Slashdot Mirror
Running For Congress, Brianna Wu Criticizes The FBI's GamerGate Report (venturebeat.com)
An anonymous reader shares this update about programmer/game developer Brianna Wu as well as the FBI's recently-released report on their GamerGate investigation:Wu has officially unveiled the web site for her campaign for a seat in the U.S. Congress, and says if elected she'll confront the FBI over their "appalling failure" when investigating members of the controversial GamerGate coalition. "Wu catalogued more than 180 death threats that she said she received because she spoke out against sexism in the game industry and #GamerGate misogyny," according to VentureBeat, which quotes Wu as saying "only a fraction of a fraction of the information we gave them was ever looked into."
The article says the FBI did investigate -- even asking Google to "preserve records" for several email addresses and YouTube accounts, and making a similar request to Microsoft. And the FBI also interviewed one minor who admitted to making at least 40 threatening phone calls, but after turning over that information learned that the state of Massachusetts had declined to prosecute. In the end the FBI's 173-page report ultimately concluded that there were no actionable leads.
Wu's response? "All this report does for me is show how little the FBI cared about the investigation."
The article says the FBI did investigate -- even asking Google to "preserve records" for several email addresses and YouTube accounts, and making a similar request to Microsoft. And the FBI also interviewed one minor who admitted to making at least 40 threatening phone calls, but after turning over that information learned that the state of Massachusetts had declined to prosecute. In the end the FBI's 173-page report ultimately concluded that there were no actionable leads.
Wu's response? "All this report does for me is show how little the FBI cared about the investigation."
No, you unimportant half-melted snowflake, the world does not revolve around you and yours.
It's gotten harder and harder now that even gay or interracial marriage is allowed and women can go vote. Being the oppressed victim is no longer as simple as being Irish.
They're really digging below the bottom of the barrel with "microaggressions" and "I identify as my gender fluids" crap.
Nothing actionable? What a shock, I tell you! What a shock!
... would be a better choice than Wu ever could have been. Even if she hadn't got fully blown victim narrative as a way of life.
Hillary lost, get over it. You have to own your guy's fuck-ups, now.
They're not the left. In fact their constant demands for censorship and outright historical revision tend to sicken most of those "lefties" you speak of. Technically the 'left' has always been pro-worker-conditions, it's why communism is what lies at the extreme of that part of the spectrum.
If there's one thing the center (or as you Americans call it "the far left") and the right can very much agree on, it's that those creeps like Brianna Wu have no interests beyond screwing everyone over while they laugh to the bank with their made up "virtue"
Wasn't he caught harassing himself on his own game developer account on steam?
Pronouns-ment....
"HE" who?
Brianna Wu?
If Wu it be...
then she -not- he.
If he not Wu...
then who?
thanks for your attention
to grammatical convention
so please, would you
say just who (Wu?)
"HE"
might be?
Wu? really, what's needed in Congress right now is an ex-General whose ACTUALLY been under fire and under a death threat.
Well she did experience death threats.
Really when the core defence of America is at stake, you have bigger problem to fix than misogyny. You need cold headed military and hard nosed politicians in Congress and Senate. Trump's men will call you a terrorist, threaten your life with actual police state, and you'll go crying, and that's no help to anyone.
You don't think defending the rights of half of the population is a worthwhile part of the struggle?
And why do you assume she'll be weak and cowardly? She stood up to a vile hate mob, had the opportunity to retire back into obscurity, and now is coming back for more. That's a lot more than I can say for a bunch of congressmen that come from a certain party that starts with R and ends with Trump.
I stole this Sig
If you go to her web page (which does look rather impressive), it has the imposing slogan, "She Fought the Alt-Right and Won." Did she? Presumably she fought against gamergate (is that the alt-right?), did she win? It seems like the FBI is saying that nothing needed to be done.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
... is another goddam non-politician with an axe to grind.
Her personal shit is not on my to do list.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Actionable lead simply means that they may want to follow up. Considering the number of fake and self inflicted "threats" it becomes silly to take any more seriously. Besides, it's name calling. The FBI has more important things to do than worry about hurt feelings.
Me telling you to pound sand up your ass until you die is not a crime. Action can be a crime, not words. Study basic justice principles and the US Constitution. After that, go pound sand up your ass until you die.
What "half" of the population you moron? About 7% of the US population supports or agrees with the current feminism movement. The "womans" march after inauguration disallowed and dis invited anyone who was not pro choice, excluding at least half the women in the country. It was propaganda, and 93% of the women in the country that don't agree with feminism want people like you to fuck off and die.
Get punched fascist.
What "half" of the population you moron? About 7% of the US population supports or agrees with the current feminism movement. The "womans" march after inauguration disallowed and dis invited anyone who was not pro choice, excluding at least half the women in the country. It was propaganda, and 93% of the women in the country that don't agree with feminism want people like you to fuck off and die.
Nope.
The poll conducted by Public Policy Polling (PPP) shows that more Americans have a favorable opinion of the women who marched during Trump’s inaugural weekend – 50 percent – than they do of the new president, who only 44 percent of respondents support. Trump’s disapproval rating – 50 percent – is also historically high for a new president.
I stole this Sig
You're in denial I can see.
Obama did NOT demote the military Generals from the security council, or the Spooks from the security council.
Flynn was in the pee memos (page 15, August 10th), he was groomed by Putin for the role back in August, yet he wasn't plucked from obscurity by Trump until November. Clearly he was pre-chosen by Putin. Flynn use to work in a company with a man who was convicted of espionage for Russia. But he claims he never talked to him. Flynn has made 20+ trips to Russia, only a few of which he'll talk about. Flynn was the man with the secret Internet connection installed into his DOD office, he claimed he thought the rule was stupid. etc.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3259984-Trump-Intelligence-Allegations.html
And the spies arrested in Russia the day after Trumps men went into the CIA fit the profile of the sources for the pee memos. i.e. the memos are real. Trump *did* have a backchannel to Putin, he *did* co-ordinated with Putin's hack of the US elections, and *is* trading US security for Trump personal gain.
What next? Well 6 eyes is next. He'll agree "information sharing" with Russia to defend against the terrorist threat. i.e. he'll give access to surveillance on US and 5 eyes politicians to Putin so Putin can rig other elections too. That will be done under cover of terrorist threat. You can see him doing that rhetoric already as prep-work.
Hillary lost, get over it. You have to own your guy's fuck-ups, now.
This is the sorest bunch of winners ever. I've never seen people who's canddates win, and they're angrier than before the election.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
I wonder where Brianna Wu got the strange notion that an internet troll could run for office and possibly win.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The election *is* over and time to move on. Hillary won't be running again, so it's a bit pointless to be talking about her, agreed. However:
> I've never seen people who's canddates win,
People who dislike scumbags like Hillary didn't see their candidate win. The US elected a different style of bad. Kasich, for example, dropped out in May, so no, "their" candidates didn't win.
Only amongst very uninformed people who treat national policy as like a ball game, where they root for "their team" does acknowledging Hillary's serious faults equate to rooting for Trump.
Now, all Americans live in a country where Trump is in fact President. Those of us who voted against him, such as myself, have Trump as our president - even though I voted against him twice. Those who favored Trump now have him as President. Hillary's speech about this was right on the money. She said all of us will now, if we're smart, will try to support good policies that he proposes and oppose bad ones. The election is over, Hillary has moved on. Now we press for good policy, the best policies we can from our President. A few years from now we'll have a chance to discuss who the next President should be.
I gave numbers of women who support the current "Feminists", and my numbers are not contrived by current political pandering propaganda polls. I also gave numbers on pro-life women, who you chose to ignore. Those numbers are also not propaganda motivated polls. Continue living in your bubble, fucking idiot.
I'm sorry, your 7% number was pretty obviously made up or talking about something completely different. I mean 10% of American men consider themselves strong feminists.
You really expect me to believe you found a legitimate poll that suggested only 7% of Americans support the feminist movement?
As for abortion they don't have the exact question to match the direction of the Trump administration, but only 19% of Americans think abortion should be illegal.
I don't know where you think the goalposts are, I'm not even sure if you're on the right field.
I stole this Sig
You think conservatives won ?
Conservatives value process and playing by the rules, the use of reason to prove our point.
The left kept screaming like children and digging in their heels till they created a reflection of themselves that hates them.
Trump won, he is purely a creation of the insanity of the left and their unwillingness to have a rational political process.
You are welcome to him.
Get punched fascist.
The irony is rich.
Get punched fascist.
Keep it up that attitude from the left is what created the Alt-Right
At the rate you all are going you will be begging for conservatives to return to the scene
It didn't work the first time around for her, it's only going to be worse to think he's any more important by being a Congresscritter.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
There were plenty of "actionable leads" in the report, but either the FBI or one of the more local DA's all just refused to prosecute. Several people admitted to doing it (death threats), but "promised not to do it again". I don't know anything about this woman, but the report says that the FBI simply failed.
That is the EXACT opposite of what the report says. They weren't actionable leads. That's why they weren't acted upon.
In fact, this report pretty much exonerates GamerGate and proves exactly what we've been saying all along. There may have been "death threats," but they weren't actually threats of harm, and they were mostly sent by idiots from the chans or other young kids. In fact, the only one they had to do any major investigative work on was the false flag targeting MrRepzion. Others, like the one Antia used to steal from that college, were outright hoaxes.
Oh, and mentioned on page 163 is that Brianna got harassed by about 40 phone calls. The only GamerGate chat Brianna has ever been in is GamerGhazi's mod chat. (Before they banned her for being a batshit insane loser.) In other words, that was a Social Justice Warrior harassing Brianna because Brianna is such an insufferable idiot that even the more asinine of the regressive left can't stand her.
The report quality is adequate to run of the mill federal cases of bomb threats and swatting investigations.
It is nice to see a nod given to SA in the report (though it does not go into much detail) - goons, true to their name, were the ones often pitting reddit/chans vs wu/sarkeesian against each other (by false flagging both camps) just for the sake of spectacular flamewars such internet cockfights tend to generate.
This is the sorest bunch of winners ever. I've never seen people who's canddates win, and they're angrier than before the election.
And how long were people harping about Bush after Obama got elected and rainbows and unicorns didn't magically appear across the country?
You think? You just watch our donations rolling in dude.
Because that worked so well for Crooked Hillary. Have fun throwing your money away at an unstable, unlikable tranny.
If she wins, I'm going to decide I'm a gender, age, and race fluid opposer of rape culture and despite having the outward physical appearance of a 40 year old chubby white man, I'm actually a gender fluid intelligence that identifies as younger than my physical projection and am black - and that on behalf of trans-gender and oppressed races everywhere, I'm running for Congress as well. #SJW2018
Some Gamergate threads about it:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak...
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak...
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak...
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak...
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak...
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak...
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak...
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak...
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak...
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak...
https://www.reddit.com/r/Kotak...
The new narrative from the Regressive Left is "Waah, the FBI didn't do enough work to find the harassment we KNOW simply MUST be there."
The reality is the FBI investigated GamerGate and exonerated us. The harassment was either kids being stupid, obvious 4chan memes, or strangely enough True Blood fans getting pissed.
Turns out it actually is about ethics in games journalism. (But really is about a Culture War in Gaming that the Left has soundly lost.)
Well she did experience death threats.
Supposedly. On the Internet. Along with a lot of other people that nobody gives a fuck about because they don't go running to the media or the media wouldn't care if they did, because they aren't female or transgender.
You don't think defending the rights of half of the population is a worthwhile part of the struggle?
What rights do they not have or are under threat?
She stood up to a vile hate mob
Played opportunistic politics for attention and victim bucks.
had the opportunity to retire back into obscurity, and now is coming back for more
Translation: Need more attention and victim bucks.
That's a lot more than I can say for a bunch of congressmen that come from a certain party that starts with R and ends with Trump.
I imagine quite a few of them actually achieved something before entering politics.
You think conservatives won ?
I think that a process that modern day crypto-conservatives used to their advantage since the early 1990's, and went nuts over for the last 8 years got out of their control. Republicans own both the house and senate, and most of the state Governments, they also have a Republican president. Sounds to me like they won really big.
Conservatives value process and playing by the rules, the use of reason to prove our point.
Conservatives, perhaps. Crypto-conservatives, the present day version no, they do not.
I don't want to get in a tit-for -tat battle, but here is one of your leaders, Mitch McConnel, on the previous occupant's nomination for the Supreme court, and the REpublican Congress refuesd to even consider the previous occupat's nomination. Tell me the process, and playing by the rules, and the use of reason that just saying "NO" is. However, rest assured that Mitch is aghast that any opposition to your Republican leader Donald Trump, the duly elected president of teh United States of America, the candidate who set Republican Conservative Records in the number of votes cast for him in the primaries, in addition to teh record set, had almost twice the votes of the nearest competitior Ted Cruz.
sorry fellow, Donald Trump is exactly the representative of the Republican party. He is the man ovrwhemlingly wanted by Republicans.
And here is the issue I have with the present day Republicans. After overwhelmingly supporting this guy, you won't own what he is. You might not like it, but you are part of what got hiim there, congratulations, you must be proud of the ultimte culmination of your hard work
Not that you'll own it. It isn't in the crypto-conservative's psyche. You'll have some excuse.
And before you accuse me of being a liberal - I'm not. I'm a Goldwater conservative, I believe in paying attention to the budget, but once set, paying the bills (present day cons like to "starve the beast". I believe in compromise to do the law (don't even get me started), I believe that th eGovernment needs to stay out of our bedrooms and private life, and I believe in separation of religion and state - and for the same reason my boy Barry did, and I quote from a speech of his in 1981:
"There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both. I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in 'A,' 'B,' 'C,' and 'D.' Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me? And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of 'conservatism.' "
This is what your party has become. What Barry warned against has become reality to the point that you elected the exact opposite of wht you preach as your vlues because you hate anyone who doesn't toe the party line, and Trump was infinitely preferable to a godammed stinking Democrat. The next several years are going to be interesting. Will the Republicans reform the country into some sort of totalitarian government, accepting every fiat your president signs, or will we have civil war number two, or will you just inherit the wind. Gonna be exciting fer sure!
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
The silly histrionics and theatrics are actually pretty funny. So, what is the mechanism by which you imagine this is going to happen? Specifically. What did you have in mind as the means by which the (what, military? which branch exactly?) executive branch was somehow going to suddenly overthrow the legislature and the courts, and all of the law enforcement agencies and people in the DoD were suddenly going to drop their personal sensibilities? Really, be specific, instead of delusional.
Which part of the democracy has been dismantled in the last week that has changed in any way, structurally, from Obama's reign? Other than, of course, many of Obama's over-reaching executive orders being reversed or headed to reversal, and a the likelihood of a constructionist being placed on the SCOTUS instead of the pro-executive-power type that Clinton said she'd place.
Is it the temporary immigration order you're worried about? Were you predicting the end of democracy when Obama did it? No? Why not?
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Just think, all this insanity from the regressive left was just barely brewing under the surface, only held back because of their delusion that the rest of the world agreed with them.
I think that abortion should be legal to anyone, but should only be paid for by the tax payers if it is needed to save the life of the mother or if the mother was a rape victim. Otherwise - pay for it yourself, I do not want to pay for the result of your conscious and consensual act (after all, you could have used protection etc).
Just like I think that the government (I live in a country with national health care) should pay when somebody has to fix his tooth, but if you just want to make your teeth look whiter or implant a gold tooth, then you get to pay for it yourself.
There may have been "death threats," but they weren't actually threats of harm, and they were mostly sent by idiots from the chans or other young kids.
Oh, death threats aren't illegal if they're sent by stupid people? Is that case law somewhere?
Kid, get your head out of your ass. The report clearly explains clearly illegal behavior. People should have been arrested.
I don't respond to AC's.
The 10% of men number you pulled out of your ass can be explained by "dudes that can't get laid any other way" pretty easily. Yes, it's higher than women who don't see the current feminism as beneficial or helpful for society (and that poll is from a mostly leftist site!). Why not search for the number I gave you instead of trolling you twat!
The poll you gave on abortion being illegal is also skewed, but dumb fucks like you can't figure out the game. Try this one. Making abortions criminal as a general rule is not the same as making them illegal especially when there are circumstances where most pro-life people have no problem with abortion. Pregnancy from rape and incest for example, or in cases where the mother's life is at risk. Quite a different from people who have the perspective that "I can't afford the baby" is not a good enough reason to have an abortion, let alone "I don't feel like being responsible for my choices.
I won't answer any more of your dumb ass trolling, you dumb fucking troll. You can go find facts if you really want to, but like most useful idiots you won't.
It's hard to have a peaceful revolution, because there's no non-facist party. Trump is nutty, but just look at the left here - we have a power and attention hungry man, who changed into a woman, so he could complain that women were horribly oppressed and harrassed and things are so hard - as a woman, and things would be better if women were treated like men are. I'll try to lay this out. - He's a man - Chooses to become a woman - Once a woman - Spends all his/her time complaining that women are "oppressed" and harrassed and mistreated and the only reason he/she has problem is because they're a woman - It's been widely showed and rumored that this person created accounts to harrass themselves so they could continue playing the victim This person is nuts. They make Trump look sane and safe in comparison. You know how pissed some people are that Trump banned immigrants from certain countries? In Canada they something similar, they just banned single males: https://www.theguardian.com/wo... I see no difference in philosophy between these 2 kinds of facists.
Yes, yes, Crashmarik, you conservatives have been denying responsibility since your love affair with the anti-communists and segregationists in the 1950s.
But we know you are Spartacus, and Spartacus is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
Tell me whats the difference between segregation and the quotas of affirmative action ?
One day of typical work of Roberta Williams was more important for gaming than the whole life of this prick.
To be fair, 99.9999% of the SJWs screeching about the FBI not deciding to send in jack booted thugs to arrest anyone with a Twitter account who has ever criticized Saint Anita or BatWu never even opened the PDF once. The narrative is "the FBI didn't do their jobs" and they're relying on confirmation bias to uphold it.
I don't want to get in a tit-for -tat battle
Really that's why you decided to fisk my statement and take an arrogant tone ?
Anyway conservatives have been pretty good about attacking Mitch McConnel, how did the left do with Obama and Hillary or do you think he brought hope and change she lost due to misogyny ?
Surely you know the difference between a campaign speech, which is designed to rally supporters, vs the federal budget request a sitting President submits to Congress? Like the budget Trump will submit next week.
Yes, while campaigning, candidate Trump made a lot of noise while saying very little. The campaign is over. Now is the time President Trump is submitting a budget to Congress - it's due in a week (though it's sometimes delayed when the White House switches parties). The budget request isn't a bunch of nothing said loudly, it's a very specific document listing actual actions the federal government intends to take, and the costs of each.
After the budget, other actual bills will be debated, bills which will become law. The President will advise Congress (via Twitter) on what he wants to have in those bills (new laws) to get his signature. That's real stuff.
> an executive order can't build a wall or conjure up more border agents.
Surprisingly, perhaps, it *can* start building a wall. The 2006 Secure Fence Act, with support from Senators Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer, authorized the 700 miles of border barrier. Only some of that has been built so far - Trump can in fact order the executive to go ahead and build the rest. To build the big wall he depicted in his campaign speeches he'll need Congress to approve more money. What will actually happen will likely be halfway between the pictures he conjured up on the campaign trail and what we already have. Even while campaigning he pointed out that much of the border is rugged country, with natural barriers already existing, so no wall is needed in many areas, he said.
I think that abortion should be legal to anyone, but should only be paid for by the tax payers if it is needed to save the life of the mother or if the mother was a rape victim.
I'd add health of the mother and serious foetal abnormalities to that list or you're going to end up with a lot of very necessary abortions uncovered.
Otherwise - pay for it yourself, I do not want to pay for the result of your conscious and consensual act (after all, you could have used protection etc).
Just like I think that the government (I live in a country with national health care) should pay when somebody has to fix his tooth, but if you just want to make your teeth look whiter or implant a gold tooth, then you get to pay for it yourself.
Obesity, smoking, drunk driving, etc., I wouldn't be surprised if the vast majority of health care spending is caring for conditions that are the result of people's "conscious and consensual" acts. And an abortion isn't a cosmetic procedure like tooth whitening.
At the same time people don't have lasting health consequences from having non-medically necessary abortions. There's not a great metaphor either way.
I'm not sure there's a good metaphor
I stole this Sig
There may have been "death threats," but they weren't actually threats of harm, and they were mostly sent by idiots from the chans or other young kids. Oh, death threats aren't illegal if they're sent by stupid people? Is that case law somewhere? Kid, get your head out of your ass. The report clearly explains clearly illegal behavior. People should have been arrested.
You don't appear to understand what "actionable" means. It literally means "there is nothing to do". It's what LEO say when they determine that something/someone isn't credible.
They've literally said "there is nothing here", and you want someone to be arrested? For what? Death threats that the report (with one exception) literally calls non-actionable?
Or do you want them to go and arrest the 10 year old who was identified as sending the threat?
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
"She fought the alt-right and won" - that is apparently her campaign slogan. That would also be news to the alt-right, that (a) didn't exist when GamerGate happened and (b) barely even knows she exists.
It's like saying: "she beat her fists against a brick wall - left blood flecks everywhere - she must've won".
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
That sounds a lot like those third wave feminists.
You realize the correct parallel would be McCain, not Bush, right? Obama ran against McCain in 2008
McCain wasn't a magnet for dislike like Hillary. Obama ("hope and change") was essentially running against Bush's legacy and a figure of scorn by the left.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
He lost his law license over his stupidity.
Wu doesn't have anything of value to revoke she's so worthless.
The FBI probably looked at what was sent to Jack Thompson and what was sent to Wu, had a good laugh and then went home to play Call of Duty.
Work Safe Porn
That was what i was saying from the start , those desth threat amounted to idiot chatter and after investigation the fbi probably came to the same conclusion ,, and found it not worth the time to charge. Possibly some ogf those were underage too, if not mentally.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
I'm from overseas. I use media from many countries. From what I have seen so far (but not recorded for either side) it would seem to be running about three-to-one the other way. Do a little googling or better yet, a search engine that does not just give you want you want to see.
This though, applies to both sides...
Please note that a demonstration is not a riot and cannot become one unless there is an opposition presence (although sometimes that opposition may come from politicised police). That presence is intrinsically aggressive and promotes volatile situations that start at insult and descend to violence. Often by the time the first punch is thrown both sides have gone way beyond civil respect. If you are going to protest a protest then have your counter-protest elsewhere. For good manners, for freedom of speech and safety of all concerned.
Why the conditional?
You say you can decide things about your identity. I simply do not believe you. You can not decide these things. You can claim to choose but you can not. These things are or they are not. Possibly except for the younger bit. We all identify as younger than we are at some stages in life. SO it seems to me that you are one who believes that gay, trans, whatever is something you choose rather than something you are inflicted with.
That does not seem to be the case for the information we have. Best guess at the moment is that it is not a choice. Is it a choice for you? If "she wins" (wins what I don't know) could you really live up to your claim and become a "gender, age, and race fluid opposer of rape culture". Could you do it and make it stick? Could you be happy with those choices?
I would really be interested in your reply if it is a serious one.
How do you know?
No, you gave nothing. Some Anonymous Coward did several posts above yours. But even that person gave nothing. An apocryphal "about 7%" with no support at all is giving less than nothing. You have not even defined terms. What is this "Feminism" that you speak of? Who comprises it? Are there any internal divisions?
You gave nothing. Except negativity. Bubbles, bubbles, every where, Nor any drop to think.....
Just in case you thought Trump wasn't enough of a show, but THIS should be awesome entertainment.
I'll stand by with popcorn and coke. I mean, I thought Trump was already gold for satire news shows, but this woman is a platinum encrusted jewel.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Every newspaper has a cartoon section, Slashdot has SJW news.
Hey, we all need something to chuckle about in our day.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
You poor, pool fool. So in love with your own image of your mentality that you do not even see the traps you are walking into.
Next, women will have prove rape to get an abortion.
We will get a lot more false rape reports.
What will happen to someone who obtains an abortion on false statements? A murder charge?
That is just off the top of my head. I am sure there is much else. How you going to handle all that oh-so-smart one?
It is not smart to call someone dumb and an idiot when you make dumb and idiotic statement yourself. You have to do better, not worse.
No, no I shouldn't. Because it will be an exercise in self-harm.
TheHustler
http://www.elmarko.org/ - Useless bilge
http://www.asylum-games.co.uk/ - Co-Founder
RTFA. The FBI tracked down several Gamergate kids in their parents' basements and decided not to arrest them because the dweebs said "they were sorry".
I don't respond to AC's.
RTFA. The FBI tracked down several Gamergate kids in their parents' basements and decided not to arrest them because the dweebs said "they were sorry".
You still don't appear to know what "actionable" means. A child posting a death threat over the internet to an adult is hardly a credible death threat, hence not actionable.
Let me repeat that in case you are slow - the gamergate "threats" were found to be from kids, hence not credible, hence not actionable. What did you expect them to do to kids?
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
Transgender is not a choice anymore than being gay is a choice. Or are you claiming otherwise? If you are then show me how you can "close" to be gay and tell me how it affected you after the event.
You are as silly as she is.
And we don't give a fuck about this either.
You want to be a man, you want to be a woman, you want to be polka dotted alien from the planet Xrbrt. For all I care, so be it. It does not matter. Not at all.
It's interesting how people confuse a person's nature with his/her/its/whatevers point. I don't care who someone is. I care about what $pronoun has to say. If all they are talking about is how they feel oppressed because someone dares to use the wrong pronoun in their presence, get the fuck out of the way, you're stealing oxygen from someone who might actually have a solution for an actual problem.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Yeah, the UKIP reaction to the Brexit-Yes was hilarious!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
For a million, I'll be whatever you want.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Hate to side with this guy, but one thing is true: The last decent president the US had was a general...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Your average newspaper has the funnies section, /. has the SJW news section.
Everyone needs a little entertainment in his life.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I do not believe that for one minute. I doubt you do either.
If you want to pick a fight with the FBI, maybe pick on the DOJ + FBI failure to prosecute Hilary for selling access to our government, taking bribes, or violating national security by dispersing classified information?
Ummmmm, no, people being mean on the internet is the worst blight we face as a species and all must be done to wipe it from the face of the earth, well, internet...
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
At the rate you all are going you will be begging for conservatives to return to the scene
Can't I just press Alt-left in my browser?
Ezekiel 23:20
For a million, I'd fuck a girl. Well, enough Viagra and a few pics of a hot guy provided. Close your eyes and think of England.
It's not like I have to pretend for long. Only long enough to get the donations rolling in.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I'm not looking for balance, I'm looking for an end to this madness. Maybe an end with horror, but better than this horror without end.
Politics today is a freak show. There is zero integrity, and it seems people don't expect any anyway. They want flashy, loudmouthed narcissist assholes who promise to unhinge the world for the sake of fighting for or against something that doesn't matter at all.
I say let them.
Give the people their narcissist idiots. And Wu and Yannwhateverhisname are the perfect candidates. Both over the top self absorbed and egoistic, filled with eternal hate against anyone who don't fully support their insane agenda and relentless in pushing it, above and beyond all sanity.
And then I want people to realize that ONE OF THOSE TWO idiots is going to rule them!
And I can only hope that this serves as the much needed wakeup call.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Oh, death threats aren't illegal if they're sent by stupid people? Is that case law somewhere?.
Kinda. Check Supreme Court decision in Elonis v. United States
You don't appear to understand what "actionable" means. It literally means "there is nothing to do". It's what LEO say when they determine that something/someone isn't credible.
Umm, no. Actionable means that they can take action. If something is actionable, there is something that can be done. Not saying in this case they should/shouldn't have anything but you're basically using the opposite of what the word means.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Are you pre-teen, or are you senile? Because you sure don't seem to remember the last eight years.
I do not think the Trumpsters are angrier than before the election, but if they are, they will tell you they are just following the advice of someone who said "elections have consequences", "punch back twice as hard", "if they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun", "if you don't like a particular policy or president, go out there and win an election", and similar victory-lap snark. It's not as if Trump supporters normalized poutrage as a political form, or torched some schlub's limo because said limo owner was trying to make a living, or whatever.
Can you provide examples or support for why it you think it is "running about three-to-one the other way"? If those examples are mostly outside the US, why are they relevant to judging whether Trump and/or Clinton voters are acting badly?
Here in the US, Trump voters are mostly working-class people who don't have time to protest in the streets. They're not professionals like the leftist mob leaders, and they're not students or jobless like the leftist fodder. Pro-Trump demonstrators in the US haven't rioted, haven't engaged in widespread property destruction or assaults outside of riots, and haven't tried to block people from attending government functions. Anti-Trump demonstrators have done all of those things. Except for one truly horrible executive order on immigration, even the anti-Trump US media haven't found any organized or significant pro-Trump lawlessness.
You are answering the wrong question. I am trying to get Notabadguy that he would not, could not change is lifestyle as a matter of choice. He knows it but he will not admit it.
>violently rioting
3 Million Marchers in America. 5 Million worldwide. Biggest protest march in human history.
Number of arrests: 0
Number of violent episodes: 0
Violence in protests are hardly ever instigated by the protestors, it's generally police that start that shit.
When the protestors are mostly white women, the police are scared to start fights -and there are no protestors fighting back you can take photos of to post on rightwing propaganda sites and claim the protests were "violent".
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Credible death threats are illegal. A toddler telling someone else in kindergarten that they're going to kill them is a mean child who probably needs a teacher to explain a few things to them, but not actually a felon. If I tell you that I'm going to launch a nuclear ICBM at every city in the western hemisphere, just to make sure that I get you, then it's a comment in poor taste, but there's a pretty slim chance that I have access to that many nukes, so it's not a credible threat. If I post a photo of you walking to work and a caption saying that it's the last day that you'll make it alive, then I'd expect a visit from law enforcement agents with no sense of humour at all and to spend a lot of time trying to convince them and possibly a judge that I didn't really mean it.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
>but should only be paid for by the tax payers if it is needed to save the life of the mother
Well that would be MORE progressive than the law BEFORE Trump took office. Current US law in this regard is the Helm's act which prohibits use of tax funding for abortions. Period. No exceptions allowed.
This applies both to foreign aid and domestic funding (for example for planned parenthood). They have to use OTHER funding sources if they want to offer abortion and limit the tax money to non-abortion services (of which they supply a multitude), and are subject to audits to prove their compliance with this.
So what the fuck exactly do you think Trump did ? Because what he SAID he did "prevent tax money from funding abortions" has nothing to DO with what he did and is an act of congress over which the white house has no say to begin with. Even if we elected Germaine Greer president she couldn't allow tax money to be used for abortions because it's prohibited by an act of congress.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
>I'm not sure there's a good metaphor
The best I've found is organ donation. Like organ donation - we're talking about saving other people's lives (in fact stopping an abortion saves ONE life, organ donation saves many). Yet organ donation requires your consent. WE have so much respect for bodily autonomy that we will not interfere with it EVEN AFTER YOU ARE DEAD to save lives unless you agreed to it while you were alive.
So why the hell should your bodily autonomy STOP existing when the life that could be saved is a fetus ?
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
One reduces the degree with which races mix, and the other increases it.
They are literally the exact OPPOSITE of each other.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Go to hell, Brianna Wu. You never answered our questions about why you're shy about being assigned the male gender at birth. Afraid that might cost you some SJW cred?
Man up already, Brianna. Oh, wait.
There may have been "death threats," but they weren't actually threats of harm, and they were mostly sent by idiots from the chans or other young kids.
Oh, death threats aren't illegal if they're sent by stupid people? Is that case law somewhere?.
Your so fucked up I hope you die. I just sent a bomb to your house disguised as a poodle. Not a stuffed toy animal, a real poodle. So, just keep that in mind the next time someone walks by your house "walking their dog". Because, IT'S A BOMB! Ha Ha Ha.
So, it that a real "death threat"? Or just the usual online crap we all have to read all the fucking time from internet trolls?
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
That offer only good to him but not me? Is it because I'm gay?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I don't want to get in a tit-for -tat battle
Really that's why you decided to fisk my statement and take an arrogant tone ?
You can always tell me what part I am wrong on.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
>I'm not sure there's a good metaphor
The best I've found is organ donation. Like organ donation - we're talking about saving other people's lives (in fact stopping an abortion saves ONE life, organ donation saves many). Yet organ donation requires your consent. WE have so much respect for bodily autonomy that we will not interfere with it EVEN AFTER YOU ARE DEAD to save lives unless you agreed to it while you were alive.
So why the hell should your bodily autonomy STOP existing when the life that could be saved is a fetus ?
But you just wiped out the bodily autonomy of the prospective mother by forcing her to go through with an unwanted process.
I stole this Sig
I read the PDF, you dumb fuck. Death threats are illegal.
Yes, they are. Non-credible threats, however, have about as much of a chance of being prosecuted and achieving jail time for the person making the non-credible threat as Wu has of winning that seat in 2018.
If I threaten you by telling you some outrageous bullshit, like "I'll rip your head off like Sub-Zero!" the FBI is going to look at that and know it isn't actionable. Now, if I threaten with something much more credible, like having taken pictures of you going in and out of your house, and saying "watch your back, you never know when I'll attack", then the FBI (or local law enforcement) will see that as a much more credible threat, especially since it appears I'm already stalking you, and know where you live.
Those differences are what separate SJW logic from real logic. SJW logic dictates that even the most outrageous thing said to them ("I'll shove a nuclear bomb up your ass and detonate it!") is a real and credible threat to their special snowflake lives; and that they now deserve money from strangers because they're a victim. Real logic says: yeah, that threat is so toooooootally real. Like, fer sure, dude. *laughs and walks away knowing the threat is a fake*.
Wu's response? "All this report does for me is show how little the FBI and most of the civilized world cared about me and the investigation".
I can't wait until we win the war on microaggressions so we can move on to those pesky nanoaggressions.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Hillary lost, get over it. You have to own your guy's fuck-ups, now.
This is the sorest bunch of winners ever. I've never seen people who's canddates win, and they're angrier than before the election.
There's just a bunch of nonsense on both sides. People are constantly (to this date) blaming Bernie Sanders supporters or people who voted Third Party. How the hell do they think we got stuck in this situation with Trump and Clinton as our "only choices"? Because of dumb asses who insist that if you don't vote for one party or the other then you're to blame for whoever gets elected. That's just bullshit. And who do you think pushes that agenda? The two parties who have everything to gain and nothing to lose from such an agenda. They don't want to see some other party rise to power. I'm so sick and tired of hearing about the election that ended over two months ago. Tell me what you're going to do now. How you're going to be a leader and an example and how you're going to do your part to help fix the current situation. But stop crying about what happened two months ago because it's over and no amount of finger pointing or complaining is going to change it.
What? Good grief.
We're talking about political power. If someone as disastrous as Brianna Wu can get elected to Congress running on a platform of "The FBI should have jailed that kid that made threatening phone calls" then ...
You know what? Just nevermind. My point has flown over your head.
Future fascists will call themselves anti-fascists.
Grow up and act like an adult.
Yes, while campaigning, candidate Trump made a lot of noise while saying very little.
It appears that way because the media only focused on some manufactured outrage. He could speak for two hours about plans for immigration or trade reform and it doesn't matter because the media is going to spend the entire news cycle screaming about whether or not he made fun of a disabled reporter. Trump's actual plans are clearly written on his website, that's what his voters read and voted for, and he is carrying out those plans at a rapid pace. At this rate he'll have his entire platform wrapped up in a few weeks. I wonder what he'll do for the rest of his presidency?
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
You misunderstood me. My post is about why abortion must be kept legal.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
What about the leftists beating the crap out of trash bins at the inauguration? I assume the trash bin provoked them? Was it Adolf Binler, the most evil and racist trash bin of all time, so it had it coming?
The left comes to "protests" ready to riot. This is not like the civil rights movement where men marched in suits and ladies in dresses. The modern left passes out instructions for what kind of clothes to wear for rioting, they bring masks, etc. So to say they're protests that can turn violent because of opposition is completely false. Yes, and Tim McVeigh peacefully drove the fertilizer van up to the federal building until the peaceful van turned violent, and the 9/11 hijackers peacefully boarded the plane and peacefully subdued the flight staff with peaceful box cutters until the peaceful meeting of the peaceful plane and the World Trade Center suddenly turned violent. The left's "peaceful protests" is just a euphemism for "assembly time before the rioting."
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
GamerGate holds a special place in my heart.
It is the only issue where I fervently hope that both sides lose.
---
According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
Yup. Even today those games have a warm place in my heart. Certainly I hold RW in higher regard than the "Two Guys from Andromeda", which - despite half a million bucks and a "delivery date" of Feb 2013 - still have yet to produce anything more than some tiny side-games.
If you look at some of the history of her games, she's been producing since 1980 (despite a "retirement" in 99), and when other companies were still dropping a few hundred k to produce she managed to pull through with big-budget Phantasmagoria (4.5x the original budget but they kept plugging, ultimately making more than double their spend back in profit and producing a damn cool game for the time).
Here's one of the threats in the report, as posted elsewhere in this thread. Can you tell where it loses all credibility?
Over 9000 bombs. GOLLY GEE, that's not an obvious meme or anything. Clearly, we need to call in the national guard immediately. I hear they might be calling in an ex navy seal with over 300 confirmed kills to go after Batwu next. The fiends!
The fact of the matter is these are obvious memes without any credibility. That makes them non-actionable shitposting, at least in the realm of law enforcement. In addition, it matches EXACTLY what GamerGate has been saying all along -- that these were trolls from baphomet, somethingawful, GNAA, kiwi farms, and other chan groups that were jumping in because people like BatWu are absolutely unhinged idiots that react hilariously to trolling.
Oh, death threats aren't illegal if they're sent by stupid people? Is that case law somewhere?
Essentially, yes. In the United States a death threat is only illegal if it's a "true threat." The definition of "true threat" varies by jurisdiction, but essentially there must be reason to believe the person making the threat has the ability and intent to carry it out. Otherwise it's really awful speech but protected under the first amendment. There is no reason to believe an anonymous threat over the internet about fucking video games is a true threat. If .00001% of the daily death threats that are spewed by 12 year olds on Xbox Live were carried out the streets would be ankle deep in blood.
Is it a shitty thing to do to send someone death threats over the internet? Absolutely. But only a complete moron or a politically motivated shitbag looking for sympathy points from complete morons would take them seriously. Wu doesn't seem like a complete moron, so I'm guessing it's the latter.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
As I understand, he again removed the funding from foreign organizations (that is, the USA does not have to fund them at all anyway, but does so out of good will or for publicity) that offer abortions. As I understand, this is what all Republicans do when they assume office and all Democrats reverse it when they assume office.
No he removed funding from organisations that even talk about abortions. Every republican since reagan has - but its no less evil for that. It would be better if they just stripped aid altogether. That would kill less people than this does.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
But we know you are Spartacus, and Spartacus is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
Woah dude, we just met.
I've had plenty of Internet Tough Guys pull that shit on me too, including a couple who mentioned where I was living or working at the time, and my response has always been "bring it on". None of them has ever shown up.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Get the politics out of my dev. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... https://encyclopediadramatica....
Tell me what you're going to do now.
Me: I'm going to get the lawn chair out, some popcorn, some tequila shots, and watch events unfold. My comments are not anything other than noting that the winners are at least as angry as they were before the election, and winning has not diminshed their anger one little bit. That does not often end well.
While I have my own political thoughts, they aren't in play here - this is just an observation.
You're welcome to the party.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Tell me what you're going to do now.
Me: I'm going to get the lawn chair out, some popcorn, some tequila shots, and watch events unfold. My comments are not anything other than noting that the winners are at least as angry as they were before the election, and winning has not diminshed their anger one little bit. That does not often end well.
While I have my own political thoughts, they aren't in play here - this is just an observation.
You're welcome to the party.
Well I wasn't trying to imply that you're the kind of person that I am describing. Both sides are angry right now. I want to see people stop complaining and start doing something. Drinking tequila is always something I can stand behind, however!
Wow, you left-wingers trot out a new nasty name every week. Tolerance, at its best.
Not a liberal, unless you consider Barry Goldwater a liberal. IOW, I like fiscal responsibility, and allowing people freedom. Crypto-conservatives give lip service to conservative principles, but don't follow them.
You cannot call yourselves fiscal conservatives when you do a perfect spend spend spend plan, and the leader of the Republican party, the man who represents your principles and goals, is planning on adding a Tax so that American citizens can pay for building the Maginot line two.
In other words, the people who call themselves conservatives that days, are just like those whom they castigate. IOW, Crypto conservatives = Liberals when it comes to spending my Tax dollars.
Or if you want to eliminate all the nice words, Modern conservatives are fucking lowlife hypocrites, and quite liberal in their spending and quite invasive of personal freedoms - exactly what you might accuse liberals of doing.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Still pounding the table sweetheart? If you had an ounce of self-awareness, you might realize how neatly you fit the stereotype of a Trumptard throwing a fit because you don't understand reality enough to not continually throw a tantrum about everything.
Are you pre-teen, or are you senile?
Ah, starting out by taking the high road, eh? Well played citizen!
I merely state that the winners have not been cheering. They've been just as anry as before. But since you cannot have a discussion without an insult, That's about all I have to say to you. Peaceout.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Kids get arrested every day. There are police officers in most public schools in the US today.
I don't respond to AC's.
Not much of a prediction.
Current fascists call themselves anti-fascists.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Trumptard? Err... I think you have it backwards. I am and always have been a liberal who believes in freedom of thought and action. I am reluctant to say so excuse I hate the abuse that is handed out to liberals in the USA where the constitution of the USA is and was about as liberal as you can get. To me the "trumptards" are betraying the heritage of the founders of the USA.
You want examples but as I tried to say, from external (to the USA) media the overall impression is that it is about three-to-one. I am not trying to make the claim of three incidents to one incident as it is no longer possibly to accept the accuracy of any US source on its own. The US is now a post factual society where truth can only be adjudged and never known.
Trump lawlessness? Emoluments act. Why is he not already in jail? Openly and determinably corrupt. A public scofflaw.
No, stop being a dick. I have no problem with gay. But are you trying to say (as a gay person) that it is a personal choice and you could choose not to be gay? Because my response is to say that that is bullshit. Ans that is what this thread is about.
Yea, that is what I meant. I guess, future as in today from yesteryear. Welp, that is one butchered comment from me.
Thanks for the correction.
Yep (sarcasm) just like grandmothers. Choice or defect? Well, we know it is not a choice because you cannot choose to be gay or straight. So, by your statement it must be a defect. Hope you are not one of those crazy religious people who you have a huge problem with your worldview.
It is not a choice and it is not a defect. It is just the way the world is. You know, like reality.
have you been living in a bubble? their are no victims here except maybe the authorities that have to deal with it. Briana was caught creating fake accounts to post fake attacks. This whole mess started with corrupt journalism which escalated into the corrupt individuals successfully turning it into an sexism issue which was enabled by the idiots that attacked them in that fashion. You don't have to believe me though their are a thousand articles out their detailing the whole saga from start to finish, you just need to avoid any that directly support one side or the other as ALL sides have acted shamefully.
And mine over yours apparently.
The USA seems to have become polarised beyond any degree I have ever seen before. I am not sure how things will pan out. I have no respect for Brianna WU but attacking her for being trans and going out of the way to use gendered terms offensively is beyond the pale. Criticise her for what she has said or done wrong by all means but not simply for existing.
Last time I heard beating a bin was property damage not violence. Stop wanking in public.
"You say "The left comes to "protests" ready to riot. This is not like the civil rights movement where men marched in suits and ladies in dresses. The modern left passes out instructions for what kind of clothes to wear for rioting, they bring masks, etc." And I say bullshit. I am a leftie in the political sense. I very much agree with the founding fathers; the epitome of the "left".
Stop being a Werribee Duck and look at the examples you chose. McVeigh, 9/11 hijackers - right wing terrorists both. You looking for examples to illustrate your foolishness? You could not have chosen better.
that's right, white women liberals only start fights at right wing functions in order to bird dog them, everyone knows this.
" just that you probably don't have the balls to act how you feel without anonymity"
so by your definition these death threats were by default not credible or serious.
he was using pronouns for a man, that's probably why you were confused.
[T]hat includes Brianna and her cry wolf corrupt friends
Just to provide us with a canonical example of victim blaming ... but I'm confident you can improve on it.
haha you just did the same thing you were decrying?
True. Very true. But then try Australia where the regressive, reactionary party is actually called the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party is actually anti-liberal. It is the party that wants to rule not govern.
But look at the root of the word, it damn well means freedom. A liberal in the only real sense of the word desires a society where each individual has as much possible freedom as is consistent with a functioning society. The very founders of the US very liberals of some ilk almost exclusively and tried to design a republic to function that way (..if you can keep it). Yet in the US today a liberal is a 'libtard'. [sarcasm] How very, very sane [/sarcasm].
I love how all of the people saying Wu is a female are AC.
https://newrepublic.com/articl...
Don't just read the headline, read the article - with all those cited examples and proof. The same behaviour that was smiled at last saturday is "rioting" when black lives matter protesters (for example) did them.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
I dunno if you are the same AC or not. But this ends here. You are not arguing in good faith and indeed, counter to your own interests if you are indeed gay. Being gay or transgender is not a fucking choice and anyone who is gay or transgender knows that.
Thus the only logical possibility remaining is that you are a troll. Farewell.
I'm not sure where "Trumptard" came from -- I generally don't use the word, and I am no fan of Trump, so I wouldn't call either of us Trumptards.
The vast majority of violent crime that I have seen covered in the US media has either been perpetrated by anti-Trump activists, or hoaxes by anti-Trump activists. If non-US media gives you the impression that Trump's supporters are committing three times as much violent crime (against either people or property) as Trump's opponents, I think those media are grievously misleading you. It gives the impression that you're a conspiracy theorist falling for Fake News, especially when you suggest that US-based sources are actually covering up some truth that fits their ideology.
There is no Emoluments Act, and there's quite a lot of legal support for the idea that he has not violated the Emoluments Clause. Why are you pushing falsehoods?
Your earlier comment: "This is the sorest bunch of winners ever. I've never seen people who's canddates win, and they're angrier than before the election."
Your newer comment: "I merely state that the winners have not been cheering. They've been just as anry [sic] as before."
I will take that about-face as a retraction of your earlier claim that Trump's supporters are angrier now than before the election, an admission that Obama is a shining example of acting angrier after winning an election than before it, and a sign that your memory is either not here yet or has already gone.
In the US as well, the term "liberal" has been captured by people who want to enforce ideological uniformity and usher in pervasive government. Some critics of those goals see the contradiction as betraying a lack of mental acuity, leading to the contraction that you complain about.
I thought you were tone who called me a Trumptard which I dislike as much as libtard. If you did not I apologise for assuming or reading it that way.
We could spend quite a bit of time trying to align definitions before we get to three to one but yes, that is impression I am getting, and not all of it from overseas.
Okay let us look at two US airplane passengers after the election. 1. Democrat woman who refuses to change her seat 2. Republican who walks up and down the aisle telling individuals how they are fucked now and the 'funny coloured' ones will be sent 'home'.
Now they both got thrown of the plane (good!) but one seems passive aggressive while the other is aggressive. The bloke walking up and down the isle was clearly trying to provoke terror.
Now it stopped short of violence on both occasions. But they are clearly not equate-able. If it had not been for the presence of cabin crew how do you think it would have gone? So, overall, I am seeing passive resistance from democrats but aggressive crowing and glee from the republicans. There is too much post truth stuff out there to get a real handle on the numbers but three to one seems to be about the ratio I am seeing of those that are credible. I am sorry if you do not like that but it is my impression. I am not normally thought of as a credulous person, more of a cynic actually.
Okay, it is not an ACT (as it is in many places) but it is law and principle that is mostly universal although some places only provide lip service to their laws on it. But I am not pushing falsehoods. He is in clear violation of its provisions. As I said, I am a cynic and there is no support for his behaviour in the law. None. Those who assert otherwise. Well if they win then you have lost your republic.
how about everything after you invented the phrase "Crypto Conservative"
I mean there are degrees of wrong and then there are degrees of wrong. Characterizing the vote against Hillary as support for Trump is beyond mindblowing.
The AC you replied to before my first comment explicitly mentioned "violently rioting in the streets and punching people". Your examples are two non-violent, although both abhorrent and obnoxious, incidents. On the other hand, we had riots after the election and riots for the inauguration, all by anti-Trump people. I assume the "punching people" bit was a reference to when a racist asshole got punched on live TV by one of the anti-Trump rioters in Washington DC -- an act that was praised by a lot of other Trump critics. Would you like to try again, and explain why you think violent crime is predominantly committed by Trump supporters?
The Emoluments Clause is short: "No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state." What is the clear violation? Did Vladimir Putin tell Russia to write a big check, payable to Donald J. Trump, that Trump then deposited?
If the ideological conformity is one that promotes the freedom all all to be diverse including many different viewpoints then I probably support that if it is done by education (not "re-education") as it is necessary that all agree not to impose or inflict their personal beliefs on others. So there must be some conformity even in diversity. In the US that conformity should be (yes, I know, I know...should) that you are all Americans and follow the rule of law not Allah, Yahveh, Karl Marx, Harpo Marx or anything else. Any lack of conformity in that is basically un-American.
Here is an example, I do not like guns (well, actually I do but I respect them too much to want them around). You may have an open carry license. Fine, do not visit my home carrying a firearm or I will have the police remove you. There you have one legal standard but accomodations to suit others.
As for pervasive government well when I call the police (above) I expect them to turn up and remove you. But really you cannot have a democratic republic without education, knowledge and thought. In that way government should be pervading. But the issue here is exactly what people consider to be pervasive. I would consider the new toilet laws pervasive. A law to address a non-existent issue. So "pervasive" is not something you can argue about really. It is a subjective issue.
There is an article on the net somewhere about reading news as if you were a spy. It makes a lot of sense.
Bearing that in mind (from your first link) 'What started out as a peaceful march, with more than 4,000 people, quickly turned violent. Over the course of the evening, "anarchists" in the crowd threw objects at officers, vandalized local businesses and damaged cars, Portland Police Sgt. Pete Simpson said.'. He said "anarchists" not democrats. I write that off to idiots or a false flag operation. It is not something with which you can tarnish Democrats. So, let me look at the second link.
Okay, read the second link. Lots of American violence, not so much elsewhere. Even the American violence is localised. Notice any correspondence with police reputations in those areas? Breaking ATMs is a democratic thing is it? Considering the numbers of protests and the number of people protesting do you think it was possible for there to be no violence? I see a lot of violent cops. Sorry, I cannot put this down to "democrats" either. You might also want to check how much violence there was in the rest of the world. I'll chalk most of those down to American contempt for Americans in general rather than anything specific.
Do you understand the word emolument? Please check that. Also I need only one example to prove you wrong ok? That is logic, check it. And here is the large calibre weapon that blows your argument away. The contract for the lease on the hotel. It specifically prohibits a particular emolument and Trump is in violation of both lease and emolument law since the moment he took office. Now I have proven you to be incorrect but are you going to admit it? Got my doubts.
Perhaps the best examples of the ideological conformity that the left is pushing in the US comes from college campuses, where conservative and libertarian speakers are often threatened or assaulted -- and where campus authorities sometimes cancel their speeches because of the heckler's vote and concerns about safety or security. There are plenty of others, but often more polished by experience in how to get away with things.
A good example of pervasive government is California's Proposition 65, which requires businesses to conspicuously notify consumers if there are any of a very long list of substances that are "known to the State of California to cause" cancer and/or birth defects in a product or place of business in California. The list currently includes things like aloe vera extract, aspirin, boric acid, caffeine, carbon monoxide *and* dioxide ... and I got tired after the letter 'C'. As a result, most products you can buy in the US have a Prop 65 warning -- which sometimes leads to confusion abroad when products intended for sale in the US make it to other countries. There are more burdensome and broader government regulations with equally unclear marginal benefits, but Prop 65 is easy to see as an excess.
While reasonable people might disagree about exactly what constitutes "pervasive" government, though, US "liberals" are in favor of a lot of government oversight to make sure companies aren't trying to cheat employees by doing things like making lunch breaks optional; they want to ensure education is run by government rather than by schools offering government-approved curricula tailored in ways that parents prefer; and so forth.
Move the goalposts much? The original AC comment said "Hillary supporters", not Democrats. (It is odd, though, that these supposedly anti-capitalist anarchists mostly sat out the last eight years in the US.) Similarly, non-US protests are essentially outside both that AC's claim and your counter-claim that numbers were "about three-to-one the other way". You seem to have conceded that violence is, in fact, mostly being perpetrated by Clinton supporters -- except when you're throwing out conspiracy theories that police instigated the violence.
An emolument is compensation for employment or holding an office. Which foreign royalty or state is paying Donald Trump a salary? You are spouting talking points that you clearly do not understand -- mentioning a hotel without specifying which one, citing supposed terms of a lease without identifying that lease, and throwing around the phrase "emolument law" as if that means anything specific. The only thing you've proven is that you cannot write coherently.
Move the goalposts much? The original AC comment said "Hillary supporters", not Democrats. (It is odd, though, that these supposedly anti-capitalist anarchists mostly sat out the last eight years in the US.) Similarly, non-US protests are essentially outside both that AC's claim and your counter-claim that numbers were "about three-to-one the other way". You seem to have conceded that violence is, in fact, mostly being perpetrated by Clinton supporters -- except when you're throwing out conspiracy theories that police instigated the violence.
Oh, put words in my mouth why don't you? Are you claiming the Hillary supporters are not democrats? Seems they would be a subset by definition. Now, I did not call them anti-capatlist anarchists. I do not even know where you got the anti-capitalist from. But it was the cop who called them anarchists not me. As to where have they been? Haven't you kept your eyes open later? Some of the black lives matter people (of course black lives matter, all lives matter) have been even assassinating cops indiscriminately. I have conceded nothing and while I am not a Hillary supporter I have no reason to attack them either and I doubt many of them are violent (most people, most places are not violent). Although I am happy to denigrate Hillary and the democratic party for what they did to Bernie. They deserved to lose.
An emolument is compensation for employment or holding an office. Which foreign royalty or state is paying Donald Trump a salary? You are spouting talking points that you clearly do not understand -- mentioning a hotel without specifying which one, citing supposed terms of a lease without identifying that lease, and throwing around the phrase "emolument law" as if that means anything specific. The only thing you've proven is that you cannot write coherently.
Oh, come on! Emoluments do not have to come from overseas. As for details http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us.... First link on a search for "trump hotel lease"
I can not write coherently? Perhaps you have to be able to think coherently to see it. I am sure everyone else can. Talk to a non-partisan lawyer.
Anyway I am done with you. Reason is not your forte. And I am fed up with reiterating stuff. Bye
On your para 1
The idealogical conformity that I would prefer is the old idea that universities are places where ideas are explored not censored. There is however a problem when people claim equality of ideas. Intelligent design for example, does not cut it and has no place in schools and universities and should not be encouraged there as it gives them recognition they do not deserve. You might call that idealogical conformity but I would call it intellectual honesty. If we were designed by another being it must be stupid (or careless).
WRT para 2
That is not an argument about mandating warnings it is an argument about how those are implemented. I am a diabetic. I would like to know the Glycemic Index and Glycemic load of the foods I buy. Too bad for me that I do not get it as it is "too hard" for the manufacturer. Snow globes seem stupid though. I (obviously) am in favour of information being supplied.
WRT para 3
Good. Companies should not cheat employees. "schools offering government approved curricula tailored in ways that parents prefer..." you mean propaganda schools? With maybe, prayers to a god required? Been here, done that. I have no desire for my kids to be inculcated rather than educated. No, you lose on that one. Many of those schools are evil beyond belief. Would you send your kids to a Madrassa that taught that women should stay in the home and always obey a male? No, education should be, must be, secular. That is part of the social conformity that is needed to make society work. I am told that many atheists in the USA, particularly in certain areas must keep mum about it and indeed, some are socially obliged to attend a church - or they are not considered members of the community and are readily mistreated. So, no, I do not support you in saying the government is too pervasive in that area. I would say - not enough. You are failing your countries children. (So are we)
Perhaps advocate their own brand of justice: doggy style justice, if you will.
Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
If it's a choice, you should have no problem fucking a guy (provided you're a straight guy). You can choose to, so go ahead and do it.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I could easily pretend to not be gay for the right money, that's what I said and that's what the whole sub-thread is about. What Notabadguy said a few posts up the hill was that if she wins this, he'll go ahead and pretend to be some genderfluid opponent of rape culture. He chose to word it in such a way that he would actually be this, but the context makes it very obvious that he would pretend for the money.
That's what the whole deal is about.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Please re-read the subthread.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
And my point is that you can't pretend. His point is that she is pretending. He does not know, can not know and the only reasonable assumption is that she is not lying as who would wish that on themselves?
Look, I do not like the person but aim at the target not the person. He is just arguing ad hominem. That is both worthless and worthless behaviour.
Anyway I am done on this topic. (I hope)
I asked questions because you are pretty incoherent. It seemed like you were trying to distinguish the protesters from Democrats -- anarchists in the US functionally act like extremist Democrats, and typically vote D, but maybe you were trying to say they're No True Democrat-man. That doesn't help your incorrect claim that most of the violent protests in the US were by Trump supporters rather than by Clinton supporters: The violent protesters preferred Clinton to Trump, and would have only voted for Stein (or anyone else) if their state was predictably going to go for Clinton.
That NBC story is astonishingly weak. You can find two law professors to support just about any bat-guano crazy idea; having legal theories that are outside the mainstream is almost a requirement to be a law professor. As the article quotes Trump correctly saying, the conflict-of-interest laws that motivate that lease term do not (and could not constitutionally) apply to the President. By its own language, the lease term they cite does not prevent lease-holders from running for, or being elected to, office. It only prohibits people who already hold office from taking or assuming an interest in the lease. It says no office-holder "shall be admitted to" the lease. Trump was "admitted to" the lease long before he started his campaign, when he did not hold any government office. If those partisan law professors (you did notice that one of them worked for Obama, right?) didn't mention anything more pertinent, you can bet they couldn't find anything more pertinent.
Your newer comment: "I merely state that the winners have not been cheering. They've been just as anry [sic] as before."
I will take that about-face as a retraction of your earlier claim that Trump's supporters are angrier now than before the election
Umm, no. Twas no about face. Come back when you can follow the conversation.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
how about everything after you invented the phrase "Crypto Conservative"
I mean there are degrees of wrong and then there are degrees of wrong. Characterizing the vote against Hillary as support for Trump is beyond mindblowing.
Okay, so let's say I am completely wrong. Do you have anything to offer for your argument beyond that your mind is "blown".
Do you understand what "crypto"-something means?
You've managed to just tell me I was wrong because I was wrong. If that's all you have to offer, don't bother to reply, unless you are one of those who feels a deep need to have the last word.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Let me get this straight (no pun intended).
You believe "transgender" is a choice. Is that correct?
You believe "gay" is a choice. Is that also correct?
What is this "50 years ago" stuff? You are talking about characteristics that the human race has had since before it was human. That's reality. So what are you actually saying? What claim are you actually making?
I do not know why I am giving you the courtesy of a reply when I will not know if any response actually comes from you. Do not think this is dialog. Unless you use an identifier it is not dialog.
Aww I hurt someone's feelings and got modded down as a troll. If only that were true...
In a world of the blind, the one-eyed man is king--and the two-eyed man is a heretic.
http://www.reuters.com/article...
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/w...
http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/01/...
http://www.usatoday.com/story/...
I don't see rioting from conservatives at all. I am not sure what news you are seeing, but these riots are from people "protesting" Trump and his policies (without even having a basic understanding of the policies). The day before the inauguration, the protesters torched a limo. Ironically, the limo was owned by a muslim man who didn't like Trump either. Protests at U C Berkeley turned violent over Milo Yiannopoulos, and the recent executive orders that were implimenting policy passed by the previous administration. Portland Oregon protests turn violent over Trumps (illegal!) immigrant stances.
There were some non-violent protests, such as the women's protests the Saturday after the inauguration, but that is hardly the norm right now.
FYI, I live 30 minutes outside DC, I hear about all the crap going on down there, and it isn't pretty with all the violence coming from these people.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
AC Tried to grab her pussy and got a surprise...Dundee style.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
That is the operative word. Crap. It has always been the violent right. Always and forever. Always will be.
Do you ever consider things for veracity?
Trump has policies? Right, Get Rich. And Barton's is to break America. That much we do know.
I was pointing out, that I haven't seen any violence from the right, you however just say without any references at all that the right is 3x as violent as the left. I don't see any violence from the right, and in fact, the only thing I have been pointed to by friends who are left leaning is that the right burned some effigies when Obama was elected. What violence are you seeing from the American conservatives? I have seen tons of violence over the past few years, and it is all people I would place in the American left.
The crap I was specifically speaking of though, is the violence and destruction. I was warned not to even go into Baltimore not too long ago because of these riots:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
They were destroying cars, burned down and looted a CVS, and all over a single traffic death that was attributed to poor training. I would love to see all this violence you see coming from the right though. The riots on the left have become the left versus the government (that they built in many cases), so as you point out, it becomes the people versus the police.
If however you were trying to say that it is 3 left to 1 right, I would tend to agree, but that is not how I read your comment. The reason is that traditionally the right values authority, whereas the left is about bucking authority. It is a core value of the movements. This leads to the left traditionally being violent to authority as they try to change the problems they see in that authority.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?