• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

White Nationalist Arrested for Alleged Threat Against Ohio Jewish Community Center

Obscurity said:
Which is astounding to me. The LEO's can spend time, or the FBI, reading the meanderings of Islamic terrorists thanks to the patriot act, but they can't be bothered to look at this sort of stuff?

What was the point of the patriot act then? Not that I agree with it, it just makes no sense.
Click to expand...

What percentage of people who discuss violence commit violence?

No one will answer this question.

Telling.

:hm
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
If I understand your position correctly, then you are also of the opinion that there are no more Communists since Marx, Engles, Trotsky, and everyone directly associated with them are now dead.

Your position makes a lot of sense, as long as you know nothing about reality and don't think about it either.
Click to expand...

As usual, you willfully fail to understand. :)

Ironic.
 
3leftsdoo said:
For your input?

Thankyouvurrymuch.
Click to expand...

Oh, you're very welcome. :thumbs:

If you don't have to be thousands of years old to be a real Christian, if you don't have to fly to Rome to be blessed by the Pope himself and instead start a 20 person congregation in the middle of who gives a ****, fly over U.S.A., and be considered a Christian ministry, then why can't a couple dozen yahoos in a trailer park who believe in white power and Jewish and minority subjugation and extermination be considered real Nazis? AmIright? But I don't have to tell a smart guy like you any of this do I? :peace
 
Herkamer63 said:
Well, I see the anti-Semitic sympathizers are out in force. I mean look at the guy that just commented on my post. I call out 2 elected officials ARE anti-Semitic, made anti-Semitic statements, and supporting a terrorist organization that is EXTREMELY anti-Semitic, as well as being anti-Israel, and the sympathizers throw $#!t fits. It's funny, too. The guy making the comment likes an old man wanting all incarcerated criminals to vote and a spineless young man, who bears resemblance to Chicken Little ("WE'RE 10 YEARS TOO LATE, WE HAVE TO FIND HIGHER GROUND"), who doesn't even have a plan of who will and how to pay everyone every month if he were elected. He also likes the 2 women making all these anti-Semitic remarks, and the same 2 women who probably don't mind seeing a few dead Jews in a Jewish community (they may have actually celebrated it). Finally, this guy that was going to shoot up the place was called Little Hitler. Who was Hitler? A Nazi. What's a Nazi? A national socialist. There you go. Not a MAGA guy. Neither were the shooters in El Paso and Dayton. Both were Leftists. This guy was one as well, so case closed.
Click to expand...

An interesting post, rambling, incoherent, bereft of logic, short on facts, long on bigotry - but interesting.

I can imagine someone who thinks only slightly more off center posting claims that (and I acknowledge that I am positing a hypothetical) someone who objected to the Israelis lining up all the Palestinians and machine gunning them into mass graves then burning the bodies and dumping the ashes into the ocean because of the fact that they dumped human waste was being "anti-Semitic". Whether they would also be deriding the person who posted such an objection on the basis that they were some sort of "tree-hugging EnviroNut" because the poster had mentioned the pollution of the oceans I leave to your imagination.
 
3leftsdoo said:
What percentage of people who discuss violence commit violence?

No one will answer this question.

Telling.

:hm
Click to expand...

I can't tell you. My point here is that the FBI can monitor Islamic channels of terrorism but can't be bothered to use the patriot act to monitor normal americans. Don't get me wrong, I am completely, 100% opposed to the patriot act. But LE can't sit here and say they don't have the resources. They infringed on all of our rights to get the resources, they just don't want to use them.
 
3leftsdoo said:
Policemen are now the arbiters of public policy? :(
Click to expand...

True, they are only the armed agents of the arbiters of public policy.

3leftsdoo said:
As a SOCIETY, we should:

A) Honor free speech.
Click to expand...

No problems with that as a general basis of proceeding.

3leftsdoo said:
B) Not punish wordcrime/thoughtcrime/pre-crime.
Click to expand...

And if those are specifically aimed at inciting the commission of actual crimes, what then?

3leftsdoo said:
C) Offer services to the mentally ill/disenfranchised/marginalized/discarded.
Click to expand...

Isn't that some sort of unAmerican "Socialist" talk?

3leftsdoo said:
D) Stop trying to attack the symptoms, but address the underlying illness of our society.
Click to expand...

Very good, now what do you see as the "underlying illness of our society". Please remember that the society of the US is EXACTLY as it is taught to young children, is a completely "classless" (in sociological terms) society, where 100% of the people are treated with complete equality, and is PERFECT because that is the way that the Founding Fathers designed it when they wrote **T*H*E** **C*O*N*S*T*I*T*U*T*I*O*N** (something that no country had ever had previously) and created the world's first republic and that any writings that claim otherwise are akin to left-wing, wacko, socialist, loony, pinko, commie, treason when composing your reply.
 
3leftsdoo said:
As usual, you willfully fail to understand. :)

Ironic.
Click to expand...

No, what is ironic is the use of an image of the person who said "The place of women in the revolution is on their backs." as an icon.
 
Master Debator said:
Oh, you're very welcome. :thumbs:

If you don't have to be thousands of years old to be a real Christian, if you don't have to fly to Rome to be blessed by the Pope himself and instead start a 20 person congregation in the middle of who gives a ****, fly over U.S.A., and be considered a Christian ministry, then why can't a couple dozen yahoos in a trailer park who believe in white power and Jewish and minority subjugation and extermination be considered real Nazis? AmIright? But I don't have to tell a smart guy like you any of this do I? :peace
Click to expand...

Nazis = Nazis

Neo-Nazis = Neo-Nazis

It's so simple.

:)
 
Obscurity said:
I can't tell you. My point here is that the FBI can monitor Islamic channels of terrorism but can't be bothered to use the patriot act to monitor normal americans. Don't get me wrong, I am completely, 100% opposed to the patriot act. But LE can't sit here and say they don't have the resources. They infringed on all of our rights to get the resources, they just don't want to use them.
Click to expand...

Annnnd we're back to agreeing with each other.

:)
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
True, they are only the armed agents of the arbiters of public policy.

No problems with that as a general basis of proceeding.

And if those are specifically aimed at inciting the commission of actual crimes, what then?

Isn't that some sort of unAmerican "Socialist" talk?

Very good, now what do you see as the "underlying illness of our society". Please remember that the society of the US is EXACTLY as it is taught to young children, is a completely "classless" (in sociological terms) society, where 100% of the people are treated with complete equality, and is PERFECT because that is the way that the Founding Fathers designed it when they wrote **T*H*E** **C*O*N*S*T*I*T*U*T*I*O*N** (something that no country had ever had previously) and created the world's first republic and that any writings that claim otherwise are akin to left-wing, wacko, socialist, loony, pinko, commie, treason when composing your reply.
Click to expand...

We have more in common ideologically than we have differences.

But.

The bolded portion?

Dangerously poor reading of what incitement actually is, and what free speech entails.

In other words, par for the course, and our biggest point of fracture.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
No, what is ironic is the use of an image of the person who said "The place of women in the revolution is on their backs." as an icon.
Click to expand...

Lamont said that?

:shock:
 
AProudLefty said:
Still not answering my question.
Click to expand...

Childish; if you want to have anything remotely resembling an adult exchange, please behave accordingly.

TIA
 
3leftsdoo said:
Annnnd we're back to agreeing with each other.

:)
Click to expand...

On most things yes. But when it comes to freedom of speech and your posts regarding who's at fault, we need further discussion. Because you and plenty of others are pointing your finger at the wrong group.
 
Obscurity said:
On most things yes. But when it comes to freedom of speech and your posts regarding who's at fault, we need further discussion. Because you and plenty of others are pointing your finger at the wrong group.
Click to expand...

Well, I blame society.

Seriously.
 
AProudLefty said:
Play a child game, get the same treatment.
Click to expand...

It's sad that you fail to recognize that your own refusal to engage seriously, and consider the crucial questions I asked, has diminished your credibility.

If you wish me to scroll by your comments, I will.

If you wish to have a serious exchange, I'll do that too.

Your choice.
 
3leftsdoo said:
It's sad that you fail to recognize that your own refusal to engage seriously, and consider the crucial questions I asked, has diminished your credibility.

If you wish me to scroll by your comments, I will.

If you wish to have a serious exchange, I'll do that too.

Your choice.
Click to expand...

All I did was asking you if you would consider it a credible threat at that point. You're the one who kept asking what would be an online credible threat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom