Home
Log in / Sign Up
    Private Messages   Advanced Search   Rules   New User Guide   FAQ   Advertise   Contact Us  
Forum -> In the News
Berkeley riot organizer = insane idealogue
  Previous  1  2  3 7  8  9 11  12  13  Next



Post new topic   Reply to topic View latest: 24h 48h 72h

marina




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 7:28 am
wondergirl wrote:
Do you think Linda Sarsour or Rasmea Odeh deserve our sympathy? Are they your role models? Do you support them (or the Jewish Voice for Peace) because you are a liberal and they organize protests for causes that you support?



This is another problem here. I have repeatedly noted that I don't support violence or extremists. I often identify as a liberal, but there's no acknowledgement of this nuance on this thread. It's just like I'm a liberal so we must all fit your misguided preconceptions of what that means. Just another form of prejudice. Same w people who accuse the entire "right" of whatever ****.
Back to top

SixOfWands




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 7:31 am
marina wrote:
I wasn't really responding to his comments. I was responding to a poster praising a different post that was listing 13 as age of consent in many countries and she seem to be talking about that as a positive social development

So it was hard for me to imagine how someone with a teen or preteen child could see that as a positive, could see the age of consent in some countries being puberty as a good thing


IMNSHO, consent laws should take into account age differentials. So two 16 year olds is different than a 30 year old and a 14 year old. And while the age of "consent" (well, marriage) in Afghanistan is 9, I'm not holding that out as a good idea.

Yiannopoulis' defense of, eg, "Father Mike," a priest with whom he had a z3xual relationship that he describes as consensual (actually, he says that he was the aggressor) in an interview with Joe Rogan is simply wrong. And even if Yiannopoulis himself was that rare 14 year old who was physically and emotionally ready and willing to enter into a relationship with an older man, most simply are not, and laws are needed to protect them. Its not a "leftist construct" that creates an "arbitrary and oppressive idea of consent," and justified his hatred of the Left.
Back to top

marina




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 7:40 am
ora_43 wrote:
Could you give an example of what you're talking about? I don't remember anyone saying anything more positive than "I don't always agree with him, but he is definitely not violent."

It's entirely possible I forgot/missed other posts. But it would help to understand what exactly you're appalled by (people saying Milo isn't a pedophile? people saying he makes some good points? etc).

In general, I think it's possible and even not-uncommon for public figures to be positive in some ways, and appalling in others. I can think of several politicians I admire for their intellectual honesty and class, despite disagreeing with them on key issues.


Quote:
I'm a huge follower of Milo


That was on the first page.

And people found his articles "hysterical"- the articles about how women who take birth control are ugly sluts and how fat people should hate themselves.

If you're talking about a writer as funny and even hysterical, that's a very positive view of that person.

And then there are all these posts just defending him and being horrified that he couldn't spout his ****. That's also what you do when you think someone's speech is worthwhile. I don't see anyone here defending marching Neo Nazis who are sometimes not permitted- for whatever reason - to speak at various locales. So his speech, according to these people, is worthy of hearing, is important.

Had Ahmadinejad been barred from speaking at Columbia in 2007 by violent protesters, I really don't think I would have seen this level of outrage here. Obviously then, Milo's speech is somehow more valued.
Back to top

marina




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 7:45 am
ora_43 wrote:
Yeah, those are two different things. Where did people say that second thing, again?


This entire thread is about how liberals are evil because they just want to shut Milo down. Look through the first pages. And no, I don't think most people here care about free speech, although some are couching it that way. They don't speak out when the Westboro Baptist Church is barred from holding their anti-Jew protests,etc.

I mean, really, how many people are appalled at this image of a woman hitting ( direct violence) a neo Nazi demonstrator? Anyone? Anyone here? Who is appalled by her physical attack on free speech?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.....ndbag
Back to top

marina




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 7:49 am
Basically, I think all this free speech outrage is just a smoke screen. I don't believe many people on this thread here care much about the Constitution's First Amendment. Many people are just using this as an opportunity to trash what they see as the Evil Left.

It's not like most people particularly cared that the Women's March - with millions of participants - was peaceful. I don't remember one single conservative poster from this website noting how MILLIONS of women identifying as left/liberals expressed their free speech rights in a non violent way. I don't remember any of our typically vocal imamother conservatives saying : HEY FREE SPEECH AND NO VIOLENCE - I LOVE THAT!!! GO FIRST AMENDMENT!

