Re: You is all a bunch of poofs!
Posted: Fri Jul 05, 2019 6:01 am
Exposing the stupidity, lies, and hypocrisy of Social Justice Warriors since July 2012
http://slymepit.com/phpbb/
You should face-friend me, brat. I just changed my FB banner pic to the Betsy Ross.John D wrote: ↑ Holy Crap. I didn't last four days on Tardbook. I just can't stand reading soooo much complete idiocy. I deleted the app from my phone so I will have to turn on my computer to use it now. I think this will keep me in touch on the few things that are useful... but... my plan to just read Facebook while I was taking a crap is not going to work.
My cousin ranting about how racist the Betsy Ross flag is just put me over the edge.... haha.
I'm enjoying watching you engage the libtards chez Jerry, BTW.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑ I stand by my prediction that PZ will one day be arrested for running into Petsmart™ naked, standing in front of the fish tanks, and screaming over and over, "WHICH ONE IS ARIEL?!!"
open border advocate wrote:Why do you THINK we dropped the atomic bomb on the gooks and not the white Germans? Coincidence? The war was basically over on both fronts at the time.
me wrote:The Trinity test explosion took place on July 16, 1945. Germany had surrendered on May 8, 1945. CORONET, the planned invasion of mainland Japan, was tentatively scheduled for March, 1946
This is the problem I have lately with encountering stupid people. I either find myself wanting to troll them or I feel compelled to teach them something. Of course, they will not learn.... so I should not even bother to try to teach... and trolling, while fun, is a giant time sink for me. I just need to walk away from this whole scene.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑ WEIT has a new feature, a discussion thread. Topics include antifa, nike sneakers, and immigration. Just had to share this exchange:
open border advocate wrote:Why do you THINK we dropped the atomic bomb on the gooks and not the white Germans? Coincidence? The war was basically over on both fronts at the time.me wrote:The Trinity test explosion took place on July 16, 1945. Germany had surrendered on May 8, 1945. CORONET, the planned invasion of mainland Japan, was tentatively scheduled for March, 1946
Because he jeopardised a Trial in progress that had reporting restrictionsshoutinghorse wrote: ↑ Tommy Robinson found guilty of contempt of court again today at the Old Bailey. This country is rotten to the core.
They had already been found gulity you fucking pillock, they were going back to court for sentencing. Robinson did nothing wrong, if you had followed the lasts two days court procedings as I have you would realise this. This isn't a case of Robinson like him or loath him but the British justice system doling out punishment for someone they don't like. It stinks of corruption. No other journalist has ever been treated this way for doing far worse, which was pointed out in this kangaroo trial. If you fail to see that then I'm afraid you are a moron and there is nothing more to say to you.InfraRedBucket wrote: ↑Because he jeopardised a Trial in progress that had reporting restrictionsshoutinghorse wrote: ↑ Tommy Robinson found guilty of contempt of court again today at the Old Bailey. This country is rotten to the core.
that meant the accused could have gone free ?
Sounds like the Justice system working there.
Er... one difference is there aren't any reporting restrictions on this trial , try to Keep up , Sherlock!shoutinghorse wrote: ↑ Soften your hard on for Robinson and look at the wider picture here, he is clearly being singled out because he pisses the establishment off, he highlights things they want brushed under the carpet (he dares to critique Islam) they see him as a dangerous agitator and want rid. They are shit scared that his message resonates with thousands of people and is gaining traction. He must be silenced.
Will any of these journalists now be brought before a judge for 'harassing' the defendent, How is this any different? Don't forget he hasn't been sentenced yet so the case is still ongoing.
Journalist? :lol:No other journalist has ever been treated this way for doing far worse
InfraRedBucket wrote: ↑Journalist? :lol:
News? :lol:a person who writes for newspapers, magazines, or news websites or prepares news to be broadcast.
That statement alone tells me you have done no research at all of his trial these last two days. There were admissions by Leeds court officials that they completely fucked up and failed to notify if the reporting restrictions were in place. TR and his team asked several times but found no one who knew yet he still erred on caution.InfraRedBucket wrote: ↑ Er... one difference is there aren't any reporting restrictions on this trial , try to Keep up , Sherlock!
Diddums ,if anyone's got a fanboi hard-on for Robinson it s you
That'all be the reporting restrictions that every other actual journalist abided by but somehow TR didnt get the memo.shoutinghorse wrote: ↑That statement alone tells me you have done no research at all of his trial these last two days. There were admissions by Leeds court officials that they completely fucked up and failed to notify if the reporting restrictions were in place. TR and his team asked several times but found no one who knew yet he still erred on caution.InfraRedBucket wrote: ↑ Er... one difference is there aren't any reporting restrictions on this trial , try to Keep up , Sherlock!
Diddums ,if anyone's got a fanboi hard-on for Robinson it s you
What you are failing to understand is that the restrictions did not include reporting on what had already been allowed into the public dicourse, this is all TR did and was proved in court. Filming defendents who had already been found guilty outside of court grounds is not contempt, again, that's all he did.
If the case against Tommy is so solid-- why did they railroad him?InfraRedBucket wrote: ↑That'all be the reporting restrictions that every other actual journalist abided by but somehow TR didnt get the memo.shoutinghorse wrote: ↑That statement alone tells me you have done no research at all of his trial these last two days. There were admissions by Leeds court officials that they completely fucked up and failed to notify if the reporting restrictions were in place. TR and his team asked several times but found no one who knew yet he still erred on caution.InfraRedBucket wrote: ↑ Er... one difference is there aren't any reporting restrictions on this trial , try to Keep up , Sherlock!
Diddums ,if anyone's got a fanboi hard-on for Robinson it s you
What you are failing to understand is that the restrictions did not include reporting on what had already been allowed into the public dicourse, this is all TR did and was proved in court. Filming defendents who had already been found guilty outside of court grounds is not contempt, again, that's all he did.
And supposedly erred on the side of caution by :
1.breaching the reporting restriction,
2.filming and streaming the video
3.confronting defendants outside court and live streaming it.
and remember the restrictions were not for this one trial but 3 linked trials so the end of this trial did not mean the end of restrictions.
The first trial began on 8 January last year,
TR was arrested and Jailed for the contempt in May , the restrictions were not actually lifted til October when all 3 trials had completed.
Only then could the verdicts of all 3 be reported:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/c ... 92176.html
Oh and there's also the small matter of 5 of the defence lawyers citing Robinson's coverage as a reason to drop the case because jurors might have seen it.
Thankfully that didnt happen.
But of course regardless of the above, you and Tommy are entitled to have your very own definition of what constitutes contempt.
Why did "who" and in what way?If the case against Tommy is so solid-- why did they railroad him?
:lol:Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑Thu Jul 04, 2019 7:53 pmI stand by my prediction that PZ will one day be arrested for running into Petsmart™ naked, standing in front of the fish tanks, and screaming over and over, "WHICH ONE IS ARIEL?!!"
My hometown friend's dad served in the Hungarian cavalry in Russia. He taught me a lesson I still put into practice to this day: before you mount a horse, pick either left or right in your trousers to pack your balls. He loved telling me his war stories cuz his son was a pacifist. He was still bent out of shape that Hungary had lost so much territory after the war. He also taught me how to say "Magyar Orzag", which means "Hungarian Republic", and "Lofus", which means "horse dick." His accent in English was so bad, we usually ended up speaking German.MarcusAu wrote: ↑ My uncle married a woman from Hungary - who got out with her family around 1956 (or just after).
Her father fought in WWII, though he would not be considered an ally. In fact, in the non-modern sense he would properly be considered Nazi-adjacent. He was a really nice guy from my recollection. Towards the end of his life he went blind and was having nightmares about his military service.
Can't say what I would have done in the same situation - it seems like luxury not to forced into the decisions he had to make at the time.
I highly recommend you read the Cecil Parrott translation of The Good Soldier Svejk by Jaroslav Hasek. You can get a good working copy on Amazon for about 5 bucks, and it will be five of the best dollars you have ever spent.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑My hometown friend's dad served in the Hungarian cavalry in Russia. He taught me a lesson I still put into practice to this day: before you mount a horse, pick either left or right in your trousers to pack your balls. He loved telling me his war stories cuz his son was a pacifist. He was still bent out of shape that Hungary had lost so much territory after the war. He also taught me how to say "Magyar Orzag", which means "Hungarian Republic", and "Lofus", which means "horse dick." His accent in English was so bad, we usually ended up speaking German.MarcusAu wrote: ↑ My uncle married a woman from Hungary - who got out with her family around 1956 (or just after).
Her father fought in WWII, though he would not be considered an ally. In fact, in the non-modern sense he would properly be considered Nazi-adjacent. He was a really nice guy from my recollection. Towards the end of his life he went blind and was having nightmares about his military service.
Can't say what I would have done in the same situation - it seems like luxury not to forced into the decisions he had to make at the time.
His wife, who he met in the US, was also from Hungary -- Transylvania. Her family fled through the woods from the Russians. Her sister was shot running right next to her. She loved me too, so I always got invited over when she made stuffed cabbage rolls.
But jeezus, Hungarians are moody bastards.
I read that in the old Imperial Austrian army, the Hungarians made the best NCOs, cuz: 1) they were moody bastards; 2) Hungarian had more curse words than the other 14 languages combined.
I work with dozens of Hungarian engineers since our electronics engineering center is in Budapest. I have the following observations to share:Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑My hometown friend's dad served in the Hungarian cavalry in Russia. He taught me a lesson I still put into practice to this day: before you mount a horse, pick either left or right in your trousers to pack your balls. He loved telling me his war stories cuz his son was a pacifist. He was still bent out of shape that Hungary had lost so much territory after the war. He also taught me how to say "Magyar Orzag", which means "Hungarian Republic", and "Lofus", which means "horse dick." His accent in English was so bad, we usually ended up speaking German.MarcusAu wrote: ↑ My uncle married a woman from Hungary - who got out with her family around 1956 (or just after).
Her father fought in WWII, though he would not be considered an ally. In fact, in the non-modern sense he would properly be considered Nazi-adjacent. He was a really nice guy from my recollection. Towards the end of his life he went blind and was having nightmares about his military service.
Can't say what I would have done in the same situation - it seems like luxury not to forced into the decisions he had to make at the time.
His wife, who he met in the US, was also from Hungary -- Transylvania. Her family fled through the woods from the Russians. Her sister was shot running right next to her. She loved me too, so I always got invited over when she made stuffed cabbage rolls.
But jeezus, Hungarians are moody bastards.
I read that in the old Imperial Austrian army, the Hungarians made the best NCOs, cuz: 1) they were moody bastards; 2) Hungarian had more curse words than the other 14 languages combined.
open borders advocate wrote:If you can’t see anything racial about our willingness to bomb the yellow people but not the white people (and we could have), you need to give it a bit more thought.
me wrote:Are you suggesting we didn't nuke the Germans because they were white, and not because they had surrendered three months before the bomb was ready?
I've not - but my Google-Fu tells me that she is still active...Bhurzum wrote: ↑ Sat in me underpants and trawling the web. Picking the missus up from work in an hour (taking her to breakfast then shopping) and as I was idly flitting from twatter (manatees, fox hunting, Tommy Robinson), to ED and FB, a though sprang into my noggin: has anyone heard from Scented Nectar recently? I hope she's ok... :(
Sigh...ok, I'll play for a little bit.InfraRedBucket wrote: ↑News? :lol:a person who writes for newspapers, magazines, or news websites or prepares news to be broadcast.
I was expecting someone to follow up post an online dictionary definition of news.Bhurzum wrote: ↑Sigh...ok, I'll play for a little bit.InfraRedBucket wrote: ↑News? :lol:a person who writes for newspapers, magazines, or news websites or prepares news to be broadcast.
news
noun
newly received or noteworthy information, especially about recent events.
a broadcast or published report
informal
information not previously known to (someone).
Now, are we going to take a joy-ride into the deeply subjective realm of what is or is not "noteworthy" or are you going to cede the trivial point that Tommy, for better or worse, is a journalist?
Bugger me, I'm a troll and my "you're being trolled" alarms are going mental. <--- freely offered escape hatch.
Livestreaming outside the court building was not breaching the reporting restriction in itself, he would only have been breaching them if he had spoken about events that had not already been reported on and were already in the public domain. He didn't.InfraRedBucket wrote: ↑ 1.breaching the reporting restriction,
2.filming and streaming the video
3.confronting defendants outside court and live streaming it.
Jeez! Now you're just making stuff up. Do you really want me to post the dictionary definition of accosting?as he never accosted them
approach and address (someone) boldly or aggressively.
"reporters accosted him in the street"
synonyms: speak to, talk to, call to, shout to, hail, initiate a discussion with;
Good enough. So we're in agreement, Tommy Robinson is a journalist.InfraRedBucket wrote: ↑I was expecting someone to follow up post an online dictionary definition of news.
Yes, it's news in the very general widest sense of the word .
That's news to me. Does that make you a journalist?Bhurzum wrote: ↑Good enough. So we're in agreement, Tommy Robinson is a journalist.InfraRedBucket wrote: ↑I was expecting someone to follow up post an online dictionary definition of news.
Yes, it's news in the very general widest sense of the word .
It makes me a special needs teacher.InfraRedBucket wrote: ↑That's news to me. Does that make you a journalist?
The Japanese command also described Russians as subhuman and ready to rape/demoralize the nation. They talked young pilots into Kamikaze. Let's just say it sounds like there was a lot of psychological manipulation of the Japanese forces. It would not have been good to be a young Japanese man in the 1940s. They had two ways out: capitulation to the Russians or the Americans, and propaganda made neither palatable. Into that crucible Truman sent the A-bomb, which I will always believe was an act of pure evil. There was the pablum of "a million dead American servicemen". Probably utter bullshit, designed to ease consciences. The Japs were ready to capitulate, with or without the emperor. We probably dropped the bomb for a combination of immoral reasons, not least of which to impress the Russians.John D wrote: ↑ Interesting trivia (well... I found it interesting). On Iwo Jima there were 20,000 Japanese defenders. When the battle was over there were only 200 Japanese left as prisoners. All of the rest.... 19,800 were dead. The Japanese were trained to never surrender. This is part of their culture and they also believed the Americans would just torture them if captured.
My dad was a coxswain on an LCVP that landed on Iwo Jima. He would have been in the front of the invasion of the Japanese mainland had it occurred. He would have likely been killed. I think I am probably alive today because of the A-bombs dropped on Japan.
That is a normal trajectory for a soldier. Soldiers start out all gung ho and afraid of letting themselves and their mates down. After a bit of combat they bond and are better soldiers for their experience. Eventually they get jaded and feel that they've earned the right to hang back and let others take up the slack. Without the peer pressure driving them as much they and with the cumulative effect of extreme stress they can start to lose their bottle. Montgomery made a mistake in insisting that his soldiers from North Africa be in Normandy when they were actually past their best. Napoleon's Imperial Guard at Waterloo were probably at a similar stage.screwtape wrote: ↑Fri Jul 05, 2019 3:49 pmJohn D - I just gave my son (29) his grandfather's war diary to read. He describes himself as a failure in the introduction because of the moment he felt he'd had enough on the beach on D-Day. Up to that point he'd been the kind of keen young soldier who volunteered for everything, and kept it up through Blitz bomb disposal, North Africa, and Sicily. But seeing an incompetent and brand new 'instant lieutenant' getting the men he'd been with all along killed on Gold Beach made something snap. He decided he wasn't going to volunteer any more, but keep himself and his men alive as best as he could. Which he did until he met a butterfly bomb at Nijmegen, and it wasn't his problem anymore. But the rest of his days he felt badly about those men on the beach, and it amazes and saddens me that he felt himself a failure as a result. In retrospect, he clearly had what we'd call PTSD now. He only ever looked relaxed when he was with another veteran. They wouldn't talk about it to each other, but just felt, I suppose, that they were in the company of someone who got it. Oddly, he talked to me endlessly about his war, and yet my older brother says he never spoke of it to him. Maybe he needed to get it out as he got older. The experience certainly changed him and became the central feature of his life aver afterwards. Anyway, I hope the boy reads it and understands a little of it.
Mareth_1943.jpg
Just realised - I never knew him with fingers on his right hand!
Does he think Dresden was a case of racial mis-identification?Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑Fri Jul 05, 2019 1:15 pmIt continues. Seriously, these people must've been dropped as babies:
open borders advocate wrote:If you can’t see anything racial about our willingness to bomb the yellow people but not the white people (and we could have), you need to give it a bit more thought.me wrote:Are you suggesting we didn't nuke the Germans because they were white, and not because they had surrendered three months before the bomb was ready?
The raping part would have been true.
Considering the Western Allies suffered 750,000 casualties from D-Day on, a million casualties, against a fanatical Japanese enemy employing mass kamikaze attacks and poison gas, is not an unreasonable estimate. There would've also been many millions of Japanese deaths, including civilians who'd been brainwashed into committing suicide (which they did en masse on Okinawa.)There was the pablum of "a million dead American servicemen". Probably utter bullshit, designed to ease consciences.
Do you consider the fire-bombing of cities for the specific purpose of killing civilians -- which the US did vs. Japan, and the US & Britain did vs. Germany -- also immoral and evil?... the A-bomb, which I will always believe was an act of pure evil....
We probably dropped the bomb for a combination of immoral reasons....
If he's heard of a Dresden, it's Harry.ThreeFlangedJavis wrote: ↑ Does he think Dresden was a case of racial mis-identification?
I'd mount her.
Yes, of course. There was a gradual escalation of ruthlessness. The Brits were generally opposed to bombing civilians (at the start). Americans kind of liked the idea, and it didn't take much to convince Churchill. By the end of the war everyone was doing it. Tit for tat isn't a great moral argument. The most that can be said for justification was that it was an escalation that had to be met to stay in the game.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑ Do you consider the fire-bombing of cities for the specific purpose of killing civilians -- which the US did vs. Japan, and the US & Britain did vs. Germany -- also immoral and evil?
I wonder if she can tölt? The gene survives in some Norwegian ponies.
Pretty impressive. I wonder if she needs to be tranqed to have her teeth floated.
Someone broke the pit...again...and I think I know who.
Those SJWs should pick on someone their own size.Service Dog wrote: ↑ AHHH-HhHHHHHAAAHHHHHHHHHH
How did I miss this? Peter Dinklage played Herve Villachaize in a movie last year...
and SJWs attacked Dink for 'white-washing' Villachaize... because Dink isn't the same RACE as Tattoo........
yeah.. they don't have ANYTHING IN COMMON....
plus they were mad that he wore 'brownface' (dark make-up) to look more-like Villachaize...
Too white! No--- too brown! Fuck it-- Let's be mad about BOTH!
https://worldofwonder.net/peter-dinklag ... g-at-this/
Allied troops slipping and sliding over human entrails slogging it out with the Nips probably weren't so convinced about imminent surrender. People were dying horribly every day and the allied soldiers had no reason to believe that imminent defeat would do anything other than increase Japanese desperation. There was a real danger of military and civilian revolt after the Japanese surrender. The article I've linked mentions a typhoon which hit Okinawa in Oct 1945 when forces were concentrated for the invasion, an event which would have crippled the invasion forces. The war was very far from over, not least in the minds of the Japanese.https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/ar ... ed/376238/Hunt wrote: ↑Sat Jul 06, 2019 3:12 pmYes, of course. There was a gradual escalation of ruthlessness. The Brits were generally opposed to bombing civilians (at the start). Americans kind of liked the idea, and it didn't take much to convince Churchill. By the end of the war everyone was doing it. Tit for tat isn't a great moral argument. The most that can be said for justification was that it was an escalation that had to be met to stay in the game.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑ Do you consider the fire-bombing of cities for the specific purpose of killing civilians -- which the US did vs. Japan, and the US & Britain did vs. Germany -- also immoral and evil?
Was the A-bombing of Japan racially motivated? That's a harder assertion to prove. There was probably some component of that, given the racial attitudes of the time. I think it made it an easier "sell" to the American public. I doubt it was a major factor. Mainly I think it was a new toy we wanted to play with; we wanted to show the Soviets who was boss, and Japan had the misfortune of coming up on the short list.
Good luck with that Starbucks ever calling 911."The barista said that a customer 'did not feel safe' because of the police presence. The barista asked the officers to move out of the customer’s line of sight or to leave."
I thought this was going to be about Jen McCreight