| US Midterms.. 22:27 - Nov 5 with 26649 views | omarjack |
Trump already promised violence if the GOP loses the house majority or the senate.
Also, It doesn't look like he'll be willing to step down in 2020 if he loses. His cult will flood the streets and do f*ck knows what.
That's what happens when people unite over a person rather than a country's interest in a democracy. They'd do anything to keep him in charge. Even defiling the constitution. That's how dictatorships are born. And that's how civil wars start.
I honestly don't think Trump will simply concede his "throne" to the Democrats. What would his supporters do? How will they find another person to worship like that?
Let's just say Trump serves 2 terms and his rule expires at 2024. Then what? No way in hell the GOP will just move on from this. They'll want him as president for life like the Kim family in North Korea. A 2nd civil war is on the way, which will affect the whole world which should obviously concern all of us. Dangerous, dangerous times. [Post edited 5 Nov 2018 22:28]
|  |
| |  |
| US Midterms.. on 12:01 - Nov 8 with 1854 views | Drizzy |
| US Midterms.. on 11:08 - Nov 8 by Mo_Wives |
No, Drizz, not every position a libertarian holds is a libertarian position...but over all their positions are mostly libertarian. Like a right wing person may have a view or two that is left wing.
Now listen up, dunce.
You are free to own a gun...you are not free to use that gun to hurt people or steal their property. The state is allowing you the freedom of gun ownership but protecting other peoples property rights at the same time. Do you understand?
Libertarians believe the state is there to protect your property RIGHTS. Not to protect your property. To prosecute anyone who infringes on those rights. They don't have to post someone outside your house to keep you safe.
Now run away again, you big dosser.  |
Yep. Still no explanation for the massive contradiction in your posts though. Nor does it explain how gun control is an authoritarian position. Like most "libertarians" your ideology succumbs to scientific evidence. Gun control is an evidence-based policy designed to protect people's freedom to, you know, live without getting shot.
I would ask where you would draw the line of state intervention, Mo, but you couldn't give a coherent response. I do think it's telling that people who are "mostly libertarian" have little to no idea of the vast amounts of regulatory framework, imposed by the state of course, that protect the "rights" you so valiantly defend.
That's all I have to say, Mo. I'm sure there'll be a customary attempt to deflect with some strange form of condescension and maybe a meme of sorts. I'll happily observe you tie yourself in knots trying to defend an illogical position. |  |
| |
| US Midterms.. on 12:02 - Nov 8 with 1854 views | Mo_Wives |
| US Midterms.. on 11:56 - Nov 8 by Ace_Jack |
I thought you might find it funny... |
Oh, sorry, Ace, I had my fists up there  
Garry Johnson is an ass...but Larry Elder is one of my heroes |  |
| |
| US Midterms.. on 12:03 - Nov 8 with 1854 views | omarjack |
| US Midterms.. on 11:37 - Nov 8 by Mo_Wives |
You're the bigot, Omar, you believe that 'non inclusive' ideas, which you don't agree with, should not be tolerated and the state should prosecute those people..
bigot
/ˈbɪɡət/
noun
noun: bigot; plural noun: bigots
a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions.
And me and MLK want all people to have the same rules regardless of their race. While you and the people who wrote the Jim Crowe laws want different rules for different races...but me and MLK are the racists? OK, Champ.  |
I don't want different laws for different people. I want true equality in society. Equal chances, equal opportunities, and equal protection.
But in the real world we live in, bad people exist from all wakes of life, and I'm not saying "I don't like to bake gay wedding cakes" bad. I'm saying "I'm gonna shoot the gay wedding" bad..and I don't mean photography.
Sometimes, hate crime laws help protect people who might be more vulnerable. Same goes for violence against "mainstream people" obviously, if an Islamist beat up a guy (for ideological reason and not a parking space argument) they'd deserve to be charged with hate crime, which is of course a harsher sentence than an average fight in the spur of the moment. Just an example.
Do I advocate for hate speech laws? Sometimes, not because I'm too @rsed about what some people think. But mostly it's because hate speech can very much fuel human life abuses (from all sides, I'm not only singling out the right wing)..words matter, And propaganda can turn lethal. To you that's ok because maybe you're rarely on the wrong end of the abuse. But not all of us live in the same circumstances as you.
I don't think people should be arrested for white supremacy, being ultra zealous religiously (including Salafist scummy imams) or being a black panther separatists etc..Did I ever claim that?
The recent effigy burning of Greenfell tower filled me with rage and disgust. And I think people were arrested for it? And I don't think they should be arrested despite being abhorrent human beings.
All I think is that, people who encourage actual violence against any collective group should be held accountable.
I'm certainly not a bigot, I never hold people responsible for evil things in association or collectively. I have friends, relatives from all wakes of life (cliche I know but it's true). | |
| |
| US Midterms.. on 12:42 - Nov 8 with 1831 views | londonlisa2001 |
| US Midterms.. on 05:46 - Nov 8 by Mo_Wives |
Let's get the racial bit out of the way first. You have spoke up in favour of the work place representing the racial make up of the country. You've said things like there are only 12% minorities in X workplace and we have 14% in the country. So you want a situation where companies are only allowed to employ 3% black people at anytime...let's call it 'Lisa's Law' aka the 3% law.
I'm not in favour of the 3% law it sounds pretty racists to me. I want business to be free to hire anyone they want regardless of skin colour.
And no, Lisa, libtards like you always want to be generous with other people white privilege. You want a kid who needs a £10 per hour job (which you dismiss as insignificant) to lose out because he's privileged while you keep your highly paid job. What have you done to give up your white privilege, Lisa?
And in our society we have a welfare state for people who are in difficult positions. We don't tie peoples legs together we say "sit on this cart and the rest of us will pull you around the track while we race". So if you want to do this historical justice nonsense let's get black people to pay back any welfare they've had and their ancestors have had from this society that they haven't benefited from and do it properly. Let's have an accounting. Let's say this is what you're owed. This is what you'll get. Agreed? yes? and after that you can shut the f*ck up.
This nonsense creates a state that needs to micromanage society in such detail that it becomes tyrannical. Read history.
Right, on to the next nonsense...
I know that's why you believe it's OK to attack them. Your movement is a fascist movement. You need to justify your violence against your opposition so you came up with that nonsense.
Someone not being violent is not someone being violent, Lisa. (Can I get my friend DJack to pay attention here. See what they do DJ...twist words to mean different things. Now not being violent is being violent)
If a right wing loon believes that Islam is a violent ideology then is it ok to hit someone carrying a Quran? Because reading a Quran is an act of violence. And yes, like Muslims, not all white supremacists are violent or in favour of violence.
So this right wing loon has taken your argument and walked into a mosque and shot peaceful people in self defence...because their beliefs were an act of aggression.
The only thing different between you and that right wing loon, Lisa, is that he actually used violence. But since you want to blur the line between violence and non violence then you are no different from him.
And, yes, I see nothing wrong with someone holding white supremacy views even though I don't agree with them. I don't need those views to be beaten out of them. I can tolerate people holding views I don't agree with because, unlike you, I am not a bigot...
bigot
/ˈbɪɡət/
noun
noun: bigot; plural noun: bigots
a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions.
And I am very proud of this.
Wake up, ffs. Someone get the smelling salts for Lisa. [Post edited 8 Nov 2018 7:32]
|
Stating I hold views I don’t hold and giving them a name doesn’t mean I hold those views Mo,
Again, I don’t believe in positive discrimination. I said that earlier, I’ve said it before, I said it in the thread about the training place (not job) you are referring to with the £10 an hour bursary.
What part of ‘I don’t believe in positive disctimination’ are you struggling with? |  | | |
| US Midterms.. on 13:10 - Nov 8 with 1826 views | WarwickHunt |
| US Midterms.. on 12:42 - Nov 8 by londonlisa2001 |
Stating I hold views I don’t hold and giving them a name doesn’t mean I hold those views Mo,
Again, I don’t believe in positive discrimination. I said that earlier, I’ve said it before, I said it in the thread about the training place (not job) you are referring to with the £10 an hour bursary.
What part of ‘I don’t believe in positive disctimination’ are you struggling with? |
I'm guessing it's the "disctimination" bit, Lis. |  | | |
| US Midterms.. on 13:25 - Nov 8 with 1812 views | Mo_Wives |
| US Midterms.. on 12:01 - Nov 8 by Drizzy |
Yep. Still no explanation for the massive contradiction in your posts though. Nor does it explain how gun control is an authoritarian position. Like most "libertarians" your ideology succumbs to scientific evidence. Gun control is an evidence-based policy designed to protect people's freedom to, you know, live without getting shot.
I would ask where you would draw the line of state intervention, Mo, but you couldn't give a coherent response. I do think it's telling that people who are "mostly libertarian" have little to no idea of the vast amounts of regulatory framework, imposed by the state of course, that protect the "rights" you so valiantly defend.
That's all I have to say, Mo. I'm sure there'll be a customary attempt to deflect with some strange form of condescension and maybe a meme of sorts. I'll happily observe you tie yourself in knots trying to defend an illogical position. |
The reason you think I'm contradicting myself is because you don't understand what I'm saying.
I laid out a list of choices to show Omar that one choice is for more freedom and one for less freedom. If you put the question should the government stop people killing each other then the choice of freedom would be: no, people are free to kill. At that point, as I said, you would be an anarchist choosing to have no government. Anarchists are pure libertarians you could say. So when Omar asked about rape killing etc. I pointed out that a libertarian government would protect peoples property rights. Having a government at all is not a libertarian/freedom choice. But libertarian groups (apart from anarchists) realise that you do need some laws. You can't always chose freedom.
So they say you can own guns but you can't kill people with them.
I would have been contradicting myself if I was saying that I always choose the libertarian option but I also chose for the state to protect people...that's not what I was saying.
My post to Omar was not saying these are my positions or these are correct positions. I was saying this position is the libertarian choice while this the authoritarian choice.
I believe you have said that you're against drug laws...that is a libertarian position.
If you believe the state should enforce drug laws...that is the authoritarian position
And now you are saying that is all you have to say so that you can run away. That my friend is a cowardly position. Off you run, Newp | |
| |
| US Midterms.. on 13:34 - Nov 8 with 1806 views | Mo_Wives |
| US Midterms.. on 12:03 - Nov 8 by omarjack |
I don't want different laws for different people. I want true equality in society. Equal chances, equal opportunities, and equal protection.
But in the real world we live in, bad people exist from all wakes of life, and I'm not saying "I don't like to bake gay wedding cakes" bad. I'm saying "I'm gonna shoot the gay wedding" bad..and I don't mean photography.
Sometimes, hate crime laws help protect people who might be more vulnerable. Same goes for violence against "mainstream people" obviously, if an Islamist beat up a guy (for ideological reason and not a parking space argument) they'd deserve to be charged with hate crime, which is of course a harsher sentence than an average fight in the spur of the moment. Just an example.
Do I advocate for hate speech laws? Sometimes, not because I'm too @rsed about what some people think. But mostly it's because hate speech can very much fuel human life abuses (from all sides, I'm not only singling out the right wing)..words matter, And propaganda can turn lethal. To you that's ok because maybe you're rarely on the wrong end of the abuse. But not all of us live in the same circumstances as you.
I don't think people should be arrested for white supremacy, being ultra zealous religiously (including Salafist scummy imams) or being a black panther separatists etc..Did I ever claim that?
The recent effigy burning of Greenfell tower filled me with rage and disgust. And I think people were arrested for it? And I don't think they should be arrested despite being abhorrent human beings.
All I think is that, people who encourage actual violence against any collective group should be held accountable.
I'm certainly not a bigot, I never hold people responsible for evil things in association or collectively. I have friends, relatives from all wakes of life (cliche I know but it's true). |
The reason people are against speech laws is not because they don't care but history has shown us that a government with speech laws is a greater danger to people.
Encouraging violence is not covered by free speech.
If words matter because they can lead to hate crimes then maybe people who bang on about white people being privileged and the ones who've committed crimes on minorities all through history should be arrested as well. Their rhetoric could lead to violence. Now, I don't want that...they're free to say what they want. [Post edited 8 Nov 2018 13:40]
| |
| |
| US Midterms.. on 13:38 - Nov 8 with 1803 views | Mo_Wives |
| US Midterms.. on 12:42 - Nov 8 by londonlisa2001 |
Stating I hold views I don’t hold and giving them a name doesn’t mean I hold those views Mo,
Again, I don’t believe in positive discrimination. I said that earlier, I’ve said it before, I said it in the thread about the training place (not job) you are referring to with the £10 an hour bursary.
What part of ‘I don’t believe in positive disctimination’ are you struggling with? |
What Warwick said. That's what I'm struggling with. You put forward arguments for TRAINING PLACES that discriminate against people due to their race and then you say you're against discrimination. That's what I'm struggling with. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| US Midterms.. on 13:42 - Nov 8 with 1801 views | Mo_Wives |
| US Midterms.. on 12:03 - Nov 8 by omarjack |
I don't want different laws for different people. I want true equality in society. Equal chances, equal opportunities, and equal protection.
But in the real world we live in, bad people exist from all wakes of life, and I'm not saying "I don't like to bake gay wedding cakes" bad. I'm saying "I'm gonna shoot the gay wedding" bad..and I don't mean photography.
Sometimes, hate crime laws help protect people who might be more vulnerable. Same goes for violence against "mainstream people" obviously, if an Islamist beat up a guy (for ideological reason and not a parking space argument) they'd deserve to be charged with hate crime, which is of course a harsher sentence than an average fight in the spur of the moment. Just an example.
Do I advocate for hate speech laws? Sometimes, not because I'm too @rsed about what some people think. But mostly it's because hate speech can very much fuel human life abuses (from all sides, I'm not only singling out the right wing)..words matter, And propaganda can turn lethal. To you that's ok because maybe you're rarely on the wrong end of the abuse. But not all of us live in the same circumstances as you.
I don't think people should be arrested for white supremacy, being ultra zealous religiously (including Salafist scummy imams) or being a black panther separatists etc..Did I ever claim that?
The recent effigy burning of Greenfell tower filled me with rage and disgust. And I think people were arrested for it? And I don't think they should be arrested despite being abhorrent human beings.
All I think is that, people who encourage actual violence against any collective group should be held accountable.
I'm certainly not a bigot, I never hold people responsible for evil things in association or collectively. I have friends, relatives from all wakes of life (cliche I know but it's true). |
Oi, tosspot, what about this Trump promising violence thing...are you going to answer that? | |
| |
| US Midterms.. on 13:47 - Nov 8 with 1793 views | Ebo |
| US Midterms.. on 15:29 - Nov 7 by Darran |
Shocking post again. |
He should be banned for that. That's very personal abuse against a female and should not be tolerated. |  |
| |
| US Midterms.. on 13:47 - Nov 8 with 1795 views | WarwickHunt |
| US Midterms.. on 13:38 - Nov 8 by Mo_Wives |
What Warwick said. That's what I'm struggling with. You put forward arguments for TRAINING PLACES that discriminate against people due to their race and then you say you're against discrimination. That's what I'm struggling with. |
I'm with Glenn on this - "I never said them things I said". | | | |
| US Midterms.. on 13:48 - Nov 8 with 1787 views | Ebo |
| US Midterms.. on 13:48 - Nov 7 by Mo_Wives |
These are Antifa members. The black bloc is a tactic they use. These people are not actually against fascism...they are fascists.
I'm not saying these people are anti fascists. They're a group that calls themselves Antifa. If I rape women but call myself Anti-Ra (because I pretend to be against rape) it doesn't mean I'm against rape. Same thing. A trick that works on the stupid.
Just to make sure, Ebs, you're not 'Antifa' as in the black bloc? what you mean is you're against fascism which would mean you are anti fascist, rather than 'Antifa' |
Again labels. Antifa has been around since the second world war. | |
| |
| US Midterms.. on 13:50 - Nov 8 with 1788 views | Mo_Wives |
| US Midterms.. on 12:42 - Nov 8 by londonlisa2001 |
Stating I hold views I don’t hold and giving them a name doesn’t mean I hold those views Mo,
Again, I don’t believe in positive discrimination. I said that earlier, I’ve said it before, I said it in the thread about the training place (not job) you are referring to with the £10 an hour bursary.
What part of ‘I don’t believe in positive disctimination’ are you struggling with? |
"Stating I hold views I don’t hold and giving them a name doesn’t mean I hold those views Mo,"
So you don't believe in 'Lisa's law'? May have to find a new name.
But I thought you wanted to fix under representation? If black people are 10% of a company then someone else is under represented. Or is this a thing that only matters when you can f*ck white people. I'm shocked...no one saw that coming. | |
| |
| US Midterms.. on 13:51 - Nov 8 with 1787 views | omarjack |
| US Midterms.. on 13:42 - Nov 8 by Mo_Wives |
Oi, tosspot, what about this Trump promising violence thing...are you going to answer that? |
Answer what? He said there will be violence. Some might interpret it as the Democrats will be the ones to start the violence.
Everything else I said is futuristic and didn't happen yet. But I think the 2020 election will be a bloodbath if Trump loses. I hope I'm just paranoid because whatever happens in the US will reflect on all of us worldwide.
Either ways nothing will happen any time soon that the election ended up in a relative stalemate. [Post edited 8 Nov 2018 13:53]
| |
| |
| US Midterms.. on 13:55 - Nov 8 with 1779 views | Mo_Wives |
| US Midterms.. on 13:48 - Nov 8 by Ebo |
Again labels. Antifa has been around since the second world war. |
Yes, I know, what's your point?
Those idiots in the videos call themselves 'Antifa'. You can go and look at their twitter accounts or badges, They use a tactic known as the black bloc.
When I post a video of Antifa I'm not suggesting that it's old fellas from WW2 under those masks...although, they do have the build of, and fight like. frail old aged pensioners. [Post edited 8 Nov 2018 14:04]
| |
| |
| US Midterms.. on 13:57 - Nov 8 with 1778 views | Mo_Wives |
| US Midterms.. on 13:47 - Nov 8 by WarwickHunt |
I'm with Glenn on this - "I never said them things I said". |
I'd like to quote my favourite philosopher...
"Words matter" (Omar 2018) | |
| |
| US Midterms.. on 14:01 - Nov 8 with 1774 views | Mo_Wives |
| US Midterms.. on 13:51 - Nov 8 by omarjack |
Answer what? He said there will be violence. Some might interpret it as the Democrats will be the ones to start the violence.
Everything else I said is futuristic and didn't happen yet. But I think the 2020 election will be a bloodbath if Trump loses. I hope I'm just paranoid because whatever happens in the US will reflect on all of us worldwide.
Either ways nothing will happen any time soon that the election ended up in a relative stalemate. [Post edited 8 Nov 2018 13:53]
|
So when you said Trump promised violence if he loses you were referring to Trump saying his opposition will turn to violence.
Nice to know you learned nothing about being truthful from the Brexit Thomas incident. But your lies reflect badly on you, so carry on. | |
| |
| US Midterms.. on 15:21 - Nov 8 with 1741 views | Lohengrin |
I’ve just spent an entirely enjoyable fifteen minutes reading this thread.
Thanks all. |  |
| An idea isn't responsible for those who believe in it. |
| |
| US Midterms.. on 15:25 - Nov 8 with 1731 views | WarwickHunt |
| US Midterms.. on 15:21 - Nov 8 by Lohengrin |
I’ve just spent an entirely enjoyable fifteen minutes reading this thread.
Thanks all. |
Weirdo. | | | |
| US Midterms.. on 16:18 - Nov 8 with 1705 views | londonlisa2001 |
| US Midterms.. on 13:10 - Nov 8 by WarwickHunt |
I'm guessing it's the "disctimination" bit, Lis. |
Lol.
I could claim I was using libertarian spelling but actually I can’t type on an iPad  | | | |
| US Midterms.. on 16:20 - Nov 8 with 1702 views | londonlisa2001 |
| US Midterms.. on 13:38 - Nov 8 by Mo_Wives |
What Warwick said. That's what I'm struggling with. You put forward arguments for TRAINING PLACES that discriminate against people due to their race and then you say you're against discrimination. That's what I'm struggling with. |
Warwick was commenting on my spelling Mo.
And I didn’t put forward arguments for it - I said I disagreed with positive discrimination.
You are imagining positions I simply didn’t take. That’s why you’re struggling. | | | |
| US Midterms.. on 16:22 - Nov 8 with 1698 views | londonlisa2001 |
| US Midterms.. on 13:50 - Nov 8 by Mo_Wives |
"Stating I hold views I don’t hold and giving them a name doesn’t mean I hold those views Mo,"
So you don't believe in 'Lisa's law'? May have to find a new name.
But I thought you wanted to fix under representation? If black people are 10% of a company then someone else is under represented. Or is this a thing that only matters when you can f*ck white people. I'm shocked...no one saw that coming. |
You continue to invent positions I simply don’t hold.
And then argue against them. | | | |
| US Midterms.. on 20:52 - Nov 8 with 1602 views | Mo_Wives |
| US Midterms.. on 16:18 - Nov 8 by londonlisa2001 |
Lol.
I could claim I was using libertarian spelling but actually I can’t type on an iPad |
I shall pick up this placard and hold it above my head... 
What an ass I am. | |
| |
| US Midterms.. on 20:53 - Nov 8 with 1600 views | Mo_Wives |
| US Midterms.. on 16:22 - Nov 8 by londonlisa2001 |
You continue to invent positions I simply don’t hold.
And then argue against them. |
OK. Next time you're arguing for them I'll remind you that you're against them, OK? | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
