Political Digression Thread -- Save UP! Move the politically focused stuff here

[cjd5050]

12 hours ago, kermit said:

You are distracted (or being duplicitous). You are calling people on the middle left of the spectrum part of the problem just because they are protesting the rise of American fascism in the same place as fringe groups like antifa. Your focus on the fringes of the movement and the suggestion that the mainstream left must get control of the fringe before they may protest appears to be designed to discredit the the left and discourage them exercising their rights. 

As you said above, this ain't kosher.

3

Bless your heart.  You're trying so hard.  

[caterpillar2]

1 hour ago, kermit said:

Yea, super logic. Now that you have enlightened me I am going to stop payment on my donation to maria prevention research because cancer, tuberculous, and fatal snake bites also kill people.  Since I can't afford to donate to all of these worthy causes I just wont do anything to help solve any of these problems, even the most deadly one.

/s/

Great come back. LOL. 

 

[caterpillar2]

2 hours ago, kermit said:

Well, this was last week: http://www.gastongazette.com/news/20170814/gaston-county-man-this-is-nazi-america

and this was in 1979 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greensboro_massacre 

And you have exempted the right from your declaration that 'selective fascism protests are bad' because...?

 

Your question doesn't make sense, but I will try to answer what I think you are trying to say. If society is against fascism, it can't only be against specific fascist organizations. Fascism involves maintaining complete power and suppressing opposition and criticism.  We do not accept the Nazis for being fascist as we know this has been their premise. Why would we accept fascism from BLM, Black Panthers, and to a lesser degree, the NAACP? 

[kermit]

4 minutes ago, caterpillar2 said:

 We do not accept the Nazis for being fascist as we know this has been their premise. 

I don't think the dude you elected president got this memo. 

[caterpillar2]

2 hours ago, kermit said:

I don't think the dude you elected president got this memo. 

So tell him, not me. Nazis aren't a threat to me or anyone else. 

[urbanlover568]

On 8/16/2017 at 10:41 AM, caterpillar2 said:

Does this mean that if those with comments support the ideals for which you disapprove, they will be banned? My family is Jewish but do not hate people that are anti-Jewish. People often  have reasons for their prejudices. It is more beneficial to understand them than to work to resolve, not bannish. I believe that in the case of this demonstration the demonstration that included the KKK was in protest of the double standard that is quite obvious in the U.S. For example, your obvious hate for radical right wing whites. I don't understand why radical left wingers are not included in your statement. That is all I have to say except that you should take a more intellectual, mature attitude.  I am finished commenting on this topic and hope that you have the decency to not ban me for using my right to freedom of speech since I broke no rules. 

Did you not say that you had a Gay son, and supported the GOP anti-gay rhetoric/policies? Now you conveniently say your family is Jewish, and don't condemn this admins neglect towards the Nazi's dangerous rhetoric and recent terrorist attack. For someone who is Jewish, and has a gay son, you oddly support groups that directly don't have you and your sons best interest in heart(if you are honest about your admissions).

Edited August 20, 2017 by mpretori

[kermit]

1 hour ago, caterpillar2 said:

So tell him, not me. Nazis aren't a threat to me or anyone else. 

The FBI and Dept of Homeland Security disagree with your threat assessment: http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/14/fbi-and-dhs-warned-of-growing-threat-from-white-supremacists-months-ago/

Quote

the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security in May warned that white supremacist groups had already carried out more attacks than any other domestic extremist group over the past 16 years and were likely to carry out more attacks over the next year, according to an intelligence bulletin obtained by Foreign Policy.

 

Edited August 20, 2017 by kermit

[caterpillar2]

2 hours ago, mpretori said:

Did you not say that you had a Gay son, and supported the GOP anti-gay rhetoric/policies? Now you conveniently say your family is Jewish, and don't condemn this admins neglect towards the Nazi's dangerous rhetoric and recent terrorist attack. For someone who is Jewish, and has a gay son, you oddly support groups that directly don't have you and your sons best interest in heart(if you are honest about your admissions).

Question one, yes I have a gay  son. Question 2, I never said I supported anti-gay rhetoric/policies. That being the case, all of the other crap you wrote doesn't apply. 

Edited August 20, 2017 by caterpillar2

[urbanlover568]

20 minutes ago, caterpillar2 said:

You need a warning from the monitor. You are getting personal and making very stupid interpretations of what I have said in the past. A good policy is to shut up if you don't understand something otherwise you look foolish. A gay son can be a conservative like he is. Members of my family are Jews. I am not and I don't wish to be. I believe that there are good in all groups including the KKK. I would love to express my feelings towards you, but I am not gay, a liberal, or a person that wishes to eliminate free speech from those thinking differently which means that I would be banned. If there is a meet up in the future, I will certainly introduce myself if you are there. I am sure that would be nice

You edit your comment more times than the hours of the day. You just said you dont like me, now want to meet me. No thankyou. I'm just reflecting on what you said before, if that bothers you, maybe watch what personal info you give out? You continue to support groups that are hostile towards your family members and son, so be it. Just goes against common sense, to me personally. 

[caterpillar2]

2 minutes ago, mpretori said:

You edit your comment more times than the hours of the day. You just said you dont like me, now want to meet me. No thankyou. I'm just reflecting on what you said before, if that bothers you, maybe watch what personal info you give out? You continue to support groups that are hostile towards your family members and son, so be it. Just goes against common sense, to me personally. 

I can assure you that I didn't want to meet you to be your buddy. You are really saying extremely stupid things. You have no clue how I feel and are way off base. Just because I don't agree with you politically doesn't make me the bad guy. I served the country too many years to deny freedoms to anybody whether they agree with me or not. That is the premise of my postings. I was never anti-gay. I thought the bathroom policy was out there and that the mayor has crap for brains, but that is my freedom to feel as I please. You should actually know someone before making ignorant assessments. 

[urbanlover568]

Just now, caterpillar2 said:

I can assure you that I didn't want to meet you to be your buddy. You are really saying extremely stupid things. You have no clue how I feel and are way off base. Just because I don't agree with you politically doesn't make me the bad guy. I served the country too many years to deny freedoms to anybody whether they agree with me or not. That is the premise of my postings. I was never anti-gay. I thought the bathroom policy was out there and that the mayor has crap for brains, but that is my freedom to feel as I please. You should actually know someone before making ignorant assessments. 

Thanks for your service. I think you got a "point". WW2 was unnecessary, when we got a Nazi-apologist trump at the helm now. David Duke, kkk leader openly praises Trump. Totally okay for these people make the below comments, right?

 

[ruraljuror]

5 hours ago, caterpillar2 said:

So tell him, not me. Nazis aren't a threat to me or anyone else. 

That is a pretty brazen thing to say given that it was only last weekend when Nazi killed a peaceful protester.

It just so happens that there is a database of all the domestic terror incidents that happened in the U.S. between 2008 and 2016.  They even categorized those domestic terror incidents into Islamic, Right wing, and Left wing then put them all on a map to make it easier to visualize.  Here it is:

https://apps.revealnews.org/homegrown-terror/

 

There were 201 cases of domestic terrorism during the tracking period.  Here are some of the findings with my emphasis in bold:

• From January 2008 to the end of 2016, we identified 63 cases of Islamist domestic terrorism, meaning incidents motivated by a theocratic political ideology espoused by such groups as the Islamic State. The vast majority of these (76 percent) were foiled plots, meaning no attack took place.
• During the same period, we found that right-wing extremists were behind nearly twice as many incidents: 115. Just over a third of these incidents (35 percent) were foiled plots. The majority were acts of terrorist violence that involved deaths, injuries or damaged property.
• Right-wing extremist terrorism was more often deadly: Nearly a third of incidents involved fatalities, for a total of 79 deaths, while 13 percent of Islamist cases caused fatalities. (The total deaths associated with Islamist incidents were higher, however, reaching 90, largely due to the 2009 mass shooting at Fort Hood in Texas.)
• Incidents related to left-wing ideologies, including ecoterrorism and animal rights, were comparatively rare, with 19 incidents causing seven fatalities – making the shooting attack on Republican members of Congress earlier this month somewhat of an anomaly.
• Nearly half (48 percent) of Islamist incidents in our database were sting operations, more than four times the rate for far-right (12 percent) or far-left (10.5 percent) incidents.

