Louis Theroux

is the domain godhatesfags.com down for anyone else?

damn.

  On 4/5/2011 at 4:45 AM, sala said:

is the domain godhatesfags.com down for anyone else?

 

damn.

seems ok to me? i went there just now and had a wank. no wait, that was godlovesfags.com............ oopps!

*doesn't read thread

i'm canadian, can anyone point me in the direction of this video that i can actually watch?

  On 4/5/2011 at 6:07 AM, essines said:

*doesn't read thread

 

i'm canadian, can anyone point me in the direction of this video that i can actually watch?

ohhyahtube.com?

  On 4/5/2011 at 6:11 AM, sala said:

  On 4/5/2011 at 6:07 AM, essines said:

*doesn't read thread

 

i'm canadian, can anyone point me in the direction of this video that i can actually watch?

 

 

ohhyahtube.com?

lol

i found it rather boring

big chuckle with the obvious gay asian dude

and the renegade was hot

*awaits first pronmovie*

Yeah, that gay guy was so sad and strange. Really, fuck, poor guy.

I loved the part where the girls were discussing the Dutch film-crew they kept in touch with. Clearly they all want to jump on whatever men come into that house, perhaps be whisked away like some of the other girls. It must be so strange, and probably empowering, for the male members of the film-crew just to spend time with indoctrinated and naturally horny women.

these people (or people like them) would not be able to operate in the UK. WTF's going on over there?

My mate told me about this docu with Keith Allen, just watching it now.

[youtubehd]Jt1kN6hzabc[/youtubehd]

  On 4/5/2011 at 1:02 PM, keltoi said:

these people (or people like them) would not be able to operate in the UK. WTF's going on over there?

First Amendment

Trying to explain to a lot of Americans that the bill of rights isn't neccesarily good because it's old and may in fact be bad because it's so old can be very difficult, but it's magnified in the case of people who take an extremely old book at face value and are lawyers.

  On 4/5/2011 at 1:02 PM, keltoi said:

these people (or people like them) would not be able to operate in the UK. WTF's going on over there?

Anjem Choudary.

Gotta love unflappable Louis.

  On 4/5/2011 at 3:32 PM, Jonas said:

  On 4/5/2011 at 12:14 PM, Gary C said:

I loved the part where the girls were discussing the Dutch film-crew they kept in touch with.

 

Thought these ultra religious conservatives would hate anything coming from Sodom & Gomorra that is Holland (gay marriage / euthanasia / soft-drugs / taxed prostitution etc).

Westboro say that any publicity is good publicity, but it wouldn't surprise me if they ask for a 'charitable contribution' from all the film-crews and journalists.

The best way to troll them would be to hang out with them, pretend you are whiter than white and start telling them they are dirty little whores. Look with intense disapproval as they parody Lady Gaga.

"i saw lust in your eyes, just then" that sort of thing.

I'd love to infiltrate the group. Then pork some of the cuter ones.

  On 4/5/2011 at 3:36 PM, Coalbucket PI said:

  On 4/5/2011 at 1:02 PM, keltoi said:

these people (or people like them) would not be able to operate in the UK. WTF's going on over there?

First Amendment

 

Trying to explain to a lot of Americans that the bill of rights isn't neccesarily good because it's old and may in fact be bad because it's so old can be very difficult, but it's magnified in the case of people who take an extremely old book at face value and are lawyers.

I'm ok with the bill of rights in general, Westboro trolling is the ugly side of it, but with so many nutjobs here I don't want to compromise it either: there are plenty who would run rampant with excessive imprisonment beyond the horrible state it's in already. Too many morons to simply revise it to modern language.

I'd say the aspect of the Constitution most Americans, especially conservative ones, get wrong is the powers of government. Much of the health-care opposition argued it's unconstitutional because it's not in the document. Well no fucking shit, medicine was almost non-existent and the average life expectancy was 25-30 years during the late 1700s. They also argue that draconian laws and inconsistent standards nationwide are part of state rights. On the other hand, they don't acknowledge that a permanently standing national army overseas isn't in the Constitution either. It's fucking ridiculous.

  On 4/5/2011 at 5:23 PM, joshuatxuk said:

  On 4/5/2011 at 3:36 PM, Coalbucket PI said:

  On 4/5/2011 at 1:02 PM, keltoi said:

these people (or people like them) would not be able to operate in the UK. WTF's going on over there?

First Amendment

 

Trying to explain to a lot of Americans that the bill of rights isn't neccesarily good because it's old and may in fact be bad because it's so old can be very difficult, but it's magnified in the case of people who take an extremely old book at face value and are lawyers.

 

I'm ok with the bill of rights in general, Westboro trolling is the ugly side of it, but with so many nutjobs here I don't want to compromise it either: there are plenty who would run rampant with excessive imprisonment beyond the horrible state it's in already. Too many morons to simply revise it to modern language.

 

I'd say the aspect of the Constitution most Americans, especially conservative ones, get wrong is the powers of government. Much of the health-care opposition argued it's unconstitutional because it's not in the document. Well no fucking shit, medicine was almost non-existent and the average life expectancy was 25-30 years during the late 1700s. They also argue that draconian laws and inconsistent standards nationwide are part of state rights. On the other hand, they don't acknowledge that a permanently standing national army overseas isn't in the Constitution either. It's fucking ridiculous.

I'm not saying it's a shit document or anything, it's just that there are those people who refuse to consider that it might not be infallible; patriotism is so indoctrinated in some people that they honestly think the constitution informs morality and not the other way around.

  On 4/5/2011 at 3:36 PM, Coalbucket PI said:

  On 4/5/2011 at 1:02 PM, keltoi said:

these people (or people like them) would not be able to operate in the UK. WTF's going on over there?

First Amendment

 

Trying to explain to a lot of Americans that the bill of rights isn't neccesarily good because it's old and may in fact be bad because it's so old can be very difficult, but it's magnified in the case of people who take an extremely old book at face value and are lawyers.

whaaaaat? Evidently you're unclear on the concept of freedom of speech? It may be unpleasant, but I for one am really glad they have the freedom to act like idiots.

incidentally they seem just like Charlie Sheen, I get the feeling they started it doing it solely to get attention, and now they can't back down. Hence their weird sense of humor about it...

  On 4/5/2011 at 5:44 PM, lumpenprol said:

It may be unpleasant, but I for one am really glad they have the freedom to act like idiots.

Agreed

  On 4/5/2011 at 4:58 PM, Obel said:

I'd love to infiltrate the group. Then pork some of the cuter ones.

the little boy was cute. with his cute little lisp.

I'm fine with people being allowed to speak their opinion, but the Westboro Baptist Church are, IMO, taking it way too far. Holding signs up with messages like "GOD HATES YOU" in public, is that really freedom of speech? Is that not destructive, harmful, and grotesquely offensive?

Also, when you see their protests, you'll notice that they sing a lot of their hateful speech. This is because the First Amendment is more relaxed when it comes to signing, so they can get away with it more easily.

who would want to fuck Louis Theroux ?¿

Oh wait. he looks good in a beard

  On 4/5/2011 at 3:36 PM, Coalbucket PI said:

  On 4/5/2011 at 1:02 PM, keltoi said:

these people (or people like them) would not be able to operate in the UK. WTF's going on over there?

First Amendment

 

Trying to explain to a lot of Americans that the bill of rights isn't neccesarily good because it's old and may in fact be bad because it's so old can be very difficult, but it's magnified in the case of people who take an extremely old book at face value and are lawyers.

the constitution isn't the problem, and anyone familiar with it will tell you the same. the process is corrupted. if you have a book of law that is never universally followed, the book is worthless.

  On 4/5/2011 at 6:58 PM, marf said:

who would want to fuck Louis Theroux ?¿

are you kidding?

Some of those chicks were pretty good looking and would probably gobble up any cock that came their way if they gotten a chance.

I'd hit it (louis)