Quizzes & Puzzles34 mins ago
Service Personel attacked at Olympics
48 Answers
http://
/// The MoD has refused to reveal how many attacks there have been on service personnel, who were forced to plug gaps in security at London 2012 after G4S failed to recruit enough security staff. ///
Why do they once again try too sweep these matters under the carpet?
The cowardly attack upon a service man, by a group of four Asian men happened on Monday 6 August, why has the news only just broke, had it had been an attack on a solitary Asian men by a gang of four soldiers, it would have been broadcast with vigour and disgust very much sooner.
/// The MoD has refused to reveal how many attacks there have been on service personnel, who were forced to plug gaps in security at London 2012 after G4S failed to recruit enough security staff. ///
Why do they once again try too sweep these matters under the carpet?
The cowardly attack upon a service man, by a group of four Asian men happened on Monday 6 August, why has the news only just broke, had it had been an attack on a solitary Asian men by a gang of four soldiers, it would have been broadcast with vigour and disgust very much sooner.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
"just because there are cretins about who think nothing of attacking homosexuals, Blacks, Whites, Asians, Jews etc, doesn't in anyway excuse these recent attacks on our Armed Forces. "
Nobody has said that they do.
"I wonder if those ABers who have took a negative approach on these attacks on our service personnel"
Who? Which ABers? If you're implying that there are posters on this thread who approve of the attacks on members of the army, then that's a very serious accusation and you ought to have the balls to prove it. Point me to a place where someone has 'taken a negative attitude to these attacks on our service personnel.'
Nobody has said that they do.
"I wonder if those ABers who have took a negative approach on these attacks on our service personnel"
Who? Which ABers? If you're implying that there are posters on this thread who approve of the attacks on members of the army, then that's a very serious accusation and you ought to have the balls to prove it. Point me to a place where someone has 'taken a negative attitude to these attacks on our service personnel.'
AOG
I think the following paragraph is a little counterintuitive:
"I wonder if those ABers who have took a negative approach on these attacks on our service personnel, would show them a little more support and respect if they themselves were to be holed up in a shopping precinct or such while these brave individuals put their own lives on the line to defuse an explosive devise?"
It seems to imply that those of us who have voiced concern over these attacks wouldn't show support and respect to the troops in the event of a terrorist attack.
I don't understand the thrust of your point.
To clarify...if a nurse had been brutally attacked on the way home from a hospital and some of us on AB had said, "That's disgraceful - hope they catch them perpetrators", it wouldn't make sense if you followed up with, "I hope that those who have voiced their repulsion are even more grateful for nurses the next time they need medical attention from them".
It just doesn't hang together correctly.
I think the following paragraph is a little counterintuitive:
"I wonder if those ABers who have took a negative approach on these attacks on our service personnel, would show them a little more support and respect if they themselves were to be holed up in a shopping precinct or such while these brave individuals put their own lives on the line to defuse an explosive devise?"
It seems to imply that those of us who have voiced concern over these attacks wouldn't show support and respect to the troops in the event of a terrorist attack.
I don't understand the thrust of your point.
To clarify...if a nurse had been brutally attacked on the way home from a hospital and some of us on AB had said, "That's disgraceful - hope they catch them perpetrators", it wouldn't make sense if you followed up with, "I hope that those who have voiced their repulsion are even more grateful for nurses the next time they need medical attention from them".
It just doesn't hang together correctly.
sp1814
/// It seems to imply that those of us who have voiced concern over these attacks wouldn't show support and respect to the troops in the event of a terrorist attack. ///
/// I don't understand the thrust of your point.///
To understand the thrust of my point please read the following sample of replies I have received to this thread, one actually from you, yourself.
/// Yeah, there's a lot of it about.///
/// Had they not been Asian would this have got a mention?
either in the telegraph or here? ///
/// So the facts, as they currently stand, point to isolated cases, and not really newsworthy or indicative of anything other than the fact that people can act aggressively to others. Hardly worthy of your usual rhetorical hyperbole...///
.
/// By the way - these attacks go on all time time, but it's usually gay men who end up with busted faces in hospital, not servicemen. ///
/// Not extremist leafleting? Oh, my the poor things must have been terrified! ///
/// Would you be so keen to have a go if it was squaddies going about their popular pass time of beating up civilians? ///
/// I just love the way you use conjecture to support your xenophobic views. ///
/// you think naval personnel are actually endangered by extremist leafleting? ///
/// Have there been many cases of terrorists leafleting before their attacks? ///
/// Auuurgh those cowardly cowards. It makes me soooo annnnngryyyyyyyy ///
All seem a negative approach to me, where is the support for our Service personnel?
/// It seems to imply that those of us who have voiced concern over these attacks wouldn't show support and respect to the troops in the event of a terrorist attack. ///
/// I don't understand the thrust of your point.///
To understand the thrust of my point please read the following sample of replies I have received to this thread, one actually from you, yourself.
/// Yeah, there's a lot of it about.///
/// Had they not been Asian would this have got a mention?
either in the telegraph or here? ///
/// So the facts, as they currently stand, point to isolated cases, and not really newsworthy or indicative of anything other than the fact that people can act aggressively to others. Hardly worthy of your usual rhetorical hyperbole...///
.
/// By the way - these attacks go on all time time, but it's usually gay men who end up with busted faces in hospital, not servicemen. ///
/// Not extremist leafleting? Oh, my the poor things must have been terrified! ///
/// Would you be so keen to have a go if it was squaddies going about their popular pass time of beating up civilians? ///
/// I just love the way you use conjecture to support your xenophobic views. ///
/// you think naval personnel are actually endangered by extremist leafleting? ///
/// Have there been many cases of terrorists leafleting before their attacks? ///
/// Auuurgh those cowardly cowards. It makes me soooo annnnngryyyyyyyy ///
All seem a negative approach to me, where is the support for our Service personnel?
AOG
I am not sure of you've got to the source of my dilemma.
When you refer to those who have taken a negative approach on these attacks, are you talking about those who have commented negatively to the story, or those who have challenged the point you are making (a key difference).
Also, why does my point that these kinds of attacks happen to gay men week in, week out constitute a negative response, when your original question implies that the attacks on the service men have been hushed up?
I was giving you an example of other sorts of attacks that don't get coverage in the national press - but this does not constitute evidence of some kind of conspiracy of silence.
I am not sure of you've got to the source of my dilemma.
When you refer to those who have taken a negative approach on these attacks, are you talking about those who have commented negatively to the story, or those who have challenged the point you are making (a key difference).
Also, why does my point that these kinds of attacks happen to gay men week in, week out constitute a negative response, when your original question implies that the attacks on the service men have been hushed up?
I was giving you an example of other sorts of attacks that don't get coverage in the national press - but this does not constitute evidence of some kind of conspiracy of silence.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.