Please hear me out before you start calling me names again (that goes for you as well, Andy). I know I'm not exactly loved on this forum, but I'll try to make a couple of things a bit more clear with this post.
1. 9/11/2004 : It was getting on my nerves how some people went on and on about 9/11. It was a tragedy, yes, but people were comparing it to WWII, which was ridiculous. I'm not talking about members like Andy, Sergio, Nick or Padovano here.
It would have been ridiculous to deny the impact 9/11 had on a lot of lives and such a thing was never my intention. But because some people blew 9/11 out of proportion I was agitated and started a discussion about people starving in Africa. Because 9/11 was bad, but in the end more people die of starvation than in terrorist attacks. I admit that I dismissed 9/11 too easily, but my main intention was to piss off people who acted as if WWIII had begun.
It was a shame that respectable members noticed my posts and took them for what they were. That's how something small got huge repercussions. From that moment on I was "anti-American" and "pro-terrorism". With Andy saying that I apparently was "pro-terrorism" I got mad and acted as if I was. Perhaps a childish reaction from my part, but understandable to say the least. "If you're not for me, you're against me" is a retarded thing to say.
2. 9/11/2005: Bullshit. Simply bullshit. What I said wasn't provocative and there would have never been such a discussion about it, if someone else had said it. Saying they weren't pretty buildings and that big buildings bring big risks, isn't provocative. It's a mere observation. But like Padovano himself admitted, everyone was waiting for me to say something.
Should I have said it another day? No, because it would have been completely irrelevant. Saying it were ugly buildings is only relevant when there's a huge picture of them right above your post. I still feel 9/11 is the day to talk about terrorism. That's how we do it here TBH.
If I wanted to be provocative I had said something much more harmful. The fact I didn't only proves that I didn't want to. I never looked for a fight that day. When I posted that sentence I had no idea of your reactions.
3. Katrina: I never said anything about Katrina. Therefore I find it odd that people are saying that I should have kept my mouth about that as well. The ONLY thing I said, was that the rescue actions were apparently going pretty slow. Which had already been said by several other people BTW. So if you're looking for a scapegoat here, please use m_elayyan, who said America was punished by God.
I don't think many of you want me back, but if you do after reading this post, please let me know.
Your darling, Seven
.
1. 9/11/2004 : It was getting on my nerves how some people went on and on about 9/11. It was a tragedy, yes, but people were comparing it to WWII, which was ridiculous. I'm not talking about members like Andy, Sergio, Nick or Padovano here.
It would have been ridiculous to deny the impact 9/11 had on a lot of lives and such a thing was never my intention. But because some people blew 9/11 out of proportion I was agitated and started a discussion about people starving in Africa. Because 9/11 was bad, but in the end more people die of starvation than in terrorist attacks. I admit that I dismissed 9/11 too easily, but my main intention was to piss off people who acted as if WWIII had begun.
It was a shame that respectable members noticed my posts and took them for what they were. That's how something small got huge repercussions. From that moment on I was "anti-American" and "pro-terrorism". With Andy saying that I apparently was "pro-terrorism" I got mad and acted as if I was. Perhaps a childish reaction from my part, but understandable to say the least. "If you're not for me, you're against me" is a retarded thing to say.
2. 9/11/2005: Bullshit. Simply bullshit. What I said wasn't provocative and there would have never been such a discussion about it, if someone else had said it. Saying they weren't pretty buildings and that big buildings bring big risks, isn't provocative. It's a mere observation. But like Padovano himself admitted, everyone was waiting for me to say something.
Should I have said it another day? No, because it would have been completely irrelevant. Saying it were ugly buildings is only relevant when there's a huge picture of them right above your post. I still feel 9/11 is the day to talk about terrorism. That's how we do it here TBH.
If I wanted to be provocative I had said something much more harmful. The fact I didn't only proves that I didn't want to. I never looked for a fight that day. When I posted that sentence I had no idea of your reactions.
3. Katrina: I never said anything about Katrina. Therefore I find it odd that people are saying that I should have kept my mouth about that as well. The ONLY thing I said, was that the rescue actions were apparently going pretty slow. Which had already been said by several other people BTW. So if you're looking for a scapegoat here, please use m_elayyan, who said America was punished by God.
I don't think many of you want me back, but if you do after reading this post, please let me know.
Your darling, Seven
.
Buy on AliExpress.com
