d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Lefty Thug Plotted To Kill Supreme Court Justices
Prev15678Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 49,893
Joined: Jun 19 2006
Gold: 3.88
Jun 16 2022 03:23am
Quote (InsaneBobb @ Jun 16 2022 07:22pm)
So now you claim to be more of a free speech absolutist than even the most absolutist libertarian?

That's really odd. I seem to recall you telling us that Donald Trump telling a crowd of people to go outside a public building a peacefully and patriotically let their voices be heard was incitement to insurrection.

Truthfully Matt, if you're going to set a standard by which others are supposed to live their lives, you have to uphold that standard. So, are you willing to state clearly, right now, that all accusations towards Trump regarding January 6th are bullshit? If not, you are a simple liar, and hypocrite, attempting to justify armed mobs threatening the lives and families of your political opponents.

In other words, you actively support terrorism, and are attempting to couch it as "freedom of speech" which your country does not even have, btw, believing we're too stupid to either comprehend or point out the clear lie.

Bottom line is, you've been a strong advocate for "hate speech" laws, you've been a strong advocate for censorship of speech on social media platforms (the digital town square), and every time you talk about freedom of speech, you're merely attempting to play off your support of active terrorism as "but muh rights".

Stay in Australia, Matt. You know, the nation that built and populated concentration camps over a cold? Yeah, the world remembers, do you?


That is not what he said at all.
Also, i had that "Cold" 5 weeks ago and can barely breathe and have half the side effects still.

This post was edited by Plaguefear on Jun 16 2022 03:24am
Member
Posts: 21,486
Joined: Jul 21 2005
Gold: 438.40
Jun 16 2022 03:34am
Quote (Plaguefear @ 16 Jun 2022 02:23)
That is not what he said at all.
Also, i had that "Cold" 5 weeks ago and can barely breathe and have half the side effects still.


That is exactly what he said, and the video of his statements is still up on Rumble, bitchute, and elsewhere.

Speaking of freedom of speech, what do you think about Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc. removing every attempt to post the video of Donald Trump's speech on January 6th?

You don't support freedom of speech. You support the violent targeting of your political opponents. You support terrorism. There's no way around this.
Member
Posts: 49,893
Joined: Jun 19 2006
Gold: 3.88
Jun 16 2022 03:38am
Quote (InsaneBobb @ Jun 16 2022 07:34pm)
That is exactly what he said, and the video of his statements is still up on Rumble, bitchute, and elsewhere.

Speaking of freedom of speech, what do you think about Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc. removing every attempt to post the video of Donald Trump's speech on January 6th?

You don't support freedom of speech. You support the violent targeting of your political opponents. You support terrorism. There's no way around this.


No you are just doing what you always do and lying, i have never once mentioned violence, your fantasies are not something i need to address.
Member
Posts: 21,486
Joined: Jul 21 2005
Gold: 438.40
Jun 16 2022 03:50am
Quote (Plaguefear @ 16 Jun 2022 02:38)
No you are just doing what you always do and lying, i have never once mentioned violence, your fantasies are not something i need to address.


Gathering a heavily armed mob outside a judge's house and threatening that judge and their family with violence if they do not rule the way you wish, within hours of an attempted assassination of said judge, is political violence and terrorism.

You've spent the last several hours attempting to justify that terrorism. You support terrorism.

Hilarious that while in this thread, you claim to be a free speech absolutist who doesn't care about laws (LOL!), in the other thread you're saying that the US should disarm it's law abiding citizens. "The rights of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is meaningless, and clearly, laws do matter to you.

You have no ground to stand on, and no right to accuse anyone else of lying. You are a progressive activist who actively supports terrorism against your political opponents.

Dunno what happened to you over the last 10 years or so, but whatever it was, it was clearly negative. :)
Member
Posts: 49,893
Joined: Jun 19 2006
Gold: 3.88
Jun 16 2022 03:52am
Quote (InsaneBobb @ Jun 16 2022 07:50pm)
Gathering a heavily armed mob outside a judge's house and threatening that judge and their family with violence if they do not rule the way you wish, within hours of an attempted assassination of said judge, is political violence and terrorism.

You've spent the last several hours attempting to justify that terrorism. You support terrorism.

Hilarious that while in this thread, you claim to be a free speech absolutist who doesn't care about laws (LOL!), in the other thread you're saying that the US should disarm it's law abiding citizens. "The rights of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is meaningless, and clearly, laws do matter to you.

You have no ground to stand on, and no right to accuse anyone else of lying. You are a progressive activist who actively supports terrorism against your political opponents.

Dunno what happened to you over the last 10 years or so, but whatever it was, it was clearly negative. :)


Ok so then in that case all the idiots on your side standing outside abortion clinics are terrorists and should be jailed, cool.
Member
Posts: 38,137
Joined: May 28 2006
Gold: 0.00
Jun 16 2022 03:58am
Quote (Plaguefear @ Jun 16 2022 07:34am)
Why would freedom of speech not apply to protests over judgements?


because leftist idiots currently in power atleast for now don't have the balls to pass their desired law to legalize Democrat voters killing a judge they dont like

currently protesting near a judges residence is not allowed by law

18 U.S. Code § 1507 - Picketing or parading
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1507

Whoever, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty, pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, or with such intent uses any sound-truck or similar device or resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

Nothing in this section shall interfere with or prevent the exercise by any court of the United States of its power to punish for contempt.
(Added Sept. 23, 1950, ch. 1024, title I, § 31(a), 64 Stat. 1018; amended Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(K), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

This post was edited by HeLiCaL on Jun 16 2022 04:02am
Member
Posts: 21,486
Joined: Jul 21 2005
Gold: 438.40
Jun 16 2022 04:11am
Quote (Plaguefear @ 16 Jun 2022 02:52)
Ok so then in that case all the idiots on your side standing outside abortion clinics are terrorists and should be jailed, cool.


Ah, time to reach out blindly for the nearest completely unrelated subject. Great job! As it turns out, it IS legal to protest businesses that operate in the "public space". And those protesting those businesses are protesting the acts of those businesses (murder), not specific people. They are not attempting to sway any judge or utilize threats and violence to get legislation enacted. They are not attempting to gather mobs on private residential property to threaten the lives and families of anyone. They are not violating any law. Funny how that works, isn't it?

Continue supporting terrorism while pointing the finger at everyone else, little Aussie boy. You've shown you ARE the enemy of every freedom loving American. :)
Member
Posts: 49,893
Joined: Jun 19 2006
Gold: 3.88
Jun 16 2022 04:44am
Quote (InsaneBobb @ Jun 16 2022 08:11pm)
Ah, time to reach out blindly for the nearest completely unrelated subject. Great job! As it turns out, it IS legal to protest businesses that operate in the "public space". And those protesting those businesses are protesting the acts of those businesses (murder), not specific people. They are not attempting to sway any judge or utilize threats and violence to get legislation enacted. They are not attempting to gather mobs on private residential property to threaten the lives and families of anyone. They are not violating any law. Funny how that works, isn't it?

Continue supporting terrorism while pointing the finger at everyone else, little Aussie boy. You've shown you ARE the enemy of every freedom loving American. :)


How is it unrelated?
They are literally protesting the exact opposite side of the people you are calling terrorists, using the same means..
@bold, yes they do and have done, many times.
Barnett Slepian
George tiller
Dr. David Gunn

Thats three i could come up with in 2 minutes, name three judges killed by the other side.

This post was edited by Plaguefear on Jun 16 2022 04:47am
Member
Posts: 21,486
Joined: Jul 21 2005
Gold: 438.40
Jun 16 2022 05:59am
Quote (Plaguefear @ 16 Jun 2022 03:44)
How is it unrelated?
They are literally protesting the exact opposite side of the people you are calling terrorists, using the same means..
@bold, yes they do and have done, many times.
Barnett Slepian
George tiller
Dr. David Gunn

Thats three i could come up with in 2 minutes, name three judges killed by the other side.


