U.K. A$$holes are more fubar'd than ours.

1. Health minister threatened with Nuremberg type trial, followed by hanging. He suggests people get vaccinated. 

2. UK. has a life saving, water rescue organization. They go into the ocean/channel to rescue people from distressed vessels. 

Anti-immigrant dillwads approached men who were launching on a rescue mission and threw rocks at them because they might have been going to rescue illegal immigrants.

this is probably a superficial and perhaps incorrect observation, but it seems that what the UK and the U.S. have in common are toxic right-wing media outlets that make their money by trying to make old white people angry.

Don't shortchange the United States.

In Los Angeles the other day, anti-maskers were protesting at a breast cancer treatment center, because the center has a strict mask policy.

A cancer treatment center.  The anti-maskers are idiots.

This is a thread from the Twitter about it, including the lowlifes arguing with a cancer patient.

Those anti-maskers should be charged with attempted murder. And I don’t say that lightly.
I had to wait months while medical authorities conducted extremely thorough testing to be sure I’d ‘probably have low risk’ of that clotting syndrome if I undergo vaccination; none of the options here are particularly safe and only one is slightly less risky. 

Idiots.

Formerlyjerseyjack said:

1. Health minister threatened with Nuremberg type trial, followed by hanging. He suggests people get vaccinated. 

2. UK. has a life saving, water rescue organization. They go into the ocean/channel to rescue people from distressed vessels. 

Anti-immigrant dillwads approached men who were launching on a rescue mission and threw rocks at them because they might have been going to rescue illegal immigrants.

Sources tell me the protests were mostly peaceful. 

terp said:

Sources tell me the protests were mostly peaceful. 

 Well, obviously they weren't, in contrast to the vast majority of demonstrations for racial justice last year in the United States.

And it's long past time to drop that stupid allegation that they weren't.

terp said:

Sources tell me the protests were mostly peaceful. 

 It's certainly been interesting to see which libertarians have actually lent their support to protesting government tyranny, and which have not.

PVW said:

terp said:

Sources tell me the protests were mostly peaceful. 

 It's certainly been interesting to see which libertarians have actually lent their support to protesting government tyranny, and which have not.

 when there's property to be protected, the "state" starts to look a lot less threatening to some so-called libertarians.  It's like the old joke about a conservative is a liberal who got mugged.  

ml1 said:

PVW said:

terp said:

Sources tell me the protests were mostly peaceful. 

 It's certainly been interesting to see which libertarians have actually lent their support to protesting government tyranny, and which have not.

 when there's property to be protected, the "state" starts to look a lot less threatening to some so-called libertarians.  It's like the old joke about a conservative is a liberal who got mugged.  

 An incredibly unnuanced comment about a nuanced issue.  Anyhoo, most people would be ok with drowning kittens if it were their tribe doing the drowning.  That's the truth.

terp said:

 An incredibly unnuanced comment about a nuanced issue.  Anyhoo, most people would be ok with drowning kittens if it were their tribe doing the drowning.  That's the truth.

Pretty “nuanced” response.

Care to be more concrete?

terp said:

 An incredibly unnuanced comment about a nuanced issue.  Anyhoo, most people would be ok with drowning kittens if it were their tribe doing the drowning.  That's the truth.

 whatever. Your reaction to the BLM protests earned you the label of "libertarian" or "so-called libertarian."

Just own it. 

ml1 said:

 whatever. Your reaction to the BLM protests earned you the label of "libertarian" or "so-called libertarian."

Just own it. 

 It’s all about “me,” “my family,” “my stuff.”

And I'll just leave this here. 

ml1 said:

not to mention how much of the violence at BLM protests was actually initiated by the police.

Nearly 1,000 instances of police brutality recorded in US anti-racism protests

jimmurphy said:

terp said:

 An incredibly unnuanced comment about a nuanced issue.  Anyhoo, most people would be ok with drowning kittens if it were their tribe doing the drowning.  That's the truth.

Pretty “nuanced” response.

Care to be more concrete?

 Sure.  I'm not going to speak for all libertarians because there is a spectrum of views.  However, the people I tend to agree with are not big fans of police.  The thinking is that they harass as much as they protect handing out tickets for petty violations and using civil forfeiture while major crimes go unsolved.  Obviously, people would prefer other private solutions to ensure security 

But, in today's world, this is the model.  The government taxes people and that pays for the police. People and property needs protection.  As long as we've organized society in this way the police need to be the ones who protect property.

terp said:

 Sure.  I'm not going to speak for all libertarians because there is a spectrum of views.  However, the people I tend to agree with are not big fans of police.  The thinking is that they harass as much as they protect handing out tickets for petty violations and using civil forfeiture while major crimes go unsolved.  Obviously, people would prefer other private solutions to ensure security 

But, in today's world, this is the model.  The government taxes people and that pays for the police. People and property needs protection.  As long as we've organized society in this way the police need to be the ones who protect property.

 but no one was protesting against the role of the police in protecting property. They were protesting misconduct, racial profiling and use of excessive force. And you were on the side of the "state" even when they were committing an alleged 1,000 acts of violence on protesters because protecting property was more important. 

