State of the Union - pre/post election & whatever...

Here you can discuss anything froth related that does not fit into another forum, or indeed any nonsense that should enter your head.

Moderator: FU!UK Committee

Re: State of the Union - pre/post election & whatever...

Postby Guest » Wed Aug 16, 2017 4:25 pm

Condottiero wrote:
McKinstry wrote:
Like in the GDR...


I'm absolutely fine with the government allowing free speech and lawful assembly no matter how vile the speech and these assholes were absolutely free to assemble and say whatever.

I am equally fine with their fellow citizens such as these folks employers learning what their employees do in their spare time and firing their racist ass.

I'm retired now but had I an employee that vile, I would have canned them at the first opportunity.

Then you would've rightly been sued for wrongful dismissal...



From what I know of 'worker's rights' in America that's bollocks.
User avatar
Guest
 

Re: State of the Union - pre/post election & whatever...

Postby rebelyell2006 » Wed Aug 16, 2017 4:29 pm

Plus, having overt white supremacists around creates a hostile work environment.
rebelyell2006
 
Posts: 4499
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2015 7:10 am
Location: New Mexico

Re: State of the Union - pre/post election & whatever...

Postby Levied Troop » Wed Aug 16, 2017 4:37 pm

Adam smiths left nut wrote:https://mobile.twitter.com/MittRomney/status/897612532386607104

See? Mittens can do it. It wasn't even hard.


May can do it, even on holiday:

http://news.sky.com/story/tories-break- ... s-10990818
Levied Troop
 
Posts: 3313
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 7:50 am
Location: European socialist paradise

Re: State of the Union - pre/post election & whatever...

Postby Adam smiths left nut » Wed Aug 16, 2017 4:39 pm

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... ist-attack

National Review discusses the devils bargain.
User avatar
Adam smiths left nut
 

Re: State of the Union - pre/post election & whatever...

Postby General Apathy » Wed Aug 16, 2017 4:50 pm

Adam smiths left nut wrote:As expected, Apathy is incapable of simply saying "I condemn Nazi murderers" without rambling on about protesters.

As I said, interference. The conversation must immediately be changed to distract from the topic that must not be discussed.

How many dead would it have taken to actually face the problem of radical racial violence with eyes open, and not try to deflect?
Do you have any sense of shame left or have you sacrificed everything?



Oh bullshit. Do you have no sense of shame left or have you never had any to begin with? I'm not sure how, from the outset, speaking against the violent agitators gives you that idea. Or my claiming the ones breaking the law should have the full force of the law brought to bear against them. Or pointing out that there is likely personal video not yet in the hands of the authorities that will help track down suspects as it apparently had in the case of the beating of the young black man in the parking garage.

Pointing out that we are a society of laws where hate speech is protected by law, as distasteful as I find it those assholes were entitled to peacefully march under the conditions of their permits. Nothing more. In pointing out there were SOME bad actors from the other side, I in no way dismissed the bad acts of those on the alt right.

In case you haven't noticed, I've been discussing radical racial violence from the outset, and have posted specifically and clearly about my opposition to the cops who shoot minorities with no cause. I've also posted specifically and clearly about the folks calling for the killing and assassination of police officers just because they wear the uniform, even though they may themselves be minorities, and may be some of the ones who brought the law breaking cops to justice. Then, just like now, I haven't absolved the bad actors on either side for the violence or the crimes they commit.

Nor have I tried to stop the discussion of the problems that a society with rules and laws have with difficult issues where distasteful opinions are being expressed legally. I've tried to address the shortcomings of the government and law enforcement when they don't do what they should be doing like in Charlottesville. Just like in Berkeley. And Baltimore. And elsewhere.

When the laws of the land can be broken on a whim because the individual feels they have the right to do so, you no longer have a civil society. What do you think the ones being killed by the policies advocated here will do in response? Are you all so fucking stupid that you WANT to trigger a race war? That you WANT to give those alt-right the cover of "We're just fighting back against those trying to kill us?"

There are folks here calling outright for murder of those who THEY have decided need to be killed. I've yet to hear you say anything in opposition to the mob violence being promoted. Folks are posting here that the freedoms we have should selectively be excluded from some others, and that the law can and should be violently be broken by those who believe they are on the side of right.

That's what Tim McVey claimed he was doing. That's what that murderous asshole in the black church was doing.

And it seems to be fine with you.
...all this from someone who is neither apathetic nor a general
General Apathy
 
Posts: 3668
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 2:39 am

Re: State of the Union - pre/post election & whatever...

Postby Adam smiths left nut » Wed Aug 16, 2017 4:54 pm

And an article on the alt-right and their hatred of Jews.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/ ... fter-jews/

Though you can just listen to pretty much anything Spencer has to say.

Still feel you have to run interference for these guys? To play loyal distraction every time they rear their ugly head? To work ceaselessly to obfuscate so people don't address the devil in the room?

Think they won't come after you and yours when they run out of enemies?
User avatar
Adam smiths left nut
 

Re: State of the Union - pre/post election & whatever...

Postby General Apathy » Wed Aug 16, 2017 4:56 pm

Adam smiths left nut wrote:http://www.nationalreview.com/article/450469/campus-conservative-organizations-alt-right-platform-free-speech-milo-yiannopoulos-charlottesville-terrorist-attack

National Review discusses the devils bargain.


Indeed it does. The exact same page could be written about those on the other side and their own devil's bargain. From all the universities who want to have "thought police" and limit who can say what and what the first amendment will and will not allow, to the action openly taken against conservatives (actual ones, not agent provocateurs like Yiannopoulos) who have the right to express their beliefs but are typically shunted aside by the LW staff, administration and LW students. Folks like Sharia Law advocate with links to Hamas like Linda Sarsour are not only welcomed, they give commencement speeches.


And the article makes my point:
Later that year, Stanford’s conservative publication, the Stanford Review, considered hosting an appearance by Yiannopoulos. A lone graduate student had invited him, but needed to find a student group to sponsor the event. I was present in the Stanford Review ’s meetings. “Someone should sponsor his lecture — it’s a matter of free speech,” argued a confused fellow editor. Soon, other editors made different arguments: “This will create a huge stir,” said one. “It will drive the social-justice warriors crazy,” offered another. This was certainly true, and a point worth considering. Campus leftists would definitely have protested the event, and might even have tried to shut it down. As one influential editor put it: “Best-case scenario is that the SJWs freak out and we get another Berkeley.” We all knew what he meant: Inviting Yiannopoulos could bait the Left to do something silly and destructive, drawing media coverage that would allow us to act as martyrs for free speech on campus. That is, the left-wing riots were not the price or downside of inviting Yiannopoulos — they were the attraction.


And that is what is being advocated here. Fools.
Last edited by General Apathy on Wed Aug 16, 2017 5:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
...all this from someone who is neither apathetic nor a general
General Apathy
 
Posts: 3668
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 2:39 am

Re: State of the Union - pre/post election & whatever...

Postby Guest » Wed Aug 16, 2017 5:00 pm

What's with all this ALT-right nonsense?

In what way does the 'alt-right' differ from...well, the 'right'?

What's the 'alt' bit bringing to it?

Am I missing something or is it just a bit of pointless labelling and buzzword?

Same with 'false-news'. Why invent a new phrase when a perfectly good one already exists - 'lies'?
User avatar
Guest
 

Re: State of the Union - pre/post election & whatever...

Postby Adam smiths left nut » Wed Aug 16, 2017 5:01 pm

Yeah, for a second, before launching into your good old Clinton/Blm/antifa routine, before the bodies were even cold.

That's why people don't take you seriously. Because you pay lip service before using death as a vehicle to vent your hatreds and help justify violence.
"Yeah, it's oh so sad but what about the people that didn't commit murder on that day? Why aren't we condemning them?"

"Sure, murder is bad, but look at those protesters". "Sure, the cops shot him but he did shoplift".

Take a long, hard look in the mirror and ask why you do this.
User avatar
Adam smiths left nut
 

Re: State of the Union - pre/post election & whatever...

Postby Il Segaiolo Pedantesco » Wed Aug 16, 2017 5:02 pm

Monkeyborg wrote:
Condottiero wrote:How about a millennial black bitch who called me a Zionist and a kike…


Oh my. Condi's inner-redneck is showing. :roll:

Despite the fact that she sounds like a very unpleasant woman, you do know her age and ethnicity are totally irrelevant to your little tale of outrage, don't you? Two wrongs don't make a right and all that.

Oh well, off to invisible-land you go. I hope you and angry old JJ are very happy there.

She and her friend were back a few weeks later to complain to the owner, as I had asked them to leave, since they weren't customers - again she referred to me as a Zionist pig and bunch of other terms out of earshot. Her age isn't irrelevant, as she's an example of what passes for irresponsible behavior in her generation. Wouldn't have brought up ethnicity, had she not claimed victimhood based on her complexion and not acted like anyone lighter than her can't be a Muslim, unfortunately not unique as mentioned to me by an imam. James Issac's behavior had nothing to do with his ethnicity... :roll:
*SVM MALLEVS CVNNORVM*

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose...
- Alphonse Karr
User avatar
Il Segaiolo Pedantesco
 
Posts: 4082
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 5:16 pm

PreviousNext

Return to The Froth Pot

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 32 guests