Originally posted by Robtard
Ask Surtur, he's the one making a "big deal" out of it. Milo fans be weird.
Lol what? You made the big deal out of it, not me. I said I don't condone what he said. You are running around like this in multiple topics.
Even pointing out the hypocrisy of how some view pedophiles, in your crazy mind, is some staunch defense of Milo and his actions, while at the same time a decree that the subject *never* be mentioned again.
Originally posted by Surtur
I said "people like him" are necessary. I specifically phrased it that way so you wouldn't take it I meant him specifically, but you did anyways. If I meant him specifically I would say what you just claimed I said: he's necessary.But no, people like him are necessary, and I explained what I meant: people who point out SJW bullshit.
That's in your revision, previously you said "he's necessary", referring specifically to Milo. Do you deny saying this?
Originally posted by Robtard
That's in your revision, previously you said "he's necessary", referring specifically to Milo. Do you deny saying this?
You've gone crazy:
Originally posted by Surtur
Yes, and I still feel people like him are necessary. Not the pedophilia part obviously, but the calling out of political correctness, etc.We need people like that. They aren't my heroes or anything, but we do need people to speak up and call it out.
Milo himself is done for, but we need to still nip this stuff in the butt completely.
There is no "he's necessary". I said people like him, there is no revision, again: people LIKE him. I even say Milo himself is done, but we still need people to nip this in the butt. I was talking about the need for people who espouse similar views on SJWs. I even said "not the pedophilia part" since I know if I didn't you'd come in with "Surtur just said pedophiles in general are necessary!!".
I even then further explained what I meant, multiple times.
Originally posted by RobtardI'm interested to see whether Milo will survive this, it's fascinating that in this day age showing seeming support for pedophilia is about the only thing you can't get away with.
My comment wasn't just to Surtur, there are a few Milophiles in here, though I suspect they'll soon distance themselves and pretend they never were. But lolz, his fascination with Tucker is both hilarious and disturbing.Milo has issues:
But in the tape, [b]the fast-talking polemicist is clear that he has no problem with older men abusing children as young as 13
, which he then conflates with relationships between older and younger gay men who are of consenting age.“No, no, no. You’re misunderstanding what pedophilia means,†Mr. Yiannopoulos says on the tape, in which he is talking to radio hosts in a video chat. “Pedophilia is not a sexual attraction to somebody 13 years old who is sexually mature. Pedophilia is attraction to children who have not reached puberty,†he adds, dismissing the fact that 13-year-olds are children.
The notion of consent, he says, is "arbitrary and oppressive."-snip
Full Story Here [/B]
Originally posted by Beniboybling
I'm interested to see whether Milo will survive this, it's fascinating that in this day age showing seeming support for pedophilia is about the only thing you can't get away with.
This is indeed an interesting phenomenon and you have to wonder the effect Hollywood potentially has.
See, for example: Meryl Streeps virtue signaling over Trump, but giving Roman Polanski a standing ovation.
Will Milo survive? I seriously doubt it. Most colleges now aren't going to want to go near him, and most conservatives are not going to come speak out and berate them for not wanting him due to his views on this stuff.
Originally posted by Surtur
You've gone crazy:There is no "he's necessary". I said people like him, there is no revision, again: people LIKE him. I even say Milo himself is done, but we still need people to nip this in the butt. I was talking about the need for people who espouse similar views on SJWs. I even said "not the pedophilia part" since I know if I didn't you'd come in with "Surtur just said pedophiles in general are necessary!!".
I even then further explained what I meant, multiple times.
Surtur trying to revision what he said and it failing. Quote provided as proof:
Originally posted by Surtur
He's necessary, and why? Shows us the true colors of douches on the left, consistently.
Yes, you were referring to Milo in that quote above. Drown in your lies and shame, sport.
Lmao, so you were asking if I said he was necessary PRIOR to this revelation? Yes.
I clearly thought you were referring to after it, which is why I gave you the requote.
So yeah I'm with the other poster, what are you whining over? That on February 4th I said it? I don't deny that.
I'm denying that I'm still suggesting he is specifically necessary. So there wasn't a lie, just you b*tching about stuff said nearly 3 weeks before this revelation.
Originally posted by SurturOh Surt, you can't help but make everything a partisan issue, can you?
This is indeed an interesting phenomenon and you have to wonder the effect Hollywood potentially has.See, for example: Meryl Streeps virtue signaling over Trump, but giving Roman Polanski a standing ovation.
Will Milo survive? I seriously doubt it. Most colleges now aren't going to want to go near him, and most conservatives are not going to come speak out and berate them for not wanting him due to his views on this stuff.
That said, you're probably right. The newspapers are already writing his obituaries.
Originally posted by SurturTrue. But on that topic, do you think its now hypocritical for those honest free speech enablers on the right to deny him platforms to speak? I wonder how Milo will spin this, how will he blame it all on the left when conservatives start shutting it down too?
Everything these days is turned into a partisan issue.
Originally posted by BeniboyblingLiterally brought that up in the Berkeley thread and he dodged with his usual "you triggered!" tactic. Anything to defend his hero.
True. But on that topic, do you think its now hypocritical for those honest free speech enablers on the right to deny him platforms to speak?
Originally posted by Beniboybling
True. But on that topic, do you think its now hypocritical for those honest free speech enablers on the right to deny him platforms to speak? I wonder how Milo will spin this, how will he blame it all on the left when conservatives start shutting it down too?
Just curious: you feel comparing the people who invited him deciding to disinvite him(that is their right) to an instance where an event had to be cancelled out of safety concerns cuz people showed up and began to burn and destroy shit..is valid and the same? You, an adult apparently capable of logic, truly feel that way? I find that interesting to be perfectly honest.
Originally posted by SurturWhat? Why must you always answer a question with a question? I'm not talking about anything like that, I'm talking, specifically, about people denying him a platform to speak because of his recently expressed views.
Just curious: you feel comparing the people who invited him deciding to disinvite him(that is their right) to an instance where an event had to be cancelled out of safety concerns cuz people showed up and began to burn and destroy shit..is valid and the same? You, an adult apparently capable of logic, truly feel that way? I find that interesting to be perfectly honest.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
What? Why must you always answer a question with a question? I'm not talking about anything like that, I'm talking, specifically, about people denying him a platform to speak because of his recently expressed views.
But people say free speech should be allowed as long as you aren't inciting others violence or anything shady like that.
If Milo said "it's okay to kill people you disagree with" that would be an issue. Just like if he said "molesting kids is okay" that is a problem, that is endorsing it.
You are acting like conservatives wanna be able to shout "fire!" in a crowded theater or some shit and have it be okay.