Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Page / 4
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 8:28:32 PM EDT
Milo is good people.
If you don't agree you hate gay people
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 8:29:03 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BigPony:
Despite labeling Milo a Troll and purveyor of hate speech Berkley University is allowing Milo's appearance tomorrow. There were calls from Professors and students to cancel it. It is gonna be yuuuuge.
View Quote


Of course, they embrace 'free speech' when it suits their agenda, and scream like banshees for any perceived slight against their actions
(e.g. blocking highway ramps, intersections, train tracks, impeding traffic, disrupting gatherings, etc is "free speech", and the police
are fascists for trying to stop them).
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 8:29:19 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Agent_Funky:


Not if what he is saying is fact.

Facts are not hate speech, nor a crime, no matter how much people may dislike it.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Agent_Funky:
Originally Posted By iggy1337:
Just to give a indication of how far Europe is down the Tubes:

In the Netherlands, the UK as well as places like Sweden (would have to dubble check some laws here) Milo would be a 'HATE SPEECH FELON' multiple times over.


Not if what he is saying is fact.

Facts are not hate speech, nor a crime, no matter how much people may dislike it.


But under your scenario, he STILL ends up in a court of law defending himself for stating facts. That is what blows our colonial minds. Maybe we need to recolonize Europe. You got a couch I can sleep on?
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 8:32:02 PM EDT
How many of those women are truely muslim, or are just aggitators wearing a hajib?
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 8:51:53 PM EDT
Did he get his twitter back?
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 8:53:08 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By spartacus2002:


But under your scenario, he STILL ends up in a court of law defending himself for stating facts. That is what blows our colonial minds. Maybe we need to recolonize Europe. You got a couch I can sleep on?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By spartacus2002:
Originally Posted By Agent_Funky:
Originally Posted By iggy1337:
Just to give a indication of how far Europe is down the Tubes:

In the Netherlands, the UK as well as places like Sweden (would have to dubble check some laws here) Milo would be a 'HATE SPEECH FELON' multiple times over.


Not if what he is saying is fact.

Facts are not hate speech, nor a crime, no matter how much people may dislike it.


But under your scenario, he STILL ends up in a court of law defending himself for stating facts. That is what blows our colonial minds. Maybe we need to recolonize Europe. You got a couch I can sleep on?


Sure, bring jerky and some Van Winkle and we've got a party

My point is that it wouldn't end up in court if you are talking about pertinent facts in a debate.

The is no law specifically relating to "hate speech". "Hate speech" is merely a fake news buzzword used to describe things they do not like. In real terms, malicious spoken or written words which are directed at someone with a view to inciting hatred could be in contravention of Laws relating to public order.

The stating of facts within an appropriate context is protected as freedom of expression in Common Law and protected further under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 8:57:44 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cobalty2004:
Did he get his twitter back?
View Quote


Nope.
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 8:59:42 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Agent_Funky:


Not if what he is saying is fact.

Facts are not hate speech, nor a crime, no matter how much people may dislike it.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Agent_Funky:
Originally Posted By iggy1337:
Just to give a indication of how far Europe is down the Tubes:

In the Netherlands, the UK as well as places like Sweden (would have to dubble check some laws here) Milo would be a 'HATE SPEECH FELON' multiple times over.


Not if what he is saying is fact.

Facts are not hate speech, nor a crime, no matter how much people may dislike it.


We have a distiction between speech in say an academic discussion and in general.

Saying Japanese have a lower IQ than Scottish people in a academic paper/publication=GTG
Saying the same at a demonsteation or even privatly = hate speech.

Geert Wilders was on trial here for correctly word for word quoting the Quoran.
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 9:03:55 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By iggy1337:


We have a distiction between speech in say an academic discussion and in general.

Saying Japanese have a lower IQ than Scottish people in a academic paper/publication=GTG
Saying the same at a demonsteation or even privatly = hate speech.

Geert Wilders was on trial here for correctly word for word quoting the Quoran.
View Quote


He was actually found guilty as I recall?
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 9:16:52 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DangerJ:
The worst part of Milo threads is all the people that have to include 'no homo' in everything they say.
View Quote


Let's you hear say that you love Milo.


I love Milo. No homo.
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 9:17:16 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RDak:
Serious question............what were those Muslims mad about(?)...........everything he said statistics wise was true.
View Quote


Facts are racist and islamophobic, dude.
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 9:23:54 PM EDT
Just got finished watching the entire talk. Well worth the time.
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 9:30:33 PM EDT
Here's the score: Radical Islam:49 (Pulse Nightclub) Gays: 0
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 9:43:37 PM EDT
I fucking love Milo! But not big or little pony... That would be homo!
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 10:42:51 PM EDT
BOOM.

Dude is hilarious and brilliant.
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 10:52:30 PM EDT
Milo shines an especially bright light on the liberal hypocracy. Good dude.
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 10:54:29 PM EDT
Its nice to see the police doing their jobs again
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 10:58:37 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 11:00:29 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BigPony:
Despite labeling Milo a Troll and purveyor of hate speech Berkley University is allowing Milo's appearance tomorrow. There were calls from Professors and students to cancel it. It is gonna be yuuuuge.
View Quote


Oh, to be a face in that crowd. Alas, I have to work but look forward to an update in this thread!!!
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 11:06:22 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By iggy1337:


We have a distiction between speech in say an academic discussion and in general.

Saying Japanese have a lower IQ than Scottish people in a academic paper/publication=GTG
Saying the same at a demonsteation or even privatly = hate speech.

Geert Wilders was on trial here for correctly word for word quoting the Quoran.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By iggy1337:
Originally Posted By Agent_Funky:
Originally Posted By iggy1337:
Just to give a indication of how far Europe is down the Tubes:

In the Netherlands, the UK as well as places like Sweden (would have to dubble check some laws here) Milo would be a 'HATE SPEECH FELON' multiple times over.


Not if what he is saying is fact.

Facts are not hate speech, nor a crime, no matter how much people may dislike it.


We have a distiction between speech in say an academic discussion and in general.

Saying Japanese have a lower IQ than Scottish people in a academic paper/publication=GTG
Saying the same at a demonsteation or even privatly = hate speech.

Geert Wilders was on trial here for correctly word for word quoting the Quoran.


That's fucked up.
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 11:09:10 PM EDT
I wish i could hear what the women were saying. I'm certain its comical.
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 11:17:59 PM EDT
I am sure I am not the first to say it, but I suspect Milo has a short life expectancy. I do not think Islamists will tolerate his outspoken position for long. I hope he makes enough money for tight security.

Go Milo

Have there been many threats against Milo? I've only discovered him about two months ago and don't know that much about him.
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 11:20:40 PM EDT
I hope they don't Malcolm X him.
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 11:27:40 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Zippy_The_Wonderdog:
I am sure I am not the first to say it, but I suspect Milo has a short life expectancy. I do not think Islamists will tolerate his outspoken position for long. I hope he makes enough money for tight security.

Go Milo

Have there been many threats against Milo? I've only discovered him about two months ago and don't know that much about him.
View Quote


I seriously am afraid for him too. I know he has tons of hired security and cops at his scheduled events, but in his personal life I hope he is taking good precautions too.
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 11:44:29 PM EDT
Furthermore, is it really necessary to say "No Homo" when you cite your appreciation for what Milo "Snuffleupagus" had said in one of is speeches? I'm not a homosexual, and I see no reason to make it a point when supporting one of Milo's points.

Cut the "no homo" bullshit. Either you like his opinions or not.

Get secure with yourself.

Go Milo.
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 11:49:08 PM EDT
By pointing out that Islam is incompatible with western thought he is crushing leftist ideas that if they somehow let Islam be, that Islam will crush the right (something the left hasn't been able to do) which will leave the leftist to establish things the way they want. I think that is why they support Islam and overlook the oh-so-obvious crimes against humanity. Liberals don't want to believe that Islam would sooner crush them if not for the right standing in the way; they believe that they are right and that somehow that alone will protect them when nothing could be further from the truth. When that is thrown in their faces they react in the only way they know how- emotionally. [://
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 11:49:31 PM EDT
He does a great job destroying liberals and Muslims...

Straight Heterosexual male...
Link Posted: 1/31/2017 11:49:45 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Zippy_The_Wonderdog:
Furthermore, is it really necessary to say "No Homo" when you cite your appreciation for what Milo "Snuffleupagus" had said in one of is speeches? I'm not a homosexual, and I see no reason to make it a point when supporting one of Milo's points.

Cut the "no homo" bullshit. Either you like his opinions or not.

Get secure with yourself.

Go Milo.
View Quote


I agree, maximum bro love!
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 12:33:29 AM EDT
The real question is.....WHAT PLATE CARRIER DOES MILO OPERATE WITH???
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 1:04:55 AM EDT
Rockstar. Barren field.
And a great delivery with presence style.

Dig the hat btw. Kevlar as well?
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 1:13:02 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 1:26:47 AM EDT
Reminds me, I forgot to check up on his YouTube channel this month.
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 1:42:07 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By trails-end:
Islam is incompatible with any society except Islam.

Dr. Bill Warner
View Quote

Islam is incompatible with itself.

Link Posted: 2/1/2017 1:53:26 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RDak:
Serious question............what were those Muslims mad about(?)...........everything he said statistics wise was true.
View Quote
paid shills?
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 2:05:18 AM EDT
I'm not gay....

But if i was....


Link Posted: 2/1/2017 2:22:37 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 2:30:32 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BMCBreeder:
Wait so it's okay to be intolerant of Islam if you're gay?  I can't get a handle on whose hate is more important.
View Quote

No.  It's OK all of the time.
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 8:50:04 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Zippy_The_Wonderdog:
Furthermore, is it really necessary to say "No Homo" when you cite your appreciation for what Milo "Snuffleupagus" had said in one of is speeches? I'm not a homosexual, and I see no reason to make it a point when supporting one of Milo's points.

Cut the "no homo" bullshit. Either you like his opinions or not.

Get secure with yourself.

Go Milo.
View Quote


I love Milo. (Somewhat homo)
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 10:49:12 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By spartacus2002:
it is very amusing to see people chanting "USA! USA!" in support of a gay Brit at the microphone. There's nothing wrong with that, just hilarious.
View Quote


Freedom is freedom.

A gay Brit has the right to express his views in a dignified manner without proto-humans shouting him, regardless of who those proto-humans are.
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 10:51:02 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By OTSmithers:
Milo is like a young unpolished Christopher Hitchens.
View Quote


I like Milo far more than Hitch.

Hitch, especially in his later years, while resolutely anti totalitarian, steadfastly refused to acknowledge the pillars of Western Civilization.
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 10:53:27 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Agent_Funky:

If you state pertinent facts in a court, and the court finds your facts unacceptable based on a perception, then the court runs the danger of becoming a juxtaposition.
View Quote


Or, what we call the Federal 9th and 2nd Court of Appeals.
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 10:54:40 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kuraki:

No.  It's OK all of the time.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kuraki:
Originally Posted By BMCBreeder:
Wait so it's okay to be intolerant of Islam if you're gay?  I can't get a handle on whose hate is more important.

No.  It's OK all of the time.


Tolerance isn't a virtue. Tolerance of things that are actually harmful to innocents is evil.
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 10:58:55 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By iggy1337:


We have a distiction between speech in say an academic discussion and in general.

Saying Japanese have a lower IQ than Scottish people in a academic paper/publication=GTG
Saying the same at a demonsteation or even privatly = hate speech.

Geert Wilders was on trial here for correctly word for word quoting the Quoran.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By iggy1337:
Originally Posted By Agent_Funky:
Originally Posted By iggy1337:
Just to give a indication of how far Europe is down the Tubes:

In the Netherlands, the UK as well as places like Sweden (would have to dubble check some laws here) Milo would be a 'HATE SPEECH FELON' multiple times over.


Not if what he is saying is fact.

Facts are not hate speech, nor a crime, no matter how much people may dislike it.


We have a distiction between speech in say an academic discussion and in general.

Saying Japanese have a lower IQ than Scottish people in a academic paper/publication=GTG
Saying the same at a demonsteation or even privatly = hate speech.

Geert Wilders was on trial here for correctly word for word quoting the Quoran.


That truly sucks, mate.

The Netherlands has always been a country that has seemed quite balanced and chilled out over such things in the past. In my time there I absolutely loved the place and the people. Admittedly I haven't visited for a while but it sounds like you guys are roughly where we were under the Blair Govt.

I'm hoping Brexit and the growing disquiet with this kind of emotional and illogical thinking will soon start to see things turn against the so called liberal mentality. I'd love to see you guys tell the EU to fuck off, and bury your socialist leadership in a landslide of decent public opinion. Sounds like the left will just keep pushing and doubling down on their stupidity, oblivious to the disquiet they are creating for themselves.
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 11:01:58 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Screechjet1:


Or, what we call the Federal 9th and 2nd Court of Appeals.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Screechjet1:
Originally Posted By Agent_Funky:

If you state pertinent facts in a court, and the court finds your facts unacceptable based on a perception, then the court runs the danger of becoming a juxtaposition.


Or, what we call the Federal 9th and 2nd Court of Appeals.


Sorry mate....not sure what that means.

Any chance of a brief explanation to relieve my ignorance? Thanks
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 11:24:31 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Agent_Funky:


Sorry mate....not sure what that means.

Any chance of a brief explanation to relieve my ignorance? Thanks
View Quote


First, IANAL.

Second, this reminds me of story of the engineer traveling with his wife and son, and the son asks mom, "How does the satellite dish work?" Mom replies, "Ask your father, he's the engineer." The son replies, "I don't want to know THAT much."

Anyway, the shortest answer I can muster that many of our dumbest judicial rulings come from the 9th and 2nd Federal Circuit courts of Appeal, covering primarily the far western US and NY, VT and CT respectively.

Now, in the US, a federal circuit appellate court is pretty powerful. Once they determine, for example that NYS gun laws are reasonable, the last stop for judicial redress is the Supreme Court. But, thankfully, an appellate courts rulings are only binding on its district. The Supreme Court is supposed to intervene when the ruling of the appellate courts get too far out of wack with each other. But that can take a long time, requires some pretty specific legal circumstances, and is ultimately at the whim of the SCOTUS to hear the case.
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 11:31:28 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By goalieMN:


Tolerance isn't a virtue. Tolerance of things that are actually harmful to innocents is evil.
View Quote

Exactly.

If my "religion" mandated I suck hydrocarbons from beneath the earths surface and released them into the ocean because my god thrives on the life force of deceased aquatic fauna, how tolerant would anyone be of me and my beliefs?
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 11:44:28 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Screechjet1:


First, IANAL.

Second, this reminds me of story of the engineer traveling with his wife and son, and the son asks mom, "How does the satellite dish work?" Mom replies, "Ask your father, he's the engineer." The son replies, "I don't want to know THAT much."

Anyway, the shortest answer I can muster that many of our dumbest judicial rulings come from the 9th and 2nd Federal Circuit courts of Appeal, covering primarily the far western US and NY, VT and CT respectively.

Now, in the US, a federal circuit appellate court is pretty powerful. Once they determine, for example that NYS gun laws are reasonable, the last stop for judicial redress is the Supreme Court. But, thankfully, an appellate courts rulings are only binding on its district. The Supreme Court is supposed to intervene when the ruling of the appellate courts get too far out of wack with each other. But that can take a long time, requires some pretty specific legal circumstances, and is ultimately at the whim of the SCOTUS to hear the case.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Screechjet1:
Originally Posted By Agent_Funky:


Sorry mate....not sure what that means.

Any chance of a brief explanation to relieve my ignorance? Thanks


First, IANAL.

Second, this reminds me of story of the engineer traveling with his wife and son, and the son asks mom, "How does the satellite dish work?" Mom replies, "Ask your father, he's the engineer." The son replies, "I don't want to know THAT much."

Anyway, the shortest answer I can muster that many of our dumbest judicial rulings come from the 9th and 2nd Federal Circuit courts of Appeal, covering primarily the far western US and NY, VT and CT respectively.

Now, in the US, a federal circuit appellate court is pretty powerful. Once they determine, for example that NYS gun laws are reasonable, the last stop for judicial redress is the Supreme Court. But, thankfully, an appellate courts rulings are only binding on its district. The Supreme Court is supposed to intervene when the ruling of the appellate courts get too far out of wack with each other. But that can take a long time, requires some pretty specific legal circumstances, and is ultimately at the whim of the SCOTUS to hear the case.

They're especially powerful with a Supreme Court divided 4-4, which is why you see this push cropping up to for Congress to change the makeup of the court to 8 justices.  The nuclear option everyone keeps talking about, that Harry kiddydiddler Reid set precedence for, was to allow every Obama court appointee to sail through Congress without deliberation.

So Obama appointed 55 judges to the Federal Court of Appeals (179 total)  and 268 to the Distric Courts (677 total).  Over a third of sitting Article III judges are Obama's appointees.

What happens when the SCOTUS can't come to a decision?  It gets remanded to the lower court.

Yeah deadlocked SCOTUS would be fucking brilliant for us
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 11:45:48 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 74HC:
How many of those women are truely muslim, or are just aggitators wearing a hajib?
View Quote

I thought the same when I saw the video. They look fake.
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 12:18:25 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BMCBreeder:
Wait so it's okay to be intolerant of Islam if you're gay?  I can't get a handle on whose hate is more important.
View Quote

I am not intolerant of Islam as a Religion. This is the US, people are welcomed to worship who they want. I lean to Zen Buddhism, but, I am very bad at it.

What I and many other are leery of is the culture/laws/suicidal actions that those in that religion are associated with.
Let's see:
Terrorist Attacks, suicidal especially
High level sexism to the point that women are, more or less, property to be traded. Men can kill women in their culture without issue in the right conditions.
Intolerance of ANY other religion/point of view/culture to the point that killing "infidels" is considered glorious.
Raping women who are Muslim is OK because they are not human in their eyes
And on...and on...

I do not hate Islam or the people of the Middle East. Their culture is not compatible with ours and, unlike Europe, American men WILL NOT put up with the actions they are taking in Europe. It would get ugly very, very quickly.

FYI, btw.
Link Posted: 2/1/2017 5:50:52 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Screechjet1:


First, IANAL.

Second, this reminds me of story of the engineer traveling with his wife and son, and the son asks mom, "How does the satellite dish work?" Mom replies, "Ask your father, he's the engineer." The son replies, "I don't want to know THAT much."

Anyway, the shortest answer I can muster that many of our dumbest judicial rulings come from the 9th and 2nd Federal Circuit courts of Appeal, covering primarily the far western US and NY, VT and CT respectively.

Now, in the US, a federal circuit appellate court is pretty powerful. Once they determine, for example that NYS gun laws are reasonable, the last stop for judicial redress is the Supreme Court. But, thankfully, an appellate courts rulings are only binding on its district. The Supreme Court is supposed to intervene when the ruling of the appellate courts get too far out of wack with each other. But that can take a long time, requires some pretty specific legal circumstances, and is ultimately at the whim of the SCOTUS to hear the case.
View Quote


@Screechjet1

Thanks for the explanation.
Page / 4
Top Top