Posts by Ian MacKay
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Jackie, I think you were exempt from that comment. You've already admitted an assault that neither you nor your victim saw fit to report to the police. We can probably assume that if your husband had turned his head at the wrong moment and you'd busted his nose, that would have been dealt with in-house too - after all, the intent was to "get a reaction", not to rearrange his face.
I don't know you. but the impression I get from your posts is that you are smart, funny and likeable, so I can't imagine that you would have kicked him viciously on the ground. etcetcSt phen. I enjoyed your contribution. Balanced. Again thanks to Jackie for being game to post as she did as well. It is just a matter of degree. Starting from just yelling/swearing at someone through to a sadistic killing it is all a matter of degree and chance.
-
"inflexible" I meant no harm but isn't a reality that people who have once taken up a position stick to it regardless. For example if you give long support to a particular political party , you refuse to recognize any nuance or distraction if it interferes with your perception. I have been long time been upset by bullying in any form. But I still look for why he/she is a bully. It is easy to punish the bully. Bit harder to prevent without looking at "other factors". You can say that this is obvious, or I am an apologist for xxx , or it is a patronizing position or whatever. Go for it.
-
Robbery: G.W Bush said if you are not for our USA then you must be with the Terrorists! I was against the Iraqi war.(DV) But concern for such things as the collateral fallout, medical help for the population etc was hard to discuss without seeming to be for the war. The issues here seem to be as inflexible. Keep up the good work. You are not an apologist for domestic violence. Was going to look up "apologist" to see if it looked like fitting anything said on these posts but it is a bit late.
-
What is a "circle-jerk"?
-
This is what you don't seem to be hearing, Ian. You might see someone who made a mistake (some mistake!), but many of the rest of us see someone who is refusing to take responsibility for that mistake, and using whatever weasel words he can to get out of it.
Deborah:My memory is not that good but I can't remember writing anything very much about Veitch. I was always much more interested in the other stuff. If you are asking me to comment directly, I think that he should for everyone's sake front up to the court system. This would be perhaps in spite of the agreement for both parties to remain silent but I am sure that that would be a minor problem and be overcome. (It may be that Kristan has strong reasons for wanting to stay quiet.) Also as an aside, for the sake of the debate on these pages it would be plain interesting to see what the full truthful story was. Contrary to the belief that I somehow support DV, I definitely don't, and I can't remember anyone on this blog who does. Greetings.
-
And, Ian, I do realise it's a Sunday but the self-crucifying martyr trip is a little tiresome. Don't know if you're paying attention, but this isn't exactly the corner of teh interwebz I'd come to if I was looking for a self-regarding circle jerk. Not at all.
Craig: Now who is patronizing ??
-
Back to the topic at hand. Ian, for the public record, as a newlywed I slapped my husband across the face to get a reaction. To his credit, he did absolutely nothing, even though he was very angry, except to tell me that if I did it again, he would slap me back. Fair enough. I felt very badly about it for quite a while. If he had slapped me back, I would have been shocked but somewhat accepting. If however, he had indulged in behaviour which left me in a wheelchair for a sustained period of time, or even if he had punched me, there would be no apology for his behaviour, just as there was none for mine. We are all human, and we all fuck up, but seriously.....
Thankyou for that. Some would say." Do want a medal for his restraint". I don't. I applaud your honesty. We take a risk when exposing like that. As I said it then just becomes a matter of degree doesn't it?
-
Hospital Sunday Jan 6 2006
October 2007 Lawyers write "demanding" $150,000
Dec 2007 Veitch pays $160,000 for loss of income and hurt feelings, and they sign a secrecy agreement. -
Jackie: The point that I am making is that in a Blog people should be able to give an opinion without personal attacks. Some of what Craig writes is thoughtful, but when he shouts abuse at me or Paul Holmes or whoever, that suggests to me that he is trying to intimidate or to deflect. When he does this, the 90% or lurkers (browsers) who read this post, will be less likely to contribute. Call that Bollocks if it makes you happy. Craig could give you some more "passionate" expressions.
-
Wrong: Calling a press conference and blandly euphemising putting someone in a wheelchair for four months (and I've seen nobody claim that's untrue) as "lashing out". Sorry, I'm just not buying the attempts to spin Veitch as some kind of victim here, no matter how seriously unimpressed I've been with the media over this.
CRAIG:What the FUUUUUCK!!! You are a fucking arrogant bastard. How dare you have a different opinion to me! ARSEHOLE!! Fuckwit. Piss OFF!!!
(Craig: I was trying to reach the bar that you set. How well did I do???)