redandblack wrote:He could have reversed and driven away. No-one would have blamed him.
FFS, he was just trying to go to work ... not his fault or problem if other workers seem to have some sort of beef with the company
by dedja » Thu Nov 17, 2011 4:32 pm
redandblack wrote:He could have reversed and driven away. No-one would have blamed him.
by redandblack » Thu Nov 17, 2011 4:36 pm
by redandblack » Thu Nov 17, 2011 4:39 pm
dedja wrote:redandblack wrote:He could have reversed and driven away. No-one would have blamed him.
FFS, he was just trying to go to work ... not his fault or problem if other workers seem to have some sort of beef with the company
by dedja » Thu Nov 17, 2011 4:48 pm
by Jimmy_041 » Thu Nov 17, 2011 4:49 pm
redandblack wrote:Let's just say that sympathy for the workers' plight has been missing from many posts, but there's been a great deal of sympathy for the bloke who drove his car into a crowd and injured someone.
I wish I had a bit more time to scan my posts, as I can be sure the core argument will often be avoided in favour of semantic argument
In this case, you have no sympathy at all for people earning a measly few dollars an hour from a company owned by someone worth $495 million. Someone who is allegedly breaking the law relating to wages and conditions in a workplace where someone was decapitated last year.
Several of the usual suspects have rushed to condemn my opinion on this again, fair enough, but I don't know how many times I have to say I don't condone violence of any kind, by whoever it is.
I do have sympathy for the workers involved, though, but I'm a bit bewildered at your vehement defence of the very powerful over the very weak.
If you really want to know more about the politics behind this anti-union campaign by the Company, there's a revealing article on it in Crikey today.
by dedja » Thu Nov 17, 2011 4:50 pm
redandblack wrote:Your ability to distill a complex situation into a simplistic one-sided argument is impressive, but IMO facile (pardon the tautolgy).
by overloaded » Thu Nov 17, 2011 4:53 pm
overloaded wrote:You are an ignorant fool redandblack
therealROSSCO wrote:Now listen to this loud and clear.....
I have not been approached to coach at the WFC this year, next year or any year. I have not approached the WFC to coach this year, next year or any year. This is an unconditional statement.
by dedja » Thu Nov 17, 2011 4:55 pm
redandblack wrote:FFS, there was no-one working and he was there to keep the workers in line (pardon the pun).
by smac » Thu Nov 17, 2011 4:57 pm
redandblack wrote:If the protesters had alternatives, then the driver also did.
He could have reversed and driven away. No-one would have blamed him. The alternative he chose was to drive into the crowd and injure someone.
I'm still wondering why so many get stuck into the lowly paid workers and see nothing wrong with the actions of the $500 million dollar man or of one of his security guards injuring someone by reckless driving?
Unless it's OK if you're going less than 10kmh.
New road rule
by dedja » Thu Nov 17, 2011 4:58 pm
by redandblack » Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:11 pm
by dedja » Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:23 pm
redandblack wrote:I'll just have a break to wonder why it's impossible to have an alternative view ...
by southee » Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:34 pm
redandblack wrote:Let's just say that sympathy for the workers' plight has been missing from many posts, but there's been a great deal of sympathy for the bloke who drove his car into a crowd and injured someone.
I wish I had a bit more time to scan my posts, as I can be sure the core argument will often be avoided in favour of semantic argument
by redandblack » Thu Nov 17, 2011 7:30 pm
dedja wrote:redandblack wrote:I'll just have a break to wonder why it's impossible to have an alternative view ...
LOL, what do you expect if you don't tolerate the views of others?
Maybe try to treat it as a debate, not a lecture ... just a suggestion.
by dedja » Thu Nov 17, 2011 8:27 pm
redandblack wrote:Your ability to distill a complex situation into a simplistic one-sided argument is impressive, but IMO facile (pardon the tautolgy).
by redandblack » Thu Nov 17, 2011 8:37 pm
by dedja » Thu Nov 17, 2011 8:40 pm
by redandblack » Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:08 pm
by dedja » Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:11 pm
by overloaded » Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:38 pm
redandblack wrote:So your test cricket jibe wasn't directed at me, then
That's good, we can all move on.
therealROSSCO wrote:Now listen to this loud and clear.....
I have not been approached to coach at the WFC this year, next year or any year. I have not approached the WFC to coach this year, next year or any year. This is an unconditional statement.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |