Remebrance Day

[Gleemonex]

"Thanks to all of you who chose to respect my feelings and share a part of themselves on this thread."
Speaking for myself, at least, I respected your feelings and shared a part of myself.

My disappointment in that post wasn't directed specifically at you. I would have preferred you hadn't set off what should be obvious to any idiot is a political powderkeg in what I had hoped -- and directly and unambiguously implored in the first post -- would be a very simple and straight-forward thread. But your tone was fairly neutral.

If there was some way to contort my opinion to "disrespect", it would still not be grounds for censorship. Such an argument would be considered a callous attempt to avoid confronting uncomfortable truths. Deleting posts and rescinding reminds me more of thought police than of a respectful society.

Note that I have called to "censor" my own posts here as well. If I really wanted to "censor" the thread, I would ask that OTHERS' posts be removed, and mine remain as a bastion of righteousness. But judging from the length of the post you place in direct violation of even the TITLE of this thread, you probably don't understand what it means to close your mouth for five consecutive seconds in the hopes that others will think they've won and move on.

The reason I asked to close the thread, and note the prophetic "Well here it comes" at the beginning of the post in question, is that this thread was destined to become political grandstanding the moment someone posted vociferously and expressly to NOT celebrate Remebrance Day. See, we're arguing right now. Thanks for contributing to peace in the world!

The reason I reacted was that I often see posts like these, and it disgusts me every time, for the same reason it disgusted oudysseos and other likeminded people.

You're perfectly free to react. That's what the "post new THREAD" button is for. Of course, then you'd miss out on the chance to be holier than thou.

It disgusts me because one standard of remembrance is appropriated these warriors, and another standard is appropriated the unknown victims.

And it disgusts me that someone on a computer likely thousands of kilometres away deigns to tell me what I believe.

The difference is in coverage, frequency and scope of the remembrance.

So you waltz into a thread where we ARE remembering, to tell us about what we AREN'T remembering? You DO know that the easiest way to not express an idea is to shut the hell up, right?

There are essentially two types of victims in official history:

1)Worthy Victims:
The nameless soldier, the jews in the holocaust, the Kurds in Iraq - in stark contrast to the Kurds in Turkey, whoever is attacked by an official enemy.

2)Unworthy Victims:
The nameless civilians, killed by allies or client states, or whose remembrance serve no useful political purpose - those are easily forgotten were it not for arduous Human Rights groups.

How the fuck do you "know" I've forgotten them?

One thing is certain: You've forgotten about Wikipedia.

Enjoy.

These distinctions are not made consciously by the people who excercise these distinctions - but they are readily observable by an objective observer who may read between the lines.

Sorry, your post was too on-topic. Could you stray further please?

-Glee