Here Comes The Left

[bilby]

You have completely disregarded my point

Indeed I have, as is my prerogative.

Would you prefer that I post a "rolleyes" or "hobbyhorse" emoji?

 

[Derec]

Would you prefer that I post a "rolleyes" or "hobbyhorse" emoji?

would fit better in reference to Mamdani himself.

 

[Toni]

"Believe" has more than one meaning.

And none of the meanings make the phrase mean what Toni said it means, i.e. take the matter seriously and investigate. "Believe" in any sense of the word implies a certain degree of prejudging the veracity of the allegations, which is something that should not happen as it leads to tunnel vision like in the infamous Duke Lacrosse case.

Reasonable people fluent in the English language aren't blind to nuance and can understand that the context of the statement indicates the correct interpretation of "believe women" is to generally accept their claims about having experienced rape and sexual assault to be honest accounts of what they genuinely think is true while also accepting that they might be mistaken or have jumped to conclusions that the facts don't support.

Which goes beyond what Toni said the phrase means. Your interpretation still means that the investigators are not impartially investigating what happened, but are privileging a woman's account of what happened just because of her gender.

And physical injuries.

Derec, I think that all rape victims should be believed : men, women, children.

I think that all rape allegations should be investigated. And assault charges, and thefts and murders and fraud. And so on. All of it. Taken seriously and investigated thoroughly.

 

[Arctish]

And it probably should be; The really big criminals act with impunity because they have diplomatic immunity, and it is highly questionable whether this fact does more harm than good in the modern world.

You have completely disregarded my point that he only wants to arrest Netanyahu is Mamdani's animosity toward Israel. He would not want to arrest an IRGC official or a Hamas terrorist. He doesn't even want NYPD to arrest illegals with valid orders of removal issued by a US immigration court.

I believe (there's that word again) that if a known Hamas official with a warrant out for his arrest from the ICC were to announce plans to visit an American city, the mayor of that city would contact the police department, the city's lawyers, and the FBI to see what his legal obligations are.

I also believe you would applaud that move and hope the mayor has the guy arrested.

And I believe it doesn't matter to you how well supported the ICC warrant is, you will loudly protest any moves to hold Netanyahu accountable for anything he's done.

 

[Derec]

And physical injuries.

If present, they can be good evidence, yes.

Derec, I think that all rape victims should be believed : men, women, children.

Calling them "victims" already prejudges the case. I do not think they should be believed a priori. I think their claims should be taken seriously, and investigated professionally and impartially. Which also means no tunnel vision and accepting the possibility that the investigation will not find enough evidence to proceed, and in some cases may even find enough evidence to proceed against the accuser.

But the phrase is inevitably rendered as "believe women". Besides the problems with "believe", it is also needlessly gendered.

I think that all rape allegations should be investigated. And assault charges, and thefts and murders and fraud. And so on. All of it. Taken seriously and investigated thoroughly.

We agree on that. And if somebody fakes a claim of a theft, or fraud, or anything else, they should be prosecuted as well. Do you agree?

 

[scombrid]

With a Mamdani in the WH and majority of his supporters in congress we would likely go the route of Venezuela.

The Venezuelan radicals destroyed the economy and the middle class by arbitrary ideological actions. Nationalized oil which fell into disrepair.

They bankrupted the government with unsustainable social programs sending.

We get Canadian content on our NPR station. They have an affordability problem and problems with rising costs for national health care. If you look at welfare states in Europe you will probably see the same. The Greek welfare state bankruptcy has been bailed out multiple times.

They may not be technically socialist or call themselves socialist but hey have mixed economies

China is socialist combed with an authoritarian politics. It has a wealth disparity problem and its own economic problems.

The left over here uses socialist and social democrat as some kind of panacea that will cure all ills and establish an imagined poorness.

Over the weekend I walked past a demonstration in Seattle. The speaker through a megaphone was shouting fuck ICE fuck ICE followed by solipsism socialism echoed by the crowd. Followed by the crowd chanting something in Spanish. The speaker pro claimed equal rights for ’all immigrants’, meaning an open border.

I listened to someone in Wa state government say they are having trouble funding education for diversity needs, code word for illegal immigrants. No English, little or no education, and no job skills. Illegal immigration is open ended and can not be p[tanned for, costs go up..

Solution, find something or somebody to tax. Our so called millionaire tax was passed by the legislature. It taxes those above certain incomes. It will be on a referendum, technically it violates the state constitution on no income tax.

The left will try to circumvent, interpret, or bend laws to suit their needs as Trump does.

A 19th century law protecting homesteaders was used to prevent people living in their cars from being moved.

I am all ears for any socialist or social democrat that can explain in detail how our system will be changed for the better. Without disruption. I doubt any can. They think and speak in ideological generalities.

Yep. Everyone not part of Project 2025 is driving us towards being like Venezuela. Elizabeth Warren was just Hugo Chavez in drag. Fuck consumer protections, environmental laws, and anti-trust law. That stuff is the rot of society.

 

[Derec]

I believe (there's that word again) that if a known Hamas official with a warrant out for his arrest from the ICC were to announce plans to visit an American city, the mayor of that city would contact the police department, the city's lawyers, and the FBI to see what his legal obligations are.

US police have no jurisdiction to enforce ICC warrants. But in case of Hamas, there could be a US warrant issued based on Hamas' status as a proscribed terrorist organization and based on crimes by Hamas against US citizens.

However, I do not think Mamdani would be eager to go after any Hamas or IRGC members. Mamdani is an Israel hater. He'd be against any Israeli prime minister, especially one who decides to go after Hamas after 10/7. After all, Ma,dani's wife supports the 10/7 massacre against Jews.

And I believe it doesn't matter to you how well supported the ICC warrant is, you will loudly protest any moves to hold Netanyahu accountable for anything he's done.

It's still a foreign court not recognized by the US.

 

[scombrid]

I suppose the unconditional support for ICE that I see from you people means you like when it disappears people irrespective of actual status without any hearing to prove its case? You like when ICE instructed the SSA to administratively kill 2 million people without actually proving that those two million people lacked legal status? You must.

 

[Derec]

Yep. Everyone not part of Project 2025 is driving us towards being like Venezuela. Elizabeth Warren was just Hugo Chavez in drag. Fuck consumer protections, environmental laws, and anti-trust law. That stuff is the rot of society.

Sigh. One can be against Project 2025 and in favor of "consumer protections, environmental laws, and anti-trust law" but still reject DSA and their platform which I wrote about in post #474.

 

[Arctish]

"Believe" has more than one meaning.

And none of the meanings make the phrase mean what Toni said it means, i.e. take the matter seriously and investigate. "Believe" in any sense of the word implies a certain degree of prejudging the veracity of the allegations, which is something that should not happen as it leads to tunnel vision like in the infamous Duke Lacrosse case.

Reasonable people fluent in the English language aren't blind to nuance and can understand that the context of the statement indicates the correct interpretation of "believe women" is to generally accept their claims about having experienced rape and sexual assault to be honest accounts of what they genuinely think is true while also accepting that they might be mistaken or have jumped to conclusions that the facts don't support.

Which goes beyond what Toni said the phrase means. Your interpretation still means that the investigators are not impartially investigating what happened, but are privileging a woman's account of what happened just because of her gender.

No.

Don't pretend you can't parse English.

Don't pretend you don't understand how reports of crimes lead to investigations, but when the police disbelieve the reports they don't bother investigating or they investigate the victims and witnesses rather than investigating the alleged criminal.

It's obvious you want to use the most extreme meaning of "believe" (intransitive verb: to have unwavering faith despite a dearth of evidence) because you want to cry about how extreme "believe women" is, apparently because you want reports of rape and sexual assault to not be taken seriously.

 

[Derec]

I suppose the unconditional support for ICE that I see from you people

I do not know anybody here who has an "unconditional support for ICE". Just because I reject open borders and pro-illegal policies of the fauxgressives and the DSA does not mean that I have to agree with the Trump administration with their approach either.

 

[Toni]

And physical injuries.

If present, they can be good evidence, yes.

Derec, I think that all rape victims should be believed : men, women, children.

Calling them "victims" already prejudges the case. I do not think they should be believed a priori. I think their claims should be taken seriously, and investigated professionally and impartially. Which also means no tunnel vision and accepting the possibility that the investigation will not find enough evidence to proceed, and in some cases may even find enough evidence to proceed against the accuser.

But the phrase is inevitably rendered as "believe women". Besides the problems with "believe", it is also needlessly gendered.

I think that all rape allegations should be investigated. And assault charges, and thefts and murders and fraud. And so on. All of it. Taken seriously and investigated thoroughly.

We agree on that. And if somebody fakes a claim of a theft, or fraud, or anything else, they should be prosecuted as well. Do you agree?

What if the victim is male?

 

[Jarhyn]

No one is saying blindly believe whatever a woman says.

That's what "believe women" means though.

No.

"Believe" has more than one meaning.

You are choosing the most extreme one so you can cry about how extreme "believe women" is.

Reasonable people fluent in the English language aren't blind to nuance and can understand that the context of the statement indicates the correct interpretation of "believe women" is to generally accept their claims about having experienced rape and sexual assault to be honest accounts of what they genuinely think is true while also accepting that they might be mistaken or have jumped to conclusions that the facts don't support. Hence the need for the police to investigate the reports and not simply dismiss them.

There's a fairly universal truism on this front, my first external exposure to which came from the military: trust but verify.

That's what "believe" in this context means.

Arguably it's what should underpin and be executed on ALL belief: to trust it as the best information you have, and to see if that information holds up to the best tests you can present to it.

The military sense of this is that you often have no time to check whether something you are immediately told is valid, but often that's no excuse to carrying through on invalid orders. So, when you can, or as soon as it's not absolutely idiotic to check, you check (even if the situation may be exacerbated a bit by checking)

The same is true of all belief, however, and "trusting without verifying" is just plain stupid. "Trust, don't verify" is the pressure that drives the vast majority of confidence scams. In fact, it's right there in the name "confidence".

 

[laughing dog]

You forgot to mention the epic irony of the whataboutism master complaining about a whataboutism.

I see you still haven't learned what a "whataboutism" is. It is different than offering an example.

Of course. Yet you whined about Ziprhead’s whataboutism. Please pay attention before you post.

 

[Patooka]

There is more than enough discussion of all things Trump without my participation

Nice cover. Still doesn't fool anyone. Come on, mate - you have years and years of posts.

Everyone knows what you are all about.

 

[ZiprHead]

They have an affordability problem and problems with rising costs for national health care.

If you had been paying attention you would know that US Americans are having an affordability problem and problems with rising costs of heath care. And Trump says affordability is a fake word.

 

[ZiprHead]

Zero evidence he'll do that, but OK.

There is evidence that he is contemplating that, and his motivation is his religion-based hatred of Israel.
Note that his wife is also a Hamas supporter.
Zohran Mamdani’s wife liked social media posts celebrating Oct. 7 attacks

That's a hit piece and the headline is a lie. The posts she liked made no mention of the 10/7 attack.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Yup, no one can be against what Israel is doing for any reason other than religion. Totally. And if you're a Muslim, obviously, the only reason you might be against what Israel is doing is because religion. It only makes sense, for some reason.

 

[Arctish]

Zero evidence he'll do that, but OK.

There is evidence that he is contemplating that, and his motivation is his religion-based hatred of Israel.
Note that his wife is also a Hamas supporter.
Zohran Mamdani’s wife liked social media posts celebrating Oct. 7 attacks

That's a hit piece and the headline is a lie. The posts she liked made no mention of the 10/7 attack.

Why am I not surprised that Derec is posting lies about Zohran Mamdani’s wife that are based on dishonestly mined quotes and assertions we’re being led to believe ( there’s that word again) without verification?

 

[laughing dog]

Zero evidence he'll do that, but OK.

There is evidence that he is contemplating that, and his motivation is his religion-based hatred of Israel.
Note that his wife is also a Hamas supporter.
Zohran Mamdani’s wife liked social media posts celebrating Oct. 7 attacks

That's a hit piece and the headline is a lie. The posts she liked made no mention of the 10/7 attack.

I am shocked, shocked I tell you to find Derec jumping to conclusions, again.