180 Seconds with Craig Ranapia - 12 December

50 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last

  • Craig Ranapia,

    Anyone have any suggestion where I can buy a cheap but reliable iron -- destroyed one in a fit of bingo rage.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Christiaan,

    Ironing your star spangled blindfold I suspect.

    Portugal • Since Dec 2006 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Christiaan,

    All you had to do Craig was admit that you perhaps could have used more accurate language (particularly in this case where you were apparently trying to make a point about someone’s presumed innocence) but instead you’ve both gone off on an embarrassing diatribe that the word “alleged” means to accuse someone of lying.

    Your reaction has only confirmed for me that it probably was a Freudian slip and you have indeed made your mind up about Assange's guilt.

    The strangest thing about your line of thought Boganette is that you've clearly already made your mind up that the accusers can't possibly be lying. Hence Assange must be lying.

    Portugal • Since Dec 2006 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to Christiaan,

    I'm very sorry I can't re-write the English language for you, or even pretend to take your disingenuous trolling seriously any more. Oh well -- life is full of disappointment.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Christiaan,

    No rewrite required Craig. All you need to do is pull your head out.

    Portugal • Since Dec 2006 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Christiaan,

    And of course then there's always the potential outcome of these alleged crimes that don't involve lying: they got bad advice, the prosecutors got it wrong, etc. Cripes he hasn't even been charged with anything yet.

    Far too nuanced for you two I suspect.

    Portugal • Since Dec 2006 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Parks,

    there’s always the potential outcome of these alleged crimes that don’t involve lying: they got bad advice, the prosecutors got it wrong, etc.

    Which is a good point: we shouldn’t assume that they are liars even if it goes to trial and he’s found not guilty.

    Going back to the original point of contention here, I really didn’t take Craig’s sans alleged ‘rape victims’ phrase as being a sneaky way to imply Assange’s guilt, or a Freudian slip. (Sometimes, slips are just slips.)

    All you had to do Craig was admit that you perhaps could have used more accurate language

    Maybe, but all you had to say was that you think people need to be careful with their language when discussing these issues. It seems to me you went a bit further & your case started out more confrontational than necessary: “practice what you preach” always sounds didactic. And “it seems that so far he is not receiving a fair trial. No comment from you on that” was a bit odd – it’s “180 seconds with Craig Ranapia” and he made it pretty clear what particular issue caught his interest here.

    Anyway, while I had question marks over the initial decision not to grant bail, I wouldn’t go so far as to say he hasn’t been given a “fair trail”, so far.

    I don’t get why it’s been suggested you think the woman are lying, or why you portray Craig and Boganette’s stance as being naively differential to the US.

    Wellington • Since May 2007 • 1165 posts Report Reply

  • Christiaan,

    Maybe, but all you had to say was that you think people need to be careful with their language when discussing these issues. It seems to me you went a bit further & your case started out more confrontational than necessary: “practice what you preach” always sounds didactic.

    Fair point. Not only confrontational but perhaps unfair. The reaction, however, suggests it really was a Freudian slip.

    And “it seems that so far he is not receiving a fair trial. No comment from you on that” was a bit odd – it’s “180 seconds with Craig Ranapia” and he made it pretty clear what particular issue caught his interest here.

    Fair point. I could have worded that better. It wasn’t so much a criticism about not commenting but an invitation to.

    In any case I don’t think it’s particularly wise to comment on this topic with addressing the political gorilla in the room.

    I don’t get why ... you portray Craig and Boganette’s stance as being naively differential to the US.

    That’s based on their reactions in this thread. They clearly see themselves as bastions of feminism but can’t even manage a serious response to comments about the broader power games at play.

    It seems to me that Craig and Boganette are stuck in automatic, presumably from having discussed this topic ad finitum with misogynous gutter dwellers. I come along and offer a nuanced (if confrontational) point and they can’t get out of automatic gear.

    Portugal • Since Dec 2006 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Christiaan,

    Anyway, while I had question marks over the initial decision not to grant bail, I wouldn’t go so far as to say he hasn’t been given a “fair trail”, so far.

    That Interpol was even involved was strange, considering he's not even been charged with anything. They'd already told him he was free to leave the country. If they wanted to speak to him again why not by video link? And passport confiscated, location tag, £200000 bail, 10 PM curfew? Now the Swedes even appealing his bail? None of this is about the safety of women.

    I hope those who are forcefully arguing that this is simply justice taking place will just as forcefully oppose any attempt by the U.S. to extradite him, whether he is guilty of these Swedish allegations or not.

    Portugal • Since Dec 2006 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Christiaan,

    Meanwhile a WikiLeaks cable shows the Swedish Department of Justice is quite capable of conspiring with the U.S. to undermine Swedish democracy: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8202745/WikiLeaks-Swedish-government-hid-anti-terror-operations-with-America-from-Parliament.html

    Portugal • Since Dec 2006 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Parks, in reply to Christiaan,

    I certainly oppose his extradition to the USA.

