The Gaming Den Forum Index The Gaming Den
Welcome to the Gaming Den.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Google
 Search WWW   Search tgdmb.com 
[Non-US] News That Makes You laugh/cry/neither...
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 114, 115, 116 ... 118, 119, 120  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Gaming Den Forum Index -> MPSIMS
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
FrankTrollman
Serious Badass


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 27140

PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Let's play historical madlibs!

The regional government of [1.Region Name] in [2.Countryname] have made a law. The Supreme Court of the country rules the law unconstitutional and orders it to be repealed. The regional government says "We like this law, and we're going to enforce it anyway, court rulings be damned." Then the head of state [3.Person Name] sends federal paramilitaries to enforce the court ruling. Lots of angry white people protest the national government's response and even physically attempt to follow the repealed law, and the national government's paramilitaries beat the crap out of hundreds of people. Eventually the fact that the national government is vastly better armed than the locals wins the day and the law in question is a dead letter.

Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)


-Frank
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Stahlseele
King


Joined: 14 Apr 2010
Posts: 5008
Location: Hamburg, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

OK, who's sockpuppet is DimmyWitty?
_________________
Welcome, to IronHell.
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
deaddmwalking
Duke


Joined: 21 May 2012
Posts: 1615

PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 6:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

First off, I agree with Kaelik 100%. Even though the supreme court of Spain ruled that the referendum should not proceed, I don't know that it was actually illegal - because it is ultimately meaningless. Putting up a 'vote' on SurveyMonkey would have been just as binding (which is non).

If the Supreme Court tells me to avoid taking an action and I take that action, I'm in contempt of court, but the action itself isn't necessarily illegal. Anyone else that wasn't told not to take that action could still do so.

Referendums aren't illegal. Calling for a referendum SHOULDN'T be illegal, and I'm not aware of any Spanish statutes that make it illegal. If the Supreme Court told them they couldn't take the action despite no laws to the contrary then you enforce that by the existing statutes which definitely don't apply to casting ballots in sham elections.

As far as the Catalan referendum - it was meaningless. It's only AFTER that someone can try to create meaning - either by declaring succession OR trying to reach a better agreement about what the Federated State should look like.

And stuff like this happens ALL THE TIME. States and Federal governments disagree about lots of things and they fight about who gets to make the decisions. And sometimes the Federal Government oversteps its limits and sometimes the states do.

But under no circumstances should Federal troops start smashing the faces of American citizens because they live in a sanctuary city that doesn't support deportation.

There's a lot going on, but Independence never happened. A Rebellion never happened. Worst case it was a 'mass demonstration'.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Voss
Prince


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 3807

PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 7:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

deaddmwalking wrote:
Anyone else that wasn't told not to take that action could still do so.

No, it is still illegal. You don't have to specifically tell every individual person not to do something.

Referendums are a legal process- they aren't spontaneous bouts of voting by random people who got together for a drink. When the government legitimately shoots them down as part of the normal process of ratification, yes, they are illegal.

So obviously you don't 100% agree with Kaelik, because you are honestly saying the exact opposite of what he is.
Quote:
Even though the supreme court of Spain ruled that the referendum should not proceed, I don't know that it was actually illegal

That is literally what that first part means. The relevant court ruled that the referendum was illegal.

Quote:
As far as the Catalan referendum - it was meaningless. It's only AFTER that someone can try to create meaning - either by declaring succession OR trying to reach a better agreement about what the Federated State should look like.

It wasn't. It had a shitload of meaning, but it's buried under low turnout and
state pressure and the Catalan government somehow knowing the outcome was 90% in favor despite many ballot boxes being carried off by police.

So the meaning of the referendum NOW is that Spain is backing off from ineffectually applied violence that actually strengthened the Catalan independence position, and going back to courts and negotiation between the Spanish government and the Catalan state government.


Quote:
And sometimes the Federal Government oversteps its limits and sometimes the states do

Yes. And those limits are defined by laws. If one or the other (or both) act outside of those limits, it is illegal.


But no- the worse case is what actually happened- an illegal referendum. The protests and demonstrations happened afterwards, and (especially the scheduled one) weren't actually illegal.

@Zinny- ah, your butthurt, presumptions and assumptions are fucking hilarious. Not at all relevant, and mostly incorrect, but still hilarious.


Last edited by Voss on Fri Oct 06, 2017 7:20 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dimmy
1st Level


Joined: 16 Sep 2017
Posts: 26

PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 7:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Point 1: If somebody's bound and determined to believe I'm a sock-puppet, or a sentient singing cream-puff, or a dog on the Internet or whatever, they're obviously never going to accept any evidence I'm not...but that doesn't actually answer the question. Stahlseele, do you believe that Spain is currently, today, in a literal state of civil war?

