Special Needs Trump Supporter Kidnapped/Tortured By Blacks

[Anacybele]

People are influenced to do things and enabled. This election was built from the ground up on hate - Hillary Clinton never said shit like "knock the crap out of him" at a heckler, nor did he offer up paying the legal fees. She also didn't build a campaign on fear nor did she actually encourage violence.

No, Trump did not say explicitly to target people with hate crimes, but his rhetoric - and this is the key word, his rhetoric - was all about spreading fear of a country that "lost its way." Lost its way from what? Slavery, Jim Crow? Not giving a shit about poor people from the 60s onwards? Nixon's campaign advisor saying that he was basically anti-black? Sending jobs overseas for cheaper while the middle class in America suffers, and then lying to them that it'll be alright as long as those immigrants are kept out of this country? There's not a point where this country was ever "great" unless you completely whitewash the history of it.

Yes, people do shitty things on both sides, but the issue was that his rhetoric puts people on defense about as much as it puts people on offense. You ultimately can't blame Trump due to personal autonomy, but you can't disregard hateful rhetoric as a factor in shit like this happening.

Yes, people can be influenced by rhetoric, and I won't deny that Trump could've picked some of his words better. But the problem is, people are still only saying Trump is the one with said rhetoric when as we both agreed, people from BOTH sides have done shitty things. And why would Trump's rhetoric influence hate crimes that go AGAINST him? Where would these haters get the influence to attack Trump supporters?

Hillary's rhetoric has been no better. She even called Trump's supporters deplorable, which was the last straw that made me oppose her entirely and NEVER support her in anything. The media's been no better either, putting ideas like Trump mocking a disabled reporter into stupid people's brains. You can't blame Trump for what the media does and I bet these two things were the biggest in influence in hate crimes against Trump supporters.

In short, Trump's rhetoric has probably been a factor, but it's hardly the only one or the worst one like people make it out to be.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Anacybele

[Tryhard]

This seems sort of antithetical. I'd ask them what their goal was, but I have a feeling that they weren't capable of thinking it through.

[HillaryForPrison]

long ass post coming up

Yes, Trump is the one spreading the hate.

How's he gonna fix this, pray tell? Jim Crow laws? A registry for all blacks and Muslims? Being white or non-white has little to do with willful ignorance about how he ran his campaign.

People are influenced to do things and enabled. This election was built from the ground up on hate - Hillary Clinton never said shit like "knock the crap out of him" at a heckler, nor did he offer up paying the legal fees. She also didn't build a campaign on fear nor did she actually encourage violence.

No, Trump did not say explicitly to target people with hate crimes, but his rhetoric - and this is the key word, his rhetoric - was all about spreading fear of a country that "lost its way." Lost its way from what? Slavery, Jim Crow? Not giving a shit about poor people from the 60s onwards? Nixon's campaign advisor saying that he was basically anti-black? Sending jobs overseas for cheaper while the middle class in America suffers, and then lying to them that it'll be alright as long as those immigrants are kept out of this country? There's not a point where this country was ever "great" unless you completely whitewash the history of it.

Yes, people do shitty things on both sides, but the issue was that his rhetoric puts people on defense about as much as it puts people on offense. You ultimately can't blame Trump due to personal autonomy, but you can't disregard hateful rhetoric as a factor in shit like this happening.

[citation needed]

I'm tired of "I'm not white but..." being used as an argument. The difference between asian and black people being racist and white people being racist is that the former's "racism" hasn't actually affected the state of US politics for the entirety of this country for its entire history and the latter's has and will continue to do so. Having that said, hate crimes out of racism are unjustified, and the law agrees with the rest of us that the four black people should be jailed, given how they promptly were.

And furthermore, you know that the mainstream media didn't respond on police shootings of people like Trayvon Martin right? It was actually called out because the issue went viral on social media. The Freddie Gray riots were covered as a bunch of black people rioting and not because of Baltimore police's history of giving settlements to victims of their rough rides - which is torture from the fuckin system and not from civilians. Arguably much, much worse. And the cops that killed Freddie Gray had no justice at all despite actually fucking killing him. The justice in this case was completely swift, and the perpetrators are in jail. Freddie's killers were found not guilty, and this wasn't the only case.

[citation needed]

The actual statistic states that only about 3 refugees have committed crimes in total... since 2001. To assume that a refugee would want to commit a crime here - and by the way, the vetting process for a refugee is significantly longer and more complicated than just getting a visa and immigrating - would immediately turn off a terrorist from entering in as a refugee. The goal of a terrorist is significantly less organized than we think and their job is to get the job done faster and give more of a divide that way, giving people like you fear to actually pretend that bullshit is fact.

He asked you specifically about breitbart. Don't dodge the point, especially because the rest of your point made zero sense.

The difference is that these four people have been sentenced to jail, and the white guy is still alive. There are many cases where the black person was killed or harassed, and the white people behind it (often cops but sometimes vigilante like George Zimmerman) had their trial out for days and didn't result in a conviction.

No they don't. Certain people use different definitions of racism, other people use the more direct "bigoted" definition. The latter is what the alt-right is about, that the white race and white culture is dying (whatever the fuck that means). The people who say that racism against white people doesn't exist believe in a more academic definition that involves a degree of systemic power.

First point: As you say, Citation needed, if your response is just he said something racist ten years ago or that he said something that offended a woman or he wanted a heckler removed, not really much of an answer, there is not a single elect that has a clean slate, Hillary made fun of Trump supporters, that's not rhetoric or spreading hate though, its only so if a white male is president (sarcasm).

as for your second comment, I do not know how he might fix it, I never said anything about blacks being murdered and how it wasn't reported, so please don't bring that point up, the US media does a lousy of reporting any sort of hate crime, no argument there as well, its funny how if any one mentions or denounces Black on White hate crime, they immediately feel the need to overshadow it with crimes against black people or try to make me seem as I disregard black people, you wonder why there's a huge racial divide in this country.

look at 9/11, it only took several muslim extremists to kill a huge number of people and ruin the state of the country for future years, it only took one extremist to commit the gay bar shooting, there needs to be a system for vetting these refugees, regardless of the number of incidents, no matter how minor it is, it needs to be at least considered.

I don't enjoy going so off topic but look at the last four or so US presidents, the racial divide is staggering and reaching new levels, the US is even more in debt, the amount of hate crime is increasing, I would rather take Trump over someone like Hillary who follows in Obama's lead, so yes in some ways the country has certainly lost its way.

if you feel the need to discuss this further than please PM me, unless the moderators don't mind.

Second point: Racism in all forms is bad, whether it is an asian or black person, affected politics or not, so I see no argument there.

Third point: I honestly missed his question, he replied twice so its hard keeping track of responses, as for breitbart, I personally see no problem with it, I could discuss this further but I would rather not here.

Fourth point: if it made zero sense then I advise you to look up the many times CNN has been caught fabricating and lying, if you couldn't I would gladly PM you them.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Thatonething

[Lord Raven]

First point: As you say, Citation needed, if your response is just he said something racist ten years ago or that he said something that offended a woman or he wanted a heckler removed, not really much of an answer.

“If you look at his wife, she was standing there. She had nothing to say. She probably, maybe she wasn’t allowed to have anything to say. You tell me”

In May, Trump implied that Gonzalo Curiel, the federal judge presiding over a class action against the for-profit Trump University, could not fairly hear the case because of his Mexican heritage.

“He’s a Mexican,” Trump told CNN of Curiel. “We’re building a wall between here and Mexico. The answer is, he is giving us very unfair rulings — rulings that people can’t even believe.”

He also kept on harping the birther conspiracy even after revelation of a birth certificate. Whether or not it's because he's racist is irrelevant because he feeds into the narrative.

“I’ll take jobs back from China, I’ll take jobs back from Japan,” Trump said during his visit to the U.S.-Mexican border in July. “The Hispanics are going to get those jobs, and they’re going to love Trump.”

https://twitter.com/JDiamond1/status/668168739100172289?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw <- whether or not you construe this as racism, wanting a heckler removed for anything other than violence is wrong, and this person was getting his ass beat for heckling.

in a room full of Jewish people;

“I’m a negotiator, like you folks,” Trump told the crowd, touting his book The Art of the Deal.

“Is there anyone who doesn’t renegotiate deals in this room?” Trump said. “Perhaps more than any room I’ve spoken to.”

“We need law and order. If we don’t have it, we’re not going to have a country,” Trump said. “African Americans and Hispanics are living in hell. You walk down the street and you get shot.”

He is also an advocate of stop-and-frisk which has been used for nothing but encouraging racism.

These are all on the campaign trail, but I'll whitewash his racism towards blacks through the majority of his life just for you, Mr. "I'm not a racist but..."

as for your second comment, I do not know how he might fix it, I never said anything about blacks so please don't bring that point up, look at 9/11, it only took several muslim extremists to kill a huge number of people and ruin the state of the country for future years, it only took one extremist to commit the gay bar shooting, there needs to be a system for vetting these refugees, regardless of the number of incidents, no matter how minor it is, it needs to be at least considered.

9/11 were not refugees, that was due to lack of good security. 9/11 caused a huge rise in security measures, and it's still an outlier in plane crashes, because can you think of any others that happened before and after? Especially ones that were as big as 9/11?

It took one extremist to commit the gay bar shooting - but he wasn't an extremist so much as a crazy guy. The guy beat his own wife who divorced from him, his father called him unhinged, and he was born and raised in the US. Unless you think he was radicalized simply because he was a brown dude, he was a terrorist that grew up in America. None of these scenarios were refugees, and people are conflating immigrants with refugees. Or should all immigrants be castrated and removed of their seed in case their brown children end up radicalized?

I don't enjoy going so off topic but look at the last four or so US presidents, the racial divide is staggering and reaching new levels, the US is even more in debt, the amount of hate crime is increasing, I would rather take Trump over someone like Hillary who follows in Obama's lead.

Source on the hate crime comment? And the context? Is more hate crime towards whites or minorities? Because a lot of incidents around Trump's election has led to a rise in hate crimes towards minorities.

Third point: I honestly missed his question, he replied twice so its hard keeping track of responses, as for breitbart, I personally see no problem with it, I could discuss this further but I would rather not here.

Do so. It's relevant to the discussion, but breitbart constantly lie and spit out hateful rhetoric. Milo Yiannopoulos is a pretty big part of breitbart and he only says shit to rile people up.

Fourth point: if it made zero sense then I advise you to look up the many times CNN has been caught fabricating and lying, if you couldn't I would gladly PM you them.

Post them in public. I'm legitimately talking about your description not making sense, I'm not saying CNN (or any media for that matter) isn't biased or fabricates things. I don't even watch the mainstream media, you don't need to convince me that CNN is unreliable.

While I do believe this is a hate crime, it's better for media outlets to not call it a hate crime until the facts are out. Talking heads can call it a hate crime, media outlets should tell you facts and expect you to make conclusions. Just a thought I should point out, but it's pretty obvious to me it was a hate crime.

Yes, people can be influenced by rhetoric, and I won't deny that Trump could've picked some of his words better. But the problem is, people are still only saying Trump is the one with said rhetoric when as we both agreed, people from BOTH sides have done shitty things. And why would Trump's rhetoric influence hate crimes that go AGAINST him? Where would these haters get the influence to attack Trump supporters?

Hillary's rhetoric has been no better. She even called Trump's supporters deplorable, which was the last straw that made me oppose her entirely and NEVER support her in anything. The media's been no better either, putting ideas like Trump mocking a disabled reporter into stupid people's brains. You can't blame Trump for what the media does and I bet these two things were the biggest in influence in hate crimes against Trump supporters.

In short, Trump's rhetoric has probably been a factor, but it's hardly the only one or the worst one like people make it out to be.

She said;

"And we cannot do it alone. I cannot do it alone. I'm not like Donald Trump, who says, 'I alone can fix it.' I've never quite figured out what it is he alone can fix. But that's not what you'll hear from me. I think we have to do this together. So, together we're gonna pass the Equality Act to guarantee full equality. We're going to put comprehensive quality affordable healthcare within reach for more people, including for mental health and addiction. We're going to take on youth homelessness, and as my wonderful, extraordinary, great daughter said, we are going to end the cruel and dangerous practice of conversion therapy. We're going to keep working toward an AIDS-free generation, a goal that I set as secretary of state, and with your help we're going to pass comprehensive gun laws. ..."

"I know there are only 60 days left to make our case -- and don't get complacent, don't see the latest outrageous, offensive, inappropriate comment and think, well, he's done this time. We are living in a volatile political environment. You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic -- you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people -- now 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks -- they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America."

"But the other basket -- and I know this because I see friends from all over America here -- I see friends from Florida and Georgia and South Carolina and Texas -- as well as, you know, New York and California -- but that other basket of people are people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they're just desperate for change. It doesn't really even matter where it comes from. They don't buy everything he says, but he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different. They won't wake up and see their jobs disappear, lose a kid to heroin, feel like they're in a dead-end. Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well."

She was referring to the "half" that was the words that I highlighted. Those are the deplorables. Do you consider yourself any of those? If so, then congratulations! That statement did not apply to you! The rest might have though - and maybe you should read into it. That's a matter of people wanting to feel offended for the sake of it. It wasn't a great thing to say, but at least she wasn't whitewashing it.

Meanwhile, Trump said the majority of Mexican immigrants were rapists (they're seing their rapists) that were pretty much excised from their country, a statement that is not only factually incorrect but leaves little room for error. On top of stating blatant misfacts about how refugees come to America to commit crimes, when in reality that doesn't make sense of a multitude of reasons that I highlighted. And don't forget him picking a VP that allowed for AIDs to spread in his home state of Indiana, wanting public funding for gay conersion shock therapy (that, mind you, is a choice, but the societal factors in someone making that choice is perpetuated by him), bills discriminating against gays and transpeople, and wanting to revoke a whole bunch of LGBT+ rights. But the thing is that this is all irrelevant, because the campaign is over.

The SJWs are as common (or maybe not nearly as common common) as the strawman Trump supporter who goes around calling everyone a cuck because they advocate for justice.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Lord Raven

[Anacybele]

By putting people on defense, they act in really aggressive ways. Ever heard of getting defensive?

She said

She was referring to the "half" that was the words that I highlighted. Those are the deplorables. Do you consider yourself any of those? If so, then congratulations! That statement did not apply to you! The rest might have though - and maybe you should read into it. That's a matter of people wanting to feel offended for the sake of it. It wasn't a great thing to say, but at least she wasn't whitewashing it.

Meanwhile, Trump said the majority of Mexican immigrants were rapists (they're seing their rapists) that were pretty much excised from their country, a statement that is not only factually incorrect but leaves little room for error. On top of stating blatant misfacts about how refugees come to America to commit crimes, when in reality that doesn't make sense of a multitude of reasons that I highlighted. And don't forget him picking a VP that allowed for AIDs to spread in his home state of Indiana, wanting public funding for gay conersion shock therapy (that, mind you, is a choice, but the societal factors in someone making that choice is perpetuated by him), bills discriminating against gays and transpeople, and wanting to revoke a whole bunch of LGBT+ rights. But the thing is that this is all irrelevant, because the campaign is over.

The SJWs are as common (or maybe not nearly as common common) as the strawman Trump supporter who goes around calling everyone a cuck because they advocate for justice.

Trump was talking about the illegal immigrants. He'd been talking about them for a long time, why do you think he brought up the wall idea? (which, by the way, I never thought would actually happen and I still don't think it will happen. It doesn't sound possible and wouldn't really solve much anyway since illegal immigrants could just then use boats to sneak in) He never said in any way that he was against ALL immigrants. And as Thatonething said, I would rather have Trump push to stop illegal immigrants than let Hillary and Obama allow all the Syrians in when terrorists are hiding among them. Like Thatonething said, it only took a few extremists to cause 9/11 and they didn't even use guns. It only took one to kill almost 50 people in that Orlando gay bar. You let even one terrorist across the border and you're already risking MANY lives.

I'm not saying I agree that all illegal Mexican immigrants are rapists, they probably aren't. But I do definitely see where Trump is coming from here.

And Hillary is just as incorrect to say even half of Trump's supporters are deplorable. Many of them likely hid their stance, which would explain how Trump managed to win in the first place. The hidden Trump supporters came out and voted without saying a word. How can half of THAT many people be so deplorable? lol

[Rend Keaven]

Alright, I'll remove the hashtag in the title just to set the whole BLM association to rest.

How is the hashtag NOT racist? Why bring up the hashtag at all if you 'don't care'?

Dylann Roof committed an indisputably racially-motivated mass shooting and there wasn't an associated trending hashtag blaming white rights, as he's been treated as a lone wolf, as an outlier, by pretty much everyone. That the 4 criminals aren't BLM members should be enough to let the hashtag die.

By the way, it was recently ruled that the anal rape of a black, disabled student by a white student wasn't a racial or sexual crime.

I wasn't trying to defend the hashtag, I was only addressing how some media outlets care more about a buzzword than the crime that as resolved around it. To me, that like if a well renowned professor in Astrophysics gave a talk on the prospects of live Mars at a Science Convention, but all the news station cared that the professor was wearing Converse shoes. I feel as if some news channels are ignoring the bigger picture. But yeah I won't address this tag here for now.

And that article does prove that there is still injustice for hate crimes out there. No matter the race of the criminals.

Really? Because there's news like this constantly - and far worse; many times the victim dies.

OK, I'll admit I was kind of over exaggerating. Hate giving excuses, but I was in a rush to catch a train to my job in the middle of the morning, where I can get annoyed by the smallest things and I felt the need to express in thoughts on this subject at that time. Big mistake on my part.

[HillaryForPrison]

He's saying the argument is dishonest. It's implicitly calling you dishonest, but it's also a dishonest argument.

Oh because it's worse elsewhere doesn't mean we should fix the system here?

SJWs are made-up and an extremely small part of this left you're talking. The fact that people think SJWs exist and are influencing politics is nonsense. Furthermore, there is at best somewhat less racism than before Obama came in office. He was opposed from day 1 for being black, and people will continue to hate him because he was black, rather than Republican obstructionism that actively made people's lives worse.

EDIT: You should explain that racism in detail and also explain why, just because it's worse in another country, doesn't mean that other countries should aim to reform in order to be better. I mean, fuck, the economy is shit, but economy is a lot worse in other countries, why fix ours? This line of logic is faulty.

I think he can reply himself, as I said you don't know me and I don't see in any way how it is dishonest as I simply stated a fact and whether he or you implicitly meant it, I rebuke it and will ask that you refrain from calling me so.

Yes you do have to fix it but it is not nearly as bad as outlets like CNN make it out to be is my argument, it is not nearly as bad as it was, it is not nearly as bad as other countries, why on earth would people thinking I'm undermining racism towards black people? I never made any such notion, racism in all forms should end.

I could explain more about that racism in detail and also explain why, but I don't think it is the best place to do so here, if you mention the point again I will though, it would be best if you PM me.

SJWs are an extremely small part but they are an incredibly loud, violent, obnoxious part and most of all highly influential part, don't try to say otherwise.

many people oppose Trump because he is white, both black and white people so there is not much of an argument there.

lol this is where I stopped reading.

I don't need to know anything about you personally to comment on how offensively dishonest it is to pretend white and black people are just as racist to each other and there isn't s complete imbalance of economic power and likelihood to survive a police encounter.

Then how easily offended you seem to be, Racism is not limited or more in one race, white people can be racist and black can be just as racist, I didn't in any way imply otherwise, please read up on the amount of single black mothers and compare to other races (white, asian, nigerian) and the number of crimes committed by black people including against other black people then ask why there is an imbalance of economic power and likelihood to survive a police encounter so enough with the victim mentality that non-whites and minorities are victims in everything, be they black, asian or whatever.

For the record I in no way said anything against black people (my mom is half african) but I can't stand that the only argument people seem to have against me is I'm undermining black people when I no have mentioned so.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Thatonething

[Lord Raven]

Trump was talking about the illegal immigrants. He'd been talking about them for a long time, why do you think he brought up the wall idea? (which, by the way, I never thought would actually happen and I still don't think it will happen. It doesn't sound possible and wouldn't really solve much anyway since illegal immigrants could just then use boats to sneak in) He never said in any way that he was against ALL immigrants.

No, he said this;

"When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best," Trump said. "They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

Illegal or not, he was referring to Mexican immigrnats as a whole. He never stated whether or not they're legal or illegal.

And as Thatonething said, I would rather have Trump push to stop illegal immigrants than let Hillary and Obama allow all the Syrians in when terrorists are hiding among them.

What's the source on this? Racism? FYI, people were fine with bringing in Christian refugees, but not those Muslims! Even though it's clear that politics shape racism and not strictly relgiion.

Like Thatonething said, it only took a few extremists to cause 9/11 and they didn't even use guns.

They used guns to hijack the plane.

It only took one to kill almost 50 people in that Orlando gay bar.

And he was born and raised in America.

You let even one terrorist across the border and you're already risking MANY lives.

The system for vetting a refugee is exceedingly complex and immigration is incredibly tough. Just as an anecdote, it took my mom 20 years to get citizenship, and it took her a solid two years to get a visa to come to the US from Pakistan (and it took my dad around a year), and I have no doubts that the process has gotten stricter.

I'm not saying I agree that all illegal Mexican immigrants are rapists, they probably aren't. But I do definitely see where Trump is coming from here.

You're saying immigrants commit more crime on average then? Is that how you understand where he's coming from? Because this is a claim rooted in lies.

And Hillary is just as incorrect to say even half of Trump's supporters are deplorable. Many of them likely hid their stance, which would explain how Trump managed to win in the first place. The hidden Trump supporters came out and voted without saying a word. How can half of THAT many people be so deplorable? lol

No, the difference is that by saying "half" and not "all" she allows the freedom to choose which "half" you belong to. She was also apologetic the next day.

"Last night I was ‘grossly generalistic,’ and that's never a good idea. I regret saying ‘half’ -- that was wrong. But let's be clear, what's really ‘deplorable’ is that Donald Trump hired a major advocate for the so-called ‘alt-right’ movement to run his campaign and that David Duke and other white supremacists see him as a champion of their values. It's deplorable that Trump has built his campaign largely on prejudice and paranoia and given a national platform to hateful views and voices, including by retweeting fringe bigots with a few dozen followers and spreading their message to 11 million people. It's deplorable that he's attacked a federal judge for his ‘Mexican heritage,’ bullied a Gold Star family because of their Muslim faith, and promoted the lie that our first black president is not a true American. So I won't stop calling out bigotry and racist rhetoric in this campaign. I also meant what I said last night about empathy, and the very real challenges we face as a country where so many people have been left out and left behind. As I said, many of Trump's supporters are hard-working Americans who just don’t feel like the economy or our political system are working for them. I'm determined to bring our country together and make our economy work for everyone, not just those at the top. Because we really are ‘stronger together.’ "

So no, she was still somewhat careless, but she never said "all." What's ironic is that the reason why Trump won is precisely those second half of people - and it wasn't because they were accused of racism, it was simply because Trump was a "change" candidate, and Clinton was a "status quo" candidate. There was more Trump campaigning in those rust belt states. Let us do away with the idea that PC culture lost the election, and not poor campaigning, given that the reason why Trump won was stated explicity in the second half of that speech, but this has nothing to do with Clinton's campaign so please do not shift the goalposts. Clinton had this one quote among a plethora of Trump quotes.

I think he can reply himself, as I said you don't know me and I don't see in any way how it is dishonest as I simply stated a fact and whether he or you implicitly meant it, I rebuke it and will ask that you refrain from calling me so.

I'm saying it's implicitly calling you dishonest, but it's not outright doing so. It's pretty obvious from most POVs.

Yes you do have to fix it but it is not nearly as bad as outlets like CNN make it out to be is my argument, it is not nearly as bad as it was, it is not nearly as bad as other countries, why on earth would people thinking I'm undermining racism towards black people? I never made any such notion, racism in all forms should end.

CNN isn't doing anything at all. People just think the mainstream media is doing too much because it's doing more than it used to.

People are thinking you're undermining racism towards black people because your words make it clear that you are trying to, because you're saying that something that is overreported is barely reported. A clear expression of the point which hasn't been looked at in any form is the riots focusing on the riots and not the cause.

I could explain more about that racism in detail and also explain why, but I don't think it is the best place to do so here, if you mention the point again I will though, it would be best if you PM me.

Why don't you just say it in public?

SJWs are an extremely small part but they are an incredibly loud, violent, obnoxious part and most of all highly influential part, don't try to say otherwise.

"the alt-right is a small part but they are incredibly loud, violent, and obnoxious and also they have whole boards on reddit and 4chan dedicated to them"

Then how easily offended you seem to be, Racism is not limited or more in one race, white people can be racist and black can be just as racist, I didn't in any way imply otherwise, please read up on the amount of single black mothers and compare to other races (white, asian, nigerian) and the number of crimes committed by black people including against other black people then ask why there is an imbalance of economic power and likelihood to survive a police encounter so enough with the victim mentality that non-whites and minorities are victims in everything, be they black, asian or whatever.

The core of this is Jim Crow laws - which were repealed only 50 years ago by the way, which is in my parents lifetimes - and that people seem to believe that putting poverty stricken black people in ghettos would resolve itself in a generation or two when it hasn't because no legislation has given the inner city a chance to be more than what they are. It's the vicious cycle, and barring some drastic or extreme measures by the government (or a trillionaire lol) it won't fix itself in two generations, because there has been zero measures since Jim Crow laws for those who you describe in the inner city to better themselves. Their schools are still shit, their neighborhoods are filled with crime, and the police keep giving them a reason to distrust the police. They're still poor as fuck and have to rely on a degree of organized crime and sale of drugs to make quick money to put food on the table. Even take some hits from a drug to help them out. That's the plight of people in the inner city who you are describing.

Frankly, I also do want a system where people in the rust belt who have over the past 20 years been experiencing similar effects meet up with people in the inner city. They'll find nothing but empathy, and that will fix relations. There is a very good reason why many black people distrust the police.

However, he didn't say that racism was a one way street.

For the record I in no way said anything against black people (my mom is half african) but I can't stand that the only argument people seem to have against me is I'm undermining black people when I no have mentioned so.

I have literally brought up significantly more than this. There is more than "the only argument," the argument is that the fact that this is huge is undermining the cause. The argument is not about you in particular.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Lord Raven

[Res]

Alright, I'll remove the hashtag in the title just to set the whole BLM association to rest.

I wasn't trying to defend the hashtag, I was only addressing how some media outlets care more about a buzzword than the crime that as resolved around it. To me, that like if a well renowned professor in Astrophysics gave a talk on the prospects of live Mars at a Science Convention, but all the news station cared that the professor was wearing Converse shoes. I feel as if some news channels are ignoring the bigger picture. But yeah I won't address this tag here for now.

Thank you.

please read up on the amount of single black mothers and compare to other races (white, asian, nigerian) and the number of crimes committed by black people including against other black people

This is going off-topic and delving into the really long and messy history of the United States, but present-day black culture hasn't arisen in a vacuum, and it's really impossible to talk about black crime rates without considering the impact a majority-white U.S. government has had over the past few hundred years.

[HillaryForPrison]

No, he said this;

Illegal or not, he was referring to Mexican immigrnats as a whole. He never stated whether or not they're legal or illegal.

What's the source on this? Racism? FYI, people were fine with bringing in Christian refugees, but not those Muslims! Even though it's clear that politics shape racism and not strictly relgiion.

They used guns to hijack the plane.

And he was born and raised in America.

The system for vetting a refugee is exceedingly complex and immigration is incredibly tough. Just as an anecdote, it took my mom 20 years to get citizenship, and it took her a solid two years to get a visa to come to the US from Pakistan (and it took my dad around a year), and I have no doubts that the process has gotten stricter.

You're saying immigrants commit more crime on average then? Is that how you understand where he's coming from? Because this is a claim rooted in lies.

No, the difference is that by saying "half" and not "all" she allows the freedom to choose which "half" you belong to. She was also apologetic the next day.

So no, she was still somewhat careless, but she never said "all." What's ironic is that the reason why Trump won is precisely those second half of people - and it wasn't because they were accused of racism, it was simply because Trump was a "change" candidate, and Clinton was a "status quo" candidate. There was more Trump campaigning in those rust belt states. Let us do away with the idea that PC culture lost the election, and not poor campaigning, given that the reason why Trump won was stated explicity in the second half of that speech, but this has nothing to do with Clinton's campaign so please do not shift the goalposts. Clinton had this one quote among a plethora of Trump quotes.

Oh my lord the amount of one sided belief you have is shocking.

Regardless I will say he is right about the mexican illegals, there is a huge difference between the amount of mexicans that actually help the country grow and integrate into it and the mexicans that only deal drugs, rape and other crimes, we are bringing a lot of poor qulity citizens and illegals, be they mexican or otherwise, that needs to be resolved.

And are you serious? regardless if he was raised in the US, he's still a Muslim Extremist, 9/11 had Muslim Extemists, the shooting was because of a Muslim Extemist, not christians not atheists, not jews, How disgustingly unpatriotic some people can be, refugee or not these were committed by muslim extremists.

I lived with the Muslim refugees you so happily seem to defend (I'm fluent in Arabic), you do not want possibly thousands of them entering the country unvetted, so please stop talking about a subject I know much more about.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Thatonething

[Lord Raven]

Oh my lord the amount of one sided belief you have is shocking.

Then counter it.

Regardless I will say he is right about the mexican illegals, there is a huge difference between the amount of mexicans that actually help the country grow and integrate into it and the mexicans that only deal drugs, rape and other crimes, we are bringing a lot of poor qulity citizens and illegals, be they mexican or otherwise, that needs to be resolved.

Source?

And are you serious? regardless if he was raised in the US, he's still a Muslim Extremist, 9/11 had Muslim Extemists, the shooting was because of a Muslim Extemist

But the point is that he was born and raised in the US. This is an American doing the crime. This is not a refugee or immigrant as you were implying.

not christians not atheists, not jews

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charleston_church_shooting

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umpqua_Community_College_shooting

They happen. It's just a bigger deal when they're not white.

How disgustingly unpatriotic some people can be.

Thankfully I don't believe in nationalism.

I lived with the Muslim refugees you so happily seem to defend (I'm fluent in Arabic), you do not want possibly thousands of them entering the country unvetted, so please stop talking about a subject I know much more about.

Okay, then tell me more. Source your claims. Are all or most or some committing these attacks ad nauseum? I never said you don't know what you're talking about (well I may have said it once, I'm not sure), I asked you to source your shit. This is not too much to ask. I will report you if you continue to make these claims without doing so. When did I say that they were unvetted? Because they don't come in unvetted, and I never said they should be unvetted.

I grew up in a Muslim family so I can tell you that you do you want thousands of these people coming in at any rate. You see how ridiculous that argument is?

Edited January 6, 2017 by Lord Raven

[Anacybele]

No, he said this;

Illegal or not, he was referring to Mexican immigrnats as a whole. He never stated whether or not they're legal or illegal.

"And some, I assume, are good people."

This automatically means he didn't call ALL Mexican immigrants rapists. He also said some brought drugs as well. If Hillary saying only "half" of Trumps supporters are deplorable is not the same as saying all of them are, then why is Trump basically saying "some bring drugs and rape, some are good people" the same as saying all Mexican immigrants are rapists/druggies? You are not keeping your claims straight and are starting to sound more hypocritical than anything.

Also, Christians aren't the one doing a lot of these terrorist attacks in the US, Muslims are. ISIS are Muslim extremists. The people behind 9/11 were Muslim extremists. The gay bar shooter was a Muslim extremist and had sided with ISIS. This is why allowing so many Muslims in the country poses more of a risk. It's sad, but true.

Oh yeah, and I forgot to mention, I don't like Mike Pence and wish Trump had never picked him as his VP. I can only hope that no nutjob decides to assassinate Trump.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Anacybele

[HillaryForPrison]

Then counter it.

Source?

But the point is that he was born and raised in the US. This is an American doing the crime. This is not a refugee or immigrant as you were implying.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charleston_church_shooting

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umpqua_Community_College_shooting

They happen. It's just a bigger deal when they're not white.

Thankfully I don't believe in nationalism.

Okay, then tell me more. Source your claims. Are all or most or some committing these attacks ad nauseum? I never said you don't know what you're talking about (well I may have said it once, I'm not sure), I asked you to source your shit. This is not too much to ask. I will report you if you continue to make these claims without doing so. When did I say that they were unvetted? Because they don't come in unvetted, and I never said they should be unvetted.

I grew up in a Muslim family so I can tell you that you do you want thousands of these people coming in at any rate. You see how ridiculous that argument is?

This has turned into a huge mess since most of your counter arguments are just recalling what the other half has done or just saying I'm making a false claim, you're not exactly refuting.

I lived with muslims, and grew up with muslim people from all parts of the east, I can talk about this here but I would rather there be a separate section to discuss this, I am fluent in Arabic and I can prove so, send me a piece of Arabic text and I will gladly translate it, be sure to send it in picture form so you won't assume I used a translator but of course knowing how you have been through these entire arguments, that won't convince you either.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Thatonething

[Lord Raven]

"And some, I assume, are good people."

"I assume," not "some are." The point is that the crux of his statement was that immigrants are dangerous. The crux of Hillary's statement is that some Trump supporters are racist, but many feel marginalized.

This automatically means he didn't call ALL Mexican immigrants rapists. He also said some brought drugs as well. If Hillary saying only "half" of Trumps supporters are deplorable is not the same as saying all of them are, then why is Trump basically saying "some bring drugs and rape, some are good people" the same as saying all Mexican immigrants are rapists/druggies? You are not keeping your claims straight and are starting to sound more hypocritical than anything.

Okay, so did Trump apologize for causing the outroar if it was so misleading? By the way, it wasn't.

Hillary said half, then backtracked because half is wrong. She also spent so much time talking about the issues that his supporters are going through - all of which are true, and not based in bullshit - and she had to apologize because her numbers were off.

Trump's exact words in a lot of things were...

“What can be simpler or more accurately stated? The Mexican Government is forcing their most unwanted people into the United States. They are, in many cases, criminals, drug dealers, rapists, etc.”

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

Do you see the difference between "half of his supporters are deplorable" and "when mexico sends its people, they're sending their worst." He is still stating that the majority of the Mexicans that come across the border are criminals. This is not a statement rooted in fact, unless you can prove otherwise. His backtracking is saying "but some of them are gucci, I guess." But that's not the point of his statement - to say that "some" Mexicans are good, the core part of his statement is about bringing fear and racism. The majority of people took to the opening statement more than the latter because a) he is saying that there are more bad people than good people (and at the very least his rhetoric is implying that) and b) he is clearly trying to incite fear. If he really does mean that a tiny portion are criminals (as is the risk of allowing anyone to do anything anywhere, that's the cost of freedom in any capacity), why didn't he say "oh whoops I gaffed." He didn't own up to it, which shows that it was deliberate.

