info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
WHO SHOT ASHLI BABBIT?
204 views
Skip to first unread message
John Deagle
Jan 7, 2021, 4:07:14 PM1/7/21
to
John Corbett
Jan 7, 2021, 9:20:44 PM1/7/21
to
On Thursday, January 7, 2021 at 4:07:14 PM UTC-5, john....@gmail.com wrote:
> https://www.bitchute.com/video/TGmNEmnModjC/
This is the first video I have seen of this shooting. It is rather
appalling. I see no justification for the use of deadly force. I wonder if
this officer will be held to the same scrutiny as would a white officer
who shot an unarmed black man.
> https://www.bitchute.com/video/TGmNEmnModjC/
This is the first video I have seen of this shooting. It is rather
appalling. I see no justification for the use of deadly force. I wonder if
this officer will be held to the same scrutiny as would a white officer
who shot an unarmed black man.
ajohnstone
Jan 8, 2021, 10:26:26 AM1/8/21
to
> I wonder if this officer will be held to the same scrutiny as would a
> white officer who shot an unarmed black man.
You can be assured the police-officer will get the fullest protection of
> white officer who shot an unarmed black man.
his union and will be investigated by a police-friendly DA.
I do note that immediate emergency medical treatment was given and she
was not first handcuffed and assistance delayed as in other cases of
police shootings.
As i said in the other post, it was the political instigators and the
inciters of this riot, who think ordinary people are sheep to be
manipulated and deceived for political gain, who should be held culpable.
John McAdams
Jan 8, 2021, 10:57:30 AM1/8/21
to
On 8 Jan 2021 15:26:24 -0000, ajohnstone <alanjjo...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
Calling articulation of a grievance (even if unjustified) "incitement"
is essentially fascist.
In US law, incitement is defined precisely and narrowly in a decision
called Brandenburg.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio
Was Black Lives Matter guilty of incitement?
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
wrote:
is essentially fascist.
In US law, incitement is defined precisely and narrowly in a decision
called Brandenburg.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio
Was Black Lives Matter guilty of incitement?
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Bud
Jan 8, 2021, 8:18:16 PM1/8/21
to
white. Can`t find it now.
John Corbett
Jan 8, 2021, 8:18:28 PM1/8/21
to
this riot had been planning it for some time. This wasn't the result of
anything Donald Trump said to them. They were going to march to the
Capitol and a good portion of them had already planned in advance to storm
the building. This was as much as anything an intelligence failure. The
leaders of the mob had signaled their intentions online but nobody was
paying attention.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-or-war-how-the-capitol-mob-mobilized-on-social-media-11610069778
Of course the mainstream media are programmed to blame every bad thing
that happens on Trump. If a meteor had fallen from the sky and smashed
into the Capitol building, it would have been Trump's fault.
Bud
Jan 8, 2021, 8:18:48 PM1/8/21
to
On Friday, January 8, 2021 at 10:26:26 AM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:
> > I wonder if this officer will be held to the same scrutiny as would a
> > white officer who shot an unarmed black man.
> You can be assured the police-officer will get the fullest protection of
> his union and will be investigated by a police-friendly DA.
As well he should be. He should be afforded his rights, representation
> > I wonder if this officer will be held to the same scrutiny as would a
> > white officer who shot an unarmed black man.
> You can be assured the police-officer will get the fullest protection of
> his union and will be investigated by a police-friendly DA.
and due process.
But this is not good enough for the leftists crowds, is it?
> I do note that immediate emergency medical treatment was given and she
> was not first handcuffed and assistance delayed as in other cases of
> police shootings.
Was she violent, did she attack anyone, was she armed, did she resist
arrest? If every leftist who committed her level of crime was shot, tens
of thousands of leftists would be dead today.
> As i said in the other post, it was the political instigators and the
> inciters of this riot, who think ordinary people are sheep to be
> manipulated and deceived for political gain, who should be held culpable.
mainstrean media? Leftist politicians? All of the above?
Suddenly people need to be held culpable.
Anthony Marsh
Jan 8, 2021, 8:24:59 PM1/8/21
to
On 1/7/2021 4:07 PM, John Deagle wrote:
> https://www.bitchute.com/video/TGmNEmnModjC/
>
That's supposed to be Roger rabbit.
SCI
> https://www.bitchute.com/video/TGmNEmnModjC/
>
That's supposed to be Roger rabbit.
SCI
ajohnstone
Jan 8, 2021, 10:39:33 PM1/8/21
to
You are right that the events were not the result of just one speech which
ended with Trump urging his supporters to march on the Capitol, telling
them "you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show
strength."
We have witnessed his disregard for law and order from the podiums of his
many rallies where his supporters were encouraged to assault his hecklers.
We also saw his response to neo-Nazis at Charlottesville.
But we can trace this "anti-elitism" tendency back to the gun-toting
Bundys and further back still to anti-abortion terrorism of the religious
right and earlier even than that. The Capitol riot was a snap-shot of a
long course of events that reveals the Dis-United States of America, and
its constant battle between reason and irrationality.
And Biden has no hope of fixing it other than appeasing the Right-wing -
something i have always said if you care to look at past posts where i
challenged the prevailing view made here that the Squad has some sort of
hold over Biden. Absolute nonsense.
Was it an intelligence failure similar to the non-existence of Saddam's
WMDs? Or was it deliberate and intentional? I am sure it will all come out
later in the wash. Conspiracy or cock-up...as always i'm inclined to the
latter explanation. But after reading about Boeing in the USA and the
Grenfell fire in London, claims of conspiring to hide the truth are
sometimes true.
ended with Trump urging his supporters to march on the Capitol, telling
them "you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show
strength."
We have witnessed his disregard for law and order from the podiums of his
many rallies where his supporters were encouraged to assault his hecklers.
We also saw his response to neo-Nazis at Charlottesville.
But we can trace this "anti-elitism" tendency back to the gun-toting
Bundys and further back still to anti-abortion terrorism of the religious
right and earlier even than that. The Capitol riot was a snap-shot of a
long course of events that reveals the Dis-United States of America, and
its constant battle between reason and irrationality.
And Biden has no hope of fixing it other than appeasing the Right-wing -
something i have always said if you care to look at past posts where i
challenged the prevailing view made here that the Squad has some sort of
hold over Biden. Absolute nonsense.
Was it an intelligence failure similar to the non-existence of Saddam's
WMDs? Or was it deliberate and intentional? I am sure it will all come out
later in the wash. Conspiracy or cock-up...as always i'm inclined to the
latter explanation. But after reading about Boeing in the USA and the
Grenfell fire in London, claims of conspiring to hide the truth are
sometimes true.
Bud
Jan 9, 2021, 12:12:35 AM1/9/21
to
On Friday, January 8, 2021 at 10:39:33 PM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:
> You are right that the events were not the result of just one speech which
> ended with Trump urging his supporters to march on the Capitol, telling
> them "you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show
> strength."
>
> We have witnessed his disregard for law and order
Yes, I remember the Trump supporters looting all those Walmarts and
> You are right that the events were not the result of just one speech which
> ended with Trump urging his supporters to march on the Capitol, telling
> them "you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show
> strength."
>
> We have witnessed his disregard for law and order
Targets and other stores. No, wait...
And I remember the leftists coming out and condeming the distruction.
No, wait...
>from the podiums of his
> many rallies where his supporters were encouraged to assault his hecklers.
> We also saw his response to neo-Nazis at Charlottesville.
would have been a non-issue and non-event. But no, they feel they have to
go and attack them.
> But we can trace this "anti-elitism" tendency back to the gun-toting
> Bundys and further back still to anti-abortion terrorism of the religious
> right and earlier even than that. The Capitol riot was a snap-shot of a
> long course of events that reveals the Dis-United States of America, and
> its constant battle between reason and irrationality.
> And Biden has no hope of fixing it other than appeasing the Right-wing -
> something i have always said if you care to look at past posts where i
> challenged the prevailing view made here that the Squad has some sort of
> hold over Biden. Absolute nonsense.
>
> Was it an intelligence failure similar to the non-existence of Saddam's
> WMDs? Or was it deliberate and intentional? I am sure it will all come
> out later in the wash. Conspiracy or cock-up...as always i'm inclined to
> the latter explanation. But after reading about Boeing in the USA and
> the Grenfell fire in London, claims of conspiring to hide the truth are
> sometimes true.
vapors. Or are they only overstating the threat to justify the
authoritarian measures they want to implement?
ajohnstone
Jan 9, 2021, 8:23:33 AM1/9/21
to
Bud, you have made very clear where your sympathies lie. A demagogue is
preferable to you as a political leader, despite the distancing of every
(at least democratic politicians) from practically every one of Trump's
policies.
Your position is a very simplistic (simpleton) one - my country right or
wrong, my fuhrer, right or wrong. Any criticism is dismissed by the
mantra, "you are either with us or against us."
preferable to you as a political leader, despite the distancing of every
(at least democratic politicians) from practically every one of Trump's
policies.
Your position is a very simplistic (simpleton) one - my country right or
wrong, my fuhrer, right or wrong. Any criticism is dismissed by the
mantra, "you are either with us or against us."
John Corbett
Jan 9, 2021, 1:12:18 PM1/9/21
to
On Friday, January 8, 2021 at 10:39:33 PM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:
> You are right that the events were not the result of just one speech which
> ended with Trump urging his supporters to march on the Capitol, telling
> them "you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show
> strength."
I'd love to see a quote where Trump told his supporters to lay siege to
> ended with Trump urging his supporters to march on the Capitol, telling
> them "you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show
> strength."
the Capitol.
>
> We have witnessed his disregard for law and order from the podiums of his
> many rallies where his supporters were encouraged to assault his hecklers.
> We also saw his response to neo-Nazis at Charlottesville.
true. There were also bad people on both sides at Charlottesville. There
were people on both sides with clubs and body armor. Not exactly standard
equipment for a peaceful protest.
>
> But we can trace this "anti-elitism" tendency back to the gun-toting
> Bundys and further back still to anti-abortion terrorism of the religious
> right and earlier even than that. The Capitol riot was a snap-shot of a
> long course of events that reveals the Dis-United States of America, and
> its constant battle between reason and irrationality.
irrationality is on the side of the right.
>
> And Biden has no hope of fixing it other than appeasing the Right-wing -
> something i have always said if you care to look at past posts where i
> challenged the prevailing view made here that the Squad has some sort of
> hold over Biden. Absolute nonsense.
the radical left which has become a force to be reckoned with in the
Democrat Party. It will be interesting to see if Biden has the fortitude
to stand up to them and what they will do if he does.
>
> Was it an intelligence failure similar to the non-existence of Saddam's
> WMDs? Or was it deliberate and intentional? I am sure it will all come out
> later in the wash. Conspiracy or cock-up...as always i'm inclined to the
> latter explanation. But after reading about Boeing in the USA and the
> Grenfell fire in London, claims of conspiring to hide the truth are
> sometimes true.
Bud
Jan 9, 2021, 1:12:25 PM1/9/21
to
On Saturday, January 9, 2021 at 8:23:33 AM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:
> Bud, you have made very clear where your sympathies lie. A demagogue is
> preferable to you as a political leader,
That he was a demagogue wasn`t important to me. What he did was.
> Bud, you have made very clear where your sympathies lie. A demagogue is
> preferable to you as a political leader,
>despite the distancing of every
> (at least democratic politicians) from practically every one of Trump's
> policies.
>
> Your position is a very simplistic (simpleton) one - my country right or
> wrong, my fuhrer, right or wrong. Any criticism is dismissed by the
> mantra, "you are either with us or against us."
country. You can believe that making America great is of no consideration
for Joe Biden.
John Corbett
Jan 9, 2021, 1:12:28 PM1/9/21
to
On Saturday, January 9, 2021 at 8:23:33 AM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:
conservatives from speaking at college campuses on the grounds that
conservative dialog is hate speech. Only a couple Democrats in the House
and none in the Senate dared to vote against the party line on the
impeachment of Trump. Policies that a few years ago would have been
dismissed as being on the lunatic fringe were embraced by all the
candidates during the Democrat primaries last year. Just one such example
was open borders and free healthcare for illegal immigrants. If wasn't
that long ago that Democrats were dead set against open borders because
the illegals would be taking jobs from blue collar workers who were once a
core element of the Democrat coalition. Then the Democrats made the
conscious decision to kick the blue collar workers to the curb in order to
curry favor with the Hispanic voters who are becoming an ever larger part
of the electorate. Moderate Democrats are afraid to oppose the new
orthodoxy for fear of being ousted by a radical opponent in the Democrat
primaries. This past election was a wake up call for Democrats in swing
districts as a number of them got voted out in the general election. The
ones who still represent swing districts now realize they face a greater
threat in the general election than they do in the primaries and are
starting to push back against the new radicalism.
donald willis
Jan 9, 2021, 4:44:10 PM1/9/21
to
ajohnstone
Jan 9, 2021, 4:44:32 PM1/9/21
to
I assure you that those who will be most vigorous in opposing the
crack-down on social media liberty will be the socialists. Already, it is
some on the Left who are pointing the finger at the Silicon Valley control
of the social media, over-flowing to control of other media such as the
Washington Post. From the days of Upton Sinclair's 'Brass Check' and John
Keracher's 'The Head-Fixing Industry' to Noam Chomsky's 'Manufacturing
Consent', it has been the liberal progressive left who have highlighted
fake news - Trump comes very late into the topic.
As Marx explained:
"You cannot enjoy the advantages of a free press without putting up with
its inconveniences. You cannot pluck the rose without its thorns!
“Censorship has outlived its time; where it still exists, it will
be regarded as a hateful constraint which prohibits what is openly said
from being written.”
“The truly radical cure for censorship would be its
abolition.”
“The absence of freedom of the press makes all other freedoms
illusory.”
“The censorship law, therefore, is not a law, it is a police
measure; but it is a bad police measure.”
After all Marx was an editor and journalist forced into exile (ever wonder
why he ended up in London as a political refugee) and can be expected to
fully defend the freedom of expression. It is the same with contemporary
socialists.
It is the State which is the threat to media freedom, not the Left. Since
McAdams raised the topic of anti-semitism elsewhere, the imposition of the
IHRA definition of it and the bans by numerous individual states of BDS
demonstrate the curtailment of the 1st Amendment rights that are being
applauded by the Right.
crack-down on social media liberty will be the socialists. Already, it is
some on the Left who are pointing the finger at the Silicon Valley control
of the social media, over-flowing to control of other media such as the
Washington Post. From the days of Upton Sinclair's 'Brass Check' and John
Keracher's 'The Head-Fixing Industry' to Noam Chomsky's 'Manufacturing
Consent', it has been the liberal progressive left who have highlighted
fake news - Trump comes very late into the topic.
As Marx explained:
"You cannot enjoy the advantages of a free press without putting up with
its inconveniences. You cannot pluck the rose without its thorns!
“Censorship has outlived its time; where it still exists, it will
be regarded as a hateful constraint which prohibits what is openly said
from being written.”
“The truly radical cure for censorship would be its
abolition.”
“The absence of freedom of the press makes all other freedoms
illusory.”
“The censorship law, therefore, is not a law, it is a police
measure; but it is a bad police measure.”
After all Marx was an editor and journalist forced into exile (ever wonder
why he ended up in London as a political refugee) and can be expected to
fully defend the freedom of expression. It is the same with contemporary
socialists.
It is the State which is the threat to media freedom, not the Left. Since
McAdams raised the topic of anti-semitism elsewhere, the imposition of the
IHRA definition of it and the bans by numerous individual states of BDS
demonstrate the curtailment of the 1st Amendment rights that are being
applauded by the Right.
Anthony Marsh
Jan 9, 2021, 4:44:35 PM1/9/21
to
The fact that you attack what you call the mainstream media tells us
which side you are on.
Is there any media which ignored this story?
Anthony Marsh
Jan 9, 2021, 4:44:39 PM1/9/21
to
>
>
John McAdams
Jan 9, 2021, 5:06:07 PM1/9/21
to
On 9 Jan 2021 21:44:30 -0000, ajohnstone <alanjjo...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
>I assure you that those who will be most vigorous in opposing the
>crack-down on social media liberty will be the socialists. Already, it is
>some on the Left who are pointing the finger at the Silicon Valley control
>of the social media, over-flowing to control of other media such as the
>Washington Post. From the days of Upton Sinclair's 'Brass Check' and John
>Keracher's 'The Head-Fixing Industry' to Noam Chomsky's 'Manufacturing
>Consent', it has been the liberal progressive left who have highlighted
>fake news - Trump comes very late into the topic.
>
>As Marx explained:
>
>"You cannot enjoy the advantages of a free press without putting up with
>its inconveniences. You cannot pluck the rose without its thorns!
>“Censorship has outlived its time; where it still exists, it will
>be regarded as a hateful constraint which prohibits what is openly said
>from being written.”
>
>“The truly radical cure for censorship would be its
>abolition.”
>
>“The absence of freedom of the press makes all other freedoms
>illusory.”
>
> “The censorship law, therefore, is not a law, it is a police
>measure; but it is a bad police measure.”
>
>After all Marx was an editor and journalist forced into exile (ever wonder
>why he ended up in London as a political refugee) and can be expected to
>fully defend the freedom of expression. It is the same with contemporary
>socialists.
>
Do you really think Marx would have opposed censorship by leftists?
Are you that naive?
It's not an accident that all his followers have imposed it when they
got power.
>It is the State which is the threat to media freedom, not the Left.
Are you defending the Tech Giants that censor conservative speech?
Yes or no?
>Since
>McAdams raised the topic of anti-semitism elsewhere, the imposition of the
>IHRA definition of it
https://www.state.gov/defining-anti-semitism/
So you are for free speech when things characterized as "anti-Semitic"
by this document are concerned?
I am too.
I'm just wondering whether you favor free speech when it comes to
things the leftists r4eally don't like.
Do you believe in free speech for racists?
>and the bans by numerous individual states of BDS
>demonstrate the curtailment of the 1st Amendment rights that are being
>applauded by the Right.
As for anti-BDS laws: do you believe government has a right to outlaw
discrimination? If so, why would you oppose BDS laws?
As for Republicans vs. Democrats, do you understand that it's
Democrats who are pushing BDS, and Republicans who generally oppose
BDS?
So who are the anti-Semites?
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
wrote:
>I assure you that those who will be most vigorous in opposing the
>crack-down on social media liberty will be the socialists. Already, it is
>some on the Left who are pointing the finger at the Silicon Valley control
>of the social media, over-flowing to control of other media such as the
>Washington Post. From the days of Upton Sinclair's 'Brass Check' and John
>Keracher's 'The Head-Fixing Industry' to Noam Chomsky's 'Manufacturing
>Consent', it has been the liberal progressive left who have highlighted
>fake news - Trump comes very late into the topic.
>
>As Marx explained:
>
>"You cannot enjoy the advantages of a free press without putting up with
>its inconveniences. You cannot pluck the rose without its thorns!
>“Censorship has outlived its time; where it still exists, it will
>be regarded as a hateful constraint which prohibits what is openly said
>from being written.”
>
>“The truly radical cure for censorship would be its
>abolition.”
>
>“The absence of freedom of the press makes all other freedoms
>illusory.”
>
> “The censorship law, therefore, is not a law, it is a police
>measure; but it is a bad police measure.”
>
>After all Marx was an editor and journalist forced into exile (ever wonder
>why he ended up in London as a political refugee) and can be expected to
>fully defend the freedom of expression. It is the same with contemporary
>socialists.
>
Are you that naive?
It's not an accident that all his followers have imposed it when they
got power.
>It is the State which is the threat to media freedom, not the Left.
Yes or no?
>Since
>McAdams raised the topic of anti-semitism elsewhere, the imposition of the
>IHRA definition of it
So you are for free speech when things characterized as "anti-Semitic"
by this document are concerned?
I am too.
I'm just wondering whether you favor free speech when it comes to
things the leftists r4eally don't like.
Do you believe in free speech for racists?
>and the bans by numerous individual states of BDS
>demonstrate the curtailment of the 1st Amendment rights that are being
>applauded by the Right.
discrimination? If so, why would you oppose BDS laws?
As for Republicans vs. Democrats, do you understand that it's
Democrats who are pushing BDS, and Republicans who generally oppose
BDS?
So who are the anti-Semites?
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
Jan 9, 2021, 10:06:18 PM1/9/21
to
On 1/8/2021 8:18 PM, Bud wrote:
> On Friday, January 8, 2021 at 10:26:26 AM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:
>>> I wonder if this officer will be held to the same scrutiny as would a
>>> white officer who shot an unarmed black man.
>> You can be assured the police-officer will get the fullest protection of
>> his union and will be investigated by a police-friendly DA.
>
> As well he should be. He should be afforded his rights, representation
> and due process.
>
> But this is not good enough for the leftists crowds, is it?
>
>> I do note that immediate emergency medical treatment was given and she
>> was not first handcuffed and assistance delayed as in other cases of
>> police shootings.
>
> You might also note that apples are different than oranges.
>
> Was she violent, did she attack anyone, was she armed, did she resist
> arrest? If every leftist who committed her level of crime was shot, tens
> of thousands of leftists would be dead today.
>
>> As i said in the other post, it was the political instigators and the
>> inciters of this riot, who think ordinary people are sheep to be
>> manipulated and deceived for political gain, who should be held culpable.
>
Silly, She was a terrorist ttying to break into the Senate to kill
> On Friday, January 8, 2021 at 10:26:26 AM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:
>>> I wonder if this officer will be held to the same scrutiny as would a
>>> white officer who shot an unarmed black man.
>> You can be assured the police-officer will get the fullest protection of
>> his union and will be investigated by a police-friendly DA.
>
> As well he should be. He should be afforded his rights, representation
> and due process.
>
> But this is not good enough for the leftists crowds, is it?
>
>> I do note that immediate emergency medical treatment was given and she
>> was not first handcuffed and assistance delayed as in other cases of
>> police shootings.
>
> You might also note that apples are different than oranges.
>
> Was she violent, did she attack anyone, was she armed, did she resist
> arrest? If every leftist who committed her level of crime was shot, tens
> of thousands of leftists would be dead today.
>
>> As i said in the other post, it was the political instigators and the
>> inciters of this riot, who think ordinary people are sheep to be
>> manipulated and deceived for political gain, who should be held culpable.
>
prople. You seem to approve of that.
Bud
Jan 9, 2021, 10:06:32 PM1/9/21
to
John Corbett
Jan 9, 2021, 10:06:55 PM1/9/21
to
> The fact that you attack what you call the mainstream media tells us
> which side you are on.
> Is there any media which ignored this story?
will treat it as a crime against humanity. When leftists riot, they gloss
over it by calling it "mostly peaceful" even as arson fires are raging in
background.
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=ali+veshi+mostly+peaceful+while+fire+rages&docid=608047479906502784&mid=FF7134D34210643FEEA0FF7134D34210643FEEA0&view=detail&FORM=VIRE
This "peaceful" riot was far more destructive then anything that happened
at the Capitol but was described as "not generally speaking, unruly". But
we're supposed to believe the MSM is not biased against the right. Give me
a break.
ajohnstone
Jan 10, 2021, 9:52:31 AM1/10/21
to
I am a member of an organization that has indeed proudly defended its
policy of never restricting the racists' and the fascists' rights to free
speech. And i have said so a number of times on this website. Suppression
of any groups political viewpoint merely drives it underground and turn
them into martyrs and victims. As such the political party has been
targetted by the left-wing when it endeavoured to debate racists and
fascist parties at public meetings. I need no lectures from others on
protecting the liberty of all to protect the freedoms of all.
And Marx in practice exercised giving his rivals the right to express
themselves if you care to study his part in the First International. It is
not hypothetical.
I forgot to mention it was those on the left like the Wobblies who
struggled for free speech on Boston Green and many other locations across
America. Vital at the time.
I thought i had made clear my position on the role of Silicon Valley
oligarchs in controlling the media. I said in my post "Already, it is some
inevitably be applied to the Left.
But i expect you wish me to condemn the Twitter ban on Trump. Well, you
are a moderator and you witness the problems with unmoderated groups. You
have imposed your own guidelines and stopped posts, haven't you?
I read today that Trump's estimated value to Twitter was $2 billion so if
he moves to other platforms such Parler, he will be welcomed with open
arms.
