|
Do yourselves a favor and shut the hell up.............
Quote:
Originally posted by Spanky
This post implys that you agree that they one we are discussing did not condemn Islamist terrorism in the strongest possible terms. Don't you think it was a mistake not condemn Islamist terrorism in the strongest possible terms?
|
As a question of PR? I'm really not interesting in that question. I have a good sense of how their letter was received among lawyers who post on this board. I have no idea how it was received in the UK, apart from Slave's post.
What would the strongest possible terms be? They could say, acts of terrorism offend us more than eating rats. That's pretty strong. But then someone could point out that they didn't say, acts of terrorism offend us more than eating rats while watching Kathy Bates in a hot tub in About Schmidt, and -- voila -- again they've failed to denounce terrorism in the strongest possible terms.
__________________
“It was fortunate that so few men acted according to moral principle, because it was so easy to get principles wrong, and a determined person acting on mistaken principles could really do some damage." - Larissa MacFarquhar
|
