It doesn't matter who the CEO is. He's not the one killing Twitter. SJW convergence is the cancer eating it from the inside, and it needs to be cut out promptly to save the patient.
1) Print up flyers for a huge social justice meeting. 2) Fire everyone that shows up. 3) Undo everything that any of those people initiated.
Like it or not, right or wrong, people judge you by how you write and speak (and look). If you have good ideas and want them to be heard, the very last thing you should do is hinder that effort by allowing yourself to sound (or look) like an uneducated moron.
No matter how many people use literally to mean figuratively, no matter how many dictionaries take note of the inverse usage, it is still wrong, and anyone trying to avoid looking like a moron would be wise to steer clear of incorrect uses. Ditto "begging the question".
Shall we see what Black's has to say on the matter?
What is ALLEGIANCE?
[B]y allegiance is meant the obligation of fidelity and obedience which the individual owes to the government under which he lives, or to his sovereign in return for the protection he receives. It may be an absolute and permanent obligation, or it may be a qualified and temporary one. The citizen or subject owes an absolute and permanent allegiance to his government or sovereign, or at least until, by some open and distinct act, he renounces it and becomes a citizen or subject of another government or another sovereign. The alien, while domiciled in the country, owes a local and temporary allegiance, which continues during the period of his residence. Carlisle v. U. S
Gosh, that sounds an awful lot like Black's is on the same page as whoever wrote 8 USC 1408, and neither of them would not recognize the definition that you just pulled out of your ass. Have these "green card holders" renounced their other citizenship by some open and distinct act? Have they sworn an oath of fidelity and obedience to the United States?
No, of course not. The only people who are nationals by 8 USC 1101.a.22.B are the descendants of other nationals still living in overseas holdings. The only people who become US nationals after birth become Citizens at the same time.
Although all U.S. citizens are also U.S. nationals, the reverse is not true. As specified in 8 U.S.C. 1408, a person whose only connection to the U.S. is through birth in an outlying possession (which is defined in 8 U.S.C. 1101 as American Samoa and Swains Island (which is administered as part of American Samoa)), or through descent from a person so born, acquires U.S. nationality but not U.S. citizenship. This was formerly the case in only four other current or former U.S. overseas possessions.[31]
Marx wanted to end history - he wanted to end differences between people so that there would be no conflict. To that end, he devised an economic system that would grind people down to a uniform miserable paste. Naturally the people who ran with it wanted to be the grinders, and not the paste.
After the Russian revolution set the example, they expected the west to follow along. We didn't. A group calling itself the Frankfurt School got together to figure out why the west didn't jump in, and what they could do about it. They identified our cultural institutions as our defense against Marxism and started working on ways to weaken us. Gramsci is notable here. Search ESR's blog for "Gramscian damage".
If you look at the current left in America, you will see that the one and only one unifying factor among the factions is a desire to destroy western traditions and institutions. What else do homosexuals and femenists have in common with Islamists who kill homosexuals and mutilate women? Why else would BLM unite with pro-immigration activists to invite in millions of central Americans who hate blacks?
The left in America is chasing after Marxist objectives in order to bring about a Marxist endpoint. Now that they are emboldened, they are even using the same violent Marxist street tactics from 100 years ago. The only difference is the strategy - today the institutions are targeted for destruction as an intermediate goal, instead of the economy.
So, yeah, I'm going to keep calling them Marxists.
Globalism just isn't a valid axis in America. Sanders campaigned as an anti-Globalist Marxist, and almost all of the Republicans candidates were pro-Globalism. In the long run, that distinction may grow to become the most important and the spectrum the parties align on, but it is not today.
When institutions stop doing what they were created for, they need to go away. The rarely do so willingly, so sometimes we need to break out the torches. I'll take your word for it that the current unions were created to fight against globalism, but they certainly are not doing so today.
Nice try. 2/10 - you are in the top 10% of commies.
A political revolt (you did notice the political revolt, right?) is not a military coup. Thinking that Obama might try to institute martial law is also not calling for a military coup. You do remember the lefties begging Obama to launch his own coup, right? There were three peaks there - right after the election, right before the electoral colleges certified their votes, and right before the inauguration.
Everything else is either off topic, gibberish, or both. If you want, take a moment or two to collect your thoughts and try again.
If you require perfect opsec all the time, you are doomed eventually.
Also, who the hell does this? The only sane way to use TOR for something dangerous is on a machine that has never and will never be connected to the internet directly or through NAT. And that computer's only network jack should be plugged into a disposable router running a bootable live system that does all-TOR all-day.
In other words, even if the client computer is trying to turn you in, which it is, it shouldn't know anything other than the reserved/private IP that your router gives it and the IP or onion address your browser is visiting.
The alt-right, at its broadest measure, is everyone who is on the right and tired of losing like gentlemen. Basically, a rejection of the country club/establishment faction of the GOP that has led us from loss to pyrrhic victory to loss. They also notice that "conservatism" is a failed ideology, since it hasn't conserved anything. The tea party movement is, by this reckoning, an early alt-right movement.
And before you say it, no, I don't care who said what in 2010, and no, I don't care how the media has been trying to spin it. This includes a very broad range of people, including some people who consider themselves white nationalist, but also a lot more who think that white nationalism is a racist ideology they would never in a billion years have anything to do with. Oh, and not all of them are white. Even some of the white nationalists aren't white. Deal with it.
In America, the left-right axis runs from Marxism on the left to Realism (anti-Marxism) on the right. We don't get too picky about what name the Marxism is going by today. Similarly, we don't care that much about why someone opposes Marxism. The different groups on each side tend to overlap a lot more than they do with any group on the other side.
Since Europe is thoroughly Marxist, your axis is mostly between globalism and tradition. Our Marxists support globalism because it advances Marxism - which would make no sense in Europe because in Europe, even the monarchists are Marxists. Yes, I know that I'm speaking in unfairly broad strokes here. It is only intended to be approximately accurate.
In America, many on the right, whether "conservative" or alt-, see that the country is approaching a tipping point. The Hart-Cellar Act is bearing demographic fruit, the schools and media are engines of Marxist propaganda almost to the exclusion of education and information, and the left had already begun their endzone dance.
Whatever is important to someone on the right, whether it is their religion, their race, their culture or the Constitution, it has been increasingly apparent that the options to preserve it have been dwindling swiftly. We do still have close to three hundred million guns, and like 90% of the combat training and experience, so the violent option is always there. Overwhelmingly, we don't want that. In fact, we are trying to avoid that so badly that we were willing to vote for a brash New York liberal and recovering Democrat on his third marriage.
If there is any possible definition of "far right" in America, it is the two very small minorities that think that the second civil war (currently ongoing) moving from cold to hot is either a good thing, or something that can't be avoided.
Every day that the news shows violent left-wing mobs destroying cities and attacking people merely for disagreeing with them, both of those minorities grow. Every time media figures pretend to be unbiased - and remain employed - while they call for assassination or military coup, those minorities grow. If, God forbid, someone were able to kill Trump, millions of people who played fair and won honestly will take it as a signal that the left will not allow a peaceful revolution, and things will get very ugly, very fast.
The spoiled kids in the streets cheering on the violence today have no idea how poorly they would fare if that ever happens. An unfinished Gender Studies degree usually means that a person thinks that food comes from the grocery store and might even suffer from PTSD ever since that one time they drove past a gun store.
(If you still see signature lines on/., please ignore mine - just this once. I don't have enough time to proofread this long post to ensure that it is up to my normal editorial standards.)
You saw calls for a military coup from right-wing celebrities? Or calls for assassination from the right-wing press? Right-wing mayors and police chiefs giving right-wing rioters "room to destroy"?
Swap right for left, and that was Wednesday, not collected incidents across 8 years.
If you think that "alt right" means "far right", you have no idea what kind of shitstorm the left is busily trying to summon by calling for assassination, coup, and terror.
Spousal privilege seems like a very silly thing now that we've thrown out ~2000 years of tradition and jurisprudence on the matter. Up until very recently, marriage was understood to merge the husband and wife into a single person. Spousal privilege is simply the right against self incrimination for a (legal) person with two bodies.
Personally, I find the use of data collected by an implanted medical device for prosecution to be abhorrent, and I will be letting my state and federal representatives know how I feel the next time I see them.
My words: I have no problem saying this directly: I voted for him because I wanted him to do the things he is doing.
Your pretzel: Wait you *wanted* to get fucked over while he enriches his billionaire friends?
Does that really strike you as "responding to what I wrote"? Am I really the one flinging poo here?
It appears that people exercising their democratic rights has really, *really* upset you.
If the behavior seen below is your idea of "right to protest", "freedom of speech" and "democratic rights", then yes, it has upset the me a great deal.
Derp, it doesn't copy the list, it references it. You do know the difference, right? This used to be a hangout for techies, including programmers. I do understand that pointers is what separates the programmers from the chaff, but give it a try.
The order says (paraphrased): "we are going to prevent entry from the countries on this handy list that Obama left us". Which is exactly what I said. And that is also exactly what the author of the linked article says.
So, what exactly is being debunked here, other than your implied claims to English literacy?
Ok kids, if you want to see how a peabrain concedes that he has no argument, scroll up and read serviscope's post a couple of times until you become familiar with the signs. The very short version is a lot of huffing and puffing, and absolutely no substance.
First, he starts with "Nuh uh", then he twists my words into a pretzel, then he continues to insist on something that everyone can plainly see is false. Then it gets really good: he links to a blogger force-fitting "facts", some real and some false, through a set of vague checkboxes, none of which have anything to do with actual fascism, and most of which could be fit to just about anyone famous.
And then, Trump is literally Hitler why? Because he is directing the publication of crimes weekly. WEEKLY, the bastard! I mean that is straight out of Mein Kampf. Everyone knows that free countries publish their crime stats quarterly.
And to top it off, he repeats his denial of the obvious and apparent fascism that we all watched on TV and youtube, because that was "other things that other people did". (See notes on fascism below)
His conclusion is that no rational being can disagree with him. Now, that just seems like a typical dehumanizing tactic - it is a lot easier to punch a guy on the street if he isn't human, or if you have defined him as evil.
Scott Adams has something to say about this topic too. I think it is well worth the read.
-----
Apparently to a peabrain, fascism is something that one man does, and not a political movement. After all, the big problem in Italy was Benito himself, and not the hordes of violent thugs, or "Fascist Party" that chose him as their leader.
If any reader has any doubt about what we are seeing in this country these days, please go look up fascism in your favorite encyclopedia and compare notes. Here is one at random: "Fascists view World War I as having made liberal democracy obsolete". Skipping the chronology, who considers democracy obsolete? In other words, who has been rioting and calling to throw out an election they didn't win?
Give me a quote. I'm not reading all of the comments there any more than I would read here on -1. Of the ones I did read, it is mostly people pretending that he said things that he did not say - and they vanish without a trace when the author calls them out.
It is neither bad, nor illegal. I have no problem saying this directly: I voted for him because I wanted him to do the things he is doing. I'm not blaming you for what he is doing, I'm laughing at you while you scramble to keep up with a guy that you think is an idiot.
And no, a trap does not imply deception. Have you never played chess? There is no deception in chess, but there are lots and lots of traps.
So, what is your proof that Trump is fascist? I've given you examples of actual, real fascism in America and invited you to contrast that with what you call fascism. What have you got?
If by "deceive the American people" you mean "keep the campaign promise he had been making for 18 months", then you might have a point. But of course, that makes no sense, at least not in English.
It is a trap in that he used a list made up by Obama, one that did not include several majority-Muslim countries that have actually been implicated in terrorist attacks. And now, people like you are raising hell about that, and effectively demanding that he extend this policy by adding them to the list.
He told you exactly what he was going to do, and then he did it. And you lot didn't have the good sense to think before you REEEEd, so now tens of millions of his supporters are pointing at you and laughing at your self-inflicted tears.
Now take responsibility for the fascist you voted for, you coward.
Nah, I voted for Trump. If you think he is the fascist, then you weren't watching the news. Was it Republicans that were attacking Democrats and shutting down her rallies? Did we watch videos of Democrats getting pelted with rocks and eggs? Chased down by packs of ferals and beaten? Sucker punched on the street?
