Ship of Fools: Deano is a ignorant racist lying hate-filled etc etc

Thread: Deano is a ignorant racist lying hate-filled etc etc Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=025071

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :

Deano is a ignorant racist lying hate-filled self-deluded 19th-hole-swilling class-envious pig with a chip on his shoulder the size of his arse, and probably too stupid to know it. There's enough "I'm not a racist butter" shite flowing from his keyboard to lubricate a giant radish in the appropriate slot.

No more to say really.

[ 13. February 2013, 00:02: Message buggered about with by: comet ]

Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on :

Didn't take long for the hat-trick.

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :

"Shall we put you on Mastermind, ken - specialised subject: The Bleeding Obvious".

In other words, good call and with apologies to John Cleese and Connie Booth.

Posted by the giant cheeseburger (# 10942) on :

Germans, Americans and Scots - I wonder who he'll hate next?

Posted by Anglican't (# 15292) on :

quote:
Originally posted by the giant cheeseburger:
Germans, Americans and Scots - I wonder who he'll hate next?

People considerably less rich than he is?

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :

It's a bit like Mitt Romney earlier this year - I'm hurt and annoyed that he hasn't specifically offended at least one of my own tick-boxes: white, male, lawyer, English, balding but what hair I do have is brunette tending to grey, southern, middle-aged, parent, etc

Posted by Otter (# 12020) on :

I was thinking he's a pretentious wanker.

Flaming asshat would also do nicely.

And deano, just to be clear, you'd still be a flaming asshat of a pretentious wanker even if I were in agreement with a basic premise of yours. Not that you can present one coherently.

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :

OK, I've now read the thread title as "Deano is an ignorant otter".

I think I need to lie down.

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :

I hope we can keep him though. As long as we promise to feed him and muck him out and make sure he can't get out and hurt anyone?

Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I hope we can keep him though.

This. He's cute.

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :

No.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

He was suspended once before, in 2007. He seems to be intent on getting suspended again. He appears to me as little more than a wind-up merchant -cum- troll.

Posted by Spiffy (# 5267) on :

I need more coffee and to lay off the urban fantasy*, I'm now contemplating the horror that is a "Cum Troll".

*Urban Fantasy is basically romance novels set in present-day cities, but with vampires and fairies and such. They're my current brain candy.

Posted by the giant cheeseburger (# 10942) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:

quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I hope we can keep him though.
This. He's cute.

Until he shits all over your carpet.

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :

quote:
Originally posted by the giant cheeseburger:

quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:

quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I hope we can keep him though.
This. He's cute.
Until he shits all over your carpet.

He's not the sort of pet you get out of its cage except to clean it out - it'd be like keeping a venomous snake or some piranhas or a lionfish or something. Not rabbit or guinea pig territory.

Only "cute" in the sense that newts are cute to herpetologists. He's cute to collectors and students of the Internet Troll species.

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :

I was thinking of the recent Norwegian film Trollhunter, Spiffy...

[ 13. December 2012, 15:32: Message edited by: Matt Black ]

Posted by Spiffy (# 5267) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
I was thinking of the recent Norwegian film Trollhunter, Spiffy...

That is an excellent film, and I usually watch it back to back this time of year with Rare Exports.

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

quote:
Originally posted by the giant cheeseburger:
Germans, Americans and Scots - I wonder who he'll hate next?

Wrong!

I have some very good, close German friends. We met in Cyprus years ago and see each other frequently. I like Germans, they are hard-working and intelligent people.

I love America and have yet to meet a bad Amrican in person. I spend about a third of the year over there on business.

Now the Scottish... well fair point.

Who I do hate...

People who think they are somehow better than others because they know a few hand-wringing, right-on phrases.

People who try to do book reviews without reading them

Fey, precious tits who resent anyone not in their cosy little clique.

Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on :

I said cute because of his comparison of prejudice faced by people with red hair (who are considered by some in the Balkans to be witches, I believe. But still.) to people with black skin. Of all the things to get worked up about (and I've seen people get picked on for having red hair, but compare that to being LGBT, or being Roma, or being Jewish, of being Muslim), and when I say worked up I mean shrill.

It's when he started talking about genocide that I considered using the [Killing me]

smilie.

(I note the connection between the word "genocide" and a smilie which writes as "killingme" [Smile]

)

Posted by Angloid (# 159) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:

Fey, precious tits who resent anyone not in their cosy little clique.

Looked in a mirror recently?

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :

Borderline hysterical rather than merely shrill.

Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on :

With a victim complex.

Like I'm one to talk [Biased]

Posted by Spike (# 36) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
Who I do hate...

People who think they are somehow better than others because they know a few hand-wringing, right-on phrases.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:

quote:
Originally posted by the giant cheeseburger:
Germans, Americans and Scots - I wonder who he'll hate next?
Wrong!

I have some very good, close German friends.

Whoa, this is so close to "I'm not a racist because I have black friends" as you can get! You have to give him one thing, his lack of self-awareness is award-winning.

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :

I think he genuinely doesn't get it.

There. I'm being kind. In Hell.

Posted by aumbry (# 436) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:
Originally posted by deano:

quote:
Originally posted by the giant cheeseburger:
Germans, Americans and Scots - I wonder who he'll hate next?
Wrong!

I have some very good, close German friends.
Whoa, this is so close to "I'm not a racist because I have black friends" as you can get! You have to give him one thing, his lack of self-awareness is award-winning.

Are Americans considered a race these days?

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by aumbry:

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:
Originally posted by deano:

quote:
Originally posted by the giant cheeseburger:
Germans, Americans and Scots - I wonder who he'll hate next?
Wrong!

I have some very good, close German friends.
Whoa, this is so close to "I'm not a racist because I have black friends" as you can get! You have to give him one thing, his lack of self-awareness is award-winning.
Are Americans considered a race these days?

Sorry, how is this relevant? I didn't say or imply that they were, only that saying "I'm not prejudiced against Germans because I have German friends" is very close to "I'm not a racist because I have black friends." I didn't apply "racist" to Germans (let alone Americans) but only to blacks.

Here, I'll diagram it for you:

Hating Germans : Having German friends :: being racist : having black friends

This isn't rocket science, at least for most people.

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:

quote:
Originally posted by the giant cheeseburger:
Germans, Americans and Scots - I wonder who he'll hate next?
Wrong!

I have some very good, close German friends. We met in Cyprus years ago and see each other frequently. I like Germans, they are hard-working and intelligent people.

I love America and have yet to meet a bad Amrican in person. I spend about a third of the year over there on business.

Now the Scottish... well fair point.

I have met Germans, Scots and Americans who fill me with dread. I have met Germans, Scots and Americans who are a joy to be with. They are people. Real ones.

quote:

Who I do hate...

People who think they are somehow better than others because they know a few hand-wringing, right-on phrases.

People who try to do book reviews without reading them

Fey, precious tits who resent anyone not in their cosy little clique.

But that represents a type of person. A type you think you see on the television, hear on the radio or read in a paper. A type that may post on the internet. A type of person is not a person one has met. I've met policemen, social workers, lawyers, builders, politicians, soldiers and many more. Darn it, I'm related to people of (I think) seven nationalities doing scores of jobs and we get on fine (with exactly two notorious exceptions). In short a fair section of those in the "right-on" professions and those in the more hard-nosed roles; some public sector, some private sector, and do you know what differentiates them? Nothing. No, one thing does; the more effective they are, the more tolerant they are of others and in particular the less inclined they are to wild generalisations that piss people off.

Use the <back> button a bit more often deano, believe me, it helps.

Posted by Caissa (# 16710) on :

A pile-on example of why hell should be abolished. [Razz]

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Caissa:
A pile-on example of why hell should be abolished.

I hear what you say [Disappointed]

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Caissa:
A pile-on example of why hell should be abolished.

By golly, guess what you can do about Hell if you don't like it?

Posted by Caissa (# 16710) on :

Three threads all targeting one person gives a whole new meaning to the trinity. [Eek!]

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Caissa:
Three threads all targeting one person gives a whole new meaning to the trinity.

A different meaning perhaps, but not new. This is by no means the first time we have had multiple calls against the same member.

Posted by RuthW (# 13) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Caissa:
A pile-on example of why hell should be abolished.

Deano is offensive to a fair number of shipmates. Should we each start a separate thread in Hell?

Posted by Firenze (# 619) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Caissa:
Three threads all targeting one person

But started by three different people over a period of a fortnight. To receive one hell call is unfortunate, but to receive three looks like carelessness.

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:

quote:
Originally posted by Caissa:
A pile-on example of why hell should be abolished.
Deano is offensive to a fair number of shipmates. Should we each start a separate thread in Hell?

We would rather you didn't.

Sioni Sais
pp Hellhosts

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :

Appears to be two options on the table:

code:

$ apt-get uninstall deano

code:

$ apt-get uninstall Hell

Posted by IntellectByProxy (# 3185) on :

Excellent l33t g33k joke there. Pwned.

Posted by jbohn (# 8753) on :

quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
Appears to be two options on the table:
code:
$ apt-get uninstall deano
code:
$ apt-get uninstall Hell

You forgot the current option:

code:

10 PRINT 'DEANO IS A FUCKWIT'
20 GOTO 10

[x-posted]

[ 13. December 2012, 17:19: Message edited by: jbohn ]

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

If any hosts on any forum feels that I've broken any rules or has any specific issues they want to bring up, please PM me and we'll discuss. If an apology is in order I'll be more than happy to oblige.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Caissa:
Three threads all targeting one person gives a whole new meaning to the trinity.

You say this as if the hunters all cruelly targeted the same poor little Bambi with their arrows.

Instead of Bambi strapping on a magnet the likes of which you've never seen, donning fluorescent orange pants and crying "IT'S ALL ABOUT ME" at the top of his lungs while prancing across the forest clearing.

The 'ginger hair' thread, in particular... I'm sorry, it will take me a while to find it... oh that's right, you won't recognise it from the front pages becuase it was a thread about the death of a nurse after (and perhaps because of) a prank call. It became a deano thread because deano grabbed it round the throat and made off with it.

[ 13. December 2012, 21:01: Message edited by: orfeo ]

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
If any hosts on any forum feels that I've broken any rules or has any specific issues they want to bring up, please PM me and we'll discuss. If an apology is in order I'll be more than happy to oblige.

Firstly, each board has different hosts so only the Hellhosts are likely to read this.

Secondly, and most importantly in the immediate context, getting Hell calls isn't because you've broken the rules of the Ship. Getting Hell calls is because you've pissed off Shipmates. If you want to mollify them, you can apologise off your own bat, you don't need a host's instruction to do it.

Thirdly, the vast majority of hosting happens openly and publicly.

orfeo
Hellhost

[ 13. December 2012, 21:09: Message edited by: orfeo ]

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:

quote:
Originally posted by Caissa:
Three threads all targeting one person gives a whole new meaning to the trinity.
You say this as if the hunters all cruelly targeted the same poor little Bambi with their arrows.

Instead of Bambi strapping on a magnet the likes of which you've never seen, donning fluorescent orange pants and crying "IT'S ALL ABOUT ME" at the top of his lungs while prancing across the forest clearing.

The 'ginger hair' thread, in particular... I'm sorry, it will take me a while to find it... oh that's right, you won't recognise it from the front pages becuase it was a thread about the death of a nurse after (and perhaps because of) a prank call. It became a deano thread because deano grabbed it round the throat and made off with it.

Well actually my point was about whether or not it was hypocritical of people to complain about prank phone calls, whilst laughing at bigoted humour. Some people thought it was fine to laugh at bigoted humour.

But call it like you see it mate.

I confess myself a little disappointed with the quality of the insults. I mean, “look in a mirror”, “fuckwit”. Dear, dear. It’s playground stuff! It’s “See that poo there? That’s you that is!”, which is funny when seven year olds do it but I thought people with IQ’s as large as some of yours would have put in a little more effort.

It’s not the sentiment that disappoints, but the reliance on tedious cliché. Where is the wit? Oscar Wilde can rest easy, that’s for sure.

Ken, Ken, Much Ado About Ken. First off, I need to apologise you on behalf of the Conservative Party. Care in the Community did you no favours. Have you tried Lithium?

I was thinking of you earlier this evening as was re-reading “A Brief History of Time”. I think Professor Stephen Hawking would love to meet you Ken. You see he is an expert on space and time and you are a waste of both.

Ken, some people’s character is left-brain, and some people’s character is right-brain. For you, I’m thinking… the stem perhaps?

How are your parents these days? Still brother and sister? I understand you were the first in your family born without a tail.

I was impressed with your list of my faults Ken. Did your carer help you with it? I must say, what SCOPE does these days is marvellous isn’t it.

Ah Ken, do you ever wonder what life would be like if you'd had enough oxygen at birth?

Anyway, Ken, one final question. If I throw you a stick, will you fuck off?

Posted by Anglican't (# 15292) on :

Wowzers.

Posted by Pooks (# 11425) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
I think he genuinely doesn't get it.

