This is by way of an apology to BobbyG and Zero.
The third post in the Pakistani Money thread is mine. Posted in a hurry, as most of my posts are, it was intended as a light slap in the usual vein here, knockabout badinage. Looking at it again though it seems quite a lot worse than that, verging on the unpleasant.
I have a sort of lame excuse. I am working at present on a text some of which is much concerned with Pakistan. Its authors are criticising another writer thought to be guilty of spreading inaccurate rumours about the (very complex) relations between the Pakistani intelligence service and terrorist networks. These rumours are rife in the western media and the constant hinting and nudging are mischievous and damaging to international relations.
Bobby's OP should be taken as an innocent question. Zero's first post looks superficially like a bit of mischievous rumour-mongering, the words 'blackmail', 'Taliban' and 'nuke' giving that impression. But the actual meaning of the words (I wish hobby was here to see this!) stripped of sensational references is fairly straightforward and contains a nugget of truth: our leaders certainly do want Pakistan to stay onside.
I do think Zero could have made his point without the shriekwords. But I got him wrong and was rude to him, for the second time in a couple of weeks too.
Dear oh dear. Bit of a minefield so to speak, this internet, what?
|
|
Think nothing of it old chap. For the most part I am unable to write in a non sensationalist way.
Last edited by: Zero on Fri 8 Apr 11 at 14:12
|
Civil of you Zeddo.
I too enjoy a bit of wild exaggeration or bad taste. We usually get away with it after all.
|
AC,
I did not take offence at your comment either!
Forums are for opinions, you do not start a thread expecting everyone to agree, they are all mini discussions and are a basis for debate!
Keep up your opinions!! :)
|
I should add this point that sometimes my opinions take things a little too far but it is often too late to tame them. I think my posts on Salford where a good example. I defend the place almost to the point of causing offence but I still think it is a poo hole.
The point is I know that place inside out and the Daily Mail who have caused all the stir don't.
Last edited by: RattleandSmoke on Sat 9 Apr 11 at 03:36
|
Going too far - Zero
