UK STRIKE DAY 30TH NOVEMBER

[fr0d0]

Fact: this action is just 1 day. Not much disruption I suggest.
As regards cost to the economy, I don't recall that being a concern on 29 April when a certain royal wedding stopped the country!

One more point on this....

On 29th April the economy PAID for an extra public holiday. Today strikers are NOT being paid. Sure there's the knock on effect... but the costs will be significantly less, and the impact is already acknowledged as much lower than anticipated.

[bozo]

Fact: this action is just 1 day. Not much disruption I suggest.
As regards cost to the economy, I don't recall that being a concern on 29 April when a certain royal wedding stopped the country!

One more point on this....

On 29th April the economy PAID for an extra public holiday. Today strikers are NOT being paid. Sure there's the knock on effect... but the costs will be significantly less, and the impact is already acknowledged as much lower than anticipated.

Certainly the cost will be less than the whole country stopping.
As for the impact, the government will do everything it can in the propoganda war to downplay the impact. What it canot do is hide the evidence from the country of the sense of injustice, outrage and anger felt by the strikers.

[bozo]

Your last post, Adrian-

Let's be clear about the racism issue. Suspicion is not the same as accusation. I would need more evidence than is available to accuse you.
I don't have that, what I do have are my suspicions.
This is no " excuse ". I need no excuse to point out the difference to you, which, typically, you refuse to accept.
Next " humour "-
I failed to grasp that a post was meant to be funny...I did however ask if it was a wind up, which it proved to be. You saw it as an opportunity to snipe at me for a lack of a sense of humour and possibly an attack of an ageist nature. Humour has its place but can easily be misunderstood.
Next insults/apologies-
We are indeed free to exchange insults. You, unfortunately, cry foul at every opportunity when they come your way.
I don't sense any apology from you, merely rebuttals of my examples of your attacks on me, so, sorry, no apology from this quarter.

[reverendjeremiah]

Fact: this action is just 1 day. Not much disruption I suggest.
As regards cost to the economy, I don't recall that being a concern on 29 April when a certain royal wedding stopped the country!

One more point on this....

On 29th April the economy PAID for an extra public holiday. Today strikers are NOT being paid. Sure there's the knock on effect... but the costs will be significantly less, and the impact is already acknowledged as much lower than anticipated.

Well what the fuck good is that?

If we can AFFORD the strike then what kind of message is it giving out?

A strike is meant to shut down production. Stop EVERYTHING so that the working peoples voices are heard.

If we can "afford" this strike, then its worthless.

---

I don't sense any apology from you, merely rebuttals of my examples of your attacks on me, so, sorry, no apology from this quarter.

dont hold your breath. Dont expect him to make anything close to an apology. This is about as far as you will get with him:

although I admit, calling you a borderline-fascist was probably a step over the line, and I retract it

A retraction is not an apology. But surely Adrian will spend 7 pages arguing semantics that a retraction is an apology in the middle of a sea of text of him playing the victim.

Even after I posted DAMN GOOD evidence to back up my original argument with him, I decided to just back down, be the good person, apologize and let it be.

I felt rather good about doing it, that is, until I read this from Adrian in response to it.

Now since reverendjeremiah has been gracious enough to accept that the blame for our "spat" doesn't wholly lie with myself, I'm not going to respond to everything he said in his last post, but I thought these specific parts required some clarification.

So now some of the blame is on me? I was just letting it go. I posted the evidence justifying my responses but decided to let it go..hey, I might be wrong...

You are NOT going to get adrian to apologize for ANYTHING. I repeat, Adrian will NOT apologize for anything.

Look at how he replied to my apology. And then right after that, he starts pecking through my post of his history all the while playing semantics and the victim to completely redefine the meaning of his words.

then again, dont be suprised, we have Adrian on another post claiming that he thinks its wrong for people to vote to protect the rights of minorities (such as black people), but that unborn babies automatcally have rights in the womb, and that the masses are allowed to vote wether a woman has freedom to choose what to do with her womb or not.

THAT is the type of person you are chatting with. So dont expect him to admit his faults publicly...expect him to play word games and semantics.

[bozo]

Great day, strike well supported and a sure sign of its impact is the Prime Minister claiming it to have been a " damp squib ".
Of course, it is only a start. More disruption will be needed in this battle.
Tragedy however that of the 3 main political parties, the tories and the liberals form the government , and the opposition party, the Labour Party, born out of the trade union movement ,was not supporting the strike. A disgrace.

[reverendjeremiah]

Great day, strike well supported and a sure sign of its impact is the Prime Minister claiming it to have been a " damp squib ".
Of course, it is only a start. More disruption will be needed in this battle.
Tragedy however that of the 3 main political parties, the tories and the liberals form the government , and the opposition party, the Labour Party, born out of the trade union movement ,was not supporting the strike. A disgrace.

then they do not represent Labor, and should ALL step down in disgrace.

The striking workers need to put together the replacements for the labor party from those amongst their ranks. those who are willing to support labor... not suck the balls of the corporations.

[Tiberius]

Let's be clear about the racism issue. Suspicion is not the same as accusation. I would need more evidence than is available to accuse you.
I don't have that, what I do have are my suspicions.
This is no " excuse ". I need no excuse to point out the difference to you, which, typically, you refuse to accept.

Do you realise how that comes across to people? Call it "suspicion", call it "accusation"; it sounds the same to the person you are aiming it at. To be even "suspected" of being a racist is something that makes me feel sick; it is a horrible thing to say about someone. Racism is one of the most disgusting ideas in existence, and if affects millions every day. I obviously can't stop you thinking it; but there is no need to voice a suspicion, especially in this kind of debate.

I failed to grasp that a post was meant to be funny...I did however ask if it was a wind up, which it proved to be. You saw it as an opportunity to snipe at me for a lack of a sense of humour and possibly an attack of an ageist nature. Humour has its place but can easily be misunderstood.

So now you "suspect" me of being ageist? Jebus. The "attack" was a jibe; nothing offensive was meant by it. However, if you'll have it:

I sincerely apologise for suggesting that you had misplaced your sense of humour decades ago. I can understand that you had simply misunderstood a joke on what is an important issue to you, which you take very seriously.

We are indeed free to exchange insults. You, unfortunately, cry foul at every opportunity when they come your way.
I don't sense any apology from you, merely rebuttals of my examples of your attacks on me, so, sorry, no apology from this quarter.

I cry foul when I feel I've been mistreated in a debate. You could do the same, and demand an apology from me. Instead, you respond by escalating the conflict. There is no need for insults of this kind in a debate, so again, if you'll have it:

I sincerely apologise for suggesting that you were a borderline fascist who doesn't support freedom of speech. I was of course mistaken, and in the heat of the moment made an accusation which I later regretted and retracted.

Ok, now I think I've apologised for the things I've said that were uncalled for. Will you now reciprocate so we can put this behind us?

---

---

dont hold your breath. Dont expect him to make anything close to an apology. This is about as far as you will get with him:

although I admit, calling you a borderline-fascist was probably a step over the line, and I retract it

A retraction is not an apology. But surely Adrian will spend 7 pages arguing semantics that a retraction is an apology in the middle of a sea of text of him playing the victim.

Indeed, a retraction is not an apology. I made my two apologies above.

Even after I posted DAMN GOOD evidence to back up my original argument with him, I decided to just back down, be the good person, apologize and let it be.

I felt rather good about doing it, that is, until I read this from Adrian in response to it.

Now since reverendjeremiah has been gracious enough to accept that the blame for our "spat" doesn't wholly lie with myself, I'm not going to respond to everything he said in his last post, but I thought these specific parts required some clarification.

So now some of the blame is on me? I was just letting it go. I posted the evidence justifying my responses but decided to let it go..hey, I might be wrong...

I'm confused; in the above quote, you said that you "decided to just back down, be the good person, apologize and let it be", and yet you oppose me stating that some of the blame was on you? If you apologised, then surely some of the blame was on you. Else, what was the reason for the apology?

In addition, you even stated a reason for apologising:

It was obviously a mistake on my behalf of misinterpretting your posts.

If that isn't an admission that some of the blame was on you (for misinterpreting my posts), then what is it? Is your apology still valid, or would you like to retract it?

Look at how he replied to my apology. And then right after that, he starts pecking through my post of his history all the while playing semantics and the victim to completely redefine the meaning of his words.

I replied by saying you were gracious to admit some of the blame. I don't see anything wrong with that; I think you were gracious to make such a statement. Then again, if the above is to be believed, you didn't mean any of it, so now I'm not sure what to think.

As for redefining the meaning of my words, I think you'll find that I actually said I was clarifying them. I felt this was in order, since in your apology you stated that you misinterpreting some of my posts. My clarification was for your benefit (in order to see my true meaning), and for any other people who were reading.

[bozo]

Great day, strike well supported and a sure sign of its impact is the Prime Minister claiming it to have been a " damp squib ".
Of course, it is only a start. More disruption will be needed in this battle.
Tragedy however that of the 3 main political parties, the tories and the liberals form the government , and the opposition party, the Labour Party, born out of the trade union movement ,was not supporting the strike. A disgrace.

then they do not represent Labor, and should ALL step down in disgrace.

The striking workers need to put together the replacements for the labor party from those amongst their ranks. those who are willing to support labor... not suck the balls of the corporations.

Unfortunately, the mass of the working class still look to the Labour Party to represent its interest. The unions too continue to bankroll the Party despite the fact that it is no longer the party of labour.
The hard part will be getting the Party back on track.....if it ever will.

[reverendjeremiah]

I'm confused; in the above quote, you said that you "decided to just back down, be the good person, apologize and let it be", and yet you oppose me stating that some of the blame was on you? If you apologised, then surely some of the blame was on you. Else, what was the reason for the apology?

a·pol·o·gy
   [uh-pol-uh-jee] Show IPA

noun, plural -gies.
1.
a written or spoken expression of one's regret, remorse, or sorrow for having insulted, failed, injured, or wronged another: He demanded an apology from me for calling him a crook.

2.
a defense, excuse, or justification in speech or writing, as for a cause or doctrine.

3.
( initial capital letter, italics ) a dialogue by Plato, centering on Socrates' defense before the tribunal that condemned him to death.

4.
an inferior specimen or substitute; makeshift: The tramp wore a sad apology for a hat.
===

THAT was my apology in bold, exactly as how I posted it. I decided to apologize and let it go. Just to stop the fucking arguing. Your smugness brought it back.

It was obviously a mistake on my behalf of misinterpretting your posts.

I said that hoping it would just get dropped. I was hoping you would say something to the point of. "No problem, I think I may too have misinterpretted your posts. Lets let this go and have a better conversation." - but you didnt. You were smug about it, continued arguing it, and then only apologized when the issue came to a head...which is what I was trying to avoid.

Now...it is obvious this conversation is volitile, even though we are clearing some of it up.

Can we just please drop it?

[Tiberius]

There was nothing smug about what I wrote. I honestly thought you were being a man and owning up to some of the blame. Now I understand that you were simply saying whatever you thought would get me to drop the subject. I find this behaviour repulsive.

People apologise because they have something to apologise for; they have something to feel sorry about, and want to rectify it. People apologise because it is the right thing to do. People who apologise just to "stop the fucking arguing" aren't doing it right.

You can drop it if you want; I've done nothing wrong towards you that merits an apology; all of my wrongs were aimed at bozo, and I've apologised for them. I'm not going to drop it; as far as I'm concerned, you wronged me, and then when I finally got an apology and said it was "gracious" of you, you turned around and explained how it wasn't an apology after all.