Invasion of US Capitol building

[harryc]

You boys need to get a grip. Your version of reality is just as skewed and unsustainable as your imagined enemies'.

I suppose you thought Golden Dawn were not a danger to your country either!

 

[RobinBHM]

Sorry to clarify I meant majority population inside prisons, not outside.

I cited 99.9% as a reasonable figure - yes there ARE people incarcerated in prison whom are either victims of a badly biased jury, circumstantial evidence that was enough to be "beyond reasonable doubt", fallible DNA evidence, or plain "framed".

Of the current 2.12 million inmates, 0.1% = 2120 people. Are there over 2,000 wholly innocent people in US jails?

I'd agree with 200 but 2120? Absolutely not; but feel free to contradict that Jacob, reasonable facts never stopped you before.

I would imagine there are many thousands of innocent people in US jails as a result of their plea bargaining system.

It always seems ironic to me that the country that calls itself the "land of the free" has pretty much more of its population incarcerated than any other country.

Privatised prisons....what could possibly go wrong.

 

[RobinBHM]

Ah, yes. Trump is insane, therefore all Trump supporters are insane, therefore all actions are justified. This must be true, because Twitter, Facebook and all media outlets confirmed it. What could possibly go wrong?

Trump fuels division with his non stop lies, gaslighting, uniting against a common enemy, encouraging far right groups, inciting hatred of immigrants.

It's is unhealthy to allow Trump access to SM to continue this.

 

[Jacob]

I would imagine there are many thousands of innocent people in US jails as a result of their plea bargaining system.

It always seems ironic to me that the country that calls itself the "land of the free" has pretty much more of its population incarcerated than any other country.

Privatised prisons....what could possibly go wrong.

less than 5% of the world population but 25% of the prisoners. USA leads the world.
It's the remnants of the traditional penal labour system originally developed as a replacement for slavery.

 

[TRITON]

I suppose you thought Golden Dawn were not a danger to your country either!

So 'Golden Dawn' isnt a brand of morning coffee then ?

 

[fixit45]

I THOUGHT THIS WAS A WORKSHOP FORUM !!!!!!!!!!!! ?????????

 

[TRITON]

I THOUGHT THIS WAS A WORKSHOP FORUM !!!!!!!!!!!! ?????????

It is, and theres loads of topics relating to that in the different sections.
This area is called 'Off Topic' therefore its not solely about wood and metal and making stuff.

You have to admit that this subject has connotations for us all, and is what you might describe as 'HOT' currently, ergo people want to talk and discuss it.

 

[Trainee neophyte]

And the insanity continues. Trump is now Golden Dawn, which was a tiny group of deranged silly people. This may come as a shock to you all, but virtually half of the American electorate (who actually voted), voted for Trump. Are you sure that disenfranchising half of the electorate is a good idea? Are you convinced that, if you only silence all the opposition, everything will be fine? Trump supporters are obviously misguided fools, so if we just re-educate them, we can bring them back to the fold?

"Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it”

Pol Pot believed in reduction camps, too.

 

[Trainee neophyte]

Trump fuels division with his non stop lies, gaslighting, uniting against a common enemy, encouraging far right groups, inciting hatred of immigrants.

It's is unhealthy to allow Trump access to SM to continue this.

Can we agree to remove all politicians from social media? Otherwise, I don't agree to your plan to silence anyone, just becuse you don't like his message. I think a much better idea would be to silence you, because you don't agree with my point of view.

Actually, silencing anyone is known to be a very bad idea. Free speech is the cornerstone of democracy, and having free speech that is only free provided it complies with the current thought police edicts is not free. You really must know this, and are either a totalitarian or just not thinking straight at the moment. This stuff really isn't rocket science.

First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist

Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist

Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist

Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew

Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me

 

[RobinBHM]

Can we agree to remove all politicians from social media? Otherwise, I don't agree to your plan to silence anyone, just becuse you don't like his message. I think a much better idea would be to silence you, because you don't agree with my point of view.

Actually, silencing anyone is known to be a very bad idea. Free speech is the cornerstone of democracy, and having free speech that is only free provided it complies with the current thought police edicts is not free. You really must know this, and are either a totalitarian or just not thinking straight at the moment. This stuff really isn't rocket science.

First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist

Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist

Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist

Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew

Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me

It is not about not liking his message.....that's a strawman

It is the damage that message does.
The message of ISIS spreading violence is also suppressed.

I agree with free speech....the problem is that lies spread faster than the truth. Look at Brexit, endless dishonest tropes get spread so fast, it's impossible to counter it.

Perhaps you could explain how we spread the message of honesty faster than the lies.

 

[Jacob]

.... This may come as a shock to you all, but virtually half of the American electorate (who actually voted), voted for Trump. ,,,,,

This may come as a shock to you but they weren't disenfranchised - they voted for Trump, but were beaten overall.
It's not difficult to understand, all elections involve winners and losers: 2020 United States presidential election - Wikipedia

 

[harryc]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...sassinate-officials-filing-idUSKBN29K0K7?il=0

 

[Trainee neophyte]

This may come as a shock to you but they weren't disenfranchised - they voted for Trump, but were beaten overall.

