Liam Neeson race row - he wanted to kill a black man!

dowie said:
When I started this thread I thought this would be a clear cut thing that almost everyone would agree on... but GD gonna GD...
Click to expand...
That was my first thought when I saw the thread title too. I get this forum is towards the right, like I am, and generally pours scorn on genuine SJW outcry issues, but to me this one is very different. To GD, it seems not.
 
dl8860 said:
That was my first thought when I saw the thread title too. I get this forum is towards the right, like I am, and generally pours scorn on genuine SJW outcry issues, but to me this one is very different. To GD, it seems not.
Click to expand...


Everyone is entitled to an opinion, whether it's right wrong, left, right. middle upstairs or down. We don't moderate those opinions but when members start getting personal, like the comment you just made, we step in.
 
Last edited:
h4rm0ny's post got deleted? That was genuinely the funniest thing I've read on this forum in a looonnngg time and I'm sure was said in jest as would happen in conversation. Extreme moderation is ruining the atmosphere of the forums, just like IRL I guess.
 
VincentHanna said:
White man not racist for wanting to kill random black people

Black man racist despite speeches like this:
Click to expand...

Rather ironic that, in the context of talking about past vs more recent actions you have choosen to comment as you have

Nelson Mandela started the terroist wing of the ANC splitting from the previous policy of non violent opposition to apartheid and it took a few years in prison before he had his 'rainbow nation' kumbar epiphany for the future of SA.. .

He was for decades a man of violence. In 1961, he broke with African National Congress colleagues who preached non-violence, creating a terrorist wing.

He later pleaded guilty in court to acts of public violence, and behind bars sanctioned more, including the 1983 Church St car bomb that killed 19 people.

Mandela even suggested cutting off the noses of blacks deemed collaborators. His then wife Winnie advocated "necklacing" instead - a burning tyre around the neck.

Mandela argued the apartheid regime left him no option but to fight violence with violence, but it is too easy to claim events proved him right. His legacy is not yet played out.
Click to expand...

Why does Mandela get a pass for previous actions in your view but not Neeson so much? Especially when the former acted on their violent impulses and the latter didn't (whether due to lack of opportunity and or perseverance)

I'm sure if Nelson had given a 100‰ truthful interview before his death there might be a few 'spicy' mentions on the matters of race. . and not just re whites and Asians but also the different groups of 'blacks' in SA with the ANC now representing little more that a nationalistic racist party for one particular numerically dominant group of blacks in SA.

Still Neeson was a massive fool to bring this up in an interview for a film. What was he thinking?
 
Caracus2k said:
Rather ironic that, in the context of talking about past vs more recent actions you have choosen to comment as you have

Nelson Mandela started the terroist wing of the ANC splitting from the previous policy of non violent opposition to apartheid and it took a few years in prison before he had his 'rainbow nation' kumbar epiphany for the future of SA.. .



Why does Mandela get a pass for previous actions in your view but not Neeson so much? Especially when the former acted on their violent impulses and the latter didn't (whether due to lack of opportunity and or perseverance)

I'm sure if Nelson had given a 100‰ truthful interview before his death there might be a few 'spicy' mentions on the matters of race. . and not just re whites and Asians but also the different groups of 'blacks' in SA with the ANC now representing little more that a nationalistic racist party for one particular numerically dominant group of blacks in SA.

Still Neeson was a massive fool to bring this up in an interview for a film. What was he thinking?
Click to expand...
Everybody seems to give Mandela a pass for his history or terrorism
 
This seems to be an appropriate thread to post this in. Im sure some feathers will be ruffled.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...e-the-hate-white-supremacist-tattoo-cover-ups
Despite no longer being associated with the Klan, Garret says he still thought very much like a racist. Until one day, over a dinner of baked chicken and fries, Garret’s beliefs about white supremacy were abruptly challenged.

At first, his landlord – a middle-aged Muslim man from Turkey named Himmet Özdemir who lived downstairs – asked Garret for some computer help. From there, Özdemir regularly hired Garret to fix his computer issues. He initially felt strange in the presence of this darker-skinned foreigner, Garret says. “But I needed the money.”

Özdemir eventually invited Garret to his house for dinner with his family. “I was still sitting there, waiting for him to fulfill all of the stereotypes. I was waiting for him to be that horrible Muslim,” Garret recalls. “It didn’t happen. He was just nice and compassionate.

“I felt so ashamed, wrong, stupid and small that I had been expecting him to show his real face, while he was showing his real face the whole time. That’s when I realized I had been wrong about everything.”

Desperate to move on from his racist past, Garret decided it was time to cover up the “skinhead” tattoo spanning his upper arm. He desperately looked for a tattoo artist that would cover up the provocative marking.

“These tattoo artists would tell me: ‘You need to know exactly what you want,’ or ‘We don’t know how much it’s going to cost,’” Garret says. “I just told them to put a block bob over it. I didn’t care.”

The solid black banner that sits atop the word “skinhead” on Garret’s left arm was his first cover-up tattoo. “It looks pretty horrible,” Garret says, looking down his shoulder. “But at the time, all I wanted was for someone to make it go away, to make it easy.”
Click to expand...
No Im not saying Liam is racist and it seems to have been missed by some that he says he is ashamed at the thoughts he had.

On a side note Im not sure if Liam is trolling to be honest.
 
dowie said:
OK this isn't some unwarranted criticism from a gender studies professor or some triggered SJWs etc.. I'm actually quite shocked by this myself, both that someone would want to do something like this as in actively go out with a weapon wanting to have a confrontation in order to give an excuse to kill a random person, let alone specifically wanting that person to be of a specific race as some form of crude revenge and also that he'd readily admit to it as though people would empathise with it! As if this was the sort of thing that might just get brushed aside these days???

Am I wrong? Am I turning into an SJW myself? Please tell me none of you empathise with his mindset then?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-47117177
Click to expand...

Yadda said:
What a strange thing for him to bring up while promoting his film. I'm sure the female concerned is chuffed to bits.
Click to expand...

Apologies if it's already been said, but his films are very much targeted at a "Fox News" (and OcUK GD) audience, who will respond favourably to this dog-whistle hand-wringing.
 
garnett said:
Apologies if it's already been said, but his films are very much targeted at a "Fox News" (and OcUK GD) audience, who will respond favourably to this dog-whistle hand-wringing.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't fret too long I'm sure you will have the opportunity to indulge yourself soon enough in some "CNN news"/ SC circle whinning threads audience (see what I did there?) pleasing entertainment more attuned to people who extol the virtues of explicit racism in the here and now?

garnett said:
If your original point is to stand, you need to show why positive discrimination is isn't a reasonable response to discrimination.
Click to expand...
 
garnett said:
Apologies if it's already been said, but his films are very much targeted at a "Fox News" (and OcUK GD) audience, who will respond favourably to this dog-whistle hand-wringing.
Click to expand...

I'm sure they'll flock to the cinema to show their support and give "the SJW's" what for.

The racist dollar is strong.
 
Yadda said:
I'm sure they'll flock to the cinema to show their support and give "the SJW's" what for.

The racist dollar is strong.
Click to expand...

Think I'll wait till its on the Tele as the quality of Neeson films has generally been on the slide since the first 'Taken' film.

Perhaps you could offer some other examples of 'racist' films that did well at the box office?

Of the top of my head I'm sure we all remember 2018's hit Black Panther that explored racial purity, supremacy and ethno nationalism?
 
Funnily enough, I don't think I've ever seen a Neeson film.

Anyway, it's surely only a matter of time before the usual YouTube chuckle-***** suggest that the best way to get the "permanently offended SJW's screeching" (or whatever) is to go and watch the film.

"SJW's will HATE you for watching this film..."

You know, the usual garbage.
 
Tony Edwards said:
This seems to be an appropriate thread to post this in. Im sure some feathers will be ruffled.

Despite no longer being associated with the Klan, Garret says he still thought very much like a racist. Until one day, over a dinner of baked chicken and fries, Garret’s beliefs about white supremacy were abruptly challenged.

At first, his landlord – a middle-aged Muslim man from Turkey named Himmet Özdemir who lived downstairs – asked Garret for some computer help. From there, Özdemir regularly hired Garret to fix his computer issues. He initially felt strange in the presence of this darker-skinned foreigner, Garret says. “But I needed the money.”

Özdemir eventually invited Garret to his house for dinner with his family. “I was still sitting there, waiting for him to fulfill all of the stereotypes. I was waiting for him to be that horrible Muslim,” Garret recalls. “It didn’t happen. He was just nice and compassionate.

“I felt so ashamed, wrong, stupid and small that I had been expecting him to show his real face, while he was showing his real face the whole time. That’s when I realized I had been wrong about everything.”

Desperate to move on from his racist past, Garret decided it was time to cover up the “skinhead” tattoo spanning his upper arm. He desperately looked for a tattoo artist that would cover up the provocative marking.

“These tattoo artists would tell me: ‘You need to know exactly what you want,’ or ‘We don’t know how much it’s going to cost,’” Garret says. “I just told them to put a block bob over it. I didn’t care.”

The solid black banner that sits atop the word “skinhead” on Garret’s left arm was his first cover-up tattoo. “It looks pretty horrible,” Garret says, looking down his shoulder. “But at the time, all I wanted was for someone to make it go away, to make it easy.”
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I wonder what this guy expected?
 
Last edited:
Yadda said:
Funnily enough, I don't think I've ever seen a Neeson film.

Anyway, it's surely only a matter of time before the usual YouTube chuckle-***** suggest that the best way to get the "permanently offended SJW's screeching" (or whatever) is to go and watch the film.

"SJW's will HATE you for watching this film..."

You know, the usual garbage.
Click to expand...

I'll be eagerly scanning the usual channels on YouTube waiting for such a video.

I rather suspect the general reaction will be more one of ambivalence towards the film itself with a general consensus that Neeson has made a rather poor decision sharing this anecdote of his past thoughts/ actions.

The films that generally garner an 'anti SJW' campaign of promotion tend to be the ones where the subject matter of the films itself has been the cause of the controversy.

Of the top of my head an example being the promotion of the 'red pill' by certain outlets after the protests at screenings
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom