Written by Tatras on 02.11.2017 at 09:44

You are 16 yeears old and live in a different country.

ageist! That's discrimination right there!
I'm 33 and have lived in a few difference countries: it's of no relevance!
#IloveBehemoth&Nergalisacooldude.

Written by Tatras on 01.11.2017 at 15:00

Written by Bad English on 01.11.2017 at 14:25

Weird things are happening in Poland, constitution changes what can make govemenet easely take control, what EU don't like, equal as Orban in Hungary wants some stupid changes, now this , whats going on there? and why Nargel cant move to Germany or Lietuva , EU is EU, why don't he moves as Izreli and Turkish bands moves to west because of religious fanatics discrimination? Many poles moved away after jping EU.

We dont have terrorist attack in our country. No muslims, no refugees, we feel safe in our cities when walking in the night. This is why no one moves west from Poland. Believe me... case in court is better than beheading by some "refugee".

Seems to me that these days Poland has become the puppy of Russia being as silly as their master. So sad for you guys...

Written by s_t_s on 02.11.2017 at 15:57

Written by Tatras on 01.11.2017 at 15:00

Written by Bad English on 01.11.2017 at 14:25

Seems to me that these days Poland has become the puppy of Russia being as silly as their master. So sad for you guys...

You feel good living in French caliphate??

The funny thing is that noone seemed to care when Megadeth did something similar (though less aggressive) with the american Eagle emblem:
https://twitter.com/Megadeth/status/660535848249634816

Written by Tatras on 02.11.2017 at 16:08

You feel good living in French caliphate??

You'd better come and check here if it's as much a caliphate as you think. Now stop spewing stupid nonsense.

As Karla would say... this has become a popcorn thread

Written by Tatras on 02.11.2017 at 16:08

Written by s_t_s on 02.11.2017 at 15:57

Written by Tatras on 01.11.2017 at 15:00

Written by Bad English on 01.11.2017 at 14:25

Seems to me that these days Poland has become the puppy of Russia being as silly as their master. So sad for you guys...

You feel good living in French caliphate??

Darkside Momo is right, you are talking crap As far as I am concerned anyone can do (almost) anything to mock the French symbols, I don't care as long as this is not linked to racism, facism or terrorism.

Written by s_t_s on 03.11.2017 at 10:26

Written by Tatras on 02.11.2017 at 16:08

Written by s_t_s on 02.11.2017 at 15:57

Written by Tatras on 01.11.2017 at 15:00

Written by Bad English on 01.11.2017 at 14:25


Darkside Momo is right, you are talking crap As far as I am concerned anyone can do (almost) anything to mock the French symbols, I don't care as long as this is not linked to racism, facism or terrorism.

And anyone can kill french cititzen on a street and your goverment will do nothing about that. This is the meaning of freedom?

Nergal is an attention whore.. He is doing everything to draw such attention. So, this case of profanation of our national emblem is no exception. Do you remember Doda, his ex-girlfriend, who used to be the famous Polish pop star? He needs all that because his music is crap.

Jeez people. trim your quotations.

Tatras ? dude seriously, throughout the many years I've been following this site, you have managed to put down the most disgusting comments I've seen. It's pretty obvious that nothing will put sense to you right now but, nevertheless some points should be stated.
First of all, your comments besides being provocably racist and xenophobic, are also close minded, which is pretty much interrelated. You say you have no Muslims or "refugees" in your country and you can walk safe at night. I wonder, do you have any idea how many crimes have been committed by Polish immigrants over time? Should this be enough for someone to say that we shouldn't have Polish people in any country because some of them have committed crimes? The same goes for any nationality or religion. You are turning against people who in their vast majority are absolutely innocent of any crime. People desperate and in need, running away from wars and collapse, just like Polish people have done, just like people from any nation have done through time. If the Polish government doesn't accept them or provide shelter to them, it's a shameful and inhumane decision and that's pretty much it.

