Re: Right wing terrorist attack in NZ
Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:05 pm
You can back peddle and attempt to dress it up however you want, it's not gallows humour. It's a shit cunt just being a shit cunt.
Not that I'd want to prohibit what language can be used but this actually does bother me, not the being rude to me part that’s at most going to make me chortle, but the use of the word cunt as a pejorative being based as it is on the notion there's something wrong with vaginas and by extension women.OptimisticJock wrote:You can back peddle and attempt to dress it up however you want, it's not gallows humour. It's a shit cunt just being a shit cunt.
Are you seriously trying to reclaim the moral high ground?Digby wrote:Not that I'd want to prohibit what language can be used but this actually does bother me, not the being rude to me part that’s at most going to make me chortle, but the use of the word cunt as a pejorative being based as it is on the notion there's something wrong with vaginas and by extension women.OptimisticJock wrote:You can back peddle and attempt to dress it up however you want, it's not gallows humour. It's a shit cunt just being a shit cunt.
Though I say that knowing full well I'm a big Peter Cook fan and cunt isn't a term he ever worried about using.
This demonstrates that there are some seriously messed up people in all societies.Galfon wrote:As much as the slightest hint of sentiment towards 'what did they expect?', 'only matter of time' (given the number of warped extreme characters with access to guns & instant global exposure), 'reap what you sow' etc..
given the base primal horror of this event and number of innocents murdered, Digby's comments appear cold and misplaced on this organ.
The great danger now is the copycat/emboldening of others with similar mindsets that often occurs with certain criminal acts.The recent muslim diaspora will be
preparing for a new chapter of dealing with integration challenges in Western cultures.
referring to the abominable characters that involve themselves in these acts, the original posts reacting to them or the last comment itself ?Sandydragon wrote: This demonstrates that there are some seriously messed up people in all societies.
The perpetrators of the act. We all have our opinions but those who perform these despicable acts are very much in a class of their own.Galfon wrote:referring to the abominable characters that involve themselves in these acts, the original posts reacting to them or the last comment itself ?Sandydragon wrote: This demonstrates that there are some seriously messed up people in all societies.
Very much so, Trump is an arse for again failing to address white pride in suitably fashion, but it's as nothing next to the actual attackSandydragon wrote:The perpetrators of the act. We all have our opinions but those who perform these despicable acts are very much in a class of their own.Galfon wrote:referring to the abominable characters that involve themselves in these acts, the original posts reacting to them or the last comment itself ?Sandydragon wrote: This demonstrates that there are some seriously messed up people in all societies.
He did condemn it, and clearly. But in answer to a follow up question stated there wasn't a problem with the rise of a problematic far rightWhich Tyler wrote:Speaking of Trump - has he actually condemned it yet? Or just sent his condolences?
Digby wrote:He did condemn it, and clearly. But in answer to a follow up question stated there wasn't a problem with the rise of a problematic far rightWhich Tyler wrote:Speaking of Trump - has he actually condemned it yet? Or just sent his condolences?
The quotes I saw from him used the words monstrous, evil and things of a similar ilk. He may have made other comments I've not seen, it's not like I'm desperate to chase down all his word salad contributions to the world, but it didn’t strike me as odd he was using terms like evil. So whilst I'm far from an apologist for Trump on the simple question of condemnation of the attack he spoke sufficiently based on the quotes I saw attributed to himmorepork wrote:Digby wrote:He did condemn it, and clearly. But in answer to a follow up question stated there wasn't a problem with the rise of a problematic far rightWhich Tyler wrote:Speaking of Trump - has he actually condemned it yet? Or just sent his condolences?
No he fucking did not. Just like with Pittsburgh, he deflected, downplayed it, and refused to name it for what it was. The press here are all over for him for not calling it out, because it is at least the third time he has downplayed terrorism by a white person. When he gets wind of an act perpetrated by a non-white person, anywhere in the world, he is all over it, labeling immediately as an immigration problem. It is too clear a pattern to not be endemic in him. The day before Chch, Trump was on record saying that his right-wing anti-immigration base was full of people that were well hard and could react badly if fired up by opposition to their ideals.
You need to pull your head out of your arse Digby.
Ah, I don't follow him (anyone actually) on Twitter so that would have passed me bymorepork wrote:I'm not getting in the mud with you over this. Dig a little deeper and check out his initial response on twitter, since deleted.
Enough.
Not in the rugby section it's notmorepork wrote:I'm calling bullshit on that. It's all over the media.
Digby wrote:Not that I'd want to prohibit what language can be used but this actually does bother me, not the being rude to me part that’s at most going to make me chortle, but the use of the word cunt as a pejorative being based as it is on the notion there's something wrong with vaginas and by extension women.OptimisticJock wrote:You can back peddle and attempt to dress it up however you want, it's not gallows humour. It's a shit cunt just being a shit cunt.
Though I say that knowing full well I'm a big Peter Cook fan and cunt isn't a term he ever worried about using.