@Chizz whats funny about calling people nazi's i think its quite a strong word to call someone, a lot of people on here lost family members due to the "nazi's"
I can't and won't speak for the other posters who clicked "Like" or "LOL" on that post. But for me, the angst imbued in that three-word phrase, suffused with enraged feeling and barely-suppressed anger was comical.
That it was posted without quoting anyone else and appeared, at first glance, to be a propos precisely nothing at all, made it stand out even more.
The structure of adjective-adjective-noun added to the comic effect. It gave the noun "twat" enhanced dramatic effect, whereas (of course) one should be more startled at the second adjective ("nazi").
This gives the reader the juxtaposition of the offending word "twat" being imbued with greater dramatic resonance than the reader should expect from a sentence where the two other words are normally the centrepiece of an insulting epithet ("fucking" and "nazi").
The brilliant way in which the sentence rolls up, through "fucking" and onwards through "nazi", takes the reader on an anticipatory journey. That journey's tension should released by a hugely-significant culmination noun. But the reader's tension is left wanting, in that "twat" is a far tamer noun than the reader might have been expecting.
The sentence is left alone, so thinking about how that piece of offence might be resolved only adds to its piquancy. Does the subject take offence at the phrase? And if so, to which word? If he objects to "nazi", is he admitting he's a "fucking twat"? Or does he gainsay either of the other terms? In which case he's tacitly agreeing to his nazism. It's a tantalising opener to a short play which the reader has to complete himself.
So, in short, the brilliantly-written, pithy comment by @Wheresmeticket? was, to all intents and purposes, "funny". That's not to say some people also found offence in it and flagged it: not me. And others still merely "liked" it. I can't speak to their motives.
Does that answer your question fully?
cheers,
i do think its a very strong word to use as the nazis were responsible for the deaths of millions of people, tommy robinson is against the warped ideology behind people that have killed a lot of people in terrorist attacks.
warped ideology as in taking it very literally, as all religions are ridiculous if taken in there literal sense.
It is a strong word. Nazis were Nazis before they killed millions and the big Nazis were supported by lots of little nazis who believed in them or who jumped on the bandwagon for their own ends. The little nazis made the genocide possible.
tommy robinson/the edl arent responsible for the mass murder of anyone, dangerous extremist converts on the other hand, if they wanna blow themselves up to mince meat then fair enough, but this is england its what i call home and the last time i checked it was a christian country, so if they want to try and put there laws on our streets someone has to stand up to them?, or what shall we do all roll back and appease everything they want.
No, all I was saying is that nazis come from somewhere - they didn't start off by slaughtering millions. The people that profess Islam as an excuse for murdering are driven by a twisted ideology as well.
I don't consider this to be a Christian country, but if that is your faith I respect that.
maybe use the word racists, not saying that the edl doesnt have combat 18 sympathisers aswell as other backwards groups, but tommy robinson might be a bit of a thug but hes not a nazi.
i think he has some very good points and hes doing something about it, there was at least 5,000 on the streets saturday and i dont consider them nazis, there just people that are english and have had enough, i said this would happen eventually people start to have enough.
really? what would you consider it as maybe in the future we will have ramadam/eid as a public holiday, hopefully never in my lifetime.
Obviously having Ramadan as a public holiday would be ridiculous. But why would anyone object to Eid being a public holiday?
Wouldn't object at all, as long as we had St Georges Day, St Andrews Day, St David's Day, St Patricks Day, Diwali, Hanukkah, and May the Fourth as public holidays as well.
@Chizz whats funny about calling people nazi's i think its quite a strong word to call someone, a lot of people on here lost family members due to the "nazi's"
I can't and won't speak for the other posters who clicked "Like" or "LOL" on that post. But for me, the angst imbued in that three-word phrase, suffused with enraged feeling and barely-suppressed anger was comical.
That it was posted without quoting anyone else and appeared, at first glance, to be a propos precisely nothing at all, made it stand out even more.
The structure of adjective-adjective-noun added to the comic effect. It gave the noun "twat" enhanced dramatic effect, whereas (of course) one should be more startled at the second adjective ("nazi").
This gives the reader the juxtaposition of the offending word "twat" being imbued with greater dramatic resonance than the reader should expect from a sentence where the two other words are normally the centrepiece of an insulting epithet ("fucking" and "nazi").
