political Politics

[aleksey.k]

@JennBlogger , could you please post either your 23andMe or nose? It honestly feels like you're a (((shill)))

 

[mr-x]

 

[JennBlogger]

@JennBlogger , could you please post either your 23andMe or nose? It honestly feels like you're a (((shill)))

@amplify is attacking Jewish people allowed on this forum? Or is this the Gab Domaining forum?

shill, dna, nose, kek, etc using all the code words:

kek - https://www.google.com/search?q=kek...hUKEwiZ6Yu795P0AhXHRjABHRN-D3gQ4dUDCA4&uact=5

Jewish nose - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Conspiracists Accuse Alex Jones of Being a ‘Zionist Shill’ After Infowars Takes Down David Duke Debate Video

Radio host's debate with notorious white supremacist, and subsequent attempts to cover tracks, results in accusations by fans that he's controlled by Jews.

www.splcenter.org

Understanding the Antisemitic History of the “Hooked Nose” Stereotype - Media Diversity Institute

Even when it is a harmless drawing, the "hooked nose" is a harmful stereotype.

www.media-diversity.org

 

[JennBlogger]

@mr-x please don't attack Canadians, we have some nice ones here.

And you posting up some video about masks, will never change the fact that masks work. It's not a debate.

If we were taking about climate change (it's happening) you mentioning Leo or Kerry using private plates, has nothing to do with climate change being real.

 

[amplify]

Give it up, @JennBlogger .

Shill is an acceptable term to call and to be called in this community since forever and you know it.

Quit trying to make connections that don't exist. From your values, I could imply that you're connected to alt-left groups, which is just as intolerable. That is, if we want to go down that route? Otherwise, save it.

 

[JennBlogger]

Give it up, @JennBlogger .

Shill is an acceptable term to call and to be called in this community since forever and you know it.

Quit trying to make connections that don't exist. From your values, I could imply that you're connected to alt-left groups, which is just as intolerable. That is, if we want to go down that route? Otherwise, save it.

Wow. You pick one word I posted and didn't touch all the other stuff.

"shill, dna, nose, kek"

Said all that, and I gave you links.

As expected.

 

[amplify]

Shill - Used here
23andme - See if you're human
Nose - See if it's growing, like Pinocchio
Kek - Equivalent to lol

The left is so obsessed by race that they see racism where it doesn't exist.

@mr-x please don't attack Canadians, we have some nice ones here.

Glad to know that you're from Canada. Enjoying your privacy on a VPN, I can see. Does our competition allow for that comfort? I usually get blocked pages using a VPN, forced to visit from my residential or cellular internet, but, not since they've updated to XF2.

 

[JennBlogger]

Shill - Used here
23andme - See if you're human
Nose - See if it's growing, like Pinocchio
Kek - Equivalent to lol

Who uses kek?

Due to the alt-right’s hijacking of the term kek, it has become linked to the movement’s ties to white supremacy, anti-semitism, and other hateful ideologies, with Kek, usually in some form of Pepe, being used mockingly as a figure of worship. This development is much to the dismay of gamers who enjoyed using kek as an expression of laughter.

kek Meaning & Origin | Slang by Dictionary.com

Kek is an online term with similar meanings to LOL or haha, used especially by gamers.

www.dictionary.com

23andme plus nose = ethnicity

shill - common trope against Jewish people

Typical stuff from the alt-rights, Gab types

And you wonder where the rep comes from.

 

[amplify]

Who uses kek?

If I recollect, it originated from Korean gamers playing StarCraft.

Your other points are invalid as I see them differently. While 23andme does determine ethnicity, I'm sure they'd report back "dog" if you submitted a blood sample of a dog.

Do you really want to continue arguing this? I mean, we are to have a light hand in moderation, but if you continue down this path, I will be forced to give you your 2nd official warning as you are taking me from other official duties (treat others how you would like to be treated—if you were a moderator and someone continued to argue their point when it has been determined by you to already not be against the rules, would you give them a warning?)

 

[JennBlogger]

If I recollect, it originated from Korean gamers playing StarCraft.

Your other points are invalid as I see them differently. While 23andme does determine ethnicity, I'm sure they'd report back "dog" if you submitted a blood sample of a dog.

Do you really want to continue arguing this? I mean, we are to have a light hand in moderation, but if you continue down this path, I will be forced to give you your 2nd official warning as you are taking me from other official duties (treat others how you would like to be treated—if you were a moderator and someone continued to argue their point when it has been determined by you to already not be against the rules, would you give them a warning?)

Of course, give me the warning, not the person who posted it. You always threaten warnings with people with differing opinions.

Nevermind.

 

[amplify]

Of course, give me the warning, not the person who posted it.

Why would I when I just posted three posts in defense of the post?

You always threaten warnings with people with differing opinions.

Do I now?

But, until then, I'll give @mr-x an informal warning that we do not lob personal attacks in the meantime.

Nevermind.

Good end to this discussion. Anything further, except an apology to me for your accusations that can be proven untrue, and not one wrapped in another complaint, will result in a 2nd official warning.

Have a good weekend!

 

[JennBlogger]

Why would I when I just posted three posts in defense of the post?

Do I now?


Good end to this discussion. Anything further, except an apology to me for your accusations that can be proven untrue, and not one wrapped in another complaint, will result in a 2nd official warning.

Have a good weekend!

I have nothing to apologize for. I made a post and backed it up, you tried to deflect. Like I said, it's not unexpected.

 

[amplify]

I think I just had an epiphany about why they're going so hard on Rittenhouse.

It's not because they don't like free speech, which is true; it's not because they don't want guns in the hands of just anyone, which is true; and it's not because they don't like due process, which is looking true.

It's precedence.

This sets precedence for a "good guy with a gun". Law enforcement isn't doing their jobs, so local militias, etc., can step up and protect their neighborhoods, even if that means crossing state lines where legal.

As we all know they don't "protest", once people get into the mob mentality, they can't stop themselves from going further as they're persuaded by each other to do so (see Jan. 6 too). If Rittenhouse is let off and a protest quickly turns to a riot with violence, we, the people, can start putting a stop to it. That is what they're scared of: Losing their ability to riot for change.

 

[JennBlogger]

I think I just had an epiphany about why they're going so hard on Rittenhouse.

It's not because they don't like free speech, which is true; it's not because they don't want guns in the hands of just anyone, which is true; and it's not because they don't like due process, which is looking true.

It's precedence.

This sets precedence for a "good guy with a gun". Law enforcement isn't doing their jobs, so local militias, etc., can step up and protect their neighborhoods, even if that means crossing state lines where legal.

As we all know they don't "protest", once people get into the mob mentality, they can't stop themselves from going further as they're persuaded by each other to do so (see Jan. 6 too). If Rittenhouse is let off and a protest quickly turns to a riot with violence, we, the people, can start putting a stop to it. That is what they're scared of: Losing their ability to riot for change.

They're going hard on him because he broke the law, killed people. It seems you're trying to advocate that people engage in illegal activity.

 

[amplify]

It seems you're trying to advocate that people engage in illegal activity.

I'm a constitutional conservative, so it's going to be real hard to convince me that he broke any law, even the underage carry due to "shall not be infringed". I think that'll be the only charge that sticks, but I hope they fight it in appeal to the SCOTUS to make that law unlawful.

Saw it.

His opinion for this is just as valid as his opinion on whether I should get my child a C19 vaccine or not because his combat Doc said it was good for him.

Furthermore, it's acknowledging the left's role as willing combatants without saying so either. Funny how that is.

 

[JennBlogger]

I'm a constitutional conservative, so it's going to be real hard to convince me that he broke any law, even the underage carry due to "shall not be infringed".

I always found it amusing when people talk about the Constitution but don't actually understand it, context etc.

Second Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The kid broke the law, it's not in question.

What does the "well regulated" part mean to you?

 

[amplify]

I always found it amusing when people talk about the Constitution but don't actually understand it, context etc.

Second Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The kid broke the law, it's not in question.

What does the "well regulated" part mean to you?

Ah, yes. The opinion of the Founding Father's as interpreted by left-leaning Wikipedia editors. And the 2nd ammendment isn't hidden; it also includes "right of the people to keep and bear arms". If what he did was truly illegal by #2A, then we'd have 0 guns or a lot more locked up, including Vapor Arm for actually brandishing a firearm at Rittenhouse—guess you don't have an issue with that though I suppose.

 

[JennBlogger]

Ah, yes. The opinion of the Founding Father's as interpreted by left-leaning Wikipedia editors. And the 2nd ammendment isn't hidden; it also includes "right of the people to keep and bear arms".

I know but you're picking specific parts, leaving the other parts out, you know, context.

You skipped what "well regulated" means to you.

The wikipedia page. Quote the parts you disagree with.

Do you also feel the encyclopedias you grew up with, probably used in reports were biased as well?

 

[amplify]

If we want to start applying law, can we agree, by his own testimony, that Vapor Arm is guilty of a Wisconsin misdemeanor (Class A; $10,000, 9 months, or both) for brandishing and a felony (Class G; $25,000, 10 years, or both) for whom at?

941.20(1)(a) Endangering safety by use of dangerous weapon.
948.21(3)(c) Neglecting a child.

Or do laws only apply to those on the right?

 

[JennBlogger]

If we want to start applying law, can we agree, by his own testimony, that Vapor Arm is guilty of a Wisconsin misdemeanor (Class A; $10,000, 9 months, or both) for brandishing and a felony (Class G; $25,000, 10 years, or both) for whom at?

941.20(1)(a) Endangering safety by use of dangerous weapon.
948.21(3)(c) Neglecting a child.

Or do laws only apply to those on the right?

Didn't touch 1 question.