|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On March 16 2019 05:06 youngjiddle wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 05:00 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 04:43 youngjiddle wrote:
Above all else, the NZ shooter's motive was to ignite tensions and push us towards civil war as stated in his manifesto. Predictably, everyone seems to be taking the bait and that's not sitting well with me. "Tensions" are already "ignited" around the time the terrorist murdered a bunch of other people. There is no bait, except to inspire others to do the same. To make clear that the greater part of society views his political act as negative is the only only way to combat this. What would make you sit well? To simply allow his message spread without counter? A proper and timely reaction is what is needed, NOT comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer.
I do not know what you are referring to as to comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer, so I will just ask you what you would think a proper and timely reaction is?
On March 16 2019 05:19 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 05:15 Simberto wrote:On March 16 2019 05:07 Nebuchad wrote:
I'm used to the rightwing having bad takes on terrorism but these are downright insane Just for fun, imagine if instead the murderer had been a muslim guy who shot up a church and claims that he was murdering people because of inspiration by stuff that Imam A and Imam B said. And now think about how Danglars and xDaunt would react to that. I find the contrast to the reaction that they display in this case very telling. Gotta protect your own team. That really goes for both sides as has been proven multiple times already in this thread. It's pathetic all around. Can you point to a single example of where a "left" poster defended a terrorist attack that is related to this attack? Even an anecdotal one. Doesn't have to be a quote.
Edit: Bad timing, or perhaps deliberate, but I just read that Trump has just decided to veto the Congressional measure revoking his declaration of a national emergency at the US-Mexico border. From the analysis it appears that the veto will pass. Considering that NZ terrorist attack, we have a US president who claims that immigrants from Mexico are mostly gangsters and criminals and a media cycle from USA that which reinforces that. It's hard to deny the link. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47591552
|
On March 16 2019 05:06 youngjiddle wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 05:00 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 04:43 youngjiddle wrote:
Above all else, the NZ shooter's motive was to ignite tensions and push us towards civil war as stated in his manifesto. Predictably, everyone seems to be taking the bait and that's not sitting well with me. "Tensions" are already "ignited" around the time the terrorist murdered a bunch of other people. There is no bait, except to inspire others to do the same. To make clear that the greater part of society views his political act as negative is the only only way to combat this. What would make you sit well? To simply allow his message spread without counter? A proper and timely reaction is what is needed, NOT comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer.
For those confused, this is what youngjiddle is referring to:
We previously spent some time talking about Candace Owen’s bad response. Is there anyone here that thinks AOC’s response on thoughts and prayers and the NRA is appropriate? Is there anyone here who thinks it is inappropriate? I want to know if the forum regulars want to go with “both sides” of bad responses, or “one side.” I don’t really know anymore. She’s kind of a rising star and some of the comments I’ve seen here echo her argument.
|
On March 16 2019 05:58 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 05:06 youngjiddle wrote:On March 16 2019 05:00 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 04:43 youngjiddle wrote:
Above all else, the NZ shooter's motive was to ignite tensions and push us towards civil war as stated in his manifesto. Predictably, everyone seems to be taking the bait and that's not sitting well with me. "Tensions" are already "ignited" around the time the terrorist murdered a bunch of other people. There is no bait, except to inspire others to do the same. To make clear that the greater part of society views his political act as negative is the only only way to combat this. What would make you sit well? To simply allow his message spread without counter? A proper and timely reaction is what is needed, NOT comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer. I do not know what you are referring to as to comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer, so I will just ask you what you would think a proper and timely reaction is? Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 05:19 Ghostcom wrote:On March 16 2019 05:15 Simberto wrote:On March 16 2019 05:07 Nebuchad wrote:
I'm used to the rightwing having bad takes on terrorism but these are downright insane Just for fun, imagine if instead the murderer had been a muslim guy who shot up a church and claims that he was murdering people because of inspiration by stuff that Imam A and Imam B said. And now think about how Danglars and xDaunt would react to that. I find the contrast to the reaction that they display in this case very telling. Gotta protect your own team. That really goes for both sides as has been proven multiple times already in this thread. It's pathetic all around. Can you point to a single example that is related to this attack? Even an anecdotal one. Doesn't have to be a quote.
Are you asking me to give an example of a left-leaning person acting like e.g. Danglars is concerning this specific act of terrorism or are you asking me to give an example of a left-leaning person using the same arguments following another terror-attack? Because the first request seems to utterly miss the point and the second request seems very head-in-the-sand unless you really haven't paid any kind of attention to lorries driving through Christmas markets, shootings in theaters, and US republican senators getting shot at baseball practice and the ensuing aftermath. There were left-leaning people (not in this thread) specifically celebrating that a republican had been shot and hoping for his demise. In this thread however, the "lone-lunatic" argument was employed just like you see now from the right-leaning poster.
|
Is AOC's response appropriate? Yes. She is a politician calling for political action in a calm manner. It's not the worse action a politician can undertake. Better than trump anyways.
Is Candace Owen’s LOL! ???? and HAHA OMG combined with lies appropriate.
No it isn't. It even in the same court.
|
On March 16 2019 06:13 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 05:58 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 05:06 youngjiddle wrote:On March 16 2019 05:00 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 04:43 youngjiddle wrote:
Above all else, the NZ shooter's motive was to ignite tensions and push us towards civil war as stated in his manifesto. Predictably, everyone seems to be taking the bait and that's not sitting well with me. "Tensions" are already "ignited" around the time the terrorist murdered a bunch of other people. There is no bait, except to inspire others to do the same. To make clear that the greater part of society views his political act as negative is the only only way to combat this. What would make you sit well? To simply allow his message spread without counter? A proper and timely reaction is what is needed, NOT comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer. I do not know what you are referring to as to comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer, so I will just ask you what you would think a proper and timely reaction is? On March 16 2019 05:19 Ghostcom wrote:On March 16 2019 05:15 Simberto wrote:On March 16 2019 05:07 Nebuchad wrote:
I'm used to the rightwing having bad takes on terrorism but these are downright insane Just for fun, imagine if instead the murderer had been a muslim guy who shot up a church and claims that he was murdering people because of inspiration by stuff that Imam A and Imam B said. And now think about how Danglars and xDaunt would react to that. I find the contrast to the reaction that they display in this case very telling. Gotta protect your own team. That really goes for both sides as has been proven multiple times already in this thread. It's pathetic all around. Can you point to a single example that is related to this attack? Even an anecdotal one. Doesn't have to be a quote. Are you asking me to give an example of a left-leaning person acting like e.g. Danglars is concerning this specific act of terrorism or are you asking me to give an example of a left-leaning person using the same arguments following another terror-attack? Because the first request seems to utterly miss the point and the second request seems very head-in-the-sand unless you really haven't paid any kind of attention to lorries driving through Christmas markets, shootings in theaters, and US republican senators getting shot at baseball practice and the ensuing aftermath. There were left-leaning people specifically celebrating that a republican had been shot and hoping for his demise. Either is fine by me. The first to either to act like Danglars, and the second, is to act like Danglars. But no-one here has specifically celebrating that a republican had been shot and hoping for his demise. Why lie?
|
On March 16 2019 06:08 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 05:06 youngjiddle wrote:On March 16 2019 05:00 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 04:43 youngjiddle wrote:
Above all else, the NZ shooter's motive was to ignite tensions and push us towards civil war as stated in his manifesto. Predictably, everyone seems to be taking the bait and that's not sitting well with me. "Tensions" are already "ignited" around the time the terrorist murdered a bunch of other people. There is no bait, except to inspire others to do the same. To make clear that the greater part of society views his political act as negative is the only only way to combat this. What would make you sit well? To simply allow his message spread without counter? A proper and timely reaction is what is needed, NOT comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer. For those confused, this is what youngjiddle is referring to: https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1106408088603713536https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1106419873922584577We previously spent some time talking about Candace Owen’s bad response. Is there anyone here that thinks AOC’s response on thoughts and prayers and the NRA is appropriate? Is there anyone here who thinks it is inappropriate? I want to know if the forum regulars want to go with “both sides” of bad responses, or “one side.” I don’t really know anymore. She’s kind of a rising star and some of the comments I’ve seen here echo her argument.
thoughts and prayers don’t do much though. we agree on that right? and criticizing do-nothingism isn’t exactly the same as disrespect
|
On March 16 2019 06:08 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 05:06 youngjiddle wrote:On March 16 2019 05:00 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 04:43 youngjiddle wrote:
Above all else, the NZ shooter's motive was to ignite tensions and push us towards civil war as stated in his manifesto. Predictably, everyone seems to be taking the bait and that's not sitting well with me. "Tensions" are already "ignited" around the time the terrorist murdered a bunch of other people. There is no bait, except to inspire others to do the same. To make clear that the greater part of society views his political act as negative is the only only way to combat this. What would make you sit well? To simply allow his message spread without counter? A proper and timely reaction is what is needed, NOT comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer. For those confused, this is what youngjiddle is referring to: https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1106408088603713536https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1106419873922584577We previously spent some time talking about Candace Owen’s bad response. Is there anyone here that thinks AOC’s response on thoughts and prayers and the NRA is appropriate? Is there anyone here who thinks it is inappropriate? I want to know if the forum regulars want to go with “both sides” of bad responses, or “one side.” I don’t really know anymore. She’s kind of a rising star and some of the comments I’ve seen here echo her argument.
I can't watch the video, just read the text of the tweet. I don't see something wrong with going ' we need action to stop things like this from happening again '
I don't think it is her place to make that comment with this situation happening in NZ and not the US though
|
On March 16 2019 06:08 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 05:06 youngjiddle wrote:On March 16 2019 05:00 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 04:43 youngjiddle wrote:
Above all else, the NZ shooter's motive was to ignite tensions and push us towards civil war as stated in his manifesto. Predictably, everyone seems to be taking the bait and that's not sitting well with me. "Tensions" are already "ignited" around the time the terrorist murdered a bunch of other people. There is no bait, except to inspire others to do the same. To make clear that the greater part of society views his political act as negative is the only only way to combat this. What would make you sit well? To simply allow his message spread without counter? A proper and timely reaction is what is needed, NOT comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer. For those confused, this is what youngjiddle is referring to: We previously spent some time talking about Candace Owen’s bad response. Is there anyone here that thinks AOC’s response on thoughts and prayers and the NRA is appropriate? Is there anyone here who thinks it is inappropriate? I want to know if the forum regulars want to go with “both sides” of bad responses, or “one side.” I don’t really know anymore. She’s kind of a rising star and some of the comments I’ve seen here echo her argument. I think its in bad taste especially so short after the event.
But the message to me is clear. This also happens in the US and every time it does its 'thoughts and prayers' instead of any sort of action to stop it from happening in the future.
Its not a question of if a mosque in the US is going to get shot up, its a question of when. And that is a frightening reality to live in.
Its a nice sound bite for the US far left but useless.