The brilliant way in which the sentence rolls up, through "fucking" and onwards through "nazi", takes the reader on an anticipatory journey. That journey's tension should released by a hugely-significant culmination noun. But the reader's tension is left wanting, in that "twat" is a far tamer noun than the reader might have been expecting.
The sentence is left alone, so thinking about how that piece of offence might be resolved only adds to its piquancy. Does the subject take offence at the phrase? And if so, to which word? If he objects to "nazi", is he admitting he's a "fucking twat"? Or does he gainsay either of the other terms? In which case he's tacitly agreeing to his nazism. It's a tantalising opener to a short play which the reader has to complete himself.
So, in short, the brilliantly-written, pithy comment by @Wheresmeticket? was, to all intents and purposes, "funny". That's not to say some people also found offence in it and flagged it: not me. And others still merely "liked" it. I can't speak to their motives.
Does that answer your question fully?
cheers,
i do think its a very strong word to use as the nazis were responsible for the deaths of millions of people, tommy robinson is against the warped ideology behind people that have killed a lot of people in terrorist attacks.
warped ideology as in taking it very literally, as all religions are ridiculous if taken in there literal sense.
It is a strong word. Nazis were Nazis before they killed millions and the big Nazis were supported by lots of little nazis who believed in them or who jumped on the bandwagon for their own ends. The little nazis made the genocide possible.
tommy robinson/the edl arent responsible for the mass murder of anyone, dangerous extremist converts on the other hand, if they wanna blow themselves up to mince meat then fair enough, but this is england its what i call home and the last time i checked it was a christian country, so if they want to try and put there laws on our streets someone has to stand up to them?, or what shall we do all roll back and appease everything they want.
No, all I was saying is that nazis come from somewhere - they didn't start off by slaughtering millions. The people that profess Islam as an excuse for murdering are driven by a twisted ideology as well.
I don't consider this to be a Christian country, but if that is your faith I respect that.
maybe use the word racists, not saying that the edl doesnt have combat 18 sympathisers aswell as other backwards groups, but tommy robinson might be a bit of a thug but hes not a nazi.
i think he has some very good points and hes doing something about it, there was at least 5,000 on the streets saturday and i dont consider them nazis, there just people that are english and have had enough, i said this would happen eventually people start to have enough.
really? what would you consider it as maybe in the future we will have ramadam/eid as a public holiday, hopefully never in my lifetime.
Obviously having Ramadan as a public holiday would be ridiculous. But why would anyone object to Eid being a public holiday?
because i'm not Muslim and likewise wouldn't expect to go to a predominantly muslim country and expect to have the day off and celebrate it.
@Chizz whats funny about calling people nazi's i think its quite a strong word to call someone, a lot of people on here lost family members due to the "nazi's"
I can't and won't speak for the other posters who clicked "Like" or "LOL" on that post. But for me, the angst imbued in that three-word phrase, suffused with enraged feeling and barely-suppressed anger was comical.
That it was posted without quoting anyone else and appeared, at first glance, to be a propos precisely nothing at all, made it stand out even more.
The structure of adjective-adjective-noun added to the comic effect. It gave the noun "twat" enhanced dramatic effect, whereas (of course) one should be more startled at the second adjective ("nazi").
This gives the reader the juxtaposition of the offending word "twat" being imbued with greater dramatic resonance than the reader should expect from a sentence where the two other words are normally the centrepiece of an insulting epithet ("fucking" and "nazi").
The brilliant way in which the sentence rolls up, through "fucking" and onwards through "nazi", takes the reader on an anticipatory journey. That journey's tension should released by a hugely-significant culmination noun. But the reader's tension is left wanting, in that "twat" is a far tamer noun than the reader might have been expecting.
The sentence is left alone, so thinking about how that piece of offence might be resolved only adds to its piquancy. Does the subject take offence at the phrase? And if so, to which word? If he objects to "nazi", is he admitting he's a "fucking twat"? Or does he gainsay either of the other terms? In which case he's tacitly agreeing to his nazism. It's a tantalising opener to a short play which the reader has to complete himself.
So, in short, the brilliantly-written, pithy comment by @Wheresmeticket? was, to all intents and purposes, "funny". That's not to say some people also found offence in it and flagged it: not me. And others still merely "liked" it. I can't speak to their motives.
