The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Only caught a glimpse of this article on the bus on the way home today, but it raised the temperature of my blood by proxy. It's the Daily Mail, as you would expect, and is fronted with a rather bold headline, proclaiming:
"Why I will ignore this afternoon's three minute silence"
by Robert Fotherington-Smythe (or whoever)
Then underneath, I could just about make out:
"Because it's nothing but a goverment publicity stunt, is offensive to those who fought for us and demeans those who died in war."
Nothing but a government publicity stunt? That's all it is? Could your black little heart possibly pump a millilitre of your cold blood to your pea-sized brain so that you might possibly comprehend that it may be considered a mark of respect? To the hundreds of thousands of innocent people who were killed? And the 200 odd Brits, and the families of all those who were affected? Nothing but a publicity stunt?
God damn this paper gets my back up. And you know why? It's not because everything that happens anywhere around the world is sick and wrong and will rape your children, and it's not because its articles are written to cater for BNP-voting half-wits, no. It's because I'm pretty sure these articles are written to provoke just this kind of reaction ie. one of disgust and conflict. No one can possibly think that a respectful three minute silence is just 'a publicity stunt', no one is that stupid.
It's written to rile and offend, and it does just that, as well as stoking the fires of the pitchfork waving masses who'll gladly go out and slaughter the coloureds because their paper says they're eating all our donkeys.
The next person I see reading the Daily Mail and stroking their chin thoughtfully, I'm going to put a shotgun in their mouth, Christie Malry style, and force them to repent.
A publicity stunt. Real sensitive, a*****e.
"Why I will ignore this afternoon's three minute silence"
by Robert Fotherington-Smythe (or whoever)
Then underneath, I could just about make out:
"Because it's nothing but a goverment publicity stunt, is offensive to those who fought for us and demeans those who died in war."
Nothing but a government publicity stunt? That's all it is? Could your black little heart possibly pump a millilitre of your cold blood to your pea-sized brain so that you might possibly comprehend that it may be considered a mark of respect? To the hundreds of thousands of innocent people who were killed? And the 200 odd Brits, and the families of all those who were affected? Nothing but a publicity stunt?
God damn this paper gets my back up. And you know why? It's not because everything that happens anywhere around the world is sick and wrong and will rape your children, and it's not because its articles are written to cater for BNP-voting half-wits, no. It's because I'm pretty sure these articles are written to provoke just this kind of reaction ie. one of disgust and conflict. No one can possibly think that a respectful three minute silence is just 'a publicity stunt', no one is that stupid.
It's written to rile and offend, and it does just that, as well as stoking the fires of the pitchfork waving masses who'll gladly go out and slaughter the coloureds because their paper says they're eating all our donkeys.
The next person I see reading the Daily Mail and stroking their chin thoughtfully, I'm going to put a shotgun in their mouth, Christie Malry style, and force them to repent.
A publicity stunt. Real sensitive, a*****e.
Page:
I'll tell you what. All the people complaining about 3 minutes silence, if there is another 3 minutes next year, you'll have every right to whinge on about it being disrespectful.
To all the people complaining about money being sent, why don't you see it for what it is. A terrible disaster. Swallow the politics for once and put your hand in your pocket for someone who really needs your help at this moment. It's not going to be week in week out. Sure there's poor and homeless in this country but that can and should be dealt with in time (and hopefully will be). If you don't donate to homless charities and are complaining about cash being sent, I don't understand what your problem is in cash being sent in the first place.......
Just a thought, instead of trying to score points off faceless names on forums huh? :D
Anyhoo. Long day. bed calls.
To all the people complaining about money being sent, why don't you see it for what it is. A terrible disaster. Swallow the politics for once and put your hand in your pocket for someone who really needs your help at this moment. It's not going to be week in week out. Sure there's poor and homeless in this country but that can and should be dealt with in time (and hopefully will be). If you don't donate to homless charities and are complaining about cash being sent, I don't understand what your problem is in cash being sent in the first place.......
Just a thought, instead of trying to score points off faceless names on forums huh? :D
Anyhoo. Long day. bed calls.
there wont be one next year though will there
What's the f**king obsession with the amount of time?
Stop being so pendantic and actually feel a bit of compassion for once.
No, I'm not being all overtly sentimental, I'm attempting to be compassionate because it's far better than to be a full-bodied ignorant cynic who couldn't give a toss because they're so cool/far away/indifferent.
'Yeah, 3 minutes is just too much'
Jesus, the EXTRA MINUTE just demeans the war dead.........did not the same war dead die to preserve compassion and understanding?!
Stop being so pendantic and actually feel a bit of compassion for once.
No, I'm not being all overtly sentimental, I'm attempting to be compassionate because it's far better than to be a full-bodied ignorant cynic who couldn't give a toss because they're so cool/far away/indifferent.
'Yeah, 3 minutes is just too much'
Jesus, the EXTRA MINUTE just demeans the war dead.........did not the same war dead die to preserve compassion and understanding?!
The Daily Mail always needs something to complain about.
Ashley wrote:
> in a way 9/11 is more tragic than the Tsunami.
Jesus...
What next? A league table of "Disasters of Our Time"? A Channel 4 program hosted by Jimmy Carr with rentaquote celebs giving us their opinion on "The Top 10...Tragedies"?
> in a way 9/11 is more tragic than the Tsunami.
Jesus...
What next? A league table of "Disasters of Our Time"? A Channel 4 program hosted by Jimmy Carr with rentaquote celebs giving us their opinion on "The Top 10...Tragedies"?
gerrid wrote:
> UrkiE-UK wrote:
> That calculation is completely irrelevant to what we're discussing.
>
>
> Explain how it is irrelevant when it is a direct reply to the
> original post.
Oh, pardon me.
Just difficult to tell.
> UrkiE-UK wrote:
> That calculation is completely irrelevant to what we're discussing.
>
>
> Explain how it is irrelevant when it is a direct reply to the
> original post.
Oh, pardon me.
Just difficult to tell.
Goatboy wrote:
> Headline today in garage
> "British deaths could treble"
Yeah, I never understand why British lives were considered more valuable than those of people from other countries.
Probably because they're not.
> Headline today in garage
> "British deaths could treble"
Yeah, I never understand why British lives were considered more valuable than those of people from other countries.
Probably because they're not.
Don’t worry. The 'papers' will soon be back to producing real news about how we almost saw Caprice’s buttocks on Celebrity Big Brother.
No, they always have been, all the way through.
Ashley wrote:
> in a way 9/11 is more tragic than the Tsunami. Whilst the death toll
> was 50 times less and the effect on the quality of life is nowhere
> near as dramatic, it was unnecessary where as at least he Tsunami was
> a natural event
in a way that's contradictory.
surely something is more tragic if it is random (ok so the tsunami wasn't exactly random, but it was natural and there was little forewarning), indiscriminant and unstoppable, rather than unnatural, planned and (worst of all) preventable?
> in a way 9/11 is more tragic than the Tsunami. Whilst the death toll
> was 50 times less and the effect on the quality of life is nowhere
> near as dramatic, it was unnecessary where as at least he Tsunami was
> a natural event
in a way that's contradictory.
surely something is more tragic if it is random (ok so the tsunami wasn't exactly random, but it was natural and there was little forewarning), indiscriminant and unstoppable, rather than unnatural, planned and (worst of all) preventable?
Page: