Nathan 4: Competing With Lawson for Title of Most Insufferable

[Maggie Mae]

As long as I'm defining words: here is sedition. 

Quote

 

se·di·tion

/səˈdiSH(ə)n/

noun

conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state or monarch.

 

The US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) ruled against all challenges to the allegations of voter fraud. Therefore, by continuing to speak out against the legitimacy of the election, individuals were participating in what we call "sedition." They were challenging the authority of the Court. 

This has nothing to do with organized protests last summer against police violence. We are afforded the right to free speech in this country. Here is the first amendment, because most Trump Supporters have no idea what it says. 

Quote

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Right now we are going to talk about the clause that says "abridging the freedom of speech" and "the right of the people to assemble." 

The SCOTUS has recognized that the 1st Amendment protections extend to individuals and collective speech. However, there are unprotected speech categories. Speech that is not protected includes obscenity, defamation, fraud, incitement, "fighting words," threats, and criminal conduct. 

Because it says "peaceably to assembly" that means that law enforcement has the right to break it up when it becomes violent or when it raises a "clear and present danger." Because the seditionists were attempting to enter controlled areas, with the intent to kill members of congress, it is clearly a "clear and present danger." There is no way to spin "climbing through a broken window with a gun pointed at you, in the presence of lawmakers who your group wants to kill in an attempt to subvert democracy" as anything but a failed coup. 

Quote

 

Coup: 

noun

1.a sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power from a government.

"he was overthrown in an army coup"

 

 

[Coconut Flan]

Basic concepts many of us think are important to teach our children, but apparently a segment of society doesn't do that:

Words have meaning.

Actions have consequences.

A corollary to that is we have laws.  You need to learn at least the basics of them and pay attention.

You have a brain and need to learn to analyze what you hear and read and learn to think for yourself.

 

Edited January 10, 2021 by Coconut Flan

[Shouldabeenacowboy]

3 hours ago, raayx01 said:

You're seriously going to label half the country domestic terrorists. Get over yourself

I am, very seriously.

I thought maybe a portion of those 70m was just gullible, that it was more complex than that, that they were, as you said "just thinking differently". 

The terrorist attack that happened last Wednesday in our capital, against our lawmakers, incited by the loser, soon to be former president, is a disgrace. It's a domestic terrorist attack to the very core of our country. 

I'll get over myself, while you go study your dictionary (look up the definition of "terrorist") and your world history (cue: Hitler's mob attacking the parliament in Berlin in 1933, guess whom Hitler falsely blamed it on - I'll give you a hint: the communists).

Russia and China are laughing so hard they're peeing in their pants. 

[Natalie22]

3 hours ago, Shouldabeenacowboy said:

I am, very seriously.

I thought maybe a portion of those 70m was just gullible, that it was more complex than that, that they were, as you said "just thinking differently". 

The terrorist attack that happened last Wednesday in our capital, against our lawmakers, incited by the loser, soon to be former president, is a disgrace. It's a domestic terrorist attack to the very core of our country. 

I'll get over myself, while you go study your dictionary (look up the definition of "terrorist") and your world history (cue: Hitler's mob attacking the parliament in Berlin in 1933, guess whom Hitler falsely blamed it on - I'll give you a hint: the communists).

Russia and China are laughing so hard they're peeing in their pants. 

Canadian sticking her nose in American politics (it's our favourite past time  ).  I'd continue that thread.  if you somehow are not racist, homophobic, transphobic, ableistic, and misogynistic, but support Donald Trump and the Republican party, sorry but you're standing so close and egging those people on that I can't really see any difference.  I'm so tired of people telling me that their friends wouldn't really hate me, despite supporting conservative policies that directly disenfranchise myself and other queer people.  If you support them, you support all their policies.

[raayx01]

5 hours ago, Shouldabeenacowboy said:

I am, very seriously.

I thought maybe a portion of those 70m was just gullible, that it was more complex than that, that they were, as you said "just thinking differently". 

