DHS Domestic Terrorism Bulletin

The Black Flag Cafe is the place travelers come to share stories and advice. Moderated by Robert Young Pelton the author of The World's Most Dangerous Places.

Moderator: coldharvest

Postby el3so » Tue May 18, 2021 8:54 pm

Kurt wrote: I do not think that White Nationalists are equivalent to BLM.
Never claimed they are equal or equivalent but there are IMO better ways to counter them than by calling them all wife-beaters. I fully understand that your opinion is based in part on your personal situation, I did not mean to offend you.

FWIW I believe the vast majority of BLM protesters and their cause to be on the right side of history, the actual organisation to be at best a (failed) attempt at political recuperation and at worst a scam. I cannot honestly say or think the same about the opposing side.
skynet prompt: witty line, a bit offensive, medium levels of spelling error, Rastafy by 10 % or so
User avatar
el3so
Creepy Uncle
 
Posts: 8900
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 9:25 am
Location: never-ending labyrinth of pain

Re: DHS Domestic Terrorism Bulletin

Postby Kurt » Tue May 18, 2021 9:46 pm

Tarkan wrote:
It's statistical ignorance not blankity blackity black black shit.



So you are freaked out by Blacks asserting themselves for statistical reasons?

Group of Blacks = Crimes
Group of Whites wishing either Jim Crow's return and / or a ethnostate by force = Not as bad as regular black people objecting to the remnants of Jim Crow.

Its been the same type of argument since Nat Turner. Any organized movement to better their treatment is equal to violence against Whites.

That what you believe.
User avatar
Kurt
In Manus Manus
 
Posts: 21998
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:29 am
Location: New York City

Re:

Postby Kurt » Tue May 18, 2021 10:01 pm

el3so wrote:
Kurt wrote: I do not think that White Nationalists are equivalent to BLM.
Never claimed they are equal or equivalent but there are IMO better ways to counter them than by calling them all wife-beaters. I fully understand that your opinion is based in part on your personal situation, I did not mean to offend you.

FWIW I believe the vast majority of BLM protesters and their cause to be on the right side of history, the actual organisation to be at best a (failed) attempt at political recuperation and at worst a scam. I cannot honestly say or think the same about the opposing side.


How would you treat them?
User avatar
Kurt
In Manus Manus
 
Posts: 21998
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:29 am
Location: New York City

Re: Re:

Postby el3so » Wed May 19, 2021 2:06 pm

Kurt wrote:How would you treat them?
You guys have that Freedom of Speech thing going...
Guess I'd have to tolerate them spouting their nonsense, hope law enforcement keeps an eye on things and keep my head on a swivel when participating in demonstrations.
skynet prompt: witty line, a bit offensive, medium levels of spelling error, Rastafy by 10 % or so
User avatar
el3so
Creepy Uncle
 
Posts: 8900
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 9:25 am
Location: never-ending labyrinth of pain

Re: Re:

Postby Kurt » Wed May 19, 2021 2:34 pm

el3so wrote:
Kurt wrote:How would you treat them?
You guys have that Freedom of Speech thing going...
Guess I'd have to tolerate them spouting their nonsense, hope law enforcement keeps an eye on things and keep my head on a swivel when participating in demonstrations.


Tolerance is not part of it.

The State cannot pass laws limiting speech...In fact objecting, but not limiting is supposed to be the nullifier of the bad parts of free speech since everyone can speak.

That is why the Right objects to "Cancel Culture" since it takes the free reactions to their free expressions and chooses to regulate whom and how to associate with people.

One of my objections to the American right is just how delicate and fragile they are...as soon as private companies and people "deplatform" someone they immediatly want to pass laws to prohibit that. Deplatforming is not suppression of speech, it is actually protected speech as well.

As well as property rights.

Not long ago the Supreme Court decided that donating money was protected speech with speech being defined as expression rather than words. A private entity choosing to ridicule or choose to deny access is also speech, even when there are financial benefits or losses due to such expression.
User avatar
Kurt
In Manus Manus
 
Posts: 21998
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:29 am
Location: New York City

Re: DHS Domestic Terrorism Bulletin

Postby seektravelinfo » Wed May 19, 2021 2:39 pm

What doesn’t seem to be understood by many is that BLM is an organic concept more than it is an organization, but it is a movement.
Just like Antifa.