Clinton did not do such a thing, and the only issue in the end were the numbers. The majority of her statement was legitimately on the exact plight of Americans and the solutions she'll see to. You can say a lot about Clinton in terms of her baggage, and you can comment on her foreign policy (you can't on Trump's), but this statement has only one small nitpick that she fixed the next day.

Also, Christians aren't the one doing a lot of these terrorist attacks in the US, Muslims are. ISIS are Muslim extremists. The people behind 9/11 were Muslim extremists. The gay bar shooter was a Muslim extremist and had sided with ISIS. This is why allowing so many Muslims in the country poses more of a risk. It's sad, but true.

Non-Muslims have performed terrorist attacks in many ways - either by ways of the police, by ways of shootings. Adam Lanza was a sort of extremist, and he killed 20 people. That guy killed 9 in a Charleston shooting. A non-Muslim committed a shooting at the local mall I grew up around. It's simply racism and incongruent to acknowledge one shooting as terrorism, and another as just a poor mentally ill shooter. They're all terrorists.

This has turned into a huge mess since most of your counter arguments are just recalling what the other half has done or just saying I'm making a false claim, you're not exactly refuting.

I have been refuting them. I have brought up proof. Where have I not? I can improve if you point it out, rather than quote a whole text block and say "oh you're doing this."

I'm asking you for sources. This does not mean what you're saying is false.

I lived with muslims, and grew up with muslim people from all parts of the east, I can talk about this here but I would rather there be a separate section to discuss this, I am fluent in Arabic and I can prove so, send me a piece of Arabic text and I will gladly translate it, be sure to send it in picture form so you won't assume I used a translator but of course knowing how you have been through these entire arguments, that won't convince you either.

That's not the point I was making. We can all bring up anecdotes, but I have a ton of experience with American Muslims, and they tend to trend to American than to the Orlando shooter. But this is wholly irrelevant to the statistics. I personally don't care if you can read and speak Arabic, the argument that "I said you don't want these people in so you don't want these people in" is grounded in personal fact. You said it, but why did you say it? What is it about them that makes me not want them? Furthermore, you kept mentioning lots and lots of rape in Germany, but I fail to see the source of the fact.

I'm telling you to post this publicly because this is a public forum.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Lord Raven

[Anacybele]

Well, even if Hillary did "own up" to what she said, I won't believe her. She's said so many lies that why should I believe she's sorry for what she said?

As for Trump's quote, I still don't see a big difference, actually. So I guess we just won't agree here.

[Tryhard]

Don't you lot ever get tired of the same old, same old? I get a headache just reading this stuff. It's tiresome because it's always the same.

[Res]

This has turned into a huge mess since most of your counter arguments are just recalling what the other half has done or just saying I'm making a false claim, you're not exactly refuting.

Why should Lord Raven (or anyone, really, I started to, then realized I wasn't responsible for all the googling) take the time to gather resources and refute your claims when you haven't done the legwork in providing the proof for your own claims? If you can start with some actual facts, then we can respond with sources of our own.

Don't you lot ever get tired of the same old, same old? I get a headache just reading this stuff. It's tiresome because it's always the same.

I'm still not sure how Hillary is relevant, and no one in this forum that I've ever seen has said they like/prefer CNN, so I'm not sure why CNN keeps getting brought up as some champion-source-of-the-left (not to mention it's actually centrist).

[HillaryForPrison]

That's not the point I was making. We can all bring up anecdotes, but I have a ton of experience with American Muslims, and they tend to trend to American than to the Orlando shooter. But this is wholly irrelevant to the statistics. I personally don't care if you can read and speak Arabic, the argument that "I said you don't want these people in so you don't want these people in" is grounded in personal fact. You said it, but why did you say it? What is it about them that makes me not want them? Furthermore, you kept mentioning lots and lots of rape in Germany, but I fail to see the source of the fact.

I'm telling you to post this publicly because this is a public forum.

Please say that to the German teenager who was raped and murdered by an Afghanistan refugee.

since you insist, just to preface again not all eastern muslims but the majority of eastern Muslims are very Xenophobic, they don't like people outside of their country, They are very racist, they don't like people of different backgrounds and skin color, including people of different eastern backgrounds.

and they are Extremely homophobic, you keep saying source this and that and they aren't a threat but you will be the first person to be thrown off a building or killed in the name of الله (God) if you support same sex marriage or for being gay, don't try to question me on this unless you can actually argue.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Thatonething

[Lord Raven]

Well, even if Hillary did "own up" to what she said, I won't believe her. She's said so many lies that why should I believe she's sorry for what she said?

This is irrelevant to the point I'm getting across at this point.

As for Trump's quote, I still don't see a big difference, actually. So I guess we just won't agree here.

I've pointed out the big difference, and willful ignorance is what leads to people feeling or being persecuted. You may consider yourself a moderate, but that's a dangerous mentality to have in some respects. You have said nothing new in this.

(I also edited my post to talk about the Muslims).

Don't you lot ever get tired of the same old, same old? I get a headache just reading this stuff. It's tiresome because it's always the same.

No, because I'm angry that we elected a racist, his veep is a homophobe and xenophobe, and that they fooled a bunch of people into voting against their best interests while blaming it on the minorities. I'm angry that people think that race isn't an issue and we should ban all Muslims. It's personal, but my arguments are impersonal as possible, and this is practice for the next four years in my eyes.

EDIT: it's also frustrating to see the struggle of an entire group of people being trivialized because of a few people. It's annoying to see a story like this - that was well resolved - go viral in a flash and getting a lot of "told you so!" when other similar stories from the other side get a lot of "fuck off it" when you say "told you so."

Please say that to the German teenager who was raped and murdered by an Afghanistan refugee.

Please show me how this is the rule and not the exception.

since you insist, just to preface again not all eastern muslims but the majority of eastern Muslims are very Xenophobic, they don't like people outside of their country, They are very racist, they don't like people of different backgrounds and skin color, including people of different eastern backgrounds.

and they are Extremely homophobic, you keep saying source this and that and they aren't a threat but you will be the first person to be thrown off a building or killed in the name of الله (God) if you support same sex marriage or for being gay, don't try to question me on this unless you can actually argue.

