Discussion in 'The Off-topic Lounge' started by lordofthepies, Feb 9, 2019.
On a slightly related note... Soul Man was a great movie.
A mortal Kombat spinoff starring that chinese wizard???
When did this come.out?
This was too easy. I even spelled it out for you people in the second post. Defending murderous racism is not a hill to be dying on if you're not a racist yourself. And even if you want to applaud Neeson's honesty, it shouldn't be your first reaction - the first should be 'holy fuck, Neeson was a murderous racist piece of shit at one stage'.
Just because you lack the self-awareness to realize you hold racist prejudices, it doesn't mean you don't have them. Most racists tend not to think of themselves as racist. And if you are dumb enough to think it's a good idea to go into bat for a guy who admitted he wanted to kill random black people for no crime other than being black, this probably applies to you.
It’s universal, a lot of Thai people hold ill will towards farang and for good reason.
It's common. Not universal. If you think everyone is a racist, it's just you projecting your own racism onto others. This is the main problem with cunts - they think everyone else is a cunt like them.
We are also not talking about simple racial prejudice here. We are talking about a guy wanting to murder someone based upon their physical appearance. That unfortunately is too common, but if you think it's a universal and reasonable response, then you are a nothing more than a horrible racist.
You’re fighting straw men. It’s absolutely not reasonable. An ex of mine was killed in the erawan bombing, I had a lot of hatred for Muslims. After a while it simmered down.
Well I guess it could be worse right? He could've pretended that he was a Native American for movie roles. I could see the outrage now.
How the fuck am I fighting straw men? I responded directly to your claim that racism is universal by saying that it isn't.
You are posting in an obvious troll thread - confirming you experienced Neesonesque rage isn't a very smart thing to do.
Lol, why are you even entertaining this conversation? Have you not read any of this dudes post before? This is what he does from time to time.
I don't know who it is as everyone seems to have a version of that screen name now.
But the entire purpose of this thread is to get a cheap laugh and to hang shit on the idiots defending Neeson.
Look at the dots behind the name. One dot and thats Galt. He usually like to post pics of himself, kind of like this
Tilt at those windmills.
Double. This forum went and UGd on me. Ronald McDonald 2.0, can you fix the forum in between vigorously defending racists?
Some actual thought on Liam Neeson...
OP. You think you're being clever but its really not. It's a hollow attempt to shoehorn a conversation so you can be right. You've not participated other than baiting and name calling.
No one justified Liam's actions and you continue to conflate him saying he was wrong with defending his actions. It's immature and again, doesn't make you right.
What if Liam told a story about trying to lure kids into a van so he could rape them but he didn't actually go through with it and was now ashamed that he ever wanted to rape kids? Would your first reaction be 'what a brave guy Liam is for admitting that?' I'm guessing no.
The story is not someone admitting that they used to hold prejudiced views. The story is a guy admitting to being such an extreme racist at one point that he was willing to murder a person based on the color of their skin. It's incredibly fucked up and deserves to be treated as fucked up. Why rush to immediately forgive him and play off like he was admitting to nothing serious? Forgiveness comes after condemnation, not instead of it.
And for fuck's sake, he even used the term 'black bastard' when telling the story - even if you're describing your thoughts at the time how do you think it's ok to use that language on TV if you're not a complete spastic?
There's probably a reason your first reaction to this story is to immediately defend the guy. It's the same reason you have strong anti-immigration views. It's the same reason you're a Trump supporter. It's the same reason you thought that Confederate statues aren't racist. You think you aren't prejudiced, but you end up on the same side as racists all of the time. Maybe there is something to learn from Neeson's self-reflection.
I've not said he was brave or any of the other hyperbole you keep adding. You just keep shoehorning because you want to be right, not discuss the topic.
I said that in the case of anger and revenge at outgroups, I understand how a black guy might want to kill white cops, a northern irish guy wants to kill Protestants, etc. ...that this anger and revenge is common enough in many to be understandable thought in human existence... and that I don't condemn someone stating they were wrong for those thoughts, and that said revenge against a group breeds more hate and revenge.
Because you framed it as a support thread. Am I to jump in to argue with you? I explained my whole view above. Go ahead and tell me where you disagree with it since I didn't post agreeing with you enough... You'll be right eventually Im sure.
Here comes the ad hominem. More trolling that can't have a conversation about the topic at hand.
I don't. I have strong illegal immigration views and have regularly espoused that we should increase refugee support. That failure to solve illegal immigration is a moral failing breeding anti Latino prejudice and preventing an increased assistance to real refugees instead of economic ones....but that isn't the simple hollow shoehorning you like to do.
Do you accuse people of pedophiles in threads about surveillance pros and cons too? It's an old trope you use.
I have various reasons in support of voting for trump. I have withheld plenty of my condemnation of the man jokingly only because I used to post in a pro-trump thread. I'm rarely there now.
None of it has to do with Liam Neeson.
Who said they werent racist? More ad hominem that can't follow complex discussions without attacking people. I once expressed my concerns they might have historical value and the overarching theme of tearing down ugly history should be done with concern. I then learned how many were cheaply put up later as an intimidation tactic and that was that. Mattserra.jpg But don't let the details stop your continued hollow attacks.
I understand that when people are attacked personally, some go after outgroups. And they are wrong. And I don't disagree with them saying they were wrong. And I don't condemn them for saying they were wrong.
He air quoted it to describe his thoughts at the time. His actions would be as wrong with or without that.
I didn't take that to mean he was using the current term to describe black people. That'd be quite different.
One time at school I tried to bite someone's nose off. Got in trouble
I know people with racist prejudices. It is possible, but extremely unlikely, that I know anyone who has walked around with a club looking for a random person to murder based on their skin color. And I know some pretty fucked up people. I can't stress that enough. It's fucking extreme and that's why I think the pedophile analogy is perfectly legitimate. We're talking more than a fleeting thought, we are talking active intent to commit basically the most heinous crime somebody can commit. I can't imagine why anyone would want to defend someone who has done that, without first agreeing that he deserves significant condemnation - and not the type of condemnation of 'oh well that was wrong but at least he says sorry'. He had active intent to commit a hate crime murder for fuck's sake.
If you saw the light on the statue issue, I'm glad. I just think if too often someone finds themselves on the same side as the worst people on the planet, it's time to rethink defending some of this shit.
Please describe the appropriate significant condemnation. Maybe I agree with whatever it is you think should be a response. You haven't really described what should be done, just that I'm not supposed to say I understand his words first.