Are you high or drunk? Be honest now. The mob gathered around Kavanaugh's home were gathered around his private residential property threatening his life and the lives of his family in order to effect legislation. A man crossed the entire nation in an attempt to assassinate Kavanaugh in order to change legislation.

A group of people outside a business saying "stop murdering children" is neither an attempt to effect legislation, nor is it a threat. Do you understand?

Your pathetic attempts to tie these events together is merely another attempt to support terrorism. Flat out. The appropriate response would be "Prosecute the would-be assassin to the fullest extent of the law, and prosecute the mob threatening him and his family to the fullest extent of the law (5K fine + 1 year in jail) and call it good." Instead, you're attempting to justify it. So let's take a look at your three "examples" of how "the right" reacts.

Barnett Slepian was killed by James Charles Kopp in a assassination style sniper shooting. Kopp was an international terrorist from California who was charged and/or suspected in multiple crimes all across Canada and the US. His actions were universally condemned, not just left and right, but even by anti-abortion activists themselves. Turns out, this guy was a crazy terrorist, and the call from the "right" was to execute him for his crimes. However, New York, which has been ruled by Democrats for the last Century, refused, and gave him life without parole. This murder occurred in 1998, btw, under a Democrat president notorious, among other things, for his anti gay marriage, pro gun control, and pro abortion stance, at a time when the SCOTUS refused to hear any challenges to Roe v Wade or Planned Parenthood v Casey.

George Tiller was a late term abortionist who was well-known for murdering viable babies during the 8th and 9th month of pregnancy. He was assassinated by Scott Philip Roeder, a guy with no priors, who apparently disliked the murder of viable babies. It was a straight out assassination, from a person apparently unaffiliated with any form of activist or protest group or even political party. His actions were universally condemned, with demands from the right to charge him with a capital crime and execute him. Yet for all that, the Democrat-led state of Kansas refused to charge him with a capital offense, and merely gave him 50 to life, which they commuted (without apparent reason) to 25 to life. He may very well be let out on parole at some point in the next decade or so, specifically because of Democrat policy in Kansas. This assassination occurred in a Democrat led state, under a Democrat President in 2009.

Dr. David Gunn was murdered by Michael Frederick Griffin in Florida. He used a perfectly legal and peaceful protest to hide himself until the Dr. showed up to work, then stepped out and shot him. He was sentenced to Life Imprisonment, and while he has appealed multiple times, the soonest he could possibly get out of jail would be 2043, at which time he'd be 82 years old, and such a release would still require a successful appeal, which he is unlikely to receive. His act was condemned not only by all political affiliations, but by the other protestors as well, all of whom reported they'd never seen him before, he had nothing to do with them. From the point of his crime to his conviction he was under detainment, with no potential for re-offense allowed. Nationally, Florida faced heated rebuke over not sentencing him to death, and still do. Unfortunately, Florida is very hesitant to exercise capital punishment for anyone who is not a serial killer, which Griffin was not. So, he will rot until he either dies, or is so old that going to the bathroom will be a chore. Note that this murder occurred in 1993, once again under a Democrat President, with a Democratic Governor of Florida failing to pressure the state prosecutors to seek the death penalty.

Now, as a result of the actions of these three, among a few others, the "Access to Entry" legislation was passed, preventing protestors from blocking entrances and exits to businesses, and disallowing them from protesting on the business's direct property, with the exception of shopping centers, where the business does not actually own the property, in which case the parking lot can still be used for protest, as long as people are not blocked from... Parking.

