Overcome by Disgust


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @blakeyrat said:

    I have faith that the vast majority of people are not potential murderers.

    How many do you suppose it takes?

    @blakeyrat said:

    I also have no desire to base my decision-making process on paranoia and fear. If I'm generous to a person and they end up shanking me, well, like I said above: shit happens. But no regrets.

    I can accept that this is your position on this. I don't want to turn away these people fleeing this awful war, either, but I'm not sticking my head in the sand about the potential problems surrounding it.

    @LaoC said:

    What if you read what I wrote instead of what you think I wanted to write?

    Jeez, I already said, because you did a giant @xaade reply. I'm happy to if you pull it out of some reply to @xaade, or at least point me to which one.



  • @boomzilla said:

    How many do you suppose it takes?

    It takes to what? Change a light bulb?

    This isn't a very good joke.

    @boomzilla said:

    I can accept that this is your position on this.

    Good.

    @boomzilla said:

    I don't want to turn away these people fleeing this awful war, either,

    I'm not convinced that's true, because if it was:

    @boomzilla said:

    but I'm not sticking my head in the sand about the potential problems surrounding it.

    This wouldn't matter to you.

    "Oh I'm interested in charity, but absolutely not if it requires sacrifice, even potential hypothetical sacrifice!"


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @tufty said:

    You seem to think the boats arrive neatly in port, and they have a nice stewardess helping people off the boat and asking "Anything to declare? Business or pleasure?".

    Huh? Not sure where you got that impression.

    @tufty said:

    Rather than using fake Syrian papers, he could use, for example, fake Austrian / German / French papers and simply walk onto a ferry. Or get himself delivered to somewhere less remote. He doesn't need to walk across Europe. Make an asylum demand in Serbia. et processed in Croatia, Austria...

    One might think so, but that's what he did.



  • @boomzilla said:

    Huh? Not sure where you got that impression.

    Because you seem to think that everyone who has been processed by the refugee centre on Leros must have come in as a refugee by boat from Syria. That is not necessarily the case, because it's not nearly as hermetic a system as you seem to think.
    @boomzilla said:
    but that's what he did.

    Indeed it is. Why, do you think?


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @blakeyrat said:

    I'm not convinced that's true, because if it was:

    boomzilla:
    but I'm not sticking my head in the sand about the potential problems surrounding it.

    This wouldn't matter to you.

    Except that both are true. But I believe you think that. You're all about not thinking about this subject.


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @tufty said:

    Indeed it is. Why, do you think?

    Dunno. Never got a chance to ask him. It sure worked though, eh?


  • Considered Harmful

    @boomzilla said:

    @LaoC said:
    What if you read what I wrote instead of what you think I wanted to write?

    Jeez, I already said, because you did a giant @xaade reply. I'm happy to if you pull it out of some reply to @xaade, or at least point me to which one.


    We were discussing something entirely different.



  • @boomzilla said:

    It sure worked though, eh?

    Only if you substitute "gaining asylum status in Serbia" for "being blown to a million pieces in Paris". Unless you consider the possibility that the use of a fake Syrian passport and passing through refugee processing centres was a deliberate act designed to increase and use the fear and mistrust of the rapidly-increasing refugee population in Europe, moving attention away from the far more dangerous and radicalised second generation European muslims. In that case, it's spectacularly sucessfull, because stupid cunts like you are swallowing it hook, line and sinker.


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @LaoC said:

    We were discussing something entirely different.

    So you were just randomly advertising your posts or what?


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @tufty said:

    @boomzilla said:
    It sure worked though, eh?

    Only if you substitute "asylum status in Serbia" for "being blown to a million pieces in Paris"

    I can't figure out how to reply to this. So I opened up my text message app and started with "I" and just went with the suggestions:

    I don't know Probably be the best treatment we have for many people who want to the seminar at the studio tomorrow


  • Considered Harmful

    @boomzilla said:

    @LaoC said:
    We were discussing something entirely different.

    So you were just randomly advertising your posts or what?

    The post had nothing to do with "a terrorist taking advantage of the refugee process", so I'm not sure why you're asking me what I had to say on that topic.


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @LaoC said:

    The post had nothing to do with "a terrorist taking advantage of the refugee process", so I'm not sure why you're asking me what I had to say on that topic.

    Sorry, I was trying to get back to the topic of the post, even though the analogy was super stretched. I agree that the current situation has little in common with WWII.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    In the US the number is actual zero, not just statistically zero.

    That's not true.

    Several of the attacks in America since 9/11 were refugees of other scenarios.

    Unless we're specifically talking only of Syrians.

    I suppose it's possible that Syrian is a superior nation?

    @LaoC said:

    As I said: a tiny country, weak economy, just out of a civil war, and now that they've taken refugees again

    "Lebanon is doing it. They've managed"

    "They haven't managed."

    backpedals "They're vulnerable right now. It's not the refugees fault."

    @LaoC said:

    Regarding jobs I'm sure given a fair distribution Europe's economy could easily provide for everybody

    Yes, that's the liberal solution. Just give them money for an undisclosed amount of time. 100 years, 200 years later, we still have the reparations going.

    No. Redistribution does not increase stability. They need jobs. They need careers. They need to provide for themselves. These are all psychological needs. Without them, they'll always be second-class. This will create cultural divisions and lead to even more violence.

    @LaoC said:

    Now would be the time to take some actual responsibility for our aquiescence to politicians' support for these assholes.

    I agree. It's our weak stance that allows Saudi to manipulate the oil market. We need to make SA irrelevant in international economics. End our economic relations with them.

    @LaoC said:

    that people in a much much worse situation such as the Lebanese are simply doing

    They aren't succeeding at it though.

    It seems relevance stops at doing for you. Not at actually producing desirable results. Which is odd, since desirable results drives a whole host of other liberal policies (like sex ed and so on).

    @LaoC said:

    Because there are "tensions" that might possibly cause "instability"?

    That's not what they're saying. They're saying it's already bad. Why else are they locking down and the immigrants are looking at Europe.



  • @LaoC said:

    Insofar as it has no practical consequences for you.

    What has any of this had practical consequences?

    If the refugees are peaceful and you see no problems with taking in hundreds of thousands, why are you saying I need to demonstrate negative consequences to ending arming militant Muslims.

    As if our debate has practical consequences....

    You do realize the governments are going to do whatever the hell they want. I doubt Obama is reading our conversation for political insight.

    @LaoC said:

    these "parallel societies"

    None of your demonstrated parallel societies have a set of religious laws that they advocate that require cutting off hands, stoning, throwing homosexuals off roofs, or running over their daughters because the girl wants to marry outside the religion.

    @LaoC said:

    But if you prefer to have the massive human misery and a massive security problem, just round the guys up in camps.

    The misery and security problems will exist no matter where they settle.

    And I've said several times that the camps need better security.

    Just because I say camps, doesn't mean I advocate the camps as they are.



  • @boomzilla said:

    How do you know?

    Fort Hood shooter waited how many years?

    @tufty said:

    moving attention away from the far more dangerous and radicalised second generation European muslims. In that case, it's spectacularly sucessfull, because stupid cunts like you are swallowing it hook, line and sinker.

    That makes what we do with the refugees totally irrelevant.

    We can pay attention to or ignore militant Europeans independently of whether we accept or reject refugees.

    There was a much better argument about refugees getting upset and joining ISIS, which is pretty far-fetched, unless the person that joins was already of that impression.

    No, they want to recruit white Muslims. Because those are harder to identify.



  • @xaade said:

    No, they want to recruit white Muslims. Because those are harder to identify.

    And a good way to do that is to preach the end of the white man's civilization. If the refugees would be idiots for joining the organization that goes directly against them, then that goes doubly so for Europeans.

    But as I said, things are a little more complex. Not all people saw the Nazis for the villains of the history they were either.


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @xaade said:

    It's our weak stance that allows Saudi to manipulate the oil market. We need to make SA irrelevant in international economics. End our economic relations with them.

    Then the Chinese (say) will pick up that slack. They'll only be irrelevant when their oil can't be pumped out.



  • @Maciejasjmj said:

    But as I said, things are a little more complex.

    It is complex.

    People want to see this black-and-white terrorist vs. peaceful Muslim scenario.

    But there are so many shades of gray in there.



  • @boomzilla said:

    Then the Chinese (say) will pick up that slack.

    I'm thinking more on a personal ethics scene for us doing business with them.

    But if you're referring to their impact on the market, well, that's one reason why we are doing business with them.

    So, do we contain them by doing business with them, or do the ivory tower thing and don't do business with them.

    Because isolationist passivism is an ivory tower. It can't exist.



  • @xaade said:

    That makes what we do with the refugees totally irrelevant.

    No, it doesn't. For starters, accepting refugees is the human thing to do. The thing that anyone with the slightest shred of empathy would do. That's where we came into this thread.

    I'll put it another way.

    Both @blakeyrat and someone describing himself as a "fucking cunt" both have infinitely more empathy than you do.



  • @tufty said:

    No, it doesn't. For starters, accepting refugees is the human thing to do. The thing that anyone with the slightest shred of empathy would do. That's where we came into this thread.

    We have homeless on the streets, should we all give them rooms in our houses?

    That's the thing that anyone with the slightest shred of empathy would do.

    Blindly letting everyone in without long term plans or goals, and without a plan to integrate and ensure sustainable stability for these people is what someone with ONLY empathy does. That's what someone who has no cultural understanding or logistical experience does.

    Someone with pragmatic skills and empathy would help the people where they are, and do so long before it gets this bad.

    You do not have a grasp of the big picture, and so when someone who does comes in, you assume they have no empathy.

    And from the perspective of a local who has lost loved ones, you appear to have no empathy for them.


  • Trolleybus Mechanic

    @boomzilla said:

    What if you read what they wrote instead of what you think they wanted to write?

    No, fuck YOUR mom.

    @xaade said:

    We have homeless on the streets, should we all give them rooms in our houses?

    Are the homeless being hunted down and murdered en mass, every night, without mercy, unless they flee the city?



  • @Lorne_Kates said:

    Are the homeless being hunted down and murdered en mass, every night, without mercy, unless they flee the city?

    Sometimes.

    And secondly.... I don't see how you don't sound as heartless as you make me out to be.



  • @Lorne_Kates said:

    Are the homeless being hunted down and murdered en mass, every night, without mercy, unless they flee the city?

    Yeah. By you, you sick fuck.


  • Trolleybus Mechanic

    @Bort said:

    Yeah. By you, you sick fuck.

    Give me your homeless, your trans, your disease-ridden hookers yearning to be free (of their lives)


  • Trolleybus Mechanic

    @xaade said:

    And secondly.... I don't see how you don't sound as heartless as you make me out to be.

    There's a lot of things about empathy and satire that you don't understand. It's okay. It's just because you're an idiot.



  • This post is deleted!


  • @fbmac said:

    It's either dumb or hipocriticalhypocritical to have a policy that blocks immigration from any poorer country and to then open an exception just for a place that is full of enemy terrorists.

    They (who? "teh SJWs", would be my guess) just wan' t to look likeas though they have empathy.


    Fixed for gramur and speling. It still doesn't make any sense.


  • ♿ (Parody)

    Dog lover Anthony Riggs was killed by a Rottweiler he had adopted from an animal control centre



  • This post is deleted!

  • BINNED

    @tufty said:

    Fixed for gramur and speling. It still doesn't make any sense.

    That sounds like a personal problem. It made plenty of sense to me.



  • This post is deleted!


  • You realise it's impossible to have a discussion with someone who posts, and then deletes what they have posted?

    If you don't think it's worth posting, or you're ashamed of what you're saying, don't post. Otherwise, leave it up, FFS.



  • @xaade said:

    We have homeless on the streets, should we all give them rooms in our houses?

    That's an entirely different issue, and one that we're already doing something (not very much, but something, at least) about. The homeless are not being shot, bombed, evicted, (in most cases) having their children forced into prostitution, or being rounded up and used as slave labour.

    @xaade said:

    Blindly letting everyone in without long term plans or goals, and without a plan to integrate and ensure sustainable stability for these people is what someone with ONLY empathy does. That's what someone who has no cultural understanding or logistical experience does.

    This is not a case were we have time or space for long term goals. It's a case where we have a massive number of desperate people who are at risk of dying if we don't let them in. People who sell everything to get away from the horror they are living. People who will come anyway, and who were coming before we decided to "let them in". Short of putting machine guns manned by "pragmatic" fucks like you along the coastline of every Greek and Italian island, there's no way of stopping them.

    "Letting them in" is not a question of keeping the borders open, because we can't close them; it's a question of trying to help these people integrate, trying to stop them ending up in overcrowded ghettos and concentrationinternmentrefugee camps. Trying to make their stay tolerable, for them and us.

    @xaade said:

    Someone with pragmatic skills and empathy would help the people where they are, and do so long before it gets this bad.

    The only way to help the people where they are / were would have been to not go barging in kicking over governments we've decided we don't want to support any more. To not fund islamic fundamentalists because they are the "enemy of our enemy". To not start a crusade against the "sand niggers". And if you have already done the above, it would have been a good idea not to then simply walk away, leaving power vacuums in countries destroyed by war. And while you're at it, it might be a good idea to do something about countries that are funding radical islam, and others that are running tanks over arabic children.

    But you can't help the people where they are. Because where they are, they're being lined up and shot by ISIS, and being bombed by the "good guys". They have no way of building a better future, because if you pile one brick on another, some fucker comes and bombs them.



  • This post is deleted!


  • @Scarlet_Manuka said:

    Australia has a lot of nowhere, so the middle of it is pretty damn isolated

    And we got even more nowhere when we excised the entire fucking mainland from the migration zone.



  • @Scarlet_Manuka said:

    you have people calling for the refugees to prove that they are Christians?

    Pretty sure everywhere has some of that.



  • @ben_lubar said:

    Republicans are big on religious liberty as long as it's some form of Christianity.

    We got both kinds - Country and Western.



  • @xaade said:

    I don't like being told I'm -ist for not wanting to have sex with whatever pops through the door

    Then you should have thought about that before installing the glory hole.



  • @boomzilla said:

    the flood of refugees is what allowed him to get back in without being noticed

    If you think that refugees constitute a "flood" compared to the number of completely ordinary people coming in every day on commercial flights, your sense of proportion is completely shot.



  • @fbmac said:

    Yes

    Fuck you, then



  • @boomzilla said:

    I opened up my text message app

    Hand in your :belt_onion:


  • Trolleybus Mechanic



  • @tufty said:

    You realise it's impossible to have a discussion with someone who posts, and then deletes what they have posted?

    We were discussing something? You only replied to talk about my grammar and spelling.


  • Trolleybus Mechanic

    @fbmac said:

    @tufty said:
    You realise it's impossible to have a discussion with someone who posts, and then deletes what they have posted?

    We were discussing something? You only replied to talk about my grammar and spelling.

    You misspeilled "grammur"


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @flabdablet said:

    If you think that refugees constitute a "flood" compared to the number of completely ordinary people coming in every day on commercial flights, your sense of proportion is completely shot.

    Yes, because all those commercial flights go through the refugee processing! But yeah, keep denying reality.



  • @boomzilla said:

    all those commercial flights go through the refugee processing! But yeah, keep denying reality.

    Are you attempting to suggest by sarcasm that folks coming in on commercial flights might be subject to less scrutiny than folks seeking asylum?

    I think that would have to be the first time I've ever seen somebody attempt to use a sarcastic riposte to one of my points in order to make it for me.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDMMYT3vkTk&t=1m8s


  • Considered Harmful

    This post is deleted!

  • Considered Harmful

    @xaade said:

    @LaoC said:
    Insofar as it has no practical consequences for you.

    What has any of this had practical consequences?

    Come again? I can't make any sense of this sentence.

    If the refugees are peaceful and you see no problems with taking in hundreds of thousands, why are you saying I need to demonstrate negative consequences to ending arming militant Muslims.
    Actually taking refugees in is a bit of an effort that goes beyond calming your soul by giving alms. You have to be tolerant of people who look differntly and you will also have to have some of your taxes spent on initial aid. All of that has little to do with the guys' peacefulness.
    @LaoC said:
    these "parallel societies"
    None of your demonstrated parallel societies have a set of religious laws that they advocate that require cutting off hands, stoning, throwing homosexuals off roofs, or running over their daughters because the girl wants to marry outside the religion.
    Sure they do. Deuteronomy 21:18-21 is but one example, there are many more. It's all in the Bible, as well as in the Quran. Of course Christians generally just ignore this part of what's supposedly their Holy Scripture, but so do the vast majority of Muslims, and particularly those who are *not* comfortable with the IS' rule. Leviticus 20:13 is apparently popular enough among some Christians BTW.
    @LaoC said:
    But if you prefer to have the massive human misery and a massive security problem, just round the guys up in camps.
    The misery and security problems will exist no matter where they settle.
    [citation needed]
    And I've said several times that the camps need better security.
    Dogs, machine gun turrets and electrified fences have been shown to be quite effective. Then again, why bother?

    @xaade said:

    @LaoC said:
    As I said: a tiny country, weak economy, just out of a civil war, and now that they've taken refugees again

    "Lebanon is doing it. They've managed"

    "They haven't managed."

    backpedals "They're vulnerable right now. It's not the refugees fault."

    If you can find anything I wrote that even remotely amounts to "It's not the refugees fault", quote it. Otherwise stop putting bullshit in my mouth.

    @LaoC said:
    Regarding jobs I'm sure given a fair distribution Europe's economy could easily provide for everybody
    Yes, that's the liberal solution. Just give them money for an undisclosed amount of time. 100 years, 200 years later, we still have the reparations going.

    No. Redistribution does not increase stability. They need jobs. They need careers.

    Of course. With some people working their asses off while others do nothing and don't have their needs fulfilled even though they would like to wok, it's pretty hard to claim that's a distributionof labor that serves human beings. "Give them money" is no solution indeed, that's why I didn't say that.

    They need to provide for themselves. These are all psychological needs. Without them, they'll always be second-class. This will create cultural divisions and lead to even more violence.
    Very well said. I just wonder how you would propose to organize that in internment camps.
    @LaoC said:
    Now would be the time to take some actual responsibility for our aquiescence to politicians' support for these assholes.
    I agree. It's our weak stance that allows Saudi to manipulate the oil market. We need to make SA irrelevant in international economics. End our economic relations with them.
    Everything but shoulder the consequences of the ongoing alliance, right?
    @LaoC said:
    that people in a much much worse situation such as the Lebanese are simply doing

    They aren't succeeding at it though.

    The refugees are doing a whole lot better than in any internment camp. They're poor, often dirt poor, but they live and they're not blowing themselves up. The Lebanese may just barely be managing it and failure may still come, but, again: their job is orders of magnitude harder than what's being discussed for Europe. They wouldn't even have flinched at one refugee to a hundred inhabitants.

    It seems relevance stops at doing for you. Not at actually producing desirable results. Which is odd, since desirable results drives a whole host of other liberal policies (like sex ed and so on).
    Sorry, can't parse that either.
    @LaoC said:
    Because there are "tensions" that might possibly cause "instability"?

    That's not what they're saying. They're saying it's already bad.


    [quote=xaade]Lebanon has an extraordinary ability to [b]remain stable despite everything[b]. But [b]if[/b] the current tensions [b]lead to instability[/b], the refugee crisis will only deepen further.[/quote]That's exactly what your quote said.

    Why else are they locking down and the immigrants are looking at Europe.
    Europe is definitely a lot better. And yes, at a 1:4 refugee ratio, Lebanon is pretty fucking close to final overload. We're not even talking about taking a tenth of that.

  • BINNED


Log in to reply