I heard that movie has heavy inspiration to creating the Half-Life series

It was a neat movie!!

I'm going to have to watch that now.

You can rent it on Utube it's a GREAT monster flick.

Btw after you see this don't let anyone tell you Hollywood is against the 2nd amendment!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHOr1ccCpo4&ytbChannel=YouTube%20Movies

Read the book, the ending's better and less depressing.

You might be thinking of the book, the movie came out almost 10 years after the game did

The movie is THAT OLD?

Yes, yes it is. And the novella was made in 1980.

From the Wikipage of "The Mist" -

"The developers of the Half-Life video game series, which also deals with creatures from parallel dimensions breaking through to ours, have listed The Mist among their primary influences for the game plot.[3] The first game in the series was originally going to be called Quiver, as a reference to the Arrowhead base from The Mist."

Eeyup, the ending is always a twist on both

...neat? Except whoever wrote that was full of it because the timeline literally doesn't match up. :p The game came out in 1998 and the movie came out in 2007. I think someone is confused and they meant the book, since that works, coming out in 1980.

Exactly. They read the STORY and decided it would make a neat game. Which it did! :D

too bad I can't fave this journal....

You still aggressively misunderstand what freedom of speech, as a legal concept, actually is. And to be perfectly blunt, if the only defense you can muster for the vile shit you say is "it's technically legal!" then it's probably shit in the first place.

Fuck honest to god, real nazis. You know, like Spencer. Fuck them with fists, preferably.

And as for the character in The Mist, as I recall she went from just being "The local biblical freak" into an increasingly erratic, crazy, violent bitch that was stirring up a mob to do her will. This doesn't sound like anyone I know of within the last year, nope. Not at all.

You didn't look at the Sargon link which is why that last statement is worthless.

Antifa as a whole is worthless. And dangerous.

Sargon is pretty worthless, tbh.

When political discourse has devolved to the point the only way for you to win your argument with another side is by beating them up physically instead of verbally with a robust debate, you are in effect admitting that you have lost the debate as your ideas are not strong enough to defeat their own.

As far as freedom of speech is concerned, you are allowed to say what you wish so long as there is no call to action that could potentially insight harm upon others. So to use the example from history you can not run into a crowded building and scream FIRE! and consider that free speech. You are however allowed to hold a protest or a demonstration where people come together and say the things they believe in.

As for the defense of it is technically legal being a defense then it is vile shit in the first place. How about the constant rhetoric of #killallmen or the chanting at some protest of pigs in a blanket fry em like bacon. Or death to white people? I disagree with those statements, however they have every right to spew their vile ideas and I am fine defending their right to say it. However when the action shifts to violence against others, and destruction of property, you lose your right to claim the moral high ground.

When you apply force to some group just because of their ideals, you strengthen and embolden them because if you truly had a better solution you would debate them. Since you can not debate them and have to resort to violence against them, it simply shows your own ideas are not strong enough to do battle with theirs in the open market place of debate.

As far as Antifa goes in the majority of examples of them I have seen, they are the ones starting the violence. Claiming to go get 100 Nazi scalps or completely shut down lawful and peaceful protests. Even when those protests are just hey, we are free speech advocates, or hey, we support the president. It has reached a point with some groups that you are a Nazi if you think we should have border security, we should work to protect our own countries self interests, and we should take care of our own as opposed to trying to be the world's police.

Always willing and interested to engage in the metaphorical battle of words with anyone, but when your only response is insults and fists, I will happily claim the victory as your will was not strong enough to debate, and instead you had to return to childhood where might makes right.

Yes, yes. That's nice and all. But on the other hand, fuck nazis. Like, honest to god, literal "non-whites need to be exterminated" nazis. There is no "reasonable debate" with those who advocate genocide. Fuck them, and fuck everyone who tries to play "I'll sit here in the middle on my moral high horse" and just ends up legitimizing them.

So any group or person that calls for genocide of a group fuck them and punch them in the face correct? So how about the parts of the black panthers that call for white genocide? Or the parts of BLM that also call for the death of white people? Or how about the various groups saying that we should disenfranchise white people for like 20 years or so to get things fixed cause white people have fucked it up for everyone? Should those people be punched as well?

So is this just some really, really flimsy effort to catch me in a "gotcha" by pearl clutching about "bu-but what about minor, extremist elements of minority grooooups?!?!?!" now?

