Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Resistance: Actvism, protests and more! The Resistance: Actvism, protests and more!

01-27-2017 , 05:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kypreanus
The Resistance: Actvism, protests and more!:

Bad argument. This used to be a forum of rational people, not of emotional ones who can't argue.

where were you when Obama won?
If you can't see the irony in your own posts then you are hopeless.
01-27-2017 , 06:11 AM
Blocking highways is not going to win anybody any support nor inspire police and military support. Let's get back to the real world.

How about getting the basics down first, like showing up at the polls. And maybe enact a few sensible boycotts and then actually stand by them rather than talk about it for two days. These are still effective ways to be heard if people are committed and organized enough. And if they're not, there's zero chance of success with any more drastic approaches anyway.
01-27-2017 , 06:41 AM
There are times in history when resistance is required, but being a crybaby over crooked Hillary losing is not of them

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8oMY1sF-E0

Are you as coherent as these feminists promoting hijabs and honor killings?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQqHS0ZXVig
01-27-2017 , 06:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperUberBob
If you can't see the irony in your own posts then you are hopeless.
You just ate the whole false narrative, bigoteer, with the hook.

You are manipulated so easily.
01-27-2017 , 07:12 AM
I'm resisting turrrible utubez vids also.
01-27-2017 , 07:14 AM
Stefan Molyneux: Women's suffrage caused WW2
01-27-2017 , 07:15 AM
You guys will take some time to realize what the wrong person in a very important position can mean.

When that realization is in place yes total blocking of all daily activity everywhere is the imperative choice.

Right now you have a liar charlatan that promotes lying as a method to create havoc and get what you want in life at the top office. That is a very dangerous message to all your youth. It is one thing to see it happen in many people and another to have it as a way of doing everything all the time. It completely undermines any process of reason and ethical conduct.


By the way i want to make clear that we are not at that point yet but it didn't exactly start in a way that could promote unity in this country. He acts very emotionally when cornered and that can lead to very dangerous decisions. He imagined that a 20% tax on imports can checkmate the Mexicans regarding the wall but he didnt think through the consequences.

You can find creative ways to get back jobs to the country without becoming irrational about it.

The way this guy is behaving it will be possible to eventually build the wall and then realize nobody cares to come here anymore anyway.

Some of the things he says need to be done like taking out all the criminals and making sure legal people vote (without this being anywhere near a big problem of course right now as he claimed in another lie) (but also that others are not suppressed by many unethical obstructive methods) etc , scrutinize all that immigrate properly and not having trade deals that undermine the country. But the way you apply these things properly and fairly is very different from what is imagined often here.

A guy that uses Twitter any time he feels like it is the guy that cannot apply the same smart ass attitude approach in important issues. This is not a game of attitude and pseudo macho behavior. If US gives attitude to the world it will find out that the world can easily defeat it with all kinds of asymmetric responses that the superpower is more vulnerable to than individual nations who can then easily turn to other eager superpowers and you can find yourself very cornered and isolated in all kinds of issues.

You must lead the world with examples of greatness not give it the finger.

Putin loves this guy because he plays right into his game in all kinds of ways. I bet the Chinese love him too.

Last edited by masque de Z; 01-27-2017 at 07:39 AM.
01-27-2017 , 10:09 AM
The Chinese have been smitten with Trump since he nuked the TPP which was designed to prevent China from gaining stronger economic control in Asia and potentially locking America out.
01-27-2017 , 10:20 AM
kypreaneus,

What's up with your avatar? It seems like only a childish idiot not worth responding to would have that one.
01-27-2017 , 10:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperUberBob
The Chinese have been smitten with Trump since he nuked the TPP which was designed to prevent China from gaining stronger economic control in Asia and potentially locking America out.
When trump signals a trade war with China and pulling funding from renewables, they know that means they can be the next big hegemon. Trump wants to hand over control of the world to someone else? Why not seize that power?

