The news thread

[QuantumSync]

"no"
"not permitted under law"

[Marie Monday]

Actions have consequences

that's not even remotely a sensible reply to what Jimmy said. I could say the same if I decide to stab someone just because they mildly insulted me

[DJChameleon]

that's not even remotely a sensible reply to what Jimmy said. I could say the same if I decide to stab someone just because they mildly insulted me

Mildy insulting someone is not what happened here and you know it.

[Trollheart]

I think you tread a dangerous line when you say stuff like "actions have consequences". Whether it's what you're saying or not @DJChameleon , it seems like you're excusing/endorsing such behaviour. We have no idea of the feelings between Jews and Palestinians, so while they might be - I say, might be - justified in tearing down a few Palestinian flags, I don't think that gives anyone else the right to kick their heads in. You can't hold a whole people responsible for the acts of their government. What about those Jews who, after World War II, planned to poison the water supply in Berlin? Had they succeeeded, would you have endorsed that as an example of "actions have consequences" too? I think there has to be a line: people do not equal a country and many things are done in the name of people by their country with which they do not agree. And even if they do agree/support it, they're still not the ones perpetrating the deeds. Violence like this is never acceptable, under any circumstances, be it Rangers v Celtic, Juventus v Inter or Miss Thompson's Exclusive School for Girls XI v Mrs. Gladstone's Ladies Preparatory School United (I'm told there were three ambulances called to the last match!) and all such events should be labelled as football violence, or just violence full stop. You can't justify it, and you should not try to.

[jimmy jazz]

Mildy insulting someone is not what happened here and you know it.

The obvious point is that consequences aren't always proportionate to the action. Hence her exaggerated example to show you how daft your own logic was.

[DJChameleon]

The obvious point is that consequences aren't always proportionate to the action. Hence her exaggerated example to show you how daft your own logic was.

But they are though, people like to hide behind freedom of speech but freedom of speech isn't freedom from consequences. It's only to be applied to speaking out against the government.

If someone called me the n word and think everything is fine and they aren't going to get decked in the face then that's their issue.

[jimmy jazz]

lol what? Nobody has said anything about freedom of speech or freedom from consequences

[Marie Monday]

^yes. Jimmy literally just said it: actions have consequences, but the consequences should not be disproportionate

[DJChameleon]

^yes. Jimmy literally just said it: actions have consequences, but the consequences should not be disproportionate

I didn't refresh to see his reply because I posted mines

[DJChameleon]

I think you tread a dangerous line when you say stuff like "actions have consequences". Whether it's what you're saying or not @DJChameleon , it seems like you're excusing/endorsing such behaviour. We have no idea of the feelings between Jews and Palestinians, so while they might be - I say, might be - justified in tearing down a few Palestinian flags, I don't think that gives anyone else the right to kick their heads in. You can't hold a whole people responsible for the acts of their government. What about those Jews who, after World War II, planned to poison the water supply in Berlin? Had they succeeeded, would you have endorsed that as an example of "actions have consequences" too? I think there has to be a line: people do not equal a country and many things are done in the name of people by their country with which they do not agree. And even if they do agree/support it, they're still not the ones perpetrating the deeds. Violence like this is never acceptable, under any circumstances, be it Rangers v Celtic, Juventus v Inter or Miss Thompson's Exclusive School for Girls XI v Mrs. Gladstone's Ladies Preparatory School United (I'm told there were three ambulances called to the last match!) and all such events should be labelled as football violence, or just violence full stop. You can't justify it, and you should not try to.

The more I look into the story the more justified I feel the attacks against them were. Fuck around and find out. Violence begets violence. They started it and were being violent and racist in the first place. It's like they haven't heard eye for an eye before.

[jimmy jazz]

Palestine Chronicle? 

[DJChameleon]

Palestine Chronicle? 

I've seen other resources outside of this one that Skymedia is doing the typical media spin where they are just deciding to make the hooligans into victims just because they are Jewish and this is far from what happened but sure laugh at the source.

[Marie Monday]

Cite a better source then

[Trollheart]

Someone a lot smarter than me said "An eye for an eye and soon the world is blind."
Think it was my local chipper, but don't quote me.

Also, it's playground mentality to say "but they started it first!" Jesus Christ man: grow up, huh?

[DJChameleon]

Someone a lot smarter than me said "An eye for an eye and soon the world is blind."
Think it was my local chipper, but don't quote me.

Also, it's playground mentality to say "but they started it first!" Jesus Christ man: grow up, huh?

The middle east conflict is purely eye for an eye and retaliation. Zionists whole argument leads to but "Hamas started it first on October 7th" to justify the current genocide they are enacting in "self defense".

How is it self defense when they are the aggressors?