- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,666
- Reactions
- 7,516
Firstly, I doubt the premise that either hoax has the capacity to "change the world". It merely polarises and antagonises two sides of society at large: Those, who think with their hearts, and those, who use their heads.
IMO it's not so much a question of "Should the 'Yes Men' be able to change the world ?" but one of "Is one criminal act justified by the mere allegation of another?"
And my answer to that is clearly "No!"
I also find it extremely distasteful to compare Dyles and the Yes Men, Whitehaven and Union Carbide.
As far as I'm aware, WHC has complied with all legal and administrative requirements and is providing jobs in a lawful business. Union Carbide, not Dow Chemical btw, has negligently brought death and misery to thousands of Indians.
+1
It's essentially fraudulent behaviour and financial terrorism in my view. If everyone with an axe to grind took matters into their own hands in this way, there'd be chaos on a grand scale.
Firstly, I doubt the premise that either hoax has the capacity to "change the world". It merely polarises and antagonises two sides of society at large: Those, who think with their hearts, and those, who use their heads.
IMO it's not so much a question of "Should the 'Yes Men' be able to change the world ?" but one of "Is one criminal act justified by the mere allegation of another?"
And my answer to that is clearly "No!"
I also find it extremely distasteful to compare Dyles and the Yes Men, Whitehaven and Union Carbide.
As far as I'm aware, WHC has complied with all legal and administrative requirements and is providing jobs in a lawful business. Union Carbide, not Dow Chemical btw, has negligently brought death and misery to thousands of Indians.
Reminds me of the show continuum.
Am just waiting for when enough Govts are bankrupted and the corporations step in.
Suppose then unless your a shareholder, you wont get to vote
I support the hoaxers intentions, but do question his methods.
If ever an irresponsible lout deserved to have his ar$e kicked, it is this guy.
+2. And then some more. Utterly irresponsible.+1
... and then some. (I don't even want to see his vile mug)
You want to judge what may be posted now? Perhaps set out some guidelines so that we do not OFFEND you, something that will apparently become an offence if Roxon's legislation to that effect is passed.Is there any possible chance that people can stop kicking Jonathan Moylon to death on a thread that is specifically about other people and bigger issues ?
Or is that just the way it is on ASF at the moment ?
You want to judge what may be posted now? Perhaps set out some guidelines so that we do not OFFEND you, something that will apparently become an offence if Roxon's legislation to that effect is passed.
The translation will be: No one with any views right of centre may say anything against anyone with views left of centre because it will ipso facto cause offence.
Is there any possible chance that people can stop kicking Jonathan Moylon to death on a thread that is specifically about other people and bigger issues ?
Or is that just the way it is on ASF at the moment ?
Is there any possible chance that people can stop kicking Jonathan Moylon to death on a thread that is specifically about other people and bigger issues ?
Or is that just the way it is on ASF at the moment ?
Nuh !! Just trying to get the discussion back to the topic Julia. I specifically introduced a quite different range of material for comment and discussion. Yours was the third successive comment that decided having a free kick at Jonathan was easier thinking about the bigger picture.
Basilio, you may take pixel's remarks as speaking for me also. Imo he should be up for a considerably greater 'kicking' than the few words that have been thus far offered on this forum.As far as I'm aware, nobody has kicked JM to death yet. (Although I wouldn't shed too many tears if someone did.)
That aside, I believe the point has already been made that both actions: by the yes Men and by JM, have been criminal acts that only a small fringe group seems to condone. Neither will endear the respective perpetrators to "we, the people" who find it tough enough to survive without stunts like that.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?