There. I'm being kind. In Hell.

I agree with you. I think he sees everything as 100010100000010001010001...

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :

I won't stop scrolling past deano's posts in Purg, but his rant against ken isn't half bad as fictional invective.

Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on :

quote:
Originally posted by the giant cheeseburger:
Germans, Americans and Scots - I wonder who he'll hate next?

Given the metaphors just used: People with disabilities.

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :

deano, I tried $code for you given profile > fail

How about neuroanatomy? People think you're using too much of your reptilian brain.

quote:
the reptilian complex was responsible for species typical instinctual behaviors involved in aggression, dominance, territoriality, and ritual displays.

We're getting "aggression, dominance, territoriality, and ritual displays". You started almost apologizing, and then reverted to your R-complex. Can we please get a little neocortex?

[Hostly edit because your linkie no workie.]

[ 14. December 2012, 00:33: Message edited by: orfeo ]

Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :

quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
Appears to be two options on the table:
code:
$ apt-get uninstall deano
code:
$ apt-get uninstall Hell

Perhaps someone can explain to me why 'ranga' is banned down here, but the above shit passes without comment?

Posted by the giant cheeseburger (# 10942) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
I won't stop scrolling past deano's posts in Purg, but his rant against ken isn't half bad as fictional invective.

The slight problem with that is that he's a troll, deliberately trying to make every thread about him, and if you ignore his posts you'll be left scratching your head about what started the madness.

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :

quote:
Originally posted by the giant cheeseburger:

quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
I won't stop scrolling past deano's posts in Purg, but his rant against ken isn't half bad as fictional invective.
The slight problem with that is that he's a troll, deliberately trying to make every thread about him, and if you ignore his posts you'll be left scratching your head about what started the madness.

Oh, I know he's annoying and likely deliberately. Thus the scrolling. But face it, we are all feeding him right now in our own ways. Very few people seem to have the will power to not feed the troll. And I'm not among those few. All I can do is look after my own blood pressure.

But thanks for the advice. [Smile]

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
I confess myself a little disappointed with the quality of the insults. I mean, “look in a mirror”, “fuckwit”. Dear, dear. It’s playground stuff! It’s “See that poo there? That’s you that is!”, which is funny when seven year olds do it but I thought people with IQ’s as large as some of yours would have put in a little more effort.

It’s not the sentiment that disappoints, but the reliance on tedious cliché. Where is the wit? Oscar Wilde can rest easy, that’s for sure.

This is, by the way, a marker for shrill trolls, generally ones who are about to get bounced. The "your insults aren't good enough" meme just screams juvenile troll. "Is that the best you've got?" (ITTBYG?) might need to become another acro like ITTWACWS. It's passed beyond cliche and into legend.

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

quote:
Originally posted by jbohn:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
Appears to be two options on the table:

code:
$ apt-get uninstall deano
code:
$ apt-get uninstall Hell
You forgot the current option:

code:
10 PRINT 'DEANO IS A FUCKWIT'
20 GOTO 10

Your current option is very basic. I would go with

code:

while(DeanoActsLikeAFuckwit)
{
 printf("Deano is a fuckwit");
}

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

Now for an official bit:

Deano,

You have been told in the past about acting like a fuckwit (actually the phrases used were 'trolling' , 'inflammatory posting', 'pervasively disruptive on multiple threads' ... but it amounts to the same thing). You have been banned, and reinstated. I suggest you re-read the email sent to you (8th May 2007, from Laura if that helps you locate it) when you were let back on. Those conditions for re-instatement still apply ... and you are very, very close to breaching those conditions.

Alan
Ship of Fools Admin

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

I reject the accusation of being a troll. That might apply were I posting stuff I didn't believe, but I stand by all of my opinions.

I am not going to pretend to hold left-wing views, which it looks like I'm being pressured into.

Would a host post something specific they have an objection to please as this particular thread contained nothing from Ken to back up his insults. Preferably highlighting the style issue that is exercising everyone.

I have a number of pm's from people who feel that I'm in the right on a number of issues, but they don't feel comfortable showing that support on the boards because of the reaction they can expect. Is that healthy on a board about religion? Why do people fear to post dissenting views about political issues? I won't reveal their names but I'll certainly pass the hosts the content of those pm's privately.

But as I say, I will certainly review any specific issues with regard to style with the hosts.

Posted by IntellectByProxy (# 3185) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
Appears to be two options on the table:

code:
$ apt-get uninstall deano
code:
$ apt-get uninstall Hell
Perhaps someone can explain to me why 'ranga' is banned down here, but the above shit passes without comment?

The above shit was funny and was an insult aimed at a particular person for being a fuckwit.

"Ranga" is not funny and is an insult aimed at a trait* shared by a group of people, therefore falls into the same verboten category as "mong" or "spaz".

*my research into this area is limited, but from my reading of Minchin et al I understand this to be a contraction of 'orangutan' and used as a term of abuse for people with red hair

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
I confess myself a little disappointed with the quality of the insults. I mean, “look in a mirror”, “fuckwit”. Dear, dear. It’s playground stuff!

Ach, at least finish it off properly. For old time's sake if nothing else! "IT'S WAR WITH NO LIMITS!!1!" [Big Grin]

(now there was a troll worthy of the name...)

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
I have a number of pm's from people who feel that I'm in the right on a number of issues, but they don't feel comfortable showing that support on the boards because of the reaction they can expect.

And here's another old standard - the lurkers support me in email!

Man, if I was playing the troll drinking game I'd be well on the way by now [Smile]

...

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
Appears to be two options on the table:

code:
$ apt-get uninstall deano
code:
$ apt-get uninstall Hell
Perhaps someone can explain to me why 'ranga' is banned down here, but the above shit passes without comment?

I understood it and I'm not remotely a techie.

Posted by Spike (# 36) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
I reject the accusation of being a troll. That might apply were I posting stuff I didn't believe, but I stand by all of my opinions.

Nobody is accusing you of posting stuff you don't believe. According to the Urban Dictionary a troll is someone who "posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument". That's what you appear to be doing.

quote:
I am not going to pretend to hold left-wing views, which it looks like I'm being pressured into.

[qb]
Cut the martyr crap. You're not the only Tory on the boards - not by a long way.

quote:
[qb]I have a number of pm's from people who feel that I'm in the right on a number of issues, but they don't feel comfortable showing that support on the boards because of the reaction they can expect.

If these people really exists and if they really think that, then they obviously don't understand how this place works.

quote:
Is that healthy on a board about religion?

ITTWACW! I was wondering how long that would take"

quote:
Why do people fear to post dissenting views about political issues?

Most people don't. There are several current threads in both Purgatory and Dead Horses where opposing views are being debated.

Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:

quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
Appears to be two options on the table:

code:
$ apt-get uninstall deano
code:
$ apt-get uninstall Hell
Perhaps someone can explain to me why 'ranga' is banned down here, but the above shit passes without comment?
I understood it and I'm not remotely a techie.

Congratulations. What do you want, a fucking medal?
My point is, as I'm sure can figure out, that this as least as obscure as the slang word, with no explanation offered.

Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on :

We're doing with with Ship of Fools Bingo (no, not him) so far.

"PMS of support"

"It's because of my political views"

"The admin are out for me"

"I'm a victim"

We just need ITTWACW (deano, that means I thought this was a Christian website) now.

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:

quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:

quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
Appears to be two options on the table:

code:
$ apt-get uninstall deano
code:
$ apt-get uninstall Hell
Perhaps someone can explain to me why 'ranga' is banned down here, but the above shit passes without comment?
I understood it and I'm not remotely a techie.
Congratulations. What do you want, a fucking medal?
My point is, as I'm sure can figure out, that this as least as obscure as the slang word, with no explanation offered.

The real point is that even if you are not familiar with the tech-speak, you can work it out without having to resort to a search engine, whereas you can't with 'ranga'. You do get that, don't you?

Posted by Stejjie (# 13941) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
We're doing with with Ship of Fools Bingo (no, not him) so far [...] We just need ITTWACW (deano, that means I thought this was a Christian website) now.

Looking at Spike's post, think you might already have it...

Posted by Evangeline (# 7002) on :

quote:
Originally posted by IntellectByProxy:
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:

quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
Appears to be two options on the table:

code:
$ apt-get uninstall deano
code:
$ apt-get uninstall Hell
Perhaps someone can explain to me why 'ranga' is banned down here, but the above shit passes without comment?
The above shit was funny and was an insult aimed at a particular person for being a fuckwit.

"Ranga" is not funny and is an insult aimed at a trait* shared by a group of people, therefore falls into the same verboten category as "mong" or "spaz".

*my research into this area is limited, but from my reading of Minchin et al I understand this to be a contraction of 'orangutan' and used as a term of abuse for people with red hair

The word ranga was explicitly NOT banned for its potentially racist, bigoted or derogatory overtones but because it is an expression that is not known on the ship.

Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:

quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
We're doing with with Ship of Fools Bingo (no, not him) so far [...] We just need ITTWACW (deano, that means I thought this was a Christian website) now.
Looking at Spike's post, think you might already have it...

Indeed.

I left out accusations of dogpiling in The Styx.

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :

As there don't seem to be any Hellhosts around right now I'm going to stop this before it takes over the whole thread.

Discussion of Ship's policy as pertains to whether certain words, phrases or snippets of geek code are permitted or not should take place in The Styx. Do not continue this tangent here.

Marvin
Admin

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

No specific posts then? Pity.

I don't think there is anything I can post that won't be twisted by some of you into an insult and they are very good at it. Must be the years and years and years of practice at it. They have become so good at keeping people out that it's unconcsious, a reflex.

It seems that quite a few people have given the same sort of message judging by how efficiently and smoothly it was rejected. you even have acronyms all ready to fire off! There is no smoke without fire.

I'm done with this thread as it really does seem to be about nothing apart from a rant-fest. I've asked a few times for specifics and got nothing back, so it's a thorough dead end in my opinion.

Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :

Specifics? Just about pretty much every post in the last few days...

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Specifics? Just about pretty much every post in the last few days...

deano has decided on the topics he wants others to be specific about, but they carry on being specific about other things. Everyone else is wrong, wrong, wrong! Poor deano [Waterworks]

Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
you even have acronyms all ready to fire off!

Most places I have worked in have their own in-jokes and acronyms. Newcomers often don't get the context. The question is whether this lack of context is used as a weapon against you.

If only someone had told you what ITTWACW meant [Waterworks]

Posted by Ceannaideach (# 12007) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:

quote:
Originally posted by the giant cheeseburger:
Germans, Americans and Scots - I wonder who he'll hate next?
Now the Scottish... well fair point.

Wee Scunner.

Translation by Pterry Pratchett

'Scunner' is a Scots word for something or someone to which/whom you've taken a strong dislike.

Posted by North East Quine (# 13049) on :

Mair nor a wee scunner - 'at deano is a girny, carnaptious, ill-fashit gypit eejit.

(More than a wee scunner - that deano is a whiny, disgruntled, ill-tempered daft idiot.)

Fit, apairt fae wir socialist politics an wir reid, reid hair, (as reid as the flag than aince flew o'er George Square) dis he hae agin Scots?

(What, apart from our socialist politics and our red, red hair (as red as the flag which once flew over George Square) does he have against Scots?

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
If only someone had told you what ITTWACW meant

I fear your gifts of irony might be wasted here.

Posted by Robert Armin (# 182) on :

quote:
Originally posted by North East Quine:
Mair nor a wee scunner - 'at deano is a girny, carnaptious, ill-fashit gypit eejit.

(More than a wee scunner - that deano is a whiny, disgruntled, ill-tempered daft idiot.)

Fit, apairt fae wir socialist politics an wir reid, reid hair, (as reid as the flag than aince flew o'er George Square) dis he hae agin Scots?

(What, apart from our socialist politics and our red, red hair (as red as the flag which once flew over George Square) does he have against Scots?

They're more intelligent than he is?

Posted by jbohn (# 8753) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by jbohn:

code:
10 PRINT 'DEANO IS A FUCKWIT'
20 GOTO 10
Your current option is very basic. I would go with
code:
while(DeanoActsLikeAFuckwit)
{
printf("Deano is a fuckwit");
}

I C what you did there... [Biased]

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
No specific posts then? Pity.

I've onlyjust got onto the Ship again since my post this morning (well, I have work to do and for some reason everything always needs to be done before Christmas). I'd credited you with sufficient common sense to have realised yourself where the ways you express what you believe have been getting up people's noses (note: the style of your posts, not your actual views). But, here are a couple of examples that I would suggest you ponder.

Insults based on mental illness are a wee* bit below the belt.

There are numerous examples of posts based on perceived characteristics of large groups of people identified by minor points, usually unrelated to the characteristics you don't like. Whether those traits are nationality (American, Scottish etc) or hair colour, or anything else. This does make you appear a wee bit bigotted. I'm not saying you are a bigot, but your posts make you look like you are.

* 'wee' is a Scots term meaning "a little bit" with connotations of "an awful lot" in many contexts.

Alan
Ship of Fools Admin

Posted by balaam (# 4543) on :

deano. Look back at the earlier Hell threads with your name on. In amongst the name calling and vitriol there were a number of posts advising you how to post here. Even in Hell there's no need to be nasty.

I strongly suggest that before you post again you go back and look at that advice and act on it.

An Admin has put you on a last warning. If you wish to continue to post here I suggest that you heed that warning, because if you do not you will, sooner or later, be suspended from this site.

What I like about this site is that it allows for the widest possible range of viewpoints. The Purgatory, Ecclesiantics, Kerygmania and Dead Horses boards are for (mostly) friendly disagreement. When things get beyond friendly they tend to end up here.

As I see it you have only one option: To change the style in which you post, and continue to post here. There are many people started off posting like a jerk who learned to change the style, but not the content, of what they post and stay here. I know, I'm one of them. You don't have to change your views, just give people who disagree with you more respect.

On the other hand, if you do not change, you are giving a very clear signal to the Hosts and Administrators that you do not wish to behave within the rules of this site. If you are suspended, or even banned, it will be your own doing.

Do yourself a favour and change now.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
I am not going to pretend to hold left-wing views, which it looks like I'm being pressured into.

NO, you thickhead, you're being pressured to quit acting like a dickhead.

Posted by Patdys (# 9397) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Patdys:

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
They are dead because of you and people who hold the same opinions as you.
Plank this prat.
Please.

Can you not see how gut wrenchingly offensive your comment is? This goes beyond trolling. This goes beyond decency.

Please consider apologising. And then please shutup just for a bit.

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Patdys:
Can you not see how gut wrenchingly offensive your comment is?

I don't know about deano, but I certainly don't see the problem with that particular post. Seems to me he's bang on the money with that one.

Posted by Patdys (# 9397) on :

Irrespective of how you feel about another poster's views, to say they are directly responsible for a mass shooting does not sit comfortably with me.

Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :

Seconded. I have no sympathy with the right to gun ownership, as one would expect given my demographic, but I recognise that people who hold other views may do so with good faith, and without direct responsibility for mass shootings.

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Patdys:
Irrespective of how you feel about another poster's views, to say they are directly responsible for a mass shooting does not sit comfortably with me.

It may not have been a wise thing to say, but very few things are out of order here, and this is not a place of comfort.

Sioni Sais
Hellhost

Posted by Patdys (# 9397) on :

I truly do not understand the point of your post. And I do not understand why you have added Hellhost to it. But it did make me smile. You must have red hair. [Razz]

(It's not a Styx complaint- it's a request for clarification)

Surely, I can voice my opinion also?

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Patdys:
I truly do not understand the point of your post. And I do not understand why you have added Hellhost to it. But it did make me smile. You must have red hair.

(It's not a Styx complaint- it's a request for clarification)

Surely, I can voice my opinion also?

I took the view that deano's post was not beyond the bounds of Hell, but also that it could be expected to generate reaction. Hell is not a comfortable place; it is a bed of nails rather than a sofa.

Your opinion was and is welcome, but that doesn't mean that anyone will take the action you desire (a little like when the boss says "I hear what you say").

SS
HH

Posted by Patdys (# 9397) on :

Thanks Sioni; my call for planking was more hyperbole ( and alliteration). I did not expect it to be taken seriously. My posts do scan differently in that context.

And Deano, my request to cease just for a bit was serious. And that includes vitriol by pm. Do not contact me privately again in any form.

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :

I'm not sure if it will help with board directed e-mails, but for PMs "ignore list" is your friend.

Posted by irish_lord99 (# 16250) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
"PMS of support"

I don't know if the apostrophe was intentionally neglected or not, but it's certainly applicable to deano either way! [Killing me]

Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Patdys:

And Deano, my request to cease just for a bit was serious. And that includes vitriol by pm. Do not contact me privately again in any form.

What Lyda said. Just block him. Works a charm for the idiots in my life. Online, at least ...

Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Patdys:
Thanks Sioni; my call for planking was more hyperbole ( and alliteration). I did not expect it to be taken seriously. My posts do scan differently in that context.

And Deano, my request to cease just for a bit was serious. And that includes vitriol by pm. Do not contact me privately again in any form.

PMs are also governed by the 10 commandments - and they are not hell - if you are concerned about the content of pms sent to you by any shipmate, you can contact an admin.

[ 16. December 2012, 10:15: Message edited by: Doublethink ]

Posted by Patdys (# 9397) on :

Thank you but no. I deleted it. It was in response to a comment I made on a Hell thread. I have now both removed the opportunity and made my views known. I am done.

Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :

Heavens to Betsy, you mean to say he behaves like an arse in private as well as in public?

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

Yep, it looks like it, and I can confirm that, as Doublethink stated, PMs are governed by the 10c's.

Sioni Sais
Hellhost

Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on :

quote:
Originally posted by irish_lord99:

quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
"PMS of support"
I don't know if the apostrophe was intentionally neglected or not, but it's certainly applicable to deano either way!

TANGENT ALERT

And totally un-apropos of the thread, no apostrophe was omitted, intentionally or otherwise, by Rosa Winkel because no apostrophe was called for. Apostrophes denote possession and contraction, not plurality. "PMS" is, I grant, possibly confusing, but Doublethink's later "PMs" fills the need exactly.

/TANGENT/

Posted by Frankenstein (# 16198) on :

quote:
Originally posted by ken:
Deano is a ignorant racist lying hate-filled self-deluded 19th-hole-swilling class-envious pig with a chip on his shoulder the size of his arse, and probably too stupid to know it. There's enough "I'm not a racist butter" shite flowing from his keyboard to lubricate a giant radish in the appropriate slot.

No more to say really.

Come on Ken, when are you going to speak your mind?

Posted by Patdys (# 9397) on :

Deano, you continue to shine. Your views on torture are abhorrent to my very core.

Posted by Patdys (# 9397) on :

Deano on torture.

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
I don’t think there will be too many raised eyebrows when I say that it’s fine by me as long as it does the job it’s intended to do.

I prefer that innocent people be protected from Islamic terrorists (let’s be honest, they’re who we are torturing here), rather than allowing the terrorist to kill those innocent people.

Some innocent people will be tortured of course and that is a shame. Lessons must be learnt and those situations avoided, but we are in a war, and in war the innocent are sometime victims.

Of course, torture is a very inefficient way of getting information, as people will tell the torturer what they want to hear to make the pain stop. Much better are things like sleep deprivation, drugs and multiple interrogations to check for discrepancies, but this takes time.