|
On March 16 2019 06:16 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 06:13 Ghostcom wrote:On March 16 2019 05:58 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 05:06 youngjiddle wrote:On March 16 2019 05:00 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 04:43 youngjiddle wrote:
Above all else, the NZ shooter's motive was to ignite tensions and push us towards civil war as stated in his manifesto. Predictably, everyone seems to be taking the bait and that's not sitting well with me. "Tensions" are already "ignited" around the time the terrorist murdered a bunch of other people. There is no bait, except to inspire others to do the same. To make clear that the greater part of society views his political act as negative is the only only way to combat this. What would make you sit well? To simply allow his message spread without counter? A proper and timely reaction is what is needed, NOT comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer. I do not know what you are referring to as to comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer, so I will just ask you what you would think a proper and timely reaction is? On March 16 2019 05:19 Ghostcom wrote:On March 16 2019 05:15 Simberto wrote:On March 16 2019 05:07 Nebuchad wrote:
I'm used to the rightwing having bad takes on terrorism but these are downright insane Just for fun, imagine if instead the murderer had been a muslim guy who shot up a church and claims that he was murdering people because of inspiration by stuff that Imam A and Imam B said. And now think about how Danglars and xDaunt would react to that. I find the contrast to the reaction that they display in this case very telling. Gotta protect your own team. That really goes for both sides as has been proven multiple times already in this thread. It's pathetic all around. Can you point to a single example that is related to this attack? Even an anecdotal one. Doesn't have to be a quote. Are you asking me to give an example of a left-leaning person acting like e.g. Danglars is concerning this specific act of terrorism or are you asking me to give an example of a left-leaning person using the same arguments following another terror-attack? Because the first request seems to utterly miss the point and the second request seems very head-in-the-sand unless you really haven't paid any kind of attention to lorries driving through Christmas markets, shootings in theaters, and US republican senators getting shot at baseball practice and the ensuing aftermath. There were left-leaning people specifically celebrating that a republican had been shot and hoping for his demise. Either is fine by me. The first to either to act like Danglars, and the second, is to act like Danglars. But no-one here has specifically celebrating that a republican had been shot and hoping for his demise. Why lie?
Read the edit.
And when you've done that fix your post (both your sentence structure and your accusation).
|
On March 16 2019 06:08 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 05:06 youngjiddle wrote:On March 16 2019 05:00 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 04:43 youngjiddle wrote:
Above all else, the NZ shooter's motive was to ignite tensions and push us towards civil war as stated in his manifesto. Predictably, everyone seems to be taking the bait and that's not sitting well with me. "Tensions" are already "ignited" around the time the terrorist murdered a bunch of other people. There is no bait, except to inspire others to do the same. To make clear that the greater part of society views his political act as negative is the only only way to combat this. What would make you sit well? To simply allow his message spread without counter? A proper and timely reaction is what is needed, NOT comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer. For those confused, this is what youngjiddle is referring to: https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1106408088603713536https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1106419873922584577We previously spent some time talking about Candace Owen’s bad response. Is there anyone here that thinks AOC’s response on thoughts and prayers and the NRA is appropriate? Is there anyone here who thinks it is inappropriate? I want to know if the forum regulars want to go with “both sides” of bad responses, or “one side.” I don’t really know anymore. She’s kind of a rising star and some of the comments I’ve seen here echo her argument.
She's mocking the NRA's pathetic redirect away from gun violence. Seems completely legit to me. Remember, the NRA's stance is that it's never a good time to talk about gun safety because there's always a mass shooting and we don't want to disrespect the victims. Instead, we should send our thoughts and prayers.
The problem is that thoughts and prayers do nothing, they don't even protect people in a church or mosque, and people on the left are sick of doing nothing to help stem an epidemic.
So I see AOC's comments as completely appropriate. What would be even better is actual legislation, but that isn't realistic right now while the NRA owns a large portion of the Republican party. Even Trump mocks Republican Legislators on that one.
|
On March 16 2019 06:20 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 06:16 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 06:13 Ghostcom wrote:On March 16 2019 05:58 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 05:06 youngjiddle wrote:On March 16 2019 05:00 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 04:43 youngjiddle wrote:
Above all else, the NZ shooter's motive was to ignite tensions and push us towards civil war as stated in his manifesto. Predictably, everyone seems to be taking the bait and that's not sitting well with me. "Tensions" are already "ignited" around the time the terrorist murdered a bunch of other people. There is no bait, except to inspire others to do the same. To make clear that the greater part of society views his political act as negative is the only only way to combat this. What would make you sit well? To simply allow his message spread without counter? A proper and timely reaction is what is needed, NOT comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer. I do not know what you are referring to as to comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer, so I will just ask you what you would think a proper and timely reaction is? On March 16 2019 05:19 Ghostcom wrote:On March 16 2019 05:15 Simberto wrote:On March 16 2019 05:07 Nebuchad wrote:
I'm used to the rightwing having bad takes on terrorism but these are downright insane Just for fun, imagine if instead the murderer had been a muslim guy who shot up a church and claims that he was murdering people because of inspiration by stuff that Imam A and Imam B said. And now think about how Danglars and xDaunt would react to that. I find the contrast to the reaction that they display in this case very telling. Gotta protect your own team. That really goes for both sides as has been proven multiple times already in this thread. It's pathetic all around. Can you point to a single example that is related to this attack? Even an anecdotal one. Doesn't have to be a quote. Are you asking me to give an example of a left-leaning person acting like e.g. Danglars is concerning this specific act of terrorism or are you asking me to give an example of a left-leaning person using the same arguments following another terror-attack? Because the first request seems to utterly miss the point and the second request seems very head-in-the-sand unless you really haven't paid any kind of attention to lorries driving through Christmas markets, shootings in theaters, and US republican senators getting shot at baseball practice and the ensuing aftermath. There were left-leaning people specifically celebrating that a republican had been shot and hoping for his demise. Either is fine by me. The first to either to act like Danglars, and the second, is to act like Danglars. But no-one here has specifically celebrating that a republican had been shot and hoping for his demise. Why lie? Read the edit. And when you've done that fix your post (both your sentence structure and your accusation). Go find an example of where someone has celebrated that a republican had been shot and hoping for his demise, and I'll read your edit...unless your edit was to delete just that, which I guess from your lazy one-liner, was not that.
|
On March 16 2019 06:13 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 05:58 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 05:06 youngjiddle wrote:On March 16 2019 05:00 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 04:43 youngjiddle wrote:
Above all else, the NZ shooter's motive was to ignite tensions and push us towards civil war as stated in his manifesto. Predictably, everyone seems to be taking the bait and that's not sitting well with me. "Tensions" are already "ignited" around the time the terrorist murdered a bunch of other people. There is no bait, except to inspire others to do the same. To make clear that the greater part of society views his political act as negative is the only only way to combat this. What would make you sit well? To simply allow his message spread without counter? A proper and timely reaction is what is needed, NOT comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer. I do not know what you are referring to as to comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer, so I will just ask you what you would think a proper and timely reaction is? On March 16 2019 05:19 Ghostcom wrote:On March 16 2019 05:15 Simberto wrote:On March 16 2019 05:07 Nebuchad wrote:
I'm used to the rightwing having bad takes on terrorism but these are downright insane Just for fun, imagine if instead the murderer had been a muslim guy who shot up a church and claims that he was murdering people because of inspiration by stuff that Imam A and Imam B said. And now think about how Danglars and xDaunt would react to that. I find the contrast to the reaction that they display in this case very telling. Gotta protect your own team. That really goes for both sides as has been proven multiple times already in this thread. It's pathetic all around. Can you point to a single example that is related to this attack? Even an anecdotal one. Doesn't have to be a quote. Are you asking me to give an example of a left-leaning person acting like e.g. Danglars is concerning this specific act of terrorism or are you asking me to give an example of a left-leaning person using the same arguments following another terror-attack? Because the first request seems to utterly miss the point and the second request seems very head-in-the-sand unless you really haven't paid any kind of attention to lorries driving through Christmas markets, shootings in theaters, and US republican senators getting shot at baseball practice and the ensuing aftermath. There were left-leaning people (not in this thread) specifically celebrating that a republican had been shot and hoping for his demise. In this thread however, the "lone-lunatic" argument was employed just like you see now from the right-leaning poster.
I'm going to require something less vague to justify the level of bothsidesism you went to. The equivalent for a muslim attack would be that the perpetrator talked about a specific imam that was his inspiration, that imam had some quotes that matched the action in some way, and the leftist went 'please don't be mean to the imam, that's what the perpetrator would want'.
I can even give you some leniency and demand something less extreme than that, because why not. But we're going to need something.
|
On March 16 2019 06:13 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 05:58 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 05:06 youngjiddle wrote:On March 16 2019 05:00 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 04:43 youngjiddle wrote:
Above all else, the NZ shooter's motive was to ignite tensions and push us towards civil war as stated in his manifesto. Predictably, everyone seems to be taking the bait and that's not sitting well with me. "Tensions" are already "ignited" around the time the terrorist murdered a bunch of other people. There is no bait, except to inspire others to do the same. To make clear that the greater part of society views his political act as negative is the only only way to combat this. What would make you sit well? To simply allow his message spread without counter? A proper and timely reaction is what is needed, NOT comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer. I do not know what you are referring to as to comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer, so I will just ask you what you would think a proper and timely reaction is? On March 16 2019 05:19 Ghostcom wrote:On March 16 2019 05:15 Simberto wrote:On March 16 2019 05:07 Nebuchad wrote:
I'm used to the rightwing having bad takes on terrorism but these are downright insane Just for fun, imagine if instead the murderer had been a muslim guy who shot up a church and claims that he was murdering people because of inspiration by stuff that Imam A and Imam B said. And now think about how Danglars and xDaunt would react to that. I find the contrast to the reaction that they display in this case very telling. Gotta protect your own team. That really goes for both sides as has been proven multiple times already in this thread. It's pathetic all around. Can you point to a single example that is related to this attack? Even an anecdotal one. Doesn't have to be a quote. Are you asking me to give an example of a left-leaning person acting like e.g. Danglars is concerning this specific act of terrorism or are you asking me to give an example of a left-leaning person using the same arguments following another terror-attack? Because the first request seems to utterly miss the point and the second request seems very head-in-the-sand unless you really haven't paid any kind of attention to lorries driving through Christmas markets, shootings in theaters, and US republican senators getting shot at baseball practice and the ensuing aftermath. There were left-leaning people (not in this thread) specifically celebrating that a republican had been shot and hoping for his demise. In this thread however, the "lone-lunatic" argument was employed just like you see now from the right-leaning poster. I think its fair to say a single incident can be described as a lone-lunatic.
When it happens every few months it becomes much harder to pass it off as that.
|
AOC calling out the NRA and painting the real picture of gun violence in the Trump era is not just appropriate, it's been a long time coming. It's always the "we just can't talk about it now" line, every time something like this happens, while people shuffle off to give thoughts and prayers, rinse and repeat ad infinitum. Something has to change if we expect the violence to change.
|
On March 16 2019 06:24 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 06:20 Ghostcom wrote:On March 16 2019 06:16 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 06:13 Ghostcom wrote:On March 16 2019 05:58 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 05:06 youngjiddle wrote:On March 16 2019 05:00 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 04:43 youngjiddle wrote:
Above all else, the NZ shooter's motive was to ignite tensions and push us towards civil war as stated in his manifesto. Predictably, everyone seems to be taking the bait and that's not sitting well with me. "Tensions" are already "ignited" around the time the terrorist murdered a bunch of other people. There is no bait, except to inspire others to do the same. To make clear that the greater part of society views his political act as negative is the only only way to combat this. What would make you sit well? To simply allow his message spread without counter? A proper and timely reaction is what is needed, NOT comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer. I do not know what you are referring to as to comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer, so I will just ask you what you would think a proper and timely reaction is? On March 16 2019 05:19 Ghostcom wrote:On March 16 2019 05:15 Simberto wrote:On March 16 2019 05:07 Nebuchad wrote:
I'm used to the rightwing having bad takes on terrorism but these are downright insane Just for fun, imagine if instead the murderer had been a muslim guy who shot up a church and claims that he was murdering people because of inspiration by stuff that Imam A and Imam B said. And now think about how Danglars and xDaunt would react to that. I find the contrast to the reaction that they display in this case very telling. Gotta protect your own team. That really goes for both sides as has been proven multiple times already in this thread. It's pathetic all around. Can you point to a single example that is related to this attack? Even an anecdotal one. Doesn't have to be a quote. Are you asking me to give an example of a left-leaning person acting like e.g. Danglars is concerning this specific act of terrorism or are you asking me to give an example of a left-leaning person using the same arguments following another terror-attack? Because the first request seems to utterly miss the point and the second request seems very head-in-the-sand unless you really haven't paid any kind of attention to lorries driving through Christmas markets, shootings in theaters, and US republican senators getting shot at baseball practice and the ensuing aftermath. There were left-leaning people specifically celebrating that a republican had been shot and hoping for his demise. Either is fine by me. The first to either to act like Danglars, and the second, is to act like Danglars. But no-one here has specifically celebrating that a republican had been shot and hoping for his demise. Why lie? Read the edit. And when you've done that fix your post (both your sentence structure and your accusation). Go find an example of where someone has celebrated that a republican had been shot and hoping for his demise, and I'll read your edit...unless your edit was to delete just that, which I guess from your lazy one-liner, was not that.
