Charlie Kirk shot at (shot?) in Utah

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

This was published in a paper in England but either forwarded from or about New York:
Birmingham Evening Mail. Tue, May 05, 1981 ·Page 10.

A new scandal rocked women's tennis today when it was revealed that teenage star Tracy Austin was under round-the-clock protection to guard her from lesbians.

A woman bodyguard accompanied the 18-year-old star in the locker rooms and onto court to protect her from sexual advances.
...
...

Tracy's mother Jenne recruited the hefty bodyguard after her young daughter told her stories of how teenage stars were recruited to lesbianism.

...
...
...Tracy had been approached by lesbian members of the women's circuit.

...

Other papers are quoted as saying she had the bodyguard to protect her from advances from lesbians in locker rooms. Presumably these alleged advances constitute today what we would call harassment and since she was a minor, some kind of legal infraction.

Allegations of lesbian harassment and recruiting to brainwashing in locker rooms were actually a big deal in the 80s cultural zeitgeist. So were allegations of gay harassment. People actually tried to use some of those allegations as self-defense arguments when they murdered a gay person.

It's kind of interesting (and relevant) how people's ideas about safety change over time as it pertains to groups.

 

[WAB]

The thing that girls and women need to learn is how to stand up to bullies.

Yeah, all those women who are sexually assaulted and raped every year, they just need to learn how to stand up to their attackers. It's their own fault for not being strong enough.

I never said it was their fault. I said that all of us women need to learn how to stand up to bullies because in the majority of cases it weakens the bully and stop his aggression. Look at Trump for example. All of those who have stood up to him are doing better compared to those who gave in to his demands. Once you give in to a bully, they want more and more and more. I wan't only talking about sexual assault. I was talking about all kinds of bullying. My late father never tried to sexually assault his daughters, but he was a bully and I'm the one who stood up to him and told him off. It worked. It worked when I shamed the man who threatened to rape me. It worked when I've told nasty doctors off etc. It might not always work, but it's the best defense we women have, so we can at least learn or train ourselves to do that. We can also take self defense courses. I've never done that but one is offered at our senior center. There are many things women can to do to help us stay safe.

I recall when one of my female high school teachers told us that the one thing a bad man is afraid of is a bad woman. She told us how she had scared off a man who had threatened to assault her. I don't remember all of the details as I was in high school in the mid 60s, but what she told us had a lot of truth in it.

No offense Emily, but you often have a way of misinterpreting what another posters writes. Of course, it's never the woman's fault if someone attacks her. I'm just encouraging us all to learn how to ward off the bullies, as it usually works. I'll leave it at that.

Not everyone is strong or brave. There are plenty of people who will not want to further antagonize their bully or attacker for fear that any kind of aggressive resistance will serve to incur greater harm. I extend my sympathies especially to a victim of sexual assault and/or rape, and even more especially to women, who are typically not as physically strong as a man. I can easily understand them not resisting to any great extent, for fear of severe injury, or death.

I can see why, ideally speaking, it's good advice to suggest that people should stand up to bullies, but realistically, it could also get someone killed.

I am NOT saying that people being abused, assaulted, or raped should just shut up, do nothing, and take it meekly. Just saying people are different in how they react under stress in extreme situations.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Are you blind to how he's totally stomping all over the Constitution?

And note that your approach to avoiding war is appeasement. History will tell you how bad a solution this is.

I see him stomping on the constitution, just like Biden, Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Reagan. Before that I was too young to follow politics but the history books say others before them did the same.

No one thinks of themself as evil. It takes someone else to hold up the mirror.
Perhaps 'fascist' is the wrong word.
How about: Power Hungry Authoriatarian Anti-democracy Tyrant wanta-be. And the people who support that shit (MAGA).
'Fascist' is just shorthand. Common usage. It didn't have the evil conatation when it was coined. But it absolutly does now.

True, nobody thinks themselves the villains in their own stories. Fascist isn't the only shorthand. Communist, Theocrat, Socialist, Nazi, and Fascist are all suitable shortcuts.

I read that during the time of U.S. Slavery, slaves from different plantations would actually fight each other over who had the wealthier master who who's master had the fancier mansion.

“Fighting” cannot succeed if it means violence as a means of directly forcing an end, but it can motivate people.
We are in this fix right now largely because violence on 1/6 was so successfully sold as a rallying cry.

The FBI has admitted that 274 of the people at that protest were undercover FBI agents. That is so far.

I'm still amused that people call it "violent", usually the same people who call "summer of love" in 2000 "mostly peaceful" while standing in front of burning buildings.

 

[Spacetime Inhabitant]

Are you blind to how he's totally stomping all over the Constitution?

And note that your approach to avoiding war is appeasement. History will tell you how bad a solution this is.

I see him stomping on the constitution, just like Biden, Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, and Reagan. Before that I was too young to follow politics but the history books say others before them did the same.

No one thinks of themself as evil. It takes someone else to hold up the mirror.
Perhaps 'fascist' is the wrong word.
How about: Power Hungry Authoriatarian Anti-democracy Tyrant wanta-be. And the people who support that shit (MAGA).
'Fascist' is just shorthand. Common usage. It didn't have the evil conatation when it was coined. But it absolutly does now.

True, nobody thinks themselves the villains in their own stories. Fascist isn't the only shorthand. Communist, Theocrat, Socialist, Nazi, and Fascist are all suitable shortcuts.

I read that during the time of U.S. Slavery, slaves from different plantations would actually fight each other over who had the wealthier master who who's master had the fancier mansion.

“Fighting” cannot succeed if it means violence as a means of directly forcing an end, but it can motivate people.
We are in this fix right now largely because violence on 1/6 was so successfully sold as a rallying cry.

The FBI has admitted that 274 of the people at that protest were undercover FBI agents. That is so far.

I'm still amused that people call it "violent", usually the same people who call "summer of love" in 2000 "mostly peaceful" while standing in front of burning buildings.

FROM THE BBC:
More than two dozen FBI informants were in Washington DC ahead of the riot at the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, but no full-time undercover agents were present or took part in the riot itself, according to a new justice department report.
The report said none of the agency's informants were authorised to enter the Capitol or join the riot, but four did enter the building.
The report also found that the FBI failed in the "basic step" of adequately using its field offices across the US to gather intelligence that could have predicted the riot.
Some on the right, including House Republicans, have for years promoted a fringe conspiracy theory that the FBI helped to orchestrate the riot

How can you claim it wasn't violent when one of your own people died trying to enter the building? We can all actually see on film many violent confrontations, and weapon wielding "protesters".

 

[laughing dog]

The FBI has admitted that 274 of the people at that protest were undercover FBI agents. That is so far.

Source?

 

[GenesisNemesis]

The FBI has admitted that 274 of the people at that protest were undercover FBI agents. That is so far.

Source?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The FBI has admitted that 274 of the people at that protest were undercover FBI agents. That is so far.

Source?

 

[ZiprHead]

The FBI has admitted that 274 of the people at that protest were undercover FBI agents. That is so far.

Source?

 

[ZiprHead]

The FBI has admitted that 274 of the people at that protest were undercover FBI agents. That is so far.

Source?

 

[Elixir]

The FBI has admitted that 274 of the people at that protest were undercover FBI agents. That is so far.

Source?

https://i.redd.it/gwx9tgyfynr61.gif

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Dude, objecting to your outgroup censoring your ingroup is not the same thing as giving a rat's ass about free speech. Throughout the time leftists have been sounding the alarm about Project 2025 they've been enthusiastically cancelling non-leftists. Did even one of you make a stink about it when that professor got fired for saying everyone's life matters?

You're focusing on the leftist mound while ignoring Everest on the right.

Mound vs. Everest, huh? Then you can produce a long list of professors axed for saying something unconservative, can you? Few people on either wing mind censorship as long as it's their side doing it. A plague on both their houses.

They've only started with the axing.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The thing is few would actually admit to being a Nazi.

Well, not after they lost the war. If it becomes safe to fly the flag again without losing their job, many will fly it just as proudly as they fly the "Confederate flag" now.

Yeah, they just find a new name with the same core behaviors and slightly different window dressing.

It's also one of the reasons that the easiest way to spot them is to spot the political groups whose names do not actually match their behavior, or which have names associated with nationalism and/or populism, while espousing "smaller*" government.

If you find the people seeking to hit social spending, or advocating to make certain human conditions criminal or regulated, completely agnostic to the behavior of the person with that condition, the those people are likely Nazis too.

As it is, Nazis, when they start to precipitate into power within a society, share a number of bedfellows who I will also call Nazis.

These "Nazi bedfellows" will in any era include a large number of false "free people", who believe they value justice and freedom and independence of thought, but whose values in practice skew towards "trains running on time" and re-instating conservative policies according to biases trained into them by religious and cultural sources.

These are, in fact, the majority of Nazis, like the soil in which the roots of the toxic plant of fascist government grows.

The fact is, of you don't want Nazis in your country, you will not be the fertile soil for this.

If you hate Nazis, really, if you want to be remembered not as an individual but as part of a *sort* of individual, as an instance of something we can count on next time, then today you will show that you can reject the comforts and the utilities of the trains running on time because you are one of those who will ultimately blow up the tracks before they can carry trains of people. Name those Nazis as what they are, and speak the words into history necessary to make the next instance of you who reads the words in the next cycle and understand before things get so out of hand as you let them get here.

MAGA are Nazis.

Those who pretend "MAGA" isn't "Nazis" are cheeky Nazis.

Your entire post boils down to "conservatives are nazis, we should make sure that there are no conservatives"

No. You are treating "conservatives" and "MAGA" as identical. They are not. You can be conservative without being MAGA--although it's going to get the MAGAs to turn on you.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Of the three sins listed, WHY would 'marrying outside one's race' be considered sinful? Because I kind of get the other ones even though I don't agree with sin as a concept.

aa

You could have someone who thinks races should be kept pure without thinking one is better than another. We see it in animal breeding. But even if it were a good idea that ship sailed long ago.

 

[Politesse]

That awkward moment when you're like "Nazis are bad" and someone goes "How dare you talk about the Republicans that way!"

 

[Jarhyn]

That awkward moment when you're like "Nazis are bad" and someone goes "How dare you talk about the Republicans that way!"

I will just say they are one in the same nowadays. There were years of loud, insistent posting about the sports angle, fifteen of them before now, in fact.

I was like "why are these forces pushing so hard on this one topic" and then I found out that the number one spearhead of the Nazi pattern is attacking exactly these people, and that it has been for over 2000 years, before the pattern was even known by the name "Nazi".

 

[TomC]

Of the three sins listed, WHY would 'marrying outside one's race' be considered sinful? Because I kind of get the other ones even though I don't agree with sin as a concept.

aa

You could have someone who thinks races should be kept pure without thinking one is better than another. We see it in animal breeding. But even if it were a good idea that ship sailed long ago.

Emily made it quite clear that she didn't hold that view.
Why does anyone expect her to explain the views of her grandpa?

The best explanation I can come up with is that she doesn't fit the ideology of most iidb members, so it doesn't occur to them that misrepresenting and strawman arguments about her look dishonest.
Tom

 

[Derec]

No. You are treating "conservatives" and "MAGA" as identical. They are not. You can be conservative without being MAGA--

And vice versa. There are many anti-establishment Bernie Bros who voted for Trump for example.
As far as prominent/leadership MAGAs, RFK Jr. is a creature of the far left. So is Tulsi Gabbard.

although it's going to get the MAGAs to turn on you.

Indeed. There is something very cultish about them.

 

[WAB]

That awkward moment when you're like "Nazis are bad" and someone goes "How dare you talk about the Republicans that way!"

I will just say they are one in the same nowadays. There were years of loud, insistent posting about the sports angle, fifteen of them before now, in fact.

I was like "why are these forces pushing so hard on this one topic" and then I found out that the number one spearhead of the Nazi pattern is attacking exactly these people, and that it has been for over 2000 years, before the pattern was even known by the name "Nazi".

When you say "sports angle", are you referring to transgenders in sports? If not, what do you mean?

 

[ZiprHead]

Thread locked for clean up.

 

[ZiprHead]

Thread reopened. I've moved the RvW discussion to the proper thread.

Stop the derails.