Trump inspired hate

[Freddie53]

Thank you, Freddie for your kind words, though, I must say I hardly consider myself a shining example for other contributors here... only a member of a team of others who, including yourself, I have admiration for...

each fighting the good fight by bringing their OWN expertise, insight, perspective, empathy, concern, and personal experiences to us, sharing information about things I otherwise would have never known, and from whom I'VE learned a GREAT deal.

And yes, as you have written, HOPEFULLY, WE "have made a [positive] difference in the lives" of at least a FEW who have read" OUR posts, so that they may "rise from the gutter of racism, sexism," and hate.

You are so right about others sharing information that we did not know. In some cases, I sorta knew, but needed validation. In other cases I've learned others perspectives that I would never know without reading here.

Maybe one day humanity may learn to value each person by what they like, think, say and do. When we think about it, the idea that anyone can have their character be judged by the pigment of their skin as asinine.

I am a retired teacher. My fear is that one of my former students will be killed in cold blood for no other reason except the amount of pigment in his skin. I was visiting with a dear friend who is black and she shared the same concern. Her grandsons are both straight A students and great athletes.

My friend and her daughter and son in law should not have to worry every time the sun goes down that before the sun comes up the next morning one of her grandsons has been murdered in the first degree for being black.

I've come to understand that it is not enough to form the best opinions and beliefs about other people. We need to be proactive. I'm learning a lot about that here.

I am hopeful that my being here and posting will not only make a difference in others, but it will help better define how I feel and what I can do in the world about what I see that is wrong.

When the issue of blackface came up, at first I didn't catch the problem. Then someone posted here at LPSG how the term blackface was used in the past. As soon as I got to the term minstrel. That is all I needed to know.

I remember a minstrel show being down as a fund raiser to raise money for those who need glasses, but can't afford them. I had never seen anything like a minstrel before. I was still in elementary school at the time. We had just moved to this Southern town. I'm very proud that my father quietly, but surely ended minstrels in the town where I lived a good part of my childhood. My father gently and guietly explained how demeaning doing minstrel shows was to the African American community. What is important is that there never was another minstrel show done for any reason in that small town. I've tried to follow that same example that my father set.

I remember my father saying that the purpose of the fund raiser was noble, that is providing glasses for those who can't afford them. But that did not justify using mockery of an ethnic group to raise the funds. I can't remember exactly how he said it. He had a way of saying things that people could understand and also respect what he had to say. The thrust of his message to the people of that small town has stayed with me through the decades I have lived since.

Combating racism requires us to look for the small stuff that is wrong. The reason I say that is that the large bad stuff is made up of lots of small bad stuff. (If that makes any sense.) It is the little battles that we win that add up to someday being totally victorious in the big battles of life.

I keep reminding myself that each person needs to remember that if a person is not part of the solution then by default he becomes part of the problem.

If I have helped one person see how racism is wrong, then my posts will have been worth it all.

There have been a few points that I being white had not seen, but I became aware because I read your posts.

 

[b.c.]

^ Thank you, Freddie, for your post and for again sharing your story of your experiences with the minstrel show. In your case, the apple hasn't fallen far from the tree, it seems, because like your father, you too have a way of saying things that people can understand and respect... even those who'd disagree, I suspect.

And yes, it makes plenty sense to say large bad stuff (greater evils) are borne of many smaller evils - too long festering, ignored, and even EMPLOYED by those who seek to USE them for their own benefit - via appeals to the basest of sentiments.

Thanks for being here.

 

[b.c.]

White Nationalist, Called A 'Domestic Terrorist' By Feds, Granted Pretrial Release | HuffPost

"A federal judge has ordered the pre-trial release of a U.S. Coast Guard lieutenant that prosecutors called a “domestic terrorist” and accused of plotting to “murder innocent civilians on a scale rarely seen in this country.”

Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert Hur argued in a court filing ahead of Thursday’s hearing that Hasson’s stockpiling of weapons and creation of a target list justified keeping him in prison until his trial.

In August 2017, Hur disclosed, Hasson searched online for the phrases “white homeland” and “when are whites going to wake up.” Three months later, he searched “please god let there be a race war.” Last March, Hur wrote, Hasson searched for “best n-------- killing gun” and visited various websites that sold guns.

The day before Hasson’s detention hearing, his lawyer wrote the judge a letter citing two recent cases where men who possessed firearms and made violent threats were released ahead of trial. But there is also precedent for detaining suspects like Hasson: A judge granted pretrial detention for Jeffrey Clark, a neo-Nazi in Washington, D.C., who was also arrested on gun charges after his family warned the feds he might try to start a race war."