Second, you are talking about safety, crime and punishment in regard to what's happening in other countries. I would simply remind you that the greatest terrorist attack of our times, that is 9/11, was committed by no immigrant, but from planes crushing on skyscrapers. You think you are safe, no. You are just indifferent to them. I leave in Greece, we have all kind of people here and no terrorist attacks, go figure. But what we have is a relative criminality. Do you know why? Because we have hundreds of thousands of desperate people, Greeks and foreigners. That's what's usually pushing people to commit violent and criminal acts, desperation. The countries you have referred to (French, Belgium) have enormous class differentiations. That means, too few rich people, too many poor and humiliated people. That's causing desperation. What the western world now is ripping is what he sows. Exploitation of the week and poor and social rejection of people that we have brought in a desperate state by plotting wars and instability in their countries. You might think that your country is safe behind walls of political inhumanity. Mate, nobody is safe from the destabilization of extreme neo-liberalization. Your people are facing it already, looking for jobs and facing racism in other countries.

Third, you and that other economic philosopher, ManiacBlasphemer, keep on saying that the EU applies leftist and even Marxist politics. Now, you can ignore whatever I have written by now, but I strongly advise you, don't say this to anybody who has the slightest clue on economics,politics and any social science in general. He might die laughing and that would be a laughist attack, you might get prosecuted for being so utterly ignorant.
Dude, i sincerely hope you see things in a bit different way in the future. Don't follow the bullshit of the past, let got the hate for innocent people and try to understand who the real enemies are.

Ladies and gentlemen, I believe it's time we returned this thread to the immediate topic at hand. It's quite possible for us to have a civil debate about the merits of Nergal's designs and his arguments without trying to start another pan-European conflict.

Tatras, you in particular should cool your jets. Keep your observations to the subject covered in this news article, and please refrain from antagonizing each of your fellow users one-by-one. This is not the place to settle your score with the rest of your continent.

In the interest of driving the discussion back towards reality, I'll offer my own two cents. As far as I'm concerned, the similarity is sufficiently vague that, as Polaria pointed out, half the other countries in Europe could claim similar offense. I think it's obvious that it is meant to be the Polish seal nonetheless, and the fact that such an ugly and unappealing design has become the best-selling shirt in Behemoth's catalogue suggests to me that people have been ordering it precisely for the confrontational effect that Nergal no doubt intended. I see no problem with that in principle. In America, this sort of riffing on national symbols has been done for so many years in so many contexts that I doubt most folks would do more than raise an eyebrow. Something as insignificant as decking out the national seal with skulls and snakes is not something I'd consider a legitimate legal offense; I can understand the consternation it causes, but I do hope that Nergal beats the rap. I have no doubt that at this point some parties in the Polish government are simply waiting to get Nergal when he slips up again.

That said, I wish there were someone other than Nergal to take such a stance. I'm not entertained by many of his stunts, and Behemoth's frequently mediocre music only underscores how much of his career is based around image. Even in cases where I might consider the Polish government too conservative, I still wonder what more I expected from the type of guy who names an album The Satanist. This is a man who released an album called Evangelion and didn't even have the decency to tell us if he's a Rei man or an Asuka man.

I'm sure the context of Polish law and culture alters his persona in ways that I can't fully grasp, but if Nergal existed in America, I'd probably think he was an edgy poseur who should concentrate more on writing music than on scaring the elderly.

Written by Drunkendeadgoat on 03.11.2017 at 13:23

large text

Fellow countryman... I don't know you but I feel proud
ps. The shirt design is fucking awful. I wouldn't wear it if it was given to me for free, let alone get a tattoo of this on my back.

Written by Drunkendeadgoat on 03.11.2017 at 13:23

great stuff

Thanks a lot dude!

Anyway...
now back to Nergal being himself

This is entertaining

Written by Paz on 03.11.2017 at 12:36

Nergal is an attention whore.. He is doing everything to draw such attention. So, this case of profanation of our national emblem is no exception. Do you remember Doda, his ex-girlfriend, who used to be the famous Polish pop star? He needs all that because his music is crap.

Totally. Ever since he started having "problems" with "justice", he seems to take great pleasure for the media coverage and playing the little victim that is being oppressed by the oh so evil authorities, as if he wasnt aware that trying to be a tough and using blasphemous stuff in a country such as Poland would be an issue ("Look at me! I swear to Satan I didnt know it would be a problem!"). Too much theatrics and dumdum edgy lord satanist.

He plays his cards well for his objective (being and attention whore) since musically he has nothing to offer (Behemoth are completely stagnant and his Nick Cave cover band is meh at best). I bet he is best friends with some religious fat fish as these kind of news are good for both of them.


I like some Behemoth though I seem to have bitched a lot

Next off topic remark or continuation of an argument will get a 3 day vacation.

Written by Tatras on 03.11.2017 at 11:18

Written by s_t_s on 03.11.2017 at 10:26

Written by Tatras on 02.11.2017 at 16:08

Written by s_t_s on 02.11.2017 at 15:57

Written by Tatras on 01.11.2017 at 15:00

Written by Bad English on 01.11.2017 at 14:25


Darkside Momo is right, you are talking crap As far as I am concerned anyone can do (almost) anything to mock the French symbols, I don't care as long as this is not linked to racism, facism or terrorism.

And anyone can kill french cititzen on a street and your goverment will do nothing about that. This is the meaning of freedom?

Crap again. Anyway to try and get back to the topic of this thread this legal threat against Behemoth is plain silly, as much as a bunch of christians protesting in front of a concert venue.

CUT THE FUCKING QUOTE TRAINS!!!!!

Written by s_t_s on 02.11.2017 at 15:57

Seems to me that these days Poland has become the puppy of Russia being as silly as their master. So sad for you guys...

Poland is one of the most anti-Russian countries in the entire EU and you call it a puppy of Russia? Rofl. Comparing the current situation in Poland with what happens in Russia now is like comparing apples and onions claiming they are the same damn thing.

Both the media and Eurocrats continue to search wildly in Eastern Europe for pro-Russian politicians but they do not look in their own court. Just recently the EC president made a pro-Russian speech. Nobody accused him and his institution of being pro-Russian. Biased much? Nor Merkel for her passive support for various Russian businesses, particularly Gazprom. Western Europe has more pro-Russian politicians and state officials than Eastern Europe has, and it is not surprising. Eastern Europe was under Russian boot for decades and they know better what it means to be pro or anti-Russian.

Written by Drunkendeadgoat on 03.11.2017 at 13:23

Third, you and that other economic philosopher, ManiacBlasphemer, keep on saying that the EU applies leftist and even Marxist politics. Now, you can ignore whatever I have written by now, but I strongly advise you, don't say this to anybody who has the slightest clue on economics,politics and any social science in general. He might die laughing and that would be a laughist attack, you might get prosecuted for being so utterly ignorant.
Dude, i sincerely hope you see things in a bit different way in the future. Don't follow the bullshit of the past, let got the hate for innocent people and try to understand who the real enemies are.

So you're implying that EU, for the last 20-30 years has not been applying leftist policies all over? Well I'll be damned. Also, the issue with the so-called muslim 'refugees' is not that Poland and other EU countries are refusing to welcome and support them. It's just that an institution, such as the EC, made up of non-elected members, imposes quotas as if the rules of a democracy have been suspended and we are now walking into a regime similar with USSR (those who live/lived in a commie country know better).

I placed refugees under '' because most of them are not Syrian or Iraqi (i.e. not from a war thorn country) and the status of a refugee you have it once you reach a country which is at peace and not involved in a war. Not when you cross 5-6 countries so that you can make your way to some social welfare paradise like Germany or the Scandinavian countries. That's called 'economic migration'.

Also, refugees or immigrants with some skills, qualifications, i.e. those with some social usage are permitted to work and stay in EU countries easily because they are of some use. It's precisely the less educated, shoddy plebs, i.e burdens that go all the way, risking their lives pointlessly to go to a country of which they heard that it is paying them to do nothing, offering them housing, etc. at the expense of the contributor, who has a right to be upset with the way his contributions are being invested.

I skipped the part when you said you are from Greece. Figures, when you have Syriza in power, a far-left political party, it is not surprising that you are not able to see the overtly left or far-left political tendency of the Eurocrats, and much of Western Europe today.

Written by Marcel Hubregtse on 05.11.2017 at 00:12

CUT THE FUCKING QUOTE TRAINS!!!!!

I honestly thought after I wrote a similar thing earlier things would start to change around here... I guess not.

On topic: I don't have much to say on this that hasn't already been said.

Written by ManiacBlasphemer on 05.11.2017 at 00:44

First of all, I am talking about the present. Right now EU is a conservative neo-liberal formation with a general policy of reducing state intervention, reforming the labor laws to a more versatile form and doing anything possible in order to become more "competitive" and fitting to the global markets desires. This is anything but "leftist". Though overall speaking as well - no, certainly not. EU since its initial inception (the 1950's Benelux) has been a primarily economic formation of capitalistic nature. The fact that during its former prosperity was offering vast amounts of money in the countries members, the relative acceptance of minorities in general and it's attempt to keep a distance from far-right or nationalistic ideas is completely compatible with its capitalistic character and shouldn't be equated with a "leftist policy". Left-wing politics are about defending the lower classes from capitalistic exploitation and equating economic and social differences. It is self-evident that this never happened in EU, quite the contrary.
Furthermore, while I have no intention of defending the EU, it's only reasonable that when thousands of people are arriving by illegal means at European soil, you either have to host them somehow, or send them back - or let them drown in the Mediterranean. It's part of the agreement with Turkey to send some of them back, what are you supposed to do with the rest that can't be send back? Let them drown? Or should they all stay in Greece and Italy? Does this make any sense to you? You have to share the burden, therefore the quotas you are referring to.
Call these people however you wish, economic migrants or refugees, nobody risks his life and his children's lives for nothing. They wish a better and safer future and they risk everything to achieve it. Just as people from the Eastern Block did in the 90's, just like Greeks did in the 20's, 50's and the present day as well. You call them "shoddy plebs and burdens". I find it amazing reading this from somebody from Romania, given how many of your people have been in the same situation. You should've known better how inaccurate and disrespectful this is. Even if most of them might not be educated, they work as hard as anyone from any other country, and deserve to be respected as human beings. You say they are crossing 5-6 countries to reach some social welfare paradise. Well, what would it be reasonable for them to do if they need a job and money to live, stay in Greece which has 35% unemployment, or go to Poland maybe?
Finally, I don't really understand what you mean by "skipping the part that I come from Greece". It was an example that despite the many refugees, economic immigrants, Muslims and whatever, there are no terrorist attacks, yet. If you think that this is due to the fact that we have a left oriented government, well maybe the rest of Europe should get one to and save this whole mess - unfortunately though, I believe that this is not the case.
Stuff, I apologize for continuing the argument but I find some things to be more important than Behemoth's atrocious shirt design. And I find no wrong in discussing them in an as much as possible civilized manner.

Written by Drunkendeadgoat on 05.11.2017 at 15:58

First of all, I am talking about the present. Right now EU is a conservative neo-liberal formation with a general policy of reducing state intervention, reforming the labor laws to a more versatile form and doing anything possible in order to become more "competitive" and fitting to the global markets desires. This is anything but "leftist". Though overall speaking as well - no, certainly not. EU since its initial inception (the 1950's Benelux) has been a primarily economic formation of capitalistic nature. The fact that during its former prosperity was offering vast amounts of money in the countries members, the relative acceptance of minorities in general and it's attempt to keep a distance from far-right or nationalistic ideas is completely compatible with its capitalistic character and shouldn't be equated with a "leftist policy". Left-wing politics are about defending the lower classes from capitalistic exploitation and equating economic and social differences. It is self-evident that this never happened in EU, quite the contrary.
Furthermore, while I have no intention of defending the EU, it's only reasonable that when thousands of people are arriving by illegal means at European soil, you either have to host them somehow, or send them back - or let them drown in the Mediterranean. It's part of the agreement with Turkey to send some of them back, what are you supposed to do with the rest that can't be send back? Let them drown? Or should they all stay in Greece and Italy? Does this make any sense to you? You have to share the burden, therefore the quotas you are referring to.
Call these people however you wish, economic migrants or refugees, nobody risks his life and his children's lives for nothing. They wish a better and safer future and they risk everything to achieve it. Just as people from the Eastern Block did in the 90's, just like Greeks did in the 20's, 50's and the present day as well. You call them "shoddy plebs and burdens". I find it amazing reading this from somebody from Romania, given how many of your people have been in the same situation. You should've known better how inaccurate and disrespectful this is. Even if most of them might not be educated, they work as hard as anyone from any other country, and deserve to be respected as human beings. You say they are crossing 5-6 countries to reach some social welfare paradise. Well, what would it be reasonable for them to do if they need a job and money to live, stay in Greece which has 35% unemployment, or go to Poland maybe?
Finally, I don't really understand what you mean by "skipping the part that I come from Greece". It was an example that despite the many refugees, economic immigrants, Muslims and whatever, there are no terrorist attacks, yet. If you think that this is due to the fact that we have a left oriented government, well maybe the rest of Europe should get one to and save this whole mess - unfortunately though, I believe that this is not the case.
Stuff, I apologize for continuing the argument but I find some things to be more important than Behemoth's atrocious shirt design. And I find no wrong in discussing them in an as much as possible civilized manner.

First of all, you most likely do not know what conservatism is, since you added it together with neo-liberalism (which is a form of socialism actually, not quite liberalism). Let me enlighten, conservatism as best described within the last 40 years is what would characterize the leadership in UK during Thatcher or in the US during Reagan. That's REAL conservatism. Also, the policy of the EU currently is to enlarge its own prerogatives and to reduce the power of the national state, becoming something along the line of what USSR was. No wonder that in conservative circles, EU is dubbed as EUSSR. Reducing state intervention? Considering the fact that the EU was so quick in bailing out your country, I would hardly call this reducing state intervention. Reforming labor laws? Sure, but not in an equal manner, they want more rights and less obligations for workers while less rights and more obligations for the patronage. Conservative? Not even close? Liberal? Hardly.

Don't confuse national minorities with immigrants. Accepting minorities like the scots, occitans, catalans or others is something that was present before the EU even formed. Also, there are some immigrants that do not have issues integrating within the countries they emigrate to. However, most of them are not the Middle East. Only a fool can be blind enough to not see how many no-go zones are in countries like France, UK or Sweden because of muslim ghettos.

Reasonable? First of all, those 'refugees' are not our responsibility. The solution is simple. Pacify the country, and once the war is over, forcefully deport them back to their own country. That is how it is done. As I mentioned before, those muslims that have a qualification and a proper education, they do not need to sail through the Mediterranean sea and cross borders illegally. Those people gain a work permit quite fast because they are not detrimental to a society, meaning that they can contribute to the country guesting him, at least enough to justify the social benefits which he has access to. Those who cross the seas risking their lives are usually the plebs, the burdens, those with low education and low working skills. With that kind of person, you have to spend years educating them and teaching them some working skills so that they can take care of themselves, not depend on the state. Many 'refugees' coming from Africa are illiterate as well. Do you realize how much money you have to spend to educate and integrate these people? Billions. And no, Merkel and Macron won't pay from their own pocket. They will pay using the money you, me and others contribute, supposedly for the welfare of our country and ultimately, us as individuals.

How the EU tries to force these refugees (that Germany and the other countries that welcomed them realized they are of not much use) upon other countries is dictatorial. It has little to do with democracy as overall, the population in Eastern European immigrants in majority does not wish to receive these people. Share the burden? Why? When Poland, Hungary, Romania, Czech Republic and Slovakia were protesting against welcoming them in such vast numbers and without proper control, why should they share the burden as well? Originally, those refugees were allowed to pass because of German and French lobby. So they should share the burden. Not impose it upon others. Do you realize what you are saying? How would you feel when someone comes to your house, forcing you to take some people in, and you can't say no even though it is your house? Would you accept it? I doubt you would. No wonder that most of those who support welcoming these 'refugees' do not set an example and actually house them themselves. And when they are told that, they reveal how hypocritical they are.

My people from Romania emigrated based on visas first and later based on work permits, before joining the EU. We did not illegally cross borders, we did not seek asylum or refugee status in other countries and we actually went where we went to work primarily, not to seek social benefits like most of the 'refugees' do. Or do you think that their obsession to go to Germany or the Scandinavian countries is a mere coincidence? No! They were informed that these countries grant them generous social benefits with little request in return. I laughed when I saw news of 'refugees' crying because they ended up in an Eastern European country which does not grant them much. Also, to impose some 'refugees' in Romania, which has itself been depopulated by its people (4 million until now) and forcing us to spend resources to integrate them, instead of investing those resources to convince those Romanians who left to return is ridiculous.

You have a very idealistic way of thinking, this is the real issue here. I doubt you went to a so called refugee camp. I went to 3 in Romania, and all I saw were people wanting to go further west for the social benefits, a lot of violence in those camps, they have a very distorted way of viewing the Western civilization. They expect everything that is provided to them to be free since they were told that the West is rich and will take care of them without them having to provide anything in return. On the long run, these 'refugees' will become detrimental to the Western countries. In fact it already is, as even Germany admits that it will be very difficult to integrate them all. Heck, the authorities do not even know how many of them are in their own country. The immigration control was so weak and so hasten that they were not able to properly verify the people that walked on their own soil. And now they wonder why so many peace trucks and so many displays made by the religion of peace.

Eastern Europe does well in opposing the quotas. Here in Romania we accept them because they will leave. Life here is too harsh for them to endure, thus they leave. Those who were already assigned to us have already left for another country. And it's not like in Romania there are no jobs. There are a lot that need to be occupied. But the 'refugees' do not seek work and they do not want to work for a low wage, like most Romanians work.

I see a couple of three day bans coming up

Let me just drop it here:

Written by ManiacBlasphemer on 05.11.2017 at 18:27

First of all, you most likely do not know what conservatism is, since you added it together with neo-liberalism (which is a form of socialism actually, not quite liberalism).

I actually wanted to quote this whole exchange for cheap laughs because it would've just crowded everything up more, but this right here is one of the dumbest takes I've ever seen anyone write on the internet haha.

Written by Desha on 12.11.2017 at 17:10

Written by ManiacBlasphemer on 05.11.2017 at 18:27

First of all, you most likely do not know what conservatism is, since you added it together with neo-liberalism (which is a form of socialism actually, not quite liberalism).

I actually wanted to quote this whole exchange for cheap laughs because it would've just crowded everything up more, but this right here is one of the dumbest takes I've ever seen anyone write on the internet haha.

Empty words without any arguments. How about studying both terms and then come back with some words of wisdom?

Written by ManiacBlasphemer on 12.11.2017 at 17:47

Written by Desha on 12.11.2017 at 17:10

Written by ManiacBlasphemer on 05.11.2017 at 18:27

First of all, you most likely do not know what conservatism is, since you added it together with neo-liberalism (which is a form of socialism actually, not quite liberalism).

I actually wanted to quote this whole exchange for cheap laughs because it would've just crowded everything up more, but this right here is one of the dumbest takes I've ever seen anyone write on the internet haha.

Empty words without any arguments. How about studying both terms and then come back with some words of wisdom?

You are basically saying "well Firefighters are just like swimming teachers!" without making any claims worth thinking about. Your claim is so dumb that you even thinking you barely know anything about what either of these words mean is insulting to language itself. I think YOU should study those terms.
Neoliberalism is a capitalist ideology that sees markets as so important that it uses the state to create new ones (instead of the state prior to neoliberalism just helping capitalism grow by providing the right circumstances, Neoliberalism FURTHERS these circumstances in an active attempt to help certain companies). Important is "the individual", not society. Neoliberalism takes great importance to free markets. Neoliberalism is deregulation instead of regulation. Cooperations being able to sue for profits that regulations would "rob" them of.
Neoliberalism is basically what is done nowadays to keep capitalism going without having to resort to fascism (since that is a bad look after WW II). Neoliberal policies actively work against any and all socialist ideals (even the most basic socialist ideas co-opted by centrist capitalists like welfare, unions or basic market regulation).
Socialism is generally seen as public ownership of the means of production. Though Marx has a more extreme definition (which makes more sense), seeing it as a system without commodity production and without markets (thus losing the law of value and the accumulating power of currency). Socialism doesn't even have the markets Neoliberalism likes so much. Socialism also doesn't require a state at all, while Neoliberalism (and by extention capitalism as a whole) does.

Neoliberlaism, unlike classical liberalism, is also known for allowing the state to interfere in the economy. That is why I mentioned it as a form of socialism. From the moment the state is allowed by an economical doctrine to intervene in the economy and regulate the free market economy, you go against the very principles of conservatism and classical liberalism. Thus, we have neoliberalism, or liberalism seen through socialist eyes. Neoliberalism was a sort of middle way found by economical philosophers to escape from the endless conflict between classical liberalism and socialist planning, both these currents being popular during the 1920s and 1930s.

Bottom line is, neoliberalism promotes a market economy under the guidance and rules of a strong state, a model which came to be known as the SOCIAL market economy.