placeholder

Great Point! The U.S. Army just gives them a gun and tells them 'You figure it out". It doesn't provide anything in the way of training. And it doesn't have NCO's to supervise them should they have the misfortune to find themselves in combat.

Thanks for giving me permission to hold that opinion. And I certainly can't stop you from holding the position that it's OK for a minor to be an armed vigilante, if that's what you believe. But whether you believe it or not, It's obviously nuts.

Well, since in your opinion age is irrelevant in the matter of someone carrying a gun, I don't put much faith in its soundness.

Where in the USA was there segregation that disfavored white people?

Did the jury decide that his behavior was reasonable and responsible? They decided that it was OK for 17 year old to be an armed vigilante? They acquitted him of murder on the grounds that he acted in self defense. They didn't decide that his behavior that night was reasonable and responsible.

Legally, it doesn't matter. But anyone with a grain of sense would know that there should be no place for a 17 year old armed vigilante.

I guess you and I will just have to disagree on whether or not it's OK for a minor to be an armed vigilante. I'm taking the crazy position that it's not But who knows?. Maybe more armed 17 year old kids ought to be recruited for vigilante duty.

If he hadn't been there, it's dubious that anyone would have been killed. Sound judgement shouldn't be expected of a 17 year old. That's why auto insurance companies charge teenagers a lot higher premiums.

17 years old, a dropout, untrained in policing, Rittenhouse wass certainly doing something wrong by carrying a loaded weapon into a volatile situation. Because of a peculiarity in Wisconsin's law, namely that the gun has to have a barrel less than 16 inches for it to be illegal, he wasn't guilty of committing a crime. That doesn't mean it isn't wrong for an armed minor to have been there.

I think in the case of Hungary, the odds are overwhelming that it's both.

First off, if its done with the number of respondents Rasmussen , it's statistically invalid. That's because the sampling of subgroups is too small. More importantly, even if Rasmussen polled a large enough sample of black respondents, it reads like a clickbait question designed to elicit certain responses. A fairer way to do the poll would have been to ask 2 questions: Is it OK to be black? Is it OK to be white? But this is Rasmussen. And as their press release indicated, they have an axe to grind, or rather bait that needs clicking.

So you wrote this why? "Sunak inherited a load of rubbish, starting with the duplicity of Teresa May's main 'negotiator' the now knighted Ollie Robbins." As I noted, a convenient scapegoat.

Really? You mean they're all living in their modest little houses near the beach? In addition do you think most of the Thais living in village kilometers away were mostly locals? More foreigners moving in means more opportunities for Thais to find work.

And this differs how from the Europeans, Americans, Canadians, and Australians who came before and are still coming?

Civil servants make convenient scapegoats. Ya think what Robbins helped negotiate wasn't done with the approval of the PM?

No, It's because the Russians remember what Stalingrad meant to the Germans that he cited it. Or do you believe that General Zhukov is commanding the Russian war effort from the grave?

It seems unlikely that the EU will agree to eliminating the role of the European Court of Justice in adjudicating disagreements. I think Sunak has made that a sine qua non.

OK. But saying that Nazi Genocide was white-on-white simply isn't true unless you believe that there is such a thing as being genuinely white. The Nazis believed that Jews and Gypsies were sub-human.

How Did Jews Become White Folks? The American nation was founded and developed by the Nordic race, but if a few more million members of the Alpine, Mediterranean, and Semitic races are poured among us, the result must inevitably be a hybrid race of people as worthless and futile as the goodfor-nothing mongrels of Central America and Southeastern Europe https://nelsonssociology101.weebly.com/uploads/2/6/1/6/26165328/jews.pdf

Technically white? Since "white" as applied to humans isn't a scientifically valid classification, how could Jews technically be so? For most of the history of racism in Europe, Jews were widely regarded as a race apart.

I think the Nazis would be quite offended by your claim that the genocide they inflicted on the Jews and Gypsies was white-on-white violence.

So many reflexively pavlovian right wing tropes on display here Claiming that critics of Scott Adams believe they are "your intellectual and moral superiors" is just the kind of unproveable claim that the right wing consistently engages in. Are you a mind reader? And another claim of mind reading. "Second, they don't believe you are entitled to any of your own OPINIONS, unless they agree with them.' So some class of comments shouldn't be criticized, and if they are, that means you reject the right for others to hold them? Such nonsense. "Mao-inspired, post-modernist take on facts" Mao-inspired? Really, Because if there's one thing that the Chinese communist party and Mao himself believed is that ethical systems are just constructs with no connection to truth? How ignorant of the fanatically self-righteous Mao and Chinese communism does one have to be to make such a ridiculous claim.? "Two wrongs make a right". First off, Rasmussen presenting the poll as a valid survey of black Americans is false. It was a random survey (at least by Rasmussen's dubious methods) of all Americans. The problem is that while a poll of all members might have a margin of error of plus or minus 5%, a smaller subset, such as those of black Americans is far more likely to be wildly inaccurate. There is also Rasmussen's openly right wing political stance to consider. Here's the opening paragraph of their press release about their poll "Despite years of progressive activism, a majority of Americans still don’t buy into the “woke” narrative that white people have a monopoly on racism." https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/general_lifestyle/january_2023/not_woke_yet_most_voters_reject_anti_white_beliefs And how is it relevant to this issue that more humans died under communist extremism than under fascist extremism? If anything is proof of the Pavlovian nature of your comments, it's how you were triggered to veer into irrelevancy.. Your comments smack of lots of resentment and very little sense.

What you failed to note was that the typhus epidemic killed thousands of Athenians, among them Pericles, their leader, during the early phase of the Peloponnesian war. Do you believe that if there has been a typhus vaccine available to the Athenians, the wise course would have been not to be vaccinated? And, by the way, it was Thucydides, not Herodotus, who reported on the Plague which occurred around 430 BC.

Well, to be fair, there is a significant contingent of members who would make such a comment seriously.

An injunction restrains someone from doing something. How does that apply in this case? Did Carlson have to an FOIA request?