Does that answer your question fully?
cheers,
i do think its a very strong word to use as the nazis were responsible for the deaths of millions of people, tommy robinson is against the warped ideology behind people that have killed a lot of people in terrorist attacks.
warped ideology as in taking it very literally, as all religions are ridiculous if taken in there literal sense.
It is a strong word. Nazis were Nazis before they killed millions and the big Nazis were supported by lots of little nazis who believed in them or who jumped on the bandwagon for their own ends. The little nazis made the genocide possible.
tommy robinson/the edl arent responsible for the mass murder of anyone, dangerous extremist converts on the other hand, if they wanna blow themselves up to mince meat then fair enough, but this is england its what i call home and the last time i checked it was a christian country, so if they want to try and put there laws on our streets someone has to stand up to them?, or what shall we do all roll back and appease everything they want.
It's only eight days since a man who grew up in England, with similarly anti-Muslim views, tried very hard to kill several people in London.
anti-extremist not anti-muslim there is a difference, but as usual you will go down the route of keep repeating yourself until you make sense in your mind.
@Chizz whats funny about calling people nazi's i think its quite a strong word to call someone, a lot of people on here lost family members due to the "nazi's"
I can't and won't speak for the other posters who clicked "Like" or "LOL" on that post. But for me, the angst imbued in that three-word phrase, suffused with enraged feeling and barely-suppressed anger was comical.
That it was posted without quoting anyone else and appeared, at first glance, to be a propos precisely nothing at all, made it stand out even more.
The structure of adjective-adjective-noun added to the comic effect. It gave the noun "twat" enhanced dramatic effect, whereas (of course) one should be more startled at the second adjective ("nazi").
This gives the reader the juxtaposition of the offending word "twat" being imbued with greater dramatic resonance than the reader should expect from a sentence where the two other words are normally the centrepiece of an insulting epithet ("fucking" and "nazi").
The brilliant way in which the sentence rolls up, through "fucking" and onwards through "nazi", takes the reader on an anticipatory journey. That journey's tension should released by a hugely-significant culmination noun. But the reader's tension is left wanting, in that "twat" is a far tamer noun than the reader might have been expecting.
The sentence is left alone, so thinking about how that piece of offence might be resolved only adds to its piquancy. Does the subject take offence at the phrase? And if so, to which word? If he objects to "nazi", is he admitting he's a "fucking twat"? Or does he gainsay either of the other terms? In which case he's tacitly agreeing to his nazism. It's a tantalising opener to a short play which the reader has to complete himself.
So, in short, the brilliantly-written, pithy comment by @Wheresmeticket? was, to all intents and purposes, "funny". That's not to say some people also found offence in it and flagged it: not me. And others still merely "liked" it. I can't speak to their motives.
Does that answer your question fully?
cheers,
i do think its a very strong word to use as the nazis were responsible for the deaths of millions of people, tommy robinson is against the warped ideology behind people that have killed a lot of people in terrorist attacks.
warped ideology as in taking it very literally, as all religions are ridiculous if taken in there literal sense.
It is a strong word. Nazis were Nazis before they killed millions and the big Nazis were supported by lots of little nazis who believed in them or who jumped on the bandwagon for their own ends. The little nazis made the genocide possible.
tommy robinson/the edl arent responsible for the mass murder of anyone, dangerous extremist converts on the other hand, if they wanna blow themselves up to mince meat then fair enough, but this is england its what i call home and the last time i checked it was a christian country, so if they want to try and put there laws on our streets someone has to stand up to them?, or what shall we do all roll back and appease everything they want.
It's only eight days since a man who grew up in England, with similarly anti-Muslim views, tried very hard to kill several people in London.
anti-extremist not anti-muslim there is a difference, but as usual you will go down the route of keep repeating yourself until you make sense in your mind.
@Chizz whats funny about calling people nazi's i think its quite a strong word to call someone, a lot of people on here lost family members due to the "nazi's"
I can't and won't speak for the other posters who clicked "Like" or "LOL" on that post. But for me, the angst imbued in that three-word phrase, suffused with enraged feeling and barely-suppressed anger was comical.
That it was posted without quoting anyone else and appeared, at first glance, to be a propos precisely nothing at all, made it stand out even more.
The structure of adjective-adjective-noun added to the comic effect. It gave the noun "twat" enhanced dramatic effect, whereas (of course) one should be more startled at the second adjective ("nazi").
