Works both ways though, Mr. P and thus gets us nowhere.
Personally I thought your comment about sinking boats was the most tasteless and offensive of the lot, but then you’d probably say you were just joking or, in AF speak, ‘just joshing rA’ (again!).
Either way I fear we’re getting into dangerous territory...Swale has taken OTR at his - ‘I say it as I see it’ - word and replied in the same vein, while AF seems to be implying that allowances need to be made...possibly because OTR would appear to be the forum’s ‘senior’ contributor.
The first a tad ruthless...the second, rather patronising...perhaps.
I guess that ultimately it’s a case of, ‘if you live by the sword, you’ll die by the sword’.
P.S. Possibly something to be discussed elsewhere...I wonder how much you actually stand by your ‘I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it’ philosophy. Seems to be one of your favourites but it doesn’t actually stand much scrutiny imo.
Last edited by ramAnag; 31-03-2023 at 11:55 AM.
Not at all. OTR makes what I’d call an impassioned statement (or series of) from what appears to be a more ‘connected’ POV than the rest of us. He expresses empathy for the people dragged into this and appears to be more concerned at the lack of respect afforded what he considers a sacred place. He asks a valid question relating to the route into U.K. and responsibility of other countries. He also suggests that those who served there might be (my words) a bit confused about the U.K. they came across if they were somehow reincarnated in Scampton post it’s proposed re use. I’m aware of many including a much younger (than me) guy I work with (ex forces) who believe similar so I didn’t think age was relevant to OTR’s comments.
Edit: ‘take your pills dear’ is crudely disguised ageism, do you agree?
Last edited by Andy_Faber; 31-03-2023 at 12:14 PM.
Yes, I think it is. Equally I’d question your ‘I don’t think you’ve quite read the room’ quip and wonder why you didn’t pick up on GP’s ‘sink the boats’ comment so quickly or indeed...at all?
As regards OTR...I may have been kinder than Swale, but I repeat, isn’t it a case of living and dying by the sword or, if you prefer, ‘if you can’t stand the heat...’
Self evidently what you’ve said about GP’s comment is true...though I’m not sure what your point is.
‘...wasn’t one of a multiple similar posts posted on a number of threads at roughly the same time’. Sorry, AF, I’m really not sure what that even means, who you’re talking about or, again, what your point is.
I'm afraid AF frequently fails to make his point clear, but whatever he is burbling on about, lets be clear, I've not called anyone names, sworn at anyone, I've responded to what for me was an ill judged, ignorant and offensive rant with simple sarcasm.
If AF or anybody else is offended by that then tough in my view.
Get it right! It was completely obviously a discriminatory comment against somebody who is displaying all the signs of a mental illness!
I any case it was an ill informed rant by somebody who is alleging that those brave souls who fought in the last war, against a regime that was actively targeting migrants and people deemed as foreigners would be somehow upset that a redundant military accommodation was being used to house people fleeing from war and threats of violence.
I rather think they would approve of some use being made of outdated unwanted facilities to provide housing for refugees!
He also deliberately used the name of Gibson's dog to as an ill disguised racist attack on the refugees. it is accepted that 60 plus years ago social attitudes were different, but we have moved on, though clearly there are many who seem unable to do that and thats sad.
But if they are entitled to have a rant on this Forum, then I'm entitled to make a sarcastic remark and if that gets up your nose Pops, well so be it!