🔥 Forget about clocks, now it's (bad) cucumbers and knives



  • Muslim kid turned in for extremism...because he drew a cucumber badly...and a knife to cut it with. :open_mouth: What will Muslim kids think up next?

    Techdirt

    Concerns were raised after the youngster drew a picture of a man cutting the vegetable. [The child's mother] said she feared her children would be taken away from her and added: 'But I haven't done anything wrong... It was a horrible day." Teachers and public service workers have a legal obligation to report any concerns of extremist behaviour to the authorities since July.

    alt text

    Oh, yeah, forgot: the kid is 4 years old.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election Banned

    @CoyneTheDup said:

    Muslim kid turned in for extremism...because he drew a cucumber badly...and a knife to cut it with. :open_mouth: What will Muslim kids think up next?

    Techdirt

    Concerns were raised after the youngster drew a picture of a man cutting the vegetable. [The child's mother] said she feared her children would be taken away from her and added: 'But I haven't done anything wrong... It was a horrible day." Teachers and public service workers have a legal obligation to report any concerns of extremist behaviour to the authorities since July.

    alt text

    Oh, yeah, forgot: the kid is 4 years old.

    :wtf::question::exclamation:

    Filed Under: What the fuck, NodeBB emoji kerning?

    Filed Under Under: What the fuck, NodeBB kills <hr> tags??

    @ben_lubar what have you done


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @CoyneTheDup said:

    kid turned in for extremism

    FTFY. Remember, this shit happens to kids who aren't Muslim, too--remember the kind who bit a pop-tart into a sort of gun shape and teachers freaked out, apparently because they thought he might...kill them with jelly?

    Because some fucktard's going to misunderstand, I'll make it clear: it's every bit as bad that this happened to this kid as it is to every other kid it happened to. Calling out that he's a Muslim and claiming--or even suggesting--that has anything to do with it, is BS.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @FrostCat said:

    Because some fucktard's going to misunderstand

    Good luck with that. The type of fucktard that would misunderstand your post would also stop reading at the first objectionable word.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @antiquarian said:

    The type of fucktard that would misunderstand your post would also stop reading at the first objectionable word.

    But at least if I've written it down I can go all blakerant on them and say "it's right there--you should've read what I wrote!"



  • @FrostCat said:

    ...remember the kind who bit a pop-tart into a sort of gun shape and teachers freaked out, apparently because they thought he might...kill them with jelly?

    Have you ever eaten a Pop Tart? I'd say being killed is a legitimate concern.



  • @FrostCat said:

    FTFY. Remember, this shit happens to kids who aren't Muslim, too--remember the kind who bit a pop-tart into a sort of gun shape and teachers freaked out, apparently because they thought he might...kill them with jelly?

    Yeah, because he violated some Zero Tolerance dead-brain rule.

    They didn't label him with the latest euphemism for "terrorist."


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election Banned

    @FrostCat said:

    Calling out that he's a Muslim and claiming--or even suggesting--that has anything to do with it, is BS.

    Because obviously the fact that the pop tart gun kid's teachers' actions weren't racially motivated is proof that no teachers are racist or intolerant towards other religions, right?


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Fox said:

    Because obviously the fact that the pop tart gun kid's teachers' actions weren't racially motivated is proof that no teachers are racist or intolerant towards other religions, right?

    You fail logic, as usual.

    I'll try to explain it again, even knowing your head is so far up your own ass you will refuse to and/or are unable to, understand.

    There's no indication of any kind that this kid's religion has anything to do with his getting in trouble. Therefore it's irresponsible to even mention it, because it winds fucktards like you up, who are more than willing to assume it's soi-disant "Islamophobia" in the absence of evidence that ever entered into the decision.

    It's far, far, more likely that the kid just drew something his teacher misinterpreted and freaked out about, but that doesn't generate outrage.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    I also can't fucking imagine why anyone would thing any kid would ever draw a "giant freaking sword" as those attention whores at techdirt called it, either!

    I apologize to everyone for not spoilering the pictures below, because the Discurse way of doing it doesn't work. Best I can do is insert a bunch of whitespace. Don't look if you don't like blood. @mods please spoiler these pictures.

    Edited by request --shadowmod

    ![0_1458684690087_Screen-Shot-2012-11-24-at-7.50.29-PM-620x476.png](/uploads/files/1458684698869-screen-shot-2012-11-24-at-7.50.29-pm-620x476.png) ![0_1458684745224_dehli.png](/uploads/files/1458684753061-dehli.png)

    This is hidden


  • sockdevs

    @FrostCat I think the <details> tag works?

    This is hidden

    There we go!


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    Hah! Looks like someone fixed it at the same time as me, in a way that broke it. So thank you shadowmod, but, uh, I guess we found a new concurrency bug. Or else the way NodeBB does images doesn't work inside a details tag?



  • @FrostCat said:

    @Fox said:
    There's no indication of any kind that this kid's religion has anything to do with his getting in trouble. Therefore it's irresponsible to even mention it, because it winds fucktards like you up, who are more than willing to assume it's soi-disant "Islamophobia" in the absence of evidence that ever entered into the decision.

    You know, @FrostCat is actually right for once. First we need to find out how many white kids were turned in as terrorists for drawing cucumbers and knives and knives cutting cucumbers. And men cutting cucumbers, and out of scale knives.

    Of course that's kind of futile. Because if we found that 100 out of 100 reports were on Muslim kids, he'd just say, "Well the 101st might be a white kid, and would completely invalidate the racism angle."


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @CoyneTheDup said:

    You know, @FrostCat is actually right for once.

    You're so stupid. Pop-Tart boy was white, so that throws out your entire stupid theory.

    Also, the guy who was told he couldn't get on an airplane because he had a Transformers tee shirt, and the person who couldn't get on a flight because of wearing a necklace with a pistol charm on it, were also white.



  • @FrostCat said:

    0_1458684690087_Screen-Shot-2012-11-24-at-7.50.29-PM-620x476.png 0_1458684745224_dehli.png



  • New line required after <details>


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @loopback0 Thanks. Hopefully the next time I use that tag, which will probably not be sooner than six months from now, I will still remember that.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @CoyneTheDup said:

    Because if we found that 100 out of 100 reports were on Muslim kids, he'd just say, "Well the 101st might be a white kid, and would completely invalidate the racism angle."

    Also, you ignorant slut, I have never said that all Muslims are dangerous/bad. Morons like you, however, insist that we can't even consider the possibility that any of them are. Perhaps if you go turn off your computer and think about it for a very long time, you might figure out where the problem in that attitude is. Instead of screeching about "Islamophobia", you might consider why so many Muslims keep blowing themselves up with the intent of taking as many kufaair with them. I hope that neither you nor anyone you care about are ever injured or killed in a terrorist bombing like yesterday's Brussels incident, and I remain optimistic that you may someday take off your blinkers, so that the West can have an actual conversation about all the Muslims who do, in fact, want to kill or convert everyone in Dar al Harb. Of course, I bet you'll refuse to ever consider the meaning of that last term, which was not invented by a non-Muslim.



  • @FrostCat

    Also, you ignorant slut, I have never said that all Muslims are dangerous/bad. Morons like you, however, insist that we can't even consider the possibility that any of them are.

    No, you just weasel around it, writing things like:

    Just for the sake of discussion, if I had to implement such a thing, my first idea would be "nobody from countries like Pakistan or Saudi Arabia comes into the US", and I'd try to refine it from there.

    Hmmm...let's see, why ban everyone from those countries? Oh, right, because Trump said:

    As far as Trump is going--at least he's saying "hey, there's a problem we should address, and that's that roughly all the terrorists in the world today are Muslim". Nobody else is even capable of admitting that there is a problem. You cannot come up with even a partial solution if you can't admit there's a problem.

