those fucking comics!

[Séguin]

You know what, just for the sake of "I don't give a fuck anymore". You're right. You're so smart, I'm so wrong.

[esoter1c]

Originally Posted by fable

he may be funny, but hs grasp of the true nature of the most contemporary problems in the world comes from his team of writers, who are a ignorant pack of monkeys at best. His remarks were so blatantly irresponsible and callous, i dont understand where it came from. Nor do i beleive that he actaully knows what the fuck hes talking about.

Actually he's very well spoken and intelligent.

He's a bit biased because he is Jewish but you can't really blame him.

Most of the reporters.editors.writers on tv are Jewish so most of this is biased.

But if you can see things from all sides not just judeo-christian you're more informed than most.

I love Daily Show it's the main reason I get a laugh in the day.

Without it I'd be one miserable hater.:317:

[miss.myra]

Originally Posted by fable

he may be funny, but hs grasp of the true nature of the most contemporary problems in the world comes from his team of writers, who are a ignorant pack of monkeys at best. His remarks were so blatantly irresponsible and callous, i dont understand where it came from. Nor do i beleive that he actaully knows what the fuck hes talking about.

yeah but the irresponsibility and callousity (is the latter a word?) are there for a reason.


satire is and has always been a very good way of showing exactly what's wrong with the world by representing things in such a way (ie swift's modest proposal!)

[fable]

I think satire is overated. And i think these days, its more a representation of people who dont have the ________ to go all the way with expressing their opinion, or contributing to some style of movement or organization.

One rarely sees satire employed in the political realm at the grassroots level. Why?

Why is it only in mainstream media, or entertainment?

[fable]

Originally Posted by 3507321C

Actually he's very well spoken and intelligent.

He's a bit biased because he is Jewish but you can't really blame him.

Most of the reporters.editors.writers on tv are Jewish so most of this is biased.

But if you can see things from all sides not just judeo-christian you're more informed than most.

I love Daily Show it's the main reason I get a laugh in the day.

Without it I'd be one miserable hater.:317:

Hes the star of a show based in political satire. WOW! Like i said before hes funny, and perhaps i was a little harsh to say hes completely unintelligent. But realistically, all i seen is someone who doesnt have the ability, aka, doesnt want to jeopordize his cash cow for the sake of being forthright with his opinions. You only ever see satire in entertainment, becuase thats all its good for. Entertainment. So with saying that, i find anything he really says, as reactionary in the worst case scenario, and humourous at the expense of triviliazing marginalized people at the best.

[fable]

Originally Posted by Robb Peppertre

You know what, just for the sake of "I don't give a fuck anymore". You're right. You're so smart, I'm so wrong.

I dont mean to beat a dead horse, but your recent comment is redundant in the sence, that it was already obvious.

You came on with a skewed, and incomplete opinion of the situation, you made offensive remarks in light of them, and then shared information in the hopes of legitimizing your comments. I could give two fucks what your heritage is. What i care about is your lack of understanding. Work on that, the back+forth between you and i, is irrelevent.

How bout reading into things, and asking some questions THEN making a comment, perhaps then, it has the chance of coming off intelligent, and condusive to discussion.

[SEAN!]

Originally Posted by fable

Hes the star of a show based in political satire. WOW! Like i said before hes funny, and perhaps i was a little harsh to say hes completely unintelligent. But realistically, all i seen is someone who doesnt have the ability, aka, doesnt want to jeopordize his cash cow for the sake of being forthright with his opinions. You only ever see satire in entertainment, becuase thats all its good for. Entertainment. So with saying that, i find anything he really says, as reactionary in the worst case scenario, and humourous at the expense of triviliazing marginalized people at the best.

umm he's pretty damn forthright with his opinions ever seen the episode of crossfire with him on it.

you fail to realize he is a comedian and not an activist its not his job or choice to live in relative poverty and dedicate his life to agitating for social and poltical change.

besides, his satire is infinitely more effective at affecting change and awareness then the easily dismissed and unbearable rhetoric espoused by professional activists such as yourself.

only someone with an absolute lack of a sense of humour would say that he is trivializing the plight of the marginalized.

[fable]

Originally Posted by SEAN!

umm he's pretty damn forthright with his opinions ever seen the episode of crossfire with him on it.

you fail to realize he is a comedian and not an activist its not his job or choice to live in relative poverty and dedicate his life to agitating for social and poltical change.

besides, his satire is infinitely more effective at affecting change and awareness then the easily dismissed and unbearable rhetoric espoused by professional activists such as yourself.

only someone with an absolute lack of a sense of humour would say that he is trivializing the plight of the marginalized.

Id say i have a healthy sense of humour, but if said humour is at the expense and detriment to a current political situation, fuck humour.

Unbearable rhetoric? Come on mate, are we going this route again? Your name calling, information you either do not choose to believe, because of any number of illusions you are under, whether through your upbringing, or your education. Furthermore, its usaully predominantley in retrospect.

But back to the current subject, id like to know exactly how John Stewarts success is measured in terms of impact, and education, asides from ratings, and his own wallet?

He is part of mainstream media which is already under a short leash, add to the fact that he ISNT an activist, (like you stated), and whats the relevany? None? But it doesnt matter right, because thats not his role? Right? So if realistic, progresive, and impactual discource in the formers landscape isnt his mandate, then if anything, he should be even under further scrutiny in regards to NEGETIVE impact. And if you tell me that the specific segment being aired in middle america, where strong anti-arab sentiment is already HIGH, doesnt have a strong NEGETIVE impact, then your not actaully looking into reality, rather your speaking in the same terms as the US and European adminstration and "free" presses dialect. Which in no way represents anyones freedoms except of those who are in power, oppressing, or profiting from such.

his satire is infinitely more effective at affecting change and awareness then the easily dismissed and unbearable rhetoric espoused by professional activists such as yourself.

come on sean, this is lame. Infinetly more effective? Then why the fuck is there blooming resistance movements across the globe, that have NO ties with such satire? Why is such satire so sparce in the most oppressed of nations? Why isnt there any record of any longstanding longterm organization, or unification of peoples BECAUSE of such satire? Are you going to tell me that the likes of SNL, and MAD TV, and other such shows, somehow compare to the massive effort and struggle undertaken by grassroots organization!?!?! Your fucking kidding me right? Perhaps the Cuban revolution, or the Bolivian revolution would have benefitted from Dennis Miller!? Hell we should of beamed over Will Farell into Fallujah! Better yet how bout Margaret Cho right into the depths of the bible belt!!!!

I give these comedians and satirist their props, but if they cross into reactionary, and it is accepted solely because they are usually funny, then we might as well put them on the same payroll as Pat Roberts, Anne Coulter, and Opera Winfrey.

only someone with an absolute lack of a sense of humour would say that he is trivializing the plight of the marginalized

Hey, newsflash, venture capitalist interns are marginalized, over weight female sectretaries are marginalized, the people of the Middle East are FUCKING dying.

Ill lighten up a tad, when you pull yourself out of the Economist for a second to breath, switch off larry king, pull the National Post out of your ass, reach a finger down your throat, and puke up CNN world News (i guess that will be the second time?) and understand that in the face of what this massive uprising is about, heads need to get serious(even if they are multi-milloinare comedians)

[thebobman]

If you cannot respect the rights of the individual for freedom of religion, speech or expression, nor respect the rights of freedom of press, nor respect the ideals of these basic human rights and the collective civilized world's governments stance of repecting these basic human rights, you do not have a place in the civilized world.

Period. end of story. bye.

the fact that the reaction to these comics is so hypocritical to the point of being nearly comically satirical is completely beside the point. If you can't grasp the concept of the charter of human rights to the point where you're burning embassies and murdering innocent people based purely on their nationality there is flat out NO room for you in the 21st century. I think if you put as much effort into pondering why your religious leaders have maintained a policy of violently surpessing the right to freedom of speech and freedom of press in your countries I think you'll find it's the root cause of the staggering gap between the very poor and the very very rich. I think you'll find that the rest of the world which you're condeming and protesting against had the SAME gap in wealth until they began to follow the principles of freedom of speech and freedom of press. That's not a coinicidence, it's human fucking evolution.

[Séguin]

Originally Posted by fable

I dont mean to beat a dead horse, but your recent comment is redundant in the sence, that it was already obvious.

"Hello kettle. This is pot. You are black."

[fable]

Originally Posted by Robb Peppertre

"Hello kettle. This is pot. You are black."

are you on crack!?!? what are you saying!? Stop, drop, and roll away. You arent saying anything condusive to any conversation, your original remarks dripped ignorance, and now somehow your latest comment applies to me....how?

go AWAY

[Séguin]

... once again. I repeat previous post.

[Chewy]

you tell em rob... you tell the world

[automatic]

[tiedye]

ahem. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . WHAT FUCKING COMICS?

I don't get the newspaper for one week and there's a jihad on our hands... where does Jughead stand in all this?


EDIT: ok, so I've read the report on the protest now.. why can't I find these said comics? How bad can they really be? Can they be any worse than a video of a reporter's head being hacked off with a bowie knife?

[fable]

Originally Posted by automatic

Lame, and the sentiment behind it is completely off the mark. Nice combination.

I feel like pineapple.

[fable]

Originally Posted by Robb Peppertre

... once again. I repeat previous post.

will you be my valentine?

[nabs]

i still find that cartoon offensive, because in our religeon any drawing of our beloved prophet (p.b.u.h) is forbidden.

If you call it Prophet Mohammed (p.b.u.h) then it is forbidden. so at the first block i would call it offensive.

[b0ld]

Originally Posted by nabs

i still find that cartoon offensive, because in our religeon any drawing of our beloved prophet (p.b.u.h) is forbidden.

If you call it Prophet Mohammed (p.b.u.h) then it is forbidden. so at the first block i would call it offensive.

Nabs,

I understand that even drawing any portrait of mohammed is forbidden in islam. However.... since the Danish cartoonist that created the cartoon and then published it does not practise islam then how is there any justification since the content is coming from a non believer. Now if the cartoonist was a muslim then it "could" be of a different story. So if a non-believer publish's content there is no means of any type of action to invoke violence. The publisher doesn't know anything about islam..... probably doesn't even worship god for all we know..... so in all respect in a civil society sure muslims can voice there anger, However not drag it on and on and on. As far as I am concerned if I practiced islam, I'd quite frankly wouldn't give a damn about the cartoonist because he doesn't know what the prophet is about and what is scriptured in the holy book.

[fable]

Originally Posted by thebobman

If you cannot respect the rights of the individual for freedom of religion, speech or expression, nor respect the rights of freedom of press, nor respect the ideals of these basic human rights and the collective civilized world's governments stance of repecting these basic human rights, you do not have a place in the civilized world.

Period. end of story. bye.

the fact that the reaction to these comics is so hypocritical to the point of being nearly comically satirical is completely beside the point. If you can't grasp the concept of the charter of human rights to the point where you're burning embassies and murdering innocent people based purely on their nationality there is flat out NO room for you in the 21st century. I think if you put as much effort into pondering why your religious leaders have maintained a policy of violently surpessing the right to freedom of speech and freedom of press in your countries I think you'll find it's the root cause of the staggering gap between the very poor and the very very rich. I think you'll find that the rest of the world which you're condeming and protesting against had the SAME gap in wealth until they began to follow the principles of freedom of speech and freedom of press. That's not a coinicidence, it's human fucking evolution.

hahahahahahahahahaha! thx mate! You win the clueless award of the week!

-The uprising was triggered by the comics, but represent middle eastern resistance to imperialist invasion and occupation.

-Who does the mainstream press represent in the world? You? Whos freedom of speech are we talking about here? The common peoples? Or perhaps is this recent desperate grab for "freedom of speach" is really oportunism at its worst. Do you find it wierd when you have the US government defending the freedom of speech a tad wierd?

-If there is freedom in the press, then why isnt there freedom for the "critics" of what the press puts out? How is a civil uprising of people that have been oppressed for two decades, not THEIR freedom to speak...out?

-Who is getting murdered? Last time i checked, the people involved in the uprising(the oppressed people of the middle east) where the ones being shot by danish police, and security? Oh wait, let me guess, CNN? Fox? Get a grip yo. Your getting caught up in the N.American "free" press, hook line and sinker.

-Embassies? what do embassies represent? The well being off common people? The interest of the poor and marginalized? Other then replacing some poor backpackers passport, they stand for a form of nationalism that is based on the blood of Colonialism.

I think if you put as much effort into pondering why your religious leaders have maintained a policy of violently surpessing the right to freedom of speech and freedom of press in your countries

YES! Shear blatant islamaphobia, based on imperialist version of what is going on in the middle east - and you use it as an argument? Sure theres been oppression, but when in the history of the universe has a foreign occupying force ever restored humanitarian living conditions? EVER? Oh, and one that is imperialist in its agenda as well? Well? NEVER?

Next thing your going to tell me, is that US/UK/French/Canadian troops are instilling democracy in Iraq? Afghanistan? Haiti? Of course it will be a N.American form of democracy right? The kind that was built on over 20 million indegenous deaths, continent wide? The one that practised slavery? The one that locks away innocent men, for the threat to national security with NO proof other than perhaps middle eastern decent.

I think you'll find that the rest of the world which you're condeming and protesting against had the SAME gap in wealth until they began to follow the principles of freedom of speech and freedom of press. That's not a coinicidence, it's human fucking evolution.

WTF!?!?!? Once again your mixing up some so called token struggle for free speech that has been galvanized by the same governments that have been oppressing the uprising communities in question for years, with grassroots struggle

There is a gap between the wealthiest of the world, and the poorest because thats the way the wealthiest and most powerful want it, and it is enacted through a government that represents said wealth.

Through the history of our world, a program of capitalism and massive industrializtion has segregated, the most poor and oppressed peoples of the world. What about their freedom of speech?

Im going to explain something to you, and hopefully itll get through your quasi-racist/islamaphobic, backwater, ignorant ass.

After two decades of colonialist, and imperialist war and occupation, including the likes of Britian, the US, the USSR, and now Canada, the people of the middle east have had everything taken from them. Their houses, their businesses, their livelyhoods, their families and friends, and just about any normalacy of a society. This of course has ,and is heralded as the quest for democracy, and installing human rights. A Democracy created by countries, that are the greatest imperialists in the known world, the creators of apartheid government, and the most giant, central hotbeds for corrupt capitalism, and oppression of indegenous peoples.

Today in the midst of social chaos, the reality is, that the only organization strong enough to resist the all out destruction to imperialist quest for economic stangleholds at the expense of third world countries resources. is that of religion. I wish there could have been an alternate leadership team, but most of them ARE DEAD. The militant religeous factions just happened to survive. And when a man has lost everything except to fight and chance victory, or a slow death, who the fuck do you think theyre going to follow? You think they give a fuck about you and your n.american, living in a fucking bubble, uneducated, suburban, my idea of struggle is no allowance, I WANT FREEDOM OF SPEACH having ass?!?!?!

It aint about satire, or having the abilitiy to wear styling jeans or go for a beer after 2am. Its about FOOD, EDUCATION, A JOB, SHELTER, and etting carpet bombed.

Who the fuck are you, to tell oppressed people how the fuck they should behave? Is their fight, against you? Who told you that? George Bush? Stephan Harper? The mainstream media?

We were just out leafletting the other day, at surrey central skytrain station. We were doing a few petition drives, handing out newspapers, getting in great discussions. When before we knew it, the skycops where telling us to get the fuck out. Civil protest? Isnt that in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, or at the very least entrenched in our Constitution somewhere? In fact i know it is. I have stuck to my wall. Now we regroup, as this is par for the course, but it raises a fucking point. Whos freedoms? And in what context are you putting your bullshit condemnation in? Yours? What fucking similarities do you have with a poor person in Iraq? or Afghanistan? or Palestine? How can you presume to talk about their freedoms, or lack off, or their behaviour? How connected are you with poor and impovrished peoples in your own fucking country? What do you know about the struggle of Indegenous peoples, and their right to freedom of speach (and their land/safety and SELF DETERMINATION?)

Your an ignorant little kid. Who sees through glasses of illusion. You pretensious condemnations exist anywhere but reality. Youve over simplified, and over generalized, like a few other on this thread. You read and watch,whats fed to you, and you think armed with this, you have a clue, legitimacy, or even a right. You have no real understanding of the real stuggle for human rights, self determination or even freedom of speach in this country let alone one that you only now through fox and cnn.

illusion, and pomp, are making you look ignorant indeed.

[automatic]

Originally Posted by nabs

i still find that cartoon offensive, because in our religeon any drawing of our beloved prophet (p.b.u.h) is forbidden.

If you call it Prophet Mohammed (p.b.u.h) then it is forbidden. so at the first block i would call it offensive.

well, sorry i offended you, but...

it's called free speech, and it's one of the values that democracies hold. i'm allowed to make comments that people may find offensive. as long as those comments don't "incite violence or prejudicial action against someone based on his/her race". since i think it'd be a stretch to say that the little cartoon i posted does either of those things, you're just going to have to deal with it. just as christians just had to deal with it when andres serrano displayed his controversial artwork "Piss Christ", which consisted of a crucifix inside a jar of his own urine


the best example of this i can give is that if a evangelical christian says "homosexuality is perverse, immoral and sinful" that is not hate speech, that is simply their opinion. if tha same person says "homosexuals deserve to be beaten to within an inch of their life for their wicked lifestyle." then that IS hate speech, as they are inciting violence.

i've seen the cartoons in question, and i have a hard time seeing how any of them could be construed as hate literature. are they critical of certain aspects of islam? yes they are. do they show representations of mohammed? yes, they do. should they be protected under free speech legislation? absolutely.

[SEAN!]

Originally Posted by fable

Id say i have a healthy sense of humour, but if said humour is at the expense and detriment to a current political situation, fuck humour.

Unbearable rhetoric? Come on mate, are we going this route again? Your name calling, information you either do not choose to believe, because of any number of illusions you are under, whether through your upbringing, or your education. Furthermore, its usaully predominantley in retrospect.

But back to the current subject, id like to know exactly how John Stewarts success is measured in terms of impact, and education, asides from ratings, and his own wallet?

He is part of mainstream media which is already under a short leash, add to the fact that he ISNT an activist, (like you stated), and whats the relevany? None? But it doesnt matter right, because thats not his role? Right? So if realistic, progresive, and impactual discource in the formers landscape isnt his mandate, then if anything, he should be even under further scrutiny in regards to NEGETIVE impact. And if you tell me that the specific segment being aired in middle america, where strong anti-arab sentiment is already HIGH, doesnt have a strong NEGETIVE impact, then your not actaully looking into reality, rather your speaking in the same terms as the US and European adminstration and "free" presses dialect. Which in no way represents anyones freedoms except of those who are in power, oppressing, or profiting from such.



come on sean, this is lame. Infinetly more effective? Then why the fuck is there blooming resistance movements across the globe, that have NO ties with such satire? Why is such satire so sparce in the most oppressed of nations? Why isnt there any record of any longstanding longterm organization, or unification of peoples BECAUSE of such satire? Are you going to tell me that the likes of SNL, and MAD TV, and other such shows, somehow compare to the massive effort and struggle undertaken by grassroots organization!?!?! Your fucking kidding me right? Perhaps the Cuban revolution, or the Bolivian revolution would have benefitted from Dennis Miller!? Hell we should of beamed over Will Farell into Fallujah! Better yet how bout Margaret Cho right into the depths of the bible belt!!!!

I give these comedians and satirist their props, but if they cross into reactionary, and it is accepted solely because they are usually funny, then we might as well put them on the same payroll as Pat Roberts, Anne Coulter, and Opera Winfrey.



Hey, newsflash, venture capitalist interns are marginalized, over weight female sectretaries are marginalized, the people of the Middle East are FUCKING dying.

Ill lighten up a tad, when you pull yourself out of the Economist for a second to breath, switch off larry king, pull the National Post out of your ass, reach a finger down your throat, and puke up CNN world News (i guess that will be the second time?) and understand that in the face of what this massive uprising is about, heads need to get serious(even if they are multi-milloinare comedians)

you're doing it again.

no one wants to hear or read your whiney bullshit, whats the point of bringing a message if no one is going to listen?

what revolution, the activist groups you say are agitating for change are but a fraction of the size they were forty years ago, its dead, you're deluded, move on. There are no sizable social movements especially relative to what existed in the past, even the anti-globalists are but a fraction of the size they were a few years ago.

i dont even read or beleive in half the shit you say i do, you're putting words in my mouth and with an attitude like yours you will never be successful.

[fable]

Originally Posted by SEAN!

you're doing it again.

no one wants to hear or read your whiney bullshit, whats the point of bringing a message if no one is going to listen?

what revolution, the activist groups you say are agitating for change are but a fraction of the size they were forty years ago, its dead, you're deluded, move on. There are no sizable social movements especially relative to what existed in the past, even the anti-globalists are but a fraction of the size they were a few years ago.

i dont even read or beleive in half the shit you say i do, you're putting words in my mouth and with an attitude like yours you will never be successful.

no one? And you know this how?

Once again, you only speak from what is only in your little bubble you call a world. I agree revolutionary movements across N.America are not what they were several years ago, let alone a decade ago, but its temporary, considering the landscape across the globe, things are only getting started up again. This is part and parcel of my beliefs, and predicitions anyways.

Whiney bullshit? You learn that in one of your econ classes? Im sure you have some market reports, bar graphs, and fancy power point presentations illustrating the whiney factor of social movements dont you?

If you dont want to get in it with me, dont, i aint got a gun up to your head. You and i are on oppositte ends of the spectrum, just have your idealogy straight, and lots of support when those ends meet, because they will.

I never presumed to think this board was a place for revolutionary action, but its a good place to share info, put down illusions, and of course, the very place i get to hear opinions of charming people like you.

Perhaps it just a different outlook of life, because from where i stand, if a structure that is needed isnt around you build it, you dont forsake it, and then proceed to educate the world on something that is based on ineqaulity, and tell me its god.

Success? I dont want, nor do i strive for your brand of success, so no worries.

pc/ez

[fable]

Originally Posted by automatic

well, sorry i offended you, but...

it's called free speech, and it's one of the values that democracies hold. i'm allowed to make comments that people may find offensive. as long as those comments don't "incite violence or prejudicial action against someone based on his/her race". since i think it'd be a stretch to say that the little cartoon i posted does either of those things, you're just going to have to deal with it. just as christians just had to deal with it when andres serrano displayed his controversial artwork "Piss Christ", which consisted of a crucifix inside a jar of his own urine


the best example of this i can give is that if a evangelical christian says "homosexuality is perverse, immoral and sinful" that is not hate speech, that is simply their opinion. if tha same person says "homosexuals deserve to be beaten to within an inch of their life for their wicked lifestyle." then that IS hate speech, as they are inciting violence.

i've seen the cartoons in question, and i have a hard time seeing how any of them could be construed as hate literature. are they critical of certain aspects of islam? yes they are. do they show representations of mohammed? yes, they do. should they be protected under free speech legislation? absolutely.

freedom of speech for the imperialists/supporters vs freedoms of speech and assembly of the oppressed.

[automatic]

Originally Posted by fable

freedom of speech for the imperialists/supporters vs freedoms of speech and assembly of the oppressed.

no, freedom of speech for all.....

i have a hard time talking to you fable. you seem to be totally incapabable of realizing even the possibility that maybe, just maybe, the other side might have a valid point. has it ever occurred to you that seeing as how you are not, nor is anyone else, omnipotent, that that means that you might not be correct all the time? that your opinions are just that: opinions? i've got pretty strongly held beliefs, but i can still acknowledge that i don't have all the answers. that i might be just plain wrong. i can acknowledge that you may actually be correct, why is it that you can't seem to acknowledge that you might not be?

as soon as someone disagrees with you you have the habit of insulting their intelligenece or maturity. you simply can't accept the fact that others beliefs might be valid.

i 'm done debating with you, for now and always.

sela

jay