Anarchist/“Anti-Fascist” Attacks Detention Center - Page 5 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15018676
Pants-of-dog wrote:Yes, I should said “in the custody of” to avoid this confusion.

In that case, why rationalise the attack described in the OP as meant to stop "others from killing children"?
His actions were consistent with the rational idea that we should not kill children and we should stop others from doing so.
#15018793
Palmyrene wrote:The people who are doing the rapes aren't the refugees. We're talking about rapes of children by positions of authority.

One of the good things Obama did--which probably didn't turn out the way he intended--was to make law enforcement wear cameras. Pretty much everything law enforcement does gets recorded. So if you want charges like that to stick, you pretty much need to show the video recording or where they were taken to a place off camera. Law enforcement is presumed innocent just like everyone else. Show some evidence of your claims.

Palmyrene wrote:Wrong. It's far more practical than your ideology.

So live somewhere where your ideology is practiced, and I'll stay here in the US.

Palmyrene wrote:That seems like projection on your part.

How so? Women are physically weaker than men. States declare a monopoly on the use of violence, and purport to use violence for just ends. In the absence of a state to protect them, women pretty much become the chattel property of men, get raped, etc. The world has bad people in it, and anarchy doesn't do much for people who can't defend themselves.

Palmyrene wrote:Do you think any Hispanic you see in California is a migrant?

No. However, there are quite a few here. My maid and my gardener are both immigrants.

Palmyrene wrote:Have you evet considered why they can't afford air fare is because they're poor refugees who've dropped everything they're doing to rush over the border.

Nearly all of them come for money. The only person who might qualify as a dictator in Central America right now is Daniel Ortega. In South America, that would be Maduro and maybe Evo Morales. All of them could claim to be democratically elected, although I think Maduro's claims are pretty dubious. Exactly who is oppressing them? For the most part, they are looking for good paying jobs that people who live in welfare states can avoid by promising political support to the welfare party.

Palmyrene wrote:Opportunists don't cross the border. They go around it.

That's semantic nonsense.

Palmyrene wrote:If they are opportunists this would be a bad idea because most opportunists don't want to have a legal hearing.

Most people who apply for asylum never show up for their hearings. :roll:


Palmyrene wrote:Mexicans living in the North go to America while Mexicans in the South go to Latin America.

It's not just Mexicans. It's Hondurans, El Salvadorans, etc. They cross Mexico to get to the US border. They aren't refugees.

Palmyrene wrote:They're refugees. They're trying to get away from Mexico not to it.

Obviously, you've never been to Mexico and understand little about migration to the US. Migrants aren't all Mexican by a long shot. Why, for example, do you think people fly from Africa, China, India and Pakistan to Mexico, and then cross over the border to the US? That's really happening.
#15018795
blackjack21 wrote:One of the good things Obama did--which probably didn't turn out the way he intended--was to make law enforcement wear cameras. Pretty much everything law enforcement does gets recorded. So if you want charges like that to stick, you pretty much need to show the video recording or where they were taken to a place off camera. Law enforcement is presumed innocent just like everyone else. Show some evidence of your claims.


No. I'm tired of conservatives making up BS claims and then when people questioning them asking those people to back up their skepticism.

I'm not playing that game and certainly not by your rules.

So live somewhere where your ideology is practiced, and I'll stay here in the US.


:lol: I'm sorry but I have anarchist friends in the US who I am not interested in abandoning. If I start an anarchist society in the MidEast, I'm most certainly going to help anarchists in the US.

How so? Women are physically weaker than men. States declare a monopoly on the use of violence, and purport to use violence for just ends. In the absence of a state to protect them, women pretty much become the chattel property of men, get raped, etc. The world has bad people in it, and anarchy doesn't do much for people who can't defend themselves.


I was talking about the whole Muslim rape gang myth in Europe. That kind of stuff is projection on your part.

Anarchy removes hierarchy not just the state. This includes patriarchy. It does this by building non-hierarchial institutions which discourages that kind of behavior.

Anarchy isn't "get rid of the state, objective accomplished". That itself is a stereotype.

No. However, there are quite a few here. My maid and my gardener are both immigrants.


Just because someone is Hispanic doesn't mean that they're an immigrant.

Also your maid and gardener should probably unionize.

Nearly all of them come for money.


You say this based on your maid and gardener whom you've employed?

Also what's wrong with that? If you work in a capitalist economy you are working for money. That BS about "you have to work for your country!" is nothing more than propaganda meant to make workers more productive and submit to their exploitative conditions. Everyone works for money.

The only person who might qualify as a dictator in Central America right now is Daniel Ortega. In South America, that would be Maduro and maybe Evo Morales. All of them could claim to be democratically elected, although I think Maduro's claims are pretty dubious.


Dude we both know claiming that they're "democratically elected" is a lie. Assad is technically democratically elected but we know he isn't. There simply isn't any other options.

Exactly who is oppressing them?


Specifically? Hierarchy.

Broadly? Cartels, government officials, drug wars, gangs, etc.

For the most part, they are looking for good paying jobs that people who live in welfare states can avoid by promising political support to the welfare party.


Most refugees and illegal immigrants don't vote. They keep their head down.

That's semantic nonsense.


You don't know what the word "semantic" even means.

Most people who apply for asylum never show up for their hearings. :roll:


Why not give me a source for once?

It's not just Mexicans. It's Hondurans, El Salvadorans, etc. They cross Mexico to get to the US border. They aren't refugees.


That reminds of a Fox News interview of a refugee from the Honduras at the border. The interviewer asked her why she wants to cross the border and then the Honduran refugee said she was trying to get her family away from the large drug wars cartels would have, how much human trafficking goes on there and how even children are taken, how dangerous it is, etc.

The Fox interviewer then turns to the camera and says "not all of them are like that".

It was the most hilarious thing I've ever watched.

Obviously, you've never been to Mexico


I have. Went there for summer vacation with my aunt. Lovely little country with great people. My favorite cities I visited was Cancun and Merida. The architecture there is simply beautiful and the food too.

and understand little about migration to the US. Migrants aren't all Mexican by a long shot. Why, for example, do you think people fly from Africa, China, India and Pakistan to Mexico, and then cross over the border to the US? That's really happening.


1. Africans, Chinese, Indians, and Pakistanis don't go to Mexico and then over the border. Usually the people who go to the US are already rich or have wealthy relatives living in the US and do so legally.

2. A majority are Mexican or from surrounding countries.
#15018809
Kaiserschmarrn wrote:In that case, why rationalise the attack described in the OP as meant to stop "others from killing children"?


Because ICE is killing children or allowing them to die, either intentionally or through family separation and neglect.

If the idea is that the government is “forced” to separate families for the safety of the children, then the government becomes the caregiver for the children and is thus responsible when they die.

And I still find it odd that the guy who is trying to save kids is considered a violent and crazed terrorist, while the people taking kids from their families and then becoming responsible for their deaths are the good guys.
#15018812
Palmyrene wrote:@Zionist Nationalist

You have money. Not everyone does. You're probably an Ashkenazi upper class dude or whatever.

Also that's a weird flex. What? You can't get laid without buying prostitutes?


lol I can easily I was just giving you an example

anyway Im sure you are upper class in Syria aswell because you mentioned that you traveled to the US and only high class people from Syria can travel there since Syria dont have visa free access to the US

What is your religion alawite,Christian,Sunni?
#15018813
Palmyrene wrote:If I start an anarchist society in the MidEast

Looking forward to your next progress report.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Because ICE is killing children or allowing them to die, either intentionally

I have seen nothing that would support this. Please show evidence if you think this is happening.

Pants-of-dog wrote:or through family separation and neglect.

Nobody is killed by family separation, so I'll ignore this. Do you classify any of the cases as neglect and if so which and on what basis?

Pants-of-dog wrote:If the idea is that the government is “forced” to separate families for the safety of the children, then the government becomes the caregiver for the children and is thus responsible when they die.

Yes, they have a duty of care, but so far you haven't shown that this was breached. Would you generally describe a child's death under the care of its parents in the same way?

Pants-of-dog wrote:And I still find it odd that the guy who is trying to save kids is considered a violent and crazed terrorist, while the people taking kids from their families and then becoming responsible for their deaths are the good guys.

Your support for vigilante justice (based on what so far seem incorrect assumptions) is noted. From what I can tell by the article in the OP, it also looks like this was not targeted at anybody who might have been actually guilty of neglect, so you also seem to support indiscriminate attacks.
#15018814
Zionist Nationalist wrote:lol I can easily I was just giving you an example

anyway Im sure you are upper class in Syria aswell because you mentioned that you traveled to the US and only high class people from Syria can travel there since Syria dont have visa free access to the US

What is your religion alawite,Christian,Sunni?


Mhmm. I'm pretty sure your toxic personality would drive many people away including women. Even if you look like Prince Charming no one is going to want to screw someone with the character of a toaster.

I'm formerly upper class though I haven't really identified with the lifestyle even when I was.

I'm something. My religious views are... complex to say the least.
#15018815
Kaiserschmarrn wrote:I have seen nothing that would support this. Please show evidence if you think this is happening.


I have already presented it in this thread.

Nobody is killed by family separation, so I'll ignore this. Do you classify any of the cases as neglect and if so which and on what basis?


So you are perfectly fine with family separation?

Yes, they have a duty of care, but so far you haven't shown that this was breached. Would you generally describe a child's death under the care of its parents in the same way?


I think they breached it when they forcibly separated children from families.

Your support for vigilante justice (on what so far seem incorrect assumptions) is noted. From what I can tell by the article in the OP, it also looks like this was not targeted at anybody who might have been actually guilty of neglect, so you also seem to support indiscriminate attacks.


I support the abolition of the entire United States governments. And since this person attacked the centre and some vehicles, and not people, I have no trouble supporting this.
#15018818
@Pants-of-dog

I support the abolition of the entire United States governments. And since this person attacked the centre and some vehicles, and not people, I have no trouble supporting this.


I assume this includes capitalist businesses and corporations? Also you may want to include all governments.

You're *this* close to being an anarchist Pants of Dog.
#15018820
Palmyrene wrote:Mhmm. I'm pretty sure your toxic personality would drive many people away including women. Even if you look like Prince Charming no one is going to want to screw someone with the character of a toaster.

I'm formerly upper class though I haven't really identified with the lifestyle even when I was.

I'm something. My religious views are... complex to say the least.


You really dont know me.
getting laid is not a problem if you know how to talk and you dont have to be nice many girls like assholes
but what do you know about those stuff you are a virgin kid

btw why you post so early its 8 am in Syria and its summer vecation as far as I know. at your age I was sleeping all the way though the noon.
#15018821
Palmyrene wrote:No. I'm tired of conservatives making up BS claims and then when people questioning them asking those people to back up their skepticism.

I'm not playing that game and certainly not by your rules.

They aren't my rules. Presumption of innocence is bedrock US law. Many countries recognize it. It was part of Roman law. It is part of Islamic law.

Palmyrene wrote:Anarchy removes hierarchy not just the state. This includes patriarchy. It does this by building non-hierarchial institutions which discourages that kind of behavior.

Hierarchies are innate human behavior. You can't eliminate it.

Palmyrene wrote:Just because someone is Hispanic doesn't mean that they're an immigrant.

I never said it did.

Palmyrene wrote:You say this based on your maid and gardener whom you've employed?

Also what's wrong with that?

As I said, I've lived in California my whole life. I've encountered many immigrants. I've met people who came seeking asylum: the former Soviet Union, Iran, Afghanistan, etc. They usually have a political reason they are leaving their country. Central Americans in the 1980s would have fled Nicaragua if they were anti-Sandinista. There were some fleeing El Salvador as well. Today, the state in question would probably be Venezuela.

Palmyrene wrote:Broadly? Cartels, government officials, drug wars, gangs, etc.

As you already argued, all of that exists in the US too. Going from the fire to the frying pan isn't asylum.

Palmyrene wrote:Most refugees and illegal immigrants don't vote. They keep their head down.

You don't know the California Democratic Party. They most certainly do vote here.


Palmyrene wrote:Why not give me a source for once?

It's common knowledge. Did you just get here or something?
Acting DHS Secretary Reveals Whopping Percentage of Migrants Don’t Show for Their Court Hearings
Acting Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kevin McAleenan told the Senate Judiciary Committee during Tuesday’s hearing that 90 percent of asylum-seekers who come into the country are not to be seen again.

As soon as they are released with a scheduled future hearing, 9 out of 10 don't bother showing up. They aren't here for asylum.

Palmyrene wrote:Lovely little country with great people.

Mexico is a pretty big.

Palmyrene wrote:1. Africans, Chinese, Indians, and Pakistanis don't go to Mexico and then over the border.

