# Royal Canadian Legion: KKK is OK with us?



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*Absolutely disgusting*. 

*KKK costume at legion Halloween party disgusts many in Ontario town*



> A small-town Ontario restaurant owner says a Royal Canadian Legion Halloween party awarded first prize to a person in Ku Klux Klan robes leading a man in blackface at the end of a rope.


(Globe & Mail)

UPDATE: Found a photo...



(The Intelligencer.ca)


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

My first reaction is Lard how did we get to be so overly sensitive. Still the KKK, Adolph Hitler, Jewish Slaughter all the Muslims groups and Muslim Slaughter all the Jews groups all tend to trigger extreme responses since they themselves are extremists.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Funny, my first reaction was "Un. F-ing. Believable. One might say it would be fitting to use the KKK's own tactics on these gentlemen to teach 'em a lesson. A little tar 'n' feathering, perhaps?"

The Royal Canadian Legion's website is inaccessible at the moment (THE ROYAL CANADIAN LEGION / La Légion royale canadienne)


----------



## ApplePie (Feb 28, 2007)

Next year to top it they are going to have people dress up as famous rapists/murders with a look alike victim. Then they are going to invite the victims family and the family that breaks down the most will decide who's costume was the best. It's all in the name of having a good time at the Legion.


----------



## toostroked (Nov 1, 2010)

I don't mind being in the minority. It is funny.


----------



## hdh607 (Sep 8, 2008)

that makes me want to barf.


----------



## ApplePie (Feb 28, 2007)

toostroked said:


> I don't mind being in the minority. It is funny.


How so?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Some days I think people are just way too sensitive. Or is it just that they want to appear so overly politically correct? I can understand why some folks would just say lighten up. Mountains and molehills come to mind here.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

SINC said:


> Some days I think people are just way too sensitive. Or is it just that they want to appear so overly politically correct? I can understand why some folks would just say lighten up. Mountains and molehills come to mind here.


SINC, perhaps it is because you have never faced racial discrimination or hatred. Perhaps you have, but I suspect you have not considering your comment. It is an entirely different story when you have. Everyone comes with their baggage and experiences. 

I find this repulsive. A sensible person would have asked the people to leave and return with appropriate dress.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"I find this repulsive. A sensible person would have asked the people to leave and return with appropriate dress. " I agree, Adrian. I had a "meeting" with some of the local KKK back in Coy, Alabama .......... at 3AM, when I was teaching in a "Freedom School" down there. Being white, from New York City and being Jewish did NOT go over well with them. 

Even if I had never experienced the "southern hospitality" of these KKK members, I still would have found the idea and picture repulsive and disgusting. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Adrian. said:


> SINC, perhaps it is because you have never faced racial discrimination or hatred. Perhaps you have, but I suspect you have not considering your comment. It is an entirely different story when you have. Everyone comes with their baggage and experiences.
> 
> I find this repulsive. A sensible person would have asked the people to leave and return with appropriate dress.


Adrian., one does not grow up in western Canada without exposure to racial discrimination, the bulk of which in my experience is currently directed at our aboriginal population.

And it also reared it's ugly head in the 1950s when displaced refugees who rode the rails as homeless folks and begged at our family home for a bite to eat were commonly rejected and called DPs. We on the other hand, fed them when we could and had compassion for their plight, often repaid in true friendship over the years.

It also extended to our Ukrainian immigrants who grew up being called "bohunks" among other unsavoury names.

I could go on, but by now, you get the idea.

Some of my best friends today, belong to those groups I have mentioned and have come far enough, and are mature enough to laugh at themselves when we discuss those days of ignorance.

I stand by my statement.

Some folks need to drop the feigned indignation and learn to laugh at history once in a while. It would do the world good.


----------



## i-rui (Sep 13, 2006)

the disturbing thing to me isn't that they showed up as a clansman and the other in blackface (there's always going to be the odd person that exhibits poor judgment), it's the fact that they WON!

if it was a private party i wouldn't have a problem with it, but a public organization really should know better. having said that I'd chalk it up to misplaced humour & supreme ignorance than any real malice or hate.


----------



## Rps (May 2, 2009)

Well, I have a pretty broad sense of humour and I know that we all don't laugh at the same jokes or gags, but there are somethings that are just poor taste. No matter what you humour, this, to me, stretches the bounds.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

SINC said:


> Some folks need to drop the feigned indignation


I doubt very highly that any of the indignation is feigned.


----------



## toostroked (Nov 1, 2010)

ApplePie said:


> How so?


Because I have faced racial discrimination and hatred. I am white.


----------



## ApplePie (Feb 28, 2007)

toostroked said:


> Because I have faced racial discrimination and hatred. I am white.


You make no sense. I fail to see humour in the hatred either way. Is it funny because the shoe is on the other foot? That still lacks humour though, that would be more about revenge then humour.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

What would you think if a black guy showed up as a "white" KKK. Would this be acceptable and/or funny? Just curious since this did happen years ago at a party I attended.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

it's simply in really, really poor taste. Period.

No amount of self righteous hot air will change that.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

SINC said:


> Some folks need to drop the feigned indignation and learn to laugh at history once in a while. It would do the world good.


Laughing at history is one thing... but the KKK are present-day, still. There are children whose parents and grandparents were murdered by these bastards, strung up in trees, dragged behind cars, lit on fire. 

Nothing to laugh about, even remotely.


----------



## ApplePie (Feb 28, 2007)

SINC said:


> Some days I think people are just way too sensitive. Or is it just that they want to appear so overly politically correct? I can understand why some folks would just say lighten up. Mountains and molehills come to mind here.


So say you get raped and later someone at a party reenacts your rape. How many days after the rape could we all laugh about it because we wouldn't want to be overly sensitive or seem too politically correct at the party - you might not have fun because everyone is being such a drowner and not laughing. A week sound good?


----------



## toostroked (Nov 1, 2010)

ApplePie said:


> You make no sense. I fail to see humour in the hatred either way. Is it funny because the shoe is on the other foot? That still lacks humour though, that would be more about revenge then humour.


I would have to get political to explain it to you, and I really do not want to go there.


----------



## ApplePie (Feb 28, 2007)

toostroked said:


> I would have to get political to explain it to you, and I really do not want to go there.


Why? I want to know what you see that is so funny. Explain the humour that you see.


----------



## toostroked (Nov 1, 2010)

ApplePie said:


> Why? I want to know what you see that is so funny. Explain the humour that you see.


A liberal, PC, person like yourself, would not even try to understand.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Aren't Hallowe'en costumes supposed to be scary?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Sonal said:


> Aren't Hallowe'en costumes supposed to be scary?


And therein lies my point. People really need to stop the self righteous BS and live a little.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

speaking of self righteous...


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

SINC said:


> And therein lies my point. People really need to stop the self righteous BS and live a little.


Would you find it appropriate to have party goers show up at the Legion dressed up as a scary Nazi's like Hitler Goering Goebbels and Bormann or perhaps just a generic SS soldier leading some poor made up soul around by a rope?


----------



## ApplePie (Feb 28, 2007)

toostroked said:


> A liberal, PC, person like yourself, would not even try to understand.


Wow at first you don't care what people think and want everyone to know.

Then someone asks you to explain it and you can't. *FAILURE*

I am not a liberal or a PC I prefer science and reason over any political party, both suck and debating which one is "better" is for monkeys, but enough of that. Nice cheap tactics to get out of answering a question, are you in grade 3 yet? Got any another other cheap tactics, because I don't think I can handle them? I'm shaking in my boots!!!! 

So again you big and tough, super deep thinking, mind more complex than all the gods combined *toostroked*, explain what is funny so my small, full of **** mind can understand? 

Pathetic.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Hey I like a good laugh as much as the next guy, but I'm not laughing.

That wasn't a joke...it was a message and the Halloween costume was the medium.

BTW ApplePie, PC=Politically Correct.


----------



## ApplePie (Feb 28, 2007)

BigDL said:


> Would you find it appropriate to have party goers show up at the Legion dressed up as a scary Nazi's like Hitler Goering Goebbels and Bormann or perhaps just a generic SS soldier leading some poor made up soul around by a rope?


No SINC would tell you if that if you dressed up as a SS Nazi officer who killed unarmed Canadian solders (being dragged behind you in costume) that would be funny/scary because:

1. It happen a while ago.

2. Halloween costumes are scary/funny (his "point" seems to fluctuate).

3. You are a pussy, or not a REAL man, or a liberal, or are self righteous that is why you can't laugh/live your life.

Laugh at slavery, laugh at rape, laugh at murder... (if you can't something according to SINC is wrong with you). Most people disagree with SINC and can clearly see what is wrong with that and why some things will never be a joke. SINC just isn't one of those people. We have not evolved to the superior heights of SINC!!! lol...


----------



## ApplePie (Feb 28, 2007)

kps said:


> Hey I like a good laugh as much as the next guy, but I'm not laughing.
> 
> That wasn't a joke...it was a message and the Halloween costume was the medium.
> 
> BTW ApplePie, PC=Politically Correct.


I know, thanks for the helping hand though... 

Damn I'm slow though... I thought he was saying I'm a PC and I'm like no - I'm a f**King Mac.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

I thought the guy was supposed to be a werewolf or something. Don't look like no Afro-Canadian to me.


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

fjnmusic said:


> *I thought the guy was supposed to be a werewolf *or something. Don't look like no Afro-Canadian to me.


Finally, something funny came out of this discussion. 


BTW, I thought the same thing.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

I've seen plenty of KKK halloween costumes in the past. I've seen Hitler/Nazi ones too. Worse ones than that too. The outrageousness of it is pretty much the point. It's just a costume.


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

groovetube said:


> speaking of self righteous...


No kidding. Funny the irony of that seems lost eh?


----------



## ertman (Jan 15, 2008)

I think people are being overly sensitive... BUT.... I personally find that this is still an inappropriate costume.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

I think the guys involved are guilty of sheer tastelessness and gutter humour gone wrong. I don't think we need to see it as being anything beyond that.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

CubaMark said:


> Laughing at history is one thing... but the KKK are present-day, still. There are children whose parents and grandparents were murdered by these bastards, strung up in trees, dragged behind cars, lit on fire.
> 
> Nothing to laugh about, even remotely.


Agreed. Lynchings continue today in the southern US. Perhaps I should dress up as Paul Bernardo and carry around a blow-up doll around and go to PG rated community events.


----------



## whatiwant (Feb 21, 2008)

Adrian. said:


> Agreed. Lynchings continue today in the southern US. Perhaps I should dress up as Paul Bernardo and carry around a blow-up doll around and go to PG rated community events.


+1
Also, claiming that you're not insensitive because you've got persecuted friends is pretty blatantly delusional.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Max said:


> I think the guys involved are guilty of sheer tastelessness and gutter humour gone wrong. I don't think we need to see it as being anything beyond that.


Definitely.

You know, I saw cognoscenti in the lefty crowd dressing up as George Bush a few years back, at the same time they were referring to him as a racist and murderer. What's up with that?


----------



## toostroked (Nov 1, 2010)

ApplePie said:


> Wow at first you don't care what people think and want everyone to know.
> 
> Then someone asks you to explain it and you can't. *FAILURE*
> 
> ...


Hey applepie, I see you got so upset, that you could not comprehend what PC meant. Now I know you would never understand anything explained to you. Your insulting post are almost as funny as the topic.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

Max said:


> I think the guys involved are guilty of sheer tastelessness and gutter humour gone wrong. I don't think we need to see it as being anything beyond that.


I think the outrage comes not from the fact that the people who wore those costumes had such bad taste, but rather from the fact that the RCL judged them to be the best costumes.

Unless it was explicitly a 'most politically incorrect' costume party, that shows an almost unbelievable level of insensitivity to what, by now, out to be recognized by everyone as a serious historical and on-going evil in our society.


----------



## Sonal (Oct 2, 2003)

Max said:


> I think the guys involved are guilty of sheer tastelessness and gutter humour gone wrong. I don't think we need to see it as being anything beyond that.


Agreed.



bryanc said:


> I think the outrage comes not from the fact that the people who wore those costumes had such bad taste, but rather from the fact that the RCL judged them to be the best costumes.


I would like to know what the other costumes in the running looked like, because the few that were visible in that photo looked like of pathetic.


----------



## toostroked (Nov 1, 2010)

kps said:


> Hey I like a good laugh as much as the next guy, but I'm not laughing.
> 
> That wasn't a joke...it was a message and the Halloween costume was the medium.
> 
> BTW ApplePie, PC=Politically Correct.


kps, You nailed it. You may not not see the humor, but I do.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Macfury said:


> Definitely.
> 
> You know, I saw cognoscenti in the lefty crowd dressing up as George Bush a few years back, at the same time they were referring to him as a racist and murderer. What's up with that?


Yep dressing up as the Shrub is certainly scary. After all this gent really should be on trial for crimes and treason. 

Not at all sure why it would be Politically OK to come as the Shrub. I find him every bit as evil as the KKK and he has a lot more blood on his hands.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Sonal said:


> Aren't Hallowe'en costumes supposed to be scary?


Sonal, this goes beyond "scary". Having lived in the deep south for five years, I was told stories, by both whites and blacks alike, of the fear that the KKK struck into the minds and bodies and souls of people that they did not approve of. You and I would both be on their "hit list". I had the opportunity to hear James Peck speak. You might want to google him and his experiences during the 1961 Freedom Rides in Alabama and what the KKK did to him. Google what the KKK did to James Chaney, Michael Schwerner and Andrew Goodman, during the Freedom Summer of 1964 voter registration drive. In 1980, three KKK members shot four elderly black women (Viola Ellison, Lela Evans, Opal Jackson and Katherine Johnson) in Chattanooga, Tennessee, following a KKK initiation rally. I could go on and on and on, but the point is that these were ALL incidents within our lifetime, against people just like you and me, and most of those who have posted in this thread. 

The KKK white robes and conical hood are symbols of terror and hate, in much the same way that the Nazi swastika is meant to cause fear.

Yes, Halloween is meant to be "scary", but you have missed the point. Something like this goes beyond "political correctness" and just plain bad taste. I think that Cuba Mark summed it up quite well. 

Paix, mon amie.


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

dr.g. said:


> sonal, this goes beyond "scary". Having lived in the deep south for five years, i was told stories, by both whites and blacks alike, of the fear that the kkk struck into the minds and bodies and souls of people that they did not approve of. You and i would both be on their "hit list". I had the opportunity to hear james peck speak. You might want to google him and his experiences during the 1961 freedom rides in alabama and what the kkk did to him. Google what the kkk did to james chaney, michael schwerner and andrew goodman, during the freedom summer of 1964 voter registration drive. In 1980, three kkk members shot four elderly black women (viola ellison, lela evans, opal jackson and katherine johnson) in chattanooga, tennessee, following a kkk initiation rally. I could go on and on and on, but the point is that these were all incidents within our lifetime, against people just like you and me, and most of those who have posted in this thread.
> 
> The kkk white robes and conical hood are symbols of terror and hate, in much the same way that the nazi swastika is meant to cause fear.
> 
> ...


 +1


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

max said:


> i think the guys involved are guilty of sheer tastelessness and gutter humour gone wrong. I don't think we need to see it as being anything beyond that.


