News: Girl at centre of bashing

[Dan]

Wow Rex....just wow.

For someone who says so much when only a few words will do, you have a severe lack of basic comprehension.

or as you might say it, even the cheapest veneer can make any wood look a masterpiece.

Problem is you aren't dallying with morons here champ

 

[Rex]

Just as the tradesman tries to hide the flaws he sees in wood with his veneer, so the little man tries to hide the flaws he sees in himself with his attack.

Which is why, no matter whether it is a street/forum/war attack, those accustomed to looking beyond veneers realise any attack is really about the weakness of the attacker, not the attacked.

 

[Mcatmos]

Oops.. I stumbled into the philosophy post, where's the league at again ?!

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Rex you have clearly provoked the attack upon yourself. But don't worry, at least you didn't tell Dan to 'ease up cuz'. Imagine how much worse it could have been.

 

[larry tate II]

Let Rex go for his life.His ridiculous twaddle gives me more amusement than The Simpsons! ..."if you cross the road,there is a good chance your head will get kicked by a car.."....huh????

 

[Dan]

indeed....

Well Rexy boy...can you explain to me the point that both myself and Duff and C&C were making?

 

[Duff]

indeed....

Well Rexy boy...can you explain to me the point that both myself and Duff and C&C were making?

I think that in an attempt at sarcasm, SER8 has proven the point nicely.

 

[The Wheel]

This thread needs to be moved to the boring & non Footy forum

 

[Andrew..]

Was there ever a statement taken from the girl involved ?

 

[Rex]

Good point SER8, and is it kinder to tell the attacker to ease up or to let him continue throwing the burning coals with his bare hands at his own shadow?


Lions and field mice have different and functional ways of responding to possible threat.  And which is funnier:

• The field mice demanding that the lion run scared at the first field mouse sniff of a confrontation, or
• The lion demanding that the field mice fight the cat?

 

[Duff]

I don't even think we're having the same conversation.

Dan & I are talking about the definition of provocation and the fact that the story was changed from day 1 to day 2.

Rex & Fluffy are trying to prove how tough they are & that therefore everybody else isn't manly.

 

[Dan]

exactly why I asked him to tell me in his own words what he thinks the point is we are making, this proves to me what i suspected all along, he knows SFA and has a hard time understanding the simplest of ideas.

Not once did I nor Duff suggest that Matai should have run away with his tail between his legs, or for that fact whether anyone else would have rune away.

The conversation we are having is of the words "Unprovoked" and how the initial media thoughts is untrue.

 

[Jatz Crackers]

I think the initial media reports got it wrong with the term "random". Clearly if Mattai/Choc approached a couple (or for that matter a couple in amongst a group) whilst they were arguing then the response wasnt random.

In the case of the use of the term "unprovoked" then I think thats highly subjective & debatable and I can see both sides of the argument here.

 

[Rex]

Good-O Dan.  You appear to now concede that Matai and Choc are more lions than field mice.  Luckily for Manly.  And that their response in this type of situation naturally will not be automatically driven by fears for self-protection like some others may be.  And that to expect them to act in fear denies the nature of the beast.

So now about your & Duff's allegation that there was provocation.  You vehemently believe the police were wrong in their assessment that it was an unprovoked attack.  So you're claiming better judgement than the police of what is provocation.

Perhaps you might see that attackers ALWAYS consider (at least at the time) they have been sufficiently provoked? 

And that ANYTHING may be considered by attackers to be sufficient provocation?  Especially when drunk. 

And that the real issue the police were dealing with is not what drunk or crazed attackers might consider to be sufficient for provocation - which could be anything - but what a reasonable man would consider sufficient for provocation.

If you attempted to allege provocation as a defence in court on the basis of what has been reported, you would be laughed out of court.

So your new definition of provocation is an interesting academic discussion, just not relevant.

 

[Dan]

Once again you have succeeded in completely missing the point.

I think I know the problem, and I have created a little multiple choice quiz for you, i suspect I already know your answers

In this picture, the woman is attempting to look at

a) her tits
b) her ass

[img=349x400]http://www.inquisitr.com/wp-content/ass-reading.jpg[/img]


In the next picture, what is represented?

a) tits
b) ass

Good luck,
Dan

 

[Matabele]

Dan.  That's not fair.  Rex will be so jealous of what the lady in the first picture is able to do he'll be speechless.

 

[The Gronk]

great rack

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

so in other words not entirely \"unprovoked\"

You are saying our guys provoked it by poking their noses where they don’t belong. That point of view neatly supports the right of men to treat women any way they please - anyone who objects is asking for a hiding.

The aspect of the bashing story that hasn’t even rated a mention, is that a woman was actually found distressed in public. Commonplace, hardly news. Of course, knowing now what those men did to Choc & Matai makes it easy to imagine reasons that woman might have been upset. It is well-established fact that women are routinely subjected to violence, especially in domestic situations.

I thought turning a blind eye to domestic violence was the real issue underlying the story. If it had been, say, Beaver & King involved instead of Choc & Matai I think the whole story would have been covered very differently.

 

[Fro]

King would have broken a fingernail

 

[clontaago]

This thread was boring until reply #54