• 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!

Washington is a fascist state

It doesn’t look intention at all.

That’s you being a white fascist wanting your comrades to be avenged.

He swerves to avoid this illegal parked van at which point people wearing dark clothes without ANSI certified high visibility apparel do not clear the way of the vehicle

He took an off-ramp to bypass a baracade. You know what an off-ramp is, don't you? That's the thing that you take to get OFF of an interstate, not on. You take an on-ramp to get on. So if he took an off-ramp to get onto the interstate, then there's no doubt about the intentions. He had to go the wrong way to access the interstate and did so in an attempt to gain access to one he knew was blocked off.

lol

But keep defending vehicular homicide. The right does seem to enjoy it, just as the Very Fine People in Charlottesville.
 
So now the police are a good thing?



Protesting on an interstate highway is unsafe but apparently that’s also not a well understood idea among the protesters and their supporters. Btw, whatever happened to your rights end at my nose. What right does anyone have to prevent someone else from going somewhere they’re legally entitled to go?

I never said police weren't necessary.

And I didn't say that the protesters couldn't rightfully be cleared off of the interstate. I merely stated, you can't just run them down because you're mad at them.
 
Don't need to read minds to know someone who uses an off-ramp to get onto the Freeway to avoid barricades was well intent on causing harm. But here you are trying to defend that. Well that's two charges of attempted murder at least.

Hmm... yes you do.

You can’t produce any evidence of your claim.

If he intended a terrorism attack on the insurrectionists he wouldn’t have stopped initially and thus given these fascistic hordes opportunity to get his plates and maybe kill him.
 
It's not self defense if you drive around barricades in order to access a road in order to run people down. That's premeditated murder.

You may support authoritative abuse of force against the exercise of rights, but I don't.

Also, I'm not a democrat, but I'm sure you won't be able to really grasp that concept.

You certainly defend these violent terrorists as if you were a Democrat. Only mentally-deranged Democrats believe the use of force and violating the law can somehow be contrived as "peacefully protesting." Those of us who are not completely insane leftist freaks know that BLM, ANTIFA, and the Democratic Party are terrorist organizations and need to be put down with force. They are dangerous violent criminals. The only protection they are entitled to under the US Constitution is due process of law when government deprives them of their liberty as they get locked away for their criminal acts.
 
Hmm... yes you do.

You can’t produce any evidence of your claim.

Your own article cites that he used the off-ramp.

This guy can sit in a jail with the Charlottesville dude.
 
You certainly defend these violent terrorists as if you were a Democrat. Only mentally-deranged Democrats believe the use of force and violating the law can somehow be contrived as "peacefully protesting." Those of us who are not completely insane leftist freaks know that BLM, ANTIFA, and the Democratic Party are terrorist organizations and need to be put down with force. They are dangerous violent criminals. The only protection they are entitled to under the US Constitution is due process of law when government deprives them of their liberty as they get locked away for their criminal acts.

There's a lot of projection and strawman in this argument.

You can't just run people down because you're pissed at what they're saying or doing. I suppose that's a "radical" concept the authoritarians.
 
Your own article cites that he used the off-ramp.

This guy can sit in a jail with the Charlottesville dude.

Again, his actions are consistent with an accident. He could’ve kept tearing down at 80 mph and the real terrorists wouldn’t have gotten his plate.

He swerved to avoid the van, hits the two people, likely thinks that they were occupants of the van which looked like maybe it was disabled, stops as the law requires, gets swarmed, then takes off after a gunshot like noise is heard.

Not consistent with terrorism
 
Right-wingers are annoying. They don't know a lot of words, but they abuse the few they learn, like 'fascist'. Nancy Pelosi criticized trump, that's fascist!

It is well understand psycholiogal fact that people who are ignorant tend to be more conservative Change is threatening when you cannot think your way through it and you cannot understand different people.

Over the past decade, several studies have shown that people who tend to hold more conservative views score low on measures of intelligence. However, it now appears that while conservatism and intelligence are negatively correlated, the link is not as strong as first thought.
Origins

Much of the previous work in this area was based on a psychological definition of conservatism, rather than a political one. The term “conservative syndrome” was coined to describe a person who attaches particular importance to respect for tradition, humility, devoutness and moderation.

Such a person tends to hold conformist values like obedience, self-discipline and politeness, and emphasises the need for social order coupled with concerns for family and national security.

A conservative person also subscribes to conventional religious beliefs and has a sense of belonging to and pride in a group with which they identify. The same person is likely to be less open to intellectual challenges and will be seen as a responsible “good citizen” at work and in society, while expressing rather harsh views toward those outside their group.

Up to 16% of “conservative syndrome” is reportedly due to low cognitive ability.

Overall, smart people tend to be socially liberal in their outlook. It was also found that countries whose citizens score low on international tests of mathematics achievement tend to be more conservative in their political outlooks and policies.
Politics versus psychology

Political scientists were quick to point out that conservative syndrome belongs to what they refer to as social conservatism.

Many members of conservative political parties, both in the US and in Australia, undoubtedly subscribe to the values captured by the syndrome. But there is also a distinct group of conservative voters who do not feel strongly about such views. These are the people who are sometimes labelled as economic liberals.

Economic liberals’ beliefs are based on the idea that individuals should be free to engage in voluntary transactions with others and to enjoy the fruits of their own labour. The typical leftist socialist position is opposed to such a view.

It was pointed out that economic liberals as a group tend to be better educated than the rest of, say, Republican Party voters and sympathisers in the US. Therefore, the correlation between intelligence and political behaviour may be essentially zero or even slightly positive.

In other words, intelligence is correlated with socially and economically liberal views.
Psychological world atlas

Several recently reported cross-cultural studies show the correlation between social conservatism and intelligence is lower than previously thought.

In that work, psychological scales for the assessment of conservatism syndrome were given to people from 33 countries from around the world.

It was reported there are essentially three “psychological continents” in the world today. Liberal countries are those from (mostly Western) Europe, and Australia and Canada. Conservative countries are those from Southeast and South Asia, Africa and South America.

All other countries – including the US, Russia and those from Confucian Asia – are somewhere in the middle.

Do smart people tend to be more liberal? Yes, but it doesn't mean all conservatives are stupid
 
There's a lot of projection and strawman in this argument.

You can't just run people down because you're pissed at what they're saying or doing. I suppose that's a "radical" concept the authoritarians.

I have absolutely no interest in what they are saying. What they are doing, however, is violating the law and violently attacking people, and I have the right to self-defense. If I see anyone blocking traffic without a police escort, I'm putting my accelerator to the floor and getting my firearm ready for use. I will take out as many terrorist scum as possible, while ensuring my life is protected at all cost.
 
Again, his actions are consistent with an accident. He could’ve kept tearing down at 80 mph and the real terrorists wouldn’t have gotten his plate.

He swerved to avoid the van, hits the two people, likely thinks that they were occupants of the van which looked like maybe it was disabled, stops as the law requires, gets swarmed, then takes off after a gunshot like noise is heard.

Not consistent with terrorism

Accesses the interstate the wrong way, runs over two people, runs off. Consistent with terrorism.
 
I have absolutely no interest in what they are saying. What they are doing, however, is violating the law and violently attacking people, and I have the right to self-defense. If I see anyone blocking traffic without a police escort, I'm putting my accelerator to the floor and getting my firearm ready for use. I will take out as many terrorist scum as possible, while ensuring my life is protected at all cost.

Blocking a road isn't violently attacking anyone. It's an annoyance, and the police can be called to handle it. You're not a cop, you're not the law, you cannot just shoot or run over people because you're inconvenienced.
 
Accesses the interstate the wrong way, runs over two people, runs off. Consistent with terrorism.

I think this is the definitive refutation to Lisa’s BS that liberals are smarter then conservatives
 
Blocking a road isn't violently attacking anyone. It's an annoyance, and the police can be called to handle it. You're not a cop, you're not the law, you cannot just shoot or run over people because you're inconvenienced.

It is when guns are fired over a traffic collision
 
I never said police weren't necessary.

And I didn't say that the protesters couldn't rightfully be cleared off of the interstate. I merely stated, you can't just run them down because you're mad at them.

Right, and I’m going to clearly state that you also cannot block whatever highway you want. Parking in the middle of a freeway isn’t just unsafe for the the protesters it’s unsafe for anyone traveling on it.
 
There's a lot of projection and strawman in this argument.

You can't just run people down because you're pissed at what they're saying or doing. I suppose that's a "radical" concept the authoritarians.


It is not proven he “ran people down”. In fact it is unlikely.

All evidence points to this being a normal traffic collision that almost became a lynching
 
Blocking a road isn't violently attacking anyone. It's an annoyance, and the police can be called to handle it. You're not a cop, you're not the law, you cannot just shoot or run over people because you're inconvenienced.

Intentionally blocking a freeway isn’t an “inconvenience”, it’s dangerous af.
 
Blocking a road isn't violently attacking anyone. It's an annoyance, and the police can be called to handle it. You're not a cop, you're not the law, you cannot just shoot or run over people because you're inconvenienced.

Pulling people from their vehicles and beating them to a pulp after they stop at one of these BLM terrorist road-blocks. Or throwing rocks and other objects at passing vehicles. These are acts of violence and warrant acting in self-defense. I am certainly not going to stop at an illegal road-block by known violent criminals. You can support these terrorists all you like, I expect it from the left, I intend to kill these terrorist scum should they get in my way.
 
Right, and I’m going to clearly state that you also cannot block whatever highway you want. Parking in the middle of a freeway isn’t just unsafe for the the protesters it’s unsafe for anyone traveling on it.

two wrongs do not make a right

If the highway was being blocked blocked by the police and he bypassed the barricade, then drove into people, his wrong is the greater wrong and in no way justified by the wrong done by the people on the freeway
 
It brings me no joy to say this, but the left wing government of Washington is essentially fascist.

They are permitting so called “peaceful” protestors to break the law with impunity then bringing the full resources of the state on anyone who causes harm to their Brownshirt instigators.


Bing

So these scum are setting up barricades and blocking the most vital international trade road in America and when someone using the freeway hits these people then the driver gets charged.

Pure evil.

And this shows why I’m souring on Donald Trump, if I were president I would order federal authorities to arrest these scumbags as they are restraining international trade. It’s also time for civil rights under color of law statutes to be used to criminally indict Jenny Durkan and Jay Inslee and Bob Ferguson. This is basically a state government collaborating with an openly Marxist violent insurrection movement


Your meds are showing....you need something else....to curb those hallucinations....still seeing those dark people flying around inside your house.... huh
 
Right, and I’m going to clearly state that you also cannot block whatever highway you want. Parking in the middle of a freeway isn’t just unsafe for the the protesters it’s unsafe for anyone traveling on it.

You can't. That's why I said the police could remove them from the interstate and safely open it up. You cannot block a highway whenever you want. The police may intervene in such and instance. You maybe not, however, purposefully run over these folk because it pissed you off.

I would hope that reasonable people could agree with this.
 
ooh, another right wing projection projection thread. i'm not a fascist, you're a fascist! i know you are, but what am i?

lol
 
"This animal is very dangerous; when attacked it defends itself."

He was never attacked. This animal is very dangerous, too irrational and emotional at times to be unable to understand right from wrong.
 
Accesses the interstate the wrong way, runs over two people, runs off. Consistent with terrorism.

Obviously you have a very twisted definition of "terrorism." Let me correct it for you:

Under 18 U.S. Code § 2331(5) domestic terrorism is defined as follows:
(5) the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that—
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended—
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping​

Illegally blocking traffic and violently attacking people are "acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State." Furthermore, the stated goal of BLM is "to intimidate or coerce a civilian population" and "to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion."

By federal definition the BLM is a domestic terrorist organization.

Under Public Law 107-40, which is still in effect, we are at war with terrorism. Congress has already authorized the use of force against terrorists.
 
Back
Top Bottom