"Stupid wingnut says something stupid" thread

[Junkenstein]

http://www.jpost.com/Not-Just-News/WATCH-Egyptian-academic-demands-Jews-give-back-gold-stolen-during-the-Exodus-375282

...(Jews who left) during the Exodus stole Egyptian gold and treasures and must be made to pay back what they took - with interest, an Egyptian political scientist has claimed.

Ammar Ali Hassan told Egypt's Channel 1 in a July interview translated by MEMRI, "We know for a fact that Moses was in this land. Most of the Jews who left Egypt to wander in the Sinai Desert were the Jews who defied Moses and rejected his preachings."

Are we actually at the point now where any old crazy shit said by anyone claiming to be some kind of expert is news? It feels like we are.

[Cain]

"Translated by MEMRI" should make you pause.  MEMRI is an Israeli "think tank" staffed to the brim with former IDF intelligence and Mossad people.  Under the guise of providing "translation services" they basically wage propaganda warfare on behalf of the Israeli government.

[Junkenstein]

Ah. Well, that explains that somewhat. Appreciated.

[Cain]

Which is not to say some idiot in Egypt didn't voice an opinion along those lines.

But basically, MEMRI trawls the cranks and lunatics of the Arab world, the sort of Daily Mail and Express op-eds of the Middle East, mistranslates them as badly as possible to make the statements look even more negative, then releases them in order to discredit Arab populations as superstitious and ignorant savages.

[Junkenstein]

Can you prosecute Maher for something yet? Please?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2780960/It-s-gross-s-racist-Ben-Affleck-clashes-guest-Bill-Maher-talk-claims-Islam-motherload-bad-ideas-host-compares-religion-Mafia.html

(Yes, it's a bad day when you're 1)getting your news from the Daily Heil and 2)Agreeing with Ben Affleck.

'Or how about the more than a billion people who aren't fanatical, who don't punish women, who just want to go to school, have some sandwiches, and don't do any of the things you say all Muslims do?' Affleck adds.
Maher responds to this by saying: 'One reason they (other views) don't get exposed is because they are afraid to speak out. Because it's the only religion that acts like the Mafia. That will f***ing kill if you say the wrong thing, draw the wrong picture or write the wrong book.'

Bonus idiocy - Interview features Sam Harris.

[Cain]

Yeah, it's good no other religions ever act like the Mafia.

[Junkenstein]

Perish the thought.

I can't help but wonder how these kind of clowns would react if you explained about murderous Buddhist monks and such. Actually, that's an idea. I'd pay money to see Buddhists get the same treatment Muslims get from Fox. You know, for fairness and balance.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Can you prosecute Maher for something yet? Please?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2780960/It-s-gross-s-racist-Ben-Affleck-clashes-guest-Bill-Maher-talk-claims-Islam-motherload-bad-ideas-host-compares-religion-Mafia.html

(Yes, it's a bad day when you're 1)getting your news from the Daily Heil and 2)Agreeing with Ben Affleck.

'Or how about the more than a billion people who aren't fanatical, who don't punish women, who just want to go to school, have some sandwiches, and don't do any of the things you say all Muslims do?' Affleck adds.
Maher responds to this by saying: 'One reason they (other views) don't get exposed is because they are afraid to speak out. Because it's the only religion that acts like the Mafia. That will f***ing kill if you say the wrong thing, draw the wrong picture or write the wrong book.'

Bonus idiocy - Interview features Sam Harris.

One of my classmates looooooves Sam Harris and I haven't had the heart to tell her that I think he's kind of a chode.

[Junkenstein]

The "I can't even" files, 776221sdj/B:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-29639956

Author John Grisham has criticised the US justice system for handing down "harsh" prison sentences to those viewing indecent images of children.

"We have prisons now filled with guys my age. Sixty-year-old white men in prison who've never harmed anybody, would never touch a child," he told the Telegraph.

"But they got online one night and started surfing around, probably had too much to drink or whatever, and pushed the wrong buttons, went too far and got into child porn."

