Guest wrote:Guest wrote:Guest wrote:Si_Crewe wrote:Guest wrote:Now - I asked first - S
How about this?
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showpost ... ostcount=7
Russia supports the legitimate Syrian regime, helps end a war and one of their diplomats gets murdered by a jihadi in apparent retaliation.
Would you say that's "reaping what you sow" or would you say that's making excuses for a completely unjustifiable terrorist act?
Oh dear.
I know you have made a bit of an effort which is more than anyone else but the DS posters in question are:
Sport1--(this person goes beyond apolgism. He skirts around supporting it, look at his attitude in the Russian ambassador thread.)
JJwales
Aetius_Maralas
AnnetteKurtain
Scottie2121
&
bollywood (added by si)
No one can back up the accusation that any of the above are 'apologists' (definition to be provided by the relevant Guest), all we have is - durrrrrrr . . well they are aren't they.
Try reading DS.
Those listed are some that sites biggest apologists. Now you're here apologizing for them? You're the apologist's apologist!
look at Aetius_Maralas trying to bring in the Jo Cox terrible but unrelated murder into the lorry crash thread because someone is concerned about about the attack. That's being an apologist, it's trying to divert the subject and belittle people's concerns.
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showpost ... tcount=163
They're not being an apologist for Islamist terrorists, they're making an irrelevant and inaccurate point.
Nil point!
He's being purposely "irrelevant and inaccurate" because someone is discussing Islamic terrorism and he's doing it to dismiss the person's concerns aka he's being an Islam apologist. You yourself can add lack of awareness to being an apologist!
It is unbelievable. Shoppers massacred while out Christmas shopping. Someone says they're concerned at the lack of protection from this kind of terrorism, the apologist reply is something about Jo Cox to try and demonstrate Islamic terrorism isn't a big problem.