"Protesters are not treated correctly" Oh, please -- spare us the drama! Moonbats act up at just about every demonstration they attend, since as far back as the 1960s, so a more factual statement from this crybaby should have been, "Protesters don't act properly; therefore the police have to respond correctly"!
Nothing like a good 'ol fashioned riot to remind the powers that be that the people can only be pushed so far. Anyone who says different is a government tool and one day your rights will be taken away too.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Oh how I wish the regular citizens would descend on these commie leftists and kill them all. The days of respectfully disagreeing are over, they need to die before they kill us all.
Kill any commie with a mask on his face, any dirty hippy bitch with a bullhorn. Kill yourselves to protest evil America.
It is completely inaccurate and irresponsible to call the instigators protesters without first learning their identities. It is at least as likely they were planted so that police could collectively punish genuine protesters with force and false arrests. The US is fascist. That happens in fascist nations.
It is obvious police are abusing thier power if people peacefully taking pictures, observers, and people just trying to make thier way home get arrested and abused for no reason.
I agree destroying property isn't good. But dragging someone down the street is definatley not right either that pig got what he deserved.
And you have to know who your sources are. Beware of yellow journalism.
I wonder if the radical left wingers who think it is their "right" to attack police and destroy property think that their conservative counterparts have the same "rights". The sad thing is that the violent radicals on the left legitimize the violent radicals on the right.
did you watch the video. They were anarchists. Anarchists are not on the left-right spectrum which ensares people into nonissues, to expand the government, and the power of the elite. Anarchists hate both parts of this 2party dictatorship. And yes they would agree with the same tactics against the DNC.
I know a few officers who were at the protest. They said there were two main groups. The peaceful protesters who wanted nothing but to protest peacefully, and didn't cause any problems. Then you have the anarchists causing chaos and ruining it for everyone. But put yourself in that position as an officer, anarchy can ensue quickly. It's a tough situation for both sides. Anarchists and Liberals are different. The same thing happened at the DNC, they just don't broadcast it.
Anarchy isn't chaos fyi, its the absence of rulers.
Many anarchists protest peacefully, some do resort to violence, but this is the case with virtually all protests.
Violence is in no way a virtue of anarchy, but some anarchists feel that the destruction of property used to perpetuate the system that keeps down the working class is ok, and that anarchy will be instilled by revolution, but thats by no means the majority opinion
Where is the civil disobedience when protesters receive permission from the authorities to even be in the streets? Civil obedience, at least as described by Gandhi, involves breaking the law and remaining non-violent. The question remains - can violence be committed against inanimate objects? Either way, I wish "peaceful protesters" would follow MLK's footsteps in terms of dissent. w/o civil disobedience, what do protests accomplish?
Seriously. This is cool. Especially where you guys are pushing the cop, thats timeless! :D I have no bad feelings at all about breaking windows, dumpsters or other things like that - thats just stuff! Police most of them are violent bastards. Even though, if they do not damage people on the body, mentally it can be sick violence too. I know what im talking about they have been hurting me and friends lot. System is screwed, dont ever be scared to riot it. Great work guys! Cheers from skandinavia!
I Was Arrested, Infact, One of the Charges against me is for breaking a window. Remember what JFK once said, "Those who make peaceful revolution Impossible, make Violent Revolution, inevitable."
"Anarchists know that a long period of education must precede any great fundamental change in society, hence they do not believe in vote begging, nor political campaigns, but rather in the development of self-thinking individuals.-Lucy Parsons
That's absurd. They aren't exercising their "usual rights", they're inciting a riot. Take your dick out of your mouth and look at the situation, don't be a sheep. These stupid white boys have no interest but their own entertainment.
such absurd outside of united states or 'civilized' europe would be called opression of freedom. most likely by dick lovers like u and ur sheepfucking friends. and nobody would check if those guys are just lumpen scum.
Watch the other videos, like where REPORTERS are arrested. Or the arrests of the people who were at the concert by the river, to see Atmosphere, RAtM, and others.
Don't believe police interpretation. 284 people arrested on Sept 2, I'm not sure what it ended up being by the end of the 5th. Yes, smashing windows is not a way to solve anything, but when the right to PEACEABLY ASSEMBLE and FREE SPEECH are impaired, something is wrong. Those are Constitutional Rights, and cannot be taken away.
Protesting is dumb and pointless. All it does is make you look bad and ricks your own self to get manipulated by others and cause trouble. Which in return leads to penalization from the law! idiots
The US Constitution doesn't treat everyone equally nor does it allow people to offend what Law Enforcement says. Once one thing is damaged or a cop is assaulted. It's finished. Protesting will come to an end limiting ANY protesters no matter if they were innocent or not. Protesting accomplishes NOTHING. PS. Protesters are limited in the areas they can assemble. The right to assemble is in the constitution. Also, protesters have to sign in before they protest. Constitution is lacking for protests
What the hell are you talking about? Have you ever been to a protest? I used to go to protest every weekend at fur stores and we were able to protest any time we wanted infront of the store, granted we don't block the side walk. You don't have to notify the police station you will be having a protest either unless there is a court order against your group saying that you do. No protest ever had a manditory sign in, because the police cant make you do that since that would abridge ur 4thAmend
Most protests you must sign in saying you are a protester. MOST is the key word. Protesting gets nothing done but puts you at risk of getting injured or possibly arrested. Protesters should be beat and sprayed with mace.
I'm fucking sick of the hierarchical structures of the exploitative, capitalistic and oppressive system that shits out corporate politicians who use propaganda to convince the mass society that they are free..
Right. Your opinion that you are "fucking sick of the hierarchical structures of the exploitative, capitalistic and oppressive system that shits out corporate politicians who use propaganda to convince the mass society that they are free.."
Yet you are quite comfortable using that same system, produced by those same corporations to express your opinion. So you are only *somewhat* sick of them. Not sick enough to boycott them.
Please do not commit logical fallacies of generalization and ad hominem attacks -- I wasn't aware that wanting liberty was for "left wing nutcases".
Oh, and the political spectrum is not one dimensional -- read a book, preferably a political one.
And I, as well as many others, believe it is actually CLEVER to USE the oppressive system to further our views. For example, expressing your views on FOX or YouTube.
Quote:"And I, as well as many others, believe it is actually CLEVER to USE the oppressive system to further our views. For example, expressing your views on FOX or YouTube."
Typical left wing excuses. Something is WRONG, IMMORAL, or EVIL, EXCEPT when THEY want to make use of it. THEN it is CLEVER.
It's not clever at all. You are doing the same thing that everyone else does.
He's a moron lol all he does is chase his tail in conversations, unless your up for entertaining yourself (with no substance) it might be best to kick the dust of your sandals with this one lol
No typo, simple English. You claim you are a Libertarian. Typically libertarians support a free market economy and capitalism. Your complaints against capitalism which is the private ownership of property typify someone that *generally* has socialist leanings.
Of course there could be those scant few Libertarians who think that capitalism, and private property ownership should be abolished. I think they would have a difficult time convincing other libertarians that their views arent socialist.
Capitalism is the private ownership of property. Now, if you are opposed to capitalism, this would mean you advocate the end of such. Yet, if you are not promoting socialism, which is state ownership of property, what's left?
I've never heard of a Libertarian that believes in the elimination of capitalism. Got some lit human?
Any economic system based on wage labor and private property will require a coercive state apparatus to enforce property rights and to maintain the unequal economic relationships that will inevitably arise. Therefore, a gift economy will be put into place and not TOUCHED by any government, it will be controlled by the people.
So then no one owns the gifts? No one owns the land or the cell phones or the hoes or the food they have grown? Obviously you are opposed to private ownership of property. You're also opposed to state ownership. (The first is anti-libertarian the second is pro-libertarian). You still havent stated how property is owned or distributed then.
No, opposing private property isn't PRO or ANTI libertarian, you simply see everything as BLACK or WHITE, YES or NO -- it's a little more complicated than that.
One could argue that private property is EXPLOITATIVE and even oppressive, which is anti-libertarian. The MORE one person expresses his "right" to have private property, the LESS the other can -- there's only a limited amount of land.
"So then no one owns the gifts?" lol
If you own it, you own it -- not a CEO and not the government.
To clarify, private property is not simply real estate, land, homes, buildings and the like. Private property is the ownership of anything by individuals, or in partnership with other individuals.
You are claiming that the government should not own property and that private property ownership is not right either. What is left?
You still have not suggested an alternative to private property ownership or socialized property.
It is a system to allocate the ownership of pieces of land to particular people who exercise full control on it..
I sympathize with participatory economics, though I consider myself an Anarchist. Therefore, I believe in a a libertarian system of horizontal organization, versus the hierarchical, oppressive and un-libertarian structure.
And if you say anything about chaos, it would prove that you are not educated enough in the field of political philosophy to further this conversation.
I know what anarchy is and tend towards the lack of need for most forms of government. So let's not assume that I think chaos is the result of anarchy, any more than it is the result of govts.
Horizontal structures have their use when they are well run, particularly by consensus rather than vote. Though this is often difficult to achieve.
Now as to ownership of land, I am of the native mindset that land can be no more owned than air. However, when we say owned we mean controlled as you noted.
So most land is unowned. But it is not just land that can be controlled. It is personal property. So in contrast to personal ownership or socialist/govt ownership, what form are you suggesting? Can I control(own) the chair that I sit on and reasonably expect that no one has a right to take it from me without my consent, or trade?
If not then that creates a de facto socialist state.
Thus, which form of ownership of THINGS are you advocating. Ownership/control?
Then you ARE for the ownership of personal property. Despite your having said you are not.
Rather perhaps a way to phrase it would be that people, companies, corporations, associations, government and individuals are not allowed undue control over resources to the extent that they can cause harm to others.
