Australian Politics Forum - we are Charlie? .. BS cowards.. >:(

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: we are Charlie? .. BS cowards.. >:(
Reply #75 - Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:41pm

ian wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:29pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:14pm:

[
Oh, and this is about the very essence of 'freedom of speech'...

no its not. If it was then all the internet heroes sounding off here would be doing it in public.

No it's about the magazine having the 'freedom of speech' to publish something that some people might disagree with...

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: we are Charlie? .. BS cowards.. >:(
Reply #76 - Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:50pm

Lord Herbert wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:36pm:

Kat wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 2:25am:

Bolt???

Say no more.

I mean, literally, say no more.

The man's an ignorant, bigoted, anencephalic nutter with little if anything
to say on just about any topic that's worth reading or listening-to.

If you think that this asshole has even the slightest clue, it's a sure sign
that you don't.

Wow! Where's this hostility coming from?

He's not racist. He's not against homos. As an immigrant himself, he's not anti-immigrant.

What exactly is it about him that upsets you?

There's something about him that obviously terrifies you - but what is it?

***

Thanks for posting that up, The Mechanic. Good stuff that comes under the heading of REALITY CHECK.

I think I, would be more afraid of meeting kat in a dark alley than any terrorist to be honest...his vile language alone makes him sound like a completely unreasonable out of control..wild animal...I am so glad hes a lefty...shiver..

Back to top

IP Logged

gizmo_2655 Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 16010 South West NSW Gender:	Re: we are Charlie? .. BS cowards.. >:( Reply #77 - Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:53pm .
Back to top	"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition. It's similar to a strawman fallacy" Bobbythebat IP Logged

Lord Herbert

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 34441
Gender: male

Re: we are Charlie? .. BS cowards.. >:(
Reply #78 - Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:03pm

cods wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:50pm:

I think I, would be more afraid of meeting kat in a dark alley than any terrorist to be honest...his vile language alone makes him sound like a completely unreasonable out of control..wild animal...I am so glad hes a lefty...shiver..

I own three cats. I'm a kat whisperer. I can tame the most insane cats that have come in from the bush. I once had an enormous feral ginger cat sitting on the lounge with me watching TV in the evenings. There were only two ferals that I couldn't break. Just too far gone.

But generally speaking - if it's got fur - I can make it purr.

I can even do this with beavers. Cool

Make them purr.

Back to top

IP Logged

ian

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 9451

Re: we are Charlie? .. BS cowards.. >:(
Reply #79 - Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:03pm

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:41pm:

ian wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:29pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:14pm:

[
Oh, and this is about the very essence of 'freedom of speech'...

no its not. If it was then all the internet heroes sounding off here would be doing it in public.

No it's about the magazine having the 'freedom of speech' to publish something that some people might disagree with...

thats not what the magazine did, try again.

Back to top

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: we are Charlie? .. BS cowards.. >:(
Reply #80 - Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:08pm

ian wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:03pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:41pm:

ian wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:29pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:14pm:

[
Oh, and this is about the very essence of 'freedom of speech'...

no its not. If it was then all the internet heroes sounding off here would be doing it in public.

No it's about the magazine having the 'freedom of speech' to publish something that some people might disagree with...

thats not what the magazine did, try again.

No?? what did they do then, (apart from publishing cartoons that offended Muslims)????

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

Lord Herbert

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 34441
Gender: male

Re: we are Charlie? .. BS cowards.. >:(
Reply #81 - Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:31pm

MORE Reality Checks from the same source ...

... here putting to bed the palliative bullshit that the 'ordinary Muslims' in society are just 'folks' that can be excluded from any discussion about Islamic jihad and western Muslims having 'bad attitude' about their non-Muslim fellow-citizens.

Stifling debate empowers radicals

Rita Panahi
Herald Sun
January 12, 2015 7:03AM

"The results of multiple polls and studies on global attitudes to extremist Islamist activity shows there is tolerance, and sometimes even support, of repellent behaviour that should be categorically condemned.

A poll conducted in 2014 by ICM research found a surprising level of support for Islamic State among sections of the French, British and, to a lesser extent, German populations.

The poll of 1000 people in each country found that an alarming 15 per cent of French respondents had a positive attitude to IS. In Britain, the figure stood at 7 per cent while only 2 per cent of Germans polled were favourably disposed to the terror group.

I say only 2 per cent but that is still a disturbingly high number given only 4-5 per cent of Germans identify as Muslim.

**

"The poll of 1000 people in each country found that an alarming 15 per cent of French respondents had a positive attitude to IS. In Britain, the figure stood at 7 per cent while only 2 per cent of Germans polled were favourably disposed to the terror group.

