Topic: Just remembering
Anonymous A started this discussion 4 weeks ago #132,351
Back when Obama was in office and he had over 3 million deported, I don't remember people throwing these conniption fits about it. They were going into work places, homes and stopping cars on the highways dragging them out and running them out of the country and nobody seemed to give a fuck back then. Maybe they did and it wasn't put out on the internet like it is today. I dunno.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 4 weeks ago, 12 minutes later[^] [v] #1,413,193
The US is a big country with a long border with Mexico. Although, most illegal immigrants are people who fly in and just stay past when their visa expires. Deportation isn’t abnormal or bad, all countries do it, the problem is how Trump is doing it. I’m left wing but I’m fine with deportation, just don’t break up families, don’t send people to countries they didn’t actually originate from, don’t claim people who aren’t gang members are gang members, and don’t put people in concentration camps.
Anonymous B double-posted this 4 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 14 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,194
And definitely don’t send asylum seekers back because when they came if they came illegally it was because they were fearing for their lives and didn’t have time to do it the legal way, which is a completely different situation and protected under international law. People have the right to seek asylum.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 4 weeks ago, 1 hour later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,224
boof joined in and replied with this 4 weeks ago, 23 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,227
SUIT
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 4 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,228
@1,413,193 (B)
Deportation is nothing new to the US government, and was not a main political topic until pretty recently. People are going ape shit over something that has been going on for many years. Back in the 30's there were thousands of Italians deported in New York alone and families broken up. Calling them wops comes from (with out papers) Getting kicked out of your home is never easy, but being here illegal you are taking a risk of that happening and they know that. That's all beside the point I'm gettin at. I get it being upset but to fuck around as they are against the Feds is pure stupidity and it just started the last year or so. I see no reason to act like some of these citizens are acting. This has been going on more than 100 years..and nobody acted like that before. I still don't get it.
Deportation is nothing new to the US government, and was not a main political topic until pretty recently. People are going ape shit over something that has been going on for many years. Back in the 30's there were thousands of Italians deported in New York alone and families broken up. Calling them wops comes from (with out papers) Getting kicked out of your home is never easy, but being here illegal you are taking a risk of that happening and they know that. That's all beside the point I'm gettin at. I get it being upset but to fuck around as they are against the Feds is pure stupidity and it just started the last year or so. I see no reason to act like some of these citizens are acting. This has been going on more than 100 years..and nobody acted like that before. I still don't get it.
boof replied with this 4 weeks ago, 5 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,230
@previous (A)
it doesn't help when the competing party claims you had an open border policy and were gleefully letting in rapists and all that shit, and only the competing party actually will do the deporting so vote for us and not the tranny party or some bullshit
it doesn't help when the competing party claims you had an open border policy and were gleefully letting in rapists and all that shit, and only the competing party actually will do the deporting so vote for us and not the tranny party or some bullshit
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 4 weeks ago, 8 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,234
@previous (boof)
So would that make you get out in the cold, get in Federal agents faces "knowing you are going to get fucked up" or stand out in the streets with a gun waiting for them, again, knowing you are going to get shot and possibly cause other innocent people to get hurt? Honestly would you do that for the reasons you just mentioned?
So would that make you get out in the cold, get in Federal agents faces "knowing you are going to get fucked up" or stand out in the streets with a gun waiting for them, again, knowing you are going to get shot and possibly cause other innocent people to get hurt? Honestly would you do that for the reasons you just mentioned?
boof replied with this 4 weeks ago, 11 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,237
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 4 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,238
@1,413,234 (A)
It’s interesting nobody ever says this about the protestors in Tiananmen. China is bad because they kill protestors, American citizens are bad because they get killed by the government. If you were born in North Korea you’d support Kim Jong Un wholeheartedly.
It’s interesting nobody ever says this about the protestors in Tiananmen. China is bad because they kill protestors, American citizens are bad because they get killed by the government. If you were born in North Korea you’d support Kim Jong Un wholeheartedly.
Anonymous E double-posted this 4 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,239
By the way, you actually do have a right to insult federal agents. It’s protected by the first amendment, you can say whatever you want to them, and it’s illegal for them to physically assault you back.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 4 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,241
@1,413,237 (boof)
A good idea as you are probably better at jacking off than answering a question using logic.
A good idea as you are probably better at jacking off than answering a question using logic.
Anonymous E replied with this 4 weeks ago, 32 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,242
Now you can say, "oh well just because you can doesn’t mean you should." And I agree with that, just because something is legally protected doesn’t make it a good idea. But in all fairness, federal agents signed up for their job knowing full well that the constitution says that American citizens have a right to free expression and that right to free expression includes insulting and yelling at federal agents, so you can’t say it’s not the agents fault. If they didn’t want to deal with that, nobody ever forced them to sign up.
Anonymous E double-posted this 4 weeks ago, 26 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,243
I’m not a federal agent, because I don’t want to deal with that myself.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 4 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,246
@1,413,239 (E)
> By the way, you actually do have a right to insult federal agents. It’s protected by the first amendment, you can say whatever you want to them, and it’s illegal for them to physically assault you back.
But either why would someone do it knowing they are going to get fucked up once they cross the line, which they end up doing most times? Are they that fucking stupid? I still don't get it. why did they just start doing this?
> By the way, you actually do have a right to insult federal agents. It’s protected by the first amendment, you can say whatever you want to them, and it’s illegal for them to physically assault you back.
But either why would someone do it knowing they are going to get fucked up once they cross the line, which they end up doing most times? Are they that fucking stupid? I still don't get it. why did they just start doing this?
Anonymous E replied with this 4 weeks ago, 27 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,247
And you also have a right to own a gun, you can’t shoot somebody just because they have a gun. They have to actually be threatening you.
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 4 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,249
@previous (E)
Nope, it's in the Constitution. Every American has the right to shoot people with a gun. You also have the right to a cruel and unusual punishment for some reason.
Nope, it's in the Constitution. Every American has the right to shoot people with a gun. You also have the right to a cruel and unusual punishment for some reason.
Anonymous E replied with this 4 weeks ago, 50 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,250
@1,413,246 (A)
Do you not understand the difference between a liberal democracy and an authoritarian dictatorship? The right to protest and criticize our government is what makes us different than Russia and China, it’s the reason why we have allies, because people want to live in countries where they have freedom. If you can’t meaningfully oppose the government in any way, the government will do whatever it wants and start rigging elections.
Do you not understand the difference between a liberal democracy and an authoritarian dictatorship? The right to protest and criticize our government is what makes us different than Russia and China, it’s the reason why we have allies, because people want to live in countries where they have freedom. If you can’t meaningfully oppose the government in any way, the government will do whatever it wants and start rigging elections.
Anonymous E double-posted this 4 weeks ago, 27 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,251
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 4 weeks ago, 4 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,252
@1,413,247 (E)
> And you also have a right to own a gun, you can’t shoot somebody just because they have a gun. They have to actually be threatening you.
Hey....you are going off track with this thread. I want to know why these idiots just started doing this over something that has been going on for a hundred of years in this country.
> And you also have a right to own a gun, you can’t shoot somebody just because they have a gun. They have to actually be threatening you.
Hey....you are going off track with this thread. I want to know why these idiots just started doing this over something that has been going on for a hundred of years in this country.
Anonymous E replied with this 4 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,254
@previous (A)
What you just said doesn’t make logical sense. Just because something’s been going on for a hundred years doesn’t mean that people support it. People can change their minds. There’s a reason why people protested slavery and later people protested Jim Crow laws.
What you just said doesn’t make logical sense. Just because something’s been going on for a hundred years doesn’t mean that people support it. People can change their minds. There’s a reason why people protested slavery and later people protested Jim Crow laws.
Anonymous E double-posted this 4 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,256
Society usually doesn’t unanimously agree on anything. For example, during slavery, most white Americans didn’t have a problem with it, and most white Americans thought black Americans were inferior. But there was a minority of white Americans that didn’t necessarily think black Americans were equal, but believed that it was immoral to own human beings as property, then eventually over several generations they became the vast majority. It doesn’t matter how long a particular thing was a certain way, beliefs are just beliefs and are always subject to change.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 4 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,258
@1,413,250 (E)
> Do you not understand the difference between a liberal democracy and an authoritarian dictatorship? The right to protest and criticize our government is what makes us different than Russia and China, it’s the reason why we have allies, because people want to live in countries where they have freedom. If you can’t meaningfully oppose the government in any way, the government will do whatever it wants and start rigging elections.
You really need to read that amendment on the right to protest and comprehend what the law really is on protesting. Just keep this in mind.The First Amendment protects your right to assemble and express your views through protest. However, police and other government officials are allowed to place certain narrow restrictions on the exercise of speech rights. Make sure you’re prepared by brushing up on your rights before heading out into the streets. This is good advice.
> Do you not understand the difference between a liberal democracy and an authoritarian dictatorship? The right to protest and criticize our government is what makes us different than Russia and China, it’s the reason why we have allies, because people want to live in countries where they have freedom. If you can’t meaningfully oppose the government in any way, the government will do whatever it wants and start rigging elections.
You really need to read that amendment on the right to protest and comprehend what the law really is on protesting. Just keep this in mind.The First Amendment protects your right to assemble and express your views through protest. However, police and other government officials are allowed to place certain narrow restrictions on the exercise of speech rights. Make sure you’re prepared by brushing up on your rights before heading out into the streets. This is good advice.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 4 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,260
@1,413,254 (E)
> What you just said doesn’t make logical sense. Just because something’s been going on for a hundred years doesn’t mean that people support it. People can change their minds. There’s a reason why people protested slavery and later people protested Jim Crow laws.
No you are just evading my question again. My question makes perfect sense, if you had any.
> What you just said doesn’t make logical sense. Just because something’s been going on for a hundred years doesn’t mean that people support it. People can change their minds. There’s a reason why people protested slavery and later people protested Jim Crow laws.
No you are just evading my question again. My question makes perfect sense, if you had any.
Anonymous E replied with this 4 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,263
Even if Trump won the 2024 election, Trump got 49.8% of the popular vote and Kamala Harris got 48.3%. So it shouldn’t be surprising to you that half the country doesn’t like Donald Trump. The reason why it looked like a landslide is because of the electoral college. American citizens don’t actually vote for our president, we vote, and then electors see the results of our votes, and then they vote for president. They’re not required by federal law to vote the way that the people voted, but over the years different states put various restrictions on them so now most of them are technically required to vote the same way as the people. But not every elector in the country votes on behalf of the same number of people, so we have this wacky voting system where the results don’t match the popular vote. Trump isn’t actually very popular.
Anonymous E double-posted this 4 weeks ago, 41 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,264
@1,413,260 (A)
I explained why your question doesn’t make sense, so explain why my explanation is wrong. Don’t just say what you said makes sense with no explanation because that’s not an argument.
I explained why your question doesn’t make sense, so explain why my explanation is wrong. Don’t just say what you said makes sense with no explanation because that’s not an argument.
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 4 weeks ago, 8 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,268
The United States used to be majority rural, so the system was originally designed to rig elections in the favor of rich white landowners. Originally, blacks didn’t have the right to vote, only men could vote, only landowners could vote, but slaves were still counted as 3/5ths of a person so that slave states were overrepresented in government. The right white slaveowners didn’t trust poor whites to make informed decisions so they created the electoral college so that in case the people voted for someone they didn’t want to win, the elites could change the outcome of the election.
Anonymous G double-posted this 4 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,270
If you look into it, that hierarchy was originally envisioned by the British. Ireland was the first colony of the British Empire, and in Ireland, the British created a system where only landowners would vote, and British Protestant settlers were given control of the land so that Irish Catholics didn’t have representation in government.
We just took that idea and did it with black people.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plantations_of_Ireland
We just took that idea and did it with black people.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plantations_of_Ireland
Anonymous G triple-posted this 4 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,271
They also killed like a million people, but that’s a tangent…
(The potato famine)
(The potato famine)
(Edited 4 minutes later.)
Anonymous G quadruple-posted this 4 weeks ago, 7 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,413,273
Even in South Africa, there’s this thing about white farmers. There were black people in South Africa before white people got there, and they were feeding themselves just fine. How did it end up that white people own all the farms? The British repeated the same strategy over and over.