This gives the reader the juxtaposition of the offending word "twat" being imbued with greater dramatic resonance than the reader should expect from a sentence where the two other words are normally the centrepiece of an insulting epithet ("fucking" and "nazi").
The brilliant way in which the sentence rolls up, through "fucking" and onwards through "nazi", takes the reader on an anticipatory journey. That journey's tension should released by a hugely-significant culmination noun. But the reader's tension is left wanting, in that "twat" is a far tamer noun than the reader might have been expecting.
The sentence is left alone, so thinking about how that piece of offence might be resolved only adds to its piquancy. Does the subject take offence at the phrase? And if so, to which word? If he objects to "nazi", is he admitting he's a "fucking twat"? Or does he gainsay either of the other terms? In which case he's tacitly agreeing to his nazism. It's a tantalising opener to a short play which the reader has to complete himself.
So, in short, the brilliantly-written, pithy comment by @Wheresmeticket? was, to all intents and purposes, "funny". That's not to say some people also found offence in it and flagged it: not me. And others still merely "liked" it. I can't speak to their motives.
Does that answer your question fully?
cheers,
i do think its a very strong word to use as the nazis were responsible for the deaths of millions of people, tommy robinson is against the warped ideology behind people that have killed a lot of people in terrorist attacks.
warped ideology as in taking it very literally, as all religions are ridiculous if taken in there literal sense.
It is a strong word. Nazis were Nazis before they killed millions and the big Nazis were supported by lots of little nazis who believed in them or who jumped on the bandwagon for their own ends. The little nazis made the genocide possible.
tommy robinson/the edl arent responsible for the mass murder of anyone, dangerous extremist converts on the other hand, if they wanna blow themselves up to mince meat then fair enough, but this is england its what i call home and the last time i checked it was a christian country, so if they want to try and put there laws on our streets someone has to stand up to them?, or what shall we do all roll back and appease everything they want.
No, all I was saying is that nazis come from somewhere - they didn't start off by slaughtering millions. The people that profess Islam as an excuse for murdering are driven by a twisted ideology as well.
I don't consider this to be a Christian country, but if that is your faith I respect that.
maybe use the word racists, not saying that the edl doesnt have combat 18 sympathisers aswell as other backwards groups, but tommy robinson might be a bit of a thug but hes not a nazi.
i think he has some very good points and hes doing something about it, there was at least 5,000 on the streets saturday and i dont consider them nazis, there just people that are english and have had enough, i said this would happen eventually people start to have enough.
really? what would you consider it as maybe in the future we will have ramadam/eid as a public holiday, hopefully never in my lifetime.
Obviously having Ramadan as a public holiday would be ridiculous. But why would anyone object to Eid being a public holiday?
because i'm not Muslim and likewise wouldn't expect to go to a predominantly muslim country and expect to have the day off and celebrate it.
But would you *object* to Eid being a national holiday?
@Chizz whats funny about calling people nazi's i think its quite a strong word to call someone, a lot of people on here lost family members due to the "nazi's"
I can't and won't speak for the other posters who clicked "Like" or "LOL" on that post. But for me, the angst imbued in that three-word phrase, suffused with enraged feeling and barely-suppressed anger was comical.
That it was posted without quoting anyone else and appeared, at first glance, to be a propos precisely nothing at all, made it stand out even more.
The structure of adjective-adjective-noun added to the comic effect. It gave the noun "twat" enhanced dramatic effect, whereas (of course) one should be more startled at the second adjective ("nazi").
This gives the reader the juxtaposition of the offending word "twat" being imbued with greater dramatic resonance than the reader should expect from a sentence where the two other words are normally the centrepiece of an insulting epithet ("fucking" and "nazi").
The brilliant way in which the sentence rolls up, through "fucking" and onwards through "nazi", takes the reader on an anticipatory journey. That journey's tension should released by a hugely-significant culmination noun. But the reader's tension is left wanting, in that "twat" is a far tamer noun than the reader might have been expecting.
The sentence is left alone, so thinking about how that piece of offence might be resolved only adds to its piquancy. Does the subject take offence at the phrase? And if so, to which word? If he objects to "nazi", is he admitting he's a "fucking twat"? Or does he gainsay either of the other terms? In which case he's tacitly agreeing to his nazism. It's a tantalising opener to a short play which the reader has to complete himself.
