OK, so show me where in the constitution or any legal code for that matter that says people have a right to social media.
I thought you were smarter than that. Apparently not though. I love it when people throw out things like the constitution or laws etc as a means to refute some argument. It's a worthless standpoint since that is driven by society as a whole and what they want, the rights they want etc. Try again. Oh wait, nevermind, I seem to remember you think you have rights by virtue of just being born. instead of just comparing people you don't like to Nazis.
Where did I say that? Please do show me. Or maybe that's just your way of shoving what I'm saying off into a corner cause you don't like it. Bravo. |
|
|
|
However, there's no such thing as a right to social media.
That's always the excuse given by those that are at least secretly happy with the "book burning". Social media has become the new "town center". The sooner everyone realizes that, the sooner things can be put in place that take that into account for the benefit of everyone. Fuck you. It's a statement of fact. If you want the government to mandate that social media companies have to give a platform to everybody or even just certain individuals, write your representatives in congress and convince them to pass such a law. oooooo.. Did I hit a nerve there? I guess you are one of those typical liberals that thinks you're better than everyone else and want to dictate to them what they can and can't say. And your "fact" is bullshit. We have a right to nothing and everything.. "Rights" are just shit we as society have made up in order to function and to have rules, laws and the like. But I noticed you didn't address the town center thing. What's wrong. You need a safe space so the bad men won't say something you don't like. Grow the fuck up and think beyond your nose in terms of the path this shit is going down. |
|
|
|
Dude, really? This is from April... I had all but forgotten about it because Trump has said a hundred or so dumb things since then. But let's take a closer look just for fun. First of all, the abstract for the poster presentation (yes, its a poster) that you linked is titled this: Internally Applied Ultraviolet Light as A Novel Approach for Effective and Safe Anti-Microbial TreatmentThe coronavirus is a virus, not a bacteria. There's actually zero research that shows ultraviolet light treatment is good for treating viruses in humans, or other living animals. I looked into it a bit and it gets way weirder. The authors of the poster work for Atyu Bioscience, which came up with " Healight Platform Technology" -- a light stick that you shove down your trachea to kill the virus. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/26/trump-coronavirus-conservatives-209325Adams and several other right-wing personalities floated the possibility that Trump had read a news release from Aytu Bioscience, a publicly traded biotech company based out of Colorado, announcing a partnership with Cedars-Sinai, a top medical research center, to work on a therapy that involved treating coronavirus patients via injecting UV-A rays, a subspectrum of ultraviolet light, into the lungs via a catheter tube.
The news release was packed with extensive legal disclaimers cautioning that any forward-looking statements indicating excitement were just predictions and are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause the actual events or results to differ materially.
In a statement, a spokesperson for Cedars-Sinai said the technology was in the preclinical phase: The technology has not been tested or used on patients.
So, no, its never been shown to be effective in treating viruses in vivo - let alone coronavirus. I mean, you can read through the patent for the device if you want -- no mention of it being used to treat respiratory viruses at all. Just a quacky idea repurposed to cash in on the coronavirus craze. Here's what the CEO tweeted the day after Trump's words: https://twitter.com/josh_disbrow/status/1253499856280326145Hmm.... There's also medical stuff about UV killing viruses if you actually cared enough to look into it.. They've even noted that covid virus tends to die outside quickly... due to UV... I even came across a medical study done something like 5 years ago I think it was that showed viruses being killed via UV... regardless. I didn't say anything about the validity of it but nice little rant you did there. I was simply pointing out that there is stuff out there and a huge part of the population that don't think they're superior mentally to everyone else would have wondered the exact same thing. And since Trump has to speak everything that comes into his head, that's what we got but it's not as "stupid" as it was made out to be when you learn about those things. The bleach thing.. well that was nuts. |
|
|
|
~snip~
Haha. How naive you are. No media can be trusted at this time. Have you been shown the true evidence that Russia sponsored Afghan militants to kill American soldiers? Maybe it was deliberately set up by opponents of Trump? Why the hell does it matter. I have little doubt it occurred but as far as I'm concerned it's no different than what the US did back when they funded Bin Laden etc to fight Russia. They probably even did some round about bounty paying as well. It's what those in power do. Each side doing dirty shit in the name of their higher morality. They're playing Risk and we're all expendable. |
|
|
|
However, there's no such thing as a right to social media.
That's always the excuse given by those that are at least secretly happy with the "book burning". Social media has become the new "town center". The sooner everyone realizes that, the sooner things can be put in place that take that into account for the benefit of everyone. |
|
|
|
 "Supposing we hit the body with a tremendous whether it's ultraviolet or just a very powerful light and I think you said that hasn't been checked because of the testing. And then I said, supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or some other way, and I think you said you're going to test that, too...
I see the disinfectant that knocks it out in a minute, one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that by injection inside or almost a cleaning? As you see, it gets in the lungs, it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it would be interesting to check that."
- Donald J. Trump, inventor, very stable genius.Funny part is that the UV thing is actually "real" in that there's been work done on using UV light internally prior to Covid. It's actually a very old thing that's come and gone over the decades. eg: https://ueg.eu/library/internally-applied-ultraviolet-light-as-a-novel-approach-for-effective-and-safe-anti-microbial-treatment/208958 |
|
|
|
I looked at his wikipedia page
Ofcourse the wikipedia page is slander.. I watched a total of one of his "race" videos half a year ago or so. It was crystal clear to me from the way he used misrepresented the stats he was presenting what his agenda was and that he wasn't trying to present a well balanced perspective on the issue. I particularly loved how he was constantly doing the "I'm not saying... " in the video. When someone goes overboard with that sort of thing, you know that's exactly what they're saying. Maybe it was just easier for me to spot what he was doing given I was familiar with the issue and data. Won't shed a tear over someone like that getting the boot. |
|
|
|
|
Doesn't matter if he loses big or small. Once the states certify the results, it's over and based on the constitution he will be out of a job Jan 20th. Who would escort him out? Who knows and really who cares. If he tried to stay regardless of the election results, he'd just prove what many think of him anyway. Besides, I suspect he'll bolt for the door as soon as he can. He's got deals to make in Russia and China with all the ass licking he's done.
|
|
|
|
Whatever happened to mexico paying for the wall?
Did you miss the talking points? The trade deal with Mexico is paying for it. That's what Trump really meant all along. Yep. |
|
|
|
Reality is reversed, of course. Wikipedia - Uncle Tom is the title character of Harriet Beecher Stowe's 1852 novel, Uncle Tom's Cabin.[1] The character was seen by many readers as ground-breaking humanistic portrayal of an African-American slave, one who uses non-resistance and gives his life to protect others who have escaped from slavery. However, the character also came to be seen especially based on his portrayal in pro-slavery dramatizations as inappropriately subservient to white slaveholders. This led to the use of Uncle Tom often shortened to just Tom as a derogatory epithet for an exceedingly subservient person or house negro, particularly one aware of their own lower-class racial status.It is the blacks who tow-tow to the Democratic machine who should be so classified. Reality requires full information and not just that cherry picked to suit an agenda. The term "Uncle Tom" is used as a derogatory epithet for an excessively subservient person, particularly when that person perceives their own lower-class status based on race. It is similarly used to negatively describe a person who betrays their own group by participating in its oppression, whether or not they do so willingly. The term has also, with more intended neutrality, been applied in psychology in the form "Uncle Tom syndrome", a term for the use of subservience, appeasement and passivity to cope with intimidation and threats.
The popular negative connotations of "Uncle Tom" have largely been attributed to the numerous derivative works inspired by Uncle Tom's Cabin in the decade after its release, rather than the original novel itself, whose title character is a more positive figure. These works lampooned and distorted the portrayal of Uncle Tom with politically loaded overtones.The vast majority of black people have decided that the highlighted meaning above is the prevalent one. Since they're the ones applying it to their own race, I think that takes precedence over what anyone else might think or want. |
|
|
|
Bolton is a criminal, DOJ is going to go after him HARD for this. Barr isn't happy at all.
Oh please. The only reason the WH and Barr are "unhappy" is because of how the book paints Trump and the administration. When has there EVER been a time when some tell all book comes out and the author isn't branded a liar, criminal and yada yada yada.. It's so people like you drink more coolaid like a good little serf. I read the book. Big deal. It's Trump being Trump, an executive branched filled with boot licking yes man as well as those that think they know better and do their own thing. Guess what. That exists in every WH and corporation although maybe the current one is worse than some. Who knows. But getting all worked up about it is a waste of time. Besides. Do you really think it's in Trumps best interest to go after Bolton? Probably end up having more information released as a result, hearings and the like. Keeping it all in the news longer than it needs to be? No. Just let it blow over and move on. |
|
|
|
Elections are NOT going to be cancelled. I highly doubt that Trump is going to be able to pull off some fucking Frank Underwood shit from House of Cards to try to sway this his way.
Doesn't need to be cancelled... postponed until we got law&order reestablished, or until we got a vaccine, or until that Martian situation is dealt with. There are other options too. E.g. impose strategic curfews/quarantines/anti-Martian blockades in places that (completely coincidentally) tend to vote for Democrats. Or just ask China for help LOL. if he postpones it without setting a new date right away i would be very worried. Not saying he isn't capable of making some dictator plays, but I'm pretty sure that constitutionally he can not stay in office after whenever his second term would've started if there's no election and congress would have to pick someone else. So it would have to be rescheduled quickly. Watched some video about what would happen if there was no election. I think it said that according to the constitution and amendments etc, he would be out of a job something like Jan 20th. Then it gets weird and depending on what the states decided to do in terms of selecting senators, the new president would end up being one of them and I think based on the percentages, it could be a democrat. Either way, one would also have to assume the military upheld their oath to the constitution and escorted him out the door sort of thing. |
|
|
|
racism will never end this way.
Exactly. And one day when all the "others" out number you and come for you, you can reflect on how you had the chance to "make peace" with them so that everyone could live in some sort of "harmony" but you didn't cause... "feelings"... Good luck with that. Well actually, what's more likely is that once they outnumber "you", they'll have the power and, since you didn't do the logical self serving thing and help to ensure shit was in place so that no one can get fucked over, they'll end up oppressing you.. either way, you're making the choice today for your future.. |
|
|
|
you are a racist!
I love watching people like you, who whine and cry like little children about the left and how insane they get with their stuff labeling everything as racist.. and then you do the same thing. I would suggest you learn a new word, bigot. |
|
|
|
kills more black people
They're not people. They're fetuses. why are we supposed to care for black people more than for other people Why are we supposed to care for white people more than for other people? When you you say that, a large number of people will hear that. Both messaging is wrong. Stop being a child crying about the messaging and deal with the substance of the complaints. You'll be happy to find out that the same issues the "others" are asking for solutions on, will also apply to and help white people in the same situations. Or whatever "race" you happen to be. It will benefit you as well. |
|
|
|
kills more black people
They're not people. They're fetuses. |
|
|
|
The US acted before most of the globe did to do the right thing. Get over it
Denmark bans import of slaves into colonies in 1792. Unclear how extensive that was. Britain abolished the slave trade in 1807, the US in 1808. Britain abolished slavery in 1833. In US, emancipation of slaves in 1863, constitution amended 1865. Problem is that people in the year 2020 will say that systemic racism is so widespread that it creates inequities towards African Americans. The problem is that it's systematic "oppression" (for lack of a better word) against "poor" people and a large number of them are black people plus the racial biases that are all wrapped in it all as well. And that's why you end up with threads like this. The "intent" of BLM was to draw intention to how black people bare the brunt of that "oppression". It was a poor choice of a name as we've seen because the other groups that also get the short end of the stick so to say pipe up and say.. hey.. what about the shit I go through.. my life matters so all lives matters.. and on and on it goes and people get so wrapped up in arguing about a stupid name as opposed to focusing on the real issues and just getting the shit done. |
|
|
|
The US acted before most of the globe did to do the right thing.
Denmark bans import of slaves into colonies in 1792. Unclear how extensive that was. Britain abolished the slave trade in 1807, the US in 1808. Britain abolished slavery in 1833. In US, emancipation of slaves in 1863, constitution amended 1865. Get over it
It's a little hard to "get over it" when you are told you're now an equal citizen and then there's constant "roadblocks" put in your way to actually be an "equal" citizen. Things such as redlining or the Tulsa massacre and so on and so forth just makes it just a tad difficult to "get over it". |
|
|
|
, pay reparations That's ridiculous and just seems to be a "white quilt" thing. The entire thing is far more complicated then.. "lets's just give them some money and wash our hands of it". It's also a subtle.. "I'll give them some money and they'll shut up about it" And who should the reparations come from? A lot of the slaves were purchased from other black people in Africa. So maybe they should pay some reparations. "We" took this land from the native Americans and have used it to all our benefits. And this currently includes black people. So maybe everyone, black, white, Hispanic and so on and so forth should just pay it forward to native Americans. Besides that, in what way do you think that "white people" can or should sit there and decide what a black persons life is worth and thus give them some reparations for that. I've heard from some black people that actually find the idea offensive. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
