with personal attacks, digs, and overall nastiness - I'll pass thanks.
These two or three represent a vocal, but tiny minority of the AB as a whole - the rest of whom I have no trouble with, and they have no troube with me.
It cannot be coincidence that I have not seen anything like as many threads pulled as have been since this little group arrived - but since I am removing myself from their theatre of malice, they will hopefully fade away - although I notice that SP1814 is robustly echoing my sentiments exactly on the 'Transgender' thread - maybe he is also at fault?
andy-hughes
// More unfounded supposition. ///
/// It is exactly that. As I pointed out, you have no reason to presume that this woman is going to be a burden on the Benefits system ///
And you have no evidence whatsoever that this woman if allowed back into this country will not be a burden on the benefits system, for starters she will automatically be able to claim child Allowance.
/// it simply suits your default position that all ISIS supporters must be wastrels and scroungers - because that is the inference you give whenever you post about them - ///
And doesn't it also suit your default position that all ISIS supporters are potential hard working, peace-loving people who have just temporary gone off the rails, but can soon be coaxed back on track with a little gentle understanding?
/// but, and this is my point - in this individual case, you have no evidence whatsoever, so it is not a valid point. ///
And neither have you any evidence that anything you have said is fact, so consequently also not a valid point.
/// You just cannot dismiss valid points by simply just dismissing them in such a way. ///
Who apart from Andy-Hughes believes them to be valid points?
// More unfounded supposition. ///
/// It is exactly that. As I pointed out, you have no reason to presume that this woman is going to be a burden on the Benefits system ///
And you have no evidence whatsoever that this woman if allowed back into this country will not be a burden on the benefits system, for starters she will automatically be able to claim child Allowance.
/// it simply suits your default position that all ISIS supporters must be wastrels and scroungers - because that is the inference you give whenever you post about them - ///
And doesn't it also suit your default position that all ISIS supporters are potential hard working, peace-loving people who have just temporary gone off the rails, but can soon be coaxed back on track with a little gentle understanding?
/// but, and this is my point - in this individual case, you have no evidence whatsoever, so it is not a valid point. ///
And neither have you any evidence that anything you have said is fact, so consequently also not a valid point.
/// You just cannot dismiss valid points by simply just dismissing them in such a way. ///
Who apart from Andy-Hughes believes them to be valid points?
Talbot - "andy-hughes
I am not the one who has been suspended for nasty remarks.
And therein lies a problem for ordinary AB users, mods don't get suspended...do they?."
I would suggest that they do - but I have no way of knowing - you'd need to take that up with the Editorial Team.
I am sure that if the Ed and associates felt that any moderator was behaving inappropriately, they would advise them accordingly, and maybe even remove their mod status?
Again, I don't know - but I would not appreciate thinking that I was in any way exempt from the rules governing the site, and I do not believe that I am.
I am not the one who has been suspended for nasty remarks.
And therein lies a problem for ordinary AB users, mods don't get suspended...do they?."
I would suggest that they do - but I have no way of knowing - you'd need to take that up with the Editorial Team.
I am sure that if the Ed and associates felt that any moderator was behaving inappropriately, they would advise them accordingly, and maybe even remove their mod status?
Again, I don't know - but I would not appreciate thinking that I was in any way exempt from the rules governing the site, and I do not believe that I am.
Naomi - "andy-hughes, I told you a long time ago that your reputation here is in jeopardy."
I am not so arrogant as to think I have a 'reputation' on here Naomi - so I fail to see why you would think that I have - jeopardised or otherwise.
You ignored me then and you're ignoring everyone else who is telling you the same thing."
Apart from yourself, the rest of the people 'telling me the same thing' are intent on a personal battle on every thread, which I have now called a halt to, so that no longer applies. Apart from that, I would not believe them if they told me the day of the week had a 'y' in it.
"My advice to you to listen to other people is kindly meant."
Thank you - but for reasons outlined, I will not be taking that advice.
I am not so arrogant as to think I have a 'reputation' on here Naomi - so I fail to see why you would think that I have - jeopardised or otherwise.
You ignored me then and you're ignoring everyone else who is telling you the same thing."
Apart from yourself, the rest of the people 'telling me the same thing' are intent on a personal battle on every thread, which I have now called a halt to, so that no longer applies. Apart from that, I would not believe them if they told me the day of the week had a 'y' in it.