It’s the monikers of these movements that raise the hackles:
Black Lives Matter
Anti-Fascism (Antifa)

The nerve, to proclaim such. Some people become emotional, downright apoplectic, that these views are held and actionable. So much so that they must arm themselves and build stockpiles of weapons, and establish “charter clubs” where they initiate by beating each other up while reciting names of cereals (Proud Boys), which they follow up by jerking each other off. Then there are the other groups, like Oath Keepers, the 1%’s, Bugaloo Bois, the KKK, QAnon ..... and a few elected members of Congress. In my city we’ve had recently a few very lame MAGA rallies held, always in front of a suburban parking lot of a Walmart or Target or Speedway Gas Station. If they’re really that brave and committed though, I’d like to see them show up at E.99/St. Clair (Cleveland).

Some rube on here pointed out that there are blacks in the Proud Boys, and I acknowledged that yes there are Hispanics and Asians too, so this rube clings to his conviction that these hate groups are inclusive and multi-racial. So they’ve got their useful idiots. Who doesn’t?
User avatar
seektravelinfo
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 6184
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 5:18 am
Location: clevelandia

Re: DHS Domestic Terrorism Bulletin

Postby Tarkan » Wed May 19, 2021 3:17 pm

Kurt wrote:
Tarkan wrote:
It's statistical ignorance not blankity blackity black black shit.



So you are freaked out by Blacks asserting themselves for statistical reasons?

Group of Blacks = Crimes
Group of Whites wishing either Jim Crow's return and / or a ethnostate by force = Not as bad as regular black people objecting to the remnants of Jim Crow.

Its been the same type of argument since Nat Turner. Any organized movement to better their treatment is equal to violence against Whites.

That what you believe.


Lol what. What remnants of Jim Crow? In Minnesota?
I'd whore myself out just one more time if I knew who to screw to get out of this grind.
User avatar
Tarkan
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 6027
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:57 am
Location: Texas

Re: Re:

Postby Tarkan » Wed May 19, 2021 3:20 pm

Kurt wrote:
el3so wrote:
Kurt wrote:How would you treat them?
You guys have that Freedom of Speech thing going...
Guess I'd have to tolerate them spouting their nonsense, hope law enforcement keeps an eye on things and keep my head on a swivel when participating in demonstrations.


Tolerance is not part of it.

The State cannot pass laws limiting speech...In fact objecting, but not limiting is supposed to be the nullifier of the bad parts of free speech since everyone can speak.

That is why the Right objects to "Cancel Culture" since it takes the free reactions to their free expressions and chooses to regulate whom and how to associate with people.

One of my objections to the American right is just how delicate and fragile they are...as soon as private companies and people "deplatform" someone they immediatly want to pass laws to prohibit that. Deplatforming is not suppression of speech, it is actually protected speech as well.

As well as property rights.

Not long ago the Supreme Court decided that donating money was protected speech with speech being defined as expression rather than words. A private entity choosing to ridicule or choose to deny access is also speech, even when there are financial benefits or losses due to such expression.


Except of course, social media is the modern town square.

Just like 1st Amendment rights have been extended to email and phone conversations, there is an argument that they should be extended to speech on tech *platforms* where the platforms are afforded legal protection because they are *platforms* and not *publishers*. Tech companies want to have their cake and eat it too.

And the government is doing an end-around on the Constitution and laws. They aren't spying on you, private companies are spying on you. Of course, the government is paying the private companies to spy on you, but never mind that.

We are lurching our way into a social credit system run by Puritanical leftist social justice warriors. These people are literally the ideological merging of the Puritans of the 1600s with the Bolsheviks.
I'd whore myself out just one more time if I knew who to screw to get out of this grind.
User avatar
Tarkan
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 6027
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:57 am
Location: Texas

Re: DHS Domestic Terrorism Bulletin

Postby Tarkan » Wed May 19, 2021 3:22 pm

seektravelinfo wrote:What doesn’t seem to be understood by many is that BLM is an organic concept more than it is an organization, but it is a movement.
Just like Antifa.