Private ownership of property, is as I said a while ago, not just about land ownership.
Taxes eliminate any kind of true ownership except if they are completely VOLUNTARY and use based.
In an anarchist society, you would obviously be able to own things.. However, private property is itself exploitative -- a corporation could monopolize land and justify it by saying that it is expressing its right to have private property.
Again, I am not for public and I am not for private ownership of land.
Thus I use a road, I somehow contribute to its upkeep, be it money, time or materials. But if I am not sending my child to a state school, I should not have to pay for state school, or any school in that case. Except as a donation.
When things are not authoritarian, but based no the will of the individuals participating, we indeed do have less opportunity for abuse.
Additionally corporate charters were never meant to be forever. They were originally for a specific purpose, then dissolved.
"Horizontal structures have their use when they are well run, particularly by consensus rather than vote. Though this is often difficult to achieve."
I completely agree.
The far-right 'libertarian' view of private property is exploitative, though I do believe in ownership of things (obviously?). For example, if I make a house, I own it.
So, you first replied to "me" and continue your nonesense over the word "some" reply three times without a response from me and then say I'm hitting on you"? ROFL!
I had blocked you yesterday after the third repsonse I believe it was, so I have no interest in you though my husband (reading this) thinks its funny how you cant seem to sense a "get lost" vibe lol
Um... "SOME" doesnt mean "evidence" ROFL!
Sorry but thats been YOUR pathetic spin this whole waste of time lol
They'll only be told to shut up and laughed at when they run around screaming like a bunch of spoiled little brats. "Speaking up" doesn't involve breaking innocent people's property and acting like an all around fucktard.
I LOVE IT. They claimed that the people who were pro-keep our troops in Iraq and "Troop Supporters", the one guy has the captions "Supports Troops" while being interveiwed. Wow, talk about non-bias.
WTF DOES SUPPORT THE TROOPS MEAN?! NOTHING. YOU CAN SAY, Support The Troops, let them eat cottage cheese for summer! (and it's still a valid statement)
I'm sorry, but did you notice that the first girl that they arrested was only trying to hand the cop a flower when they sprayed her in the face with mace? And did you notice that that second protester was already arrested when they started spraying his face with mace?
Violence is not violence if it is committed against violent property. Violence is spraying normal people in the face with mace.
No what you saw was a few seconds of video. I've seen these idiots before, they claim to be about peace and then they go around tearing shit up. They didn't pepper her because she was trying to hand the cop a flower.
IF that was all she was doing, she was entering a violent altercation. Stay the fuck out of the way and let the officer do his peace keeping job. Of course we cannot expect anarchists to actually deal with reality and truth. No more than we can expect women to do the same.
First off, I have been involved with the anarchist community for three years and I have never encountered a more caring and sacrificed group of people in my life. The people that put their safety and freedom on the line in order to protect everyone else from the ever approaching police state.
And if you really believe what you said about women, fuck off. Seriously. Just fuck off. I am not going to argue this further on the internet, but if you would like to find another means, fine by me.
are you people retarted? lets rally for peace and against violence than come into my town and destroy it. police keep us safe and still I am afraid to walk alone anywhere. The protesters did nothing but make my life complicated lets block streets so the people of the city can't go about their daily life. sweet guys
It appears the so called violent ones always get away when folks like Any Goodman get arrested. Somehow it does ressemble Canadas "agent provocatuers" where cops were the ones wearing the masks and carrying the rocks (as exposed). I wouldnt doubt that some of the younger folks doing the violence arent hired, because they are always the ones to slip away (so easily) while the peacful ones are dragged into pens.
Being an ex cop is irrelevant. You are still claiming the possibility that folks were hired to act this way. I have to have something we call evidence, not a random thrown about idea that maybe this or that might have happened.
Maybe they are Martians. Maybe they acted like idiots because of DTD in their breakfast cereal.
Sorry tiger but your "evidence" doesn't wash. Evidence from one incident in ANOTHER CASE doesn't hold water. Why not speculate that the cops in this case were also violating women since we have admissions ON OCCASION from police officers that HAVE done so?
Speculation about one event, from evidence on another is nothing but complete fabrication.. So NO it ISNT true.
I would think as a former cop you would understand how evidence works. Making wild and crazy claims doesn't make them true.
I was the one who said it was possible that SOME could be, and YOU were the one who called "me" on that possibility and the evidence of that video plainly shows that some in fact were cops (and admitedly so)
So YES from ONE case is suited to the "SOME" I keep talking about, not to mention theres another video I cannot recall the name of the same type folks in the U.S doing it. Nevertheless, the video is evidence that cops indeed have as they have admited and you chose to want to be right lol
The video doesn't show cops at all doing any such thing. Claiming SOME is a false allegation when there is NO evidence of your claim. Which there is NO evidence. Stating SOME is completely FALSE.
SOME ex-cops were investigated for FRAUD. That doesn't have anything to do with YOU. We don't claim because of THEM that YOU have evidence against you. Learn the difference between POSSIBLE and PROBABLE.
The video shows criminals violating the law. It then shows police officers protecting the public.
Your whole argument is BASELESS LOL. You have been dancing through our entire conversation over my comment on *SOME* get over it already. The evidence in the video I posted validates what I had said from the beginning and THAT is where your argument started.
Your PROBROBLY retarded but its POSSIBLE you just cant stand being wrong rofl!
I call bullshit and you know it. YOUR claim about what went on in the video is FALSE. The CLAIM that you made is NOT validated by the video and the events you CLAIM occurred in the video are FALSE. There is no dancing around at all. You made up some bullshit that didnt happen and was not backed by facts. I called you on it. Give me ONE PLACE in the video that proves the fuckwits breaking shit were actually cops. PROOF dickwit.
You cannot call someones bullshit on the word SOME hon, I really hate to break it to you. You come running into the conversation with an assertion I didnt make. I expressed that "I doubt" and "some" so if you read that as a definite thing I cannot quarrel over your reading comprehension and the conclusions you draw and argue over.
I made up no bullshit at all. I provided a video of mainstream news in Canada showing cops were involved in that partiular protest validating my "some"
Based on videotape of a comet exploding, I conclude that SOME of the earth is exploding.
Yes I CAN absolutely call bullshit on SOME when it is a LIE. Video of CANADIAN police has NOTHING to do with your FABRICATION that PORTLAND police are ACTUALLY the "anarchists" in THIS video. You fabricated something WITHOUT EVIDENCE.
I am really sick and tired of people condemning our police who are doing their best to PROTECT US. You can swing it any way you want sugartits, but the fact is you are wrong
Oh you cant even quote me on that, conversations with you are like doing some retarded dance I'm not interested in dancing with ya.
You fabricated things I never said because your little youtubey (think you know it all) attitude jumped on me over the word "some". Please get a life rofl!
And thanks :D We do try to protect your gullible asses but we used to have fun as well.
If you think we are perfect upright and always do justice, I'm fine with your delusions lmao!
Now you are just being stupid. See, I'm on the side of something we men like to call EVIDENCE. Which means, before I believe an accusation against a police officer, I need EVIDENCE. You really have to be a broad because only a woman would think it is always only ONE way or the OTHER way. We are not talking about ALL OTHER cases. We are talking about your claims about THE POLICE IN THIS VIDEO. That's it sugartits. Jesus feckin christ can women be fuck all stupid.
Um yeah, as a former cop I understand evidence lol But that was not my claim on this video (if you cant read I dont know what to tell you). The evidence was in the posted video on the "SOME" word you keep avoiding.
Sugartits, if you blocked me, why are you still responding?
Obviously you are hitting on me. I concluded this because I know that not even a broad could be as dumb as you are pretending to be.
It seems to me you're the one desperately clinging to the slightest hope that the fuckwits throwing rocks are cops. I'd call that delusional frustration. Such is the nature of women though. So I am not surprised, and thus, not frustrated. Try something we men like to call evidence. Too hard for ya?
Um maybe because if you were smart enough (try using both heads) to know how youtube works it doesnt affect the post replies but the comments on your page or the personal receiving DUH!
Your such a dounce lol
And no again for the *umpteenth time* I said SOME (your stuck on that word I know) and then I copy pasted a video showing one that did you retard lol
Delusional is not being able to see that SOME are in fact cops holding rocks, but thats the nature of morons like yourself
No dipwip, YOU are stuck on the word SOME. Claiming that ANY of the folks there are actually cops SOME or MANY or ONE without something called EVIDENCE makes you a woman. Because it's incredibly womanly to believe in fantasies without evidence.
Now if you have EVIDENCE that any of the persons with rocks were cops THEN I might accept your CLAIM. Otherwise you are just spouting stupid left wing bullshit.
You a moron lmao!!!!!!!! You cannot even quote me because you have been having this "imaginary" argument with me over things you "believe" I said when I have not lol
If anyone is in fantasy land its YOU, I come back to amuse myself and watch you find arguments on things I never said and I must admit this is very entertaining lol
Told ya, the evidence of rocks in the hands of cops was in the video I provided. I said nothing about this video save the "possibilty" of some could hired
You argue like a 12 year old girl. Congratulations, considering the brains most females stop maturing at age seven. By 23 a female starts her disgusting decline into forgetableness.
What's the timestamp of the part you are claiming? You're the one making claims, I am merely stating that YOUR claims require evidence. That's reality sourtits. Something women are afraid to face. "OOO OOO I have to give evidence of a ridiculous claim ooo ooo I'm a woman just believe me."
I don't even have to read your reply to know what it doesn't say. Want to know what it DOESN'T say? ANYTHING about EVIDENCE. How about a time stamp from the video for your CLAIM that police officers are throwing the rocks?
Oh wait, that would require manwork. Something a female is incapable of doing, she might break a sweat by pressing the PAUSE on that thar vid and typing out something like 1:10, or whatever time holds the evidence for her claim.
"It appears the so called violent ones always get away when folks like Any Goodman get arrested. Somehow it does ressemble Canadas "agent provocatuers" where cops were the ones wearing the masks and carrying the rocks (as exposed). I wouldnt doubt that some of the younger folks doing the violence arent hired, because they are always the ones to slip away (so easily) while the peacful ones are dragged into pens."
You're a woman so we don't expect you to remember even your words.
Nope, I was right. I don't need to qualify everything different about the town. But since you aren't capable of comprehension skills greater than second grade, I will give you some extra help.
The town was DIFFERENT. Thus, it was NOT the SAME. That town was in a DIFFERENT PLACE. It had DIFFERENT ROADS. DIFFERENT BUILDINGS. DIFFERENT TREES.
And DIFFERENT women. That doesn't matter because women in one place are as stupid as any other place. M>W.
You get dumber with every comment. Only a female would think that we have to further clarify every difference when we say things like "Different person" or "different town".
You were called out on your unproven assertion that the cops at the RNC were actually a potential cause cause of the violence, based on the events elsewhere.
Sorry sugar tits, you fail in typical womanly fashion.
No not really your a walking retard and your errors are fun to poke at. You were simply talking about the differnces in the two videos and you went on your spew about towns and I simply corrected it. Not because I'd normally do that but to observe your reactions whenever you are wrong, its become entertaining.
And again, No I did not say that lmao!! Nice try though, I knew I'd see a little dancing with words to try and make it what you want the argument to be. But that was ridiculous lol
Actually YOU were talking about the difference in the two videos. I've made not a single error. All that I have said from the start is, what is your evidence for the claim that the assholes running amuck in this video are even potentially police or hired?
The only thing YOU could offer was ANOTHER VIDEO that had nothing to do with this or the RNC.
Again you got proof of the claim that I quoted? Answer? No. Not a drip of proof.
Get facts that prove your claim and I will believe it. M>W.
Um yeah I BROUGHT that video INTO the conversation after YOUR FIRST RESPONSE which stressed SOME and in my first response was HIRED youngsters (I notice you just CAUGHT YOURSELF ON) lmao! THAT was MY POINT from YOUR FIRST RESPONSE ONWARD
From your FIRST QUOTE (of misreading me and dragging me on and on) lmao
It's *never* anyone at these "peaceful rallies" causing violence, but *always* the police.
I didn't catch myself on anything toots. Yer the one who said you wouldnt be surprised if the cops has shit to do with this. Then you went on when I challenged you to claim that I shouldnt trust everything cops do.
Here is where LOGIC (me) and FANTASY (you) differ. I believe neither the police nor left wing nuts like you, nor anyone else, WITHOUT EVIDENCE. Simply CLAIMING that someone committed a crime isn't enough for me to believe it, regardless of who they are.
So what if I wouldnt be surprised, its not something I need evidence for. I wouldnt be surprised on the BASIS of that OTHER VIDEO providing the very EVIDENCE that I based my NON SURPRISAL OVER rofl!
I'm not even a voter rofl, and I'm a left winger? Talk about pea brain lmao!
Claiming someone did a crime is much different from "not being surprised if they did"
It APPEARS the so called violent ones always get away when folks like Any Goodman get arrested. SOMEHOW IT DOES RESSEMBLE Canadas "agent provocatuers" where cops were the ones wearing the masks and carrying the rocks (as exposed). I WOULDNT DOUBT that SOME of the YOUNGER FOLKS doing the violence arent hired, because they are always the ones to slip away (so easily) while the peacful ones are dragged into pens.
Cops where? right there in the part you quoted nimrod.
You still need to get an education and prove your ridiculous assertions. We could step back and quote every other statement you made and it is CLEAR you were talking about cops.
Trying to back pedal now isn't going to reduce the need for your to prove your assertions.
Typical woman, get called on the carpet then act like that's NOT what you meant.
We really should end women's suffrage cause dayum are you stooooopid, with a capital G.
Nah your really trying to weasel now, the emphasis of your inquisition is on who I was who I wouldnt doubt it was and I stressed some of the younger folks being HIRED not cops, the quote above is YOURS (mentioning the police lol.
Your the one in need of the education hon, back pedal my ass its bringing the first idiotic response of YOURS to the forefront lmao!
HIRED younger folks is NOT the police hon, if I meant police I would have said it because I provided the video with the police duh!
And I dont need an education "to prove" why I would not be surprised by something lol
It was CLEAR that in regards to THIS video my statement where I stated I would not have doubted YOUNGER FOLKS being HIRED is not the same as COPS (who already draw paychecks) you moron lol
Wow gone for several hours and you're carrying on a conversation without me. That's brilliant considering that you "blocked" me.
You're stupidity knows no bounds. Thinking that you HAVE to vote to be a left winger. Thank the deities that many of your sort DONT vote. We're fucked enough without your type adding to the chaos.
Nah just adressing your two dimwitted responses, just didnt have enough room :P Shit happens sometimes, you werent missed it was a great break, I thank God for your absence lol
The block was on your mouth on my comment section which really matters little I could actually edit it out. I already informed you of what the block does and doesnt do.
You been displaying your stupidy lol
I dont vote because I believe the elections are rigged, so whether I do or do not means nothing :D
Uh huh. Keep telling yourself that toots. Women will convince themselves of any fairy tale just to continue to have something to bitch about. Women are simply not happy if they're not miserable.
I could reccomend a good counselor for your women issues, I bet your mother didnt breast feed you. You have a hang up with breasts and some obvious issues with women.
Has every woman been so utterly miserable in your company that you project their own lack of happiness with you onto other women chatting with ya?
You're own complete despondency about the value of voting demonstrates your happiness rating sugar tits. People without hope are always miserable. Personally I'm starting to hope we become a worldwide police state and idiots like you are sent to Mars. God that would be beautiful. A world without morons.
Sorry I dont know where you think my hope or happiness lies but its not gaged by whether I vote or not lmao! After watching the American Blackout documentary I'm just being realistic (not to mention other videos on the subject).
Thanks for sharing your far reaching hopes with me lol Most folks hope for much higher things, but if you can only reach as far (in your hopes) to a garbage man situation (verses that of a brain surgeon) that might be a genetic defect you cannot help lol
I would have voted for Ron Paul soooo... whatever the hell wing I am so be it lol (thats if I were so vote and belived it counted). I'm certainly not ashamed of whatever wing (or hand even foot) I am. Which wing would the third party be (since he is not running)and in that case I would think its a kool thing to vote third party (or rather) against both right and left (if I thought it mattered) Whats that then MID wing" then? lol
So in what way am I a left winger in relation to all this
Woulda coulda shoulda. Ron Paul is about the closest thing to a real answer that you've given since this began.
Not voting is the waste. You want to see a change, then pick a third party and vote. It might not make a difference this election, but it will force them by law, with enough votes, to place the third party on the ballots next time around. It will also send a message.
In the real world we call that a big FUCK YOU to both parties. Or are you just a wee wittle girl afraid to offend?
Its not a woulda coulda shoulda deal, I refuse to vote. I dont believe in the validity of the election process. In my opinion my vote is not wasted by casting it or witholding it. Besides there hasnt been anyone I believed in save Ron Paul and now hes not running but even if he did (and that would be great) I dont trust it.
Ron Paul is a real person, not an answer lol because you never gave me a question to use him as an answer:D
Whats to fear in offending or not offending anyway?
By the holy deities. Just when I was about to give you credit for getting a bit smart you have to get even more stupid.
Since you indicate your ridiculous belief that answers are only in response to questions, I ANSWER your CLAIM with a quote from the dictionary. It's a nice little book that our Lord gave us when we want to look up words. You should try using it sometime.
3: something done in response or reaction
Your Ron Paul statement was in RESPONSE to something I had said. Learn English
Oh please you've only proven yourself retarded the entire chat lol. Trust me I dont depend on you as an intellegence gage for myself especially when I rate you moronic lol
Whats this "our Lord stuff"? calling people sugar tits is the way you honor your Lord?
Now your not only a moron but a hypocrit lmao
It might have been an "additional response" but not an answer to a direct question.
Actually I am an atheist that believes deities are created by man. They represent parts of our psyche. There are of course the personified dieties, the sun, moon, earth and so on. Additionally, ancestors are for some deities. Nevertheless in all cases deities are man-made. I do not subscribe to the notion that deities exist as real entities.
Thus, this is not warped at all and perfectly logical that my deities would find things, like calling you sugartits, uproariously funny.
Ok so your an athiest with a few self created impersonal deities in your Psyche that is (in reality) a non-existent entity that finds you uproariously funny when you utilize the word "sugartits" for me?
Interesting...
Without a doubt I'm sure you dont consider this (or yourself for that manner) warped at all lol
You're reading comprehension skills are miserably lacking. I'd suggest reading material on the nature of deity and the human psyche, but I wouldn't want your white matter brain to strain from the effort. Since we're clearly talking about symbolic deities, their laughing would also be symbolic. The point you lost long ago is that I am not a believer in an Almighty. Thus, calling you sugar tits is neither a violation of my moral code, nor hypocritical.
Well duh, I got that after you brought the Lord into your coversation only afterward claim your an athiest with dieties (symbolically) laughing at the word sugartits lmao!
Whatever floats your boat. My reading comprehension skills serious lack, and you judge this how? By your own screwed up nonsense of deitie pals laughing at sugartits? rofl!
I'll pass on the reccomended reading material but thanks anyways :D
Are you confessing to a moral code or are you completely void of one?
See? Despite the fact that I told you plainly deities and their laughter is symbolic, you still revert to the belief that I was being literal. Thus, indeed, your reading comprehension is growing even worse. I had thought it not possible sugartits.
Of course you will pass, they're books that are beyond your ability. Understanding them requires something called a brain. It takes a man for that.
Obviously you are making fun of me. If you weren't doing a good job of it and being at least mildly funny, I wouldn't waste my time. You've slightly better skills than your sisters who can only resort to the ever repetitive and stupid "ur gay ur so gay urrrr gay" comments. So you are atypical as a broad. That's respect, even if you don't see it.
Pity that your husband told you that, I was going to chalk that up as broadly funny. Still you wrote it so that counts for something sugartits. Respek.
No never I do nothing or say nothing without him. I'm am a very incapable weak (pathetic even) female species.
He also types what he is thinking "through me" utilizing mind and body control. All credit is his whether its broadly funny or not or atypical or not, its His majesty. He is a King to be worshipped and I do just that everyday
But certain concepts are simply beyond the female mind. Concepts like, symbolism, allegory, logic, reality and evidence are just too much for you to handle.
But hey, I give credit where it is due. You've yet to call up any of The Laws of Women, however in-adroitly. It's probably because hubby is over your shoulder telling you, write this or that. True, you're *nearly* fucking up his sound advice. But one can't expect perfection from a woman, she's simply incapable of even mediocrity. M>W.
If certain concepts are beyond the female brain when will you get it through yours to stop trying to teach us weak minded (imperfect) women to live up to your brilliance? lol
I see, you believe you are king of the archetype, the stud of allegories, symbols and similitudes
I'm way too small for all that (if it makes ya feel bigger where it counts) lol
Yep my husband sits right here & tells me what to type, I wouldnt know what to think without my man around telling me what to think.
Why? One can always hope that women will one day step up to the plate and fill the shoes of equality we men have been trying to hand you for generations.
Bigger where it counts eh? To think I had written off you as a Laws of Women woman. I guess I was wrong.
Your last statement, though untrue, is the most brilliant thing you've said. You're actually starting to come off as a woman who has her own mind. Despite that slip into Law 2, almost a near worthy self image. Congrats sugartits. M>W.
I'm touched by the hope you have for all of the sugartits out there.
The handouts are too generous (theres no words that can express my thankfulness enough)
NEVER will I have my own mind, only my darling husbands, a man without whom I am no woman and can speak no words without his careful guidance and thoughtful permission... only HE can make me the true woman I'm meant to be. I bow to Him
Everyone should read "The Gatekeepers of the So Called Left" Charles Shaw is the Publisher and Editor-in-Chief of Newtopia, and has been deeply involved in the anti-war movement since the bombing of Afghanistan. Newtopia Magazine is a member group of United for Peace and Justice.
Democracy Now! is funded by the Ford Foundation and CIA. Google it. COINTELPRO is all over these marches...
What does it take for people to see the "control" taking place!
There's a difference between anarchists and activists. These "ninja-like" anarchists were most likely Agent Provocateurs, employed by the police to incite riot and create general chaos for the cameras, giving the original protesters a bad image. The media is labeling ALL protesters "anarchists". This explains why they "simply disappeared", they were allowed to pass behind the lines of riot police before the illegal mass arrests began.
This is why America sucks, they think the government is against them and then they go somewhere to instigate the embodiment of the government and then complain about the consequences. KEEP ON CREATING YOUR OWN WORLD. NO ONE IS AGAINST YOU UNLESS YOU ARE BREAKING LAWS. Which these people were. They were able to live out their oppressive government FANTASY, by making a scene.
ur very ignorant wreck. those people are paid by the police to create havoc and give the peaceful protesters a bad name. didnt u see how there was only a couple of them and they got out with no hassle? while people standing for the truth get pepper sprayed for not doing anything... u should be ashamed of ur stupidity.
T.V. Lies Youtube Ron Paul
kommon12Cents 9 months ago
I want to apologize and say 2 years later that we live in a police state.
ryanbg328 9 months ago
There is a time to fight and that time has come
blackmesa10 1 year ago
the way the news says it makes the protesters look like the bad guys
TH3T4RG3T 1 year ago
@TH3T4RG3T because nearly all the media is owned by richard fucking murdock
chekkitProductions 1 year ago
"Protesters are not treated correctly" Oh, please -- spare us the drama! Moonbats act up at just about every demonstration they attend, since as far back as the 1960s, so a more factual statement from this crybaby should have been, "Protesters don't act properly; therefore the police have to respond correctly"!
MoonbatsAreDingbats 1 year ago
Nothing like a good 'ol fashioned riot to remind the powers that be that the people can only be pushed so far. Anyone who says different is a government tool and one day your rights will be taken away too.
IrishDroog 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Kudos to that officer who showed admirable restraint by not emptying his gun into those savages!
ycips82 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Oh how I wish the regular citizens would descend on these commie leftists and kill them all. The days of respectfully disagreeing are over, they need to die before they kill us all.
Kill any commie with a mask on his face, any dirty hippy bitch with a bullhorn. Kill yourselves to protest evil America.
goatbut29 2 years ago
those hooligans sure got way too far by ruining the neighborhood; but your comment shows that you are not too different :)
Havayosunu 2 years ago
be a man and do it you're self pussy
YouthTheRebel 2 years ago
your scum of the earth you conservative trash bag. you dont even have a clue whAT you believe in dirt baag.
fedex482 2 years ago 3
It is completely inaccurate and irresponsible to call the instigators protesters without first learning their identities. It is at least as likely they were planted so that police could collectively punish genuine protesters with force and false arrests. The US is fascist. That happens in fascist nations.
momentinpassing 2 years ago
It is obvious police are abusing thier power if people peacefully taking pictures, observers, and people just trying to make thier way home get arrested and abused for no reason.
I agree destroying property isn't good. But dragging someone down the street is definatley not right either that pig got what he deserved.
And you have to know who your sources are. Beware of yellow journalism.
PelicanGreed 2 years ago
Why destroy windows and other property? what did they ever do to them? leave the windows alone!
contractki11er 2 years ago
At 0:56....
Those anarchists are my friends...
I know them.
mutiny218 2 years ago
I wonder if the radical left wingers who think it is their "right" to attack police and destroy property think that their conservative counterparts have the same "rights". The sad thing is that the violent radicals on the left legitimize the violent radicals on the right.
powerslavet69 2 years ago
did you watch the video. They were anarchists. Anarchists are not on the left-right spectrum which ensares people into nonissues, to expand the government, and the power of the elite. Anarchists hate both parts of this 2party dictatorship. And yes they would agree with the same tactics against the DNC.
Calhoon1832 2 years ago 2
I know a few officers who were at the protest. They said there were two main groups. The peaceful protesters who wanted nothing but to protest peacefully, and didn't cause any problems. Then you have the anarchists causing chaos and ruining it for everyone. But put yourself in that position as an officer, anarchy can ensue quickly. It's a tough situation for both sides. Anarchists and Liberals are different. The same thing happened at the DNC, they just don't broadcast it.
ryanbg328 2 years ago
Anarchy isn't chaos fyi, its the absence of rulers.
Many anarchists protest peacefully, some do resort to violence, but this is the case with virtually all protests.
Violence is in no way a virtue of anarchy, but some anarchists feel that the destruction of property used to perpetuate the system that keeps down the working class is ok, and that anarchy will be instilled by revolution, but thats by no means the majority opinion
Calhoon1832 2 years ago 2
Where is the civil disobedience when protesters receive permission from the authorities to even be in the streets? Civil obedience, at least as described by Gandhi, involves breaking the law and remaining non-violent. The question remains - can violence be committed against inanimate objects? Either way, I wish "peaceful protesters" would follow MLK's footsteps in terms of dissent. w/o civil disobedience, what do protests accomplish?
theWanderingScribe 2 years ago
dont be mad at the police they were doin there job
Doug11B 3 years ago
so their job is to hold people down an spray chemicles in their face?
m3030078 2 years ago 2
Yes. If those people were members of a radical conservative group like the ones Janet Napolitano warned about I bet you would be cheering the police.
powerslavet69 2 years ago
@ powerslave, yet again you falsely believe anarchists are liberals.
Calhoon1832 2 years ago
"promised" a peaceful march.
My hubby looks so hawt in his riot gear!
YOU GO BABY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Marymarybobeary 3 years ago
These kids dont know how to riot.
FIGHTSANDARGUMENTS 3 years ago
Seriously. This is cool. Especially where you guys are pushing the cop, thats timeless! :D I have no bad feelings at all about breaking windows, dumpsters or other things like that - thats just stuff! Police most of them are violent bastards. Even though, if they do not damage people on the body, mentally it can be sick violence too. I know what im talking about they have been hurting me and friends lot. System is screwed, dont ever be scared to riot it. Great work guys! Cheers from skandinavia!
klarhetitroen 3 years ago
I Was Arrested, Infact, One of the Charges against me is for breaking a window. Remember what JFK once said, "Those who make peaceful revolution Impossible, make Violent Revolution, inevitable."
"Anarchists know that a long period of education must precede any great fundamental change in society, hence they do not believe in vote begging, nor political campaigns, but rather in the development of self-thinking individuals.-Lucy Parsons
MNjuggalo420 3 years ago
rember LIBERAL like peace
MyturBinisdrty 3 years ago
Oh you're real fucking cool. Idiot anarchists, trying to make politics into fashion.
GamberroSalvador 3 years ago
anarchists lack usual rights in 'free' state?
protfl 3 years ago
That's absurd. They aren't exercising their "usual rights", they're inciting a riot. Take your dick out of your mouth and look at the situation, don't be a sheep. These stupid white boys have no interest but their own entertainment.
GamberroSalvador 3 years ago
such absurd outside of united states or 'civilized' europe would be called opression of freedom. most likely by dick lovers like u and ur sheepfucking friends. and nobody would check if those guys are just lumpen scum.
protfl 3 years ago
Watch the other videos, like where REPORTERS are arrested. Or the arrests of the people who were at the concert by the river, to see Atmosphere, RAtM, and others.
