caze
-
Posts
5,154 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Content Type
Events
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Downloads
Store
Everything posted by caze
-
Evidence?
-
It's definitely a better place than facebook or twitter.
-
The Following is definitely entirely terrible, but I did manage to extract some amount of perverse pleasure from watching it. The main antagonist also has to be one of the least scary fictional psychopaths ever to be captured on screen.
-
...for those who don't remember Guy Goma:
-
by tank his numbers I just mean lose whatever swing voters he might've picked up in the last couple of weeks. he's probably guaranteed to win 40% of the electorate no matter what he does, that would lead to a landslide victory for Clinton though.
-
wow. trump started off ok, but once he started interrupting her every 2 seconds it started to go wrong for him, and by the end he was babbling like the fucking lunatic asshole that he is. Clinton really didn't have to do much to win that, kept calling him 'Donald' which seemed to really get under his skin, and then just stand back and let him shoot himself in the foot. that bit about him not being racist because he has a county club in Florida that allows in black people "one of the proudest things I've ever done" , or words to that effect. lol. one area where Clinton was a bit weak was schooling him on NAFTA, and bigging up Bill's record at that time. let him land a few undeserved blows there. Clinton's weird toothy smile is a bit off putting, but it's nothing compared to that weird duckface thing Trump does every couple of seconds, in fact he has a whole host of bizarre facial and vocal ticks, his command of the english language isn't much better than a 12 year old either. Trump's recent gains in the polling seems to have stalled in the last few days, Clinton back ahead with a more comfortable electoral college lead now again. if that performance doesn't tank his numbers over the next week then I'll have lost all faith in humanity.
-
https://twitter.com/chuckdevore/status/780531063177285633/photo/1
-
Thought the first episode of Quarry was quite good, always good to see Peter Mullan in anything, and the main guy was much better than he was in Prometheus, where he was really annoying. Looks like it'll be a good deal more subtle than the trashy (but enjoyable) nonsense of Banshee, though Buddy looks like he'll provide a touch of that flavour to the show (he was great in Justified). It looked great, they nicely ramped up tension through the episode, and the music was excellent as well.
-
Yeah, the second episode was very good. The whole election thing in the first one didn't work at all.
-
...and don't forget Irn-Bru.
-
glad someone finally mentioned mitch hedberg. he was amazing. there was a sweet spot with his stuff, when it worked it really killed, but often fell pretty flat at times too - given the simplicity of it. saw louis ck a few weeks ago, had shitty seats so could've been better, preferred his previous few shows, but might have liked it more if it had been in a smaller venue. will want to rewatch when the video comes out. saw stewart lee last year, was great and he's been in great form in recent years. stanhope is great, definitely my favourite guy working at the moment. the bit about killing his ma is brilliant. disliking him because of some vague alt-right smear is fucking retarded. I liked that todd barry crowd work show, but don't know much of his other stuff. maria bamford was also mentioned, she's great too. tig notaro also great. dylan moran was great before he stopped drinking. kindof boring now, unsurprisingly. bill hicks was way overrated, but pretty good. find a lot of the older stuff hasn't really aged that well, carlin and pryor for example. and lenny bruce just wasn't funny at all. I can understand why comedians revere those guys though, but they don't do anything for me. i still like woody allen's stuff though, even though he apparently hated stand up.
-
yeah, great news. no chance labour of getting anywhere near government for the foreseeable future. hopefully the lib dems can capitalise on this now, though even if they do their prospects wouldn't be much better than labour's have been in recent years. the problem is the electoral system, it ridiculously favours the tories.
-
...weird Asian stereotype written by the Asian guy who created the show. I saw a trailer for it and it looked shit so didn't bother.
-
so not a crossover featuring the predators from outer space? disappointed.
-
Actually you're wrong, and it's not only a modern change that has allowed for reform from literalist interpretations of Islam, read up on these guys from the 8th century: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu%CA%BFtazila
-
You keep saying this, but then when people do offer reasonable criticism you label them bigots. It's not a fabrication, you're incapable of engaging honestly with these arguments, so you fall back on insulting them with claims of bigotry.