Hypocrisy and double standards slip down the list of what’s important when people’s lives are at stake.

quote:
Originally posted by deano:

quote:
Originally posted by leo:
In any case, the evidence gained as a result of torture is usually inaccurate.
I agree and I said as much in my first post upthread.

I do not care about the responses against my post. It's "us" vs "them", and I am on the side of "us".

The brutal truth is they will hate us whether we torture them or not. They will kill us for simply not being like them. Thus they have to die first, and we have to extract information from them in any way that works. Torture isn't the most effective tool, but it can be quick and useful. It's a hammer, and it has a restricted utility.

That's they way it is.

Deano, how are you different from the terrorist you describe other than you believe your cause is just and the end justifies the means? Oh wait...

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Patdys:
I do not care about the responses against my post. It's "us" vs "them", and I am on the side of "us".

Nope, you're not "us", you're a "them", and you're on your own side, all by yourself, in the outer darkness, where you're supposed to be crying and weeping and gnashing your teeth, except your friends pulled all your teeth out, so you're left gnashing your gums.

quote:
deano - NO!
[qb]The brutal truth is they will hate us whether we torture them or not. They will kill us for simply not being like them. Thus they have to die first, and we have to extract information from them in any way that works. Torture isn't the most effective tool, but it can be quick and useful. It's a hammer, and it has a restricted utility. /QB]

Are you trying to justify something you did? You've done military service?

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

Hostly Notice

Just for the record, hosts find thread necromancy and crappy coding/editing almost equally annoying.

Patdys - Why now, nearly two months after the last post?

no prophet - the crappy coding in yours leaves the origin of your second quote uncertain, and therefore does nothing for the meaning.

Sioni Sais
Hellhost

Posted by Patdys (# 9397) on :

Sioni, the quotes are from a current purg thread on torture. It's not necromancy when it is contemporaneous.

No prophet- you have just attributed deano's shite to me. Please let make my own stupid quotes all on my own, I don't need ownership of other people's crap.

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

If it would better please the host, we can start a new thread. I certainly feel there is enough to warrant him being called here.
However

quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:

quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Deano is offensive to a fair number of shipmates. Should we each start a separate thread in Hell?
We would rather you didn't.

Sioni Sais
pp Hellhosts

Back to our regularly scheduled Hell Call...

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
Of course, torture is a very inefficient way of getting information, as people will tell the torturer what they want to hear to make the pain stop.

So why the fuck do it? Why the fuck excuse it? Are you merely a sadistic shit? Whilst I believe torture should not be used regardless, there exists no reason in the name of intelligence gathering to use it.

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Patdys:
Sioni, the quotes are from a current purg thread on torture. It's not necromancy when it is contemporaneous.

Patdys,

Thanks for the clarification, that makes sense now. Carry on.

quote:

No prophet- you have just attributed deano's shite to me. Please let make my own stupid quotes all on my own, I don't need ownership of other people's crap.

That too.

Sioni Sais
Hellhost

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

Let's summarise the Purgatory thread...

"Do we ever suppoort torture?"
No
No
No
No (CIA = SS)
No
No
Yes under certain circumstances
HELL CALL... HELL CALL!

Why the fuck was the question asked if the only thing you wanted to hear was a great string of "NO! Never!"

No Prohphet, you are the most evil person I know. You are quite simply a malignant tumour masquerading as a human being. Equating the CIA with the SS is simple proof that you are pond scum.

[ 10. February 2013, 11:43: Message edited by: deano ]

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :

deano:

quote:
No Prohphet (sic), you are the most evil person I know.

Wow. Most evil? You must walk on the mild side.

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

Oh boy, do I wish we had a watertight convention that any allusion to Godwin's Law was cause enough to close a thread.

SS
HH

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Oh boy, do I wish we had a watertight convention that any allusion to Godwin's Law was cause enough to close a thread.

SS
HH

Then you would have had to close the Purgatory thread after No Prophets post and saved everyone a lot of trouble.

I don't walk on the mild side at all. I've met murderers and people who have done quite a few nasty crimes in the rooms of AA, and I have more respect for every one of those people than No Prophet.

No Prophet is toxic. An apologist for genocide and terror. Not Satan, but the guy who nips out to the shops to buy Satan a packet of cigarettes.

[ 10. February 2013, 12:00: Message edited by: deano ]

Posted by PeteC (# 10422) on :

Do it anyway. Then the Hellions can start another thread on Dean O.

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

quote:
Originally posted by PeteC:
Do it anyway. Then the Hellions can start another thread on Dean O.

Like I care about what No Prophet thinks about me. It's like caring about what what the parasites in dog shite think about the person who's shoe they are clinging to.

In fact, I'd welcome a rule about Godwins law. That may well curtail the vast bulk of No Prohets posts.

Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
An apologist for genocide and terror.

How do apologists for torture differ, exactly, from apologists for genocide and terror, you bigoted sadist with shit for brains?

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
An apologist for genocide and terror.
How do apologists for torture differ, exactly, from apologists for genocide and terror, you bigoted sadist with shit for brains?

By recognising that one group is trying to save innocent people. No Prohpet is equating the SS, who butchered the innocent with a democratically accountable institution.

A viler hypocrite I've yet to meet.

Posted by the giant cheeseburger (# 10942) on :

Try looking in the mirror.

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:

quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
An apologist for genocide and terror.
How do apologists for torture differ, exactly, from apologists for genocide and terror, you bigoted sadist with shit for brains?
By recognising that one group is trying to save innocent people. No Prohpet is equating the SS, who butchered the innocent with a democratically accountable institution.

Are you suggesting that the CIA is democratically accountable? While it is under the law, the existence of an explicit "CIA Accountability Act" shows that there shortcomings in the CIA's supposed accountability regarding, say, aspects of the 9/11 investigations amongst its many covert operations. After all, a covert operation that you report to a House committee on doesn't stay covert for long.

Anyone who suggests that Britain's secret services end with MI5, MI6 and Special Branch is missing the point about secret services.

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
By recognising that one group is trying to save innocent people. No Prohpet is equating the SS, who butchered the innocent with a democratically accountable institution.

A viler hypocrite I've yet to meet.

While it's difficult to ascertain the number of civilians killed in CIA drone strikes, a rough figure of 50 civilians to 1 suspect (note, suspect) is given.

They're not trying to save 'innocent people'. That's a gloss you're putting on it to make yourself feel, well, less racist perhaps, I don' t know.