Those people are shitheads too. This isn't hard. On the other hand, those people at least have far, far deeper cultural and racial issues that have informed that opinion. As opposed to being precious little porcelain snowflakes crying about the need to preserve the beauty of white culture and genetics while being among the worst examples of it, invoking the imagery of a brutal regime that went about systematically murdering all its undesireables among racial, cultural, and social lines. A few dumb fucks going "kill whitey" really doesn't carry the sake import and concern as "lets genocide the fuck out of all the undesireables in our country by all and any means necessary!" while invoking Nazi propaganda does, y'know?

But that doesn't make them any less a gaggle of shitheads that I wouldn't exactly cry over eating a fist to the face. It's just a hilariously limp dick false equivalency on par with Alex's endless attempts to paint a college professor cracking a joke about wanting a white genocide for christmas (hint: the only people that seriously use the phrase "white genocide" are fucking jokes that deserve being mocked at every opportunity) as proof of a systematic campaign across colleges to suppress and murder the poor, poor whitey. And if you really can't figure out why comparing the Black Panther movement, its origins, and its rhetoric, to nazis crying for genocide than there's really no helping and no point.

Forgive the delay in reply, breakfast was just calling my name. As for this being a gotcha moment, no, just simply trying to get the bearing down on what your views on anyone advocating genocide of any group. If you are cool with punching anyone who calls for genocide on any group for any reason then more power to you, just be prepared for the return salvo of punches. A hate group is a hate group, but due to the way the constitution reads as well as various judicial precedent set over the course of our history, so long as they are not attacking people nor are they actively pursuing harming others, then they are covered by free speech.

That is the tricky part of that amendment. You have the right to spew bullshit, but folks have the right to not listen. However when you attack anyone for what they are saying, you threaten the fundamental right that they have to say it. An attack on free speech from any angle is an attack on free speech for all of us. Yes it is deplorable what some folks say (looking at you neo-nazis, elements of BLM, BAMN, and KKK) but the problem is they have every right to say it. You can't just go around punching people you disagree with, if so I would have no friends at work, or online due to disagreements.

By advocating violence, you simple feed into what they want. A cause to lash out or proof that their ideas are validated because they are dangerous enough to have someone oppose them beyond the debate floor.

The right to free speech, as it exists legally, purely says the government won't censor you. Even from an ethical/moral/philosophical standpoint, it's purely having the right to say it, not freedom from the consequences of it. Not freedom to force others to provide a venue for it, or respect it, or listen to it, or even to care about it at all. The simple reality is that "debating" honest to god, proper nazis legitimizes them. Beating the shit out of honest to god fucking nazis? Who cares if they have their beliefs validated. Their beliefs were already validated to them, and so god damn toxic that it's not worth caring about it.

If nazis, honest to god fucking genocidal ~master race~ bullshit spewing nazis, are constantly getting their shit beat in for being fucking stupid and disgusting enough to spew their disgusting and fucking stupid shit in public however they'll stop doing it. They'll cower among themselves in the filthy little dark holes in the ground they deserve, like they did until the election run and unfortunate success of a particularly impressive pissbaby emboldened them.

So just so I have a clear understanding. It is ok to physically attack people who have different beliefs than you and it is ok to deny venues to people even after they have been invited to speak at a location, and it is ok to attack people attending an event that has been set up in advance because you disagree with their ideas?

That is a slippery slide that you are setting up if that is ok because that creates a precedent that anyone who disagrees with anyone is allowed to be shut down because we disagree with their ideas.

I think that being an honest to god, literal, genocide advocating nazi means you've willingly surrendered at least parts of the social contract.

Quit trying to twist being a literal. fucking. nazi. into "a difference of beliefs" or other weasel-word bullshit.

But weasel wording is fun. But I digress. Using your purported definition, a Nazi is someone calling for a genocide of a specific group correct? Then by that definition the BLM protesters calling for the death of cops in a form of genocide as that is a group they wish eradicated, thus Nazi. Or swinging to another area Islamists who call for the death of all non Muslims another group are Nazis. Or swinging it back to another group BAMN who calls for violent militant action against those they disagree with would be Nazi's wanting them silenced, beaten down and forced to hide. By your definition those people are Nazis.

My issue with saying that all Nazi's should be fought, opposed, beaten down, and stripped of their right to speak is that the term Nazi is thrown around to hit anyone who disagrees with you. We have seen it on the left and the right. So with that being said, the people at lets use Berkley as an example who came for a free speech rally, and in support of the President were attacked by people calling them Nazis. So I ask simply, who are Nazi? Because the word has been thrown around so much now it has lost all of its meaning. Too many people claim that Trump supporters are Nazis because the voted for him. So is lets call it half of America Nazis because the elected Trump?

Being a cop is a career choice, but that's nice and weaselly as it is in the first place.

My issue is you're trying to go "bu-bu-but these guys say mean things tooooo!" without actually examining the different circumstances that don't really make it comparable. It was cute up to a certain point, it's stopped being cute at this point when it becomes increasingly blatant you're just hoping to find some little slip in the definition or personal opinion to let you invalidate the entire thing.

So let me spell it out for you: Black Lives Matter having some black people in it that have severe issues with cops and whitey? Quite frankly, I wouldn't shed any tears for them eating a punch to the face for trying to act on it, but there's a distinctly different set of circumstances behind members of a group of people that have been disenfranchised and oppressed for literally centuries lashing out when the same brutality seems to continue unabated and without any real change seeming to come. When the disenfranchised and oppressed are stomped on still while the oppressors and their limp-dick supporters, the comfortable middle class that'd rather let it continue than deal with being discomforted and inconvenienced, the very people Martin Luther King Jr said were the largest problem with achieving equality, insist that racism is dead and gosh why can't you people just protest in the proper, "polite" manner that doesn't inconvenience anyone, so it can continued being ignored. When that shit keeps happening for literally half a century after they supposedly "dealt with" racism, it's not hard to figure out why some might finally just start saying some very, very impolite things. It's very much a "without condemning nor condoning, I understand" kind of thing.

It also really isn't equivalent to a bunch of people deciding that those assholes from 70 years ago had a good idea when they went about systematically rounding up and exterminating undesireable and start very publicly speaking about wanting to accomplish it via forced deportation, sterilization, and other methods. If you really can't figure out the differences between these groups of people and their motivations, I'm really not sure what you could possibly be hoping to achieve here other than the aforementioned bullshit of hoping to get a "gotcha!" moment out of me. The only problem is that your sort of obnoxious efforts to compare apples and oranges to justify some ~truth is in the middle~ milquetoast bullshit handling of literal nazis has already made me not care. Because your exact mentality is what offers legitimacy to Richard Spencer or David Duke. That sort of bullshit is just as dangerous as those pieces of shit themselves.

Not particularly. My point in this is that far too many people have thrown out the term Nazi to describe people who politically do not line up with what they believe in. Using your own definition of a Nazi is someone who wants to genocide a particular group because of blank reasons and eliminate them. Yes being a cop is an occupation but it is founded by a core system of beliefs and if you recall history Nazis also attempted to eliminate their political opponents and also threw them into the same concentration camps. So it is not an unfair comparison.

My overall point in this, when you try to silence someone because you disagree with them, even Nazis, you lend credibility to their argument. Going back to the Civil Rights marches, people increased their support to them when violence was used against them because they saw the horrors of what was being done and thought maybe these people have a point because they are not fighting back and well dang if folks are trying this hard to keep them silent then they might have a point to what they are advocating.

The best way to defeat an ideology is not through violence, not through destruction because you can not kill an idea unless you kill every single last person who thought it and you still leave the chance of someone else finding some writing of theirs and going hey, this person has a point. You defeat it by letting the ideas come into full light and discussion you look at the pro and cons of said ideology and when it is flawed such as any racial supremacy doctrine, you expose it for the weak argument it is. It is better to publicly humiliate them in debate and crush their credibility and make them a laughing stock whom no one can take seriously. By using violence as your answer all you do is show you are afraid of what they are saying and think their must be some truth to it.

Trying to pretend that nazis deserve to be "debated" legitimizes their disgusting fucking ideology far better than stomping it out through force when it comes up, honestly.

And my point is that so many people are being labeled Nazis that it is ridiculous and innocent people are getting stomped for it. I condemn violence against people peacefully protesting. Do you?

Is there really something peaceful about advocating for genocide?

I point to the Berkley protests where people came there for a free speech demonstation and were attacked by antifa because they were Nazis. You know free speech advocacy the thing Nazis hold most dear.

Not sure if you've noticed, but the altright in general loves to shield itself in the concept of absolute free speech. Nazis do the same because it helps them spread their bullshit. It's not exactly an uncommon theory, let alone practice, to exploit the societal freedoms of a group you hate and wish to cause harm to in order to benefit your cause.

