emo72 wrote: » You're so right. Attention seeking dopes, the pair of them and we gave them our time. Arguing with each other about who's right? Who cares! Everyone go for a walk right now.
hatrickpatrick wrote: » In fairness, Apple devices by default autocorrect to "z" so expect that one to become far more common across the board.
pickarooney wrote: » I'm the Radicalized Right and so's my wife!
keffiyeh wrote: » I dare you to properly qualify what you 'meant' by that. I dare you.
Malayalam wrote: » It's kind of got a ring to it, doesn't it, although if I could I'd opt instead to be the Radicalised Right-On. At least it would explain my hippie wardrobe.
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » I've begun to agree with a few FG policies. Was I radicalised by Simon Harris when he handed out an 8th leaflet outside my College ? He only said "Use your vote" but was that a subliminal message ???? /sarcasm
Malayalam wrote: » Heh Probably. Lookit, one only has to flinch ever so slightly at the thought of loping off kids genitals to be considered right wing nowadays so, reluctantly, I embrace my new-found nazi credentials. It's kind of a pity because the right have such bad breath, awful sex-lives and boring outfits but, hey, what are ya gonna do?
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » The SS outfits were black and therefore slimming - happy to get on board with that!
Venom wrote: » Well they were designed by Hugo Boss after all.
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » Were they ??? Never knew that!!
Sal Butamol wrote: » What works of his have you read?
Venom wrote: » It seems apart from making hundreds and hundreds of racist tweets, Jeong's journalistic ethics (lol) are coming under fire seeing as she doxed a rape victim in the UK.http://matthewhopkinsnews.com/?p=6029 I suppose this is just satire as well is it?
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » So was Roseanne's - yet many people called for her sacking, and got it. The method of communication does not negate the content, nor should it. "Just a tweet" is such a cop out.
professore wrote: » I requested Brian? to provide a definition of racism but he hasn't replied. No one has yet defined what racism is. Below is what dictionary.com comes back with. Sarah Jeong definitely has tweeted hundreds of examples of a. Roseanne's tweet does not fall under either. Yet she got fired.
And anyone who comes back with privilege + power can fcuk right off. The Kulaks in the Soviet Union, the intelligentsia in Mao's China and even the Jews in Nazi Germany are all examples of groups that had privilege and power, and were still racially discriminated against, murderously in these cases. I would argue that the current leftist rhetoric against straight white males is straight out of the racist's playbook. Anyone that can't see this is wilfully ignoring the facts. noun a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.
Brian? wrote: » Taytoland wrote: » A few? Pages full of them. I saw a Twitter thread earlier with them. Staggering actually. It doesn’t change the fact that it’s tweets and only tweets. That’s my point.
Taytoland wrote: » A few? Pages full of them. I saw a Twitter thread earlier with them. Staggering actually.
Taytoland wrote: » You could literally say this about anything.
Brian? wrote: » Taytoland wrote: » You could literally say this about anything. I could say that about any tweets. Yes
Brian? wrote: » They were. The Nazis were a very well turned out bunch of homicidal maniacs. They loved a bit of genocide, but that was no reason to abandon sartorial elegance.
Omackeral wrote: » Here, you still haven't come back with my dare of you finding a post of mine that can be considered alt-right. Actually, I asked twice so it's a double dare.
Brian? wrote: » When did you request that? I'm happy with the dictionary definition. I usually am with words. Who is coming back with the privilege argument?
Brian? wrote: » If those tweets weren't satire, they are racist. The only bone of contention is whether you believe they were satire or not. I'm keeping an open mind on it until proved otherwise. Despite all the brick bats, I think thats a pretty reasonable stance to take.
Taytoland wrote: » So anything goes on Twitter then?