What they're doing - their mission parameters - is to kill people they believe to be enemies of the USA. We can argue about the burden of proof required to unleash the Hellfire missiles, but the simple fact is that suspected enemies of the USA are killed with around 49 other people who happen to either live with them or next to them, or are driving past them, at the time of their deaths.

So to say they're 'protecting innocent people' is just false.

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

No prophet basically said the victims of the SS are the same as those under investigation by the CIA. That the people under cia investigation are the same as those little boys who had their balls cut off or gassed or used as slaves.

I can look in a mirror just fine.

Apologists for No Prophet need to consider what that piece of sludge is saying.

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
people under cia investigation

No, that's not right. You're using "using CIA investigation" as a euphemism for "on a CIA kill list".

And what about the 50 people who will die around them? Any thoughts about them? Or about the person who presses the button knowing that they're going to kill innocent people along with the suspect?

Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
No prophet basically said the victims of the SS are the same as those under investigation by the CIA. That the people under cia investigation are the same as those little boys who had their balls cut off or gassed or used as slaves.

1. Where did no prophet say this? Please enlighten us with quotes from no prophet. Alternatively, learn to read.

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
I can look in a mirror just fine.

Does this mean it's okay with you for US institutions to disobey laws they've agreed to uphold? Do you pick and choose which laws to obey and which to ignore?

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
Apologists for No Prophet need to consider what that piece of sludge is saying.

A number of us have. Notice that no prophet has not been called to Hell over the comparison s/he actually made, which was NOT about victims, but about institutions using torture.

[ 10. February 2013, 14:09: Message edited by: Porridge ]

Posted by Fool on the hill (# 9428) on :

Lol, I'm not sure why anyone is bothering with deano. He's morbidly hilarious.

Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on :

Indeed.

I do believe that it is possible to have a reasoned debate about things like torture (my view is that deano is lucky to not have dark skin and be Muslim and share the name of a suspected terrorist. I say that, as I read in German a report of someone who had the same name as a terrorist suspect who was from Germany, went to Macedonia on holiday, was arrested, taken to Afghanistan and tortured. He's now been paid 70,000 Euros compensation).

This is deano we are talking about though. Him taking the moral high ground? [Killing me]

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
No prophet basically said the victims of the SS are the same as those under investigation by the CIA. That the people under cia investigation are the same as those little boys who had their balls cut off or gassed or used as slaves.

I can look in a mirror just fine.

Apologists for No Prophet need to consider what that piece of sludge is saying.

It is difficult to crawl under the bar set by the SS.
However, those who torture people they believe to be innocent are doing their best limbo walk in imitation.

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :

Yes, it's not really to with morality, is it? It becomes a pragmatic thing, I suppose. You use whatever methods you can get away, in order to kill the bad guys. Of course, the bad guys also see you as the bad guys, so there are massive amounts of mutual projection - no, they're the ones who are bad, we are good. This is both hilarious and tragic.

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

I've just realised, I'm dealing with a bunch of conspiracy theorists.

That explains everything, the paranoia, the irrationality, and the delusional defensiveness.

The CIA = SS and Elvis faked the moon landings, and anyone who disagrees is an agent of "the man".

No Prophet is still a spineless, cowardly pile of cancer though.

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
I've just realised, I'm dealing with a bunch of conspiracy theorists.

Nope. We're dealing with someone who hasn't a clue what "innocent" means, and worse still, doesn't care.

I'm not sure what that makes you, but I think ken's OP gets close.

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

No. He's not even in the right ballpark.

But I guess the conspiracy theorists cannot buy that.

Innocent: To be working in the World Trade Centre at 9 am on September 11th, 2001.

That's what it means.

[ 10. February 2013, 16:02: Message edited by: deano ]

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
.... the paranoia, the irrationality, and the delusional defensiveness.

deano on deano.

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

Conspiracy theorists? I've given you a solid refutation of the efficacy of torture. So their is not practical reason to use it. I've given you a concrete example of torture being used whilst the majority of the torturers thought the victim innocent.
And you think we have blinders on? You think we are irrational?
I think, no matter in what time you were born, no matter what system operational; you would bow to your masters and accept any explanation they cared to give. All in the name of nationalism.

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :

That seems correct. Our torture is good, whereas theirs is bad.

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

quote:
Originally posted by deano:
No. He's not even in the right ballpark.

But I guess the conspiracy theorists cannot buy that.

Innocent: To be working in the World Trade Centre at 9 am on September 11th, 2001.

That's what it means.

That's only a partial definition. To be complete you need to also add "living next door to someone on the CIA kill list".

But you don't, because you don't give a fuck about them, no matter how innocent they are.

So your definition is inherently faulty, giving you a twisted understanding of what it means to be innocent. It doesn't mean "looks like me", and it never did.

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :

Yes - we are innocent; they are guilty. Ah, the splendour of naive morality.

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :

quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
That seems correct. Our torture is good, whereas theirs is bad.

Yes . Like our bombs are are 'smart' and their's are 'dirty'.

Aye , all clever stuff .

Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :

Shane, Shane, come back!

Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:
Indeed.

I do believe that it is possible to have a reasoned debate about things like torture (my view is that deano is lucky to not have dark skin and be Muslim and share the name of a suspected terrorist. I say that, as I read in German a report of someone who had the same name as a terrorist suspect who was from Germany, went to Macedonia on holiday, was arrested, taken to Afghanistan and tortured. He's now been paid 70,000 Euros compensation).

This is deano we are talking about though. Him taking the moral high ground?

Italics mine.

But Rosa: can't you see that, by dean-o-logic, this person HAD to be tortured in order to protect the lives of those who died in the Twin Towers on 9/11?

[Ultra confused]

Posted by Tortuf (# 3784) on :

The arguments ought to be unpacked a bit.

First, are we at war with Al Qaeda? Yes.

Should we be at war with Al Qaeda? I believe so, yes. Al Qaeda is waging war with the West, it seems to be prudent to wage war with them.

Does that mean that traditional rules of war should apply? In a strictly military mission where we are trying to destroy a boots on the ground base, yes.

What does that mean exactly? Is the base away from civilians? If it is we ought to endanger as few of our soldiers as is possible. That may mean dropping a big ass bomb and then waiting around the periphery with helicopter gunships.

If it is in the middle of a town? Small smart bombs or no bombs and assault teams with helicopter air support done in the middle of the night. Something like what happened to Bin Laden.

Do we put them on trial first? Tell me who seriously contends we ought to put an Al Qaeda military base on trial first.

So, does Al Qaeda wage war from military bases? Sometimes. Are all of the bases in Iraq and Afghanistan? No. As can be seen from where Osama Bin Laden was found, they are in Pakistan. Al Qaeda troops are in Mali doing their usual gawd awful thing.

