Okay, let's get this into some perspective. I was married for 5 years, and during that time my wife had 2 affairs. I have a clearly defined moral stance on betrayal. If Mosley hadn't been a dirty cheating scumbag, there would have been nothing to get caught in the act. So ride your horse, kiddo. If I were to give you what you just gave me, I'd call you a dirty cheating scumbag, but I don't make such presumptions.
Again, you're confusing personal positions and attacking me on personal matters without even knowing me, while I'm considering the outcome of your personal position as intrusive of other people's privacy. I never cheated my girlfriend, never indulged in s&m, never paid for sex. These are things I'm unwilling to do, but that doesn't matter. If you think private relationships should be public when Mosley didn't have a public stance to defend about cheating, prostitutes or s&m, I have a good reason to think you're just blinded by personal experience and emotional matters. Sorry, but these reasons aren't good for me. I prefer newspapers staying out of my sexual life, no matter if I'm famous or not, and I apply the same principles to Mosley. Is it so hard to understand?
Really?
Your moral ground is shakey and apparently the rules that have to apply to me don't apply to you. I'm simply not interested in discussing the matter with you. I've thoroughly glazed over, now.
Ask some other moderator or forumer you trust as a reasonable person, if you don't trust me.
As for the other quote, that's only the logical consequence of your reasoning. You accept the outcome, you accept the method.
Edit: I mean to say, the principles I apply to Mosley are the principles I apply to you. They are universal. I don't care about your sexual life, it's not a business of mine, and I make no exception, save for politicians (for example Spitzer) who have a strong moral position about the sexual life of others, which they don't apply to themselves. That makes their position untenable, but I don't think the same about Mosley, although he'll likely go for these reasons. These reasons for me are far from being good, or justifiable. I consider the right to live my private life in peace more important. This is definitely a guarantee I can offer.
...who has thus far yet to be shown to have broken any laws. This is what it comes down to. I'm utterly in agreement with Albieg here, and can hardly add anything to supplement an already cogent argument.
Sam, you were being sarcastic when you said "and that it is generally accepted that many companies in the UK use cameras to spy on their workforce"? Right?
Please tell me you were. It is the general acceptance of such daily surveillance, daily tresspass, that is so wrong:
To which list I will add speed cameras (surveillance that integrates a form of justice devoid of due process).
Max Mosley is a waste of flesh... A waste of flesh, not because of "loose morals", but because he represents a degenerate system of privilege. That's my opinion, but I will defend him here because to do anything else would be to lay down rights that people I love and respect fought vigourously for.
Fully agreed.
How can Mercedes and BMW criticize Mosley, IIRC mercedes and bmw have used concentration camps when producing there cars?. I didnt know Bernie was jewish!.
You don't have to be jewish to be outraged because of the Holocaust, or similar displays of cruelty. But I suppose that Mercedes and BMW did so because they have good reasons - given their past - to strongly distance themselves from the accusations against Mosley. That's why Mosley complained about BMW and Mercedes not asking him about the allegations, which analysing the clip seem to be unfounded or impossible to prove with certainty: he says that given Mercedes and BMW past they should have been more cautious. However Mosley did it without a careful wording, thus offering his flank to some more (probably undeserved) attacks.
No, I wasn't being sarcastic, I was being sardonic. I didn't ever say I was happy about it, but as you point out there is a CCTV culture in the UK, like it or not.
Using your logic, YOU cannot be trusted to not cheat on your partner, because you accept and defend Mosley cheating on his wife. Personally, I find your acceptance of Mosley's behaviour quite abhorrent. I hope, if you do cheat on your partner, you get caught and she gets to find out about it. I don't care by what means. Or am I playing your trick of applying logic and wilfully disregarding the existence of reason? I'm responding to this insult from you:
The fact that I never behaved or that I wouldn't behave like Mosley seems completely lost on you. I can personally condemn Mosley for what he did, but that's none of Mosley business. He can do what he likes, it's none of my business.
You're not using logic or reason, you're making assumptions about my morality by applying your moralistic positions to me. And if I ever cheat on my girlfriend and get caught, this would be none of your damn business, once again, unless you prove to me it should be. Get out of my bed, stay in yours, I'm not calling my girlfriend or telling her about this, she would be upset at you because of your stupid assumptions. And stop using my private life as an example, you don't know anything about it.
I'm only applying the same flat logic and lack of reason to you as you did to me. 
I don't care whether you cheat on your partner, but that doesn't change the fact that if you do you'll be a scumbag for doing it. In my moralistic, arrogant, self-opinionated opinion. Again, just like you.
I don't care whether you cheat on your partner, but that doesn't change the fact that if you do you'll be a scumbag for doing it. In my moralistic, arrogant, self-opinionated opinion. Again, just like you.
