A bigot on a train in Portland was screaming anti-Islamic abuse at two women, one of whom was wearing a head scarf. Two men got up to confront him. The racist -- with the ironic surname 'Christian' -- stabbed them both to death (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40070319).
Your deplorables are listening to you, Asshole. Unfortunately.
Also, why is he not being referred to as a 'Christian extremist terrorist'? Because if he'd been a Muslim screaming abuse at two teen girls wearing crosses, we all know he would be.
Jeebus is Great!
Disgusting.
Trump should be held responsible for inciting violence. Oh wait this is the United States justice is dead
Quote from: fencerider on May 28, 2017, 12:19:25 AM
Trump should be held responsible for inciting violence. Oh wait this is the United States justice is dead
The US is violence incarnate ... arrest the whole country.
http://resistancereport.com/news/white-terrorists-killed-more-this-week/
This pushed the number of people killed in white hate crimes this week above the number of people killed by refugees in the last 40 (when 3 people were killed by Cuban refugees).
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/u-s-hate-crimes-20-percent-2016-fueled-election-campaign-n733306
https://thinkprogress.org/thinkprogress-has-been-tracking-hate-since-trumps-election-here-s-what-we-found-e0288ed69869
The number of hate crimes, many of them violent crimes, targeting the weaker in society has increased by 20% since Trump was inaugurated, and over 1/3rd of them were done in Trump's name. Even conservative estimates put that number in the hundreds since the election.
Where are the people talking about this violent, racist, sexist white ideology? Why do we not have more people telling us to fear that heterosexual white man because he belongs to a group that, quite often, hold violent and bigoted ideological views (even if they are not violent themselves) and live in a culture that perpetuates violence and bigotry?
Oh, right, that would be stupid. That standard we hold blacks, Muslims, gays, women... suddenly starts to look really moronic when we apply it to ourselves. Funny how that works.
Getting back at the terrorists by murdering civilians. That'll teach 'em.
Quote from: fencerider on May 28, 2017, 12:19:25 AM
Trump should be held responsible for inciting violence. Oh wait this is the United States justice is dead
You can go move to some shitty Middle Eastern country if you don't like free speech.
Quote from: FaithIsFilth on May 29, 2017, 07:19:42 PM
You can go move to some shitty Middle Eastern country if you don't like free speech.
Why is 'free speech' considered to be free of responsibility? It never has been. You may be free to holler fire in a theater, but you will not be free of the legal responsibility to do so. I am 'free' to say many things. But my hearers are also free to return the favor. 'Hate speech' is not free speech. It is illegal. I love free speech--and despise hate speech. Trump engages in hate speech--but gets away with it.
Quote from: Mike Cl on May 29, 2017, 09:31:18 PM
Why is 'free speech' considered to be free of responsibility? It never has been. You may be free to holler fire in a theater, but you will not be free of the legal responsibility to do so. I am 'free' to say many things. But my hearers are also free to return the favor. 'Hate speech' is not free speech. It is illegal. I love free speech--and despise hate speech. Trump engages in hate speech--but gets away with it.
If you are sensitive millennial, then a fart in your general direction is hate speech. France is much more clearly defined as to hate speech. The woman mayor of Paris is trying to ban a rally, that only allows Black people to go. Segregation is hate-association. Just because you hate Republicans, doesn't make what they say ... hate speech, otherwise, I think we can arrest a whole lot of both Republicans and Democrats, since I hate both of them. See ... hating isn't hate speech, only if you say something about it. Or you can come arrest me for thought crime ... but then all the atheists can be arrested for that. Don't throw stones in glass house alley.
Quote from: fencerider on May 28, 2017, 12:19:25 AM
Trump should be held responsible for inciting violence. Oh wait this is the United States justice is dead
Don't forget G W Bush!
Quote from: pr126 on May 30, 2017, 04:42:46 AM
Don't forget G W Bush!
And don't forget Bill Clinton (worse WH boss since Kennedy) and Barak Obama (using GCHQ to spy on political opponents).
This thread is about a crazy asshole fatally knifing two victims. The subtext is that he was a radical bigot, and below that is the philosophical issue of free speech. Keep in mind that Mr. Christian was the attacker here. His two victims were exercising their free speech by telling him to stop being an asshole in public. Mr. Christian was also engaging in free speech by yelling slurs at innocent women of a misguided faith, although it's harder to make the case that Christian was engaging in free speech since he combined murder with his speech.
