View Full Version : US Politics Thread 2021-24
I guess we have to ask ourselves, "would you have liked to have been aborted?"
"The dead only know one thing, its better to be alive"
So you advocate life begins with active brainwaves (apparently). I'm confident in assuming fetuses don't have those thoughts/feelings. :shucks:
Otto Harkaman
09-04-21, 02:24 PM
http://www.krakenmediadesigns.com/images/biden.jpg
I didn't say anything like that. I asked you, if you would have liked to have been aborted?
Which about the biggest 'beside the point' you could have brought up. It would be kinda like' Hey, Otto, would you have preferred to be born with a silver spoon in your mouth?'
Thinking about this article Arlo posted as a response to one of my comments.
Soon there's midterm elections in the United States.
If some of these Texan politicians lose against politicians who are pro-abortion will this law then be removed or changed ?
Here in Denmark or Sweden a law stays even if the architect behind it lose the election.
Markus
3catcircus
09-04-21, 02:49 PM
Thinking about this article Arlo posted as a response to one of my comments.
Soon there's midterm elections in the United States.
If some of these Texan politicians lose against politicians who are pro-abortion will this law then be removed or changed ?
Here in Denmark or Sweden a law stays even if the architect behind it lose the election.
Markus
Only way it happens is if the entire legislature flips to a simple majority who oppose it, introduce a repeal, and overcome a veto from the governor by 2/3 majority from each chamber of the legislature. The TX governor has a line item veto power, btw.
If some of these Texan politicians lose against politicians who are pro-abortion ...
Nobody is pro-abortion. Pro-choice may be the term you want to use.
Buddahaid
09-04-21, 03:11 PM
Roe v. Wade is actually bad case law anyway. There is no right to privacy associated with abortion in the Constitution, yet that's what SCOTUS claimed as the basis for their ruling.
I'll just throw this out from Cornell Law School explaining the court's decision.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-14/section-1/abortion
I hear that this rat on your neighbor clause tip line for the Texas law is being slammed with fake tips making it useless. :up:
Otto Harkaman
09-04-21, 03:14 PM
http://www.krakenmediadesigns.com/images/biden.jpg
Skybird
09-04-21, 03:19 PM
I didn't say anything like that. I asked you, if you would have liked to have been aborted?
That quesiton only makes sense when the use of the term "you/me/I" make sense. And for that a brain with sufficient complexity to form mind, awareness, ego, personality etc are precondition.
Where there is no "you", there is no self that can like or dislike anything. It does not exist. And a self, in the widest meaning of the term cannot form up without bio-material structures needed for maintaining it being in place.
A beating heart means nothing. Its as much a human as this already is a living frog:
https://scilogs.spektrum.de/wblogs/gallery/51/Galvani-frogs-legs-electricity.gif
Its he brain that makes all what we describe as "human". Not the heart - the brain. Cerebrum. Diencephalon. Brain stem. Cerebellum. Basal ganglia. Limbic system.
Without this, with such brain structures not yet existent or already being dead, what you have is not a human, but is reflex-bound flesh. Not even instinct-driven: instincts demand the existence of a sufficiently complex brain as well.
-------
There is an implication in that medieval Texas law that is not ebign mentione dhere. That si the bounty.-hunting that it propagates, and the defamation encorzagement. That even taxi drivers who drive a women that meets a doctor doing abpertions can get hunted down andmamde paying - without the driver needing to know anything. Staff in hpsiutals in texas is nreprted to be concenred for beign held liable for abportions in their clinbis even if they have nothign to do with it.
It turns everybody into a potential spy on others, and a bounty hunter. Great. This way mistrust gets sown and social cohesion get hollowed out from inside, every dictatorship works like this.
Would you have preferred to be born with a silver spoon in your mouth or been aborted?
Doubling up 'beside-the-points' is not an act of 'cancelling out' the actual beside-the-points. You aren't good at this Otto. How about this? If your sister or daughter was forced by law to carry her pregnancy full term at the age of 12 (and, legally, that's rape) and died in childbirth would you simply be glad because it wasn't you?
That quesiton only makes sense when the use of the term "you/me/I" make sense. And for that a brain with sufficient complexity to form mind, awareness, ego, personality etc are precondition.
<snip>
Its he brain that all is about. Not the heart - the brain. Cerebrum. Diencephalon. Brain stem. Cerebellum. Basal ganglia. Limbic system.
Without this, what you have is not a human, but reflex-bound flesh. Not even instinct-driven: instincts demand the existence of a sufficiently complex brain as well.
Tried that. He's having none of it (guessing because he think's he has a great point).:shucks:
Otto Harkaman
09-04-21, 03:25 PM
http://www.krakenmediadesigns.com/images/biden.jpg
Absolutely, I hate my sister, I would hope it was extremely painful and lasted a long time.
So I am truthful, how about you, would you have liked to have been aborted?
You're losing 'compassion' legitimacy, bro.
I would never have known it, had I been. If my mother had not been given a choice... I would have been.
Only way it happens is if the entire legislature flips to a simple majority who oppose it, introduce a repeal, and overcome a veto from the governor by 2/3 majority from each chamber of the legislature. The TX governor has a line item veto power, btw.
A single item law can't be 'line itemed.'
Otto Harkaman
09-04-21, 03:49 PM
http://www.krakenmediadesigns.com/images/biden.jpg
Exactly
"The dead only know one thing, it is better to be alive"
Guess you didn't understand my post. That's ok. You seldom seem to. I understand yours, however. SMDH. :shucks:
Otto Harkaman
09-04-21, 04:11 PM
http://www.krakenmediadesigns.com/images/biden.jpg
No I understood that you were never going to answer truthfully, you are very happy you are alive and that you weren't aborted.
I hope you facilitate many deaths, if people want to kill their children so be it.
I answered you very truthfully. I could not have possibly desired one way or the other, as a fetus. Fetuses don't have a choice, one way or the other. And my comment about my being alive because my mother was given a choice seems to have sailed right over your head.
Hyperbolizing pro-choice by accusing people who take that stance as 'children killers' who 'facilitate death' is the worst form of dis-intellectual pearl clutching. It would be quite entertaining if it didn't mimic how actual conservative politicians seem to think, by and large.
https://scontent-dfw5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/p180x540/241332379_10223542628887273_2332207040310307516_n. jpg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=KKR7lzzRh3oAX9Y6RJe&_nc_oc=AQmX83Nuqx_jgkpmlIqDsHQ2PrS8WnPxJoc1j2Tw3ae BANLhZ-3GWrYkWUkx4t1trdqJJ0csvaIYZbl5LL1_H51T&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.xx&oh=ae17aca4d4a6c3efc0fe3c5ddd6ac81b&oe=61381E36
3catcircus
09-04-21, 06:20 PM
A single item law can't be 'line itemed.'
That's not how the law gets written and amended.
Legislators will write legislation in a manner so as to potentially tie it to unrelated legislation all the time. When that bill is presented that has changed to 10 different sections of the law, the governor can pass whatever portion he wants and line item veto the rest.
BTW, here's the text of the change to the law:
https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/87R/billtext/html/SB00008F.HTM
You'll note that if parts of the law are deemed unconstitutional, they'll sever that portion while retaining the rest.
3catcircus
09-04-21, 06:50 PM
https://scontent-dfw5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/p180x540/241332379_10223542628887273_2332207040310307516_n. jpg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=KKR7lzzRh3oAX9Y6RJe&_nc_oc=AQmX83Nuqx_jgkpmlIqDsHQ2PrS8WnPxJoc1j2Tw3ae BANLhZ-3GWrYkWUkx4t1trdqJJ0csvaIYZbl5LL1_H51T&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.xx&oh=ae17aca4d4a6c3efc0fe3c5ddd6ac81b&oe=61381E36
This is very very simple.
Are you a biological female? Did a biological male ejaculate into your vagina? Did neither of you use birth control? Go to the drugstore and get the morning-after pill the next day. You don't need a prescription.
Did you use birth control and still concerned you could get pregnant? Buy a pregnancy test at the drugstore before six weeks. Or go to your doctor or planned parenthood before six weeks.
You were raped? Why wouldn't you ask for a morning after pill when the cops call the ambulance to take you to the hospital?
What this change to the law does is force people to either be responsible or go outside the state if they procrastinate.
Some will say "but the woman may not know she can become pregnant until after 6 weeks..." My answer to that is: are you a biological female whose vagina was ejaculated into by a biological male?
I once knew a girl who swore that she had gotten pregnant from sitting on a public toilet seat. She knew exactly when it happened.
I once knew a girl who swore that she had gotten pregnant from sitting on a public toilet seat. She knew exactly when it happened.
I'm sure you did. :up:
Rockstar
09-04-21, 10:58 PM
I new a girl who was married and got pregnant, with twins! That scared the hell out of me especially since she wasn’t my wife. I know, I’m going straight to hell. :wah:
Buddahaid
09-04-21, 11:08 PM
I new a girl who was married and got pregnant, with twins! That scared the hell out of me especially since she wasn’t my wife. I know, I’m going straight to hell. :wah:
:haha: Is this a contest? Nothing happened here oh look at that shiney thing over there....
I new a girl who was married and got pregnant, with twins! That scared the hell out of me especially since she wasn’t my wife. I know, I’m going straight to hell. :wah:
Oh you wicked boy!!:o But was it good? :D
Buddahaid
09-05-21, 01:09 AM
This is very very simple.
You were raped? Why wouldn't you ask for a morning after pill when the cops call the ambulance to take you to the hospital?
You've grown up (mostly) in a family that doesn't tell you about the birds and the bees because they are embarassed or too hung up themselves to even discuss it?
You were raped by your father but you are too young and afraid to do anything about it and hope it will go away because you don't want to get another beating but it doesn't just go away?
You were raped by your boyfriend but you don't want to get him in trouble because you love him, or you're afraid of him?
It's not only about people who have a choice or are immoral. It's not that obvious.
It's not as simple as you want to make it.
Why Satanists may be the last hope to take down Texas’s abortion bill:
https://fortune.com/2021/09/03/why-satanists-may-be-the-last-hope-to-take-down-texass-abortion-bill/
The group argues that they should have access to the abortion pills Misoprostol and Mifepristone for religious use through the The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) which was created to allow Native Americans access to peyote for religious rituals. Under these rules, the Temple is arguing that they should be granted those same rights to use abortifacients for their own religious purposes.
Gotta love these guys :haha:
Buddahaid
09-05-21, 01:43 AM
Why Satanists may be the last hope to take down Texas’s abortion bill:
https://fortune.com/2021/09/03/why-satanists-may-be-the-last-hope-to-take-down-texass-abortion-bill/
Gotta love these guys :haha:
Pretty funny how this stuff can cycle back and bite one on ones righteous arse.
Anyway, it's just not possible to legislate morality in a free society without making that society less than free. It's funny how the less government republicans can embrase big government when the laws are to their liking. Look in the mirror hypocrites.
Rockstar
09-05-21, 09:03 AM
You've grown up (mostly) in a family that doesn't tell you about the birds and the bees because they are embarassed or too hung up themselves to even discuss it?
You were raped by your father but you are too young and afraid to do anything about it and hope it will go away because you don't want to get another beating but it doesn't just go away?
You were raped by your boyfriend but you don't want to get him in trouble because you love him, or you're afraid of him?
It's not only about people who have a choice or are immoral. It's not that obvious.
It's not as simple as you want to make it.
You forgot the possibility of aliens and immaculate conception. There is absolutely no law barring a female victim of rape or incest from seeking help. Being afraid, for whatever reason, is not IMO an abortion rights issue. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink. The damage done in the above circumstances are much more complicated and harder to fix than just making a trip to the abortion clinic.
The new law basically empowers citizens, not the State, to sue abortion care providers should they abort a fetus after the 6th week. But the kicker is that the new law states that a man wether an alien, divine, relative or rapist who impregnates a woman through rape or incest cannot file a lawsuit. Seems to me then in such cases allowances will be made and should the victim desire an abortion after the 6th week no one can sue the abortion provider. That’s my take.
3catcircus
09-05-21, 11:16 AM
You forgot the possibility of aliens and immaculate conception. There is absolutely no law barring a female victim of rape or incest from seeking help. Being afraid, for whatever reason, is not IMO an abortion rights issue. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink. The damage done in the above circumstances are much more complicated and harder to fix than just making a trip to the abortion clinic.
The new law basically empowers citizens, not the State, to sue abortion care providers should they abort a fetus after the 6th week. But the kicker is that the new law states that a man wether an alien, divine, relative or rapist who impregnates a woman through rape or incest cannot file a lawsuit. Seems to me then in such cases allowances will be made and should the victim desire an abortion after the 6th week no one can sue the abortion provider. That’s my take.
Yep. The pro-abortion activists conveniently ignore that fact. That they're prattling on about abortion is now illegal without the " after detecting a fetal heartbeat" part is them assuming that all of the low-information people who never read past the headlines will now give them donations and support.
I just don't get the veracity with which they insist that abortion should be only a woman's choice to get whenever, whatever, wherever. Some of these activists even advocate killing them after a live birth. I'm sure there were no pro-abortion activists, for example, crusading to put someone like Dr. Kermit Gosnell out of business, despite his "snipping" the spinal cords of late 3rd trimester viable babies, as he took advantage of desperate illegal immigrants and the poor.
This is the stuff that pro-abortion activists want to brush under the carpet:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/58-horrific-details-from-the-kermit-gosnell-trial-that-you-do-not-want-to-read
The problem isn't abortion. The problem is how planned parenthood and other abortion activists lobby to make abortion less regulated than liposuction because of the profit motive to supply dead babies for research.
Our own experience shows this bizarre focus on killing babies. My wife was pregnant with our first child and we decided to get genetic testing due to her age. The results came back for a higher risk of Trisomy-18, so her OB/GYN had us come in for genetic counseling followed by an amniocentesis to confirm viability. The first thing the counselor said was that we were past the gestational time for what is legal in our state, but we could go to another state to get an abortion and she rattled off those states by rote. She couldn't tell us what the increased risk was, though.
It wasn't until I specifically asked the doctor "what is the normal risk and what is our increased risk." Our increased risk was a 6% chance of Trisomy-18. Six percent?!?!? Well take our chances. Now, that "you should have an abortion" baby is an annoying teenage scholar-athlete who eats us out of house and home...
Rockstar
09-05-21, 01:02 PM
Speaking of profit motive I read a little and it seems the people who took the case before the Supreme Court were the abortion providers. Seems the Texas law is going to cut into their profit margin and they didn’t like it. As for arguements it’s the same old usin’ agin themins’ extremist what if party politics.
3catcircus
09-05-21, 01:33 PM
Speaking of profit motive I read a little and it seems the people who took the case before the Supreme Court were the abortion providers. Seems the Texas law is going to cut into their profit margin and they didn’t like it. As for arguements it’s the same old usin’ agin themins’ extremist what if party politics.
That's a different problem - money and politics shouldn't coexist in a quid pro quo. No lobbyists, no industry trade groups, no PACs, no donations allowed by anyone other than individuals. Eliminate the temptation here in front of politicians, and you eliminate the chicanery that results. House of Cards is fiction, but it's closer to reality than not.
Some of these activists even advocate killing them after a live birth.
The only people I ever see claiming that are the anti-choice crowd. :shucks:
Another reason to why I stay neutral in this thread is because my knowledge in how law is made on state(like Texas) level is almost none existent.
I know mostly how law is made in Washington DC.
What I know is in both cases the law does not count before the president or a governor sign the bill.
They can also refuse to sign it.
I guess in both cases the law makes another round to make changes or remove it.
Markus
3catcircus
09-05-21, 03:07 PM
The only people I ever see claiming that are the anti-choice crowd. :shucks:
As per usual, you're incorrect.
https://nypost.com/2019/02/13/these-abortion-laws-arent-what-pro-choice-is-supposed-to-mean/
As per usual, you're incorrect.
https://nypost.com/2019/02/13/these-abortion-laws-arent-what-pro-choice-is-supposed-to-mean/
'After a live birth' and 'viable fetus' are actually not the same thing. But then, I gave up long ago on your ability to differentiate. So, again, what you claim is pearl-clutching hyperbole. (per usual) :shucks:
It has been debated a lot in our countries Denmark and Sweden.
When does a festus become a human-When the first heartbeat comes or the first signal occur between two points in the brain ?
This discussion came because the politicians wanted to change when a woman could have an abortion-here the limit is 12 week. This can be expand to 16 week if there's a risc for the woman.
Markus
3catcircus
09-05-21, 03:46 PM
'After a live birth' and 'viable fetus' are actually not the same thing. But then, I gave up long ago on your ability to differentiate. So, again, what you claim is pearl-clutching hyperbole. (per usual) :shucks:
I'm guessing you didn't even bother reading the article. That's ok, I don't expect low-information people to put in the work.
3catcircus
09-05-21, 03:49 PM
It has been debated a lot in our countries Denmark and Sweden.
When does a festus become a human-When the first heartbeat comes or the first signal occur between two points in the brain ?
This discussion came because the politicians wanted to change when a woman could have an abortion-here the limit is 12 week. This can be expand to 16 week if there's a risc for the woman.
Markus
Wai-wai-wait...
You mean to tell me that liberal European democracies have stricter abortion laws than most states in the US!?!
Don't let the pro-abortion activists find out, it'll make them spontaneously combust...
Wai-wai-wait...
You mean to tell me that liberal European democracies have stricter abortion laws than most states in the US!?!
Don't let the pro-abortion activists find out, it'll make them spontaneously combust...
Correction
From a Danish page about abortion
The abortion limit in Denmark is 12 weeks. This means that you have the right to have a medical or surgical abortion if you are no longer pregnant than 12 weeks. After that time, it requires special permission to terminate the pregnancy.
If you are in a situation where you want an abortion, but are longer than 12 weeks, you must apply to the Abortion Council for permission. You can do this until the end of the 22nd week of pregnancy. An approval of the abortion requires that the three professionals in the consultation assess that there are significant reasons to terminate the pregnancy. For example, it could be that:
Your physical or mental health is at risk due to pregnancy or childbirth or in relation to having to be responsible for a child
The child is at risk of developing a serious physical or mental illness
Rape, incest or any other criminal act is to blame for the pregnancy
It is assessed that you will not be able to care for the child
Markus
I'm guessing you didn't even bother reading the article. That's ok, I don't expect low-information people to put in the work.
You 'guess' a lot. Did you? :shucks:
3catcircus
09-05-21, 04:48 PM
Correction
From a Danish page about abortion
The abortion limit in Denmark is 12 weeks. This means that you have the right to have a medical or surgical abortion if you are no longer pregnant than 12 weeks. After that time, it requires special permission to terminate the pregnancy.
If you are in a situation where you want an abortion, but are longer than 12 weeks, you must apply to the Abortion Council for permission. You can do this until the end of the 22nd week of pregnancy. An approval of the abortion requires that the three professionals in the consultation assess that there are significant reasons to terminate the pregnancy. For example, it could be that:
Your physical or mental health is at risk due to pregnancy or childbirth or in relation to having to be responsible for a child
The child is at risk of developing a serious physical or mental illness
Rape, incest or any other criminal act is to blame for the pregnancy
It is assessed that you will not be able to care for the child
Markus
So let me get this straight... It's not just the woman's choice?!?! I'm shocked.
^ Up to the 12th week any woman who's pregnant can chose to take an abortion and no question asked, after that it's up to this Abortion Council to either approve a woman's wish or reject her wish for an abortion.
I understand it's kind of different when it comes to your country, USA each state has their own abortion law.
Markus
Torvald Von Mansee
09-05-21, 08:19 PM
As per usual, you're incorrect.
https://nypost.com/2019/02/13/these-abortion-laws-arent-what-pro-choice-is-supposed-to-mean/
Using the New York Post as a source? Cute.
Is it an opinion piece? Well, I'm not giving the Post a click to find out, but if so, doubly cute.
Torvald Von Mansee
09-05-21, 08:20 PM
I'm guessing you didn't even bother reading the article. That's ok, I don't expect low-information people to put in the work.
NY Post article. See my previous post.
Torvald Von Mansee
09-05-21, 08:23 PM
This is very very simple.
Are you a biological female? Did a biological male ejaculate into your vagina? Did neither of you use birth control? Go to the drugstore and get the morning-after pill the next day. You don't need a prescription.
Did you use birth control and still concerned you could get pregnant? Buy a pregnancy test at the drugstore before six weeks. Or go to your doctor or planned parenthood before six weeks.
You were raped? Why wouldn't you ask for a morning after pill when the cops call the ambulance to take you to the hospital?
What this change to the law does is force people to either be responsible or go outside the state if they procrastinate.
Some will say "but the woman may not know she can become pregnant until after 6 weeks..." My answer to that is: are you a biological female whose vagina was ejaculated into by a biological male?
Oh, I take it you are female. You certainly wouldn't want to tell someone how to lead their life without walking in their shoes!!!
3catcircus
09-05-21, 08:57 PM
NY Post article. See my previous post.
You don't have to like the source for it to be factual reporting.
Before Cuomo signed updated abortion legislation for NY, if a chemically-induced abortion resulted in a live birth, they were protected. After he sighed it, a chemically-induced abortion resulting in a live birth didn't require subsequent medical intervention - the abortionist could simply throw a preemie into the corner and let it die hours later.
Inconvenient truths...
3catcircus
09-05-21, 08:59 PM
Oh, I take it you are female. You certainly wouldn't want to tell someone how to lead their life without walking in their shoes!!!
So you're advocating for people to have no consequences for irresponsible behavior. And we wonder why society is full of lawlessness and immorality.
Before 'Mr. Informed' gets too carried away (again):
Fact check: New York's abortion law doesn't allow any abortion 'up until birth,' as claimed
New York state's abortion law has previously been the subject of misinformation.
It became a talking point when Cuomo signed abortion legislation codifying Roe vs. Wade into state law in January 2019.
New York's Reproductive Health Act allows practitioners to perform an abortion on a patient who is 24 weeks or more away from the start of a pregnancy if the fetus is not viable or the abortion is necessary "to protect the patient's life or health."
The law does not define "health" or viability of a fetus. The determination of these factors must be made by a "health care practitioner licensed, certified, or authorized" under state law, "acting within his or her lawful scope of practice."
Before Cuomo signed the legislation, abortions after 24 weeks were allowed only when the mother's life was at risk. They otherwise were criminalized.
The Reproductive Health Act also removed abortion from the state's penal code, and the statute still defines a person as a "human being who has been born and is alive." Killing a baby once born is still considered homicide.
Typically, pregnancies range from 38 to 42 weeks and babies are considered viable at 37 weeks. Across the country:
43 states restrict abortion by gestational age.
19 states ban abortion at 20 weeks of pregnancy.
5 states ban abortion at 24 weeks of pregnancy.
18 states ban abortion based on viability of the fetus.
Alabama has the most restrictive abortion law in the U.S., banning abortion at any stage of pregnancy and for any reason, including in cases of rape and incest. The law is on hold after a federal judge ruled the ban "defies the United States Constitution."
Virginia has a more lenient law than Alabama in terms of time frame and bans abortion at the third trimester, which begins at 25 weeks.
A 2018 report from the CDC found that in 2015, there were 638,169 reported abortions in the U.S. Of those, 65% of the procedures were performed at or before the eight-week mark and 91% were performed at or before the 13-week mark. Only 1.3% of abortions recorded were performed at 21 weeks or later.
It is false to state or imply that any abortion can occur in New York "up until birth" as the social posts claims. That is misleading. Additionally, no state in the U.S. allows abortion "up until birth."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/04/30/fact-check-andrew-cuomo-new-york-law-does-not-allow-abortion-up-until-birth/3014473001/
:shucks:
Rockstar
09-05-21, 10:43 PM
Occupy Congress or Insurrection, I wonder how far things will go, or will it be a non-event? I think social media corporations should suspend their accounts immediately :D
https://youtu.be/kcCnaghYjKc
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/241282399_5504080996351576_5767120842931939466_n.j pg?_nc_cat=1&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=_E-SnrlEoTUAX-9vgE6&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-1.xx&oh=b51ffdc8cc8026ea8aa221376351de5d&oe=615C0B33
3catcircus
09-06-21, 07:19 AM
Before 'Mr. Informed' gets too carried away (again):
Fact check: New York's abortion law doesn't allow any abortion 'up until birth,' as claimed
New York state's abortion law has previously been the subject of misinformation.
It became a talking point when Cuomo signed abortion legislation codifying Roe vs. Wade into state law in January 2019.
New York's Reproductive Health Act allows practitioners to perform an abortion on a patient who is 24 weeks or more away from the start of a pregnancy if the fetus is not viable or the abortion is necessary "to protect the patient's life or health."
The law does not define "health" or viability of a fetus. The determination of these factors must be made by a "health care practitioner licensed, certified, or authorized" under state law, "acting within his or her lawful scope of practice."
Before Cuomo signed the legislation, abortions after 24 weeks were allowed only when the mother's life was at risk. They otherwise were criminalized.
The Reproductive Health Act also removed abortion from the state's penal code, and the statute still defines a person as a "human being who has been born and is alive." Killing a baby once born is still considered homicide.
Typically, pregnancies range from 38 to 42 weeks and babies are considered viable at 37 weeks. Across the country:
43 states restrict abortion by gestational age.
19 states ban abortion at 20 weeks of pregnancy.
5 states ban abortion at 24 weeks of pregnancy.
18 states ban abortion based on viability of the fetus.
Alabama has the most restrictive abortion law in the U.S., banning abortion at any stage of pregnancy and for any reason, including in cases of rape and incest. The law is on hold after a federal judge ruled the ban "defies the United States Constitution."
Virginia has a more lenient law than Alabama in terms of time frame and bans abortion at the third trimester, which begins at 25 weeks.
A 2018 report from the CDC found that in 2015, there were 638,169 reported abortions in the U.S. Of those, 65% of the procedures were performed at or before the eight-week mark and 91% were performed at or before the 13-week mark. Only 1.3% of abortions recorded were performed at 21 weeks or later.
It is false to state or imply that any abortion can occur in New York "up until birth" as the social posts claims. That is misleading. Additionally, no state in the U.S. allows abortion "up until birth."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/04/30/fact-check-andrew-cuomo-new-york-law-does-not-allow-abortion-up-until-birth/3014473001/
:shucks:
Nobody made the claim of NY killing babies up until birth at full term. What you fail to understand is that after 24 weeks, a botched chemical abortion leading to a live birth previously required the physician in attendance to render suitable medical aid. Now, that don't have to which means that those live births are left to die, typically by suffocation. Given appropriate medical care, viability at 24-26 weeks is currently achievable on a routine basis.
Since the law doesn't define health or viability and removed abortion after 24 weeks from the penal code, it allows abortion mills to kill otherwise viable babies. That the law can be abused this way means it will be and very likely is right now - we have proof of this elsewhere in the earlier Kermit Gosnell situation in PA. There were tons of complaints against him over his 30 years of killing. State regulators hadn't inspected his clinic since 1993. The only reason his house of horrors came to light was because the FBI was investigating the potential of drugs being illegally dispensed. This guy wasn't even certified to do OB/GYN work and he killed for over 30 years.
Catfish
09-06-21, 08:40 AM
^ which is probably due to the fact that abortions were illegal in a lot of states, so doctors were often outlawed, and having to do it under shady and bad conditions. If abortion was publicly and officially allowed there would be no "botched abortions".
"The ciderhouse rules" by John Irving is a good book b.t.w..
New York's Reproductive Health Act allows practitioners to perform an abortion on a patient who is 24 weeks or more away from the start of a pregnancy if the fetus is not viable or the abortion is necessary "to protect the patient's life or health."
The law does not define "health" or viability of a fetus. The determination of these factors must be made by a "health care practitioner licensed, certified, or authorized" under state law, "acting within his or her lawful scope of practice."
Before Cuomo signed the legislation, abortions after 24 weeks were allowed only when the mother's life was at risk. They otherwise were criminalized.
The Reproductive Health Act also removed abortion from the state's penal code, and the statute still defines a person as a "human being who has been born and is alive." Killing a baby once born is still considered homicide.
Typically, pregnancies range from 38 to 42 weeks and babies are considered viable at 37 weeks. Across the country:
43 states restrict abortion by gestational age.
19 states ban abortion at 20 weeks of pregnancy.
5 states ban abortion at 24 weeks of pregnancy.
18 states ban abortion based on viability of the fetus.
Alabama has the most restrictive abortion law in the U.S., banning abortion at any stage of pregnancy and for any reason, including in cases of rape and incest. The law is on hold after a federal judge ruled the ban "defies the United States Constitution."
Virginia has a more lenient law than Alabama in terms of time frame and bans abortion at the third trimester, which begins at 25 weeks.
It is false to state or imply that any abortion can occur in New York "up until birth" as the social posts claims. That is misleading. Additionally, no state in the U.S. allows abortion "up until birth."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/04/30/fact-check-andrew-cuomo-new-york-law-does-not-allow-abortion-up-until-birth/3014473001/
:shucks:
Thank you Arlo for enlighten me about the Abortions rule in the different states.
Markus
3catcircus
09-06-21, 09:43 AM
^ which is probably due to the fact that abortions were illegal in a lot of states, so doctors were often outlawed, and having to do it under shady and bad conditions. If abortion was publicly and officially allowed there would be no "botched abortions".
"The ciderhouse rules" by John Irving is a good book b.t.w..
No, these are legal abortions in modern times where use of chemicals to induce the abortion results in a live birth. Obviously, with a surgical abortion, the baby is chopped up and removed in pieces, or the head is cracked open and the brain vacuumed out.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/health_policy/mortality-records-mentioning-termination-of-pregnancy.htm
Anyone wanna fact check?
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/p526x296/241510023_5507773572648985_6312561669333767027_n.j pg?_nc_cat=1&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=WV_3Aajz8J8AX_q-NvT&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-1.xx&oh=327d64c471a4e57cdd58cd197ba7feed&oe=615C89E3
LOL.... you forgot to mention the 21 week limit, the 5 day waiting period, or that abortions must be performed in a hospital or clinic that is certified to perform said abortions. And after 12 weeks, 2 doctors must sign off on that course of treatment. Its not as cut and dried as you try to make it. But I'll give you an "E" for effort.
LOL.... you forgot to mention the 21 week limit, the 5 day waiting period, or that abortions must be performed in a hospital or clinic that is certified to perform said abortions. And after 12 weeks, 2 doctors must sign off on that course of treatment. Its not as cut and dried as you try to make it. But I'll give you an "E" for effort.
I think 12 week is standard here in Europe. During these 12 weeks no question asked if a woman wish an abortion. Thereafter doctors is needed to approve an abortion-In Denmark the limit here is 22 weeks.
Markus
3catcircus
09-07-21, 10:15 AM
I think 12 week is standard here in Europe. During these 12 weeks no question asked if a woman wish an abortion. Thereafter doctors is needed to approve an abortion-In Denmark the limit here is 22 weeks.
Markus
So why is it that EU countries seem to limit abortion after 1st trimester, yet abortion activists in the US continue with messaging that the US is repressive unlike the enlightened Europeans...
So why is it that EU countries seem to limit abortion after 1st trimester, yet abortion activists in the US continue with messaging that the US is repressive unlike the enlightened Europeans...
To be honest I don't know.
What I do know is that people in Europe fancy USA because they think they are so free
And Americans think the same about Europe.
This is the impression I got.
Markus
LOL.... you forgot to mention the 21 week limit, the 5 day waiting period, or that abortions must be performed in a hospital or clinic that is certified to perform said abortions. And after 12 weeks, 2 doctors must sign off on that course of treatment. Its not as cut and dried as you try to make it. But I'll give you an "E" for effort.
Well this avoided the facts mentioned, entirely. Not into fact checking, I see. :shucks:
https://scontent-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/s720x720/241140044_10218913320574140_8999661242804664892_n. jpg?_nc_cat=1&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=Sv_3Py1ZfcYAX8Z4ehn&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-1.xx&oh=a6320c9ab0c58838637c2deaa7bd4a11&oe=615C2A1F
u crank
09-07-21, 07:28 PM
Of the 438,000 children in foster care, how many of them were not aborted because of an existing law in the USA?
If you say so.
Address one fact, directly. Just one. Prove it false. Or prove it true, for that matter. 'But-what-about-isms' don't count. If you didn't wanna try then you could have just not posted. :shucks:
I did, "abortion is freely available on demand" is an exaggeration. Abortions are on,y available on "demand" during the first 17 days of pregnancy, after that restrictions and regulations come into play. After 22 weeks abortions are almost non existent.
How's that for addressing your "facts"?
Skybird
09-08-21, 11:32 AM
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/texas-gov-abbott-signs-sweeping-election-bill-law-n1278602
When the electorate elects party representatives and thus influences the names and ideological structure of the governing bodies, it is - historically misleadingly - called (modern) "democracy".
How is it called if a party in fear to lose power tries to create the electorate that it needs to get elected by hindering opposing voters from access to elections? "Freer democracy", maybe? :88)
critics point to the reduction in early voting hours in some of the state's most populous areas, which will now be prohibited from allowing overnight early voting.
(...)
Republicans say the legislation is necessary to prevent voter fraud from occurring, despite broad evidence indicating that voter fraud is exceedingly rare.:har:The law bans drive-thru and overnight early voting, which were popular in Houston's Harris County during the pandemic.
Rockstar
09-08-21, 11:53 AM
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/elections-guidance-letter-drive-thru-voting
October 16, 2020
Dear Texas Elections Officials: Some political subdivisions throughout Texas have expanded their use of "curbside" voting this election season to offer expansive "drive-thru" voting to all registered voters. This letter serves as a notice and reminder that the Election Code provides curbside voting as an option only to those who meet a certain, narrow set of criteria. Curbside voting is not, as some have asserted contrary to Texas law, an option for any and all voters who simply wish to vote from the comfort of their cars when they are physically able to enter the polling place.
The Texas Election Code provides that "[e]ach polling place shall be located inside a building." Tex. Elec. Code § 43.031(b). The Code makes no provision for polling places located outdoors, in parking lots, or in parking structures. More specifically, the Code makes no provision for "drive-thru" voting centers at which any voter may cast a ballot from his or her vehicle regardless of physical condition.
The Code does, however, provide a limited allowance for "curbside" voting for those who face certain barriers to entering established polling places. Specifically, an election official may provide a ballot to a registered voter "at the polling place entrance or curb" only if the voter is "physically unable to enter the polling place without personal assistance or likelihood of injuring the voter's health." Tex. Elec. Code§ 64.009(a). But if a voter can enter the polling place on his or her own without a likelihood of injury, then it is unlawful for an election official to allow that voter to cast a ballot outside the polling place.
While election officials should not ordinarily question a voter's good-faith representation that the voter is physically unable to enter a polling place, officials should not actively encourage voters to engage in unauthorized curbside voting when they fail to meet the requisite legal criteria. Fear of COVID-19 does not render a voter physically unable to cast a ballot inside a polling place without assistance. Accordingly, election officials should not advise voters that such fear qualifies them to cast a curbside ballot.
Elections must be held in compliance with these Election Code provisions. Encouraging or facilitating election operations that violate these rules is unlawful and could result in legal liability for political subdivisions and their officials. My office is committed to enforcing our State's laws to ensure safe, free, and fair elections.
Sincerely,
Ken Paxton
Attorney General of Texas
You know if this is true I suppose people could tell their elected officials they want the current laws looked at and see what can be done to change it.
But instead…
https://media.giphy.com/media/iNDnvyjHpuTxC/giphy.gif
And in the end nothing will be done to change it because it’s useful to the opposing party and people just love the drama.
I did, "abortion is freely available on demand" is an exaggeration. Abortions are on,y available on "demand" during the first 17 days of pregnancy, after that restrictions and regulations come into play. After 22 weeks abortions are almost non existent.
How's that for addressing your "facts"?
Not very good, actually.
Current Norwegian legislation and public health policy provides for abortion on request in the first 12 weeks of gestation, by application up to the 18th week.
So ... sounds like that one fact checked as true, in spite of the false color you attempted to add. How about the rest? Wanna give it a shot? :shucks:
3catcircus
09-08-21, 03:35 PM
Not very good, actually.
Current Norwegian legislation and public health policy provides for abortion on request in the first 12 weeks of gestation, by application up to the 18th week.
So ... sounds like that one fact checked as true, in spite of the false color you attempted to add. How about the rest? Wanna give it a shot? :shucks:
Norway isn't Denmark isn't Sweden isn't Holland isn't...
https://abortion-policies.srhr.org/countries/
Not very good, actually.
Current Norwegian legislation and public health policy provides for abortion on request in the first 12 weeks of gestation, by application up to the 18th week.
So ... sounds like that one fact checked as true, in spite of the false color you attempted to add. How about the rest? Wanna give it a shot? :shucks:
Norway is not the Netherlands.
Right you are.
Abortion in the Netherlands was fully legalized on November 1, 1984, allowing abortions to be done on-demand until the twenty-first week. Abortion for medical reasons can be performed until 24 weeks. There is a five-day waiting period for abortions.
em2nought
09-09-21, 01:47 AM
The party of empathy. :har:
"Get That Sellout Piece Of Sh*t Out Of Here"
https://dailycaller.com/2021/09/08/larry-elder-egged-woman-gorilla-mask/
3catcircus
09-09-21, 10:18 AM
The party of empathy. :har:
https://dailycaller.com/2021/09/08/larry-elder-egged-woman-gorilla-mask/
So what you're saying is that antifa leftist turds are completely unathletic...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ylfto5YnOww&t=20s
3catcircus
09-09-21, 12:51 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ylfto5YnOww&t=20s
So, he's a sidewalk busker?
As entertaining as it was I doubt such was his intention, even for free. He does seem to be an anti-anti-fascist (which would be either a fascist sympathizer or outright fascist). :shucks:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QChjRtTd1L8
Happy Friday, everyone. Enjoy your weekend. :yeah:
Skybird
09-10-21, 10:43 AM
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/09/08/opinions/texas-abortion-law-abbott-us-lushkov/index.html
The fact is that, more and more, the Republicans who have carefully engineered their vise-like grip on the levers of power, do not necessarily reflect the will of a growing number of everyday people in this changing state. Polling by The University of Texas at Austin and the Texas Tribune (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.texastribune.org/2021/03/02/texas-gambling-abortion-marijuana-confederate/__;!!AQdq3sQhfUj4q8uUguY!y9ff1qGuKVsneazbpgTMp1D9k rpm6k55HcjnKpagdEuEAb6_so5mOA_FWPrHP91fi9lofQ$) in March was quite revealing, for example, on the question of state abortion laws, with 31% of respondents saying those laws should be stricter, 18% saying the laws should be left as is and 37% saying they should be less strict.
And while some Texans certainly think abortion is the most important problem in the state, many -- as polling shows -- see immigration, voting rights, gun control, health care and education as more urgent priorities (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/static.texastribune.org/media/files/0da4df7c9184b91826591675a245a5b6/ut-tt-2021-06-toplines.pdf?_ga=2.154706299.252138390.1630596285-1607528176.1630596285__;!!AQdq3sQhfUj4q8uUguY!yQu5 blRNOSx4O_-J6Stc8jOO0g5-9L8VSf14QQsxZwsOMUBA9VWP5rO3cweNXvnZD3XU8SAT$).
This nuance and diversity of political views is not always visible, because since 2002, when Republicans gained control of both the state legislature and the governor's office, Texas has been a deeply gerrymandered state (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/slate.com/news-and-politics/2006/03/mess-with-texas.html__;!!AQdq3sQhfUj4q8uUguY!yQu5blRNOSx4O_-J6Stc8jOO0g5-9L8VSf14QQsxZwsOMUBA9VWP5rO3cweNXvnZDyJorAg7$). Redistricting, including in 2003, which immediately gained the GOP six seats, was supported more recently when the US Supreme Court last year turned away (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/17-586_o7kq.pdf__;!!AQdq3sQhfUj4q8uUguY!xrYwTVXdSIF-VHmEOL4D7NEz6XRy9KxVNP8b8qKFFM3paA0tCIthuUD0n-APvLjNVZ7R_mZW$) claims that Republican state lawmakers had not been intent on diluting influence of minority voters when they again redrew the voting district map in 2011.
Texas is also among the hardest states (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.texastribune.org/2020/10/19/texas-voting-elections/__;!!AQdq3sQhfUj4q8uUguY!xrYwTVXdSIF-VHmEOL4D7NEz6XRy9KxVNP8b8qKFFM3paA0tCIthuUD0n-APvLjNVXpTDakZ$) in the nation in which to vote, even before SB 1 (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/871/billtext/pdf/SB00001I.pdf__;!!AQdq3sQhfUj4q8uUguY!xrYwTVXdSIF-VHmEOL4D7NEz6XRy9KxVNP8b8qKFFM3paA0tCIthuUD0n-APvLjNVU5rjktU$) -- which bans drive-through voting, creates new rules for voter assistance, further restricts mail-in voting, and established monthly citizenship checks -- went into effect (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.texastribune.org/2021/08/30/texas-voting-restrictions-bill/__;!!AQdq3sQhfUj4q8uUguY!xrYwTVXdSIF-VHmEOL4D7NEz6XRy9KxVNP8b8qKFFM3paA0tCIthuUD0n-APvLjNVaTI5c8A$). The state still does not have automatic voter registration, for example, but does have tight voter identification laws, restricts vote-by-mail to the disabled and elderly, and has drastically reduced the number of polling places in some parts of the state.
These laws create what Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.texastribune.org/directory/trey-martinez-fischer/__;!!AQdq3sQhfUj4q8uUguY!xrYwTVXdSIF-VHmEOL4D7NEz6XRy9KxVNP8b8qKFFM3paA0tCIthuUD0n-APvLjNVRgetJFO$), D-San Antonio, has called a "generations-long pattern of discrimination (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.texastribune.org/2021/07/14/texas-democrats-walkout-voting-rights/__;!!AQdq3sQhfUj4q8uUguY!xrYwTVXdSIF-VHmEOL4D7NEz6XRy9KxVNP8b8qKFFM3paA0tCIthuUD0n-APvLjNVT_QjzSD$)," especially affecting voters of color. (After Abbott signed the new law restricting voting, incidentally, a coalition of civil rights groups filed a lawsuit (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/07/us/politics/greg-abbott-texas-voting-rights-law.html)challenging it.)
But whether on voting or abortions, the new wave of legislation from this Republican government, should be seen not as representative of all Texans, but rather as an attempt to assert dominance from the right onto a reality that is very much in flux. People of color drove 95% of Texas' population growth in 2020, (as a result of the 2020 US Census, Texas gained two congressional seats this year -- the only state in the country to do so. And while newcomers to Texas have long voted across the political spectrum, the diverse new influx may well make the political landscape more fluid than it has been in nearly two decades (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/11/texas-turning-blue/616978/__;!!AQdq3sQhfUj4q8uUguY!xrYwTVXdSIF-VHmEOL4D7NEz6XRy9KxVNP8b8qKFFM3paA0tCIthuUD0n-APvLjNVdnrtgBi$).
Changing demographics (https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.texastribune.org/2021/08/12/texas-2020-census/__;!!AQdq3sQhfUj4q8uUguY!wFUfMJriEAq_7uVUHWnxSMyXS 3ZunBGvrhoydIciFY_HTKzLVzssbCK2jp7Jh_gVb_c$) and the growth of cities mean that the population is increasingly leaning away from traditional red-state politics. In a new UT/Texas Politics Poll, 52% of participants said the state was moving in the wrong direction, the lowest impression since the project started in 2008, and Abbott scored the lowest approval rating of his tenure.
Otto Harkaman
09-10-21, 11:43 AM
^ CNN = DNN (Democratic News Network)
^ CNN = DNN (Democratic News Network)
Democratic might well fit, given the anti-democracy attitude of those on the extreme right. :shucks:
u crank
09-10-21, 12:49 PM
Democratic might well fit, given the anti-democracy attitude of those on the extreme right. :shucks:
I think the anti-democracy attitude exists at the extremes of both the left and the right.
I think the anti-democracy attitude exists at the extremes of both the left and the right.
Do you? Please illustrate. :shucks:
u crank
09-10-21, 02:11 PM
Do you? Please illustrate. :shucks:
Really? How about we have the guy making the accusation going first?
Really? How about we have the guy making the accusation going first?
The claim that left and right extremism in the United States are equally undemocratic is yours (or did you forget?) But I'll not shy away from addressing it, if that somehow makes you more comfortable in backing your claim, afterwards.
In U.S. politics there are people on the extreme end of conservatism attempting to suppress the vote (literally anti-democracy). There's also that poorly executed insurrection thing. I can't give you an example of an extreme left group doing the same. (Here's where you provide a legitimate example).
I will say this much, though, extremism is indeed harmful to humanity. But you don't fight extremism with extremism (not if you're sane). :shucks:
u crank
09-10-21, 04:58 PM
The claim that left and right extremism in the United States are equally undemocratic is yours ..
I didn't say they were equally undemocratic, I said the anti-democracy attitude exists at the extremes of both the left and the right. Are you saying that they don't?
Much of what the far Left in America today stands for is undemocratic. They have a problem with free speech and they cheer on big tech censorship. They seem to find it hard to support law and order. Defund the police is not a right wing idea. The problem of anti-Semitism on the left is obvious. Their solution to racism is anti-racism racism. And the most worrisome one of all, the rise and the embrace of authoritarianism on the left. The young are much afflicted by this.
I could give you a list of sins from the extreme right as well. The anti democratic attitude exists on both extremes.
I will say this much, though, extremism is indeed harmful to humanity. But you don't fight extremism with extremism (not if you're sane). :shucks:
I would agree with that.
I didn't say they were equally undemocratic, I said the anti-democracy attitude exists at the extremes of both the left and the right. Are you saying that they don't?
Much of what the far Left in America today stands for is undemocratic. They have a problem with free speech and they cheer on big tech censorship. They seem to find it hard to support law and order. Defund the police is not a right wing idea. The problem of anti-Semitism on the left is obvious. Their solution to racism is anti-racism racism. And the most worrisome one of all, the rise and the embrace of authoritarianism on the left. The young are much afflicted by this.
I could give you a list of sins from the extreme right as well. The anti democratic attitude exists on both extremes.
I would agree with that.
And here I was kinda expecting you to prove how 'undemocratic' the 'extreme left' is. Instead you went on about what you think being 'undemocratic' means other than actually being undemocratic (some of which is outright lies and projection such as the 'anti-Semitism' charge and mistaken viewpoint of who is more authoritarian). You probably should have gone with your first instinct and just not tried. The only facts in our exchange, so far, is that only the extreme right has taken actual political and physical actions to threaten Democracy in America. Don't say I didn't give you a chance to rationally back up your claim, though. What shall we discuss next? Who practices domestic terrorism and to what degree? :shucks:
(I actually kinda like you, kid.) :up:
u crank
09-10-21, 05:39 PM
And here I was kinda expecting you to prove how 'undemocratic' the 'extreme left' is.
I think I did. You just didn't like the answer but that's not my problem.
You probably should have gone with your first instinct and just not tried.
I think you may be right. All I've read from you in this thread tells me that.
The only facts in our exchange, so far, is that only the extreme right has taken actual political and physical actions to threaten Democracy in America.
Kinda funny but isn't that your assertion? See that's what I mean.
What shall we discuss next? Who practices domestic terrorism and to what degree?
Depends. Does Antifa qualify?
Does Antifa qualify?
Certainly you think it does. Based on what?
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/internet/trump-loyalists-push-evidence-free-claims-antifa-activists-fueled-mob-n1253176
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/fbi-director-wray-repeatedly-refutes-claims-antifa-activists-attacked-capitol-n1259297
"In an October 9 report, the Department of Homeland Security called the white-supremacist movement the “most persistent and lethal threat in the homeland”. By comparison, the Antifa movement has no structure or centralized hierarchy and thus it does not constitute a threat to American democracy, much less the United States."
https://theconversation.com/fact-check-us-is-there-an-antifa-threat-in-the-united-states-as-donald-trump-claims-150555
https://www.adl.org/antifa
The Antifa movement is only active when there's a demonstration where they can have a fight with the police and destroy things.
It also happens they beat some right wing supporters.
Markus
u crank
09-10-21, 06:05 PM
Certainly you think it does. Based on what?
You are doing it again. I said no such thing. I asked a question, nothing more. You shouldn't try to think and speak for others. Bad form.
The Antifa movement is only active when there's a demonstration where they can have a fight with the police and destroy things.
It also happens they beat some right wing supporters.
Sadly, I'm sure you believe that. :shucks:
You are doing it again. I said no such thing. I asked a question, nothing more. You shouldn't try to think and speak for others. Bad form.
Feel free to correct me when I do. Never-the-less, why would you mention them, otherwise? :shucks:
He (she?) does it all the time and will wear you out, he (she?) always has to have the last word. :shucks:
What's the dog you have in this, presently? :shucks:
u crank
09-10-21, 07:09 PM
Never-the-less, why would you mention them, otherwise? :shucks:
Why would I mention them? Well to see if you would agree that extremism exists on both the left and the right. But I think we are clear on your opinion there.
Why would I mention them? Well to see if you would agree that extremism exists on both the left and the right. But I think we are clear on your opinion there.
Should I drag you back through this thread to see how it started? (Hint: someone called CNN DNN then defined what that supposedly meant.) Whether I wanted to know how random your thought process is ... is beside the point. :shucks:
u crank
09-10-21, 08:19 PM
Should I drag you back through this thread to see how it started?
That won't be necessary. I have a good memory. Let's sum up for the listeners who missed it.
You don't think that Left wing extremism is a threat to democracy, only Right wing extremism is.
And I think they both are.
Is that fair?
That won't be necessary. I have a good memory. Let's sum up for the listeners who missed it.
You don't think that Left wing extremism is a threat to democracy, only Right wing extremism is.
And I think they both are.
Is that fair?
To complete the picture ... you apparently think you see 'left wing extremism' where I don't and you apparently see threats to democracy where I don't. (Feel free to protest that you didn't post nor do you feel such. *ShruG*)
Let me illustrate.
If we were to agree that fascism is a form of extremism (per your insistence, I really don't know if you think so or not but I do) then what does that make anti-fascism per definition? Is it extremism on the other end or is it anti-extremism (bearing in mind that it's not an organized group, per say and that its only 'agenda' is to fight fascism)? Also bear in mind that there have been no individuals who espouse anti-fascism that have tried to overthrow the U.S. government, in whole or in part, nor is there any evidence of any anti-fascist individuals or groupings advocating doing so. There are no anti-fascist individuals or groupings arming themselves and standing at voting locations attempting to intimidate non-anti-fascists out of voting.
I am against extremism of all flavors - Muslim, Christian, Jewish, fascists, nazis, militants in general (homegrown unregulated militias qualify), white supremacists and so forth and so on. U.S. politics does not have an extreme left. There is definitely an extreme right, however, that seems to view everything to the left of it (no matter how slight) as extreme. Their fear/hatred of anti-fascism and the Black Lives Matter movement is merely an attempt at 'what-about-ism.'
Fair enough? :shucks:
Should I drag you back through this thread to see how it started? (Hint: someone called CNN DNN then defined what that supposedly meant.) Whether I wanted to know how random your thought process is ... is beside the point. :shucks:
Arlo , You are a Cuck an Woke it's all right . And it's a good thing you are behind a keyboard.
Buddahaid
09-10-21, 09:46 PM
Nothing wrong with being woke. It doesn't mean you have extreme views but that you can see where inequality lives.
Arlo , You are a Cuck an Woke it's all right . And it's a good thing you are behind a keyboard.
Uh oh. You better watch out or you'll go to the forum brig. Where are you? Behind your refrigerator? :shucks:
Uh oh. You better watch out or you'll go to the forum brig. Where are you? Behind your refrigerator? :shucks:
Is that the best you have.If it was not for forum stuff i would tear you a new ass young man.
Is that the best you have.If it was not for forum stuff i would tear you a new ass young man.
Is that a physical threat combined with a compliment? Good thing you're behind a keyboard, though, right? :shucks:
If you have any ball's where are you from?
If you have any ball's where are you from?
Oh, Jeebus, you're still at it. I'm from Texas. What zoo are you from? :shucks:
To complete the picture ... you apparently think you see 'left wing extremism' where I don't and you apparently see threats to democracy where I don't. (Feel free to protest that you didn't post nor do you feel such. *ShruG*)
Let me illustrate.
If we were to agree that fascism is a form of extremism (per your insistence, I really don't know if you think so or not but I do) then what does that make anti-fascism per definition? Is it extremism on the other end or is it anti-extremism (bearing in mind that it's not an organized group, per say and that its only 'agenda' is to fight fascism)? Also bear in mind that there have been no individuals who espouse anti-fascism that have tried to overthrow the U.S. government, in whole or in part, nor is there any evidence of any anti-fascist individuals or groupings advocating doing so. There are no anti-fascist individuals or groupings arming themselves and standing at voting locations attempting to intimidate non-anti-fascists out of voting.
I am against extremism of all flavors - Muslim, Christian, Jewish, fascists, nazis, militants in general (homegrown unregulated militias qualify), white supremacists and so forth and so on. U.S. politics does not have an extreme left. There is definitely an extreme right, however, that seems to view everything to the left of it (no matter how slight) as extreme. Their fear/hatred of anti-fascism and the Black Lives Matter movement is merely an attempt at 'what-about-ism.'
Fair enough? :shucks:
Look's to me that we have a professor with tenure.
Look's to me that we have a professor with tenure.
If you keep complimenting me I might have to just keep taking them. :shucks:
Onkel Neal
09-11-21, 12:01 AM
Let's keep the conversation civil, please. :yep:
u crank
09-11-21, 06:17 AM
To complete the picture ... you apparently think you see 'left wing extremism' where I don't and you apparently see threats to democracy where I don't.
It is obvious we have a different view on this subject. I'm not convinced and so far nothing you have said has changed my mind.
If we were to agree that fascism is a form of extremism (per your insistence, I really don't know if you think so or not but I do) then what does that make anti-fascism per definition?
Well we agree on something. I think fascism is a form of extremism. The problem is how to address this threat. In America, in my country Canada and other nations groups of people dress in black (it use to be brown) go into the street to apparently fight fascism. To do this they engage in violent acts, destroy property, threaten innocent bystanders, attack members of the media, fight with the police and seek out and violently attack their political opponents. This is textbook fascism. Let's ask the relevant question. Do you support this kind of behavior? Do you cheer it on? Do you engage in it?
I guess I am an old school type of guy. I think that any kind of political violence is wrong and a threat to the civilized democratic order. I don't care what the cause is. I condemn all of it, right, left and center. The Antifa movement, violent segments of BLM and other fringe groups on the left engage in this kind of illegal and violent behavior. Do you condemn it?
U.S. politics does not have an extreme left. There is definitely an extreme right, however, ....
I guess it is hard to condemn something if you don't think it exists. I understand your position perfectly. So be it.
U.S. politics does not have an extreme left.
Bernie Sanders
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Kamala Harris
Ilhan Omar
Sadly, I'm sure you believe that. :shucks:
No I do not believe anything anymore
I based my comments on what I have seen in the news throughout the years-When there's a demonstration in some cities in our western world and this demonstration evolve from peaceful to violent I always hear in the news that it was the far left/antifa.
If this should wrong then please enlighten me..I'm here to learn.
Markus
It is obvious we have a different view on this subject. I'm not convinced and so far nothing you have said has changed my mind.
Didn't expect it would. Exchanging opinions seldom pulls someone across the divide they prefer, nowadays. :shucks:
Well we agree on something. I think fascism is a form of extremism. The problem is how to address this threat. In America, in my country Canada and other nations groups of people dress in black (it use to be brown) go into the street to apparently fight fascism. To do this they engage in violent acts, destroy property, threaten innocent bystanders, attack members of the media, fight with the police and seek out and violently attack their political opponents. This is textbook fascism. Let's ask the relevant question. Do you support this kind of behavior? Do you cheer it on? Do you engage in it?
I don't confuse Antifa for brownshirts of the 1920s. You're projecting the traits of the 'Proud/Boogaloo Boys onto them. They've been caught, more than once, attempting to infiltrate Antifa, dressed in black and destroying property, in order to discredit them. They obviously weren't very good at it and Anti-fascists tried to stop them (at least busting their cover). I certainly don't support Proud/Boogaloo Boys behavior. They want disruption and violence in the street and many of them want a racial civil war.
I guess I am an old school type of guy. I think that any kind of political violence is wrong and a threat to the civilized democratic order. I don't care what the cause is. I condemn all of it, right, left and center. The Antifa movement, violent segments of BLM and other fringe groups on the left engage in this kind of illegal and violent behavior. Do you condemn it?
When and if it really happens, I would.
:shucks: Take care.
.
Bernie Sanders
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Kamala Harris
Ilhan Omar
My statement stands. False equivalency ain't my thing. :shucks:
No I do not believe anything anymore
I based my comments on what I have seen in the news throughout the years-When there's a demonstration in some cities in our western world and this demonstration evolve from peaceful to violent I always hear in the news that it was the far left/antifa.
If this should wrong then please enlighten me..I'm here to learn.
Markus
Trying my best. Biased source preference will never give you a true picture. You need to be less vociferous over the sensationalized right leaning articles and learn to separate the wheat from the chaff. Alas, Russian propaganda seems to be the favorite flavor, for some. :shucks:
Trying my best. Biased source preference will never give you a true picture. You need to be less vociferous over the sensationalized right leaning articles and learn to separate the wheat from the chaff. Alas, Russian propaganda seems to be the favorite flavor, for some. :shucks:
Thank you Arlo.
Reading your answer, makes me wonder-who are they, those who only take part in a demonstration to destroy things and fight the police.
Maybe they are non-political ? Don't have any political standpoint they just like to destroy a peaceful demonstration.
Markus
Thank you Arlo.
Reading your answer, makes me wonder-who are they, those who only take part in a demonstration to destroy things and fight the police.
Maybe they are non-political ? Don't have any political standpoint they just like to destroy a peaceful demonstration.
Markus
I've mentioned the Proud Boys and the Boogaloo Boys. Those are two of the worst groups.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/who-are-proud-boys-11601485755
https://ctc.usma.edu/pride-prejudice-the-violent-evolution-of-the-proud-boys/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/19/what-is-boogaloo-movement/3204899001/
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/07/american-boogaloo-meme-or-terrorist-movement/613843/
^ All of these link you posted are related to USA and the name you wrote are active in USA.
But I was thinking Europe-France, UK, Germany a.s.o.
Many years ago there was some huge demonstration in England and it developed from peaceful to a destructive demonstration.
Proud Boys are what I know far right.
Could it be different between who's destructive in USA and Europe ?
Markus
^ All of these link you posted are related to USA and the name you wrote are active in USA.
But I was thinking Europe-France, UK, Germany a.s.o.
Many years ago there was some huge demonstration in England and it developed from peaceful to a destructive demonstration.
Proud Boys are what I know far right.
Could it be different between who's destructive in USA and Europe ?
Markus
Doubtful. Far right extremists are dangerous globally.
u crank
09-11-21, 11:53 AM
You're projecting the traits of the 'Proud/Boogaloo Boys onto them. They've been caught, more than once, attempting to infiltrate Antifa, dressed in black and destroying property, in order to discredit them
During the summer of 2020 there were 100 straight days of rioting and violence in the streets of Portland Oregon. That violence came to a head on Aug. 29 when an Antifa activist, Michael Reinoehl murdered Aaron Danielson, a Trump supporter.
When and if it really happens, I would.
Have at it.
Can someone enlighten me.
Those who caused destruction during these mass demonstration in USA after what happened in Minneapolis - who were they ?
I have until now been told it was mostly Antifa-But this seems not to be the case.
Markus
During the summer of 2020 there were 100 straight days of rioting and violence in the streets of Portland Oregon. That violence came to a head on Aug. 29 when an Antifa activist, Michael Reinoehl murdered Aaron Danielson, a Trump supporter.
Have at it.
I condemn Michael Reinoehl. Your turn.
"The (Proud Boys group) glorifies political violence against the left-wing, with McInnes once declaring: “I want violence, I want punching in the face. I’m disappointed in Trump supporters for not punching enough.”
https://www.dazeddigital.com/politics/article/50608/1/brief-history-of-the-violent-alt-right-group-the-proud-boys-donald-trump-debate
"An examination of hours of interviews and statements from Biggs, Nordean and other Proud Boys leaders shows that in addition to the group's often hateful and discriminatory ideology, violence has always been at the core of the group's identity. But it remains to be seen how years' worth of extremist rhetoric, and at times involvement with real violence, will play into the federal case against the group."
"Picciolini, who now runs the organization Free Radicals, told NPR that he views the Proud Boys as the "street thugs" of the white power movement.
"They're the ones who attend the rallies and protests to try and intimidate other people — counterprotesters," said Picciolini.
When Ethan Nordean sent that counterprotester to the hospital with a "significant concussion" in 2018, according to a police report first reported by The New York Times, it became a powerful symbol to try to intimidate the group's opponents and recruit new members.
McInnes called it "the greatest punch in the history of Trump's presidency" and called it "art" as he cackled while watching the video on repeat. Nordean also appeared on the far-right, conspiracy-mongering show Infowars, where host Alex Jones called him a "folk hero."
"Later that year, in New York City, multiple members of the Proud Boys faced criminal charges for attacking counterprotesters after an event McInnes hosted. The event involved McInnes reenacting the 1960 assassination of a Japanese socialist leader by a far-right ultra-nationalist. McInnes played the assassin, according to a journalist who witnessed the event.
Unlike the aftermath of other incidents, members of the Proud Boys received prison time. "I know enough about history to know what happened in Europe in the '30s when political street brawls were allowed to go ahead without any type of check from the criminal justice system," said New York Judge Mark Dwyer as he sentenced two members to four years in prison.
https://www.npr.org/2021/04/09/985104612/conspiracy-charges-bring-proud-boys-history-of-violence-into-spotlight
"Air Force Staff Sgt. Steven Carrillo and Richard Justus allegedly pulled up in a white van alongside a guard shack at the federal courthouse in Oakland, California, late last month and shot and killed a Federal Protective Service Contract Officer Patrick Underwood, critically injuring his partner. They allegedly fled the scene, which was near where protests were taking place in the wake of George Floyd’s death, setting off an eight-day manhunt.
"We believe Carrillo and Justice chose this date because the planned protest in Oakland provided an opportunity for them to target multiple law enforcement personnel and avoid apprehension to the large crowds attending the demonstrations, as described in detail in the complaint," John Bennett, FBI special agent in charge of the San Francisco field office said at a press conference after an arrest was made.
Carrillo, according to federal prosecutors, was linked to a little known but emerging movement called "boogaloo." They also go by "boogaloo bois" or "boogaloo boys."
Justus turned himself in and was charged with attempted murder. Carrillo was arrested after a witness eventually reported seeing the van and "observed what appeared to be ammunition, firearms and bomb making equipment" inside, prosecutors allege. Santa Cruz Sheriff’s Office deputies showed up to Carrillo’s doorstep, and as they approached his home, he opened fire, killing Santa Cruz County Sheriff’s Sgt. Damon Gutzwiller.
The government alleges that Carrillo fled on foot, and then began carjacking innocent people using what is known as a ghost gun --- a firearm which is privately made and untraceable. Court documents say that when authorities searched his van they found a bulletproof vest with a patch on it that tied Carrillo to boogaloo."
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/boogaloo-movement-recent-violent-attacks/story?id=71295536
https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states
Rockstar
09-11-21, 12:29 PM
https://youtu.be/NgfYH7yXl6U
Btw if you want a list of left wing extremists AND right wing extremists just visit the FBI website. So, yes we have for many many years had both extremist groups operating in this country.
So Trump's 'woke' now. Interesting. :shucks:
Btw if you want a list of left wing extremists AND right wing extremists just visit the FBI website. So, yes we have for many many years had both extremist groups operating in this country.
Many years ...
The current trend shows right wing terrorist groups on the upswing with left wing practically non-existent.
"Domestic Terrorism
Domestic right-wing terrorist groups often adhere to the principles of racial supremacy and embrace antigovernment, antiregulatory beliefs. Generally, extremist right-wing groups engage in activity that is protected by constitutional guarantees of free speech and assembly. Law enforcement becomes involved when the volatile talk of these groups transgresses into unlawful action.
On the national level, formal right-wing hate groups, such as the National Alliance, the World Church of the Creator (WCOTC) and the Aryan Nations, represent a continuing terrorist threat. Although efforts have been made by some extremist groups to reduce openly racist rhetoric in order to appeal to a broader segment of the population and to focus increased attention on antigovernment sentiment, racism-based hatred remains an integral component of these groups’ core orientations.
Right-wing groups continue to represent a serious terrorist threat. Two of the seven planned acts of terrorism prevented in 1999 were potentially large-scale, high-casualty attacks being planned by organized right-wing extremist groups.
The second category of domestic terrorists, left-wing groups, generally profess a revolutionary socialist doctrine and view themselves as protectors of the people against the “dehumanizing effects” of capitalism and imperialism. They aim to bring about change in the United States and believe that this change can be realized through revolution rather than through the established political process. From the 1960s to the 1980s, leftist-oriented extremist groups posed the most serious domestic terrorist threat to the United States. In the 1980s, however, the fortunes of the leftist movement changed dramatically as law enforcement dismantled the infrastructure of many of these groups, and the fall of communism in Eastern Europe deprived the movement of its ideological foundation and patronage."
https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/testimony/the-terrorist-threat-confronting-the-united-states (<FBI website)
Confronting White Supremacy
https://www.fbi.gov/news/testimony/confronting-white-supremacy (<FBI website)
"FBI Director Christopher Wray bluntly labeled the January riot at the U.S. Capitol as “domestic terrorism” Tuesday and warned of a rapidly growing threat of homegrown violent extremism that law enforcement is scrambling to confront through thousands of investigations."
https://apnews.com/article/fbi-chris-wray-testify-capitol-riot-9a5539af34b15338bb5c4923907eeb67
:shucks:
u crank
09-11-21, 12:58 PM
I condemn Michael Reinoehl. Your turn.
I guess you missed it.
I think that any kind of political violence is wrong and a threat to the civilized democratic order. I don't care what the cause is. I condemn all of it, right, left and center.
Rockstar
09-11-21, 01:10 PM
We need to confront white supremacy, it’s everywhere claim Democrats who now say some blacks are really white supremacists. Typical Democrat California clown show.
A professor at California State University Los Angeles (CSU LA) said Larry Elder is "a Black face on white supremacy" during a Labor Day campaign event for California Governor Gavin Newsom.
https://www.newsweek.com/professor-calls-larry-elder-black-face-white-supremacy-newsom-campaign-event-1627196
In my little world there's no difference when it comes to far right and far left.
They are both violent in nature. I don't weight them to see who's most violent among these two groups.
Markus
Rockstar
09-11-21, 01:22 PM
The "Left vs. Right" battle has very little bearing anymore in real life. What we're facing now isn't a sideways conflict but a vertical one: the 99% vs. the 1% (and its minions). The nationalists vs. the globalists. Democratic rule vs. corporate/plutocratic rule. Unfortunately, the 1% globalist plutocrats are winning handily, since they have monopoly control of the media and have bought out virtually all the politicians. It's not looking too good for the rest of us.
CJ Hopkins, who normally writes satire, has analyzed the current state of affairs in a colorful 3-part series:
https://consentfactory.org/2020/10/13/the-covidian-cult/
https://consentfactory.org/2021/04/21/the-covidian-cult-part-ii/
https://consentfactory.org/2021/09/02/the-covidian-cult-part-iii/
Their initiation into the Covidian Cult began in January, when the medical authorities and corporate media turned on The Fear with projections of hundreds of millions of deaths and fake photos of people dropping dead in the streets. The psychological conditioning has continued for months. The global masses have been subjected to a constant stream of propaganda, manufactured hysteria, wild speculation, conflicting directives, exaggerations, lies, and tawdry theatrical effects. Lockdowns. Emergency field hospitals and morgues. The singing-dancing NHS staff. Death trucks. Overflowing ICUs. Dead Covid babies. Manipulated statistics. Goon squads. Masks. And all the rest of it.
Eight months later, here we are. The Head of the Health Emergencies Program at the WHO has basically confirmed an IFR of 0.14%, approximately the same as the seasonal flu. And here are the latest survival rate estimates from the Center for Disease Control:
Age 0-19 … 99.997%
Age 20-49 … 99.98%
Age 50-69 … 99.5%
Age 70+ … 94.6%
The “science” argument is officially over. An increasing number of doctors and medical experts are breaking ranks and explaining how the current mass hysteria over “cases” (which now includes perfectly healthy people) is essentially meaningless propaganda, for example, in this segment on ARD, one of the big mainstream German TV channels.
And the mandate nazis are still gathering steam. ‘Go spit in a mirror and report back, or wear a mask to show you care” is all that’s left for the gulliable trying to shield themselves from the idea they were mindless members of a cult.
Buddahaid
09-11-21, 01:37 PM
https://youtu.be/NgfYH7yXl6U
Btw if you want a list of left wing extremists AND right wing extremists just visit the FBI website. So, yes we have for many many years had both extremist groups operating in this country.
Trump says lots of things.
Catfish
09-11-21, 01:55 PM
https://youtu.be/NgfYH7yXl6U
:har:
"Never was so much nonsense perpetrated to so many by so few."
BoB (Battle of Bullsh!t)
I guess you missed it.
Ah. But no specific condemnation for the examples I provided in spite of expecting such from me. That's ok. :up::shucks:
We need to confront white supremacy, it’s everywhere claim Democrats who now say some blacks are really white supremacists. Typical Democrat California clown show.
A professor at California State University Los Angeles (CSU LA) said Larry Elder is "a Black face on white supremacy" during a Labor Day campaign event for California Governor Gavin Newsom.
https://www.newsweek.com/professor-calls-larry-elder-black-face-white-supremacy-newsom-campaign-event-1627196
Is this a tap dance to claim white supremacy either doesn't exist or isn't a threat? Cute. :shucks:
u crank
09-11-21, 02:37 PM
Ah. But no specific condemnation for the examples I provided in spite of expecting such from me.
Come on. Now you are being petty. The reason I pointed out the Michael Reinoehl / Aaron Danielson case is because of your refusal to condemn Antifa violence. Just to reiterate so there is no confusion. I whole heartedly condemn any and all political violence. There is no specific about it. If you can think of any group of thugs that you might think I would not condemn let's hear it. We will clear that up immediately.
Come on. Now you are being petty. The reason I pointed out the Michael Reinoehl / Aaron Danielson case is because of your refusal to condemn Antifa violence. Just to reiterate so there is no confusion. I whole heartedly condemn any and all political violence. There is no specific about it. If you can think of any group of thugs that you might think I would not condemn let's hear it. We will clear that up immediately.
Antifa (anti-fascists) is not an organized group. It's like you trying to condemn anti-terrorists (people who detest terrorism) for something a person who adopts that philosophy did that was reprehensible.. In fact, I don't see why you're not anti-fascist (Antifa). Yes, you provide an example of someone claiming to be an anti-fascist killing a proud boy. That was bad. But it's not a true or accurate moral assessment against anti-fascism. I'm glad you are against violence and extremism in spite of your confusion, however. :shucks:
Catfish
09-11-21, 02:51 PM
40 to 50 shots fired. As far as i read the police shot Reinoehl while they had a warrant to arrest him. He ran, they shot him. 40-50 times.
Also:
"Reinoehl’s death came on same day that he appeared to confess to shooting Danielson in an video interview, claiming that he acted in self-defense.
‘I had no choice. I mean, I, I had a choice. I could have sat there and watched them kill a friend of mine of color. But I wasn’t going to do that,’ Michael Reinoehl, 48, said in a clip of a video interview published by Vice News on Thursday."
"Reinoehl did not say outright that he shot Danielson in the fragment of video shown by Vice News before the full interview is aired on Thursday night, but did say his actions that night were in self-defense."
B.t.w. when it comes to looting and all that i take it there was a good arithmetic means of american people to do that, but most probably not 'Antifa'. They define themselves for political protest.
The only reason this keeps being echoed is that Trump once said it to put the blame on what he hates.
As we know he says and hates a lot of things.
u crank
09-11-21, 03:32 PM
Antifa (anti-fascists) is not an organized group.
Neither are serial killers, child molesters and rapists. Society does not tolerate them because they are not organized. There is an obvious reason.
It's like you trying to condemn anti-terrorists (people who detest terrorism) for something a person who adopts that philosophy did that was reprehensible.
We don't condemn people for belonging to any group. At least I don't. I don't condemn Antifa for their political beliefs although I might disagree with those beliefs. I condemn them for political violence. It is no more complicated than that.
In fact, I don't see why you're not anti-fascist (Antifa).
I can think of a number of reasons. I don't agree with their political philosophy which is way too far left. And I don't agree with their chosen methods for combating fascism. Political violence will not make society one bit better. They act like spoiled children.
I can be opposed to a lot of political extremism without the cosplay.
But it's not a true or accurate moral assessment against anti-fascism.
in spite of your confusion
Possibly not but why not improve yourself. Why have anything to do with thugs and anarchists? Why do you defend them?
That's why I am confused.
Possibly not but why not improve yourself. Why have anything to do with thugs and anarchists? Why do you defend them?
That's why I am confused.
You were confused to start with. You bought into the fable that people who are anti-fascist are thugs and anarchists, by default. However, it's a proven fact that the fascists they despise are the thugs (and even anarchists, to a degree). Your assessment that I require improvement due to your mistaken assumptions is either part of your confusion or existential projection. :shucks:
u crank
09-11-21, 04:23 PM
You were confused to start with. You bought into the fable that people who are anti-fascist are thugs and anarchists, by default.
Oh my. It is in the same post you are quoting from.
We don't condemn people for belonging to any group. At least I don't. I don't condemn Antifa for their political beliefs although I might disagree with those beliefs. I condemn them for political violence. It is no more complicated than that.
Why have anything to do with thugs and anarchists? Why do you defend them?
Oh my. :shucks:
u crank
09-11-21, 04:43 PM
Oh my. :shucks:
Your problem is one of comprehension. The thugs and anarchists I am referring to and I would hope that you don't associate with or defend are the people who are breaking the law. Some of those people are in the non organization broadly known as Antifa. You aren't defending people who break the law are you?
Your problem is one of comprehension. The thugs and anarchists I am referring to and I would hope that you don't associate with or defend are the people who are breaking the law. Some of those people are in the non organization broadly known as Antifa. You aren't defending people who break the law are you?
How in the wide wide world of sports is this supposed to illustrate a comprehension problem on my part? How are you imagining my defense of anything you've claimed so far (much less association)? :shucks:
Otto Harkaman
09-11-21, 04:52 PM
http://www.krakenmediadesigns.com/images/biden.jpg
I don't understand why you are hanging out on a forum that is about submarine warfare?
:lurk:
:hmm2:
More accurately, a submarine simulation forum. Your life on it seems hardly devoted to such, yerownself (as reflected in your post history). Start or participate in an SH4 (or even general submarine thread) and lure me to it. :shucks:
https://i.imgur.com/yltSZcA.png
https://i.imgur.com/TbN1k6P.png
https://i.imgur.com/K7GpQfx.png
:yeah:
https://i.imgur.com/UvyGtP3.png
u crank
09-11-21, 05:11 PM
How in the wide wide world of sports is this supposed to illustrate a comprehension problem on my part? How are you imagining my defense of anything you've claimed so far (much less association)? :shucks:
I'm not imagining anything. I am trying to get you to answer a simple question. Would you like me to repeat the question?
And I who thought that this subforum called General Topic was a place where we discussed anything which isn't exactly related to subs, if we want to discuss subs like SHIII, SHIV or SHV we have subforums for this.
I could be wrong though.
Markus
I'm not imagining anything. I am trying to get you to answer a simple question. Would you like me to repeat the question?
Which one/version do you want me to answer ... again? Bear in mind, questions based on false presumptions that are leading (ie: have you stopped beating your grandmother?) will not receive 'simple' yes/no answers and will require me to take the time to set you straight (as usual). I'll make the effort to stimie that game every time. :shucks:
u crank
09-11-21, 05:41 PM
Which one/version do you want me to answer ... again? Bear in mind, questions based on false presumptions that are leading (ie: have you stopped beating your grandmother?) will not receive 'simple' yes/no answers and will require me to take the time to set you straight (as usual). I'll make the effort to stimie that game every time. :shucks:
Ok. I'll give it a try. I'll do my best to not ask a 'leading' question although I feel that you are giving yourself a way out but hey do what you like. I'm just looking for an answer. Here goes.
Do you condemn the violent members of the loosely affiliated group known as Antifa? Not all of them mind you, just the violent law breakers. Do you condemn them?
Ok. I'll give it a try. I'll do my best to not ask a 'leading' question although I feel that you are giving yourself a way out but hey do what you like. I'm just looking for an answer. Here goes.
Do you condemn the violent members of the loosely affiliated group known as Antifa? Not all of them mind you, just the violent law breakers. Do you condemn them?
I condemned the example you gave, already. Bear in mind, Antifa is not an organized group. I'll be more than happy to condemn anymore specific and unimagined examples that are proven not to be proud boys (an actual organized right wing group) pretending to be either Antifa or BLM and smashing store windows with a hammer or some such.
You've claimed that you condemn any and all violent and illegal activity by any person whether affiliated with a group or not (any group).
If we're good with that then we're merely left with our relative perceptions whether based on provable fact or supposition.
Where do you want to go from here (if anywhere)? :shucks:
Otto Harkaman
09-11-21, 06:01 PM
http://www.krakenmediadesigns.com/images/biden.jpg
How does playing predominately white submarine crews sinking Asians mesh with your anti-white supremacist ethos?
It serves as an historical setting for the Pacific Theater in WWII. Stop trying so hard. You're failing miserably. :shucks:
Otto Harkaman
09-11-21, 06:28 PM
http://www.krakenmediadesigns.com/images/biden.jpg
u crank
09-11-21, 06:31 PM
I condemned the example you gave, already.
Yes you condemned that single example. Thank you but that isn't exactly what I was looking for. It would be somewhat time consuming to document the many examples of Antifa violence and illegal behavior. It is not that hard to find on the internet. I have a feeling that you can't or won't give a broad and conclusive condemnation of Antifa violence. Your choice and I respect that.
Where do you want to go from here (if anywhere)?
I think I have done my best to make my position clear and if that is your final thoughts then I think we are done.
As a famous man once said ... "Good night and good luck".
Yes you condemned that single example. Thank you but that isn't exactly what I was looking for. It would be somewhat time consuming to document the many examples of Antifa violence and illegal behavior. It is not that hard to find on the internet. I have a feeling that you can't or won't give a broad and conclusive condemnation of Antifa violence. Your choice and I respect that.
If it isn't that hard, I would have expected a plethora of examples so you could prove your disdain for Antifa is truly warranted. But I'm not going to force you to do anything you don't want to. Your choices are fine by me, as well.
I think I have done my best to make my position clear and if that is your final thoughts then I think we are done.
As a famous man once said ... "Good night and good luck".
Good night and good luck to you, as well. :shucks:
Trying hard and failing at what?
Trying way too hard to present an issue of hypocrisy where none exists. Do you think you're not transparent? :shucks:
Rockstar
09-11-21, 10:48 PM
Thinking of you Catfish ;)
https://youtu.be/Byd_G2shoVc
https://youtu.be/k7hMEC9j-u4
Rockstar
09-12-21, 10:04 AM
For catfish
https://youtu.be/CMuz9r-CUJc
Rockstar
09-12-21, 10:46 AM
Can’t get catfish outta my mind.
https://youtu.be/L9dv3YGUaKY
Catfish
09-12-21, 01:08 PM
^ Thanks, got a good laugh out of this.
https://i.imgur.com/yG0rJ3q.png
Rockstar
09-12-21, 03:12 PM
^ Thanks, got a good laugh out of this.
Get ready, we might see the Weapon of Crass Destruction make another run. It will be fun watching the headlines, media, new memes and ratings frenzy go wild. They love Trump
It's interesting to read what people think about this 6th January riot in Washington.
Those who support Trump says there's nothing in his speech that indicate he said they should attack the Congress.
Those who dislike Trump says he did and you can clearly hear in his speech.
I have heard his speech a few times..
The only passage where he between the line could have encourage his followers to attack Congress was when he said "I'll be there with you in the spirit.
As I remember nowhere did he say-When you arrive please attack the Congress.
The reason to this comment was Arlo's picture on this page.
Markus
Rockstar
09-12-21, 03:30 PM
Can’t for the Talibangate investigation, it’s gonna be great. I’m sure some no named putz has a fake secret dossier for sale . What will it be this time? Trump praying to allah or peeing on the christian bible. Or maybe more Russian collusion. Who cares there’ll be accusations galore and more tax payer monies pissed away, I can’t wait LOL
Calm down, Francis. :shucks:
Catfish
09-12-21, 03:43 PM
How does playing predominately white submarine crews sinking Asians mesh with your anti-white supremacist ethos?
Being anti-racist is anti-white. Seems so, in your book?
Being anti-racist is anti-white. Seems so, in your book?
Meh. Give him a break. He wanted so badly to make a point and that was all he had. :shucks:
I'm one of the weird kind
who got Trump on my mind
Day and night
can't be right
He is gone
it ain't fun
:D
Markus
I'm one of the weird kind
who got Trump on my mind
Day and night
can't be right
He is gone
it ain't fun
:D
Markus
TMI :shucks:
TMI :shucks:
I got the idea to this funny limerick when I saw a friend who had Trump and the number 24 as his logo on fb.
Markus
Aktungbby
09-13-21, 10:35 AM
https://i.imgur.com/yG0rJ3q.pngWhoops! Make that three: King George III oversaw the burning of the White House in the War of 1812...in 1814, as retaliation for an American attack on York,Ontario the previous year!! President Madison did not ever return to live in it for the remainder of his term. His successor, President Monroe, moved in to the renovated abode in 1817.:yep:
u crank
09-13-21, 12:48 PM
Without drastic changes, Democrats are on track to lose big in 2022
The marked decline in support for President Biden and his administration nationally and in key swing states indicates that the Democratic Party could endure a blowout defeat in the 2022 midterm elections.
https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/571868-without-drastic-changes-dems-are-on-track-to-lose-big-in-2022?rl=1
The Democrats’ 1994 defeat came after they pushed through Congress the then-largest tax increase in history without any Republican support. And in 2010, Democrats lost due in large part to voters’ perception of an ineffective economic stimulus as well as governmental overreach on health care and the economy by the administration and congressional Democrats.
Simply put, the current 2022 outlook for Democrats is grim — and it could get even worse.
If the Biden administration continues to push unnecessarily big government spending initiatives and tax increases, along with weak immigration policies and an incoherent foreign policy strategy, Democrats could suffer the most substantial midterm loss of any party in recent history.
Whoops! Make that three: King George III oversaw the burning of the White House in the War of 1812...in 1814, as retaliation for an American attack on York,Ontario the previous year!! President Madison did not ever return to live in it for the remainder of his term. His successor, President Monroe, moved in to the renovated abode in 1817.:yep:
That wasn't in Brad Whitford's lifetime. But it fits comparatively, somewhat (an act of war vs. terrorism, however).
@ u crank
It's more than a year before your Midterm election so a lot can happen until then.
I know this from my own countries Denmark and Sweden. Parties who has low percentage win more seats than expected a year before and parties lose seats despite high percentage the year before.
Markus
u crank
09-13-21, 01:55 PM
@ u crank
It's more than a year before your Midterm election so a lot can happen until then.
That is true Markus but I see no attempt on the Biden administration's part to change course. If anything they are doubling down on the mistakes that got them in this position.
That is true Markus but I see no attempt on the Biden administration's part to change course. If anything they are doubling down on the mistakes that got them in this position.
Nothing new here then, it happens in every democracy, a party does not change political course and then they hit the iceberg.
Need more knowledge about Americans inner child, to know if they act same way as most of the European voters do.
There's no doubt that the Dem will use threat to make people vote on them.
Guess they will use the name of the former President as a threat or what will happen if Rep win.
Markus
https://i.imgur.com/fPcrrPB.png
3catcircus
09-14-21, 05:44 AM
https://i.imgur.com/fPcrrPB.png
He's right, but not for the reason you believe. Trump wouldn't have brought over a single unvetted Afghan before he got all of our own citizens and allied Afghanis out first.
Actually, it's not even fair to compare Trump to Biden since Biden isn't actually in charge of anything. This administration with Biden as a figurehead is full of Obama holdovers who are pulling the strings - and their utter incompetence is on full display.
Catfish
09-14-21, 06:25 AM
^ Actually Trump did not care, despite what he says now. We all know he says a lot.
Trump's schedule was for exit by May, 100 days after the inauguration of Biden. When Trump had lost the election he stopped doing anything.
Any responsible administration would have been planning the witdrawal in advance earlier in 2020, if not already extracted at least some allies. Or maybe no one believed Trump meant what he said? I take it that Biden's administration was not briefed in advance, and then discovered that no planning had been done.
The media seem to prefer playing the blame game with the Biden administration, which inherited the problem, rather than asking questions about the Trump administration, which created the timing and terms of withdrawal.
u crank
09-14-21, 07:11 AM
The media seem to prefer playing the blame game with the Biden administration, which inherited the problem, rather than asking questions about the Trump administration, which created the timing and terms of withdrawal.
Hmm. The Biden administration didn't stick to the terms and timing of the withdrawal set by the Trump administration. The Biden administration had seven months from Jan. 20 till Aug. 30 to plan a safe and orderly withdrawal. The media and the American public are blaming Biden's administration because of the way it was planned and carried out. Trump had no say in it. Biden's people just did a very poor job and deserve all the criticism they are getting.
The hypothetical question to ask though is whether the Biden administration would have orchestrated a withdrawal had the previous administration not planned on one. In a way Trump did Biden a favor and of course everything is still Trump's fault. All is well in the world.
:D:D:D
Biden owns this all by himself. He signed 15 EO's, reversing Trump policies, on his first day. He Had control of the withdrawal. Biden chose to Arbitrarily close Bagram I
Airbase and remove the last of the military before evacuating civilians. He also refused to use his over-the-horizon capability to assist the Afghan government in resisting the Taliban.
Rockstar
09-14-21, 10:14 AM
Learned something new, the possible origin of the term “redneck”. Which leads us to even more white supremacist rednecks arrested on capital steps.
https://youtu.be/PZosGxJ5lXs
https://image.cnbcfm.com/api/v1/image/106911765-16263881132021-07-15t222432z_1487171924_rc2alo9fkfdx_rtrmadp_0_usa-trump-pentagon.jpeg?v=1626388199&w=720&h=405
"Woodward and Costa write that Milley, deeply shaken by the Jan 6th assault, 'was certain that Trump had gone into a serious mental decline in the aftermath of the election, with Trump now all but manic, screaming at officials and constructing his own alternate reality about endless election conspiracies.'
Milley worried that Trump could 'go rogue,' the authors write.
"You never know what a president's trigger point is," Milley told his senior staff, according to the book.
In response, Milley took extraordinary action, and called a secret meeting in his Pentagon office on January 8 to review the process for military action, including launching nuclear weapons. Speaking to senior military officials in charge of the National Military Command Center, the Pentagon's war room, Milley instructed them not to take orders from anyone unless he was involved.
"No matter what you are told, you do the procedure. You do the process. And I'm part of that procedure," Milley told the officers, according to the book. He then went around the room, looked each officer in the eye, and asked them to verbally confirm they understood.
Milley's fear was based on his own observations of Trump's erratic behavior. His concern was magnified by the events of January 6 and the 'extraordinary risk' the situation posed to US national security, the authors write. Milley had already had two back-channel phone calls with China's top general, who was on high alert over the chaos in the US.
Then Milley received a blunt phone call from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, according to the book. Woodward and Costa exclusively obtained a transcript of the call, during which Milley tried to reassure Pelosi that the nuclear weapons were safe.
Pelosi pushed back.
"What I'm saying to you is that if they couldn't even stop him from an assault on the Capitol, who even knows what else he may do? And is there anybody in charge at the White House who was doing anything but kissing his fat butt all over this?"
Pelosi continued, "You know he's crazy. He's been crazy for a long time." Milley responded, "Madam Speaker, I agree with you on everything."
https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/14/politics/woodward-book-trump-nuclear/index.html?fbclid=IwAR2XPYTxNDmIJSFAwW61aWZDnsDCFK G85Lz71WZxnwE9qcAGADZnvHfJ-CI
^
"including launching nuclear weapons."
If I remember correctly what Platapus once told me about chain of command when it comes to order nuclear strike-The President can't order such a strike, when there's no nuclear threat.
Markus
^
"including launching nuclear weapons."
If I remember correctly what Platapus once told me about chain of command when it comes to order nuclear strike-The President can't order such a strike, when there's no nuclear threat.
Markus
Unless, of course, there's a hurricane inbound. :shucks:
Unless, of course, there's a hurricane inbound. :shucks:
Had to dig into my memory and it showed me both a picture and some scene from the news where Mr Donalds said one should use nukes against these F5 hurricane.
My memory could also created something that isn't exactly true.
Edit
My memory was correct
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49471093
End edit
Markus
AVGWarhawk
09-14-21, 02:46 PM
Biden owns this all by himself. He signed 15 EO's, reversing Trump policies, on his first day. He Had control of the withdrawal. Biden chose to Arbitrarily close Bagram I
Airbase and remove the last of the military before evacuating civilians. He also refused to use his over-the-horizon capability to assist the Afghan government in resisting the Taliban.
100%
Rockstar
09-14-21, 06:08 PM
A good laugh
https://youtu.be/FRTcO0AD-GM
Buddahaid
09-14-21, 06:20 PM
A good laugh
https://youtu.be/FRTcO0AD-GM
Yeah that worked out really well and proved recall elections are just a money waste. Effort better spent finding an elecable candidate at the next election.
u crank
09-15-21, 11:11 AM
Gen. Mark Milley: China’s Man In The Pentagon?
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/general-mark-milley-china-man-in-pentagon/
By now you will have read that the Joint Chiefs head phoned his Chinese counterpart twice during the final months of the Trump administration, to reassure the Chinese that the US wasn’t planning to attack China — this, because Milley was worried about Trump’s mental stability.
If Milley was so afraid of the president’s mental state that he felt compelled to phone the top Chinese general not once but twice, why did Milley not warn Congress and the American public? This makes no sense. Where was Milley during the second impeachment trial? Milley thought he was working for a deranged Commander in Chief capable of starting a war with nuclear-armed China in a fit of pique, but he didn’t want to go public with this concern. Incredible.
...he didn’t make it public when it could have stopped what Milley regarded as a grave danger to world piece, but when it also would have cost him something; now he’s revealing that he carried out an act radically destabilizing of the civilian chain of command, when doing so could not do any good, but also wouldn’t hurt Milley, and might actually boost his personal stock.
3catcircus
09-15-21, 12:14 PM
Gen. Mark Milley: China’s Man In The Pentagon?
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/general-mark-milley-china-man-in-pentagon/
The fact that our FVEY partners sent a "WTF?!?!" to our intel folks when Milley contacted his bestest buddy Chinese general should be a canary in a coal mine that this wasn't a normal back-channel communique. Every nation will communicate with other nations even if their public-facing stance in each other is oppositional. A US general telling a CCP general that he will prevent the President from attacking isn't just poor form. It's a clear violation of civilian control of our military.
That other military officers who were present when this communication occurred are willing to testify could mean "it's a nothing burger" or it could be that they believe it to be out of bounds. That Vindman is criticizing Milley shouldn't be ignored since it implies that he thinks that his own actions were ok (even though they weren't) but Milley's aren't.
I also have grave concerns over the fact that Pelosi appears to have had knowledge of Milley's actions and didn't consider them to be an issue.
Bottom-line: Trump's actions did not violate his oath of office, but it seems that his JCS, intel community, and members of Congress did violate their oaths on an almost continual basis. That's a systemic problem with our federal officials.
If people who aren't the leaders of nations are talking to each other to assure themselves that the leaders aren't going to act crazy, why even bother having leaders to begin with? Just go ahead and install military juntas throughout the world.
Rockstar
09-15-21, 05:01 PM
Just look at this even more white supremacists protesting Democrats. This time at the Met Gala. We need more fences and surveillance arrest them all. Hate to say it but protesting Democrats seems to becoming a common theme among both the right and left wing electorate. I guess that’s what happens when people see them getting rich while they cheat, steal and rob from the people.
@6:39
https://youtu.be/uutgPG8vtdg
Skybird
09-15-21, 05:36 PM
Milley did his job. That includes maintaining communicational links to defuse possible conflicts before they could cause sparks that might set fire on a fuse that leads to something attached that could blow up.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/milley-s-office-defends-call-chinese-official-against-trump-s-n1279262
3catcircus
09-15-21, 06:06 PM
Milley did his job. That includes maintaining communicational links to defuse possible conflicts before they could cause sparks that might set fire on a fuse that leads to something attached that could blow up.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/milley-s-office-defends-call-chinese-official-against-trump-s-n1279262
Except it's not his job. His job is to advise the civilian leadership of the National Command Authority.
Buddahaid
09-15-21, 06:56 PM
Except it's not his job. His job is to advise the civilian leadership of the National Command Authority.
That is his job but he also swore to protect the constitution from foreign and domestic enemies and in that sense he was doing his duty ensuring procedure would be followed when the sitting president was for all intent and purposes refusing to accept the election results. There is no case for treason against Miley.
Oath of Commissioned Officers
I ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God. (Title 5 U.S. Code 3331, an individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services)
10 U.S. Code § 163 - Role of Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff
U.S. Code
prev | next
(a)Communications Through Chairman of JCS; Assignment of Duties.—Subject to the limitations in section 152(c) of this title, the President may—
(1)direct that communications between the President or the Secretary of Defense and the commanders of the unified and specified combatant commands be transmitted through the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and
(2)assign duties to the Chairman to assist the President and the Secretary of Defense in performing their command function.
(b)Oversight by Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff.—
(1)The Secretary of Defense may assign to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff responsibility for overseeing the activities of the combatant commands. Such assignment by the Secretary to the Chairman does not confer any command authority on the Chairman and does not alter the responsibility of the commanders of the combatant commands prescribed in section 164(b)(2) of this title.
(2)Subject to the authority, direction, and control of the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff serves as the spokesman for the commanders of the combatant commands, especially on the operational requirements of their commands. In performing such function, the Chairman shall—
(A)confer with and obtain information from the commanders of the combatant commands with respect to the requirements of their commands;
(B)evaluate and integrate such information;
(C)advise and make recommendations to the Secretary of Defense with respect to the requirements of the combatant commands, individually and collectively; and
(D)communicate, as appropriate, the requirements of the combatant commands to other elements of the Department of Defense.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII_S3_C1_1_2/
ArtIII.S3.C1.1.2 Treason Clause: Doctrine and Practice
Article III, Section 3, Clause 1:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
Skybird
09-15-21, 06:56 PM
Except it's not his job. His job is to advise the civilian leadership of the National Command Authority.
Obviously the speaker of the current joint staff disagrees with your opinion.
u crank
09-15-21, 07:35 PM
That is his job but he also swore to protect the constitution from foreign and domestic enemies and in that sense he was doing his duty ensuring procedure would be followed when the sitting president was for all intent and purposes refusing to accept the election results. There is no case for treason against Miley.
Why not just get rid of all the politicians and diplomats and let the generals run everything? That's worked out before.
Buddahaid
09-15-21, 07:49 PM
Why not just get rid of all the politicians and diplomats and let the generals run everything? That's worked out before.
I don't see that Miley was anywhere near that spin on it and I don't believe he would have gone there anyway, but then again, I don't have any faith in Donald Trump acting for the good of anybody but himself and agree he needed to be treated with both respect for his office and with eyes open.
Cripes the spoiled little boy can't even suck up his bent pride enough to stand with former presidents on the anniversary of 9/11. That in itself is proof enough he isn't up to the job of being president.
u crank
09-15-21, 08:00 PM
I don't see that Miley was anywhere near that spin on it and I don't believe he would have gone there anyway ...
But that is just it. It's a dangerous step in that direction. And if this gets swept under the rug it will just embolden people like Miley to go down that road. He should at the very least resign.
Buddahaid
09-15-21, 08:08 PM
But that is just it. It's a dangerous step in that direction. And if this gets swept under the rug it will just embolden people like Miley to go down that road. He should at the very least resign.
If I was Miley I'd resign since I'd have already put in forty years service, but maybe he still sees Trumpism as a threat to the constitution he swore to protect.
3catcircus
09-15-21, 08:31 PM
That is his job but he also swore to protect the constitution from foreign and domestic enemies and in that sense he was doing his duty ensuring procedure would be followed when the sitting president was for all intent and purposes refusing to accept the election results. There is no case for treason against Miley.
Oath of Commissioned Officers
I ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God. (Title 5 U.S. Code 3331, an individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services)
10 U.S. Code § 163 - Role of Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff
U.S. Code
prev | next
(a)Communications Through Chairman of JCS; Assignment of Duties.—Subject to the limitations in section 152(c) of this title, the President may—
(1)direct that communications between the President or the Secretary of Defense and the commanders of the unified and specified combatant commands be transmitted through the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and
(2)assign duties to the Chairman to assist the President and the Secretary of Defense in performing their command function.
(b)Oversight by Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff.—
(1)The Secretary of Defense may assign to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff responsibility for overseeing the activities of the combatant commands. Such assignment by the Secretary to the Chairman does not confer any command authority on the Chairman and does not alter the responsibility of the commanders of the combatant commands prescribed in section 164(b)(2) of this title.
(2)Subject to the authority, direction, and control of the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff serves as the spokesman for the commanders of the combatant commands, especially on the operational requirements of their commands. In performing such function, the Chairman shall—
(A)confer with and obtain information from the commanders of the combatant commands with respect to the requirements of their commands;
(B)evaluate and integrate such information;
(C)advise and make recommendations to the Secretary of Defense with respect to the requirements of the combatant commands, individually and collectively; and
(D)communicate, as appropriate, the requirements of the combatant commands to other elements of the Department of Defense.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII_S3_C1_1_2/
ArtIII.S3.C1.1.2 Treason Clause: Doctrine and Practice
Article III, Section 3, Clause 1:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
Except he is subject to the UCMJ. He could be charged under Article 92 (failure to obey a lawful order), 94 (mutiny/sedition), 103 (aiding the enemy), or the catch-all 134.
Aiding the enemy certainly fits:
Any person who—
(1)aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or
(2)without proper authority, knowingly harbors or protects or gives intelligence to, or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly;
That "...communicates or corresponds with ..." clause is pretty much what he did, given that his actions were without the knowledge and authority of the President or SECDEF.
Article 134, on the other hand, is the "you're guilty of something" that they can try you under when all else fails.
Remember , as a member of the military, he doesn't have the same protections as a civilian when it comes to the legal process.
What ought to happen is the Sec of Army should demand he retire if they are unwilling to prosecute.
Rockstar
09-15-21, 08:48 PM
If I was Miley I'd resign since I'd have already put in forty years service, but maybe he still sees Trumpism as a threat to the constitution he swore to protect.
You have absolutely no understanding of the chain of command and the subservient role of the military to civilian authority which is the ultimate authority. Thinking the Generals oath gives him authority to behave in a such manner is utter nonsense. The oath he took is for the defense of the constitution against enemy’s foreign and domestic. That dumbass general has absolutely no authority whatsoever to arbitrarily declare or consider a sitting president the duly elected Commander in Chief and President of the United States of America an enemy of this country or its constitution. The General should be sent to the brig to rot and as well as all the traitors to the constitution that behave in such a manner. Having been in the service and a pretty good understanding of the chain of command and the role of the civilian authority over the military. I think it’s you and the general who are the enemies of the constitution.
Buddahaid
09-15-21, 08:53 PM
Except he is subject to the UCMJ. He could be charged under Article 92 (failure to obey a lawful order), 94 (mutiny/sedition), 103 (aiding the enemy), or the catch-all 134.
Aiding the enemy certainly fits:
Any person who—
(1)aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or
(2)without proper authority, knowingly harbors or protects or gives intelligence to, or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly;
That "...communicates or corresponds with ..." clause is pretty much what he did, given that his actions were without the knowledge and authority of the President or SECDEF.
Article 134, on the other hand, is the "you're guilty of something" that they can try you under when all else fails.
Remember , as a member of the military, he doesn't have the same protections as a civilian when it comes to the legal process.
What ought to happen is the Sec of Army should demand he retire if they are unwilling to prosecute.
Fair enough.
Buddahaid
09-15-21, 08:57 PM
Thinking the Generals oath gives him authority to behave in a such manner is utter nonsense. The oath he took is for the defense of the constitution against enemy’s foreign and domestic. That dumbass general has absolutely no authority whatsoever to declare a sitting president of the United States of America an enemy of this country or its constitution. The General should be sent to the brig to rot.
Please show me where he declared Trump an enemy, as apposed to entertained it as a possibility, that's not an opinion piece.
Rockstar
09-16-21, 07:25 AM
These area your words which imply you believe Miley was acting to protect the constitution.
but maybe he still sees Trumpism as a threat to the constitution he swore to protect.
These area your words which imply you believe Miley was acting to protect the constitution.
but maybe he still sees Trumpism as a threat to the constitution he swore to protect.
His job is to defend the constitution against ENEMEYs of the constitution. He is told by civilian authority who the enemy is. The General isn’t paid to wander off the reservation and make that determination on his own. Nor are kook left wing blue-anon conspiracy theorists.
Speaking of the Constitution, you should read it again and understand what it says. :)
A man (or woman) does not hold supreme powers. The office they were elected to holds the power, at least in US. :yep:
This is why the US military does not swear an oath of allegiance to a man (or woman). They swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution.
Its a subtle difference, but you should look into it.
Rockstar
09-16-21, 08:08 AM
Speaking of the Constitution, you should read it again and understand what it says. :)
A man (or woman) does not hold supreme powers. The office they were elected to holds the power, at least in US. :yep:
This is why the US military does not swear an oath of allegiance to a man (or woman). They swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution.
Its a subtle difference, but you should look into it.
So what your saying then is the executive, the house and senate doesn’t matter and a military officer can take matters into his own hands and determine who the enemy is?
One thing YOU should understand about our system of government is no one person is in charge. Especially a rogue general who takes it upon himself to defend the constitution. They should fire him and yank all pay and retirement benefits.
Buddahaid
09-16-21, 08:17 AM
These area your words which imply you believe Miley was acting to protect the constitution.
These area your words which imply you believe Miley was acting to protect the constitution.
His job is to defend the constitution against ENEMEYs of the constitution. He is told by civilian authority who the enemy is. The General isn’t paid to wander off the reservation and make that determination on his own. Nor are kook left wing blue-anon conspiracy theorists.
Yes those are my words but I asked you to show me where Miley said Trump was a domestic enemy as you claim.
Isn't it up to the American authorities to decide whether this Mr. Miley committed a felony crime by his acting under President Trump ?
Markus
Kptlt. Neuerburg
09-16-21, 08:39 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNYifB6i8QI&t=1s
Rockstar
09-16-21, 08:42 AM
Yes those are my words but I asked you to show me where Miley said Trump was a domestic enemy as you claim.
If his job is to defend the constitution against ENEMIES. Then why even bring up the argument about his sworn oath? Because you left out the most part of the oath which describes who he is to defend our constitution against. Only kook left wing conspiracy theorist extremists would go so far to declare a duly elected official the President of the United Stated an enemy of the constitution. Because that’s what your arguement just did.
Buddahaid
09-16-21, 08:46 AM
If his job is to defend the constitution against ENEMIES. Then why even bring up the argument about his sworn oath? Because you left out the most part of the oath which describes who he is to defend our constitution against. Only kook left wing conspiracy theorist extremists would go so far to declare a duly elected official the President of the United Stated an enemy of the constitution. Because that’s what your arguement just did.
So you won't back up your claim about Miley and focus on what I said.
Isn't it up to the American authorities to decide whether this Mr. Miley committed a felony crime by his acting under President Trump ?
Markus
Actually, his title is Gen. Miley. You might want to look into how many hoops you have to jump through to earn that title. :03:
Actually, his title is Gen. Miley. You might want to look into how many hoops you have to jump through to earn that title. :03:
Ok Gen. Miley.
I've followed how you discussed whether he committed a crime or not and it was because of this I wrote
Isn't it up to the American authorities....?
I'm not speculating in if he get a verdict or not, but if they open a case against him.
Markus
3catcircus
09-16-21, 11:49 AM
So - here's an interesting thought.
The US has civilian control of the military as one of the bases of how the military is organized. By definition, all military members report to the President. That whole chain of command thing.
The President is duly elected, and his actions are based upon the belief that what he is doing is in accordance with his oath of office. Even if that consists of calling another leader "Rocket Man" or taking actions that alter how the nation intersects with other nations (Paris climate, trade war with China, etc.). It does not matter that his subordinates don't like the way he carries out his duties. It isn't their place to countermand his orders or to oppose his actions. Question and advise in confidence? Sure. But that's it. As a member of the military, you're obligated to follow his orders. Or resign your commission. Enlisted are kinda screwed because they are obligated to a term of service under their contract, but officers can resign they're commission any time after their initial 5 year obligation.
Now, the JCS chair believes that the President is going to do "something" after the Jan 6th trespassing... At no point has the President violated his oath of office, and at no point has he taken clear steps to avoid a transfer of power - arresting Biden and Harris, suspending Congress, locking himself in the White House.
Yet, we're supposed to believe Milley going behind his back to allegedly prevent him from attacking China is anything other than insubordinate? The guy is still duly-elected for another 14 days, and Milley's obligation is to obey his orders as Commander in Chief. Milley has no reporting chain to Pelosi and he certainly has no authorization to call a Chinese general and tell him that he would prevent Trump from attacking China.
It may or may not qualify as treason, but it damn sure is insubordinate, it certainly is failure to obey a lawful order, and it definitely is aiding the enemy.
Buddahaid
09-16-21, 11:58 AM
I'm not reading his alleged behavior as anything more than making sure policy would be followed and as the liasson between the Secretary of Defense, the president, and the joint chiefs, that he is informed of any orders.
Rockstar
09-16-21, 11:59 AM
So - here's an interesting thought.
The US has civilian control of the military as one of the bases of how the military is organized. By definition, all military members report to the President. That whole chain of command thing.
The President is duly elected, and his actions are based upon the belief that what he is doing is in accordance with his oath of office. Even if that consists of calling another leader "Rocket Man" or taking actions that alter how the nation intersects with other nations (Paris climate, trade war with China, etc.). It does not matter that his subordinates don't like the way he carries out his duties. It isn't their place to countermand his orders or to oppose his actions. Question and advise in confidence? Sure. But that's it. As a member of the military, you're obligated to follow his orders. Or resign your commission. Enlisted are kinda screwed because they are obligated to a term of service under their contract, but officers can resign they're commission any time after their initial 5 year obligation.
Now, the JCS chair believes that the President is going to do "something" after the Jan 6th trespassing... At no point has the President violated his oath of office, and at no point has he taken clear steps to avoid a transfer of power - arresting Biden and Harris, suspending Congress, locking himself in the White House.
Yet, we're supposed to believe Milley going behind his back to allegedly prevent him from attacking China is anything other than insubordinate? The guy is still duly-elected for another 14 days, and Milley's obligation is to obey his orders as Commander in Chief. Milley has no reporting chain to Pelosi and he certainly has no authorization to call a Chinese general and tell him that he would prevent Trump from attacking China.
It may or may not qualify as treason, but it damn sure is insubordinate, it certainly is failure to obey a lawful order, and it definitely is aiding the enemy.
When high ranking officers publicly denounce or in other ways diminish the office of the presidency. It worries me because that kind of behavior can have a detrimental effect on the good order and discipline within the ranks. Because if they if Generals can misbehave and play politics. That means the lower ranks can divide in political groups also, that’s not good. That’s why IMO they should bust him down and fire his divisive arse and make sure he doesn’t receive any benefits.
Let me see if I got this right.
Trump becomes more mad in the end of his term. In his madness he think/decide to attack China, but Gen. Miley does not follow order he contradicts the President and he even call China to cool things down.
If I did understand it correctly He has saved our life and should have a medal instead of being prosecuted.
Markus
Rockstar
09-16-21, 12:37 PM
Let me see if I got this right.
Trump becomes more mad in the end of his term. In his madness he think/decide to attack China, but Gen. Miley does not follow order he contradicts the President and he even call China to cool things down.
If I did understand it correctly He has saved our life and should have a medal instead of being prosecuted.
Markus
If you look at the timing of these headlines about Miley, Trump, Nukes, and China you will find they coincide with Bob Woodward and Robert Costa new book ‘Peril’ .
If you look at the timing of these headlines about Miley, Trump, Nukes, and China you will find they coincide with Bob Woodward and Robert Costa new book ‘Peril’ .
From a book-well then there's a chance that the situation is exaggerated
To something else(no need to start a new comment)
There have been in the news and in Danish article.
It's about Biden being interrupted in his performance-They showed a clip from Boise where Biden spoke and then the picture disappeared and a logo appeared instead.
Markus
3catcircus
09-16-21, 03:01 PM
I'm not reading his alleged behavior as anything more than making sure policy would be followed and as the liasson between the Secretary of Defense, the president, and the joint chiefs, that he is informed of any orders.
Except Milley doesn't get to make the call to China or converse with Pelosi on his own authority. His job is to advise and obey his civilian leaders - neither of whom authorized him to do what he did.
He gets to say, "I advise against this because..." and then say, "Yes, Mr. President," even if they choose to not heed his advice.
We don't need a Myanmar government in the US...
Buddahaid
09-16-21, 03:37 PM
Except Milley doesn't get to make the call to China or converse with Pelosi on his own authority. His job is to advise and obey his civilian leaders - neither of whom authorized him to do what he did.
He gets to say, "I advise against this because..." and then say, "Yes, Mr. President," even if they choose to not heed his advice.
We don't need a Myanmar government in the US...
We also don't need a Lukashenko as president for that matter.
https://i.imgur.com/ZTey0bx.png
Rockstar
09-16-21, 05:15 PM
https://youtu.be/28JiA5tkB_Q
Rockstar
09-16-21, 05:18 PM
https://youtu.be/7eTIW3IfVuM
Rockstar
09-16-21, 05:20 PM
… wealthy white DEMOCRAT donors had no food in front of them and were not yet eating, there was not a mask in sight — except on the faces of the overwhelmingly non-white people hired as servants, all of whom had their gratuitous faces covered. Servants, apparently, are much more pleasant when they are dehumanized. There is no need for noses or mouths or other identifiable facial features for those who are converted into servile robots.
Similar scenes were visible at the even more opulent birthday bash which former President Barack Obama threw for himself to commemorate his 60 years on the planet. Held at his sprawling $12 million weekend estate on Martha's Vineyard, Obama and 400 of his closest maskless friends spent hours in indoor tents dancing, chatting in close circles, and yelling in each other's ears over the live music. While custom-made masks engraved with Obama's renowned humility were provided to the guests (“44×60”), only the servants were reported to have worn masks. Who can throw a Hawaiian luau-themed party at one of the country's wealthiest retreats in the middle of a pandemic and joblessness crisis while wearing disfiguring masks, however chic and carefully hand-crafted they might be?
https://youtu.be/E4xxPdgGonM
I've read more accurately in A Danish article about this Gen. Milley case
Here I say-It's up to you American to decide if there should be a case against him or not.
Markus
Rockstar
09-16-21, 06:02 PM
IMO all that’s going on now is media hype and controversy. It stirs people up to want to know more about the latest gossip. Unfortunately, if you want to know more you’re going to have to shell out $29.49 on Amazon for the book.
Rockstar
09-16-21, 08:52 PM
https://youtu.be/-ZySNh_F8TQ
IMO all that’s going on now is media hype and controversy. It stirs people up to want to know more about the latest gossip. Unfortunately, if you want to know more you’re going to have to shell out $29.49 on Amazon for the book.
Well, not like there's no right-wing material in the fantasy section. But they learned from Goebbels .... so there's that. :shucks:
Rockstar
09-16-21, 09:47 PM
Funny you should bring up Goebbels.
Propaganda Minister Goebbels was an impoverished intellectual in the days when the menace of national socialism seemed remote to the German people. Until 1933 he lived on a meager salary which he received as a Party functionary. His rise illustrates the operation of direct power - getting, without giving. He simply let it be known to his Party friends in the Municipal Council of Berlin that a larger gift would be acceptable to him. He then became the new owner of extensive estates near Berlin, formerly the property of the municipality, recently given to him as a ‘present’ by the Berlin Chamber of Commerce in recognition of his “services to the nation”.
Goebbels doesn’t sound like something from the right wing fantasy books section. He sounds just like that left wing Democrat Chicago street activist who is now living in a mansion on a 12 acre estate in Martha’s Vinyard.
Goebbels doesn’t sound like something from the right wing fantasy books section. He sounds just like that left wing Democrat Chicago street activist who is now living in a mansion on a 12 acre estate in Martha’s Vinyard.
Right wing extremists have been trying to project that for years. Which .... is very Goebbellian. Sorry, make that Orwellian. Well, both. :shucks:
https://i.imgur.com/4skBYD9.png
Deepslick
09-17-21, 05:55 AM
Well, not like there's no right-wing material in the fantasy section. But they learned from Goebbels .... so there's that. :shucks:
Goebbels was a leftist like his national socioalist party. A big fat lie made after the war placed the nazis on the right. Muossolini was a life long marxist. Hitler himself said they were socialists. History books written after the war was made by leftist progressives. You will not find it anywhere before the war anyone placing the nazis and the fascists on the right. Everyone knew it back then and there wasnt even an argument about it. The nazis fought the communists in germany in the 20s and 30s but only because those communists looked to moscow for leadership. Well made scam and a rewriting of history after ww2. Communism, socialism, fascism...all born of the same whore mother. Leftists all. The leftists have been busy since ww2 after they lose the war and positioned themselves in all the important places in the societies where they could change the societies from within but in a hidden way. Bit by bit. Here we are with a full blown remaking of marxism called cultural marxism. Good luck.
Goebbels was a leftist like his national socioalist party.
No need to read the rest. There's a degree of ignorance there that's a bit too proud of itself, sir.
Rockstar
09-17-21, 08:39 AM
No need to read the rest. There's a degree of ignorance there that's a bit too proud of itself, sir.
Funny you should bring up ignorance.
Here’s a portion of a letter from a German businessman.
“….You have no idea how far State control goes and how much power National Socialist party representatives have over our work. The worst of it is that they are so ignorant. In this respect they certainly differ from the former Social-Democratic officials. These National Socialist radicals think of nothing except “distributing the wealth.”
Some businessmen have started studying Marxist theories, so they have a better understanding of the present economic times.
How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary National Socialist government decisions concerning quantity, quality, and prices for materials.”
I bet that sounds like capitalism to such a learned fellow as yourself huh? :shucks:
Funny you should bring up ignorance.
Here’s a portion of a letter from a German businessman.
“….You have no idea how far State control goes and how much power National Socialist party representatives have over our work. The worst of it is that they are so ignorant. In this respect they certainly differ from the former Social-Democratic officials. These National Socialist radicals think of nothing except “distributing the wealth.”
Some businessmen have started studying Marxist theories, so they have a better understanding of the present economic times.
How can we possibly manage a firm according to business principles if it is impossible to make any predictions as to the prices at which goods are to be bought and sold? We are completely dependent on arbitrary National Socialist government decisions concerning quantity, quality, and prices for materials.”
I bet that sounds like capitalism to such a learned fellow as yourself huh? :shucks:
Actually, examples of such were indeed gone over in scholastic settings, going far to explain both confusion and delusion then. As it apparently still does now.
https://fullfact.org/online/nazis-socialists/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism
https://www.bundestag.de/en/parliament/history/parliamentarism/third_reich
https://escholarship.org/content/qt7bt808vx/qt7bt808vx_noSplash_42cc71f23d786740f0b6278d3ec022 02.pdf
But never mind that. Winning you over with historical facts will never be a thing. :shucks:
derstosstrupp
09-17-21, 09:32 AM
The answer is not a straightforward one because it is hard to view what the Nazis were trying to achieve through the lens of what socialism looks like today, which is more akin to the Social Democrats Hitler combatted. Hitler was very much a socialist and intended for Germany to become a national socialist state. He drew a very clear distinction between what he called international Socialism, and national Socialism. He was in support of the old Prussian adage “Gemeinnutz vor Eigennutz”, the concept of putting the community before your own interests. For them that meant national community, not international community. And the policies that he put into place throughout the 1930s are reflective of this principle. The stressing of the Volksgemeinschaft and demand of individuals to subjugate themselves to that principle was a reality, not only in daily life but also in economic life.
I studied this quite a bit when I was doing some independent study of Austrian economics years ago. And since I speak German I went to Hitler’s speeches. The evidence there is everywhere. What rockstar posted, that letter, is very consistent with what I have come to understand about national socialist economic policy. It was state run, it did allow individual businessmen the opportunity for initiative, but within the guidelines set by the government.
This topic came up here not long ago, and rockstar posted a very good in-depth analysis video. I also contributed to that thread and I recommend looking over those contributions, one of which is below. Hitler himself explains his outlook and economic policies (and what he’s already done, not what he’s just saying he’ll do):
https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=2757911&postcount=24
I made it clear there and I will make it clear here, I do not view the evils of that regime as lying in their socialism. The evils lie elsewhere. If a nation can make socialist policies work for themselves, stressing sacrifice for the greater good, compulsory labor and military service, emphasis on physical fitness, keeping rapacious business practices in check, etc., more power to them. Probably wouldn’t work for some, particularly the US with the individualistic outlook that defines us (often to our detriment), but certainly elsewhere it might.
I also said this there and I will say it again, people really really really really want him to not be associated with Socialism because of the emotional response that that regime elicits. But looking at it objectively through the lens of history, he clearly was. But again, not an indictment of Socialism itself.
Of course it was state run. Nazism required everything to be totally controlled by the state for the benefit of the state. Where today's extreme right wing is involved, is its poorly fashioned attempt to divorce itself from Nazism's extreme right identity and project it on to liberals. Ironically, in the U.S., nazis/neo-nazis are not attracted to liberal politics, causes or ideology. Instead they have been attracted to authoritarian ideology (imagine that) while attempting to project that image onto their political enemies (their preferred term instead of 'opponent'). That meant being fervent supporters of Republicanism as it began its slide toward 'the party of Trump.' If there is a political litmus paper, that would be it.
There won't be an eventual 'coming to reality' on this forum (or any) from those devoted to that viewpoint. But then, there won't be any swaying from their viewpoint by anyone already immersed in historical relevancy and current reality.
So, in that, all I can offer is love, understanding and sympathy. :shucks:
derstosstrupp
09-17-21, 10:01 AM
Fwiw, the extreme right in the US supported Trump in spite of his alignment with the Republican Party, and cheered whenever Trump bucked “traditional conservatives”. They didn’t become Republicans. They hate both parties for the same reason the Nazis hated them - they view them as ineffectual. Far-right-wingers call Republicans “cucks” and “Democrats just going the speed limit”, as they typically come around to agree with the left eventually (“caving in” as they see it).
The true extreme right wing also is very much in support of socialistic policies that the Nazis implemented. Just for white people.
Proud Boys etc isn’t really the true far right. They are much more moderate than the real ones.
Rockstar
09-17-21, 10:57 AM
Fwiw, the extreme right in the US supported Trump in spite of his alignment with the Republican Party, and cheered whenever Trump bucked “traditional conservatives”. They didn’t become Republicans. They hate both parties for the same reason the Nazis hated them - they view them as ineffectual. Far-right-wingers call Republicans “cucks” and “Democrats just going the speed limit”, as they typically come around to agree with the left eventually (“caving in” as they see it).
The true extreme right wing also is very much in support of socialistic policies that the Nazis implemented. Just for white people.
Proud Boys etc isn’t really the true far right. They are much more moderate than the real ones.
Even if our governments were perfect. The extremes of both ends of the political spectrums will declare it ineffectual or in the way of their cause and desire to see it replaced. I also think given a chance either one would resort to violence to further their own race or ideology. One of the reasons they are called extremists.
What I find amusing is how people here take things as if was a personal attack upon themselves to call National Socialism SOCIALISM. I just finished the two books The Vampire Economy and The Wages of Destruction and seems pretty clear to me it wasn’t a secret code for right wing Trump supporting capitalists.
As you said: “I do not view the evils of that regime as lying in their socialism. The evils lie elsewhere.” Very true there are many if not all aspects of socialism which work just fine for a lot of countries. The evil lay in those who wield the power and their ideology, think Mein Kampf.
Even though I don’t, I know of many a person, black, white, hispanic and even one Haitian who support Trump. None of them are right wing extremists, racists, nazis or have a desire to overthrow a government. So don’t let the headlines fool anyone. Not everyone in this country are extremists just because they happen to vote for a particular person. I just hope their vote is an educated vote.
Trump supporters entering the street in Washington tomorrow Saturday.
I hope it will be a peaceful demonstration.
USA have had enough of violent demonstration.
Markus
Rockstar
09-17-21, 06:03 PM
. IMO there seems to me to be many more people and groups taking to streets lately than just Trump supporters. Which is fine by me so long as they are peaceful gatherings and don’t tear things up.
If they start breaking things then I’m all for dropping the hammer on’em
:shucks:. IMO there seems to me to be many more people and groups taking to streets lately than just Trump supporters. Which is fine by me so long as they are peaceful gatherings and don’t tear things up.
If they start breaking things then I’m all for dropping the hammer on’em
Right wing hate groups have violence woven into their ideology. Kinda hard to divorce them from what they love most. With their targets being anything left of them (basically anyone not in their ranks) then I'm sure there'll be accusations of the left being the cause of it all, whether anti-fascists, BLM or the Washington D.C. mothers for peace defend themselves or not. :shucks:
Rockstar
09-17-21, 07:08 PM
:shucks:
Right wing hate groups have violence woven into their ideology. Kinda hard to divorce them from what they love most. With their targets being anything left of them (basically anyone not in their ranks) then I'm sure there'll be accusations of the left being the cause of it all, whether anti-fascists, BLM or the Washington D.C. mothers for peace defend themselves or not. :shucks:
I suggest you get a TIDE online data base account it’s easy. You will find all types of left and right wing groups and causes accused of violence and terror.
I suggest you get a TIDE online data base account it’s easy. You will find all types of left and right wing groups and causes accused of violence and terror.
Apparently not domestically.
https://www.dni.gov/files/Tide_Fact_Sheet.pdf
:shucks:
https://external-dfw5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/safe_image.php?d=AQEUO3yxpDFR2q2v&w=500&h=261&url=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.vanityfair.com%2Fphotos%2F 5ff69600c97c041ce0e7ac0d%2F16%3A9%2Fw_1280%2Cc_lim it%2F1230086798&cfs=1&ext=jpg&_nc_oe=6eb2c&_nc_sid=06c271&ccb=3-5&_nc_hash=AQFGlDr2ItJMJDFw
TRUMP WANTS GENERAL MILLEY CHARGED WITH TREASON FOR MAKING HIM LOOK STUPID
BY BESS LEVIN
SEPTEMBER 15, 2021
Something you may have gleaned over the last several years is that Donald Trump does not take criticism—constructive, real, or imagined—very well. One major example of his paper-thin skin would obviously be his reaction to the American people denying him a second term in office, which of course resulted in him inciting a violent mob to attack the U.S. Capitol. For those who’ve had their brains scrambled by the 45th president, let us just say here and now that that is not a normal way to respond to such an event. Smaller examples of Trump’s inability to deal with anyone saying anything about him less glowing than “you’re an Adonis with a 390-point IQ” would include the many times he turned on people he had hired and praised, and then, after they gave their unvarnished opinion of him, called them “dumb as a rock,” “mentally retarded,” “clueless,” or a “lowlife.”
Naturally, it was in no way surprising that his reaction to the news that General Mark Milley reportedly took steps to stop him from starting a war with China and a nuclear war with any number of countries was characteristic of Trump, i.e. bat**** crazy with a string of terrifying run-on sentences to boot.
According to The Daily Beast, after The Washington Post and CNN reported that Peril, a forthcoming book by Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, details a pair of calls Milley made to assure China that despite the then president being insane, the U.S. would not start a war against the country, and that if he was going to attack, Milley would give his counterpart a heads up, Trump called several close associates and demanded they go on TV to declare Milley should be charged with treason. And of course, they did:
They followed his orders as various MAGA-faithful pundits and Trumpy candidates—including Ohio U.S Senate candidate Josh Mandel, Trump-aligned TPUSA frontman Charlie Kirk, and several former Trump officials—dutifully echoed the “treason” charge on social media. And by Tuesday evening, the twice-impeached former U.S. president was on a Newsmax show cohosted by his former White House [press secretary] using the T-word. “I’ve had so many calls today saying that’s treason,” Trump told Newsmax hosts Sean Spicer and Lyndsay Keith.… “If this is true, General Milley would be a traitor to this country and should be tried for treason immediately. If true, he should be fired and tried for treason immediately,” Fox News star and informal Trump adviser Sean Hannity exclaimed later on Tuesday night, alongside an on-air graphic that blared “Benedict Milley.”
Excerpts of Woodward and Costa’s work published by the Post and CNN say that Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Mark Milley—who continues on in that role under President Joe Biden—was so unnerved by Trump’s behavior in the aftermath of the insurrection and election that he believed the president was in “serious mental decline” and that the president could “go rogue.” At the time, such concerns were shared throughout the administration and one senior Trump official told The Daily Beast that the insurrection had “changed the calculus” and that “People are concerned about [the president’s] state of mind.”
Following his appearance on Newsmax, Trump released a typically deranged statement that simultaneously accused Milley of committing a treasonous act and claimed the entire story was made up, which read, in part:
If the story of “Dumbass” General Mark Milley, the same failed leader who engineered the worst withdrawal from a country, Afghanistan, in U.S. history, leaving behind many dead and wounded soldiers, many American citizens, and $85 Billion worth of the newest and most sophisticated Military equipment in the world, and our Country’s reputation, is true, then I assume he would be tried for TREASON in that he would have been dealing with his Chinese counterpart behind the President’s back and telling China that he would be giving them notification “of an attack.” Can’t do that!
The good news is that the story is Fake News concocted by a weak and ineffective General together with two authors who I refused to give an interview to because they write fiction, not fact. Actions should be taken immediately against Milley, and better generals in our Military, of which we have many, should get involved so that another Afghanistan disaster never happens again. Remember, I was the one who took out 100% of the ISIS Caliphate. Milley said it couldn’t be done!
Incidentally, Trump spoke to Woodward extensively for the veteran reporter’s 2020 book, Rage. Presumably it was the revelation in that book that the 45th president purposely lied to the country about COVID-19 that caused him to decline interview requests for Peril.
In other Milley news, the general can likely expect an earful from Trump’s conservative lackeys in Congress when he testifies later this month. Per Axios:
When Joint Chiefs Chairman Mark Milley goes before Congress on Sept. 28, he may face some of the most hostile questioning of any modern four-star general.… The big picture: Republicans were already irate with Milley for playing a starring role in a string of recent Trump books. Even some of his friends are cringing over his extensive and high-profile scenes in these books and perceptions that he's participated on “deep background” with multiple authors. Extensive direct quotes attributed to Milley have led Republicans to accuse him of personally leaking to authors.
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), who serves on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, cited Woodward’s and Costa’s reporting in calling for President Biden to fire Milley, accusing him of working to “actively undermine the sitting Commander in Chief of the United States Armed Forces.”
While Republicans may be out for blood, at present Milley’s job is apparently safe. On Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki told reporters: “I can assure you all that the president knows General Milley. He has been chairman of the Joint Chiefs for almost eight months of his presidency. They’ve worked side by side through a range of international events. And the president has complete confidence in his leadership, his patriotism, and his fidelity to our Constitution.”
Bess Levin is a politics correspondent at Vanity Fair.
Otto Harkaman
09-17-21, 07:39 PM
all the Socialism and Fascism nonsense is a smoke screen, we are a TAC (Transactional Advertising Consortium) hating Trump sells big time, the justification for hating him is just dust bunnies. Welcome to the political version of the Kardashians or Ben and Jlo romance.
https://theupsidedownworld.files.wordpress.com/2016/12/trump-kardashian.png
You have weird kink. :shucks:
Otto Harkaman
09-17-21, 08:00 PM
I have no idea what you posted Arlo because I've had you on ignore for awhile now, welcome to Cancel Culture :salute: gotta love it :yeah:
Oh and Bob Woodward's new book about Trump
NEW YORK, September 23 —Simon & Schuster announced today that Bob Woodward's RAGE has sold 600,000 copies across all formats through the first week on sale in the U.S. The combined sales figure includes pre-orders, sales of print books, ebooks, audiobooks, and e-audiobooks.
Yeah baby, Trump sells
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.