Point 2: Trollman, your mad-libs game is cute, but it's also dodging the question. Do you believe that Spain is currently, today, in a literal state of civil war?

Point 2a: If your point was that any defiance of national law by sub-national bodies constitutes a full-scale revolt against the government, I can fill in your mad-libs with "practically the entire U.S.", "the U.S.", and "not applicable", because this --

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_cannabis_by_U.S._jurisdiction#/media/File:Map-of-US-state-cannabis-laws.svg

I assume you do not believe the United States is currently, today, in a literal state of civil war. And yet all but five of the country's 55 assorted states and territories is in blatant defiance of federal laws regarding marijuana as an absolutely-forbidden-without-exception "Schedule I substance". The good ol' District of Columbia itself is in defiance of federal laws. And in many of those states and territories, they've been non-compliant for years. Plural. How is this possible? Why aren't hippies and stoners being exploded with Hellfire missiles even as we speak?

Point 3: Ancient History, you say that nobody has claimed that this is an armed revolt. Being a dim-wit -- Stahlseele is right about that one, albeit unnecessarily childish what with those diminutive "Ys", but what else can we expect from an attention-seeking baby -- that is exactly the point I'm trying to establish. Because Stahlseele keeps saying there's no other way to describe what's going on in Spain except "rebellion/civil war". Zinegata has referred at least once to "the Catalan rebels", and in that same post, he or she said "Frank and I are simply pointing out that Catalan is in fact in a state of rebellion"; in an earlier post, he or she declared "that Catalan f***wits are still trying to declare independence makes this an ongoing rebellion" and went on for several paragraphs about "the reality of war". Direct quotes.

So you can see why a dumb prole like myself could get confused. It sure sounds an awful lot like they're saying this is, right this minute, an honest-to-Franco Spanish civil war. I know that is ludicrous, and I must therefore be incorrect. And you say it is incorrect: "It is not, nor has anyone claimed, that this is an armed revolt". Great! Um...how exactly should I interpret those sentences, then?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Stahlseele
King


Joined: 14 Apr 2010
Posts: 5008
Location: Hamburg, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 8:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

If you had read the things i wrote as closely as you suggest trying to nitpick stuff you do not like . . you would have noticed that no, i never ever claimed it to be in an active state of civil war.
I only asked you, and i don't actually remember who else and i am too lazy to go back and check, what you want to call the situation of a part of a country wanting and probably trying to secede from said country.
You do not want the word rebellion used.
You do not want the words civil war used.
So, what? Gonna simply call it secession instead?
What are you going to call that situation?
_________________
Welcome, to IronHell.
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mask_De_H
Duke


Joined: 18 Jun 2009
Posts: 1784

PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Stahlseele wrote:
If you had read the things i wrote as closely as you suggest trying to nitpick stuff you do not like . . you would have noticed that no, i never ever claimed it to be in an active state of civil war.
I only asked you, and i don't actually remember who else and i am too lazy to go back and check, what you want to call the situation of a part of a country wanting and probably trying to secede from said country.
You do not want the word rebellion used.
You do not want the words civil war used.
So, what? Gonna simply call it secession instead?
What are you going to call that situation?


A clusterfuck?
_________________
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
deaddmwalking
Duke


Joined: 21 May 2012
Posts: 1615

PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 9:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

I'm going to call it a dispute about sovereignty.

When the laws don't speak to something, it isn't illegal. It's undefined. Both parties are trying to get a more favorable definition approved and agreed upon. Both are using tools at their disposal to move their agenda forward. That's what should happen.

Spain made a tactical error by using violence where it was not warranted and targeting the wrong people. There were a lot of alternatives that they could have done. Personally, I'd have let the referendum happen while explaining how non-binding and illegal it was. Then I would let the parliament vote. If they voted for something that didn't follow the rule of law I would either arrest them or charge them with dereliction of duty or some such and have them removed from office. I would not acknowledge that they had declared independence and as long as the rest of the world doesn't recognize them, it isn't a problem.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nachtigallerator
Journeyman


Joined: 25 Jun 2009
Posts: 120

PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 11:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

