Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'West Mall' started by Mr. Deez, Feb 8, 2012.
I'm not up to speed on my Twitter personas. Is this a mock persona making fun of SJWs?
I think its a British person, in the mode of @GodfreyElfwick who was banned by Twitter. It may be the same person even. He/she/they got more clever with the account. It's subtle enough to avoid the censor (so far) while still making the same points.
Of course, it is as close to an absolute rule as you can find that liberal censors have no sense of humor
I know at least one poster wrote that he was tired of reading about the dumb things liberals say and do. But if you dont fight this stuff now, these same type of idiots are going to be running your government at all levels before you know it. And then you will be the one being forced to asimil8.
So this one is about some poor slob in in Canada who had this license plate for 2 years before Manitoba revoked it. The plate was retroactively considered to be "hurtful." No matter whether about Star Trek (as it clearly was) or humans).
He sued and was given access to some of the Govt emails which showed no public complaint about his plate was ever filed. Rather they learned of it by monitoring social media.
“This is really, really serious and we are considering serious disciplinary action for those who were involved and contributed to approving a plate that is so obviously inappropriate ....
* * *
The day after MPI staff heard of the plate, Troller was called to return the plate to any MPI bureau. He said he wouldn’t be able to do that until the end of the week. “We can’t wait the week,” Burns wrote later that day. Hocken, he said, “wants the plate off the road immediately.”
‘ASIMIL8’ licence plate is hurtful whether it is about Star Trek or humans, government emails say
I can never un-see that. Thanks a lot!
Do not let these people win political office
If you do, you will live to regret it
Too late. They are in power and calling for taxing the rich to solve the ills of society.
One of many intersectionalist dilemmas
If you endorse a movement or people that would have your head severed if they had their choice, I'm not quite sure there's much hope for you.
I cannot improve on this:
Was on my way to post this... that's just weird. Apparently at NBC New York, even getting ratioed on a tweet is "good publicity."
Having said that... when you read the article it's a little harder to figure out exactly what you SHOULD call it. If a guy shows up at your house armed (doesn't say whether he was brandishing it when he showed up) and you get into an argument that leads to a scuffle whereupon you shoot the guy with his own gun... I dunno, what's the name for that other than "stupid," "braindead," "people with serious anger issues"... aka "Florida Man."
On the other hand... why was he there? The article makes it seem like this was an argument, but a quote at the end indicates he was trying to break in. Great example of a journalist who doesn't know all the facts trying SO HARD to be careful that he just makes the article more confusing than it should be.
Complete deception by calling it an argument. This wasn't an ideological dispute. This was a property owner protecting himself, his family, and his property. Describing any other way is evil.
NBC NY must giggling all over themselves .
Kamala Harris’s Outrageous Assault on the Knights of Columbus
We all know immigrants from Mexico are Catholic. No dissent from the Left. You know why? Because the Left knows those hapless serfs will quietly live in their feudal patronage complex and vote Democrat. This is the absolute proof that the modern day American Liberal is possibly the biggest political hypocrite ever in the face of this type of questioning by Harris. It's the same with the Muslim refugees; they are as homophobic and misogynistic as it gets. But they are political tools in the quest to regain power.
I believe that.
You make a good point about the Dem love and reluctance to admit reality. Muslim/ Islam can not co-exist with our form of government or culture.
It's just so obvious to me. It is very upsetting to see the arrogance of Harris and Feinstein. We have a real problem. They are on a mission and they are untouchable. I can't believe they get away with it so easily.
Say what you want about Trump but the law is on his side concerning immigration. He is doing his job. The sanctuary cities, the videos we have all seen of Democrat politicians attacking illegal immigration in the past, accusations of racism, calls for open borders, refusing the wall and the calls to abolish ICE along with attacks such as this on out of favor Catholics is a clear indication of their ruthless nature in the quest for power.
The obsession with racism conveniently enables the Left to ignore the realities of cultural characteristics and preferences that reality identifies as real. It is not to denigrate; it's to admit what is true. I lived in South Texas long enough to know the culture and I will continue to beat this drum; it is not what the progressive American Liberal wants.
Let's not give serfs a bad wrap. Sure they had to swear fealty to their lord.
But did you know that the lord had to swear benevolent rule to the serf? It was a 2 way agreement. If the lord didn't live up to his end of the oath, the serfs had a right, an obligation, to depose him and find a new leader. If only we had it so good. We are stuck with whoever people vote for regardless of how they govern.
The thoughtful and considerate xenophobe.
Muslims (like other religious groups) can coexist with our form of government and culture. Plenty of them do it every day. The issue is the willingness to embrace American culture and values and elevate them over Islamic culture and values as they're practiced in other nations.
If someone attends mosque and worships as Muslims do but embraces American culture and respects the rights of other religious and non-religious people and the rule of law, a Muslim can be a perfectly good American just like a Christian, Jew, Hindu, or anyone else can be. The problem is when we encourage people not to embrace American culture and values and put emphasis on religious and ethnic identity rather than on American identity. It's the salad bowl versus the melting pot issue. Keep in mind that until recently, we were pretty good at assimilating Muslims, and they were pretty receptive to assimilation.
That's a big word for a liberal. Intellectually dishonest of course, but still a big word.
This conversation is not about about Conservatives rejecting Islam or immigrants. It's about how Islam is anathema to everything the modern day progressive Liberal stands for. This conversation is about hypocrisy. I know a Muslim family very well having dated one for three years. I met her entire family. They have assimilated. They are also Republicans because abortion and homosexuality is a sin according to their Bible.
Do you think muslims should be able to have sharia councils and muslims must adhere to their findings?
I have no idea what a sharia council is, so I'm going to lean heavily on my google machine. I see they have one in the UK. Is that our government or culture?
"Sharia is not a book of statutes or judicial precedent imposed by a government, and it's not a set of regulations adjudicated in court."
But some folks think sharia is islamic law. Do US courts recognize islamic law? Yes. Like marriage and divorces. But does the US have religious courts as part of our courts? No. Does Israel? Yes. Is that our government or culture?
Keep researching. Can a woman bring a grievance directly to a sharia council in the same way a man can?
Before you start moving your goalposts and drag me down some sharia hole, let's go back to your original remark that Islam cannot coexist with our form of government or culture.
It has for centuries. It does today.
5 myths about Sharia law debunked by a law professor | Commentary | Dallas News
LH, I've gone back and forth with him on the Sharia councils. You're not going to get anywhere with him. He's not talking about the UK Sharia council. He's talking about the tribunals all over the world (including in the US) that resolve disputes between Muslims applying Sharia law. They sound sinister, but so long as the parties submit to them voluntarily and so long as they don't violate US law, they're no different from binding arbitration. But they're a common object of fear mongering by some on the Right.
The reason you won't get anywhere with Horn6721 is that he basically thinks that a woman can't consent to a Sharia tribunal. It's always under some kind of duress. Well, he can't prove that and you can't disprove it in every case, so you'll be at an impasse. May as well save yourself the trouble.
It is really simple. A female is discriminated against which is against our laws.
We can have that conversation, but that's not what he said, is it? For every aspect of Islam that you find anathema to my liberal views, I can find the a similar deformed spiritual doctrine in other religions and their extreme zealots. Show your Republican muslim friends some respect. Because to me, your views are anathema to American values.