Louise O'Neill on manned mission to Mars: "Why not go to Venus?" (MOD Warning post 1)

PlaneSpeeking

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Par for the course for the Far Left who go out to bat for the Palestinians, no questions asked.
Just look at the Labour Party and the Anti-Semitic issues they are having in their party.

And when told to do something about it - decided to allow people to call Jews "Nazis".

RabbleRouser2k

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Wow, I really never knew that!

It's a very, very rough film to watch. For years after I avoided a pub I used to frequent merely for having a pinball machine in a quiet back area. Freaked me out.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheryl_Araujo


https://lindsaychapie.wordpress.com/2014/03/07/new-bedford-in-1983/

Dang, I thought it was in Mexico-nope, it was America. She was of Portugese descent.

Very harrowing case-the guys were convicted (in contrast to what I had read before) but they got lenient sentences, and it was her who was shoved outta town. Obviously never recovered from it, drove drunk one night and died in a car accident. She was 25. The people who 'hounded her' outta town were her own Portugese community.

Absolutely sickening crime-but the coverage in the media afterwards was far worse. It occurred at a time when the media could reveal the victim's name, it was up to their own discretion to keep it secret or not. They chose not to.

Funny how films can affect people, I knew someone who saw Jaws as a kid, and has never swam in the seasince then. He was travelling home from work one day, and on his route there's a beach. He was thinking to himself 'maybe its time to put that whole movie behind me, and swim in the sea'... and then he saw a dead shark on the sand. Killed that notion of swimming.

Wibbs wrote: »

Jodie Foster nailed that role. Not a shock mind you. Helluva actress and scarily intelligent with it.

It's a movie I only watched once in Secondary school.

Ipso

keano_afc wrote: »

Shapiro is fantastic. He stands up to liberals and calls them out on their nonsense, which is why they protest and label him. Its their hallmark.

This nonsense should be held over him for eternity.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/friends-of-hamas-and-andrew-breitbarts-legacy

PlaneSpeeking

Ipso wrote: »

This nonsense should be held over him for eternity.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/friends-of-hamas-and-andrew-breitbarts-legacy

That is some Olympic gold medal standard straw grasping there.

keano_afc

Ipso wrote: »

This nonsense should be held over him for eternity.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/friends-of-hamas-and-andrew-breitbarts-legacy

Must try harder.

Ipso

Ipso wrote: »

This nonsense should be held over him for eternity.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/friends-of-hamas-and-andrew-breitbarts-legacy

Maybe, but then we should expect the same standards from all the media outlets. There has been a certain relaxing of standards when it comes to the media during my lifetime, mostly I'd imagine due to the internet/SM and the influence of politics directly affecting media.

The problem is that we only see standards being raised for certain stories or certain journalists but not being applied across the board.

Jesus I completely forgot that Ben Sharpiro was an editor at Breitbart. How can you respect anyone affiliated with that media outlet. You're celebrating someone worse than Piers Morgan.

PlaneSpeeking

Deleted User wrote: »

Jesus I completely forgot that Ben Sharpiro was an editor at Breitbart. How can you respect anyone affiliated with that media outlet. You're celebrating someone worse than Piers Morgan.

Sounds suspiciously like blind prejudice there.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Jesus I completely forgot that Ben Sharpiro was an editor at Breitbart. How can you respect anyone affiliated with that media outlet. You're celebrating someone worse than Piers Morgan.

Remember where I asked you to prove he was a bigot? And how making the claim without proving it, would be suggestive of your own "situation"... the above reinforces the impression. :rolleyes:

kunst nugget

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Sounds suspiciously like blind prejudice there.

Andrew Breitbart's vision for the website was a 'Huffington Post for the right' and so I treat it exactly as I would the Huffington Post by ignoring it because it's bias-riddled bollix.

PlaneSpeeking

kunst nugget wrote: »

Andrew Breitbart's vision for the website was a 'Huffington Post for the right' and so I treat it exactly as I would the Huffington Post by ignoring it because it's bias-riddled bollix.

Can't argue that as I've not read either but at least that is fair.

PlaneSpeeking

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Sounds suspiciously like blind prejudice there.

My prejudice is based on reading it over the years. Its pure, fabricated garbage. I was somewhat regretting challenging Shapiro earlier, thinking I may have gotten the wrong impression of him, but no. I'm doubling down now. Breitbart is one of the worst media outlets I've ever encountered. They openly admitted to making up stories to incite emotional responses and turn people towards their ideology.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Remember where I asked you to prove he was a bigot? And how making the claim without proving it, would be suggestive of your own "situation"... the above reinforces the impression. :rolleyes:

YouTube videos of him calling people idiots for having differing opinions fits the bill. All this has taught me is that a bigot is not as bad a word as I once thought.

PlaneSpeeking

Deleted User wrote: »

YouTube videos of him calling people idiots for having differing opinions fits the bill. All this has taught me is that a bigot is not as bad a word as I once thought.

Oh it is but you're saying that as it's been - correctly - turned on you.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

YouTube videos of him calling people idiots for having differing opinions fits the bill. All this has taught me is that a bigot is not as bad a word as I once thought.

So, everyone who disagrees with someone else is a bigot.

For me, I'll reserve the term for far more extreme examples relating to the more traditional prejudices. TBH I don't really like the way people are taking these terms (bigot, racist, misogynist, etc) and watering them down to cover far more than they were originally intended to include.

PlaneSpeeking

Deleted User wrote: »

So, everyone who disagrees with someone else is a bigot.

For me, I'll reserve the term for far more extreme examples relating to the more traditional prejudices. TBH I don't really like the way people are taking these terms (bigot, racist, misogynist, etc) and watering them down to cover far more than they were originally intended to include.

I disagree with the DUP's stance on gay marriage.

Apparently that makes them free and me a bigot.

Stop the planet I want to get off!!

7aubzxk43m2sni

Deleted User wrote: »

My prejudice is based on reading it over the years. Its pure, fabricated garbage. I was somewhat regretting challenging Shapiro earlier, thinking I may have gotten the wrong impression of him, but no. I'm doubling down now. Breitbart is one of the worst media outlets I've ever encountered. They openly admitted to making up stories to incite emotional responses and turn people towards their ideology.

Right, but why is Shapiro a bigot?

Grand. Forget about the bigot comment. He's not a bigot. I'll admit my dislike of him led me to use that word.

He's dogmatic in his opinions.

More importantly, he used to be an editor for brietbart ffs. There's probably no point on debating this further as that will forever taint him in my eyes. And it should affect your opinion of him too.

Next your gonna tell me Alex Jones is an upstanding journalist

7aubzxk43m2sni

Deleted User wrote: »

Grand. Forget about the bigot comment. He's not a bigot. I'll admit my dislike of him led me to use that word.

He's dogmatic in his opinions.

More importantly, he used to be an editor for brietbart ffs. There's probably no point on debating this further as that will forever taint him in my eyes. And it should affect your opinion of him too.

It's equally unhealthy to disregard a person because of some of their associations.

I don't like Breitbart, and I don't love Shapiro, but I find it hard to argue with nearly anything he says because he tends to back up his statements pretty well.

7aubzxk43m2sni

Deleted User wrote: »

Next your gonna tell me Alex Jones is an upstanding journalist

Who mentioned Alex Jones before you?

Sierra Clumsy Place

Sierra Clumsy Place wrote: »

Who mentioned Alex Jones before you?

Um, nobody? Whats your point

7aubzxk43m2sni

Deleted User wrote: »

Um, nobody? Whats your point

You bring him up as a tactic to throw Shapiro's name alongside it, so an uninformed observer lumps the two together, knows Alex Jones is a bit of a nutcase, and assumes Shapiro must be too.

Rory28

Deleted User wrote: »

Grand. Forget about the bigot comment. He's not a bigot. I'll admit my dislike of him led me to use that word.

He's dogmatic in his opinions.

More importantly, he used to be an editor for brietbart ffs. There's probably no point on debating this further as that will forever taint him in my eyes. And it should affect your opinion of him too.

Give him a chance. I would also have an issue with brietbart but i wouldn't write him off just for that. he knows his sh1t.

Omackeral

Deleted User wrote: »

Grand. Forget about the bigot comment. He's not a bigot. I'll admit my dislike of him led me to use that word.

He's dogmatic in his opinions.

More importantly, he used to be an editor for brietbart ffs. There's probably no point on debating this further as that will forever taint him in my eyes.

That's all fair and pretty decent of you to admit your mistake or mis-labeling or whatever you wanna call it. You're also more than entitled to your own views on people.

Deleted User wrote: »

And it should affect your opinion of him too.

Aaaaaand we're back to telling people what to think I see. Bollocks to that.

Ulysses Gaze

Sierra Clumsy Place wrote: »

You bring him up as a tactic to throw Shapiro's name alongside it, so an uninformed observer lumps the two together, knows Alex Jones is a bit of a nutcase, and assumes Shapiro must be too.

Same tactic the far left use with Jordan Peterson. They lump him in with Richard Spencer.

Hector Savage

I started listening to the blindboy podcast, just switched it off before the interview with LON started, couldn't take it.

How that gob****e is taken seriously is beyond me ..

professore

Hector Savage wrote: »

I started listening to the blindboy podcast, just switched it off before the interview with LON started, couldn't take it.

How that gob****e is taken seriously is beyond me ..

Try listening to Ash Sarkar for 5 minutes. She's now celebrated for telling Piers Morgan she's "literally a communist". With her iPhone and creepy nails she wouldn't last 5 minutes under communism. Her brand of "politics" probably plays well with the Love Island set.

Hector Savage

professore wrote: »

Try listening to Ash Sarkar for 5 minutes. She's now celebrated for telling Piers Morgan she's "literally a communist". With her iPhone and creepy nails she wouldn't last 5 minutes under communism. Her brand of "politics" probably plays well with the Love Island set.

oh yeah that absolute fool, I did see her.
Why doesn't she move to communist utopia Venezuela ?

PlaneSpeeking

Hector Savage wrote: »

I started listening to the blindboy podcast, just switched it off before the interview with LON started, couldn't take it.

How that gob****e is taken seriously is beyond me ..

Like Bressie, he played the mental health card al the way to the bank.

Apparently, listening to counsellors, experts in their field and the medical/psychological/psychiatric profession isn't the done thing nowadays.

Failed singers and whatever the hell the Rubber Bandits are is de rigeur.