Do you take North Korean threats seriously?

[Vitamin]

So you'd rather stay in the sunny, cheerful side of wrong and sufferings, right from the comfort of your con-camp-free country.

What are we talking about actually, then, politics, humour, justice..?

Must everything be about social justice? We aren't allowed to have any fun until the entire world is happy and wealthly, and all the rivers flow with candy for the children(sugar free of course, must watch out for cavities)! Do you think you're the world's mother or something?

Honestly belamo, I never took you for a card carrying member of the PC police. I thought you were smart enough to see past that bullshit. Apparently not.

 

[belamyi]

Must everything be about social justice? We aren't allowed to have any fun until the entire world is happy and wealthly, and all the rivers flow with candy for the children(sugar free of course, must watch out for cavities)! Do you think you're the world's mother or something?

Honestly belamo, I never took you for a card carrying member of the PC police. I thought you were smart enough to see past that bullshit. Apparently not.

That's because I am not and because I am and do I'll explain why to you:

You are assuming I was implying that we should do as you describe there that you assume I say that we should do but, actually, what I was talking about was not about no "fun" for anyone until everybody else is happy, which is way beyond PC and is the mark of all wacky governments, dictatorships, churches and illuminati in general, but about dismissing the meaningful part of it, the more "serious" one and keeping just the fun...

maybe because my life since my early teens has been a constant tension with a world in which I fit only occasionally and briefly at that, like a crazy restless electron, I have less problems with understanding what is outside the mainstream, the normality, whatever, and be more aware of all the boomerang social and moral problems that are carelessly dismissed and thrown away.


So I was not talking against (ME! ) not being ironic, sardonic, critical... but about doing it right and not merely goofing around, because mocking and criticizing and laughing IS a serious matter, WAY MORE than weeping and being ceremoniously sentimental, and because a film in the (purported) spirit of The Interview is much healthier and important, more moral than that of a half-brained Spielberg vehicle for social recognition... yes, I am talking about Schindler , Amistad and all that sort of lame intellectual and moral wannabes that he has delivered as little mice through his Hollymountain.

 

[belamyi]

If you need it shorter, Vitamin: what I am against, as always, is that hypocritical exercise of dishonesty that claims to be so honest and courageous... what I see in people like Mia Farrow and all those I could read even in this forum, is the sort of prudish righteousness very courageous to assert themselves what so coward to be true to the principles they claim to defend that we can see in hypocritical, PC charity.
The defense of freedom of speech these days is not truly so, it IS the PC version of it that goes only mid way to crush others, the outsiders, the baddies, but not willing to go as far on themselves.

You know, the trick with principles is that they follow their own, strict logic, which becomes ruthless on those with a very definite idea of whom must be presented as bad or good ones: that is why, in the name of freedom, nobody had anything to say against the decisions of the Bush Jr. government on Iraq, and why there is never anything wrong, not considering the Muslims, but according to our own democratic principles, whenever the government of Israel is in action to behave like an politically recognized version of those he is attacking.

Damn... it didn't end up as short is it was intended a couple of paragraphs above...

 

[pat grimshaw]

The capitalist parasites of Hollywood

 

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

^ is a thang

sssshhhh"

anyway

thankyou

 

[belamyi]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_(Bad)_Weddings

 

[kev]

I have always been against Communism...as some people here know.

 

[nyctopgam]

http://mlg.com.pk/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/education_logo_picture.jpg

I don't click on links without an accompanying note. So, whatever.

 

[belamyi]

I don't click on links without an accompanying note. So, whatever.

Which doesn't imply I am so naive as to believe that people after a certain age can actually EVER be educated... they might be tamed and or battered by life, but not educated... not re-educated but, precisely, recieving what they thought they didn't need after they reached a certain status in life, among those that they feel that justify their being ignorant and proud old spoilt brats.

 

[nyctopgam]

Which doesn't imply I am so naive as to believe that people after a certain age can actually EVER be educated... they might be tamed and or battered by life, but not educated... not re-educated but, precisely, recieving what they thought they didn't need after they reached a certain status in life, among those that they feel that justify their being ignorant and proud old spoilt brats.

Huh? But if I follow you, the age after which we stay hard wired is 7.

 

[belamyi]

Huh? But if I follow you, the age after which we stay hard wired is 7.

Sometimes even earlier... that depends on you of course, it may be much... much, much, much, much, much, much later

 

[Vitamin]

If you need it shorter, Vitamin: what I am against, as always, is that hypocritical exercise of dishonesty that claims to be so honest and courageous... what I see in people like Mia Farrow and all those I could read even in this forum, is the sort of prudish righteousness very courageous to assert themselves what so coward to be true to the principles they claim to defend that we can see in hypocritical, PC charity.
The defense of freedom of speech these days is not truly so, it IS the PC version of it that goes only mid way to crush others, the outsiders, the baddies, but not willing to go as far on themselves.

You know, the trick with principles is that they follow their own, strict logic, which becomes ruthless on those with a very definite idea of whom must be presented as bad or good ones: that is why, in the name of freedom, nobody had anything to say against the decisions of the Bush Jr. government on Iraq, and why there is never anything wrong, not considering the Muslims, but according to our own democratic principles, whenever the government of Israel is in action to behave like an politically recognized version of those he is attacking.

Damn... it didn't end up as short is it was intended a couple of paragraphs above...

If I'm reading you correctly you seem to have a rather overly-lofty idea of what is considered free speech, at least in the US. Of course freedom of speech covers thought provoking, sometimes even inflammatory, social commentary, but it also covers the right to just make a stupid movie.

 

[Vitamin]

In either case, the US appears to have retailated against North Korea. The entire North Korean internet is down.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...-internet-outage-network-researcher-says.html

This is what happens when you only have 1,024 IP addresses for a whole country.

 

[belamyi]

If I'm reading you correctly you seem to have a rather overly-lofty idea of what is considered free speech, at least in the US. Of course freedom of speech covers thought provoking, sometimes even inflammatory, social commentary, but it also covers the right to just make a stupid movie.

The overly-lofty idea, especially in the USA, of freedom of speech, is merely a way of reducing all reasonable questioning to either mere personal fancies, quirks, "one's opinion", or else something with which to laugh along in some sort of silly act.

"Freedom of speech" has sense or, if you prefer, is something so fundamental in a real democracy, when it goes far beyond the right to be silly at home: it's about, not just a government, but a whole society being able to approach any topic without biases or taboos.
I wonder how racial discrimination and racial crimes and police violence could ever become the healthy topic of satire anywhere in America, let alone a tent-pole Hollywood movie.

 

[Vitamin]

The overly-lofty idea, especially in the USA, of freedom of speech, is merely a way of reducing all reasonable questioning to either mere personal fancies, quirks, "one's opinion", or else something with which to laugh along in some sort of silly act.

Um, no not really. If you've run into Americans online who happen to disagree with you, then maybe they just flat out disagree with you.

"Freedom of speech" has sense or, if you prefer, is something so fundamental in a real democracy, when it goes far beyond the right to be silly at home: it's about, not just a government, but a whole society being able to approach any topic without biases or taboos.
I wonder how racial discrimination and racial crimes and police violence could ever become the healthy topic of satire anywhere in America, let alone a tent-pole Hollywood movie.

It's been done, multiple times actually.

 

[belamyi]

In either case, the US has appeared to have retailated against North Korea. The entire North Korean internet is down.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...-internet-outage-network-researcher-says.html

This is what happens when you only have 1,024 IP addresses for a whole country.

Yeeeeaaaaah, sure it was ok to make a movie like that...


http://money.cnn.com/video/media/20...ere-pulled.cnnmoney/index.html?iid=HP_Taboola


only that we decided there are too many bombings and blood involved in the threats to risk going to the end of something that is ideally so fiiiine

 

[belamyi]

My whole point: if those who claim to be the most for a certain principle are not without serious reserves against it, unwilling to exert it to the full, how can they expect anyone else to accept it even at the most basic level.

 

[zoltanspawn]

Sometimes I'd be willing to settle for clear speech.

 

[Vitamin]

Sometimes I'd be willing to settle for clear speech.

Ikr?

 

[belamyi]

Sometimes I'd be willing to settle for clear speech.

You don't mean my posts in which I say that if America is not able to make satire from covert rampant racism and easy-trigger policemen, how can you expect any sort of dictatorship to be more open to the concept of "free speech"... do you?