Give Me a Urinal or Give Me Death!

#1681

rayshul wrote:Sup Renee. We good. What's up witchoo?

Hey there :) Not a ton. Same thing, different year. Dealing with really crappy snow (that should clear out in a day or so) and a job that I'm not very keen on. But all good :) You??

#1682

ReneeHendricks wrote:Hey bitches :) Been a very, very long time since I've popped in. How is everyone??? I miss you guys!

Renee Kelly
Vague Bitch

I don't know if we've had any contact, but I am glad you are back! It's...it's been a trip. PZ Myers now spends his time counting his gray pubes. Ophelia Benson spends her days combing her beard while plotting against transwomen. Richard Carrier has been Radforded and the legal fund that PZ and friends collected to fight his lawsuits seems to have topped out at 21K.

Oh, and half of FTB have left FTB for "The Orbit," where they are freed from the requirements of being forced to blog once every several months.

Here's leading atheist light Greta Christina who, somehow, keeps getting invites on semi-mainstream podcasts. (She loves to "overprepare" for her totally amazing talks.) She gave a very powerful talk at SJWkepticon:

[youtube][/youtube]

You can tell that the talk is great because it has 740 thumbs down and 64 thumbs up.

#1683

Really? wrote:
ReneeHendricks wrote:Hey bitches :) Been a very, very long time since I've popped in. How is everyone??? I miss you guys!

Renee Kelly
Vague Bitch
I don't know if we've had any contact, but I am glad you are back! It's...it's been a trip. PZ Myers now spends his time counting his gray pubes. Ophelia Benson spends her days combing her beard while plotting against transwomen. Richard Carrier has been Radforded and the legal fund that PZ and friends collected to fight his lawsuits seems to have topped out at 21K.

Oh, and half of FTB have left FTB for "The Orbit," where they are freed from the requirements of being forced to blog once every several months.

Here's leading atheist light Greta Christina who, somehow, keeps getting invites on semi-mainstream podcasts. (She loves to "overprepare" for her totally amazing talks.) She gave a very powerful talk at SJWkepticon:

[youtube][/youtube]

You can tell that the talk is great because it has 740 thumbs down and 64 thumbs up.

LOL! So, same ol', same ol' and Fluevogs seems to have really not aged well in the past ... what, 2 years? Wow! I may be 50 but I know I *must* be leading a better life than PZ, Ophie, Rapie Carrier, and Fluevog Greta :)

Nice to be back :D

#1684

Ok, I made it 8 minutes into this - - and I'm done. She gave me a headache within 8 minutes. Oh, and why doesn't this woman change her f'ing Twitter avatar? She looks *NOTHING* like that avatar in place now! Seriously. Vanity, thy name is Greta!

#1685

I still don't understand why people use their sexiest picture as their avatar. I mean people are gonna know. You should look ugly in your pictures so people are surprised you don't look like shit in real life.

At least I thought that was what I was doing but my friend said I look better in photos so now I'm gon go kill myself.

Cruise consulting sounds fun.

#1686

Snow? Snow??

Has anyone mentioned weather lately?

Im in for a 106+ degrees F weekend.

#1687

I kind of had a feeling PZ was going to have trouble making it to 30k, but worse than that, when he eventually returns to the till, as he will have to if the case turns serious, it's going to be empty. I think the well has run dry.

#1688

Really? wrote:
ReneeHendricks wrote:Hey bitches :) Been a very, very long time since I've popped in. How is everyone??? I miss you guys!

Renee Kelly
Vague Bitch
I don't know if we've had any contact, but I am glad you are back! It's...it's been a trip. PZ Myers now spends his time counting his gray pubes. Ophelia Benson spends her days combing her beard while plotting against transwomen. Richard Carrier has been Radforded and the legal fund that PZ and friends collected to fight his lawsuits seems to have topped out at 21K.

Oh, and half of FTB have left FTB for "The Orbit," where they are freed from the requirements of being forced to blog once every several months.

Here's leading atheist light Greta Christina who, somehow, keeps getting invites on semi-mainstream podcasts. (She loves to "overprepare" for her totally amazing talks.) She gave a very powerful talk at SJWkepticon:

[youtube][/youtube]

You can tell that the talk is great because it has 740 thumbs down and 64 thumbs up.

When does the crushing Tiger tanks with her bare hands begin? You will notice she would not try to crush a Sherman tank because they were too fast and maneuverable and would outflank her hands and fuck her up with peashooters. Not like the slow ungainly sitting duck Tiger tank.

#1689

How This Weight-Loss Skeptic Lost 60 Pounds and Kept it Off
http://www.alternet.org/story/149549/ho ... ept_it_off

Fuck that's depressing

#1690

Aneris wrote:I guess, you also condemn GamerGate because They™ have harrassed and doxed. It was not the action of some few, but everyone can be blamed, or do you have some other rationale for that situation?

