Russell Brand calls Fox News’ Sean Hannity a 'terrorist'

  • 142 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for airshocker
#101 Posted by airshocker (31700 posts) -

@xeno_ghost said:

@airshocker: you can't accurately answer a thread just by reading the title, it helps if you dig a little deeper if there is a link read/watch it check out the opening post, but you even watched the video and you still get it wrong.

"And I will continue to do so if provoked"

You really think your winning by reacting like you think he wants you to react? Hmmmm

Anyway thinking about it, all Russell did was review Hannitys debate and post his review on you tube, you wierdly was annoyed by this, are you equally annoyed when a games reviewer post a review on you tube should the reviewer go and debate with the developers first, anyone who post an opinion on you tube in your world is a coward or is petty I guess.

But what you're actually telling me is that I SHOULD NOT trust what you say when it comes to thread titles. It's simple: If you want someone to be accurate when talking with you, you can't mislead them. It's, therefore, not their fault when they do make a mistake because YOU made the mistake that confused them. If you had just paraphrased what the video was actually about, that would be a different story. You are actually MISLEADING the readers of this thread with your title.

Winning? What is there to win here, exactly? Is there some coveted trophy I should be concerned with achieving? Your problem is you think there's actually something to win here. That's hilarious.

You need to start proof-reading before you post. It's starting to seem like you're just rolling your face across the keyboard before you respond. That's how little sense you're making. I think responding to each point the way did is pretty childish, yes. It definitely rubs me the wrong way, especially if this guy is trying to be taken seriously.

Avatar image for toast_burner
#102 Posted by toast_burner (25028 posts) -

Is airshocker seriously still going on about this? He hasn't even demonstrated how my post was insulting him. He said that countering a persons points without the other person being present is cowardly, I said that by the same line of thinking he is also cowardly. That's not an insult, it's a direct answer to the argument made in his post.

Avatar image for airshocker
#103 Posted by airshocker (31700 posts) -

@toast_burner said:

Is airshocker seriously still going on about this? He hasn't even demonstrated how my post was insulting him. He said that countering a persons points without the other person being present is cowardly, I said that by the same line of thinking he is also cowardly. That's not an insult, it's a direct answer to the argument made in his post.

Regurgitating what you previously tried to say doesn't make it anymore correct.

Avatar image for toast_burner
#104 Edited by toast_burner (25028 posts) -

@airshocker said:

@toast_burner said:

Is airshocker seriously still going on about this? He hasn't even demonstrated how my post was insulting him. He said that countering a persons points without the other person being present is cowardly, I said that by the same line of thinking he is also cowardly. That's not an insult, it's a direct answer to the argument made in his post.

Regurgitating what you previously tried to say doesn't make it anymore correct.

And why is it wrong? You've made no attempt to have any kind of conversation. You just seem to be venting frustration.

Avatar image for airshocker
#105 Posted by airshocker (31700 posts) -

@toast_burner said:

@airshocker said:

@toast_burner said:

Is airshocker seriously still going on about this? He hasn't even demonstrated how my post was insulting him. He said that countering a persons points without the other person being present is cowardly, I said that by the same line of thinking he is also cowardly. That's not an insult, it's a direct answer to the argument made in his post.

Regurgitating what you previously tried to say doesn't make it anymore correct.

And why is it wrong? You've made no attempt to have any kind of conversation. You just seem to be venting frustration.

I already told you. Go back and read it if you want but I'm not going to repeat myself.

Avatar image for toast_burner
#106 Posted by toast_burner (25028 posts) -

@airshocker said:

@toast_burner said:

@airshocker said:

@toast_burner said:

Is airshocker seriously still going on about this? He hasn't even demonstrated how my post was insulting him. He said that countering a persons points without the other person being present is cowardly, I said that by the same line of thinking he is also cowardly. That's not an insult, it's a direct answer to the argument made in his post.

Regurgitating what you previously tried to say doesn't make it anymore correct.