"My advice to you to listen to other people is kindly meant."
Thank you - but for reasons outlined, I will not be taking that advice.
AOG - "andy-hughes
// More unfounded supposition. ///
/// It is exactly that. As I pointed out, you have no reason to presume that this woman is going to be a burden on the Benefits system ///
And you have no evidence whatsoever that this woman if allowed back into this country will not be a burden on the benefits system, for starters she will automatically be able to claim child Allowance."
No argument there, except to say that if as I have suggested, and it is only a suggestion because neither of us know the facts here - if she has paid into the system, she is entitled to the benefits, should she require them.
" /// it simply suits your default position that all ISIS supporters must be wastrels and scroungers - because that is the inference you give whenever you post about them - ///
And doesn't it also suit your default position that all ISIS supporters are potential hard working, peace-loving people who have just temporary gone off the rails, but can soon be coaxed back on track with a little gentle understanding? "
Absolutely not, and I don't believe I have ever given that impression. If you feel I have, please allow me to state for the record that I regard IS militants as a bunch of twisted murdering bandit scum who are an utter waste of oxygen.
But we have to be pragmatic about this.
Not matter how loathesome they are - and they are, no doubt about that - they do represent a very real threat to the safety of the west, and as such, we should endeavour to try and deal with them by means other than military action.
History has proved beyond doubt that armed combat merely strengthens their belief that they are right and we are wrong, they are Jihadists, they believe their cause is backed by their faith - you cannot fight against an enemy like that./
/// but, and this is my point - in this individual case, you have no evidence whatsoever, so it is not a valid point. ///
And neither have you any evidence that anything you have said is fact, so consequently also not a valid point. "
Again no argument - shall we agree that each of our positions are equally valid - or invalid, since we do not have evidence and are merely exchanging view points.
/// You just cannot dismiss valid points by simply just dismissing them in such a way. ///
Who apart from Andy-Hughes believes them to be valid points? "
Well, anyone who does not agree with me is entirely welcome to post a view, and we can discuss it - that is the essence of the section I think.
// More unfounded supposition. ///
/// It is exactly that. As I pointed out, you have no reason to presume that this woman is going to be a burden on the Benefits system ///
And you have no evidence whatsoever that this woman if allowed back into this country will not be a burden on the benefits system, for starters she will automatically be able to claim child Allowance."
No argument there, except to say that if as I have suggested, and it is only a suggestion because neither of us know the facts here - if she has paid into the system, she is entitled to the benefits, should she require them.
" /// it simply suits your default position that all ISIS supporters must be wastrels and scroungers - because that is the inference you give whenever you post about them - ///
And doesn't it also suit your default position that all ISIS supporters are potential hard working, peace-loving people who have just temporary gone off the rails, but can soon be coaxed back on track with a little gentle understanding? "
Absolutely not, and I don't believe I have ever given that impression. If you feel I have, please allow me to state for the record that I regard IS militants as a bunch of twisted murdering bandit scum who are an utter waste of oxygen.
But we have to be pragmatic about this.
Not matter how loathesome they are - and they are, no doubt about that - they do represent a very real threat to the safety of the west, and as such, we should endeavour to try and deal with them by means other than military action.
History has proved beyond doubt that armed combat merely strengthens their belief that they are right and we are wrong, they are Jihadists, they believe their cause is backed by their faith - you cannot fight against an enemy like that./
/// but, and this is my point - in this individual case, you have no evidence whatsoever, so it is not a valid point. ///
And neither have you any evidence that anything you have said is fact, so consequently also not a valid point. "
Again no argument - shall we agree that each of our positions are equally valid - or invalid, since we do not have evidence and are merely exchanging view points.
/// You just cannot dismiss valid points by simply just dismissing them in such a way. ///
Who apart from Andy-Hughes believes them to be valid points? "
Well, anyone who does not agree with me is entirely welcome to post a view, and we can discuss it - that is the essence of the section I think.
Baldric - "/// Apart from that, I would not believe them if they told me the day of the week had a 'y' in it.///
and that in all fairness is a large part of the problem!"
I don't think that refusing to believe people who show themselves out to cause trouble and attack any AB'er personally on a sustained basis is anything of a problem.
People I respect I listen to.
and that in all fairness is a large part of the problem!"
I don't think that refusing to believe people who show themselves out to cause trouble and attack any AB'er personally on a sustained basis is anything of a problem.
People I respect I listen to.
andy-hughes
/// Getting out would be the priority, not apportioning degrees of acceptance based on the label on the bombs you are trying to avoid! ///
The people who stood by this country during WW2, did not enjoy the option of fleeing back to another country, when they had bombs raining down upon their heads.
So why should a 'traitor' to this country enjoy the safety of this country, when her preferred chosen country, begins to receive some flack?
/// Getting out would be the priority, not apportioning degrees of acceptance based on the label on the bombs you are trying to avoid! ///
The people who stood by this country during WW2, did not enjoy the option of fleeing back to another country, when they had bombs raining down upon their heads.
So why should a 'traitor' to this country enjoy the safety of this country, when her preferred chosen country, begins to receive some flack?
vetuste - "At the moment poor Andy's heavily outnumbered by us knuckle-draggers. Where are all your mates today, Andy?"
Unlike 'you knuckle draggers', to use your own phrase - I am perfectly able to defend myself, I don't depend on safety in numbers.
I am sure all my 'mates' are aware of that - which is why the attackers always post en masse, and others do not.
Unlike 'you knuckle draggers', to use your own phrase - I am perfectly able to defend myself, I don't depend on safety in numbers.
I am sure all my 'mates' are aware of that - which is why the attackers always post en masse, and others do not.
AOG - "andy-hughes
/// Getting out would be the priority, not apportioning degrees of acceptance based on the label on the bombs you are trying to avoid! ///
The people who stood by this country during WW2, did not enjoy the option of fleeing back to another country, when they had bombs raining down upon their heads."
Comparing our situation with IS to the war is comparing oranges with lemons - apart from an enemy to be dealt with, the remainder of the circumstances are a universe apart.
" So why should a 'traitor' to this country enjoy the safety of this country, when her preferred chosen country, begins to receive some flack?"
I suggest that your view is an over-simplification based on - as I assume we have agreed - no actual factual evidence.
I am not aware that this woman has personally elected to fight for IS - only that her husband is a supporter, but he is not the subject of the discussion.
And at the risk of sounding like a broken record, if this woman has British citizenship, and I don't know if she has or not, but for the sake of argument - if she has, then this is her country, and she is entitled to return to it.
You may have issued of morality over that situation - and to be clear, I do too - but that is still the law.
/// Getting out would be the priority, not apportioning degrees of acceptance based on the label on the bombs you are trying to avoid! ///
The people who stood by this country during WW2, did not enjoy the option of fleeing back to another country, when they had bombs raining down upon their heads."
Comparing our situation with IS to the war is comparing oranges with lemons - apart from an enemy to be dealt with, the remainder of the circumstances are a universe apart.
" So why should a 'traitor' to this country enjoy the safety of this country, when her preferred chosen country, begins to receive some flack?"
I suggest that your view is an over-simplification based on - as I assume we have agreed - no actual factual evidence.
I am not aware that this woman has personally elected to fight for IS - only that her husband is a supporter, but he is not the subject of the discussion.
And at the risk of sounding like a broken record, if this woman has British citizenship, and I don't know if she has or not, but for the sake of argument - if she has, then this is her country, and she is entitled to return to it.
You may have issued of morality over that situation - and to be clear, I do too - but that is still the law.
andy-hughes, //I am not so arrogant as to think I have a 'reputation' on here Naomi //
Come, come, if we’re going to discuss this let us not be disingenuous. You know full well that several of the more prolific and ‘long-serving’ members here, myself included, have acquired reputations of one sort or another, and you are no exception. Not only do you often post things in your own defence like “As people know I don’t do this or that….” - even though you clearly do "do this or that" when it suits you, but I've actually seen you describe yourself as the elder statesman of AnswerBank - and that was years ago.
Come, come, if we’re going to discuss this let us not be disingenuous. You know full well that several of the more prolific and ‘long-serving’ members here, myself included, have acquired reputations of one sort or another, and you are no exception. Not only do you often post things in your own defence like “As people know I don’t do this or that….” - even though you clearly do "do this or that" when it suits you, but I've actually seen you describe yourself as the elder statesman of AnswerBank - and that was years ago.