I think that what we've got here is a failure to communicate. I've condemned the black bloc, which is a specific tactic to commit crimes and get away with them. Plenty of antifas have engaged in it. I also condemn anyone who harasses (really harasses, not writies "you're a liar" or "you suck" or even "you're a cunt" to someone on twitter) and doxes.

I don't have any evidence of prominent GamerGate members openly promoting haraasses (again, real harassment, not SJW style "you called me mean names on the Internet") and doxxing. If some of them did, I condemn them too, and so should anyone else with a modicum of dignity. There is such a thing as bad tactics.

On the other hand the black bloc tactic was justified and used by the antifa movement. Repeatedly. True, not all of them, but a significant and prominent part. The black bloc is an authoritarian tactic. At the very best you have people trying to stop people with the idea they dislike from marching or having concerts. That's pretty illiberal, even if the ideas of those people as a despicable and vile as those of fascists/nazis.

I am not even sure it had anything to do with Antifa (maybe it had). The punching of Spencer was a different event, where people with the Antifa flag were seen. Even on that occasion, it wasn't some organized idea to punch him. One individual did it, and apparently in a spur of the moment when he saw him giving an interview. Now that many YouTubers moved rightwards, it seems to also have affected their brains and the usual rot set in. Sargon promoted a petition to have the Antifa banned. What a hypocrite. Sure, he has Good Reasons™

It may not have been an organized idea to punch Spencer but I haven't seen any condemnation from the other "antifa" groups. As for Sargon he's trying to have the Antifa classified as a terrorist group, not banned. I don't agree with him because the "antifas" are a vague collection of groups, including pacific and reasonable ones, but I wouldn't mind having the black bloc tactic to be considered illegal. In many places (banks, for example) it's illegal to go around with your face covered, I think it's a good idea to make it illegal in protests, too.

If your aim is to commit property crimes (or worse) and get away with it you get no sympathy from me. Respect other people's property, don't act like a thug.

I doubt they were Antifas and find it dubious to blame them all. Especially an event with Milo screams Social Justice Warriors. The people who have excused or even lauded the punching (at Berkley), were also not Antifa, but your usual Regressives. Again, they are completely different people. The Black-Red flag carriers in New York were anarchists, that is Anti-Authoritarians. They have zero to do Problem Glasses PC culture. You can condemn The Left™ only insofar as that the Dan Arels and PZ Myers, i.e. Regressives have essentially taken over the public perception. And they are not even all that left. They are fucking Clinton Democrats. I can agree to the rant(s) by Jonathan Pie to that effect.

I don't give a shit about the fact that some people call themselves "Anti-Authoritarians". If they use authoritarian tactics, like hiding in a crowd to get away with property crimes and sometimes even crimes against the person, you're an authoritarian. Anarco-communists are often violent bullies who don't respect property rights.

The problem for me isn't just the SJWs, who are part of it of course. The problem is the whole idea of a left which uses and justifies bad tactics "because the targets deserve it". Fuck this. Some tactics are always bad, regardless of who is target. I remember the cunts in the no-global movement who thought it was a good idea to smash McDonald's. Some of them were arrested, and I see nothing wrong with that. If you act like criminal you get treated like a criminal.

I'm sick and tired of the left which claims the moral high ground over the right but then justifies property damage in name of "revolutionary" ideals.

One thing that I'd like more leftists to understand is there's no chance of a violent revolution to change the world for the better in liberal democracies. Liberal democracies may be a sub-optimal equilibrium, but getting away from that equilibrium only creates worse situation. All violent revolutionary paths away from a liberal democracy lead to bloodthirsty dictatorships, both on the rights and (surprise, surprise) on the left, too.

There can only be reforms and preservation of the liberal democratic system. The real battles against "fascism" are done in courts, in parliaments, in the media, in higher education, in the institution. A judge stopped Trump's executive order, not the "Women's March".

Protesting is fine, but you have to do it peacefully and civilly, to show that your dissent isn't a subversive street battle but a way to signal that people are unhappy, and keeping in mind that it's only a signal, rallying people to your side, not the real way to change things. Tactically speaking you also have to focus on a specific message and watch out for the infiltration of people who don't really share that message, but that's another thing.

I'm sympathetic to many leftist ideas but I've grown tired of the idea that the left as a whole is morally superior to the right as a whole. No, it's not. There are authoritarian cunts on both sides, there are bad tactics on both sides, and it's time for people to ditch those cunts and tactics and sit down and talk to your counterparts, to find a compromise about shared liberal principles.

I don't see my political ideas as being "the Moral Good" (tm). I see them as a tentative to see what works and what doesn't in a society according to some goals (preservation of the liberal democratic system, equal legal rights, harmonic economic development which doesn't produces a steep social divide, helping people with issues to get better, providing assistance to those who can't get better, etc.) and try and fix problems.

I don't see people who share my liberal democratic values but disagree about what works and what doesn't and how to fix it as morally inferior or somehow defective. I see them as people with a different perspective and different proposals.

And even if some people don't share my liberal democratic values as long as they don't preach or act in a violent or subversive way they can't be punished. Even nazis have the right to expose nazi ideas, or communist to expose communist ideas. If they promote specific plans for violence or subversion, or act on those plans, they will be punished according to the law just like anyone else who does those things (white supremacists, muslim supremacists, and yes, even anarchists).

My beef with the SJWs is that they promote tactics which might lead to a subversion of liberal democracy. They undermine essential principles of liberal democracy like freedom of speech and thought, presumption of innocence, equality before the law, etc. I'm fine with them expressing their ideas as long as I can criticize them and as long as their ideas don't become embedded into laws. There's a legal and institutional battle to fight against SJW infiltration of the rules of the institutions and in defense of those liberal democratic principles, and a cultural battle to fight against SJW ideas through the means of a liberal democratic cultural battle, namely criticism, mockery and satire.

The SJWs of course are only one of the groups which promote subversion of liberal democracy. There are religious fundamentalists (christian and muslim, mostly, but not just them), racial supremacists and separatists (white, black, etc.) the Regressive Right in general (all the conservatives who love censorship, for example) and yes, even anarchist.

I think that both the liberal democratic left and the liberal democratic right need to distinguish themselves from those who don't accept liberal democracy, without IFs and BUTs, and to steer people with leftist or rightist sympathies away from the illiberal sides. Since my political sympathies align with the left I think it's more productive to focus on criticism of the left, but I don't mind criticizing the right if it needs criticism.

#1691

Clarence wrote:I'll take your word about European Antifa (though all I've ever heard of them is that they are so violent they sometimes downright kill right wingers)

Source please. This is a bold claim, and I've never seen any evidence for this. The absolute worst the Black Bloc cunts do is breaking windows , setting cars on fire and punching people. I've never heard of political murders, this looks like pure slander.

#1692

Kirbmarc wrote:
Clarence wrote:I'll take your word about European Antifa (though all I've ever heard of them is that they are so violent they sometimes downright kill right wingers)
Source please. This is a bold claim, and I've never seen any evidence for this. The absolute worst the Black Bloc cunts do is breaking windows , setting cars on fire and punching people. I've never heard of political murders, this looks like pure slander.

Seems to me that both you and Tigzy are misreading Clarence. He hasn't said "they kill right wingers", only that he's heard they do. Rather different kettles of fish - methinks. :-)

#1693

Steersman wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:
Clarence wrote:I'll take your word about European Antifa (though all I've ever heard of them is that they are so violent they sometimes downright kill right wingers)
Source please. This is a bold claim, and I've never seen any evidence for this. The absolute worst the Black Bloc cunts do is breaking windows , setting cars on fire and punching people. I've never heard of political murders, this looks like pure slander.
Seems to me that both you and Tigzy are misreading Clarence. He hasn't said "they kill right wingers", only that he's heard they do. Rather different kettles of fish - methinks. :-)

So if I wrote "I've read that Steersman is a pedo" in a context with no clarification, would that be OK? Because I have read that claim, but, as you know, it was only a morbid and inappropriate joke. And if I wrote that claim without adding that it was only a joke that would be slander.

#1694

Kirbmarc wrote:
Steersman wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote: <snip>
Source please. This is a bold claim, and I've never seen any evidence for this. The absolute worst the Black Bloc cunts do is breaking windows , setting cars on fire and punching people. I've never heard of political murders, this looks like pure slander.
Seems to me that both you and Tigzy are misreading Clarence. He hasn't said "they kill right wingers", only that he's heard they do. Rather different kettles of fish - methinks. :-)
So if I wrote "I've read that Steersman is a pedo" in a context with no clarification, would that be OK? Because I have read that claim, but, as you know, it was only a morbid and inappropriate joke. And if I wrote that claim without adding that it was only a joke that would be slander.

I wouldn't be particularly happy about it - surprise, surprise. But I wouldn't call it slander. Note:

Defamation—also calumny, vilification, and traducement—is the communication of a false statement that harms the reputation of an individual person, business, product, group, government, religion, or nation.

Not a "false statement" to say that you read that as it is factually true - that you read that. Might qualify as innuendo but that might be a stretch - and don't think it is actually against the law.

#1695

Kirbmarc wrote:
Steersman wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote: <snip>
Source please. This is a bold claim, and I've never seen any evidence for this. The absolute worst the Black Bloc cunts do is breaking windows , setting cars on fire and punching people. I've never heard of political murders, this looks like pure slander.
Seems to me that both you and Tigzy are misreading Clarence. He hasn't said "they kill right wingers", only that he's heard they do. Rather different kettles of fish - methinks. :-)
So if I wrote "I've read that Steersman is a pedo" in a context with no clarification, would that be OK? Because I have read that claim, but, as you know, it was only a morbid and inappropriate joke. And if I wrote that claim without adding that it was only a joke that would be slander.

Besides which, I might suggest that what you read was a claim, if not a clear jest, that I was a pedo, not proof or a legal judgement. Or a medical one for that matter since, to belabor a point, pedophilia is not, in itself, a crime. Seems somewhat different from what Clarence was saying.

#1696

It's a pretty big difference from describing a group of faceless people and targeting one person, too.

#1697

http://i.imgur.com/OEE0pz9.jpg

Life ain't getting any better for Indiana. Bagged and tagged

#1698

ReneeHendricks wrote:Hey bitches :) Been a very, very long time since I've popped in. How is everyone??? I miss you guys!

Renee Kelly
Vague Bitch

We've all be waiting patiently for the next episode of Chill Girls in Pink Corvettes to come out.

#1699

MacGruberKnows wrote:When does the crushing Tiger tanks with her bare hands begin?

I thought she'd do it between her thighs. Sounds plausible.

#1700

Steersman wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:So if I wrote "I've read that Steersman is a pedo" in a context with no clarification, would that be OK? Because I have read that claim, but, as you know, it was only a morbid and inappropriate joke. And if I wrote that claim without adding that it was only a joke that would be slander.
Besides which, I might suggest that what you read was a claim, if not a clear jest, that I was a pedo, not proof or a legal judgement. Or a medical one for that matter since, to belabor a point, pedophilia is not, in itself, a crime. Seems somewhat different from what Clarence was saying.

Steers, it doesn't matter what precise definitions Merriam-Webster and Wikipedia give on 'slander', or even whether you yourself call it slander, the statement that you're a pedo will spread all by itself and your neighbours will start putting dogshit in your mailbox or set fire to your shed.

#1701

rayshul wrote:It's a pretty big difference from describing a group of faceless people and targeting one person, too.

Perhaps it's more difficult to paint a target on a whole group, but if you persist such smears they will eventually run amok.

And no, I'm not fond of that black antifa whatever either (even though most self-described antifas I knew in the 80s were pretty mellow and the more radical ones were far more bound to damage property than other people).

#1702

rayshul wrote:It's a pretty big difference from describing a group of faceless people and targeting one person, too.

True. And I've got a thick skin. Or am just naturally obtuse. ;-)

But there's also the difference between an accusation of a desire - which isn't a crime in itself, although it might limit one's choice of careers - and of actually committing the crime of murder. As Kirbmarc recently argued or suggested, we all probably at one time or another have had the urge to do something that is rightly construed as a criminal act. But we have enough self-control to override such desires. Reminds me of a lovely quote from Eleanor Roosevelt that I like to trot out at every opportunity :-)

Roosevelt wrote:...our children must learn...to face full responsibility for their actions, to make their own choices and cope with the results...the whole democratic system...depends upon it. For our system is founded on self-government, which is untenable if the individuals who make up the system are unable to govern themselves.

Indeed.

#1703

Brive1987 wrote:http://i.imgur.com/OEE0pz9.jpg

Life ain't getting any better for Indiana. Bagged and tagged

He's got a golden retriever/german shepherd look about him, probably going to be a fair size when fully grown. Did we run a sweepstake for how long until the novelty wears off and she has to rehome him?

#1704

feathers wrote:
Steersman wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:So if I wrote "I've read that Steersman is a pedo" in a context with no clarification, would that be OK? Because I have read that claim, but, as you know, it was only a morbid and inappropriate joke. And if I wrote that claim without adding that it was only a joke that would be slander.
Besides which, I might suggest that what you read was a claim, if not a clear jest, that I was a pedo, not proof or a legal judgement. Or a medical one for that matter since, to belabor a point, pedophilia is not, in itself, a crime. Seems somewhat different from what Clarence was saying.
Steers, it doesn't matter what precise definitions Merriam-Webster and Wikipedia give on 'slander', or even whether you yourself call it slander, the statement that you're a pedo will spread all by itself and your neighbours will start putting dogshit in your mailbox or set fire to your shed.

True. Reminds me of a passage in Dawkins' The God Delusion of a mob that attacked some guy's house because they were unclear on the difference between a pedophile and a pediatrician ...

But one of the reasons why I make some effort to be clear about defintions; Rome wasn't built in a day and all that ... ;-)

#1705

feathers wrote:
rayshul wrote:It's a pretty big difference from describing a group of faceless people and targeting one person, too.
Perhaps it's more difficult to paint a target on a whole group, but if you persist such smears they will eventually run amok.

And no, I'm not fond of that black antifa whatever either (even though most self-described antifas I knew in the 80s were pretty mellow and the more radical ones were far more bound to damage property than other people).

The black bloc are also more likely to damage property than attack people. Damage to property is a crime too, though, and what's most troubling is the culture of impunity and lack of responsibility in those movements, along with the recent cheers for personal violence. No, the black bloc idiots are not murderers or terrorists, but this doesn't mean they're people we shouldn't be a little wary. And frankly I wouldn't mind if people who gather together to protest were prohibited from hiding their faces.

Declaring the antifas to be terrorist is idiotic and illiberal since they're a bunch of diverse people, but declaring the black bloc tactic of acting like faceless mobs with no accountability to be illegal isn't a bad idea.

#1706

Someone tells me this is orbit blogger Ania doing what she does best. Confirmation?

#1707

Oglebart wrote:
Brive1987 wrote:http://i.imgur.com/OEE0pz9.jpg

Life ain't getting any better for Indiana. Bagged and tagged
He's got a golden retriever/german shepherd look about him, probably going to be a fair size when fully grown. Did we run a sweepstake for how long until the novelty wears off and she has to rehome him?

I gave it a year, max.

#1708

feathers wrote:
Steersman wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:So if I wrote "I've read that Steersman is a pedo" in a context with no clarification, would that be OK? Because I have read that claim, but, as you know, it was only a morbid and inappropriate joke. And if I wrote that claim without adding that it was only a joke that would be slander.
Besides which, I might suggest that what you read was a claim, if not a clear jest, that I was a pedo, not proof or a legal judgement. Or a medical one for that matter since, to belabor a point, pedophilia is not, in itself, a crime. Seems somewhat different from what Clarence was saying.
Steers, it doesn't matter what precise definitions Merriam-Webster and Wikipedia give on 'slander', or even whether you yourself call it slander, the statement that you're a pedo will spread all by itself and your neighbours will start putting dogshit in your mailbox or set fire to your shed.

Whatever the written statement , it would not be slander , it would be libel if written or published.
[/pedant]

#1709

Kirbmarc wrote:The black bloc are also more likely to damage property than attack people. Damage to property is a crime too, though, and what's most troubling is the culture of impunity and lack of responsibility in those movements, along with the recent cheers for personal violence. No, the black bloc idiots are not murderers or terrorists, but this doesn't mean they're people we shouldn't be a little wary. And frankly I wouldn't mind if people who gather together to protest were prohibited from hiding their faces.

Declaring the antifas to be terrorist is idiotic and illiberal since they're a bunch of diverse people, but declaring the black bloc tactic of acting like faceless mobs with no accountability to be illegal isn't a bad idea.

Terrorism is like rape in the sense the definition is being extended to the point it loses all meaning.

If vandalism is 'terrorism' then most 'terrorist' offences don't even deserve a custodial sentence.

#1710

Shatterface wrote:Terrorism is like rape in the sense the definition is being extended to the point it loses all meaning.

If vandalism is 'terrorism' then most 'terrorist' offences don't even deserve a custodial sentence.

The ideal punishment for vandalism is to make you pay for all the damages you cause. If you don't have enough money, be forced to do community service, ideally cleaning up your own mess.

#1711

feathers wrote:
Oglebart wrote:
Brive1987 wrote:http://i.imgur.com/OEE0pz9.jpg

Life ain't getting any better for Indiana. Bagged and tagged
He's got a golden retriever/german shepherd look about him, probably going to be a fair size when fully grown. Did we run a sweepstake for how long until the novelty wears off and she has to rehome him?

I gave it a year, max.

Well she gave up her beloved cats Fry n Brandon without a fight, once reality kicks in and she finds she can't get dogsitters when she wants to go to conventions and kennels charge money then 'Indy's' days as pampered cutesy pooch are finished.

#1712

ReneeHendricks wrote:Ok, I made it 8 minutes into this - - and I'm done. She gave me a headache within 8 minutes. Oh, and why doesn't this woman change her f'ing Twitter avatar? She looks *NOTHING* like that avatar in place now! Seriously. Vanity, thy name is Greta!

Only 8 minutes in? Did you reach the part about she associated Trump's election with fighting Nazis? <<Sigh>> She was ahead of her time by a month or two.

#1713

[youtube][/youtube]

#1714

shoutinghorse wrote:
...
Well she gave up her beloved cats Fry n Brandon without a fight, once reality kicks in and she finds she can't get dogsitters when she wants to go to conventions and kennels charge money then 'Indy's' days as pampered cutesy pooch are finished.

In the meantime the dog is a quick-fix to get the attention she requires.

#1715

Not exactly going to plan is it Shia.

#1716

ReneeHendricks wrote:Hey bitches :) Been a very, very long time since I've popped in. How is everyone??? I miss you guys!

Renee Kelly
Vague Bitch

Welcome back to The Pit, Renee!

#1717

Yeah, glad to see you back here Renée.

#1718

feathers wrote:
MacGruberKnows wrote:When does the crushing Tiger tanks with her bare hands begin?
I thought she'd do it between her thighs. Sounds plausible.

[youtube][/youtube]

#1719

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Yeah, glad to see you back here Renée.

Enough with the privilege flaunting Phil.

#1720

Anyway welcome back - and I hope you decide to stay

[youtube][/youtube]

#1721

Hey, Renée. welcome back!

#1722

Aneris,

I don't think there can be any serious doubts that it wasn't Antifa doing the UC Berkeley thing, since there was co-ordinated Facebook activity before the events and there's a video of Yvette Felarca, the Asian-looking lady who also gave interviews during the events at Sacramento, giving a victory speech in front of the Martin Luther King Jnr building the next morning, along with some Mexican (or Hispanic or whatever) guy. Unfortunately I didn't mark the video in any way at the time I saw it, so I've lost track of it, but there's a snippet of it in Paul Joseph Watson's video on the UC Berkeley events here at 2:39:-

[youtube][/youtube]

#1723

Grr, should be "was Antifa" and "co-ordinating"

#1724

gurugeorge wrote:Aneris,

I don't think there can be any serious doubts that it wasn't Antifa doing the UC Berkeley thing, since there was co-ordinated Facebook activity before the events and there's a video of Yvette Felarca, the Asian-looking lady who also gave interviews during the events at Sacramento, giving a victory speech in front of the Martin Luther King Jnr building the next morning, along with some Mexican (or Hispanic or whatever) guy. Unfortunately I didn't mark the video in any way at the time I saw it, so I've lost track of it, but there's a snippet of it in Paul Joseph Watson's video on the UC Berkeley events here at 2:39:-

[youtube][/youtube]

Vid added.

#1725

katamari Damassi wrote:A few months ago I unsubscribed from the podscast Stuff You Missed In History Class because the hosts unironically used the term "mansplained." Now I've had to give up on Stuff You Should Know, because the hosts have totally bought the Jordan Belamire "I was raped in virtual reality" story.

I made the jump years ago, sadly.

#1726

[youtube][/youtube]

Why does TF00t have a hate on for Musk? Even if hyperloop turns out to be a wacky boondoggle, at least Musk is trying new things.

I can imagine TF back in 1903; "All of that work for THREE SECONDS of flight."

#1727

Should've previewed.

#1728

katamari Damassi wrote:[youtube][/youtube]

Why does TF00t have a hate on for Musk? Even if hyperloop turns out to be a wacky boondoggle, at least Musk is trying new things.

I can imagine TF back in 1903; "All of that work for THREE SECONDS of flight."

"Trying new things" could be said for every other pseudo-science thing that Thunderfoot has criticized (solar freakin' roadways, the WaterSeer, recycling carbon from CO2 in athmosphere, the thorium car, etc) and many of them have turned or will turn into sinkholes for investments that will likely go nowhere. There are serious issues about the hyper-loop, especially for the stability of the vacuum, the astronomic costs, etc. It's also a bit weird that Musk is outsourcing all the jobs to a competition of different teams of students.

I think that TF is concerned about the hype. I don't know how the resource for the hyper-loop is financed, but if the public is spending money on it American taxpayers should be concerned, too. Maybe it'll work, but it's sold as a done thing and "the future of transportation" without addressing criticism.

#1729

Kirbmarc wrote:
feathers wrote:
rayshul wrote:It's a pretty big difference from describing a group of faceless people and targeting one person, too.
Perhaps it's more difficult to paint a target on a whole group, but if you persist such smears they will eventually run amok.

And no, I'm not fond of that black antifa whatever either (even though most self-described antifas I knew in the 80s were pretty mellow and the more radical ones were far more bound to damage property than other people).
The black bloc are also more likely to damage property than attack people. Damage to property is a crime too, though, and what's most troubling is the culture of impunity and lack of responsibility in those movements, along with the recent cheers for personal violence. No, the black bloc idiots are not murderers or terrorists, but this doesn't mean they're people we shouldn't be a little wary. And frankly I wouldn't mind if people who gather together to protest were prohibited from hiding their faces.

Declaring the antifas to be terrorist is idiotic and illiberal since they're a bunch of diverse people, but declaring the black bloc tactic of acting like faceless mobs with no accountability to be illegal isn't a bad idea.

I don't know what legally I'd like to do about it. I can't really make up my mind on that regard. And to be honest, the black bloc BY ITSELF doesn't really bother me, I mean it does. It makes the left look bad, and being a leftist I have an invested interest against that..but other than that, it's not the biggest deal ever. Charge them with the crimes they do and move on.

But I don't think it's going to be just property crime forever. I'm more concerned about the people out there that are basically BEGGING for violence to be done in their names. That's the thing I'm worried about, is the escalation. And I think we'll get there, soon in fact. Where we'll go past that, I don't know. Further down the shithole or will people pull back? I don't know. But..I think it should concern any liberal person.

#1730

Kirbmarc wrote:
katamari Damassi wrote:[youtube][/youtube]

Why does TF00t have a hate on for Musk? Even if hyperloop turns out to be a wacky boondoggle, at least Musk is trying new things.

I can imagine TF back in 1903; "All of that work for THREE SECONDS of flight."
"Trying new things" could be said for every other pseudo-science thing that Thunderfoot has criticized (solar freakin' roadways, the WaterSeer, recycling carbon from CO2 in athmosphere, the thorium car, etc) and many of them have turned or will turn into sinkholes for investments that will likely go nowhere. There are serious issues about the hyper-loop, especially for the stability of the vacuum, the astronomic costs, etc. It's also a bit weird that Musk is outsourcing all the jobs to a competition of different teams of students.

I think that TF is concerned about the hype. I don't know how the resource for the hyper-loop is financed, but if the public is spending money on it American taxpayers should be concerned, too. Maybe it'll work, but it's sold as a done thing and "the future of transportation" without addressing criticism.

This looks too easy to sabotage to ever be really safe. That is unless they come up with a tube material that can't be punctured.

#1731

Malky wrote:This looks too easy to sabotage to ever be really safe. That is unless they come up with a tube material that can't be punctured.

Encase in concrete.

Our water systems are easy to sabotage too. Thankfully most people don't do it.

#1732

MacGruberKnows wrote:
Really? wrote:
ReneeHendricks wrote:Hey bitches :) Been a very, very long time since I've popped in. How is everyone??? I miss you guys!

Renee Kelly
Vague Bitch
I don't know if we've had any contact, but I am glad you are back! It's...it's been a trip. PZ Myers now spends his time counting his gray pubes. Ophelia Benson spends her days combing her beard while plotting against transwomen. Richard Carrier has been Radforded and the legal fund that PZ and friends collected to fight his lawsuits seems to have topped out at 21K.

Oh, and half of FTB have left FTB for "The Orbit," where they are freed from the requirements of being forced to blog once every several months.

Here's leading atheist light Greta Christina who, somehow, keeps getting invites on semi-mainstream podcasts. (She loves to "overprepare" for her totally amazing talks.) She gave a very powerful talk at SJWkepticon:

[youtube][/youtube]

You can tell that the talk is great because it has 740 thumbs down and 64 thumbs up.
When does the crushing Tiger tanks with her bare hands begin? You will notice she would not try to crush a Sherman tank because they were too fast and maneuverable and would outflank her hands and fuck her up with peashooters. Not like the slow ungainly sitting duck Tiger tank.

The problem for her is that the production capacity of the Sherman will be so high she will not be able to smash then fast enough.

and wow... I am so happy Trump's election destroyed the world she was trying to make. :lol:

#1733

Kirbmarc wrote:
katamari Damassi wrote:[youtube][/youtube]

Why does TF00t have a hate on for Musk? Even if hyperloop turns out to be a wacky boondoggle, at least Musk is trying new things.

I can imagine TF back in 1903; "All of that work for THREE SECONDS of flight."
"Trying new things" could be said for every other pseudo-science thing that Thunderfoot has criticized (solar freakin' roadways, the WaterSeer, recycling carbon from CO2 in athmosphere, the thorium car, etc) and many of them have turned or will turn into sinkholes for investments that will likely go nowhere. There are serious issues about the hyper-loop, especially for the stability of the vacuum, the astronomic costs, etc. It's also a bit weird that Musk is outsourcing all the jobs to a competition of different teams of students.

I think that TF is concerned about the hype. I don't know how the resource for the hyper-loop is financed, but if the public is spending money on it American taxpayers should be concerned, too. Maybe it'll work, but it's sold as a done thing and "the future of transportation" without addressing criticism.

I assumed Musk was using his own money or that of investors he convinced this project was worthwhile.

#1734

Bhurzum wrote:
John D wrote:Go to the 10 minute mark and watch the University Professor tell the cops they should beat up neo-Nazis. Haha. The "intellectual" left has gone "full-retard"..... (and you should never go "full-retard").
Yup, I posted an edited version (the wacky professor of REEEEconomics) a page back. Still, it's always good to get the full context.

May have been :nin:'d and you might have seen this already as it was linked by your friend and mine, the inimitable Paul Joseph Watson, but the Telegraph article does make a few good points (among a few questionable ones) on the violence at Berkeley and the Left's predilection for such:

“Have you heard of Milo Yiannopoulos?” I overheard someone saying a couple of days ago. “Have you watched his shows on YouTube? They’re kind of addictive!” they continued as Berkeley burnt. It’s a sad fact that the current student infatuation with professional provocateurs is good for no-one: left-wing students appear too willing to engage in violence, whilst campus conservatives are more in love with unprincipled agitators than the real value of free speech. ....

But there’s little defence for the violence which Berkeley faced, like the University of Washington before it. In an excellent piece by a student journalist, the arbitrariness of the fighting is shocking: it’s impossible to justify students being attacked because some professional revolutionary with anger issues decided they looked like a Nazi. That refrain against ‘respectability politics’ certainly doesn’t justify attacking unfortunate bystanders on a whim. Frankly, the idea that initiating violence is the solution to politics is the preserve of bonkers ideologues or thugs out looking for a fight, and that’s just as true on the left as on the right. ....

Seem to recollect seeing that Milo is planning a return to Berkeley - like MacArthur to the Philippines? ;-) Time for some :popcorn:

#1735

Billie from Ockham wrote:
Steersman wrote:#NothingToDoWithIslam ... "Trump slated to add Egypt and Saudi Arabia to list of proscribed Muslim countries"(#fakenews but hopefully ...)
If Trump actually has the balls (and drive for consistency) to put Saudi Arabia on his list, then I might start to like the guy.

Indeed. Though he seems to be growing on people - and on various European countries:

Most Europeans want immigration ban from Muslim-majority countries, poll reveals

47 per cent of Britons want to stop immigration from Muslim majority countries

A majority of Europeans want a ban on immigration from Muslim-majority countries, a poll has revealed.

An average of 55 per cent of people across the 10 European countries surveyed wanted to stop all future immigration from mainly Muslim countries. .... A ban was supported by 71 per cent of people in Poland, 65 per cent in Austria, 53 per cent in Germany and 51 per cent in Italy. ....

But you might also like a recent post from Cathy Young on the same topic; she exhibits her signature balance, a willingness to look at both sides of an issue, although I think she's too quick to discount the rather odious underlying ideology of Islam itself and its support by so-called "moderates":

Young wrote:Both the Right and Left Get the Muslim Ban Wrong

.... One side all but dismisses militant Islamism as a phantom menace, touting statistics to show that lawnmowers and armed toddlers are a more potent threat than jihadist terror. The other equates Islam itself with terrorism and regards every Muslim toddler as a potential jihadist. Meanwhile, very real issues are getting lost amidst the polemical histrionics. ....

The perception of religious animus is strengthened by the fact that some of Trump’s top aides, including National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, have made sweeping statements against Islam. While at times Flynn has limited his criticism to radical Islam, in a speech in Dallas last August he asserted that Islam is not a religion at all but “a political ideology [that] will mask itself as a religion” and a “malignant cancer.” ....

Only a small minority of Muslims worldwide sympathize with ISIS, and numerous Muslim clerics and organizations condemn it. But Islam also has a larger extremism problem — again, currently unmatched by other major religions. A 2013 Pew Research Center poll found that majorities of Muslims in many countries, including Afghanistan, Egypt, and Pakistan, favor the death penalty for adultery and apostasy; in Pakistan, the assassin of a liberal politician who had advocated changing draconian blasphemy laws became a hero to many. Intolerance toward religious minorities, particularly Jews, is also rampant. ....

Of course, sweeping generalizations serve no one. Islam is no monolith, even in its approach to such issues as blasphemy; it has always incorporated a multitude of sects, theological schools, and cultures. The 2013 poll found little support for sharia law, and even less for harsh religion-based punishments, among Lebanese, Central Asian, Turkish, or Bosnian Muslims. Yet unfortunately, radical Islamic fundamentalism and political Islamism have been expanding their reach across the Muslim world due to many factors, including Saudi financing. ....

Trump has, of course, been focusing on the "problematic" contributions by Iran, with probably some justification. But his perspective on Islam in general sure looks like the proverbial breath of fresh air, particularly in comparison to the mephitic atmosphere of Obama and Clinton.

#1736

rayshul wrote:How This Weight-Loss Skeptic Lost 60 Pounds and Kept it Off
http://www.alternet.org/story/149549/ho ... ept_it_off

Fuck that's depressing

After the obligatory SJW gobbledegook preamble, her actual nutrition advice is spot on. Dunno what this proves, though.

#1737

Lsuoma wrote:
Mothra's Dentist wrote: Here is an example of the good "professor's", a lecturer at MOMA btw, art:
[youtube][/youtube]
Boy, this needs wider distribution - if people see that they are paying "professors", often with tenure, to produce this shit, the pitchforks would (justifiably) be broken out with stunning rapidity.

Video removed by user. Sorry about that.

:o :o :o

#1738

InfraRedBucket wrote:Whatever the written statement , it would not be slander , it would be libel if written or published.
[/pedant]

Please note that if I record myself saying something defamatory and then make the recording public, that is libel, not slander, even though it was spoken. The key is publication vs being "overheard" by a third party (where the scare quote are to leave the door open to visual slander, such as when I somehow express something defamatory in gestures, such as using gestures to imply that you've done something that you haven't and I know that you haven't and some third person sees the gesture).

[/pedant^2]

#1739

Amazing. Just give these fools enough rope, and they will merrily hang themselves.

Spoiler alert: the chick reveals at the end that she did not vote. :doh:

[youtube][/youtube]

#1740

ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote:Amazing. Just give these fools enough rope, and they will merrily hang themselves.

Spoiler alert: the chick reveals at the end that she did not vote. :doh:

[outube][outube]

The wee bearded dude was priceless - his wavering tone, wracked with uncertainty and utterly bereft of self confidence. As for the dumb cunt in the ninja mask - she's a lefty, what did you expect? I love the way she claimed to have spoken with extremists then folded the instant she was asked who or where they were. Yup, totally not bullshit.

Very enjoyable, hopefully the dude makes some more.