It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 5:47 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 130 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 1:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:05 pm
Posts: 68609
pizza_Place: Lina's Pizza
The "perpetrator" is obviously a MI-6 sleeper agent who carried out this "attack" in an effort to reinvigorate British nationalism and raise a fervor against foreigners.

Wake up chaps!

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
There is not a damned thing wrong with people who are bull shitters.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 1:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
You two don't bother reading actual news at all do you?


Right, because it's improper to surmise a terror link when a car rams into 11 people in a country that has had a rash of vehicular attacks of a particular variety in the last 6 months. :roll:


That doesn't excuse it. You were equally presumptuous during the Charlottesville incident too. It was a rush to judgment then as it is now. Own it and keep it moving. Continuing to argue the point just demonstrates bias and makes you look even more foolish.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 2:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 20575
pizza_Place: Giordano's
long time guy wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
You two don't bother reading actual news at all do you?


Right, because it's improper to surmise a terror link when a car rams into 11 people in a country that has had a rash of vehicular attacks of a particular variety in the last 6 months. :roll:


That doesn't excuse it. You were equally presumptuous during the Charlottesville incident too. It was a rush to judgment then as it is now. Own it and keep it moving. Continuing to argue the point just demonstrates bias and makes you look even more foolish.


What the hell are you talking about? My only "presumption" was that the facts as we knew them didn't constitute a hate crime, which was actually just a reaction to someone else presuming it was a hate crime.

And there is absolutely nothing wrong with seeing the early reports and presuming terrorism. To pretend that isn't the current state of affairs in that part of the world is just willful ignorance, and its dangerous and it will get more people killed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 2:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
You two don't bother reading actual news at all do you?


Right, because it's improper to surmise a terror link when a car rams into 11 people in a country that has had a rash of vehicular attacks of a particular variety in the last 6 months. :roll:


That doesn't excuse it. You were equally presumptuous during the Charlottesville incident too. It was a rush to judgment then as it is now. Own it and keep it moving. Continuing to argue the point just demonstrates bias and makes you look even more foolish.


What the hell are you talking about? My only "presumption" was that the facts as we knew them didn't constitute a hate crime, which was actually just a reaction to someone else presuming it was a hate crime.

And there is absolutely nothing wrong with seeing the early reports and presuming terrorism. To pretend that isn't the current state of affairs in that part of the world is just willful ignorance, and its dangerous and it will get more people killed.


Nope. Presuming that each of these incidents is an act of Islamic terrorism is even more dangerous and it only serves to feed the appetite of right wing nut jobs that get hard ons when such attacks occurs.

There is no upside in presuming that this was an act of terrorism. You're promoting an agenda as opposed to allowing the facts to play out. You did the same thing with the Charlottesville car incident and you wound up looking equally foolish. You were quick to try and defend the actions of a Nazi extremist and that is dangerous also.

You repeatedly slant events so that they coincide with your own worldview.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 2:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 20575
pizza_Place: Giordano's
long time guy wrote:
Nope. Presuming that each of these incidents is an act of Islamic terrorism is even more dangerous and it only serves to feed the appetite of right wing nut jobs that get hard ons when such attacks occurs.

There is no upside in presuming that this was an act of terrorism. You're promoting an agenda as opposed to allowing the facts to play out.


Actively wishing away facts of the current climate of terrorist attacks in Europe, particularly with regards to London, puts people in danger. The objective reality is that the last, what, 3 out of 4 times since March the early-morning facts were "multiple people injured/killed by car running into them" the "facts played out" into a terrorist attack committed by a particular kind of terrorist. And the last 4 acts ALL were attacks of hate and terror.

Quote:
You did the same thing with the Charlottesville car incident and you wound up looking equally foolish. You were quick to try and defend the actions of a Nazi extremist and that is dangerous also.


Yeah....that's not what I did. If you could stop saying it, dingus, that'd be great.

Quote:
You repeatedly slant events so that they coincide with your own worldview.


:lol: :lol: :lol: The First Amendment is about religious tolerance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 2:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Nope. Presuming that each of these incidents is an act of Islamic terrorism is even more dangerous and it only serves to feed the appetite of right wing nut jobs that get hard ons when such attacks occurs.

There is no upside in presuming that this was an act of terrorism. You're promoting an agenda as opposed to allowing the facts to play out.


