ZXtheD

Duelist
  • Content count

    352
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

260 Good

1 Follower

About ZXtheD

  • Rank
    Knight of the Abyss

Recent Profile Visitors

767 profile views
  1. YES, THEY DO. Also, by your admission that means a good bit of the country are right-wing loons, because those publications are NOT far-left.
  2. "Far left"...lol ok guy. Just because you say it's true doesn't mean it's true. Those publications aren't communist, aren't marxist, aren't socialist, or any other term that's anywhere near what you'd call "far left". Also you didn't even include all the OTHER right-wing outlets that I named, along with the others. Lol you people have the worst persecution complex when you're guilty of all the things you accuse your opponents of. If you think those outlets are far left, that in of itself reveals you WAY TOO far right. You're basically in right-wing danger zone with at least some of your views.
  3. How does the media have more a dog in the fight when the right-wing has saturated the internet with sewage? Evens out to me. Tbh a lot of the problems in this country has come from right wing media proliferating garbage online with anti-social justice youtube, publications like breitbart, and outside of the internet you have talk radio and the likes of fox news and various other right-wing think tanks funded by the likes of Rupert Murdoch, Joseph Coors, and others. Even now we have billionaires funding actual "shitpost" efforts online in favor of Trump, and don't even get me started on this anti-SJ trolls who degrade and brigade every comment section and social media site online, along with all the death threats and other forms of toxicity. All this "edutainment" coming from these people is part of the reason for the decay that we have in politics. All of this is the reason why Trump has gotten so far-a controlled, non-stop effort on part of the Right, and yet somehow you're able to say with a straight face that you're all victims of the "mainstream media", when in truth you're PART of a mass media machine yourself.
  4. police shooting

    Your source doesn't work. I'm looking for more info on it but can only find the usual right-wing outlets taunting it, and the source threw up an arbitrary percentage too. THEN on top of that he says that all these people came from outside of state within hours JUST to protest/start trouble? Even if he is correct that doesn't nullify why the 30% were out there, along with the rest of the protesters out there who actually take issue with the police's actions. And you know this how? When you have quislings like David Clarke, Allen West, Wayne Dupree, Larry Elder, Marco "taco trucks on every corner" Gutierrez, and other who side with people who'd rather see them and others of their race dead/incarcerated/whatever else, I'd disagree. Then on top of that if those same police have experienced racism from their own departments but are STILL there, or are there and haven't spoken out against it, that says a lot about them. Shows me you don't like your people all too much, and this is only IF a black cop even shot Keith Scott, since we still haven't gotten a name of the officer who actually did it. You take the polices word for it a lot, while I don't. They don't have a great track record of honesty. Even now this same dept lied about Scott pointing a weapon at them, and they lied about having transparency with the dashcam footage as well, with Chief Putney saying this: “I never said ‘full transparency.’ I said ‘transparency,’ and transparency’s in the eye of the beholder.”
  5. police shooting

    No, he didn't. She was only charged, not convicted. And even if she was convicted, she could still be let off (see Peter Liang).
  6. OH, another reason why I'm considering Clinton. Nuclear weapons are a big deal to me and I don't want them in the hands of Trump.
  7. police shooting

    I'm not trying to convert anyone; I'm only interested in defeating those with erroneous mindsets. I'm not interested in entertaining and giving credence to beliefs I see as ass-backwards or even harmful. As for your other points they really don't have anything to do with racial profiling and harassment, and some of these recent shootings though. Especially with the killings of Alton Sterling, Philando Castille, Terrence Crutcher, and many others. @Gemstone Mine True, card carrying white supremacists aren't the majority of the force, BUT when you have the entire profession protecting these people, and carry at least part of their mindset there's a problem. I remember seeing a story where an entire dept was cleaned out after finding that the lot of them were either sending each other racist emails/texts or part of a WS group, and another dept planted drugs and weapons on thousands black people since the 90s, and this is in my state of Alabama. Were these officers of the latter dept part of a WS group? Maybe, maybe not, but if they weren't they still had the mindset of one. When you have the Chicago police hosting unmarked locations used to house and torture thousands of civilians, mainly black men, I'm not going to give people like that the benefit of the doubt. Same Chicago police that released a former police commissioner that oversaw the torture of hundreds of black men. When you have NYC locking many people up for undisclosed amounts of time WITHOUT trial, I'm not going to assume any kind of innocence on those people, and the list goes on and on and on, and it's not just limited to certain regions of the US either. Thing is I'd be more sympathetic if they actually dealt with this problem-if there's corruption in their ranks, they should SAY AND DO SOMETHING, not cover it up and get pouty when called out on it.
  8. police shooting

