Australian Politics Forum - cheese eating surrender monkeys

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 42124

Re: cheese eating surrender monkeys
Reply #45 - Jan 17^th, 2015 at 10:57pm

freediver wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 2:17pm:

Svengali wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 1:37pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 1:33pm:

Oh hi svengali. Fancy seeing you here. While I've got your attention, how far would you go in trying to appease terrorists? Do you support Charlie Hebdo's right to freedom of expression?

I don't support incitement. The magazine appears to have decided to focus its existence on ridiculing muslims.

So Charlie Hebdo is guilty of inciting violence?

What was it inciting when it published those cartoons, FD?

There is a point where ridicule can be taken too far. Some people are most sensitive than others. I think the Charlie Hebdo publishers failed to take into account the probable backlash against their efforts, particularly after a previous firebombing and the continuous death threats they were were receiving. That they appear not to supplied even some basic security to their employees makes them IMO culpable in what occurred.

If you want to exercise your freedom of speech go ahead but don't be surprised when people take offence. I'd suggest there were other ways to ridicule Islam and Mohammed than being simple toilet-wall graphitti. Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Postmodern Trendoid III

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 10266
Gender: male

Re: cheese eating surrender monkeys
Reply #46 - Jan 18^th, 2015 at 5:46am

Aussie wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 7:54pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 7:40pm:

Charlie Hebdo's right to mock Muhammed should be legally protected, with the full force of the law. Their right to go about their business without being assaulted for the views they express, or how they express them, or any other reason, should be legally protected with the full force of the law.

Do you agree Aussie?

You have left a thousand areas of weazel room in that question, so you'll need to tidy up a great deal. What do you mean by the 'full force of the law?' What do you mean by 'their business?' What do you mean by 'mock?' What do you mean by 'Muhammad?' What do you mean by 'legally protected?' Do you mean the full force of the same law which restricts mocking the holocaust, for example ~ on just one point.

Good propaganda, Comrade. Ask for multiple definitions to the point of continual obfuscation. Only then can we "progressives" continually mock and ridicule Christianity for world peace. War is peace.

Back to top

IP Logged

Phemanderac

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3507
Gender: male

Re: cheese eating surrender monkeys
Reply #47 - Jan 18^th, 2015 at 7:05am

freediver wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 7:40pm:

Charlie Hebdo's right to mock Muhammed should be legally protected, with the full force of the law. Their right to go about their business without being assaulted for the views they express, or how they express them, or any other reason, should be legally protected with the full force of the law.

Do you agree Aussie?

How they express their views....

Is this protection only afforded Charlie Hedbo?

How one "expresses their views" is kind of at the crux of the entire discussion, you see, it is about Freedom of Speech not Freedom of Expression - after all, the two shooters were only expressing their opinion opposed to Charlie Hedbo...

So, do you want Freedom of Speech or Freedom of Expression?

Which position would you surrender?

Back to top

On the 26th of January you are all invited to celebrate little white penal day...

"They're not rules as such, more like guidelines" Pirates of the Caribbean..

IP Logged

aquascoot

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 34874
Gender: male

Re: cheese eating surrender monkeys
Reply #48 - Jan 18^th, 2015 at 7:08am

Svengali wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 5:08pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 5:00pm:

Svengali wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 3:26pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 3:02pm:

Svengali wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 2:35pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 2:22pm:

Svengali wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 1:45pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 1:27pm:

So the terrorism is all our fault?

Tell me svengali, how far would you go to appease the terrorists?

The appropriate policy and principle is to avoid creating disaffected persons in the first place.

You obviously have not known any Muslims and not ventured out of Australia other than short trips. You are just a stooge and dupe of more powerful forces of hostility.

So you are more a fan of pre-appeasement? We must guess what will drive the Muslims into a mad rage and placate them before they do it?

Any suggestions on how?

No. What you are doing is incitement. You are inciting the lowest level of society into following your lead and indiscriminately being hostile to all Muslims.

Just demonstrates the shallowness of your morals.

Should my 'incitement' be censored?

I believe you should turn yourself in to your local police station and confess your extremist views and incitement attempts.

Do you think Charlie Hebdo should be censored in order to appease the terrorists?

What other pre-appeasement strategies would you suggest to stop the Muslims scaring you into post-appeasement?

I suggest sending Freediver to Syria with a sign disparaging the prophet Mohammed. I am willing to contribute to the ticket.

Freediver can then engage with those he wishes to change.

You were going alright til you posted this crap.that thinking is no different to the " uncovered meat" speech by the Muslim cleric. ie . If a crime is committed against Freediver or a girl in a bikini it is their fault because Muslim men can't control their impulses ( in this case to kill). Very sad thought process

Back to top

IP Logged

aquascoot

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 34874
Gender: male

Re: cheese eating surrender monkeys
Reply #49 - Jan 18^th, 2015 at 7:17am

Brian Ross wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 10:57pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 2:17pm:

Svengali wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 1:37pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 1:33pm:

Oh hi svengali. Fancy seeing you here. While I've got your attention, how far would you go in trying to appease terrorists? Do you support Charlie Hebdo's right to freedom of expression?

I don't support incitement. The magazine appears to have decided to focus its existence on ridiculing muslims.

So Charlie Hebdo is guilty of inciting violence?

What was it inciting when it published those cartoons, FD?

There is a point where ridicule can be taken too far. Some people are most sensitive than others. I think the Charlie Hebdo publishers failed to take into account the probable backlash against their efforts, particularly after a previous firebombing and the continuous death threats they were were receiving. That they appear not to supplied even some basic security to their employees makes them IMO culpable in what occurred.

If you want to exercise your freedom of speech go ahead but don't be surprised when people take offence. I'd suggest there were other ways to ridicule Islam and Mohammed than being simple toilet-wall graphitti. Roll Eyes

Again just rediculous thinking.
They are " culpable " because they should have known these criminals can't control themselves.
That's like saying if I cut someone off in traffic and he " road rages" on me and knocks my teeth out with a tyre lever, it is somehow MY FAULT because I should have known he was capable of such an act,

Epic fail my friend,
The guilt lies totally with terrorists, absolutely, undeniably 100%. The cartoonists are heroes in my books, absolute brave martyrs . If you can't see that, there really is no hope for you. Your logic is actually more twisted then the ISIS fighters who at least are committed to a logical course of action

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49204
At my desk.

Re: cheese eating surrender monkeys
Reply #50 - Jan 18^th, 2015 at 7:59am

Brian, Aussie, cods, pansi, svengali, Phem, you have all suggested in your own unique way that the cartoons should not have been published and that freedom of speech is not worth it if it upsets Muslims. Yet none of you will explain how far you would go to appease terrorists. Why is that? Are you scared to say?

John Smith wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 10:32pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 17^th, 2015 at 9:42pm:

Do you support Charlie Hebdo's right to mock Islam?

John, how about you make some up for me, for free.

I'm not a cartoonists. I just find it amusing that you accuse others of being cheese eating surrender monkeys for not posting offensive images, when in the 3 yrs I've been on here, you've never once done so yourself on your own forum.

Your not a surrender monkey are you FD?

I actually made one up the other day. The one with Osama.

Quote:

What was it inciting when it published those cartoons, FD?

Svengali made the suggestion, ask him. I think it was another way of blaming Charlie Hebdo for the terrorist attacks.

Quote:

There is a point where ridicule can be taken too far.

There is a point where spineless appeasement can be taken to far. Do you know where that is Brian?

Quote:

Some people are most sensitive than others.

So the Muslims who murdered 20 people are really just sensitive new age guys whose feelings were hurt?

Quote:

I think the Charlie Hebdo publishers failed to take into account the probable backlash against their efforts, particularly after a previous firebombing and the continuous death threats they were were receiving. That they appear not to supplied even some basic security to their employees makes them IMO culpable in what occurred.

Yes, they should have taken the hint from all the other occasions that Muslims murdered 20 people in response to cartoons. It is their fault for not having foresight as excellent as your hindsight.

Quote:

If you want to exercise your freedom of speech go ahead but don't be surprised when people take offence. I'd suggest there were other ways to ridicule Islam and Mohammed than being simple toilet-wall graphitti.

There are Brian, but that is hardly the point, is it? There are all sorts of ways we could spinelessly appease terrorists. That does not mean we should, does it?

Quote:

How one "expresses their views" is kind of at the crux of the entire discussion, you see, it is about Freedom of Speech not Freedom of Expression - after all, the two shooters were only expressing their opinion opposed to Charlie Hedbo...
So, do you want Freedom of Speech or Freedom of Expression?
Which position would you surrender?

Freedom of expression is never interpreted by rational people to mean shooting people. It basically means the same thing as freedom of speech, but is broader to include non-speech expression such as artwork. I did suggest to you and Karnal that you start a new thread to discuss the definitions if you still don't understand what everyone is saying. I thought you were just obfuscating at the time, but apparently you really do not know, or are being deliberately thick. You should do a bit of catch-up before trying to discuss this with the adults, just to save everyone a bit of time.

Quote:

You were going alright til you posted this crap.that thinking is no different to the " uncovered meat" speech by the Muslim cleric. ie . If a crime is committed against Freediver or a girl in a bikini it is their fault because Muslim men can't control their impulses ( in this case to kill). Very sad thought process

You'd be surprised how many people here are trying to blame everyone but the gunmen for the attacks.

Quote:

Epic fail my friend,
The guilt lies totally with terrorists, absolutely, undeniably 100%. The cartoonists are heroes in my books, absolute brave martyrs . If you can't see that, there really is no hope for you. Your logic is actually more twisted then the ISIS fighters who at least are committed to a logical course of action

This is the same person who argued that we have no right (or even ability) to criticise all the horrible things done in the name of Islam overseas, but who often has a go at the pope. He seems to think Islam needs special protection because people are criticising it. It is simply not possible that the criticism is deserved, and no amount of terrorist attacks will change his mind. They just make him more resolute. There more evil things done by Muslims in the name of Islam, the more culpable non-Muslims are.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Aussie Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 38801 Gender:	Re: cheese eating surrender monkeys Reply #51 - Jan 18^th, 2015 at 8:41am I reckon it is well past time you defined freedom of speech, and where you reckon the limits are. (Do not pigeon me as you have in that last post. I have not expressed any view as yet, other than to point out what I regard as your hypocrisy.)
Back to top	IP Logged

Phemanderac

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3507
Gender: male

Re: cheese eating surrender monkeys
Reply #52 - Jan 18^th, 2015 at 9:03am

[quote author=freediver link=1421464923/50#50 date=1421531975]Brian, Aussie, cods, pansi, svengali, Phem, you have all suggested in your own unique way that the cartoons should not have been published and that freedom of speech is not worth it if it upsets Muslims. Yet none of you will explain how far you would go to appease terrorists. Why is that? Are you scared to say?

Bullshit...

Demonstrate exactly and explicitly where I have done that.

What I have done is called you on your own hypocrisy with regards your hand wringing for Freedom of Speech, which you demonstrably do not support in action.

That is all I have done.

No where have I either indicated that
"the cartoons should not have been published and that freedom of speech is not worth it if it upsets Muslims."

In point of fact, that is a blatant and outright lie on your part.

Which kind of pigeon holes you.

Get back when you can add honestly and critical thinking to you posts won't you.

Back to top

On the 26th of January you are all invited to celebrate little white penal day...

"They're not rules as such, more like guidelines" Pirates of the Caribbean..

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49204
At my desk.

Re: cheese eating surrender monkeys
Reply #53 - Jan 18^th, 2015 at 9:10am

Quote:

I reckon it is well past time you defined freedom of speech, and where you reckon the limits are.

How about you go first and tell us what rights you would give up to appease terrorists?

Quote:

Do not pigeon me as you have in that last post. I have not expressed any view as yet, other than to point out what I regard as your hypocrisy.

Don't be scared Aussie.

Quote:

What I have done is called you on your own hypocrisy with regards your hand wringing for Freedom of Speech, which you demonstrably do not support in action.
That is all I have done.

You have also demonstrated that you have an infantile interpretation of freedom of speech and are incapable of making a rational judgement on the matter. Like I keep telling you, go ahead and start a thread on the definition, rather than posting the same idiotic crap in thread after thread.

Quote:

No where have I either indicated that
"the cartoons should not have been published and that freedom of speech is not worth it if it upsets Muslims."

Do you support Charlie Hebdo's right to publish those cartoons? No need to whine about what you did and did not say. Just come out and say what you think right here.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Phemanderac

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3507
Gender: male

Re: cheese eating surrender monkeys
Reply #54 - Jan 18^th, 2015 at 9:16am

freediver wrote on Jan 18^th, 2015 at 9:10am:

Do you support Charlie Hebdo's right to publish those cartoons? No need to whine about what you did and did not say. Just come out and say what you think right here.

ROFLMAO - you are the whiner ol' son...

I have never indicated or demonstrated other than support for their right to publish that which they choose to.

I have clearly come out and said what I "think" somewhat consistently. I invite you to have a go at thinking...

Back to top

On the 26th of January you are all invited to celebrate little white penal day...

"They're not rules as such, more like guidelines" Pirates of the Caribbean..

IP Logged

Rocketanski Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 1335 Gender:	Re: cheese eating surrender monkeys Reply #55 - Jan 18^th, 2015 at 9:16am How far does the defence of provocation for murder extend? How badly do you have to be offended before it's o.k to chop someone's head off or blow up a school bus?
Back to top	IP Logged

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: cheese eating surrender monkeys
Reply #56 - Jan 18^th, 2015 at 9:24am

get this members of ozpol/'/ FreeDUMB

will never ever answer a question....he is like a stuck record.. and just as boring...

mummy must have taught him a new word.. 'appeasement' and he finds the dribbling need to ask it everywhere he goes.....

dont anyone want to tell him tha

t no one can appease mad brain washed fanatics........

and he is slowly becoming just like them.... demanding and repetitive..

ways to appease freedumb....

demand an ignore button.....???

nah that wouldnt fit in with freedumbs idea of FREEDOM OF SPEECH. Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: cheese eating surrender monkeys
Reply #57 - Jan 18^th, 2015 at 9:29am

Rocketanski wrote on Jan 18^th, 2015 at 9:16am:

How far does the defence of provocation for murder extend? How badly do you have to be offended before it's o.k to chop someone's head off or blow up a school bus?

that you see is not the argument.....someone on here ev en brought in WW11 as an example.. of something or other....you are deflecting....no ones head was chopped off in Paris.. no school bus was blown up...

if you are mad enough to ignore madmen when they make it quite clear they will kill you if you keep PROV OKING....

then that is really up to you...

would you have done what Charlie did... had you been the owner of that magazine.........????????

would you have provoked them even more.......

and btw fanatics dont need much provoking...

Back to top

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: cheese eating surrender monkeys
Reply #58 - Jan 18^th, 2015 at 9:42am

cods wrote on Jan 18^th, 2015 at 9:29am:

Rocketanski wrote on Jan 18^th, 2015 at 9:16am:

How far does the defence of provocation for murder extend? How badly do you have to be offended before it's o.k to chop someone's head off or blow up a school bus?

that you see is not the argument.....someone on here ev en brought in WW11 as an example.. of something or other....you are deflecting....no ones head was chopped off in Paris.. no school bus was blown up...

if you are mad enough to ignore madmen when they make it quite clear they will kill you if you keep PROV OKING....

then that is really up to you...

would you have done what Charlie did... had you been the owner of that magazine.........????????

would you have provoked them even more.......

and btw fanatics dont need much provoking...

Round them all up, and their families and friends and deport them, never to be allowed in again.

Back to top

IP Logged

Ex Dame Pansi

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 24168

Re: cheese eating surrender monkeys
Reply #59 - Jan 18^th, 2015 at 9:49am

Rocketanski wrote on Jan 18^th, 2015 at 9:16am:

How far does the defence of provocation for murder extend? How badly do you have to be offended before it's o.k to chop someone's head off or blow up a school bus?

It's never ever ok to chop heads off, ever.

However, if you feel the need to provoke some madman to the extent they want to chop your head off, go for it.

Is the provocation necessary in the name of free speech. I think not, however we should all be entitled to provoke certain groups if we feel like doing so, but we should always be prepared to take the consequences because by now we know what they will likely be.

Back to top

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace." Hendrix
andrei said: Great isn't it? Seeing boatloads of what is nothing more than human garbage turn up.....

IP Logged