+1


----------



## mrjimmy (Nov 8, 2003)

Dr.G. said:


> Sonal, this goes beyond "scary". Having lived in the deep south for five years, I was told stories, by both whites and blacks alike, of the fear that the KKK struck into the minds and bodies and souls of people that they did not approve of. You and I would both be on their "hit list". I had the opportunity to hear James Peck speak. You might want to google him and his experiences during the 1961 Freedom Rides in Alabama and what the KKK did to him. Google what the KKK did to James Chaney, Michael Schwerner and Andrew Goodman, during the Freedom Summer of 1964 voter registration drive. In 1980, three KKK members shot four elderly black women (Viola Ellison, Lela Evans, Opal Jackson and Katherine Johnson) in Chattanooga, Tennessee, following a KKK initiation rally. I could go on and on and on, but the point is that these were ALL incidents within our lifetime, against people just like you and me, and most of those who have posted in this thread.
> 
> The KKK white robes and conical hood are symbols of terror and hate, in much the same way that the Nazi swastika is meant to cause fear.
> 
> ...


A big + 1


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

mrjimmy said:


> A big + 1


It's just simply something I wouldn't do in public even if one or two people were in on the sick joke. You have the right to do it, but it's not right to do it.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macfury said:


> It's just simply something I wouldn't do in public even if one or two people were in on the sick joke. You have the right to do it, but it's not right to do it.


Macfury and I don't agree on many things, but I would agree with him here. Yes, one has the right to dress up this way, just as they have the right to spread the hatred that this group advocates. I might not like it but that is what comes with having the right of free speech in a democratic society, even if the likes of the KKK, the Nazi Party, et al, would end that right ASAP they took power. 

I like Macfury's turn of a phrase in that yes, while you have the right to do this, "it's not right to do it". Guess that this was part of what I was wanting to say in my previous long post. 

Merci, mon ami. Paix.


----------



## ApplePie (Feb 28, 2007)

toostroked said:


> Hey applepie, I see you got so upset, that you could not comprehend what PC meant. Now I know you would never understand anything explained to you. Your insulting post are almost as funny as the topic.


*toostroked* I got what PC meant the first time. I was making a joke about it. (Maybe it would have been funnier if I said it in my KKK costume ).

Again knock off the you're a liberal or you're upset sh*t tactics. I did not start with the name calling, I asked you a question. If I "insulted"/"mocked" anyone I also "insulted"/"mocked" myself.

Since you like to tell me about myself, I will do the same.

*toostroked* thinks the costume is funny because he is white and was once discriminated against (he even says so in his own words). It is a form of petty revenge against a whole race. His inferiority is lessened (in his mind) by images of slavery. He is quick to tell you his opinion, but if you ask him about his opinion he gets very defensive and likes to start the name calling. He also likes to say no would could understand him (which like the images of slavery) fuels his disillusion of superiority and lessen his feelings of inferiority. 

Oh... btw I am not upset or a liberal or PC (PC people don't say what I just did ). These are just words toostroked.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Max said:


> I think the guys involved are guilty of sheer tastelessness and gutter humour gone wrong. I don't think we need to see it as being anything beyond that.


Tasteless for sure, but the sad part about these two clowns is that small town Ontario, small town Quebec, small-town <insert Province> is full of them. It's based mostly on ignorance and a definite detachment from the more multicultural experience of large city.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Sorry I have lived in small towns and big cities.

Biggest bigots were city duds.

FWIW at it's peak in the 1920s our little community boasted over 40 different languages spoken. Somehow even the Italians and the Poles managed to somewhat peacefully co-exist. Not to mention the Irish and Scots.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

I'm with Kps on this one. Not that bigots can't be found just about anywhere, mind.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

I too have lived in small towns and big cities, and tolerance and bigotry may be found, as Max correctly contends, "just about anywhere". Paix, mes amis.


----------



## minstrel (Sep 9, 2002)

It would seem for the RCL the KKK is not OK. Ontario Command has closed the branch. The Campbellford branch is not allowed to sell poppies or officially participate in Rembrance Day activities. With any luck that will satisfy those demanding that some kind of action be taken.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

That seems overly harsh to me. Permanently closed? That's over the top.


----------



## whatiwant (Feb 21, 2008)

Max said:


> That seems overly harsh to me. Permanently closed? That's over the top.


