Page 7 of 9
Posted: 11 Jul 2005, 10:59
by Izzy HaveMercy
Sorry. Back to happy mode now.
IZ.
Posted: 11 Jul 2005, 11:02
by Quiff Boy
Izzy HaveMercy wrote:Cimmerian wrote:Jesus Christ, I knew you lot could be a bunch of pedantic bastards but come on, even I knew what QB meant and I only lurk here!
Note his usage of the phrase "like that", proving that no he was not actually making a blanket statement at all. Far from it, he was making a very specific point, and one I'd agree with, that Mr Biscuits comment was crass, vulgar and bordering on the offensive. And in my opinion LazCorp’s attempt at wit merely detracted from the point QB was trying to make.
@ Mr Biscuit: are you really as much of an obnoxious wanker was your recent posts make you out to be? Or are you just going through a hard time in your personal life? I've not really enjoyed reading your posts in the last couple of weeks. Are you sure you aren't one of the resident trolls returned with an older ID?
I don't think "petty" enters into it. A comment like that would get you banned from some forums. Grow up.
You mean that you take offense at THIS:
Black Biscuit wrote: Correct me if I am wrong (yes, I don't mind being corrected if I am wrong) but I don't recall actually making any 'blanket statement'. Or is someone just being petty?
THAT comment makes you use the words "pedantic bastards", "crass", "vulgar", "offensive" and "obnoxious wanker"???
Either you are very easily offended, or you only frequent forums for little kids and pregnant women...
I made a lot of bad comments (and not only me), but YOUR comment on Black Biscuit's is the most offensive I've seen here in a year...
Tolerance is a virtue... sometimes.
IZ.
i suspect his comments were directed to the handlful of posts BB has made recently where he has spouted ill-considered, arrogant s**t.
or at least thats my interpretation of cimm's post.
i'm just glad to know someone else doesnt like reading that s**t.
Posted: 11 Jul 2005, 11:06
by Quiff Boy
Izzy HaveMercy wrote:Tolerance is a virtue... sometimes.
indeed. but being called petty for pointing out that a post was narrow minded, bigoted and full of s**t tends to make one feel not best disposed to virtuosity.
whatever. we all know where we standon this topic, i'm sure. and as such i think its run its course.
as a wise man once said, dont feed the troll.
Posted: 11 Jul 2005, 13:05
by Johnny M
Back on topic and it's not a topic I choose to return to lightly.
Kings Cross is still awash with TV crews from all the globe. I know the news needs to be reported but I do find it all rather morbid. And for the second time I was accosted for a TV intereview. And for the second time I politely refused though this time my 'f*ck off!' had slighlty more venom in it.
The makeshift shrine is growing daily. The flowers, the pictures, the cards, the candles. The wall is bedecked with the flags of many nations. The majority all bearing the same message,
We Are All London
Poignant stuff.
Posted: 11 Jul 2005, 13:24
by Eva
I do agree that the news need(ed) to cover it, but I also felt similarly when watching the recent news about it in German/Swissgerman tv: I had the distinct feeling they were very much relieved that they don't have to think of worthy reports now, during summer, when usually nothing important happens anyway, so they're stretching it, just like a soup where you add water for every pint of soup you've eaten.
On the other hands, the above is what all but a few tv broadcasters do all the time, wether it's about the garden keeper of the year or about Britney Spears' new pants...
Posted: 11 Jul 2005, 15:20
by CorpPunk
Don't be so glum! You haven't even got to my favorite part yet: the air-quality warnings!
Oh no asbestos! Oh no black lung!
Oh no your grandchildren are going to have two heads but only be half as smart!
Posted: 11 Jul 2005, 15:59
by Johnny M
Can you stop all this -->
<-- nonsense in open forum? God forbid that people actually start to think we're mates or summat?
* shudder *
Posted: 11 Jul 2005, 16:06
by CorpPunk
What makes you think that was aimed at you? I'm a bit of a kiss whore, I'll have you know. That one's for the highest bidder.
Posted: 11 Jul 2005, 16:13
by Johnny M
And there was me thinking that maybe it was another short hair and Docs moment and aimed at Eva.
I think in ebay parlance, at the end of your 'kiss auction', you may find 'no bids received' is the winner.
Posted: 11 Jul 2005, 16:16
by CorpPunk
That was really mean.
And untrue. At the very least I would bribe that one person who's pretending to be my friend to bid.
Posted: 11 Jul 2005, 16:18
by Quiff Boy
Posted: 11 Jul 2005, 16:21
by James Blast
Posted: 11 Jul 2005, 17:03
by Obviousman
Very
Another thing: The Belgian internal affairs minister had been to the London video surveillance central the day before, and there were articles in Belgian newspapers about its perfection the day before the attacks...
