Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 111

Thread: Rolling Stones and the Boston Bomber cover.

  1. #51
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,193

    Re: Rolling Stones and the Boston Bomber cover.

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    Um, yes. I believe they are martyrs to those with similar mind sets. Did you know some serial killers and other horrible people actually get love letters while in prison, and even get married sometimes? There will always be those who admire these kind of people, obviously.
    So why don't you shut down all media and any mention of evil in the world. Can't show what happened on 9/11 because someone else may try to fly a plane into a building - can't show the Zimmerman trial, because it will breed hundreds of Zimmermans roaming the streets murdering innocent black kids, etc. etc.

    You really have a very poor opinion of your fellow Americans if you think they are so weak of will and self-respect that masses of them instantly become criminal minds because they see a picture of an evil person on the cover of a magazine.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  2. #52
    Sage
    Higgins86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,253

    Re: Rolling Stones and the Boston Bomber cover.

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    It's hard to understand or credit because it's simply nonsense. People like Tsarnaev have been gracing the cover of magazines for decades - Osama bin Laden, Timothy McVey, Saddam Hussien, Jeffrey Daumer, etc. etc. etc. Did they all become martyrs with huge followings?

    A little less drama and a lot more reason and sanity would be welcomed.
    But its rolling stone magazine and that is the reason people r reacting. If it had of been time magazine it would not of provoked the same reaction.

  3. #53
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Rolling Stones and the Boston Bomber cover.

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    Your point is perfect - people need to see that not all terrorists have beards to their bellies and turbans round their heads - some look like one of your kid's friends in school.
    That can all be accomplished without sensationalizing him on the cover. All this does is extend his 15 minutes of fame. All the media has done, and continues to do, is elevate him to celebrity status and that's exaclty what he wants. The fact that he wants it is the reason why I and others wish to deny him that and I will not purchase the magazine.

    No, my boycotting of the magazine won't stop others from reading it, but I will have the satisfaction of knowing I don't support his elevation.

  4. #54
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

    Re: Rolling Stones and the Boston Bomber cover.

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    So why don't you shut down all media and any mention of evil in the world. Can't show what happened on 9/11 because someone else may try to fly a plane into a building - can't show the Zimmerman trial, because it will breed hundreds of Zimmermans roaming the streets murdering innocent black kids, etc. etc.

    You really have a very poor opinion of your fellow Americans if you think they are so weak of will and self-respect that masses of them instantly become criminal minds because they see a picture of an evil person on the cover of a magazine.
    Lol! MASSIVE hyperbole.

  5. #55
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:33 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,006

    Re: Rolling Stones and the Boston Bomber cover.

    I notice that all the usual right wing sites are playing this up big time. I wonder how much of this attack on Rolling Stone is simply right wing payback for their brutal exposure of right wing icons like the NRA, ALEC, the Koch Brothers and other right wing gods?
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  6. #56
    free market communist
    Gardener's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    09-30-17 @ 12:27 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    26,661

    Re: Rolling Stones and the Boston Bomber cover.

    1101360413_400.jpg

    Did good Americans boycot Time magazine in 1936?
    "you're better off on Stormfront discussing how evil brown men are taking innocent white flowers." Infinite Chaos

  7. #57
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Rolling Stones and the Boston Bomber cover.

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    I notice that all the usual right wing sites are playing this up big time. I wonder how much of this attack on Rolling Stone is simply right wing payback for their brutal exposure of right wing icons like the NRA, ALEC, the Koch Brothers and other right wing gods?
    I don't think it has anything to do with left and right on this one. I know people on all sides that are boycotting Rolling Stones for this, including me. Continung the celebrity elevation is exactly what this scum bag wants. Why people want to accomodate a terrorist I have no idea.

  8. #58
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,193

    Re: Rolling Stones and the Boston Bomber cover.

    Quote Originally Posted by Higgins86 View Post
    But its rolling stone magazine and that is the reason people r reacting. If it had of been time magazine it would not of provoked the same reaction.
    That just proves the reaction is asinine, not the use of the pic.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  9. #59
    Sage
    Higgins86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,253

    Re: Rolling Stones and the Boston Bomber cover.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gardener View Post
    1101360413_400.jpg

    Did good Americans boycot Time magazine in 1936?
    well man of the year is just a reflection on the most news worthy person of that year.
    ‘This is not peace, it is an armistice for 20 years.’ (Ferdinand Foch. After the Treaty of Versailles, 1919).

  10. #60
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,193

    Re: Rolling Stones and the Boston Bomber cover.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    That can all be accomplished without sensationalizing him on the cover. All this does is extend his 15 minutes of fame. All the media has done, and continues to do, is elevate him to celebrity status and that's exaclty what he wants. The fact that he wants it is the reason why I and others wish to deny him that and I will not purchase the magazine.

    No, my boycotting of the magazine won't stop others from reading it, but I will have the satisfaction of knowing I don't support his elevation.
    I have no problem with that - at least you're not trying to force your opinion, your views on other members of society by trying to force stores from displaying and selling the magazine - It's perfectly reasonable to exercise your own censorship on a product you disagree with, but not reasonable for you to exercise your own level of censorship on other's free right to purchase.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •