[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [b] ++ Re: [thecabal] Fwd: Blunkett joins outcry over paedophile satire
- To: "It was totally irrelevant to a bunch of Welsh teenagers\." <brass@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [b] ++ Re: [thecabal] Fwd: Blunkett joins outcry over paedophile satire
- From: Rik Hemsley <rik@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 05:05:22 +0100
- In-reply-to: <3.0.5.32.20010801042338.007da9e0@pop3.demon.co.uk>; from tom@hedonists.org on Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 04:23:38 +0100
- Mail-followup-to: "It was totally irrelevant to a bunch of Welsh teenagers." <brass@xxxxxxxxx>
- References: <3.0.5.32.20010730074532.00806100@pop3.demon.co.uk> <3.0.5.32.20010729100631.007f0720@pop3.demon.co.uk> <4.3.1.0.20010729010139.0328bed8@pop.ntlworld.com> <3.0.5.32.20010729100631.007f0720@pop3.demon.co.uk> <20010729143239.B10499@geoid.clara.co.uk> <3.0.5.32.20010730074532.00806100@pop3.demon.co.uk> <20010730125744.A6135@geoid.clara.co.uk> <3.0.5.32.20010801042338.007da9e0@pop3.demon.co.uk>
- Sender: Rik Hemsley <rik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
#if Tom
> So in conclusion:
> I wasn't suggesting she was wrong. I was saying she's rubbish. I apologise
> for not communicating this in a more obvious manner the first time around.
My problem was that you countered this statement...
'This programme trivialised traumatic experiences that can affect
children for almost their whole lives.'
.. by stating that not all such children will suffer effects for
(almost) their whole lives, and that some will not suffer at all.
That point is certainly true, but it is also superfluous and looks like
you are trying to disagree with what she said. The way your reply was
worded made it seem like you were using it to undermine her whole
standpoint.
Now I shall celebrate National Orgasm Day. That is, if I haven't
run out of talc. My gimp suit is all sticky.
Rik
God's way of forcing BEMLI back on topic..
* Last Subject: Re: [b] -- flipper --*
* Last Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 05:07:19 +0100 --*
* 08:33-33 --*