Less than a year after Islamist suicide bombers attacked London, killing 52 people, a poll conducted by the Sunday Telegraph found that although 99 per cent of British Muslims were against the attack, 20 per cent had sympathy for the “feelings and motives” of the bombers.

But let’s not be too hasty in dismissing the significance of the 1 per cent of those polled who said the suicide bombers were right to carry out the attack.

There are about 2.7 million Muslims in the UK.

If that 1 per cent is representative, then that’s 27,000 Muslims who saw the utter carnage and devastation caused by the London bombings and thought that the attacks were “right”.

The poll also showed that an equal number of Muslims were for and against the introduction of sharia law.

**

"Pew’s 2006 Global Attitudes poll revealed that 8 per cent of Muslims in the US thought suicide bombings could “often/sometimes” be justified. A further 5 per cent thought they were justifiable
only rarely.

This permissive attitude to violent jihad among some Muslims helps explain why so many young men raised, and often born, in Western countries have gone to the Middle East to fight alongside terrorists.

According to British MP Khalid Mahmood, there are more than twice as many British Muslims fighting for extremist groups in the Middle East than there are serving in the British Army.

**

"The useful idiots of the Left are forever fretting about a non-existent backlash against the Muslim community; the phony Islamophobia card is used to silence debate and deserved criticism.

**

link

Back to top

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: we are Charlie? .. BS cowards.. >:(
Reply #82 - Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:34pm

Kat wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 6:53pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 6:38pm:

Kat wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 9:10am:

innocentbystander. wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:58am:

The fact that the Left become far more irrationally angry over Bolt and Abbott than they do over murdering scum terrorists says a lot of things about them, one thing it says to me is that they are mentally disturbed. Cheesy

Irrationally angry?

No, do wake up.

We merely have very finely-tuned bulldust detectors.

Not that they need to be, with this Bolt peanut, his BS is so blatant
that anyone (except a neo-con) can see it.

The only mentally-disturbed ones here are the Islamophobes on the
Right who insist upon tarring all Muslims with the terrorist brush.

That's plain stupid, and totally counter-productive.

It is they who need to be shut-down, not the moderates or the left.

you are just an incredibly angry, bitter and deeply disturbed individual.

Says you. Most wouldn't agree.

There is nothing abusive or offensive in my comment, neither is there anything that is not correct.

You, not I, are the one with problems.

Oh I think pretty much everyone other than Pansi thinks you are an angry poster.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: we are Charlie? .. BS cowards.. >:(
Reply #83 - Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:36pm

ian wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 6:40pm:

ian wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 1:47pm:

red baron wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 9:06am:

Just a point here...When Monty Python came out and satirised Christ , did the Christian World rise up and destroy the BBC?

I don't so Tim

So? I have an aquaintance whom is seriously overweight, I dont disparage fat people or make jokes about his weight, thats because I know he doesnt like it and I respect it. I dont see this issue any differently. Muslims find caricatures of their prophet extremely disrespectful, the French journalists involved were deliberately provocative in my opinion.

provocative... and the penalty for that should be a strongly worded email or a phone call or 20 protestors waving handmade placards.

Being provocative is what writers and cartoonists are meant to be - except in North Korea.

who cares? dont make caricatures of a religious figure knowing that you are going to greatly offend them for no other reason than you can. See how easy it is? Just involves a little respect for your fellow man, of course you dont understand that.

and I think you are an arsehole. So should I drive over there and shoot you because you offend me?

Gizmo is right and you are, as always, wrong.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: we are Charlie? .. BS cowards.. >:(
Reply #84 - Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:43pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:36pm:

ian wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 6:40pm:

ian wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 1:47pm:

red baron wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 9:06am:

Just a point here...When Monty Python came out and satirised Christ , did the Christian World rise up and destroy the BBC?

I don't so Tim

So? I have an aquaintance whom is seriously overweight, I dont disparage fat people or make jokes about his weight, thats because I know he doesnt like it and I respect it. I dont see this issue any differently. Muslims find caricatures of their prophet extremely disrespectful, the French journalists involved were deliberately provocative in my opinion.

provocative... and the penalty for that should be a strongly worded email or a phone call or 20 protestors waving handmade placards.

Being provocative is what writers and cartoonists are meant to be - except in North Korea.

who cares? dont make caricatures of a religious figure knowing that you are going to greatly offend them for no other reason than you can. See how easy it is? Just involves a little respect for your fellow man, of course you dont understand that.

and I think you are an arsehole. So should I drive over there and shoot you because you offend me?

Gizmo is right and you are, as always, wrong.

So, ian, how long do you think it would take to find 10 caricatures of Jesus (that no-one has been murdered over) on the internet??