So, in short, the brilliantly-written, pithy comment by @Wheresmeticket? was, to all intents and purposes, "funny". That's not to say some people also found offence in it and flagged it: not me. And others still merely "liked" it. I can't speak to their motives.
Does that answer your question fully?
cheers,
i do think its a very strong word to use as the nazis were responsible for the deaths of millions of people, tommy robinson is against the warped ideology behind people that have killed a lot of people in terrorist attacks.
warped ideology as in taking it very literally, as all religions are ridiculous if taken in there literal sense.
It is a strong word. Nazis were Nazis before they killed millions and the big Nazis were supported by lots of little nazis who believed in them or who jumped on the bandwagon for their own ends. The little nazis made the genocide possible.
tommy robinson/the edl arent responsible for the mass murder of anyone, dangerous extremist converts on the other hand, if they wanna blow themselves up to mince meat then fair enough, but this is england its what i call home and the last time i checked it was a christian country, so if they want to try and put there laws on our streets someone has to stand up to them?, or what shall we do all roll back and appease everything they want.
No, all I was saying is that nazis come from somewhere - they didn't start off by slaughtering millions. The people that profess Islam as an excuse for murdering are driven by a twisted ideology as well.
I don't consider this to be a Christian country, but if that is your faith I respect that.
maybe use the word racists, not saying that the edl doesnt have combat 18 sympathisers aswell as other backwards groups, but tommy robinson might be a bit of a thug but hes not a nazi.
i think he has some very good points and hes doing something about it, there was at least 5,000 on the streets saturday and i dont consider them nazis, there just people that are english and have had enough, i said this would happen eventually people start to have enough.
really? what would you consider it as maybe in the future we will have ramadam/eid as a public holiday, hopefully never in my lifetime.
Obviously having Ramadan as a public holiday would be ridiculous. But why would anyone object to Eid being a public holiday?
I guess I'd put st George's day as a public holiday ahead of Eid
@Chizz whats funny about calling people nazi's i think its quite a strong word to call someone, a lot of people on here lost family members due to the "nazi's"
I can't and won't speak for the other posters who clicked "Like" or "LOL" on that post. But for me, the angst imbued in that three-word phrase, suffused with enraged feeling and barely-suppressed anger was comical.
That it was posted without quoting anyone else and appeared, at first glance, to be a propos precisely nothing at all, made it stand out even more.
The structure of adjective-adjective-noun added to the comic effect. It gave the noun "twat" enhanced dramatic effect, whereas (of course) one should be more startled at the second adjective ("nazi").
This gives the reader the juxtaposition of the offending word "twat" being imbued with greater dramatic resonance than the reader should expect from a sentence where the two other words are normally the centrepiece of an insulting epithet ("fucking" and "nazi").
The brilliant way in which the sentence rolls up, through "fucking" and onwards through "nazi", takes the reader on an anticipatory journey. That journey's tension should released by a hugely-significant culmination noun. But the reader's tension is left wanting, in that "twat" is a far tamer noun than the reader might have been expecting.
The sentence is left alone, so thinking about how that piece of offence might be resolved only adds to its piquancy. Does the subject take offence at the phrase? And if so, to which word? If he objects to "nazi", is he admitting he's a "fucking twat"? Or does he gainsay either of the other terms? In which case he's tacitly agreeing to his nazism. It's a tantalising opener to a short play which the reader has to complete himself.
So, in short, the brilliantly-written, pithy comment by @Wheresmeticket? was, to all intents and purposes, "funny". That's not to say some people also found offence in it and flagged it: not me. And others still merely "liked" it. I can't speak to their motives.
Does that answer your question fully?
cheers,
i do think its a very strong word to use as the nazis were responsible for the deaths of millions of people, tommy robinson is against the warped ideology behind people that have killed a lot of people in terrorist attacks.
warped ideology as in taking it very literally, as all religions are ridiculous if taken in there literal sense.
It is a strong word. Nazis were Nazis before they killed millions and the big Nazis were supported by lots of little nazis who believed in them or who jumped on the bandwagon for their own ends. The little nazis made the genocide possible.
tommy robinson/the edl arent responsible for the mass murder of anyone, dangerous extremist converts on the other hand, if they wanna blow themselves up to mince meat then fair enough, but this is england its what i call home and the last time i checked it was a christian country, so if they want to try and put there laws on our streets someone has to stand up to them?, or what shall we do all roll back and appease everything they want.