It’s the monikers of these movements that raise the hackles:
Black Lives Matter
Anti-Fascism (Antifa)

The nerve, to proclaim such. Some people become emotional, downright apoplectic, that these views are held and actionable. So much so that they must arm themselves and build stockpiles of weapons, and establish “charter clubs” where they initiate by beating each other up while reciting names of cereals (Proud Boys), which they follow up by jerking each other off. Then there are the other groups, like Oath Keepers, the 1%’s, Bugaloo Bois, the KKK, QAnon ..... and a few elected members of Congress. In my city we’ve had recently a few very lame MAGA rallies held, always in front of a suburban parking lot of a Walmart or Target or Speedway Gas Station. If they’re really that brave and committed though, I’d like to see them show up at E.99/St. Clair (Cleveland).

Some rube on here pointed out that there are blacks in the Proud Boys, and I acknowledged that yes there are Hispanics and Asians too, so this rube clings to his conviction that these hate groups are inclusive and multi-racial. So they’ve got their useful idiots. Who doesn’t?


It's kind of hard to call someone a useful idiot when they the actual leader of the organization. The Proud Boys were being run by an "underprivileged minority". As this rube pointed out, "white nationalist" is just a fill in term for anything leftists don't like. It has zero actual meaning these days. And BLM may be an organic concept, but it's an organic concept with billions of dollars in financial backing from corporate America.
I'd whore myself out just one more time if I knew who to screw to get out of this grind.
User avatar
Tarkan
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 6027
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:57 am
Location: Texas

Postby el3so » Wed May 19, 2021 7:43 pm

Kurt wrote:
el3so wrote:
Kurt wrote:How would you treat them?
Guess I'd have to tolerate them spouting their nonsense, hope law enforcement keeps an eye on things and keep my head on a swivel when participating in demonstrations.
Tolerance is not part of it.
Not tolerance as in a supposedly laudable character trait but as in not being able to infringe on others' right to express their ideas/opinions, however repugnant or stupid, in the public space.

Kurt wrote:The State cannot pass laws limiting speech... In fact objecting, but not limiting is supposed to be the nullifier of the bad parts of free speech since everyone can speak.
I fail to see the "bad parts of free speech". But you are correct, you are indeed allowed and I guess encouraged to call them all sorts of names.
skynet prompt: witty line, a bit offensive, medium levels of spelling error, Rastafy by 10 % or so
User avatar
el3so
Creepy Uncle
 
Posts: 8900
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 9:25 am
Location: never-ending labyrinth of pain

Re: Re:

Postby el3so » Wed May 19, 2021 7:53 pm

Tarkan wrote:
Kurt wrote:
el3so wrote:
Kurt wrote:How would you treat them?
Freedom of Speech thing
That is why the Right objects to "Cancel Culture" since it takes the free reactions to their free expressions and chooses to regulate whom and how to associate with people.

One of my objections to the American right is just how delicate and fragile they are...as soon as private companies and people "deplatform" someone they immediatly want to pass laws to prohibit that. Deplatforming is not suppression of speech, it is actually protected speech as well.
Just like 1st Amendment rights have been extended to email and phone conversations, there is an argument that they should be extended to speech on tech *platforms* where the platforms are afforded legal protection because they are *platforms* and not *publishers*. Tech companies want to have their cake and eat it too.
Tech companies care only about ad revenue and law suits.
Tarkan wrote: We are lurching our way into a social credit system run by Puritanical leftist social justice warriors. These people are literally the ideological merging of the Puritans of the 1600s with the Bolsheviks.
Classic Tarkan. Remember to post pictures if they do send you to the gulag ;-)
skynet prompt: witty line, a bit offensive, medium levels of spelling error, Rastafy by 10 % or so
User avatar
el3so
Creepy Uncle
 
Posts: 8900
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 9:25 am
Location: never-ending labyrinth of pain

Re: DHS Domestic Terrorism Bulletin

Postby Kurt » Wed May 19, 2021 8:37 pm

Tarkan wrote:
Kurt wrote:
Tarkan wrote:
It's statistical ignorance not blankity blackity black black shit.



So you are freaked out by Blacks asserting themselves for statistical reasons?

Group of Blacks = Crimes
Group of Whites wishing either Jim Crow's return and / or a ethnostate by force = Not as bad as regular black people objecting to the remnants of Jim Crow.

Its been the same type of argument since Nat Turner. Any organized movement to better their treatment is equal to violence against Whites.

That what you believe.


Lol what. What remnants of Jim Crow? In Minnesota?


Yes.

https://www.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/i ... 4359132ee4
https://www.minnpost.com/metro/2019/02/ ... l-visible/
https://www.mnrealtor.com/blogs/mnr-new ... ies-real-e
https://www.tpt.org/minnesota-experienc ... ad-jiyjix/
https://www.minnpost.com/mnopedia/2019/ ... black-men/
https://www.mnhs.org/duluthlynchings/lynchings
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-cour ... e-n1230876
and more recently
https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/10/us/minne ... index.html
and in 2015 a bunch of nazis who lived in Minnesota were arrested for going to "shoot some Dindoos". They filmed their plans so ..you know, not as swift as the gerrymanderers.

In the North, like Minnesota, things were not as brazen as the KKK and separate toilets but they had the same attitude as other racists and that is that "blacks ruin things" so might as well keep them out. You keep out people with property laws and cops who target "strangers".

So yes, Jim Crows remnants are still around. They existed and still exist in Minnesota. Right now no one is trying to suppress their vote like "down south" but as soon as Blacks get enough votes to sway elections away from Whites, both Republican and Democrat, you can bet the little laws and regulations will pop up that make it more difficult for them to vote.
User avatar
Kurt
In Manus Manus
 
Posts: 21998
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:29 am
Location: New York City

Re:

Postby Kurt » Wed May 19, 2021 8:43 pm

el3so wrote:
Kurt wrote:
el3so wrote:
Kurt wrote:How would you treat them?
Guess I'd have to tolerate them spouting their nonsense, hope law enforcement keeps an eye on things and keep my head on a swivel when participating in demonstrations.
Tolerance is not part of it.
Not tolerance as in a supposedly laudable character trait but as in not being able to infringe on others' right to express their ideas/opinions, however repugnant or stupid, in the public space.

Kurt wrote:The State cannot pass laws limiting speech... In fact objecting, but not limiting is supposed to be the nullifier of the bad parts of free speech since everyone can speak.
I fail to see the "bad parts of free speech". But you are correct, you are indeed allowed and I guess encouraged to call them all sorts of names.


By "bad parts of speech" I mean if I say "Gas the Kikes!" and you call me a fuckwit that is what I mean. Now if you ran this message board and I said "Gas The Kikes" and you removed that post and banned me, that too is freedom of speech.

If I want to say that kind of stuff I should get my own website, run my own message board etc. etc. Leased property and private property being money, a car or a house is a platform of speech for the owner. The government shall not infringe upon what I say on my property but I, as owner of my property am free to infringe upon what others say on it.

Lease agreements like with AWS need to be followed per Amazon's guidelines. Its their property and they can boot people off it, even if that person leased webspace from Amazon. That is how Free Speech "Corrects" Free Speech.

Nothing is stopping anyone from saying or writing what they want. If they are deplatformed they can move to other platforms or create their own...or just get a printing press and mail stuff out.
User avatar
Kurt
In Manus Manus
 
Posts: 21998
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:29 am
Location: New York City

Re: Re:

Postby Kurt » Wed May 19, 2021 8:58 pm

Tarkan wrote:
Kurt wrote:
el3so wrote:
Kurt wrote:How would you treat them?
You guys have that Freedom of Speech thing going...
Guess I'd have to tolerate them spouting their nonsense, hope law enforcement keeps an eye on things and keep my head on a swivel when participating in demonstrations.


Tolerance is not part of it.

The State cannot pass laws limiting speech...In fact objecting, but not limiting is supposed to be the nullifier of the bad parts of free speech since everyone can speak.

That is why the Right objects to "Cancel Culture" since it takes the free reactions to their free expressions and chooses to regulate whom and how to associate with people.

One of my objections to the American right is just how delicate and fragile they are...as soon as private companies and people "deplatform" someone they immediatly want to pass laws to prohibit that. Deplatforming is not suppression of speech, it is actually protected speech as well.

As well as property rights.

Not long ago the Supreme Court decided that donating money was protected speech with speech being defined as expression rather than words. A private entity choosing to ridicule or choose to deny access is also speech, even when there are financial benefits or losses due to such expression.


Except of course, social media is the modern town square.

Just like 1st Amendment rights have been extended to email and phone conversations, there is an argument that they should be extended to speech on tech *platforms* where the platforms are afforded legal protection because they are *platforms* and not *publishers*. Tech companies want to have their cake and eat it too.

And the government is doing an end-around on the Constitution and laws. They aren't spying on you, private companies are spying on you. Of course, the government is paying the private companies to spy on you, but never mind that.

We are lurching our way into a social credit system run by Puritanical leftist social justice warriors. These people are literally the ideological merging of the Puritans of the 1600s with the Bolsheviks.


I agree with you on the Bolsheviks thing and the puritan thing but I think we disagree on who is who. Bolsheviks proclaimed a majority when they had none and used that help take power. They always said they had more people than they did. They did not have nearly the percentage the Trumpers had but they still did more with less and lasted 70+ years with it too.

Puritans were all in favor of laws banning Non Calvinist theology and lifestyle but would bitch when Puritanism was not included in a town hall meeting. Sorta like bitching about deplatforming while passing laws prohibiting things like the 1619 project or race theory that critiques things like Black slavery.

Besides, if "equal time" on platforms had not been removed in the Reagan Era thus making it so no Liberal counterpart would be needed for Rush Limbaugh on the radio then the Town Square argument might have some more teeth. But it doesn't. Businesses are private property and they are not obliged to provide a platform for everyone who wants one. This means that they can manipulate public opinion, as media always has.

But then you do what "Alternative" media has always done and that is form your own media. The right has no fortitude for this stuff, they just want it handed to them. It's not like OAN or News Max doesn't exist either. You got your voice, it is just small. You are being slapped down, you handle that by creating your own stuff and supporting people who do. You do it outside facebook and twitter. You do it without google search rankings. It can be done just like the internet did in 1997.
User avatar
Kurt
In Manus Manus
 
Posts: 21998
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:29 am
Location: New York City

Re: Re:

Postby el3so » Wed May 19, 2021 11:10 pm

Kurt wrote: By "bad parts of speech" I mean if I say "Gas the Kikes!" and you call me a fuckwit that is what I mean.
I know you are making a point and statements like that are of course quite illegal in my neck of the woods but even if you and they weren't, I and probably most people wouldn't call (hypothetical) you anything, chances of an actual dialogue as in an exchange of ideas being nil.

But if you would instead formulate some opinion (supported by cherry-picked facts or regurgitated propaganda) on how, say, the Holocaust isn't real, Covid19 is a government conspiracy or operation Barbarossa was a pre-emptive attack, I would probably try to counter your arguments. Name-calling wouldn't sway either one of us towards seeing the other person's point of view or help us achieve a common ground that could be a base for tackling whatever current problem is making you (or me) believe and esp say such things.
Exchanging curse-words, insults or obscenities isn't free speech IMO. They should of course be covered by it but that is more of a happy by-product.
skynet prompt: witty line, a bit offensive, medium levels of spelling error, Rastafy by 10 % or so
User avatar
el3so
Creepy Uncle
 
Posts: 8900
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 9:25 am
Location: never-ending labyrinth of pain

Previous

Return to Black Flag Cafe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 15 guests

cron