The terrorist attack that happened last Wednesday in our capital, against our lawmakers, incited by the loser, soon to be former president, is a disgrace. It's a domestic terrorist attack to the very core of our country. 

I'll get over myself, while you go study your dictionary (look up the definition of "terrorist") and your world history (cue: Hitler's mob attacking the parliament in Berlin in 1933, guess whom Hitler falsely blamed it on - I'll give you a hint: the communists).

Russia and China are laughing so hard they're peeing in their pants. 

Didn't say they weren't terrorist, but some of my relatives support him and condemn the riots, most conservatives are pissed off at the double standard. 

 

1 hour ago, Natalie22 said:

Canadian sticking her nose in American politics (it's our favourite past time  ).  I'd continue that thread.  if you somehow are not racist, homophobic, transphobic, ableistic, and misogynistic, but support Donald Trump and the Republican party, sorry but you're standing so close and egging those people on that I can't really see any difference.  I'm so tired of people telling me that their friends wouldn't really hate me, despite supporting conservative policies that directly disenfranchise myself and other queer people.  If you support them, you support all their policies.

You can still like and respect people with different politics and lifestyles without having to agree with it. My grandmother is strictly against gay marriage, but my cousin is gay and might get married in the next year. They disagree on a lot of things especially that, but they still love each other because they're more than their politics and gay identity. I don't care what you support but just because someone believes in traditional marriage, guns, traditional gender roles and a lot of other conservative things do not make them EVIL,  and just because you support someone doesn't mean you agree with every little thing they say or do, there's probably plenty of things Joe Biden has done in his life that you might not support or agree with, but you still support him, but nobody holds that against you, all or nothing.

[Natalie22]

41 minutes ago, raayx01 said:

 

 

You can still like and respect people with different politics and lifestyles without having to agree with it. My grandmother is strictly against gay marriage, but my cousin is gay and might get married in the next year. They disagree on a lot of things especially that, but they still love each other because they're more than their politics and gay identity. I don't care what you support but just because someone believes in traditional marriage, guns, traditional gender roles and a lot of other conservative things do not make them EVIL,  and just because you support someone doesn't mean you agree with every little thing they say or do, there's probably plenty of things Joe Biden has done in his life that you might not support or agree with, but you still support him, but nobody holds that against you, all or nothing.

If you think your grandmother's actions and beliefs are not causing your cousin harm, you are completely wrong.  I have family I am in contact with, whom I love, yet who I absolutely would describe as homophobic and problematic and they have made my life and my mental health worse.  It's pretty challenging to outright cut off your family, but those 'differences of opinion' are really saying you think that your loved one shouldn't be allowed to live their life and embrace who they are.  That's a despicable thing to do to someone you care about.

There is room for disagreement, but not when it comes to giving and respecting people's human rights.  If you can't do that basic action and if you support people who are against basic human rights you deserve to be judged.  

[Melissa1977]

2 hours ago, raayx01 said:

You can still like and respect people with different politics and lifestyles without having to agree with it. My grandmother is strictly against gay marriage, but my cousin is gay and might get married in the next year. They disagree on a lot of things especially that, but they still love each other because they're more than their politics and gay identity. I don't care what you support but just because someone believes in traditional marriage, guns, traditional gender roles and a lot of other conservative things do not make them EVIL,  and just because you support someone doesn't mean you agree with every little thing they say or do, there's probably plenty of things Joe Biden has done in his life that you might not support or agree with, but you still support him, but nobody holds that against you, all or nothing

I know a lot of people like your grandma (some are young). And yes, they harm. They are polite and nice but they vote to cut other people rights. I know delightful grandmas in the park who, with a wide smile, say that the foreigner children playing in the swings should be out of the country. Those children play with theirs, go to their birthday parties, everything looks so neat... But when that people have the chance to get their political dreams come true, it's a disgrace for others.

I am a woman with full rights, a career, I can divorce. I can do whatever. I don't want nobody to erase my rights just because they think gender roles should be law. So no, not all ideologies are the same, some harm. I'm not going to respect an ideology that wants me to lose my job because my sex. It has happened in other countries before and it could happen in ours if we relax and think that all beliefs must be respected.

[lumpentheologie]

9 hours ago, Melissa1977 said:

I know a lot of people like your grandma (some are young). And yes, they harm. They are polite and nice but they vote to cut other people rights. I know delightful grandmas in the park who, with a wide smile, say that the foreigner children playing in the swings should be out of the country. Those children play with theirs, go to their birthday parties, everything looks so neat... But when that people have the chance to get their political dreams come true, it's a disgrace for others.

That's pretty rich coming from a TERF. 

[Bluebirdbluebell]

On 1/8/2021 at 8:13 AM, llucie said:

My personal experience with protests is that no matter what people are protesting for some individuals in the crowd always take it too far and become violent. So yes some people did take the BLM protests too far. We have all seen the images of the riots and burning cars. I also personally dont think shooting that woman to death in the capitol by the police was justified if she was unarmed.

But i dont think that is the issue most people have with this protest. The issue is that they were protesting the results of democratic elections. They were protesting against democracy. The BLM protest were protesting for equality and justice so it is not really comparable.

And they were supposed to wait until she did something to shoot her! She was with a group of heavily armed assholes coming to harm everyone in the building.  Were the Capitol police suppose to wait until they started killing people?  They are congress people, staffers, reporters, the vice president, etc. in the building, and everyone including the police was probably fearing for the lives. 

The police officer who died was killed by fire extinguisher. Probably not a weapon someone brought with them, but one used against him.  She could have killed someone. 

[Maggie Mae]

On 1/8/2021 at 4:13 AM, llucie said:

I also personally dont think shooting that woman to death in the capitol by the police was justified if she was unarmed.

She was with a group of people who had nooses, weapons, and were shouting "hang Mike Pence." One of her fellow insurrectionists broke the window that she was trying to go through. The Capitol Police and possibly the Secret Service had barricaded that door. There were still lawmakers in that room, you can see one of them on camera. It was absolutely warranted. She had no business being there. 

The group of insurrectionists had replaced an American Flag with a Trump flag. It's pretty clear what their intent was. If they were too stupid to realize that they would get shot when they screamed about wanting a "revolution" while storming the Capitol Building, with weapons, that's on them. 

[llucie]

2 hours ago, Maggie Mae said:

She was with a group of people who had nooses, weapons, and were shouting "hang Mike Pence." One of her fellow insurrectionists broke the window that she was trying to go through. The Capitol Police and possibly the Secret Service had barricaded that door. There were still lawmakers in that room, you can see one of them on camera. It was absolutely warranted. She had no business being there. 

The group of insurrectionists had replaced an American Flag with a Trump flag. It's pretty clear what their intent was. If they were too stupid to realize that they would get shot when they screamed about wanting a "revolution" while storming the Capitol Building, with weapons, that's on them. 

I know that. I still dont think it was justified. Police could have arrested her and all the others. Police should be able to arrest unarmed people without shooting them to death! She did deserve jail but not capital punishment (well i personally dont think capital punishment is justified for any crime). And police should not be the ones giving the punishment anyway, thats a judge job after a fair trial.  

Edited January 10, 2021 by llucie
to add

[llucie]

3 hours ago, Bluebirdbluebell said:

And they were supposed to wait until she did something to shoot her! She was with a group of heavily armed assholes coming to harm everyone in the building.  Were the Capitol police suppose to wait until they started killing people?  They are congress people, staffers, reporters, the vice president, etc. in the building, and everyone including the police was probably fearing for the lives. 

The police officer who died was killed by fire extinguisher. Probably not a weapon someone brought with them, but one used against him.  She could have killed someone. 

I understand all that but i still think police should have been able to protect the building without killing anyone.

Saying they were allowed to shoot her to death because she could have potentially killed someone or because they were scared would be the same as saying it should be ok to shoot an intruder to death if he was robbing your house for example. I know that is too a controversial topic, but in my country it is illegal and i agree with it.

