Once again - you're dodging.
Calling inconvenient information "propaganda" doesn't make it any less factual.
Having the race card played on you sucks, doesn't it?
Virginia
- Thread starter DrMaseofBase
- Start date
Once again - you're dodging.
Calling inconvenient information "propaganda" doesn't make it any less factual.
Having the race card played on you sucks, doesn't it?
Part of your problem is that you equate Judaism to the State of Israel. Israel is a nation. Yes, the majority of the populace is Jewish, and yes the country was established as a refuge for Jews displaced by WW2. But, it is also a country surrounded by enemies. It is a country that is the target of multiple terrorist groups who would be happy if the country ceased to exist. They can't be blamed for their desire to have strong, secure borders. They have no choice.
Yet, when a Jewish individual speaks out in favor of multi-culturism, in a western country, you get all excited and couch it as "See, all the Jews want other countries to be multi-cultural, but they don't feel the same about Israel". Jewish individuals should be allowed to have beliefs and philosophies without those beliefs being lumped in to how the State of Israel functions. It is not as simple and easy as you make it out to be. The State of Israel has to consider many factors when deciding on what happens within their country.
I'm not dodging anything. Your "inconvenient information" is nothing more than cherry picked antisemitic propaganda, and you probably know that is the case. If you don't, then you are a gullible individual who has fallen prey to people who are what I have accused you of being.
The Jewish state is quite secular. Most in the country do not practice Judaism.
You're not doing the same thing as Been. Been (or anyone else) doesn't come over here and post anti-goyem links and caricatures and then claim he's being misrepresented. You post nazi icons and people that defend nazis and then complain when you're lumped with them.
What you've done is find some person somewhere that purportedly says something bad (I decline to watch the videos as your posts are typically either deceptive or just goofy) and then claim your adversary supports it. Been has never quoted or referenced the Idaho democrat or Jerusalem rabbi. You're being characterized, fairly or unfairly, for what you have posted or communicated. Nobody finds some nobody white nationalist and say, "Here's what this guy said, now you come over here and watch it and denounce it and if you don't then you're a bigot." You're being characterized for your posts, not what someone, somewhere that you don't support has said.
You forgot the rest of that paragraph shysterkine. Sorry to rain on your limp dicked attempt to reframe my comments to pursue your narrative. Does being blatantly dishonest ever bother you or is it hardwired into who you are?
By all means, Jewish individuals (or any other ethnicity or demographic) can speak out in favor of multi-culturalism, globalism, legalizing marijuana, legalizing prostitution, etc etc etc.
We should *all* be able to discuss and debate the marketplace of ideas free from harm, violence, and discrimination.
So by all means, speak out for or against any issue -- but don't cry "racism" when *organized lobbying* of politicians by Jewish *groups* in favor of a policy that most Americans (and Israelis) are strongly against.
And you accuse me of "dodging".
Well I agree with the rest of it. I just think it's laughable to try and claim victim status. You're born in the best country in the world, in the best time to be born, born into the dominant race, and the dominant sex, and you're claiming demographic victimization. I don't see the victimization. To the extent there is any, it pales in comparison to much more compelling victimization this country has inflicted on other demographic groups.
Don't call someone deceptive because they isolate a couple things from a very long post. I can't take all day to parse that stuff. I agree with it all, I guess, except the "whitey is the victim."
As for the anti-muslim rant.... okay. What do you want me to say that I haven't said ten times over?
I don't agree with your explanation of what I am doing. I will continue to call you out for what you are and what you are doing.
So? That's right. And even I'm not sorry enough to circulate pro-nazi propaganda. That said, on these boards I am to White Trash what Indy is to football. I have a masters in White Trash studies with a rural Oklahoma emphasis. Don't you ever lecture me about White Trash, my people invented it and it's in my bones. I will either call it out to criticize or praise it as I see fit.
Yes, if one demographic has kept another demographic enslaved, uneducated and deprived them of the family unit, I am fine with making a special accommodation for the deprived demographic for a while to get them in a position to compete, earn and participate in the economy with the dominant demographic. I'm more offended by the people that bitch and push back and claim victim status at any effort to correct it after all that damage. I guess I'm offended by government discrimination other than that. What's that have to do with anything itt?
Have you heard from Styx? Was he in VA this weekend? Does he wear a sorcerer's robe at these deals or just his usual leather jacket? You'd think if he's gonna blast some old anti-antifa spells he'd wear the robe.
And you're still being deceptive. I'm sorry if the truth stings. Please point me to where I'm claiming whitey is the victim.
And no, that wasn't an anti-Muslim rant either. Looks like being a shyster is encoded in your DNA.
I just cant' search your posts and re-read stuff. You've been about the racial narrative for a looong time.
I have to go now -- I heard an ambulance siren.
And still. I'll make revisiting my "narrative" real easy for you. Democrats are a bunch of hypocrites in regards to race. That isn't claiming or even hinting that whitey is a victim. See, real easy.
Here's a nice little truth bomb.
it's so simple isn't it?
one has to wonder if there is anything not worth defending in the name of tribal politics.
there are multiple unAmerican domestic terrorist groups at play right now. none should get a pass. alt right, antifa, blm... conflating any of these groups with mainstream political identities is dangerous and counterproductive. all should be considered pariahs and be treated that way by everyone in the vast political middle of this country. casting stones at antifa without casting them at the alt right ---or vice versa--- is not a very enlightened position to take.
identitarian politics and racial collectivism of any kind are antithetical to the concept of individual rights or constitutional american values.
there is nothing good about any concept which involves racial collectivism, black, white, brown or whatever. it's truly bizarre that in a time in which gender is considered a social construct, that the entire concept of race is not.
In Joplin, at least one of their guys got his ass handed to him by a bunch of (us) bikers.
He was being a straight out d**k directly in the face of people that lost their family members, including kids who lost their parents. He got beaten down. He deserved it.
And if I was on a jury and someone was charged for hitting him, I would acquit. IMO showing up at a funeral to deliberately wound grieving families and friends is an invitation to fight, just like saying, "I dare you to punch me, bitch."
"Speech" does not mean private immunity from the citizenry -- it means the goverment won't punish the speaker. The world would be a much more civilized place if there were consequences for that type of indefensible behavior.
no, you simply need to evolve beyond your tribalist limitations. i'm not going to argue with you. there needs to be no sacred cows, or it literally means nothing to call one group out. it lacks gravitas. it lacks nuance. it lacks legitimacy.
there are a lot of non traditional GOP conservatives, constitutionalists and libertarians right now who are facing a very ugly truth about any appearance of association with the actual richard spencer alt right brand. this riot and the images of morons with torches were bad optics, and these people need to be minimized and distanced.
until progressives do the same with blm and antifa en masse, this is a pointless conversation to have. the middle is paying attention. hopefully.
If Nazis are bad for America, the Commies in BLM and ANTIFA are bad for America.
9 dead 30 wounded in chicago last weekend
http://abc7chicago.com/
you should head to chicago and organize a peace march with obama he knows the way around
absolutely correct. the time has come to address all of these groups honestly and critically.
a little well deserved karmic violence aside, it didn't devolve into a bloody riot I'm assuming. would you generally agree that these counter protests to phelps' asshole family is generally pretty ideal?
I apologize for missing this post syskatine. no propaganda on my part that i am aware of. i just think it's time we all got past politicizing the other side's hateful fringe while ignoring our own.
personally, i am a classic (pre FDR) free-speech liberal. live and let live. i espouse many libertarian ideals but think libertarianism is more of a critical ingredient than a stand alone political philosophy. without it, everything sucks. but it lacks a certain structural reality. i'm not a tattooed in member of the proud boys, but they are largely tongue in cheek in much of their presentation. the masturbation thing is specifically encouraged to keep them potent for women they encounter - which is kind of on the face of it, gavin mcinness humor, but frankly pretty solid advice.
fundamentally, the proud boys are basically an elks lodge kind of fraternal club that celebrates the value of western (not racial) culture and it's contributions to mankind. racism has no part in this ideology. just a basic 'the west is the best' ethos, which i find hard to rationally argue with. in fact I'm not sure where you get the idea that there is a racial component, but i would urge you to consider the source whatever it may be.
in fact the proud boys are hated by the richard spencer alt right who coined the term 'alt lite' for them because they don't by into his racist white nationalist act.
if a riot didn't break out, probably safe to have considered it a safe distance.
i think if you are willing to destroy property to shut down events or physically attack people to stop them from talking, you are limiting their free speech. agree?
Agreed. I have been a countering biker protestor at three of them. It is interesting to note that by third that I went to, they only sent out the old women and children to do the actual on the street protesting. The men were apparently feeling too vulnerable to beatings.
Okay. One of them brawls, wave swastikas and kills people. The other brawls. You have to admit those are some pretty stark distinctions.
Where is this coming from that the antifascists were communists? Do they self identify as communists or is that coming from outside the movement?
You have my response to this earlier.
The entire term "free speech" refers to government action.
If you destroy property and physically attack people, you are committing a crime.
As I asked/suggested earlier, we also need to address whether or not the particular actions at Charlottesville by White Nationalists is even protected from government intervention under the Bradendburg v Ohio standard. They did show up on the site of their protest before their permitted time. They did continue their violent and violence inciting conduct after being declared an unlawful assembly by authorities.
This particular incident is much more nuanced and fact specific than antifa infringing upon white nationalists free speech. That's a simplistic evaluation. While I disagree with the violence on both sides, I also have a hard time drumming up any sympathy for folks like the White Nationalists ultimately getting the violence they were pretty clearly intent upon inciting.
I thought we were originally talking about "limiting speech" as the standard and not committing criminal attacks to limit the speech.
Admittedly, when I looked at it there wasn't anything racially offensive. I was ready to be triggered and lift your hide but..... nothing. Except for the masturbation.
What do you mean "keep them potent for women they encounter"?
They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought. I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.
I don't know the answer to this maybe JD might know. If the WS groups violated the law by showing up before the permit indicated, did the "peace" protestors have a permit to assemble? I really don't know what the law is on that one, if one if ok and the other isn't or if they were both in the wrong.
I'm like you I don't have much sympathy for the ws groups, so anyway to shut them down or make them inconsequential is fine by me. However how much violence would they have incited if no one would have shown up to give them someone to incite or if the media would have just reported on it in a way not to stir up emotions (which ultimately drive ratings). It's like me yelling at the refs after the CMU game from my living room. If there's no one there to hear it does it really matter what I say? I know we cant just live in a vacuum and I'm sure this could be something straight out of some manifesto somewhere but it seems like every new form of communication tool we creates makes the world worse. Printing press, telephone, radio, tv, internet and now the cell phone just seems to continue going downhill.
I'm like you I don't have much sympathy for the ws groups, so anyway to shut them down or make them inconsequential is fine by me. However how much violence would they have incited if no one would have shown up to give them someone to incite or if the media would have just reported on it in a way not to stir up emotions (which ultimately drive ratings). It's like me yelling at the refs after the CMU game from my living room. If there's no one there to hear it does it really matter what I say? I know we cant just live in a vacuum and I'm sure this could be something straight out of some manifesto somewhere but it seems like every new form of communication tool we creates makes the world worse. Printing press, telephone, radio, tv, internet and now the cell phone just seems to continue going downhill.
bunch of nazitards march around in a park it's a fart in the forest
insert cameras politicians and counter protesters you get the tempest in a teapot
it was a made for tv event
It doesn't seem smart to just ignore them and let them do what they want. If a group of people want to gather, and march in support of breast cancer survivors, they should be allowed to do so. If a group of people want to gather and march in support of autism victims/research, they should be allowed to do so. It is pretty hard to imagine anyone being opposed to those two things.
But, if a group of Nazis/White Supremacists want to gather and march, and we treat them like the other two groups I listed above, are we not equating the Nazi cause to the other causes? Are we not condoning their actions? Are we not saying that it is OK for people on the fence to join them in their cause?
A Dr. Strangelove reference. Good job!They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought. I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.
They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought. I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.
Post of the week. I laughed.
Counterprotestors had a permit for Saturday at emancipation park. WS groups had one for Saturday as well. WS group did not have one for Friday nights "blood and soil" tiki torch party. City officials realizing the possibility of violence with two groups both in emancipation park, revoke WS Saturday permit (technically reissued them one for a larger park and separated from the counterprotestors). Kessler sued to stay where he had been originally permitted.
Judge issues decision.
"Kessler's assertion in this regard is supported by the fact that the City solely revoked his permit, but left in place the permits issued to counter-protestors," Conrad wrote. "The disparity in treatment between the two groups with opposing views suggests that the defendants' decision to revoke Kessler's permit was based on the content of his speech rather than other neutral factors that would be equally applicable to Kessler and those protesting against him. This conclusion is bolstered by other evidence, including communications on social media indicating that members of City Council oppose Kessler's political viewpoint."
The judge wrote further that though the city maintained its decision to revoke Kessler's permit was due to the number of people likely to attend his demonstration, "their concerns in this regard are purely speculative." He added, "there is no evidence to support the notion that many thousands of individuals are likely to attend the demonstration."
I hope that answers your questions. I simply disagree that "not showing up" is either an effective or appropriate response to speech and conduct you might believe will unlawfully illicit or involve unlawful conduct. Taking the bait and engaging in retaliatory or pre-emotive violence yourself isn't either. It's pretty clear to me...having watch the Vice report last night, seeing statements of the WS protest organizers, and reviewing what happened on a timeline...that the goal of this "protest" was to engage in and incite violence from the beginning. That isn't "free speech".
Last edited:
To me, the only way the WS groups have any measurable influence is when:
1. they commit violence
2. they somehow sucker someone else to commit violence as a counter to them
3. the media gives them coverage
The best way to make them go away is to ignore them.
They have no political power, little money and no Hollywood/famous peeps propping them up by sitting down at NFL games or making speeches on their behalf at the grammys.
If they commit violence. Put them in jail. Otherwise, ignore them.
1. they commit violence
2. they somehow sucker someone else to commit violence as a counter to them
3. the media gives them coverage
The best way to make them go away is to ignore them.
They have no political power, little money and no Hollywood/famous peeps propping them up by sitting down at NFL games or making speeches on their behalf at the grammys.
If they commit violence. Put them in jail. Otherwise, ignore them.