Don't believe police interpretation. 284 people arrested on Sept 2, I'm not sure what it ended up being by the end of the 5th. Yes, smashing windows is not a way to solve anything, but when the right to PEACEABLY ASSEMBLE and FREE SPEECH are impaired, something is wrong. Those are Constitutional Rights, and cannot be taken away.
Haliax 3 years ago
Damn hippies. If I was in charge I would make sure no one protested against me.
Pawluk44 3 years ago
Megalomaniac much?
PunkSkaOi 3 years ago
DON'T MACE ME BRO!
TheSpriteMonster 3 years ago
keith is the man
bigajosep 3 years ago
Protesting is dumb and pointless. All it does is make you look bad and ricks your own self to get manipulated by others and cause trouble. Which in return leads to penalization from the law! idiots
nopiluvin 3 years ago
yea good thing we never protested king george's rule of the colonies
bigajosep 3 years ago 2
Penalization for protesting? Have you read the U.S. constitution or do you live in Iran?
studywar 3 years ago
The US Constitution doesn't treat everyone equally nor does it allow people to offend what Law Enforcement says. Once one thing is damaged or a cop is assaulted. It's finished. Protesting will come to an end limiting ANY protesters no matter if they were innocent or not. Protesting accomplishes NOTHING. PS. Protesters are limited in the areas they can assemble. The right to assemble is in the constitution. Also, protesters have to sign in before they protest. Constitution is lacking for protests
nopiluvin 3 years ago
What the hell are you talking about? Have you ever been to a protest? I used to go to protest every weekend at fur stores and we were able to protest any time we wanted infront of the store, granted we don't block the side walk. You don't have to notify the police station you will be having a protest either unless there is a court order against your group saying that you do. No protest ever had a manditory sign in, because the police cant make you do that since that would abridge ur 4thAmend
studywar 3 years ago
Most protests you must sign in saying you are a protester. MOST is the key word. Protesting gets nothing done but puts you at risk of getting injured or possibly arrested. Protesters should be beat and sprayed with mace.
nopiluvin 3 years ago
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
I'm fucking sick of the hierarchical structures of the exploitative, capitalistic and oppressive system that shits out corporate politicians who use propaganda to convince the mass society that they are free..
..Free to obey
Viva liberty, viva equality -- FIGHT BACK.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
KenCat1337 3 years ago
As I can see by your use of that very same corporate technology to post your view.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
My voice isn't being heard over the voices of others to millions of people in a biased manner, I'm simply stating my opinion, WHICH IS MY RIGHT.
KenCat1337 3 years ago
Right. Your opinion that you are "fucking sick of the hierarchical structures of the exploitative, capitalistic and oppressive system that shits out corporate politicians who use propaganda to convince the mass society that they are free.."
Yet you are quite comfortable using that same system, produced by those same corporations to express your opinion. So you are only *somewhat* sick of them. Not sick enough to boycott them.
Typical left wing nutcases.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
"Typical left wing nutcases."
Please do not commit logical fallacies of generalization and ad hominem attacks -- I wasn't aware that wanting liberty was for "left wing nutcases".
Oh, and the political spectrum is not one dimensional -- read a book, preferably a political one.
And I, as well as many others, believe it is actually CLEVER to USE the oppressive system to further our views. For example, expressing your views on FOX or YouTube.
KenCat1337 3 years ago
Quote:"And I, as well as many others, believe it is actually CLEVER to USE the oppressive system to further our views. For example, expressing your views on FOX or YouTube."
Typical left wing excuses. Something is WRONG, IMMORAL, or EVIL, EXCEPT when THEY want to make use of it. THEN it is CLEVER.
It's not clever at all. You are doing the same thing that everyone else does.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
"Typical left wing excuses"
Logical fallacy of generalization. And Jesus, I'm not "liberal" -- I'm no democrat, marxist, etc.
I am for LIBERTY.
And yes, using something against itself IS clever. For example, turning someone else's kick into force against the wall to defend yourself is clever.
KenCat1337 3 years ago
More excuses. Good try though. Vote libertarian, at least then I might believe your bullocks.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
I am a Libertarian.
And STOP FUCKING COMMITTING LOGICAL FALLACIES.
I want liberty, you're calling me liberal as though it's a bad thing. Therefor, you must be conservative. Are you for control?
KenCat1337 3 years ago
He's a moron lol all he does is chase his tail in conversations, unless your up for entertaining yourself (with no substance) it might be best to kick the dust of your sandals with this one lol
KARStarla 3 years ago
"tail in conservations"! LOL!
I replied to no one, HE replied to ME.
KenCat1337 3 years ago
Unfortunately thats how he happened to me LOL
I sympathize lol
KARStarla 3 years ago
Libertarian eh? Interesting way to support a free market economy. We call that socialism around here.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
I think you have a typo...
"Interesting way to support a free market economy. We call that socialism around here."
!?!??!?! lol
KenCat1337 3 years ago
No typo, simple English. You claim you are a Libertarian. Typically libertarians support a free market economy and capitalism. Your complaints against capitalism which is the private ownership of property typify someone that *generally* has socialist leanings.
Of course there could be those scant few Libertarians who think that capitalism, and private property ownership should be abolished. I think they would have a difficult time convincing other libertarians that their views arent socialist.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
"TYPICALLY libertarians support a free market economy and capitalism."
Yes, TYPICALLY. Because I am a Libertarian, I oppose oppression. Economic and even personal oppression comes form capitalism.
I never, EVER said that the economy should be controlled or that all or ANY property should be owned by a government.
And there aren't a "scant few" Libertarians who oppose capitalism.
KenCat1337 3 years ago
Capitalism is the private ownership of property. Now, if you are opposed to capitalism, this would mean you advocate the end of such. Yet, if you are not promoting socialism, which is state ownership of property, what's left?
I've never heard of a Libertarian that believes in the elimination of capitalism. Got some lit human?
aoirthoir 3 years ago
Wow, there are millions of us.
I strongly oppose state socialism, for it is generally oppressive and advocates "forceful" charity.
KenCat1337 3 years ago
So which alternative to private ownership property and state ownership of property are you advocating?
Since you are opposed to socialism, and you are opposed to capitalism...
aoirthoir 3 years ago
Any economic system based on wage labor and private property will require a coercive state apparatus to enforce property rights and to maintain the unequal economic relationships that will inevitably arise. Therefore, a gift economy will be put into place and not TOUCHED by any government, it will be controlled by the people.
KenCat1337 3 years ago
So then no one owns the gifts? No one owns the land or the cell phones or the hoes or the food they have grown? Obviously you are opposed to private ownership of property. You're also opposed to state ownership. (The first is anti-libertarian the second is pro-libertarian). You still havent stated how property is owned or distributed then.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
No, opposing private property isn't PRO or ANTI libertarian, you simply see everything as BLACK or WHITE, YES or NO -- it's a little more complicated than that.
One could argue that private property is EXPLOITATIVE and even oppressive, which is anti-libertarian. The MORE one person expresses his "right" to have private property, the LESS the other can -- there's only a limited amount of land.
"So then no one owns the gifts?" lol
If you own it, you own it -- not a CEO and not the government.
KenCat1337 3 years ago
To clarify, private property is not simply real estate, land, homes, buildings and the like. Private property is the ownership of anything by individuals, or in partnership with other individuals.
You are claiming that the government should not own property and that private property ownership is not right either. What is left?
You still have not suggested an alternative to private property ownership or socialized property.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
It is a system to allocate the ownership of pieces of land to particular people who exercise full control on it..
I sympathize with participatory economics, though I consider myself an Anarchist. Therefore, I believe in a a libertarian system of horizontal organization, versus the hierarchical, oppressive and un-libertarian structure.
And if you say anything about chaos, it would prove that you are not educated enough in the field of political philosophy to further this conversation.
KenCat1337 3 years ago
I know what anarchy is and tend towards the lack of need for most forms of government. So let's not assume that I think chaos is the result of anarchy, any more than it is the result of govts.
Horizontal structures have their use when they are well run, particularly by consensus rather than vote. Though this is often difficult to achieve.
Now as to ownership of land, I am of the native mindset that land can be no more owned than air. However, when we say owned we mean controlled as you noted.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
So most land is unowned. But it is not just land that can be controlled. It is personal property. So in contrast to personal ownership or socialist/govt ownership, what form are you suggesting? Can I control(own) the chair that I sit on and reasonably expect that no one has a right to take it from me without my consent, or trade?
If not then that creates a de facto socialist state.
Thus, which form of ownership of THINGS are you advocating. Ownership/control?
aoirthoir 3 years ago
"So in contrast to personal ownership or socialist/govt ownership, what form are you suggesting?"
lol Not EVERYTHING is either right-wing libertarian and state socialist.
"Can I control(own) the chair that I sit on and reasonably expect that no one has a right to take it from me without my consent, or trade?"
Absolutely.
"If not then that creates a de facto socialist state."
Agreed.
KenCat1337 3 years ago
Then you ARE for the ownership of personal property. Despite your having said you are not.
Rather perhaps a way to phrase it would be that people, companies, corporations, associations, government and individuals are not allowed undue control over resources to the extent that they can cause harm to others.
Private ownership of property, is as I said a while ago, not just about land ownership.
Taxes eliminate any kind of true ownership except if they are completely VOLUNTARY and use based.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
In an anarchist society, you would obviously be able to own things.. However, private property is itself exploitative -- a corporation could monopolize land and justify it by saying that it is expressing its right to have private property.
Again, I am not for public and I am not for private ownership of land.
