^^^ You love civil disobedience? Really? But you are liberal.
You don't? Most liberals do love civil disobedience, equal rights and living wages, stopping and preventing wars, reigning in the financial maffias...that's what civil disobedience is all about, that's liberalism to a T.
That is some article talking about what was going on in the 1860s, and the writer decided to call the (then) legal stuff that the KKK was doing "civil disobedience". That was a very poor choice of words on the writer's part, and totally irrelevant to the way people normally use the term today. It also says that the KKK stepped beyond the author's odd concept of civil disobedience into truly fucked up shit. So you equate civil disobedience to KKK members because of this one thing that I assume you found via Google?
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
^^^ You love civil disobedience? Really? But you are liberal.
You don't? Most liberals do love civil disobedience, equal rights and living wages, stopping and preventing wars, reigning in the financial maffias...that's what civil disobedience is all about, that's liberalism to a T.
That is some article talking about what was going on in the 1860s, and the writer decided to call the (then) legal stuff that the KKK was doing "civil disobedience". That was a very poor choice of words on the writer's part, and totally irrelevant to the way people normally use the term. It also says that the KKK stepped beyond the author's odd concept of civil disobedience into truly fucked up shit. So you equate civil disbedience to KKK members because of this one thing that I assume you found via Google?
You obviously didn't scroll up to read the picture edit.
^^^ You love civil disobedience? Really? But you are liberal.
You don't? Most liberals do love civil disobedience, equal rights and living wages, stopping and preventing wars, reigning in the financial maffias...that's what civil disobedience is all about, that's liberalism to a T.
That is some article talking about what was going on in the 1860s, and the writer decided to call the (then) legal stuff that the KKK was doing "civil disobedience". That was a very poor choice of words on the writer's part, and totally irrelevant to the way people normally use the term. It also says that the KKK stepped beyond the author's odd concept of civil disobedience into truly fucked up shit. So you equate civil disbedience to KKK members because of this one thing that I assume you found via Google?
You obviously didn't scroll up to read the picture edit.
I did read that actually. I'm not sure what your point is.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
^^^ You love civil disobedience? Really? But you are liberal.
You don't? Most liberals do love civil disobedience, equal rights and living wages, stopping and preventing wars, reigning in the financial maffias...that's what civil disobedience is all about, that's liberalism to a T.
That is some article talking about what was going on in the 1860s, and the writer decided to call the (then) legal stuff that the KKK was doing "civil disobedience". That was a very poor choice of words on the writer's part, and totally irrelevant to the way people normally use the term. It also says that the KKK stepped beyond the author's odd concept of civil disobedience into truly fucked up shit. So you equate civil disbedience to KKK members because of this one thing that I assume you found via Google?
You obviously didn't scroll up to read the picture edit.
I did read that actually. I'm not sure what your point is.
The article draws upon facts that civil disobedience runs rampant in kkk. 1860 till now (or at least a pic from 1999 for reference). Same manner, same tone after all this time. Civil disobedience - kkk
^^^ You love civil disobedience? Really? But you are liberal.
You don't? Most liberals do love civil disobedience, equal rights and living wages, stopping and preventing wars, reigning in the financial maffias...that's what civil disobedience is all about, that's liberalism to a T.
That is some article talking about what was going on in the 1860s, and the writer decided to call the (then) legal stuff that the KKK was doing "civil disobedience". That was a very poor choice of words on the writer's part, and totally irrelevant to the way people normally use the term. It also says that the KKK stepped beyond the author's odd concept of civil disobedience into truly fucked up shit. So you equate civil disbedience to KKK members because of this one thing that I assume you found via Google?
You obviously didn't scroll up to read the picture edit.
I did read that actually. I'm not sure what your point is.
The article draws upon facts that civil disobedience runs rampant in kkk. 1860 till now (or at least a pic from 1999 for reference). Same manner, same tone after all this time. Civil disobedience - kkk
But you said you equate civil disobedience to KKK members, and were therefore surprised that I support civil disobedience. I.e. Civil disobedience = KKK. That doesn't mean the same as saying the KKK has practiced civil disobedience. Sorry for paying too much attention to what you wrote.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
^^^ You love civil disobedience? Really? But you are liberal.
You don't? Most liberals do love civil disobedience, equal rights and living wages, stopping and preventing wars, reigning in the financial maffias...that's what civil disobedience is all about, that's liberalism to a T.
That is some article talking about what was going on in the 1860s, and the writer decided to call the (then) legal stuff that the KKK was doing "civil disobedience". That was a very poor choice of words on the writer's part, and totally irrelevant to the way people normally use the term. It also says that the KKK stepped beyond the author's odd concept of civil disobedience into truly fucked up shit. So you equate civil disbedience to KKK members because of this one thing that I assume you found via Google?
You obviously didn't scroll up to read the picture edit.
I did read that actually. I'm not sure what your point is.
The article draws upon facts that civil disobedience runs rampant in kkk. 1860 till now (or at least a pic from 1999 for reference). Same manner, same tone after all this time. Civil disobedience - kkk
Nice try, not. Did you read it? It specifies the different manners and tones throughout the decades, almost all of which do not qualify as civil disobedience. The KKK wear hoods to protect their identity in the committing of crimes, by nearly every definition, civil disobedience requires breaking the law openly and getting arrested for it. A better use of Google would have been starting with a definition of what civil disobedience is.
^^^ You love civil disobedience? Really? But you are liberal.
You don't? Most liberals do love civil disobedience, equal rights and living wages, stopping and preventing wars, reigning in the financial maffias...that's what civil disobedience is all about, that's liberalism to a T.
That is some article talking about what was going on in the 1860s, and the writer decided to call the (then) legal stuff that the KKK was doing "civil disobedience". That was a very poor choice of words on the writer's part, and totally irrelevant to the way people normally use the term. It also says that the KKK stepped beyond the author's odd concept of civil disobedience into truly fucked up shit. So you equate civil disbedience to KKK members because of this one thing that I assume you found via Google?
You obviously didn't scroll up to read the picture edit.
I did read that actually. I'm not sure what your point is.
The article draws upon facts that civil disobedience runs rampant in kkk. 1860 till now (or at least a pic from 1999 for reference). Same manner, same tone after all this time. Civil disobedience - kkk
Nice try, not. Did you read it? It specifies the different manners and tones throughout the decades, almost all of which do not qualify as civil disobedience. The KKK wear hoods to protect their identity in the committing of crimes, by nearly every definition, civil disobedience requires breaking the law openly and getting arrested for it. A better use of Google would have been starting with a definition of what civil disobedience is.
I believe you said earlier Most liberals do love civil disobedience, equal rights and living wages, stopping and preventing wars, reigning in the financial maffias...that's what civil disobedience is all about, that's liberalism to a T.
So breaking the law is required for civil disobedience? And someone states they love civil disobedience......
Duh, yes, civil disobedience is necessarily breaking the law. I think the fact that you don't fully read posts yet reply to them anyway is showing this afternoon.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
^^^ You love civil disobedience? Really? But you are liberal.
You don't? Most liberals do love civil disobedience, equal rights and living wages, stopping and preventing wars, reigning in the financial maffias...that's what civil disobedience is all about, that's liberalism to a T.
That is some article talking about what was going on in the 1860s, and the writer decided to call the (then) legal stuff that the KKK was doing "civil disobedience". That was a very poor choice of words on the writer's part, and totally irrelevant to the way people normally use the term. It also says that the KKK stepped beyond the author's odd concept of civil disobedience into truly fucked up shit. So you equate civil disbedience to KKK members because of this one thing that I assume you found via Google?
You obviously didn't scroll up to read the picture edit.
I did read that actually. I'm not sure what your point is.
The article draws upon facts that civil disobedience runs rampant in kkk. 1860 till now (or at least a pic from 1999 for reference). Same manner, same tone after all this time. Civil disobedience - kkk
Nice try, not. Did you read it? It specifies the different manners and tones throughout the decades, almost all of which do not qualify as civil disobedience. The KKK wear hoods to protect their identity in the committing of crimes, by nearly every definition, civil disobedience requires breaking the law openly and getting arrested for it. A better use of Google would have been starting with a definition of what civil disobedience is.
I believe you said earlier Most liberals do love civil disobedience, equal rights and living wages, stopping and preventing wars, reigning in the financial maffias...that's what civil disobedience is all about, that's liberalism to a T.
So breaking the law is required for civil disobedience? And someone states they love civil disobedience......
Yes it is. Maybe try some reading. Yes, she did and I do too. So too should women, black people, native people, and any laborers who make a living wage, because they all owe their rights to those who practiced civil disobedience.
^^^ You love civil disobedience? Really? But you are liberal.
You don't? Most liberals do love civil disobedience, equal rights and living wages, stopping and preventing wars, reigning in the financial maffias...that's what civil disobedience is all about, that's liberalism to a T.
That is some article talking about what was going on in the 1860s, and the writer decided to call the (then) legal stuff that the KKK was doing "civil disobedience". That was a very poor choice of words on the writer's part, and totally irrelevant to the way people normally use the term. It also says that the KKK stepped beyond the author's odd concept of civil disobedience into truly fucked up shit. So you equate civil disbedience to KKK members because of this one thing that I assume you found via Google?
You obviously didn't scroll up to read the picture edit.
I did read that actually. I'm not sure what your point is.
The article draws upon facts that civil disobedience runs rampant in kkk. 1860 till now (or at least a pic from 1999 for reference). Same manner, same tone after all this time. Civil disobedience - kkk
Based on your posts...kkk= civil disobedience
So therefore you are okay with....
Lynchings Burning crosses on people's lawns Beatings Church burnings Murders Etc etc
^^^ You love civil disobedience? Really? But you are liberal.
You don't? Most liberals do love civil disobedience, equal rights and living wages, stopping and preventing wars, reigning in the financial maffias...that's what civil disobedience is all about, that's liberalism to a T.
That is some article talking about what was going on in the 1860s, and the writer decided to call the (then) legal stuff that the KKK was doing "civil disobedience". That was a very poor choice of words on the writer's part, and totally irrelevant to the way people normally use the term. It also says that the KKK stepped beyond the author's odd concept of civil disobedience into truly fucked up shit. So you equate civil disbedience to KKK members because of this one thing that I assume you found via Google?
You obviously didn't scroll up to read the picture edit.
I did read that actually. I'm not sure what your point is.
The article draws upon facts that civil disobedience runs rampant in kkk. 1860 till now (or at least a pic from 1999 for reference). Same manner, same tone after all this time. Civil disobedience - kkk
Based on your posts...kkk= civil disobedience
So therefore you are okay with....
Lynchings Burning crosses on people's lawns Beatings Church burnings Murders Etc etc
^^^ You love civil disobedience? Really? But you are liberal.
You don't? Most liberals do love civil disobedience, equal rights and living wages, stopping and preventing wars, reigning in the financial maffias...that's what civil disobedience is all about, that's liberalism to a T.
That is some article talking about what was going on in the 1860s, and the writer decided to call the (then) legal stuff that the KKK was doing "civil disobedience". That was a very poor choice of words on the writer's part, and totally irrelevant to the way people normally use the term. It also says that the KKK stepped beyond the author's odd concept of civil disobedience into truly fucked up shit. So you equate civil disbedience to KKK members because of this one thing that I assume you found via Google?
You obviously didn't scroll up to read the picture edit.
I did read that actually. I'm not sure what your point is.
The article draws upon facts that civil disobedience runs rampant in kkk. 1860 till now (or at least a pic from 1999 for reference). Same manner, same tone after all this time. Civil disobedience - kkk
Based on your posts...kkk= civil disobedience
So therefore you are okay with....
Lynchings Burning crosses on people's lawns Beatings Church burnings Murders Etc etc
Me?
Nobod else on here has equated the kkk with civil disobedience
words like "alleged" "anonymous" and "Hacker" give this story a bit of a bullshit base to start with, maybe before we start believing some idiots listing names of people they say are KKK we should be looking into the hackers first, maybe Kat or myself are KKK members ?.....or maybe EV is the grand wizard. hay ! lets start listing names numbers and address's of folks we think are black panthers members....lets look on the interweb for pictures of Elvis alive today living in small town America and hanging out with Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix and Janis Joplin......I seen em' !!!!!
that's it America let's keep stoking the fire of racism because we can't live without it.
Godfather.
That's what is great about anonymous they will lay out all the evidence out to be judged.
I know it's a little bit more worrisome about the names on your side.
Also on your side you say you want transparency but when exposed get very angry. It's all lip service. Your side wants the secrets.
my side ? what is my side in your opinion ?
Godfather.
I'd say your side is conservatives. In the last few years, you guys have been parroting each other, saying that if someone says racism is happening, that the person identifying the racism is being racist themselves and that doing this is making racial tensions worse. It's an interesting form of denial. This gets paired with blind faith in law enforcement in cases of cops abusing their power. I think it has to do with us white guys slowly losing our white privilege, which makes some people afraid of that change.
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,326
Lets clear something up here real easy like: All apples are a fruit. Not all fruits are apples.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
words like "alleged" "anonymous" and "Hacker" give this story a bit of a bullshit base to start with, maybe before we start believing some idiots listing names of people they say are KKK we should be looking into the hackers first, maybe Kat or myself are KKK members ?.....or maybe EV is the grand wizard. hay ! lets start listing names numbers and address's of folks we think are black panthers members....lets look on the interweb for pictures of Elvis alive today living in small town America and hanging out with Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix and Janis Joplin......I seen em' !!!!!
that's it America let's keep stoking the fire of racism because we can't live without it.
Godfather.
That's what is great about anonymous they will lay out all the evidence out to be judged.
I know it's a little bit more worrisome about the names on your side.
Also on your side you say you want transparency but when exposed get very angry. It's all lip service. Your side wants the secrets.
my side ? what is my side in your opinion ?
Godfather.
I'd say your side is conservatives. In the last few years, you guys have been parroting each other, saying that if someone says racism is happening, that the person identifying the racism is being racist themselves and that doing this is making racial tensions worse. It's an interesting form of denial. This gets paired with blind faith in law enforcement in cases of cops abusing their power. I think it has to do with us white guys slowly losing our white privilege, which makes some people afraid of that change.
so total anarchy would be better ? also I don't really subscribe to any political party or labels, I've always voiced my opinion on what I believe is best....some disagree I'm sure, it just seems to me that labels and parties are a target for blame and finger pointing, our government has become consumed with it self and doing that they have lost sight for the best interest of the people and when the people become angry they turn on each other and the government uses that as a tool.
words like "alleged" "anonymous" and "Hacker" give this story a bit of a bullshit base to start with, maybe before we start believing some idiots listing names of people they say are KKK we should be looking into the hackers first, maybe Kat or myself are KKK members ?.....or maybe EV is the grand wizard. hay ! lets start listing names numbers and address's of folks we think are black panthers members....lets look on the interweb for pictures of Elvis alive today living in small town America and hanging out with Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix and Janis Joplin......I seen em' !!!!!
that's it America let's keep stoking the fire of racism because we can't live without it.
Godfather.
That's what is great about anonymous they will lay out all the evidence out to be judged.
I know it's a little bit more worrisome about the names on your side.
Also on your side you say you want transparency but when exposed get very angry. It's all lip service. Your side wants the secrets.
my side ? what is my side in your opinion ?
Godfather.
I'd say your side is conservatives. In the last few years, you guys have been parroting each other, saying that if someone says racism is happening, that the person identifying the racism is being racist themselves and that doing this is making racial tensions worse. It's an interesting form of denial. This gets paired with blind faith in law enforcement in cases of cops abusing their power. I think it has to do with us white guys slowly losing our white privilege, which makes some people afraid of that change.
I don't know about loosing the privilege, not for many generations to come. I look at concentration of $$$.
I'd call it more of a shaming...a bright light shining in dark places. Who wears hoods in a good organization? It's really creepy to do that and we'll just see how it shakes out and how much validity we should attach to the list. We'll evaluate it as we do everything we talk about in here. Have a beautiful week, everyone.
while I agree with the premise to some extent where do you draw the line on shaming someone? there are plenty of instances of people being shamed on the internet for much less things than being KKK members but ends up with those having very bad effects on those being shamed, even to the point of death. Shaming and outing people is a form of bullying. Where is the line to be drawn? Shaming and outing people like this is a very thin line that all of us should give second thoughts too supporting.
Edit: i don't want anyone to take my above comments in any way as some kind of support for KKK members who are outed.
I'd call it more of a shaming...a bright light shining in dark places. Who wears hoods in a good organization? It's really creepy to do that and we'll just see how it shakes out and how much validity we should attach to the list. We'll evaluate it as we do everything we talk about in here. Have a beautiful week, everyone.
while I agree with the premise to some extent where do you draw the line on shaming someone? there are plenty of instances of people being shamed on the internet for much less things than being KKK members but ends up with those having very bad effects on those being shamed, even to the point of death. Shaming and outing people is a form of bullying. Where is the line to be drawn? Shaming and outing people like this is a very thin line that all of us should give second thoughts too supporting.