When Fascism comes to America, it will be called anti-Fascism
Why do you embarrass yourself? Everyone with eyes knows that I didn't say that. Have you ever considered a career in journalism? They are eager to hire dishonest little pricks like you.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you trying to argue that Twitter doesn't need to participate in a homosexual "wedding" if they don't want to?
It doesn't matter who the CEO is. He's not the one killing Twitter. SJW convergence is the cancer eating it from the inside, and it needs to be cut out promptly to save the patient.
1) Print up flyers for a huge social justice meeting.
2) Fire everyone that shows up.
3) Undo everything that any of those people initiated.
These two are unlikely to get much love here:
http://issuesetc.org/
http://www.thesurvivalpodcast....
Also:
http://podcastone.com/the-milo...
I stand by my assessment. This usage is wrong.
Like it or not, right or wrong, people judge you by how you write and speak (and look). If you have good ideas and want them to be heard, the very last thing you should do is hinder that effort by allowing yourself to sound (or look) like an uneducated moron.
On the other hand, Soros doesn't fund organizations that organize and encourage people to drink and drive, so your DUI isn't feeding a RICO case.
No matter how many people use literally to mean figuratively, no matter how many dictionaries take note of the inverse usage, it is still wrong, and anyone trying to avoid looking like a moron would be wise to steer clear of incorrect uses. Ditto "begging the question".
Shall we see what Black's has to say on the matter?
Gosh, that sounds an awful lot like Black's is on the same page as whoever wrote 8 USC 1408, and neither of them would not recognize the definition that you just pulled out of your ass. Have these "green card holders" renounced their other citizenship by some open and distinct act? Have they sworn an oath of fidelity and obedience to the United States?
No, of course not. The only people who are nationals by 8 USC 1101.a.22.B are the descendants of other nationals still living in overseas holdings. The only people who become US nationals after birth become Citizens at the same time.
Not even close dude.
https://www.infogalactic.com/i...
Hmm. Let me think for a second. Oh, here it is:
Marx wanted to end history - he wanted to end differences between people so that there would be no conflict. To that end, he devised an economic system that would grind people down to a uniform miserable paste. Naturally the people who ran with it wanted to be the grinders, and not the paste.
After the Russian revolution set the example, they expected the west to follow along. We didn't. A group calling itself the Frankfurt School got together to figure out why the west didn't jump in, and what they could do about it. They identified our cultural institutions as our defense against Marxism and started working on ways to weaken us. Gramsci is notable here. Search ESR's blog for "Gramscian damage".
If you look at the current left in America, you will see that the one and only one unifying factor among the factions is a desire to destroy western traditions and institutions. What else do homosexuals and femenists have in common with Islamists who kill homosexuals and mutilate women? Why else would BLM unite with pro-immigration activists to invite in millions of central Americans who hate blacks?
The left in America is chasing after Marxist objectives in order to bring about a Marxist endpoint. Now that they are emboldened, they are even using the same violent Marxist street tactics from 100 years ago. The only difference is the strategy - today the institutions are targeted for destruction as an intermediate goal, instead of the economy.
So, yeah, I'm going to keep calling them Marxists.
Globalism just isn't a valid axis in America. Sanders campaigned as an anti-Globalist Marxist, and almost all of the Republicans candidates were pro-Globalism. In the long run, that distinction may grow to become the most important and the spectrum the parties align on, but it is not today.
When institutions stop doing what they were created for, they need to go away. The rarely do so willingly, so sometimes we need to break out the torches. I'll take your word for it that the current unions were created to fight against globalism, but they certainly are not doing so today.
Nice try. 2/10 - you are in the top 10% of commies.
A political revolt (you did notice the political revolt, right?) is not a military coup. Thinking that Obama might try to institute martial law is also not calling for a military coup. You do remember the lefties begging Obama to launch his own coup, right? There were three peaks there - right after the election, right before the electoral colleges certified their votes, and right before the inauguration.
Everything else is either off topic, gibberish, or both. If you want, take a moment or two to collect your thoughts and try again.
If you require perfect opsec all the time, you are doomed eventually.
Also, who the hell does this? The only sane way to use TOR for something dangerous is on a machine that has never and will never be connected to the internet directly or through NAT. And that computer's only network jack should be plugged into a disposable router running a bootable live system that does all-TOR all-day.
In other words, even if the client computer is trying to turn you in, which it is, it shouldn't know anything other than the reserved/private IP that your router gives it and the IP or onion address your browser is visiting.
No one believes that was a threat. And I do mean no one, not the Secret Service, not Hilary, not even you.
The alt-right, at its broadest measure, is everyone who is on the right and tired of losing like gentlemen. Basically, a rejection of the country club/establishment faction of the GOP that has led us from loss to pyrrhic victory to loss. They also notice that "conservatism" is a failed ideology, since it hasn't conserved anything. The tea party movement is, by this reckoning, an early alt-right movement.
And before you say it, no, I don't care who said what in 2010, and no, I don't care how the media has been trying to spin it. This includes a very broad range of people, including some people who consider themselves white nationalist, but also a lot more who think that white nationalism is a racist ideology they would never in a billion years have anything to do with. Oh, and not all of them are white. Even some of the white nationalists aren't white. Deal with it.
In America, the left-right axis runs from Marxism on the left to Realism (anti-Marxism) on the right. We don't get too picky about what name the Marxism is going by today. Similarly, we don't care that much about why someone opposes Marxism. The different groups on each side tend to overlap a lot more than they do with any group on the other side.
Since Europe is thoroughly Marxist, your axis is mostly between globalism and tradition. Our Marxists support globalism because it advances Marxism - which would make no sense in Europe because in Europe, even the monarchists are Marxists. Yes, I know that I'm speaking in unfairly broad strokes here. It is only intended to be approximately accurate.
In America, many on the right, whether "conservative" or alt-, see that the country is approaching a tipping point. The Hart-Cellar Act is bearing demographic fruit, the schools and media are engines of Marxist propaganda almost to the exclusion of education and information, and the left had already begun their endzone dance.
Whatever is important to someone on the right, whether it is their religion, their race, their culture or the Constitution, it has been increasingly apparent that the options to preserve it have been dwindling swiftly. We do still have close to three hundred million guns, and like 90% of the combat training and experience, so the violent option is always there. Overwhelmingly, we don't want that. In fact, we are trying to avoid that so badly that we were willing to vote for a brash New York liberal and recovering Democrat on his third marriage.
If there is any possible definition of "far right" in America, it is the two very small minorities that think that the second civil war (currently ongoing) moving from cold to hot is either a good thing, or something that can't be avoided.
Every day that the news shows violent left-wing mobs destroying cities and attacking people merely for disagreeing with them, both of those minorities grow. Every time media figures pretend to be unbiased - and remain employed - while they call for assassination or military coup, those minorities grow. If, God forbid, someone were able to kill Trump, millions of people who played fair and won honestly will take it as a signal that the left will not allow a peaceful revolution, and things will get very ugly, very fast.
The spoiled kids in the streets cheering on the violence today have no idea how poorly they would fare if that ever happens. An unfinished Gender Studies degree usually means that a person thinks that food comes from the grocery store and might even suffer from PTSD ever since that one time they drove past a gun store.
(If you still see signature lines on /., please ignore mine - just this once. I don't have enough time to proofread this long post to ensure that it is up to my normal editorial standards.)
You saw calls for a military coup from right-wing celebrities? Or calls for assassination from the right-wing press? Right-wing mayors and police chiefs giving right-wing rioters "room to destroy"?
Swap right for left, and that was Wednesday, not collected incidents across 8 years.
If you think that "alt right" means "far right", you have no idea what kind of shitstorm the left is busily trying to summon by calling for assassination, coup, and terror.
Spousal privilege seems like a very silly thing now that we've thrown out ~2000 years of tradition and jurisprudence on the matter. Up until very recently, marriage was understood to merge the husband and wife into a single person. Spousal privilege is simply the right against self incrimination for a (legal) person with two bodies.
Personally, I find the use of data collected by an implanted medical device for prosecution to be abhorrent, and I will be letting my state and federal representatives know how I feel the next time I see them.
My words: I have no problem saying this directly: I voted for him because I wanted him to do the things he is doing.
Your pretzel: Wait you *wanted* to get fucked over while he enriches his billionaire friends?
Does that really strike you as "responding to what I wrote"? Am I really the one flinging poo here?
If the behavior seen below is your idea of "right to protest", "freedom of speech" and "democratic rights", then yes, it has upset the me a great deal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
How much more do you want? Do you want to see links to people encouraging this violence too?
Derp, it doesn't copy the list, it references it. You do know the difference, right? This used to be a hangout for techies, including programmers. I do understand that pointers is what separates the programmers from the chaff, but give it a try.
The order says (paraphrased): "we are going to prevent entry from the countries on this handy list that Obama left us". Which is exactly what I said. And that is also exactly what the author of the linked article says.
So, what exactly is being debunked here, other than your implied claims to English literacy?
Ok kids, if you want to see how a peabrain concedes that he has no argument, scroll up and read serviscope's post a couple of times until you become familiar with the signs. The very short version is a lot of huffing and puffing, and absolutely no substance.
First, he starts with "Nuh uh", then he twists my words into a pretzel, then he continues to insist on something that everyone can plainly see is false. Then it gets really good: he links to a blogger force-fitting "facts", some real and some false, through a set of vague checkboxes, none of which have anything to do with actual fascism, and most of which could be fit to just about anyone famous.
And then, Trump is literally Hitler why? Because he is directing the publication of crimes weekly. WEEKLY, the bastard! I mean that is straight out of Mein Kampf. Everyone knows that free countries publish their crime stats quarterly.
And to top it off, he repeats his denial of the obvious and apparent fascism that we all watched on TV and youtube, because that was "other things that other people did". (See notes on fascism below)
His conclusion is that no rational being can disagree with him. Now, that just seems like a typical dehumanizing tactic - it is a lot easier to punch a guy on the street if he isn't human, or if you have defined him as evil.
Scott Adams has something to say about this topic too. I think it is well worth the read.
-----
Apparently to a peabrain, fascism is something that one man does, and not a political movement. After all, the big problem in Italy was Benito himself, and not the hordes of violent thugs, or "Fascist Party" that chose him as their leader.
If any reader has any doubt about what we are seeing in this country these days, please go look up fascism in your favorite encyclopedia and compare notes. Here is one at random: "Fascists view World War I as having made liberal democracy obsolete". Skipping the chronology, who considers democracy obsolete? In other words, who has been rioting and calling to throw out an election they didn't win?
Give me a quote. I'm not reading all of the comments there any more than I would read here on -1. Of the ones I did read, it is mostly people pretending that he said things that he did not say - and they vanish without a trace when the author calls them out.
It is neither bad, nor illegal. I have no problem saying this directly: I voted for him because I wanted him to do the things he is doing. I'm not blaming you for what he is doing, I'm laughing at you while you scramble to keep up with a guy that you think is an idiot.
And no, a trap does not imply deception. Have you never played chess? There is no deception in chess, but there are lots and lots of traps.
So, what is your proof that Trump is fascist? I've given you examples of actual, real fascism in America and invited you to contrast that with what you call fascism. What have you got?
No, the real irony here is that Trump didn't even make the list. Obama left it for him.
https://sethfrantzman.com/2017/01/28/obamas-administration-made-the-muslim-ban-possible-and-the-media-wont-tell-you/
So, if you believe that Trump excluded countries that he has business dealings with, you've been watching fake news.
If by "deceive the American people" you mean "keep the campaign promise he had been making for 18 months", then you might have a point. But of course, that makes no sense, at least not in English.
It is a trap in that he used a list made up by Obama, one that did not include several majority-Muslim countries that have actually been implicated in terrorist attacks. And now, people like you are raising hell about that, and effectively demanding that he extend this policy by adding them to the list.
He told you exactly what he was going to do, and then he did it. And you lot didn't have the good sense to think before you REEEEd, so now tens of millions of his supporters are pointing at you and laughing at your self-inflicted tears.
Nah, I voted for Trump. If you think he is the fascist, then you weren't watching the news. Was it Republicans that were attacking Democrats and shutting down her rallies? Did we watch videos of Democrats getting pelted with rocks and eggs? Chased down by packs of ferals and beaten? Sucker punched on the street?
- unknown, but chillingly accurate
Why do you embarrass yourself? Everyone with eyes knows that I didn't say that. Have you ever considered a career in journalism? They are eager to hire dishonest little pricks like you.