Dude... Are you that naïve? The numbers we see cannot happen unless they bribe politicians and judges. It's a system here. Do you really think that US District Court judges are just complete knuckleheads, or do you think there is some emolument for them if they further the interests of human trafficking? Politicians, judges, media--they are all profiting from this. There is plenty of bribery and corruption in America. NAFTA didn't make Mexico more like America. It made America more like Mexico. The money in human trafficking is immense. This has been going on for a long time. This article is from 2014: Immigrants From Over 75 Countries Illegally Crossing U.S. Border

We saw migrants from Africa and from Pakistan this year on the Mexican border. It does happen.

Palmyrene wrote:2. A majority are Mexican or from surrounding countries.

The majority are from Guatemala, El Salvador and Nicaragua. Less than half are from Mexico now.
#15018822
Pants-of-dog wrote:I have already presented it in this thread.

Not in the least.

Pants-of-dog wrote:So you are perfectly fine with family separation? I think they breached it when they forcibly separated children from families.

As I expected, no evidence.

Pants-of-dog wrote:I support the abolition of the entire United States governments.

By any means necessary?

Pants-of-dog wrote:And since this person attacked the centre and some vehicles, and not people, I have no trouble supporting this.

He tried to explode a propane tank and came armed with a rifle, and since you believe he was there to "save kids" how do you think he would have gone about doing that without attacking people?
#15018876
Kaiserschmarrn wrote:Not in the least.


As I expected, no evidence.


By any means necessary?


He tried to explode a propane tank and came armed with a rifle, and since you believe he was there to "save kids" how do you think he would have gone about doing that without attacking people?


If you wish to portray this man as a violent murderer, please provide evidence that he attacked anyone.

At this point, he still seems like the good guy in comparison to the border and immigration people,
#15018892
Zionist Nationalist wrote:You really dont know me.
getting laid is not a problem if you know how to talk and you dont have to be nice many girls like assholes


Toxic personalities aren't the "asshole" archetype that girls find attractive. Those "assholes" aren't creepy and have actual social skills. You don't.

but what do you know about those stuff you are a virgin kid


:lol: Well, whatever let's you sleep at night.

btw why you post so early its 8 am in Syria and its summer vecation as far as I know. at your age I was sleeping all the way though the noon.


I was at a party though by that time it died down.
#15018900
blackjack21 wrote:They aren't my rules. Presumption of innocence is bedrock US law. Many countries recognize it. It was part of Roman law. It is part of Islamic law.


That's not what I'm referring to.

Hierarchies are innate human behavior. You can't eliminate it.


I don't think you know what I mean by hierarchy.

I never said it did.


Then what's the point of saying that you "live in California" as evidence of you knowing immigrants?

As I said, I've lived in California my whole life. I've encountered many immigrants. I've met people who came seeking asylum: the former Soviet Union, Iran, Afghanistan, etc. They usually have a political reason they are leaving their country. Central Americans in the 1980s would have fled Nicaragua if they were anti-Sandinista. There were some fleeing El Salvador as well. Today, the state in question would probably be Venezuela.


Have you met any of the Hispanics you're actually complaininh about.

As you already argued, all of that exists in the US too. Going from the fire to the frying pan isn't asylum.


As I have said before, they either don't know that or are in hurry to get out of Mexico as quickly as possible.

You don't know the California Democratic Party. They most certainly do vote here.


Illegal immigrants or refugees don't vote. Yes, California has a large Hispanic population but most of them were born in California or the US.

It's common knowledge. Did you just get here or something?
Acting DHS Secretary Reveals Whopping Percentage of Migrants Don’t Show for Their Court Hearings


Omg do actually have to put in effort and research this shit. Ok...

The article appears to have been written in 2019. Seperating kids at the border has been going on since the Obama administration. We've recently found out that children go to their court hearings alone. This may be the reason why refugees don't go to their court hearings

Mexico is a pretty big.


You know what's bigger? America.

Dude... Are you that naïve?


No because the immigrants from Muslim countries in the West are negligible, the rate of Indians and Chinese coming into America in 2019 is larger than the Muslim immigrants but still small, and literally no one from African countries goes to America for anything other than business.

We saw migrants from Africa and from Pakistan this year on the Mexican border. It does happen.


Not often and they usually were living in Mexico prior to seeking refuge in America.

The majority are from Guatemala, El Salvador and Nicaragua. Less than half are from Mexico now.


Mhmm.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 15

del Netanyahu’s indictment exposes Trump, too […]

Another school shooting

All I can say is that I am routinely shocked at t[…]

What is happening in Iran?

dont take skinster seriously she is obviously ment[…]

Ukrainegate

Eric Ciaramella is a CIA analyst and former Nation[…]