Gilly wrote:
The point being?

Why don't you see if you can work it out? It's pretty obvious.

Gilly wrote:
OK, let me guess, you've no wish to show your dissent outside of a few fellow forum posters because you wish for a quiet life? Am I on the right track? That's fine, as I stated earlier. Really, it's fine, and I'm not going to re-iterate my reasoning, it's been done whether you believe me or not.
But.......
Emmeline Pankhurst-what a twat, bringing suffragettes to the fore, silly moo gone got herself killed by a 'oss' for her troubles. No point in her death, wimmin can't vote right?
Mahatma Ghandi?-Skinny gupta blathering on about turning the other cheek and wanting independence for India? Cunt should have put his efforts into keeping that bedsheet clean.
Aung San Suu Kyi, another silly moo, fancy wanting democracy, thoroughly deserves to be jailed for her unreasonable expectations,what a twat.

I've taken the thread off-topic, apologies but I felt the need to respond.

I've no problem expressing my 'dissent', as you'd know if you'd been around longer.

There are lots of instances where I think demonstrating is entirely futile - particularly major issues, like the one in the OP. As well as demonstrations, I've also invested a fair bit of energy in the past in other pursuits - campaigns of sorts - to try to get things changed for the better. I also found them to have no effect.

That's not to say I disapprove of people trying in whatever way they see fit. I applaud it in fact.

I do have a problem (and admittedly, having been around forums for a good while now, I generally can't be bothered getting embroiled in protracted arguments any more about things, because that's also pretty futile) with people insisting others shouldn't eat certain things, or shouldn't watch TV, or they should be out demonstrating etc etc etc.

Do what you think might be fruitful (that's addressed generally, rather than to you personally) but don't try to impose it on others. And implications that those who don't share your activities are spineless, or can't be bothered getting off their asses etc are pretty ignorant and calculated to make those making such proclamations feel superior, imo.

Hypothetically speaking, if I thought it would take something other than peaceful demonstrating to alter things, and I'd be a willing participant, it would probably be a bit stupid to broadcast that on an open forum.

See, and the voting thing - I believe that's just supporting an unworkable system. It's nothing at all to do with Emily Pankhurst, because it's nothing to do with gender. It's about enabling the perpetuation of the illusion of democracy. But you see, I've had that discussion so many times before, that I genuinely can't be arsed doing it again. No offence intended.

*Edit* Oh, and I meant to add, what you felt the need to do, the way I see it, was to jump to quite a lot of wrong conclusions. Maybe you should be a bit careful about that.

I'll keep it brief, I haven't insisted or demanded anything, as before, kindly quote the bit where I did otherwise that statement is invalid.
The same goes for demands others do something, please post the quote and I'll gladly retract,again,invalid.
As for not reading posts and jumping to conclusions, read my other response on 'my' demo thread and attempt to absorb what I said there, it hasn't changed, perhaps you need to concentrate? I repeat, not once have I suggested folks are spineless for not acting. Do you read anything I post or do you cherry pick your arguments and make shit up? Again, proof please.
The vote? What's to stop you defacing your ballot paper or voting for the Rainbow George party (I did both on different occasions), but this is just a suggestion, not an instruction/order/demand whatever.
Do you seriously imagine the CIA are monitoring SZ for potential rebellion? Have a word.
So, in a nutshell I haven't insisted anything change, haven't accuse people of being spineless,have stated that we do our own thang etc etc etc.
As for not voting, well that can be construed as action could it not?
Emily Pankhursts protest was about emancipation, as a female you might want to consider that.

Not so brief then. Whoopsadaisy.

You must have either missed this, or else decided to ignore it because you'd like to have an argument..
Gilly wrote:
Let me know which it is, before I waste valuable energy on discussing it with you beyond this post.

I'm aware of what emancipation is - why do you suggest that I should consider that? Be specific please.

Your ...Vambo wrote: and the whole make-up of that post were all based on your entirely wrong assumptions.

You might want to point out to me which supposedly 'cherry picked arguments and made up shit' were aimed at you.

The point I was making in my answer to WUB's thread was about the impotency of any of us, imo, to do anything about the UK debt. That you took that to be some kind of insult to yourself is a bit of a mystery tbh.

Do you have some logical reason for assuming that I don't go to the polling stations and write, 'None of the above' on the voting cards? Do you think you know me? Have we met?

I know that great lengths are gone to to monitor the entire internet. I thought we all knew that. Evidently not. I do know that a young man from the town I was born in was thrown in prison recently for making a bad taste joke on the internet. So yes, I'll exercise the caution that I believe to be appropriate - I hope you don't take that as a personal slur on yourself for some reason.

Let's start with you backing up your assertions that I'm pulling people up for not demonstrating in public and calling them spineless first, then I'll answer your other apparent issues.
A long as you decide you're impotent so shall it be, your choice,again, I'm not judging you on your perceptions,please illustrate otherwise.

Vambo wrote:
Tell you what - you show where I've asserted that about you first. That would be a good place to start. Just quote it.
Vambo wrote:
Oh good - that suggests that you can tell me some way that I / we can do something to resolve the UK debt mega-mountain. Fire away - I'm all ears.
Vambo wrote:
Erm, I shouldn't think any illustration from myself is necessary, given that your comments re Pankhurst, Ghandi etc are there in plain view.

*Edit* I see you've edited a silly picture into your post since I started responding. Very good.

Gilly wrote:

Oh, so you've failed miserably, because the bit you've underlined comes right around a specific notification that I was speaking generally rather than my comment being aimed at you.

You've tried to have a fight based on your own lack of understanding of what you read. You've included silly pictures in a feeble attempt to make your imagined opponent look small.

And when challenged to back yourself up, and realising you've embarrassed yourself, you're not going to admit you got the wrong end of the stick and make peace. No way! You're going off in a huff, and pretending the 'shit' in this thread wasn't excreted by you! Excellent!

And a jolly good evening to you too, Vambo. LMAO!