Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
You didn’t address the fact that I was not questioning the agreement. I was questioning the interpretation of that agreement. To wit, the sandwich example above.
It’s actually the consistency of your arguments that is the key here. You are certainly batting for the other side, and you are not the only one.
I didn’t call you a terrorist. However, if we are ever invaded by a foreign power, don’t expect me to support your application to join the resistance. You are too conflicted for my liking.
|
So, because he’s doing what you did with previous administrations (disagreeing with what they are doing with regards their relationship with Europe), you are stating that anyone who doesn’t agree with you, is akin to a Quisling?
People who disagree with you are not "batting for the other side", they are disagreeing with the way our current government is behaving on treaties and agreements, where the issues were previously pointed out before the treaties and agreements were signed, and now those forecast issues are actually happening, they’re being stigmatised as disloyal.
“My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right.”
No one cast aspersions on your patriotism or loyalty to the country when you disagreed with the Government of the day - for you to do so to others shows the paucity of your arguments.
btw - yeh, like you would be in the resistance, and would be a referee for others’ suitablity - what skills would you bring to the party? The ability to forecast 14 years in the future?