[Maggie Mae]

17 minutes ago, llucie said:

I know that. I still dont think it was justified. Police could have arrested her and all the others. Police should be able to arrest unarmed people without shooting them to death! 

They didn't know she was unarmed! She was part of an insurrection! What part of that don't you understand? If they took their time to grab her, that's one less protective service person on that side of the barrier. Then two more come in, what if they had bombs? (Spoiler, they did have weapons.) 

 By shooting her, all of the terrorists fell back a bit, which allowed the police to regain control of the situation and allow the lawmakers to escape. I've known for as long as I've been alive and understood what a President is that you don't make death threats to the President. You don't threaten the Vice President. You don't go running after caravans of high ranked politicians because they can and will kill you. That's how it works. I have zero sympathy for people who stated that their intent was to assassinate the vice president, then attempt to climb into the room where the vice president has left within the last 3 minutes, as part of a mob.  Had it just been her, maybe I could see your side. But she was part of a coup that was trying to overthrow our Government.  

 

[Bluebirdbluebell]

Just now, llucie said:

I understand all that but i still think police should have been able to protect the building without killing anyone.

Saying they were allowed to shoot her to death because she could have potentially killed someone or because they were scared would be the same as saying it should be ok to shoot an intruder to death if he was robbing your house for example. I know that is too a controversial topic, but in my country it is illegal and i agree with it.

Some of those protestors were heavily armed. They could have killed any number of innocent people! She could have had a concealed weapon. 

When your country is under seige and a group of armed, volatile citizens tries to kill members of your government you can judge!

[llucie]

 

4 minutes ago, Bluebirdbluebell said:

Some of those protestors were heavily armed. They could have killed any number of innocent people! She could have had a concealed weapon. 

When your country is under seige and a group of armed, volatile citizens tries to kill members of your government you can judge!

Protesters have tried to enter my country congress before actually, and we even had a coup d'État. The guy who commited the coup d'État was arrested and send to prison.

15 minutes ago, Maggie Mae said:

They didn't know she was unarmed! She was part of an insurrection! What part of that don't you understand? If they took their time to grab her, that's one less protective service person on that side of the barrier. Then two more come in, what if they had bombs? (Spoiler, they did have weapons.) 

 By shooting her, all of the terrorists fell back a bit, which allowed the police to regain control of the situation and allow the lawmakers to escape. I've known for as long as I've been alive and understood what a President is that you don't make death threats to the President. You don't threaten the Vice President. You don't go running after caravans of high ranked politicians because they can and will kill you. That's how it works. I have zero sympathy for people who stated that their intent was to assassinate the vice president, then attempt to climb into the room where the vice president has left within the last 3 minutes, as part of a mob.  Had it just been her, maybe I could see your side. But she was part of a coup that was trying to overthrow our Government.  

 

Well lets just agree to disagree, i see by the downvotes that this is a very sensitive topic for you. I just think of this as a moral issue and i will not change my mind anyway.

[FluffySnowball]

Regardless of where we stand on the “was it justified to shoot her”-issue, one thing seems certain to me: had the group storming the capitol been supporters of BLM, had they been Muslims or POC, this attack wouldn’t have ended with five deaths, but dozens if not hundreds. 

And regarding her being shot: I personally think it was justified and she brought it on herself, my husband thinks she should have been tasers or arrested instead. We both are very left-leaning and despise such acts of terrorism btw - just noting that for context. 

Edited January 10, 2021 by FluffySnowball

[meep]

18 minutes ago, llucie said:

 

Protesters have tried to enter my country congress before actually, and we even had a coup d'État. The guy who commited the coup d'État was arrested and send to prison.

Well lets just agree to disagree, i see by the downvotes that this is a very sensitive topic for you. I just think of this as a moral issue and i will not change my mind anyway.

Maybe when my country stops slaughtering my people and black people and indigenous people for protesting or any other "reason", I will one day have a smattering of sympathy. Until then, no. 

Edited January 10, 2021 by meep
clarification

[llucie]

44 minutes ago, meep said:

Maybe when my country stops slaughtering my people and black people and indigenous people for protesting or any other "reason", I will one day have a smattering of sympathy. Until then, no. 

Thats why police should never be able to kill anyone unarmed or just because they feel treatened. Police are people that has bias like racism. Obviously eliminating racism should be the ultimate objective, but until then if police didnt have this much power that they can murder a person without consecuences then a lot of those appalling crimes of police officers murdering black people or other minorities just because they claim to felt treatened could be avoided.

Edited January 10, 2021 by llucie
edited due to policy

[Bluebirdbluebell]

28 minutes ago, llucie said:

Protesters have tried to enter my country congress before actually, and we even had a coup d'État. The guy who commited the coup d'État was arrested and send to prison.

Well lets just agree to disagree, i see by the downvotes that this is a very sensitive topic for you. I just think of this as a moral issue and i will not change my mind anyway.

I think it's a moral issue to not let an angry mob potentially kill a building full of people! How dare you insinuate that the rest of us don't have moral reasons for thinking the way we do?

Wait your coup d'Etat was one guy! Just one person. Just one person! There are hundreds if not thousands involved in this shit. At least 30...40...rioters inside the Capitol!

Thank you for recognizing it's sensitive, feel free to stop talking.  

[Natalie22]

32 minutes ago, llucie said:

 

Protesters have tried to enter my country congress before actually, and we even had a coup d'État. The guy who commited the coup d'État was arrested and send to prison.

Well lets just agree to disagree, i see by the downvotes that this is a very sensitive topic for you. I just think of this as a moral issue and i will not change my mind anyway.

I really am unclear how this is something you identify to be more 'sensitive' to MaggieMae than to you.  I don't know if you meant your comment to come off this way, but it seems dismissive and patronizing.  It comes off as though you are the one who is level-headed about this topic, which I don't think is even an important point.  Emotion doesn't equal a lack of understanding or clarity on an issue.  I think it's unfair to think that this isn't a moral issue to other people.  Many of us do see this as a moral issue.  Those people could have killed someone had they gotten through the window.  They made it clear that was many of their goal.  

[llucie]

1 minute ago, Bluebirdbluebell said:

I think it's a moral issue to not let an angry mob potentially kill a building full of people! How dare you insinuate that the rest of us don't have moral reasons for thinking the way we do?

Wait your coup d'Etat was one guy! Just one person. Just one person! There are hundreds if not thousands involved in this shit. At least 30...40...rioters inside the Capitol!

Thank you for recognizing it's sensitive, feel free to stop talking.  

WTF! I asure you i never tryed to imply you didnt also have a moral reason to think the way you do!

1 minute ago, Natalie22 said:

I really am unclear how this is something you identify to be more 'sensitive' to MaggieMae than to you.  I don't know if you meant your comment to come off this way, but it seems dismissive and patronizing.  It comes off as though you are the one who is level-headed about this topic, which I don't think is even an important point.  Emotion doesn't equal a lack of understanding or clarity on an issue.  I think it's unfair to think that this isn't a moral issue to other people.  Many of us do see this as a moral issue.  Those people could have killed someone had they gotten through the window.  They made it clear that was many of their goal.  

That was not my intention at all. English it is not my fisrt language and clearly moral didnt have the meaning i though it had. I profoundly apologize. I really didnt think i was saying anything controversial when i said police shouldn have killed an unarmed person, clearly there is cultural issues here that i was not aware.

[Coconut Flan]

Free Jinger has a policy to NOT ask people about down votes.  People are allowed to vote on posts as they wish without being asked to justify their votes by anyone.  Thank you!

 

[Maggie Mae]

1 hour ago, llucie said:

Protesters have tried to enter my country congress before actually, and we even had a coup d'État. The guy who commited the coup d'État was arrested and send to prison.

Well lets just agree to disagree, i see by the downvotes that this is a very sensitive topic for you. I just think of this as a moral issue and i will not change my mind anyway.

I didn't even know you weren't from the US. It's not a "sensitive topic" for me. If it was, I wouldn't engage. I think that the Cap Police and Secret Service did what they could under the circumstances. It's not their job to decide who in an unruly mob of people are armed and not armed. Their job is to stop the threat.

Their job is to protect our lawmakers. The mob was about to overrun that door as well, and there were still members of Congress and possibly the VP in that room. Had that happened, and harm had come to any one of them... i don't know. Maybe next time you are standing behind a barricade while people are smashing it with a sledgehammer that they brought in, and your job is to protect the highest ranking officials in the nation, we can talk again. 

Honestly, I think that shooting that woman probably saved a lot of people. They had flexicuffs, they had guns, tasers, illegal drugs, half of them were drunk, they had rebar for flag poles and their intent was to overthrow the election and install a president who wasn't elected. They signaled their intent all over social media for months and then took down the US Flag and put up a Trump flag. What does that look like to you? They wore shirts that literally said "Civil War, January 6, 2021. MAGA." If they thought they could start a war and not be maced, shot, or injured in any way, they really are the dumbest of the dumb. 

Do you know what they would have done with AOC or IIhan Omar? Do you know what they would have done to Nancy Pelosi? They even talked about executing Mitch McConnell. Had they overrun the police behind the barricade while the police "arrested" a person that may or may not have been armed, we would be having a very different conversation right now. 

42 minutes ago, llucie said:

police didnt have this much power that they can murder a person without consecuences

The Secret Service (who I believe were at least in the room, some were escorting Pence and Harris, and I've been told they were some of the voices warning the crowd to back up) are not typical police. 

[llucie]

24 minutes ago, Maggie Mae said:

I didn't even know you weren't from the US. It's not a "sensitive topic" for me. If it was, I wouldn't engage. I think that the Cap Police and Secret Service did what they could under the circumstances. It's not their job to decide who in an unruly mob of people are armed and not armed. Their job is to stop the threat.

Their job is to protect our lawmakers. The mob was about to overrun that door as well, and there were still members of Congress and possibly the VP in that room. Had that happened, and harm had come to any one of them... i don't know. Maybe next time you are standing behind a barricade while people are smashing it with a sledgehammer that they brought in, and your job is to protect the highest ranking officials in the nation, we can talk again. 

Honestly, I think that shooting that woman probably saved a lot of people. They had flexicuffs, they had guns, tasers, illegal drugs, half of them were drunk, they had rebar for flag poles and their intent was to overthrow the election and install a president who wasn't elected. They signaled their intent all over social media for months and then took down the US Flag and put up a Trump flag. What does that look like to you? They wore shirts that literally said "Civil War, January 6, 2021. MAGA." If they thought they could start a war and not be maced, shot, or injured in any way, they really are the dumbest of the dumb. 

Do you know what they would have done with AOC or IIhan Omar? Do you know what they would have done to Nancy Pelosi? They even talked about executing Mitch McConnell. Had they overrun the police behind the barricade while the police "arrested" a person that may or may not have been armed, we would be having a very different conversation right now. 

Well i am glad you didnt take it as bad as i though. I really jumped the gun asuming the dislike meant you were severely offended. I dont usually give dislikes so i tend to think of them as worst that they are meant i think.

Obviously if there was no other way as a last resource i understand using real bullets, but in the images i saw it didnt look like they were using all the resources police usually uses to disperse crowds. Maybe i did not see the correct images but for what it was shown here on tv it looked like that crowd could have easily be dispersed with rubber bullets, watter cannons, pepper spray and batons before they entered the building. But yes maybe once they were inside the violence was already inevitable.

Edited January 11, 2021 by llucie
spelling

[formergothardite]

I'm kind of amazed that people expect that in the midst of an armed attack on our country where an assortment of dangerous militias came with the intention of overthrowing the government by brutally murdering members of Congress, that police are supposed to calmly figure out who is armed and who isn't before they shoot the violent attackers. 

If I understand correctly that woman was climbing through the door extremely near Pence who she was most likely planning on helping murder. If one doesn't want to get shot, then don't attack a country in an attempt to murder many of the leaders.