 

[Freddie53]

This is such a ridiculously false assertion and so far off the mark that it barely even MERITS a reply.

Anyone who has been paying attention to what I've been writing knows my commentaries are not anti-White, anti-Christian (I happen to be Catholic ... bud), anti-men, nor ANY of that garbage you're insinuating.

And the fact that you'd try to SUGGEST it shows how bereft YOU are of any logical argumentation or defense for that which YOU try to defend. It's just another BULLSHIT right wing version of trying to make us out to be the "haters."

My (OUR) "MOTIVE" here is simply the CONTINUED hope and dream that we, as a society, can aspire to the noblest of sentiments and ideas re. the treatment of PEOPLE - regardless of their race, sexuality, religion, age or origin.

That we, as a PEOPLE should embody diversity, acceptance, compassion, and empathy for those in need, those disparaged, those displaced, discriminated against, demonized and marginalized by ideology that seeks to "OTHER" them.

Basic human DECENCY and CIVIL RIGHTS... That's our "MOTIVE."

Is that SIMPLE ENOUGH for you? BTW, what's YOURS??

I've been following B. C. for years. He sometimes is quite upfront in stating his views. However, B. C. has defended equal rights for everyone who is a resident of the United States. I believe I can state and prove that B.C. believes that all people in the US should be given the same opportunities and chances that everyone else has.

By that I mean:

The US Constitution is color blind. Our laws and Constitution do not recognize color, religious preference, gender, sexual preferences, ethnic background and/or age. If I left something out it is a memory failure, not deliberate. Everyone who is a resident of the US has the same civil rights. There is nothing in our laws that indicate that some people should have it better because of the indicators I have named.

Some of us inherit lots of money while others don't inherit any. Is this fair? Yes, because the money belongs to someone. The money does not belong to the state. If I have saved a $1000 and decide to give it to my child right now or later when I die that is my choice, not anyone else's.

However. it is illegal for me to get a $1000 from the state because I am white, Latino, black, male, female, gay, straight, transgender. young, old, Christian, Muslim, Hindu or agnostic.

Just look at the words that Trump has said. Trump has said on several occasions that people who are white supremacists are good people. It is not BC's or my fault that Trump has defended people who are racists. We have the video where Trump is talking about grabbing women's vagina. That is not BC's or my fault that this is what we know that these are the actual words of Donald Trump.

It is not your fault either. And I want to make it clear that it is not your fault that Trump has said and done some of the things he has said and done.

What does concern me is there are people who deny that Trump had said and done what it is that Trump has said and done. It appears that you are either defending these comments and actions by our president or you are denying them.

Consider this:

Johnny signs a contract to play pro football. He will make a lot more money playing football then I will make in several years teaching school. The reason for that is that Johnny has a talent for playing football. Johnny is not going to make a lot more money that I do because he is white or black, gay or straight, etc. Johnny will make a lot more money than I do because he can run three times faster than I can. Johnny can catch the football when it is thrown to him. I can't even get to the area where the ball is throne.

My point is that there are reasons why some make more than others, but it is not because they have any rights that that others don't have. We all have the same basic rights if we are residents of the United States.

Everyone that is a poster to the LPSG is free to believe what they wish to believe. If you believe that Trump is exactly what the US needs, then by all means feel free to state your beliefs.

Some of us agree with Donald Trump and some of us disagree with Donald Trump. I would hope that all of us could come to an agreement on what Donald has actually said.

It is not B. C. or my fault what Donald Trump has said. We have videos of what Trump has said. It doesn't upset me if you agree with him. It does upset me just a little when people want to pretend that Trump didn't say what we have on video what he said.
Trump has a totally different vision for the US than BC and I have. I believe that the US is doing well if all citizens have access to some very basic qualities of life. Trump believes the US is doing well if he and other billionaires can make all the money they can off the backs of others.

Let's face it. There is a difference of vision. I believe I can defend my vision. My vision of America is a nation where the minimum wage is enough that if two people are partners and they both work 40 hours, they should have access to a good education, health care, water, sewage, and basic services. At present the US is in last place among the Western world in standard of living for the middle class.

Trump gave a huge tax cut for the wealthy. Trump is proposing massive cuts in Social Security and in Medicare. It is not BC's or my fault that Trump is proposing and doing things that hurt the middle class.

If you approve of what Trump wants to do, you have a right to believe what you want to believe. I can hope that you can be honest with yourself and other posters here at the LPSG what Trump has said and what Trump has done as the president of the United States.