@deaddmwalking:
Have you considered the fact that Spain is not a common law system? We (meaning europeans, and brits no longer count at this point) don't really have the idea of "contempt of court" that people in the common law tradition have, to the point that it's impossible to translate that term directly. The power of the judge to stop you from disrupting the proceedings and disobeying his orders is limited to whatever you do in court. If for instance a german court wanted to tell you to stop doing X or be punished, they would have to either punish you right now in the hopes that that serves as a lesson, or specify a punishment, grant conditional discharge, and include things you should not do in the judgement. Now, the Constituational Court did not tell you not to vote in the referendum, because giving orders to citizens is not what constitutional courts do. They review the legality of a decision from other branches of government. Consequences or the lack thereof falls to the executive branch. And if a court declares an act of parliament illegal, and people still follow through on what that act was supposed to allow, then that is not a grey area where you can actually still do that thing because it wasn't explicitly forbidden in the court ruling. That is a bizarre interpretation of what the anulment of a law means and more importantly does not mean. The law of the land continues to apply, so you can very well be breaking the law in this constellation, and you might want to not do it if you're careful. Acts of parliament are not usually voided unless they are starkly in conflict with other laws. You seem to operate on the assumption that only the referendum bill and the court decision that rejected it matter, and that's simply not the case.

https://www.quora.com/Does-Spain-have-sedition-laws

That is the best source on spanish sedition law I could dig up on short notice, because I'm not literate in Spanish and couldn't verify a citation if I tried. Heck, I don't even know if the spanish penal code is on the internet in an authorized version or not. It would be really useful if someone here had the spanish skills to check. But from what that unauthorized translation by a self-proclaimed law student says, it actually does sound like participating in an illegal vote could be close enough to a crime to build a reasonable case for police to shut it down. You really don't need to be comitting any criminal acts for police to be well within their authority to tell you to leave or be forcibly removed, they just need the reasonable suspicion that you are, or are going to, or that you just shouldn't be in this place because this is an illegal referendum, crime or no crime. Whether or not that's going to hold up in administrative court six months later does not matter, you still have to do what they say right now.

So I think discussing this in terms of civil war is overblown, if not by much - it was a referendum to secede from Spain. But invoking martial law to justify police violence against even very large groups of people is largely uneccessary, either in the US or in europe. We get some of that shit every time Merkel decides to host her next bullshit international summit. If those laws are a good thing or not is another matter, but you're really misled if you think "the law does not speak to that".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 12084

PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 1:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

deaddmwalking wrote:
First off, I agree with Kaelik 100%. Even though the supreme court of Spain ruled that the referendum should not proceed, I don't know that it was actually illegal - because it is ultimately meaningless. Putting up a 'vote' on SurveyMonkey would have been just as binding (which is non).

If the Supreme Court tells me to avoid taking an action and I take that action, I'm in contempt of court, but the action itself isn't necessarily illegal. Anyone else that wasn't told not to take that action could still do so.

Referendums aren't illegal. Calling for a referendum SHOULDN'T be illegal, and I'm not aware of any Spanish statutes that make it illegal.


I wish you wouldn't 100% agree with me in the same post you state literally the exact opposite of the things I said.
_________________
"DSMatticus" wrote:
Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
maglag
Duke


Joined: 02 Apr 2015
Posts: 1106

PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 2:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Zinegata wrote:
maglag wrote:
Well if in voting day I looked out of the window and saw her majesty's cops forming phalanxes around the boots while curbstomping anybody and everybody holding a piece of paper or pen, I would stay at home too.

The vote may not be all that matters, but is still a key part of democracy, and the glorious royal government of Spain declared "nope, you don't even get to pretend to vote, we're just gonna break your bones".


Voting when your judicial and executive branches have explicitly declared that the specific election you are voting for is illegal - and not merely non-binding - is not democracy to begin with.

It is fiction that the referendum in Catalan was in any shape or form related to a real democracy. It's a combination of mob rule and political brinksmanship masquerading as democracy.

That you couldn't tell the difference is emblematic of why Western democracies are in such deep trouble.


No, the real trouble is the glorious royal police of Spain curbstomping hundreds of unarmed people whose biggest "crime" was voicing their opinion while most other european governments go "this is fine".

Secondary is the bit where you try to shift goalposts so hard, like you had claimed that most of the people stayed at home because they didn't want to vote, to which I pointed out the threat of the majesty's cops breaking their bones if they attempted to vote may've played as much if not a bigger part.
_________________
FrankTrollman wrote:

Actually, our blood banking system is set up exactly the way you'd want it to be if you were a secret vampire conspiracy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FrankTrollman
Serious Badass


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 27140

PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 3:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

maglag wrote:
No, the real trouble is the glorious royal police of Spain curbstomping hundreds of unarmed people whose biggest "crime" was voicing their opinion while most other european governments go "this is fine".


