cod'ead wrote:
Given your track record on this and various other threads, you seem to be the Sin Bin's very own David Icke.
You have a message(s) and keep banging it(them) out, however much they are repeated doesn't make them any more correct than when you first uttered them
I offer my opinions. I offer the reasoning of my opinions. If my opinions and reasoning are wrong then it should be easy for other people to quote me and show that I'm wrong.
That, IMO, is not what people do.
Take the Zimmerman trial on the TV thread. It is a subject that disturbs me because of many issues.
Mintball's opinion is that it's an injustice caused by massive US racism. That's Mintball's opinion, and by word she's going to keep that opinion. Doesn't offer any reasons behind that opinion, but hey, it's her opinion and she has a right to it.
I wrote at length about why the details of the case in no way supported what she said.
Mintball disappeared.
That's pretty much how the Sin Bin works.
I'm not surprised about how your characterise me. I've disagreed with you. I have said offensive things to you just as I've said offensive things to many people that employ the "it's my opinion and I don't have to defend it" stance. (I'm not saying you have done that. I don't remember the details of our previous discussions.)
I think calling me Sin Bin's David Icke is massively wrong. But Icke thinks the criticism of him is often wrong too, and he's obviously a nutter. I might be suffering from a similar delusion. But on reading back many of the arguments I've had I don't think so.
I do think that perhaps my participation in forums is pointless. I do enjoy deep debate but it seems my my method of pointing out where I think people are wrong and why is not really wanted.