KenCat1337 3 years ago
Thus I use a road, I somehow contribute to its upkeep, be it money, time or materials. But if I am not sending my child to a state school, I should not have to pay for state school, or any school in that case. Except as a donation.
When things are not authoritarian, but based no the will of the individuals participating, we indeed do have less opportunity for abuse.
Additionally corporate charters were never meant to be forever. They were originally for a specific purpose, then dissolved.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
"Horizontal structures have their use when they are well run, particularly by consensus rather than vote. Though this is often difficult to achieve."
I completely agree.
The far-right 'libertarian' view of private property is exploitative, though I do believe in ownership of things (obviously?). For example, if I make a house, I own it.
KenCat1337 3 years ago
Congratulations protesters! You accomplished nothing other than asserting normal people's view that you are douchebags.
How about those gallop polls lately by the way?
iiiiihexiiiii 3 years ago
Bout time someone with some brains had something to say on this video. Good word hex.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
LOL
This is what goes on behind the scenes with the police, how do I know? Cause I was one lol
watch?v=G63FEamhpA0
KARStarla 3 years ago
Yep! Anyone who wants to speak up against anyhting will be shut up and laughed at
watch?v=G63FEamhpA0
KARStarla 3 years ago
Yeah and you have evidence that the fuckers in this video are cops?
Wait, what is that I hear from every one of your comments? Yeah, it's what we call a LACK OF EVIDENCE.
fear > mban. End of story.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
STOP hitting on me for Christ sake.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
So, you first replied to "me" and continue your nonesense over the word "some" reply three times without a response from me and then say I'm hitting on you"? ROFL!
I had blocked you yesterday after the third repsonse I believe it was, so I have no interest in you though my husband (reading this) thinks its funny how you cant seem to sense a "get lost" vibe lol
Um... "SOME" doesnt mean "evidence" ROFL!
Sorry but thats been YOUR pathetic spin this whole waste of time lol
KARStarla 3 years ago
They'll only be told to shut up and laughed at when they run around screaming like a bunch of spoiled little brats. "Speaking up" doesn't involve breaking innocent people's property and acting like an all around fucktard.
iiiiihexiiiii 3 years ago
the republicans(and dems) are creating violence and murder all over the world and they are worried about a coupel of broken windows?
robaquarian 3 years ago
I LOVE IT. They claimed that the people who were pro-keep our troops in Iraq and "Troop Supporters", the one guy has the captions "Supports Troops" while being interveiwed. Wow, talk about non-bias.
WTF DOES SUPPORT THE TROOPS MEAN?! NOTHING. YOU CAN SAY, Support The Troops, let them eat cottage cheese for summer! (and it's still a valid statement)
virindi1 3 years ago
I'm sorry, but did you notice that the first girl that they arrested was only trying to hand the cop a flower when they sprayed her in the face with mace? And did you notice that that second protester was already arrested when they started spraying his face with mace?
Violence is not violence if it is committed against violent property. Violence is spraying normal people in the face with mace.
DIY25 3 years ago 2
No what you saw was a few seconds of video. I've seen these idiots before, they claim to be about peace and then they go around tearing shit up. They didn't pepper her because she was trying to hand the cop a flower.
IF that was all she was doing, she was entering a violent altercation. Stay the fuck out of the way and let the officer do his peace keeping job. Of course we cannot expect anarchists to actually deal with reality and truth. No more than we can expect women to do the same.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
First off, I have been involved with the anarchist community for three years and I have never encountered a more caring and sacrificed group of people in my life. The people that put their safety and freedom on the line in order to protect everyone else from the ever approaching police state.
And if you really believe what you said about women, fuck off. Seriously. Just fuck off. I am not going to argue this further on the internet, but if you would like to find another means, fine by me.
DIY25 3 years ago
Thank you. Great writing.
klarhetitroen 3 years ago
are you people retarted? lets rally for peace and against violence than come into my town and destroy it. police keep us safe and still I am afraid to walk alone anywhere. The protesters did nothing but make my life complicated lets block streets so the people of the city can't go about their daily life. sweet guys
NMSchmiddy 3 years ago
It appears the so called violent ones always get away when folks like Any Goodman get arrested. Somehow it does ressemble Canadas "agent provocatuers" where cops were the ones wearing the masks and carrying the rocks (as exposed). I wouldnt doubt that some of the younger folks doing the violence arent hired, because they are always the ones to slip away (so easily) while the peacful ones are dragged into pens.
KARStarla 3 years ago
Uh yeah. Brilliant deduction. It's *never* anyone at these "peaceful rallies" causing violence, but *always* the police.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
Uh yeah, *brilliant education* you cannot read the word *some*
I am an ex cop you freak lol
KARStarla 3 years ago
Being an ex cop is irrelevant. You are still claiming the possibility that folks were hired to act this way. I have to have something we call evidence, not a random thrown about idea that maybe this or that might have happened.
Maybe they are Martians. Maybe they acted like idiots because of DTD in their breakfast cereal.
Most likely though they are just assholes.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
I am claiming THE POSSIBILITY that it doesnt always have to be protestors
And that EVIDENCE is an admission from COPS (hello????) that it is TRUE
Havent seen this I take it
watch?v=KLTLSq03jmk
KARStarla 3 years ago
Sorry tiger but your "evidence" doesn't wash. Evidence from one incident in ANOTHER CASE doesn't hold water. Why not speculate that the cops in this case were also violating women since we have admissions ON OCCASION from police officers that HAVE done so?
Speculation about one event, from evidence on another is nothing but complete fabrication.. So NO it ISNT true.
I would think as a former cop you would understand how evidence works. Making wild and crazy claims doesn't make them true.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
I was the one who said it was possible that SOME could be, and YOU were the one who called "me" on that possibility and the evidence of that video plainly shows that some in fact were cops (and admitedly so)
So YES from ONE case is suited to the "SOME" I keep talking about, not to mention theres another video I cannot recall the name of the same type folks in the U.S doing it. Nevertheless, the video is evidence that cops indeed have as they have admited and you chose to want to be right lol
KARStarla 3 years ago
The video doesn't show cops at all doing any such thing. Claiming SOME is a false allegation when there is NO evidence of your claim. Which there is NO evidence. Stating SOME is completely FALSE.
SOME ex-cops were investigated for FRAUD. That doesn't have anything to do with YOU. We don't claim because of THEM that YOU have evidence against you. Learn the difference between POSSIBLE and PROBABLE.
The video shows criminals violating the law. It then shows police officers protecting the public.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
Your whole argument is BASELESS LOL. You have been dancing through our entire conversation over my comment on *SOME* get over it already. The evidence in the video I posted validates what I had said from the beginning and THAT is where your argument started.
Your PROBROBLY retarded but its POSSIBLE you just cant stand being wrong rofl!
KARStarla 3 years ago
I call bullshit and you know it. YOUR claim about what went on in the video is FALSE. The CLAIM that you made is NOT validated by the video and the events you CLAIM occurred in the video are FALSE. There is no dancing around at all. You made up some bullshit that didnt happen and was not backed by facts. I called you on it. Give me ONE PLACE in the video that proves the fuckwits breaking shit were actually cops. PROOF dickwit.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
You cannot call someones bullshit on the word SOME hon, I really hate to break it to you. You come running into the conversation with an assertion I didnt make. I expressed that "I doubt" and "some" so if you read that as a definite thing I cannot quarrel over your reading comprehension and the conclusions you draw and argue over.
I made up no bullshit at all. I provided a video of mainstream news in Canada showing cops were involved in that partiular protest validating my "some"
loser lol
KARStarla 3 years ago
Based on videotape of a comet exploding, I conclude that SOME of the earth is exploding.
Yes I CAN absolutely call bullshit on SOME when it is a LIE. Video of CANADIAN police has NOTHING to do with your FABRICATION that PORTLAND police are ACTUALLY the "anarchists" in THIS video. You fabricated something WITHOUT EVIDENCE.
I am really sick and tired of people condemning our police who are doing their best to PROTECT US. You can swing it any way you want sugartits, but the fact is you are wrong
aoirthoir 3 years ago
Oh you cant even quote me on that, conversations with you are like doing some retarded dance I'm not interested in dancing with ya.
You fabricated things I never said because your little youtubey (think you know it all) attitude jumped on me over the word "some". Please get a life rofl!
And thanks :D We do try to protect your gullible asses but we used to have fun as well.
If you think we are perfect upright and always do justice, I'm fine with your delusions lmao!
KARStarla 3 years ago
Now you are just being stupid. See, I'm on the side of something we men like to call EVIDENCE. Which means, before I believe an accusation against a police officer, I need EVIDENCE. You really have to be a broad because only a woman would think it is always only ONE way or the OTHER way. We are not talking about ALL OTHER cases. We are talking about your claims about THE POLICE IN THIS VIDEO. That's it sugartits. Jesus feckin christ can women be fuck all stupid.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
Um yeah, as a former cop I understand evidence lol But that was not my claim on this video (if you cant read I dont know what to tell you). The evidence was in the posted video on the "SOME" word you keep avoiding.
Quote me aoirthoir
Getting fustrated hon?
KARStarla 3 years ago
Sugartits, if you blocked me, why are you still responding?
Obviously you are hitting on me. I concluded this because I know that not even a broad could be as dumb as you are pretending to be.
It seems to me you're the one desperately clinging to the slightest hope that the fuckwits throwing rocks are cops. I'd call that delusional frustration. Such is the nature of women though. So I am not surprised, and thus, not frustrated. Try something we men like to call evidence. Too hard for ya?
aoirthoir 3 years ago
Um maybe because if you were smart enough (try using both heads) to know how youtube works it doesnt affect the post replies but the comments on your page or the personal receiving DUH!
Your such a dounce lol
And no again for the *umpteenth time* I said SOME (your stuck on that word I know) and then I copy pasted a video showing one that did you retard lol
Delusional is not being able to see that SOME are in fact cops holding rocks, but thats the nature of morons like yourself
KARStarla 3 years ago
No dipwip, YOU are stuck on the word SOME. Claiming that ANY of the folks there are actually cops SOME or MANY or ONE without something called EVIDENCE makes you a woman. Because it's incredibly womanly to believe in fantasies without evidence.
Now if you have EVIDENCE that any of the persons with rocks were cops THEN I might accept your CLAIM. Otherwise you are just spouting stupid left wing bullshit.
Typical woman.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
You a moron lmao!!!!!!!! You cannot even quote me because you have been having this "imaginary" argument with me over things you "believe" I said when I have not lol
If anyone is in fantasy land its YOU, I come back to amuse myself and watch you find arguments on things I never said and I must admit this is very entertaining lol
Told ya, the evidence of rocks in the hands of cops was in the video I provided. I said nothing about this video save the "possibilty" of some could hired
lmao
KARStarla 3 years ago
You argue like a 12 year old girl. Congratulations, considering the brains most females stop maturing at age seven. By 23 a female starts her disgusting decline into forgetableness.
What's the timestamp of the part you are claiming? You're the one making claims, I am merely stating that YOUR claims require evidence. That's reality sourtits. Something women are afraid to face. "OOO OOO I have to give evidence of a ridiculous claim ooo ooo I'm a woman just believe me."
No. Provide the evidence.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
Cant find where I said anything can ya?
LMAO!!!!!
Heres girl for ya, "nah, nah, nah, nah, nah, you cannot quote me and your whole argument is pointless, nah, nah, nah, nah, nah
I love watching you chase your tail, dont it suck for you that our whole conversation is open to everyones view? lol
Although I'd comsider it rather childish, I'll admit I sometimes bite onto stupid conversation out of pure boredom
NO. Provide MY CLAIM to what you WANT evidence FOR you moron
KARStarla 3 years ago
I don't even have to read your reply to know what it doesn't say. Want to know what it DOESN'T say? ANYTHING about EVIDENCE. How about a time stamp from the video for your CLAIM that police officers are throwing the rocks?
Oh wait, that would require manwork. Something a female is incapable of doing, she might break a sweat by pressing the PAUSE on that thar vid and typing out something like 1:10, or whatever time holds the evidence for her claim.
Most likely though, there is NONE.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
And no sugar tits a cop from a DIFFERENT town on a DIFFERENT date, is NOT evidence that THESE cops are throwing stones.
The only ones fucking up people's property in these vidoes, are criminals. We call them assholes around here.
PROOF. A concept that is too large for the tiny brain of a female.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
I see, you cant be wrong gracefully can ya? lmao
I think you mean a cop from a different country
And once again your not even arguing with my argument and havent since this discussion began, its a fantasy in your head.
Still cant quote me huh? lol
KARStarla 3 years ago
To quote you:
"It appears the so called violent ones always get away when folks like Any Goodman get arrested. Somehow it does ressemble Canadas "agent provocatuers" where cops were the ones wearing the masks and carrying the rocks (as exposed). I wouldnt doubt that some of the younger folks doing the violence arent hired, because they are always the ones to slip away (so easily) while the peacful ones are dragged into pens."
You're a woman so we don't expect you to remember even your words.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
I remember my exact words perfectly as I keep referring to them to figure out where the hell your coming from lmao!
and I'm so glad you quoted me (good boy) and so the next step is to ask you how does what I wrote apply to any of the arguments you made? lol
I dont expect you to make any sense but dance a whole hell of alot lmao!
KARStarla 3 years ago
Let's see, different town? Check.
Nope, I was right. I don't need to qualify everything different about the town. But since you aren't capable of comprehension skills greater than second grade, I will give you some extra help.
The town was DIFFERENT. Thus, it was NOT the SAME. That town was in a DIFFERENT PLACE. It had DIFFERENT ROADS. DIFFERENT BUILDINGS. DIFFERENT TREES.
And DIFFERENT women. That doesn't matter because women in one place are as stupid as any other place. M>W.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
Um, you were speaking between the videos (mine) IN CANADA and this one (IN THE USA)
Thats two different countries lmao!
Keep going, every "your stupid" type remarks keep blowing up in your face lol
KARStarla 3 years ago
You get dumber with every comment. Only a female would think that we have to further clarify every difference when we say things like "Different person" or "different town".
You were called out on your unproven assertion that the cops at the RNC were actually a potential cause cause of the violence, based on the events elsewhere.
Sorry sugar tits, you fail in typical womanly fashion.
PROOF? No? Thought so. M>W.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
No not really your a walking retard and your errors are fun to poke at. You were simply talking about the differnces in the two videos and you went on your spew about towns and I simply corrected it. Not because I'd normally do that but to observe your reactions whenever you are wrong, its become entertaining.
And again, No I did not say that lmao!! Nice try though, I knew I'd see a little dancing with words to try and make it what you want the argument to be. But that was ridiculous lol
KARStarla 3 years ago
Actually YOU were talking about the difference in the two videos. I've made not a single error. All that I have said from the start is, what is your evidence for the claim that the assholes running amuck in this video are even potentially police or hired?
The only thing YOU could offer was ANOTHER VIDEO that had nothing to do with this or the RNC.
Again you got proof of the claim that I quoted? Answer? No. Not a drip of proof.
Get facts that prove your claim and I will believe it. M>W.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
Um yeah I BROUGHT that video INTO the conversation after YOUR FIRST RESPONSE which stressed SOME and in my first response was HIRED youngsters (I notice you just CAUGHT YOURSELF ON) lmao! THAT was MY POINT from YOUR FIRST RESPONSE ONWARD
From your FIRST QUOTE (of misreading me and dragging me on and on) lmao
It's *never* anyone at these "peaceful rallies" causing violence, but *always* the police.
--------------
See? Its NEVER and ALWAYS and POLICE?
Your arguing with YOURSELF :P
KARStarla 3 years ago
I didn't catch myself on anything toots. Yer the one who said you wouldnt be surprised if the cops has shit to do with this. Then you went on when I challenged you to claim that I shouldnt trust everything cops do.
Here is where LOGIC (me) and FANTASY (you) differ. I believe neither the police nor left wing nuts like you, nor anyone else, WITHOUT EVIDENCE. Simply CLAIMING that someone committed a crime isn't enough for me to believe it, regardless of who they are.
PROOF? None? thought so.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
So what if I wouldnt be surprised, its not something I need evidence for. I wouldnt be surprised on the BASIS of that OTHER VIDEO providing the very EVIDENCE that I based my NON SURPRISAL OVER rofl!
I'm not even a voter rofl, and I'm a left winger? Talk about pea brain lmao!
Claiming someone did a crime is much different from "not being surprised if they did"
OMG! I'm laughing too hard!
I never met someone so moronic in my life lol
Proofs on your NON argument hon (still)
KARStarla 3 years ago
Your dumber with every reply
You called me out for THIS lmao!
It APPEARS the so called violent ones always get away when folks like Any Goodman get arrested. SOMEHOW IT DOES RESSEMBLE Canadas "agent provocatuers" where cops were the ones wearing the masks and carrying the rocks (as exposed). I WOULDNT DOUBT that SOME of the YOUNGER FOLKS doing the violence arent hired, because they are always the ones to slip away (so easily) while the peacful ones are dragged into pens.
Cops Where?
KARStarla 3 years ago
Cops where? right there in the part you quoted nimrod.
You still need to get an education and prove your ridiculous assertions. We could step back and quote every other statement you made and it is CLEAR you were talking about cops.
Trying to back pedal now isn't going to reduce the need for your to prove your assertions.
Typical woman, get called on the carpet then act like that's NOT what you meant.
We really should end women's suffrage cause dayum are you stooooopid, with a capital G.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
Nah your really trying to weasel now, the emphasis of your inquisition is on who I was who I wouldnt doubt it was and I stressed some of the younger folks being HIRED not cops, the quote above is YOURS (mentioning the police lol.
Your the one in need of the education hon, back pedal my ass its bringing the first idiotic response of YOURS to the forefront lmao!
HIRED younger folks is NOT the police hon, if I meant police I would have said it because I provided the video with the police duh!
KARStarla 3 years ago
And I dont need an education "to prove" why I would not be surprised by something lol
It was CLEAR that in regards to THIS video my statement where I stated I would not have doubted YOUNGER FOLKS being HIRED is not the same as COPS (who already draw paychecks) you moron lol
KARStarla 3 years ago
Wow gone for several hours and you're carrying on a conversation without me. That's brilliant considering that you "blocked" me.
You're stupidity knows no bounds. Thinking that you HAVE to vote to be a left winger. Thank the deities that many of your sort DONT vote. We're fucked enough without your type adding to the chaos.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
Nah just adressing your two dimwitted responses, just didnt have enough room :P Shit happens sometimes, you werent missed it was a great break, I thank God for your absence lol
The block was on your mouth on my comment section which really matters little I could actually edit it out. I already informed you of what the block does and doesnt do.
You been displaying your stupidy lol
I dont vote because I believe the elections are rigged, so whether I do or do not means nothing :D
KARStarla 3 years ago
Uh huh. Keep telling yourself that toots. Women will convince themselves of any fairy tale just to continue to have something to bitch about. Women are simply not happy if they're not miserable.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
Keep telling myself what?
I could reccomend a good counselor for your women issues, I bet your mother didnt breast feed you. You have a hang up with breasts and some obvious issues with women.
Has every woman been so utterly miserable in your company that you project their own lack of happiness with you onto other women chatting with ya?
I'm a happy camper actually :D
KARStarla 3 years ago
You're own complete despondency about the value of voting demonstrates your happiness rating sugar tits. People without hope are always miserable. Personally I'm starting to hope we become a worldwide police state and idiots like you are sent to Mars. God that would be beautiful. A world without morons.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
Sorry I dont know where you think my hope or happiness lies but its not gaged by whether I vote or not lmao! After watching the American Blackout documentary I'm just being realistic (not to mention other videos on the subject).
Thanks for sharing your far reaching hopes with me lol Most folks hope for much higher things, but if you can only reach as far (in your hopes) to a garbage man situation (verses that of a brain surgeon) that might be a genetic defect you cannot help lol
KARStarla 3 years ago
I would have voted for Ron Paul soooo... whatever the hell wing I am so be it lol (thats if I were so vote and belived it counted). I'm certainly not ashamed of whatever wing (or hand even foot) I am. Which wing would the third party be (since he is not running)and in that case I would think its a kool thing to vote third party (or rather) against both right and left (if I thought it mattered) Whats that then MID wing" then? lol
So in what way am I a left winger in relation to all this
KARStarla 3 years ago
Woulda coulda shoulda. Ron Paul is about the closest thing to a real answer that you've given since this began.
Not voting is the waste. You want to see a change, then pick a third party and vote. It might not make a difference this election, but it will force them by law, with enough votes, to place the third party on the ballots next time around. It will also send a message.
In the real world we call that a big FUCK YOU to both parties. Or are you just a wee wittle girl afraid to offend?
aoirthoir 3 years ago
Its not a woulda coulda shoulda deal, I refuse to vote. I dont believe in the validity of the election process. In my opinion my vote is not wasted by casting it or witholding it. Besides there hasnt been anyone I believed in save Ron Paul and now hes not running but even if he did (and that would be great) I dont trust it.
Ron Paul is a real person, not an answer lol because you never gave me a question to use him as an answer:D
Whats to fear in offending or not offending anyway?
KARStarla 3 years ago
By the holy deities. Just when I was about to give you credit for getting a bit smart you have to get even more stupid.
Since you indicate your ridiculous belief that answers are only in response to questions, I ANSWER your CLAIM with a quote from the dictionary. It's a nice little book that our Lord gave us when we want to look up words. You should try using it sometime.
3: something done in response or reaction
Your Ron Paul statement was in RESPONSE to something I had said. Learn English
aoirthoir 3 years ago
Oh please you've only proven yourself retarded the entire chat lol. Trust me I dont depend on you as an intellegence gage for myself especially when I rate you moronic lol
Whats this "our Lord stuff"? calling people sugar tits is the way you honor your Lord?
Now your not only a moron but a hypocrit lmao
It might have been an "additional response" but not an answer to a direct question.
Learn to put a cork in it lol
KARStarla 3 years ago
Actually I am an atheist and a pagan. Sugar tits doesnt insult any of my deities. They're quite fond of funny shit.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
Ah ok, your an athiest who believes in his own dieties lmao!
I think I heard them all now, your more warped then I estimated
Your deities are fond of funny SHIT huh? No wonder they follow you around lmao!
KARStarla 3 years ago
Actually I am an atheist that believes deities are created by man. They represent parts of our psyche. There are of course the personified dieties, the sun, moon, earth and so on. Additionally, ancestors are for some deities. Nevertheless in all cases deities are man-made. I do not subscribe to the notion that deities exist as real entities.
Thus, this is not warped at all and perfectly logical that my deities would find things, like calling you sugartits, uproariously funny.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
Ok so your an athiest with a few self created impersonal deities in your Psyche that is (in reality) a non-existent entity that finds you uproariously funny when you utilize the word "sugartits" for me?
Interesting...
Without a doubt I'm sure you dont consider this (or yourself for that manner) warped at all lol
perfectly logical lmao!
KARStarla 3 years ago
You're reading comprehension skills are miserably lacking. I'd suggest reading material on the nature of deity and the human psyche, but I wouldn't want your white matter brain to strain from the effort. Since we're clearly talking about symbolic deities, their laughing would also be symbolic. The point you lost long ago is that I am not a believer in an Almighty. Thus, calling you sugar tits is neither a violation of my moral code, nor hypocritical.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
Well duh, I got that after you brought the Lord into your coversation only afterward claim your an athiest with dieties (symbolically) laughing at the word sugartits lmao!
Whatever floats your boat. My reading comprehension skills serious lack, and you judge this how? By your own screwed up nonsense of deitie pals laughing at sugartits? rofl!
I'll pass on the reccomended reading material but thanks anyways :D
Are you confessing to a moral code or are you completely void of one?
KARStarla 3 years ago
See? Despite the fact that I told you plainly deities and their laughter is symbolic, you still revert to the belief that I was being literal. Thus, indeed, your reading comprehension is growing even worse. I had thought it not possible sugartits.
Of course you will pass, they're books that are beyond your ability. Understanding them requires something called a brain. It takes a man for that.
How much do you weigh? I'm testing a theory here.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
I'm making fun of you (I thought being a man with an ability to grasp a concept like that would "get" something that).
5000 1/2 lbs but if you put me in water I'm alot lighter (my husband told me to tell you that):D
KARStarla 3 years ago
Obviously you are making fun of me. If you weren't doing a good job of it and being at least mildly funny, I wouldn't waste my time. You've slightly better skills than your sisters who can only resort to the ever repetitive and stupid "ur gay ur so gay urrrr gay" comments. So you are atypical as a broad. That's respect, even if you don't see it.
Pity that your husband told you that, I was going to chalk that up as broadly funny. Still you wrote it so that counts for something sugartits. Respek.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
No never I do nothing or say nothing without him. I'm am a very incapable weak (pathetic even) female species.
He also types what he is thinking "through me" utilizing mind and body control. All credit is his whether its broadly funny or not or atypical or not, its His majesty. He is a King to be worshipped and I do just that everyday
He thinks its kool :P
KARStarla 3 years ago
But certain concepts are simply beyond the female mind. Concepts like, symbolism, allegory, logic, reality and evidence are just too much for you to handle.
But hey, I give credit where it is due. You've yet to call up any of The Laws of Women, however in-adroitly. It's probably because hubby is over your shoulder telling you, write this or that. True, you're *nearly* fucking up his sound advice. But one can't expect perfection from a woman, she's simply incapable of even mediocrity. M>W.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
If certain concepts are beyond the female brain when will you get it through yours to stop trying to teach us weak minded (imperfect) women to live up to your brilliance? lol
I see, you believe you are king of the archetype, the stud of allegories, symbols and similitudes
I'm way too small for all that (if it makes ya feel bigger where it counts) lol
Yep my husband sits right here & tells me what to type, I wouldnt know what to think without my man around telling me what to think.
KARStarla 3 years ago
Why? One can always hope that women will one day step up to the plate and fill the shoes of equality we men have been trying to hand you for generations.
Bigger where it counts eh? To think I had written off you as a Laws of Women woman. I guess I was wrong.
Your last statement, though untrue, is the most brilliant thing you've said. You're actually starting to come off as a woman who has her own mind. Despite that slip into Law 2, almost a near worthy self image. Congrats sugartits. M>W.
aoirthoir 3 years ago
I'm touched by the hope you have for all of the sugartits out there.
The handouts are too generous (theres no words that can express my thankfulness enough)
NEVER will I have my own mind, only my darling husbands, a man without whom I am no woman and can speak no words without his careful guidance and thoughtful permission... only HE can make me the true woman I'm meant to be. I bow to Him
heres where I faint
KARStarla 3 years ago
lol Hey dipwad wheres my so called claim fantasy boy?
Talk about spouting BS with no evidence! Typical BOY
lmao!!
KARStarla 3 years ago
that was pretty cool when that 1 protester pushed that COP that was funny
SumDoom4 3 years ago
agent prococateues or not, this is how you rally
figocooldude 3 years ago
Nice that they spray him while he's down. Is that necessary? It's like the cop that sprayed the girl that tried to give him a flower.
bluejulian 3 years ago
The Answer to 1984 is 1776. Down with the Police State!!! Anti-Fascist Liars. New World Order trash. Too bad Mr. Molotov didn't show up.
Fuck "Recreate '68"
How bout "Recreate Seattle '99x10"
See yall at Ground Zero...
9/11/08 NOW OR NEVER
tzolkin2013 3 years ago 3
Everyone should read "The Gatekeepers of the So Called Left" Charles Shaw is the Publisher and Editor-in-Chief of Newtopia, and has been deeply involved in the anti-war movement since the bombing of Afghanistan. Newtopia Magazine is a member group of United for Peace and Justice.
Democracy Now! is funded by the Ford Foundation and CIA. Google it. COINTELPRO is all over these marches...
What does it take for people to see the "control" taking place!
CreativeMessage 3 years ago
There's a difference between anarchists and activists. These "ninja-like" anarchists were most likely Agent Provocateurs, employed by the police to incite riot and create general chaos for the cameras, giving the original protesters a bad image. The media is labeling ALL protesters "anarchists". This explains why they "simply disappeared", they were allowed to pass behind the lines of riot police before the illegal mass arrests began.
W7ENK 3 years ago
This is why America sucks, they think the government is against them and then they go somewhere to instigate the embodiment of the government and then complain about the consequences. KEEP ON CREATING YOUR OWN WORLD. NO ONE IS AGAINST YOU UNLESS YOU ARE BREAKING LAWS. Which these people were. They were able to live out their oppressive government FANTASY, by making a scene.
wReCktangle 3 years ago
ur very ignorant wreck. those people are paid by the police to create havoc and give the peaceful protesters a bad name. didnt u see how there was only a couple of them and they got out with no hassle? while people standing for the truth get pepper sprayed for not doing anything... u should be ashamed of ur stupidity.
cadaviar 3 years ago
what is wrong with some of you? how the hell can u avoid the blatant facts.
doottamas 3 years ago