Actively wishing away facts of the current climate of terrorist attacks in Europe, particularly with regards to London, puts people in danger. The objective reality is that the last, what, 3 out of 4 times since March the early-morning facts were "multiple people injured/killed by car running into them" the "facts played out" into a terrorist attack committed by a particular kind of terrorist. And the last 4 acts ALL were attacks of hate and terror.

Quote:
You did the same thing with the Charlottesville car incident and you wound up looking equally foolish. You were quick to try and defend the actions of a Nazi extremist and that is dangerous also.


Yeah....that's not what I did. If you could stop saying it, dingus, that'd be great.

Quote:
You repeatedly slant events so that they coincide with your own worldview.


:lol: :lol: :lol: The First Amendment is about religious tolerance.



I'm glad that you provided the religious tolerance quote also. The Founding Fathers stated that the United States would be a nation that practiced "Religious tolerance". When they spoke of religious freedoms it was referenced. If you don't think freedom of religion relates to that then you are a bigger fool than first implied.


Your idiotic rationale regarding "well it's easy to presume that" is no more valid than those you repeatedly debate regarding cop shootings. When they use that particular argument you're always Johnny on the spot to defend the police.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 3:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Nope. Presuming that each of these incidents is an act of Islamic terrorism is even more dangerous and it only serves to feed the appetite of right wing nut jobs that get hard ons when such attacks occurs.

There is no upside in presuming that this was an act of terrorism. You're promoting an agenda as opposed to allowing the facts to play out.


Actively wishing away facts of the current climate of terrorist attacks in Europe, particularly with regards to London, puts people in danger. The objective reality is that the last, what, 3 out of 4 times since March the early-morning facts were "multiple people injured/killed by car running into them" the "facts played out" into a terrorist attack committed by a particular kind of terrorist. And the last 4 acts ALL were attacks of hate and terror.

Quote:
You did the same thing with the Charlottesville car incident and you wound up looking equally foolish. You were quick to try and defend the actions of a Nazi extremist and that is dangerous also.


Yeah....that's not what I did. If you could stop saying it, dingus, that'd be great.

Quote:
You repeatedly slant events so that they coincide with your own worldview.


:lol: :lol: :lol: The First Amendment is about religious tolerance.



Charlottesville attack Page 6 for those scoring at home. None are. Here comes the classic pivot to provide justification for the Car attack. I'm sure you were simply providing a "different perspective" however.

viewtopic.php?f=75&t=107910&start=180&hilit=Nazi

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 3:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 20575
pizza_Place: Giordano's
long time guy wrote:

Charlottesville attack Page 6 for those scoring at home. None are. Here comes the classic pivot to provide justification for the Car attack. I'm sure you were simply providing a "different perspective" however.

http://www.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopi ... hilit=Nazi


...relating tweets from a reporter actively reporting on the incident is "defend[ing] the actions of a Nazi extremist"? You're insane.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 3:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
long time guy wrote:

Charlottesville attack Page 6 for those scoring at home. None are. Here comes the classic pivot to provide justification for the Car attack. I'm sure you were simply providing a "different perspective" however.

viewtopic.php?f=75&t=107910&start=180&hilit=Nazi


...relating tweets from a reporter actively reporting on the incident is "defend[ing] the actions of a Nazi extremist"? You're insane.



Nope dog ain't hunting. It was another one of your "I ain't saying I'm just saying" tactics. Interesting that I was not the only person to pick up on it. There were at least 3 people I believe who picked up on it too. The second you entered the mix the pivot occurred. You instantly attempted to make the Nazi jerk the victim and you found that one article which supported your right wing garbage.

As far as the tolerance/freedom garbage goes you and others are wrong on that too. You are basically stating that it is ok to be intolerant of someone based upon their religion and that is patently false. First Amendment protects against that.

The leaders of this country have professed tolerance for centuries here and now because right wingers have a hard on for Muslims it's sudden ok to be intolerant. Yeah right. It wasn't explicitly stated but it has been inferred and implied throughout this country's history fool.

It's why many an immigrant and refugee has sought refuge in this country.

Your history was wrong about this just like it was wrong about secession. I provided at least 4 declarations which pertained to expansion all were ignored as you latched onto to some stupid theory regarding sources.

You have to get away from your Hackery at some point Lecture Note.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 3:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 20575
pizza_Place: Giordano's
long time guy wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
long time guy wrote:

Charlottesville attack Page 6 for those scoring at home. None are. Here comes the classic pivot to provide justification for the Car attack. I'm sure you were simply providing a "different perspective" however.

http://www.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopi ... hilit=Nazi


...relating tweets from a reporter actively reporting on the incident is "defend[ing] the actions of a Nazi extremist"? You're insane.