Edit: i don't want anyone to take my above comments in any way as some kind of support for KKK members who are outed.
I think that shaming is a completely valid thing to do in some cases, and this is one of them. I think bringing "bullying" into it is a really tired thing to do. It's basically ridiculous to brow beat the shaming of KKK members. Shaming them and white supremacists in general is completely appropriate. I actually think we'd be remiss NOT to shame such people.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I'd call it more of a shaming...a bright light shining in dark places. Who wears hoods in a good organization? It's really creepy to do that and we'll just see how it shakes out and how much validity we should attach to the list. We'll evaluate it as we do everything we talk about in here. Have a beautiful week, everyone.
while I agree with the premise to some extent where do you draw the line on shaming someone? there are plenty of instances of people being shamed on the internet for much less things than being KKK members but ends up with those having very bad effects on those being shamed, even to the point of death. Shaming and outing people is a form of bullying. Where is the line to be drawn? Shaming and outing people like this is a very thin line that all of us should give second thoughts too supporting.
Edit: i don't want anyone to take my above comments in any way as some kind of support for KKK members who are outed.
Screw it. If your a racist, no less a white racists that has all the advantages, you should be called out for being an insecure ass. Racism is a cancer and should be exposed.
I'd call it more of a shaming...a bright light shining in dark places. Who wears hoods in a good organization? It's really creepy to do that and we'll just see how it shakes out and how much validity we should attach to the list. We'll evaluate it as we do everything we talk about in here. Have a beautiful week, everyone.
none i can think of
Anonymous has good intentions. Their information has backfired in the past but to compare Anonymous to the KKK isn't really fair.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
I'd call it more of a shaming...a bright light shining in dark places. Who wears hoods in a good organization? It's really creepy to do that and we'll just see how it shakes out and how much validity we should attach to the list. We'll evaluate it as we do everything we talk about in here. Have a beautiful week, everyone.
while I agree with the premise to some extent where do you draw the line on shaming someone? there are plenty of instances of people being shamed on the internet for much less things than being KKK members but ends up with those having very bad effects on those being shamed, even to the point of death. Shaming and outing people is a form of bullying. Where is the line to be drawn? Shaming and outing people like this is a very thin line that all of us should give second thoughts too supporting.
Edit: i don't want anyone to take my above comments in any way as some kind of support for KKK members who are outed.
I think that shaming is a completely valid thing to do in some cases, and this is one of them. I think bringing "bullying" into it is a really tired thing to do. It's basically ridiculous to brow beat the shaming of KKK members. Shaming them and white supremacists in general is completely appropriate. I actually think we'd be remiss NOT to shame such people.
agree but i guess my contention is who decides what is shaming worthy? If we leave that decision up people like Kim Davis we could end up in a dark place. it's a slippery slope.
I'd call it more of a shaming...a bright light shining in dark places. Who wears hoods in a good organization? It's really creepy to do that and we'll just see how it shakes out and how much validity we should attach to the list. We'll evaluate it as we do everything we talk about in here. Have a beautiful week, everyone.
none i can think of
Anonymous has good intentions. Their information has backfired in the past but to compare Anonymous to the KKK isn't really fair.
not trying to compare the two at all. just asking a question about the slope that this type of behavior is taking us down. as i said above, who gets to decide what is shame worthy? yea KKK members are shame worthy, but if people like Kim Davis get to decide then we could be going down a slippery path.
I'd call it more of a shaming...a bright light shining in dark places. Who wears hoods in a good organization? It's really creepy to do that and we'll just see how it shakes out and how much validity we should attach to the list. We'll evaluate it as we do everything we talk about in here. Have a beautiful week, everyone.
while I agree with the premise to some extent where do you draw the line on shaming someone? there are plenty of instances of people being shamed on the internet for much less things than being KKK members but ends up with those having very bad effects on those being shamed, even to the point of death. Shaming and outing people is a form of bullying. Where is the line to be drawn? Shaming and outing people like this is a very thin line that all of us should give second thoughts too supporting.
Edit: i don't want anyone to take my above comments in any way as some kind of support for KKK members who are outed.
