What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

French Rage said:
I'm just glad to know the people marching with tiki torches and shouting "Jews will not replace us" were not deplorable.
Click to expand...

Nor are people who drive Dodge Chargers into the crowd of protesters. Or the people who yell "Black Lives Dont Matter Here".

I like how according to the Daily Stormer and the Mental Midgets who "read" it (I am guessing they have it read to them or they look at the cute pictures) Virginia is run by Jewish Communists and Black Criminals looking to destroy America. I know when I think of places the Jews control I think of Charlottesville, Virginia! Thankfully they took up the rallying cry of Lee at Fredricksburg to stop the Jewish Bolshevik Revolution! Who knew 150 years later they would still be fighting the same fight!
 
Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

Car in Virginia = Not Terrorism. Nice people.
Car in Barcelona = Terrorism. Not nice people.

The Centrist view.
 
Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

ScoobyDoo said:
Car in Virginia = Not Terrorism. Nice people.
Car in Barcelona = Terrorism. Not nice people.

The Centrist view.
Click to expand...

Assuming that's at me, your right to swing your fist ends at my nose and I've said as much. Having re-stated that:

The car driver in Virginia? Not sure 'terrorist' fits. Murderer surely does. Not vehicular manslaughter; murder. It was a willful act and should be punished as such.

EDIT: I just went and read a couple textbook definitions of 'terrorism'. Yeah, Virginia car guy fits because he knew who he was aiming at (political motive).
 
Last edited:
Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

The Sicatoka said:
Assuming that's at me, your right to swing your fist ends at my nose and I've said as much. Having re-stated that:

The car driver in Virginia? Not sure 'terrorist' fits. Murderer surely does. Not vehicular manslaughter; murder. It was a willful act and should be punished as such.

EDIT: I just went and read a couple textbook definitions of 'terrorism'. Yeah, Virginia car guy fits because he knew who he was aiming at (political motive).
Click to expand...

It was terrorism. He intended to harm and instill fear in a particular group of people.
 
Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

The Sicatoka said:
The car driver in Virginia? Not sure 'terrorist' fits. Murderer surely does. Not vehicular manslaughter; murder. It was a willful act and should be punished as such.
Click to expand...

The spreading of terror for political purposes. Yep, terrorist. Just like every f-cker wearing a hood. That's terrorism.

Edit: yes, as you say in your addendum. We agree.

He should be investigated, prosecuted, and sentenced as a terrorist, and that means uncovering the network of terrorists he plans with and meets with to arrange these events. We suspended Americans' civil rights in that fight. I oppose that -- but if that's what we're gonna do, do it for these f-cks just as hard as we do it for the towelies.
 
Last edited:
Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

The Sicatoka said:
Assuming that's at me, your right to swing your fist ends at my nose and I've said as much. Having re-stated that:

The car driver in Virginia? Not sure 'terrorist' fits. Murderer surely does. Not vehicular manslaughter; murder. It was a willful act and should be punished as such.

EDIT: I just went and read a couple textbook definitions of 'terrorism'. Yeah, Virginia car guy fits because he knew who he was aiming at (political motive).
Click to expand...

These days, they seem to become synonymous. Either way, both acts were reprehensible.
 
Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

Handyman said:
The problem with the defenders of the rally isnt their beliefs in White Supremacy (though that is a different set of issues) it is their belief that their Freedom of Speech (pardon the pun) trumps everyone else's. Racists have every right to spew their crap publicly if they choose. (they cant act on it obviously) But f non-racists show up to try and shout them down that is just the way it is. They dont seem to get that. No one's freedom was infringed on until things got violent.
Click to expand...
Agreed, though there seems to be a good amount of knuckle draggers who assume the counter protesters started that violence or that because there was some violence from the counter protesters, "both sides" is now somehow legitimized.
 
Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

CBS poll says 67% of Republicans agree with the way Trump handled Charlottesville.

That portion of the country is very, very sick.
 
Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

Drew S. said:
A lot of republicans don't condone violence on either side.
Click to expand...

I think we can now admit most Republicans are neo-Nazi's/white supremacists or tolerant of those movements. Not sure that's even up for debate anymore. As those groups both engage in violence, one can extrapolate that Republicans approve as well..
 
Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

FlagDUDE08 said:
It's already been explained several times. There's no need to state it again because you decided to have you fingers in your ears and instead wanted to gas-light me.
Click to expand...

So you admit the photo is accurate? 'bout time.
 
Rover said:
I think we can now admit most Republicans are neo-Nazi's/white supremacists or tolerant of those movements. Not sure that's even up for debate anymore. As those groups both engage in violence, one can extrapolate that Republicans approve as well..
Click to expand...

I've posted on quite a few occasions the neo-nazi crowd disgusts me and there shouldn't be any tolerance for it. At the same time, I strongly disapprove of the left's violence as well. I'm not claiming there is as much on the left or whatever. Not trying to debate that. Just making the simple point I don't approve of it.
 
Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

Drew S. said:
I've posted on quite a few occasions the neo-nazi crowd disgusts me and there shouldn't be any tolerance for it. At the same time, I strongly disapprove of the left's violence as well. I'm not claiming there is as much on the left or whatever. Not trying to debate that. Just making the simple point I don't approve of it.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure Rover's just gas-lighting. No different from the fake news.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top