 

[b.c.]

You see, folks, it just SO HAPPENS that being a white supremacist out to kill mass people with a firearm, like Christopher Hasson, doesn't make you A TERRORIST. It's only terrorism if you're someone "other":

Why So Many Violent White Supremacists Aren’t Charged With Domestic Terrorism – Mother Jones

"A federal judge on Thursday announced that Christopher Hasson, a US Coast Guard lieutenant accused of plotting to kill politicians and journalists, may be released from jail ahead of his trial. US District Judge Charles B. Day said that while he had “grave concerns” about Hasson, a 50-year-old white supremacist from Maryland who had been stockpiling weapons for at least a decade, he could not fairly deny bond because Hasson had only been charged with gun and drug offenses and not a crime like terrorism.

Given the scope of Hasson’s plotting, his case has reopened a debate about why it’s difficult to prosecute violent white supremacist schemes as terrorism.

Federal prosecutors say Hasson... had been planning to “murder innocent civilians on a scale rarely seen in this country”; his hit list included prominent Democratic officials like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, and Chuck Schumer, along with journalists like MSNBC host Joe Scarborough and CNN’s Don Lemon.

He allegedly wrote that he wanted to establish “a white homeland,” and he searched online for the “best” gun to kill black people [NOTE: this is the nice version of what this fkr actually WROTE] and the home addresses of two Supreme Court justices.

Why hasn’t Hasson been charged as a terrorist? In part, it’s because US terrorism laws make it harder to convict for certain acts of violence if they are motivated by white supremacy.

There are about 50 terrorism statutes that can be used to prosecute far-right domestic terrorists, including for things like using a bomb, which can be characterized as a weapon of mass destruction, or for attacking a government official.

According to Mary McCord, a longtime federal prosecutor who was formerly deputy assistant attorney general for national security at the Justice Department, there’s no terrorism statute that applies to someone who uses a firearm or a vehicle to commit violence motivated by white supremacy. For crimes involving these weapons, however, it is possible to convict if the perpetrator was motivated by a connection to an international extremist group.

“If I’m the San Bernardino shooter, or if I’m Omar Mateen at Pulse nightclub and I commit my crime with a firearm, I’ve done it on behalf of ISIS, so I can be charged with material support to a terrorist organization,” she says. “If I do the same as a white supremacist”—think Pittsburgh synagogue shooter Robert Bowers or James Field, who used a vehicle to kill in Charlottesville, Virginia—”there’s no terrorism crime I can be charged with..."


Isn't that special?

 

[b.c.]

Another act of terrorism, inspired by hate based demagoguery:

Shooting at Chabad synagogue near San Diego kills one, injures three; suspect in custody
Suspect in deadly synagogue shooting near San Diego wrote anti-Semitic manifesto - oregonlive.com
The San Diego synagogue shooting is the latest in a trend of anti-Semitic incidents - Los Angeles Times

And in RELATED NEWS:

Fox reporter blasts colleagues in leaked email, you sound like a 'White Supremacist chat room'

Exposed: Military Investigating 4 More Servicemen For Ties To White Nationalist Group | HuffPost

 

[swingfun]

How about blame the shooter instead of our president. Were any of the mass shootings before blamed on our past presidents? I dont think so...oh and MAGA.

 

[b.c.]

How about blame the shooter instead of our president. Were any of the mass shootings before blamed on our past presidents? I dont think so...oh and MAGA.

YOUR president is a bigot, a hater, a fascist, and a demagogue.

"The shooting in Pittsburgh last year was the the deadliest attack on Jewish people in U.S. history, and the attacker made clear that he wanted to eradicate Jews. Jewish community centers around the country received dozens of bomb threats in 2017. The 2016 presidential campaign included anti-Jewish imagery. White supremacists have marched through the streets of Charlottesville, Va., with torches chanting, “Jews will not replace us!”

Data indicate the problem is getting worse. The number of anti-Semitic incidents and crimes has been rising rapidly after years of decline, though the most recent annual tallies are still below the peaks of the last two decades.

The Anti-Defamation League has tracked anti-Semitic incidents since 1979, drawing on reports from victims, police and news publications. The worst year was 1994, with 2,066 incidents. By 2013, the total fell to 751. It has been rising ever since, with the biggest all-time annual jump coming in 2017, when the tally climbed 57% to 1,986. (Data for 2018 have not yet been released).

“We’re not necessarily seeing a historic rise in anti-Semitism when you zoom out,” said Brian Levin, director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at Cal State San Bernardino. “But the anti-Semites and white supremacists are more emboldened.”

Last year, the Anti-Defamation League reported that “4.2 million anti-Semitic tweets were shared or re-shared in English on Twitter” over a yearlong period ending in January 2018.

“A lot of anti-Semitism has now gone from public spaces to virtual spaces,” Levin said. “We have a fragmentation of hate groups. We now have loners, autonomous actors and small local groups filling the gap where the largest groups had previously exerted some kind of prominence. Not anymore.”

The Anti-Defamation League and other civil rights groups have pointed out that the steep rise in anti-Semitic incidents corresponds to ... Trump’s rise to power and blame him for fueling anti-Jewish sentiment.

The groups said [Trump's] anti-immigrant and anti-refugee pronouncements have emboldened white supremacist groups, which have embraced him.

[Trump] has also tweeted anti-Jewish and anti-Muslim memes from known extremists, including a campaign tweet that featured a symbol similar to the Star of David, images of cash and the phrase “most corrupt candidate ever” to describe Hillary Clinton.

In late 2017, Trump tweeted anti-Muslim videos from the far-right group Britain First, drawing condemnation from Prime Minister Theresa May.

Activists said Trump’s vilification of liberal philanthropist George Soros, whom he has accused of hiring people to protest conservative causes, has played into conspiracy theories about wealthy Jews."

source: The San Diego synagogue shooting is the latest in a trend of anti-Semitic incidents - Los Angeles Times

 

[deleted15807]

You see, folks, it just SO HAPPENS that being a white supremacist out to kill mass people with a firearm, like Christopher Hasson, doesn't make you A TERRORIST. It's only terrorism if you're someone "other":

Why So Many Violent White Supremacists Aren’t Charged With Domestic Terrorism – Mother Jones

"A federal judge on Thursday announced that Christopher Hasson, a US Coast Guard lieutenant accused of plotting to kill politicians and journalists, may be released from jail ahead of his trial. US District Judge Charles B. Day said that while he had “grave concerns” about Hasson, a 50-year-old white supremacist from Maryland who had been stockpiling weapons for at least a decade, he could not fairly deny bond because Hasson had only been charged with gun and drug offenses and not a crime like terrorism.

Given the scope of Hasson’s plotting, his case has reopened a debate about why it’s difficult to prosecute violent white supremacist schemes as terrorism.

Federal prosecutors say Hasson... had been planning to “murder innocent civilians on a scale rarely seen in this country”; his hit list included prominent Democratic officials like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, and Chuck Schumer, along with journalists like MSNBC host Joe Scarborough and CNN’s Don Lemon.

He allegedly wrote that he wanted to establish “a white homeland,” and he searched online for the “best” gun to kill black people [NOTE: this is the nice version of what this fkr actually WROTE] and the home addresses of two Supreme Court justices.

Why hasn’t Hasson been charged as a terrorist? In part, it’s because US terrorism laws make it harder to convict for certain acts of violence if they are motivated by white supremacy.

There are about 50 terrorism statutes that can be used to prosecute far-right domestic terrorists, including for things like using a bomb, which can be characterized as a weapon of mass destruction, or for attacking a government official.

According to Mary McCord, a longtime federal prosecutor who was formerly deputy assistant attorney general for national security at the Justice Department, there’s no terrorism statute that applies to someone who uses a firearm or a vehicle to commit violence motivated by white supremacy. For crimes involving these weapons, however, it is possible to convict if the perpetrator was motivated by a connection to an international extremist group.

“If I’m the San Bernardino shooter, or if I’m Omar Mateen at Pulse nightclub and I commit my crime with a firearm, I’ve done it on behalf of ISIS, so I can be charged with material support to a terrorist organization,” she says. “If I do the same as a white supremacist”—think Pittsburgh synagogue shooter Robert Bowers or James Field, who used a vehicle to kill in Charlottesville, Virginia—”there’s no terrorism crime I can be charged with..."


Isn't that special?

If Sandy Hook or Las Vegas had been done by a Muslim we would have seen a slew of new laws and new wars but because they weren't we will have no new laws and no new wars. Expect them to continue unabated.

 

[Freddie53]

Perhaps it’s not a rediclulous false assertion, nor off the mark, if one feels and interprets your posts that way. Similar to how you choose to interpret the posts of others, and spin and run with them (over, and over, and over . . . .).

Also, you habitually use the pronouns “we, “us,” “our.” Most of us here speak for ourselves. Kindly let us know for whom you are speaking? Who are you referencing when you use these pronouns to, presumably, strengthen your position as one of the dominant view or opinion.

Lastly, you claim to be a Catholic. So am I. And on this holiest of Holy Days, I suggest you reflect and respect others here for their differences. Turn the other check, just as Christ did, and move on. That would be a true Catholic.

Happy Easter.

He should turn the other check as he is a good Catholic like you who always "turn the other check, just like Christ did, and move on."

That is what you always do isn't it?

 

[Klingsor]

How about blame the shooter instead of our president. Were any of the mass shootings before blamed on our past presidents? I dont think so...oh and MAGA.

Because we didn't have president like *this* before. He's definitely make America *something*.

 

[b.c.]

Hate-filled letter posted online claims to be from synagogue shooting suspect.
.
John Earnest: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know | Heavy.com

meanwhile...

White nationalists interrupt author at Politics and Prose - The Washington Post
.
Maxine Waters outraged by release of death-threatening terrorist: We are walking targets

from the plus column:

NJ Gov. Murphy orders Rebel-tainted Mississippi state flag out of park overlooking Statue of Liberty

 

[SonyToyo]

If Sandy Hook or Las Vegas had been done by a Muslim we would have seen a slew of new laws and new wars but because they weren't we will have no new laws and no new wars. Expect them to continue unabated.

We didn’t see new laws after Orlando or San Diego.

Your argument is useless.

 

[gr8gatsby]

We didn’t see new laws after Orlando or San Diego.

Your argument is useless.

You are right Sony, we should have seen massive changes in gun laws after that terrible shooting. America failed again.

 

[Jjz1109]

He should turn the other check as he is a good Catholic like you who always "turn the other check, just like Christ did, and move on."

That is what you always do isn't it?

Awwwww, aren’t you special? Defending BC?

If you read the thread in order, you’ll get the messaging. The reference was to the moderator’s recent addition of rules (also see post # 4259 in this thread) in the Politics forum, and to respect other’s views and differences (you know, tolerance???), something many of you know nothing about. No surprise, as you guys love to take statements out of context, put on your spin, and fit into your crazy-ass agenda. When will you ever learn? Everyone’s on to your BS.

 

[Klingsor]

No surprise, as you guys love to take statements out of context, put on your spin, and fit into your crazy-ass agenda.

Freddie may be many things, but I don't see anything crazy-ass about him.

Not 'til I get him drunk, anyway.

 

[Jjz1109]

Freddie may be many things, but I don't see anything crazy-ass about him.

Not 'til I get him drunk, anyway.

Awwwww, aren’t you special? Defending BC?

If you read the thread in order, you’ll get the messaging. The reference was to the moderator’s recent addition of rules (also see post # 4259 in this thread) in the Politics forum, and to respect other’s views and differences (you know, tolerance???), something many of you know nothing about. No surprise, as you guys love to take statements out of context, put on your spin, and fit into your crazy-ass agenda. When will you ever learn? Everyone’s on to your BS.

 

[keenobserver]

Awwwww, aren’t you special? Defending BC?

If you read the thread in order, you’ll get the messaging. The reference was to the moderator’s recent addition of rules (also see post # 4259 in this thread) in the Politics forum, and to respect other’s views and differences (you know, tolerance???), something many of you know nothing about. No surprise, as you guys love to take statements out of context, put on your spin, and fit into your crazy-ass agenda. When will you ever learn? Everyone’s on to your BS.

So how did your mirror answer you? Clearly that is who you are talking to, having just exactly done what you accuse others of doing.

 

[deleted15807]

So how did your mirror answer you? Clearly that is who you are talking to, having just exactly done what you accuse others of doing.

I was about to say the same thing

 

[b.c.]

Awwwww, aren’t you special? Defending BC?

If you read the thread in order, you’ll get the messaging. The reference was to the moderator’s recent addition of rules (also see post # 4259 in this thread) in the Politics forum, and to respect other’s views and differences (you know, tolerance???), something many of you know nothing about. No surprise, as you guys love to take statements out of context, put on your spin, and fit into your crazy-ass agenda. When will you ever learn? Everyone’s on to your BS.

He isn't defending me, bud.

He's correctly pointing out how you disingenuously and connivingly try to USE Christian doctrine as a means to SHUT US DOWN... to silence us from bringing up, discussing, and condemning that which YOU choose to either defend or ignore.

Btw, the rules recently added at the top of this forum were ALWAYS there... in the TOS. And there is nothing in those rules that says we must accept views, ideologies, doctrines, viewpoints, rhetoric, and demagoguery that is offensive, bigoted, retrogressive, reprehensible, distorted, and/or otherwise objectionable to us.