Welcome to the Lounge

Shameel6-Dec-13 2:08

6-Dec-13 2:08

The point I wanted to make is that you support English rebels who indulged in armed resistance against unjust taxation but you label an armed resistance against apartheid as terrorism. I cannot see it as anything else other than bigotry and racism.

OriginalGriff6-Dec-13 2:15

OriginalGriff

6-Dec-13 2:15

He's a Troll - it doesn't have to make sense as long as it gets a response.
I've already had to invoke Godwin's Law, but he hasn't shut up...

Basically: Don't Feed The Troll! Laugh | :laugh:

Erudite_Eric6-Dec-13 2:32

6-Dec-13 2:32

Thats right, lable anyone whose opinions you disagree with a troll. Its so easy isnt it. Saves you from having to be tollerant.

OriginalGriff6-Dec-13 3:27

OriginalGriff

6-Dec-13 3:27

Correct: I am lacktoes inTrollerant.

Erudite_Eric6-Dec-13 2:16

6-Dec-13 2:16

There is a difference between a militia taking on an army and a terrorist killing civilians thorugh bombs.

I would have thought that quite obvious.

Shameel6-Dec-13 2:38

6-Dec-13 2:38

As I had already stated, one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. If you believe in their cause, they're militia/freedom fighters/armed resistance, otherwise, they're just terrorists.

Erudite_Eric6-Dec-13 2:58

6-Dec-13 2:58

once again, no, they arent the same, regardless of whether you believe in their cause or not.

Shameel6-Dec-13 3:07

6-Dec-13 3:07

Hate him and call him a terrorist all your life, the facts is that he will remain a hero and a warrior who played a major role in abolishing apartheid in SA and will be remembered and cherished for centuries to come.

Erudite_Eric6-Dec-13 3:33

6-Dec-13 3:33

See, thats where you are wromng. He was no 'warrior'.

While being anti racist is admirable, you cannot justify the murder of civilians in bringing about its end.

jschell6-Dec-13 12:36

6-Dec-13 12:36

Erudite_Eric wrote:
There is a difference between a militia taking on an army and a terrorist killing civilians thorugh bombs.

That is simplistic and not an apt analogy.

For starters civilians died and were threatened in the US civil war.
And military technology was significantly different then. If the US revolution had happened in the 1950s then it is very likely that more bombs would have been used.

jschell6-Dec-13 12:29

6-Dec-13 12:29

Shameel wrote:
I never knew unjust taxation was a greater crime than apartheid.

What specific part of apartheid do you think existed which did not have a counterpart in the early Americas?

Shameel6-Dec-13 21:15

6-Dec-13 21:15

Apartheid existed everywhere and still exists in many parts of the world, I did not deny that. The question here is if it acceptable to launch armed resistance against a government that systematically institutionalized and legalized apartheid.

jschell7-Dec-13 10:32

7-Dec-13 10:32

Shameel wrote:
Apartheid existed everywhere and still...

Which does nothing to address the specific statement that you made and to which I responded.

AGAIN which specific part of apartheid, some specific practice that occurred, which you know about and which you believe did NOT have a specific counter part in the early Americas?

Shameel8-Dec-13 0:29

8-Dec-13 0:29

jschell wrote:
AGAIN which specific part of apartheid, some specific practice that occurred, which you know about and which you believe did NOT have a specific counter part in the early Americas?

Did I ever deny that it did not exist in the Americas? I'm not sure why you're asking me this question.

jschell6-Dec-13 12:27

6-Dec-13 12:27

Chris Quinn wrote:
were terrorists who should have been hanged for treason.

Err...you do know that that was in fact a real possibility?

Chris Quinn8-Dec-13 20:25

Chris Quinn

8-Dec-13 20:25

Of course I do - and it should have happened! Mad | :mad:

=========================================================
I'm an optoholic - my glass is always half full of vodka.
=========================================================

Eddy Vluggen6-Dec-13 0:19

Eddy Vluggen

6-Dec-13 0:19

Erudite_Eric wrote:
So yeah, Martin Luther King he isnt, Bin Laden he is.

So lets keep things in perspective eh?

One man's terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.

For the record, I voted your post as abuse - de mortuis nil nisi bonum, at least today.

Bastard Programmer from Hell Suspicious | :suss:

If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]

Simon_Whale6-Dec-13 0:21

Simon_Whale

6-Dec-13 0:21

Had to google that bit of Latin, Well said Thumbs Up | :thumbsup:

Every day, thousands of innocent plants are killed by vegetarians.

Help end the violence EAT BACON

Erudite_Eric6-Dec-13 0:23

6-Dec-13 0:23

I am not speaking ill of the dead, merely pointing out the cras hypocrisy of the worlds leaders today. And anyone here who hero worships him.

And if you think thats abusive then you are a fool.

Eddy Vluggen6-Dec-13 0:31

Eddy Vluggen

6-Dec-13 0:31

Erudite_Eric wrote:
And if you think thats abusive then you are a fool.

Thank you, I'll wear that title with pride. It's abusive because you're merely making an issue out of it due to the emotional point that you don't like to ignore the fact that hero's and saint's do not exist by definition.

Bastard Programmer from Hell Suspicious | :suss:

If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]

Erudite_Eric6-Dec-13 1:18

6-Dec-13 1:18

What on earthis that supposed to mean?

I am abusive because I am emotionally NOT ignoring the fact saints dont exist?

How the hell does that work?

Eddy Vluggen6-Dec-13 6:21

Eddy Vluggen

6-Dec-13 6:21

Erudite_Eric wrote:
What on earthis that supposed to mean?

It's supposed to be an explanation on why I gave a harsh vote, for what looks like a rational remark in the lounge. I'm not good at explaining stuff.

Your only reason to make an issue out of it, is because you find it unfair that he is being treated as a hero. On his dying day.

Your reason is based on emotion; something "feels" unfair.

Rationally, there are no saints, no hero's. We're all (mostly) human.

Further, news has the tendency to be dramatized; it does not merely snow, it storms. The Dow does not go down half a point, it crashes to it's "weekly low". PC sales do not simply slump without anyone asking if it's the end of the desktop (or Microsoft) era.

I had the choice between marking it as spam or abuse; it's certainly not spam, but it shouldn't be in the lounge either - not today. Had you made your point any other day, I'd simply ignore it - but not on his dying day. So 'abuse', since it would be offensive for some readers.

Bastard Programmer from Hell Suspicious | :suss:

If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]