Ezra Levant appeals to White supremacy due to his stance on muslims and immigration. He also sells the conspiracy theories that those in the alt-right crave such as paid and professional protesters.
Alt-right does not equal white supremacy, but a majority of white supremacist and nazi’s but into the the alt-right message.
So, who is creating the anti muslim and immigration message in the alt-right? Are modern Palestinians Muslim? Is Israel building fence and walls to keep Africa out?
So, who is creating the anti muslim and immigration message in the alt-right? Are modern Palestinians Muslim? Is Israel building fence and walls to keep Africa out?
So, who is creating the anti muslim and immigration message in the alt-right? Are modern Palestinians Muslim? Is Israel building fence and walls to keep Africa out?
We really do need you to be more clear if we're going to communicate better, @TakisMegas. I think the answer to the first question would just be "the alt-right." Opposition to legal and/or illegal immigration, especially from Islamic countries, is a signature position of the alt-right movement, and the alt-right movement is generally very skeptical of the potential influence of Islam on European and other cultures.
There's no one person that decided "alt-right people will be anti-Muslim or anti-immigration," just like there's no one person that decided "the GOP will be pro-life" or "the Democratic party will be pro-choice." These are just the common beliefs of folks in these groups. Nobody told these people to express these beliefs.
As for the second question, the CIA World Factbook says the religious breakdown of the Palestinian population is "Muslim 80-85% (predominantly Sunni), Jewish 12-14%, Christian 1-2.5% (mainly Greek Orthodox), other, unaffiliated, unspecified <1% (2012 est.)." I'm not sure what this question is about, though, since no other forumites have mentioned Palestine in the thread recently.
For the third question, Israel does maintain a strict border with Palestine that includes physical walls, but Israel does not border Africa. Again, we really need context to understand these questions, because other forumites have also not discussed Israeli border or immigration policy recently.
I don't see how these questions relate to each other, or to the current conversation. I get the feeling that you're thinking about a completely different topic, and we kinda need to know what that is in order for these questions to make sense. Right now, these are just non-sequiturs. For what it's worth, Rule 6 of the thread is "Be Clear."
Thought I'd post the letter I got from my congresswoman. Likely not written by Representative Dingell herself, but an interesting read nonetheless...
Debbie Dingell
12th District, Michigan
116 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-4071
House Committee on
ENERGY AND COMMERCE
HOUSE COMMITTEE
ON NATURAL RESOURCES
District Offices:
19855 West Outer Drive
Suite 103-E
Dearborn, MI 48124
(313) 278-2936
301 West Michigan Avenue
Suite 400
Ypsilanti, MI 48197
(734) 481-1100
Website: debbiedingell.house.gov
October 17, 2019
Dear Mr. xxxxx,
Thank you for contacting me regarding the potential impeachment of President Trump. Your thoughts are important.
The Constitution sets forth the general principles which control the process of impeachment, vesting the power to impeach in the House of Representatives, while imbuing the Senate with the power to try impeachments. The proceedings would to be initiated by the House Committee on the Judiciary. The focus of an impeachment inquiry is to determine whether the person involved has engaged in treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. If the House Committee on the Judiciary, by majority vote, determines that grounds for impeachment exist, a resolution impeaching the individual in question and setting forth specific allegations of misconduct, in one or more articles of impeachment, will be reported to the full House for consideration.
Through a whistleblower complaint to the Intelligence Community Inspector General, Congress learned of a phone call with President Trump and the President of Ukraine which concerned the Intelligence Community. The Inspector General of the Intelligence Community, who was appointed by President Trump, called the complaint credible, an urgent concern, and a danger to our national security. The Inspector General of the Intelligence Community determined that this whistleblower report represented a real threat to our national security, and it is the duty of Congress to understand the perceived threat and to address the issues. The Acting Director of National Intelligence's refusal to comply with the mandated practice of immediately providing this information is unprecedented, represents a dangerous breach protocol and raises numerous questions regarding the President's conduct. The release of the whistleblower's complaint and the President's transcript of the phone reveal deeply concerning information regarding the President's use of his position to persuade a foreign power to investigate a political rival. We still do not know all of the details or circumstances of these communications. It is critical that we ensure the safety and security of our elections, and we must understand all of the facts. We do not know all the details of these communications, so it is essential that Congress ensure we have all the information surrounding these events.
Impeachment is a very serious issue, and this is a sad time for our country. It is an action by the Congress that should only be used in the gravest and most serious circumstances. I have consistently warned of foreign entities' continued efforts to divide our country and I have tried to ensure that Congress avoid further contributing to that division. My biggest responsibility as an elected official is to protect our national security and the Constitution, and in light of these developments, I am supportive of an investigation that follows the facts. I remain unmoving in my belief that no one is above the law and we must use all Congressional authorities to follow the facts, launch an investigation, and uncover the truth. We still have the responsibility to lower drug prices for Americans and to get a trade deal that's going to help hardworking men and women, and we have a moral responsibility to protect our Constitution and the future of our democracy.
Again, thank you for contacting my office. If you are interested in regular updates on current legislation or issues of the day, you can visit my website at https://debbiedingell.house.gov and sign up for my newsletter. You can also find me on Twitter at @RepDebDingell and on Facebook. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future on interests of concern.
It's a well-written letter meant to appeal to moderates, but it's hard to continue fence-sitting when they keep incriminating themselves in public settings. Yesterday Trump's Chief of Staff ADMITTED to a quid pro quo in a press conference, and literally said "get over it". Then pretended he didn't say what he said an hour later. The pattern is always the same. First deny the whole thing happened. When that is no longer tenable, try to hang onto some flimsy BS technicality. When that position is inevitably overwhelmed as well, the end position is always "yeah, we actually did do it, screw you."
So, who is creating the anti muslim and immigration message in the alt-right? Are modern Palestinians Muslim? Is Israel building fence and walls to keep Africa out?
For what it's worth, Rule 6 of the thread is "Be Clear."
Cryptic is fun sometimes too. Just sayin, @semiticgod. Who knows which rabbit hole leads to enlightenment?
Wow, I was just thinking, "What the Democratic Party really needs is more insightful input from Hillary Clinton". Apparently Russia is grooming Tulsi Gabbard to create havoc in 2020.
An anti-endorsement from Hillary? Yeah that's worth it's weight in gold - for Gabbard!
It's a well-written letter meant to appeal to moderates, but it's hard to continue fence-sitting when they keep incriminating themselves in public settings. Yesterday Trump's Chief of Staff ADMITTED to a quid pro quo in a press conference, and literally said "get over it". Then pretended he didn't say what he said an hour later. The pattern is always the same. First deny the whole thing happened. When that is no longer tenable, try to hang onto some flimsy BS technicality. When that position is inevitably overwhelmed as well, the end position is always "yeah, we actually did do it, screw you."
So, who is creating the anti muslim and immigration message in the alt-right? Are modern Palestinians Muslim? Is Israel building fence and walls to keep Africa out?
We really do need you to be more clear if we're going to communicate better, @TakisMegas. I think the answer to the first question would just be "the alt-right." Opposition to legal and/or illegal immigration, especially from Islamic countries, is a signature position of the alt-right movement, and the alt-right movement is generally very skeptical of the potential influence of Islam on European and other cultures.
There's no one person that decided "alt-right people will be anti-Muslim or anti-immigration," just like there's no one person that decided "the GOP will be pro-life" or "the Democratic party will be pro-choice." These are just the common beliefs of folks in these groups. Nobody told these people to express these beliefs.
As for the second question, the CIA World Factbook says the religious breakdown of the Palestinian population is "Muslim 80-85% (predominantly Sunni), Jewish 12-14%, Christian 1-2.5% (mainly Greek Orthodox), other, unaffiliated, unspecified <1% (2012 est.)." I'm not sure what this question is about, though, since no other forumites have mentioned Palestine in the thread recently.
For the third question, Israel does maintain a strict border with Palestine that includes physical walls, but Israel does not border Africa. Again, we really need context to understand these questions, because other forumites have also not discussed Israeli border or immigration policy recently.
I don't see how these questions relate to each other, or to the current conversation. I get the feeling that you're thinking about a completely different topic, and we kinda need to know what that is in order for these questions to make sense. Right now, these are just non-sequiturs. For what it's worth, Rule 6 of the thread is "Be Clear."
The whole point of my comments where to make people see for themselves who the Alt-right are and what their purpose is. It's not a "Muh Fascist orange man bad REeeEEe" for the left. I responded to an ignorant comment about Nazis and Fascists which should be the real concern here, not my cookie crumb style adventure to help people see who are running the Alt-right.
I yield back my time, though I will always have a swift and assertive reaction to bullshit in all its forms.
"As for the second question, the CIA World Factbook says the religious breakdown of the Palestinian population is "Muslim 80-85% (predominantly Sunni), Jewish 12-14%, Christian 1-2.5% (mainly Greek Orthodox), other, unaffiliated, unspecified <1% (2012 est.)."
Yes @semiticgod I am fully aware, as are 100's millions of humans why modern day Palestine is under occupation.
As for the third, being literal everyday and in everything you do will make you sick and age quickly.
Here's some help, from wiki about Israel's African wall.
Wow, I was just thinking, "What the Democratic Party really needs is more insightful input from Hillary Clinton". Apparently Russia is grooming Tulsi Gabbard to create havoc in 2020.
An anti-endorsement from Hillary? Yeah that's worth it's weight in gold - for Gabbard!
Alt-right does not equal white supremacy, but a majority of white supremacist and nazi’s but into the the alt-right message.
Yes. A shame people don't make these important distinctions more often. A lot of the people in the "alt right" are white nationalists, for sure. This is not the same thing as a belief in racial supremacy. In many ways, it is a defensive posture built on a real and perceived threat to their communities, beliefs and culture, etc. It's really not so simple as hating other people, and we do a disservice to ourselves to adopt these untruths.
