mr.moralizer--- tell me what it feels like condoning dressing up in a SS uniform and torture, but acting like it's the end of the world when someone sends a very poor covered-crotch shot through the Internet---even while knowing it probably was a politically targeted forgery anyways. (one thing off---wtf sends those kinda shots. seriously. might as well go the whole way with your "mistress". To me, it reeks of a political attacker who is so timid and sexually regressed, anything penis-related makes him shiver in fear, even in the face of trying to humiliate his worst enemy. three guesses what party that "mature adult" votes for, and the first two don't count.)
Didn't Tom Cruise just dress up in a SS uniform for that movie Valkyrie? He must be ashamed. I don't think it's the end of the world. I would expect an adult to report sexual harassment to the authorities. Unless of course he is the guilty party.......... If it was a political attack then of course Weiner would tell the authorities. Politicians love to play the victim and liberals would want to put someone like Breitbart (I believe thats who the liberals are claiming "hacked" his twitter and FB account) behind bars. It is quite obvious that it wasn't a hack job and you're protecting some perv.
isn't tom cruise HIRED to do so. and wasn't his character THE NAZI GENERAL WHO TRIED TO KILL HITLER, and not a roving SS division that probably committed some of the worst war crimes in history? It is quite obvious that it wasn't a acting job and you're protecting some white supremacist Nazi.
Yeah, because people who voluntarily go to WW2 reenactments and willingly react the actions of a SS division famed for its' brutality have nothing sick within them. they just wanna relive "when amazing happened" tea party is full of nazis! and partiers! and SICK SICK people! NaziGate! blog research with sources that have been sued for libel! many open-ended questions---why has he not the called the cops on himself? Did Mr.Tea Party really want to kill every Slav? We're not saying he would, but something makes us think he does, and he hasn't said no. let the irrelevant FUN BEGIN!
You're in august company, fmullegun (fred?) the last person to accuse me of following them around the internet was DaDakota, and maybe one of the Rockets Dynasty sworn brotherhood. All this because you're afraid to admit it's possible to hack twitter? Good god, why? Seems like you miscalculated a bit, fred.
Actors take roles all the time that require them to play evil/sadistic characters with no redeeming qualities. There are lots of movies about real-life serial killers and the such. People go see these movies too. Do I really need to point some out?
I just don't see the similarity. DD just plain makes up stuff and revises his own history. You extrapolated me saying that twitter account hacking is a cliche to twitter never gets hacked. That is not a logical summary of what i said. Yeah me saying that people often claim a tweet wasn't them means that no one ever had someone get their password. You trying to make these connections that don't make any sense make me wonder what you are up to.
actors that are hired and paid vast sums of money, to play a part in a movie that ultimately vilifies their character and dumps their beliefs on the sordid ground. vs. people who voluntarily reenact being Nazis because they find some sick pleasure in glorifying it all. it's like the difference between being a prostitute and banging ugly dudes just...because. DO I REALLY NEED TO POINT SOME OUT?
So it is completely unethical and psychotic to play an SS officer in a reenactment......unless you're getting paid? Does that work for other ethical dilemmas? Say like sending a dic-pic to a girl. How do you know why he does it? Maybe he is glorifying the Allies by showing how reprehensible the enemy was.
Have you ever heard of Cape Cod? I own a summer home there. You are a pathetic piece of work, and your only avenue of relevancy is this bbs.
How is it "quite obvious" that it wasn't a hack job? Every ounce of evidence gathered so far seems to indicate that someone was obsessed with Anthony Weiner and hacked his account to send the photo to the girl in question. So it seems like maybe you're the one protecting the perv who really sent the picture. The only evidence you seem to rely on is that he hasn't contacted the authorities. Do you have some sort of link to a source that states this? (And no, a link to the blog of Joe Schmo who claims to be an American patriot is not a reliable source.) I don't know why I'm bothering though, because the truth is though that it doesn't matter how much evidence is presented, partisan hacks like you and Basso will never change your mind. He's a Democrat so, therefore, he is guilty in your mind.
I Agree. I never said otherwise what evidence are you referring to? How about Weiner's spokesperson: As far as evidence it looks like this (which has already been posted):
Tallanvor coming into a basso thread and accusing others of partisan protectionism is such a weakly constructed facade, so f**king predictable it even lacks the novelty which basso has worked so hard to cultivate. Seriously man, at least keep us guessing. Let's get one thing straight, Northside isn't protecting Weiner, Dems, or anyone in particular, he is pointing out your fallacious assumption that if all this is true (Weiner's 18 year old being his mistress and the hot picks being of himself), that it makes Weiner a pervert. It makes him a hypocrite, a poor role model, morally unsound, and ostensibly unfit to serve in public office, in addition to all sorts of much more politically toxic labels which could be of more use to GOPs trying to delegitimize Weiner's career, but he merely is accused of a consensual sexual relationship with an attractive 18 year old girl who posted pictures of herself that are far more explicit than what he is alleged to have sent. I know GOPs haven't had much to celebrate in the last 12 years, but trying to equate Weiner with To Catch a Predator, or any sexual pervert for that matter, is not only fallacious, but irresponsible. You shouldn't throw the pervert word around so loosely just for character assassination. But it's politics, and I know you will continue to wear your rose sunglasses. Just add some "I know this doesn't add up" Basso treble or "At least I'm trying to be reasonable" CaseyH bass to the mix. You're putting me to sleep.
let's see... getting pleasure from simulating the actions of a slaughtering machine-like unit that committed multiple war crimes. or getting pleasure from sending awkward pictures of your covered-up dick in an attempt to please a young woman you may have a chance at having sex with (the "cyber-mistress" that has never met him and vividly disavows everything lolololol) yeah, both are socially awkward, devious, and not exactly behavior you'd expect from a leader. but I know which one I'm more comfortable with. (hint: not the one that thinks WW2 is "good times.") Maybe Rep. Weiner is making a deep and sordid political statement about how the American emphasis on covering and repressing sexuality (a perfectly healthy and natural activity) has led to a set of people that regard a man running a sword through another man as more suitable for children to watch then two women kissing. Maybe he was quietly pointing out how it is so sad that sex somehow loses to violence in terms of base animal instinct:and how some Americans have grown to encourage hate, rather than love. BUT I DOUBTS IT
We can argue what the word 'pervert' means if you want. I don't associate it just with being a pedophile. You missed the point. Some unethical act doesn't become ethical just because you are getting paid (usually). This would be the trait of an unprincipled person.
Yeah, so Tom Cruise is a monster for playing the guy who ends up killing Hitler and getting paid. (Von Stauffenberg incidentally, was a Catholic aristocrat who hated the Nazis and ESPECIALLY hated the SS--->maybe why he tried to kill Hitler and remove the Nazi Party from power? so to suggest that Tom Cruise put on a SS uniform is to be patently and blatantly unaware of history. He in fact wears the regular gray Wehrmacht tunic rather than the distinctive dark SS tunic marked by the double lightning insignia. I let it slide the first time you asserted this out of a bit of niceness, but honestly, now I just don't give a s*** lol.) money can make people do funny things. doesn't make it less unethical. more justifiable though. who can offer any reasonable defense of someone doing something so blatantly unethical with no pay though? clearly you try. I applaud your partisan stand on morals. it's so...inspiring.
he didn't kill hitler. So if money doesn't make it more or less ethical and playing a SS officer in a WWII reenactment is unethical. Then it is safe to say you think Ralph Fiennes was unethical in playing SS officer Amon Goth (convicted of murdering thousands) in Schindler's List?
