MarcusAu wrote:I think the Christian peace and love bit - was traditionally an in-group / out-group deal.
The out-group just needed to be told the good news - even if it killed them.
I guess that would depend on the branch of Christianity.
From my subjective Catholic upbringing "turn the other cheek" and more importantly the story of the Good Samaritan were larger on the radar. Charity works were also big. But in retrospect, I was incredibly naive to think that a significant portion of the take on Sunday was going to charity works. Beyond charity works, other groups were not really large on the radar. More of an insular community from the congregational perspective. And the area neighbors were just the neighbors.
You need to roll back to the middle ages for matters to get really bad.
Guest_97f56d3c wrote:Re: the conv at Patheos where some folks say in the US the suit won't fly because the SPLC list is just opinion, It'll be interesting to see if Popehat chimes in on the Nawaz SPLC suit like he did with Dave Rubin.
"Nawaz should be the first person fighting for the SPLC's right to publish their inflammatory and wrong statements against him, that he is bothered by that and doesn't proves he is alt-right!" -- Poopdeck Popehat!
Guest_97f56d3c wrote:Apologies for using his first name.
To that extent, I'm okay with PZ's use of his name since Sargon's name escaped a long time ago, and he seems relatively okay with that.
There's even a wiki entry, not just a kiwi farms or ED or rational wiki entry....
Doxing is the calculated use of RL information, outside the context from which it was gleaned, in order to cause damage to people choosing to operate under nym.
Sargon publishes as Sargon. PZ's effort is clearly a pathetic attempt to inflict some sort of RL pain on his enemy. It is exactly the same modus operandi he used on Skep.
Guest_97f56d3c wrote:Re: the conv at Patheos where some folks say in the US the suit won't fly because the SPLC list is just opinion, It'll be interesting to see if Popehat chimes in on the Nawaz SPLC suit like he did with Dave Rubin.
"Nawaz should be the first person fighting for the SPLC's right to publish their inflammatory and wrong statements against him, that he is bothered by that and doesn't proves he is alt-right!" -- Poopdeck Popehat!
He already did, this morning.
Would love to see this suit gain some traction just to make this dipshit enjoy a mouthful of crow.
deLurch wrote:
I guess that would depend on the branch of Christianity.
From my subjective Catholic upbringing "turn the other cheek" and more importantly the story of the Good Samaritan were larger on the radar. Charity works were also big. But in retrospect, I was incredibly naive to think that a significant portion of the take on Sunday was going to charity works. Beyond charity works, other groups were not really large on the radar. More of an insular community from the congregational perspective. And the area neighbors were just the neighbors.
You need to roll back to the middle ages for matters to get really bad.
Well yes. There was never outright hatred preached. But even without overtly acknowledging it - there was still a lot of anit-gay and anti-birth control sentiment about. And without being directly effected - some sex abuse cover up too. And lots of guilt trips.
I think if you scratched the surface - you could find some political support of Irish catholics (as opposed to the protestants) - especially with so many Irish priests about.
The more that I think about it - the weirder it seems to introduce all the images and stories of blood sacrifices and torture to children too (eg praying at stations of the cross). Or to give them the idea of original sin.
And of course you can appreciate the money scam aspect - with tax free status and no oversight for the income.
I went to catholic school (another money scam) - and it's hard to tell if the general strangeness of childhood was much effected by the surreal experience of being beaten by an older woman dressed in a nun's habit. Some things are impossible to explain...
pro-boxing-fan wrote:
He already did, this morning.
Would love to see this suit gain some traction just to make this dipshit enjoy a mouthful of crow.
I think it MIGHT be possible in that the SPLC's opinion not only is often consulted by our converged and fraudulent 'press' (which should still, sadly, protect the SPLC) but also law enforcement and Governmental organizations put people on watchlists and write reports based on this 'information'.
Guest_97f56d3c wrote:Re: the conv at Patheos where some folks say in the US the suit won't fly because the SPLC list is just opinion, It'll be interesting to see if Popehat chimes in on the Nawaz SPLC suit like he did with Dave Rubin.
"Nawaz should be the first person fighting for the SPLC's right to publish their inflammatory and wrong statements against him, that he is bothered by that and doesn't proves he is alt-right!" -- Poopdeck Popehat!
He already did, this morning.
Would love to see this suit gain some traction just to make this dipshit enjoy a mouthful of crow.
I do too but mostly in the hope that the SPLC would tone down the hate rhetoric seeing the real possibility of being sued left and right whatever the outcome of those suits. The SPLC is not a person and they have a lot of money.
Maybe im indulging in wishful thinking but whatever.
The sort of idiotic caricature of "free speech absolutism" which White and others engage in is infuriating. The article he penned not long ago suggests he at least should know better, that libel is not protected speech and not even the likes of Rubin or Nawaz have ever argued otherwise, but he's still blinkered enough to act as though people attempting to defend their reputations from blatant falsehoods are being hypocritical by attempting to "silence" others.
Yeah it seems a lot of ex-muslim atheists are strongly atheist, if not outright anti-theist.
Many ex-christian atheists are kind of soft on religion - and see it as having a positive effect on social cohesion (in a way that other social institutions clearly don't serve).
There may be an argument to be had there - but in my experience the costs outweigh the benefits - so it's unlikely I'll be joining up with a congregation any time soon.
And I know the technical argument is over whether what was said constitutes libel, but Ken tries to have it both ways by calling them dummies for not knowing that it isn't and hypocrites as though they must. He's an asshole twice over.
Sunder wrote:The sort of idiotic caricature of "free speech absolutism" which White and others engage in is infuriating. The article he penned not long ago suggests he at least should know better, that libel is not protected speech and not even the likes of Rubin or Nawaz have ever argued otherwise, but he's still blinkered enough to act as though people attempting to defend their reputations from blatant falsehoods are being hypocritical by attempting to "silence" others.
So what is his problem?
Does he think that free speech is squandered on the hoi polloi who are too ignorant and unqualified to use it in any beneficial way?
Should everyone just sit back and allow the experts like White speak freely on their behalf?
On the Sargon of Akkad vs. Sarkessian issue, a few people have protested his actions for trying to "deplatform" her.
Here is the video where Sargon makes his complaint:
[youtube][/youtube]
Given that the extent of Sargon's 'instigation' at the even consisted of him quietly sitting in the audience, I think he behaved in a wholly appropriate manner. Sarkessian has consistently lobbied for silencing people for 'harassment' of the 'you suck' level.
Calling for Sarkessian to live up to her own rules is the right call. It is what we did with pz myers. It works. If she doesn't like her own rules, then she and her supporters need to rethink them.
If Sargon & Sarkeesian's positions were reversed with Sargon as the speaker, there would have been holy hell to pay. Equal rights means equal responsibilities.
Sunder wrote:The sort of idiotic caricature of "free speech absolutism" which White and others engage in is infuriating. The article he penned not long ago suggests he at least should know better, that libel is not protected speech and not even the likes of Rubin or Nawaz have ever argued otherwise, but he's still blinkered enough to act as though people attempting to defend their reputations from blatant falsehoods are being hypocritical by attempting to "silence" others.
Ken White is a pervert who jacks off to his own mother's soiled undies.
That's just an opinion.
Maajad Nawaz is at the center of an international conspiracy to incite others to commit act of violence against all moslems. So please don't hire him anymore.
Sunder wrote:Tfoot's come down on Anita's side funnily enough. Perhaps not surprisingly as his spat with Sargon's group is still fresh.
He did that how?
Twitter shitstirring, calling them snowflakes for having their feefees hurt. Same thing Watson and Peez did.
I know he's on the outs with Sargon's bunch but Phil is not as dumb as Watson and Peez so he at least ought to know better than to take it at face value.
Sunder wrote:Tfoot's come down on Anita's side funnily enough. Perhaps not surprisingly as his spat with Sargon's group is still fresh.