That's fine if it's your POV. But it's putting property above the safety of people's bodies at the hands of the police. 

ml1 said:

terp said:

 Sure.  I'm not going to speak for all libertarians because there is a spectrum of views.  However, the people I tend to agree with are not big fans of police.  The thinking is that they harass as much as they protect handing out tickets for petty violations and using civil forfeiture while major crimes go unsolved.  Obviously, people would prefer other private solutions to ensure security 

But, in today's world, this is the model.  The government taxes people and that pays for the police. People and property needs protection.  As long as we've organized society in this way the police need to be the ones who protect property.

 but no one was protesting against the role of the police in protecting property. They were protesting misconduct, racial profiling and use of excessive force. And you were on the side of the "state" even when they were committing an alleged 1,000 acts of violence on protesters because protecting property was more important. 

That's fine if it's your POV. But it's putting property above the safety of people's bodies at the hands of the police. 

 I was not on the side of the state. However, I was just not supportive of the violence and wanton destruction that came with some of the protests.  

terp said:

ml1 said:

terp said:

 Sure.  I'm not going to speak for all libertarians because there is a spectrum of views.  However, the people I tend to agree with are not big fans of police.  The thinking is that they harass as much as they protect handing out tickets for petty violations and using civil forfeiture while major crimes go unsolved.  Obviously, people would prefer other private solutions to ensure security 

But, in today's world, this is the model.  The government taxes people and that pays for the police. People and property needs protection.  As long as we've organized society in this way the police need to be the ones who protect property.

 but no one was protesting against the role of the police in protecting property. They were protesting misconduct, racial profiling and use of excessive force. And you were on the side of the "state" even when they were committing an alleged 1,000 acts of violence on protesters because protecting property was more important. 

That's fine if it's your POV. But it's putting property above the safety of people's bodies at the hands of the police. 

 I was not on the side of the state. However, I was just not supportive of the violence and wanton destruction that came with some of the protests.  

 you were on the side that committed 1000 instances of brutality because they were "protecting property."

Property over people. Why won't you stand behind what was your obvious position at the time?

You are a child.

terp said:

You are a child.

 that's your standard response when challenged, so I'll chalk it up to projection.

Ha.  Not my standard response for everything.  It's my standard response for those who tell me what I think because it fits their child like view of the world.

I am on the side of peace.  I am critical of anyone who initiates violence.   I have been consistent on that.  Sorry if that doesn't fit in with your charicature.

terp said:

Ha.  Not my standard response for everything.  It's my standard response for those who tell me what I think because it fits their child like view of the world.

I am on the side of peace.  I am critical of anyone who initiates violence.   I have been consistent on that.  Sorry if that doesn't fit in with your charicature.

 So you disagree with the actions of Abraham Whipple and John Brown et. al., against the HMS Gaspee?

There's a difference between attacking those agressing on you and burning and looting local businesses. 

terp said:

Ha.  Not my standard response for everything.  It's my standard response for those who tell me what I think because it fits their child like view of the world.

I am on the side of peace.  I am critical of anyone who initiates violence.   I have been consistent on that.  Sorry if that doesn't fit in with your charicature.

first of all, I'm not the only one here calling you out on that issue, so it's not a caricature.  It was the truth that anyone here reading your comments could see that you were wholly critical of the mass of overwhelmingly peaceful demonstrators.  And you continue (just a few comments above in fact) to make fun of the truthful fact that the vast majority of protests last summer were peaceful.  

you're the person who whines constantly and hyperbolically about "state violence" when they are taking the "fruits of your labor" through taxation "at the point of a gun."  And yet all over the country the "state" sent riot cops out to fire tear gas and rubber bullets with the intent of terrorizing people exercising their first amendment rights.  And they set curfews to serve as phony pretexts to set upon people doing nothing more than marching in the street.  THAT was real state violence.  And yet you're still mocking the people who were victimized by the "state."  

so sure focus on individual actors who committed arson or assault. I agree those people should be arrested and prosecuted.  But in the grand scheme, the violence and terrorism committed by the police last summer was disproportionally over the top by multiples more.  Where's your concern for that?

ml1 said:

terp said:

Ha.  Not my standard response for everything.  It's my standard response for those who tell me what I think because it fits their child like view of the world.

