Oregon terrorists don't plan siege very well, put out plea for snacks

[Luiz 4,253]

4 minutes ago, Fays1 said:

Everyone should watch this video (The Truth About The Oregon Rancher Standoff):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1JzuQf4DMU

How do I embed the video?

yas stefan   

i'll watch this tomorrow tho  almost bed time. thx

[AJH219 4,448]

1 minute ago, JbGaga said:

BLM have armed members, they have threatened violence, HAS CAUSED VIOLENCE, they have planed sit-ins on federal and public property. There is no difference in my mind. If Militia in Oregon are Terrorists then BLM are also Terrorists.

I have no respect for any "activist group" who destroy private property of people who literally done nothing to warrant such destruction. 

[mmm 879]

2 minutes ago, ItsVenusBitch said:

This is 30 minutes long, don't expect people to go head over heels about it  

Also, a quick scan of his account and hes clearly an extreme right winger AND a misogynist with a clear agenda  

Hes a Libertarian witch means hes against right and left wing.. hes also not a misogynistic if you actually watch any of his videos.. doesnt matter who he is though..

[AJH219 4,448]

Just now, Fays1 said:

Hes a Libertarian witch means hes against right and left wing.. hes also not a misogynistic if you actually watch any of his videos.. doesnt matter who he is though..

Why bother with him/her?  It's clear there is only ONE way these mindless sheep think and to try and even offer a different perspective is like sending in a wolf

[lego 44,165]

3 minutes ago, ajhuffman219 said:

https://www.rt.com/usa/217835-oakland-protest-black-violence/?

This was just last week. So don't come at us with your ignorance on the matter because we've got our facts ready

HAVE TURNED VIOLENT

which means, it wasn't at first

like I said, any peaceful protest can attract violent people who may have NOTHING to do with the movement itself. How can you prove it? This has happened in every ****ing country. And majority of them are not violent, it's totally different from planned occupation with guns and open threats of violence. 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

6 minutes ago, Fays1 said:

Hes a Libertarian witch means hes against right and left wing.. hes also not a misogynistic if you actually watch any of his videos.. doesnt matter who he is though..

Maybe right wing was inaccurate, his ideology tends to match some of the more radical right wing ideologies, regardless of whether he agrees with them on actual policy - it's more of a social issues thing. Idrc about the context of that, Im just pointing out that you've suggested people watch a video labeled "the truth" when in fact its CLEARLY biased in one direction  This seems ill thought out considering you are trying to persuade people (at least, I got that impression)

And yes, a quick check on him and he espouses extremely misogynistic rhetoric and is known for it, (at least amongst the most immediate feminist circles compared to the manosphere and anti-feminist ones I could find in a quick google search) Honestly though, his video titles do a lot of the work for you.

[AJH219 4,448]

3 minutes ago, SubRosa said:

HAVE TURNED VIOLENT

which means, it wasn't at first

like I said, any peaceful protest can attract violent people who may have NOTHING to do with the movement itself. How can you prove it? This has happened in every ****ing country. And majority of them are not violent, it's totally different from planned occupation with guns and open threats of violence. 

Unfortunately every time I see the movement in the news, it is not for anything positive. It is always about how they are causing an un-need ruckus wherever they go. 

[lego 44,165]

Just now, ajhuffman219 said:

Unfortunately every time I see the movement in the news, it is not for anything positive. It is always about how they are causing an un-need ruckus wherever they go. 

Because peaceful protests/headlines don't bring enough clicks. That type of news is boring.

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

7 minutes ago, ajhuffman219 said:

Why bother with him/her?  It's clear there is only ONE way these mindless sheep think and to try and even offer a different perspective is like sending in a wolf

Girl stop  I understand your perspective actually, my post was more of a rhetorical criticism  

[AJH219 4,448]

2 minutes ago, SubRosa said:

Because peaceful protests/headlines don't bring enough clicks. That type of news is boring.

Well, finally, something we can agree on. Its too bad we don't get more positive aspects of the movement. 

 

1 minute ago, ItsVenusBitch said:

Girl stop  I understand your perspective actually, my post was more of a rhetorical criticism  

My bad  

[Bebe 17,289]

57 minutes ago, JbGaga said:

 

Also I'm just going to quote you this one last time to clarify this. Since you accused me of being clearly bias (and knowingly bias) by selecting left-wing news organisations to defend the title I will flip the script.

If Right-Wing organisation Fox News wrote an entire article titled "Black Lives Matter: largest domestic terrorist group in US" and provided a long list of reasons why BML should be considered a terrorist group then I personally don't see why someone couldn't post it here with that title.

I would absolutely disagree and argue against  the premise that BML are a terrorist group, like people are here with these Oregon 'terrorists/protesters", I would criticise the merits of the article and would find it completely unfair and ludicrous that they are being labelled terrorists but I wouldn't see a reason to change the title.

Our role here isn't to take political sides. If a reputable and major news organisation is framing a news article in a certain way then we cannot fault our users for framing it in the same way. Are you allowed to be critical of the way the article and discussion is being framed? Absolutely that's fantastic, but if the original source is from a reputable news organisation I see no reason to change it. I actually think it would be far more problematic if we started changing around sources and adjusting titles to change the framing ourselves when the original source came from a reputable place.

[Princess Die 1,864]

This is called Natural Selection. 

[mmm 879]

38 minutes ago, ItsVenusBitch said:

Maybe right wing was inaccurate, his ideology tends to match some of the more radical right wing ideologies, regardless of whether he agrees with them on actual policy - it's more of a social issues thing. Idrc about the context of that, Im just pointing out that you've suggested people watch a video labeled "the truth" when in fact its CLEARLY biased in one direction  This seems ill thought out considering you are trying to persuade people (at least, I got that impression)

And yes, a quick check on him and he espouses extremely misogynistic rhetoric and is known for it, (at least amongst the most immediate feminist circles compared to the manosphere and anti-feminist ones I could find in a quick google search) Honestly though, his video titles do a lot of the work for you.

Right wing believe in free market but are against social issues.. left wing believes in social issues but are against free market.. libertarians believe in free market and social issues.. so how is his ideas radical and against social issues when hes a libertarian that believes in complete and absolute freedom for everyone?

Being anti feminist doesnt make you a misogynistic because feminism is a political movement.. I am anti feminist so em I misogynistic? it seems like you dont mind accusing others of misogyny and use that word loosely without even making sure and you refuse to make an actual argument of your accusation! it seems like you like to falsely accuse anyone that disagree with your ideology. also what do you mean his video titles do alot for me?

[Morphine Prince 109,667]

@SubRosa People on Twitter are calling them "Y'all Qaeda" LMFAO. 

[lego 44,165]

4 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

@SubRosa People on Twitter are calling them "Y'all Qaeda" LMFAO. 

I saw