Offensive Avatars

i agree.
somebody needs to make a picture of osamabama getting it from behind by mother teresa with a strap on dildo.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

But I'm not.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

clearly this is a racist statement.
i hope you get banned AND sued.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I've only used a Hitler avatar the once when I argued over it with Enmos - I maintain copies of my avatars so I don't need to depend on memory to recall another one. I also provide links to support my claims

Meanwhile just to be clear. I do not consider the above picture as offensive and see nothing wrong with using it as a demonstration of freedom of expression. I am not sure why anyone would object to it in any case.

But please continue to enlighten us with your "truths" such as

Let me guess: that avatar was just another thing you happened to see while I was on ignore - long enough to complain about it at any rate. How many years have you been commenting and reporting on my posts while having me on ignore?

 

Is that Donald Pleasance stood at the side of the car?

 

Hard to tell, are they in front of a screen? It looks like an old fashioned movie set, with the dull background

 

Yeah, it's hard to say without seeing the image, and our eyewitness phlogistician didn't describe that well what was on screen.

Usual problem analysing such things, eye witnesses!

 

i am not convinced by the "evidence" offered. I'm just a guy that knows enough science, and it rational enough to be a skeptic. I'm not gullible, prone to fantasy, nor do I want to believe. That's who I am.

Show me something of merit

Evidence for claim is nonexistent, and consists solely of your own "eye witness report". That is not satisfactory, and you know it.

You seem to have a lower standard of what constitutes evidence

you still haven't managed to dig up any vaguely credible "evidence", nor make a postulation that survives scrutiny?

All you have is anecdotal evidence? How about some real data?

/snicker

 

it is?
since when was it illegal to trash political and/or religious leaders?

your logic escapes me.

 

well see sam you aren't giving appropriate credit.
that is actually stryder on the left, james (standing), and of course plasma.
i'm not positive but i believe you can glimpse the mod team in the background.

 

Why are you quoting me out of context? Because you can't make a point honestly?

 

Again, quoting out of context. Can't you make a point honestly?

SAM used a picture of Hitler similar to the above. She's now trying to re-write history and say it was a bobblehead. She changed it to that after the initial complaint. I don't know why she can't just admit what she did, but she's SAM, and honesty isn't something to be expected.

 

Mostly I am missing the whole point of the argument. Since I keep copies of my avatar out of habit, I merely popped into the folder and presented the one I used.

BUT​

What difference does it make which picture of Hitler it is? All of them are interchangeable as far as my point is concerned i.e. "offensive" avatar

So is all the "evil" of Hitler condensed into his mustache/salute?

Is this a benevolent Hitler?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

since you insist...you come off like a hypocritical woo woo

 

How exactly? Because you dishonestly misquoted me? How does that work?

 

you deride eyewitness accounts as unreliable (as evinced by your quotes) yet hold your own account as infallible (as evinced by your accusation)

show me the evidence
your word aint shit

ahh
sounds like the deluded fanaticism of a zealot

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

but she's SAM, and honesty isn't something to be expected.​

 

Is this avator offensive if so I will change it.
Just wondering? Thx.

 

What is this?

Is this annual Opening of the Old Wounds, and its attendant ritual, the Pouring On of the Salts? Timeless traditions...

4 eyewitnesses with similar testimony, are deemed unworthy to the non-eyewitness who feels differently. After all, the five senses are fooled and unreliable and all that good stuff.
Along comes a fifth eyewitness, whose testimony corroborates the preconception of the non-eyewitness.
Eyewitness #5 has a far greater chance of having credible testimony, and thus a stunning reversal of laws once held sacred and true, and for a brief moment, human perception is inexplicably valid.

Amen.