I wouldn't label a single one of the names listed as being even a white nationalist though. GOP types want nothing to do with it.
Admittedly I am more than passing familiar with modern alt right points of view. I find they diagnose many problems correctly but have very dumb solutions. I certainly wouldn't consider them, as a whole, inherently dangerous or worthy of total condemnation.
Now, there are literal white supremacist Nazi types out there. Probably about 20 in the whole country, but they exist. And they are geninunely repulsive to the point where it's an open question of whether or not they should be allowed to exist.
Wow, I was just thinking, "What the Democratic Party really needs is more insightful input from Hillary Clinton". Apparently Russia is grooming Tulsi Gabbard to create havoc in 2020.
An anti-endorsement from Hillary? Yeah that's worth it's weight in gold - for Gabbard!
You can't make this shit up. It's gotten to the point of mental illness now. Wow.
A potential Tulsi Gabbard third-party run is nothing less than a plausible deniability vote for people who want Trump to win another term but don't have balls to admit it any longer. Tulsi will grab onto any reason she can to explain away why she can't crack 2% in the polls, including going into a hysteric fit about a comment Hillary Clinton made on a podcast in which she never even mentions her by name. But a hit dog will holler. The fact is most people invested in Democratic politics hate her guts, believe she is a obvious spoiler possibly like Jill Stein (I said as much 4 months ago) and know the only reason she isn't a Republican is because she can't win in Hawaii with an R after her name.
Alt-right does not equal white supremacy, but a majority of white supremacist and nazi’s but into the the alt-right message.
Yes. A shame people don't make these important distinctions more often. A lot of the people in the "alt right" are white nationalists, for sure. This is not the same thing as a belief in racial supremacy. In many ways, it is a defensive posture built on a real and perceived threat to their communities, beliefs and culture, etc. It's really not so simple as hating other people, and we do a disservice to ourselves to adopt these untruths.
I wouldn't label a single one of the names listed as being even a white nationalist though. GOP types want nothing to do with it.
Admittedly I am more than passing familiar with modern alt right points of view. I find they diagnose many problems correctly but have very dumb solutions. I certainly wouldn't consider them, as a whole, inherently dangerous or worthy of total condemnation.
Now, there are literal white supremacist Nazi types out there. Probably about 20 in the whole country, but they exist. And they are geninunely repulsive to the point where it's an open question of whether or not they should be allowed to exist.
I would bet there are far more than 20 Nazi types in the country. I actually took a peak at 8-Chan after @jjstraka34 mentioned what a cesspool it was. He wasn't wrong...
Wow, I was just thinking, "What the Democratic Party really needs is more insightful input from Hillary Clinton". Apparently Russia is grooming Tulsi Gabbard to create havoc in 2020.
An anti-endorsement from Hillary? Yeah that's worth it's weight in gold - for Gabbard!
You can't make this shit up. It's gotten to the point of mental illness now. Wow.
A potential Tulsi Gabbard third-party run is nothing less than a plausible deniability vote for people who want Trump to win another term but don't have balls to admit it any longer. Tulsi will grab onto any reason she can to explain away why she can't crack 2% in the polls, including going into a hysteric fit about a comment Hillary Clinton made on a podcast in which she never even mentions her by name. But a hit dog will holler. The fact is most people invested in Democratic politics hate her guts, believe she is a obvious spoiler possibly like Jill Stein (I said as much 4 months ago) and know the only reason she isn't a Republican is because she can't win in Hawaii with an R after her name.
So you don't like her? she's not Democrat enough. How do you define a "Modern Democrat", someone you don't agree with?
Alt-right does not equal white supremacy, but a majority of white supremacist and nazi’s but into the the alt-right message.
Yes. A shame people don't make these important distinctions more often. A lot of the people in the "alt right" are white nationalists, for sure. This is not the same thing as a belief in racial supremacy. In many ways, it is a defensive posture built on a real and perceived threat to their communities, beliefs and culture, etc. It's really not so simple as hating other people, and we do a disservice to ourselves to adopt these untruths.
I wouldn't label a single one of the names listed as being even a white nationalist though. GOP types want nothing to do with it.
Admittedly I am more than passing familiar with modern alt right points of view. I find they diagnose many problems correctly but have very dumb solutions. I certainly wouldn't consider them, as a whole, inherently dangerous or worthy of total condemnation.
Now, there are literal white supremacist Nazi types out there. Probably about 20 in the whole country, but they exist. And they are geninunely repulsive to the point where it's an open question of whether or not they should be allowed to exist.
I would bet there are far more than 20 Nazi types in the country. I actually took a peak at 8-Chan after @jjstraka34 mentioned what a cesspool it was. He wasn't wrong...
you went there, for gods sakes man bleach your eyes
Alt-right does not equal white supremacy, but a majority of white supremacist and nazi’s but into the the alt-right message.
Yes. A shame people don't make these important distinctions more often. A lot of the people in the "alt right" are white nationalists, for sure. This is not the same thing as a belief in racial supremacy. In many ways, it is a defensive posture built on a real and perceived threat to their communities, beliefs and culture, etc. It's really not so simple as hating other people, and we do a disservice to ourselves to adopt these untruths.
I wouldn't label a single one of the names listed as being even a white nationalist though. GOP types want nothing to do with it.
Admittedly I am more than passing familiar with modern alt right points of view. I find they diagnose many problems correctly but have very dumb solutions. I certainly wouldn't consider them, as a whole, inherently dangerous or worthy of total condemnation.
Now, there are literal white supremacist Nazi types out there. Probably about 20 in the whole country, but they exist. And they are geninunely repulsive to the point where it's an open question of whether or not they should be allowed to exist.
I would bet there are far more than 20 Nazi types in the country. I actually took a peak at 8-Chan after @jjstraka34 mentioned what a cesspool it was. He wasn't wrong...
you went there, for gods sakes man bleach your eyes
Scientific curiosity. Waste of a good night's sleep...
Alt-right does not equal white supremacy, but a majority of white supremacist and nazi’s but into the the alt-right message.
Yes. A shame people don't make these important distinctions more often. A lot of the people in the "alt right" are white nationalists, for sure. This is not the same thing as a belief in racial supremacy. In many ways, it is a defensive posture built on a real and perceived threat to their communities, beliefs and culture, etc. It's really not so simple as hating other people, and we do a disservice to ourselves to adopt these untruths.
I wouldn't label a single one of the names listed as being even a white nationalist though. GOP types want nothing to do with it.
Admittedly I am more than passing familiar with modern alt right points of view. I find they diagnose many problems correctly but have very dumb solutions. I certainly wouldn't consider them, as a whole, inherently dangerous or worthy of total condemnation.
Now, there are literal white supremacist Nazi types out there. Probably about 20 in the whole country, but they exist. And they are geninunely repulsive to the point where it's an open question of whether or not they should be allowed to exist.
I would bet there are far more than 20 Nazi types in the country. I actually took a peak at 8-Chan after @jjstraka34 mentioned what a cesspool it was. He wasn't wrong...
you went there, for gods sakes man bleach your eyes
Scientific curiosity. Waste of a good night's sleep...
I have to admit if Tulsi ran 3rd party, I'd vote for her over Trump. Ditto for Klobuchar as well. Unless Warren winds up being the candidate I'm voting Libertarian otherwise. Warren lost me after her hemming and hawing over raising taxes on the middle-class to pay for her policies. At least Bernie admits it's going to cost me instead of lying about the rich paying for everything. I liked Yang at first but his broken record talk about paying me $1000/month for my vote kinda soured me on him. Since marijuana is legal in Michigan now I may be tempted to light up a fatty and vote for space-cadet Williamson if she somehow won the candidacy in an alternate reality...
Alt-right does not equal white supremacy, but a majority of white supremacist and nazi’s but into the the alt-right message.
Yes. A shame people don't make these important distinctions more often. A lot of the people in the "alt right" are white nationalists, for sure. This is not the same thing as a belief in racial supremacy. In many ways, it is a defensive posture built on a real and perceived threat to their communities, beliefs and culture, etc. It's really not so simple as hating other people, and we do a disservice to ourselves to adopt these untruths.
I wouldn't label a single one of the names listed as being even a white nationalist though. GOP types want nothing to do with it.
Admittedly I am more than passing familiar with modern alt right points of view. I find they diagnose many problems correctly but have very dumb solutions. I certainly wouldn't consider them, as a whole, inherently dangerous or worthy of total condemnation.
Now, there are literal white supremacist Nazi types out there. Probably about 20 in the whole country, but they exist. And they are geninunely repulsive to the point where it's an open question of whether or not they should be allowed to exist.
I would bet there are far more than 20 Nazi types in the country. I actually took a peak at 8-Chan after @jjstraka34 mentioned what a cesspool it was. He wasn't wrong...
you went there, for gods sakes man bleach your eyes
Scientific curiosity. Waste of a good night's sleep...
You were so preoccupied with whether or not you could, you didn't bother to stop and think if you SHOULD.
Wow, I was just thinking, "What the Democratic Party really needs is more insightful input from Hillary Clinton". Apparently Russia is grooming Tulsi Gabbard to create havoc in 2020.
An anti-endorsement from Hillary? Yeah that's worth it's weight in gold - for Gabbard!
You can't make this shit up. It's gotten to the point of mental illness now. Wow.
A potential Tulsi Gabbard third-party run is nothing less than a plausible deniability vote for people who want Trump to win another term but don't have balls to admit it any longer. Tulsi will grab onto any reason she can to explain away why she can't crack 2% in the polls, including going into a hysteric fit about a comment Hillary Clinton made on a podcast in which she never even mentions her by name. But a hit dog will holler. The fact is most people invested in Democratic politics hate her guts, believe she is a obvious spoiler possibly like Jill Stein (I said as much 4 months ago) and know the only reason she isn't a Republican is because she can't win in Hawaii with an R after her name.
So you don't like her? she's not Democrat enough. How do you define a "Modern Democrat", someone you don't agree with?
It's fairly sinple. I don't trust her, and even more so, I don't trust where her support comes from. And by that I don't mean Russia (though Russian bots on social media go ALL OUT for her, which is what Hillary is talking about). I mean the make-up of her domestic constituency, meager as it is. All I smell is a spoiler. She has said she won't do so. We'll see if she sticks to it.
Alt-right does not equal white supremacy, but a majority of white supremacist and nazi’s but into the the alt-right message.
Yes. A shame people don't make these important distinctions more often. A lot of the people in the "alt right" are white nationalists, for sure. This is not the same thing as a belief in racial supremacy. In many ways, it is a defensive posture built on a real and perceived threat to their communities, beliefs and culture, etc. It's really not so simple as hating other people, and we do a disservice to ourselves to adopt these untruths.
I wouldn't label a single one of the names listed as being even a white nationalist though. GOP types want nothing to do with it.
Admittedly I am more than passing familiar with modern alt right points of view. I find they diagnose many problems correctly but have very dumb solutions. I certainly wouldn't consider them, as a whole, inherently dangerous or worthy of total condemnation.
Now, there are literal white supremacist Nazi types out there. Probably about 20 in the whole country, but they exist. And they are geninunely repulsive to the point where it's an open question of whether or not they should be allowed to exist.
I would bet there are far more than 20 Nazi types in the country. I actually took a peak at 8-Chan after @jjstraka34 mentioned what a cesspool it was. He wasn't wrong...
you went there, for gods sakes man bleach your eyes
Scientific curiosity. Waste of a good night's sleep...
You were so preoccupied with whether or not you could, you didn't bother to stop and think if you SHOULD.
It was much easier to get there than I thought it would be. It was after Google banned the site so I had to type it manually on the browser header. I honestly thought it wouldn't work...
Wow, I was just thinking, "What the Democratic Party really needs is more insightful input from Hillary Clinton". Apparently Russia is grooming Tulsi Gabbard to create havoc in 2020.
An anti-endorsement from Hillary? Yeah that's worth it's weight in gold - for Gabbard!
You can't make this shit up. It's gotten to the point of mental illness now. Wow.
A potential Tulsi Gabbard third-party run is nothing less than a plausible deniability vote for people who want Trump to win another term but don't have balls to admit it any longer. Tulsi will grab onto any reason she can to explain away why she can't crack 2% in the polls, including going into a hysteric fit about a comment Hillary Clinton made on a podcast in which she never even mentions her by name. But a hit dog will holler. The fact is most people invested in Democratic politics hate her guts, believe she is a obvious spoiler possibly like Jill Stein (I said as much 4 months ago) and know the only reason she isn't a Republican is because she can't win in Hawaii with an R after her name.
So you don't like her? she's not Democrat enough. How do you define a "Modern Democrat", someone you don't agree with?
It's fairly sinple. I don't trust her, and even more so, I don't trust where her support comes from. And by that I don't mean Russia (though Russian bots on social media go ALL OUT for her, which is what Hillary is talking about). I mean the make-up of her domestic constituency, meager as it is. All I smell is a spoiler. She has said she won't do so. We'll see if she sticks to it.
It may not be just Democrat votes she soaks up. Just sayin'. I like her and my even-more-conservative-than-me buddy at work likes her too. She also did very well in the last debate (probably why there's a bullseye on her now).
Alt-right does not equal white supremacy, but a majority of white supremacist and nazi’s but into the the alt-right message.
Yes. A shame people don't make these important distinctions more often. A lot of the people in the "alt right" are white nationalists, for sure. This is not the same thing as a belief in racial supremacy. In many ways, it is a defensive posture built on a real and perceived threat to their communities, beliefs and culture, etc. It's really not so simple as hating other people, and we do a disservice to ourselves to adopt these untruths.
I wouldn't label a single one of the names listed as being even a white nationalist though. GOP types want nothing to do with it.
Admittedly I am more than passing familiar with modern alt right points of view. I find they diagnose many problems correctly but have very dumb solutions. I certainly wouldn't consider them, as a whole, inherently dangerous or worthy of total condemnation.
Now, there are literal white supremacist Nazi types out there. Probably about 20 in the whole country, but they exist. And they are geninunely repulsive to the point where it's an open question of whether or not they should be allowed to exist.
I would bet there are far more than 20 Nazi types in the country. I actually took a peak at 8-Chan after @jjstraka34 mentioned what a cesspool it was. He wasn't wrong...
you went there, for gods sakes man bleach your eyes
Scientific curiosity. Waste of a good night's sleep...
You were so preoccupied with whether or not you could, you didn't bother to stop and think if you SHOULD.
It was much easier to get there than I thought it would be. It was after Google banned the site so I had to type it manually on the browser header. I honestly thought it wouldn't work...
You don't need to go to 8chan, just go to Youtube.
Since I watch alot of Youtube vidoes, I read alot of Youtube comments. I will fully admit there are LOADS of less than kind things that get posted over and over again by liberals about conservatives. But they bascially reach their peak at contemtuous, condescending and insulting.
On the other hand, today a watched a video from a right-wing Youtuber about California. I read at least 150-200 comments and this is what it boiled down to, with very little if any variation:
1.) People from California are locusts
2.). People from California shouldn't be allowed to vote.
3.) If a person ever moves out of California, they should never be able to vote in another state they move to.
4.) I wish I could shoot the people I see in my state with California license plates.
5.) California should secede, then we should invade and annex them.
Call it confirmation bias if you want, but I don't just read comments on videos on one side. Liberals believe conservatives need to be removed from political power and, at worst, believe they are really dumb. The comments on the other side indicate that they don't believe liberals should have rights or even EXIST.
I wouldn't label a single one of the names listed as being even a white nationalist though.
I'm only quite familiar with Sargon (subscribed to his youtube) out of all those names, and I wouldn't call him even a nationalist. If he's not a liberal, then I'm a F-ing communist (and I think communists have no right to exist - at the very least outside of prison or uranium mines, where they liked so much to throw people to).
Alt-right does not equal white supremacy, but a majority of white supremacist and nazi’s but into the the alt-right message.
Yes. A shame people don't make these important distinctions more often. A lot of the people in the "alt right" are white nationalists, for sure. This is not the same thing as a belief in racial supremacy. In many ways, it is a defensive posture built on a real and perceived threat to their communities, beliefs and culture, etc. It's really not so simple as hating other people, and we do a disservice to ourselves to adopt these untruths.
I wouldn't label a single one of the names listed as being even a white nationalist though. GOP types want nothing to do with it.
Admittedly I am more than passing familiar with modern alt right points of view. I find they diagnose many problems correctly but have very dumb solutions. I certainly wouldn't consider them, as a whole, inherently dangerous or worthy of total condemnation.
Now, there are literal white supremacist Nazi types out there. Probably about 20 in the whole country, but they exist. And they are geninunely repulsive to the point where it's an open question of whether or not they should be allowed to exist.
I would bet there are far more than 20 Nazi types in the country. I actually took a peak at 8-Chan after @jjstraka34 mentioned what a cesspool it was. He wasn't wrong...
you went there, for gods sakes man bleach your eyes
Scientific curiosity. Waste of a good night's sleep...
You were so preoccupied with whether or not you could, you didn't bother to stop and think if you SHOULD.
It was much easier to get there than I thought it would be. It was after Google banned the site so I had to type it manually on the browser header. I honestly thought it wouldn't work...
You don't need to go to 8chan, just go to Youtube.
Since I watch alot of Youtube vidoes, I read alot of Youtube comments. I will fully admit there are LOADS of less than kind things that get posted over and over again by liberals about conservatives. But they bascially reach their peak at contemtuous, condescending and insulting.
On the other hand, today a watched a video from a right-wing Youtuber about California. I read at least 150-200 comments and this is what it boiled down to, with very little if any variation:
1.) People from California are locusts
2.). People from California shouldn't be allowed to vote.
3.) If a person ever moves out of California, they should never be able to vote in another state they move to.
4.) I wish I could shoot the people I see in my state with California license plates.
5.) California should secede, then we should invade and annex them.
Call it confirmation bias if you want, but I don't just read comments on videos on one side. Liberals believe conservatives need to be removed from political power and, at worst, believe they are really dumb. The comments on the other side indicate that they don't believe liberals should have rights or even EXIST.
I honestly have to agree with you, at least partially. I truly believe that liberals in general have a very simplistic view of how things work in the 'real' world (in particular, the whole 'life should be fair' thing seems to me to be a recipe for lifelong misery). However, conservatives like me have very little power to even share our viewpoints anymore with how polarized things are. As naive as I think liberals are, I'm starting to realize how dogmatically stupid the average so-called conservative is. Wrapping religion into their politics has made many of them into closed-minded zealots. The people on the other side of the political spectrum from myself on this forum may find this hard to believe, but I actually do have an open mind.
I've said in the past that there are around 10 or so people in this thread from all sides of the spectrum that I could work with to hash out a national policy that is far preferable to the bullshit that we're subjected to on a day-by-day basis in this country.
Yes, I was wondering if I should have added that an awful lot of people love to call themselves liberal nowadays, despite having nothing in common with actual liberalism. And I'm not talking about Sargon
Tulsi Gabbard will win 2024 United States Presidential Election as a Dem. This 'how far left can we go' and 'Fake News Memes' edgy wannabe social media tripe will die out. Then the world can get back to actually trying to fight real issues like climate change, Universal health care and social income gaps.
Comments
Alt-right does not equal white supremacy, but a majority of white supremacist and nazi’s but into the the alt-right message.
So, who is creating the anti muslim and immigration message in the alt-right? Are modern Palestinians Muslim? Is Israel building fence and walls to keep Africa out?
There's no one person that decided "alt-right people will be anti-Muslim or anti-immigration," just like there's no one person that decided "the GOP will be pro-life" or "the Democratic party will be pro-choice." These are just the common beliefs of folks in these groups. Nobody told these people to express these beliefs.
As for the second question, the CIA World Factbook says the religious breakdown of the Palestinian population is "Muslim 80-85% (predominantly Sunni), Jewish 12-14%, Christian 1-2.5% (mainly Greek Orthodox), other, unaffiliated, unspecified <1% (2012 est.)." I'm not sure what this question is about, though, since no other forumites have mentioned Palestine in the thread recently.
For the third question, Israel does maintain a strict border with Palestine that includes physical walls, but Israel does not border Africa. Again, we really need context to understand these questions, because other forumites have also not discussed Israeli border or immigration policy recently.
I don't see how these questions relate to each other, or to the current conversation. I get the feeling that you're thinking about a completely different topic, and we kinda need to know what that is in order for these questions to make sense. Right now, these are just non-sequiturs. For what it's worth, Rule 6 of the thread is "Be Clear."
Debbie Dingell
12th District, Michigan
116 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-4071
House Committee on
ENERGY AND COMMERCE
HOUSE COMMITTEE
ON NATURAL RESOURCES
District Offices:
19855 West Outer Drive
Suite 103-E
Dearborn, MI 48124
(313) 278-2936
301 West Michigan Avenue
Suite 400
Ypsilanti, MI 48197
(734) 481-1100
Website: debbiedingell.house.gov
October 17, 2019
Dear Mr. xxxxx,
Thank you for contacting me regarding the potential impeachment of President Trump. Your thoughts are important.
The Constitution sets forth the general principles which control the process of impeachment, vesting the power to impeach in the House of Representatives, while imbuing the Senate with the power to try impeachments. The proceedings would to be initiated by the House Committee on the Judiciary. The focus of an impeachment inquiry is to determine whether the person involved has engaged in treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. If the House Committee on the Judiciary, by majority vote, determines that grounds for impeachment exist, a resolution impeaching the individual in question and setting forth specific allegations of misconduct, in one or more articles of impeachment, will be reported to the full House for consideration.
Through a whistleblower complaint to the Intelligence Community Inspector General, Congress learned of a phone call with President Trump and the President of Ukraine which concerned the Intelligence Community. The Inspector General of the Intelligence Community, who was appointed by President Trump, called the complaint credible, an urgent concern, and a danger to our national security. The Inspector General of the Intelligence Community determined that this whistleblower report represented a real threat to our national security, and it is the duty of Congress to understand the perceived threat and to address the issues. The Acting Director of National Intelligence's refusal to comply with the mandated practice of immediately providing this information is unprecedented, represents a dangerous breach protocol and raises numerous questions regarding the President's conduct. The release of the whistleblower's complaint and the President's transcript of the phone reveal deeply concerning information regarding the President's use of his position to persuade a foreign power to investigate a political rival. We still do not know all of the details or circumstances of these communications. It is critical that we ensure the safety and security of our elections, and we must understand all of the facts. We do not know all the details of these communications, so it is essential that Congress ensure we have all the information surrounding these events.
Impeachment is a very serious issue, and this is a sad time for our country. It is an action by the Congress that should only be used in the gravest and most serious circumstances. I have consistently warned of foreign entities' continued efforts to divide our country and I have tried to ensure that Congress avoid further contributing to that division. My biggest responsibility as an elected official is to protect our national security and the Constitution, and in light of these developments, I am supportive of an investigation that follows the facts. I remain unmoving in my belief that no one is above the law and we must use all Congressional authorities to follow the facts, launch an investigation, and uncover the truth. We still have the responsibility to lower drug prices for Americans and to get a trade deal that's going to help hardworking men and women, and we have a moral responsibility to protect our Constitution and the future of our democracy.
Again, thank you for contacting my office. If you are interested in regular updates on current legislation or issues of the day, you can visit my website at https://debbiedingell.house.gov and sign up for my newsletter. You can also find me on Twitter at @RepDebDingell and on Facebook. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future on interests of concern.
Sincerely,
Debbie Dingell
Member of Congress
Cryptic is fun sometimes too. Just sayin, @semiticgod. Who knows which rabbit hole leads to enlightenment?
An anti-endorsement from Hillary? Yeah that's worth it's weight in gold - for Gabbard!
https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics/hillary-clinton-tulsi-gabbard/index.html?r=https://www.cnn.com/
The whole point of my comments where to make people see for themselves who the Alt-right are and what their purpose is. It's not a "Muh Fascist orange man bad REeeEEe" for the left. I responded to an ignorant comment about Nazis and Fascists which should be the real concern here, not my cookie crumb style adventure to help people see who are running the Alt-right.
I yield back my time, though I will always have a swift and assertive reaction to bullshit in all its forms.
"As for the second question, the CIA World Factbook says the religious breakdown of the Palestinian population is "Muslim 80-85% (predominantly Sunni), Jewish 12-14%, Christian 1-2.5% (mainly Greek Orthodox), other, unaffiliated, unspecified <1% (2012 est.)."
Yes @semiticgod I am fully aware, as are 100's millions of humans why modern day Palestine is under occupation.
As for the third, being literal everyday and in everything you do will make you sick and age quickly.
Here's some help, from wiki about Israel's African wall.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt–Israel_barrier
You can't make this shit up. It's gotten to the point of mental illness now. Wow.
Yes. A shame people don't make these important distinctions more often. A lot of the people in the "alt right" are white nationalists, for sure. This is not the same thing as a belief in racial supremacy. In many ways, it is a defensive posture built on a real and perceived threat to their communities, beliefs and culture, etc. It's really not so simple as hating other people, and we do a disservice to ourselves to adopt these untruths.
I wouldn't label a single one of the names listed as being even a white nationalist though. GOP types want nothing to do with it.
Admittedly I am more than passing familiar with modern alt right points of view. I find they diagnose many problems correctly but have very dumb solutions. I certainly wouldn't consider them, as a whole, inherently dangerous or worthy of total condemnation.
Now, there are literal white supremacist Nazi types out there. Probably about 20 in the whole country, but they exist. And they are geninunely repulsive to the point where it's an open question of whether or not they should be allowed to exist.
A potential Tulsi Gabbard third-party run is nothing less than a plausible deniability vote for people who want Trump to win another term but don't have balls to admit it any longer. Tulsi will grab onto any reason she can to explain away why she can't crack 2% in the polls, including going into a hysteric fit about a comment Hillary Clinton made on a podcast in which she never even mentions her by name. But a hit dog will holler. The fact is most people invested in Democratic politics hate her guts, believe she is a obvious spoiler possibly like Jill Stein (I said as much 4 months ago) and know the only reason she isn't a Republican is because she can't win in Hawaii with an R after her name.
I would bet there are far more than 20 Nazi types in the country. I actually took a peak at 8-Chan after @jjstraka34 mentioned what a cesspool it was. He wasn't wrong...
So you don't like her? she's not Democrat enough. How do you define a "Modern Democrat", someone you don't agree with?
you went there, for gods sakes man bleach your eyes
Scientific curiosity. Waste of a good night's sleep...
Yes, always for science.
You were so preoccupied with whether or not you could, you didn't bother to stop and think if you SHOULD.
It's fairly sinple. I don't trust her, and even more so, I don't trust where her support comes from. And by that I don't mean Russia (though Russian bots on social media go ALL OUT for her, which is what Hillary is talking about). I mean the make-up of her domestic constituency, meager as it is. All I smell is a spoiler. She has said she won't do so. We'll see if she sticks to it.
It was much easier to get there than I thought it would be. It was after Google banned the site so I had to type it manually on the browser header. I honestly thought it wouldn't work...
It may not be just Democrat votes she soaks up. Just sayin'. I like her and my even-more-conservative-than-me buddy at work likes her too. She also did very well in the last debate (probably why there's a bullseye on her now).
You don't need to go to 8chan, just go to Youtube.
Since I watch alot of Youtube vidoes, I read alot of Youtube comments. I will fully admit there are LOADS of less than kind things that get posted over and over again by liberals about conservatives. But they bascially reach their peak at contemtuous, condescending and insulting.
On the other hand, today a watched a video from a right-wing Youtuber about California. I read at least 150-200 comments and this is what it boiled down to, with very little if any variation:
1.) People from California are locusts
2.). People from California shouldn't be allowed to vote.
3.) If a person ever moves out of California, they should never be able to vote in another state they move to.
4.) I wish I could shoot the people I see in my state with California license plates.
5.) California should secede, then we should invade and annex them.
Call it confirmation bias if you want, but I don't just read comments on videos on one side. Liberals believe conservatives need to be removed from political power and, at worst, believe they are really dumb. The comments on the other side indicate that they don't believe liberals should have rights or even EXIST.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Sargon_of_Akkad
I honestly have to agree with you, at least partially. I truly believe that liberals in general have a very simplistic view of how things work in the 'real' world (in particular, the whole 'life should be fair' thing seems to me to be a recipe for lifelong misery). However, conservatives like me have very little power to even share our viewpoints anymore with how polarized things are. As naive as I think liberals are, I'm starting to realize how dogmatically stupid the average so-called conservative is. Wrapping religion into their politics has made many of them into closed-minded zealots. The people on the other side of the political spectrum from myself on this forum may find this hard to believe, but I actually do have an open mind.
I've said in the past that there are around 10 or so people in this thread from all sides of the spectrum that I could work with to hash out a national policy that is far preferable to the bullshit that we're subjected to on a day-by-day basis in this country.
Tulsi Gabbard will win 2024 United States Presidential Election as a Dem. This 'how far left can we go' and 'Fake News Memes' edgy wannabe social media tripe will die out. Then the world can get back to actually trying to fight real issues like climate change, Universal health care and social income gaps.