Does that mean we ought to be taking action against Al Qaeda wherever they are? That is a question that ought to be answered from several points of view. There is bound to be a military advantage to Al Qaeda operatives wondering if they are going to have their ass blown off at any moment.

At the same time Al Qaeda and its analogs came into being because of social and economic oppression and leaders who distracted them from the oppression by telling them about the great satan. If we are seen as ruthless killers who have no compunction about killing civilians the image of the great satan will certainly be invigorated and expanded.

Do I know the answer? Nope.

So, the next two issues, torture and drones.

Torture. The military says it doesn't work. The CIA apparently says it does. I say torture is degrading to both the victim and the torturer. There is just no excuse for it.

Drones. There are a lot of reasons for drones. They are stealthy. They are cheaper than pilots and planes. They endanger fewer lives of pilots and gunners.

On the negative side, firing a missile that kills 50 civilians to one bad guy is terrible math. It appears to have us live up to the great satan moniker. If my family had been blown to bits by a drone fired missile I would probably take up arms against the US.

Maybe we could take a more subtle tack. How about machine gun drones? Less boom and fewer innocents killed.

Finally, should we have something approximating probable cause to assassinate someone with a drone? As in get the intended target a lawyer and a hearing?

Umm, somehow that doesn't work. Should it only be the President? I think he has other stuff to do. Internal standards that look to make sure it is the right person and that the person is doing or planning bad stuff? Yes.

Posted by Anglican't (# 15292) on :

quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:

quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
That seems correct. Our torture is good, whereas theirs is bad.
Yes . Like our bombs are are 'smart' and their's are 'dirty'.

Aye , all clever stuff .

Presumably 'smart' bombs are so-called because they are designed to kill their intended target but nothing more, but 'dirty' bombs are designed to kill as many people as possible.

Surely that's not 'clever', simply just descriptive?

Posted by Arethosemyfeet (# 17047) on :

Al Qaeda is a terrorist organisation. They have no authority to wage war any more than the IRA. That makes them criminals, who should be prosecuted.

Posted by RuthW (# 13) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
Al Qaeda is a terrorist organisation. They have no authority to wage war any more than the IRA. That makes them criminals, who should be prosecuted.

Bullshit like this is why I'm a pacifist.

Posted by Anglican't (# 15292) on :

quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:

quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
Al Qaeda is a terrorist organisation. They have no authority to wage war any more than the IRA. That makes them criminals, who should be prosecuted.
Bullshit like this is why I'm a pacifist.

While I'm not sure that I agree entirely with what arethosemyfeet had said (or certainly the possible implications of what he's said), which bit of it is supposed to be 'bullshit'?

Posted by Tortuf (# 3784) on :

The part where Al Qaeda has no authority to wage war so we can treat them like criminals.

I'll search for treaties that define who can wage war and who cannot,* but I think there are probably no treaties on the subject.

In any event, I would much rather be treated like a criminal than a combatant. They have so many more rights.

______________
*No, I won't. Who gives a shit.

Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:

quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:

quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
That seems correct. Our torture is good, whereas theirs is bad.
Yes . Like our bombs are are 'smart' and their's are 'dirty'.

Aye , all clever stuff .
Presumably 'smart' bombs are so-called because they are designed to kill their intended target but nothing more, but 'dirty' bombs are designed to kill as many people as possible.
Surely that's not 'clever', simply just descriptive?

You've worked quite hard at missing the point, haven't you?

Posted by Arethosemyfeet (# 17047) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Tortuf:
The part where Al Qaeda has no authority to wage war so we can treat them like criminals.

I'll search for treaties that define who can wage war and who cannot,* but I think there are probably no treaties on the subject.

In any event, I would much rather be treated like a criminal than a combatant. They have so many more rights.

Which was my point. I want to see due process of law, not extra-judicial murder.

Posted by Anglican't (# 15292) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:

quote:
Originally posted by ********'t:

quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:

quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
That seems correct. Our torture is good, whereas theirs is bad.
Yes . Like our bombs are are 'smart' and their's are 'dirty'.

Aye , all clever stuff .
Presumably 'smart' bombs are so-called because they are designed to kill their intended target but nothing more, but 'dirty' bombs are designed to kill as many people as possible.
Surely that's not 'clever', simply just descriptive?
You've worked quite hard at missing the point, haven't you?

Go on then, spell it out for me. Because as far as I can see, the fact that they are built with very different intentions and are used in very different ways seems to me to be a pretty important point.

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by ********'t:

quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
You've worked quite hard at missing the point, haven't you?
Go on then, spell it out for me. Because as far as I can see, the fact that they are built with very different intentions and are used in very different ways seems to me to be a pretty important point.

They are very different. One is made to kill them, the other is made to kill us.

Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :

Sioni Sais has beaten me to it .
My point is that much of we the the mis-informed public are bombarded with is propaganda.

FWIW I believe Al-Qaeda had to be engaged militarily.
It's currently politically advantageous for Westerners to be seen to use surgical strikes, minimizing civilian casualties, so as to avoid inflaming the whole of Islam.
The terrorist, as his name suggests, believes the terror tactic of killing as many people as possible and creating panic and fear is advantageous to his cause.

If, God forbid, this thing ever goes nuclear then numbers killed by either side will very quickly cease to be an issue. (That's if any of us really even know who is on whose side).

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :

quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
Sioni Sais has beaten me to it.

By more than a week, apparently [Roll Eyes]

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

Me and my son bought some new Footjoy golf shoes last weekend. £70 for mine and £40 for his (he’s ten). I thought that was pretty good. Mine will last for a good few years, and hopefully his should last him the season.

He plays, not me. Pretty good too. We are currently in “pre-season” training! The junior competitions at the local course start in March, and the Derbyshire Futures Tour starts in late June.

Should be good this year as his game has really improved over the winter with the clubs junior winter coaching. He’ll be moved back onto the “ladies” tee, as opposed to the “junior” tee’s as he brought his handicap down from 26 to 13 last season, and increased his drive from 90 yards to about 180 yards.

But his short game is his strength, and as you know you “drive for show, putt for dough!”

Posted by fletcher christian (# 13919) on :

Is this your attempt at getting this thread closed? Maybe it should be left permanently open.....like the Phelps thread [Devil]

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Is this your attempt at getting this thread closed? Maybe it should be left permanently open.....like the Phelps thread

It's worked.

Hostly Bowler on

Thread closed.

Hostly Bowler off

Sioni Sais
Hellhost

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0