[Caf002]

Unless he was one of those dudes who wears his pants extra low, I find it interesting that his pants are down.

[Ballerina]

I hate SJWs. Hang em all. Trying to always have their hands in my pocket claiming to be victims of something.

[HeyJealousy]

Originally Posted by Ballerina ↗

I hate SJWs. Hang em all. Trying to always have their hands in my pocket claiming to be victims of something.

A little bit harsh, don't you think?

Political extremists, of all stripes, tend to irk me.

But SJWs are generally just passionate young activists, who rightfully detest injustice, but end up being wayyy in over their head because they allow emotion to trump logic. And that's what does them in.

Gamergate was a disaster, for sure, but it's not costing people's lives. The SJW crowd is more of a nuisance than an actual threat. The far right OTOH......

[humanlife]

I haven’t been on here for a while but I finally see something US based

[HeyJealousy]

Originally Posted by humanlife ↗

I haven’t been on here for a while but I finally see something US based

Crime-scene photos, from the US, are exceptionally hard to come by nowadays (on the surface web, at least) but a few still get leaked here and there.

Do you remember Ogrish and Rotten? Back in those days, it wasn't uncommon to see graphic crime-scene photos from a low-profile murder trial in the US, UK or Canada.

I think it was the notorious "Porsche Girl" case that elicited a crackdown on "leakers", and a drastic shift in the Internet from its Wild Wild West days to where we are today.

Also, at one time, Rotten.com was clamoring to obtain autopsy photographs of NASCAR driver Dale Earnhardt Sr, who died in a crash.

Earnhardt's family tried to block the release of the photographs, and they won in the end.

[GlowingGhoul]

Originally Posted by HeyJealousy ↗

As if the Right is a stranger to “political violence”.
Give me a break, man.

Only one side has politicians who routinely tell their followers it's perfectly ok to go up to your political opponents in public, even with their families, and let them know they are not welcome there "or anywhere". This Alynsky* tactic started in the modern Democrat party with Obama's call for his supporters to confront his opponents and "Get in their face".

Antifa have made it clear that if you disagree with their Marxist ideology, you and your family have forfeit the right to any sense of safety. And whether it's Maxine Waters or Antifa, neither has to worry about unwanted attention from the media or law enforcement despite the undercurrent of murder. That's the real threat. When individuals are made examples of by this mob, and nothing is done about it, others will be silenced.

There's nothing new here. Nearly all pre-Marxist revolution countries that had been democratic went through a phase of leftist politician sanctioned mob violence. Plausible deniability, while your opponents are intimidated into silence.


*The theory from 'Rules for Radicals" that ideology doesn't feel pain, but individuals do, and therefore it was far more effective to attack individuals in your opponents party than with through persuasion.

[GlowingGhoul]

Wow, no edit button sucks

[HeyJealousy]

Originally Posted by GlowingGhoul ↗

Only one side has politicians who routinely tell their followers it's perfectly ok to go up to your political opponents in public, even with their families, and let them know they are not welcome there "or anywhere". This Alynsky* tactic started in the modern Democrat party with Obama's call for his supporters to confront his opponents and "Get in their face".

Antifa have made it clear that if you disagree with their Marxist ideology, you and your family have forfeit the right to any sense of safety. And whether it's Maxine Waters or Antifa, neither has to worry about unwanted attention from the media or law enforcement despite the undercurrent of murder. That's the real threat. When individuals are made examples of by this mob, and nothing is done about it, others will be silenced.

There's nothing new here. Nearly all pre-Marxist revolution countries that had been democratic went through a phase of leftist politician sanctioned mob violence. Plausible deniability, while your opponents are intimidated into silence.


*The theory from 'Rules for Radicals" that ideology doesn't feel pain, but individuals do, and therefore it was far more effective to attack individuals in your opponents party than with through persuasion.

Fair enough. But how do you feel about businesses who refuse to serve gay couples? Is this okay? Or what about businesses who refuse to serve folks who they vehemently disagree with on politics? Is this okay?

If you answered "yes" to only one of the above, then you have a double standard. I'm not saying that you do, but that's exactly what a double standard is. Praising one party for doing one thing, while frowning down upon another party for doing the same.

[beantown]

Originally Posted by MolokoPlusVellocet ↗

His killers were black. I guarantee it.

You say he was an SJW? I'm betting the only social justice he gave a shit about was BLM. I doubt he was fighting for women, gay, tranny or paedo rights.

What the fuck are paedo rights? Are you referring to paedophilia?

[dano63016]

weird, not a blip in the local news. Not that I'm worked up about that. One less jack off whipping people into a frenzy to set shit on fire because some asshole got killed doing something stupid. whatever