Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
Read in the news today that mass murderer Breivik has won part of his case against Norwegian authorities for a breach of his human rights as he had been kept in solitary.
I dont know the full details of the case (not sure if anyone will) my question to the thoughtful is - are human rights laws a double edge sword? & should someone who has commited such an atrocious vile crime be allowed to have rights especially when they have taken the life of so many??  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Serious topic - i appreciate its not for all
Read in the news today that mass murderer Breivik has won part of his case against Norwegian authorities for a breach of his human rights as he had been kept in solitary.
I dont know the full details of the case (not sure if anyone will) my question to the thoughtful is - are human rights laws a double edge sword? & should someone who has commited such an atrocious vile crime be allowed to have rights especially when they have taken the life of so many?? "Two points: . 1/ you state you don;t know the full details already - find out as much detail as you can before having an emotive reaction . 2/ you have to give, to the vilest scum, the same basic protections you would demand if you were in the same position. That is human rights. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you can't do the time, don't do the crime." He wasn't appealing his sentence, just his treatment within prison. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. He wasn't appealing his sentence, just his treatment within prison. " But that doesn't rhyme.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Serious topic - i appreciate its not for all
Read in the news today that mass murderer Breivik has won part of his case against Norwegian authorities for a breach of his human rights as he had been kept in solitary.
I dont know the full details of the case (not sure if anyone will) my question to the thoughtful is - are human rights laws a double edge sword? & should someone who has commited such an atrocious vile crime be allowed to have rights especially when they have taken the life of so many??
Two points:
.
1/ you state you don;t know the full details already - find out as much detail as you can before having an emotive reaction
.
2/ you have to give, to the vilest scum, the same basic protections you would demand if you were in the same position. That is human rights."Ok Point.1 it wasn't an emotive reaction it was a general thought. I dont believe i need to find out the full details of a story to have a GENERAL discussion & Point.2 he was in solitary confinement not unprotected or at risk of harm | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. He wasn't appealing his sentence, just his treatment within prison. But that doesn't rhyme. "He wasn't appealing his sentence, he shows no repentance. He wasn't treated fair, he wants to get square. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. He wasn't appealing his sentence, just his treatment within prison. But that doesn't rhyme.
He wasn't appealing his sentence, he shows no repentance. He wasn't treated fair, he wants to get square. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some opinion can be controversial, this maybe one of those options but: To do what he did, I think most people would agree, would most likely involve some degree of mental fragility... Or at the very least, a suceptability to be 'brainwashed' either by others or autonomously. What he did was as horrible as one can imagine, but an ill man deserves the right to be treated humanely.. " Was he really ill though? Even now when he was attending courts for these hearings regarding the matter of inhumane treatment he was given a nazi salute im court further demonstrating his extreme right wing beliefs and ideology. I personally believe what he did he was in full control of his actions and will and wasnt 'brainwashed' into doing. Thats just my opinion though | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just cos he's a criminal, doesn't mean people can commit crimes upon him. People seem to forget that when people do abhorrent things. " I agree. It is quite contradictory of the authorities to punish him for breaching the rights of his victims yet breach his as well. I feel they need to set a fair example. And have done in taking them to court over this. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some opinion can be controversial, this maybe one of those options but: To do what he did, I think most people would agree, would most likely involve some degree of mental fragility... Or at the very least, a suceptability to be 'brainwashed' either by others or autonomously. What he did was as horrible as one can imagine, but an ill man deserves the right to be treated humanely.. Was he really ill though? Even now when he was attending courts for these hearings regarding the matter of inhumane treatment he was given a nazi salute im court further demonstrating his extreme right wing beliefs and ideology. I personally believe what he did he was in full control of his actions and will and wasnt 'brainwashed' into doing. Thats just my opinion though " I see your point, but I would say that having an extreme right wing view, and following it to this extreme, does suggest a level of belief in an ideology that defys rational thoughts. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Our human rights laws reflect very well on us as a society. We should protect them at all costs. " this.. once 'we' take away someone's human rights because they are really bad or did something really horrendous then its a bit of a slippery slope.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"More people will be bothered about Breviks human rights over the rights of those he decided to kill en masse. " I doubt that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"More people will be bothered about Breviks human rights over the rights of those he decided to kill en masse. " Do you feel thier rotting corpses are suffering some form of opression? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Our human rights laws reflect very well on us as a society. We should protect them at all costs. this.. once 'we' take away someone's human rights because they are really bad or did something really horrendous then its a bit of a slippery slope.." Can i turn this around and ask, what rights is someone entitled to when they have taken the basic right of living away from someone else? Or When should human rights laws be applied and should those who commit such levels of wrong be given the same rights? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Our human rights laws reflect very well on us as a society. We should protect them at all costs. this.. once 'we' take away someone's human rights because they are really bad or did something really horrendous then its a bit of a slippery slope.. Can i turn this around and ask, what rights is someone entitled to when they have taken the basic right of living away from someone else? Or When should human rights laws be applied and should those who commit such levels of wrong be given the same rights?" Human rights should always be in adhered to. We have regulations in place that should be followed. It's not changed because of how likeable a person is. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"More people will be bothered about Breviks human rights over the rights of those he decided to kill en masse. Do you feel thier rotting corpses are suffering some form of opression?" Oh dear. The daft assumptions on the thoughts in someone's mind come out. The statement made proven within moments
Anders. Upset as he's being starved of a family life. The poor lamb. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"More people will be bothered about Breviks human rights over the rights of those he decided to kill en masse. Do you feel thier rotting corpses are suffering some form of opression? Oh dear. The daft assumptions on the thoughts in someone's mind come out. The statement made proven within moments