What all three of these people have in common, as contemptable and downright dastardly as they all were, was a desire to stop seeing babies murdered. Griffin was reported to have shouted "STOP KILLING BABIES" when he murdered Gunn. And yet, none of the three were active in actual protests, none of the three were part of groups of protestors. Each of these went with the intent to kill abortionists, each of these three cases occurred while Democrats were in office both in the White House and in the State Governance. And in all three cases, Republicans nationwide were calling for the death penalty.

Now, on the contrary to this, Nicholas John Roske crossed the nation from California to DC with the arms and armament to assassinate Kavanaugh specifically to change the vote regarding Roe v Wade. There is no question, he has admitted to it. Legislation was passed to prevent any form of protest or picketing of judges specifically because they are NOT political (or not supposed to be), and EVERY so-called protest at a judge's house involves threats and typically violence, EVERY so-called protest at a judge's residence (or courthouse) involves a case. It was determined that if judges are to be apolitical, and not a part of the business world, having pitchfork-waving mobs at their doors any time the political wind shifts is bad, hence the law against it.

And multiple Federal Judges have been murdered in office. You're a fan of wiki, spend 2 seconds and go look it up yourself. What you'll find is that most of them were murdered over case decisions. Big surprise, eh? As a result of some of the earlier murders, information regarding the addresses and phone numbers of these judges were not made public. Why have the so-called "conservatives" on the Supreme Court all had their private home addresses given out by such stunning and brave publications as WaPo and the Daily Beast? Why have politicians such as Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Chuck Schumer, and Kamala Harris encouraged people to violate federal law and protest these judges?

The bottom line is every time you claim that "people on my side" did this or that, you're simply making shit up. None of the murderers/terrorists involved have or had anything to do with me, and I do not support murder or any other form of violence in relation to politics whatsoever, unless it is in the last defense of your life, such as the Rittenhouse case. I believe all three of the murderers should have been executed, and frankly, I don't care how states set their abortion laws. If California or West Virginia want to allow it up until birth, or 7 days after birth, or whatever nonsensical bullshit they can justify to themselves? That's their business. If Oklahoma wants to ban it outright? Good on them. If Texas, Arizona, and Florida want to limit abortion to pre-heartbeat, giving pregnant women 15-16 weeks (that'd be nearly 4 months, well into the second trimester)? Great! You've already stated you don't give a shit about laws, how about the Constitution? The Constitution states that any rights not enumerated therein fall to the States. Abortion does not appear anywhere in the Constitution. Roe was a shitty judgement and an attempt to pass federal law from the bench, usurping the powers of the Legislature. It was done in the hope that it would tamp down the outcry and outrage over abortion, and instead, it enflamed it. Likewise with Planned Parenthood vs Casey. Overturning them both and letting the States deal with it is fine. IF Congress wanted to get together and pen their names to legislation federally legalizing abortion, that's super! I support the idea. Warning: Anyone voting FOR any form of late term abortion will be unlikely to win re-election. Which is why they don't touch it.

So, how are these things comparable, exactly? Millions of protests have occurred outside abortion clinics in the last 10 years. You couldn't even point to one murder or bombing in the last 10 years. I'm pointing at an attempted assassination that occurred this month, and heavily armed crowds of protestors actively threatening him and his family mere hours after, along with Justice Barrett, when we passed a federal statute banning pickets/protests of Judges homes or Courthouses specifically to avoid embroiling those who's concern is supposed to be "blind justice" and "enforcing the Constitution" in pure partisan politics.

Go on, terrorist sympathizer, continue on continuing on trying to compare nonsensical bullshit to the attempted assassination of a SCOTUS judge, and the ongoing threats against he and other (NON-POLITICAL) SCOTUS justices and their families. For the record, had people pulled this shit with RBG, there would have been a public outcry from both left and right. Had there been an attempted assassination of RBG, there would have been a universal outcry. Where's your outcry now?

You have no principles. Terrorism is fine, and it's not "really" terrorism, because those bad people are guilty of wrongthink!