Can you imagine if the US decided in the infancy of the Internet that it was a stupid thing to fund and some other country got to implement it? Man are we willingly giving up being the leaders of technology. Sad how much we're going to miss out on, like all the other petro-states. Maybe our high tariffs will save US oil and coal companies from going broke overnight, but if they don't divest it'll happen soon enough.

And all the solar panels we use will all say "made in china", and it'll be thanks to trump that a massive amount of wealth is transferred out of the country.
01-27-2017 , 11:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minirra
Blocking highways is not going to win anybody any support nor inspire police and military support. Let's get back to the real world.

How about getting the basics down first, like showing up at the polls. And maybe enact a few sensible boycotts and then actually stand by them rather than talk about it for two days. These are still effective ways to be heard if people are committed and organized enough. And if they're not, there's zero chance of success with any more drastic approaches anyway.
It's not about winning hearts and minds. It's about forcing a crisis so that the powerful have to come to the negotiating table rather than ignore you.

I suggest taking a look here.
01-27-2017 , 11:30 AM
It's also about drawing attention to the issues and winning hearts and minds
01-27-2017 , 01:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chezlaw
It's also about drawing attention to the issues and winning hearts and minds
There is no one-size-fits-all answer why peeps might want to shut down a freeway. Each case is unique. However, one thing they invariably have in common is the peeps out on the freeway aren't shy about explaining why.

What is also ubiquitous is the MSM ignoring the why, and instead creating a chorus of "what do 'the protesters' want?".
01-27-2017 , 01:58 PM
just a reminder, riots/protests work

Quote:
The demonstration was organized by Republican operatives, sometimes referred to as the "Brooks Brothers Brigade",[5] to oppose the recount of ballots during the Florida election recount. Realizing that they could not meet a court-ordered deadline, the canvassers decided to limit the recount to the 10,750 ballots rejected by computer, and moved the counting process to a smaller room closer to the ballot-scanning equipment to speed up the process, while restricting media access to 25 feet away while they continued. Republicans objected to this change of plans and insisted the canvassers must do a full recount. At this time, New York Rep. John Sweeney told an aide to "Shut it down."[2][4][6] The demonstration turned violent, and according to the NY Times, "several people were trampled, punched or kicked when protesters tried to rush the doors outside the office of the Miami-Dade supervisor of elections. Sheriff's deputies restored order." DNC aide Luis Rosero was kicked and punched. Within two hours after the riot died down, the canvassing board unanimously voted to shut down the count, in part due to perceptions that the process wasn't open or fair, and in part because the court-mandated deadline was impossible to meet.[7][8][9]

The controversial incident was set in motion by John E. Sweeney,[10] a New York Republican who was nicknamed "Congressman Kick-Ass" by President Bush for his work in Florida.[11] Sweeney defended his actions by arguing that his aim was not to stop the hand recount but to restore the process to public view.[12] Some Bush supporters did acknowledge they hoped the recount would end. "We were trying to stop the recount; Bush had already won," said Evilio Cepero, a reporter for WAQI, an influential Spanish talk radio station in Miami. "We were urging people to come downtown and support and protest this injustice." A Republican lawyer commented, "People were pounding on the doors, but they had an absolute right to get in."[7] The protest prevented official observers and members of the press from getting in.[9][13]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks_Brothers_riot
01-27-2017 , 11:15 PM
01-27-2017 , 11:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ive
Stefan Molyneux: Women's suffrage caused WW2
You are out of your mind continuing to read or listen to any of that once you solved his game. I watched and studied it for quite some time. I like to click buttons and figure out these things. All paths lead to genocide within his theory, insofar as it contains coherent elements. Punch him. Hard.
01-27-2017 , 11:54 PM
Has this been verified? @Max Cut
01-28-2017 , 12:03 AM
Found some local news coverage, interesting!
01-28-2017 , 12:30 AM
01-28-2017 , 06:20 AM
Call your Representative and Senators and tell them "we don't want that damn wall!"