Anders. Upset as he's being starved of a family life. The poor lamb."I read your post in the voice of Christopher Lee in my head for some reason. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Our human rights laws reflect very well on us as a society. We should protect them at all costs. this.. once 'we' take away someone's human rights because they are really bad or did something really horrendous then its a bit of a slippery slope.. Can i turn this around and ask, what rights is someone entitled to when they have taken the basic right of living away from someone else? Or When should human rights laws be applied and should those who commit such levels of wrong be given the same rights? Human rights should always be in adhered to. We have regulations in place that should be followed. It's not changed because of how likeable a person is. " Agreed - its not a popularity contest and applied to the most likeable people only. The point i was trying to make is should they be applied universally or should there be a restriction based on the level of the crime you commit and are found guilty of? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Our human rights laws reflect very well on us as a society. We should protect them at all costs. this.. once 'we' take away someone's human rights because they are really bad or did something really horrendous then its a bit of a slippery slope.. Can i turn this around and ask, what rights is someone entitled to when they have taken the basic right of living away from someone else? Or When should human rights laws be applied and should those who commit such levels of wrong be given the same rights?" The punishment is a restriction of liberty. If we then say that human rights don't apply any longer then it becomes fair game to say that we should punish them further by, perhaps, whipping them every day or only giving them bread and water or no access to medical care if they are ill. Where does it stop? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Our human rights laws reflect very well on us as a society. We should protect them at all costs. this.. once 'we' take away someone's human rights because they are really bad or did something really horrendous then its a bit of a slippery slope.. Can i turn this around and ask, what rights is someone entitled to when they have taken the basic right of living away from someone else? Or When should human rights laws be applied and should those who commit such levels of wrong be given the same rights? Human rights should always be in adhered to. We have regulations in place that should be followed. It's not changed because of how likeable a person is. Agreed - its not a popularity contest and applied to the most likeable people only. The point i was trying to make is should they be applied universally or should there be a restriction based on the level of the crime you commit and are found guilty of? " A human right isn't a luxury only for the "good people". | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"More people will be bothered about Breviks human rights over the rights of those he decided to kill en masse. Do you feel thier rotting corpses are suffering some form of opression? Oh dear. The daft assumptions on the thoughts in someone's mind come out. The statement made proven within moments
Anders. Upset as he's being starved of a family life. The poor lamb."Dead people dont have human rights because well thier dead. So the emotive little sound bite "people care more about his human rights than the dead peoples" is an utterly pointless comment to make. You can do whatever you like to him, shoot him, flay him, burn him at the stake. Aint gonna make the dead anymore comfortable or uphold thier "rights" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Our human rights laws reflect very well on us as a society. We should protect them at all costs. this.. once 'we' take away someone's human rights because they are really bad or did something really horrendous then its a bit of a slippery slope.. Can i turn this around and ask, what rights is someone entitled to when they have taken the basic right of living away from someone else? Or When should human rights laws be applied and should those who commit such levels of wrong be given the same rights?" the punishment as it stands is the loss of freedom due to incarceration so for me there are still certain fundamental rights that the state should maintain or not tinker with.. someone like Brevik should like Hindley etc have the same rights as you or i who get banged up for something far less.. its what sets us above other countries, not because we can say look at us but because someone should maintain a civilised society, not saying we are perfect or that we dont get things wrong etc.. once the legislators take away the rights from the perpetrators of the most heinous crimes because its populist then it's a 'who's next' issue for whomever.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. He wasn't appealing his sentence, just his treatment within prison. " Prison is not supposed to be a bed of roses, it is a punishment as well as protecting society from evil and dangerous people. If you don't want to serve time in an austere regime then don't commit crime. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. He wasn't appealing his sentence, just his treatment within prison. Prison is not supposed to be a bed of roses, it is a punishment as well as protecting society from evil and dangerous people. If you don't want to serve time in an austere regime then don't commit crime. " After school detention ain't supposed to be fun. Doesn't mean you can waterboard kids during it. Get some logic ffs. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. He wasn't appealing his sentence, just his treatment within prison. Prison is not supposed to be a bed of roses, it is a punishment as well as protecting society from evil and dangerous people. If you don't want to serve time in an austere regime then don't commit crime. " So you don't think prisons ought to be regulated? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. He wasn't appealing his sentence, just his treatment within prison. Prison is not supposed to be a bed of roses, it is a punishment as well as protecting society from evil and dangerous people. If you don't want to serve time in an austere regime then don't commit crime. " in your austere regime is there any rehabilitation, education etc.. mine would have it.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"More people will be bothered about Breviks human rights over the rights of those he decided to kill en masse. Do you feel thier rotting corpses are suffering some form of opression? Oh dear. The daft assumptions on the thoughts in someone's mind come out. The statement made proven within moments
Anders. Upset as he's being starved of a family life. The poor lamb.
Dead people dont have human rights because well thier dead.
So the emotive little sound bite "people care more about his human rights than the dead peoples" is an utterly pointless comment to make.
You can do whatever you like to him, shoot him, flay him, burn him at the stake.
Aint gonna make the dead anymore comfortable or uphold thier "rights""What I typed "More people will be bothered about Breviks human rights over the rights of those he decided to kill en masse". How you read that, as you've typed quote "people care more about his human rights than the dead peoples" Try reading what was said not what you think was said whilst epitomising the point it was making  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Our human rights laws reflect very well on us as a society. We should protect them at all costs. this.. once 'we' take away someone's human rights because they are really bad or did something really horrendous then its a bit of a slippery slope.. Can i turn this around and ask, what rights is someone entitled to when they have taken the basic right of living away from someone else? Or When should human rights laws be applied and should those who commit such levels of wrong be given the same rights? Human rights should always be in adhered to. We have regulations in place that should be followed. It's not changed because of how likeable a person is. Agreed - its not a popularity contest and applied to the most likeable people only. The point i was trying to make is should they be applied universally or should there be a restriction based on the level of the crime you commit and are found guilty of? A human right isn't a luxury only for the "good people". " No it is not just for good people, i do however believe that human rights could be suited to the crime commited. However that is my opinion and mine only. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"More people will be bothered about Breviks human rights over the rights of those he decided to kill en masse. " An individual can't breach another's human rights. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Serious topic - i appreciate its not for all
Read in the news today that mass murderer Breivik has won part of his case against Norwegian authorities for a breach of his human rights as he had been kept in solitary.
I dont know the full details of the case (not sure if anyone will) my question to the thoughtful is - are human rights laws a double edge sword? & should someone who has commited such an atrocious vile crime be allowed to have rights especially when they have taken the life of so many?? "that is the only part of the case against the norwegian govt he won.... he lost the bits saying that he should be allowed the thoughts and writing allowed to be known to the general public...... i didn't realise he was being held alone, and not in some special supermax type unit | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" No it is not just for good people, i do however believe that human rights could be suited to the crime commited. However that is my opinion and mine only." Thank goodness our courts don't agree with you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" No it is not just for good people, i do however believe that human rights could be suited to the crime commited. However that is my opinion and mine only. Thank goodness our courts don't agree with you. " Im not asking anyone to agree with me im giving my opinion on a subject and asking for other peoples opinions. Its been a while since i came on the forums but its nice to see my old 'fan club' still chasing after me
BTW do you know which one of our courts made the decision? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" No it is not just for good people, i do however believe that human rights could be suited to the crime commited. However that is my opinion and mine only. Thank goodness our courts don't agree with you. Im not asking anyone to agree with me im giving my opinion on a subject and asking for other peoples opinions. Its been a while since i came on the forums but its nice to see my old 'fan club' still chasing after me
BTW do you know which one of our courts made the decision?"You feeling a bit paranoid fella? My response wasn't about you, it was my opinion on the subject matter. Isn't that what the thread is after? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"More people will be bothered about Breviks human rights over the rights of those he decided to kill en masse. Do you feel thier rotting corpses are suffering some form of opression? Oh dear. The daft assumptions on the thoughts in someone's mind come out. The statement made proven within moments
Anders. Upset as he's being starved of a family life. The poor lamb.
Dead people dont have human rights because well thier dead.
So the emotive little sound bite "people care more about his human rights than the dead peoples" is an utterly pointless comment to make.
You can do whatever you like to him, shoot him, flay him, burn him at the stake.
Aint gonna make the dead anymore comfortable or uphold thier "rights"
What I typed "More people will be bothered about Breviks human rights over the rights of those he decided to kill en masse".
How you read that, as you've typed quote "people care more about his human rights than the dead peoples"
Try reading what was said not what you think was said whilst epitomising the point it was making "Errr thats what youve said ""More people will be bothered about Breviks human rights over the rights of those he decided to kill en masse". How exactly can anyone violate the rights of the dead at this point? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" No it is not just for good people, i do however believe that human rights could be suited to the crime commited. However that is my opinion and mine only. Thank goodness our courts don't agree with you. Im not asking anyone to agree with me im giving my opinion on a subject and asking for other peoples opinions. Its been a while since i came on the forums but its nice to see my old 'fan club' still chasing after me
BTW do you know which one of our courts made the decision?
You feeling a bit paranoid fella? My response wasn't about you, it was my opinion on the subject matter.
Isn't that what the thread is after? "Not paranoid at all though it is a unique trait you have in picking out my posts in any thread i respond to. Even though i haven't been on for a while and the last time i was on here i specifically highlighted this trait of yours, somehow you still manage it tonight. I guess its just coincidence we happen to be online at the same night at the same time in the same forum
Everyone is welcome to an opinion so you carry on sunshine  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you can't do the time, don't do the crime. He wasn't appealing his sentence, just his treatment within prison. Prison is not supposed to be a bed of roses, it is a punishment as well as protecting society from evil and dangerous people. If you don't want to serve time in an austere regime then don't commit crime. After school detention ain't supposed to be fun. Doesn't mean you can waterboard kids during it. Get some logic ffs. " was he waterboarded? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He's human, he gets human rights, it's that simple. There is no action a person could take that would stop them being human. Our society should guard against blurring the line between punishment and impinging someones human rights."  Yes this.
I'm not wholly convinced all the things raised in his case actually *are* what I'd deem to be infringements of his human rights, but I'm not a judge. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" No it is not just for good people, i do however believe that human rights could be suited to the crime commited. However that is my opinion and mine only. Thank goodness our courts don't agree with you. Im not asking anyone to agree with me im giving my opinion on a subject and asking for other peoples opinions. Its been a while since i came on the forums but its nice to see my old 'fan club' still chasing after me
BTW do you know which one of our courts made the decision?
You feeling a bit paranoid fella? My response wasn't about you, it was my opinion on the subject matter.
Isn't that what the thread is after?
Not paranoid at all though it is a unique trait you have in picking out my posts in any thread i respond to.
Even though i haven't been on for a while and the last time i was on here i specifically highlighted this trait of yours, somehow you still manage it tonight. I guess its just coincidence we happen to be online at the same night at the same time in the same forum
Everyone is welcome to an opinion so you carry on sunshine "I don't know who you are fella, and I don't remember any such exchange. You don't register on my radar. I like you haven't used the forums very much lately, but my understanding of the way it works is if somebody starts a thread it's because they would like other people to give their opinion on the subject. Your reaction to my opinion seems....well let's just say, I don't know where you're coming from. Back on topic, I do think that the courts were also correct in rejecting some of his other points. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry but to demand human rights you have to be human. He ceased to be classed as human once first shot was fired. The guy is an attention seeking, remorseless egomaniac. The only difference between him and isis is he has different religions beliefs. And they are inhuman. " Yeah let's dehumanise people and put them in big camps. What could go wrong... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry but to demand human rights you have to be human. He ceased to be classed as human once first shot was fired. The guy is an attention seeking, remorseless egomaniac. The only difference between him and isis is he has different religions beliefs. And they are inhuman. Yeah let's dehumanise people and put them in big camps. What could go wrong... " Crikey talk about taking something right out of context. That's just being inflammatory for the sake of it. There is a difference between locking up suspects into a big camp without trial or conviction. As apposed to a know criminal, convicted of a horrendous crime against humanity, being locked up. Besides the conditions that he is being kept in could hardly be classed as inhuman. A three room cell with a mini gym, ensuite facilities, satellite TV and room service!! Well meals delivered to his room. Basically room service. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry but to demand human rights you have to be human. He ceased to be classed as human once first shot was fired. The guy is an attention seeking, remorseless egomaniac. The only difference between him and isis is he has different religions beliefs. And they are inhuman. Yeah let's dehumanise people and put them in big camps. What could go wrong... Crikey talk about taking something right out of context. That's just being inflammatory for the sake of it. There is a difference between locking up suspects into a big camp without trial or conviction. As apposed to a know criminal, convicted of a horrendous crime against humanity, being locked up. Besides the conditions that he is being kept in could hardly be classed as inhuman. A three room cell with a mini gym, ensuite facilities, satellite TV and room service!! Well meals delivered to his room. Basically room service. " I reckon the problem is that this prison took it upon themselves to decide what is or isn't inhumane, and ignored the law. That's not a good precedent. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry but to demand human rights you have to be human. He ceased to be classed as human once first shot was fired. The guy is an attention seeking, remorseless egomaniac. The only difference between him and isis is he has different religions beliefs. And they are inhuman. Yeah let's dehumanise people and put them in big camps. What could go wrong... Crikey talk about taking something right out of context. That's just being inflammatory for the sake of it. There is a difference between locking up suspects into a big camp without trial or conviction. As apposed to a know criminal, convicted of a horrendous crime against humanity, being locked up. Besides the conditions that he is being kept in could hardly be classed as inhuman. A three room cell with a mini gym, ensuite facilities, satellite TV and room service!! Well meals delivered to his room. Basically room service. I reckon the problem is that this prison took it upon themselves to decide what is or isn't inhumane, and ignored the law. That's not a good precedent. " Good point. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Intesting when people from other parts of the world committ the same crimes people have no problem with dropping bombs and shooting them where's there human rights? But now he deserves human rights he should be in guantamo " when its combatant against the same, and there are many 'variations' within that context then yes its the way of things to neutralise the opposition but once you capture them then they have certain rights which should be upheld.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry but to demand human rights you have to be human. He ceased to be classed as human once first shot was fired. The guy is an attention seeking, remorseless egomaniac. The only difference between him and isis is he has different religions beliefs. And they are inhuman. Yeah let's dehumanise people and put them in big camps. What could go wrong... Crikey talk about taking something right out of context. That's just being inflammatory for the sake of it. There is a difference between locking up suspects into a big camp without trial or conviction. As apposed to a know criminal, convicted of a horrendous crime against humanity, being locked up. Besides the conditions that he is being kept in could hardly be classed as inhuman. A three room cell with a mini gym, ensuite facilities, satellite TV and room service!! Well meals delivered to his room. Basically room service. " It's not out of context at all. What most people fail to grasp is that dehumanisation is a process, not a single event. It always starts on the fringes with people that are broadly disliked. The problem is that it keeps going. Nobody likes terrorists do they so let's lock them up in a Cuban prison and have them kneel in Cuban heat for hours on end without trial. Well if it's ok to do that to them then it's definately ok to torture a nordic nut job who has had a trial... It's laughable you think the conditions were ok, humans are wired to need social interaction. We have been social beings for millions and millions of years. Our brains can't cope with solitary confinement. Unless you've actually been there, it's hard to imagine what it can do to you. Solitary confinement is torture. Torture violates human rights. He is a human. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think some people are thinking Breviks in Guantanamo alongside feeling sorry for him. Being real Guantanamo doesnt even come into the Brevik equation. The poor lamb didnt consider 70-80 people's human rights before he killed them all. Solitary confinement and no chance of a private & family life whilst he serving the his sentence and it's shock horror. Brevik, human rights, moral high ground. What next advocates of dietary advice from Jeffrey Dahmer." You wouldn't last 24 hours in solitary | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" You wouldn't last 24 hours in solitary" I'm not sure anyone's made a claim they would last in solitary. Plus no one here finds themselves in it, as they've not killed 70-80 innocents. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" You wouldn't last 24 hours in solitary I'm not sure anyone's made a claim they would last in solitary. Plus no one here finds themselves in it, as they've not killed 70-80 innocents." It's torture. We don't torture people regardless of what crimes they've done. That's the fundamental basis of human rights. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" You wouldn't last 24 hours in solitary I'm not sure anyone's made a claim they would last in solitary. Plus no one here finds themselves in it, as they've not killed 70-80 innocents. It's torture. We don't torture people regardless of what crimes they've done. That's the fundamental basis of human rights. " If only 70-80 innocent people's human rights had been respected this thread wouldn't even be
As said earlier 'What next, advocates of dietary advice from Jeffrey Dahmer'
Nn | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry but to demand human rights you have to be human. He ceased to be classed as human once first shot was fired. The guy is an attention seeking, remorseless egomaniac. The only difference between him and isis is he has different religions beliefs. And they are inhuman. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Sorry but to demand human rights you have to be human. He ceased to be classed as human once first shot was fired. The guy is an attention seeking, remorseless egomaniac. The only difference between him and isis is he has different religions beliefs. And they are inhuman. "If you don't believe in the concept of human rights then that's your privilege. But don't pretend to support them and twist what they mean. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Surely this comes down to why he's in solitary. As a form of aditional punsihment or as protection?" More so he's not shived in general population... We have to treat them well, or risk becoming the vile thing we hate.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"All those who care for the killers rights.....what about the rights of the person he killed? I believe he lost his rights when he decided to live outside the law and commit a heinous crime. " That's fine, you don't agree with the concept of human rights. That's your choice. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"All those who care for the killers rights.....what about the rights of the person he killed? I believe he lost his rights when he decided to live outside the law and commit a heinous crime. That's fine, you don't agree with the concept of human rights. That's your choice. " Don't talk to me in the forums. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"All those who care for the killers rights.....what about the rights of the person he killed? I believe he lost his rights when he decided to live outside the law and commit a heinous crime. That's fine, you don't agree with the concept of human rights. That's your choice. Don't talk to me in the forums. " Don't post in the forums then. Don't know who you are, it's a public forum. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"All those who care for the killers rights.....what about the rights of the person he killed? I believe he lost his rights when he decided to live outside the law and commit a heinous crime. That's fine, you don't agree with the concept of human rights. That's your choice. Don't talk to me in the forums. Don't post in the forums then. Don't know who you are, it's a public forum. " He's Brighton Steve From Brighton!
Smile and be friendly it's Friday | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"All those who care for the killers rights.....what about the rights of the person he killed? I believe he lost his rights when he decided to live outside the law and commit a heinous crime. That's fine, you don't agree with the concept of human rights. That's your choice. Don't talk to me in the forums. " lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"All those who care for the killers rights.....what about the rights of the person he killed? I believe he lost his rights when he decided to live outside the law and commit a heinous crime. " Oh, yes, bring back the death sentence. Not. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"All those who care for the killers rights.....what about the rights of the person he killed? I believe he lost his rights when he decided to live outside the law and commit a heinous crime. Oh, yes, bring back the death sentence. Not." that is the best line on this thread exsept the not they should bring it back. Especially for crimes this bad. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"All those who care for the killers rights.....what about the rights of the person he killed? I believe he lost his rights when he decided to live outside the law and commit a heinous crime. Oh, yes, bring back the death sentence. Not. that is the best line on this thread exsept the not they should bring it back. Especially for crimes this bad. " Ya cockwomble... The Not! Is the point of that line... If he's dead he can't be punished | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"All those who care for the killers rights.....what about the rights of the person he killed? I believe he lost his rights when he decided to live outside the law and commit a heinous crime. Oh, yes, bring back the death sentence. Not. that is the best line on this thread exsept the not they should bring it back. Especially for crimes this bad. Ya cockwomble... The Not! Is the point of that line... If he's dead he can't be punished "It is about respect. Not sure why he wants to be out of solitary, mind. It will not go well for him. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just cos he's a criminal, doesn't mean people can commit crimes upon him. People seem to forget that when people do abhorrent things. " I disagree 100%,they have no human rights we are to soft. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just cos he's a criminal, doesn't mean people can commit crimes upon him. People seem to forget that when people do abhorrent things. I disagree 100%,they have no human rights we are to soft." I agree with this, he lost his human rights when he killed the 70+ people. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Lets not forget whys he's locked up. For killing 70-80 innocent people. He's not in Guantanamo, he's not being tortured Guantanamoesque, he's not been picked up at random & incarcerated for nothing. He's decided he's pissed of he's in solitary confinement and not able to have a private life & family life. The 70-80 innocents family & friends, anyone hit by the after effect of Breviks actions are probably pissed off about something too. Sadly the 70-80 had their human rights taken away so incapable of a few things never mind being pissed off. Maybe Brevik, the dear lamb, should have contemplated what he's complaining about now before he randomly killed en masse, without remorse. Poor Anders the mass killer and his human rights "For me this is not about him, it's not even about what he's done, it's about us. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just cos he's a criminal, doesn't mean people can commit crimes upon him. People seem to forget that when people do abhorrent things. " Well lets put you in a room with the parents of all the dead victims and let you explain your philosophy... No trial or human rights for those poor people. Some crimes are so abhorrent with indisputable evidence that there very human rights should be sacrificed.. What deterrent does your solution provide to the next mad man.. Lets hope its not your off spring in his way.. I think that would soon change your opinion.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just cos he's a criminal, doesn't mean people can commit crimes upon him. People seem to forget that when people do abhorrent things. Well lets put you in a room with the parents of all the dead victims and let you explain your philosophy... No trial or human rights for those poor people. Some crimes are so abhorrent with indisputable evidence that there very human rights should be sacrificed.. What deterrent does your solution provide to the next mad man.. Lets hope its not your off spring in his way.. I think that would soon change your opinion.." You're wrong to assume being a victim of a crime would change my mind, and no, I wouldnt ever consciously commit a crime upon someone. I'm able to separate emotion from such decisions. I also don't think "mad" men would respond to a deterrent. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just cos he's a criminal, doesn't mean people can commit crimes upon him. People seem to forget that when people do abhorrent things. I disagree 100%,they have no human rights we are to soft." Not being monstrous isn't the equivalent of being soft. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He should have been taken outside and shot like he did to all those kids. "Actually that's what he'd prefer too if you read the case... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just cos he's a criminal, doesn't mean people can commit crimes upon him. People seem to forget that when people do abhorrent things. Well lets put you in a room with the parents of all the dead victims and let you explain your philosophy... No trial or human rights for those poor people. Some crimes are so abhorrent with indisputable evidence that there very human rights should be sacrificed.. What deterrent does your solution provide to the next mad man.. Lets hope its not your off spring in his way.. I think that would soon change your opinion.." Bjorn Ihler a survivor of the actual massacre itself carried out by Breivik has come out in strong support of the Norwegian courts decision. He said quote: “I think at the end of the day, he deserves the same human rights as any other inmate and I don’t think he poses a particularly much larger threat than any one of those who believe in many of the same things as him who today live outside of prison and speak their hateful messages freely. “Of course, Breivik denied us all humanity and all human rights. But that does not ever make it right for us to deny him the same thing. If we do that, we follow the same logic as him I think.” | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just cos he's a criminal, doesn't mean people can commit crimes upon him. People seem to forget that when people do abhorrent things. Well lets put you in a room with the parents of all the dead victims and let you explain your philosophy... No trial or human rights for those poor people. Some crimes are so abhorrent with indisputable evidence that there very human rights should be sacrificed.. What deterrent does your solution provide to the next mad man.. Lets hope its not your off spring in his way.. I think that would soon change your opinion.. Bjorn Ihler a survivor of the actual massacre itself carried out by Breivik has come out in strong support of the Norwegian courts decision. He said quote: “I think at the end of the day, he deserves the same human rights as any other inmate and I don’t think he poses a particularly much larger threat than any one of those who believe in many of the same things as him who today live outside of prison and speak their hateful messages freely. “Of course, Breivik denied us all humanity and all human rights. But that does not ever make it right for us to deny him the same thing. If we do that, we follow the same logic as him I think.” " That is true from what's being reported in the news and what Bjorn tweeted. However there are those who survived and don't feel that way. According to the beeb (not always the best at independent reporting i must admit) Eskil Pedersen, another survivor is quoted as saying he was "surprised, and then angry and upset" by the ruling. I guess it's a bit like this thread, opinions, even of those directly involved, will differ though, from a personal perspective, it's interesting to read to the varying thoughts on the subject. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just cos he's a criminal, doesn't mean people can commit crimes upon him. People seem to forget that when people do abhorrent things. Well lets put you in a room with the parents of all the dead victims and let you explain your philosophy... No trial or human rights for those poor people. Some crimes are so abhorrent with indisputable evidence that there very human rights should be sacrificed.. What deterrent does your solution provide to the next mad man.. Lets hope its not your off spring in his way.. I think that would soon change your opinion.. You're wrong to assume being a victim of a crime would change my mind, and no, I wouldnt ever consciously commit a crime upon someone. I'm able to separate emotion from such decisions. I also don't think "mad" men would respond to a deterrent." Tell it to Lee Rigby's parents!! I'm so not wrong.. Someone who his of serious historical significance preached an eye for an eye.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just cos he's a criminal, doesn't mean people can commit crimes upon him. People seem to forget that when people do abhorrent things. Well lets put you in a room with the parents of all the dead victims and let you explain your philosophy... No trial or human rights for those poor people. Some crimes are so abhorrent with indisputable evidence that there very human rights should be sacrificed.. What deterrent does your solution provide to the next mad man.. Lets hope its not your off spring in his way.. I think that would soon change your opinion.. You're wrong to assume being a victim of a crime would change my mind, and no, I wouldnt ever consciously commit a crime upon someone. I'm able to separate emotion from such decisions. I also don't think "mad" men would respond to a deterrent. Tell it to Lee Rigby's parents!! I'm so not wrong.. Someone who his of serious historical significance preached an eye for an eye.. " Hitler (a significant historical person) also believed in ethnic cleansing. Doesn't make it right. Your argument for removing human rights is simply "this would be hard to say to the parents of a murdered person". I'm not sure that is a good enough argument. I think we'll have to keep them in place. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" For me this is not about him, it's not even about what he's done, it's about us. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So... if a dog bites someone and is considered dangerous they get put down, but a man who mass murders doesn't get the same... who is that fair to exactly? "It is actually fair to both. It is fair to treat all humans with equality. It is fair to treat dogs equally. It is not normal or therefore fair to treat some humans like one would treat dogs. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some opinion can be controversial, this maybe one of those options but: To do what he did, I think most people would agree, would most likely involve some degree of mental fragility... Or at the very least, a suceptability to be 'brainwashed' either by others or autonomously. What he did was as horrible as one can imagine, but an ill man deserves the right to be treated humanely.. " . If my dog was ill the most humane solution might come in the form of an injection... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So... if a dog bites someone and is considered dangerous they get put down, but a man who mass murders doesn't get the same... who is that fair to exactly?
It is actually fair to both.
It is fair to treat all humans with equality. It is fair to treat dogs equally.
It is not normal or therefore fair to treat some humans like one would treat dogs.
"But a man, an intelligent human, who is supposed to know logic and think rationally, kills a lot of innocent people. Did he not lose his human rights when he took their's away? He's more of a monster to do that, where as a dog is not a logical being, so does not understand the consequences of its actions. Yet we can dictate how we deal with a "dangerous" animal to prevent it from harming others again. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Norway has a criminal justice system which is the envy of most of the developed world. They do it right, their ethos works, it's irrefutable. Their success is clear in the facts and figures. Human rights are central to this ethos. Revenge is not as important as rehabilitation. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just cos he's a criminal, doesn't mean people can commit crimes upon him. People seem to forget that when people do abhorrent things. Well lets put you in a room with the parents of all the dead victims and let you explain your philosophy... No trial or human rights for those poor people. Some crimes are so abhorrent with indisputable evidence that there very human rights should be sacrificed.. What deterrent does your solution provide to the next mad man.. Lets hope its not your off spring in his way.. I think that would soon change your opinion.. You're wrong to assume being a victim of a crime would change my mind, and no, I wouldnt ever consciously commit a crime upon someone. I'm able to separate emotion from such decisions. I also don't think "mad" men would respond to a deterrent. Tell it to Lee Rigby's parents!! I'm so not wrong.. Someone who his of serious historical significance preached an eye for an eye.. " Quoting a mythical spirit in the sky? What about quoting Ghandi (who actually existed): "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So... if a dog bites someone and is considered dangerous they get put down, but a man who mass murders doesn't get the same... who is that fair to exactly?
It is actually fair to both.
It is fair to treat all humans with equality. It is fair to treat dogs equally.
It is not normal or therefore fair to treat some humans like one would treat dogs.
But a man, an intelligent human, who is supposed to know logic and think rationally, kills a lot of innocent people. Did he not lose his human rights when he took their's away? He's more of a monster to do that, where as a dog is not a logical being, so does not understand the consequences of its actions. Yet we can dictate how we deal with a "dangerous" animal to prevent it from harming others again."He's human and therefore will be afforded human rights. We are higher up the food chain than dangerous animals. They're not human so the collective we chooses not to treat them like humans. A dog has certain rights in our society as you well know, but not human rights. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Tell it to Lee Rigby's parents!! I'm so not wrong.. Someone who his of serious historical significance preached an eye for an eye.. Quoting a mythical spirit in the sky? What about quoting Ghandi (who actually existed): "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" "
I would also add that those who cling to such statements as 'an eye for an eye' when discussing modern, developed justice systems are more aligned to sharia law than western European legal frameworks.
I doubt Lee Rigby's parents would back sharia law being introduced here for obvious reasons. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
He who decided he had an interest in human rights after removing the human rights/mass murder of 70-80 innocents. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People still concerned, upset for poor Anders He who decided he had an interest in human rights after removing the human rights/mass murder of 70-80 innocents."It was dead for 2 days. You revived the thread to take the piss and be rude to people with differing views. Perhaps just get over it, it must be difficult harbouring resentment unnecessarily. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People still concerned, upset for poor Anders He who decided he had an interest in human rights after removing the human rights/mass murder of 70-80 innocents.
It was dead for 2 days. You revived the thread to take the piss and be rude to people with differing views. Perhaps just get over it, it must be difficult harbouring resentment unnecessarily. "Got to laugh at what some sensationalists read into a comment lmfao. Dear dear
Good to see you throw more vitriol in the direction of someone in a discussion that you ever would at poor Anders
Says much. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People still concerned, upset for poor Anders He who decided he had an interest in human rights after removing the human rights/mass murder of 70-80 innocents.
It was dead for 2 days. You revived the thread to take the piss and be rude to people with differing views. Perhaps just get over it, it must be difficult harbouring resentment unnecessarily.
Got to laugh at what some sensationalists read into a comment lmfao. Dear dear
Good to see you throw more vitriol in the direction of someone in a discussion that you ever would at poor Anders
Says much."I just think it's dumb to say "this is still alive?!" when it was you who revived it. I guess you're not able to see that, you don't seem the brightest. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People still concerned, upset for poor Anders He who decided he had an interest in human rights after removing the human rights/mass murder of 70-80 innocents.
It was dead for 2 days. You revived the thread to take the piss and be rude to people with differing views. Perhaps just get over it, it must be difficult harbouring resentment unnecessarily.
Got to laugh at what some sensationalists read into a comment lmfao. Dear dear
Good to see you throw more vitriol in the direction of someone in a discussion that you ever would at poor Anders
Says much.
I just think it's dumb to say "this is still alive?!" when it was you who revived it. I guess you're not able to see that, you don't seem the brightest. "Oh dear rude, resentment now not the brightest
In addition the technique of quoting things
such as - "this is still alive?!" when it was you who revived it
that certainly aint from what I've typed that's irked you is interesting too.
You've just falsely typed something up and then quoted it
Obviously seeing or reading something that aint typed by me in here. Although from someone taking greater offence from individuals in a forum discussion than they ever would from Anders killing 70-80 I suppose anythings possible.
Someone makes a point you dont like, just call them rude, resentful, not the brightest whilst imagineering a 'false quote' up. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People still concerned, upset for poor Anders He who decided he had an interest in human rights after removing the human rights/mass murder of 70-80 innocents.
It was dead for 2 days. You revived the thread to take the piss and be rude to people with differing views. Perhaps just get over it, it must be difficult harbouring resentment unnecessarily.
Got to laugh at what some sensationalists read into a comment lmfao. Dear dear
Good to see you throw more vitriol in the direction of someone in a discussion that you ever would at poor Anders
Says much.
I just think it's dumb to say "this is still alive?!" when it was you who revived it. I guess you're not able to see that, you don't seem the brightest.
Oh dear rude, resentment now not the brightest
In addition the technique of quoting things
such as - "this is still alive?!" when it was you who revived it
that certainly aint from what I've typed that's irked you is interesting too.
You've just falsely typed something up and then quoted it
Obviously seeing or reading something that aint typed by me in here. Although from someone taking greater offence from individuals in a forum discussion than they ever would from Anders killing 70-80 I suppose anythings possible.
Someone makes a point you dont like, just call them rude, resentful, not the brightest whilst imagineering a 'false quote' up."I'm confused...have you only come on this thread to have a pop at someone? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People still concerned, upset for poor Anders He who decided he had an interest in human rights after removing the human rights/mass murder of 70-80 innocents.
It was dead for 2 days. You revived the thread to take the piss and be rude to people with differing views. Perhaps just get over it, it must be difficult harbouring resentment unnecessarily.
Got to laugh at what some sensationalists read into a comment lmfao. Dear dear
Good to see you throw more vitriol in the direction of someone in a discussion that you ever would at poor Anders
Says much.
I just think it's dumb to say "this is still alive?!" when it was you who revived it. I guess you're not able to see that, you don't seem the brightest.
Oh dear rude, resentment now not the brightest
In addition the technique of quoting things
such as - "this is still alive?!" when it was you who revived it
that certainly aint from what I've typed that's irked you is interesting too.
You've just falsely typed something up and then quoted it
Obviously seeing or reading something that aint typed by me in here. Although from someone taking greater offence from individuals in a forum discussion than they ever would from Anders killing 70-80 I suppose anythings possible.
Someone makes a point you dont like, just call them rude, resentful, not the brightest whilst imagineering a 'false quote' up.
I'm confused...have you only come on this thread to have a pop at someone?"Cos he can only say dumb, mean stuff. And he can't understand embellishment. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People still concerned, upset for poor Anders He who decided he had an interest in human rights after removing the human rights/mass murder of 70-80 innocents.
It was dead for 2 days. You revived the thread to take the piss and be rude to people with differing views. Perhaps just get over it, it must be difficult harbouring resentment unnecessarily.
Got to laugh at what some sensationalists read into a comment lmfao. Dear dear
Good to see you throw more vitriol in the direction of someone in a discussion that you ever would at poor Anders
Says much.
I just think it's dumb to say "this is still alive?!" when it was you who revived it. I guess you're not able to see that, you don't seem the brightest.
Oh dear rude, resentment now not the brightest
In addition the technique of quoting things
such as - "this is still alive?!" when it was you who revived it
that certainly aint from what I've typed that's irked you is interesting too.
You've just falsely typed something up and then quoted it
Obviously seeing or reading something that aint typed by me in here. Although from someone taking greater offence from individuals in a forum discussion than they ever would from Anders killing 70-80 I suppose anythings possible.
Someone makes a point you dont like, just call them rude, resentful, not the brightest whilst imagineering a 'false quote' up.
I'm confused...have you only come on this thread to have a pop at someone?
Cos he can only say dumb, mean stuff. And he can't understand embellishment."Ahh, for the latest installment ^^^ I'm dumb & mean and go on to explain away your imagineering/false quoting as embellishment. As already said, someone makes a point you do not like, just call them rude, resentful, not the brightest whilst imagineering a 'false quote' up. The diddums, foot stamping & techniques some adopt when someone has a difference of opinion. Name calling, insulting and imagineering words/terms they aint typed to "quote" them, aka lying, making stuff up (very different to embellishment). All the best with concern/pity or whatever it is for Anders Brevik. Also all the best with the vitriol for those with less concern/pity towards the zero remorse killer of 70-80 innocents too. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People still concerned, upset for poor Anders He who decided he had an interest in human rights after removing the human rights/mass murder of 70-80 innocents.
It was dead for 2 days. You revived the thread to take the piss and be rude to people with differing views. Perhaps just get over it, it must be difficult harbouring resentment unnecessarily.
Got to laugh at what some sensationalists read into a comment lmfao. Dear dear
Good to see you throw more vitriol in the direction of someone in a discussion that you ever would at poor Anders
Says much.
I just think it's dumb to say "this is still alive?!" when it was you who revived it. I guess you're not able to see that, you don't seem the brightest.
Oh dear rude, resentment now not the brightest
In addition the technique of quoting things
such as - "this is still alive?!" when it was you who revived it
that certainly aint from what I've typed that's irked you is interesting too.
You've just falsely typed something up and then quoted it
Obviously seeing or reading something that aint typed by me in here. Although from someone taking greater offence from individuals in a forum discussion than they ever would from Anders killing 70-80 I suppose anythings possible.
Someone makes a point you dont like, just call them rude, resentful, not the brightest whilst imagineering a 'false quote' up."If you've seen enough of the thread and dislike what others write, consider that less is often more. You could open a new topic if you would like differing views upon something of interest, where there's nothing to offend anyone. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People still concerned, upset for poor Anders He who decided he had an interest in human rights after removing the human rights/mass murder of 70-80 innocents.
It was dead for 2 days. You revived the thread to take the piss and be rude to people with differing views. Perhaps just get over it, it must be difficult harbouring resentment unnecessarily.
Got to laugh at what some sensationalists read into a comment lmfao. Dear dear
Good to see you throw more vitriol in the direction of someone in a discussion that you ever would at poor Anders
Says much.
I just think it's dumb to say "this is still alive?!" when it was you who revived it. I guess you're not able to see that, you don't seem the brightest.
Oh dear rude, resentment now not the brightest
In addition the technique of quoting things
such as - "this is still alive?!" when it was you who revived it
that certainly aint from what I've typed that's irked you is interesting too.
You've just falsely typed something up and then quoted it
Obviously seeing or reading something that aint typed by me in here. Although from someone taking greater offence from individuals in a forum discussion than they ever would from Anders killing 70-80 I suppose anythings possible.
Someone makes a point you dont like, just call them rude, resentful, not the brightest whilst imagineering a 'false quote' up.
I'm confused...have you only come on this thread to have a pop at someone?
Cos he can only say dumb, mean stuff. And he can't understand embellishment.
Ahh, for the latest installment ^^^ I'm dumb & mean and go on to explain away your imagineering/false quoting as embellishment.
As already said, someone makes a point you do not like, just call them rude, resentful, not the brightest whilst imagineering a 'false quote' up.
The diddums, foot stamping & techniques some adopt when someone has a difference of opinion. Name calling, insulting and imagineering words/terms they aint typed to "quote" them, aka lying, making stuff up (very different to embellishment).
All the best with concern/pity or whatever it is for Anders Brevik. Also all the best with the vitriol for those with less concern/pity towards the zero remorse killer of 70-80 innocents too."You're silly. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