No, all I was saying is that nazis come from somewhere - they didn't start off by slaughtering millions. The people that profess Islam as an excuse for murdering are driven by a twisted ideology as well.
I don't consider this to be a Christian country, but if that is your faith I respect that.
maybe use the word racists, not saying that the edl doesnt have combat 18 sympathisers aswell as other backwards groups, but tommy robinson might be a bit of a thug but hes not a nazi.
i think he has some very good points and hes doing something about it, there was at least 5,000 on the streets saturday and i dont consider them nazis, there just people that are english and have had enough, i said this would happen eventually people start to have enough.
really? what would you consider it as maybe in the future we will have ramadam/eid as a public holiday, hopefully never in my lifetime.
Obviously having Ramadan as a public holiday would be ridiculous. But why would anyone object to Eid being a public holiday?
because i'm not Muslim and likewise wouldn't expect to go to a predominantly muslim country and expect to have the day off and celebrate it.
But would you *object* to Eid being a national holiday?
What do you mean by 'object'?
Personally I would 'object' because where do you draw the line and on what basis is Eid being given public holiday status
Number of worshippers living in this country that follow islam? We could quite easily have national premiership day. Probably just as many premier league football fans across the country as there are muslims, maybe more. People treat football like a religion
@Chizz whats funny about calling people nazi's i think its quite a strong word to call someone, a lot of people on here lost family members due to the "nazi's"
I can't and won't speak for the other posters who clicked "Like" or "LOL" on that post. But for me, the angst imbued in that three-word phrase, suffused with enraged feeling and barely-suppressed anger was comical.
That it was posted without quoting anyone else and appeared, at first glance, to be a propos precisely nothing at all, made it stand out even more.
The structure of adjective-adjective-noun added to the comic effect. It gave the noun "twat" enhanced dramatic effect, whereas (of course) one should be more startled at the second adjective ("nazi").
This gives the reader the juxtaposition of the offending word "twat" being imbued with greater dramatic resonance than the reader should expect from a sentence where the two other words are normally the centrepiece of an insulting epithet ("fucking" and "nazi").
The brilliant way in which the sentence rolls up, through "fucking" and onwards through "nazi", takes the reader on an anticipatory journey. That journey's tension should released by a hugely-significant culmination noun. But the reader's tension is left wanting, in that "twat" is a far tamer noun than the reader might have been expecting.
The sentence is left alone, so thinking about how that piece of offence might be resolved only adds to its piquancy. Does the subject take offence at the phrase? And if so, to which word? If he objects to "nazi", is he admitting he's a "fucking twat"? Or does he gainsay either of the other terms? In which case he's tacitly agreeing to his nazism. It's a tantalising opener to a short play which the reader has to complete himself.
So, in short, the brilliantly-written, pithy comment by @Wheresmeticket? was, to all intents and purposes, "funny". That's not to say some people also found offence in it and flagged it: not me. And others still merely "liked" it. I can't speak to their motives.
Does that answer your question fully?
cheers,
i do think its a very strong word to use as the nazis were responsible for the deaths of millions of people, tommy robinson is against the warped ideology behind people that have killed a lot of people in terrorist attacks.
warped ideology as in taking it very literally, as all religions are ridiculous if taken in there literal sense.
It is a strong word. Nazis were Nazis before they killed millions and the big Nazis were supported by lots of little nazis who believed in them or who jumped on the bandwagon for their own ends. The little nazis made the genocide possible.
tommy robinson/the edl arent responsible for the mass murder of anyone, dangerous extremist converts on the other hand, if they wanna blow themselves up to mince meat then fair enough, but this is england its what i call home and the last time i checked it was a christian country, so if they want to try and put there laws on our streets someone has to stand up to them?, or what shall we do all roll back and appease everything they want.
It's only eight days since a man who grew up in England, with similarly anti-Muslim views, tried very hard to kill several people in London.
anti-extremist not anti-muslim there is a difference, but as usual you will go down the route of keep repeating yourself until you make sense in your mind.
Can you clarify. Are you saying that the man man who carried out a terrorist attack was anti - extremist?
@Chizz whats funny about calling people nazi's i think its quite a strong word to call someone, a lot of people on here lost family members due to the "nazi's"
I can't and won't speak for the other posters who clicked "Like" or "LOL" on that post. But for me, the angst imbued in that three-word phrase, suffused with enraged feeling and barely-suppressed anger was comical.