In short you believe it is ok to cause violence to others after they have been called Nazis. So even if folks go to a protest for free speech if Antifa shows up and says these guys are Nazis even if they are not, they are well within their rights to attack them. Cool, I do believe know you well enough now to get a pretty good picture of your character. Hope you have a wonderful day my friend.

You keep running around in circles being reeeally desperate to wring your hands and somehow convince yourself of that.

I've kind of lost interest in playing the semantics and ~quit being intolerant of their intolerance guuuuuys~ game, though.

And again, there is no hand wringing on this side. I wished to understand your position. It is that anyone who advocates genocide should be punched. I have now listed several groups where people have called for genocide and I fully expect youtube videos popping up soon of you wonderful Nazi punching individuals going forth to these different groups and dispensing your brand of five fingered justice to the various groups calling for genocide of people. Be they white, black, Asian, Hispanic, or any part of the technicolored rainbow between.

As far as the quit being intolerant of their intolerance. I do not tolerate it. I openly denounce them, and shred their arguments to pieces thus embarrassing them and pointing out their flaws and insanity. From there I have taken away their credibility making them a pathetic ideology to circle the wagons behind.

Meanwhile you feel it is ok to assault people who have broken no laws. Have fun doing that my friend, and again, may you have a wonderful day.

Uh-huh. Right.

I applaud your valiant effort to make sense of this guy. I can't tell if he's a troll or a sociopath. He is unwilling or incapable of separating people who advocate genocide (even though he is fixated on "Nazis") with people who have different views than his own (or those of his cult).

Funny, I was pretty sure I was making exactly that distinction.

That is twisted logic mein friend, and wrong. More power to ya, but looking at that kind of commentary, you ruled any voice of reason real fucking quick. Being hot headed and confrontational is childish at its best and a worse pandemic spreading throughout the youth of today.

I don't give a shit about your tone argument, broham. "Fuck nazis" isn't exactly a subject that requires calm, collected, reasonable debate. Doing that just legitimizes literal fucking nazis.

Nice to try and imply I'm just a kid, too. Because that isn't in and of itself another attempt to discredit me on top of tone policing.

I spoke nothing of discredit, you've done a fine job of demonstrating your tone and any argument you might have had through the oblivious lack of discretion you possess, that you openly seem to advocate for whatever reason. Only a fool doesn't understand that all things are to be approached with prudence, especially those in regards to others in all cases. as for the alleged implications, idk, do you feel as I was implying you were a kid?

Yeah, still a tone argument.

And if you can't figure out the latter part, you're not paying very much attention to what you're writing. Or you're just trying to play innocent.

i'm going to assume that that last line was a reference to George Soros?

Everything is George Soros if you're right-wing, stupid, and desperate enough. He's literally everything and anything required for the right-wing and its media apparatus to play the victim despite the sheer number of people on "their side" that have done the sames hit they accuse him of. Right down to trying to pay protesters to disrupt events.

you'll have to be more specific

I was specifically making reference to Donald Trump. Then to the fact that the right-wing has demonized Soros and turned him into a boogeyman they can literally blame anything on.

trump didn't pay protesters to violently disrupt event. trump isn't funding a racial nationalist movement.

Former his election team did, actually. Or rather, tried to.

Latter he's pretty much the fucking centerpiece for.

lol if you think Soros did either though.

you actually think that white nationalism won trump the election?

It played an undeniable part.

well i sure as hell deny it. the left's notion that trump is a white nationalist hurt trump with moderates by a whole lot.

lol https://twitter.com/RVAwonk/status/.....11045362634752

That article in no way refuted my point. Besides, linking to a mother Jones article as evidence? You may as well have just linked to that video of Van Jones blaming the election on a "whitelash" or some shit on BuzzFeed

Because clearly it's lying when it quotes other, white nationalist websites about what they think.

What a fucking joke.

Why not. https://www.reddit.com/r/starterpac....._pack/dgzhorg/

They didn't get spanked as kids, so now they'll get killed as adults.

Sad, but it works for me.

I for one really need a good spanking.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdFLPn30dvQ

Sorry...but this remains the ultimate on spanking...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXT_IOt81Xs

Well, yes.

I would argue that this is more what those antifa lunatis need: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=desb0W6u80Y

Perfect.

this might also work https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_WXqj-qqbo

Too delicate.

ok, how about this then? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1qLpYfOy_0

Much better. Or this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDDEWS97CWU

I can't believe that I forgot that one

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-c8bv7e6EI

and this gem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAg1r6zw7Bg

OW! MY BALLS!

loved that movie

If you loved that movie, I recommend this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Marching_Morons

http://mysite.du.edu/~treddell/3780.....ing-Morons.pdf

Reaaaalllyyy?