The crime is participating in an unconstitutional political process. Of course all the other countries think it's fine. States have a right to use any amount of force they want to enforce their own laws.

If the referrendum had been a call to bring back human sacrifice or rape little girls or do any other unconsitutional thing, would you be getting all huffy about it? We're talking about a literal existential threat to the continued existence of the Spanish state, in the eyes of Spain this is literally worse than any of those things, what the fuck did you expect to happen?

And while we're on the subject, why are you only upset about the police stopping unconstitutional actions that Russian intelligence is supporting? Why aren't you ranting about the literal genocide of the Rohinga?

-Frank
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 12084

PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 4:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

FrankTrollman wrote:
If the referrendum had been a call to bring back human sacrifice or rape little girls or do any other unconsitutional thing, would you be getting all huffy about it?


Yes, as a general rule I get all huffy about a country sending out police to beat up innocent people geographically located in the general area as government officials doing unconstitutional actions.
_________________
"DSMatticus" wrote:
Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord


Joined: 25 Sep 2008
Posts: 10159

PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 4:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Kaelik wrote:
I mean.... for fucks sake, is anyone as fucking pissed the fuck off as I am that Frank Trollman has decided to cast the Indian Self Rule Movement as really about how salt laws were bad, but Britain ruling India forever was perfectly acceptable to them and they definitely weren't pursing independence?
If I may psychoanalyze, I think it's more panic of the breakdown of the post-Reagan liberal social order. Between everything that's happened in the last few years (Brazil's descent into fascism, Trump, 2007 financial crisis, Brexit, fucking Trump, and looming above everything climate change) it's pretty clear that the consensus of the last three and a half decades is coming to an end. What's more, the breakdown doesn't seem to be going into a good or even stable direction. There are some good signs, but most everything we've seen since the start of this decade has been bad. Not just for the liberal-conservative consensus (though it's the most obvious victim thereof) but for humanity in general.

A natural response to this kind of breakdown is embracing the ethos of authoritarianism. Maybe not explicit authoritarianism like that of fascism, but definitely a zero-tolerance attitude to any further dissolution of the liberal-conservative consensus. I mean, it's clear that trying to uphold said consensus through soft power and brute transactional politics is failing, so if you value the liberal-conservative consensus as much as I believe Frank does, Operation Zero Tolerance is suddenly on the table. Any stick to beat a dog, after all.
_________________
Josh Kablack wrote:
Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Koumei
Serious Badass


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 12793
Location: South Ausfailia

PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 6:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

I would say "violence as the first, last, best, and in fact only solution" is becoming more popular across the various spectra. I mean the various conservative/religious/backwards types have been big on that for ages, but now people in general are looking at the problems, looking at what provably hasn't been working (and how now there are BIGGER problems that need to be solved even faster and even harder), and thinking "Have we tried just fucking [punching/shooting/detonating - circle appropriate] them?"


_________________
Count Arioch the 28th wrote:
There is NOTHING better than lesbians. Lesbians make everything better.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord


Joined: 25 Sep 2008
Posts: 10159

PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 6:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Koumei wrote:
I mean the various conservative/religious/backwards types have been big on that for ages, but now people in general are looking at the problems, looking at what provably hasn't been working (and how now there are BIGGER problems that need to be solved even faster and even harder), and thinking "Have we tried just fucking [punching/shooting/detonating - circle appropriate] them?"
I'm not particularly surprised, because people losing faith in republican consensus and compromise is a common outcome (and definite signal) of dominant political regimes disjoining. On the milder end, you have the New Deal/Labour social democratic consensus disjoining shortly after a briefly militant resurgence of the New Left/antifa and vigilante films and later right-wing anti-terrorist/anti-Soviet fiction becoming popular. And that's what you get when the disjunction is relatively mild. When it's not-so-mild, you get the filibusters and even secessions threatened by the Confederacy or even fascists and militant communists rallying and fighting in the streets.
_________________
Josh Kablack wrote:
Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
OgreBattle
King


Joined: 03 Sep 2011
Posts: 5091

PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 9:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Is the People's Republic of China a fascist country?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Stahlseele
King


Joined: 14 Apr 2010
Posts: 5008
Location: Hamburg, Germany

PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 9:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Well, according to websters dictionary, fascism is:
Quote:
a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

Pretty much nails China on the head right?
Well, at least the peoples republic of china.
Not the other china in think.

And if it weren't so sad, one could laugh at the fact that as per part of that definition, Antifa is actually a fascist movement as well.
_________________
Welcome, to IronHell.
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)


Last edited by Stahlseele on Sat Oct 07, 2017 10:02 pm; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Eikre
Knight


Joined: 03 Aug 2009
Posts: 490

PostPosted: Sat Oct 07, 2017 10:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Hot tips: premising an assertion with "according to the Merriam WebsterDictionary, the definition of..." immediately dooms the credibility of any successive words to the cretinous depths of a seventh-grader's essay work. It's like some kind of magical incantation.
_________________
This signature is here just so you don't otherwise mistake the last sentence of my post for one.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
phlapjackage
Knight


Joined: 24 May 2012
Posts: 313

PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 12:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

FrankTrollman wrote:
States have a right to use any amount of force they want to enforce their own laws.

I don't think they do. In particular, places like the US (supposedly) have protection from cruel and unusual punishment and unreasonable force. In general, states possibly might be within legal rights (questionable but if so it's a sign of a corrupt state, see NK), but definitely aren't within moral rights to use any amount of force...that's crazy talk.

FrankTrollman wrote:

And while we're on the subject, why are you only upset about the police stopping unconstitutional actions that Russian intelligence is supporting? Why aren't you ranting about the literal genocide of the Rohinga?
We're talking about Spain here, if you want to talk about that it's a different topic. No points for trying to...damn, what logical fallacy is this? Can't remember...
_________________
Koumei: and if I wanted that, I'd take some mescaline and run into the park after watching a documentary about wasps.
PhoneLobster: DM : Mr Monkey doesn't like it. Eldritch : Mr Monkey can do what he is god damn told.
Chamomile: Deaddmwalking... was a holy warrior dedicated not to a specific cause, but to doing battle with a single foe. With his nemesis forever banished from our shores, he goes off to become a normal denner who puts irritating people on ignore rather than endlessly engage them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Stahlseele
King


Joined: 14 Apr 2010
Posts: 5008
Location: Hamburg, Germany

PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 12:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Quote:
I don't think they do. In particular, places like the US (supposedly) have protection from cruel and unusual punishment and unreasonable force. In general, states possibly might be within legal rights (questionable but if so it's a sign of a corrupt state, see NK), but definitely aren't within moral rights to use any amount of force...that's crazy talk.

And yet the US of A is one of those backwards hellholes with the deathpenalty still enforced . .
_________________
Welcome, to IronHell.
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hyzmarca
Prince


Joined: 14 Mar 2011
Posts: 3445

PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 12:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

FrankTrollman wrote:

And while we're on the subject, why are you only upset about the police stopping unconstitutional actions that Russian intelligence is supporting? Why aren't you ranting about the literal genocide of the Rohinga?

-Frank


Because there's no way Trump is going to send in troops to protect Muslims, but he might send in troops to protect Catalonians, if he can remember that they're white.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 12084

PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 12:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

phlapjackage wrote:
FrankTrollman wrote:

And while we're on the subject, why are you only upset about the police stopping unconstitutional actions that Russian intelligence is supporting? Why aren't you ranting about the literal genocide of the Rohinga?
We're talking about Spain here, if you want to talk about that it's a different topic. No points for trying to...damn, what logical fallacy is this? Can't remember...


It's called whataboutism, and like all "fallacies" it's sometimes correct. But in this case not, because the people generally criticizing Spain aren't defending Rohinga or trying to distract from it, or ignoring it. Or otherwise you know, not the people who also oppose the same thing when it happens elsewhere. Because you know, yes, when police states oppress innocent (or even not innocent, but all the voters were completely innocent of any crime at all) people it's always bad.
_________________
"DSMatticus" wrote:
Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Click here to see the hidden message (It might contain spoilers)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Chamomile
Prince


Joined: 03 May 2011
Posts: 3887

PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 12:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

FrankTrollman wrote:

And while we're on the subject, why are you only upset about the police stopping unconstitutional actions that Russian intelligence is supporting? Why aren't you ranting about the literal genocide of the Rohinga?

-Frank


Is someone here in favor of that genocide?
_________________
I have a blog
Also a Discord channel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
erik
Prince


Joined: 07 Mar 2008
Posts: 4929

PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Add User to Ignore List

Chamomile wrote:
FrankTrollman wrote:

And while we're on the subject, why are you only upset about the police stopping unconstitutional actions that Russian intelligence is supporting? Why aren't you ranting about the literal genocide of the Rohinga?

-Frank


Is someone here in favor of that genocide?


Occluded Sun is a safe bet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Gaming Den Forum Index -> MPSIMS All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 114, 115, 116 ... 118, 119, 120  Next
Page 115 of 120

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group