I am on the side of peace.  I am critical of anyone who initiates violence.   I have been consistent on that.  Sorry if that doesn't fit in with your charicature.

first of all, I'm not the only one here calling you out on that issue, so it's not a caricature.  It was the truth that anyone here reading your comments could see that you were wholly critical of the mass of overwhelmingly peaceful demonstrators.  And you continue (just a few comments above in fact) to make fun of the truthful fact that the vast majority of protests last summer were peaceful.  

you're the person who whines constantly and hyperbolically about "state violence" when they are taking the "fruits of your labor" through taxation "at the point of a gun."  And yet all over the country the "state" sent riot cops out to fire tear gas and rubber bullets with the intent of terrorizing people exercising their first amendment rights.  And they set curfews to serve as phony pretexts to set upon people doing nothing more than marching in the street.  THAT was real state violence.  And yet you're still mocking the people who were victimized by the "state."  

so sure focus on individual actors who committed arson or assault. I agree those people should be arrested and prosecuted.  But in the grand scheme, the violence and terrorism committed by the police last summer was disproportionally over the top by multiples more.  Where's your concern for that?

 Show me where I supported police violence.  I have many well established issues with police behavior.  The fact is that cities burned.  I support peaceful protest.  You see everything through a tribal lens.  This makes you extremely impressionable and it seems like more susceptible than most to propaganda.  I'm thinking you are either putting me on or you are in the top 1%.  Certainly top 5 %.

terp said:

ml1 said:

terp said:

Ha.  Not my standard response for everything.  It's my standard response for those who tell me what I think because it fits their child like view of the world.

I am on the side of peace.  I am critical of anyone who initiates violence.   I have been consistent on that.  Sorry if that doesn't fit in with your charicature.

first of all, I'm not the only one here calling you out on that issue, so it's not a caricature.  It was the truth that anyone here reading your comments could see that you were wholly critical of the mass of overwhelmingly peaceful demonstrators.  And you continue (just a few comments above in fact) to make fun of the truthful fact that the vast majority of protests last summer were peaceful.  

you're the person who whines constantly and hyperbolically about "state violence" when they are taking the "fruits of your labor" through taxation "at the point of a gun."  And yet all over the country the "state" sent riot cops out to fire tear gas and rubber bullets with the intent of terrorizing people exercising their first amendment rights.  And they set curfews to serve as phony pretexts to set upon people doing nothing more than marching in the street.  THAT was real state violence.  And yet you're still mocking the people who were victimized by the "state."  

so sure focus on individual actors who committed arson or assault. I agree those people should be arrested and prosecuted.  But in the grand scheme, the violence and terrorism committed by the police last summer was disproportionally over the top by multiples more.  Where's your concern for that?

 Show me where I supported police violence.  I have many well established issues with police behavior.  The fact is that cities burned.  I support peaceful protest.  You see everything through a tribal lens.  This makes you extremely impressionable and it seems like more susceptible than most to propaganda.  I'm thinking you are either putting me on or you are in the top 1%.  Certainly top 5 %.

 the "tribal lens" thing is BS, but you do you.

someone who actually cared about the police violence against protesters wouldn't still be mocking the demonstrations a year later.  it's lip service now when you're being called out on your comments (and again, not just by me).

When did I mock the protesters? 

terp said:

When did I mock the protesters? 

 don't try to say this isn't a mocking reference to BLM protests as mostly peaceful.

terp said:

Sources tell me the protests were mostly peaceful. 

and your focus on violence is way disproportionate to reality.  how many of these cities burned last summer?

I was mocking the propaganda.   The Kenosha victim's mother pleaded with people to stop burning and looting for the love of god.  Are you to tell me you find that CNN screenshot to be even handed journalism? 

when the local news reports a murder, should they rather focus on the 8 billion people who weren't murdered?  "Tonight, most people weren't murdered"  

It's not so much that you are wrong, but your position is laughable.  I'm amazed that you lack the self reflection to see that.  It's really remarkable.  But as you say "you do you"

terp said:

when the local news reports a murder, should they rather focus on the 8 billion people who weren't murdered?  "Tonight, most people weren't murdered" 

 If that media outlet seemed nearly exclusively focused on murders at the expense of everything else the other 8 billion people were doing, I might start to have some doubts about that outlet.

PVW said:

terp said:

when the local news reports a murder, should they rather focus on the 8 billion people who weren't murdered?  "Tonight, most people weren't murdered" 

 If that media outlet seemed nearly exclusively focused on murders at the expense of everything else the other 8 billion people were doing, I might start to have some doubts about that outlet.

 Ha. What?