Nope dog ain't hunting. It was another one of your "I ain't saying I'm just saying" tactics.


From now on I'll check with you on which reports from reporters on the scene are OK to relay to others.

Quote:
Interesting that I was not the only person to pick up on it. There were at least 3 people I believe who picked up on it too.


Funny you should mention that:

Terry's Peeps wrote:
Mine was more directed at the author of the tweets.


Quote:
The second you entered the mix the pivot occurred. You instantly attempted to make the Nazi jerk the victim and you found that one article which supported your right wing garbage.


It wasn't an article, they were tweets, from a reporter. A reporter whose job it is to report facts accurately, from an outlet that I think is rather well respected. A reporter whose job it is to report facts accurately from an outlet that I think is rather well respected and who was also on the scene. I never once advocated for the veracity of her reporting. I also then said this:

Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Taylor Lorenz does social media work for The Hill. Which way does that outlet lean, politically, and would they be OK with an employee on the scene reporting perhaps exculpatory/mitigating facts to something that so perfectly demonizes the Alt Right?


Fuck off.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 3:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 54161
Location: Pearl Harbor, Waukesha, and other things that make no sense
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
The Hill is firmly centrist, I believe. Very inside-the-Beltway, pretty close to NPR, in my opinion.

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 3:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 10:19 pm
Posts: 6517
pizza_Place: Kaiser's - Kenosha
long time guy wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
long time guy wrote:

Charlottesville attack Page 6 for those scoring at home. None are. Here comes the classic pivot to provide justification for the Car attack. I'm sure you were simply providing a "different perspective" however.

http://www.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopi ... hilit=Nazi


...relating tweets from a reporter actively reporting on the incident is "defend[ing] the actions of a Nazi extremist"? You're insane.



Nope dog ain't hunting. It was another one of your "I ain't saying I'm just saying" tactics. Interesting that I was not the only person to pick up on it. There were at least 3 people I believe who picked up on it too. The second you entered the mix the pivot occurred. You instantly attempted to make the Nazi jerk the victim and you found that one article which supported your right wing garbage.

As far as the tolerance/freedom garbage goes you and others are wrong on that too. You are basically stating that it is ok to be intolerant of someone based upon their religion and that is patently false. First Amendment protects against that.

The leaders of this country have professed tolerance for centuries here and now because right wingers have a hard on for Muslims it's sudden ok to be intolerant. Yeah right. It wasn't explicitly stated but it has been inferred and implied throughout this country's history fool.

It's why many an immigrant and refugee has sought refuge in this country.

Your history was wrong about this just like it was wrong about secession. I provided at least 4 declarations which pertained to expansion all were ignored as you latched onto to some stupid theory regarding sources.

You have to get away from your Hackery at some point Lecture Note.


Let us know how tolerant you are when the old ladies from the Kingdom Hall or those dorks on the bikes with the white shirts and backpacks show up at your doorstep.
:roll: :roll: :roll:

_________________
Just chillin' like Garret Quillin.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 3:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Curious Hair wrote:
The Hill is firmly centrist, I believe. Very inside-the-Beltway, pretty close to NPR, in my opinion.


The political leanings of the writers are immaterial. I'm aware of the Hill. My point is that he cherry picked one of the few articles which appeared to absolve the Nazi fanatical jerk. That wasn't an accident in my opinion either. It doesn't make him a Nazi but it does question his ability to be objective. He is decidedly partisan and presupposing that he will be anything but makes little sense.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 4:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
shirtless driver wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
long time guy wrote:

Charlottesville attack Page 6 for those scoring at home. None are. Here comes the classic pivot to provide justification for the Car attack. I'm sure you were simply providing a "different perspective" however.

viewtopic.php?f=75&t=107910&start=180&hilit=Nazi


...relating tweets from a reporter actively reporting on the incident is "defend[ing] the actions of a Nazi extremist"? You're insane.



Nope dog ain't hunting. It was another one of your "I ain't saying I'm just saying" tactics. Interesting that I was not the only person to pick up on it. There were at least 3 people I believe who picked up on it too. The second you entered the mix the pivot occurred. You instantly attempted to make the Nazi jerk the victim and you found that one article which supported your right wing garbage.

As far as the tolerance/freedom garbage goes you and others are wrong on that too. You are basically stating that it is ok to be intolerant of someone based upon their religion and that is patently false. First Amendment protects against that.