    You might weasel around it, but it's quite clear you support the "every Muslim is a terrorist" crowd; your advocacy and your choice of quotes show that clear as day. You're not fooling anyone.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @CoyneTheDup said:

    You might weasel around it, but it's quite clear you support the "every Muslim is a terrorist" crowd;

    Clearly you don't understand how negotiating works. Your opening bid is beyond what you actually want. I don't actually want to ban all Muslims from coming to the US. I think refusal to consider banning some of them is suicidal.

    BTW I happen to know someone who was actually at the airport in Brussels that was bombed, but left a few hours before it happened.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @CoyneTheDup said:

    They didn't label him with the latest euphemism for "terrorist."

    BTW I dont' see anything in the BBC article that asserts he was singled out due to his religion, but I guess your kneejerk anti-anti-"Islamophobia" prevented you from seeing that. They say the teachers misheard how he said "cucumber"--in a way that seems believable, based on how weirdly little kids say words--coupled with his drawing what looked like a big knife.

    If I had to report stupid stuff like drawing knives as possible extremism (or, in the US, that violated moronic Zero Tolerance policies) then I would have reported this kid too, because I presumably would've wanted to keep my job. I realize that such nuances may be beyond someone who blindly assumes any report of suspicious behavior by someone who happens to be a Muslim simply must be "Islamophobia".



  • @CoyneTheDup said:

    You might weasel around it, but it's quite clear you support the "every Muslim is a terrorist" crowd; your advocacy and your choice of quotes show that clear as day. You're not fooling anyone.

    Sticking people in the Hitler Box is sure a good way to deal with such horrible, unwashed filth! Good on you brother! Keep fighting the holy fight!


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election Banned

    @FrostCat said:

    There's no indication of any kind that this kid's religion has anything to do with his getting in trouble.

    Yes there is.

    Concerns were raised after the youngster drew a picture of a man cutting the vegetable. [The child's mother] said she feared her children would be taken away from her and added: 'But I haven't done anything wrong... It was a horrible day." Teachers and public service workers have a legal obligation to report any concerns of extremist behaviour to the authorities since July.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Fox said:

    extremist behaviour

    Do you see the word "Muslim" there? 'Cos I don't. Looks like some bigotry on your part to me.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election Banned

    @FrostCat said:

    @Fox said:

    extremist behaviour

    Do you see the word "Muslim" there? 'Cos I don't. Looks like some bigotry on your part to me.

    Everyone knows that "extremist behavior" is a euphemism for supporting ISIS these days. Especially in politics.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Fox Clearly not "everyone".

    Irregardless, it's no better or worse than when it happens to white kids or those of any other color, religion, or other group. Also, see my very first post, where I said this was "every bit as bad that this happened to this kid as it is to every other kid it happened to," because I just knew some fucktard was going to claim I was some kind of racist[1] no matter what disclaimer I put on, and @CoyneTheDup obligingly shit himself and did so.

    [1] even though Islam's a religion, so saying "islamophobia" is racism is retarded, even for SJWs.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election Banned

    @FrostCat said:

    s no better or worse than when it happens to white kids or those of any other color, religion, or other group.

    Yes it is. Discrimination added onto general stupidity is worse than stupidity on its own.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Fox said:

    Discrimination added onto general stupidity is worse than stupidity on its own.

    Did you know that when airbags became widespread, reported injury rates in accidents went up quite a bit? People investigated it and found out that if you are killed in a car accident and also break a leg or something, nobody bothered to write the additional injury down.

    Let's see if you're smart enough to figure out what I'm saying. My money's on "not".



  • @FrostCat said:

    BTW I dont' see anything in the BBC article that asserts he was singled out due to his religion, but I guess your kneejerk anti-anti-"Islamophobia" prevented you from seeing that. They say the teachers misheard how he said "cucumber"--in a way that seems believable, based on how weirdly little kids say words--coupled with his drawing what looked like a big knife.

    And yet, for this widely reviled "radicalization" law, the very first case of its being applied and reported in the media involved a Muslim kid. When Muslim kids are just so common in UK. How amazing is that?

    As for the "extremism" title, well, from the Guardian:

    The case is the latest chapter in the often unhappy story of the relationship between British Muslims and the various incarnations of the government’s anti-terrorism Prevent programme. In particular, the mother’s lawyer and activists now also say that the incident raises questions about the circumstances in which 19 children were referred last year to a panel which, under Prevent’s Channel initiative, assesses those at risk from radicalisation and recommends possible interventions.

    Tell me again with a straight face that "extremism" and "radicalization" don't really have anything to do with--aren't euphamisms for--terrorism.


  • BINNED

    Fucking hell, we need a thread mute in this forum. Or you could keep this incessant argument in one thread, but then you might all notice that it's the same 5 points going round and round


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election Banned

    @FrostCat said:

    Let's see if you're smart enough to figure out what I'm saying.

    You're saying you think getting a few days off from school is worse for a child than being threatened with systematic racism because your family is of middle-eastern descent. In lieu of a lengthy post explaining how wrong this is - again (I'm seriously tired of people acting like racism is a minor or non-issue) - let me simply say fuck you.


  • BINNED

    @Fox So you didn't get it. What @FrostCat is saying is it's separate issues. The law under which the kid was reported applies to everyone, otherwise it would be unconstitutional. If someone chooses to apply that law based on race then that person is being a racist and is breaking a different law, completely unrelated to the first one.

    Now, was the teacher racist? Maybe. But it's impossible to know this without further evidence, you're just asserting this. And saying it's systematic is plain wrong because there's nothing in the law that targets a religion, nationality or race.

    Unless the system you're talking is some nebulous concept where people enforcing the system are the members of it because they are "white" or something. In which case, there's a flaw in that thinking, let's see if you can find it.



  • @CoyneTheDup said:

    Oh, right, because Trump said:

    It's hilarious how people hang on every utterance of that guy like he'll remember what he said tomorrow.


  • BINNED

    @boomzilla said:

    It's hilarious how people hang on every utterance of that guy

    Now imagine how it feels to us who are not from the US and only have a vague idea of what is going on. I swear, every time there are presidential elections in the US the whole Internet feels like being a kid that just changed schools and the only fun the new kids you meet know is cracking injokes about some drunken teacher they had last year.



  • @Onyx said:

    Now imagine how it feels to us who are not from the US and only have a vague idea of what is going on.

    About the same as it does here in the states, I imagine. FTR, he's largely walked back the stop Muslim immigration outburst:

    “I would be extremely careful about people from the Middle East coming into our country,” he said on “CBS This Morning." "We should be vigilant at our borders.”

    When pressed for specifics, Trump said he would want "good documentation" from travelers.

    I'm sure this just makes him more of a Nazi, somehow.



  • @FrostCat said:

    I don't actually want to ban all Muslims from coming to the US. I think refusal to consider banning some of them is suicidal.

    And pray tell, how do you decide which Muslims shall or shall not come to the US?

    Look, if you have a surefire way to filter out bad Muslims from good Muslims, you might want to tip the US and European governments off. They've kinda been looking for it for a while now.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Maciejasjmj said:

    if you have a surefire way to filter out bad Muslims from good Muslims

    If they blow themselves up in public, they are bad. Foolproof! :expressionless:



  • @dkf said:

    If they blow themselves up in public

    So if they blow themselves up in the bathroom it's ok?



  • @Luhmann What about a public bathroom?



