|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On February 04 2017 04:46 sharkie wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2017 04:43 ticklishmusic wrote:On February 04 2017 04:37 Blisse wrote:http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/ivanka-trump-jared-kushner-lgbt-order-234617?cmpid=sfIvanka Trump and Jared Kushner worked to sink LGBT order
Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump helped lead the charge to scuttle a draft executive order that would have overturned Obama-era enforcements of LGBT rights in the workplace, multiple sources with knowledge of the situation told POLITICO.
A draft executive order on LGBT rights — which outlines how to roll back former president Barack Obama’s protections and expand legal exemptions based on religious beliefs — has been circulating among journalists and worried progressive groups this week.
But two sources close to Kushner and Ivanka Trump, who have in the past been supporters of gay rights, said the young couple were both in favor of putting out a clear statement from the president, promising to uphold the 2014 Obama executive order and stopping the momentum for the turnaround in its tracks.
On Tuesday night, the White House released a statement noting that “President Donald J. Trump is determined to protect the rights of all Americans, including the LGBTQ community. President Trump continues to be respectful and supportive of LGBTQ rights, just as he was throughout the election.” Haven't ever heard anything bad about Ivanka which is cool. apart from the fact that she truly believes she's some sort of self made woman who has succeeded in spite of being born into wealth and power. poor little rich girl. as long as she uses her fortune for others I don't see a problem with it?
so if she does something which she doesnt do she'd be a good person?
|
re: Milo
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/quebec-city-mosque-attack-suspect-known-for-right-wing-online-posts/article33833044/
The suspect in the deadly attack on a Quebec City mosque was known in the city’s activist circles as an online troll who was inspired by extreme right-wing French nationalists, stood up for U.S. President Donald Trump and was against immigration to Quebec – especially by Muslims.
Alexandre Bissonnette, 27, a student at Laval University, grew up on a quiet crescent in the Cap-Rouge suburb of Quebec City and lived in an apartment a few kilometres away.
His online profile and school friendships revealed little interest in extremist politics until last March, when France’s far-right National Front Leader Marine Le Pen visited Quebec City, inspiring Mr. Bissonnette to vocal extreme online activism, according to people who clashed with him starting around this time.
There's a weak argument to be made: should political extremists, like Le Pen, Milo, be given a platform to speak if it turns out they can radicalize people to the point of "terrorism"?
|
On February 04 2017 04:53 Blisse wrote:re: Milo http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/quebec-city-mosque-attack-suspect-known-for-right-wing-online-posts/article33833044/Show nested quote +The suspect in the deadly attack on a Quebec City mosque was known in the city’s activist circles as an online troll who was inspired by extreme right-wing French nationalists, stood up for U.S. President Donald Trump and was against immigration to Quebec – especially by Muslims.
Alexandre Bissonnette, 27, a student at Laval University, grew up on a quiet crescent in the Cap-Rouge suburb of Quebec City and lived in an apartment a few kilometres away.
His online profile and school friendships revealed little interest in extremist politics until last March, when France’s far-right National Front Leader Marine Le Pen visited Quebec City, inspiring Mr. Bissonnette to vocal extreme online activism, according to people who clashed with him starting around this time. There's a weak argument to be made: should political extremists, like Le Pen, Milo, be given a platform to speak if it turns out they can radicalize people to the point of "terrorism"?
If you can directly show such a connection, you can easily make a case against them. The question is, is their speech directly inciting unlawful behavior? Milo would basically have to say --> go out and kill x people because they aren't like us. He's light years away from such statements.
|
On February 04 2017 04:53 Blisse wrote:re: Milo http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/quebec-city-mosque-attack-suspect-known-for-right-wing-online-posts/article33833044/Show nested quote +The suspect in the deadly attack on a Quebec City mosque was known in the city’s activist circles as an online troll who was inspired by extreme right-wing French nationalists, stood up for U.S. President Donald Trump and was against immigration to Quebec – especially by Muslims.
Alexandre Bissonnette, 27, a student at Laval University, grew up on a quiet crescent in the Cap-Rouge suburb of Quebec City and lived in an apartment a few kilometres away.
His online profile and school friendships revealed little interest in extremist politics until last March, when France’s far-right National Front Leader Marine Le Pen visited Quebec City, inspiring Mr. Bissonnette to vocal extreme online activism, according to people who clashed with him starting around this time. There's a weak argument to be made: should political extremists, like Le Pen, Milo, be given a platform to speak if it turns out they can radicalize people to the point of "terrorism"?
I don't see what argument could be made to make that a reality and not delving in some shitty authoritarianism. So long as they don't directly incite violence, the people who commit violence are making connections that don't exist between some pieces of information.
I don't think that we should try to kill risk, we live in a world of 7.5 billion people or whatever, we drive cars and jump off planes with parachutes. Like all good things in life, freedom of expression will indirectly have some undesired consequences, I think it's unavoidable but I think we should just understand that it's part of our political process. And would alternative political processes be completely devoid of such deaths?
I continue to say that attempts to sanitize society will fail.
|
On February 04 2017 04:53 Blisse wrote:re: Milo http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/quebec-city-mosque-attack-suspect-known-for-right-wing-online-posts/article33833044/Show nested quote +The suspect in the deadly attack on a Quebec City mosque was known in the city’s activist circles as an online troll who was inspired by extreme right-wing French nationalists, stood up for U.S. President Donald Trump and was against immigration to Quebec – especially by Muslims.
Alexandre Bissonnette, 27, a student at Laval University, grew up on a quiet crescent in the Cap-Rouge suburb of Quebec City and lived in an apartment a few kilometres away.
His online profile and school friendships revealed little interest in extremist politics until last March, when France’s far-right National Front Leader Marine Le Pen visited Quebec City, inspiring Mr. Bissonnette to vocal extreme online activism, according to people who clashed with him starting around this time. There's a weak argument to be made: should political extremists, like Le Pen, Milo, be given a platform to speak if it turns out they can radicalize people to the point of "terrorism"?
yes, remember this?
+ Show Spoiler +
Incitement of violence is very real even if it's only statistical in nature. If you rile up a crowd of 1000 people and ten start to beat people up you're still responsible.
It's not authoritarian to stop it at all. Hell it's a favourite tactic of authoritarian governments to mobilise against 'traitors' or dissenters.
|
On February 04 2017 04:32 Acrofales wrote:
I'm generally not opposed to taking the safety labels off shit and letting the problem solve itself, but financial products have gotten really complicated (in fact, they're often so complicated that people whose job it is to understand them often don't), so regulating that v seems kinda necessary.
Also, the freedom to be ripped off is not analogous to the freedom to eating unhealthy foods. Wtf?
The regulations aren't to stop people from being dumb with their own money. There are plenty of avenues for that without the banks.
It's to stop the banks from playing fast and loose with everyone's money.
|
On February 04 2017 05:28 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2017 04:53 Blisse wrote:re: Milo http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/quebec-city-mosque-attack-suspect-known-for-right-wing-online-posts/article33833044/The suspect in the deadly attack on a Quebec City mosque was known in the city’s activist circles as an online troll who was inspired by extreme right-wing French nationalists, stood up for U.S. President Donald Trump and was against immigration to Quebec – especially by Muslims.
Alexandre Bissonnette, 27, a student at Laval University, grew up on a quiet crescent in the Cap-Rouge suburb of Quebec City and lived in an apartment a few kilometres away.
His online profile and school friendships revealed little interest in extremist politics until last March, when France’s far-right National Front Leader Marine Le Pen visited Quebec City, inspiring Mr. Bissonnette to vocal extreme online activism, according to people who clashed with him starting around this time. There's a weak argument to be made: should political extremists, like Le Pen, Milo, be given a platform to speak if it turns out they can radicalize people to the point of "terrorism"? yes, remember this? + Show Spoiler +Incitement of violence is very real even if it's only statistical in nature. If you rile up a crowd of 1000 people and ten start to beat people up you're still responsible. It's not authoritarian to stop it at all. Hell it's a favourite tactic of authoritarian governments to mobilise against 'traitors' or dissenters.
Looks like a handy chart for the second amendment people to make use of.
|
On February 04 2017 05:28 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2017 04:53 Blisse wrote:re: Milo http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/quebec-city-mosque-attack-suspect-known-for-right-wing-online-posts/article33833044/The suspect in the deadly attack on a Quebec City mosque was known in the city’s activist circles as an online troll who was inspired by extreme right-wing French nationalists, stood up for U.S. President Donald Trump and was against immigration to Quebec – especially by Muslims.
Alexandre Bissonnette, 27, a student at Laval University, grew up on a quiet crescent in the Cap-Rouge suburb of Quebec City and lived in an apartment a few kilometres away.
His online profile and school friendships revealed little interest in extremist politics until last March, when France’s far-right National Front Leader Marine Le Pen visited Quebec City, inspiring Mr. Bissonnette to vocal extreme online activism, according to people who clashed with him starting around this time. There's a weak argument to be made: should political extremists, like Le Pen, Milo, be given a platform to speak if it turns out they can radicalize people to the point of "terrorism"? yes, remember this? + Show Spoiler +Incitement of violence is very real even if it's only statistical in nature. If you rile up a crowd of 1000 people and ten start to beat people up you're still responsible. It's not authoritarian to stop it at all. Hell it's a favourite tactic of authoritarian governments to mobilise against 'traitors' or dissenters.
I don't recall that image. Are those crosshairs with the intention of shooting them?
Also trying to determine whether that part is sarcastic or not.
I don't agree with silencing extremists, but I don't know how much I would disagree with a normal protest with a small chance of turning violent, as opposed to an intentionally violent protest, assuming Berkeley was the former, against those extremists. Which is the sentiment I'm trying to relate. Hard to say what % chance they'll turn violent though.
|
There is no evidence connecting that map to Gifford's being shot. That hundreds of thousands of people don't shootup a certain Minneapolis-Based retail store every year is apparently something that should shock us.
|
On February 04 2017 05:45 cLutZ wrote:
There is no evidence connecting that map to Gifford's being shot. That hundreds of thousands of people don't shootup a certain Minneapolis-Based retail store every year is apparently something that should shock us.
I was about to say. That's the second time he's used that in this thread recently. The shooter certainly didn't fit the profile of someone who would like Palin anyways.
|
Christ, if we want to talk about inciting violence, how about all of the reckless rhetoric from politicians and the media about Trump?
|
On February 04 2017 06:06 xDaunt wrote:
Christ, if we want to talk about inciting violence, how about all of the reckless rhetoric from politicians and the media about Trump?
Inciting assassination? Or do you mean against his supporters? Because I haven't seen anybody advocating assassination, and if you mean saying he's doing lasting damage to our democracy (possibly spurring someone to assassinate him out of some twisted patriotism) then it seems like you're ultimately just arguing we shouldn't be allowed to make strong criticisms of the president.
|
On February 04 2017 06:06 xDaunt wrote:
Christ, if we want to talk about inciting violence, how about all of the reckless rhetoric from politicians and the media about Trump?
That doesn't count because Trump is evil and violence is justified. Or something along those lines.
|
Some ass with a machete gets shot in France and Trump's all over it. A Canadian fan of his slaughters 6 people, wounded more, at their house of worship and not a peep.
|
almost like the democrats dont say anything when islam does terrorism its funny how it works both ways
|
On February 04 2017 06:23 sertas wrote:
almost like the democrats dont say anything when islam does terrorism its funny how it works both ways
was gonna say the same thing, it is a product of ideology.
|
On February 04 2017 06:23 sertas wrote:
almost like the democrats dont say anything when islam does terrorism its funny how it works both ways
Ignoring "when Islam does terrorism" for the moment, which attacks are you two thinking of?
|
On February 04 2017 06:16 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2017 06:06 xDaunt wrote:
Christ, if we want to talk about inciting violence, how about all of the reckless rhetoric from politicians and the media about Trump? Inciting assassination? Or do you mean against his supporters? Because I haven't seen anybody advocating assassination, and if you mean saying he's doing lasting damage to our democracy (possibly spurring someone to assassinate him out of some twisted patriotism) then it seems like you're ultimately just arguing we shouldn't be allowed to make strong criticisms of the president.
Well we can start with this twit for one:
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Canada11517 Posts
On February 04 2017 04:53 Blisse wrote:re: Milo http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/quebec-city-mosque-attack-suspect-known-for-right-wing-online-posts/article33833044/Show nested quote +The suspect in the deadly attack on a Quebec City mosque was known in the city’s activist circles as an online troll who was inspired by extreme right-wing French nationalists, stood up for U.S. President Donald Trump and was against immigration to Quebec – especially by Muslims.
Alexandre Bissonnette, 27, a student at Laval University, grew up on a quiet crescent in the Cap-Rouge suburb of Quebec City and lived in an apartment a few kilometres away.
His online profile and school friendships revealed little interest in extremist politics until last March, when France’s far-right National Front Leader Marine Le Pen visited Quebec City, inspiring Mr. Bissonnette to vocal extreme online activism, according to people who clashed with him starting around this time. There's a weak argument to be made: should political extremists, like Le Pen, Milo, be given a platform to speak if it turns out they can radicalize people to the point of "terrorism"?
The trouble is, unless Milo is saying or at least strongly implying that violence is the solution we are kind of in the territory where we are chasing after whatever crazy thing a nutjob latched on to last before going on their killing spree- violent video games, the Joker/Bane, Helter Skelter, etc. But that's the problem- we are chasing after the fact; it's not predictive, as it's difficult to figure out if these guys wouldn't have latched on to something else and done the same thing, but with some other loosely connected fixation.
|
On February 04 2017 06:28 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On February 04 2017 06:16 ChristianS wrote:On February 04 2017 06:06 xDaunt wrote:
Christ, if we want to talk about inciting violence, how about all of the reckless rhetoric from politicians and the media about Trump? Inciting assassination? Or do you mean against his supporters? Because I haven't seen anybody advocating assassination, and if you mean saying he's doing lasting damage to our democracy (possibly spurring someone to assassinate him out of some twisted patriotism) then it seems like you're ultimately just arguing we shouldn't be allowed to make strong criticisms of the president. Well we can start with this twit for one: + Show Spoiler +
I have no love for Sarah Silverman. That's a fucked up tweet and she shouldn't have said it. Any others?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://images.gawker.com/18k2d72iz9k0hjpg/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636.jpg)