This post was edited by InsaneBobb on Jun 16 2022 06:01am
Member
Posts: 49,893
Joined: Jun 19 2006
Gold: 3.88
Jun 16 2022 06:08am
Quote (InsaneBobb @ Jun 16 2022 09:59pm)
Are you high or drunk? Be honest now. The mob gathered around Kavanaugh's home were gathered around his private residential property threatening his life and the lives of his family in order to effect legislation. A man crossed the entire nation in an attempt to assassinate Kavanaugh in order to change legislation.

A group of people outside a business saying "stop murdering children" is neither an attempt to effect legislation, nor is it a threat. Do you understand?

Your pathetic attempts to tie these events together is merely another attempt to support terrorism. Flat out. The appropriate response would be "Prosecute the would-be assassin to the fullest extent of the law, and prosecute the mob threatening him and his family to the fullest extent of the law (5K fine + 1 year in jail) and call it good." Instead, you're attempting to justify it. So let's take a look at your three "examples" of how "the right" reacts.

Barnett Slepian was killed by James Charles Kopp in a assassination style sniper shooting. Kopp was an international terrorist from California who was charged and/or suspected in multiple crimes all across Canada and the US. His actions were universally condemned, not just left and right, but even by anti-abortion activists themselves. Turns out, this guy was a crazy terrorist, and the call from the "right" was to execute him for his crimes. However, New York, which has been ruled by Democrats for the last Century, refused, and gave him life without parole. This murder occurred in 1998, btw, under a Democrat president notorious, among other things, for his anti gay marriage, pro gun control, and pro abortion stance, at a time when the SCOTUS refused to hear any challenges to Roe v Wade or Planned Parenthood v Casey.

George Tiller was a late term abortionist who was well-known for murdering viable babies during the 8th and 9th month of pregnancy. He was assassinated by Scott Philip Roeder, a guy with no priors, who apparently disliked the murder of viable babies. It was a straight out assassination, from a person apparently unaffiliated with any form of activist or protest group or even political party. His actions were universally condemned, with demands from the right to charge him with a capital crime and execute him. Yet for all that, the Democrat-led state of Kansas refused to charge him with a capital offense, and merely gave him 50 to life, which they commuted (without apparent reason) to 25 to life. He may very well be let out on parole at some point in the next decade or so, specifically because of Democrat policy in Kansas. This assassination occurred in a Democrat led state, under a Democrat President in 2009.

Dr. David Gunn was murdered by Michael Frederick Griffin in Florida. He used a perfectly legal and peaceful protest to hide himself until the Dr. showed up to work, then stepped out and shot him. He was sentenced to Life Imprisonment, and while he has appealed multiple times, the soonest he could possibly get out of jail would be 2043, at which time he'd be 82 years old, and such a release would still require a successful appeal, which he is unlikely to receive. His act was condemned not only by all political affiliations, but by the other protestors as well, all of whom reported they'd never seen him before, he had nothing to do with them. From the point of his crime to his conviction he was under detainment, with no potential for re-offense allowed. Nationally, Florida faced heated rebuke over not sentencing him to death, and still do. Unfortunately, Florida is very hesitant to exercise capital punishment for anyone who is not a serial killer, which Griffin was not. So, he will rot until he either dies, or is so old that going to the bathroom will be a chore. Note that this murder occurred in 1993, once again under a Democrat President, with a Democratic Governor of Florida failing to pressure the state prosecutors to seek the death penalty.

Now, as a result of the actions of these three, among a few others, the "Access to Entry" legislation was passed, preventing protestors from blocking entrances and exits to businesses, and disallowing them from protesting on the business's direct property, with the exception of shopping centers, where the business does not actually own the property, in which case the parking lot can still be used for protest, as long as people are not blocked from... Parking.

