Someone should tell the alt-righters that it's hard to argue you planned for a peaceful protest when many of your members wore helmets, carried riot shields, and had knives or clubs.
Are you trying to equate white supremacists with unionists and Jews? They're not the same. The KKK were Americas first domestic terrorist organization.
To be fair you could argue that the Boston Tea Party was an act of domestic terrorism, as well as the tarring and feathering of British officials since the Colonies were not yet in a state of open warfare. Don't forget the Mormons out West, too. But yes, the KKK are and definitely were domestic terrorists, just arguably not the first ones.
Antifa was fighting the original fascists in Italy in 1921 already.
And the Democratic Party was supporting slavery in the 19th century — and still had a KKK "Grand Wizard" among it Senators until his recent death.
Just remember that the Democratic Party of the 19th Century is ideologically aligned with the modern day Republican Party after a shift in the mid 1900s.
Hard to paint antifascist groups as the violent aggressors with a timeline like that.
Pick up a history book, they were the violent aggressors in many cases. It's one of the reasons why people were sympathetic towards the nazi's,
People were sympathetic to the Nazis because Britain and France wanted to royally screw over Germany because of WWI and the Nazis claimed to offer a way to stand up for the German people, recover Germany's rightful place in Europe, and provided easy scapegoats in the Jews and Communists. It wasn't anger towards the Communists, it was anger over the treatment they received and the contemporary economic situation in Germany (which probably didn't help Communism very much since in recessions most people tend to want to hold on to what little they have left rather than "give it away" as collectivization would appear to be).
Nazis, aka National -Socialists-, are NOT far right.
They are of the Left. Perhaps right of communism, but still far left. Maybe on the Right as far as europe is concerned, since that whole continent is on the left.
Fascism is also of the Left. Right of communism, but still of the left.
All 3, National Socialism, Fascism, and Communism are all about state/federal control of the economies and peoples.
None of that is the purview of the right.
The political spectrum goes more than one direction.
Communists and Fascists sit on opposite ends of the economic line, but both sit squarely on the Authoritarisn side of the spectrum. Libertarians are Libertarian Right, as are many Republicans in all likelihood. Alt-right, Neo-nazis, and fascists are all Authoritarian Right. You are confusing and conflating the methodology with the ideology.
Glad to see I wasn't the only one that thought of mid 1930s Germany when they saw pictures of hundreds of young men marching around in (citronella tiki) torches.
Yeah I thought the same thing, you know what it reminded me of? When the nazi's started fighting back against the antifascists(aka antifaschistische aktion) who were violently assaulting people in the streets, at protests and so on.
You do realize that that article you linked to states that Antifaschistische Aktion formed in 1932, nearly a decade after the Beer Hall Putsch? The AA might have been a continuation of the RFB, but even the RFB was formed in 1924. The SA/Brownshirts were formed in 1920/21. Hard to paint antifascist groups as the violent aggressors with a timeline like that.
It's not censorship or a violation of freedom of speech. All they did was cancel the hosting of the site. The site is free to purchase hosting services somewhere else.
Are they still free to purchase hosting services within the US, though? Anti-terrorism laws apply to that kind of extremist content.
Well good thing for them Trump refuses to call them terrorists, or even mention them at all.
after white supremacists organised a controversial far-right march called "Unite the Right".
How about being honest: neo-Nazi's holding a Nazi rally.
Glad to see I wasn't the only one that thought of mid 1930s Germany when they saw pictures of hundreds of young men marching around in (citronella tiki) torches.
As a side note, they could at least have put in the effort to make real torches. All you need is a stick, a rag, gasoline/kerosene, and some wire. Using the tiki torches takes them from intimidating (which I am sure they were going for) to comical. Maybe they were worried about bugs during the rally?
As usual, leftists want to censor things rather than refute them. The greatest enemy to free speech in the world is leftists. If you can refute someone, speak up and do it, even if the speech is disagreeable, such as white supremacy.
It's not censorship or a violation of freedom of speech. All they did was cancel the hosting of the site. The site is free to purchase hosting services somewhere else. It's basically as if GoDaddy owned a bulletin board and someone puts a flyer on there they don't like. They are free to remove that flyer and tell the person not to post it again. Individuals (corporations, etc) are not obligated to provide you a forum for your speech, and your right to free speech does not translate into a right to be heard by others.
Personally, I never thought I'd be on GoDaddy's side on anything, but I have no problem with this.
I propose a companion law to give it more teeth. It could be called the Financial and Economic Exploitation Law. They could then be known collectively as COPPA-FEEL
One favorite drill a friend ran was to tell the crew GPS was down - now navigate for the next few hours the old way. Lots of head scratching and moaning when he did that. There's a lot to be said for keeping proven, if time consuming, skills sharp for when all the latest stuff goes south.
With good charts-which any naval or merchant ship should have-if the GPS goes out couldn't you just take your last known position and use your heading, speed, and time to plot out a decently accurate idea of where you are anyway? It might not be accurate enough closer to shore but in deep water it should be serviceable until GPS is restored.
All he said was "Let's get away from this cult and be as productive (through enabling each and every Google employee to reach his full potential) as we can be".
But didn't he also argue that an entire group of his coworkers had inherently less potential than other groups simply based on their gender?
That's true and not true. I would argue that the true MAIN characters have not died yet or rarely die in the overall scheme of things. The 3(4 if you count Snow) Stark children are still alive this far.
3(or 4 counting Snow) out of 5(6/Snow) Stark children are alive. So 40% are dead, plus Ned, Catharine, and Rob's pregnant wife. So a good part of the Stark family was killed, many of them brutally.
Cersi lives,
As does Jamie and Tyrion. The dead Lannisters include their father And Cersei/Jamie's 3 children. So, more dead than alive.
It's really more that the book and show have no qualms killing off major characters to advance the plot. Most stories will hold onto main characters until they are no longer needed in the story and maybe kill off one or two for effect. GoT kills off main characters very abruptly,when they could very easily play a greater role in the story. I think that is part of what draws people to the show/books. It makes the story seem a lot more realistic.
No, GoT fans obsess about spoilers and avoid being exposed to them at all costs. ASoIaF fans would sell a body part to obtain GRRMs notes in order to lord them over the aforementioned GoT fans.
At this point in the series, why would they? The show has moved beyond the books in terms of story progression and while the producers are working with GRRM, they have said that the stories could very likely diverge on many points. The general plot lines could remain similar, but the show has already shown a willingness to kill off people alive in the books and vice versa, or focus on separate subplots. Really any book vs show "conflict" is nothing more than tribalism.
I didn't realize Kingsman was a comic but I found the movie pretty enjoyable. The second film could be interesting. However, how did I not know that they released a Kingsman/Archer crossover short earlier this year?
kidded yourselves and voted third party are about to see the results. I didn't like Hillary either but the alternative was obviously worse.
To paraphrase a famous quote: The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil.
Many people who voted third party this election, myself included, were hoping that 2016 would finally loosen the grips that the Republican/Democrat divide has on the political system. instead it seems to have only strengthened it.
Well. I'm one of those indoctrinated through libertarianism (I'm also an indoctrinator.). Yes, the nanny-state is bad; it is tyranny; and I have, and will continue to fight against it.
It's not a nanny state. There are a certain number of services that individuals cannot realistically provide to/for themselves in any efficient or effective way. That is where government steps in. And it's not nanny state. Nanny state is the government telling you where can and can't live, what you can eat, who you can marry, how to live your life. Providing services that actually allow people to live their lives is the role of government. Are you going to maintain your own internet, pave your own roads, run your own clean water to your house, and keep people from taking everything you have all by yourself? Good luck with all that. People like you are why there will never be a libertarian running this country. For you the only acceptable level of government is virtually no government at all. We've seen that. It's called Somalia.
It was actually a pretty fun game. Stopped playing it though because of hackers. Every time you tried to gather a resource a hacker would zoom in, immediately harvest it, and fly off. Just got too annoying.
The f**king travesty that is Obamacare comes from people trying to force their idea on everyone.
No, the travesty of Obamacare is that they are still forcing everyone to purchase health insurance. Cut out the insurance companies and healthcare costs drop immediately, simply because you are no longer paying the middleman. Why would you fight tooth and nail for the opportunity to pay one company money monthly just so you can pay another company a little less money? It makes much more sense to pay one time (or rather monthly in the form of taxes) and then not have to pay again. Insurance companies have to worry about profit (well, really they don't because they make a metric shit ton and have customers literally forced to pay them), the government doesn't. It's simple math. But too many people have been indoctrinated either through libertarianism (all government bad!) or the Republican party (anything that even resembles Socialism is evil!).
The reality is, there are certain things that simply makes sense to be run by the federal government: defense, tax collection, and support programs such as Social Security/Medicare/healthcare in general. Otherwise you eventually end up with wealthy states with top of the line healthcare and poorer states letting people die in ditches. When disparity like that gets bad enough, that's when you end up with civil war.
Slashdot Mirror
Someone should tell the alt-righters that it's hard to argue you planned for a peaceful protest when many of your members wore helmets, carried riot shields, and had knives or clubs.
Are you trying to equate white supremacists with unionists and Jews? They're not the same. The KKK were Americas first domestic terrorist organization.
To be fair you could argue that the Boston Tea Party was an act of domestic terrorism, as well as the tarring and feathering of British officials since the Colonies were not yet in a state of open warfare. Don't forget the Mormons out West, too. But yes, the KKK are and definitely were domestic terrorists, just arguably not the first ones.
And the Democratic Party was supporting slavery in the 19th century — and still had a KKK "Grand Wizard" among it Senators until his recent death.
Just remember that the Democratic Party of the 19th Century is ideologically aligned with the modern day Republican Party after a shift in the mid 1900s.
Hard to paint antifascist groups as the violent aggressors with a timeline like that.
Pick up a history book, they were the violent aggressors in many cases. It's one of the reasons why people were sympathetic towards the nazi's,
People were sympathetic to the Nazis because Britain and France wanted to royally screw over Germany because of WWI and the Nazis claimed to offer a way to stand up for the German people, recover Germany's rightful place in Europe, and provided easy scapegoats in the Jews and Communists. It wasn't anger towards the Communists, it was anger over the treatment they received and the contemporary economic situation in Germany (which probably didn't help Communism very much since in recessions most people tend to want to hold on to what little they have left rather than "give it away" as collectivization would appear to be).
This has got to be the greatest PR con job ever.
Nazis, aka National -Socialists-, are NOT far right. They are of the Left. Perhaps right of communism, but still far left. Maybe on the Right as far as europe is concerned, since that whole continent is on the left. Fascism is also of the Left. Right of communism, but still of the left.
All 3, National Socialism, Fascism, and Communism are all about state/federal control of the economies and peoples. None of that is the purview of the right.
The political spectrum goes more than one direction. Communists and Fascists sit on opposite ends of the economic line, but both sit squarely on the Authoritarisn side of the spectrum. Libertarians are Libertarian Right, as are many Republicans in all likelihood. Alt-right, Neo-nazis, and fascists are all Authoritarian Right. You are confusing and conflating the methodology with the ideology.
Just like how Obama didn't call the BLM protester who killed 5 cops in Dallas a terrorist.
"Oh, but that's different!" No, it really isn't. Both BLM and the Nazis need to go...they're both breeding violent, hate-filled people.
False equivalency. Trump cannot control what Obama did or said. But Trump can control what he does (or in this case conspicuously does not) say.
Glad to see I wasn't the only one that thought of mid 1930s Germany when they saw pictures of hundreds of young men marching around in (citronella tiki) torches.
Yeah I thought the same thing, you know what it reminded me of? When the nazi's started fighting back against the antifascists(aka antifaschistische aktion) who were violently assaulting people in the streets, at protests and so on.
You do realize that that article you linked to states that Antifaschistische Aktion formed in 1932, nearly a decade after the Beer Hall Putsch? The AA might have been a continuation of the RFB, but even the RFB was formed in 1924. The SA/Brownshirts were formed in 1920/21. Hard to paint antifascist groups as the violent aggressors with a timeline like that.
GoDaddy is not a business that offers services to the public?
Fascist/rascist is a protected class?
It's not censorship or a violation of freedom of speech. All they did was cancel the hosting of the site. The site is free to purchase hosting services somewhere else.
Are they still free to purchase hosting services within the US, though? Anti-terrorism laws apply to that kind of extremist content.
Well good thing for them Trump refuses to call them terrorists, or even mention them at all.
after white supremacists organised a controversial far-right march called "Unite the Right".
Glad to see I wasn't the only one that thought of mid 1930s Germany when they saw pictures of hundreds of young men marching around in (citronella tiki) torches.
As a side note, they could at least have put in the effort to make real torches. All you need is a stick, a rag, gasoline/kerosene, and some wire. Using the tiki torches takes them from intimidating (which I am sure they were going for) to comical. Maybe they were worried about bugs during the rally?
As usual, leftists want to censor things rather than refute them. The greatest enemy to free speech in the world is leftists. If you can refute someone, speak up and do it, even if the speech is disagreeable, such as white supremacy.
It's not censorship or a violation of freedom of speech. All they did was cancel the hosting of the site. The site is free to purchase hosting services somewhere else. It's basically as if GoDaddy owned a bulletin board and someone puts a flyer on there they don't like. They are free to remove that flyer and tell the person not to post it again. Individuals (corporations, etc) are not obligated to provide you a forum for your speech, and your right to free speech does not translate into a right to be heard by others.
Personally, I never thought I'd be on GoDaddy's side on anything, but I have no problem with this.
I always assumed there was a reason that MREs always came with a bottle of hot sauce. Covers up the taste.
There's no reason to worry. As we speak Trump and Kim Jong Un are working on a plan to solve Global Warming once and for all!
I propose a companion law to give it more teeth. It could be called the Financial and Economic Exploitation Law. They could then be known collectively as COPPA-FEEL
One favorite drill a friend ran was to tell the crew GPS was down - now navigate for the next few hours the old way. Lots of head scratching and moaning when he did that. There's a lot to be said for keeping proven, if time consuming, skills sharp for when all the latest stuff goes south.
With good charts-which any naval or merchant ship should have-if the GPS goes out couldn't you just take your last known position and use your heading, speed, and time to plot out a decently accurate idea of where you are anyway? It might not be accurate enough closer to shore but in deep water it should be serviceable until GPS is restored.
All he said was "Let's get away from this cult and be as productive (through enabling each and every Google employee to reach his full potential) as we can be".
But didn't he also argue that an entire group of his coworkers had inherently less potential than other groups simply based on their gender?
That's true and not true. I would argue that the true MAIN characters have not died yet or rarely die in the overall scheme of things. The 3(4 if you count Snow) Stark children are still alive this far.
3(or 4 counting Snow) out of 5(6/Snow) Stark children are alive. So 40% are dead, plus Ned, Catharine, and Rob's pregnant wife. So a good part of the Stark family was killed, many of them brutally.
Cersi lives,
As does Jamie and Tyrion. The dead Lannisters include their father And Cersei/Jamie's 3 children. So, more dead than alive.
It's really more that the book and show have no qualms killing off major characters to advance the plot. Most stories will hold onto main characters until they are no longer needed in the story and maybe kill off one or two for effect. GoT kills off main characters very abruptly,when they could very easily play a greater role in the story. I think that is part of what draws people to the show/books. It makes the story seem a lot more realistic.
No, GoT fans obsess about spoilers and avoid being exposed to them at all costs. ASoIaF fans would sell a body part to obtain GRRMs notes in order to lord them over the aforementioned GoT fans.
At this point in the series, why would they? The show has moved beyond the books in terms of story progression and while the producers are working with GRRM, they have said that the stories could very likely diverge on many points. The general plot lines could remain similar, but the show has already shown a willingness to kill off people alive in the books and vice versa, or focus on separate subplots. Really any book vs show "conflict" is nothing more than tribalism.
I didn't realize Kingsman was a comic but I found the movie pretty enjoyable. The second film could be interesting. However, how did I not know that they released a Kingsman/Archer crossover short earlier this year?
Sounds to me like a couple programmers found a way to take their retirement accounts into their own hands.
He is just board.
Well, I hope his favorite chair at least has good lumber support
kidded yourselves and voted third party are about to see the results. I didn't like Hillary either but the alternative was obviously worse.
To paraphrase a famous quote: The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil.
Many people who voted third party this election, myself included, were hoping that 2016 would finally loosen the grips that the Republican/Democrat divide has on the political system. instead it seems to have only strengthened it.
Well. I'm one of those indoctrinated through libertarianism (I'm also an indoctrinator.). Yes, the nanny-state is bad; it is tyranny; and I have, and will continue to fight against it.
It's not a nanny state. There are a certain number of services that individuals cannot realistically provide to/for themselves in any efficient or effective way. That is where government steps in. And it's not nanny state. Nanny state is the government telling you where can and can't live, what you can eat, who you can marry, how to live your life. Providing services that actually allow people to live their lives is the role of government. Are you going to maintain your own internet, pave your own roads, run your own clean water to your house, and keep people from taking everything you have all by yourself? Good luck with all that. People like you are why there will never be a libertarian running this country. For you the only acceptable level of government is virtually no government at all. We've seen that. It's called Somalia.
It was actually a pretty fun game. Stopped playing it though because of hackers. Every time you tried to gather a resource a hacker would zoom in, immediately harvest it, and fly off. Just got too annoying.
The f**king travesty that is Obamacare comes from people trying to force their idea on everyone.
No, the travesty of Obamacare is that they are still forcing everyone to purchase health insurance. Cut out the insurance companies and healthcare costs drop immediately, simply because you are no longer paying the middleman. Why would you fight tooth and nail for the opportunity to pay one company money monthly just so you can pay another company a little less money? It makes much more sense to pay one time (or rather monthly in the form of taxes) and then not have to pay again. Insurance companies have to worry about profit (well, really they don't because they make a metric shit ton and have customers literally forced to pay them), the government doesn't. It's simple math. But too many people have been indoctrinated either through libertarianism (all government bad!) or the Republican party (anything that even resembles Socialism is evil!).
The reality is, there are certain things that simply makes sense to be run by the federal government: defense, tax collection, and support programs such as Social Security/Medicare/healthcare in general. Otherwise you eventually end up with wealthy states with top of the line healthcare and poorer states letting people die in ditches. When disparity like that gets bad enough, that's when you end up with civil war.