Things that make you go What the F**k?

[Roesider]

Anyone supporting the showing of the film "Cuties" on Netflix.

Hopefully such folk aren't involved with any youth groups.

I assume you have watched it and can explain why you want it banned. Surely you arent repeating a moral panic you read elsewhere

If it's not evident to you why it should be banned not much point in debating it.

That approach might work on Qanon where the campaign started. You want something you haven't seen banned and can't explain why.

If you think it's harmless Baile explain to me why it shouldn't be banned.

[Baile Brigín 2]

Anyone supporting the showing of the film "Cuties" on Netflix.

Hopefully such folk aren't involved with any youth groups.

I assume you have watched it and can explain why you want it banned. Surely you arent repeating a moral panic you read elsewhere

If it's not evident to you why it should be banned not much point in debating it.

That approach might work on Qanon where the campaign started. You want something you haven't seen banned and can't explain why.

If you think it's harmless Baile explain to me why it shouldn't be banned.

Its not up to me to explain why something shouldn't be banned. Its up to you to justify why it should. You admit you haven't seen it, so you are following others, and the campaign statred in a very dark place

[Roesider]

Anyone supporting the showing of the film "Cuties" on Netflix.

Hopefully such folk aren't involved with any youth groups.

I assume you have watched it and can explain why you want it banned. Surely you arent repeating a moral panic you read elsewhere

If it's not evident to you why it should be banned not much point in debating it.

That approach might work on Qanon where the campaign started. You want something you haven't seen banned and can't explain why.

If you think it's harmless Baile explain to me why it shouldn't be banned.

Its not up to me to explain why something shouldn't be banned. Its up to you to justify why it should. You admit you haven't seen it, so you are following others, and the campaign statred in a very dark place

Campaign started in a very dark place? The filming of this started in a very dark place and is still there.

Hoping the authorities are taking note of those watching it.

[Roesider]

People blocking emergency department in Los Angeles to prevent police getting urgent medical treatment after they were shot in their patrol car. Disgusting.


https://abcnews.go.com/US/los-angeles-sheriffs-deputies-shot-ambush-critical-condition/story?id=72978931

[haranguerer]

You need to work on your comprehension. That doesn't appear to be what happened going by the link you've posted and further reading it inspired. Commonsense would also suggest protesters would be doing well to beat the ambulance to the hospital, especially because presumably they'd have had to wait to hear about the shooting. And what hospital they were in. Obviously not agreeing with the protest at a hospital, but it doesn't appear to have had the purpose you say.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/la-hospital-protesters-block-police-er-shooting-compton-b434035.html

[haranguerer]

People blocking emergency department in Los Angeles to prevent police getting urgent medical treatment after they were shot in their patrol car. Disgusting.


https://abcnews.go.com/US/los-angeles-sheriffs-deputies-shot-ambush-critical-condition/story?id=72978931

And its just gotten more 'interesting' - have a look at this

https://twitter.com/josie_huang/status/1305261859155505153

You wouldn't think the cops could manage to be the bad guys of that script, but yep, they managed it. although i suppose the script as you had it was largely invented.

[johnnycool]

I see that the PSNI have scooped the dickhead that may have let a young child to drive his lorry along the M1. 🤯 Wab

https://www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/belfast-news/young-boy-driving-lorry-video-18919244#ICID=Android_BelfastLiveNewsApp_AppShare

What the f**k is wrong with people?

I don’t know what is more stupid: allowing a lad to drive a lorry or putting the video of it online.

There's another video doing the rounds of a wee girl driving a lorry as well. The Da is in the video.

Thick as shít.

[Baile Brigín 2]

Anyone supporting the showing of the film "Cuties" on Netflix.

Hopefully such folk aren't involved with any youth groups.

I assume you have watched it and can explain why you want it banned. Surely you arent repeating a moral panic you read elsewhere

If it's not evident to you why it should be banned not much point in debating it.

That approach might work on Qanon where the campaign started. You want something you haven't seen banned and can't explain why.

If you think it's harmless Baile explain to me why it shouldn't be banned.

Its not up to me to explain why something shouldn't be banned. Its up to you to justify why it should. You admit you haven't seen it, so you are following others, and the campaign statred in a very dark place

Campaign started in a very dark place? The filming of this started in a very dark place and is still there.

Hoping the authorities are taking note of those watching it.

Its a Qanon conspiracy theory, obseesed with peados that lot.

You still haven't bothered with the why bit. Just trust you?

[five points]

Campaign started in a very dark place? The filming of this started in a very dark place and is still there.

Hoping the authorities are taking note of those watching it.

Its a Qanon conspiracy theory, obseesed with peados that lot.

You still haven't bothered with the why bit. Just trust you?

The same was probably said about Johnny Rotten in 1978 when he dared mention the rumours surrounding Jimmy Savile. How could a dirty, and probably paedo obsessed, punk like Rotten attack a national treasure?
https://louderthanwar.com/interesting-1978-clip-of-johnny-rotten-warning-about-jimmy-savile/

[J70]

Campaign started in a very dark place? The filming of this started in a very dark place and is still there.

Hoping the authorities are taking note of those watching it.

Its a Qanon conspiracy theory, obseesed with peados that lot.

You still haven't bothered with the why bit. Just trust you?

The same was probably said about Johnny Rotten in 1978 when he dared mention the rumours surrounding Jimmy Savile. How could a dirty, and probably paedo obsessed, punk like Rotten attack a national treasure?
https://louderthanwar.com/interesting-1978-clip-of-johnny-rotten-warning-about-jimmy-savile/

Which means what?

Plenty of at-the-time unsupported allegations have turned out to be true. Plenty more have not.

Should each case not be taken on its merits?

If Roesider is pontificating on the WTF thread that we should all be outraged about this film (and he/she may well be correct), is it not fair to ask him/her exactly what the problem is?

[Milltown Row2]

I see that the PSNI have scooped the dickhead that may have let a young child to drive his lorry along the M1. 🤯 Wab

https://www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/belfast-news/young-boy-driving-lorry-video-18919244#ICID=Android_BelfastLiveNewsApp_AppShare

What the f**k is wrong with people?

I don’t know what is more stupid: allowing a lad to drive a lorry or putting the video of it online.

There's another video doing the rounds of a wee girl driving a lorry as well. The Da is in the video.

Thick as shít.

Seen, what the f**k is wrong with these people?

[five points]

Which means what?

...

Should each case not be taken on its merits?

It means exactly this: Each case should indeed be taken on its merits.

It's ridiculous and dangerous to dismiss public concerns because of where they first originated.

[J70]

Which means what?

...

Should each case not be taken on its merits?

It means exactly this: Each case should indeed be taken on its merits.

It's ridiculous and dangerous to dismiss public concerns because of where they first originated.

Yes, a broken clock is right twice a day. However, its perfectly valid to harbour strong doubts and suspicions of the motives and authenticity of claims originating from movements like QAnon.

[five points]

Which means what?

...

Should each case not be taken on its merits?

It means exactly this: Each case should indeed be taken on its merits.

It's ridiculous and dangerous to dismiss public concerns because of where they first originated.

Yes, a broken clock is right twice a day. However, its perfectly valid to harbour strong doubts and suspicions of the motives and authenticity of claims originating from movements like QAnon.

There are better hills to die on than defending or equivocating about child pornography.

[J70]

Which means what?

...

Should each case not be taken on its merits?

It means exactly this: Each case should indeed be taken on its merits.

It's ridiculous and dangerous to dismiss public concerns because of where they first originated.

Yes, a broken clock is right twice a day. However, its perfectly valid to harbour strong doubts and suspicions of the motives and authenticity of claims originating from movements like QAnon.

There are better hills to die on than defending or equivocating about child pornography.

Was anyone defending or equivocating about child pornography?