HEY RED......

I made a similar statement not too long ago. You can only push people so far before they finally snap. It may not be now or tomorrow or next month but eventually groups like antifa are going to push too hard and then they will be met with bullets next time they show up to start a riot.

Yep. Hopefully, only a few will need to be ventilated pour encourager les autres...

Remember what Carlin said. a Radio has two knobs. One turns it off, the other changes the station. Yes. Nazi's and Klansmen have the right to spew the audiocrap as they will, Good people can simply not listen.

Certainly but I would debate them anytime.

"Good People" like those who belong to Antifa?

That isn't what was said or suggested!
No need to argue!

I have this little kick for debate and I like your journal just for that.

That said, mobs form for such a variety of reasons, religion is but one of the many factors to it, I could talk all day about the idealism that comes from trying to educate and communicate values to people that just won't have it, but the bullet? I think it was acceptable in the movie because it was the very last resort, had they done it before the lynched the soldier boy, yeah, he may have been saved, but the message would blur, people would wonder if they jumped the gun too soon, if they tried hard enough to talk reason into the mob.

I believe in self defense, not so much in pre-emptive defense, but we can argue that too, I personally feel such violent methods, can only bring more harm than good, even if I was pretty much yelling " shoot that bitch already " while watching the movie.

I do applaud that people understand that violence MAY bring more violence but when violence has already been brought then justice must follow.

Those people who don't stand up for the attacked may declare themselves as nonviolent but they are also unjust.

I approve of violence as a defense measure, already said that, this measure may or may not involve retaliatory actions, depending on the circumstances, I am not an idealistic hippie, but this measure has to be taken very, very seriously, how often our seek for this so called justice is just the means to enact revenge, if there is not a clear, lasting benefit for such an extreme course of action, my stance will always lean towards "no".

I am not self righteous, I may personally side to this or that position, I am, we are all unjust in some way or another, some people argue that justice does not exist, and that seeking it is futile, I am cynical enough to understand that view, but I do not share it, and knowing that, I can only say that, no matter under what banner you want to justify your methods, in the end, each and everyone better be ready to face the consequences, because no matter how justified you think you are, in the end, you are just killing another person, another person that may have their own loved ones, another person that may see your action as unjust and think the way you did, and enact their own version of justice. Look at your stereotypical street gang war and you may understand my point of view.

Understood!

We can kiss now.

GET A ROOM YOU TWO

I don't want a room, I want him to... ooh...

AntiFa as a whole is a cancer and needs to be cut out before it spreads. The idea of naming everyone that you oppose in any way, shape, or form, or anyone you do not agree with as a 'Nazi', and then claiming it is perfectly right and necessary to commit any and all acts of violence against Nazis is pretty much what a Nazi would do. They are arguing against themselves but are too blind/stupid/clinically insane to realize it. They actively go looking to start violence, attack unnamed individuals with weapons (sometimes even deadly weapons) in mobs so they cannot defend themselves, and all the while scream about how they are the victims and how their own victims are the aggressors.

They are a terrorist group, plain and simple. They threaten and commit acts of violence to get what they want, and so far have been getting a lot of what they want time and time again, and this just causes them to become more aggressive and grow in number. They are no different from any other terrorist group and should be directly treated as such. If you are someone who defends these people or identifies yourself as one of these people, you are a fucking animal and should be locked up before your stupid has a chance of spreading.

Man, there's few things I'd love more than for the media and country to be more open to referring to protest groups within the US as terroristic groups, but are you really sure you want to chuck that first rock in the glass house? It won't be pretty, and ~AntiFa~ isn't going to be anywhere near the top of that list. Not when we had Y'all Queda running around last year, or the ever so lovely "polling station watchers" going full Jim Crow and bringing out the dogs and trying to show up armed for purely, purely well meaning reasons of course. Or, you know, actively calling for members at a rally to beat the shit out of protesters while waxing poetic about ~the good old days~ of dealing with their sort, y'know?

Once again you assume that I would not consider those groups who would do similar things but on the other side of the fence (the right) to be better then the ones on the left. That is wrong as usual. You cannot look at one side and assume that everything on the other side is all fucking sunshine and marshmallows. Actual KKK or people associated with them are bad as well, but to be honest I have not seen video of KKK members actively counter-protesting and inciting actual violence (I dont mean just calling for it, but like so many videos coming out from Antifa protests, but ACTUALLY starting fights) against other groups. I would like to think that they realized they are not exactly a well received publicly and that they would do well to keep their stupid hate shit to themselves.

And while we are mentioning polling station watchers, what about the reports of many inner city polling stations in cities like Chicago were being controlled by members of the Black Panthers in 2008 and 2012 who were literally telling people to their face that if you were not voting for Barack Obama, that you were not voting period? I even got to see some cell phone footage that was sent to a friend of mine from his friend who lived in Chicago at the time that literally showed this. Is it ok for them to do it then? Why didn't you mention them in your post?

If you run too far to the extreme on either side, left or right, you are going to end up being an asshole. Not one side is innocent. But we are talking about these violent fucks in Antifa, not some bullshit you are throwing out there to try and redirect the conversation.

The "New Black Panthers" you mean? That no substantiated reports about doing such things ever came out about? No video, no pictures. Just at best a black dude being near a polling station talking to someone? What about them? They're the most hilariously flimsy boogeyman the right has thrown up, and that's even with them constantly trying to prop up Soros as whatever they need at the moment.

Edit: Guess you're referring to this ever so spectacularly amazing, wide spread, and horrific case? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_B.....imidation_case One dude with a nightstick, who police escorted away, with no indications of actual voters calling in about him based on a quick skim of this?

Once again trying to redirect the conversation away from the topic. No I'm not talking about that one case, I'm talking about the many unreported cases due to threats and people getting their cellphones taken from them. That video I mentioned was sent to my friend but was deleted soon after because the sender figured there was no point doing anything with it, as he was convinced he would get retaliated against if he shared it with any media outlets. He did say that many who tried to video tape anything were either chased off or had their phones or other devices taken from them. Needless to say, it was not just the militant group there but also small mobs of like minded individuals assisting them. My point is that the black panthers are no better then the KKK and the KKK is no better then the black panthers, but THAT is neither here nor there.

The fact of the matter is that you seem to be defending a group of people who make it a point to use threats of violence, and when possible, actual violence, to get their way. They threatened the safety of people and property when Ann Coulter wanted to do a speech, and of course they got what they wanted and canceled her speech. Let me tell you something, I dont know what you do when someone you don't agree with is doing a speech at a venue, but you know what I do? I DON'T GO. I don't go running over there and protesting it and breaking windows and starting fires and threatening to kill the speaker there. But since you are defending the people who do this, I can only guess that this is exactly what you do. Of course your going to argue that I'm wrong, but the fact remains that groups like BAMN are terror groups and that you are trolling this journal defending them, which just proves my point.

But why am I even bothering to argue with you? Your nothing more then a SJW troll and nothing I do or say is going to change your mind.

Ah, I see. This anecdotal evidence that doesn't exist but proves your claim. Convenient.

And you never provided evidence to prove your claim and also never bothered to address the actual topic at hand. Doubly convenient.

I'm tired of feeding you troll. Go back to the bridge you came from and go harass some goats.

Ah, yes. I only linked the only notable incident of what your claiming that seems to have happened, ever. You spin a grand tale of handmade artisinal footage of some ever so dangerous black person ruling over a personal fiefdom of a polling station... that was deleted and never acted upon, aside being shared personally with you. Because lol of course.

I don't follow biblical nonsense but, i do find it ironic that the mist "stops" just after the liftle kid dies (if i remember, the religious one pointed at the kid and said it has to die or be sacrified for the monsters to go away)

In the book, things are a lot more grim and there's nothing to be found, no hope, no nothing. The ending of the movie was a creation of the movie, although King has said he likes it better (or at least just as well, I can't remember which but I want to say better) than the book's ending. In the case of the movie, just waiting one more day would have resulted in their rescue without any of them having to die. It wasn't that it was stopping, just that the military was making some progress.

oh i know that, but it still gives me the kind of bad taste in my mouth that tells me "she were right... coincidence?"
i do not believe in religious things like that, but i do like to question things and keep questioning until there is an absolute difinitive answer

I see it as more of a commentary of giving up hope and being punished for it, more than a comment on the religious fanatic being right. If they'd killed the kid that night, they still wouldn't have been rescued for another day or so (not that they wouldn't see this as vindication of their beliefs anyways). Likewise, if they'd killed the fanatic they'd have still been rescued the next day.

according to our real life world, yes

I love when these people fight what they call Fascism by being fascists and then saying they aren't because they are fighting against it. Same mental gymnastics blacks use when they say they can't be racists, simply trying to get a free pass on doing what they oppose because it works and if you call them on it, you get shamed for it.

Ah, yes, the whole "quit being intolerant of my intolerance!" theory.

I really hated that movie, especially the ending. Came out at the same time as Cloverfield and they pulled off the monsters very well and I too was calling for somebody to put a bullet in Betty Bible Thumper within the first minute she started yammering.


AntiFa Faggots will always cry out Nazi at ANYONE they deem 'Unworthy', attack on mobs and blindside attack and sucker punch folks, then scream the loudest when their intended targets fight back.

based on a lot of the journals you have posted, I'm surprised you don't have a local chapter of crazy ass antifa where you live. I still think you need to get away from the crazy over there and get to someplace a bit more sane. I only wish there was such a place anymore.

http://redpanels.com/354/

"Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal." - Karl Popper

TL;DR version: Tolerating hatred is the death of tolerance.

If you're planning a final solution, you might as well be traditional with Zyklon-B, bro.

I mean you've got all 3 branches of government, you've got the news media, you've got roving gangs of thugs shooting people and police quietly ignoring it or actively covering it up, you've got free speech of liberals and centrists being suppressed with legislation...the only thing LEFT is to murder all remaining dissenters. And here you are, openly suggesting those evil "cultist freaks" need to get shot for being non-fascists.

Anything to avoid talking about the insane incompetence and corruption you elected.

"You know my position regarding bullies and mobs."
You'll defend them to the death as long as they hate "leftists" and you proudly stand with lots of them.

"Nazi's also have freedom of speech and only cowards are afraid of debate."
Which is why you and other fascists refuse to ever debate anything, preferring to lie, insult, and block people.


http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis.....dment-right-by
https://www.salon.com/2017/04/27/tr.....-white-people/

Fun times.

Do you get paid for your propaganda?

Do you?

AMAZING COMEBACK!!

It was a shit retort in the first place, it really didn't require anything but that in return.

It really is a far more honest question to be shoved at you however. Boring posts news stories. You post biased propaganda filled youtube videos.

Prove that they are incorrect.

Keep in mind the cultist leader is SAYING she doesn't want people to have freedom of speech.

Get some rules that apply to everyone equally and grow up.

You telling others to grow up is pretty much the absolute definition of throwing a rock in a glass house.

You ignored first hand video evidence...

It could bite him directly in the ass hard and he'd still deny it. There is no reasoning with that troll.

Yet another glass house you're wanting to throw rocks in?

Stop trolling.

Is it really trolling to point out that you've been led to evidence countless times yet you disregard it, attempt to discredit it, or just stop commenting and refuse to acknowledge it, yet you want to complain about YetAnotherFuckingYoutubeVideo™ not being watched?

You just troll you dont have evidence.

You're full of shit, Alex. I've stopped bothering to provide evidence because when I actually made these nice, big, effort filled posts with links and evidence and all that? You ignored them. You tried to talk around them. Or I'd get a "nice wall of text loser, I'm not reading that despite expecting you to watch youtube videos" response.

For fucks sake I literally had to explain systemic racism to you and had to tell you what the southern strategy even is, because you'd somehow managed to embed yourself into rambling about politics without knowing about it.

*I* gave you evidence.

Hell, you CREATED the evidence. Your initial post is, "we have to kill people because they said things I don't like." That's your "freedom of speech."

Your full of shit. The rally or talk wasn't for them but they showed up with weapons and attacked people.

It's a bad joke they don't believe in freedom of speech and you don't believe in self defense.

It's video evidence.

"Your full of shit. The rally or talk wasn't for them,"
There were two rallies.

"but they showed up with weapons and attacked people"
Yes, your Neo-nazi Trumpers showed up with weapons and in some cases have shot people.

"It's a bad joke they don't believe in freedom of speech and you don't believe in self defense."
I believe in freedom of speech, I believe in self-defense. As a result, when the liberals do occasionally defend themselves from constant attacks by right-wing nutjobs who have openly called for "Cracking skulls" and "locking and loading" for decades I'm inclined to just say, "well good."

"It's video evidence."
What is? The part where Sargon babbles for 20 minutes about things? Or the videos where we see Stormtrumpers shooting people and pretend it was legal?

See, the funniest thing about this is every quote you've thrown out of "liberal cultists" is still tame and tepid compared to what you can hear on AM Hate radio from mainstream Republicans every day, going back decades.

And again, at BEST you are just as bad as her. Your initial statement was "this lady said something I don't like, KILL HER!!!"

Dangerous cults, amirite? https://www.reddit.com/r/starterpac....._pack/dgzhorg/

Well there are alot of WRitteN accounts on the Left's side while the Right has video evidence.

Uh-huh. But those oh-so-violent leftists, huh? Clearly attacking poor, defenseless, harmless right-wing and altright people just minding their own business, hm?

when its on video....

Psssst. Let me help you out. You're staring at a collection of stories including people literally stalking people down and murdering them because Trump is president now, so clearly they're allowed to and you're trying to claim some fucking idiots saying things in a youtube video or idiots bashing on each other at a protest is equivalent to it. To say nothing of all the blatant hate crimes committed under the idea that somehow Trump being president just plain means its okay to beat the shit out of gay people, latinos, blacks, etc.

It's a false equivalency, and your determination to protect it is fucking disgusting.

Also, lol. ~Dangerous cults~ indeed. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/04/2.....ness-says.html

Well conservative aren't big on reading...

BTW everything so terrible that the BAMN lady said? Just a normal Tuesday when listening to Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Anne Coulter, or the like at any time in the last 30 years. Liberals complain about neo-nazis who literally say that my family needs to be killed, you're complaining when a liberal says we need to defend ourselves against those crazy people.

You don't really notice all the awful things mainstream conservatives say because they've been mainstream for so long. But they're still saying these awful things.

Funny how all you have to do is fart out a youtube link to a disingenuous twatmouth but everyone else has to have it in triplicate. Okay, here's your legwork done:

Now of course, we have people planning to "crack some skulls" and shooting people for voicing their opinion ( http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle.....-yiannopoulos/ ) and we have violent fascist thugs starting fights (while the cops do nothing http://www.motherjones.com/politics.....s-antifa-trump ) and we have your Dear Leader explaining protesters being allowed to speak violated his free speech ( http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w.....-a7695001.html ) but you'll quibble and defend all of this because your initial journal post was you calling for the censorship and murder of someone because she said something you don't like.

In your own terms, "put a bullet in her head" for daring to say things that offend you. At the very best, you're just as bad as her. At worst Sargon was being dishonest (as usual) and you're alone on that island of hate. So much for "rules that apply to everybody."

But no, let us freak out about an organization I've literally never heard of until now, call for murder and pogroms of it's membership, and do so in defense of someone with ALL the power who has done exactly the same things.

It's funny how much effort you put into defending nazis.

That's a republican game ( http://bipartisanreport.com/2017/04.....right-details/ and http://boingboing.net/2017/01/13/ja.....-trying-t.html ) but the Republican Projection Principle is well-known. If the GOP is making an accusation, they're guilty of doing it.

Hey, I don't know where all of you live, but I feel like I would of heard about all the mass killings that everyone seems to be under the impression are going on all the time...

Seriously, everyone seems to be talking like towns are being levelled and scads of people are dying right now in mainstreet USA and uhhhhhhhhhhhhh they don't seem to be? At all? I mean, yeah, people are dying, it's a hazard of being alive, but not nearly the number it would take to be called a "significant" number in terms of populations.

Do you all ever like... read the things you type out loud? I feel like if you said them out loud, you'd all realize how ridiculous you sound.

Maybe you guys should think about like, de-escalation or something? I mean how about, for starters, everyone just stops talking like it's okay or "just" or something to kill people for their beliefs. I mean, it's one thing to want to defend yourself, but... does no one here want to shoot kneecaps or something? You all seem to talk like you just can't WAIT to see some people die. As if loss of life could be construed as a good thing and not a failure of everyone involved when it occurs.

Can we all just agree that no, it isn't okay to wish harm on people who disagree with you, whether that be protesters against your favourite monarch/president/godfigure or yes, literal fucking Nazis? Intentions are not actions, am I the only one who learned anything from Minority Report?

Look at the link....
See the cult...
Listen to the cult...

If the communists are being attacked and not permitted to speak I will stand by their rights.

That is not the case however its the cultists.

By any means necessary is a horrible philosophy to try to live by simply because it means you will do whatever it takes to get what you want. Including any form of criminal or immoral act. If you have to eat a baby to get what you want,you'll eat a baby. You might as well declare yourself a sub-human monster and just be honest about it.