Someone contact the News Of The World: we started with Mosley's dirty underwear and now we're well on our way on getting the scoop on lfs forum members!
I don't like it when people make assumptions of me, and then assert them. I'm just gonna drop out of this thread.
Okay, I'll be a scumbag in your eyes. I'm fine with that, as I'm fine with the fact that Mosley is a scumbag in my eyes for cheating on his wife if his wife doesn't consent or like his cheating, but that's another thing you seem to assume without knowledge.
And no, I'm no moralist: I don't apply my morals to you. That's a huge difference since you don't have necessarily to adhere to my moral standards. But I'm still willing to defend your right not to be harassed in your private life. You seem to accept it because the results are fine for you. Sorry, but that's not what I do.
And what kind of assumption did I do about you? The fact that you're fine with what happened to Mosley? The fact that you justify it, or accept its logical consequences, then you blindlessly point your finger at me saying I insulted you? That's rubbish. Mine's not an assumption, it's a certainty. My guarantees are clear: I won't attack Mosley, so I won't attack you on the same ground. You can't do the same thing, it's in your own words.
(Re-edit for clarity. Being attacked just because I defend anyone's right to privacy is one of the most stupid things I've ever endured in this forum.)
And no, I'm no moralist: I don't apply my morals to you. That's a huge difference since you don't have necessarily to adhere to my moral standards. But I'm still willing to defend your right not to be harassed in your private life. You seem to accept it because the results are fine for you. Sorry, but that's not what I do.
And what kind of assumption did I do about you? The fact that you're fine with what happened to Mosley? The fact that you justify it, or accept its logical consequences, then you blindlessly point your finger at me saying I insulted you? That's rubbish. Mine's not an assumption, it's a certainty. My guarantees are clear: I won't attack Mosley, so I won't attack you on the same ground. You can't do the same thing, it's in your own words.
(Re-edit for clarity. Being attacked just because I defend anyone's right to privacy is one of the most stupid things I've ever endured in this forum.)
That's an unfortunate part of history, it has no relevance to either of these companies nearly 70 years later. Mr Mosley has a far nastier and more direct connection with this period of history than the CEO of BMW or Mercedes. Given his history the fact he is getting sexually aroused at it really is pretty horrendous.
It's not as if either of the companies had any choice anyway, they could hardly have gone 'Errr.. sorry Hitler we don't like the whole National Socialist business so we've decided not to help the war effort'
Again, review the clip. If you're able to distinguish that from a generic s&m prison themed role play, you're invited to show evidence. I commented on YouTube saying the same things and a professional s&m mistress agreed that it wasn't possible to distinguish it, although she condones nazi fantasies in domination and replied she had an orthodox jewish customer asking her to dominate him in such a fantasy.
As for Mercedes and BMW, executing orders wasn't a good excuse for Porsche. Just take a look at the Nurenberg trials, and see what happened to Speer for his usage of slave labour forces. Porsche wasn't tried at Nurenberg, but he did however have his share of prison time for his deeds.
Edit: http://www.cracked.com/article ... brands-nazis-gave-us.html . Via a link provided some time ago by my girlfriend. Interesting trivia.
The amount of analysis and scrutineering that has gone into this video is staggering. Soon enough we'll be able to claim our very own resident expert on it for the LFS forum and we'll be able to upgrade our forensics lab to a +3 level.
What should we discuss about, given the fact that people are willing to assume things for certain when they have the evidence needed to decide, since that is the same evidence that a newspaper uses to support its claims? Have you got something better, xaotik? Feel free to share. I'm eager to have a better understanding, or better evidence. And I'll decide for myself whenever I can, without relying solely on third party commentary.
Edit: s&m clips not relevant to this case aren't accepted as something better, of course. I'm interested in the story but seeing Mosley spanked doesn't exactly get me aroused. It's just part of it and I'm able to look at it emotionlessly, but just as part of something bigger.
Edit: s&m clips not relevant to this case aren't accepted as something better, of course. I'm interested in the story but seeing Mosley spanked doesn't exactly get me aroused. It's just part of it and I'm able to look at it emotionlessly, but just as part of something bigger.
The only way this is going to be resolved is if one of us finds out for sure whether Max Mosley is aroused by Nazi role-play. I nominate Dustin.
Whether I have or have not any evidence is of no consequence, kind sir, and certainly of no relevance to my previous statement.
Perhaps you'll dedicate some more time into acquiring a complete copy of the video and thus sate your thirst for complete understanding of the sexual escapades a 70 y/o rich British public figure has indulged himself in and so stupidly allowed to be recorded and circulated?
How's his german accent?
Perhaps you'll dedicate some more time into acquiring a complete copy of the video and thus sate your thirst for complete understanding of the sexual escapades a 70 y/o rich British public figure has indulged himself in and so stupidly allowed to be recorded and circulated?
How's his german accent?
He didn't know about the cameras. They are hidden and sometimes manually operated, there's at least one camera concealed in an object, you can clearly distinguish the typical hidden camera operation in some sequences. This could happen to anyone, regardless of his or her activity.
And if I could get my hands on the video I'd be happy to spend some time analysing it for my trivial mental exercises, but obviously I can't get my hands on it, at least easily or legally. It's just as LFS or any other activity that can make my brain work.
Edit: and your remark about analyses concerns me, since I seem to be one of the few willing to question the allegations of a newspaper without accepting it blindly. Is my way of spending my time so important for you? I'll waste it as I like regardless of your opinion, thanks. As long as I don't go off-topic or break any rules you shouldn't be concerned.
By all means, I don't mean to deter you. If you think you are wasting your time as you say then you just have yourself to answer to - definitely not me. I like to waste my time and energy in poking fun at situations and attempting cynical remarks.
For the most part I share the same viewpoint on this situation as you, but I reserve the right to add, once more, that the person in question was not born yesterday and he should of known better than to leave his guard down together with his trousers.
However, if there's to be a piece of text to counter every single user's remarks about this situation it will surely not be coming from me.
Yes, I'm obviously wasting my time. I don't question your right to do cynical and humorous remarks, anyway, but in this case I felt the need to respond because I don't think it's well directed, at the cost of being considered a less than humorous person. It's a really small price to pay when people you know and meet assess you as a funny guy with a very serious edge in your 'real' life.
Back on topic, spying - even with hidden cameras - is so easy that unless you're paranoid it's really difficult to assess Mosley as naive. I'd need more information for such judgement.
I forgot to say that I'm answering to those who have a very clear opinion about facts they think they know. I'm questioning that knowledge asking for conclusive evidence. So far, it hasn't appeared. If people have such a strong opinion about those facts they must have very strong evidence, don't you think so?
Back on topic, spying - even with hidden cameras - is so easy that unless you're paranoid it's really difficult to assess Mosley as naive. I'd need more information for such judgement.
I forgot to say that I'm answering to those who have a very clear opinion about facts they think they know. I'm questioning that knowledge asking for conclusive evidence. So far, it hasn't appeared. If people have such a strong opinion about those facts they must have very strong evidence, don't you think so?
sam and albieg youre both making the same mistake of compiling a list of immoral behaviours order them and then accuse the other of having them in the wrong order
and albieg dont you find it a bit bizarre that you value privacy so highly but then in the next sentence you point out that were lacking evidence for the nazi claim ad that you would happily look at the full 2 hour privacy invading tape?
and albieg dont you find it a bit bizarre that you value privacy so highly but then in the next sentence you point out that were lacking evidence for the nazi claim ad that you would happily look at the full 2 hour privacy invading tape?
Point me in the right direction about the list of immoral behaviours I compiled about SamH and I'll gladly correct my position. If you can't, you're accusing me of something I haven't done.
For the second thing, I don't find it bizarre. I already said there's no way I can obtain the tape legally. I'm only evaluating a situation and certainly I'm not using against Mosley any of his private facts, unless you have - once again - proof of the contrary. Besides that, I'm concentrating on the only aspect that I deem important for his public role in this case: the nazi allegations, and I already stated that only such issues would render his private matters public, in my opinion. So there's no incoherence at all.
Edit: I have to say something more about my position about privacy. It has been quite a difficult week for me exactly for such matters. In the firm I work for, the owners have decided to use a system that tracks down entries and exits at work. I already told them that if such a system was applied to me I would have quit my job. Nevertheless they went on and decided to use the system also with me, saying it at a meeting. As soon as they told so, I raised my hand saying that I would have immediately quit as I told them. I've been personally attacked by an owner and I left the room, preparing my stuff to leave, while other people were saying "stop him, if he leaves he won't ever be back". So the meeting went on while I was emptying my desk taking away my personal stuff, with the person in charge of the human resources carefully watching me and preventing me from reaching the exit door, while asking me to wait and saying that he understood, "but you know what they think...". I was later told that other workers were supportive and that they had no troubles in me being an exception. So I was then asked to stay, and I accepted to stay. It was something personal, for me. I didn't require anyone to be supportive of my position since I only have to answer to my conscience, and nothing more.
I don't live just breathing. I have bills to pay and food to buy, so I need my job, and no matter if you're good, the IT market is tough. I could have been jobless for three or four months, and that would have been a problem for me. But the cost, in this case, wasn't important. My family was informed about my decision and about the possibility of me being jobless for some time. I explained my reasons, and no one questioned them. You may think your privacy is a little thing, but in reality it is fundamental for your individual freedoms.
Mosley's future?
(208 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG