Post by Dave Shephe » Sun, 26 Mar 1995 03:46:04

 First off, I choose to ignore the BS chicanery you use to try
 and draw me into endless off-subject bickering about style & netiquette.
 Suffice it to say I can shred those arguments as well.


> It now appears to me that Dave Shepherd is attempting to do
> precisely that - evade the issue and drag it into a Scottish vs English
> flame war on the basis of what he perceives my nationality to be.

 One hell of an inverted accusation from someone who started a
 "BAN ENGLAND" thread..!

 Absolutely not what ~I~ am doing. In fact quite the opposite.

 Despite my repeated insistences to the contrary, David Morning refuses
 to acknowledge that 'the issue' which I am challenging is NOT whether
 or not England football team or fans should be sanctioned en masse in
 an effort to combat hooliganism.

    It is clear that:
         1)  D.A. Morning thinks they should.
         2)  D.W. Shepherd thinks they shouldn't.
         3)  What we think is irrelevant because the decision is UEFA's.

    End Of Discussion...

 ...or is it?
 Seemingly not, because Mr Morning continues to accuse my messages of
 being apologia for ***. When I state "I condemn all ***"
 it does not seem to sink in far enough to prevent him from repeating
 the apologist accusations.

 I am not taking issue specifically with Morning's 'sign', but the fact
 that he chose to raise it demands that other issues arising from
 the original be discussed.

 'The Issues' with which I am concerned are twofold:

   1)  Reporting of hooliganism drastically over-hyped.
       Like most fans I am sick of the sensationalism and being
       tarred by those trying to sell papers, gain viewers, or enjoy
       pointing their fingers like self-righteous armchair tricoteures.

       Refer back through this thread for my reasoning and
       evidence in this respect. It's not 'apologising', no matter
       how much Mr Morning shrieks that it is.

   2)  I despise bigots.
       That goes not only for bigotry stemming from race, but bigotry
       stemming from nationality, political bigotry, bigotry about town
       of origin, or even simple bigotry keyed only by whether your scarf
       is (e.g.) Blue or Red. I choose to speak out against bigotry of any  
       kind when I see a bad case of it.

       Whether or not Mr Morning himself is in fact a bigot is
       not primarily important - what is important is that to show
       favour for a sign shouting "BAN ENGLAND" in a location
       where one know the readership comprises large numbers of English
       football fans is inflammatory in the extreme.

   It is You, not I, Mr Morning, who is tending to "drag (this) into
   a Scottish vs English flame war". Your claim to have great experience
   on networks must have taught you what constitutes an inflammatory
   subject, so to post such a message begs the question 'why
   did you do it?'

   One strong possibility was that, as you said, you might "hate the
   English". I accused you of that motive. Seeing that you did not deny
   this was the case (despite being accused & invited to deny it many
   times), I have recently asked you to explain in your own words
   what your motives ARE. If you have a reasonable explanation for
   why you posted such an inflammatory message, why not present it?

   You now claim "there is no 'REAL' motive". I challenge this
   statement. Nobody posts anything to a newsgroup for 'no reason'.
   You 'sat down with a sign' in a soccer newsgroup with a very
   large English readership demanding that English soccer be
   sanctioned. Only an utter fool would do so for 'no reason'.
   You are IMO no fool, so 'no reason' doesn't fit.

   I would like to believe that you are not a bigot, but you leave
   the readers and myself no other reasonable explanations.

   The problem, Mr Morning, is that if your voice is one which can defend
   itself with reason when challenged by someone like myself, then it
   has a worthwhile - if disputed - case to offer.
   However, if that voice is born out of an ulterior motive such as
   bigotry, its worth is negated - written off as the ravings of
   someone driven by hatred or resentment, not by reason.

   Until you offer some positive evidence to contradict the overwhelming
   suspicion that your premise is rooted in bigotry, then your premise
   is rendered valueless.

   Yet this is not the end of the matter - it leads to something more
   sinister and serious..
   Not only does a bigot's opinion damage any case there might reasonably
   be for agreeing with the premise, but it also damages the credibility
   of himself towards any other issue he might share an untainted view
   about; it damages the reputation of the distinguished institution you
   work at and send from (BTW - I made no assumptions - I checked); it
   damages the reputation of your country, the Union, and the readership
   of the newsgroup as a whole.

   This and only this is the reason why I continued to destroy your
   arguments, declined to rise to your baiting tactics and continued to
   demand that you either justify yourself or admit that you do have
   other agenda at work here than the interests of football.

   I have refused to stand by and let you, unchallenged
     - pollute this newsgroup with your hatred-based bile,
     - risk generating hatred of Scotland amongst English readers,
     - attempt to generate hatred of England among non-English readers,
     - degrade the reputation of the UK and r.s.s. by increasing hate-noise,
   and, if applicable,
     - use football as a vehicle to publicise your personal convictions.

   Committing football *** is despicable.
   Inciting hatred is also despicable.
   Hatred can and does spawn ***.
   You, sir, are one small but integral part of football's *** problem.

   _YOU_ can do nothing to help football's problems by posting 'BAN ENGLAND'
   messages on this newsgroup - however people like you can and do
   increase them.

   _ONE_ can do nothing to help football's problems by 'sticking
   up signs' about 'to ban or not to ban'.

   _I_ can at least help football's problems by exposing those like you
   whom I suspect of being nothing but hate-mongers for what they are -
   poisonous bigots.

 If I thought you were just a harmless prat, I'd have appropriately
 ignored you. I satisfied myself that things were not that simple after
 a brief tour through some other newsgroups that likely you have
 other issues closer to your heart than merely the safety of fans of
 teams who play England or English clubs.

 I assert that your "BAN ENGLAND" topic is inappropriate for a
 "Discussion about Soccer", and should be removed to somewhere more
 appropriate for its content.. and if you can't find one - create one:
 alt.hooliganism, perhaps.

 To this end I invite you to join me in abandoning this thread.

- - -