The leaders of this country have professed tolerance for centuries here and now because right wingers have a hard on for Muslims it's sudden ok to be intolerant. Yeah right. It wasn't explicitly stated but it has been inferred and implied throughout this country's history fool.

It's why many an immigrant and refugee has sought refuge in this country.

Your history was wrong about this just like it was wrong about secession. I provided at least 4 declarations which pertained to expansion all were ignored as you latched onto to some stupid theory regarding sources.

You have to get away from your Hackery at some point Lecture Note.


Let us know how tolerant you are when the old ladies from the Kingdom Hall or those dorks on the bikes with the white shirts and backpacks show up at your doorstep.
:roll: :roll: :roll:



I've had to be extremely tolerant of bullshit in my life. That wouldn't be much different.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 4:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 54161
Location: Pearl Harbor, Waukesha, and other things that make no sense
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
long time guy wrote:
The political leanings of the writers are immaterial. I'm aware of the Hill. My point is that he cherry picked one of the few articles which appeared to absolve the Nazi fanatical jerk. That wasn't an accident in my opinion either. It doesn't make him a Nazi but it does question his ability to be objective. He is decidedly partisan and presupposing that he will be anything but makes little sense.


I don't think JLN is a Nazi but he does seem to be somewhere in the neoreactionary constellation. But there definitely are too many Nazis among us these days (if not on this particular board, in life at large).

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 4:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 20575
pizza_Place: Giordano's
Curious Hair wrote:
long time guy wrote:
The political leanings of the writers are immaterial. I'm aware of the Hill. My point is that he cherry picked one of the few articles which appeared to absolve the Nazi fanatical jerk. That wasn't an accident in my opinion either. It doesn't make him a Nazi but it does question his ability to be objective. He is decidedly partisan and presupposing that he will be anything but makes little sense.


I don't think JLN is a Nazi but he does seem to be somewhere in the neoreactionary constellation. But there definitely are too many Nazis among us these days (if not on this particular board, in life at large).


What the shit is that?

Quote:
The neoreactionary movement (a.k.a. neoreaction, NRx, the Dark Enlightenment) is a loosely-defined cluster of Internet-based political thinkers who wish to return society to forms of government older than liberal democracy. They generally present their views as a revival of the traditions of Western civilization, or a return to a natural order of things.

Many of the current wave of neoreactionaries were former libertarians who had concluded that freedom and the free market were fundamentally incompatible with liberal democracy. Mencius Moldbug, generally considered the founder of the current movement, describes his own journey as "from Mises to Carlyle" via Hans-Hermann Hoppe, an anarcho-capitalist who pushed feudalism as his desired end state.[1]

Hostility to modernity and democracy is the main point of agreement among neoreactionaries. Moldbug writes that "a reactionary is a believer in order, stability, and security. All of which he treats as synonyms ... Thus, the order that the rational reactionary seeks to preserve and/or restore is arbitrary. Perhaps it can be justified on some moral basis. But probably not. It is good simply because it is order, and the alternative to order is violence at worst and politics at best. If the Bourbons do not rule France, someone will – Robespierre, or Napoleon, or Corner Man."[35]

Echoing traditional libertarian concerns, they assert that democracies are necessarily less financially stable than autocracies in general, and monarchies in particular: that a king will be "fiscally responsible" because the king has a property interest in the kingdom.


Yeah....no, not at all for me.

Instead of trying to diagnose me, why not just ask me outright my stance on political/social/economic issues and going from there? Or listen to my appearance on Dr. Ken's show where I state quite explicitly that I think the core of Julie DiCaro's beliefs and causes are Right and Good.


Last edited by Juice's Lecture Notes on Sat Oct 07, 2017 4:16 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 4:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 20575
pizza_Place: Giordano's
long time guy wrote:
Curious Hair wrote:
The Hill is firmly centrist, I believe. Very inside-the-Beltway, pretty close to NPR, in my opinion.


The political leanings of the writers are immaterial. I'm aware of the Hill. My point is that he cherry picked one of the few articles which appeared to absolve the Nazi fanatical jerk. That wasn't an accident in my opinion either. It doesn't make him a Nazi but it does question his ability to be objective. He is decidedly partisan and presupposing that he will be anything but makes little sense.


They were live tweets from a reporter at the event and talking to police about it! What should I have done, ignored the tweets from the reporter on the scene? You want that kind of stuff ignored simply because it might indicate something other than what you think? That's the very antithesis of objectivity.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 4:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 10:19 pm
Posts: 6517
pizza_Place: Kaiser's - Kenosha
long time guy wrote:
shirtless driver wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
long time guy wrote:

Charlottesville attack Page 6 for those scoring at home. None are. Here comes the classic pivot to provide justification for the Car attack. I'm sure you were simply providing a "different perspective" however.

http://www.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopi ... hilit=Nazi


...relating tweets from a reporter actively reporting on the incident is "defend[ing] the actions of a Nazi extremist"? You're insane.



Nope dog ain't hunting. It was another one of your "I ain't saying I'm just saying" tactics. Interesting that I was not the only person to pick up on it. There were at least 3 people I believe who picked up on it too. The second you entered the mix the pivot occurred. You instantly attempted to make the Nazi jerk the victim and you found that one article which supported your right wing garbage.

As far as the tolerance/freedom garbage goes you and others are wrong on that too. You are basically stating that it is ok to be intolerant of someone based upon their religion and that is patently false. First Amendment protects against that.

The leaders of this country have professed tolerance for centuries here and now because right wingers have a hard on for Muslims it's sudden ok to be intolerant. Yeah right. It wasn't explicitly stated but it has been inferred and implied throughout this country's history fool.

It's why many an immigrant and refugee has sought refuge in this country.

Your history was wrong about this just like it was wrong about secession. I provided at least 4 declarations which pertained to expansion all were ignored as you latched onto to some stupid theory regarding sources.

You have to get away from your Hackery at some point Lecture Note.


Let us know how tolerant you are when the old ladies from the Kingdom Hall or those dorks on the bikes with the white shirts and backpacks show up at your doorstep.
:roll: :roll: :roll:



I've had to be extremely tolerant of bullshit in my life. That wouldn't be much different
.


So are you saying that Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons trying to proselytize because their God commands them to is bullshit?

_________________
Just chillin' like Garret Quillin.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 4:25 pm 
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
You two don't bother reading actual news at all do you?


Right, because it's improper to surmise a terror link when a car rams into 11 people in a country that has had a rash of vehicular attacks of a particular variety in the last 6 months. :roll:

Right and when you posted this it had been over an hour since even Channel 7 had sent out the push notification that it wasn't a terror attack, and they are usually 3 days behind.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 4:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 20575
pizza_Place: Giordano's
Baby McNown wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
You two don't bother reading actual news at all do you?


Right, because it's improper to surmise a terror link when a car rams into 11 people in a country that has had a rash of vehicular attacks of a particular variety in the last 6 months. :roll:

Right and when you posted this it had been over an hour since even Channel 7 had sent out the push notification that it wasn't a terror attack, and they are usually 3 days behind.


I checked CNN and BBC, both still had the "open mind" remarks as the latest on motivation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 4:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 11:52 pm
Posts: 12551
Location: Ex-Naperville, Ex-Homewood, Now Tinley Park
pizza_Place: Oh I'm sorry but, there's no one on the line
https://www.thoughtsandprayersthegame.com/

_________________
"All crowds boycotting football games shouldn't care who sings or takes a knee because they aren't watching." - Nas


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 4:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 11:28 am
Posts: 22545
Location: Boofoo Zoo
pizza_Place: Chuck E Cheese
Most of the "news" immediately reported after these events is wrong anyway, no matter which "side" they support.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 5:22 pm 
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
You two don't bother reading actual news at all do you?


Right, because it's improper to surmise a terror link when a car rams into 11 people in a country that has had a rash of vehicular attacks of a particular variety in the last 6 months. :roll:

Right and when you posted this it had been over an hour since even Channel 7 had sent out the push notification that it wasn't a terror attack, and they are usually 3 days behind.


I checked CNN and BBC, both still had the "open mind" remarks as the latest on motivation.

Let me ask just for the record. Are you functionally retarded?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-41538762


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 5:37 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 76685
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
When should we wait for facts/more information and when shouldn't we? I just want to make sure I get it right in the future.

_________________
Nas: Blago, who has single handedly destroyed CFMB?

Blago: https://youtube.com/shorts/Lftdxd-YXt8?feature=share

"You can’t love your country only when you win." -President Biden

https://youtu.be/R6e4ruziZBI?si=1G4W1vbh0eGQuHfU


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 5:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 20575
pizza_Place: Giordano's
Baby McNown wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
You two don't bother reading actual news at all do you?


Right, because it's improper to surmise a terror link when a car rams into 11 people in a country that has had a rash of vehicular attacks of a particular variety in the last 6 months. :roll:

Right and when you posted this it had been over an hour since even Channel 7 had sent out the push notification that it wasn't a terror attack, and they are usually 3 days behind.