You really don't want to be talking about lazy here...
|
It's also fair to say that a lone event can be passed off as a lone lunatic event if it isn't encouraged by a political spectrum. When multiple events occur, as encouraged by the rhetoric of the far right, that trump can't even call this a terror attack, and xdaunt and danglars seemed mostly concerned with disproving the terrorists' manifesto, how is that equivalent?
|
You know what they say, faith without works is dead. The violence isn't going to stop because you want it to unless something is done about it. There's an awful lot of wanting, but not a lot of doing going on - that is why the "thoughts and prayers" defense is bullshit, if you believe in that sort of thing.
|
On March 16 2019 06:36 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 06:24 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 06:20 Ghostcom wrote:On March 16 2019 06:16 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 06:13 Ghostcom wrote:On March 16 2019 05:58 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 05:06 youngjiddle wrote:On March 16 2019 05:00 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 04:43 youngjiddle wrote:
Above all else, the NZ shooter's motive was to ignite tensions and push us towards civil war as stated in his manifesto. Predictably, everyone seems to be taking the bait and that's not sitting well with me. "Tensions" are already "ignited" around the time the terrorist murdered a bunch of other people. There is no bait, except to inspire others to do the same. To make clear that the greater part of society views his political act as negative is the only only way to combat this. What would make you sit well? To simply allow his message spread without counter? A proper and timely reaction is what is needed, NOT comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer. I do not know what you are referring to as to comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer, so I will just ask you what you would think a proper and timely reaction is? On March 16 2019 05:19 Ghostcom wrote:On March 16 2019 05:15 Simberto wrote:On March 16 2019 05:07 Nebuchad wrote:
I'm used to the rightwing having bad takes on terrorism but these are downright insane Just for fun, imagine if instead the murderer had been a muslim guy who shot up a church and claims that he was murdering people because of inspiration by stuff that Imam A and Imam B said. And now think about how Danglars and xDaunt would react to that. I find the contrast to the reaction that they display in this case very telling. Gotta protect your own team. That really goes for both sides as has been proven multiple times already in this thread. It's pathetic all around. Can you point to a single example that is related to this attack? Even an anecdotal one. Doesn't have to be a quote. Are you asking me to give an example of a left-leaning person acting like e.g. Danglars is concerning this specific act of terrorism or are you asking me to give an example of a left-leaning person using the same arguments following another terror-attack? Because the first request seems to utterly miss the point and the second request seems very head-in-the-sand unless you really haven't paid any kind of attention to lorries driving through Christmas markets, shootings in theaters, and US republican senators getting shot at baseball practice and the ensuing aftermath. There were left-leaning people specifically celebrating that a republican had been shot and hoping for his demise. Either is fine by me. The first to either to act like Danglars, and the second, is to act like Danglars. But no-one here has specifically celebrating that a republican had been shot and hoping for his demise. Why lie? Read the edit. And when you've done that fix your post (both your sentence structure and your accusation). Go find an example of where someone has celebrated that a republican had been shot and hoping for his demise, and I'll read your edit...unless your edit was to delete just that, which I guess from your lazy one-liner, was not that. You really don't want to be talking about lazy here... It would have been easy for you to tell me what you have edited, (and without a snide remark about grammar). There is nothing for me to fix about my post. I have responded to your quoted post. If you have edited it after the fact, tha'ts on you to tell me what you have changed to make yourself look better, not me.
Don't edit your post, to make yourself look better, and then ask the guy who responded to your original post to delete their reply; just type out a new one to clarify what you have written instead.
|
On March 16 2019 06:27 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2019 06:13 Ghostcom wrote:On March 16 2019 05:58 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 05:06 youngjiddle wrote:On March 16 2019 05:00 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 16 2019 04:43 youngjiddle wrote:
Above all else, the NZ shooter's motive was to ignite tensions and push us towards civil war as stated in his manifesto. Predictably, everyone seems to be taking the bait and that's not sitting well with me. "Tensions" are already "ignited" around the time the terrorist murdered a bunch of other people. There is no bait, except to inspire others to do the same. To make clear that the greater part of society views his political act as negative is the only only way to combat this. What would make you sit well? To simply allow his message spread without counter? A proper and timely reaction is what is needed, NOT comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer. I do not know what you are referring to as to comments like AO-Cortez's mocking the "NRA" and prayer, so I will just ask you what you would think a proper and timely reaction is? On March 16 2019 05:19 Ghostcom wrote:On March 16 2019 05:15 Simberto wrote:On March 16 2019 05:07 Nebuchad wrote:
I'm used to the rightwing having bad takes on terrorism but these are downright insane Just for fun, imagine if instead the murderer had been a muslim guy who shot up a church and claims that he was murdering people because of inspiration by stuff that Imam A and Imam B said. And now think about how Danglars and xDaunt would react to that. I find the contrast to the reaction that they display in this case very telling. Gotta protect your own team. That really goes for both sides as has been proven multiple times already in this thread. It's pathetic all around. Can you point to a single example that is related to this attack? Even an anecdotal one. Doesn't have to be a quote. Are you asking me to give an example of a left-leaning person acting like e.g. Danglars is concerning this specific act of terrorism or are you asking me to give an example of a left-leaning person using the same arguments following another terror-attack? Because the first request seems to utterly miss the point and the second request seems very head-in-the-sand unless you really haven't paid any kind of attention to lorries driving through Christmas markets, shootings in theaters, and US republican senators getting shot at baseball practice and the ensuing aftermath. There were left-leaning people (not in this thread) specifically celebrating that a republican had been shot and hoping for his demise. In this thread however, the "lone-lunatic" argument was employed just like you see now from the right-leaning poster. I'm going to require something less vague to justify the level of bothsidesism you went to. The equivalent for a muslim attack would be that the perpetrator talked about a specific imam that was his inspiration, that imam had some quotes that matched the action in some way, and the leftist went 'please don't be mean to the imam, that's what the perpetrator would want'. I can even give you some leniency and demand something less extreme than that, because why not. But we're going to need something.
I don't need leniency. I do need for you to adhere to normal standards for a debate though.
Directly from Wikipedia on the shooting of the republican congressman at the baseball practice. Try and see if some of these soundbites sound familiar:
On May 22, 2017, Hodgkinson wrote "Trump is a Traitor. Trump Has Destroyed Our Democracy. It's Time to Destroy Trump & Co." above his repost of a Change.org petition demanding "the legal removal" of Trump and Vice President Mike Pence for "treason". He belonged to numerous political Facebook groups, including those named "Terminate the Republican Party," "The Road To Hell Is Paved With Republicans," and "Donald Trump is not my President."[58]
If you want to blame Trump for the NZ terrorist attack because the guy quoted him and pointed to him as an inspiration, then really you have to blame the democrats for the Republican shooting (mind you, I am not advocating that).
|
Waste of space, not a fruitful discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