This may come as a shock to you, but there is a significant number of people who feel that the election was rigged, and that the legal system then failed to give them even peremptory justice, and now their ability to speak out is being removed as fast as possible. It doesn't matter that you believe they are wrong - they still believe they are being beset at every turn. By disenfranchised, I meant that they feel they have had all democratic, civil options removed, rather than just losing an election. If their vote isn't counted, and their voice isn't heard - what comes next? Soap box, ballot box, bullet box? Is that your intention?

All I see is is a gleeful Left desparately trying to encourage violence, for no purpose. Why do that? Who benefits? When was the last time that a losing candidate was impeached, because he lost?

An interesting theory that I don't yet ascribe to is that the Democrats probably did rig the election, because why else all this out and out warfare on the right? If they had won honestly, they would use the immortal words of Barack Obama: "I won, you lost; get over it". As it is, the Color Revolution process requires a disorderly transition of power, so the opposition can be reviled, silenced and made illegal.

 

[Trainee neophyte]

It is not about not liking his message.....that's a strawman

It is the damage that message does.
The message of ISIS spreading violence is also suppressed.

I agree with free speech....the problem is that lies spread faster than the truth. Look at Brexit, endless dishonest tropes get spread so fast, it's impossible to counter it.

Perhaps you could explain how we spread the message of honesty faster than the lies.

The problem here is that your "truth'" is no less subjective than the the opposite side's "truth". Who to believe? Who is the final arbiter? Neither side will believe the other, and both sides appear to have have a very loose idea of what "truth" actually means. On that basis, I say silence nobody. Hear all sides. My reasoning is simple: you start suppressing voices, they will use other means to make themselves heard. Even more importantly, just because it is not you being silenced today, it doesn't mean it won't be you being silenced tomorrow. Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.

 

[Droogs]

Just because they feel the election was rigged when the facts says otherwise does not give them licence to do as they have done. Doen't matter what they "believe", if it did then ISIS should still be running most of the middle east: every Geman should be wearing black or brown; every monkey should be getting hanged for being a Spanish spy: et al

Bull merd argument TN c'mon you can do better.

There is not alternate facts/truths etc only that which is factually correct and that which when presented in any other way is a lie

 

[billw]

This may come as a shock to you but they weren't disenfranchised - they voted for Trump, but were beaten overall.
It's not difficult to understand, all elections involve winners and losers: 2020 United States presidential election - Wikipedia

Exactly, they complain their voice "isn't being heard" but they voted. Their voice was heard. It just wasn't as loud as the one from people who like the other guy.

 

[Jacob]

This may come as a shock to you, but there is a significant number of people who feel that the election was rigged, and that the legal system then failed to give them even peremptory justice, and now their ability to speak out is being removed as fast as possible. It doesn't matter that you believe they are wrong - they still believe they are being beset at every turn. By disenfranchised, I meant that they feel they have had all democratic, civil options removed, rather than just losing an election. If their vote isn't counted, and their voice isn't heard - what comes next? Soap box, ballot box, bullet box? Is that your intention?

All I see is is a gleeful Left desparately trying to encourage violence, for no purpose. Why do that? Who benefits? When was the last time that a losing candidate was impeached, because he lost?

An interesting theory that I don't yet ascribe to is that the Democrats probably did rig the election, because why else all this out and out warfare on the right? If they had won honestly, they would use the immortal words of Barack Obama: "I won, you lost; get over it". As it is, the Color Revolution process requires a disorderly transition of power, so the opposition can be reviled, silenced and made illegal.

How do you think things should have been handled differently?
What should the outcome have been?

 

[billw]

The problem here is that your "truth'" is no less subjective than the the opposite side's "truth". Who to believe? Who is the final arbiter? Neither side will believe the other, and both sides appear to have have a very loose idea of what "truth" actually means. On that basis, I say silence nobody. Hear all sides. My reasoning is simple: you start suppressing voices, they will use other means to make themselves heard. Even more importantly, just because it is not you being silenced today, it doesn't mean it won't be you being silenced tomorrow. Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.

There can only ever be one set of facts. That is what makes them facts rather than being estimates, opinions or lies.

The US election has not factually been shown to be fraudulent, the people's opinions fueled by Trump's lies say that it was. But they can't prove it was, which either 1) fuels conspiracy theories or 2) corroborates the existing position of no fraud.

Trump's continued lies were partially because he can't admit to losing, but also because he's a grifter and look how much money he raised from lying. Why would he stop?

 

[Skydivermel]

Talking about free speech and/or freedom of speech. If you believe we have free speech then you should read this book. Here

 

[D_W]

I THOUGHT THIS WAS A WORKSHOP FORUM !!!!!!!!!!!! ?????????

"Off topic" seems to be a concept that a large cohort can't grasp.

It'd be lovely if the moderators had a way of making the OT forums invisible to each person who complains about off topic material being in off topic forums.