Temporarily. If you flip to CTV they're airing the story practically every 10mins it seems.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Thanks but I'm not much of a TV news junkie any more. I must be an internet junkie.

Glad it's only temporary, but it's like the whole chapter gets punished for a tasteless episode. I guess it's all about optics.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

Anyone who has remotely defended this has just lost respect from me. 

The KKK are not something "in the history", and even if they were, why the hell is it something to laugh and make a joke about? 

How about a costume of an dark skinned terrorist killing a white Canadian solider with a RPG... would that be funny? 

Some of the responses in this thread have really boggled my mind.


----------



## Adrian. (Nov 28, 2007)

ehMax said:


> Anyone who has remotely defended this has just lost respect from me.
> 
> The KKK are not something "in the history", and even if they were, why the hell is it something to laugh and make a joke about?
> 
> ...


I think most of us have come to expect those who would defend stories such as this Mr. Mayor.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

*Nuff Said...*

Racist Halloween jokers truly sorry 



> CAMPBELLFORD, Ont. - They know they're dumb and dumber.
> 
> But they are sorry.
> 
> ...


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

ehMax said:


> How about a costume of an dark skinned terrorist killing a white Canadian solider with a RPG... would that be funny?


Yes, it would.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

I move that the moderators close this thread, before more people (^^^^) reveal far too much of themselves in a public forum. It's for your own good, guys. 

Un. Be. Lievable.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

CubaMark said:


> I move that the moderators close this thread, before more people (^^^^) reveal far too much of themselves in a public forum. It's for your own good, guys.
> 
> Un. Be. Lievable.


I think the apologies and truly sincere statements of regret by the people who dressed in the costumes should be enough to close the thread without any intervention on the part of ehMax.... if people would just leave it alone....


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

CubaMark said:


> I move that the moderators close this thread, before more people (^^^^) reveal far too much of themselves in a public forum. It's for your own good, guys.
> 
> Un. Be. Lievable.


I move that we recognize that Robert's Rules don't apply here and that this is not a board meeting.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Max said:


> I move that we recognize that Robert's Rules don't apply here and that this is not a board meeting.


Point of information! Point of information, I say!


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

A quick summary:

Beer + old farts = brain fart = extreme reaction
Sobriety = contrition = forgiveness

Still I do wish people were as outraged by the US bringing the Gestapo back to life in the form of the Patriot Act and Homeland Security. Guess the brain fart is a safer target.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

The thing about homeland security is that it's neither secure nor homey. It's just creepy. Individual rights are being sacrificed at the altar of fear. Not a great thing for any country endowed with a rich history of democracy.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Max said:


> The thing about homeland security is that it's neither secure nor homey. It's just creepy. Individual rights are being sacrificed at the altar of fear. Not a great thing for any country endowed with a rich history of democracy.


Even the word "homeland" is a bit creepy.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Max said:


> The thing about homeland security is that it's neither secure nor homey. It's just creepy. Individual rights are being sacrificed at the altar of fear. Not a great thing for any country endowed with a rich history of democracy.


Those Homey guys remind me of MCSE Certified IT weenies...do and say anything to justify their jobs.


----------



## whatiwant (Feb 21, 2008)

Macfury said:


> Even the word "homeland" is a bit creepy.


Motherland security. :-|


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

Max said:


> I move that we recognize that Robert's Rules don't apply here and that this is not a board meeting.


I therefore move that "Bourinot's Rules of order" are established herein as the Canadian answer as I agree Robert's Rules need not apply here.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

I second that emotion.


----------



## pcronin (Feb 20, 2005)

All I know is that the KKK took my baby away
they took her away
away from me...


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

jawknee said:


> Motherland security. :-|


I was thinking more "Fatherland Security"


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Fatherland, motherland, big brotherland - all the same... someone else will protect you. You don't have to worry, just follow and obey!


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Max said:


> Fatherland, motherland, big brotherland - all the same... someone else will protect you. You don't have to worry, just follow and obey!


Hey, that's the bryanc coda! Nobody should own a firearm because the government and police will keep you safe!


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Macfury said:


> Hey, that's the bryanc coda! Nobody should own a firearm because the government and police will keep you safe!


Only problem is: It is the protectors who are rapidly becoming far and away the biggest threat.

Guess that's why it's called the protection racket.


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

Macfury said:


> Hey, that's the bryanc coda! Nobody should own a firearm because the government and police will keep you safe!


My biggest problem with the gun nuts is the naïvety of their belief that having guns has anything to do with protecting your freedom from the fascist tendencies of governments or other large organizations.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

bryanc said:


> My biggest problem with the gun nuts is the naïvety of their belief that having guns has anything to do with protecting your freedom from the fascist tendencies of governments or other large organizations.


Point of clarification: Exactly who/what qualifies as a gun "nut"?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

bryanc said:


> My biggest problem with the gun nuts is the naïvety of their belief that having guns has anything to do with protecting your freedom from the fascist tendencies of governments or other large organizations.


That's why you're part of the slave class, kid.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

bryanc said:


> My biggest problem with the gun nuts is the naïvety of their belief that having guns has anything to do with protecting your freedom from the fascist tendencies of governments or other large organizations.


yep. Seems to works miracles on gun crime and murder numbers south of the border doesn't it.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

bryanc said:


> My biggest problem with the gun nuts is the naïvety of their belief that having guns has anything to do with protecting your freedom from the fascist tendencies of governments or other large organizations.


Hmmmm....


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

FeXL said:


> Point of clarification: Exactly who/what qualifies as a gun "nut"?


Well, in this context, it's anyone who thinks their possessing firearms protects them from "the government" or other authoritarian threats to their freedom.

While the jack-booted thugs may make the occasional appearance (especially in Toronto), the biggest threats to our freedom and security come from middle-aged white guys in corporate board rooms or political back-rooms, making deals regarding how our value as consumers is to be allocated. Resisting the police or other authorities with violence is almost certainly doomed to quick and violent failure.

If you want to change the world, change how you spend your money; having a gun is of no significance.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Bryan's got a point here... a good answer to Kps' "implied facepalm." Sad that Tommy Lee Jones got dragged into this endless debate. Nonetheless, changing how you spend your money makes some sense. As does the notion that some high-powered suits in boardrooms control much more of our lives than we traditionally like to consider.

However, I see both sides of the debate. Possessing firearms does indeed afford you a degree of protection from thugs; I don't see how that can be reasonably debated. I dunno about you guys, but I would rather not be part of a force attempting to invade any given population where the residents have ready access to their own trusty, well cared for firearms and plenty of ammo.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

In his reply to FeXL he has a point, not in his original face palm post. 

Those that hate and fear their government(s) span vastly different ideologies not just the extreme right and not just those that believe in gun ownership. There are extreme left wing groups that arm themselves for whatever it may be...a revolution or the apocalypse (the anarchistic one and not the religious one).

...and yeah, I wish I could have left one of my all time favourite actors out of it,...but the look says it all.


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Fair 'nuff.

At some point, the extreme left meets the extreme right and you can't tell who stands for what... simply because they're animals sharing the same stripes.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Max said:


> Fair 'nuff.
> 
> At some point, the extreme left meets the extreme right and you can't tell who stands for what... simply because they're animals sharing the same stripes.


Yup... Maybe we should put all those extremists one way or the other in valley somewhere and let em fight it out. That way there should be pretty much nothing left of 'em on either side and then the "meek (moderates) truly will inherit the earth"... just a thought.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

screature said:


> Yup... Maybe we should put all those extremists one way or the other in valley somewhere and let em fight it out. That way there should be pretty much nothing left of 'em on either side and then the "meek (moderates) truly will inherit the earth"... just a thought.


Except it ain't the moderates who brought humanity, kicking and screaming out of apedom.


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

screature said:


> Yup... Maybe we should put all those extremists one way or the other in valley somewhere and let em fight it out. That way there should be pretty much nothing left of 'em on either side and then the "meek (moderates) truly will inherit the earth"... just a thought.


My thought on that is: in world inhabited only by moderates, how long would it take to label groups within as the new extremists?


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

About as long as it takes to say the word "tomato."


----------



## bryanc (Jan 16, 2004)

Macfury said:


> Except it ain't the moderates who brought humanity, kicking and screaming out of apedom.


There are times where extreme phenotypes are advantageous. The question is, is this one of them? Certainly none of the examples of extremism on display look very advantageous to me.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

bryanc said:


> There are times where extreme phenotypes are advantageous. The question is, is this one of them? Certainly none of the examples of extremism on display look very advantageous to me.


Problem is that we're just in an abnormally calm period by human historical standards. Humanity is best served by a combination of Morlocks and Eloi.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Perhaps things are relatively calm for -you-, but it may not be so for many others being slaughtered into mass graves.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

groovetube said:


> Perhaps things are relatively calm for -you-, but it may not be so for many others being slaughtered into mass graves.


In the aggregate, groove. Not only referring to myself.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Sorry that doesn't wash either. Just because there's a pile of us all giddy in consumerism and 'the dream' doesn't mean even 'in the aggregate' there isn't more horrendous things daily than before ranging from mass murder to cancer.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

groovetube said:


> Sorry that doesn't wash either. Just because there's a pile of us all giddy in consumerism and 'the dream' doesn't mean even 'in the aggregate' there isn't more horrendous things daily than before ranging from mass murder to cancer.


More horrendous than ever before? Mass murderers? And cancer too you say? I had no idea things were getting so bad.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

no you said everything was rosy.

The classic macfury 'wha???'.


----------



## i-rui (Sep 13, 2006)

Macfury said:


> Except it ain't the moderates who brought humanity, kicking and screaming out of apedom.


I thought TeaBaggers didn't believe in evolution!!


----------



## Snapple Quaffer (Sep 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> Except it ain't the moderates who brought humanity, kicking and screaming out of apedom.


And it ain't the moderates who could reduce humanity, eventually, back to the level of apedom.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

groovetube said:


> no you said everything was rosy.
> 
> The classic macfury 'wha???'.


Classic case of groovetube confusion; "Round and round she goes! LOL!"


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> *Problem is that we're just in an abnormally calm period by human historical standards.* Humanity is best served by a combination of Morlocks and Eloi.


Just in case anyone is er, confused, by macfurys running around in circles.
:clap:


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Snapple Quaffer said:


> And it ain't the moderates who could reduce humanity, eventually, back to the level of apedom.


It would be a long, slow decline I grant you.


----------



## Snapple Quaffer (Sep 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> It would be a long, slow decline I grant you.


Explain, for the greater good of mankind, if you will.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

(gets popcorn, then goes and watches tv instead...)


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

Snapple, our dear MF would have us believe that moderation is essentially a barbaric trait and as such is an obstruction to evolution.

Kewl! I imagine there are many texts on the intertewbz to support that, yo.


----------



## Snapple Quaffer (Sep 2, 2003)

Thank you, Max.

I shall, henceforth, strive to be less moderate, for the common good.

It's suddenly become quite obvious to me that The Universal Ancestor must have been one mean-spirited [email protected]$^ard.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

oh man, does this mean I have to, choose 'a side'?


----------



## Max (Sep 26, 2002)

It is important to eschew moderation for the sake of humanity's extremities, I always say.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

groovetube said:


> oh man, does this mean I have to, choose 'a side'?


No. You would only switch later and say you didn't.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Max said:


> It is important to eschew moderation for the sake of humanity's extremities, I always say.


Eschew THIS!!!


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

Macfury said:


> No. You would only switch later and say you didn't.


yes but that would make me a libertarian though wouldn't it.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

Snapple Quaffer said:


> It's suddenly become quite obvious to me that The Universal Ancestor must have been one mean-spirited [email protected]$^ard.


^^If you are to be successful in this politically correct environment, you have to be gender neutral...

Besides, humans were traced to a common ancestor and it was a "she". The mitochondrial Eve.


----------

