@Iconochasm's banner p

Iconochasm

All post-temple whore technology is gay.

3 followers   follows 10 users  
joined 2022 September 05 00:44:49 UTC

				

User ID: 314

Iconochasm

All post-temple whore technology is gay.

3 followers   follows 10 users   joined 2022 September 05 00:44:49 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 314

In an isolated case, sure. For this repeated, consistent ideologically driven nonsense there's no reason to give her the benefit of the doubt that she won't just turn around and blockade them again, newly emboldened by the lack of consequences. At this point, what the protestors are doing is functionally a heckler's veto on law enforcement. Speaking as a person whose side just won an election on enforcing that law in particular, I want the book thrown at these idiots.

Rittenhouse was filmed from every angle, fully available for review, and then litigated in every detail during a weeks long trial.

A significant portion of the electorate is still just straight-up lying about all of it.

Frankly, I do not give a fuck. Civilians on the sidewalk being assholes is normal even for regular police ops. The ICE people earn a 100k$/year of taxpayer money, the 'libtards' on the sidewalk do not. You will forgive me for holding the people with the government paychecks and badges to higher standards than the others.

Of course. Infinitely high standards for ICE agents, whoopsie-daisie we accidentally frauded $10 billion for welfare agents.

Fairness says right-wingers can act like this at every Democrat employed by the state of Minnesota, right? Their offices are paid for by the tax-payers, so they should have no expectation to privacy or not having people scream the most insane, hateful obscenities in their faces every minute they're on the clock.

Maybe if Nick and Dave are literally filming every single form that they fill out, we'll finally get a handle on all the fraud and corruption.

And obviously, if any of them is ever less than perfectly professional about the process, they get fired immediately.

I agree that in practice, these kinds of histrionics aren't good for much. But I'm curious how you would answer the following - suppose, for the sake of argument, that you did believe ICE under Trump are an institution of evil, that ~every ICE operation is a moral outrage. How would you behave if you were walking around your neighborhood and found yourself witness to just such an operation? If necessary, switch out ICE and immigration enforcement under Trump for any atrocity of your choice that a lawfully-elected government with diametrically opposed values and politics to your own might legalize within your lifetime, and ask yourself how you'd react to seeing that underway.

One of the reasons I despise these sort of protestors is the LARPing, Stolen Valor element to it. If I happened upon the SS engaged in an operation, I can't really say what I would do without more of a scenario. But I am willing to go on the record and say that performatively screaming at them like the worst Karen to ever disgrace a department store, accomplishing nothing remotely useful except making sure the Legions of Terror know that I am powerless and that I hate them, seems like the stupidest fucking thing I could possibly do. It's literally a Futurama gag.

The anti-ICE protestors have been exactly that stupid for probably 9 digits worth of encounter-people in the last year, and the response from the Legions of Terror has been incredibly reserved and professional. They do this shit, and get away with this shit, millions of times, precisely because everything they pretend to believe is wrong.

And they either know that, on at least some level,

Or they're all appallingly useless retards.

In the real world, ICE is doing routine law enforcement, following real, democratically enacted laws, after their biggest booster just won an election on having them do exactly that, and their professionalism and accuracy rates are, AFAICT, unprecedented in government service.

If I thought that was still evil (and there are government agencies where that is the case), then I would, you know, argue against them. And vote against them. And try to convince other people. I certainly wouldn't interpose myself in an ATF agent's way while he was doing his job, screaming that he's a baby murderer in his face, and then have the unmitigated gall to act surprised when he didn't take that well.

The people protesting this by acting like the shittiest, pro-criminal, traitor Karens are basically throwing a parade with a marching band, riding in the position of honor atop a bus sized brass boar, banging cymbals overhead, while planes in the sky write "We refuse to abide by the results of elections and you'd have to be fools to tolerate sharing a country with us."

In other words, where you see something that needlessly escalates tense situations towards violence, I see the useful venting of energy that could otherwise boil over into far more immediate violence.

Would you be that sanguine if we "vented" some anti-immigration energy by screaming obscenities in the faces of Somali daycare owners every time they tried to enter any public space?

Or do you just accept that left-wingers are dumb children who can't be expected to act like proper citizens or adults?

I am not any kind of relevant professional, but my impression is that the military has a pretty strong "You should be following orders unless they are obviously insane" ethos... which seems pretty critical to their functioning as a military. Kelly's wink wink nudge nudge "You should disobey orders that might upset the cast of The View" is probably not the sort of thing that a serious military can tolerate.

Citizens (generally leftist white women) have been actively obstructing the enforcement of immigration law for almost a year now. One of their favorite tactics is using their cars to block ICE agents and vehicles. I could see how this might seem like an extraordinary claim if you've paid zero attention to the character and nature of the anti-ICE protests for the last year.

Morally? I think they're absolutely culpable. I find their behavior virulently anti-social and anti-civic, and it ought to be possible to crack down on it in some fashion. Maybe if they'd gotten hit with obstruction or harassment misdemeanors beforehand, we wouldn't be talking about how much blame they deserve for a death.

There's a better angle of the incident than what's been linked here (which I can't link to because I do stupid things to try to limit my time wasted on these topics). The guy standing by the driver's side door in the beginning is not the shooter. The shooter, at the time he pulls his gun, is fully in front of the vehicle with no angle to any other window. It looks like the last shot may have gone in the driver's side window, but it's all happening very fast.

Likely doing the thing they often do where they stop and harass people for observing them.

There was a longer video I saw that showed a few minutes beforehand. There were dozens of people on foot "observing" the ICE agents, where "observing" is some dishonest libtard euphemism for "screaming insults and hostility like psychotic banshees in a way that absolutely and obviously made the situation more tense, stressful and dangerous for everyone involved."

Only this time, the observer panicked and so did ICE.

Yes. The protestors should all be tried as accessories. In the best case for your take here, they were idiotically engineering the precursors for a tragedy. In the realistic scenario, they were actively hoping for it, plus or minus some dead LEOs.

He's brilliant, but also incredibly goofy.

The problem with this thinking is that it creates a terribly perverse incentive. You can get away with any degree of bad behavior as long as you're willing to bad faith scream "politicized witch hunt".

At the end of the day, the only stable equilibrium is to consider actual evidence, and not overly much give a fuck about witch hunt bitching.

Fun fact: I frequently see low level welfare fraud and manipulation. The only time I've seen a white person do it, he was a "Traveller". Just openly admitted it to me, too.

You said "no", but the following text looks a lot like "yes".

If a racist motive leads to uncovering genuine fraud, should that fraud then be ignored or tolerated so as not to embolden racists?

How many 0's worth of underaged British girls should we tolerate being gang-raped to avoid the appearance of saying that Pakistanis are gang-rapists?

especially when we've already shown a willingness to excuse the exact same behavior when it's done by someone we like.

Have we?

So, I actually read all of that meandering, incoherent, emotionally manipulative PBS article you linked earlier. It has a single mention of Phil Bryant that makes nothing remotely resembling an effort to justify your take on the topic. His wiki article does mention that he was a potential target of investigation, though no charges were filed. It also notes that he purportedly reported the misuse of funds himself. That's just the man's word, but given Wikipedia's general high level of partisanship, I would consider that decent evidence in his favor.

Following the link to the original source (because, contra-Hanania, I actually read), I see that we're talking about the misuse of $77 million, and the Pulitzer-prize winning reporting on the topic. And I see that the indictments were brought by another one of Bryant's appointees.

Which is good, as far as it goes. Bryant's personal culpability over the pharma company looks like he's either an utter idiot or the indictments luckily hit right before he could sign off on real corruption. That behavior is very bad, and also very endemic to our political class in general.

The Minnesota fraud case looks to be something in the ballpark of a hundred times worse.

Are you excusing that behavior because condemning it would hamper people you like and embolden people you dislike?

How would you respond to someone blithely dismissing the entire Mississippi scandal as you just being an irrational bigoted monster who hates the Packers for no reason except that you're evil?

Are you less concerned about the fraud then the possibility that people might be racist?

As always, Hanania is retarded. Probably 95% of progressive culture is now short form videos, and the exact same dynamic has played out countless times for them as well. No amount of text-based reporting on the countless deaths, rapes, and sex-trafficked children along the border elicited a millionth of the fury as a suggestive image of a Border Patrol agent "whipping" a migrant from horseback. It's been the case since at least Kony 2012.

In mine, it was a shaman, and she cucked the old GM with the new GM.

I have never seen a school, preschool or day care in which it was not painfully obvious if there were kids around.

Relatedly, I know for a fact that one of the ones my kids went to had a ton of fraud going on. Employees paid partially under the table to maximize government benefits. There was a system where some of the parents got this card from the state where they were supposed to swipe in to prove they dropped the kid off, but most of them just left it with the employees to bill the government for extra days. Owners were a pair of rich Indian women who bought the place as a net-loss vanity project - and still ran it as a scammy money laundering front.

Sorry, just to clarify, but you mean quashing the whistleblower reports?

I suppose that does "work", for a certain sense of problem resolution.

Sure. In isolation, some few people will be able to grasp the problem. But at some point, if you actually want to change anything, you have to look at cause and effect. And once that happens, I predict that the overwhelming consensus position will be that infinity fraud is preferable to giving Trump an anti-immigration news cycle.

Or, frankly, telling a brown person "no". After all, the progressives in Tim Walz' government have been getting whistleblower reports about this for years and actively quashing them.

I've some sympathy with this view, but it's a broader sort of criticism than "how is the economy doing year over year". If inflation figures are fake now, then they also were 4, 10, 20 and 30 years ago.

Do you think inflation numbers are wrong then?

Majestica - A Christmas Carol.

Best paired with the nightmare acid-trip Jim Carrey version of the movie.

As I said to the wizard last night while he was measuring out collateral fireball damage...

Do it.

Are you familiar with Nietzsche's Genealogy of Morals? He criticizes Christianity for being a morality for slaves, of sour grapes insisting that being poor, meek, weak and passive was actually good, and that being strong, rich, mighty and proud was bad. The notion certainly rhymes with how woke oppressed/oppressor dynamics and the oppression Olympics plays out.

Is there a contradiction between the typical progressive belief in blank slateism and progressive women's (and some men's) choosiness in who to partner up and have babies with?

It's just standard issue compartmentalization. Most progressives understand that kids are going to take from their parents. They know what genetics is. It's just such an obvious, omnipresent thing that it requires staggering levels of ideological malware to start disputing that white people have white kids, or that smart people have smart kids.

The problem arises when one is offered the opportunity to reason about how that dynamic might play out over large populations and large spans of time. In that case, the typical response is to just turn it off.