-
Fine, we should just ignore them then, disrespect the texts (while pretending that you're not). We've also had to ignore large swathes of biblical text to get where were are today in the west.
-
Islam doesn't have to be a political ideology, though has been for large parts of it's history, as was the Catholic church for much of it's history. Islamism is explicitly political though.
-
...and to make things clearer for you. zionism is a political ideology, islamism is a political ideology. criticism of zionism is ok, and doesn't necessarily make you an anti-semite (as long as you don't go as far as thinking Israel has no right to exist or other such ridiculous positions). criticism of islamism is also ok, and it doesn't make you bigoted towards muslims. you seem to think the first is ok, but the latter isn't. that's the hypocrisy. and it's a perfectly valid analogy.
-
You're flat out wrong there, if people bring Muslim into the equation with regard to a suicide bomber for example it's often treated like it's irrelevant, or even racist to even bring up, that happens all the time here, and elsewhere. I didn't object to your employment of the term Zionist (I just pointed out your hypocrisy), and I didn't say anything about which Zionists do or do not use that tactic (the range of Zionist positions is not defined by their choice of rhetorical strategies, it's their differing positions on land/security/human rights/etc). There are plenty of Jews in Israel who consider themselves Zionists who are strong critics of the state of Israel, you can disagree with government policy and still think your country deserves to exist. I'm not in the slightest bit confused, it's just that you don't have a clue what I'm talking about by the looks of things.
-
well, no they're not. also, I'm not stem-educated. and I don't use reddit, and have never used reddit. So congratulations, everything you've said is incorrect! Good job. Not surprising coming from someone who works in the social sciences I guess.
-
I'm not caught up in the use of terminology, I'm just using examples of hypocrisy to point out flaws in your reasoning. It would be entirely accurate to describe you as a Zionist in a broad sense, so congratulations you're a Zionist! (I will refer to you as a Zionist as often as possible from now on). As to whether accusations of anti-semitism are used to deflect criticism of Israel, I'd agree that they are, especially notable when used by members of the Israeli government on current affairs programs and the likes, it's their go-to move. Of course this is exactly the kind of tactic I'm complaining about when it comes to Islam as well. And just as there exist real anti-muslim bigots, there also exist real anti-semite leftists, jew-based conspiracy theories are rampant on the hard-left. You'd have to provide some evidence that their views are essentially bigoted, I know that they're not. And I know that you'll try and twist some quotes taken out of context to try and prove that they are, so there's probably no point in you trying. who?
-
ffs, that's exactly what I'm saying! smh. when it's then used to describe someone who's just offering some critique on some part of Islamic ideology it's a problem. if this was some minor issue that almost never happened then I wouldn't even mention it, but it's widespread. so there are two solutions, either wankers on the left stop using it incorrectly, or talk about changing to a more sensible term to highlight said wankery.
-
that wasn't my point though, I only mentioned it as an ironic aside. the problem with it is that it's used to describe people who don't hold bigoted views about people as bigots.
-
Murray doesn't suggest that though, he merely suggests that it is often used that way, and it is (I previously said it was 'widely abused'). If all the word was applied to was the kind of thing you describe then yes, it would be a reasonable word to use - even if the meaning had changed over time, it's not though. What would be a better way of describing it? Anti-muslim bigotry works well. Muslimophobia also makes more sense, but sounds a bit clunky. Or you can simply describe someone as a bigot when speaking about a certain individual when the context is obvious. It's funny you mention misuse of a term for political reasons, and then go on to talk about Zionists. lol. a Zionist is simply someone who believes the state of Israel has a right to exist, there are lots of different types of Zionists, not all of them are the rabid caricature the far-left constantly promotes. You'd no doubt complain if someone mentioned the fact that a suicide bomber was a Muslim, but have no problem using the term Zionist in a similar manner.