    (And oops, I meant "deferential", before.)

    Wellington • Since May 2007 • 1165 posts Report Reply

  • Boganette,

    "They clearly see themselves as bastions of feminism" - Really? Gosh you've got an active imagination Christiaan. I'm always surprised when people troll for a reaction then get all emotional when they get the exact reaction they were seeking.

    Wellington • Since Dec 2010 • 15 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to Christiaan,

    In any case I don’t think it’s particularly wise to comment on this topic with addressing the political gorilla in the room.

    Christiaan: I'll say this one more time -- there are at least two other threads here where you can address that gorilla to your heart's content. I chose to address certain aspects of the sexual charges laid against Assange. I'm really finding it tiresome, and more than a little troll-ish, being harangued for not discussing what you want in terms you approve of. It's also pretty shitty netiquette.

    It seems to me that Craig and Boganette are stuck in automatic, presumably from having discussed this topic ad finitum with misogynous gutter dwellers. I come along and offer a nuanced (if confrontational) point and they can’t get out of automatic gear.

    *headdesk*

    Frankly, I've done you the courtesy of reviewing the audio, in a good faith effort to see if you actually have cause for complaint. (I'd be the last person to claim I've never gotten anything wrong, tonally or in matter of fact.) Honestly, I don't and being obnoxiously man-splained and patronising won't improve your case.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Boganette,

    Christiaan - it might help you to read this link to see why this is a sensitive topic to people http://tinyurl.com/24h8nlx

    Wellington • Since Dec 2010 • 15 posts Report Reply

  • Christiaan,

    Frankly, I've done you the courtesy of reviewing the audio, in a good faith effort to see if you actually have cause for complaint. (I'd be the last person to claim I've never gotten anything wrong, tonally or in matter of fact.) Honestly, I don't and being obnoxiously man-splained and patronising won't improve your case.

    Fine. Well, at least you taught me a new word: mansplain.

    Portugal • Since Dec 2006 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Christiaan, in reply to Boganette,

    Christiaan - it might help you to read this link to see why this is a sensitive topic to people http://tinyurl.com/24h8nlx

    Thanks for the link. It's a nice insight. However I'm offended if you think it applies to what I've said. What I've said above doesn't fit any of the given examples. Take note, also, that whoever wrote that eloquent piece thought it important to use the word alleged.

    Portugal • Since Dec 2006 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Boganette,

    Why am I not surprised that you're offended. Sigh.

    Wellington • Since Dec 2010 • 15 posts Report Reply

  • Christiaan,

    Wouldn't you? You're accusing me of being a rape apologist for fucks sake.

    Portugal • Since Dec 2006 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Boganette,

    *rolls eyes* yeah you're such a victim Christiaan. Jeez. You come on here and de-rail the shit out of Craig's post and then get all worked up because you got called on it. FFS indeed.

    Wellington • Since Dec 2010 • 15 posts Report Reply

  • Christiaan,

    I haven’t been called on anything! You’ve been called on an embarrassing diatribe trying to redefine the meaning of ‘alleged’ and now you’re clearly irked by it.

    Either put up or shut up. Please explain how the above link applies to what I’ve said.

    Portugal • Since Dec 2006 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    Christiaan:

    Against my every instinct, I've been civil to you, while wanting to poke my eyes out with tiny toothpicks to distract myself from the acid reflux burning through my internal organs, Alien-style.

    We're just going to have to agree to disagree and you need to move on, because your persistent flaming isn't going to change my mind to your satisfaction. Also, patronising and belittling other PAS users doesn't really go down well around here.

    I've also told you repeatedly that there are several threads on PAS where you should find the framing of Wikileaks-releated discussion more to your liking.

    Please, please take that as a friendly and final warning. M'kay? I don't want to kick this upstairs to Russell for a moderation ruling (free speech isn't free, and all that), but I don't want to be receiving any more complaints about your conduct on this thread.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Christiaan,

    All you've done is accuse me of being a liar, a troll and a mansplain. And now your sidekick is accusing me of a being a fucking rape apologist. The last thing you've been is civil.

    Portugal • Since Dec 2006 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to Christiaan,

    At the bottom of every post, there's a wee Report button. If you think anyone -- myself included -- has treated you in a manner that doesn't meed PAS's terms and conditions, you're welcome to utilize it.

    Otherwise, I intend to ignore you and encourage everyone else to do the same.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Christiaan,

    I think you should both be ashamed of yourselves and I hope you're embarrassed this thread is here for all to read.

    Portugal • Since Dec 2006 • 121 posts Report Reply

  • Christiaan,

    Well I’ve just read through the comments on that post you linked to Boganette and perhaps that’s what you meant me to do earlier. I’m sorry to hear you speak from experience on this Craig.

    Portugal • Since Dec 2006 • 121 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.