Excellent question…and I point out that only Trump spent millions of his own money for a $200k job…and his family made BILLIONS with no exaggeration and no assumptions, guesses, or theories, it’s a proven and under investigation fact. Biden didn’t have tens of millions to spend, his son didn’t either much less billions he’s accused of taking, and his family isn’t directly profiting from being in a nepotistic administration, getting “gifts” from hostile foreign powers in the tens and hundreds of millions, or in Jared’s case, BILLIONS from the Saudis.

Trump exhibits every single tenet of fascism-
WIKI- Fascism - a far-RIGHT, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation and race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy. Sounds exactly like the Trump right to me….and an impossibility for the left since fascism is a far right ideology.

Utter bullshit nonsense. Jan 6 alone, before investigating or prosecuting or housing the criminal terrorists cost over $500 million with 5 dead, for just one day of many far right riots. How much damage and cost has the election fraud fraud with its never ending “investigations” by politically connected organizations with zero experience, destroying entire county wide election systems and invalidating thousands of voting machines brought? How much of the near $40 billion wasted on the border fence that isn’t slowing a single immigrant was just stolen by politically connected groups with zero construction experience who promised to build a wall? If you want to add up costs and damage by party, you can’t then just ignore all costs and damages done by the extreme right/Trumpist fascists.
Now, how much destruction, death, and damage are the right promising to create if Trump is indicted? Pushing their followers to prepare to riot violently should the law be applied to their side while still chanting “lock her up” over Clinton who was only accused of 1% the crimes Trump was caught red handed committing….and you don’t see any hypocrisy, nothing wrong at all with demanding prison for any infraction by political enemies and total blanket immunity for their leaders.

You watch too much far right propaganda (the kind that replayed riot videos from years ago claiming they were of Portland burning daily for months…you must have thought Portland was made of asbestos to still be there to burn after week one of that lie, truth is the Portland “riots” were mostly peaceful and were only about a 4 city block area, not the entire city, something else OAN and FOX neglected to tell you), the kind of far right propaganda that never reported on the far right actors caught shooting crowds, lighting fires, shooting cops, setting bombs, etc. Most arsons, nearly all deaths, and 100% of cop killing and bombings during the 2020 riots (that Trump couldn’t stop but did exacerbate) were caused by proud and boogaloo boys trying false flag attacks. They were caught and prosecuted (or killed) committing crimes and blaming blm. There weren’t many BLM prosecutions and fewer convictions because there was no evidence the BLM activists committed these crimes, unlike the right wingers that were convicted of them…but you weren’t told that on OAN. They were dumb enough to carry manifestos explaining the false flag plans.

Dangerous? Hardly. The right perpetrated every instance of domestic terrorism this decade and last. Death threats at unbelievable levels even to the FBI and DOJ (because you’re idiots), showing up at school board meetings armed and apoplectic, refusing public health laws and making the pandemic 10+ times worse…the right is insane and armed and angry and self righteous and ready and willing to retry the civil war (too dumb to know it was the worst thing that ever happened to America and much worse for the confederacy)….nothing is more dangerous.
Violent? The right has that on lock too, 10/10 top gun murder states are red states. Red counties also have higher gun deaths.
Anti-free speech!?! 😂 Don’t say gay…not a Democratic governmental censorship. No CRT- again, not Democratic censorship or rational. Book banning and burning, again, not the Democrats or left.

“I just admit this is true”? Is this a typo or a brain fart? I did not, and do not “admit” or agree anything you said here is true.

Sorry, friendo, you have everything backwards as usual…based on your FEELINGS, not any facts. You just can’t admit you’ve been so wrong, so instead you continue to be wrong. Grow up. Being an adult means admitting mistakes, something you haven’t done once in the time I’ve known you.

You just can’t and won’t see facts or truth, and insist despite all evidence that your side is peaceful…peaceful gun toting and shooting, stabbing and smashing, Molotov and bomb carrying, don’t back down, no compromise, angry, vitriolic, uncivil, murderous mobs demanding their loser despotic dictator be installed as president for life and death to any opposition….not just on Jan 6 too. Ever since Nov 4 2020, Jan 6 was just one bad day of your normal behavior at Trump’s direction for his benefit….but it failed because you’re all really just cowardly snowflakes that ran at the first gunfire, not strong brave patriots fighting for freedom but weak, scared seditionists fighting for a non democratic dictator.

PS- sounds like Toth Senchal is done, failed to get the shareholder support needed to get an extension on their merger that would have brought funding, so no merger, no $1.5 billion in funding, not going public, >$1.5 million in debt and preparing to stiff their vendors in true Trump style. Another failed Trump venture costing his investors millions and leaving his vendors unpaid as usual. Suckers…what idiot gives Trump credit? No bank will.

PPS - how are you likening the right wing switch from “Trump did nothing wrong, nothing burger” to “There’s nothing in the constitution barring Trump from running for president from prison”? I’ve heard various senators and representatives say that now…not just morons on the street but morons in congress. So deep in the cult you think a president that does business through collect phone calls that are monitored and recorded is a reasonable sacrifice to have Trump back. 🤦‍♂️

PPPS- we just got video of Trump’s lawyers with their tech guy being escorted into Georgia election offices by one of the fake electors at the exact time voting machines and the tabulation systems were illegally breached in that office on Jan 7 21 (the day after the failed coup). This happened in multiple states, illegal breaching of voting systems by Trump’s team, harming the nation irreparably, all at Trump’s direction. Wrong is wrong….at what point is wrong enough to stop supporting wrong. I would say there is no wrong so wrong you would drop Trump, not if he’s caught mid ejaculation in the 6 year old boy he is in the process of electrocuting to death to enhance his own orgasm…you would blame the dead boy, not Trump.

PPPPS- Trump just admitted he’s a serious drug addict, addicted to cocaine, meth, crack, heroin, even fentenal. He did this by accusing Fetterman of all those addictions with zero evidence, which means it’s projection 100% of the time. This you guy, a deranged dope fiend and incestuous pedophile who steals top secret documents and spreads them around his property that’s open to the public. 😂

The proof that these assholes don’t believe their “good guy with a gun” lie is they don’t allow guns at the NRA events.

I wish some nut(s) would attack the NRA event, shooting a few dozen gun proponent politicians that normally hide behind their armed security and bullet proof podiums. I’m sure their tune would change significantly if some of their ilk were silenced permanently. No one deserves it more than Abbot.

Edit: BTW…more unarmed school children have been murdered in school this year than police officers in the line of duty. For all their bravado, their whining about how dangerous it is to be a cop, the necessity for more militarized equipment for their safety, it’s actually more dangerous to be a 10 year old student. I guess those kids should all get vests, rifles, pepper spray, armored vehicles and buildings, etc. ..that’s the solution.

Also, guns are the leading cause of death for children under 19 …have been since 2020.

Fucking worthless cowards and thugs, every single one. They deserve one more bullet each…delivered at high speed.

I’m curious as to what lengths the force went to trying to hide these videos.

This is why actually defunding, not just talk, not just removing some of their duties, is necessary. You can’t be a well armed militarized criminal attack force without the funding.

It is MUCH more on point if you substitute "Biden" with "Conservative American Militarism."

To be fair, yes Biden pulled out way too hastily. He'll own it.

But it's always the GOP that starts getting American soldiers killed on foreign grounds and bleeding American people dry to feed the MIC, make an embarassment of itself abroad, dragging all its allies down along its military misadventures. And then it takes an Democrat POTUS to cut the lost -- at tremendous political cost (and courage to take the blowback) -- to free up the $$$ to rebuild America.

It's just a crying shame America can never win a war post WWII.

Concern about the Afghan people. What a laugh. Since when the Right ever cared about "People"? It's always money over people. The American Right doesn't even care about its own people, let alone a foreign people that the Right is extremely suspicious of (Any random Fox/OAN/Newsmax host: NO F***KING AFGHAN REFUGEES!!!! ALL THE AFHGAN THAT WORKED FOR US AS TRANSLATORS ARE TERROISTS, ALL THERE WOMEN & CHILDREN ARE COMING TO TAKE OVER AMERICA! BELIEVE YOU ME!!).

I'll go ahead and say the unpopular truth....we need to not just defund, but disband the police. Fire them all, then allow them to reapply for their jobs, but those with excessive complaints, or any crimes on their record don't get hired back or at a minimum should have to go back to school with no pay, then pass a psychological screening far more stringent than the one they passed originally.
No amount of funding change (which is needed), demilitarization (which only means not making them more militarized, no one's taking their swat tanks or snipers), no amount of public outrage, or chiefs quitting will make a difference if the same criminal cops are still on the force, they need a massive purge and complete culture change or things will not get better.

One other change that I believe will definitely help, remove immunity so criminal cops not only go to prison, but also are first in line to pay restitution for their own crimes out of their own pockets, then once they're bankrupt the union's pockets, and if they both run out of money the city/state comes last in line for obligation to pay. When cops lose everything when they're convicted for abusing their authority, the bad apples will straighten up fast or quit.

Its kind of comical how terrified american police officers always appear in these videos. The contrast between the police officer and the woman's composure is too much, they may want to consider improving their selection procedure and training techniques.

the elephant in the room, and no one wants to admit it right or left, is that the history of police /judicial systems has never been good. Im not saying it to advocate for anarchy but basically everywhere, always, police abuse their power, while preventing very little crime / providing justice. I dont pretend to know all of history, but I never get much of a response when I say this and I thinks its because power corrupts no matter what, and there will always be minority others to justify abusing. The very very best you can hope for is to have enough oversight so as to make the corruption spread out, obscure, and minimal but even then...

For a long time I thought the US police was at least more effective in closing cases but between the US getting its ass kicked in the drug war despite the militarized police and a report I saw about poor coordination across state lines leading to murders and missing persons cases going unresolved for decades

The intent of the 2nd amendment was so that The People could rise up against a tyrannical government and overthrow it, should the need arise. That was practical back then, when both sides were just a bunch of dudes with muskets.
Nowadays, it would be impossible to rise up and overthrow the military (and militarized police), even with the best assault rifles. So an overthrow-by-violence just isn't practical.

I think it would be OK for active military or SWAT police to own and practice with AR-15, but I support a ban for everyone else (similar to what was in place 1994-2004). I like your idea about allowing them at shooting ranges too, where they are rented, not owned.

Some AR-15 owners say they use them to hunt coyotes, but give me a break- you can use any rifle for that.

Hydrogen fuel cells show promise for our new AI drone overlords.

Also, with the militarization of police departments, I doubt it will be a decade before they stop sending out manned patrol cars and switch over to fully-armed air and land drones.

@bcglorf
this video is from larken rose,a seriously devout libertarian.
he views statism as a form a religion,and that if a state is given too much power it will always lead to a form of tyranny.

i didn't post this as some kind of statement,or that the content reflects my own philosophy or ideals,but i try to understand all points of view to the best of my ability,even if i disagree.

so i am not making the case for when it is ok to shoot a cop,but i find larken's arguments compelling on a philosophical level.

because he does have a point in regards to america's hyper-militarized policing over the past decade.that is something that should concern us all.

anyways,for me it is just hearing a viewpoint from a different camp other than my own,and i thought his argument interesting.

No prob, I was just wondering.
Oh...I'm sorry you took it that way. I gave her a pass on this story alone, and only on the specific detail that she didn't say what the commentator claimed she did, but she did IMPLY what he said, and to those that don't listen closely, that's likely what they heard. I did not "buy it", I do hear what she came close to saying, and I call her out for being completely biased in her assessments and implications about what this means. You are correct, however, that while I APEAR to give her a pass for qualifying, I would likely not give those on the right the same....but that's only an appearance. Her IMPLICATION that this would "prove" they have something on Trump is just biased, conjecture, and wrong, and is a reason I don't watch her, even though I agree mostly with her takes on things.....mostly.
Kyle was lying when he reported what she said....and that's what I took issue with. I also took issue with his take on the issue that Russia militarizing it's borders isn't something to guard against...history proves him wrong.

The 'proof' of Russian involvement in the hacking is classified, you won't get to see it. That's an issue with Trump decrying the intelligence community (who didn't really get Iraq wrong, btw, they were clear in their uncertainty in their reports, but the administration erased any hint of uncertainty and claimed the redacted reports were fact publicly.)...but as a whole, I still have some trust in them...perhaps it's misplaced but I have a hard time believing so many intelligence organizations came to the same specific conclusions based on pure bias.

Um...Russia expanded into 2 countries recently, and are eyeing the other Slavic states. To me, that's a renewal of a hot war if we ever react like we're obligated to by treaty, until we do, it's a renewal of the cold war (and a violation of numerous treaties, including https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances) ...one that the pentagon is probably quite happy about, granted.

Again, don't feel you have to defend your viewpoint from me, or your admiration for a reporter....but allow me to have my own viewpoint, and to state and explain it if I choose. I am also quite biased, but not to the point of exclusion of fact.


EDIT: As to the troop placement in the Eastern NATO countries, I would like to see minutes of the 1990 summit where this agreement/guarantee was either made or not, not just reports of what Putin says today VS what Gorbachev says today...I want to see what was ACTUALLY said in the meeting, and more important, what was SIGNED by the parties. That the Russians haven't produced a signed treaty guaranteeing NATO wouldn't deploy farther in the East EVER is a pretty good indicator to me that it was not agreed on, so claims about what may have been SAID during negotiations are moot and have no bearing at all on what was agreed on. It's possible there was that agreement, if they just point us to it, I'll be on their side on this topic (unless it included a clause like "unless Russia begins expansion back into it's now independent satellites")

Here is the problem, Mr. Schlosser is a journalist, not a Nuclear Scientist. He does not understand, or has chosen to ignore for propaganda reasons, that an unarmed warhead is EXTREMELY unlikely to perform the exact sequence of events that need to take place to have a nuclear reaction happen.

Yes, he is fully correct in that we have had numerous 'butt-clenching' moments in which we could have started WW3 due to a malfunction or human error. But in the other cases he mentions, such as the bombs that landed on Spain, the lightning bolt on the tower, and the wrench on the rocket, the chance of the warhead going up while being unarmed is infinitesimal. They simply don't go 'boom' because of a collision or explosion. Now you could have a 'dirty bomb' type incident where the radioactive materials could be spread and come into contact with humans, but that is about it.

The cases that have been officially listed as Broken Arrows were because they involved an active bomb, like the one in Florida. Everything else he mentions in this video is his 'belief' and is conjecture.

Now, before I get unloaded on, I wish we didn't have nuclear weapons. I don't agree with Trump that we should renew the arms race, I think he is nuts since we have more than enough weapons to blanket the cities of the world more than a couple of times. If you add all the nukes from the Big 3 (USA/Russia/France...yes, France) there are enough to cover every single inch of the world.

The problem is, who bells the cat? If we give up all of our weapons, we are at risk. I wish we weren't, but we would be. If we bring down our numbers gradually, there are still other countries that may not, like North Korea. How do we trust the other country is actually following through? In a perfect world, we would all lay down our weapons and sing kumbaya, but as Heinlein wrote: "...Anyone who clings to the historically untrue and thoroughly immoral doctrine that violence never settles anything I would advise to conjure up the ghosts of Napoleon Bonaparte and the Duke of Wellington and let them debate it. The ghost of Hitler could referee and the jury might well be the Dodo, the Great Auk, and the Passenger Pigeon. Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and their freedoms."

PS...Yes, I know Starship Troopers is a controversial novel with overtones of Militarism and Fascism. However, there are quotes that ring true no matter what 'ism' people attach to the overall story. If you doubt that, look at the utter disbelief and depression that overcame liberals when Trump won. "He simply was supposed to, it was impossible, not like this, we have no hope, etc" were the feelings of the people who gave him no hope of winning. I, having lived and read enough to get a fair picture of how fucked up we are as a species, had little doubt he could pull it off. We elected a former Wrestler as governor, a former actor as governor, and a former actor as President. We overlook mass genocide in other countries. We ignore climate change. We spend hundreds of billions on defense and less than 10 on space exploration, all the while living on a planet that is already critically overpopulated (and is growing almost exponentially).

Settle the fuck down there Social Justice Warrior...I said nothing personal to you so cool your jets. I am honestly getting tired of taking the sane, reasonable route in everything I do. I just got off facebook responding to one of those "233 blacks, 411 whites" posts that "show" cops don't kill more blacks...and I get flak for not defending cops. I come here, point out that Marah and his minions are full of shit on one point, and I get flak...fuck both polar sides.

With that said let us get into the meat of your tantrum. I never even implied, hinted, suggested or whispered that many police actions are somehow mitigated or diminished because things are better. In fact, that whole distraction you ranted on is irrelevant to the whole meaning of my post. What the point was is this--THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO INCENTIVE FOR A SIDE TO BECOME A BETTER GROUP WHEN THE OTHER SIDE NEVER ACKOWLEGES PROGRESS. This is why Democratic and Republican lawmakers are so polarized. Why cops and blacks are so polarized. Why religions are so polarized.

I mean if we talked to our children like we talk about this, we would seem pretty fucking stupid. "Hey Timmy! I know you improved your D to a C+, but fuck you! That's not good enough you shit head. You miswell be an F student in this house!" Yeah, see how little Timmy might not come around to his dad's way of thinking? I swear, you mention some positivity and people flip the fuck out...like we are selling out to the bad cops or some stupid shit. And this is exactly what Marah's point was and is. His words were clear---NO PROGRESS. (You could argue that he meant only that there has been no progress in the thin blue line but then you would have to be a really belligerent asshole who takes words out of context to fit their meaning...)

Next, you mention all the tax dollars our police force gets...BWAHAHAAHA! Holy fuck, and I am sure the education system is overflowing with money too! Just because the numbers are large doesn't mean the actual tax dollars are significant nor does it mean the money flows to the actual police either. Now this does bring up your very serious observation that I find worrisome as well...the militarization of police...unfortunately our politicians cut sweet deals with companies that make war toys, just like in the military, and basically give away huge percentages of the police "budget." This drastically reduces the actual money police have to do their jobs while lining the politicians' pockets with contributions later.

As far as the shooting one unarmed person per week comment you made that should give YOU some perspective of how utterly stupid the side you are on is. 52 deaths a year in this manner (Say if your hyperbolic statement was actually right instead of being smartass.) 39 thousand deaths happen as a result of car accidents. Do I minimize the deaths? No. Do I put them in perspective? Of course.

I personally think that the no snitch code to crimes, whether on the street or in the force, should be a crime. Nowhere should be safe, period.

We've seen what the police really do, and it's unacceptable - that's his point. It might be better than in the 1950's* - fuck you, it might be better than in the 1200's for all I care - the point is that right now it's not as good as America deserves. America doesn't deserve perfection, but for all the tax dollars it spends on police, for all the freedoms it surrenders to government, it deserves in return a police force that won't shoot unarmed citizens once a week. Maher cares what the police actually do - that's why he's saying this.

*Also, even though some of the issues you raise have improved, we've also seen steady police militarization since the 1950's, both in the training and in the equipment police are given. In some ways that means things have gotten worse since the 50's - many cops on the streets now see themselves as roving tactical assault units, rather than boring civil servants.

Oh, you mean the small area between Poland and Lithuania? The one that Russia is pouring troops and weapons, -- including missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads, into at such a rate that the region is now one of Europe's most militarized places?

Moscow is stationing "thousands of troops, including mechanized and naval infantry brigades, military aircraft, modern long-range air defense units and hundreds of armored vehicles in the territory."

I mean, it's only scaring the piss out of two of our friendly countries in the region. Well, more if you consider that Russia's military buildup in the region allows them direct coverage of Sweden, Germany, and other nations that really don't trust the former USSR.

So, to use your example, I would absolutely expect Russia to get antsy and not sit by idly if we suddenly moved a LARGE portion of our active military forces to the Florida Keys. All of this is more posturing and sword rattling by Putin, a direct throwback to the USSR leaders of old. If he thought he could get away with it without open warfare, he would be rolling tanks into all the old USSR satellite states.

It isn't just this incident alone, either, as Russia has been steadily stepping up calculated shows of force and close encounters with our forces well away from anything close to their territory. Primarily, if you ask me, because the world outcry over the Ukraine situation stifled their little miniature coup attempt from taking over the entire country.

***Edit***

I just wanted to add, I don't want to go to war with Russia. I agree that many of the things that we are doing, such as considering adding former Soviet states to NATO, are antagonizing them. But I feel that in some cases our hands are tied by the fact that Putin, directly or indirectly, is making a lot of those former states think that he is planning on re-absorbing them under the umbrella of a new USSR. If he would keep his nose out of their internal affairs, I am pretty sure we wouldn't be building up in response.

@Jinx

hey thanks for keeping this conversation going and not just making assumptions and allowing us both to come to a better understanding.

though i am not really surprised,i am gladdened.

in my opinion,i think this situation may be a problem with indentifying with labels and maybe putting too much weight on them to convey complicated and complex human interactions.

i would call myself a social justice warrior,but i would never identify as those who behave is the extremists do.but to imply that the responsibility is on ME,or any other critic,to redefine these radical social justice warriors as somehow not being representative of the majority,is a false dynamic,because that is how they define themselves.

basically the "No true scotsman" fallacy.which is employed ad-nauseum by these extremists.that somehow if you do not adhere to their radical agenda you are somehow not qualified to label yourself:feminist,anarchist (this has been directed at me),socialist, etc etc.

this is just a silly and binary way of breaking down peoples complex human perceptions and understandings to fit a narrow,and restrictive narrative,in order to achieve an agenda.

so while we all viewed GW bush's "if you're not with us,you're against us",as an inane and utterly stupid statement.how come there is little push back when the EXACT same tactic is used to silence someone who may not be 100% on board with a certain agenda?

does me posting this video automatically translate to me being "anti-social justice warrior"?

of course not! that is just silly,but in todays climate that is exactly how some people view complex situations,and it HAS to stop!

you brought up police.
good.
lets use that as an example.
the fact the americas militarized and dysfunctional police force has accounted for more police shootings than soldiers have died in iraq.do we REALLY need to be told that it is not ALL cops.

of course not.again,that is silly but it DOES mean that maybe there is a problem within the institution that needs to be addressed.

here is a perfect case for social justice warriors to bring this corruption and rot to the surface,and here we have black lives matter.which is receiving mixed coverage in the media,but they have gotten people talking and even some incremental reforms in the woks AND,just recently..6 cops fired from a cleveland precinct for shooting civilians.this is where social justice warriors are not only necessary but vital!

but what if.....

those cops who were feeling threatened,or intimidated by the criticism and examination of their institution coming from black lives matters decided to use a tactic right out of these extremists playbook?

maybe some doxxing?
exposing personal information about the protesters?
how about a few false accusations of rape?
maybe personal harassing calls to friends and family members of the black lives matter movement?
how about some false charges of harassment and sexual discrimination?

that would effectively shut down the black lives matter movement within weeks,and how would we respond to that kind of underhanded tactics?

we would be outraged.
we would be furious at the absolute abuse of power.a power bestowed by the state.

and our outrage would be justified.

do you see where i am coming from here?

in the example i have given,which may or not be the best analogy.we can easily see the abuse of power as a form of bullying to get a group that is a dissenting ideology..to shut..the fuck..up.

freedom of speech is NOT just speech you or i agree with,or happen to support,but it also speech that we may dislike,disagree and even find offensive.

but by allowing those we dislike or disagree to say their piece,allows us and everybody else to examine,discern and ultimately discard as ridiculous.or,converesly,find some merit that was previously hidden from us,due to our lack of knowledge or understanding.

i realize i am reiterating my previous point,but i think it is so very important.

free speech allows the free flow of ideas and dialogue and allows good ideas to be absorbed into the body politic and the bad ones discarded into the trash bin.

but there MUST be the allowance of the free flow of thought!

so when i post a video such as this i am not ridiculing actual socially conscious people.i am exposing bad ideas,supported by narrow minded people who wish to impose THEIR sense of how a society should be and attempt to circumvent the very slow process of discussion,argument and debate by hijacking the conversation and shutting down all dissent and disagreement with the most fascist tactics possible.

up until a month ago i was fairly ignorant to things like gamergate and whatnot.i thought i had a pretty fair understanding of what a social justice warrior was,and even included myself as one.

but then,quite by accident,i fell upon a few stories that highly disturbed me.one ,in particular was the case of greg allen elliot who was being criminally prosecuted for harassment on twitter.

now the case was finally resolved,and elliot was found not guilty.
so hooray for justice right?
free speech won in the end right?
or did it...did elliot actually win?
i am not so sure.

you see.
he was a web designer.
and once he was charged 3 years ago,he was banned from any internet use.so effectively he was jobless.
on top of that his defense cost 100k.
sounds like a loss to me.

now let us examine stephanie guthrie.a prominent toronto feminist and tedtalk speaker:
1.she made the accusation of harassment and brought the charges.
2.even though this all started with a man who created a game where anita sarkesians faced was punched,and was the supposed imetus for all this fuss,guthrie never laid charges against the creator of the game.though she did,along with her followers harassed and bullied this man until he closed down his account.so chock one up for feminism? i guess?
4.what guthrie found so reprehensible about elliot was that he had the audacity to question guthries rage and called for a calm interaction.(mainly because there are literally 100's of face-punching games).
5.guthrie and her followers found this call for calm offensive and doxxed elliot and proceeded to harass his employer,his family and ffirends.
6.elliot lost his job.his employer could not handle the harassment.so feminist win again? i guess?
7.when guthrie blocked elliot on twitter she continued to publicly accuse him of misogyny,bigot and even a pedophile.
8.she then brought accusations against elliot for criminal harassment,and that she "felt" harassed.
9.guthrie has paid ZERO for her accusations.she has suffered no accountability nor responsibility.

now the court case is over,and elliot has been vindicated and free speech is still in place for today.

but lets look at the bigger picture.
and let us imagine how easily this situation could be abused.
can we really look at guthrie vs elliot as ANY form of justice? or is it MORE liekly that guthrie was abusing a court system to punish a man she happened to disagree with?with ZERO consequences.

now maybe you agree with guthrie.
maybe you are one of those people that believe in your heart that words are weapons and people should be held accountable for those words.they should be stripped of wealth,work and home..they should be punished.

ok.
thats fine.
maybe you agree because it is a matter you support?
a racist pig loses a job for saying racists things.
or a bigot gets kicked out of his apartment for being a bigoted asshole.

but how about this..
hypothetically:
a devout chritian woman is protesting an abortion clinic with her children in tow.

and lets say a pro-choice atheist comes over to her and starts to berate her i front of her children.ridiculing her for her beliefs and saying jesus was a zombie.that she is a horrible person for believing in such a tyrannical deity,that this so-called all-loving entity punishes all no-believers in a lake of fire for all eternity.that as a mother,teaching her children to worship such a god is tantamount to child abuse.berating her so badly that her children begin to cry?

now what if that interaction was filmed?
then posted to youtube?
what if a "social justice warrior" of the religious flavor decided that berating person needed to pay for his words?
what if that person got doxxed?
and the end result was he loses his job (because corporations are notoriously controversy allergic),and maybe his landlord is notified and he is kicked out of his apartment?

would you be ok with all that?
because that is the EXACT same metric that radical social justice warriors use!

and what about false accusations?
you dont even have to be actually offended and /or harassed,you just have to accuse and the rest takes care of itself.

are you ok with that kind of creative abuse?

so when i bring things like this to the forefront and attempt to expose the underlying idiocy.what i just wrote is where i am coming from.

and yes.these radicals and their underhanded tactics need to be exposed and all the attention brought to them the better.

why? because what and how they are behaving is anti-democracy anti-freedom and anti-liberty.

and i am all for debating specific issues,and will gladly do so..with glee,but i will not and cannot respect what the radical elements are doing to an otherwise worthy cause.

and YOU should be calling them out as well.

i know this is long and i probably lost the plot somewhere,but this is very important,becuase it threatens all of us and if we simply ignore these nimrods they will just become even more entrenched,self-righteous and arrogant in their own little bubble worlds.

that bubble needs to be popped,and soon.

anyways.thanks for hanging (if you made it this far)
there will be danishes and punch in the lobby!