Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Guys, let's not make this a big deal. Stop talking about it, stop trying to confront a worldwide issue, let's just pretend it never happened. Wash, rinse, repeat. 

 

It's a shame Shapiro and Jr. weren't in that mosque.

It would have been a different outcome.

Shalom 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

I do follow that.

Not all muslims are responsible for the Paris attacks....but the ones who happily and purposefully engage in radicalization and demonization of the targets of the attacks damned well bear some responsibility.

Not all Trumpkins are responsible for these murders....but the ones who happily and purposefully engage in radicalization and demonization of the targets of the attacks damned well bear some responsibility.

You don't get to sow the seeds of hate, fervently water and fertilize them, and then disclaim responsibility when they predictably and inevitably grow to bear their bloody fruit.

When you call a people "semiliterate monkeys," and people are listening, some of them will take your dehumanization of people to heart, and act on it.  When you blanket-refer to a people as "murderers and rapists," that isn't intended to, nor does it, inspire affection of those people.  It is intended to and does inspire contempt and loathing.  Which paves the road to violence.

If you demonize and dehumanize a people enough, people will hear you and act on it.  It worked when the nazis did it.  It worked when various muslim radicals have done it in recent years.  It's working when the new tide of white nationalists are doing it.  It is proven and predictable.  Rhetoric matters.  Radicalization matters.  You are GODDAMNED WELL RESPONSIBLE FOR MORE THAN JUST YOUR ACTIONS -- you live in a fucking community, you selfish asshole.

Fox News and their twitter sycophants are to right wing terrorists what wahhabi madrassas are to radical islamic terrorists. 

It's not hard to see where these seeds are being planted. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Guys, let's not make this a big deal. Stop talking about it, stop trying to confront a worldwide issue, let's just pretend it never happened. Wash, rinse, repeat. 

 

D1uGpRWXcAUzCId?format=png&name=small

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, FondrenRoad said:

You have no right to free speech on privately owned social media platforms.  In fact, a lot of this hate speech directly violates Twitter and Facebook terms of service.  Twitter and Facebook put profit way ahead of justice, however, so they don't give a shit.

Not sure why you quoted me with this statement. I could give a fuck if all these right wing douchebags get banned from private social media platforms. I was specifically responding to a previous comment talking about imprisoning people who are guilty of  what they consider hate speech. That's a slippery slope I dont think we need.

Edited by Blotto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

Ben's just hoping they don't dig into this guy's history on social media like they did with the guy who shot up the mosque in Quebec City.

 

 

Purely coincidental, I'm sure.  How are these accounts not the equivalent of yelling fire in a theater?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

D1uGpRWXcAUzCId?format=png&name=small

Remember how we've read:

"Muslims need to clean up the violent elements they have going on!"

"The black community needs to take care of its problems, and put a stop to these young gangbangers shooting people!"

"Mexico needs to stop being corrupt, and needs to get rid of the violent drug traffickers selling dope to Americans!"

I remember.

What I DON'T remember reading is:

"The Western world/western leaders and "thought leaders" need to take care of the violent jackasses they're helping create."

Nope.  Responsibility?  That's for brown and black folks only.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about this.  How about we just call white people "semiliterate primitive monkeys?"  Does that seem cool?  Can't possibly have the effect of dehumanizing white people, could it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

 

What I DON'T remember reading is:

"The Western world/western leaders and "thought leaders" need to take care of the violent jackasses they're helping create."

 Narrator: You won’t 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoyed the words of the NZ PM. 

 

https://thespinoff.co.nz/news/15-03-2019/we-were-chosen-because-we-represent-diversity-jacinda-ardern-on-christchurch-terrorist-attack/

 

Our thoughts and our prayers are with those who have been impacted today. Christchurch was the home of these victims. For many this may not have been the place they were born, in fact for many New Zealand was their choice, the place they actively came to and committed themselves to, the place they were raising their families, where they were part of communities that they loved and who loved them, it was a place that many came to for its safety, a place where they were free to practise their culture and their religion.

For those of you who are watching at home tonight and questioning how this could have happened here, we, New Zealand, we were not a target because we are a safe harbour for those who hate. We were not chosen for this act of violence because we condone racism, because we’re an enclave for extremism, we were chosen for the very fact that we are none of these things, because we represent diversity, kindness, compassion, a home for those that share our values, a refuge for those who need it. And those values, I can assure you, will not and cannot be shaken by this attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, rantanamo said:

Mental Health has become the new buzzword for this stuff.  Some of these people are simply delusional idiots.

I don’t think it’s a new buzzword.   Here in the US, a helluva lot of the mass shooters had contact with mental health support at some level, and then fell through the cracks.  Sandy Hook, Aurora, Parkland, etc. are just recent examples of where the shooters were known to have mental health issues, but still easily got what they needed to pull off their attacks.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what might be the next group targeted?"

Gays - Florida night club

Jews - Pittsburgh synagogue 

Muslims - New Zealand, a few cases in the US too (one was mistakenly done on Sikhs)

Black Christians - South Carolina

so, who remains?  I'm thinking Latinos -- by a Nazi type who hates immigrants. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Seems like Trump’s political enemies have been targeted multiple times already.

No way that can happen again.

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, NowThis said:

so, who remains?  I'm thinking Latinos -- by a Nazi type who hates immigrants. 

It's coming.  It's just a matter of when.  And if you think a bunch of us aren't looking over our shoulders when we're at certain places, you'd be way wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, NowThis said:

 

Yet the slorches and ball sack and gbr or whatever the fuck his name is, will come on here and defend that pathological lying sack of shit.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, NowThis said:

 

Yet the slorches and ball sack and gbr or whatever the fuck his name is, will come on here and defend that pathological lying sack of shit.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ted Lange said:

 


It's interesting, reading the online babblings and "manifesto"  of this deranged gunman, how attuned to U.S. politics he was, how many references he made.  Donald Trump, Charlottesville etc....    

This is Trump's legacy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just watched the video of the shooting. That was some grizzly shit. I’m surprised Facebook hasn’t taken it down yet. Couldn’t help but wish that those people could have been carrying and at least had the chance to light that piece of shit up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, USNALonghorn said:

Just watched the video of the shooting. That was some grizzly shit. I’m surprised Facebook hasn’t taken it down yet. Couldn’t help but wish that those people could have been carrying and at least had the chance to light that piece of shit up.

Oh yes by all means lets use this as a platform to push this fucking retardation again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Oh yes by all means lets use this as a platform to push this fucking retardation again

Yes, wishing that innocent victims had a chance to protect themselves is retardation. Grow the fuck up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, USNALonghorn said:

Just watched the video of the shooting. That was some grizzly shit. I’m surprised Facebook hasn’t taken it down yet. Couldn’t help but wish that those people could have been carrying and at least had the chance to light that piece of shit up.

Yes, we're all aware of the NRA's canned response after mass shootings. Polly want a cracker?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Yes, we're all aware of the NRA's canned response after mass shootings. Polly want a cracker?

And yet you keep posting in the active shooter thread. What’s your plan of action?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, USNALonghorn said:

And yet you keep posting in the active shooter thread. What’s your plan of action?

You're not fooling anyone here. Go peddle your bullshit on TexAgs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not having to go to fucking church strapped is a good starting point.

Why does “the plan” always start with arming the victims for some of y’all?

We get it, ammo boners are awesome.

I don’t give a fuck and I shouldn’t have to go to church/school/grocery store/concert in full battle rattle just because some people are more worried about wrapping their dicks up in the flag, camo, and guns than they’re worried about the piles of dead bodies.

Start with the problem - the radicalized shooters. Once someone shows me a good faith effort on addressing that beyond thoughts and prayers, I’ll be willing to discuss defensive measures.

Until then, my response to anyone blathering about hardening our way of life or arming victims is a hearty “Fuck off”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

You're not fooling anyone here. Go peddle your bullshit on TexAgs.

I’m here to have a debate. “Go peddle your bullshit on TexAgs” is not an educated reply. Try again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

Not sure.  Swam had a different writing style.

When he got here he said we all ought to know who he is so there was no need to say so.

In other words he's a gutless chickenshit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's coming.  It's just a matter of when.  And if you think a bunch of us aren't looking over our shoulders when we're at certain places, you'd be way wrong.


Congrats! At least you don’t look too foreign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, EMAWesome said:

What I would prefer would be for you to fuck yourself in the ass with a chain saw.  I would prefer Muslins to not be murdered in cold blood in their masques.  I would also prefer Islamic radicals to not murder concert goers in cold blood in Paris arena.  I would prefer Mexicans who want to live in this country to immigrate legally and not unnecessarily risk their lives trying to enter the U.S. illegally.   I would also prefer that illegal immigrants who do commit violent acts in this country were not protected by liberal politicians whose only concern with the entire issue is how many more votes they would get if you could get these illegal immigrants the ability to vote.   I don't cheer for unnecessary violence towards anyone.  I also don't cheer for unnecessarily abandoning common sense when it comes to dealing with issues of these magnitudes.  I am responsible for my decisions and actions.  I am responsible for what I choose to read, view, or otherwise acknowledge on the internet and for my reactions to that stimuli.  I am not responsible for any other person's decisions or actions.  I am not responsible for how someone else reacts to whatever they absorb on the internet That is their responsibility.  They made the decision to do or not do whatever, I did not.  

2

If you're wondering why I negged you, it's for repeating this fucking lie. Now, take some responsibility for your part in spreading it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

What leadership looks like:

 

What knee jerk reacting looks like.  The shooter mentioned he had thought about carrying out the attack in a multitude of different ways beforehand.  The only reason he chose guns was because he there would be a huge amount of idiots in the United States who would react the way they have reacted.  There could be some kind of mystical device surrounding New Zealand that disintegrates all firearms in the country and it wouldn't have stopped this.   Also what is the point of bringing up that 16 year olds can have guns in New Zealand?  The shooter was 28 years old.   Their gun laws are already light years tougher than they are in the U.S.  It wasn't a gun that decided to commit a terrorist act.  It was a human being.  The conundrum of the situation is that if you think gun control laws are controversial try implementing human being control laws.

Edited by EMAWesome

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

What knee jerk reacting looks like.  The shooter mentioned he had thought about carrying out the attack in a multitude of different ways beforehand.  The only reason he chose guns was because he there would be a huge amount of idiots in the United States who would react the way they have reacted.  There could be some kind of mystical device surrounding New Zealand that disintegrates all firearms in the country and it wouldn't have stopped this.  Their gun laws are already light years tougher than they are in the U.S.  It wasn't a gun that decided to commit a terrorist act.  It was a human being.  The conundrum of the situation is that if you think gun control laws are controversial try implementing human being control laws.

2

This defines all laws you fuckwit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

Fair enough.

I should have said: hate speech that incites violence or endangers people is not protected under the first amendment and the people inciting this shit should be locked up.

Better?

Now what's your defense for the right wing hate mongers and the army of psychopaths they're inspiring?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TexArcher said:

hate speech that incites violence or endangers people is not protected under the first amendment 

Actually...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TexArcher said:

Fair enough.

I should have said: hate speech that incites violence or endangers people is not protected under the first amendment and the people inciting this shit should be locked up.

Better?

Now what's your defense for the right wing hate mongers and the army of psychopaths they're inspiring?

I am not defending anyone.  And yes hate speech that incites violence or endangers people is only not protected under very narrow circumstances that would not be applicable in most cases (getting in someone's face and using fighting words).  The Supreme Court and constitution take a very dim view on viewpoint discrimination, no matter how grotesque it is.

You can say kill all the whites.  And be protected.  Even if someone hears it and hurts someone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Actually...

Brandenburg v Ohio.  Inflammatory speech that incites lawlessness is not protected.

Right wingers will now argue that nothing Candace Owens said incited lawlessness.  And she's vague enough that that's probably true, in a legal sense.  It's just a massive fucking coincidence that a mass murderer mentioned her by name.

But what about Richard Spencer and his ilk?  Can they be accused of inciting violence?

Something needs to be done to put a fucking stop to these people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TexArcher said:

Brandenburg v Ohio.  Inflammatory speech that incites lawlessness is not protected.

Right wingers will now argue that nothing Candace Owens said incited lawlessness.  And she's vague enough that that's probably true, in a legal sense.  It's just a massive fucking coincidence that a mass murderer mentioned her by name. 

But what about Richard Spencer and his ilk?  Can they be accused of inciting violence?

Something needs to be done to put a fucking stop to these people.

There are all sorts of legal articles on hate speech.  The prohibitions on inciting violence are extremely narrow and aren't going to apply to people saying shit on tv, speeches, radio or social media.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The right shaming people that spew hate against Muslims, Mexicans etc might help but think deep down most of them agree with those thoughts even if they personally would not shoot up a group of innocent people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

Brandenburg v Ohio.  Inflammatory speech that incites lawlessness is not protected.

Right wingers will now argue that nothing Candace Owens said incited lawlessness.  And she's vague enough that that's probably true, in a legal sense.  It's just a massive fucking coincidence that a mass murderer mentioned her by name.

But what about Richard Spencer and his ilk?  Can they be accused of inciting violence?

Something needs to be done to put a fucking stop to these people.

There is also the leader...

8F1A7450-10F8-422C-95B0-181F6F61DE68_zps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mpu


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
×
×
  • Create New...