And somehow we are now blaming Bill Clinton, which is fine because free speech technically includes irrelevant speech along with wild and reaching exaggeration. And those are not against the law either. I think we should put our foot down once and for all. Just make being illogical a crime, and be done with all of this shit.
Quote from: trdsf on May 27, 2017, 03:21:51 PM
A bigot on a train in Portland was screaming anti-Islamic abuse at two women, one of whom was wearing a head scarf. Two men got up to confront him. The racist -- with the ironic surname 'Christian' -- stabbed them both to death (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40070319).
Seems to be true.
Quote from: trdsf
Your deplorables are listening to you, Asshole. Unfortunately.
"According to his posts,
he was a passionate Bernie Sanders supporter who later supported,
but did not vote for, President Trump. He frequently posted violent threats against Hillary Clinton and her supporters."
https://www.buzzfeed.com/juliareinstein/portland-suspect?utm_term=.bgwy3RL8A#.pa44GrYRk
While not a big fan of buzzfeed, they have screenshots of this guys facebook posts. Many people do not accept that significant numbers of democrat voters hated Clinton so much, they stayed home. Others, much to some peoples dismay, voted for Trump as the lesser of two evils in november. Point being, your connection to Trump seems very weak.
Quote from: trdsf
Also, why is he not being referred to as a 'Christian extremist terrorist'? Because if he'd been a Muslim screaming abuse at two teen girls wearing crosses, we all know he would be.
Probably because there is no evidence he is a christian other than surname association. Again, refer to the above buzzfeed link and one will see his appeal to All the Gods in an April 19th post. While pure speculation on my part, I would guess William Ernest Henley, were he still alive, would not approve of his poem being cited in reference to the Oklahoma bombing event.
Quote from: FaithIsFilth on May 29, 2017, 07:19:42 PM
You can go move to some shitty Middle Eastern country if you don't like free speech.
Or more "free" counties with higher human rights ratings, as well as standard of living and quality of life ratings, that are harsh on hate speech.
It's almost like absolute freedom of speech isn't a necessity for a free and happy society.
Quote from: Mike Cl on May 29, 2017, 09:31:18 PM
Why is 'free speech' considered to be free of responsibility? It never has been. You may be free to holler fire in a theater, but you will not be free of the legal responsibility to do so. I am 'free' to say many things. But my hearers are also free to return the favor. 'Hate speech' is not free speech. It is illegal. I love free speech--and despise hate speech. Trump engages in hate speech--but gets away with it.
Trump went too far by talking about protesters getting beat up. He did not go too far when talking about Muslims or Mexicans (personally I really dislike what he's said about Muslims and Mexicans, but that's beside the point). No amount of slit throats will change my mind. I'll take the slit throats and free speech over no slit throats and no free speech. I appreciate the sacrifice of those getting their throats slit.
Quote from: Shiranu on May 30, 2017, 08:33:32 AM
Or more "free" counties with higher human rights ratings, as well as standard of living and quality of life ratings, that are harsh on hate speech.
It's almost like absolute freedom of speech isn't a necessity for a free and happy society.
I don't see people as truly free if they aren't allowed to speak their minds.
Quote from: FaithIsFilth on May 30, 2017, 11:09:47 AM
Trump went too far by talking about protesters getting beat up. He did not go too far when talking about Muslims or Mexicans (personally I really dislike what he's said about Muslims and Mexicans, but that's beside the point). No amount of slit throats will change my mind. I'll take the slit throats and free speech over no slit throats and no free speech. I appreciate the sacrifice of those getting their throats slit.
That's good. My main point being, not slit throats, but holding people--especially our 'leaders' , responsible for what they say. They are free to say what they legally want--we are free to legally respond. Drump should be about raising the bar of responsibility, not tearing it down.
Quote from: FaithIsFilth on May 30, 2017, 11:35:01 AM
I don't see people as truly free if they aren't allowed to speak their minds.
You are always free ... to obey the SJW fascists.
Quote from: FaithIsFilth on May 30, 2017, 11:35:01 AM
I don't see people as truly free if they aren't allowed to speak their minds.
You aren't free, no matter what you do. The laws of matter don't change because life is unfair. In fact the law of nature is ... those who can benefit from unfairness do, and often promote greater unfairness. Tooth and claw ... either scratch, bite or be cat food.
Quote from: SGOS on May 30, 2017, 07:01:22 AM
And somehow we are now blaming Bill Clinton, which is fine because free speech technically includes irrelevant speech along with wild and reaching exaggeration. And those are not against the law either. I think we should put our foot down once and for all. Just make being illogical a crime, and be done with all of this shit.
Some people here would support a Dem, if they shoved people alive into ovens. Others would oppose Reps, if they raised people from the dead. Neither will happen, it is a rhetorical point. This whole post (and most others) are rhetorical points to be won or lost. Engarde!
Quote from: Mike Cl on May 30, 2017, 12:51:21 PM
That's good. My main point being, not slit throats, but holding people--especially our 'leaders' , responsible for what they say. They are free to say what they legally want--we are free to legally respond. Drump should be about raising the bar of responsibility, not tearing it down.
You must be very disappointed with Obama too ;-)
Quote from: Baruch on May 30, 2017, 01:19:51 PM
You must be very disappointed with Obama too ;-)
Nope--not so much.
Quote from: Mike Cl on May 30, 2017, 12:51:21 PM
That's good. My main point being, not slit throats, but holding people--especially our 'leaders' , responsible for what they say. They are free to say what they legally want--we are free to legally respond. Drump should be about raising the bar of responsibility, not tearing it down.
I think the guy I responded to was saying that Trump should be charged with a crime. You hold Trump responsible by having people vote him out of office in 2020 or don't vote him in in the first place (problem is though, his anti-Muslim and anti-Mexican rhetoric seems to have won over Muslims and Mexican-Americans. Maybe they respect Trump's "strength" and don't like their fellow Muslims and Mexicans as much as we think they do. Trump is the People's Champion. Got way more Muslim, hispanic, and black votes than Romney and others) not by doing away with free speech, which I think is what he was suggesting. I support the right to free speech and that means people are entitled to say things a thousand times worse than what Trump has said about Muslims and Mexicans.
Quote from: Baruch on May 30, 2017, 01:15:42 PM
You aren't free, no matter what you do. The laws of matter don't change because life is unfair. In fact the law of nature is ... those who can benefit from unfairness do, and often promote greater unfairness. Tooth than claw ... either scratch, bite or be cat food.
I know. Americans are not really free. You can go to jail for pot. You don't have the legal right to take your own life, etc.
Quote from: Hydra009 on May 29, 2017, 02:43:43 PM
Getting back at the terrorists by murdering civilians. That'll teach 'em.
Getting back at the terrorists by
becoming one...that'll teach 'em!
Quote from: Unbeliever on May 30, 2017, 05:08:48 PM
Getting back at the terrorists by becoming one...that'll teach 'em!
Who's on first, What's on second ...
The first government authorized terror, was by General George Washington, against Portsmouth England (British naval port) ... the British stopped the terrorist (arsonist) before he got very far.
I seriously doubt that the first government organized terror happened as recently as the American Revolution. I mean, there's a hell of a lot of history you're disregarding to make such a claim.
Quote from: Unbeliever on May 30, 2017, 07:37:41 PM
I seriously doubt that the first government organized terror happened as recently as the American Revolution. I mean, there's a hell of a lot of history you're disregarding to make such a claim.
I think he was referring to the first by our govt. Which means it was even before we had an actual govt. I haven researched that, but it sounds reasonable.
But I do think the term 'terror attack' or 'terrorism' is so overused as to be meaningless any more. I dare say that terror has been a weapon from the beginning of human time. It is pretty easy to see that if your enemy is terrorized it is pretty easy meat. Terror must be the oldest human weapon--even older than stones.
Quote from: Unbeliever on May 30, 2017, 07:37:41 PM
I seriously doubt that the first government organized terror happened as recently as the American Revolution. I mean, there's a hell of a lot of history you're disregarding to make such a claim.
The first by my government ... read between the lines, please. Early terrorism is the (fictional) claim that the Pharaoh had Semite male babies killed. Earlier than that, was Sargon, king of Akkad, who liked lots of S&M. You counted dead enemies by counting up their severed penises.
Quote from: FaithIsFilth on May 29, 2017, 07:19:42 PM
You can go move to some shitty Middle Eastern country if you don't like free speech.
I see you support the very liberal definition of the first ammendment. I agree only with the reason d'etre of the first ammendment. protection of repurcussion when speaking out against what you perceive as a wrong doing of the government. As such most of what Bradley Manning and Erik Snowden did, was what the first ammendment was created for.
You can not however tell your younger brother or your fans to go hit somebody and not expect to be held accountable if they do. Donald Trump said a lot of things about getting muslims out of the U.S., and keeping muslims out, and that the U.S. is a Christian only nation.
Free speech does not give you permission to denigrate sacred objects of some one else's religion. Free speech doesnt give you permission to play act killing a police officer or a politician. What you are argueing for is not a nation with liberty what you are argueing for is anarchy. The founders did not fight for anarchy nor did they fight for any one to disrespect others
"Free speech does not give you permission to denigrate sacred objects of some one else's religion." ... but that is what this site is all about, that and political self stimulation. But I agree, pissing on people, figuratively or literally, is a good way to get a fist sandwich. None of us are holy rollers ... are you? You seem to support the protection of "sacred cows" and the PC of "shibboleths".
The Brights mocking the Dims ... but who is who?
Quote from: FaithIsFilth on May 30, 2017, 11:35:01 AM
I don't see people as truly free if they aren't allowed to speak their minds.
You're free to move to some shitty anarchist state then?
Quote from: fencerider on May 31, 2017, 02:25:20 AM
Free speech does not give you permission to denigrate sacred objects of some one else's religion.
Actually, yes it does.
Quote from: Cavebear on May 31, 2017, 10:58:17 AM
Actually, yes it does.
Yep. What he posted doesn't make any sense. "Thank God for dead soldiers" is free speech. "All niggers/ Muzzies/ whatever should be deported" is free speech. A celeb holding an artistic decapitated head of Trump is free speech and makes me go "meh". Hell, you can praise ISIS and as long as you're careful, that is free speech. Someone made a thread a little while ago with an American professor saying that white people should have the right to vote taken from them, and that whites who complain about it should be arrested for complaining. That is free speech. What did Trump actually say about Muslims that would/ should not be considered free speech? Trump said that some non-Americans should not be brought into the country. OK. He's talking about non-Americans there... Shitting on Islam? If Chris Hitchens were still alive, should we charge him with hate speech too? In that case, much of this forum would probably have to be charged as well to remain consistent.
What Trump said was fucked up, I agree. If it wasn't for his rhetoric, you probably wouldn't have seen the slight uptick in bigotry and hate crimes. I dislike what Trump has said about Muslims just as much as others do, but you don't do away with free speech because a couple people die or because someone walks into a pizza shop with a gun to investigate. That's called being a pussy. How many Americans have died in wars, etc. and look at all the millions of lives of others around the world that they've had to take in war to give you/ keep that right to free speech. I can guarantee you, my pile of dead bodies beats your pile of dead bodies.
Quote from: fencerider on May 31, 2017, 02:25:20 AM
Donald Trump said a lot of things about getting muslims out of the U.S., and keeping muslims out, and that the U.S. is a Christian only nation.
Like what? I don't remember anything about getting Muslims out of the US. I think you just made that up. When did he call the US a Christian only nation, because I seriously doubt he said that when his own daughter is Jewish.
Quote from: FaithIsFilth on May 31, 2017, 01:14:28 PM
Like what? I don't remember anything about getting Muslims out of the US. I think you just made that up. When did he call the US a Christian only nation, because I seriously doubt he said that when his own daughter is Jewish.
Other Republicans (particular 700 club folks) have said as much. But all Republicans are Trump, and all Trumps are Republicans, and gun toting Neanderthal good-old-boys. Not a prissy Leftist among them ;-)
Quote from: FaithIsFilth on May 31, 2017, 01:14:28 PM
Like what? I don't remember anything about getting Muslims out of the US. I think you just made that up. When did he call the US a Christian only nation, because I seriously doubt he said that when his own daughter is Jewish.
"Donald Trump in an interview Friday Sat, Jun 11th, 2016 at 7:55 am, America is a Judeo-Christian nation. Why? Silly question: Because “that’s the way it is.â€