He did that how?
Twitter shitstirring, calling them snowflakes for having their feefees hurt. Same thing Watson and Peez did.
I know he's on the outs with Sargon's bunch but Phil is not as dumb as Watson and Peez so he at least ought to know better than to take it at face value.
He'd be better off to ignore it. Sarkie is on her way down anyhow, Sargon is an asshole, why not just stay above the fray?
Sunder wrote:Tfoot's come down on Anita's side funnily enough. Perhaps not surprisingly as his spat with Sargon's group is still fresh.
He did that how?
I am looking for evidence of Sargon running a letter writing campaign, but I have yet to see that.
So at this point my question is if thunderf00t has made the argument that we need to hold SJWs to their own standards.
And as far as his complaint of a letter writing campaign (which I don't see any evidence for yet), I think Thunderf00t is standing on thin ice.
I generally like thunderf00t. There are points of his I agree with and disagree with. But my gut tells me that he is letting his personal tiff with Sargon get the best of him.
I generally like thunderf00t. There are points of his I agree with and disagree with. But my gut tells me that he is letting his personal tiff with Sargon get the best of him.
The letter writing campaign refers to Sargon request in his vid to email the organisers and politely ask them to apply their own code of conduct rules. Sargon included their email addresses in the YT description.
deLurch wrote:
I generally like thunderf00t. There are points of his I agree with and disagree with. But my gut tells me that he is letting his personal tiff with Sargon get the best of him.
As he did with Sarko - he seems to get his obsessions and then shag them to death.
deLurch wrote:
I generally like thunderf00t. There are points of his I agree with and disagree with. But my gut tells me that he is letting his personal tiff with Sargon get the best of him.
As he did with Sarko - he seems to get his obsessions and then shag them to death.
Brive1987 wrote:The letter writing campaign refers to Sargon request in his vid to email the organisers and politely ask them to apply their own code of conduct rules. Sargon included their email addresses in the YT description.
OK. Thank you. I rewatched the video and heard it at the 3:59 mark.
PZ has found a report that PROVES that right wing terrorism is far worse that the Islamic variety.
Oh. In America, the land of the loopy gun crazy anti government conspiracy mad free.
The report doesn't get around to reviewing Europe. Even then the mullahs apparently killed more yanks, albeit using less attacks. And that after starting the clock well after 911.
Still. There you go. That PZ came with a smile is all that matters.
The horde have found a way to slate IS attacks in with USA ant governmenters, Christian anti abortionists and the harassment of Anita.
Ed Seedhouse
24 June 2017 at 5:24 pm
I’d argue that “Isamist” terrorist are actually part of the far right. They support an autocratic and antidemocratic government and the strict enforcement of religious beliefs which they hold to be “traditional”.
What’s left or centrist about that?
And yes there are also left wing terrorists and crazy people. The rightists seem to be the big threat at the moment.
CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:Inernational pitizens, if you'd be so kind, would you mind stating if you would rather your country had some enshrined protections for freedom of speech like the USA's First Amendment? If not, why not?
I would actually. Right now it seems that if you are a man, any woman who does not like what you have to say can call the police and have you arrested and prosecuted.
If you manage to get off, a bunch of women will protest, and the media will diligently report on how women are being persecuted again.
Wasn't it barely a week ago one of Ken's buddies was saying Disney's gay agenda was why the latter's parks were posting falling profits since families were instead choosing to go places like the ark park?
I generally like thunderf00t. There are points of his I agree with and disagree with. But my gut tells me that he is letting his personal tiff with Sargon get the best of him.
I agree.
He's wasting his time at best.
Thunderfoot didn't seem to object when Carrier was banned from Skepticon for violating conference policies that Thunderfoot thought were unnecessary and draconian. He seems to take great joy in his enemy being hoisted by their own petard.
@Really, in Thunderf00t's defense, to my knowledge, Thuderf00t was not calling for Carrier to be removed from his platform. He was simply relishing it occurring to Carrier by his own team.
I generally like thunderf00t. There are points of his I agree with and disagree with. But my gut tells me that he is letting his personal tiff with Sargon get the best of him.
I agree.
He's wasting his time at best.
Thunderfoot didn't seem to object when Carrier was banned from Skepticon for violating conference policies that Thunderfoot thought were unnecessary and draconian. He seems to take great joy in his enemy being hoisted by their own petard.
To reiterate what I said above the strange thing to me is that tfoot would even entertain the idea that it really is a case of hurt feelings. He has to know better.
Of course Sargon can't come out and say he's using Alinsky tactics, but so many other people have pointed it out to Phil that he must know.
So the only reasonable conclusion is that Phil's playing dumb, pretending not to get it just so he can say "nyah nyah widdle Sargy gonna cwy?"
Sunder wrote:To reiterate what I said above the strange thing to me is that tfoot would even entertain the idea that it really is a case of hurt feelings. He has to know better.
Of course Sargon can't come out and say he's using Alinsky tactics, but so many other people have pointed it out to Phil that he must know.
So the only reasonable conclusion is that Phil's playing dumb, pretending not to get it just so he can say "nyah nyah widdle Sargy gonna cwy?"
So that leaves me with my primary question. Does thunderf00t have a history of not holding others to their own standards? Especially when it boils down to having someone removed or barred from speaking a conference.
As it stands, Thunderf00t is pushing a pure freedom of speech angle. It is possible that he is staying consistent.
Personally, I fall on the side of making your opponent play by their own rules. Turning the other cheek won't get us anywhere with this crowd. They cronicly take advantage of our civility & better nature.
deLurch wrote:@Really, in Thunderf00t's defense, to my knowledge, Thuderf00t was not calling for Carrier to be removed from his platform. He was simply relishing it occurring to Carrier by his own team.
Brive1987 wrote:PZ has found a report that PROVES that right wing terrorism is far worse that the Islamic variety.
Oh. In America, the land of the loopy gun crazy anti government conspiracy mad free.
The report doesn't get around to reviewing Europe. Even then the mullahs apparently killed more yanks, albeit using less attacks. And that after starting the clock well after 911.
Still. There you go. That PZ came with a smile is all that matters.
Brive, you're a damn moron. The Horde has become a little flaccid of late, and Meyers was simply pumping in some blood and closing the exit valves to allow it to rise once more. Just because you're too dumb to see the truth, I for one am glad that there are still some sharp minds ever ready to see through the MSM's bullshit with science and critical thinking.
Brive1987 wrote:PZ has found a report that PROVES that right wing terrorism is far worse that the Islamic variety.
Oh. In America, the land of the loopy gun crazy anti government conspiracy mad free.
The report doesn't get around to reviewing Europe. Even then the mullahs apparently killed more yanks, albeit using less attacks. And that after starting the clock well after 911.
Still. There you go. That PZ came with a smile is all that matters.
Brive, you're a damn moron. The Horde has become a little flaccid of late, and Meyers was simply pumping in some blood and closing the exit valves to allow it to rise once more. Just because you're too dumb to see the truth, I for one am glad that there are still some sharp minds ever ready to see through the MSM's bullshit with science and critical thinking.
Brive1987 wrote:PZ has found a report that PROVES that right wing terrorism is far worse that the Islamic variety.
Oh. In America, the land of the loopy gun crazy anti government conspiracy mad free.
The report doesn't get around to reviewing Europe. Even then the mullahs apparently killed more yanks, albeit using less attacks. And that after starting the clock well after 911.
Still. There you go. That PZ came with a smile is all that matters.
Brive, you're a damn moron. The Horde has become a little flaccid of late, and Meyers was simply pumping in some blood and closing the exit valves to allow it to rise once more. Just because you're too dumb to see the truth, I for one am glad that there are still some sharp minds ever ready to see through the MSM's bullshit with science and critical thinking.
Really? wrote:Thunderfoot didn't seem to object when Carrier was banned from Skepticon for violating conference policies that Thunderfoot thought were unnecessary and draconian. He seems to take great joy in his enemy being hoisted by their own petard.
[youtube][/youtube]
Christ on an Ark. 36 minutes.
So I downloaded the SRT file & ran a search on the words "standard" "measure" and "stick"
What I came up with as far as meat goes is at the 33 minute & 4 second mark. Watch for 1 minute. Handy link:
SRTish wrote:God did dick get what he deserved. I mean the guy who led the charge about how conferences should micro police people's flirting activities to the point where this would be sexual assault. And yet it does say touching not gropey. He touched someone's arm therefore sexual assault. Bravo day the guy who is perfectly Peter joyously right the character assassination rumor train without a conscience until of course he found himself tithe twigs tracks yeah. God he got what he deserved and now he's banned from life from all future conferences of skepticcon by his former feminist allies. I mean really who would touch the guy now.
So Thunderf00t did a fair amount of defense of Carrier in terms of saying what he did, wasn't harassment by normal standards, but did fail by his own pushed standards. And Thunderf00t is clearly relishing in that Carrier got hoisted by his own petard by being banned from the conference, other wise known as 'deplatforming.'
Sunder wrote:To reiterate what I said above the strange thing to me is that tfoot would even entertain the idea that it really is a case of hurt feelings. He has to know better.
Of course Sargon can't come out and say he's using Alinsky tactics, but so many other people have pointed it out to Phil that he must know.
So the only reasonable conclusion is that Phil's playing dumb, pretending not to get it just so he can say "nyah nyah widdle Sargy gonna cwy?"
So that leaves me with my primary question. Does thunderf00t have a history of not holding others to their own standards? Especially when it boils down to having someone removed or barred from speaking a conference.
As it stands, Thunderf00t is pushing a pure freedom of speech angle. It is possible that he is staying consistent.
Personally, I fall on the side of making your opponent play by their own rules. Turning the other cheek won't get us anywhere with this crowd. They cronicly take advantage of our civility & better nature.
Dumb to play the other side's game. Then the other side says you are a hyprocrite because - in this case - you are doing the same thing you are accusing the other side of - and that is what the typical reader walks away with. You are a hypocrite. 99% of the people don't get into the details. You are a hypocrite is as far as they go. The nuanced "I'm just doing what the other side is doing to show what hypocrites they are...' does not fit on a bumper sticker. You lose. Being consistent is bad policy in this ADHD clickbait era? No, it is the only policy.
Do you really think Kerry's explanation for voting for a bill then voting against it wins the day against "FLIP FLOP, FLIP FLOP!!!!"
I generally like thunderf00t. There are points of his I agree with and disagree with. But my gut tells me that he is letting his personal tiff with Sargon get the best of him.
I agree.
He's wasting his time at best.
I agree, too. Sargon is just holding up a mirror. Nothing more, nothing less.
Who here thinks that #Vidcon is going to do anything about Sargon's complaint? Saturday has already passed, so they clearly did not bump Anita from her Saturday speech.
I don't expect them to do anything. I have to pretty much agree with most people. He did it to demonstrate her hypocrisy.
Now who is going to get sold on this demonstration.
Pro-Sargon people will in all likelyhood stay pro-Sargon.
Pro-Anita people will in all likelyhood stay pro-Anita. But it does appear as if her star has already faded.
People like Laci Green have eventually become feed up with the hypocrisy. But that has taken several years, and has been a slow process of erosion. And appears to have been primarily due to herself knowing she was in their own cross-hairs.
Vidcon might silently opt to not invite Sakresian to be a speaker next year. Calling people in the audience Human Garbage when the have said nothing is clearly unprofessional for someone who claims to be fighting against harassment.
Not sure what the rest of vidcon attendees might think. I bet most don't care and are more obsessed with meeting their own favorite celebrity.
Really? wrote:For some reason, this YouTuber kept the camera on herself through the Sargon panel. The big moment starts around 2:30.
[youtube][/youtube]
I think that she might be Mundane Matt's girlfriend/wife. If she isn't, I can guarantee Matt where he can find an easy lay this weekend.
Really? wrote:Thunderfoot didn't seem to object when Carrier was banned from Skepticon for violating conference policies that Thunderfoot thought were unnecessary and draconian. He seems to take great joy in his enemy being hoisted by their own petard.
[youtube.][/youtube]
Christ on an Ark. 36 minutes.
So I downloaded the SRT file & ran a search on the words "standard" "measure" and "stick"
What I came up with as far as meat goes is at the 33 minute & 4 second mark. Watch for 1 minute. Handy link:
SRTish wrote:God did dick get what he deserved. I mean the guy who led the charge about how conferences should micro police people's flirting activities to the point where this would be sexual assault. And yet it does say touching not gropey. He touched someone's arm therefore sexual assault. Bravo day the guy who is perfectly Peter joyously right the character assassination rumor train without a conscience until of course he found himself tithe twigs tracks yeah. God he got what he deserved and now he's banned from life from all future conferences of skepticcon by his former feminist allies. I mean really who would touch the guy now.
So Thunderf00t did a fair amount of defense of Carrier in terms of saying what he did, wasn't harassment by normal standards, but did fail by his own pushed standards. And Thunderf00t is clearly relishing in that Carrier got hoisted by his own petard by being banned from the conference, other wise known as 'deplatforming.'
Yeah, Thunderf00t was so excited he had pleasure himself through Carrier's entire history in the A/S community, starting with the grand roll out of Atheism plus. I couldn't make myself watch more than five minutes of it.
IMO his videos would be better if he would wait until he's zipped up and washed his hands to start recording them.
I think back then Thunderf00t kept the repetition of his arguments to a minimum. His later videos, especially when it comes to items like solar roadways, Elon Musk etc really get bogged down with that. I wish I could slip him $500 bucks to get take a video editing course. He has done well as an amateur. But he could do a hell of a lot better by learning some critical basics.
Sunder wrote:To reiterate what I said above the strange thing to me is that tfoot would even entertain the idea that it really is a case of hurt feelings. He has to know better.
Of course Sargon can't come out and say he's using Alinsky tactics, but so many other people have pointed it out to Phil that he must know.
So the only reasonable conclusion is that Phil's playing dumb, pretending not to get it just so he can say "nyah nyah widdle Sargy gonna cwy?"
So that leaves me with my primary question. Does thunderf00t have a history of not holding others to their own standards? Especially when it boils down to having someone removed or barred from speaking a conference.
As it stands, Thunderf00t is pushing a pure freedom of speech angle. It is possible that he is staying consistent.
Personally, I fall on the side of making your opponent play by their own rules. Turning the other cheek won't get us anywhere with this crowd. They cronicly take advantage of our civility & better nature.
Dumb to play the other side's game. Then the other side says you are a hyprocrite because - in this case - you are doing the same thing you are accusing the other side of - and that is what the typical reader walks away with. You are a hypocrite. 99% of the people don't get into the details. You are a hypocrite is as far as they go. The nuanced "I'm just doing what the other side is doing to show what hypocrites they are...' does not fit on a bumper sticker. You lose. Being consistent is bad policy in this ADHD clickbait era? No, it is the only policy.
Do you really think Kerry's explanation for voting for a bill then voting against it wins the day against "FLIP FLOP, FLIP FLOP!!!!"
deLurch wrote:Mundane Matt's 2 cents on the issue. Less sleep worthy than unusual. But nothing new to learn if you have followed their antics this weekend.
[youtube][/youtube]
The title card image of the video is apparently the moment when she saw Sargon and started texting the head of security.
I'm happy to bet that Jonathan McIntosh saw that face a lot.
So the skuttlebutt around the speakers at the Vidcon conference is that a bunch of men sat down in front of a woman's panel and started yelling and harassing them.
This is within the US, right? I understood that worldwide, after Islamic terrorism, Communist terrorists were the next largest source of violence. (And, to be fair, the gap between them was large).
