Boston Marathon: Is terrorism ever justified?

[scottycelt]

Well, you were seeking to portray Simon as a victim of "personal abuse" when all some of us were doing was asking him to define his terms (without which no reasonable debate is possible) and challenging his rather hectoring language.

And I'm sorry, Scotty, it is a form of intellectual bullying to refer to people as anarchists or hard left (or "extreme left" as you did) in such a wholly derogatory fashion, especially when you don't even know what the person's political philosophy is. Let's just assume that when someone expresses a negative view on, say, the actions of the Boston police, that happens to be what they think and not that they're fictitious anarchists seeking to undermine society, shall we? Until you or Simon do that you can never wholly avoid accusations of bullying.

And all I did was define 'anarchists' and 'extreme left' which was requested of Simon. I've never described any member here (or anyone else) as being an anarchist, or on the hard left. You are simply making things up as you go along, DavidP.

Best plan is to put Simon and myself on 'ignore' and then you don't need to feel 'bullied'. That's what the Ignore button is for ... I never use it myself and will certainly not put you or any other member on any ignore list. Personally, I relish the rich variety of opinion on a forum such as this one and consider that there are few things in life less interesting and rewarding than people who keep agreeing with me. Not that there is very much danger of that, here ... :winkeye:

However, if some members wish to use this Forum as a sort of Mutual Admiration Society, that's just fine, they can do exactly that without any complaint whatsoever from myself.

Sorted!

[Richard Barrett]

What's all this talk about bullying? Scottycelt knew full well before he posted them that his laughable "definitions" of anarchists and the "extreme left" were going to be described as the rubbish they are. Presumably he also knew that referring me to the Wikipedia article on the latter was going to make his description look even sillier. I don't really understand what drives people like scottycelt and Simon to post contentious nonsense and await the reactions, which almost inevitably bring discussion of the actual thread issue grinding to a halt, as they have in this case, or why accusations of "bullying" start flying around once this happens, I guess it's just another weirdness of internet interaction.

[scottycelt]

What's all this talk about bullying? Scottycelt knew full well before he posted them that his laughable "definitions" of anarchists and the "extreme left" were going to be described as the rubbish they are. Presumably he also knew that referring me to the Wikipedia article on the latter was going to make his description look even sillier. I don't really understand what drives people like scottycelt and Simon to post contentious nonsense and await the reactions, which almost inevitably bring discussion of the actual thread issue grinding to a halt, as they have in this case, or why accusations of "bullying" start flying around once this happens, I guess it's just another weirdness of internet interaction.

The usual fiction from the usual source.

It was a single member who asked the question of Simon, whom, it would appear, sensibly declined to answer as he knew his response would be deliberately distorted as my own has been.

I was stupid enough to answer the question.

Let's just leave it at that.

[amateur51]

The usual fiction from the usual source.

It was a single member who asked the question of Simon, whom, it would appear, sensibly declined to answer as he knew his response would be deliberately distorted as my own has been.

I was stupid enough to answer the question.

Let's just leave it at that.

Well I certainly asked for definitions and I can't see how it was any sort of sensible to ignore it. It revealed a certain vacuousness in the use of the terms in the first place ... unless they were used provocatively :erm::whistle:

[Richard Barrett]

he knew his response would be deliberately distorted as my own has been...

In what way was your response distorted? Looking back through the thread all I can see is that it was questioned to the point that its tenuous basis in reality was exposed. You're right to say that this would also have happened to Simon, but if you and he use words in such a provocatively sloppy way what do you expect?

[DavidP]

And all I did was define 'anarchists' and 'extreme left' which was requested of Simon. I've never described any member here (or anyone else) as being an anarchist, or on the hard left. You are simply making things up as you go along, DavidP.

Best plan is to put Simon and myself on 'ignore' and then you don't need to feel 'bullied'. That's what the Ignore button is for ... I never use it myself and will certainly not put you or any other member on any ignore list. Personally, I relish the rich variety of opinion on a forum such as this one and consider that there are few things in life less interesting and rewarding than people who keep agreeing with me. Not that there is very much danger of that, here ... :winkeye:

However, if some members wish to use this Forum as a sort of Mutual Admiration Society, that's just fine, they can do exactly that without any complaint whatsoever from myself.

Sorted!

I never said I felt bullied on this thread. The person being bullied has to feel humiliated or intimidated whereas I find your's and (the strangely silent) Simon's attempts to shut down the discussion by labelling people as extremists or anarchist wreckers to be frankly laughable.

[eighthobstruction]

I guess it's just another weirdness of internet interaction.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzlG28B-R8Y

[Serial_Apologist]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzlG28B-R8Y

:biggrin: :ok:

[Beef Oven]

In post #558, Scotty asks for it to be left at that. Maybe people should get off his back.

[amateur51]

In post #558, Scotty asks for it to be left at that. Maybe people should get off his back.

Did you notice how scotty started that post, Beefy?

Talk about passive-aggressive :erm:

[DavidP]

In post #558, Scotty asks for it to be left at that. Maybe people should get off his back.

We will when he stops using terms like "extreme left", "hard left" etc the sole purpose of which is to imply those so-labelled have dishorable or destructive motives.

[Beef Oven]

We will when he stops using terms like "extreme left", "hard left" etc the sole purpose of which is to imply those so-labelled have dishorable or destructive motives.

Read his post #558, see that he doesn't use those terms, note that he asks for things to be left there, and comply or carry on getting at him.

[DavidP]

Read his post #558, see that he doesn't use those terms, note that he asks for things to be left there, and comply or carry on getting at him.

I suggest you look back over his and Simon's contributions. If you describe an individual as being "hard" or "extreme" (as in hard left or extreme left) presumably you'd be saying such a person had honorable or constructive motives?

[Beef Oven!]

Rather than start a new terrorism thread -


"Social media networks in China have been abuzz with fears that the 153 Chinese nationals on board the plane were the target of terrorists.

The disappearance came just a week after a knife attack blamed on separatists from Xinjiang province that left at least 29 people dead.

Malaysian officials have consistently said that they are not ruling out any theory."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26558070