If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WREG Memphis)   Extremist right wing groups increase to all time high since election of Obama 4 years ago. But don't you dare call them racists   (wreg.com) divider line 213
    More: Obvious, Southern Poverty Law Center, Mark Potok, right-wing, Mid South, racists, Nation of Islam  
•       •       •

1350 clicks; posted to Politics » on 06 Mar 2013 at 11:00 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



213 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-07 07:38:22 AM

Saiga410: Stating McVeigh's justification = personally think it is justified? Wow the derp is strong in this one.


"To understand something does not mean approval of it"

Something quite lost on self righteous here on Fark.
 
2013-03-07 07:49:21 AM

The Muthaship: what_now: But if you start defending the Family Research Counsel, you're going to get pushback.

Not defending them, honestly.  I disagree with everything they say.  But, I don't think they are a hate group.  They are fundies for sure.  They believe homosexuality is a sin.  They believe same sex marriage is a sin.  I still can't find anything credible that said they advocate violence of any kind.  The SPLC plays fast and loose with their labeling because it drives donations.  Unfortunately, it has consequences, too.  And, IMO, it casts them in a bad light.


Would you like a hand with moving those goalposts?
 
2013-03-07 07:54:17 AM

IlGreven: Parthenogenetic: I thought his fears of a dark, technological dystopia were interesting. The hippies who hate pervasive corporatism and the sovereign citizens who fear the New World Order probably share the same enemy.

...because the right-wingers fear the evil jack-booted corporations.

Wait...most of them think those corporations are the ones keeping the big, bad, EEEEEEBIL gubmint in check.

/If you're not as scared of corporations as you are of the government, there is something wrong with you.


You don't see the potential for the state and corporations to work against individual liberty?

Hippies and sovereign citizens want to be left alone to smoke weed and play GI Joe, respectively.

The state does not like non-conforming citizens, and would like to monitor, harass, and jail them.  Corporations can make a lot of money selling weapons and surveillance gear to the state, as well as incarcerating the prisoners.

Oddly, despite the tone of what I just wrote, I am not some unruly-coiffed tinfoil hat-wearing hippie/prepper living on the margins of society; I'm a suburban, middle class sheeple.

Surely there are other "normal" people who don't like the encroaching Nanny/surveillance state?
 
2013-03-07 08:37:01 AM
Is this one of those tea party equals hate, ows equals love stories
 
2013-03-07 10:09:00 AM

Dancin_In_Anson: Saiga410: Stating McVeigh's justification = personally think it is justified? Wow the derp is strong in this one.

"To understand something does not mean approval of it"

Something quite lost on self righteous here on Fark.


"A Derp saved is a Derp earned"
 
2013-03-07 01:00:14 PM

The Muthaship: Whiskey Pete: The Muthaship: Ah, the SPLC.

Moving along.....

Oh, PLEASE elaborate!

SPLC requirements for being labeled a hate group:

1. Fail to fully support the agenda of the SPLC with every word and deed.


Not even close. You sound like butthurt Chrisitian. calling gays pedophiles, regularly, calling them peverted, in need or therapy, sinners, calling them the downfall of society, etc. gets you labeled a hate group. YOU GET YOUR OWN OPINIONS; FACTS ARE NOT UP FOR DEBATE.
 
2013-03-07 01:23:54 PM

abb3w: The Muthaship: You guys really can't take a little dissent in the CJ, can you?

Farkers are mostly fine with dissent. However, if you can't give an well-informed, evidence-based, logically reasoned basis for the dissent, they won't dignify your position with anything beyond mockery and LOL-cat pictures.


How does DIA keep getting bites then?
 
2013-03-07 01:31:36 PM
teh mutha f**ka ship
 
2013-03-07 01:42:50 PM

Zafler: abb3w: The Muthaship: You guys really can't take a little dissent in the CJ, can you?

Farkers are mostly fine with dissent. However, if you can't give an well-informed, evidence-based, logically reasoned basis for the dissent, they won't dignify your position with anything beyond mockery and LOL-cat pictures.

How does DIA keep getting bites then?


You're welcome.
 
2013-03-07 02:04:05 PM

Whiskey Pete: You're welcome.


No, some people still respond seriously to him.
 
2013-03-07 02:12:35 PM

Zafler: No, some people still respond seriously to him.


Most of them have above room temperature IQs. The rest can only respond with....wait for it....
 
2013-03-07 09:11:00 PM

Parthenogenetic: Surely there are other "normal" people who don't like the encroaching Nanny/surveillance state?


I think there's a great deal of disagreement among the general public about how much "encroaching" is going on and how much of a "nanny/surveillance state" there is.
 
2013-03-08 11:22:10 AM

Parthenogenetic: Reverend Monkeypants: Parthenogenetic: Dancin_In_Anson: what_now: It bothered him so much he blew up 168 American citizens?

The sickening irony does not escape me either.

His methods could be criticized, but I am sure his intentions were sincerely patriotic.  He was simply doing whatever was in his power to preserve America (Land of the Free and Home of the Brave), by performing an act of resistance against the jackbooted thuggery of the vast left wing liberal conspiracy to subvert the government of the American people, by the American people, and for the American people, and to hand over the reins of power to the UN.

I'm not saying those people individually deserved what they got.  But by working for the federal government, they were willing collaborators with the vast left wing conspiracy; little Eichmanns.  And in war, collateral damage sometimes happens.  McVeigh was trying to blow up a Federal building, it wasn't his fault there were people inside.  Isn't that the rationale you libs use when you defend 0bama's cowardly drone strikes?

I'm not necessarily defending McVeigh, not in public.  I'm just asking questions.  But you can see why, in the face of liberal tyranny, why doing that might have made sense.  Assuming it was his idea, and that it wasn't a false flag operation conducted by the CIA, MK-ULTRA, ACORN, and George Soros to justify rounding up real American patriots, of course.

So, the UnaBomber should be revered too as well then?.....

*sigh*  The "Little Eichmanns" reference didn't trigger a little red flag?  Fine.

No.  No, the UnaBomber is completely different.  So were the Weather Underground.  You see, they were liberal terrorists, not patriots.


Depends on who you ask, I guess.  Still just loons railing against the system.  UnaBomber's targets were generally corporate tools but his gripe was with the government/society allowing it to happen.  His intentions were seriously patriotic as well and he was out for what he believed was in everyone's best interest.
/not defending
 
Displayed 13 of 213 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report