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

ian

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 9451

Re: we are Charlie? .. BS cowards.. >:(
Reply #85 - Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:57pm

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:08pm:

ian wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:03pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:41pm:

ian wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:29pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:14pm:

[
Oh, and this is about the very essence of 'freedom of speech'...

no its not. If it was then all the internet heroes sounding off here would be doing it in public.

No it's about the magazine having the 'freedom of speech' to publish something that some people might disagree with...

thats not what the magazine did, try again.

No?? what did they do then, (apart from publishing cartoons that offended Muslims)????

better, nearly got it. They deliberately set out to offend Muslims by publishing the most offensive caricatures they could about Islam. Methinks there is an agenda, but then Im not as smart as you gizmo.

Back to top

IP Logged

ian

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 9451

Re: we are Charlie? .. BS cowards.. >:(
Reply #86 - Jan 12^th, 2015 at 9:00pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:36pm:

ian wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 6:40pm:

ian wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 1:47pm:

red baron wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 9:06am:

Just a point here...When Monty Python came out and satirised Christ , did the Christian World rise up and destroy the BBC?

I don't so Tim

So? I have an aquaintance whom is seriously overweight, I dont disparage fat people or make jokes about his weight, thats because I know he doesnt like it and I respect it. I dont see this issue any differently. Muslims find caricatures of their prophet extremely disrespectful, the French journalists involved were deliberately provocative in my opinion.

provocative... and the penalty for that should be a strongly worded email or a phone call or 20 protestors waving handmade placards.

Being provocative is what writers and cartoonists are meant to be - except in North Korea.

who cares? dont make caricatures of a religious figure knowing that you are going to greatly offend them for no other reason than you can. See how easy it is? Just involves a little respect for your fellow man, of course you dont understand that.

and I think you are an arsehole. So should I drive over there and shoot you because you offend me?

Gizmo is right and you are, as always, wrong.

what on earth has personal opinion of others got to do with offending others religious beleifs?

Back to top

IP Logged

ian

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 9451

Re: we are Charlie? .. BS cowards.. >:(
Reply #87 - Jan 12^th, 2015 at 9:01pm

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:43pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:36pm:

ian wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:27pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 6:40pm:

ian wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 1:47pm:

red baron wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 9:06am:

Just a point here...When Monty Python came out and satirised Christ , did the Christian World rise up and destroy the BBC?

I don't so Tim

So? I have an aquaintance whom is seriously overweight, I dont disparage fat people or make jokes about his weight, thats because I know he doesnt like it and I respect it. I dont see this issue any differently. Muslims find caricatures of their prophet extremely disrespectful, the French journalists involved were deliberately provocative in my opinion.

provocative... and the penalty for that should be a strongly worded email or a phone call or 20 protestors waving handmade placards.

Being provocative is what writers and cartoonists are meant to be - except in North Korea.

who cares? dont make caricatures of a religious figure knowing that you are going to greatly offend them for no other reason than you can. See how easy it is? Just involves a little respect for your fellow man, of course you dont understand that.

and I think you are an arsehole. So should I drive over there and shoot you because you offend me?

Gizmo is right and you are, as always, wrong.

So, ian, how long do you think it would take to find 10 caricatures of Jesus (that no-one has been murdered over) on the internet??

Dont care, because Im not looking to deliberatly offend anyone. Got it?

Back to top

IP Logged

ian

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 9451

Re: we are Charlie? .. BS cowards.. >:(
Reply #88 - Jan 12^th, 2015 at 9:03pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:34pm:

[

Oh I think pretty much everyone other than Pansi thinks you are an angry poster.

you appear to be quite an angry poster yourself, when challenged on anything your first resort is to personal abuse, every single time. Has to be something in your background to explain that, overbearing Mother perhaps?

Back to top

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: we are Charlie? .. BS cowards.. >:(
Reply #89 - Jan 12^th, 2015 at 9:03pm

ian wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:57pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:08pm:

ian wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 8:03pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:41pm:

ian wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:29pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 12^th, 2015 at 7:14pm:

[
Oh, and this is about the very essence of 'freedom of speech'...

no its not. If it was then all the internet heroes sounding off here would be doing it in public.

No it's about the magazine having the 'freedom of speech' to publish something that some people might disagree with...

thats not what the magazine did, try again.

No?? what did they do then, (apart from publishing cartoons that offended Muslims)????

better, nearly got it. They deliberately set out to offend Muslims by publishing the most offensive caricatures they could about Islam. Methinks there is an agenda, but then Im not as smart as you gizmo.

Yeah, well I knew that.

Tell me though, how many people were killed as a result of making 'The Life of Brian'??
And how many death threats/attacks did Dave Allen receive??

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged