|
natedawgnow
Rocky mountain hood rat



Registered: 02/09/15
Posts: 8,939
Loc: ation
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: natedawgnow]
#26873581 - 08/10/20 03:40 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Vahn421 said: "Terrorism (Noun):
1. The use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes. 2. The state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization. 3. Terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government."
Let's focus on #1 and #3.
We essentially have two opposing forces and MOST of America is going to agree that at least one of these two organizations, (if not both), are terrorists: Antifa/Rioters and Police/Government.
So, who are the real terrorists? Or are they ALL terrorists?
I lean toward all of them, but I'll take the boys in blue over any other group.
Hypothetically, the result of Antifa having all the power right now would mean an immediate return to a caste system with black people at the very top and white people at the very bottom. The sins of the fathers would be heaped on the heads of the sons and we'd likely see executions in the street. We'd look like Venezuela in 6 months. That power is unbridled, unchecked, and ironically completely fascist and racist. (All the things they claim to hate.)
This is, hypothetically of course, assuming China doesn't nut so hard over far leftists after they finish sucking its dick that it claims us as their own.
Cops and government fuck up, but no cops just means drug lords rise as the terrorist/boss of any given territory anyway, and I promise you they aint as civil as cops.
Vahns original comment, 1st post in the terrorist thread, for all to see. Same post on the last page and same post quoted by vahn on this page.
Pertinent info in bold
--------------------
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 10 minutes, 31 seconds
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: natedawgnow] 1
#26873605 - 08/10/20 03:56 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Falcon straight up gaslights people on a regular basis. I’m just happy other people are finally starting to recognize his sleazy tactics.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: natedawgnow]
#26874102 - 08/10/20 09:03 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
natedawgnow said: Dude its the 2nd to last comment on the last page.
I have my settings set to show 100 posts per page, so my "last page" likely isn't the same as yours. Can you just provide a link, or are you going to keep dodging this for pages and pages?
Quote:
natedawgnow said: For real you are being horrible obtuse right now
There you go again with the name calling, rather than just providing a link. You're arguing with emotion rather than facts. Provide the link, and I'll shut up. Easy peasy. 
Quote:
natedawgnow said: and you're doing it on purpose cause you know youre wrong.
I asked you for a source. That isn't something I can be "right or wrong" about.
Quote:
natedawgnow said: I quoted it right after your obligatory "source or make believe" to my original assertion that he said it. So this just proves to me that you dont give 2 shits about evidence.
Excellent, now we're getting somewhere!!!
My "obligatory source or make believe" question was here. Your very next post to me was "Dude I quoted where vahn said what I claimed he said."
So you DIDN'T quote it right after my 'obligatory source or make believe'; you just lied again.
Quote:
natedawgnow said: You just like to argue even when proven wrong.
And what have you "proven me wrong about"? Me asking you for a source and you not providing one is not you "proving me wrong".
Quote:
natedawgnow said: The amount of hypocrisy you are displaying right now is gross.
The amount of make believe you are displaying right now is gross.
Quote:
natedawgnow said: Where did I say vahn wants people executed fal? Source or make believe?
You said it right here: "You cry make believe at everyone else except the guy who claims we're in a race war; that white peeps will soon be executed in the streets". Notice I provided a link as evidence.
Quote:
natedawgnow said: Seriously bad faith tactics there which everyone can see
Asking for evidence is bad faith tactics only against a make believer.
So are you going to provide a link to Vahn's statement, or are you challenging koods for the King of Make Believe title?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: koods]
#26874105 - 08/10/20 09:06 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: This is the way he operates. The king of bad faith debating.
Falcon straight up gaslights people on a regular basis. I’m just happy other people are finally starting to recognize his sleazy tactics.
The guy who's challenging you for the King of Make Believe title is also recognizing that I like evidence? Good!!! 
By the way, can you help natedawgnow find that quote from Vahn?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
natedawgnow
Rocky mountain hood rat



Registered: 02/09/15
Posts: 8,939
Loc: ation
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: natedawgnow]
#26874112 - 08/10/20 09:11 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
natedawgnow said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
natedawgnow said: Why the fuck wont fal criticize where it's actually due?
Are you not reading my posts? Here's my disagreement.
Disagreeing with one point about disruptive protest is not criticizing.
Where is you make believe rhetoric when vahn says dems want to dismantle all laws?
You cry make believe at everyone else except the guy who claims we're in a race war; That white peeps will soon be executed in the streets; That antifa is an organized domestic terror group; etc.
Where is your demand of sources for vahns bullshit? Come on dude you know what I'm talking about.
I want a source for dems wanting to abolish laws. I want a source for us being in an ethnic conflict as it is defined internationally. Vahn thinks this is on par with rwanda and you say nothing.
He literally said this is a race war that will end with whites being executed in the street 
This is the link you posted. No where did i say vahn wants people executed in the streets.
I have now quoted vahns comment about whites being executed in the streets 2 times and it has been quoted by vahn once himself. You are refusing to read it.
Ballsalsa why isnt this considered trolling? Asks for evidence, i supply it, he denies its existence and continues to assert I supplied no evidence.
--------------------
|
natedawgnow
Rocky mountain hood rat



Registered: 02/09/15
Posts: 8,939
Loc: ation
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: natedawgnow]
#26874113 - 08/10/20 09:12 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
natedawgnow said:
Quote:
Vahn421 said: "Terrorism (Noun):
1. The use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes. 2. The state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization. 3. Terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government."
Let's focus on #1 and #3.
We essentially have two opposing forces and MOST of America is going to agree that at least one of these two organizations, (if not both), are terrorists: Antifa/Rioters and Police/Government.
So, who are the real terrorists? Or are they ALL terrorists?
I lean toward all of them, but I'll take the boys in blue over any other group.
Hypothetically, the result of Antifa having all the power right now would mean an immediate return to a caste system with black people at the very top and white people at the very bottom. The sins of the fathers would be heaped on the heads of the sons and we'd likely see executions in the street. We'd look like Venezuela in 6 months. That power is unbridled, unchecked, and ironically completely fascist and racist. (All the things they claim to hate.)
This is, hypothetically of course, assuming China doesn't nut so hard over far leftists after they finish sucking its dick that it claims us as their own.
Cops and government fuck up, but no cops just means drug lords rise as the terrorist/boss of any given territory anyway, and I promise you they aint as civil as cops.
Vahns original comment, 1st post in the terrorist thread, for all to see. Same post on the last page and same post quoted by vahn on this page.
Pertinent info in bold
One more time for the guy who cant follow a thread
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: natedawgnow]
#26874185 - 08/10/20 09:55 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
natedawgnow said:
Quote:
natedawgnow said: You cry make believe at everyone else except the guy who claims we're in a race war; That white peeps will soon be executed in the streets
I have now quoted vahns comment about whites being executed in the streets 2 times and it has been quoted by vahn once himself. You are refusing to read it.
Ballsalsa why isnt this considered trolling? Asks for evidence, i supply it, he denies its existence and continues to assert I supplied no evidence.
Actually, you still haven't linked to Vahn's post about people being executed that you want me to call make believe. You quoted your own quote.
But don't respond to this yet, I see you think you got to it in your NEXT post, which I'll reply to next...
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: natedawgnow]
#26874211 - 08/10/20 10:15 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Ok, I read your last post.
You want me to call Vahn a make believer for his guess about the future? That's his opinion. How would ANYONE know if he's right or wrong? I don't think he's make believing about what he thinks. 
And by the way, that thread's title was "Who are the real terrorists? Or are they ALL just terrorists?" It was actually a question he wanted to discuss.
No, I can't call someone's guess about the future make believe.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (08/10/20 10:21 PM)
|
natedawgnow
Rocky mountain hood rat



Registered: 02/09/15
Posts: 8,939
Loc: ation
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 1
#26874227 - 08/10/20 10:30 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
natedawgnow said: That white peeps will soon be executed in the streets
I remember Vahn disagreeing about this, but maybe I missed the post you're referring to?
Here you are asking for proof where vahn said white people will end up being executed in the street.
I supplied the evidence. Youre being completely dishonest dude.
--------------------
|
natedawgnow
Rocky mountain hood rat



Registered: 02/09/15
Posts: 8,939
Loc: ation
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: natedawgnow] 1
#26874230 - 08/10/20 10:32 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
You'll call koods a make believer for taking trumps words literally, but you defend vahn when he implies we're in a race war that will end with whites executed in the streets.
Fuckin ridiculous
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: natedawgnow]
#26874259 - 08/10/20 11:05 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
natedawgnow said: You'll call koods a make believer for taking trumps words literally
Source, or make believe?
I would never have called koods a make believer for taking Trump's words literally. I'm confident you're lying AGAIN.
I did provide alternative explanations, as evidenced here, and then Vahn provided evidence that at least one of these other explanations was completely valid, because Vahn also likes evidence (notice how I just linked to the evidence for you ).
Quote:
natedawgnow said: but you defend vahn when he implies we're in a race war that will end with whites executed in the streets.
Fuckin ridiculous
I didn't defend his idea. I defended him against your claim that it was make believe. We can't know if he's right or not. He believes it, and again, we can't know the future.
The right thing to do here is to engage in a discussion with Vahn of why you think that's not going to happen, not tell me why I should call him a make believer for something he hasn't yet been proven wrong about.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (08/10/20 11:25 PM)
|
Vahn421
Awakening Moonlighter



Registered: 04/03/12
Posts: 2,162
Loc: Portland
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: natedawgnow]
#26874276 - 08/10/20 11:32 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
natedawgnow said: You'll call koods a make believer for taking trumps words literally, but you defend vahn when he implies we're in a race war that will end with whites executed in the streets.
Fuckin ridiculous
You're really taking me out of context.
I said if ANTIFA were in charge, this is what we would see... and I used the word, "hypothetically."
And I stand by it. There is footage of Bernie Sanders field organizers saying that cities would burn if Trump wins (and Bernie loses) and people may need to be reeducated in gulags in the near future. These people have an entire network. His thoughts are not independent. They interviews lots of people and this is just a sample.
I don't think you're realizing how much indoctrination we're dealing with. Do you HONESTLY believe it's not going to get worse? We already had a mob try to kill a police officer in his own home. How come so few here are willing to morally condemn this?
How about the time these courageous men and women got into an old lady's face and berated her and threw paint on her? They sure showed her! Another threat neutralized! I'll bet they patted themselves on the back real good for that one.
Let's not forget the 13 cops that were injured just the other night, including the one in critical condition.
For some reason it isn't clear to most people here how dangerous these stupid fucks are. They don't tolerate being talked back to. They don't tolerate diversity of opinion. If they get angry, you'll get punished. They're a fuckin mindless mob and it's been progressively getting worse for the last 5 years. You have to be a blind fool to miss it.
I know where this is going. I'll be the one that gets to say, "I told you so." I'd be nicer about it, but the dickish behavior in here has stunned me and I don't like playing nice with people who don't treat their opposition with respect.
Edited by Vahn421 (08/10/20 11:50 PM)
|
natedawgnow
Rocky mountain hood rat



Registered: 02/09/15
Posts: 8,939
Loc: ation
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: Vahn421] 1
#26874290 - 08/10/20 11:56 PM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Ya because antifa is a real organization 
@fal- whatever you say dude. Your bullshit tactics have been revealed. This is my last post concerning this topic. Believe and justify said beliefs however you want.
Anybody who's following this thread besides vahn can see you for what you are here.
A bot
--------------------
|
Vahn421
Awakening Moonlighter



Registered: 04/03/12
Posts: 2,162
Loc: Portland
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: natedawgnow]
#26874301 - 08/11/20 12:07 AM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Stick around, man. Watch the show unfold. It's gonna be unlike anything we've ever seen in our lifetimes.
--------------------
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: natedawgnow] 2
#26874307 - 08/11/20 12:18 AM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
natedawgnow said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
natedawgnow said: You'll call koods a make believer for taking trumps words literally
Source, or make believe?
I would never have called koods a make believer for taking Trump's words literally.
@fal- whatever you say dude. Your bullshit tactics have been revealed. This is my last post concerning this topic. Believe and justify said beliefs however you want.
Anybody who's following this thread besides vahn can see you for what you are here.
A bot 
So you can't find a source for your claim that I called koods a make believer for taking trumps words literally?
Ok, duly noted by everyone here. You're the make believer.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 2
#26874319 - 08/11/20 12:28 AM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
natedawgnow said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
natedawgnow said: That white peeps will soon be executed in the streets
I remember Vahn disagreeing about this, but maybe I missed the post you're referring to?
Here you are asking for proof where vahn said white people will end up being executed in the street.
I supplied the evidence. Youre being completely dishonest dude.
I acknowledged that here (maybe you missed that?) I was looking for context to see if Vahn was make believing or not (I explained why he wasn't).
Can you back your current claim about me calling koods a make believer for taking trumps words literally? I'm almost certain you're lying about that.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (08/11/20 02:51 AM)
|
shivas.wisdom
בּ



Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,428
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 47 minutes, 31 seconds
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: MagicMush123] 1
#26874680 - 08/11/20 09:15 AM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
MagicMush123 said: Apparently you think that attacking an unknown vehicle in your proximity is more reasonable than simply walking away. If a vehicle is crawling towards you like in the video, whats more reasonable; parting like the red sea or confronting it and proceeding to smash it up? If you can say with a straight face that confronting and attacking a vehicle is more reasonable than moving away from it then you have picked sides
'Get out of the way' assumes the driver doesn't have malicious intent. The threat that I believe the protesters were reasonably justified in fearing was the threat of a malicious vehicular attack.
I've asked multiple times to multiple people: how do you suggest we respond to the recent trends of vehicular attacks on protests? 'Get out of the way' isn't sufficient if you are being directly targeted - avoiding protests in areas with vehicle access isn't reasonable either. Can you propose a better solution?
--------------------
|
Vahn421
Awakening Moonlighter



Registered: 04/03/12
Posts: 2,162
Loc: Portland
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: shivas.wisdom] 1
#26874714 - 08/11/20 09:36 AM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I'm gonna keep harping on it, really.
If the protesters actually think a car is a "reasonable threat" then they should be running.
This is like running toward a lion and trying to disable it's claws with a nail filer.
EDIT: As for the question, "what is the better solution?" That really depends on what the end goal is. What IS the end goal? When is Antifa done? When are the rioters done? When?
--------------------
Edited by Vahn421 (08/11/20 09:38 AM)
|
shivas.wisdom
בּ



Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,428
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 47 minutes, 31 seconds
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#26874716 - 08/11/20 09:37 AM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: But all you've established so far (and I'm open to new evidence) is that the road was obstructed at a different location than where the truck entered. I understand why the protesters were nervous, but I don't think that gives them the right to attack the truck without first being attacked. I guess it depends on what the law says, and we've seen different interpretations. I don't think you can't attack someone without first being attacked.
You absolutely can preemptively attack someone in self-defence, assuming the fear is reasonable and the force proportional to the feared threat. If someone is threatening you with a gun, you don't need to wait until you are shot before fighting back. If someone is threatening you with a vehicle, you don't need to wait until you are run over before fighting back.
Quote:
Even as the first person to use force, it’s possible to act in self-defense. If a reasonable person would think that physical harm is in the immediate offing, the defendant can typically use reasonable force to prevent the attack. People don’t have to wait until they’ve actually been struck to act in self-defense. On the other hand, they can’t use ostensibly preventative force without good reason.
Source
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: It would completely invalidate your claim that the protesters had a right to self defense if they weren't attacked first.
False; see above.
Did the protesters provoke the threat they initially feared? The threat was a vehicular attack on a street protest, and nothing in that situation could justifiably provoke a vehicular attack.
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: Again, I never weighed in on whether the driver was guilty of being reckless after he was attacked. I said the protesters had no right to attack the driver without first being attacked.
I guess it depends on the law and whether preemptive self defense is allowed.
Well, I've now established that preemptive self-defence can be legally justified so I guess your opinion is wrong.
--------------------
|
Vahn421
Awakening Moonlighter



Registered: 04/03/12
Posts: 2,162
Loc: Portland
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
|
Re: Is there ANY good argument for blocking traffic? [Re: shivas.wisdom] 1
#26874720 - 08/11/20 09:40 AM (3 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
preemptive self-defense can be legally justified
#!: That doesn't mean it always is nor that it will hold up under scrutiny.
#2: Antifa doesn't care about laws. They will break/ignore them if they don't work in their favor and cite them if they do. Much like Christians and their Bible, really.
--------------------
|
|