[Cain]

Well...I'm not sure of US law in this regard, and I'm going off simply what you've quoted there.

But if US law is the same as UK law, then, no matter what, whether it's by accident or legitimate research (say, as part of a law firm or child advocacy group), no matter who you are or what circumstance it occurs under, accessing child porn is illegal and so long as there is proof you did it, there are no mitigating circumstances which allow you to avoid or reduce your sentence.

Intent does not apply at all to child pornography, and I can understand why that is.  On the other hand, apparently you can rape children for decades if you're a celebrity without suffering any ill consequences, so there does seem to be something of a discrepancy here.  And furthermore, how many actual cases of this have occured?  Any innocent person in prison is a tragedy, a truly vile criminal act.  But does it happen that often, with this particular offence?  I don't know.

[Junkenstein]

Fair comment.

Let's add some further context to the quote:

He said a "good buddy" of his had been imprisoned for three years for viewing child pornography on a website labelled "sixteen-year-old wannabe hookers" when his drinking was out of control.

"We have prisons now filled with guys my age. Sixty-year-old white men in prison who've never harmed anybody, would never touch a child," he told the Telegraph.

"But they got online one night and started surfing around, probably had too much to drink or whatever, and pushed the wrong buttons, went too far and got into child porn."

US judges had "gone crazy" during the last 30 years, he added.

"I have no sympathy for real paedophiles. God, please lock those people up. But so many of these guys do not deserve harsh prison sentences, and that's what they're getting."

To me, this sounds like the man has had a couple too many drinks and looked at questionable content. It's the exact kind of behaviour you'd expect to see when someone's worried they might get a knock on the door over their browsing history.

The other thing is the "My buddy looked at 16yearoldwannabehookers.com while drunk and is now in jail. This seems unfair to me". Have you ever been so drunk that you've just been feeling crazy and wanted to have a laugh looking at child porn? I haven't.

The final bit is the fear. He's identifying and it again, seem to me to be sympathising with other celebrities around his age who are facing uncomfortable questions and jail over their activities. He's attacking an apparent prison pipeline but this is surely far from the largest feeder to prisons. In fact, based on the numbers of people in jail for offences, it's probably one of the smallest pipelines. When compared to say Drugs, debt or misbehaving in school.

Overall, it just seems to be another stunning example of a generational gap in thinking. Men, particularly in their late 50's + seem to be coming out with this kind of shit rather frequently and at best it's minimising a horrific crime and at worst justifying it as somehow acceptable, in the right context.

If he want's to talk about the number of folk in prison, fine. That's certainly worth discussing. You want to talk about a realistic way to reform and rehabilitate convicted paedophiles? Sure. The current system is a joke and just warehouses them in an increasingly untenable way. You want to tell me your buddy has a drinking problem and was looking at child porn and shouldn't be in jail for that? Well, now we have a bit of a problem.

Let's put it this way :

If I told you I had a good friend who is now in jail because he looked a a website with a name close to the above, what would you:
A - Think of me
B- Think of my friend.

I doubt it would be positive.

[Cain]

Ah, well, in that context, yeah, that's pretty shitty.

I think there is a valid point (in the way I put it), but obviously that's quite tainted and self-serving given the circumstances.

[Junkenstein]

Well at least it's another name to add to the list of people likely to get a knock on the door.

Still got money on Bruce. Somewhat surprised there's been no more on Cliff. He's probably the only accused so far able to afford a decent lawyer.

[Cain]

I still think Bruce is more of a tall leggy blonde kind of guy.  Like Rod Stewart, only with even less musical talent (yes, this is possible). 

Surprising the papers aren't talking more about Cliff, but as you say, he can afford the best lawyers money can buy.  His legal team have probably put the police-media leak machine on the defensive, knowing any screwup will be used to delay or throw the trial.

[Junkenstein]

Assuming it even gets that far. I would suspect he's got access to the finest fixers around as well so any evidence is probably disappearing as quickly as it is found.