 

[kermit]

And here is a third source, this one is from the libertarian oriented koch brothers funded thinktank the  CATO institute. CATO found that radical conservative terrorists are 10 times more likely to to kill than the left. 

Let that sink in -- the koch brothers people say that the radical right is 1000% more likely to kill you than the left.

But yea, lets just ignore the data and keep on pretending that nazis are harmless and the antifa is the real problem without any evidence supporting that belief at all.

https://www.cato.org/blog/terrorism-deaths-ideology-charlottesville-anomaly?wpisrc=nl_todayworld&wpmm=1

[caterpillar2]

10 hours ago, ruraljuror said:

That is a pretty brazen thing to say given that it was only last weekend when Nazi killed a peaceful protester.

It just so happens that there is a database of all the domestic terror incidents that happened in the U.S. between 2008 and 2016.  They even categorized those domestic terror incidents into Islamic, Right wing, and Left wing then put them all on a map to make it easier to visualize.  Here it is:

https://apps.revealnews.org/homegrown-terror/

 

There were 201 cases of domestic terrorism during the tracking period.  Here are some of the findings with my emphasis in bold:

• From January 2008 to the end of 2016, we identified 63 cases of Islamist domestic terrorism, meaning incidents motivated by a theocratic political ideology espoused by such groups as the Islamic State. The vast majority of these (76 percent) were foiled plots, meaning no attack took place.
• During the same period, we found that right-wing extremists were behind nearly twice as many incidents: 115. Just over a third of these incidents (35 percent) were foiled plots. The majority were acts of terrorist violence that involved deaths, injuries or damaged property.
• Right-wing extremist terrorism was more often deadly: Nearly a third of incidents involved fatalities, for a total of 79 deaths, while 13 percent of Islamist cases caused fatalities. (The total deaths associated with Islamist incidents were higher, however, reaching 90, largely due to the 2009 mass shooting at Fort Hood in Texas.)
• Incidents related to left-wing ideologies, including ecoterrorism and animal rights, were comparatively rare, with 19 incidents causing seven fatalities – making the shooting attack on Republican members of Congress earlier this month somewhat of an anomaly.
• Nearly half (48 percent) of Islamist incidents in our database were sting operations, more than four times the rate for far-right (12 percent) or far-left (10.5 percent) incidents.

 

Let me clarify. White radical groups don't kill innocent people. We don't have to stay out of certain parts of town because of white radical groups. White radical groups don't car-jack, rape, burglarize, mug, play "knock out games" on innocent, unaware citizens, abandon their wives and children, stay stoned, live off of welfare, and maintain this lifestyle by preying on ignorant liberal apologists that blame everything on slavery. Why would you put Islamist terrorism in the category with whites. White extremists don't want them around.

Edited August 21, 2017 by caterpillar2

[urbanlover568]

16 minutes ago, caterpillar2 said:

Let me clarify. White radical groups don't kill innocent people. We don't have to stay out of certain parts of town because of white radical groups. White radical groups don't car-jack, rape, burglarize, mug, play "knock out games" on innocent, unaware citizens, abandon their wives and children, stay stoned, live off of welfare, and maintain this lifestyle by preying on ignorant liberal apologists that blame everything on slavery. Why would you put Islamist terrorism in the category with whites. White extremists don't want them around.

Wow

[kermit]

44 minutes ago, caterpillar2 said:

Let me clarify. White radical groups don't kill innocent people. We don't have to stay out of certain parts of town because of white radical groups. White radical groups don't car-jack, rape, burglarize, mug, play "knock out games" on innocent, unaware citizens, abandon their wives and children, stay stoned, live off of welfare, and maintain this lifestyle by preying on ignorant liberal apologists that blame everything on slavery. Why would you put Islamist terrorism in the category with whites. White extremists don't want them around.

I wanted to quote this for posterity as well.

and needed to ask, Heather Heyer was guilty of what exactly? 

[11 HouseBZ]

I thought I had a response to this, but I'm truly at a loss for words. Sadly this viewpoint of POC is very wide spread. We apparently are still the problem to a lot of people. 

[go_vertical]

5 hours ago, caterpillar2 said:

Let me clarify. White radical groups don't kill innocent people. We don't have to stay out of certain parts of town because of white radical groups. White radical groups don't car-jack, rape, burglarize, mug, play "knock out games" on innocent, unaware citizens, abandon their wives and children, stay stoned, live off of welfare, and maintain this lifestyle by preying on ignorant liberal apologists that blame everything on slavery. Why would you put Islamist terrorism in the category with whites. White extremists don't want them around.

Whites do in fact car-jack, rape, burglarize, and mug. Biker gangs (predominately comprised of white males) have done those exact things for decades to fund their BS. White teens have been caught on film playing the "knockout game". White parents get divorced too. Whites are just as likely to smoke weed and people of all races in this country are on welfare. 

Why don't you just come out and say you don't like people of color. Seriously, it's getting pretty obvious to the rest of us here.

[caterpillar2]

3 hours ago, go_vertical said:

Whites do in fact car-jack, rape, burglarize, and mug. Biker gangs (predominately comprised of white males) have done those exact things for decades to fund their BS. White teens have been caught on film playing the "knockout game". White parents get divorced too. Whites are just as likely to smoke weed and people of all races in this country are on welfare. 

Why don't you just come out and say you don't like people of color. Seriously, it's getting pretty obvious to the rest of us here.

 

Edited August 21, 2017 by caterpillar2
I am tired of talking to those that only see one side of life, the fantasy side.

[Durhamite]

11 hours ago, caterpillar2 said:

Let me clarify. White radical groups don't kill innocent people. We don't have to stay out of certain parts of town because of white radical groups. White radical groups don't car-jack, rape, burglarize, mug, play "knock out games" on innocent, unaware citizens, abandon their wives and children, stay stoned, live off of welfare, and maintain this lifestyle by preying on ignorant liberal apologists that blame everything on slavery. Why would you put Islamist terrorism in the category with whites. White extremists don't want them around.

Don't you know white people aren't capable of committing crimes.  It's labeled as an illness which is treatable with legal aid and a few trips to the behavioral center.  There are more white people on welfare than black people due to shear volume.  

It's all fear and ignorance but black people (especially black Americans) are the most resilient people on earth.  Labels, stereotypes, etc don't even bother us.  The difference is we're accustomed to bullsht, challenges and tons of adversity.  See, the mediocre white male syndrome has to be a fearful existence, especially amongst the uneducated and marginally talented.  Not getting that "hook" up for cool jobs and other perks gotta scare the heck of them. Just buckle down and work harder, go get that extra degree (or degree because I've worked with plenty of white males in engineering roles who'd never been to college).  Not maligning those guys because some actually went back to night school to get there but that opportunity ain't gonna happen for black folk...no sir.  

Here's the other problem, assuming black people are stupid.  When you see and live in that world of bullsht many of us just wanna get high and beat the living the sht of them....wouldn't you? I mean you ride by and thumb your nose at my neighborhood, accuse me of being a thief and rapist.  Yet you commit more crimes and have the wherewithal to mask it as though it never happened and say go get them ngrs, those are the criminals.  This ain't a fantasy, that's why a wanna fck you up....I ain't stupid.  As a said, there ain't a more tolerable race on the planet and the only reason democracy has had one iota of chance to last this long in America...any other race or ethnicity wouldn't taken up arms and attempted to completely burn this btch to the ground.

 

 

 

 

[deleted]

The things said on this thread earlier today were ignorant, inaccurate, offensive and racist.  It is not political correctness to acknowledge that fact.  I believe in spirited debate but when hateful words are written/said we should condemn them.  I condemn them and apologize to people of color on UP.

[southslider]

The biggest lie perpetuated by politics is division.  It's a manipulative distraction from the more dire struggles shared by the human condition.

[Neo]

23 hours ago, caterpillar2 said:

Let me clarify. White radical groups don't kill innocent people. We don't have to stay out of certain parts of town because of white radical groups. White radical groups don't car-jack, rape, burglarize, mug, play "knock out games" on innocent, unaware citizens, abandon their wives and children, stay stoned, live off of welfare, and maintain this lifestyle by preying on ignorant liberal apologists that blame everything on slavery. Why would you put Islamist terrorism in the category with whites. White extremists don't want them around.

You have been warned for the final time. See you in a week. If you continue then you can find somewhere else to promote hate.

[videtur quam contuor]

This is my thinking on the Stonewall Street issue. Recently the Observer reported that after our current discussion on Confederate naming the Public Librarian responsible for historic documents found a handwritten note from aldermen in 1869 that had a sentence that said streets were to be named for Hill, Vance, Lee and Stonewall. Hill Street is still here. Vance disappeared with I-277 and Lee has still not been found, if it ever existed. There is a Lee street today elsewhere in a part of Charlotte not existing at that time.

One obvious issue to me is that there is one difference in the four names as listed. Three list the honored man by his given family name. One uses a nickname. My sense tells me that our forebears would never use a nickname to honor a man they wished to memorialize. Stonewall is the only one that does not follow the centuries old pattern of using the given name of the man. He was also the only one not alive at the time of the naming, another reason that using the nickname is impossible to imagine. I cannot believe aldermen from that period would abandon custom and take such a cavalier attitude to naming one who may well have been revered at that time.

There is a map in the Carolina Room history collection at the Library that shows Stonewall Street from before the Civil War. That document is not an original but a later copy. Was there a Stonewall street from pre Civil War that was simply re-assigned in 1869? Would this be a re-naming? There is just not enough evidence for me to rename today a street that we cannot be sure was renamed nearly one hundred fifty years ago.

We have a General Pershing Street, not Black Jack Street.

We also have Jefferson Davis Street:

 

 

Edited September 7, 2017 by tarhoosier

[ah59396]

1 hour ago, tarhoosier said:

This is my thinking on the Stonewall Street issue. Recently the Observer reported that after our current discussion on Confederate naming the Public Librarian responsible for historic documents found a handwritten note from aldermen in 1869 that had a sentence that said streets were to be named for Hill, Vance, Lee and Stonewall. Hill Street is still here. Vance disappeared with I-277 and Lee has still not been found, if it ever existed. There is a Lee street today elsewhere in a part of Charlotte not existing at that time.

One obvious issue to me is that there is one difference in the four names as listed. Three list the honored man by his given family name. One uses a nickname. My sense tells me that our forebears would never use a nickname to honor a man they wished to memorialize. Stonewall is the only one that does not follow the centuries old pattern of using the given name of the man. He was also the only one not alive at the time of the naming, another reason that using the nickname is impossible to imagine. I cannot believe aldermen from that period would abandon custom and take such a cavalier attitude to naming one who may well have been revered at that time.

There is a map in the Carolina Room history collection at the Library that shows Stonewall Street from before the Civil War. That document is not an original but a later copy. Was there a Stonewall street from pre Civil War that was simply re-assigned in 1869? Would this be a re-naming? There is just not enough evidence for me to rename today a street that we cannot be sure was renamed nearly one hundred fifty years ago.

We have a General Pershing Street, not Black Jack Street.

We also have Jefferson Davis Street:

 

 

 

 

If I recall, wasn't Stonewall Street named on behalf of Mary Anna Jackson?  I was under the impression she lived with relatives in Charlotte during the war, hence the street name.