It was just still whining and complaining about the dumb women with their stupid p**** hats and ugly posters.

.
Back to top

DrMom




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 8:06 am
marina wrote:
I really don't think this is anything new. I think people have always - throughout the generations - protested, sometimes violently and destructively, against speech and conduct they disagree with. And although violent protests are wrong in my opinion, they've been happening forever. I really don't see what the big differences here and why all the drama about liberals and the Big Bad Left.

It's not like the original Tea Party was a peaceful protest. Right?

A poor argument.

A systematic and coordinated stifling of one particular political p.o.v. by the media, by academia, and by street mobs is not a normal course of events, except perhaps in totalitarian states.

This phenomenon has occurred multiple times -- always with leftists shutting down conservative speech and almost never the reverse -- in the past few months.

Perhaps in your mind this is the new normal and you are okay with that?
Back to top

dimyona




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 8:16 am
Without whining and complaining about evil liberals or psychopath right wingers, I do want to express that I'm honestly surprised at this sudden mass outrage against Milo.

We all know who we're dealing with. He tends to be outspoken about controversial topics, and usually with a dark and sarcastic sense of humor. I tend to disagree with him on most things, but he's generally entertaining and makes some sound points within his mix of trollish provocations.

I happen to have watched the Joe Rogan podcast back when it was first aired, and although he's being edgy and provocative, in no way is he promoting or encouraging pedophilia. As he said in his statement, his humorous take on it is his own way of dealing with his experience as a victim. And we can disagree on his opinion about the age of consent, but how can we do that without dialogue?

We can probably all agree that his words are tasteless, like many jokes about Holocaust victims, some of which I also find funny. Please don't throw tomatoes- humor/laughter is an involuntary reflex, and often helps us deal with dark and painful topics.

Of course, no one is obligated to provide him with a platform. Simon & Schuster is free to cancel their deal, as I'm sure their contract allowed for, and CPAC may invite the nutjob of their choice to speak. (Their prior roster usually included calm intellectuals like Ann Coulter, if that gives you a picture of whom they find acceptable.)

What I don't get is the sudden outrage on these statements as if this is the one dealbreaker that is an exception to the free speech argument that's been made in regard to his appearances until now. While this may subjectively be even more controversial than some of his past statements, it does not cross any legal threshold, and is definitely not news.
Back to top

SixOfWands




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 8:34 am
DrMom wrote:
A poor argument.

A systematic and coordinated stifling of one particular political p.o.v. by the media, by academia, and by street mobs is not a normal course of events, except perhaps in totalitarian states.

This phenomenon has occurred multiple times -- always with leftists shutting down conservative speech and almost never the reverse -- in the past few months.

Perhaps in your mind this is the new normal and you are okay with that?


We're witnessing a presidency that is attacking the First Amendment by attacking news sources that are not completely favorable to him, and attempting to marginalize them with the appellation "fake news."

What about Sarah Nyberg? (Whose supporters were accused by Breitbart of promoting pedophilia. Irony alert.)

Olga Perez Stable Cox?

Anita Sarkeesian?

Shaun King? (Who Yiannopoulis accused of not being black.)

Shall we talk about William and Mary College?

Are you organizing a protest in favor of Steven Salaita, who was fired for his anti-Israel animus?

Are you upset that Bill O’Reilly called on governors and legislators to monitor college classrooms more directly to prevent professors from “harming students with insane [left wing] ideology.”

Upset by right wing demands for “trigger warnings” (typically about nudity, relations and gay themes).

Are you organizing a protest against Republican-controlled states that are pushing for legislation that would discourage and even criminalize nonviolent, public demonstrations.

Its not all one-sided.

But I am an advocate of free speech in (almost) all of its forms. Yiannopoulis should have been able to speak. And no one should have come.
Back to top

marina




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 8:36 am
DrMom wrote:
A poor argument.

A systematic and coordinated stifling of one particular political p.o.v. by the media, by academia, and by street mobs is not a normal course of events, except perhaps in totalitarian states.

This phenomenon has occurred multiple times -- always with leftists shutting down conservative speech and almost never the reverse -- in the past few months.

Perhaps in your mind this is the new normal and you are okay with that?


This is what people do: They forget the past and imagine that TODAY EVERYTHING IS AWFUL AND THE WORLD HAS GONE MAD AND KIDS TODAY! AND GET OFF MY LAWN!

Extremists on both sides can get violent. You want some examples of extreme conservatives getting violent? Ok. Maybe these are all fake news, though. Be careful whom you believe.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/te.....lism/
http://ftrradio.com/2012/12/re.....tack/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/....._riot


Last edited by marina on Tue, Feb 21 2017, 8:43 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top

33055




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 8:41 am
marina wrote:
Basically, I think all this free speech outrage is just a smoke screen. I don't believe many people on this thread here care much about the Constitution's First Amendment. Many people are just using this as an opportunity to trash what they see as the Evil Left.

It's not like most people particularly cared that the Women's March - with millions of participants - was peaceful. I don't remember one single conservative poster from this website noting how MILLIONS of women identifying as left/liberals expressed their free speech rights in a non violent way. I don't remember any of our typically vocal imamother conservatives saying : HEY FREE SPEECH AND NO VIOLENCE - I LOVE THAT!!! GO FIRST AMENDMENT!

It was just still whining and complaining about the dumb women with their stupid p**** hats and ugly posters.

.


I have consistently voiced my opposition against censorship on this site and IRL for years. I think at points only you and I were vocal against banning certain posters. I didn't agree with the posters. I think you even called one crazy but said you like crazy which is my sentiment exactly. I also would never permit the schools to install filters on my computer even though I send to very right leaning schools. I may have been the only parent holdout. At least that is what I was told.by admin. I have consistently been against banning certain words like g°y on this site. That being said, I am against cruelty and mocking others like IT.

The left is shutting down free speech which you acknowledged. I am not against millions of women being against DT, but I don't understand what are the ascertainable goals. If he isn't your president, then who is? Is there a secret shadow government?

My objection to the the word pu$$y being bantered around is because it is female genitalia, and it is crude, and there are children who are going to not understand boundaries. It doesn't belong in the streets IMO and cheapens the movement. Just the same I wouldn't ban the word if it is in discourse like this one. I don't like crude words for their shock value.

The women's march was never a lone topic on this site but always part of a discussion. There have been way too many protests back to back, often violent, that any individual protest loses its effectiveness.
Back to top

marina




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 8:41 am
SixOfWands wrote:
We're witnessing a presidency that is attacking the First Amendment by attacking news sources that are not completely favorable to him, and attempting to marginalize them with the appellation "fake news."

What about Sarah Nyberg? (Whose supporters were accused by Breitbart of promoting pedophilia. Irony alert.)

Olga Perez Stable Cox?

Anita Sarkeesian?

Shaun King? (Who Yiannopoulis accused of not being black.)

Shall we talk about William and Mary College?

Are you organizing a protest in favor of Steven Salaita, who was fired for his anti-Israel animus?

Are you upset that Bill O’Reilly called on governors and legislators to monitor college classrooms more directly to prevent professors from “harming students with insane [left wing] ideology.”

Upset by right wing demands for “trigger warnings” (typically about nudity, relations and gay themes).

Are you organizing a protest against Republican-controlled states that are pushing for legislation that would discourage and even criminalize nonviolent, public demonstrations.

Its not all one-sided.

But I am an advocate of free speech in (almost) all of its forms. Yiannopoulis should have been able to speak. And no one should have come.


You know whose rights I'm most concerned about? Professor Joy Karega's. She used to be a professor at Oberlin college in Ohio, but got herself fired when she started writing about how Jews caused 9/11.

https://www.washingtonpost.com.....f79e4


CAN YOU IMAGINE? SHE GOT FIRED for speaking her mind. An outrage to be sure. Not a 1st Amendment issue, but still- this university is stifling her academic freedom. TERRIBLE! SAD!
Back to top

marina




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 8:48 am
Ok, my First Amendment zealots.

Who is upset about this? Anyone?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/.....ation

If you don't like the source for that, here's the bill itself

https://www.legis.iowa.gov/leg.....SF288

Tell me how much it bothers you that LEGISLATORS (not crazy college kids and middle school teachers) introduced a law requiring universities to condition hiring based on political party affiliation.

Does this vicious assault on the First Amendment make you worry at night? Are you going to post a thread about this on imamother? Or are you like: YOU GO IOWA!
Back to top

33055




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 8:51 am
marina wrote:
You know whose rights I'm most concerned about? Professor Joy Karega's. She used to be a professor at Oberlin college in Ohio, but got herself fired when she started writing about how Jews caused 9/11.

https://www.washingtonpost.com.....f79e4


CAN YOU IMAGINE? SHE GOT FIRED for speaking her mind. An outrage to be sure. Not a 1st Amendment issue, but still- this university is stifling her academic freedom. TERRIBLE! SAD!


She got fired for intellectual dishonesty and violating her code of ethics.
Back to top

marina




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 8:54 am
Quote:
I am not against millions of women being against DT, but I don't understand what are the ascertainable goals. If he isn't your president, then who is? Is there a secret shadow government?


Did I ever say he's not my president? Of course he is.

And that phrase when used by others generally means "I don't accept his moral authority" not that he is not actually the president.

The goals of any march is first and foremost to raise awareness and then to unify the protesters. If you look at the NYT's photos of the marches across the world, you will see what I mean. What people were protesting what awareness they were trying to raise, etc.
Back to top

marina




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 8:55 am
Squishy wrote:
She got fired for intellectual dishonesty and violating her code of ethics.


her intellectual dishonesty was saying that jews caused 9/11. I don't understand your distinction or why you are not upset that she can't speak her mind at this college campus.
Back to top

33055




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 8:56 am
marina wrote:
Ok, my First Amendment zealots.

Who is upset about this? Anyone?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/.....ation

If you don't like the source for that, here's the bill itself

https://www.legis.iowa.gov/leg.....SF288

Tell me how much it bothers you that LEGISLATORS (not crazy college kids and middle school teachers) introduced a law requiring universities to condition hiring based on political party affiliation.

Does this vicious assault on the First Amendment make you worry at night? Are you going to post a thread about this on imamother? Or are you like: YOU GO IOWA!


There is a lot of crazy legislation introduced often to score points with voters. Congress alone considers over 5000 bills a year. I don't know how many are considered in total in all 50 states, but I am sure it numbers quite high.
Back to top

marina




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 9:03 am
Squishy wrote:
There is a lot of crazy legislation introduced often to score points with voters. Congress alone considers over 5000 bills a year. I don't know how many are considered in total in all 50 states, but I am sure it numbers quite high.


Sure. But this is right wing conservatives pushing for shutting down free speech. In a way that would be legally enforceable were it to come to pass. Moreover, the people involved are LAWMAKERS not some teachers and college kids.

I would like some conservative imamother posters to start a thread about how outrageous it is that these legislators, elected by the people, are looking to stifle free speech in a way very reminiscent of communist Russia. Holding my breath now.


Last edited by marina on Tue, Feb 21 2017, 9:05 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top

33055




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 9:04 am
marina wrote:
her intellectual dishonesty was saying that jews caused 9/11. I don't understand your distinction or why you are not upset that she can't speak her mind at this college campus.


My distinction is that she had no foundation for what she said. If she could have backed it up, I would be interested.
Back to top

marina




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 9:06 am
Squishy wrote:
My distinction is that she had no foundation for what she said. If she could have backed it up, I would be interested.


So people should be able to speak only when their words are true? When they can back up what they want to speak about?

Should Milo be allowed to speak at Oberlin about how fat people should hate themselves and people on birth control should stop being such ugly sluts?
Back to top

33055




 
 
    
 

Post Tue, Feb 21 2017, 9:08 am
marina wrote:
Sure. But this is right wing conservatives pushing for shutting down free speech. In a way that would be legally enforceable were it to come to pass. Moreover, the people involved are LAWMAKERS not some teachers and college kids.

I would like some conservative imamother posters to start a thread about how outrageous it is that these legislators, elected by the people, are looking to stifle free speech in a way very reminiscent of communist Russia. Holding my breath now.


There is a bill before congress to get rid of the IRS. You can hold your breath before either bill gets passed.
Back to top
Page 8 of 13   Previous  1  2  3 7  8  9 11  12  13  Next Recent Topics




Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> In the News

Related Topics Replies Last Post
If you worked with an organizer- couple of questions
by amother
11 Mon, Feb 05 2024, 8:32 am View last post
Monsey Organizer
by amother
3 Fri, Jan 26 2024, 10:10 am View last post
Home organizer for ND Moms. AMA
by amother
69 Thu, Jan 18 2024, 5:38 pm View last post
Own a summer home in the catskills and CES bill insane
by yentee
1 Sat, Dec 30 2023, 10:33 pm View last post
Insane summer expenses
by amother
4 Fri, Dec 29 2023, 6:00 am View last post