Donald Trump’s Mexican Border Wall Is a Moronic Idea
The data show that fences don’t keep migrants out — they just keep them from going home.
http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/08/18/...ration-border/
Quote:
Enforcement was further buttressed by the launching of Operation Blockade in El Paso, Texas, in 1993 and Operation Gatekeeper in San Diego, California, in 1994. These operations, led by the U.S. Border Patrol, erected a literal wall of enforcement resources at the two busiest U.S.-Mexico border crossings. They also diverted migratory flows away from these regions, through the Sonoran Desert, and into Arizona. This diversion greatly increased the costs and risks of undocumented border crossing: Since 1986, more than 7,000 migrants have died along the border, and the average cost of crossing has risen from $600 to $4,500, according to estimates from the Mexican Migration Project, which I co-direct.

Although the intent of border enforcement was to discourage migrants from coming to the United States, in practice it backfired, instead discouraging them from returning home to Mexico. Having experienced the risks and having paid the costs of gaining entry, undocumented men increasingly hunkered down and stayed in the United States, rather than circulating back to face the gantlet once more. As a result, the rate of return migration began to fall after 1986 and accelerated with the launching of the border operations in 1993 and 1994.

Because net migration equals the difference between those entering and leaving the United States, the falling rate of return produced a huge increase in the net volume of undocumented migration. Through the 1990s and early 2000s, in other words, the United States spent billions of dollars, only to double the rate of undocumented population growth. Not only that, but Operation Gatekeeper’s diversion of migrants away from California and into Arizona prompted them to continue onward to new destinations throughout the United States. Census data indicate that two-thirds of Mexican migrants who arrived between 1985 and 1990 went to California; by the 1995-to-2000 time period, that share had fallen to just one third, where it has since remained. Led by Mexicans, but also by Central Americans, the fastest-growing Latino populations are now in places like Georgia, North Carolina, and Iowa — not California.

In addition, as male migrants spent more time north of the border, they were increasingly joined by their wives and children. And then they started making babies. At present, almost 80 percent of the 5.1 million children of unauthorized immigrants were born in the United States and are U.S. citizens. In the end, the militarization of the border transformed what had been a circular flow of workers going overwhelmingly to just three states — California, Texas, and Illinois — into a much larger settled population of families living across all 50 U.S. states — not a good outcome for a policy whose goal was the limitation and control of immigration.

Doubling down on a failed policy of border militarization by adding more fences and walls is not only moronic because it would continue, at great cost, a demonstrably counterproductive strategy for restricting immigration — but it is also senseless because net undocumented migration from Mexico has stopped. Trump appears not to have received the memo. By the Department of Homeland Security’s own estimates, the total undocumented population peaked at 12 million in 2008, fell by a million by 2009, and since then has fluctuated around 11 million people.
The estimates for this stupid wall are all over the place, but it might cost $40 billion over 16 years. That's our money. Remember the majority of voting taxpayers voted against this monstrosity. Call and let them know what that money should be spent on instead. Education, healthcare, better airports and roads and bridges?

Last edited by einbert; 01-28-2017 at 06:29 AM.
01-28-2017 , 10:45 AM
Seems like it'd be a good idea for Hollywood to fast track an adaptation of Nineteen Eighty-Four. A-list talent would be falling all over themselves to contribute for just union scale, in front and behind the camera. Get a small, competent and motivated production team running the show and they could have a good movie ready for blockbuster season with huge public interest driven by loads of free publicity.
01-28-2017 , 10:54 AM
I suppose there's already this:

01-28-2017 , 10:56 AM
Would be hard to better the 80's version starring Richard Burton and John Hurt (who sadly died yesterday), with cinematography by Roger Deakins.

1984
01-28-2017 , 11:14 AM
It wouldn't need to better it, just be decent, and blatantly about the present. People are dumb and lazy. The messages from a 33 year old movie based on a 68 year old book obviously aren't resonating as well as they should be these days.

      
m