Posted: 11 Jul 2005, 19:11
by James Blast
Posted: 11 Jul 2005, 20:52
by eastmidswhizzkid
if we're going to talk "conspiracy theories" (if thats what we
are doing);apart from taking the heat off of g.w.bush's (lack of) enviromental commitments at the g8 -not to mention all the lovely new freedom-restricting laws that will ensue.id cards anybody?- would we (london) have still got the olympics if the bombing had happened two days before?i think not.
and another thing- the general election wasnt so long ago.if the intent was the same as is assumed with regard to madrid (ie influencing the electorate against involvement in iraq) why not then?
i dont know what i personally
believe in these matters;except that if you think "they"
wouldnt do it,perhaps you are as naive/ignorant/complacent as they need you to be.
Posted: 11 Jul 2005, 20:54
by James Blast
i just pass these links on
Posted: 12 Jul 2005, 08:29
by RicheyJames
not really. i'd imagine that any half-way competent "crisis management consultant" would have identified that an attack of this nature was a likely scenario (especially in the light of the madrid attack) and would, therefore, quite naturally be briefing their clients how to "manage" such a "crisis" on a regular basis.
there are no conspiracies. elvis is dead, the americans landed on the moon in 1969 and lee harvey oswald shot kennedy. eastmidswhizzkid: i think you need to lay off the pharmaceuticals.
Posted: 12 Jul 2005, 14:41
by eastmidswhizzkid
RicheyJames wrote:
not really. i'd imagine that any half-way competent "crisis management consultant" would have identified that an attack of this nature was a likely scenario (especially in the light of the madrid attack) and would, therefore, quite naturally be briefing their clients how to "manage" such a "crisis" on a regular basis.
there are no conspiracies. elvis is dead, the americans landed on the moon in 1969 and lee harvey oswald shot kennedy. eastmidswhizzkid: i think you need to lay off the pharmaceuticals.
conspiracy
theories ,
RJ.by their nature unproven,and therefore steadfastly rubbished by the close-minded.still,a pleasure as always....
Posted: 12 Jul 2005, 14:57
by RicheyJames
eastmidswhizzkid wrote:RicheyJames wrote:
not really. i'd imagine that any half-way competent "crisis management consultant" would have identified that an attack of this nature was a likely scenario (especially in the light of the madrid attack) and would, therefore, quite naturally be briefing their clients how to "manage" such a "crisis" on a regular basis.
there are no conspiracies. elvis is dead, the americans landed on the moon in 1969 and lee harvey oswald shot kennedy. eastmidswhizzkid: i think you need to lay off the pharmaceuticals.
conspiracy
theories ,
RJ.by their nature unproven,and therefore steadfastly rubbished by the close-minded.
pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate
i'd rather be a close-minded cynic than a credulous fool.
Posted: 12 Jul 2005, 15:33
by Izzy HaveMercy
Talking about conspiracy theories:
I just heard on Belgian radio that
police entered a house in Leeds where they thought they'd find evidence about the bombs.
There even was a 'controlled explosion'
Apparently no-one was home...
What are you UP to, Quiffy??
IZ.
Posted: 12 Jul 2005, 15:40
by RicheyJames
don't worry. a few explosions in the parts of leeds the police have sealed off (burley, beeston and holbeck) can only improve things.
Posted: 12 Jul 2005, 21:36
by eastmidswhizzkid
James Blast wrote:i just pass these links on
sorry
mr b. that was a general "you";not
you personally.
Posted: 12 Jul 2005, 21:48
by eastmidswhizzkid
RicheyJames wrote:eastmidswhizzkid wrote:RicheyJames wrote:
not really. i'd imagine that any half-way competent "crisis management consultant" would have identified that an attack of this nature was a likely scenario (especially in the light of the madrid attack) and would, therefore, quite naturally be briefing their clients how to "manage" such a "crisis" on a regular basis.
there are no conspiracies. elvis is dead, the americans landed on the moon in 1969 and lee harvey oswald shot kennedy. eastmidswhizzkid: i think you need to lay off the pharmaceuticals.
conspiracy
theories ,
RJ.by their nature unproven,and therefore steadfastly rubbished by the close-minded.
pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate
i'd rather be a close-minded cynic than a credulous fool.
fortunately,i'm neither.
quid quid latine dictum sit,altum videtur.
(did you go to public school?that would explain a lot.)
Posted: 12 Jul 2005, 22:21
by James Blast
eastmidswhizzkid wrote:(did you go to public school?that would explain a lot.)
it would explain his hair-do, if nothing else
Posted: 13 Jul 2005, 08:42
by RicheyJames
eastmidswhizzkid wrote:RicheyJames wrote:pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate
i'd rather be a close-minded cynic than a credulous fool.
fortunately,i'm neither.
quid quid latine dictum sit,altum videtur.
a fair point. it was a touch pretentious to quote the original latin but that doesn't make the point any less valid.
(did you go to public school?that would explain a lot.)
would it? would you be able to describe exactly what you think it might explain without resorting to crude stereotypes?
and, james, i don't have a hair-do, i just have hair.