That it was posted without quoting anyone else and appeared, at first glance, to be a propos precisely nothing at all, made it stand out even more.
The structure of adjective-adjective-noun added to the comic effect. It gave the noun "twat" enhanced dramatic effect, whereas (of course) one should be more startled at the second adjective ("nazi").
This gives the reader the juxtaposition of the offending word "twat" being imbued with greater dramatic resonance than the reader should expect from a sentence where the two other words are normally the centrepiece of an insulting epithet ("fucking" and "nazi").
The brilliant way in which the sentence rolls up, through "fucking" and onwards through "nazi", takes the reader on an anticipatory journey. That journey's tension should released by a hugely-significant culmination noun. But the reader's tension is left wanting, in that "twat" is a far tamer noun than the reader might have been expecting.
The sentence is left alone, so thinking about how that piece of offence might be resolved only adds to its piquancy. Does the subject take offence at the phrase? And if so, to which word? If he objects to "nazi", is he admitting he's a "fucking twat"? Or does he gainsay either of the other terms? In which case he's tacitly agreeing to his nazism. It's a tantalising opener to a short play which the reader has to complete himself.
So, in short, the brilliantly-written, pithy comment by @Wheresmeticket? was, to all intents and purposes, "funny". That's not to say some people also found offence in it and flagged it: not me. And others still merely "liked" it. I can't speak to their motives.
Does that answer your question fully?
cheers,
i do think its a very strong word to use as the nazis were responsible for the deaths of millions of people, tommy robinson is against the warped ideology behind people that have killed a lot of people in terrorist attacks.
warped ideology as in taking it very literally, as all religions are ridiculous if taken in there literal sense.
It is a strong word. Nazis were Nazis before they killed millions and the big Nazis were supported by lots of little nazis who believed in them or who jumped on the bandwagon for their own ends. The little nazis made the genocide possible.
tommy robinson/the edl arent responsible for the mass murder of anyone, dangerous extremist converts on the other hand, if they wanna blow themselves up to mince meat then fair enough, but this is england its what i call home and the last time i checked it was a christian country, so if they want to try and put there laws on our streets someone has to stand up to them?, or what shall we do all roll back and appease everything they want.
No, all I was saying is that nazis come from somewhere - they didn't start off by slaughtering millions. The people that profess Islam as an excuse for murdering are driven by a twisted ideology as well.
I don't consider this to be a Christian country, but if that is your faith I respect that.
maybe use the word racists, not saying that the edl doesnt have combat 18 sympathisers aswell as other backwards groups, but tommy robinson might be a bit of a thug but hes not a nazi.
i think he has some very good points and hes doing something about it, there was at least 5,000 on the streets saturday and i dont consider them nazis, there just people that are english and have had enough, i said this would happen eventually people start to have enough.
really? what would you consider it as maybe in the future we will have ramadam/eid as a public holiday, hopefully never in my lifetime.
Obviously having Ramadan as a public holiday would be ridiculous. But why would anyone object to Eid being a public holiday?
because i'm not Muslim and likewise wouldn't expect to go to a predominantly muslim country and expect to have the day off and celebrate it.
But would you *object* to Eid being a national holiday?
What do you mean by 'object'?
Personally I would 'object' because where do you draw the line and on what basis is Eid being given public holiday status
Number of worshippers living in this country that follow islam? We could quite easily have national premiership day. Probably just as many premier league football fans across the country as there are muslims, maybe more. People treat football like a religion
I guess hoping it does not become a national holiday "in my lifetime" would qualify as "objecting". What's the basis on which we have a Bank Holiday on the last Monday of May?
I understand your point that you would not want it to become a national holiday simply because there are already enough. But what if the end of May Bank Holiday were scrapped in favour of one to coincide with Eid-al Fatir in June? That would mean Bank Holidays in May and June instead of what we have now which is no Bank Holidays between May and August.
The point I am getting to is simply why would anyone object to having a day's holiday in which some British people celebrate their religion and some don't? I will declare an interest here: we get two days off every year to celebrate the most important Christian festival, but other than stuffing my face with chocolate, I don't worship; but neither do I object when lots of other people do.
@Chizz whats funny about calling people nazi's i think its quite a strong word to call someone, a lot of people on here lost family members due to the "nazi's"
I can't and won't speak for the other posters who clicked "Like" or "LOL" on that post. But for me, the angst imbued in that three-word phrase, suffused with enraged feeling and barely-suppressed anger was comical.
That it was posted without quoting anyone else and appeared, at first glance, to be a propos precisely nothing at all, made it stand out even more.
The structure of adjective-adjective-noun added to the comic effect. It gave the noun "twat" enhanced dramatic effect, whereas (of course) one should be more startled at the second adjective ("nazi").
This gives the reader the juxtaposition of the offending word "twat" being imbued with greater dramatic resonance than the reader should expect from a sentence where the two other words are normally the centrepiece of an insulting epithet ("fucking" and "nazi").
The brilliant way in which the sentence rolls up, through "fucking" and onwards through "nazi", takes the reader on an anticipatory journey. That journey's tension should released by a hugely-significant culmination noun. But the reader's tension is left wanting, in that "twat" is a far tamer noun than the reader might have been expecting.
The sentence is left alone, so thinking about how that piece of offence might be resolved only adds to its piquancy. Does the subject take offence at the phrase? And if so, to which word? If he objects to "nazi", is he admitting he's a "fucking twat"? Or does he gainsay either of the other terms? In which case he's tacitly agreeing to his nazism. It's a tantalising opener to a short play which the reader has to complete himself.
So, in short, the brilliantly-written, pithy comment by @Wheresmeticket? was, to all intents and purposes, "funny". That's not to say some people also found offence in it and flagged it: not me. And others still merely "liked" it. I can't speak to their motives.
Does that answer your question fully?
cheers,
i do think its a very strong word to use as the nazis were responsible for the deaths of millions of people, tommy robinson is against the warped ideology behind people that have killed a lot of people in terrorist attacks.
warped ideology as in taking it very literally, as all religions are ridiculous if taken in there literal sense.
It is a strong word. Nazis were Nazis before they killed millions and the big Nazis were supported by lots of little nazis who believed in them or who jumped on the bandwagon for their own ends. The little nazis made the genocide possible.
tommy robinson/the edl arent responsible for the mass murder of anyone, dangerous extremist converts on the other hand, if they wanna blow themselves up to mince meat then fair enough, but this is england its what i call home and the last time i checked it was a christian country, so if they want to try and put there laws on our streets someone has to stand up to them?, or what shall we do all roll back and appease everything they want.
No, all I was saying is that nazis come from somewhere - they didn't start off by slaughtering millions. The people that profess Islam as an excuse for murdering are driven by a twisted ideology as well.
I don't consider this to be a Christian country, but if that is your faith I respect that.
maybe use the word racists, not saying that the edl doesnt have combat 18 sympathisers aswell as other backwards groups, but tommy robinson might be a bit of a thug but hes not a nazi.
i think he has some very good points and hes doing something about it, there was at least 5,000 on the streets saturday and i dont consider them nazis, there just people that are english and have had enough, i said this would happen eventually people start to have enough.
really? what would you consider it as maybe in the future we will have ramadam/eid as a public holiday, hopefully never in my lifetime.
Obviously having Ramadan as a public holiday would be ridiculous. But why would anyone object to Eid being a public holiday?
because i'm not Muslim and likewise wouldn't expect to go to a predominantly muslim country and expect to have the day off and celebrate it.
But it does happen, as an example, I'll be getting 3 days off for Christmas this year.
Comments
Personally I would 'object' because where do you draw the line and on what basis is Eid being given public holiday status
Number of worshippers living in this country that follow islam? We could quite easily have national premiership day. Probably just as many premier league football fans across the country as there are muslims, maybe more. People treat football like a religion
I understand your point that you would not want it to become a national holiday simply because there are already enough. But what if the end of May Bank Holiday were scrapped in favour of one to coincide with Eid-al Fatir in June? That would mean Bank Holidays in May and June instead of what we have now which is no Bank Holidays between May and August.
The point I am getting to is simply why would anyone object to having a day's holiday in which some British people celebrate their religion and some don't? I will declare an interest here: we get two days off every year to celebrate the most important Christian festival, but other than stuffing my face with chocolate, I don't worship; but neither do I object when lots of other people do.
A few people(his people) have started a free Tommy hashtag and are saying he is tbe biggest target in Britain and if he goes to prison will be killed