    http://www.oregonlive.com/today/index.ssf/2016/07/police_shootings_brings_into_s.html http://abcnews.go.com/US/philadelphia-police-investigate-officer-photographed-tattoo-resembling-nazi/story?id=41823227 You were saying? What if it's their job to harass and brutalize the citizenry? As for this non-aggression principle (which I know very well), people have already been provoked. Action is justified at this point. I've always taken the NAP as to mean physical violence, so we're adding verbal and economic action now? That's new seeing how physical, verbal, and economic aggression can be used to solve this issue. Why do you think I'm at least verbally harsh to your lot?
  9. police shooting

    And let me guess, these guys are patriots for taking on these "terrorists"?- http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/26/us/4-arrested-in-shooting-at-black-lives-matter-protest-are-identified.html Also, either the majority of officers are in on it or have a bad case of bystander effect. As for solving this issue of brutality, you actually vet these officers for white supremacist ties, replace the officials complicit in this, from the judges to the DAs and onward. Financially back those who actually will punish bad eggs and starve those who reward them. I don't really care what you think an appropriate response to brutality is, not because the end justifies the means, but because people criticize those who dislike police brutality for just because they speak out against it. To a lot of people it doesn't really matter how you protest-it's all bad, which tells me they don't have a problem with the method of protest, but with the message instead. Lastly, race and class have everything to do with this. The police are only able to get away with what they do because black people in general have no resources to challenge them. They not only need to organize their votes and protests, but their wallets too if they really want this to end. Might not be much but you gotta start somewhere. Edit: Oh, forgot to mention, that footage of that guy getting jumped supposedly comes from England, not Charlotte. Wouldn't surprise me if this was the case.
  10. police shooting

    Yeah, it's usually "your camp" that defends this, and they do talk about it nonstop. They're the ones crying about how BLM are terrorists and whatnot. You say these cops are human beings that have families to go home to, well they're also human beings that defend their corrupt colleagues or are silent about it. The ones that aren't are intimidated, victimized, fired, or worse. This doesn't tell me that the majority of the police are good; they'll cry about Keapernick criticizing them but won't/can't even criticize their own for corruption. "They're doing this for political gain". Oh? They are? Show me what they're gaining politically from destroying property. You're acting like all those unnamed faces are trying to get some book deal or something. Even if it was for some kind of political gain, that'd be a good thing, since you need political power to actually punish corrupt police, so are you admitting in a roundabout way that you don't really want the issue of police brutality to be solved?
  11. police shooting

    I'm also sick of police shooting people then lying about what happened on the scene too. I'm also sick of the police try to bury the damning evidence against them, ESPECIALLY like the law just passed this year in North Carolina that makes it much tougher to get bodycam footage of these incidences (not much of a coincidence either). I'm ALSO sick of people criminalizing the victims of these shootings, and especially the ones that start digging for any forms of criminal history of the victim within hours of the news breaking. As for the guy harmed, the perp should and probably will face justice. Can't say that about the police who kill anyone though. The police already do this, but I don't see the outrage coming from your camp when it happens. Just a lot of rationalization and mental gymnastics. Or silence. Also the rioters aren't burning down their neighborhoods, since they don't actually own any of the things destroyed, and if they do it's either untouched or they try to rebuild it. Black cop doesn't mean shit when you have stuff like this happening http://www.rawstory.com/2016/09/man-dies-of-thirst-in-jail-run-by-trump-loving-sheriff-after-guards-cut-off-his-water-for-six-days/ If you REALLY care about the innocent, care about the people needlessly dying at the hands of the police and being let off/protected by complicit system. Stop defending them. The rioting isn't happening because they "want new stuff" or any other talking point like that. It's probably happening because of years of bad relations between the police in the community. Same thing that happened in Milwaukee-Sheriff Clarke's police dept is absolute trash with an extensive history of corruption and abuse. The link I posted is only the tip of the iceberg, but you wouldn't know that by his crying to the national guard over a problem he created/perpetuated.
  12. Not offended at all, just calling it as I see it. They were "leaders" only to the right wing which is why they continually act like they are, even when corrected on it. I can see you being one, yeah. If you're pro-LGBT, you wouldn't be a trump supporter, seeing how his running mate is one of the most anti-LGBT politicians in the land, and didn't the republican platform openly and recently become staunchly anti-LGBT. You also would support Trump if you're anti-death penalty, since he's called for the deaths of the families of terrorists, of whom we don't know if they're innocent or guilty of any crimes. It's funny you speak of "Russian scare tactics" when your candidate, and his supporters, have openly called for Russia to hack his political opponents. They all say "It's just a joke bro", but that's bullshit seeing how they gleefully trot out all the info these foreign entities throw into the wind, not to mention praise Putin. For people who love to see themselves as patriots, this Putin/Russia fetish of Trump and you supporters seem to be a conflict of interest. Doesn't Trump's have business ties to several foreign entities that would, if he were to become president, conflict with his duties as commander in chief? Not to mention issues with his foundation that, from what I've seen, look like a gigantic fraud. As for engaging in perjury, Trump already lies 10 times per 3 minutes, and it's sad that even though I'm exaggerating it might be true. Acting like a war hawk? Uh...ok you're bullshitting here, not because Hillary isn't a war hawk, but trump would be a foreign policy disaster, one of the reasons I even stated above. I don't even need to bring up the Iraq flap because it's the most benign thing he's ever said in regards to foreign policy, and it seemed like he didn't even know too much about the war at the time. He's not going to do anything to reverse the effects of the crime bill either. In fact he seems to want to double down on it with more policing, which will hurt even more people in the "drug life", not help, unless you mean for these people to get a nice construction job on a chain gang. As for the other stuff I could see Hillary doing all the same things, so there's that. For the most part the things you "say" you're against in Hillary are much worse in Trump, and the things you're supposedly "for" are things Hillary actually would support...cept to 2 things-immigration and refugees. Could you drop the facade and tell us what this is REALLY about?
  13. I can see why harambe can be tied to racism, as people, especially the right wing has been comparing black people to apes forever. Then on top of that Breitbart is a white-supremcist outlet at this point, complete with it's writers actually defending a white supremacist movement, the alt-right, as some cool, hip, edgy force that all the cool kids are into (lol). As for your Sharpton/Jackson comment, there's this http://www.rainbowpush.org/commentaries/single/black_voters_have_plenty_to_lose_with_trump Looks like those guys don't speak glowingly of Trump anymore, huh? Even if they did, why do people think that Sharpton/Jackson speak for black people anyway. People like you always act like they're the leaders of black folk. Well...let me tell you something-they aren't, so stop trying to make them out to be. "Yeah Trump was wrong, b-b-b-but they started it"-How about 8 years of conservative bullshit that pushed this? Are we going to ignore that too? Are we going to ignore that ll the people that pushed that narrative for so long are mostly supporting Trump? Seems like all these people share a common line of thinking to me. Clinton doesn't seem to be that great of a candidate, but idk how you can defend Trump as some saint, void of all corruption, if you think Clinton is so bad. If you're a democrat now voting for Trump, I'm calling bullshit, because for one he represent NOTHING the Dems supposedly stand for. Hell, we have people faking to be black trump supporters online to make it look like Trump is some kind of uniter, so it wouldn't be farfetched to have someone fake political affiliation. Oh and lastly, I haven't forgotten this little quote from Trumpologist: You know, it would've been easier for you to say this from the jump: YOU DON'T CARE about the bullshit Trump spews, as long as he continues to represent something that garners your undying support. It definitely isn't that he's honest, it isn't that he's an outsider, it isn't that he tells the truth (at least a "truth" that contradicts your worldview). So...if it isn't those things aren't the reason you support him, I wonder what is...mind you this quote is reminiscent of something I said earlier in this thread.