Culture

[TorontoGold]

The problem is medical, fire, police emergencies.

My brother almost died from his appendix bursting. He literally would have died had some bozos blocked traffic, Costing us 15 minutes.

Somebody went into a diabetic coma in the NY subway awhile back but wasn't allowed to get past the protestors. I think they eventually 'negotiated' their way through. I may be wrong though.

That's 100% wrong that they did that and I believe that all emergency services should be allowed through no matter what.

My main issue w/Drayer is that he believes the protestors should be run over. Which just creates more chaos.

 

[RDU Irish]

That's 100% wrong that they did that and I believe that all emergency services should be allowed through no matter what.

My main issue w/Drayer is that he believes the protestors should be run over. Which just creates more chaos.

Not in the long run.

 

[Irish#1]

I'm not saying she was perfectly right, but this treatment from the judge is absurd.

Holy crap. That video shows the most violent group of protestors I've ever seen. They should get life plus 20 with no chance of parole.

 

[drayer54]

Protect themselves? Hmmmm some stupid hippies on a highway vs some pickup truck....who wins?

That's 100% wrong that they did that and I believe that all emergency services should be allowed through no matter what.

My main issue w/Drayer is that he believes the protestors should be run over. Which just creates more chaos.

I believe in self-defense. People shouldn't have to risk being beaten or having their cars pounded by violent rioters. This isn't dumb hippies. This is mobs. We've seen it in 2020. I can bombard you with videos if you need them.

The point is that the law should favor those who are conducting lawful operations on the highway. I'm not advocating for frogger. But people shouldn't be left defenseless against violent mobs.

Is that photo real and not photo shopped?

Because that looks like DC in a damn Godzilla movie

That was DC. They didn't board up the cities for the 2020 elections in case Trump lost.

 

[Sea Turtle]

No pride while there is genocide.

 

[TorontoGold]

I believe in self-defense. People shouldn't have to risk being beaten or having their cars pounded by violent rioters. This isn't dumb hippies. This is mobs. We've seen it in 2020. I can bombard you with videos if you need them.

The point is that the law should favor those who are conducting lawful operations on the highway. I'm not advocating for frogger. But people shouldn't be left defenseless against violent mobs.

That was DC. They didn't board up the cities for the 2020 elections in case Trump lost.

And those people were arrested? Nobody is saying don't arrest someone committing a crime.

 

[Irish#1]

I just don't understand the logic of blocking a highway for any cause. Do they think they are winning any new converts for "the cause" by pulling these stunts?

How many times has the news reported on someone being killed or seriously inured because traffic was stopped on the highway and a semi plowed into the end car?

 

[GATTACA!]

And those people were arrested? Nobody is saying don't arrest someone committing a crime.

THE LEFT IS ACTING LIKE IT NEVER HAPPENED!!!!

 

[TorontoGold]

THE LEFT IS ACTING LIKE IT NEVER HAPPENED!!!!

I think they want us to have a running loop of a CVS burning down on our monitors, of course this would be right next to Hunter Biden's cock.

 

[Bishop2b5]

She has a point

 

[greyhammer90]

She has a point

Does she? Citation needed for all the stats she purports show that America is actually bad now. At least she's hot.

Really unfortunate that both parties agree that America is doing so badly, when we're still lapping everyone else globally and our lifestyle/safety stats keep showing that everything is markedly better now than it was "in the good old days." Dems have always loved playing the "America is actually doing badly because poor people exist and (gosh darn it!) everyone should get everything" schtick, but Republicans have taken the playbook and run with it since the Teaparty tempest and now MAGA. I guess fear sells.

 

[drayer54]

And those people were arrested? Nobody is saying don't arrest someone committing a crime.

When you have cops in front of you and when you have a violent mob in front of you, there are two different scenarios.

Recall the mother in her minivan in Fredericksburg, Va, calling 911 because a mob was banging on her car with children in the back, and 911 informed her that it was sanctioned by city hall. They weren't hippies.

Show me which police you see here out arresting people and which people need self-defense.
Recall that people decided these communities need less police, not more.

Very peaceful

 

[TorontoGold]

When you have cops in front of you and when you have a violent mob in front of you, there are two different scenarios.

Recall the mother in her minivan in Fredericksburg, Va, calling 911 because a mob was banging on her car with children in the back, and 911 informed her that it was sanctioned by city hall. They weren't hippies.

Show me which police you see here out arresting people and which people need self-defense.
Recall that people decided these communities need less police, not more.

Very peaceful

What response do you want from me? I said anyone committing a crime should be arrested.

I guess you're making the case that cops are lazy and should be actually doing their job?

 

[drayer54]

What response do you want from me? I said anyone committing a crime should be arrested.

I guess you're making the case that cops are lazy and should be actually doing their job?

Or that the reality is that the cops aren’t there and when people are put into dangerous positions, the law should favor the innocent bystander, not the violent aggressors.

 

[Irish#1]

Does she? Citation needed for all the stats she purports show that America is actually bad now. At least she's hot.

And in the end, isn't that all that really maters?

 

[greyhammer90]

And in the end, isn't that all that really maters?

I could watch her spread misinformation and distrust in my fellow Americans all day...

 

[ab2cmiller]

Who would've guessed that there would be negative ramifications in California's SB132 law that was passed a few years ago which allows biological male inmates to self-identify and be placed in women's prisons.

Roughly 1/3 of inmates who were transferred from male facilities to female facilities (after self identifying) were registered sex offenders.

The inmate that is discussed in the Yahoo article didn't start to identify as a trans woman until 3 months after SB132 went into place. California female prisons started placing condom dispensers in all dayrooms.

Some states require transfers to undergo some form of hormonal and/or surgical changes to be housed in the women’s prison. California, New Jersey, and Washington, have rules that simply allow them to simply self-identify. Sounds like there are lots of people working hard to fix the law in California. I have no clue if they will be successful.

This is insanity.

3rd-strike 'trans' rape suspect prompts rebellion against CA law after attack in women's prison

Women's rights activists have condemned a California law that lets transgender inmates choose their prisons after a biological male in a women's prison was charged with rape.

www.yahoo.com

 

[Irish#1]

Hard to understand how some rationalize these changes.

 

[Irish#1]

 

[Irish#1]

 

[ulukinatme]

It's no wonder our youth today are so confused. This lady said she did a study abroad about Israel and Palestine and she was clueless about their cultures. If you're LGB it doesn't make a lot of sense to support Palestine over Israel. Seems like a lot of misguided antisemitism as a result of disinformation.

 

[TorontoGold]

It's no wonder our youth today are so confused. This lady said she did a study abroad about Israel and Palestine and she was clueless about their cultures. If you're LGB it doesn't make a lot of sense to support Palestine over Israel. Seems like a lot of misguided antisemitism as a result of disinformation.

I don't think that's necessarily fair. Just because someone's religion/culture is incredibly repressive doesn't mean they should be killed. It's tough to advocate for gay rights within in Gaza/West Bank when they're facing much bigger challenges then trying to understand what a LGBTQ person is.

 

[ulukinatme]

I don't think that's necessarily fair. Just because someone's religion/culture is incredibly repressive doesn't mean they should be killed. It's tough to advocate for gay rights within in Gaza/West Bank when they're facing much bigger challenges then trying to understand what a LGBTQ person is.

True, but no is suggesting they get killed because of their stance towards LGBTQ. We're just questioning why the LGBTQ community is throwing their support behind Palestine and not Israel. The later is clearly the more progressive of the two and supports Pride, while Palestine would jail or execute you for being LGBTQ. It just seems to be miscommunication among young people on the cultures, as shown by the video. I hate to use this analogy because I think they're referenced too often in politics, but it would be like Jews supporting Hitler and the Axis powers during WWII instead of the Allies. Both sides were killing people, but one side hated the Jews and were exterminating them. It's a bit like LGBTQ supporting Palestine over Israel.

 

[TorontoGold]

True, but no is suggesting they get killed because of their stance towards LGBTQ. We're just questioning why the LGBTQ community is throwing their support behind Palestine and not Israel. The later is clearly the more progressive of the two and supports Pride, while Palestine would jail or execute you for being LGBTQ. It just seems to be miscommunication among young people on the cultures, as shown by the video. I hate to use this analogy because I think they're referenced too often in politics, but it would be like Jews supporting Hitler and the Axis powers during WWII instead of the Allies. Both sides were killing people, but one side hated the Jews and were exterminating them. It's a bit like LGBTQ supporting Palestine over Israel.

The way it's been explained to me by friends that are part of that community is that basic human rights take precedence over gender ideologies. Additionally, the LGBTQ community is supporting the Palestinian people and NOT Hamas - which is a very important distinction.

I don't think that comparison fits this situation, because supporting a government or person is much different than a ethnic group of people. I think the comparison that's a better fit to this situation is the African National Congress in South Africa. The Sharpeville massacre was horrible, but that doesn't mean that the black South African's deserved the apartheid conditions. Collective punishment is not something a reasonable person should support. If someone says they support Hamas they're fucking stupid, but I think everyone can say they support Palestinian people.

 

[Irish#1]

It's no wonder our youth today are so confused. This lady said she did a study abroad about Israel and Palestine and she was clueless about their cultures. If you're LGB it doesn't make a lot of sense to support Palestine over Israel. Seems like a lot of misguided antisemitism as a result of disinformation.

 

[ulukinatme]

The way it's been explained to me by friends that are part of that community is that basic human rights take precedence over gender ideologies. Additionally, the LGBTQ community is supporting the Palestinian people and NOT Hamas - which is a very important distinction.

I don't think that comparison fits this situation, because supporting a government or person is much different than a ethnic group of people. I think the comparison that's a better fit to this situation is the African National Congress in South Africa. The Sharpeville massacre was horrible, but that doesn't mean that the black South African's deserved the apartheid conditions. Collective punishment is not something a reasonable person should support. If someone says they support Hamas they're fucking stupid, but I think everyone can say they support Palestinian people.

Are we sure that Palestinians care about basic human rights? Only 24% of Palestinians support a two state solution today, down from 60% in 2012 according to a Gallup poll. Two state solutions have been proposed in the past by Israel and other countries, and Palestine has refused to accept them. This predates Hamas' rise to power in the 80s and 90s. "From the river to the sea" isn't a call for peace.

 

[TorontoGold]

Are we sure that Palestinians care about basic human rights? Only 24% of Palestinians support a two state solution today, down from 60% in 2012 according to a Gallup poll. Two state solutions have been proposed in the past by Israel and other countries, and Palestine has refused to accept them. This predates Hamas' rise to power in the 80s and 90s. "From the river to the sea" isn't a call for peace.

I think we run into a very, very dark place if we start ascribing the worst actions of a group to the entire population. I'll just ask your opinion on my previous point about the ANC - because the ANC did commit atrocities does that mean the entire black African population was wrong in it's movement for self determination and to remove apartheid conditions? You will/should say - of course not. There is plenty of modern examples of collective punishment being wrong, do all Iraqi's deserve to have their rights diminished because of Al-Qaeda?

I'm glad you're saying these things to me instead of to an actual Palestinian, because it would lead to probably an altercation since it's frankly ahistorical. The PLO did accept a two-state solution in 1982. Also, the UN passed resolution 242 which stated the Palestinian territories were theirs and Israel is illegally occupying them. The Oslo accords also showed steps towards a two state solution in 1993 and 1995. Bibi is directly responsible for Hamas gaining legitimacy by backing them and fracturing the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.

The river to the sea comment is especially important that you understand it's meaning. It's first usage was by a Zionist in the 40's. It's also important you understand the intention of when it's used. When it was used first in the 60's by the PLO it was used in an aspirational sense that all peoples would receive the same rights Israeli/Palestinian. The most recent usage of the phrase by Hamas is obviously terrible, and Bibi has used this phrase too. When it is uttered by Bibi/Hamas it is in derogatory term, but for a common Palestinian it is absolutely not a cry for genocide.

 

[TorontoGold]

I just want to say - I genuinely don't believe you to be a mean spirited person. I think there is a GREAT number of opportunists that are trying to put their propaganda into it to muddy the waters. You can see this by the born again muslim types like Andrew Tate who only support palestinians because he's any antisemite. That weakens the broader argument of having lasting peace. Or those that are starting to do holocaust denalism because they see the opportunity.

 

[ulukinatme]

I think we run into a very, very dark place if we start ascribing the worst actions of a group to the entire population. I'll just ask your opinion on my previous point about the ANC - because the ANC did commit atrocities does that mean the entire black African population was wrong in it's movement for self determination and to remove apartheid conditions? You will/should say - of course not. There is plenty of modern examples of collective punishment being wrong, do all Iraqi's deserve to have their rights diminished because of Al-Qaeda?

I'm glad you're saying these things to me instead of to an actual Palestinian, because it would lead to probably an altercation since it's frankly ahistorical. The PLO did accept a two-state solution in 1982. Also, the UN passed resolution 242 which stated the Palestinian territories were theirs and Israel is illegally occupying them. The Oslo accords also showed steps towards a two state solution in 1993 and 1995. Bibi is directly responsible for Hamas gaining legitimacy by backing them and fracturing the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.

The river to the sea comment is especially important that you understand it's meaning. It's first usage was by a Zionist in the 40's. It's also important you understand the intention of when it's used. When it was used first in the 60's by the PLO it was used in an aspirational sense that all peoples would receive the same rights Israeli/Palestinian. The most recent usage of the phrase by Hamas is obviously terrible, and Bibi has used this phrase too. When it is uttered by Bibi/Hamas it is in derogatory term, but for a common Palestinian it is absolutely not a cry for genocide.

I don't think it was '82. There was the '82 Arab Summit that year where they called for Israel to relinquish territories they took as a result of the 6 Day War. There were the Camp David Accords in '78/'79 after the Egyptian and Jordanian armies retreated, the "land for peace" deal, but nothing related. I think the closest they came to both sides agreeing to a two state solution was the Oslo Accords you mentioned in the early 90s. PLO was going to agree to UN 242 terms and they were supposed to be finalized after a 5 year period of time, but there was too much contention about religious landmarks that both sides shared and the process fell through after more violence.

You make a good point there about the Oslo Accords though. That's probably the closest both sides have come to adopting the two state solution.

 

[Sea Turtle]

I don't think it was '82. There was the '82 Arab Summit that year where they called for Israel to relinquish territories they took as a result of the 6 Day War. There were the Camp David Accords in '78/'79 after the Egyptian and Jordanian armies retreated, the "land for peace" deal, but nothing related. I think the closest they came to both sides agreeing to a two state solution was the Oslo Accords you mentioned in the early 90s. PLO was going to agree to UN 242 terms and they were supposed to be finalized after a 5 year period of time, but there was too much contention about religious landmarks that both sides shared and the process fell through after more violence.

You make a good point there about the Oslo Accords though. That's probably the closest both sides have come to adopting the two state solution.

Every time the Palestinians reject a deal, the next one gets worse due to time and reality.

They should have taken the 1947 deal. They would have had half of all of Israel. They will never get that deal again.

Then they should have taken the Oslo deal. 94% of the entire West Bank and Gaza plus East Jerusalem. They will never get that deal again.