OT - Manchester again.

[swaledale]

So you?re saying it?s ok for folk to cause terror / break the law so long as they say they?re going to do so? Nice one Swale

NO and that's perfectly clear in my whole post, although clearly either your comprehension skills are lacking or you interpret what you read to align with your own dogma and blinkered thinking.

[swaledale]

yet you happily lauded Kirk's assassaination since you didnt agree with his actions....

No I ****ing didn't, I merely said I saw no reason to respect the man now he is dead, when I didn't respect him before.

That's repeating what's been pushed out by the right wing and MAGA lot in the US and Kimmel who was "cancelled" but now happily is back on air didn't "laud" Kirk's death either just made an observation that was fundamentally true.

[ramAnag]

I realise that was aimed at rA but I decided to read #35.

There's nothing in there lauding or applauding Kirk's death. No wallowing in it either.

Respect is earned, Swale is of the opinion Kirk didn't garner respect when alive so why give it to him in death? There will be people close to him that genuinely loved him, what we saw of him was a public aura of which there's not much to be proud, IMO. Was the private aura different? We'll never know.

That's my take on #35. I'd like to understand what it is in #35 that you want rA to re-read and contextualise?

Me too! Entirely agree. Unfortunately it is a repeated strategy of some on here to exaggerate and misrepresent.
Swale has neither lauded nor wallowed in Kirk’s death. He’s suggested that the fact that someone has died shouldn’t alter one’s opinion of them and, imo, he’s quite right.
Those who feel the need to misrepresent have usually lost the argument in my experience.

[Andy_Faber]

NO and that's perfectly clear in my whole post, although clearly either your comprehension skills are lacking or you interpret what you read to align with your own dogma and blinkered thinking.

What?s clear is you got caught out.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Me too! Entirely agree. Unfortunately it is a repeated strategy of some on here to exaggerate and misrepresent.
Swale has neither lauded nor wallowed in Kirk’s death. He’s suggested that the fact that someone has died shouldn’t alter one’s opinion of them and, imo, he’s quite right.
Those who feel the need to misrepresent have usually lost the argument in my experience.

Glad you've recovered from your arduous drive back from holidays (?) and good to see you nestled in the back seat again 😃😃

[ramAnag]

Glad you've recovered from your arduous drive back from holidays (?) and good to see you nestled in the back seat again ����

Thanks, but you really are odd. You and AF constantly and consistently agree with/support each other but no one is infantile enough to mention rear seat/rear gunner etc, yet every time I agree with Swale you reach for the same tedious and childish response.
You’ve said nothing about MA, who reached exactly the same conclusion, but it’s Swale and rA so, in your head, I must be just acting in his defence.

It’s nothing to do with that. Yes, Swale and I - and MA, mac and Sith for that matter - often agree politically, while you, AF and TTR - if he can tear himself away from all things Thai - tend to adopt an opposite stance. That is kind of what happens in arguments and debates so don’t be surprised if and when you get called out for fabricating and misrepresenting others. If you talk bollux and say things that are simply untrue you - and anyone else - are likely to get shot down in flames…and not just by me.

[MadAmster]

Thanks, but you really are odd. You and AF constantly and consistently agree with/support each other but no one is infantile enough to mention rear seat/rear gunner etc, yet every time I agree with Swale you reach for the same tedious and childish response.
You’ve said nothing about MA, who reached exactly the same conclusion, but it’s Swale and rA so, in your head, I must be just acting in his defence.

It’s nothing to do with that. Yes, Swale and I - and MA, mac and Sith for that matter - often agree politically, while you, AF and TTR - if he can tear himself away from all things Thai - tend to adopt an opposite stance. That is kind of what happens in arguments and debates so don’t be surprised if and when you get called out for fabricating and misrepresenting others. If you talk bollux and say things that are simply untrue you - and anyone else - are likely to get shot down in flames…and not just by me.

Simply understood what was written. Nothing special.

[Andy_Faber]

Thanks, but you really are odd. You and AF constantly and consistently agree with/support each other but no one is infantile enough to mention rear seat/rear gunner etc, yet every time I agree with Swale you reach for the same tedious and childish response.
You’ve said nothing about MA, who reached exactly the same conclusion, but it’s Swale and rA so, in your head, I must be just acting in his defence.

It’s nothing to do with that. Yes, Swale and I - and MA, mac and Sith for that matter - often agree politically, while you, AF and TTR - if he can tear himself away from all things Thai - tend to adopt an opposite stance. That is kind of what happens in arguments and debates so don’t be surprised if and when you get called out for fabricating and misrepresenting others. If you talk bollux and say things that are simply untrue you - and anyone else - are likely to get shot down in flames…and not just by me.

I think we are all too far into these debates not to have each revealed personal tactics/quirks which can be exploited, some fairly, some not, by others (and yes, myself included). I think you?ve just got to put your big boy pants on (or Swales-damn, there I go again) and take it as part of the game.

[ramAnag]

Simply understood what was written. Nothing special.

Indeed. Sadly something that appears beyond one or two as, unfortunately, AF’s latest foolish response confirms.

If you’ve got a point, make it…if you’ve got to make stuff up you probably haven’t got a point to make.

[Geoff Parkstone]