Octopus Overlords

em2nought wrote:So I'm a bad guy because I hope that kid didn't intentionally kill that girl, or try to kill the others? Great! Did I say he didn't do it intentionally? No, I think he probably did. I just wish he didn't. I'd hate to take away your happiness derived from someone on the right finally killing someone on the left.

Grifman wrote:

em2nought wrote:So I'm a bad guy because I hope that kid didn't intentionally kill that girl, or try to kill the others? Great! Did I say he didn't do it intentionally? No, I think he probably did. I just wish he didn't. I'd hate to take away your happiness derived from someone on the right finally killing someone on the left.

The problem is that you didn't say it that way. If you had posted this instead of what you did post, I don't think anyone would have batted an eye at you. Maybe you should consider how/what you post rather than blame others for how they perceive you.

Rip wrote:

Carpet_pissr wrote:

Holman wrote:“You cannot be against General Lee and be for General Washington,” the email reads, “there literally is no difference between the two men.”

Except one was a general on the losing side of a great war, and the other was a general on the winning side of a great war.
And that one was for "a more perfect union" and the other was trying to tear that union apart.
And one was a founding father of our country, the other wasn't.
And one has monuments due to his role in creating and leading the country. The other has monuments due to his role with the Confederacy (again, LOST, and on wrong side of history).
But yeah, other than those and a couple of dozen other glaring differences, LITERALLY the same.

Pro tip: your boss HATES losers! Also, I expect a high powered attorney to be a little more careful in the words he chooses. LITERALLY no difference? IDIOT.

You should read up a little on Lee, he most certainly didn't WANT to tear the Union apart.

pr0ner wrote:

Grifman wrote:

em2nought wrote:So I'm a bad guy because I hope that kid didn't intentionally kill that girl, or try to kill the others? Great! Did I say he didn't do it intentionally? No, I think he probably did. I just wish he didn't. I'd hate to take away your happiness derived from someone on the right finally killing someone on the left.

The problem is that you didn't say it that way. If you had posted this instead of what you did post, I don't think anyone would have batted an eye at you. Maybe you should consider how/what you post rather than blame others for how they perceive you.

Eh. What he posted here still has issues. He's claiming that people in the thread are happy that Heather Heyer was murdered in Charlottesville. I mean, really? That's how he ends the post?

em2nought wrote:So I'm a bad guy

Holman wrote:(Incidentally, one of Trump's golf resorts features a monument to a civil war battle that never took place. They made it up to add an air of "history" to the course.)

Holman wrote:"Destroying our history."

Captain Caveman wrote:

Holman wrote:(Incidentally, one of Trump's golf resorts features a monument to a civil war battle that never took place. They made it up to add an air of "history" to the course.)

What?? I know I shouldn't be surprised by this, but the depth of his insanity never ceases to amaze.

Captain Caveman wrote:

Holman wrote:(Incidentally, one of Trump's golf resorts features a monument to a civil war battle that never took place. They made it up to add an air of "history" to the course.)

What?? I know I shouldn't be surprised by this, but the depth of his insanity never ceases to amaze.

“Many great American soldiers, both of the North and South, died at this spot. The casualties were so great that the water would turn red and thus became known as ‘The River of Blood.’ It is my great honor to have preserved this important section of the Potomac River!”

Nice sentiment, small problem: there apparently was no such battle.

The Times checked with various historians in the area who had trouble tying the site of Trump's course to any such event.

“No. Uh-uh. No way. Nothing like that ever happened there,” Richard Gillespie, the executive director of the Mosby Heritage Area Association, told the Times.

Gillespie went on to say the closest thing to what Trump was describing was a battle 11 miles up the river in 1861. “The River of Blood?” he said. “Nope, not there.”

Trump, who is a leading Republican candidate for President, questioned how historians could dispute the battle. "How would they know," he told the Times. "Were they there?"

LordMortis wrote:

Captain Caveman wrote:

Holman wrote:(Incidentally, one of Trump's golf resorts features a monument to a civil war battle that never took place. They made it up to add an air of "history" to the course.)

What?? I know I shouldn't be surprised by this, but the depth of his insanity never ceases to amaze.

Cite! Please! I'm not proud of it but my schadenfreude against Trump now goes to 11.

“Many great American soldiers, both of the North and South, died at this spot. The casualties were so great that the water would turn red and thus became known as ‘The River of Blood.’ It is my great honor to have preserved this important section of the Potomac River!”

Trump, who is a leading Republican candidate for President, questioned how historians could dispute the battle. "How would they know," he told the Times. "Were they there?"

Trump, who is a leading Republican candidate for President, questioned how historians could dispute the battle. "How would they know," he told the Times. "Were they there?"

LordMortis wrote:SMH

Trump, who is a leading Republican candidate for President, questioned how historians could dispute the battle. "How would they know," he told the Times. "Were they there?"

Captain Caveman wrote:Amazing scene in Durham, NC this morning:

https://twitter.com/CelesteHeadlee/stat ... 8321544192

Really bad plaque wrote:Many great American soldiers, both of the North and South, died at this spot. The casualties were so great that the water would turn red and thus became known as ‘The River of Blood.’ It is my great honor to have preserved this important section of the Potomac River!”'

Octavious wrote:Oh god fuckface is going on about tearing down monuments now. We get it! You need to keep the KKK on your side!

LordMortis wrote:

Kraken wrote:

Holman wrote:Daily Stormer has just been been booted from GoDaddy.

They already have a new home, though, with servers in Russia.

So now Russians are consorting with Nazis? Times sure do change.

Or history sure does repeat itself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E ... ntrop_Pact

Go ahead and invade Poland, we're right there with you.

Russia's media watchdog said Thursday it "requested" that a Russian internet provider boot The Daily Stormer off its website because the American group spews neo-Nazi propaganda and incites racial and national hatred.

The Daily Stormer had briefly taken refuge at the Ru-center, which provided the Russian domain, after being kicked off American servers by GoDaddy and Google following the uproar over Charlottesville white nationalist demonstrations.

Even before the Russian watchdog officially stepped in, the neo-Nazi website had been forced to retreat temporarily to the dark Web when security firm Cloudflare severed ties with the site Wednesday.

Officially, Roskomnadzor, the watchdog organization, can only shutdown websites on charges of extremism after approval from Russia’s General Prosecutor’s Office, The Moscow Times reported, but its "request" carries considerable weight.

Isgrimnur wrote: stuff

Holman wrote:Most of the statues threatened with removal were put up during the rise of Jim Crow or in reaction to the Civil Rights movement.

Carpet_pissr wrote:I don't think that the statues or monuments should be destroyed. But let's put them in museums where they belong and can be more protected and preserved for those that still worship them.

malchior wrote:Bannon thinks all this is helping Trump's cause.Essentially he believes this will further alienate and motivate Whites. Maybe he is right but wtf does that say about our nation then?

Defiant wrote:Which means he still has the support of the Republican base.

Carpet_pissr wrote:

malchior wrote:Bannon thinks all this is helping Trump's cause.Essentially he believes this will further alienate and motivate Whites. Maybe he is right but wtf does that say about our nation then?

That maybe we're not as great as We thought we were?

The Turner Diaries depicts a violent revolution in the United States which leads to the overthrow of the federal government, nuclear war, and, ultimately, a race war.

The Bannon Diaries depicts a violent Executive branch coup d'etat in the United States which leads to the overthrow of the federal government, nuclear war, and, ultimately, a race war.

YellowKing wrote:The CBS poll showed 2/3rds of Republicans approved of Trump's response. Which is reprehensible, and one more nail in the coffin of me ever voting Republican again.

I hope Trump & Bannon continue to rule only their small core, though. It's going to make the next election much easier after they've alienated independents, moderates, minorities, women, etc.

As an aside, I've been trying to track my pro-Trump friends in light of all this chaos. The overwhelming response has been complete radio silence/head in the sand. Most of them have stopped watching the news, as if ignoring the monster they put in office will somehow make everything hunky-dory.

em2nought wrote:So I'm a bad guy because I hope that kid didn't intentionally kill that girl, or try to kill the others? Great! Did I say he didn't do it intentionally? No, I think he probably did. I just wish he didn't. I'd hate to take away your happiness derived from someone on the right finally killing someone on the left.

em2nought wrote:So I'm a bad guy because I hope that kid didn't intentionally kill that girl, or try to kill the others? Great! Did I say he didn't do it intentionally? No, I think he probably did. I just wish he didn't. I'd hate to take away your happiness derived from someone on the right finally killing someone on the left.

LordMortis wrote:My tracking is "Why is the left trying to destroy history?" which was apparently Trump's tracking as well. Ignore the chants and the guns and riot shields and swastikas. This is about preserving American heritage. Ostensibly that's what the march was about and everything else is poor media focus and liberals changing the message. Sadly, they get to point to NC and say "see that!"

LordMortis wrote:My tracking is "Why is the left trying to destroy history?" which was apparently Trump's tracking as well.

YellowKing wrote:I'm not falling for that crap.

RunningMn9 wrote:

LordMortis wrote:My tracking is "Why is the left trying to destroy history?" which was apparently Trump's tracking as well.

The few pro-Trump folks that still make it through my carefully constructed net (two more muted today) have been barking two talking points:

1) Leftists are trying to destroy our history and culture.
2) The MSM is trying everything they can to stop the Trump agenda. Whatever the fuck that means.