This has less to do with religion and more to do with background. Being a child of eastern immigrants, I can admit that there was homophobia starting out, but people's minds can be swayed. If you displace someone from their culture - if they're sufficiently old enough, they'll know better not to do these crimes, and if they're young enough, they'll be tolerant unlike the generation before - then you'll run into the issue of people not being all-in on the culture.

Otherwise, a refugee doesn't give a shit about any of that but are rather thankful that their world isn't being completely flung apart. There are exceptions, but if a new population has a lower crime rate than the current population, then it's worth the risk. You're saying you've grown up, but a change of scenery changes people. As I said, the Muslims that commit major crimes (especially post-911) in the US are American born. There is very little evidence to support the claim that immigrants and refugees will lead to a spike in crime rates because of their propensity for crime and terrorism. You are correct that there are some values dissonance, but you are also not showing how people act in their home country is congruent from how they'll act when they become refugees of another country.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Lord Raven

[HillaryForPrison]

Why should Lord Raven (or anyone, really, I started to, then realized I wasn't responsible for all the googling) take the time to gather resources and refute your claims when you haven't done the legwork in providing the proof for your own claims? If you can start with some actual facts, then we can respond with sources of our own.

I think he can speak for himself.

if you could see the contradiction in what you just said, he only showed one source so far, he hasn't refuted anything and just mentioned the opposite, if I say black crime he says white crime, if I say muslim extremists he says church shooting, he isn't refuting as you say I'm not as well, people sure love living in an echo chamber and just repeat and agree with the news they want to hear and people they agree with, all the information I mentioned is readily available online, literally just search "amount of single black mothers in the US vs other minorities,, whites" for example you will be flooded with statistics, then you can cherry pick the resources that only you might trust, then you can argue with me about it.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Thatonething

[Lord Raven]

The burden of proof is on you for bringing up the point. If I ask for a source, you give me the source, because I'm not doing your homework for you.

I furthermore had an argument for that which you summarily ignored, and it was founded in logic. If you want to provide sources for things, then call it out and I will gladly do so. As it stands, you have never asked me for a source, so I have had no reason to prove it with sources, because I can do homework for myself. This is how it works.

If my source is cherry picked and incorrect, the beauty is you can either a) point out flaws in methodology or b) bring up another source that does so. It's pretty easy. As it stands, if you bring up dubious claims, expect people to ask you where it came from.

FYI I don't know why you said half of that stuff, because you're giving me the impression you're ignoring points. I did not simply say "white crime" to "black crime," I said "white people are capable of committing terrorism too, and in comparable quantities" in response to "the majority of [i assume domestic] terrorism is caused by Muslims." You cherry picked isolated instances and I'm doing the same, if only as an expression of the logic being incoherent.

Whether or not I can speak for myself is irrelevant. This is an open forum. You can respond to whoever you want.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Lord Raven

[HillaryForPrison]

The burden of proof is on you for bringing up the point. If I ask for a source, you give me the source, because I'm not doing your homework for you.

I furthermore had an argument for that which you summarily ignored, and it was founded in logic. If you want to provide sources for things, then call it out and I will gladly do so. As it stands, you have never asked me for a source, so I have had no reason to prove it with sources, because I can do homework for myself. This is how it works.

If my source is cherry picked and incorrect, the beauty is you can either a) point out flaws in methodology or b) bring up another source that does so. It's pretty easy.

Please ask me what else you'd like to be sourced by PM, I'm tired of arguing with you on a public forum, it is not the place for any of these arguments.

Rape caused by refugees in Germany.

https://www.rt.com/news/353485-germany-rape-refugee-cemetery/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Year's_Eve_sexual_assaults_in_Germany

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/8663/germany-migrants-rape

https://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2016/07/11/europes-muslim-rape-epidemic-cologne-is-every-day/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/07/10/leaked-document-says-2000-men-allegedly-assaulted-1200-german-women-on-new-years-eve/

Statistics on single black mothers.

https://newsone.com/1195075/children-single-parents-u-s-american/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African-American_family_structure

http://www.blacknews.com/news/black_unwed_mothers101.shtml#.WG_xnVN97IU

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/jun/23/barack-obama/statistics-dont-lie-in-this-case/

I'm certain someone is going to say that the US government changed these statistics too.

[Lord Raven]

You're throwing sources at me. Show your specific points and show how they contradict mine, because you're again expecting me to do your homework for you. If I have made dubious claims, the onus was on you to ask me for sources for that particular claim. I have asked you to source specific claims, and you threw a bunch of links at me without context, not referencing any of the specific points I told you to source.

Please ask me what else you'd like to be sourced by PM, I'm tired of arguing with you on a public forum, it is not the place for any of these arguments.

Why not? You keep saying this but you don't explain why. Edited January 6, 2017 by Lord Raven

[ping]

Please say that to the German teenager who was raped and murdered by an Afghanistan refugee.

I have to confess something horrible: Germans are sadistic murderers. Here's the proof:

A married (now divorced for financial reasons) couple from Höxter (a town in central Germany), Wilfried and Angelika W., baited two women via contact ads to their farmhouse in order to torture them over a long period of time until they died as a result. Tell those two women that the majority of Germans are decent people and that Wilfried and Angelika W. are just exception to the rule.

Or, less sarcastically: That sentence deeply disgusts me.

I think he can speak for himself.

As it has been stated, this is a public forum. There is no reason why Res shouldn't be allowed to join the discussion.

[HillaryForPrison]

Furthermore, you kept mentioning lots and lots of rape in Germany, but I fail to see the source of the fact.

I'm telling you to post this publicly because this is a public forum.

Your words, I'm sure this is something against site rules so please feel free to PM me or start a new section, out of respect for this topic.

because it is not about the petty and unrelated arguments that we had, it is about the hate crime itself.

I don't want to drag this topic any further here, aside from what I mentioned, its hard keeping track with the amounts of replies and edits made.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Thatonething