I checked CNN and BBC, both still had the "open mind" remarks as the latest on motivation.

Let me ask just for the record. Are you functionally retarded?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-41538762


Image


Image


Image


Image


When is Jason coming back from Miami?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 5:42 pm 
Right. See thanks for posting the NOT TERROR RELATED headline. Just step back and admit you are wrong.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 5:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 20575
pizza_Place: Giordano's
Baby McNown wrote:
Right. See thanks for posting the NOT TERROR RELATED headline. Just step back and admit you are wrong.


My post at 11:30 AM was made after checking CNN and BBC's reporting on the matter. At the time (again, 11:30AM, some 6 hours ago), the motive was not yet determined, and the quote used by both outlets referenced an "open mind". Time, as it does, passed, and 1 hour ago (meaning 5 hours had come and gone since my post at 11:30 am) the BBC updated the article you linked. What this means is, that at the time I posted, both CNN and BBC had not reported on the official stance of London police regarding motive, and the facts reported had all the earmarks of the recent spate of vehicular attacks that have occurred specifically in that city.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 6:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
shirtless driver wrote:
long time guy wrote:
shirtless driver wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
long time guy wrote:

Charlottesville attack Page 6 for those scoring at home. None are. Here comes the classic pivot to provide justification for the Car attack. I'm sure you were simply providing a "different perspective" however.

viewtopic.php?f=75&t=107910&start=180&hilit=Nazi


...relating tweets from a reporter actively reporting on the incident is "defend[ing] the actions of a Nazi extremist"? You're insane.



Nope dog ain't hunting. It was another one of your "I ain't saying I'm just saying" tactics. Interesting that I was not the only person to pick up on it. There were at least 3 people I believe who picked up on it too. The second you entered the mix the pivot occurred. You instantly attempted to make the Nazi jerk the victim and you found that one article which supported your right wing garbage.

As far as the tolerance/freedom garbage goes you and others are wrong on that too. You are basically stating that it is ok to be intolerant of someone based upon their religion and that is patently false. First Amendment protects against that.

The leaders of this country have professed tolerance for centuries here and now because right wingers have a hard on for Muslims it's sudden ok to be intolerant. Yeah right. It wasn't explicitly stated but it has been inferred and implied throughout this country's history fool.

It's why many an immigrant and refugee has sought refuge in this country.

Your history was wrong about this just like it was wrong about secession. I provided at least 4 declarations which pertained to expansion all were ignored as you latched onto to some stupid theory regarding sources.

You have to get away from your Hackery at some point Lecture Note.


Let us know how tolerant you are when the old ladies from the Kingdom Hall or those dorks on the bikes with the white shirts and backpacks show up at your doorstep.
:roll: :roll: :roll:



I've had to be extremely tolerant of bullshit in my life. That wouldn't be much different
.


So are you saying that Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons trying to proselytize because their God commands them to is bullshit?


I'm not deeply religious and for the record Jehovah's witnesses have knocked on my door for the entirety of my life. I've never had an issue with them and I respect their right to believe whatever it is that they believe. In fact some of my family members are Jehovah's witnesses. Some are also Muslim as Well as Christian. Never had a problem.

I'm not overly religious and I've always felt that religious zealotry is for fools quite honestly. Don't know what your point happens to be and I really don't care.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 6:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 10:19 pm
Posts: 6517
pizza_Place: Kaiser's - Kenosha
It was just a question.
You sure are a pleasant person.

_________________
Just chillin' like Garret Quillin.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 6:46 pm 
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Right. See thanks for posting the NOT TERROR RELATED headline. Just step back and admit you are wrong.


My post at 11:30 AM was made after checking CNN and BBC's reporting on the matter. At the time (again, 11:30AM, some 6 hours ago), the motive was not yet determined, and the quote used by both outlets referenced an "open mind". Time, as it does, passed, and 1 hour ago (meaning 5 hours had come and gone since my post at 11:30 am) the BBC updated the article you linked. What this means is, that at the time I posted, both CNN and BBC had not reported on the official stance of London police regarding motive, and the facts reported had all the earmarks of the recent spate of vehicular attacks that have occurred specifically in that city.

At the time you made your post ABC of all the wounded horse newsrooms already had it from the PD as not being terror. This is where you step back from the keyboard for a bit. Being trounced by me doesn't look good on your resume.


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 130 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group