  • @lucas1
    If they are in a stool then it's private? Who knows? Maybe the guy next to you is just sharting really hard or he's muslim but not that good at making bombs



  • @Onyx said:

    @Fox So you didn't get it. What @FrostCat is saying is it's separate issues. The law under which the kid was reported applies to everyone, otherwise it would be unconstitutional. If someone chooses to apply that law based on race then that person is being a racist and is breaking a different law, completely unrelated to the first one.

    But that's exactly the thing with these laws--I don't even have a good name for them, so for discussion let's call them Modern Jim Crow laws. Lawmakers tell us with forced smiles that these laws are meant to apply equally to everyone. But their very design and the training that goes with them makes them--wink-wink-nudge-nudge discrimination laws designed for discrimination at time of application.

    They aren't just unfair, they are fucking unfair in their very conception.

    So I found this finally, that gives us figures for this particular Prevent law: In 67% of the cases discussed in the article, the child was Muslim. Do you think the teachers are getting the message of who it is to be applied to? Do you think the Muslims might think this law is about them?

    The Stop and Frisk law in New York City: In 2011, 92% of the people stopped were male; 87% black or Latino. In some cases, individuals were stopped multiple times on the same block by officers in sight of each other. Do you think those black and Latino males were getting the message that walking was illegal for them?

    The Voter Identification laws...well, I'll just let the article say it:

    When looking at the voter turnout rates between whites and non-whites under voter ID laws, the guidelines continued to have a dampening effect. White voters already generally cast ballots at higher rates than Latino and black voters in most states, but that imbalance is intensified by voter ID requirements. In states where ID is not needed to vote, the gap between white and Latino turnout rates is just 5.3 percent in general elections. But that number jumps to 11.9 percent in states that do require ID. There’s a 4.8 percent gap between black and white turnout in non-voter ID states compared with a 8.5 percent gap between black and white voters in voter ID states.

    Do you think maybe the blacks and Latinos are getting the message that they're not supposed to vote?

    But when this is pointed out, oh-so-clever people on the Conservative side (politicians, pundits, even rank and file)...that can detect the tiniest slight in the media, Second Amendment, states's rights, SJW...all of a sudden those people turn dumb-and-dumber and start talking about how, "There's nothing in the law that intends that result, the law is fair on its face."

    Bullshit. We have a phrase for people who dodge issues like that: mealy-mouthed.

    Racism and bigotry are back in ways I would never have imagined in November, 2000. Blacks are all thugs, gang-bangers, welfare cheats, and prostitutes that deserve to be murdered at the slightest pretext; but when they plead #BlackLivesMatter, "OMG they're racist." Every Muslim is a terrorist, but we'll pretend the radicalization law isn't about them, even as thousands of them are shoveled into bureaucratic hell. One of my favorites, every illegal (because there is No Such Thing as a legal immigrant) is a welfare leach on all our social services--even as they take all our best jobs. And of course, vote; they must vote because how else will we keep them f_____g blacks from voting for a Democrat?

    I'm very tired of all of this.


  • BINNED

    @CoyneTheDup said:

    So I found this finally, that gives us figures for this particular Prevent law: In 67% of the cases discussed in the article, the child was Muslim. Do you think the teachers are getting the message of who it is to be applied to? Do you think the Muslims might think this law is about them?

    The Stop and Frisk law in New York City: In 2011, 92% of the people stopped were male; 87% black or Latino. In some cases, individuals were stopped multiple times on the same block by officers in sight of each other. Do you think those black and Latino males were getting the message that walking was illegal for them?

    So... you suggest that these laws are inherently racist just because people choose to apply them in that manner? Look, I'm not even defending any of them, I'm not familiar with them to do so, and the one which your initial link is about sounds stupid to me, at face value at least.

    The point is, laws weren't written that way, that's how people choose to act on them. And sorry, news flash, bigots are gonna be bigots no matter what you do. But you can't say the law is bigoted based on a few individuals.

    @CoyneTheDup said:

    Racism and bigotry are back in ways I would never have imagined in November, 2000.

    I am going to guess there's a reason for this specific date?

    @CoyneTheDup said:

    when they plead #BlackLivesMatter, "OMG they're racist."

    From what I saw on the movement that spawned that hashtag the participants were mostly full of shit, IMHO.

    @CoyneTheDup said:

    Every Muslim is a terrorist, but we'll pretend the radicalization law isn't about them, even as thousands of them are shoveled into bureaucratic hell.

    See above. Also, yes, they are a higher risk group, but not because of descent but because of religious indoctrination. And the part of the reason Islam can still get away with this shit is because there's this constant fear of "anti radical Islam === racist. If we could slap down Islam's bullshit like we did with Christianity ages ago I suspect there would be some positive movement in this regard.

    The last part I won't comment on, I'm not familiar enough with US political rhetoric.

    @CoyneTheDup said:

    I'm very tired of all of this.

    Ditto.



  • @Onyx said:

    If we could slap down Islam's bullshit like we did with Christianity ages ago I suspect there would be some positive movement in this regard.

    Sure. But you catch millions of Arabs who are either as "Muslim" as most Poles are "Catholic", or even not Muslim at all, in the crossfire. Because, as a society, we're apparently too dumb to realize not everyone is a walking stereotype.


  • BINNED

    @Maciejasjmj That's why I said "Islam" (ideology), not "Muslims" (people). But this distinctions seems to be hard for people, so I agree. That's where most of these statistic imbalances most likely stem from, too.

    Fucking humans. I feel like I should go over to the zoo and apologise to the rest of the ape family again.



  • @Onyx said:

    @Maciejasjmj That's why I said "Islam" (ideology), not "Muslims" (people). But this distinctions seems to be hard for people, so I agree. That's where most of these statistic imbalances most likely stem from, too.

    Fucking humans. I feel like I should go over to the zoo and apologise to the rest of the ape family again.

    Muslim
    adjective

    1. of or relating to the religion, law, or civilization of Islam.

    Weasel-worded denial rejected.


  • BINNED

    @CoyneTheDup How does that change what I said in any way? Are you saying "A Muslim" is not a person? Are you saying "Islam" is a person or a group of people? If I say I want to see Scientology gone, does that mean I want to kill Tom Cruise?



  • @Onyx said:

    If I say I want to see Scientology gone, does that mean I want to kill Tom Cruise?

    You know, you might want to use a better example, no one's gonna blame you if you do...


  • BINNED

    @Maciejasjmj Fuck you, I like him. Mostly because he seems to be trying to repent for sins of making Minority Report by doing decent Sci-Fi lately.



  • @Onyx said:

    So... you suggest that these laws are inherently racist just because people choose to apply them in that manner? Look, I'm not even defending any of them, I'm not familiar with them to do so, and the one which your initial link is about sounds stupid to me, at face value at least.

    The point is, laws weren't written that way, that's how people choose to act on them. And sorry, news flash, bigots are gonna be bigots no matter what you do. But you can't say the law is bigoted based on a few individuals.

    No, I'm saying that the laws were openly written to permit bigotry.

    Take Stop and Frisk. It was created because the mayor of NYC perceived that blacks and Latinos were the cause of every evil in the city. But one thing we did accomplish in 40 years of civil rights law, no one can openly pass a law that says, "Officers shall hereby stop and frisk all niggers and spics on the slightest suspicion or even no suspicion." Writing that would be gauche.

    So they write it, "Officers shall hereby stop and frisk anyone on the slightest suspicion or even no suspicion." Even as they grin slyly among themselves, "And we know what we mean by anyone, don't we?" [wink, wink, nudge, nudge "Know what I mean? Know what I mean?"

    Then it goes to the commanders. They understand the message full well, and so they create training programs. And the training programs don't say officers should only stop blacks and Latinos but, funny thing, all the pictures in the training program are blacks and Latinos, and the focus is on black and Latino neighborhoods. And the trainers use euphemisms like "thug" and "gang-banger", which we all know what those mean, don't we? And the rank and file gets the message [wink, wink, nudge, nudge] "Know what I mean? Know what I mean?""]

    So niggers and spics are stopped everywhere; as I noted, sometimes multiple times on the same block. And they complain, and people who aren't bigoted are outraged. Questions are raised. And NYC government is happy to confirm that there's nothing racist in the law; there's nothing racist in the training (No, you can't see that because it's a NATIONAL SECRET.) And there's no orders or handouts we give the officers that would encourage racism (but you're not allowed to see those either...NATIONAL SECRET again). And it's not like we tell the officers to stop only blacks and Latinos but we want to be fair so it's not like we discourage it either. And it's not like we rate officers by the number of blacks or Latinos they stop (but we do rate them by whether those stops are in the neighborhoods where blacks or Latinos live...but that, too, is a NATIONAL SECRET.)

    So the result is a program so evidently racist that NYC had to be ordered by a federal judge (twice) to discontinue it entirely.

    But there is nothing overtly racist, so according to bigots that makes it okay,.

    And the fact that the mayor and police commisioner wanted police to stop all niggers and spics on any pretext, created a law that permitted it, that their desires and the desires of other bigots were all communicated [wink, wink, nudge, nudge, "Know what I mean? Know what I mean?"] with nothing on paper we can see is supposed to excuse the entire racist edifice.

    And when the inevitable result is manifest, then the architects of the situation turn mealy-mouthed and say, "Well, we didn't really intend that." Everyone, on every side, knows full well what they intended but plausible deniability, that's the modern bigot's watchwords.


  • Grade A Premium Asshole

    @CoyneTheDup said:

    But when this is pointed out, oh-so-clever people on the Conservative side (politicians, pundits, even rank and file)...that can detect the tiniest slight in the media, Second Amendment, states's rights, SJW...all of a sudden those people turn dumb-and-dumber and start talking about how, "There's nothing in the law that intends that result, the law is fair on its face."

    Bullshit. We have a phrase for people who dodge issues like that: mealy-mouthed.

    Can you give me even the slightest idea on how a law that only requires a government ID and is applied equally to everyone is racist? Because I don't get it. Are blacks and latinos being prevented from getting those IDs?

    @CoyneTheDup said:

    Racism and bigotry are back in ways I would never have imagined in November, 2000. Blacks are all thugs, gang-bangers, welfare cheats, and prostitutes that deserve to be murdered at the slightest pretext

    Where the fuck do you get this stuff? What sort of fucked up, twisted shit are you swallowing where you think that this is any sort of opinion that sane people hold? Maybe at a Klan meeting...but not in general society.

    @CoyneTheDup said:

    but when they plead #BlackLivesMatter, "OMG they're racist."

    Because they are. BLM would be classified as a hate group in any society that is not afraid of getting the race card pulled on them.

    @CoyneTheDup said:

    Every Muslim is a terrorist, but we'll pretend the radicalization law isn't about them, even as thousands of them are shoveled into bureaucratic hell.

    No one thinks that every Muslim is a terrorist. You are just making shit up at this point. But, you are absolutely delusional if you stick your fingers in your ears whenever anyone tries to point out that although almost every single Muslim is peaceful, at the same time almost every single modern terrorist is a Muslim. Your side of the argument is that we cannot even look at Muslims for terrorist connections because that would be Islamophobic. That is stupid.

    @CoyneTheDup said:

    One of my favorites, every illegal (because there is No Such Thing as a legal immigrant)

    Wait...what? :wtf: are you getting on about now?

    @CoyneTheDup said:

    And of course, vote; they must vote because how else will we keep them f_____g blacks from voting for a Democrat?

    :wtf: ??

    @CoyneTheDup said:

    I'm very tired of all of this.

    So stop making up imaginary boogeymen to be scared by. Problem solved.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.