Nazis showing up at places uninvited.

[Gamebreaker]

4 hours ago, Llevron said:

 

The internet is the next battlefield. I know we all want it to be free and open for anything and everything but I have become convinced that the way to end this **** and ISIS is to disconnect these monsters from each other. Let them wither on the vine and died alone. 

 

How you do that, I have no idea. 

 

I know how you do that, but it's illegal. 

[visionary]

 

[LadySkinsFan]

They need to move these white terrorist trials to other parts of the country, because obviously their peeps are acquitting them when they should be in jail. We're seeing jury nullification.

[EBoz]

8 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said:

They need to move these white terrorist trials to other parts of the country, because obviously their peeps are acquitting them when they should be in jail. We're seeing jury nullification.

LOL

[visionary]

 

[visionary]

 

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Mr. Sinister]

Kamala Jarris has to be the most attractive senator ever. And that hearing has zero chance of going well, if it goes at all.

[Llevron]

21 hours ago, Mr. Sinister said:

Malcom X and NOI (and the Black Panthers) would be a very natural reaction to the war being waged on blacks across America. It's an angry and fed up response to the  treatment of African Americans. I think King was the much harder path to follow, and im sure a lot of families were having arguments over it. I think it takes a ton of wisdom and courage to do what King did. I can say from my own experience that although hate breeds hate, love propagates love, and although it is an absurdly more difficult path than basically saying "**** all of you, burn this **** down," with love, more can be accomplished than the alternative.

 

Both of those men grew in ways that weren't covered in my history books as a kid. Like all people who are wise enough to learn from those they disagree with, they migrated more towards the middle. King wasn't only non-violence. And X learned, from King if I remember correctly, that you have to be able to communicate with the enemy unless you are ready to destroy them. And that wasn't a fight he could possibly win. King was tougher than he gets credit for. And X calmer. Both lost their fight to evil men. Love didn't save them. Or us.

 

I want for what you say to be the truth. Honestly I do. I would much prefer love to any alternative. But I just dont think it jives with reality where evil does exist. I dont want to drive this topic too far off the road, but consider all that America herself has accomplished with love. Then consider all that she has accomplished with hate. Love is at a disadvantage to hate and evil. Hate and evil do exist in this world. And it does make me disappointed to have to seriously type that. But it is reality. And - making an attempt to go back on topic - if you let hate exist where it is comfortable....eventually it will peak its ugly head back out to destroy all that peace and love you fight so hard to protect. Its a classic story. I just think we need to close the book on that ass and finish it for good. No more to be continued. And thats how I feel about these hate groups and where they congregate. They dont deserve to congregate.

 

Emperor Palpatine was right. 

11 hours ago, Mr. Sinister said:

Kamala Jarris has to be the most attractive senator ever. And that hearing has zero chance of going well, if it goes at all.

 

And yea shes hott. That brain of hers just makes it better. 

Edited August 23, 2017 by Llevron

[visionary]

 

[LD0506]

Well, in a rather twisted way this has all been kinda fun, I am enjoying watching apologists for the neoNazis and Trump try to keep from screaming "It isn't fair that these commie ****** lovers keep calling us racists!"

[visionary]

 

[Popeman38]

18 hours ago, LadySkinsFan said:

They need to move these white terrorist trials to other parts of the country, because obviously their peeps are acquitting them when they should be in jail. We're seeing jury nullification.

So you want to move trials to area you know you can get the outcome you desire?  That can't be abused or anything...

2 hours ago, LD0506 said:

Well, in a rather twisted way this has all been kinda fun, I am enjoying watching apologists for the neoNazis and Trump try to keep from screaming "It isn't fair that these commie ****** lovers keep calling us racists!"

Some fun has been had. But then I have to get dirty and defend their right to exist and protest. Denying them the chance to protest sets the stage for the govt to prevent any group from protesting under the guise of public safety.

 

Then I feel all gross and no amount of alcohol or showering helps.

[Springfield]

29 minutes ago, visionary said:

 

 

Start a thread on reddit.  If anyone can do it...

[Springfield]

Quote

Copied. Keep it going.
So grateful to have studied our history seems a lot of people do not know US history concerning the Civil War.
Many people think the Civil War of 1860-1865 was fought over one issue alone, slavery. Nothing could actually be further from the truth. The War Between the States began because the South demanded States' rights and were not getting them.
The Congress at that time heavily favored the industrialized northern states to the point of demanding that the South sell it's cotton and other raw materials only to the factories in the north, rather than to other countries. The Congress also taxed the finished materials that the northern industries produced heavily, making finished products that the South wanted, unaffordable. The Civil War should not have occurred. If the Northern States and their representatives in Congress had only listened to the problems of the South, and stopped these practices that were almost like the taxation without representation of Great Britain, then the Southern states would not have seceded and the war would not have occurred.
I know for many years, we have been taught that the Civil War was all about the abolition of slavery, but this truly did not become a major issue, with the exception of John Brown's raid on Harper's Ferry, until after the Battle of Antietam in September 1862, when Abraham Lincoln decided to free the slaves in the Confederate States in order to punish those states for continuing the war effort. The war had been in progress for two years by that time.
Most southerners did not even own slaves nor did they own plantations. Most of them were small farmers who worked their farms with their families. They were fighting for their rights. They were fighting to maintain their lifestyle and their independence the way they wanted to without the United States Government dictating to them how they should behave.
Why are we frequentlytaught then, that the Civil War, War of Northern Aggression, War Between the States, or whatever you want to call it, was solely about slavery? That is because the history books are usually written by the winners of a war and this war was won by the Union. the Civil War was about much more than abolishing the institution of slavery.
It was more about preserving the United States and protecting the rights of the individual, the very tenets upon which this country was founded. I personally think that the people who profess that the Civil War was only fought about slavery have not read their history books. I really am glad that slavery was abolished, but I don't think it should be glorified as being the sole reason the Civil War was fought. There are so many more issues that people were intensely passionate about at the time. Slavery was one of them, but it was not the primary cause of the war. The primary causes of the war were economics and states' rights.
Regards
P.S
Ignorance breeds ignorance Educate so you may appreciate !!
This was a forwarded piece that I copied and pasted. Please read this.

 

Got the above off FB.  Shared by someone I feel should be above all this.

[LadySkinsFan]

Geez, revisionist history for sure. 

 

Textbooks published in Texas for decades.

[Gamebreaker]

And he has the audacity to say ignorance breeds ignorance at the end of his heavily edited version of events. Someone should've posted a link to the secession documents every Southern state created stating their refusal to stop slavery was the reason for them leaving the Union, and then tell him to STFU. 

Edited August 23, 2017 by Gamebreaker

[grego]

6 minutes ago, Gamebreaker said:

And he has the audacity to say ignorance breeds ignorance at the end of his heavily edited version of events. Someone should've posted a link to the secession documents every Southern state created stating their refusal to stop slavery was the reason for them leaving the Union, and then tell him to STFU. 

 

i was just looking at those. 

 

https://www.civilwar.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states

 

seems to me slavery was the main reason for their secession. not sure what the counter-argument to this is. (they only mentioned slavery, but it was really something else?)

 

states rights- as in, the northern states should not have the right to tell southerners passing through that they can't do so with someone they consider property.

 

so, technically, states rights. 

 

i would say that kind of whitewashes the actual issue, doesnt it?

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/five-myths-about-why-the-south-seceded/2011/01/03/ABHr6jD_story.html?utm_term=.312649065f86

 

As the nation begins to commemorate the anniversaries of the war’s various battles — from Fort Sumter to Appomattox — let’s first dispense with some of the more prevalent myths about why it all began.

1. The South seceded over states’ rights.

Confederate states did claim the right to secede, but no state claimed to be seceding for that right. In fact, Confederates opposed states’ rights — that is, the right of Northern states not to support slavery.

On Dec. 24, 1860, delegates at South Carolina’s secession convention adopted a “Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union.” It noted “an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery” and protested that Northern states had failed to “fulfill their constitutional obligations” by interfering with the return of fugitive slaves to bondage. Slavery, not states’ rights, birthed the Civil War.

 

South Carolina was further upset that New York no longer allowed “slavery transit.” In the past, if Charleston gentry wanted to spend August in the Hamptons, they could bring their cook along. No longer — and South Carolina’s delegates were outraged.

[Burgold]

3 hours ago, LD0506 said:

Well, in a rather twisted way this has all been kinda fun, I am enjoying watching apologists for the neoNazis and Trump try to keep from screaming "It isn't fair that these commie ****** lovers keep calling us racists!"

It's rather crazy how they complain that libs are commies with one breath and then brush off Putin's handiwork with the next... or take Russia's word over the FBI, CIA, and every other US intel op.

 

These guys are the masters of wanting to eat their cake and having it too. We love Putin and Russia's okay in our book you dirty rotten Red Commie!

 

(I seriously had that encounter with someone a few days ago. I find it incredible)

[LadySkinsFan]

Putin was raised in a ****ized version of communism.

 

Putin is more right wing/authoritarian and has more in common with our home grown right wing authoritarians. No wonder they are so simpatico, they want to rule by dictatorship.

 

That's why our home grown right wingers are so dangerous to our Republic, they have been trying to destroy it for decades. I keep telling people to check out the John Birch Society.

[Mr. Sinister]

1 hour ago, Popeman38 said:

So you want to move trials to area you know you can get the outcome you desire?  That can't be abused or anything...

 

Its not like it isn't already being abused or anything...

[Popeman38]

Just now, Mr. Sinister said:

 

Its not like it isn't already being abused or anything...

But we want to end that practice, not expand it!

1 hour ago, Springfield said:

 

Got the above off FB.  Shared by someone I feel should be above all this.

I have avoided the stupid of Facebook since it was launched, please don't degrade my one social vice on the internet! 

[Llevron]

12 minutes ago, Popeman38 said:

But we want to end that practice, not expand it!

 

How sway? 

[Mr. Sinister]

9 minutes ago, Popeman38 said:

But we want to end that practice, not expand it!

 

How is trying these gumps in an area outside of their good ol' boy network (where they cant screw with jury members or intimidate local sherrifs) "expansion," or "Getting the outcome you desire," rather than the best attempt at getting a just verdict?

 

Unless you are joking, what you're saying makes no sense.

[Popeman38]

14 minutes ago, Mr. Sinister said:

 

How is trying these gumps in an area outside of their good ol' boy network (where they cant screw with jury members or intimidate local sherrifs) "expansion," or "Getting the outcome you desire," rather than the best attempt at getting a just verdict?

 

Unless you are joking, what you're saying makes no sense.

I don't think moving a trial away from the area it happened in is a good idea, in general.  The orginal post I responded to was:

Quote

 

LadySkinsFan:

They need to move these white terrorist trials to other parts of the country, because obviously their peeps are acquitting them when they should be in jail. We're seeing jury nullification.

 

 

That statement is working to achieve the desired result: jail. If you start with a verdict, and work your way back to rig the process (either way), the justice system is worthless.

 

I understand moving a trial to get an unbiased jury pool.  But moving it in order to get the desired outcome?  Antithetical to our justice system.  At that point, the trial becomes state theater.

Edited August 23, 2017 by Popeman38