And why is it wrong? You've made no attempt to have any kind of conversation. You just seem to be venting frustration.

I already told you. Go back and read it if you want but I'm not going to repeat myself.

No you haven't. Simply saying "you insulted me" without showing where the insult was means nothing.

Avatar image for airshocker
#107 Posted by airshocker (31700 posts) -

@toast_burner said:

No you haven't. Simply saying "you insulted me" without showing where the insult was means nothing.

Actually, I'm pretty sure I said you were being a dick and trying to get a rise out of me by parroting what I said. Which you were.

Avatar image for toast_burner
#108 Edited by toast_burner (25028 posts) -

@airshocker said:

@toast_burner said:

No you haven't. Simply saying "you insulted me" without showing where the insult was means nothing.

Actually, I'm pretty sure I said you were being a dick and trying to get a rise out of me by parroting what I said. Which you were.

And you haven't shown what makes you think I was trying to get a rise out of you.

Avatar image for airshocker
#109 Edited by airshocker (31700 posts) -

@toast_burner said:

And you haven't shown what makes you think I was trying to get a rise out of you.

Well, by omission, you just admitted you were trying to be a dick about it. So I don't think it's that big of a stretch to also say you were trying to get a rise out of me. You did phrase it in such a way as to try and call me a coward. But I'm not going to sit here and analyze every portion of your post to give you an overly complex and pedantic reason of why I think you did what you did. That's a waste of my time.

We'll end this like we ended it before: If you want to actually have a discussion with me in the future, you can phrase your questions like an adult would. If you want to act like a tool, that's fine too. Doesn't make a difference to me.

Avatar image for airshocker
#110 Posted by airshocker (31700 posts) -

@toast_burner said:

And you haven't shown what makes you think I was trying to get a rise out of you.

Well, by omission, you just admitted you were trying to be a dick about it. So I don't think it's that big of a stretch to also say you were trying to get a rise out of me. You did phrase it in such a way as to try and call me a coward. But I'm not going to sit here and analyze every portion of your post to give you an overly complex and pedantic reason as to why I know you did. That's a waste of my time.

We'll end this like we ended it before: If you want to actually have a discussion with me in the future, you can phrase your questions like an adult would. If you want to act like a tool, that's fine too. Doesn't make a difference to me.

Avatar image for toast_burner
#111 Posted by toast_burner (25028 posts) -

@airshocker said:

@toast_burner said:

And you haven't shown what makes you think I was trying to get a rise out of you.

Well, by omission, you just admitted you were trying to be a dick about it. So I don't think it's that big of a stretch to also say you were trying to get a rise out of me. You did phrase it in such a way as to try and call me a coward. But I'm not going to sit here and analyze every portion of your post to give you an overly complex and pedantic reason as to why I know you did. That's a waste of my time.

We'll end this like we ended it before: If you want to actually have a discussion with me in the future, you can phrase your questions like an adult would. If you want to act like a tool, that's fine too. Doesn't make a difference to me.

How did I just admit to insulting you? Are you reading stuff that isn't actually there?

How could you interpret my post to think I was calling you a coward? For that to be the case I would have had to agree with your stance that countering a persons arguments without that person being present makes you a coward. But since I clearly don't think that then obviously I wasn't calling you a coward.

That last paragraph is pure irony.

Avatar image for airshocker
#112 Posted by airshocker (31700 posts) -

@toast_burner said:

@airshocker said:

@toast_burner said:

And you haven't shown what makes you think I was trying to get a rise out of you.

Well, by omission, you just admitted you were trying to be a dick about it. So I don't think it's that big of a stretch to also say you were trying to get a rise out of me. You did phrase it in such a way as to try and call me a coward. But I'm not going to sit here and analyze every portion of your post to give you an overly complex and pedantic reason as to why I know you did. That's a waste of my time.

We'll end this like we ended it before: If you want to actually have a discussion with me in the future, you can phrase your questions like an adult would. If you want to act like a tool, that's fine too. Doesn't make a difference to me.

How did I just admit to insulting you? Are you reading stuff that isn't actually there?

How could you interpret my post to think I was calling you a coward? For that to be the case I would have had to agree with your stance that countering a persons arguments without that person being present makes you a coward. But since I clearly don't think that then obviously I wasn't calling you a coward.

That last paragraph is pure irony.

Yeah, until you start actually reading my posts, I'm done with you.

Avatar image for toast_burner
#113 Posted by toast_burner (25028 posts) -

@airshocker said:

@toast_burner said:

@airshocker said:

@toast_burner said:

And you haven't shown what makes you think I was trying to get a rise out of you.

Well, by omission, you just admitted you were trying to be a dick about it. So I don't think it's that big of a stretch to also say you were trying to get a rise out of me. You did phrase it in such a way as to try and call me a coward. But I'm not going to sit here and analyze every portion of your post to give you an overly complex and pedantic reason as to why I know you did. That's a waste of my time.

We'll end this like we ended it before: If you want to actually have a discussion with me in the future, you can phrase your questions like an adult would. If you want to act like a tool, that's fine too. Doesn't make a difference to me.

How did I just admit to insulting you? Are you reading stuff that isn't actually there?

How could you interpret my post to think I was calling you a coward? For that to be the case I would have had to agree with your stance that countering a persons arguments without that person being present makes you a coward. But since I clearly don't think that then obviously I wasn't calling you a coward.

That last paragraph is pure irony.

Yeah, until you start actually reading my posts, I'm done with you.

Are you incapable of thinking?

Avatar image for airshocker
#114 Posted by airshocker (31700 posts) -

@toast_burner said:

Are you incapable of thinking?

No, at 4 o'clock in the morning I'm incapable of having the patience to deal with someone who utterly refuses to read what I say. Especially when I have better things to do. Have fun.

Avatar image for toast_burner
#115 Posted by toast_burner (25028 posts) -

@airshocker said:

@toast_burner said:

Are you incapable of thinking?

No, at 4 o'clock in the morning I'm incapable of having the patience to deal with someone who utterly refuses to read what I say. Especially when I have better things to do. Have fun.

Even though what I said was a direct response to what you said? It seems you just can't cope with people disagreeing with you.

Avatar image for airshocker
#116 Posted by airshocker (31700 posts) -

@toast_burner said:

Even though what I said was a direct response to what you said? It seems you just can't cope with people disagreeing with you.

Just because you respond to someone doesn't mean you actually read what they say. That's a problem you tend to have.

Avatar image for toast_burner
#117 Posted by toast_burner (25028 posts) -

@airshocker said:

@toast_burner said:

Even though what I said was a direct response to what you said? It seems you just can't cope with people disagreeing with you.

Just because you respond to someone doesn't mean you actually read what they say. That's a problem you tend to have.

So what part of your post did I not understand? You said I implied you are a coward. I pointed out how that is obviously not true.

It seems you're not reading my posts because you want to think I insulted you because that gives you an excuse to insult me.

Avatar image for airshocker
#118 Posted by airshocker (31700 posts) -

I'll prove it to you. I just scrolled down to the very bottom of the page, didn't read a word you've just said, and now I've responded. Take care, buddy.

Avatar image for toast_burner
#119 Posted by toast_burner (25028 posts) -

What an incredibly cowardly response :P

Avatar image for xeno_ghost
#120 Edited by Xeno_ghost (990 posts) -

@airshocker: yes the title is slightly misleading but if you watch the video you get the real story, accept for you it seems :p

Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
#121 Posted by deactivated-59d151f079814 (47239 posts) -

@hoosier7 said:

@sSubZerOo said:

@airshocker said:

@wis3boi said:

I wonder how someone on Fox feels being on the other end of the 'terrorist' spectrum for once

Oh come on. I get it, people hate Hannity. He's definitely a dick and that's part of the reason I haven't watched him in a few years. But calling him a terrorist? That's a little ridiculous. If anything, he's a bully.

.. Pretty much this.. Trying to claim a news host is a terrorist is not just wildly inaccurate but it devalues what exactly a terrorist is..

Using fear to push people to conform to a political ideal certainly sounds quite like terrorism to me.

I don't agree with what you said about devaluing the word as it has little value as it stands. There's no international legal definition of terrorism and it's too broad in it's possible meanings, it's often used to discredit legitimate opposition and the fact that many now revered political individuals could just as easily be branded as terrorists shows just how flawed it is.

Makes for a great buzzword for Fox though and that's exactly why Russell's used it.

Perhaps you should look up the term.. It means the forcing of a perspective or political view point through VIOLENCE AND INTIMIDATION.. Hannity maybe a lot of things, but he doesn't fit under that.

Avatar image for airshocker
#122 Posted by airshocker (31700 posts) -

@xeno_ghost said:

@airshocker: yes the title is slightly misleading but if you watch the video you get the real story, accept for you it seems :p

No, the title is completely misleading. The title says one thing when it's not actually true. That's dishonest.I shouldn't have to watch the video just to understand the OP himself was lying to me. You should change the title to be more representative of what the video is actually about.

Avatar image for seahorse123
#123 Posted by seahorse123 (1237 posts) -

Listen Sean Hannity is a rude, ignorant, loud lunatic which peddles the globalists constant message of hate and the only reason he has got such a job is because of Fox News which love ignorant retarded mouth pieces that hate Muslims and love Israel.

Avatar image for Riverwolf007
#124 Posted by Riverwolf007 (26023 posts) -

fear = money.

that is exactly how simple it is and why the "news" is the way it is now.

Avatar image for Sword-Demon
#125 Edited by Sword-Demon (7007 posts) -

@sSubZerOo said:

@hoosier7 said:

@sSubZerOo said:

@airshocker said:

@wis3boi said:

I wonder how someone on Fox feels being on the other end of the 'terrorist' spectrum for once

Oh come on. I get it, people hate Hannity. He's definitely a dick and that's part of the reason I haven't watched him in a few years. But calling him a terrorist? That's a little ridiculous. If anything, he's a bully.

.. Pretty much this.. Trying to claim a news host is a terrorist is not just wildly inaccurate but it devalues what exactly a terrorist is..

Using fear to push people to conform to a political ideal certainly sounds quite like terrorism to me.

I don't agree with what you said about devaluing the word as it has little value as it stands. There's no international legal definition of terrorism and it's too broad in it's possible meanings, it's often used to discredit legitimate opposition and the fact that many now revered political individuals could just as easily be branded as terrorists shows just how flawed it is.

Makes for a great buzzword for Fox though and that's exactly why Russell's used it.

Perhaps you should look up the term.. It means the forcing of a perspective or political view point through VIOLENCE AND INTIMIDATION.. Hannity maybe a lot of things, but he doesn't fit under that.

minus the violence part, the definition actually fits pretty well imo

Avatar image for airshocker
#126 Posted by airshocker (31700 posts) -

Come on guys, please edit the post chains if you're not actually speaking to one of the people in them.

Avatar image for AmazonTreeBoa
#127 Posted by AmazonTreeBoa (16745 posts) -

It's Russell Brand. Who cares wtf that idiot says?

Avatar image for xeno_ghost
#128 Posted by Xeno_ghost (990 posts) -

@airshocker: "No, the title is completely misleading. The title says one thing when it's not actually true. That's dishonest.I shouldn't have to watch the video just to understand the OP himself was lying to me. You should change the title to be more representative of what the video is actually about"

ok true but I can't be bothered you're the only one complaining about it.... But that has no bearing on the fact that you watched the video, and you still can't get the facts right. Anyway a thread based on a video or a news story or article with a link to it requires watching or reading before you can make "factual" comments on the thread, the video is the talking point not the title.

I'll admit the title is misleading but I copy/pasted it from the article(not passing blame).

Avatar image for airshocker
#129 Posted by airshocker (31700 posts) -

@xeno_ghost said:

@airshocker: "No, the title is completely misleading. The title says one thing when it's not actually true. That's dishonest.I shouldn't have to watch the video just to understand the OP himself was lying to me. You should change the title to be more representative of what the video is actually about"

ok true but I can't be bothered you're the only one complaining about it.... But that has no bearing on the fact that you watched the video, and you still can't get the facts right. Anyway a thread based on a video or a news story or article with a link to it requires watching or reading before you can make "factual" comments on the thread, the video is the talking point not the title.

I'll admit the title is misleading but I copy/pasted it from the article(not passing blame).

Well does it really matter if I'm the only one? Me and you are the only ones having this discussion. Actually, I never said I watched the entire video. I watched a portion of it.

Either way, the title is the talking point of the thread. It's what gets people to come into your thread. It should be correct in the future.

Avatar image for xeno_ghost
#130 Posted by Xeno_ghost (990 posts) -

@AmazonTreeBoa: "It's Russell Brand. Who cares wtf that idiot says"

Out of Hannity and Brand Hannity is by far the biggest fucktard. I guess your a Hannity supporter?

Avatar image for xeno_ghost
#131 Posted by Xeno_ghost (990 posts) -

@sSubZerOo: "Perhaps you should look up the term.. It means the forcing of a perspective or political view point through VIOLENCE AND INTIMIDATION.. Hannity maybe a lot of things, but he doesn't fit under that"

I don't remember Brand saying Hannity fits the definition of a terrorist in its entirety. Hannity was for sure forcing his perspective or political view point through INTIMIDATION, don't you agree?

Avatar image for seahorse123
#132 Posted by seahorse123 (1237 posts) -

@AmazonTreeBoa: You say he is stupid probably because you don't understand him.

Avatar image for AmazonTreeBoa
#133 Posted by AmazonTreeBoa (16745 posts) -

@seahorse123 said:

@AmazonTreeBoa: You say he is stupid probably because you don't understand him.

Nope, I say it because he is a moron and has proven it a number of times with the ignorance that he spews.

Avatar image for xeno_ghost
#134 Posted by Xeno_ghost (990 posts) -

@AmazonTreeBoa: why is Brand a moron?

Avatar image for AmazonTreeBoa
#135 Posted by AmazonTreeBoa (16745 posts) -

@xeno_ghost said:

@AmazonTreeBoa: why is Brand a moron?

I already answered that question. Having issues grasping what was said the first time are we?

@AmazonTreeBoa said:

@seahorse123 said:

@AmazonTreeBoa: You say he is stupid probably because you don't understand him.

Nope, I say it because he is a moron and has proven it a number of times with the ignorance that he spews.

Avatar image for seahorse123
#136 Posted by seahorse123 (1237 posts) -

@AmazonTreeBoa: You just don't understand him if you can call Russell brand ignorant then if you go by your logic you would think Sean Hannity is an open minded intellectual.

Avatar image for xeno_ghost
#137 Edited by Xeno_ghost (990 posts) -

@AmazonTreeBoa: having trouble expressing specific reasons behind your statements are we?

What moronic ignorant things did brand say that out weighs the the moronic ignorant things that Hannity said?

Avatar image for AmazonTreeBoa
#138 Edited by AmazonTreeBoa (16745 posts) -

@xeno_ghost said:

@AmazonTreeBoa: having trouble expressing specific reasons behind your statements are we?

What moronic ignorant things did brand say that out weighs the the moronic ignorant things that Hannity said?

Calling Hannity a terrorist. Are you really this slow or just trying to troll? I don't even need to bother with other ignorant things he has said. This...THIS right here that he said is ignorant.

Avatar image for seahorse123
#139 Edited by seahorse123 (1237 posts) -

Yay Sean Hannity what an amazing open minded intellectual man he is just like a prophet! *sigh*

Avatar image for AmazonTreeBoa
#140 Posted by AmazonTreeBoa (16745 posts) -
@seahorse123 said:

@AmazonTreeBoa: You just don't understand him if you can call Russell brand ignorant then if you go by your logic you would think Sean Hannity is an open minded intellectual.

First...LOL this coming from the GMO food extremist.

Anyways, what I think of Hannity is irrelevant. Doesn't change the fact Russell is a moron that makes moronic statements such as this.

Avatar image for seahorse123
#141 Posted by seahorse123 (1237 posts) -

@AmazonTreeBoa: Laugh like a sheep and be an ignorant slave oh and don't forget to take your vaccines.

Avatar image for comp_atkins
#142 Posted by comp_atkins (34794 posts) -

2 dopes on tv make idiotic comments and we make a 135+ post thread to discuss it...

who are the real idiots then?

Avatar image for xeno_ghost
#143 Edited by Xeno_ghost (990 posts) -

@AmazonTreeBoa: no need to resort to insults bro, really are a lot Americans like this? Can't have a simple discussion without trying to insult someone, and you are American I can just tell by your stinking attitude. Anyway Brand never called Hannity a terrorist, WATCH THE VIDEO!!!

Avatar image for xeno_ghost
#144 Edited by Xeno_ghost (990 posts) -

@comp_atkins: "2 dopes on tv make idiotic comments and we make a 135+ post thread to discuss it"

The question was who of the two's views do you agree with? And do you agree with Hannitys conduct Or brands criticism of Hannitys conduct? They both had different opinions and conducted themselves differently what's not to discuss?

Why are you annoyed it is being discussed?

Brand makes a lot more sense than Hannity by 100% if you watch the video Brand didn't call Hannity a terrorist, he likened Hannitys aggressive intimidating behaviour to force his political views to that of a behavioural element of a terrorist. Sorry bout the misleading title, but that said Brand made some good points about the situation with Isreal and Palestine, he made good points about Hannitys unprofessional behaviour during the debate, Hannity made zero good points and insulted a guest on his show. Unless you are a fan of Hannity or agree with his views I don't see how you can even say Brand comes across as much of a dope as Hannity you may not like other things Brand has done but that has no bearing on this video.

"who are the real idiots then"

I guess you are, even more so than any of us because you have involved your self in the thread that you claim warrants no discussion :p

Avatar image for comp_atkins
#145 Posted by comp_atkins (34794 posts) -

@xeno_ghost said:

@comp_atkins: "2 dopes on tv make idiotic comments and we make a 135+ post thread to discuss it"

The question was who of the two's views do you agree with? And do you agree with Hannitys conduct Or brands criticism of Hannitys conduct? They both had different opinions and conducted themselves differently what's not to discuss?

Why are you annoyed it is being discussed?

Brand makes a lot more sense than Hannity by 100% if you watch the video Brand didn't call Hannity a terrorist, he likened Hannitys aggressive intimidating behaviour to force his political views to that of a behavioural element of a terrorist. Sorry bout the misleading title, but that said Brand made some good points about the situation with Isreal and Palestine, he made good points about Hannitys unprofessional behaviour during the debate, Hannity made zero good points and insulted a guest on his show. Unless you are a fan of Hannity or agree with his views I don't see how you can even say Brand comes across as much of a dope as Hannity you may not like other things Brand has done but that has no bearing on this video.

"who are the real idiots then"

I guess you are, even more so than any of us because you have involved your self in the thread that you claim warrants no discussion :p

the suggestion was we all are, myself included :P

Avatar image for xeno_ghost
#146 Posted by Xeno_ghost (990 posts) -

@comp_atkins: lol! Fair enough.

Avatar image for Jebus213
#147 Edited by Jebus213 (10014 posts) -
@airshocker said:

If Brand wants to be taken serious he should actually go on the show and go toe to toe against Hannity. This editing of a debate that he wasn't even a part of seems cowardly.

See, now I'm more of an unbiased person. I don't fully support Israel or the Palestinians.

But uh, Hannity's show really isn't worth anyones time. The guy is a self-indoctrinated asshole, like you of course.