QT last night - Will Self - what a fool

ninky_2

Conrad wrote: »

I'm a little slow, who is 'Mr Ed'?:o

the talking horse.....

lostinrates

I find it interesting that in this sort of thread even we become intolerant of someone else's views, even if they are abhorant to the majority and expressed in such a way so as seemingly going for maximum impact. I don't mean disagreeing with them, I ean the ease with which we , as a species, slip into gang ridicule.IMO this is as significant a reason why crime will never be obliterated. People, generally, are capable of simply being not very nice, and we push, and push and push at the limits of what count's as acceptable.

ninky_2

don't worry lir. most who express strong views that are not held by the majority expect gang ridicule. i've had it on here myself. there is possibly even something in the outsider mentality that seeks out gang ridicule. it's fairly safe on an anonymous internet forum too.

The_White_Horse

lemonjelly wrote: »

Point of order. You've spent several pages whinging about no lefty answering your point. I've responded. You appear to be choosing to not answer.

Now, is this because you can't?

Is this because you accept that what you first stated was wrong? Because clearly it was.

The white horse - unable to respond to a reasoned debate with a lefty!

Shame on you & your double standards.
Hypocrite.

All this is very nice, but the inmates have been given 93mGBP in dole payments, so its actually irrelevant (and incorrect). Just because there is a statute it doesn't mean its being followed or interpreted in the same manner as you have interpreted it.

Conrad

lostinrates wrote: »

I find it interesting that in this sort of thread even we become intolerant of someone else's views, even if they are abhorant to the majority and expressed in such a way so as seemingly going for maximum impact. I don't mean disagreeing with them, I ean the ease with which we , as a species, slip into gang ridicule.IMO this is as significant a reason why crime will never be obliterated. People, generally, are capable of simply being not very nice, and we push, and push and push at the limits of what count's as acceptable.

Your'e right. Were all capable of gang think.

I well recall mature rational seemingly well rounded celebs ganging up in celeb Big Brother - the irony being all of them when interveiwed claimed to loath bullying.

We're all mad as snakes. According to various threads on this forum none of us are bad drivers either, ha!:rotfl:

The_White_Horse

Conrad wrote: »

In his world everything is simple > if you abuse / murder your'e well, yep just born evil, end of. It goes no deeper than that. In a way this manner of thinking is the lazy / easy route. It's more challenging to go deeper, but in his simple world that way lies the lefty. I'm right wing.

Minds me of people like Anne Coulthard, the American journo that says thing like 'just nuke em' when discussing Lebannon. Utterly simplistic, yet she doesn't realise this about herself, and to add to the irony she claims the moral high ground!.

you have no evidence to show that people aren't simply born evil. you carve out excuse after excuse about abuse, broken home, learning problems etc etc but never just "he was bad". I think sometimes the simple obvious answer is the correct one.

lemonjelly

lostinrates wrote: »

I find it interesting that in this sort of thread even we become intolerant of someone else's views, even if they are abhorant to the majority and expressed in such a way so as seemingly going for maximum impact. I don't mean disagreeing with them, I ean the ease with which we , as a species, slip into gang ridicule.IMO this is as significant a reason why crime will never be obliterated. People, generally, are capable of simply being not very nice, and we push, and push and push at the limits of what count's as acceptable.

I'm not sure whether I agree here lir.

I don't see this thread as a "ganging up".

I see it as calling a bully's bluff.

White horse has thrown a lot of insults around at a lot of people. Also, has made some interesting allegations. Now, given those allegations have been made, WH needs to justify them.

In example, WH asserts people in prison can claim benefits.

Initially I simply asserted these weren't true.

The response was that I am a fool, supported by a daily express link.

I've responded with hard evidence showing that legislation expressly states that what WH asserted was not true.

Now, in addition on the thread WH has repeatedly mocked "the lefty" for not responding to WH's assertions (which is arguable - ask JonnyBravo). However has failed to respond to my counter to their arguement (or indeed those of other posters).

I'd argue it isn't a co-ordinated "ganging up" on, rather a number of shocked but enlightened people challenging what they see as a concern.

Actually, the fact that it appears WH is alone in the views held tells a story. If the issues were greyer in nature, I feel sure there would be more debate.

In reality, WH makes an assertion, then follows it up with disdainful comments as opposed to arguing the material facts.

The_White_Horse

ninky wrote: »

i don't think white horse cares if the death penatly acts as a deterrent or not. it's eye for an eye mentality.

actually its not. whilst it is certainly a punishment, it is also cheaper. why bother looking after these people (not just thompson and venables, but the likes of fred west, shipman (although they killed themselves) huntley etc etc) - just get rid and job done. no more problem.

If i wanted eye for eye i would suggest that the death penalty is performed in the style of the original murder.

chucky

The_White_Horse wrote: »

you have no evidence to show that people aren't simply born evil. you carve out excuse after excuse about abuse, broken home, learning problems etc etc but never just "he was bad". I think sometimes the simple obvious answer is the correct one.

neither do you have the evidence - i think that you're all hay and no substance champion the wonder horse

you never came back to this post... wonder why :think:

chucky wrote: »

i've read your posts but why don't you provide me with a long list of links to research articles (not The Sun) that supports your statements that violent tendencies are genetically determined and maintained from children to adult.

can you confirm that there is evidence of both nature and nurture in a person's make-up? some people may be born 'evil', others may not, but are we then in a position to judge which it is in this case, not having read the case notes and with no evidence that this story is true?

tomterm8

Conrad wrote: »

Your'e right. Were all capable of gang think.

I well recall mature rational seemingly well rounded celebs ganging up in celeb Big Brother - the irony being all of them when interveiwed claimed to loath bullying.

We're all mad as snakes. According to various threads on this forum none of us are bad drivers either, ha!:rotfl:

I don't even drive, so I know I'm not a bad driver, but I think white horse is probably a bad driver given he appears to not respect the speed limit:D

I think he's correct on the benefit thing though, the list of benefits doesn't appear to include jobseekers allowance:D I do wonder how they appear at the job centre in order to claim it though. Maybe they go over the fence