I gave State promoted censorship of the BDS campaign (not that i actually
believe BDS will be a success) and the imposition of IHRA definition guide
as examples of suppression of free speech more effective that your claims
of what is now being called the cancel culture on campus. I personally
recall the support for Californian farm-workers by using a boycott.
BDS is aimed at zionism, and is not anti-semitic. Where are the calls for
any neighborhood kosher store to be boycotted? As usual your partisan bias
against the Democratic Party leads you to misrepresent its position. The
vast majority of the House Democrats voted to characterize BDS as
anti-semitic. FACT. In July 2020, the House overwhelmingly passed such a
resolution that condemns BDS . The final vote was 398-17, with 209
Democrats voting for the legislation and just 16 opposing it.
Well, i also believe that US and UN trade sanctions too are discriminatory
and harmful and oppose those. I wrote about that here.
https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2010s/2019/no-1375-march-2019/sanctions-waging-war-without-bullets/
policy of never restricting the racists' and the fascists' rights to free
speech. And i have said so a number of times on this website. Suppression
of any groups political viewpoint merely drives it underground and turn
them into martyrs and victims. As such the political party has been
targetted by the left-wing when it endeavoured to debate racists and
fascist parties at public meetings. I need no lectures from others on
protecting the liberty of all to protect the freedoms of all.
And Marx in practice exercised giving his rivals the right to express
themselves if you care to study his part in the First International. It is
not hypothetical.
I forgot to mention it was those on the left like the Wobblies who
struggled for free speech on Boston Green and many other locations across
America. Vital at the time.
I thought i had made clear my position on the role of Silicon Valley
oligarchs in controlling the media. I said in my post "Already, it is some
on the Left who are pointing the finger at the Silicon Valley control of
the social media, over-flowing to control of other media such as the
Washington Post."
So for the record, any action taken against those on the Right will
the social media, over-flowing to control of other media such as the
Washington Post."
inevitably be applied to the Left.
But i expect you wish me to condemn the Twitter ban on Trump. Well, you
are a moderator and you witness the problems with unmoderated groups. You
have imposed your own guidelines and stopped posts, haven't you?
I read today that Trump's estimated value to Twitter was $2 billion so if
he moves to other platforms such Parler, he will be welcomed with open
arms.
I gave State promoted censorship of the BDS campaign (not that i actually
believe BDS will be a success) and the imposition of IHRA definition guide
as examples of suppression of free speech more effective that your claims
of what is now being called the cancel culture on campus. I personally
recall the support for Californian farm-workers by using a boycott.
BDS is aimed at zionism, and is not anti-semitic. Where are the calls for
any neighborhood kosher store to be boycotted? As usual your partisan bias
against the Democratic Party leads you to misrepresent its position. The
vast majority of the House Democrats voted to characterize BDS as
anti-semitic. FACT. In July 2020, the House overwhelmingly passed such a
resolution that condemns BDS . The final vote was 398-17, with 209
Democrats voting for the legislation and just 16 opposing it.
Well, i also believe that US and UN trade sanctions too are discriminatory
and harmful and oppose those. I wrote about that here.
https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2010s/2019/no-1375-march-2019/sanctions-waging-war-without-bullets/
John Corbett
Jan 10, 2021, 9:52:42 AM1/10/21
to
On Saturday, January 9, 2021 at 10:06:18 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> On 1/8/2021 8:18 PM, Bud wrote:
> > On Friday, January 8, 2021 at 10:26:26 AM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:
> >>> I wonder if this officer will be held to the same scrutiny as would a
> >>> white officer who shot an unarmed black man.
> >> You can be assured the police-officer will get the fullest protection of
> >> his union and will be investigated by a police-friendly DA.
> >
> > As well he should be. He should be afforded his rights, representation
> > and due process.
> >
> > But this is not good enough for the leftists crowds, is it?
> >
> >> I do note that immediate emergency medical treatment was given and she
> >> was not first handcuffed and assistance delayed as in other cases of
> >> police shootings.
> >
> > You might also note that apples are different than oranges.
> >
> > Was she violent, did she attack anyone, was she armed, did she resist
> > arrest? If every leftist who committed her level of crime was shot, tens
> > of thousands of leftists would be dead today.
> >
> >> As i said in the other post, it was the political instigators and the
> >> inciters of this riot, who think ordinary people are sheep to be
> >> manipulated and deceived for political gain, who should be held culpable.
> >
> Silly, She was a terrorist ttying to break into the Senate to kill
> prople. You seem to approve of that.
Please tell us what evidence you have that her intent was to kill people.
> On 1/8/2021 8:18 PM, Bud wrote:
> > On Friday, January 8, 2021 at 10:26:26 AM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:
> >>> I wonder if this officer will be held to the same scrutiny as would a
> >>> white officer who shot an unarmed black man.
> >> You can be assured the police-officer will get the fullest protection of
> >> his union and will be investigated by a police-friendly DA.
> >
> > As well he should be. He should be afforded his rights, representation
> > and due process.
> >
> > But this is not good enough for the leftists crowds, is it?
> >
> >> I do note that immediate emergency medical treatment was given and she
> >> was not first handcuffed and assistance delayed as in other cases of
> >> police shootings.
> >
> > You might also note that apples are different than oranges.
> >
> > Was she violent, did she attack anyone, was she armed, did she resist
> > arrest? If every leftist who committed her level of crime was shot, tens
> > of thousands of leftists would be dead today.
> >
> >> As i said in the other post, it was the political instigators and the
> >> inciters of this riot, who think ordinary people are sheep to be
> >> manipulated and deceived for political gain, who should be held culpable.
> >
> Silly, She was a terrorist ttying to break into the Senate to kill
> prople. You seem to approve of that.
If there was intent to kill, it was by the cop that shot her.
Bud
Jan 10, 2021, 9:53:22 AM1/10/21
to
On Saturday, January 9, 2021 at 10:06:18 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> On 1/8/2021 8:18 PM, Bud wrote:
> > On Friday, January 8, 2021 at 10:26:26 AM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:
> >>> I wonder if this officer will be held to the same scrutiny as would a
> >>> white officer who shot an unarmed black man.
> >> You can be assured the police-officer will get the fullest protection of
> >> his union and will be investigated by a police-friendly DA.
> >
> > As well he should be. He should be afforded his rights, representation
> > and due process.
> >
> > But this is not good enough for the leftists crowds, is it?
> >
> >> I do note that immediate emergency medical treatment was given and she
> >> was not first handcuffed and assistance delayed as in other cases of
> >> police shootings.
> >
> > You might also note that apples are different than oranges.
> >
> > Was she violent, did she attack anyone, was she armed, did she resist
> > arrest? If every leftist who committed her level of crime was shot, tens
> > of thousands of leftists would be dead today.
> >
> >> As i said in the other post, it was the political instigators and the
> >> inciters of this riot, who think ordinary people are sheep to be
> >> manipulated and deceived for political gain, who should be held culpable.
> >
> Silly, She was a terrorist ttying to break into the Senate to kill
> prople.
This is why nobody should believe anything a leftist says.
> > On Friday, January 8, 2021 at 10:26:26 AM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:
> >>> I wonder if this officer will be held to the same scrutiny as would a
> >>> white officer who shot an unarmed black man.
> >> You can be assured the police-officer will get the fullest protection of
> >> his union and will be investigated by a police-friendly DA.
> >
> > As well he should be. He should be afforded his rights, representation
> > and due process.
> >
> > But this is not good enough for the leftists crowds, is it?
> >
> >> I do note that immediate emergency medical treatment was given and she
> >> was not first handcuffed and assistance delayed as in other cases of
> >> police shootings.
> >
> > You might also note that apples are different than oranges.
> >
> > Was she violent, did she attack anyone, was she armed, did she resist
> > arrest? If every leftist who committed her level of crime was shot, tens
> > of thousands of leftists would be dead today.
> >
> >> As i said in the other post, it was the political instigators and the
> >> inciters of this riot, who think ordinary people are sheep to be
> >> manipulated and deceived for political gain, who should be held culpable.
> >
> Silly, She was a terrorist ttying to break into the Senate to kill
> prople.
Bud
Jan 10, 2021, 9:53:30 AM1/10/21
to
carrying Nancy Pelosi`s podium, in this article...
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/man-photographed-carrying-pelosis-lectern-has-been-arrested/ar-BB1cBUYf
Check out the backgroup, and imagine if BLM or Antifa had stormed that
building. All those statues, paintings, ect would have been destroyed.
These guys even stay within the velvet ropes. Of course the guy with the
podium was taking home a souvenir, but that is what Americans do when they
visit tourist locations.
This guy`s view...
https://i.4cdn.org/gif/1610212882329.webm
Pamela Brown
Jan 11, 2021, 1:14:16 PM1/11/21
to
Come senators, congressmen
Please heed the call
Don’t stand in the doorway
Don’t block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There’s a battle outside and it is ragin’
It’ll soon shake your windows and rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin’
https://www.bobdylan.com/songs/times-they-are-changin/
Pamela
https://dylagence.wordpress.com/
John McAdams
Jan 11, 2021, 1:21:27 PM1/11/21
to
On 11 Jan 2021 18:14:13 -0000, Pamela Brown <pamel...@gmail.com>
wrote:
A threat, huh.
That's the reality behind all the "love and peace" rhetoric of the 60s
left. A nasty authoritarianism.
That's become really prominent in US politics.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
wrote:
That's the reality behind all the "love and peace" rhetoric of the 60s
left. A nasty authoritarianism.
That's become really prominent in US politics.
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Pamela Brown
Jan 11, 2021, 6:42:28 PM1/11/21
to
https://bobdylanstore.com/products/theres-a-battle-hoodie?variant=37462026649777
donald willis
Jan 11, 2021, 6:42:48 PM1/11/21
to
I was pissed (circa 1969) when an admittedly peaceful sit-in at UCLA
resulted in my European Film History class being cancelled.
Priorities....
John Corbett
Jan 11, 2021, 8:10:33 PM1/11/21
to
canceled classes at Ohio State in the spring of 1970. What can I say. I
was raised to be a liberal. I'm considered the black sheep of the family
because I am the only one who morphed into a libertarian strain of
conservatism.
Pamela Brown
Jan 11, 2021, 8:10:51 PM1/11/21
to
On Monday, January 11, 2021 at 12:21:27 PM UTC-6, John McAdams wrote:
Ways, there is a sub-theme about Pres. McKinley, who ordered troops to
Cuba from Key West and was assassinated. There is also a reference to the
Truman Little White House there as well. Odd, considering that Pres.
Trump's winter White House at Mar-a-lago is not far from there:
https://www.bobdylan.com/songs/key-west-philosopher-pirate/
Bud
Jan 12, 2021, 8:23:00 AM1/12/21
to
liberals were against many of the things they embrace and champion today.
Now they are for censorship, political indocrination, enemies lists, ect.
Leftists are fond of their reeducation camps when they get into power,
teaching the people how to "think right".
John Corbett
Jan 12, 2021, 12:16:35 PM1/12/21
to
opposing viewpoints. I remember during the 1970 uprising that shut down
the Ohio State campus one particular incident. There was a gathering on
what is called the Oval, a large green area with sidewalks crisscrossing
it in many directions. We had the typical cast of liberal speakers. Woody
Hayes came out to try to do his part to help keep a lid on the situation.
At the time, he was coaching his greatest teams and his popularity was at
an all time high. He was also a very conservative voice. His rhetoric was
very conciliatory but from the very beginning, he was booed and shouted
down. I also remember one guy going before the local TV cameras and saying
free speech had to have reasonable controls. When the reporter asked him
who decided what was reasonable, he answered, "We the people.". I'll grant
you that sentiment is much more prevalent today but it has always been
there.
donald willis
Jan 12, 2021, 8:37:18 PM1/12/21
to
at Ohio State in the spring of 1970. What can I say. I
> was raised to be a liberal. I'm considered the black sheep of the family
> because I am the only one who morphed into a libertarian strain of
> conservatism.
political orientations. They--or we--are all pretty much one-sided and
see only good for their (our) party, or orientation, bad for the other.
dcw
ajohnstone
Jan 12, 2021, 8:37:20 PM1/12/21
to
Once again i have to blow the horn for my own organization in its long
tradition in defense of free speech for our opponents.
Remember Eysenck and his views on race from back then. My party condemned
and went on the record at the time to criticize attempts to silence
him.
https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1973/1970s/no-826-june-1973/eysenck-lse-socialist-defends-free-speech/
We practice what we preach, having debated in the past with
Mosley’s British Union of Fascists in the 1930s and we defended
his right to liberty when he was interned during WW2. We have held public
meetings with more recent right-wing extremists. We even offered to debate
Islamic Jihadist sympathizers but the invite fell through when they tried
to insist upon a male-female segregated meeting an unacceptable condition
to ourselves.
The last refuge of those who favour censorship is the proposition that
people should be legally banned from insulting each other. It is true that
if you want to persuade someone to change their views insulting them is
not the best way to begin. But you can’t allow one side in an
argument to cry “you’ve offended me” and appeal to
the law to silence the other side. It would mean an end to free speech.
Preventing free speech is neither democratic nor an effective way of
preventing the spread of ideas.
We now after the Capitol riot face calls for the banning of various
groups. Ideas cannot be suppressed by legislation. Nor can Antifa end
racism with street-fights. You can't kick your ideas into the head of your
opponents.
tradition in defense of free speech for our opponents.
Remember Eysenck and his views on race from back then. My party condemned
and went on the record at the time to criticize attempts to silence
him.
https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1973/1970s/no-826-june-1973/eysenck-lse-socialist-defends-free-speech/
We practice what we preach, having debated in the past with
Mosley’s British Union of Fascists in the 1930s and we defended
his right to liberty when he was interned during WW2. We have held public
meetings with more recent right-wing extremists. We even offered to debate
Islamic Jihadist sympathizers but the invite fell through when they tried
to insist upon a male-female segregated meeting an unacceptable condition
to ourselves.
The last refuge of those who favour censorship is the proposition that
people should be legally banned from insulting each other. It is true that
if you want to persuade someone to change their views insulting them is
not the best way to begin. But you can’t allow one side in an
argument to cry “you’ve offended me” and appeal to
the law to silence the other side. It would mean an end to free speech.
Preventing free speech is neither democratic nor an effective way of
preventing the spread of ideas.
We now after the Capitol riot face calls for the banning of various
groups. Ideas cannot be suppressed by legislation. Nor can Antifa end
racism with street-fights. You can't kick your ideas into the head of your
opponents.
John Corbett
Jan 13, 2021, 10:19:10 AM1/13/21
to
although officially in Ohio you are whatever you declared in the most
recent primary. I intended to register as a Democrat in the most recent
primary and vote for Sanders just to cause a bit of chaos in the Democrat
Party but as is almost always the case, by the time the Ohio primary came
around, the outcome was no longer in doubt and because of Covid, I skipped
the primary altogether. I think I voted in the GOP primary in the previous
election but I'm not positive. I usually vote for Libertarian candidates
when that option is available and if not I used to choose between the
major party candidates. That has changed. After seeing what the Democrat
Party has become, I have vowed I will never vote for another Democrat as
long as I live. I did something this past election I had never done
before. I voted straight Republican not because I like the Republican
Party but to me the Democrats have become repulsive by the way they
reacted to the Trump presidency. I didn't vote for Trump in 2016 but did
in 2020 partly for that reason and partly because I approve of the way he
has governed even though his tweets and some of the things he says are
silly.
I do not automatically defend Republicans or conservatives even when I
find myself in agreement with them. I had no problem with them contesting
the Electoral College vote because that is a legal process defined by law
which the Democrats have resorted to three times in this century alone. I
did not condone the violent attack on the Capitol and have condemned it
both in this forum and in others. In the future I will continue to vote
for a mix of Libertarian and Republican Party candidates but the Democrats
are dead to me.
John Corbett
Jan 13, 2021, 10:19:13 AM1/13/21
to
all. When speech is suppressed, it encourages violence. The decision by
the tech giants to ban certain conservative voices is going to backfire in
the long run. Since they are private companies, they are not bound by the
constraints of the First Amendment as a government entity would be.
Freedom of speech doesn't require someone else to provide you with the
soap box. However they risk losing their liability immunity by doing this.
Social media companies were granted such immunity on the grounds that they
are nothing more than a pass through and that any liable is committed by
the person doing the posting, not the platform. Once they make the
conscious effort to edit what content they allow, they cease to be a pass
through and could open themselves up to liable. Don't expect a Democrat
administration to press this issue.
As a side note, I wonder if the same principle would apply to this
newsgroup. For example, if someone were to call another person a Nazi,
could that person sue John McAdams for allowing it. I'm just speaking
hypothetically. I have no plans to do so.
Anthony Marsh
Jan 13, 2021, 4:47:55 PM1/13/21
to
On 1/10/2021 9:52 AM, ajohnstone wrote:
> I am a member of an organization that has indeed proudly defended its
> policy of never restricting the racists' and the fascists' rights to free
> speech. And i have said so a number of times on this website. Suppression
> of any groups political viewpoint merely drives it underground and turn
> them into martyrs and victims. As such the political party has been
> targetted by the left-wing when it endeavoured to debate racists and
> fascist parties at public meetings. I need no lectures from others on
> protecting the liberty of all to protect the freedoms of all.
>
> And Marx in practice exercised giving his rivals the right to express
> themselves if you care to study his part in the First International. It is
> not hypothetical.
>
No one cares about Marx now Why don't you babble on and on about the
> I am a member of an organization that has indeed proudly defended its
> policy of never restricting the racists' and the fascists' rights to free
> speech. And i have said so a number of times on this website. Suppression
> of any groups political viewpoint merely drives it underground and turn
> them into martyrs and victims. As such the political party has been
> targetted by the left-wing when it endeavoured to debate racists and
> fascist parties at public meetings. I need no lectures from others on
> protecting the liberty of all to protect the freedoms of all.
>
> And Marx in practice exercised giving his rivals the right to express
> themselves if you care to study his part in the First International. It is
> not hypothetical.
>
Spartans?
> I forgot to mention it was those on the left like the Wobblies who
> struggled for free speech on Boston Green and many other locations across
> America. Vital at the time.
>
you.
> I thought i had made clear my position on the role of Silicon Valley
> oligarchs in controlling the media. I said in my post "Already, it is some
> on the Left who are pointing the finger at the Silicon Valley control of
> the social media, over-flowing to control of other media such as the
> Washington Post
> So for the record, any action taken against those on the Right will
> inevitably be applied to the Left.
>
> But i expect you wish me to condemn the Twitter ban on Trump. Well, you
> are a moderator and you witness the problems with unmoderated groups. You
> have imposed your own guidelines and stopped posts, haven't you?
>
> I read today that Trump's estimated value to Twitter was $2 billion so if
> he moves to other platforms such Parler, he will be welcomed with open
> arms.
>
> I gave State promoted censorship of the BDS campaign (not that i actually
> believe BDS will be a success) and the imposition of IHRA definition guide
> as examples of suppression of free speech more effective that your claims
> of what is now being called the cancel culture on campus. I personally
> recall the support for Californian farm-workers by using a boycott.
>
> BDS is aimed at zionism, and is not anti-semitic. Where are the calls for
> any neighborhood kosher store to be boycotted? As usual your partisan bias
> against the Democratic Party leads you to misrepresent its position. The
> vast majority of the House Democrats voted to characterize BDS as
> anti-semitic. FACT. In July 2020, the House overwhelmingly passed such a
> resolution that condemns BDS . The final vote was 398-17, with 209
> Democrats voting for the legislation and just 16 opposing it.
>
Anthony Marsh
Jan 13, 2021, 4:47:58 PM1/13/21
to
I though that by now one of you would have mentioned the Weather
Underground.
Anthony Marsh
Jan 13, 2021, 4:48:01 PM1/13/21
to
On 1/12/2021 8:37 PM, ajohnstone wrote:
> Once again i have to blow the horn for my own organization in its long
> tradition in defense of free speech for our opponents.
>
> Remember Eysenck and his views on race from back then. My party condemned
> and went on the record at the time to criticize attempts to silence
> him.
>
> https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1973/1970s/no-826-june-1973/eysenck-lse-socialist-defends-free-speech/
>
> We practice what we preach, having debated in the past with
> Mosley???s British Union of Fascists in the 1930s and we defended
> Once again i have to blow the horn for my own organization in its long
> tradition in defense of free speech for our opponents.
>
> Remember Eysenck and his views on race from back then. My party condemned
> and went on the record at the time to criticize attempts to silence
> him.
>
> https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1973/1970s/no-826-june-1973/eysenck-lse-socialist-defends-free-speech/
>
> We practice what we preach, having debated in the past with
> his right to liberty when he was interned during WW2. We have held public
> meetings with more recent right-wing extremists. We even offered to debate
> Islamic Jihadist sympathizers but the invite fell through when they tried
> to insist upon a male-female segregated meeting an unacceptable condition
> to ourselves.
>
> The last refuge of those who favour censorship is the proposition that
> people should be legally banned from insulting each other. It is true that
> if you want to persuade someone to change their views insulting them is
> not the best way to begin. But you can???t allow one side in an
> meetings with more recent right-wing extremists. We even offered to debate
> Islamic Jihadist sympathizers but the invite fell through when they tried
> to insist upon a male-female segregated meeting an unacceptable condition
> to ourselves.
>
> The last refuge of those who favour censorship is the proposition that
> people should be legally banned from insulting each other. It is true that
> if you want to persuade someone to change their views insulting them is
> argument to cry ???you???ve offended me??? and appeal to
> the law to silence the other side. It would mean an end to free speech.
> Preventing free speech is neither democratic nor an effective way of
> preventing the spread of ideas.
>
> We now after the Capitol riot face calls for the banning of various
> groups. Ideas cannot be suppressed by legislation. Nor can Antifa end
> racism with street-fights. You can't kick your ideas into the head of your
> opponents.
>
So you know nothing about the law and you think it is OK to talk about
> Preventing free speech is neither democratic nor an effective way of
> preventing the spread of ideas.
>
> We now after the Capitol riot face calls for the banning of various
> groups. Ideas cannot be suppressed by legislation. Nor can Antifa end
> racism with street-fights. You can't kick your ideas into the head of your
> opponents.
>
killing people. You call that free speech.
I got a visit from the Secret Service just for entioning the Zero Factor
here.
Pamela Brown
Jan 13, 2021, 4:48:05 PM1/13/21
to
Anthony Marsh
Jan 13, 2021, 4:48:09 PM1/13/21
to
On 1/12/2021 8:37 PM, donald willis wrote:
> On Monday, January 11, 2021 at 5:10:33 PM UTC-8, John Corbett wrote:
>> On Monday, January 11, 2021 at 6:42:48 PM UTC-5, donald willis wrote:
>>> On Monday, January 11, 2021 at 10:21:27 AM UTC-8, John McAdams wrote:
>>>> On 11 Jan 2021 18:14:13 -0000, Pamela Brown <pamel...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, January 10, 2021 at 8:53:30 AM UTC-6, Bud wrote:
>>>>>> On Saturday, January 9, 2021 at 10:06:55 PM UTC-5, John Corbett wrote:
>>>>>>> On Saturday, January 9, 2021 at 4:44:35 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/man-photographed-carrying-pelosis-lectern-has-been-arrested/ar-BB1cBUYf
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Check out the backgroup, and imagine if BLM or Antifa had stormed that
>>>>>> building. All those statues, paintings, ect would have been destroyed.
>>>>>> These guys even stay within the velvet ropes. Of course the guy with the
>>>>>> podium was taking home a souvenir, but that is what Americans do when they
>>>>>> visit tourist locations.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This guy`s view...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://i.4cdn.org/gif/1610212882329.webm
>>>>>
>>>>> Ironic Dylan lyrics...
>>>>>
>>>>> Come senators, congressmen
>>>>>
>>>>> Please heed the call
>>>>>
>>>>> Don???t stand in the doorway
> On Monday, January 11, 2021 at 5:10:33 PM UTC-8, John Corbett wrote:
>> On Monday, January 11, 2021 at 6:42:48 PM UTC-5, donald willis wrote:
>>> On Monday, January 11, 2021 at 10:21:27 AM UTC-8, John McAdams wrote:
>>>> On 11 Jan 2021 18:14:13 -0000, Pamela Brown <pamel...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, January 10, 2021 at 8:53:30 AM UTC-6, Bud wrote:
>>>>>> On Saturday, January 9, 2021 at 10:06:55 PM UTC-5, John Corbett wrote:
>>>>>>> On Saturday, January 9, 2021 at 4:44:35 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/man-photographed-carrying-pelosis-lectern-has-been-arrested/ar-BB1cBUYf
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Check out the backgroup, and imagine if BLM or Antifa had stormed that
>>>>>> building. All those statues, paintings, ect would have been destroyed.
>>>>>> These guys even stay within the velvet ropes. Of course the guy with the
>>>>>> podium was taking home a souvenir, but that is what Americans do when they
>>>>>> visit tourist locations.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This guy`s view...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://i.4cdn.org/gif/1610212882329.webm
>>>>>
>>>>> Ironic Dylan lyrics...
>>>>>
>>>>> Come senators, congressmen
>>>>>
>>>>> Please heed the call
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Don???t block up the hall
>>>>>
>>>>> For he that gets hurt
>>>>>
>>>>> Will be he who has stalled
>>>>>
>>>> A threat, huh.
>>>>
>>>> That's the reality behind all the "love and peace" rhetoric of the 60s
>>>> left. A nasty authoritarianism.
>>> I like to think of myself as "on the left" (old left, not new left). But
>>> I was pissed (circa 1969) when an admittedly peaceful sit-in at UCLA
>>> resulted in my European Film History class being cancelled.
>>> Priorities....
>>>>
>> I used to be a raging liberal and I was one of the people responsible for
>> canceled classes
>
> So you're the one! Oh, Ohio State. Wrong state.
>
> at Ohio State in the spring of 1970. What can I say. I
>> was raised to be a liberal. I'm considered the black sheep of the family
>> because I am the only one who morphed into a libertarian strain of
>> conservatism.
>
> I morphed in the opposite direction. Now, though, I mistrust all
> political orientations. They--or we--are all pretty much one-sided and
> see only good for their (our) party, or orientation, bad for the other.
>
> dcw
>
Gee, I wonder if anyone here is old enough to remember the Kent State
>>>>> For he that gets hurt
>>>>>
>>>>> Will be he who has stalled
>>>>>
>>>> A threat, huh.
>>>>
>>>> That's the reality behind all the "love and peace" rhetoric of the 60s
>>>> left. A nasty authoritarianism.
>>> I like to think of myself as "on the left" (old left, not new left). But
>>> I was pissed (circa 1969) when an admittedly peaceful sit-in at UCLA
>>> resulted in my European Film History class being cancelled.
>>> Priorities....
>>>>
>> I used to be a raging liberal and I was one of the people responsible for
>> canceled classes
>
> So you're the one! Oh, Ohio State. Wrong state.
>
> at Ohio State in the spring of 1970. What can I say. I
>> was raised to be a liberal. I'm considered the black sheep of the family
>> because I am the only one who morphed into a libertarian strain of
>> conservatism.
>
> I morphed in the opposite direction. Now, though, I mistrust all
> political orientations. They--or we--are all pretty much one-sided and
> see only good for their (our) party, or orientation, bad for the other.
>
> dcw
>
Massacre. Liberals were shot and killed for protesting the Vietnam war.
Does anyone remember how they figured out who fired the shots? Cute
anecdote. I was the person who talked our college out of shutting down.
Later the Dean thanked me personally. Turns out he was a fraternuity
brother of mine. Art comes first.
ajohnstone
Jan 13, 2021, 8:49:44 PM1/13/21
to
It may appear because of the number of times we have disagreed that our
ideas are entirely incompatible, JC. Perhaps not as much as we think.
I’m sure as an advocate of minimum government you know that in the
UK, the largest sea-rescue organization is not the government-run
Coastguard but the Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI), a voluntary
charity that declines any government funding to preserve its independence.
There is usually a waiting list of volunteers seeking to risk their lives
in the wildest of weathers and they wish to join, not for any monetary
reward as it is unpaid but they do so for the ‘selfish’
and ‘egoistical’ reason of receiving the respect and
esteem of their communities.
They are also following that age-old tradition, the ‘law of the
sea’, where mariners come to the assistance of those in
difficulty, and it is in practise even today when many in distress are
refugee boat-people and are picked up at considerable cost by commercial
shipping much to the chagrin of governments who have tried to criminalize
rescues. It is all based upon a simple principle but in fancy parlance, it
is called enlightened self-interest.
Then on a smaller scale there are the volunteer mountain rescue teams,
willing to save others at great risk to themselves. They believe in mutual
aid. Related is also the upkeep of the network of bothies, emergency
shelters in the mountains. It is also performed by volunteers.
I don't think I have to cite all the voluntary organisations and all the
work done by the charities and NGOs to show that people express altruism
and empathy for others. We are a caring nurturing cooperative species.
This gives us a glimpse of what can happen if we establish a state-free
society in the future. Like yourself I don’t believe we need the
State to keep society operating but I do suggest a very different way of
accomplishing that aspiration.
ideas are entirely incompatible, JC. Perhaps not as much as we think.
I’m sure as an advocate of minimum government you know that in the
UK, the largest sea-rescue organization is not the government-run
Coastguard but the Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI), a voluntary
charity that declines any government funding to preserve its independence.
There is usually a waiting list of volunteers seeking to risk their lives
in the wildest of weathers and they wish to join, not for any monetary
reward as it is unpaid but they do so for the ‘selfish’
and ‘egoistical’ reason of receiving the respect and
esteem of their communities.
They are also following that age-old tradition, the ‘law of the
sea’, where mariners come to the assistance of those in
difficulty, and it is in practise even today when many in distress are
refugee boat-people and are picked up at considerable cost by commercial
shipping much to the chagrin of governments who have tried to criminalize
rescues. It is all based upon a simple principle but in fancy parlance, it
is called enlightened self-interest.
Then on a smaller scale there are the volunteer mountain rescue teams,
willing to save others at great risk to themselves. They believe in mutual
aid. Related is also the upkeep of the network of bothies, emergency
shelters in the mountains. It is also performed by volunteers.
I don't think I have to cite all the voluntary organisations and all the
work done by the charities and NGOs to show that people express altruism
and empathy for others. We are a caring nurturing cooperative species.
This gives us a glimpse of what can happen if we establish a state-free
society in the future. Like yourself I don’t believe we need the
State to keep society operating but I do suggest a very different way of
accomplishing that aspiration.
John Corbett
Jan 14, 2021, 1:27:44 PM1/14/21
to
On Wednesday, January 13, 2021 at 8:49:44 PM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:
> It may appear because of the number of times we have disagreed that our
> ideas are entirely incompatible, JC. Perhaps not as much as we think.
Libertarians share SOME positions with groups across the political
> It may appear because of the number of times we have disagreed that our
> ideas are entirely incompatible, JC. Perhaps not as much as we think.
spectrum. Totalitarianism is the only one that is completely at odds with
libertarianism.
>
> I’m sure as an advocate of minimum government you know that in the
> UK, the largest sea-rescue organization is not the government-run
> Coastguard but the Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI), a voluntary
> charity that declines any government funding to preserve its independence.
>
supported by tax dollars but in other places they are a subscription
service. If you want their protection, you pay a fee. If you don't
subscribe, they won't stop your house from burning down. They will try to
save lives if anyone is inside but they will let the house burn to the
ground. I read one story about a guy who didn't subscribe and his house
caught on fire. The fire department showed up, made sure nobody was inside
and then stood back and watched it burn. He offered to write a check on
the spot but they refused to help. Who would pay the regular fee if they
could just wait until the service was needed to sign up.
> There is usually a waiting list of volunteers seeking to risk their lives
> in the wildest of weathers and they wish to join, not for any monetary
> reward as it is unpaid but they do so for the ‘selfish’
> and ‘egoistical’ reason of receiving the respect and
> esteem of their communities.
>
> They are also following that age-old tradition, the ‘law of the
> sea’, where mariners come to the assistance of those in
> difficulty, and it is in practise even today when many in distress are
> refugee boat-people and are picked up at considerable cost by commercial
> shipping much to the chagrin of governments who have tried to criminalize
> rescues. It is all based upon a simple principle but in fancy parlance, it
> is called enlightened self-interest.
>
> Then on a smaller scale there are the volunteer mountain rescue teams,
> willing to save others at great risk to themselves. They believe in mutual
> aid. Related is also the upkeep of the network of bothies, emergency
> shelters in the mountains. It is also performed by volunteers.
>
> I don't think I have to cite all the voluntary organisations and all the
> work done by the charities and NGOs to show that people express altruism
> and empathy for others. We are a caring nurturing cooperative species.
> This gives us a glimpse of what can happen if we establish a state-free
> society in the future. Like yourself I don’t believe we need the
> State to keep society operating but I do suggest a very different way of
> accomplishing that aspiration.
people are willing to do it. If we had no government welfare, people would
be voluntarily help those in need. We see that when there are natural
disasters and the Red Cross needs extra funds.
Altruism should be voluntary. When the state makes it compulsory people
become entitled to aid whether they need it or not. If we didn't have
government welfare, we would have a lot fewer people who need to be on
welfare. Just as people have a caring spirit, they also will look after
their own self interest. If they didn't have the government hand outs,
they would learn to take care of themselves. Then the only people who
would need assistance are those incapable of taking care of themselves.
Bud
Jan 14, 2021, 6:21:24 PM1/14/21
to
boats indefinitely? Are they dropped off back at their home countries?
Countries and the governments of those countries should decide who comes
in to the country, not the people who desire to come in.
They should be taken back to their point of origin.
David Von Pein
Jan 15, 2021, 1:37:39 AM1/15/21
to
On Saturday, January 9, 2021 at 4:44:10 PM UTC-5, donald willis wrote:
> I thought America was always pretty great....
Indeed.
I think the last four years have proved one thing above all others:
Regardless of who is occupying the Oval Office, America will survive and
will always remain great....even if the Oval Office occupant is a
pathetic, racist clown.
> I thought America was always pretty great....
Indeed.
I think the last four years have proved one thing above all others:
Regardless of who is occupying the Oval Office, America will survive and
will always remain great....even if the Oval Office occupant is a
pathetic, racist clown.
John McAdams
Jan 15, 2021, 1:45:46 AM1/15/21
to
On 15 Jan 2021 06:37:36 -0000, David Von Pein <davev...@aol.com>
wrote:
You mean like Barack Obama?
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
wrote:
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John Corbett
Jan 15, 2021, 9:25:59 AM1/15/21
to
racist isn't one of them. As a businessman he was praised by Jesse Jackson
for being a friend to the black community. There is no doubt that there
are racists in his coalition but they are a small part of it and not the
driving force. His appeal to them is that he doesn't bow down at the altar
of political correctness. The fact that racists voted for him doesn't make
him a racist any more than Marxists voting for Biden make him a Marxist.
Pamela Brown
Jan 15, 2021, 4:31:03 PM1/15/21
to
elitist.
Bud
Jan 15, 2021, 4:31:17 PM1/15/21
to
On Friday, January 15, 2021 at 1:37:39 AM UTC-5, David Von Pein wrote:
David?
"clown" I won`t dispute.
John McAdams
Jan 15, 2021, 4:35:59 PM1/15/21
to
On 15 Jan 2021 21:31:01 -0000, Pamela Brown <pamel...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Egotist, most certainly.
But his sensibilities and style are much more in tune with working
class Americans than those of the Democrats.
You know: the people who call people not of their tribe "deplorables"
or "bitter clingers."
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
wrote:
But his sensibilities and style are much more in tune with working
class Americans than those of the Democrats.
You know: the people who call people not of their tribe "deplorables"
or "bitter clingers."
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
Jan 15, 2021, 6:15:35 PM1/15/21
to
On 1/15/2021 9:25 AM, John Corbett wrote:
> On Friday, January 15, 2021 at 1:37:39 AM UTC-5, David Von Pein wrote:
>> On Saturday, January 9, 2021 at 4:44:10 PM UTC-5, donald willis wrote:
>>> I thought America was always pretty great....
>>
>> Indeed.
>>
>> I think the last four years have proved one thing above all others:
>> Regardless of who is occupying the Oval Office, America will survive and
>> will always remain great....even if the Oval Office occupant is a
>> pathetic, racist clown.
>
> There are a lot of things you can say about Trump, good and bad, but
> racist isn't one of them. As a businessman he was praised by Jesse
> Jackson
Silly. Trump ran on racism. He as always been a racist.
> On Friday, January 15, 2021 at 1:37:39 AM UTC-5, David Von Pein wrote:
>> On Saturday, January 9, 2021 at 4:44:10 PM UTC-5, donald willis wrote:
>>> I thought America was always pretty great....
>>
>> Indeed.
>>
>> I think the last four years have proved one thing above all others:
>> Regardless of who is occupying the Oval Office, America will survive and
>> will always remain great....even if the Oval Office occupant is a
>> pathetic, racist clown.
>
> There are a lot of things you can say about Trump, good and bad, but
> racist isn't one of them. As a businessman he was praised by Jesse
> Jackson
> for being a friend to the black community. There is no doubt that there
> are racists in his coalition but they are a small part of it and not the
> driving force. His appeal to them is that he doesn't bow down at the altar
> of political correctness. The fact that racists voted for him doesn't make
> him a racist any more than Marxists voting for Biden make him a Marxist.
>
Why didn't you bring up Socialism? So lazy!
Anthony Marsh
Jan 15, 2021, 6:15:38 PM1/15/21
to
rent to blacks? You never heard what he said about the Central Park case?
Anthony Marsh
Jan 15, 2021, 6:15:41 PM1/15/21
to
Refusing to rent to blacks.
His comments about the Central Park case.
OK, what color of ostrich are you?
donald willis
Jan 15, 2021, 6:15:44 PM1/15/21
to
On Friday, January 15, 2021 at 1:35:59 PM UTC-8, John McAdams wrote:
> On 15 Jan 2021 21:31:01 -0000, Pamela Brown <pamel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >On Friday, January 15, 2021 at 12:37:39 AM UTC-6, David Von Pein wrote:
> >> On Saturday, January 9, 2021 at 4:44:10 PM UTC-5, donald willis wrote:
> >> > I thought America was always pretty great....
> >>
> >> Indeed.
> >>
> >> I think the last four years have proved one thing above all others:
> >> Regardless of who is occupying the Oval Office, America will survive and
> >> will always remain great....even if the Oval Office occupant is a
> >> pathetic, racist clown.
> >
> >I don't see Pres. Trump as a racist. I do see him as an egotist an
> >elitist.
> Egotist, most certainly.
>
> But his sensibilities and style are much more in tune with working
> class Americans than those of the Democrats.
Yeah, he's just an everyday guy. I remember a "Daily Show" in which Trump
> On 15 Jan 2021 21:31:01 -0000, Pamela Brown <pamel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >On Friday, January 15, 2021 at 12:37:39 AM UTC-6, David Von Pein wrote:
> >> On Saturday, January 9, 2021 at 4:44:10 PM UTC-5, donald willis wrote:
> >> > I thought America was always pretty great....
> >>
> >> Indeed.
> >>
> >> I think the last four years have proved one thing above all others:
> >> Regardless of who is occupying the Oval Office, America will survive and
> >> will always remain great....even if the Oval Office occupant is a
> >> pathetic, racist clown.
> >
> >I don't see Pres. Trump as a racist. I do see him as an egotist an
> >elitist.
> Egotist, most certainly.
>
> But his sensibilities and style are much more in tune with working
> class Americans than those of the Democrats.
was seen in a New York restaurant eating pizza with a fork. He tried so
hard to seem to be an "everyday guy"....
John Deagle
Jan 15, 2021, 6:16:02 PM1/15/21
to
with Charlamagne tha God, a co-host of the radio show 'The Breakfast
Club'.'If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or
Trump, then you ain’t black'.
John Deagle
Jan 15, 2021, 6:16:09 PM1/15/21
to
On Friday, January 15, 2021 at 2:37:39 AM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
sort of mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and
clean."
David Von Pein
Jan 15, 2021, 6:16:28 PM1/15/21
to
0 new messages