What all three of these people have in common, as contemptable and downright dastardly as they all were, was a desire to stop seeing babies murdered. Griffin was reported to have shouted "STOP KILLING BABIES" when he murdered Gunn. And yet, none of the three were active in actual protests, none of the three were part of groups of protestors. Each of these went with the intent to kill abortionists, each of these three cases occurred while Democrats were in office both in the White House and in the State Governance. And in all three cases, Republicans nationwide were calling for the death penalty.

Now, on the contrary to this, Nicholas John Roske crossed the nation from California to DC with the arms and armament to assassinate Kavanaugh specifically to change the vote regarding Roe v Wade. There is no question, he has admitted to it. Legislation was passed to prevent any form of protest or picketing of judges specifically because they are NOT political (or not supposed to be), and EVERY so-called protest at a judge's house involves threats and typically violence, EVERY so-called protest at a judge's residence (or courthouse) involves a case. It was determined that if judges are to be apolitical, and not a part of the business world, having pitchfork-waving mobs at their doors any time the political wind shifts is bad, hence the law against it.

And multiple Federal Judges have been murdered in office. You're a fan of wiki, spend 2 seconds and go look it up yourself. What you'll find is that most of them were murdered over case decisions. Big surprise, eh? As a result of some of the earlier murders, information regarding the addresses and phone numbers of these judges were not made public. Why have the so-called "conservatives" on the Supreme Court all had their private home addresses given out by such stunning and brave publications as WaPo and the Daily Beast? Why have politicians such as Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Chuck Schumer, and Kamala Harris encouraged people to violate federal law and protest these judges?

The bottom line is every time you claim that "people on my side" did this or that, you're simply making shit up. None of the murderers/terrorists involved have or had anything to do with me, and I do not support murder or any other form of violence in relation to politics whatsoever, unless it is in the last defense of your life, such as the Rittenhouse case. I believe all three of the murderers should have been executed, and frankly, I don't care how states set their abortion laws. If California or West Virginia want to allow it up until birth, or 7 days after birth, or whatever nonsensical bullshit they can justify to themselves? That's their business. If Oklahoma wants to ban it outright? Good on them. If Texas, Arizona, and Florida want to limit abortion to pre-heartbeat, giving pregnant women 15-16 weeks (that'd be nearly 4 months, well into the second trimester)? Great! You've already stated you don't give a shit about laws, how about the Constitution? The Constitution states that any rights not enumerated therein fall to the States. Abortion does not appear anywhere in the Constitution. Roe was a shitty judgement and an attempt to pass federal law from the bench, usurping the powers of the Legislature. It was done in the hope that it would tamp down the outcry and outrage over abortion, and instead, it enflamed it. Likewise with Planned Parenthood vs Casey. Overturning them both and letting the States deal with it is fine. IF Congress wanted to get together and pen their names to legislation federally legalizing abortion, that's super! I support the idea. Warning: Anyone voting FOR any form of late term abortion will be unlikely to win re-election. Which is why they don't touch it.

So, how are these things comparable, exactly? Millions of protests have occurred outside abortion clinics in the last 10 years. You couldn't even point to one murder or bombing in the last 10 years. I'm pointing at an attempted assassination that occurred this month, and heavily armed crowds of protestors actively threatening him and his family mere hours after, along with Justice Barrett, when we passed a federal statute banning pickets/protests of Judges homes or Courthouses specifically to avoid embroiling those who's concern is supposed to be "blind justice" and "enforcing the Constitution" in pure partisan politics.

Go on, terrorist sympathizer, continue on continuing on trying to compare nonsensical bullshit to the attempted assassination of a SCOTUS judge, and the ongoing threats against he and other (NON-POLITICAL) SCOTUS justices and their families. For the record, had people pulled this shit with RBG, there would have been a public outcry from both left and right. Had there been an attempted assassination of RBG, there would have been a universal outcry. Where's your outcry now?

You have no principles. Terrorism is fine, and it's not "really" terrorism, because those bad people are guilty of wrongthink!


I am way too busy to read whatever this is.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev15678Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll