BrainKing - Discussion boards (Politics)

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

(V): Perhaps you could tell the Canadian Defence Minister that..

that guy is an idiot then!

24. March 2009, 16:36:51

Mort

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

Czuch: An idiot.

Ok, lets put it on another foot... supposed it was your military taking a beating from some comedians? Ya know... tend to shoot friendlies, don't know how to shoot.....

... But I know how you'd react to that. You'd be furious. That's not idiotic, that's being loyal to your soldiers and your military.

24. March 2009, 17:45:21

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

(V): But I know how you'd react to that. You'd be furious.

you would be wrong again....

24. March 2009, 18:48:33

Mort

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

Czuch: you'd let your troops be mocked? Shame on you!!!

As I said, us Brits were against GWII, but we supported our troops 99.99%
We've even set up a new charity over here to aid those injured in action.

24. March 2009, 18:57:27

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

(V): I think many who confused(and used) opposition to the Iraq war as opposition to the actual soldiers believe there own propoganda now.

24. March 2009, 21:35:34

Mort

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

Jim Dandy: I didn't. Our soldiers do what they are told to do, they fight where they are told to fight. It's a job.. a hard one and can lead (as I've met some guy who saw the bad side of the Northern Ireland war) to it affecting their lives mentally and/or physically for a period of time that extend to being for the rest of their lives. Opposition to he war, calling a leader a joke or putting him down for being an idiot... that's par for the political course and par for the right to people to have an opinion on the matter.

I mean.. when you find your PM has lied about significant details regarding Saddam's offensive capability and that the decision for us Brits to join in on GWII... then you have the right to be annoyed. When you feel that Saddam had no WMD's.... and I believe many of those presenting evidence in the UN by their manner thought the evidence was dodgy...

... Are you going to keep quiet, or voice your concerns?

24. March 2009, 20:06:34

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

(V): As I said, us Brits were against GWII,

Well, my opinion it is just as disrespectful to make a parody about Bush as it is the canadian military...

explain to me how it is different?

24. March 2009, 20:31:21

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

Czuch: Your opinion is noted, we each have one

24. March 2009, 21:46:31

Mort

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

Czuch: Bush is a leader, not military. And excuse me, but the way some Republicans are making jokes of your current Democrat President is the same or worse.

I also have to say that if opposition politicians are allowed in a democratic free western world to take the mickey out of our PM during PM's Question time, or at any other opportunity they can find.. it kinda gets you thinking that such attitude keeps our leaders on the ball.

25. March 2009, 03:23:14

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

(V): Bush is a leader, not military. And excuse me, but the way some Republicans are making jokes of your current Democrat President is the same or worse.

Sorry I am not letting this one go..... you are saying that certain topics are off limits for making fun of on a comedy show, right?

But that makes a bigger question then.... who makes the choice of what those topics are???? You think it is the military, I think it includes a president, someone else thinks the handicapped are included, then there are those that dont like anyone making fun of clowns..

the point is, you either have to let them make fun of anyone they want to or nobody at all!

Which is it for you???? It seems like you want to be the person to decide who can be made fun of, that your opinion is the most valid one and the rest of us dont matter?

There is a bigger issue here... its called censorship...

25. March 2009, 08:12:43

Mort

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

Czuch: .. then if you think it includes the President, you can't make fun of your current president.

... And please... censorship.. That's been in place since WW! or WWII.

25. March 2009, 08:20:35

The Usurper

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

(V): "... And please... censorship.. That's been in place since WW! or WWII."

Very true, and a good point. So much so, that most of the pundits on TV can't properly be criticized personally for what they say, at least not directly so....since they are using talking-points or slants as dictated by their superiors. They are more like sponges without real opinions, ready to obsorb the next factoid or spin.

25. March 2009, 08:36:31

Mort

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

The Usurper: Our TV over here, has rules and limits. And viewers are free to complain to the regulators if they are offended. Sometimes such complaints are upheld and the broadcaster is 'told off', sometimes not.

Sometimes, the news publishers will work with the gov and/or police to keep certain info quiet, to protect or to aid the efforts into an enquiry.

... Or as in the case of recently deceased it is considered bad form to print or broadcast names before the family is informed... Especially in regards to soldiers names who have been KIA.

But maybe that is just very good manners.

25. March 2009, 09:52:25

The Usurper

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

(V): Yes, some things are clearly a matter of etiquette, not free speech. And free speech, moreover, applies to us as individuals, not necessarily to a broadcaster who is paid to do a job.

But this statement....

"Sometimes, the news publishers will work with the gov and/or police to keep certain info quiet, to protect or to aid the efforts into an enquiry."

...yes that can be true, and even justifiable, as you well know. Unfortunately, sometimes (on certain topics, oftentimes) this collaborative relationship between government & media has a more sinister aspect....which is why we must turn to alternate sources of news to get the real scoop on certain issues.

25. March 2009, 13:31:39

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

(V): then if you think it includes the President, you can't make fun of your current president.

How is it you always seem to get the simple things all twisted up????

My argument here is that comedians poking fun at the canadian military is no different from them poking fun at our president.... no matter who they make jokes about someone is going to be "offended".

My question to you all, is why you think the canadian military deserves special treatment? (okay, I have heard your arguments why already) but if you then give them exemption from comical parody, why stop there? Why is it okay to parody my president? You see yet? Just because someone is offended, doesnt matter, and if you still think it does,,then what i want from you is a list of what is off limits to comedians.... is it just the canadian military, or are there others on your list?

25. March 2009, 14:01:03

Mort

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

Czuch: Well.. From my point of view your argument fails. And there are other things on my list, many other things. But that is my personal feelings. I can't expect everyone else to feel the same, but just to acknowledge that I (like you) have the right to those feelings. We might not agree, but we still have the right to feel.

25. March 2009, 16:28:41

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

(V): And there are other things on my list, many other things

name them

25. March 2009, 17:52:20

Mort

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

Czuch: All?

25. March 2009, 21:21:22

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

(V): All?

Sure, why not... Id like to know what kind of world we would live in if you were in charge of the censorship...

BTW, I must have missed all the angry posts from you all when Bam had a laugh at the expense of handicapped people?????? Disabled must not be on your list I guess...

25. March 2009, 21:30:27

Mort

Subject: Re: Bam had a laugh at the expense of handicapped people

Czuch: He didn't, he used the wrong analogy and screwed up because of that. It is then to choose whether you think the man had a temporary attack of idiocy (as we all do being human) ... or is a idiot fall stop.

The vote is out as it's too early to tell.

Censorship... Mmmmm Difficult, my main thing would be adverts that don't tell the truth or are designed to pray on peoples fears attenuated by a Hollywood culture that requires a very big bank account to realistically meet the false idol the adverts 'project' as being real rather then delusional.

TV... it's a thing of the moment, one cannot tell until one has seen. But I certainly wouldn't be a 'mary'..... British TV, etc... is so much more open then your US system.

25. March 2009, 21:38:45

Subject: Re: Bam had a laugh at the expense of handicapped people

(V):

wow, you really do have a way of missing the point and straying from a topic

You were complaining about comedy against the canadian military.... I simply want to know what other topics of comedy you would have off limits as well???

25. March 2009, 22:20:32

Mort

Subject: Re: Bam had a laugh at the expense of handicapped people

Czuch: Because Czuch. It depends on how it's done. Not just the content, but the intent and the timing. But generally racism, and subjects based on an ism.

He made a stupid analogy. Not a tirade of immature moronic garbage. I don't even get how they get to call themselves comedians!! We have guys here that use their brains to make jokes.

26. March 2009, 02:10:25

Subject: Re: Bam had a laugh at the expense of handicapped people

(V): Not just the content, but the intent and the timing.

Right... well the INTENT was COMEDY!!!!!!!

BTW, the intent of Bam was comedy as well, except Bam is NOT a comedian, he is president

Just because you do not think it was funny doesnt matter.... thats my point, I dont think making fun of Bush was funny either, but that does not make it wrong or that it should be banned or anything like that

You can have a personal dislike, anything you want, but that is all you get... the rest is just something annoying buzzing in my ear...

25. March 2009, 21:42:08

Subject: Re: Bam had a laugh at the expense of handicapped people

(V): He didn't, he used the wrong analogy and screwed up because of that.

He tried to make a joke using disabled people.... but he is the president of the US

These other guys tried to make a joke using the canadian military.... but they are COMEDIANS

25. March 2009, 22:14:03

Subject: Re: Bam had a laugh at the expense of handicapped people

Czuch: Don't try to understand any of it. It will give you a migrane.

25. March 2009, 22:23:48

Mort

Subject: Re: Don't try to understand any of it. It will give you a migrane.

Artful Dodger: You get headaches from trying to understand me... I'm expanding your mind then!! ...... Thankyou for letting me know that.

25. March 2009, 22:12:41

Subject: BTW, I must have missed all the angry posts from you all when Bam had a laugh at the expense of handicapped people?????? Disabled must not be on your list I guess...

Czuch: It wasn't said on Fox so it's ok. By the way, an O'Reilly guest once said a certain thing was "retarded." Well, you know what hit the fan on that one?

25. March 2009, 22:28:37

Mort

Subject: Re: an O'Reilly guest once said a certain thing was "retarded."

Artful Dodger: No... he said..."I'm a little retarded about this".. He said he didn't know or failed to understand. PC was overdone by people who missed the point and what he said. I suggest that like Obama, that was overplayed.

25. March 2009, 23:42:52

Subject: Re: an O'Reilly guest once said a certain thing was "retarded."

(V): I should have said he just used the word instead. Point is still there. It was on Fox and people came unglued. PC is at the point now where it's way past being silly.

26. March 2009, 02:23:37

Subject: Re: an O'Reilly guest once said a certain thing was "retarded."

(V): he said..."I'm a little retarded about this".

NO... he said something like... " I felt like i should be in special olympics".... nothing none of us has not ever said before, and he laughed about it, as we all have done before, but he is president, and he is not a professional comedian... how you can complain about a comedy show parody about the canadian army, yet are not even fazed a little bit about Bam, just tells me that you have some biases, especially since you never have any issues with Bush being slammed all day long for many of his gaffs, many similar to what Bam just did?

26. March 2009, 02:24:53

Subject: Re: an O'Reilly guest once said a certain thing was "retarded."

Czuch: V and I were talking about something different. Dick Morris dropped the "retarded" word.

26. March 2009, 02:31:53

Subject: Re: an O'Reilly guest once said a certain thing was "retarded."

Artful Dodger: K sorry

25. March 2009, 16:32:42

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

(V): so you are advocating to be the worlds big brother? Or maybe I miss your point as well? Are you saying it is in bad taste but you respect their right to do it anyway?

24. March 2009, 19:40:36

Subject: Re: Really.. a non issue... Perhaps you could tell the Canadian Defence Minister that..

(V): It's no longer an issue because it's been dealt with. That's all I meant by saying it's a non issue. I will go even farther. People who continue to make this an issue are exploiting the dead soldiers. They are using this incident, and the death of the Canadian soldiers to score points.

24. March 2009, 21:39:03

Mort

Subject: Re: Really.. a non issue... Perhaps you could tell the Canadian Defence Minister that..

Artful Dodger: ?? Sorry, but I think you'll find that a certain country doesn't feel that way.. and many of that countries Commonwealth brothers and sisters may share that feeling.

And I'm not pretending to be offended. I am offended.
As I said, if it happened over here those guys would be canned.

24. March 2009, 22:07:02

Subject: Re: Really.. a non issue... Perhaps you could tell the Canadian Defence Minister that..

(V): Be offended then. It was 5 insignificant people, several of whom are comedians (they make fun of stuff for a living) on a show that mocks everyone (including the US). It's much to do about nothing at this point. People have already apologized. So for those of you still offended, it's not about you anyway so who cares that you are offended?

24. March 2009, 22:11:08

Mort

Subject: Re: Really.. a non issue... Perhaps you could tell the Canadian Defence Minister that..

Artful Dodger: Wow..... people are not allowed to show empathy for their Commonwealth brothers.... I shall tell the Queen not to bother with it any more after all the hard work to rebuild relations and the sense of a Commonwealth.

It's all pointless!!

24. March 2009, 22:13:24

Subject: Re: Really.. a non issue... Perhaps you could tell the Canadian Defence Minister that..

(V): I don't see sympathy being shown. I see something else at play here.

24. March 2009, 22:17:04

Mort

Subject: Re: Really.. a non issue... Perhaps you could tell the Canadian Defence Minister that..

Artful Dodger: Well that's you, and I feel that's you getting grumpy over Fox.

But as I said, it doesn't matter. When something similar happened on a BBC radio show (as in went OTT) ... One guy had to resign, the other was suspended for several months. And they were just taking the mickey over relations between the one who resigned and a famous person grand daughter (she is an adult who enjoys bondage and goth) ....

24. March 2009, 23:33:00

Subject: Re: Well that's you, and I feel that's you getting grumpy over Fox.

(V): And I feel it's you taking advantage of the military that are in harms way for your own ideological view.

25. March 2009, 08:09:16

Mort

Subject: Re: And I feel it's you taking advantage of the military that are in harms way for your own ideological view.

Artful Dodger:

You'd be wrong then.

25. March 2009, 16:42:04

Subject: Re: You'd be wrong then.

(V): So would you.

25. March 2009, 17:53:28

Mort

Subject: Re: So would you..

Artful Dodger: Nope.

25. March 2009, 19:33:03

Subject: Re: So would you..

(V): Yep.

24. March 2009, 22:18:13

Subject: Re: Really.. a non issue... Perhaps you could tell the Canadian Defence Minister that..

Artful Dodger: re: So for those of you still offended, it's not about you anyway so who cares that you are offended?

You make interesting conclusions based on very limited knowledge.

24. March 2009, 23:37:18

Subject: Re: Really.. a non issue... Perhaps you could tell the Canadian Defence Minister that..

Jim Dandy: It isn't about you or anyone else here. It was a statement made on a comedy show. They apologized. It's not the official position of the US. It's not what the average US citizen even thinks. Many people, including myself, agree with Jules that it was in bad taste. But it's over and done with. There's nothing more to be said of it. Canada complained, the offenders apologized, Canada accepted the apology. So unless you are simply taking advantage of this situation for your own benefit (so you can appear offended - How Dare They!!!!) then accept it for what it is: a mistake that was dealt with and now it's over with. So go on to the next item.

~sigh

24. March 2009, 23:58:06

Subject: Re: Really.. a non issue... Perhaps you could tell the Canadian Defence Minister that..

Modified by The Col (25. March 2009, 00:01:07)

Artful Dodger: HUH?
I'm not sure you haven't had an out of body experience during the progress of the discussion, but it's your board, go nuts

24. March 2009, 19:42:37

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

Czuch: "but it is nothing to do with fox news, any more than saturday night live has to do with NBC news....
"

Exactly. But some people like to expoloit stories like this one and pretend to be offended just to lash out at those they disapprove of.

24. March 2009, 19:44:35

Subject: Re: 116 dead,4 last week in Afghanistan since 2002

Czuch: "Well deserved if it were to continue.

Thats hog wash!

If it is okay to characterize our president in the ways they did with parody about Bush, then the canadian military shouldnt be off limits either!!!"

I saw the bit and it was funny. But it offended our friends in Canada and they are deserving of better. Those on the left deserve nothing but contempt when they pull stuff but allies in the war against terrorism deserve differently.

25. March 2009, 00:55:42