+Start a topic
?Search __________________________________

-Log In
Log In to post a reply
52 messages
View: flat \ threaded

1745 posts

Re: wikileaks.

Dara wrote:
Like some others here I find your attitude irksome. You are arrogant, bad mannered and supercilious. You have the image of a yobbish and opinionated immature narcissist. Resorting to name calling when people take you to task is a perfect example of this - 'precious heathers indeed'.

I assume you can see the irony of this section of your post. I hope you can also see that the “heathers” tag is not simply slagging people in the way that “complete and utter asshole is”. The fact is that you and cyberpainter have teamed up on me like the girls in Heathers. You employ classic bullying tactics such as refusing to acknowledge the validity of any aspect of my argument (e.g. straw man), saying “others” don’t like me to validate your attack and spewing forth a tirade of abuse.

Dara wrote:
Your opinion is valid and very welcome on here as a stimulus to free debate as is everyone else's. But remember it is just that - an opinion. To infer that people are idiots because they have not read your posts completely, or followed your opinion assiduously as THE definitive view on world politics or whatever else, or watched and commented in agreement with your comments on a stolen military intelligence filmclip - is so arrogant, it just makes you sound like a complete and utter asshole.

I have never called anyone an idiot. I don’t think people are “idiots”; they simply behave in ways that I don’t approve of or say things that I don’t agree with. I have never said that anyone must agree with me on a matter of opinion as it is not possible. Stating my opinion in a forthright manner does not make me arrogant or dismissive. If you can find evidence of me stating the others must agree with my opinion or else, please show me.
As for not reading my post then making an ill informed remark, yes, I do think that is bad form. If I don’t read your whole post then I may not get the whole picture. As Calapia inferred that I was advocating the loss of homes, I thought that was unfair. I do put time into my posts and expect a bit of respect in return. I could have just said “fuck off” to you for abusing me or ignoring your arguments until you acknowledged your error with the straw man comment. But you put time in to make this post and so I think that you deserve to be heard. I think simply posting things like QED is unfair and evasive. I think you know you have egg on your face because you cannot counter the valid and reasoned points that I have made. If I have ever avoided a point that you have made, please point it out and I would happily respond.

Dara wrote:
For what it's worth, I totally agree with what Prince Hassan of Jordan said - these leaks are insignificant - they only have power in the media if we give them power. President Ahmadinejad neutralised them brilliantly in one sentance - 'this is western propaganda designed to destroy the relations between muslim brothers'. The world community - media and politicians alike, are united in saying that this is nothing we didn't know or suspect anyway. The latest releases today detaling potential targets for terrorists in the USA are different - they actually put real lives in danger.

Assange is an arrogant, self aggrandising low standard journalist. Despite what his blindly fawning followers say, he has a lot to gain from being world famous. If no one reads what you write - you are not a journalist, or at least you are a very weak one. I think we will find out who he really is and what his motives really are in the coming years - that is if he himself, or someone else doesn't blow his head off first.

I have heard the theory that Assange is a stooge, pedalling disinformation on behalf of the US or somewhere else. I guess that is the problem with a secret society with spin and conspiracies. It is hard to tell what is real. Good point (asides from the aggression), it does make me think.

Dec 07, 2010, 01:27


Topic Outline: