Maybe he didn't think he needed to verbalise the opinion that murder is wrong.
When you want to quell a violent situation you condemn the violence and make it known to stop doing it when you are one of the leaders of the public situation. To not say anything indicates that you sympathise with the perpetrator of the violence. If the guy was just a joe blow who was there, then no he need not say anything but when you are the organiser of the event that lead to the death of 5 innocent people then you have a responsibility to condemn the violence.
Further to that, based on your statement it seems we no longer need condemn anything because we all know it is wrong so no need to say anything at all. Why bother saying anything when we already know it is wrong? Cop murders innocent man? No need to say it is wrong. Domestic violence? No need to say anything as we all know it is wrong.
Maybe he didn't think he needed to verbalise the opinion that murder is wrong.
When you want to quell a violent situation you condemn the violence and make it known to stop doing it when you are one of the leaders of the public situation. To not say anything indicates that you sympathise with the perpetrator of the violence. If the guy was just a joe blow who was there, then no he need not say anything but when you are the organiser of the event that lead to the death of 5 innocent people then you have a responsibility to condemn the violence.
Do you want to read the last half of your last sentence again?
Maybe he didn't think he needed to verbalise the opinion that murder is wrong.
When you want to quell a violent situation you condemn the violence and make it known to stop doing it when you are one of the leaders of the public situation. To not say anything indicates that you sympathise with the perpetrator of the violence. If the guy was just a joe blow who was there, then no he need not say anything but when you are the organiser of the event that lead to the death of 5 innocent people then you have a responsibility to condemn the violence.
Do you want to read the last half of your last sentence again?
Maybe he didn't think he needed to verbalise the opinion that murder is wrong.
When you want to quell a violent situation you condemn the violence and make it known to stop doing it when you are one of the leaders of the public situation. To not say anything indicates that you sympathise with the perpetrator of the violence. If the guy was just a joe blow who was there, then no he need not say anything but when you are the organiser of the event that lead to the death of 5 innocent people then you have a responsibility to condemn the violence.
Do you want to read the last half of your last sentence again?
Do you want to stop being obtuse?
I think it’s wrong enough to give you another shot at it.
Maybe he didn't think he needed to verbalise the opinion that murder is wrong.
When you want to quell a violent situation you condemn the violence and make it known to stop doing it when you are one of the leaders of the public situation. To not say anything indicates that you sympathise with the perpetrator of the violence. If the guy was just a joe blow who was there, then no he need not say anything but when you are the organiser of the event that lead to the death of 5 innocent people then you have a responsibility to condemn the violence.
Do you want to read the last half of your last sentence again?
Do you want to stop being obtuse?
I think it’s wrong enough to give you another shot at it.
It amazes me at how much of a wanker you can be at times Wim.
Maybe he didn't think he needed to verbalise the opinion that murder is wrong.
When you want to quell a violent situation you condemn the violence and make it known to stop doing it when you are one of the leaders of the public situation. To not say anything indicates that you sympathise with the perpetrator of the violence. If the guy was just a joe blow who was there, then no he need not say anything but when you are the organiser of the event that lead to the death of 5 innocent people then you have a responsibility to condemn the violence.
Do you want to read the last half of your last sentence again?
Do you want to stop being obtuse?
I think it’s wrong enough to give you another shot at it.
It amazes me at how much of a wanker you can be at times Wim.
I’m trying to be nice.
Fwiw, I’m surprised by how often you turn to outright abuse.
Maybe he didn't think he needed to verbalise the opinion that murder is wrong.
When you want to quell a violent situation you condemn the violence and make it known to stop doing it when you are one of the leaders of the public situation. To not say anything indicates that you sympathise with the perpetrator of the violence. If the guy was just a joe blow who was there, then no he need not say anything but when you are the organiser of the event that lead to the death of 5 innocent people then you have a responsibility to condemn the violence.
Do you want to read the last half of your last sentence again?
Do you want to stop being obtuse?
I think it’s wrong enough to give you another shot at it.
It amazes me at how much of a wanker you can be at times Wim.
I’m trying to be nice.
No you’re not, you’re being deliberately abtuse. So I will leave you to your self-congratulatory ■■■■■■■■■■■■.
Maybe he didn't think he needed to verbalise the opinion that murder is wrong.
When you want to quell a violent situation you condemn the violence and make it known to stop doing it when you are one of the leaders of the public situation. To not say anything indicates that you sympathise with the perpetrator of the violence. If the guy was just a joe blow who was there, then no he need not say anything but when you are the organiser of the event that lead to the death of 5 innocent people then you have a responsibility to condemn the violence.
Do you want to read the last half of your last sentence again?
Do you want to stop being obtuse?
I think it’s wrong enough to give you another shot at it.
It amazes me at how much of a wanker you can be at times Wim.
I’m trying to be nice.
No you’re not, you’re being deliberately abtuse.
I apologise for being unclear.
I think…‘but when you are the organiser of the event that lead to the death of 5 innocent people then you have a responsibility to condemn the violence.’ is a long way from reasonable.
Maybe he didn't think he needed to verbalise the opinion that murder is wrong.
Edit: and if I were being mean, I’d point out that you have left something out of your assessment there. I don’t know whether you’re unaware of it, so…the thing is, I’m not making any moral judgement based on what you didn’t say.
What bit was I supposed to assess…?
Was it something we disagree on?
Maybe he didn't think he needed to verbalise the opinion that murder is wrong.
Edit: and if I were being mean, I’d point out that you have left something out of your assessment there. I don’t know whether you’re unaware of it, so…the thing is, I’m not making any moral judgement based on what you didn’t say.
What bit was I supposed to assess…?
Was it something we disagree on?
It’s not something we disagree on.
I’m merely pointing out that it wasn’t just policemen who were shot. And the fact that you didn’t mention non-police doesn’t mean I think you don’t care about them.
Maybe he didn't think he needed to verbalise the opinion that murder is wrong.
When you want to quell a violent situation you condemn the violence and make it known to stop doing it when you are one of the leaders of the public situation. To not say anything indicates that you sympathise with the perpetrator of the violence. If the guy was just a joe blow who was there, then no he need not say anything but when you are the organiser of the event that lead to the death of 5 innocent people then you have a responsibility to condemn the violence.
Do you want to read the last half of your last sentence again?
Do you want to stop being obtuse?
I think it’s wrong enough to give you another shot at it.
It amazes me at how much of a wanker you can be at times Wim.
I’m trying to be nice.
No you’re not, you’re being deliberately abtuse.
I apologise for being unclear.
I think…‘but when you are the organiser of the event that lead to the death of 5 innocent people then you have a responsibility to condemn the violence.’ is a long way from reasonable.
It’s perfectly reasonable. It may not be his personal fault, but he does have the responsibility to condemn the violence.
Also, give the kids a break.
They're too busy deciding whether they're hemi-demi-pan-sexual or not in a world where cis is an insult.
And I'm pretty sure they didn't ask for that.
This is how people like Donald Trump get popular. “Oh you have a different opinion? It’s wrong!”
“Oh by the way, you’re also racist, sexist, farking anti-animalist, homophobe, anti-trans goon sexual.”
“Also you don’t believe all the ■■■■ that’s fed to you by media? You’re a tin-foil hat moron. You’re also crazy.”
Then someone such as Trump comes along, perhaps says thing that are actually much more extreme than what they believe, but they’re so sick of being called racist by social justice dickheads, that they SUPPORT him. At least someone like him allows them to feel ok about expressing an opinion. Obviously I’m not referring to outright silly genuinely racist beliefs here, but a frustrated population will elect people like this. They’re over it.
Off topic, but it’s relevant to your comment as these farksticks are my generation and it’s embarrassing.
Okay, I’ve obviously…well firstly offended you and secondly not expressed myself properly, so for both I apologise.
At no point did I mean to label you as anything. In this particular post I was trying to say that I understood the pressures that the latest generation has that others didn’t have to face. I guess it came across as mocking them for it?
In any case I agree with your post completely. The new left scare the crap out of me.
No no, I wasn’t having a go at you Wim. I was just referencing all these flogs who claim they’re all these stupid genders, then get offended when some poor moron on the street calls them “she” instead of “they” or “stupid ■■■■■■■”.
There’s a youtuber by the name of Blair White, who is a trans girl and cannot stand this stupidity. She’s made a number of videos for those interested.
Maybe he didn't think he needed to verbalise the opinion that murder is wrong.
Edit: and if I were being mean, I’d point out that you have left something out of your assessment there. I don’t know whether you’re unaware of it, so…the thing is, I’m not making any moral judgement based on what you didn’t say.
What bit was I supposed to assess…?
Was it something we disagree on?
It’s not something we disagree on.
I’m merely pointing out that it wasn’t just policemen who were shot. And the fact that you didn’t mention non-police doesn’t mean I think you don’t care about them.
I didn’t pick up at all that you were pointing out that the non-police were the topic of conversation to be left out of my assessment, but in this case the discussion was about the police specifically.
(And the good reverend didn’t mention the non-police either. Not being smart, just saying).
Also, give the kids a break.
They're too busy deciding whether they're hemi-demi-pan-sexual or not in a world where cis is an insult.
And I'm pretty sure they didn't ask for that.
This is how people like Donald Trump get popular. “Oh you have a different opinion? It’s wrong!”
“Oh by the way, you’re also racist, sexist, farking anti-animalist, homophobe, anti-trans goon sexual.”
“Also you don’t believe all the ■■■■ that’s fed to you by media? You’re a tin-foil hat moron. You’re also crazy.”
Then someone such as Trump comes along, perhaps says thing that are actually much more extreme than what they believe, but they’re so sick of being called racist by social justice dickheads, that they SUPPORT him. At least someone like him allows them to feel ok about expressing an opinion. Obviously I’m not referring to outright silly genuinely racist beliefs here, but a frustrated population will elect people like this. They’re over it.
Off topic, but it’s relevant to your comment as these farksticks are my generation and it’s embarrassing.
Okay, I’ve obviously…well firstly offended you and secondly not expressed myself properly, so for both I apologise.
At no point did I mean to label you as anything. In this particular post I was trying to say that I understood the pressures that the latest generation has that others didn’t have to face. I guess it came across as mocking them for it?
In any case I agree with your post completely. The new left scare the crap out of me.
No no, I wasn’t having a go at you Wim. I was just referencing all these flogs who claim they’re all these stupid genders, then get offended when some poor moron on the street calls them “she” instead of “they” or “stupid ■■■■■■■”.
There’s a youtuber by the name of Blair White, who is a trans girl and cannot stand this stupidity. She’s made a number of videos for those interested.
Yeah that crap is getting over the top stupid. How is the average person meant to keep up with the latest gender nouns it is getting rather confusing?
Geez do NOT get stopped by the police in the US, and if you do make sure you do everything exactly as they tell you. So far this year cops in the US have killed 509 people.
White 238
Black 123
Hispanic 79
other 23
unkown 46 (intrigued by the unknown bit)
Geez do NOT get stopped by the police in the US, and if you do make sure you do everything exactly as they tell you. So far this year cops in the US have killed 509 people.
White 238
Black 123
Hispanic 79
other 23
unkown 46 (intrigued by the unknown bit)