Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...
Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods
Pants-of-dog wrote:The counter protesters were not breaking the law, even if we accept the use of the Canadian criminal code for this argument, which is actually not the right set of laws to use in this jurisdiction.
Bulaba Jones wrote:Blackjack is right: if there are counterprotesters on a street, you are authorized to murder them all for standing around. It totally isn't stupid as fuck to suggest/imply they deserve to be murdered by neo-Nazis for standing around and being annoying/inconvenient.
Heisenberg wrote:I don't believe any of those offences carry a summary death penalty, but perhaps there are some weird bylaws that apply when neo-Nazi marchers are mildly inconvenienced by something.
Bulaba Jones wrote:Blackjack is right: if there are counterprotesters on a street, you are authorized to murder them all for standing around.
You like to say I "support" Nazis, even though all the real Nazis are dead and gone
blackjack21 wrote:I suppose that is supposed to be funny. Of course, I've never said anything to support such a ludicrous notion. However, I find it odd that your nom de guerre is Heisenberg. He formalized quantum mechanics, but was also leading the Nazi quest to build an atomic bomb. The US sent an OSS agent to one of Heisenberg's lectures to shoot and kill him if Heisenberg indicated that Germany was close to achieving an atomic bomb. Don't you find it odd that you choose the name of a Nazi collaborator?
Stormsmith wrote:If you're talking about WWII German Nazi, they live on as do our vets, so you're wrong
If you're talking about an ideology, well, those are today's Nazis and neo-nazies.
Apparently. You're welcome.
I don't scream. Plse don't put all-consuming on my fingertips. I offered nothing on counter protesters ergo that's wrong, too
I didn't write about Antifa/BLM, where are you getting this?
Buzz has a habit of assuming that anyone who disagrees with him hates white people, or wants to destroy western civilisation, or something like that.
Stormsmith wrote:Cheers, Pants-of-dog.
I know what and why he writes as he does. I'm just trying to get him to understand that BTW staying on topic, he wouldn't be beaten to the point of being blooded.
Stormsmith wrote:In reality, if he simply supported everyone's right to lawfully protest he'd be done. He wouldn't need to take the high road. But instead, he supports the morally inferior position only, and finds brazenly whacky arguments (Saskatchewan law) in an attempt to bolster his argument (s), and is mocked accordingly. Sad. Embarrassing.
Ho hum. Another person accusing me of something I[…]
No more suspect than the claims of those receivi[…]
The USA is rated more moral. Look it up. No, you[…]
First article is of a girl who webcams, who I alr[…]