Quake3World

Jew Division, the Goy Division's cover band.

that trump guy has built very many buildings of quality!

PhoeniX wrote:Jew Division, the Goy Division's cover band.

tried to think of some Christian ones, but all i could come up with was My Ecumenical Romance

seremtan wrote:

PhoeniX wrote:Jew Division, the Goy Division's cover band.

tried to think of some Christian ones, but all i could come up with was My Ecumenical Romance

axbaby wrote:I have a general sense of religion and racism (I think both are harmful) but yes religion is not a race. I have been corrected.
Stoning Temple Pilots
Al-Shebop

Why is it anti-semitic and racist to speak against Israel's government?

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:*blarg*

let's see you do any better, Brian #2

Captain Mazda wrote:

axbaby wrote:I have a general sense of religion and racism (I think both are harmful) but yes religion is not a race. I have been corrected.
Stoning Temple Pilots
Al-Shebop

Why is it anti-semitic and racist to speak against Israel's government?

nobody mentioned the Israeli govt, Mr Trews

seremtan wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:*blarg*

let's see you do any better, Brian #2

How about, U2 (Will Go To Hell If You Don't Accept Jesus As Your Lord And Savior)

Freedom of speech, should there be a limit?
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/d ... -1.2496771

Charlie Hebdo cartoon of what that drowned child could do if drowning had not occurred. Shows monkey faced people harassing and chasing woman.
My Translation of the cartoon text: "What the little Syrian kid would have turned out to be, Ass Grabber in Germany."

seremtan wrote:

Captain Mazda wrote:Why is it anti-semitic and racist to speak against Israel's government?

nobody mentioned the Israeli govt, Mr Trews

Nobody mentioned you, mosestan.

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:How about, U2 (Will Go To Hell If You Don't Accept Jesus As Your Lord And Savior)

terrible

axbaby wrote:Freedom of speech, should there be a limit?

incitement with a clear and present danger proviso or malicious defamation, sure. neither of those apply to the Charlie Hebdo instance though. and beyond that, no

why do more and more morons see something offensive and immediately start questioning the very freedom that allows the offense? once you start down the road of silencing people who say things someone finds offensive, you can kiss your free speech goodbye and say hello to a world of majoritarian dogma and people who who have forgotten how to think

seremtan wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:How about, U2 (Will Go To Hell If You Don't Accept Jesus As Your Lord And Savior)

terrible

it was funny

seremtan
I don't know I just feel it's kind of sad that we have the right to troll a drowned child, I guess you cannot silence poor taste in a cartoon.

The cartoon basically is saying that it's a good thing the kid died otherwise he would grow up to sexually assault German woman.
The French Newspaper keeps poking the bear and then wonder why they get bit (the paper has that right).

seremtan wrote:a world of majoritarian dogma and people who who have forgotten how to think

omg a world full of you!

NO CHILD LEFT UNTOUCHED

axbaby wrote:The cartoon basically is saying that it's a good thing the kid died otherwise he would grow up to sexually assault German woman.

is it though? or is it drawing attention to the hypocrisy of crying over a dead Syrian child refugee one minute, then accusing all male Syrian refugees (i.e. the grown-up versions of the dead child) of being rapists the next?

bear in mind this cartoon is French and they probably have a weird sense of humour that doesn't translate very well. also bear in mind that some people are professional offence-takers who will jump on any opportunity to be outraged in the name of their favourite cause du jour while pretending not to get the joke

this reminds me of that American woman who made a (admittedly somewhat tasteless) joke about white privilege on twitter ("going to Africa, hope i don't get AIDS! just joking - i'm white!") then got monstered by a mob who decided not to get the joke for the sake of some manufactured outrage

It's always a fine line between satire and insult. The question I would ask Charlie Hebdo is if they could make the same point in a more tasteful way. I guess that's not really the Hebdo way, but that's also where thing start to itch a little. You see, with the whole JeSuisCharlie thing, people have been putting them up as a shining beacon of free speech, as something we should cherish and protect. Now I don't know Charlie Hebdo that well, but it wouldn't surprise me if they intentionally try to piss of people rather than making some bigger political statement. Maybe Charlie Hebdo is not the best thing to use as example of the beauty and importance of free speech.

Lol

How can this be defeated, this guy is literally is a ticking time-bomb.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49rqBg8uDbg[/youtube]

Memphis wrote:[img]-[/img]

lol

[lvlshot]http://i.imgur.com/djb7pel.jpg[/lvlshot]

seremtan wrote: professional offence-takers

Eraser wrote:Maybe Charlie Hebdo is not the best thing to use as example of the beauty and importance of free speech.

no it probably isn't, but the danger of emphasising a distinction between 'good' free speech and 'bad' speech is that you give ammunition to people who want to ban the 'bad' free speech - often for self-interested and partisan reasons

Yeah I'm against censorship in any way, but I think it's important to be able to be aware of the intention behind the way people express themselves. If you know someone is doing it just to be a troll, then it's a valuable skill to be able to make that distinction and treat it as such (best by just ignoring it). Unfortunately, it seems that people are easier to offend with baseless bullshit than with accurate, verifiable facts.

no, there are plenty of morons offended by facts as well

I'm offended you said that...