I think that shaming is a completely valid thing to do in some cases, and this is one of them. I think bringing "bullying" into it is a really tired thing to do. It's basically ridiculous to brow beat the shaming of KKK members. Shaming them and white supremacists in general is completely appropriate. I actually think we'd be remiss NOT to shame such people.
agree but i guess my contention is who decides what is shaming worthy? If we leave that decision up people like Kim Davis we could end up in a dark place. it's a slippery slope.
How about we just go with common sense on this one? I personally don't subscribe to the slippery slope theory. I believe it to be one of the weakest arguments in just about all cases precisely because it rejects common sense.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I'd call it more of a shaming...a bright light shining in dark places. Who wears hoods in a good organization? It's really creepy to do that and we'll just see how it shakes out and how much validity we should attach to the list. We'll evaluate it as we do everything we talk about in here. Have a beautiful week, everyone.
none i can think of
Anonymous has good intentions. Their information has backfired in the past but to compare Anonymous to the KKK isn't really fair.
not trying to compare the two at all. just asking a question about the slope that this type of behavior is taking us down. as i said above, who gets to decide what is shame worthy? yea KKK members are shame worthy, but if people like Kim Davis get to decide then we could be going down a slippery path.
The public decides. If Anonymous issued a list of people that jerked off no one would care because everyone jerks off.
Kim Davis gave us her version of shaming and the public was overwhelming against it.
Post edited by Gern Blansten on
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
I'd call it more of a shaming...a bright light shining in dark places. Who wears hoods in a good organization? It's really creepy to do that and we'll just see how it shakes out and how much validity we should attach to the list. We'll evaluate it as we do everything we talk about in here. Have a beautiful week, everyone.
none i can think of
Anonymous has good intentions. Their information has backfired in the past but to compare Anonymous to the KKK isn't really fair.
not trying to compare the two at all. just asking a question about the slope that this type of behavior is taking us down. as i said above, who gets to decide what is shame worthy? yea KKK members are shame worthy, but if people like Kim Davis get to decide then we could be going down a slippery path.
The public decides. If Anonymous issued a list of people that jerked off no one would care because everyone jerks off.
not true, people cared about who was on the AshleyMadison.com list that was put out. Was that ok to out regular people for that? And i think it's a huge difference in outing celebrities for these types of behaviors (like the Duggar dude) and outing regular everyday people. outing people based on what you think is shame-worthy can ruin lives and you may have different levels of what you consider shame worthy.
again not advocating against outing KKK members here as I think every reasonable person agrees with the shamefulness of those members .
Comments
1860 till now (or at least a pic from 1999 for reference).
Same manner, same tone after all this time.
Civil disobedience - kkk
Did you read it? It specifies the different manners and tones throughout the decades, almost all of which do not qualify as civil disobedience.
The KKK wear hoods to protect their identity in the committing of crimes, by nearly every definition, civil disobedience requires breaking the law openly and getting arrested for it.
A better use of Google would have been starting with a definition of what civil disobedience is.
Most liberals do love civil disobedience, equal rights and living wages, stopping and preventing wars, reigning in the financial maffias...that's what civil disobedience is all about, that's liberalism to a T.
So breaking the law is required for civil disobedience?
And someone states they love civil disobedience......
I think the fact that you don't fully read posts yet reply to them anyway is showing this afternoon.
Yes, she did and I do too.
So too should women, black people, native people, and any laborers who make a living wage, because they all owe their rights to those who practiced civil disobedience.
So therefore you are okay with....
Lynchings
Burning crosses on people's lawns
Beatings
Church burnings
Murders
Etc etc
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
also I don't really subscribe to any political party or labels, I've always voiced my opinion on what I believe is best....some disagree I'm sure, it just seems to me that labels and parties are a target for blame and finger pointing, our government has become consumed with it self and doing that they have lost sight for the best interest of the people and when the people become angry they turn on each other and the government uses that as a tool.
Godfather.
1995 San Francisco
San Jose
San Diego 2 shows
2003 Missoula
2005 Missoula
2006 Denver 2 shows with Tom Petty
Gorge 2 shows
2009 Utah
LA1
LA2
2012 Missoula : Meet and Greet : "Instant Classic show"
2013 Portland
Spokane
2018 Missoula
Edit: i don't want anyone to take my above comments in any way as some kind of support for KKK members who are outed.
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
Kim Davis gave us her version of shaming and the public was overwhelming against it.
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
again not advocating against outing KKK members here as I think every reasonable person agrees with the shamefulness of those members .