Cannot say I blame him, I’d probably punch someone in the face if they came up behind me and bashed an egg over my head too, lol
I agree for the most part. I would have some hesitation swinging on a kid. I don’t know. As an adult an elected official maybe he should of taken the high road. The kid didn’t back down after getting socked though.
There is no doubt in my mind I would at least push the kid away. It’s the fact that he went after him again that is a bit telling. While on camera.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Halifax, you must send your T's and P's before criticizing a man spouts xenophobic rhetoric daily helping foster and normalize such nationalism
Post one: a link to a news article about a shooting in New Zealand Post two: a comment about what Trump will do about it Post three: a comment about what Trump did about it Post four: a comment about what Trump's comments symbolize to the world
It's fair and reasonable to say that a conversation about a shooting should at least be allowed to exist about a shooting for some amount of time (preferably more than 'no' time) before it, like most other threads, inevitably gets related to Trump and veers the conversation into a new direction.
And the OP could have started that conversation by posting a comment along with their link to the horror. And, are there now rules about when or at what point a poster’s comments are deemed appropriate, knowing the OP lacked any comments at all? It’s not lost on some of us that the US has no moral leadership at this point in time and, was my post more moronic than that of Team Trump Treason’s first tweet regarding the horror? A link to Breitbart with no further comment? Normalization is well entrenched. Give it five and a half more years and see what that gets you (you in the general sense).
And for clarity purposes, the second post wasn’t about what Team Trump Treason would do about it, but rather, what he would say about it. Would he condemn it? Stick up for Muslims in some way, shape or form? No, it was to link to Breitbart with no comments at all. Disgusting.
If you're bringing up rules, we're not going to reach common ground. My idea of what's appropriate in discourse would be to not hijack everything under the sun and immediately relate it back to Trump. My rationale is that it's not fair to the other topics that usually just get left behind while the media black hole sucks everything else up yet again. Your idea of what's appropriate doesn't agree with that, and I have no reason to claim my opinion is any more or less valid than yours, so I'll move on.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
What makes it a manifesto vs just some crazy rant?
Same thing. Racist terrorist's manifesto = crazy rant. What does it matter? Semantics aren't important here.
Manifesto: a written statement declaring publicly the intentions, motives, or views of its issuer
I was just curious. I heard people on the radio referring to it as a manifesto. My opinion is that makes it sound more important and legit. But since you used the term too I was wondering what made it a manifesto for you.
I decided to look it up as well since it seemed you were upset I asked... "a public declaration of policy and aims, especially one issued before an election by a political party or candidate."
I wasn't upset you asked at all.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Halifax, you must send your T's and P's before criticizing a man spouts xenophobic rhetoric daily helping foster and normalize such nationalism
Post one: a link to a news article about a shooting in New Zealand Post two: a comment about what Trump will do about it Post three: a comment about what Trump did about it Post four: a comment about what Trump's comments symbolize to the world
It's fair and reasonable to say that a conversation about a shooting should at least be allowed to exist about a shooting for some amount of time (preferably more than 'no' time) before it, like most other threads, inevitably gets related to Trump and veers the conversation into a new direction.
And the OP could have started that conversation by posting a comment along with their link to the horror. And, are there now rules about when or at what point a poster’s comments are deemed appropriate, knowing the OP lacked any comments at all? It’s not lost on some of us that the US has no moral leadership at this point in time and, was my post more moronic than that of Team Trump Treason’s first tweet regarding the horror? A link to Breitbart with no further comment? Normalization is well entrenched. Give it five and a half more years and see what that gets you (you in the general sense).
And for clarity purposes, the second post wasn’t about what Team Trump Treason would do about it, but rather, what he would say about it. Would he condemn it? Stick up for Muslims in some way, shape or form? No, it was to link to Breitbart with no comments at all. Disgusting.
If you're bringing up rules, we're not going to reach common ground. My idea of what's appropriate in discourse would be to not hijack everything under the sun and immediately relate it back to Trump. My rationale is that it's not fair to the other topics that usually just get left behind while the media black hole sucks everything else up yet again. Your idea of what's appropriate doesn't agree with that, and I have no reason to claim my opinion is any more or less valid than yours, so I'll move on.
I appreciate that you took the time to respond but I’ll have to say that we’ll agree to disagree. Have a great rest of your weekend.
Halifax, you must send your T's and P's before criticizing a man spouts xenophobic rhetoric daily helping foster and normalize such nationalism
Post one: a link to a news article about a shooting in New Zealand Post two: a comment about what Trump will do about it Post three: a comment about what Trump did about it Post four: a comment about what Trump's comments symbolize to the world
It's fair and reasonable to say that a conversation about a shooting should at least be allowed to exist about a shooting for some amount of time (preferably more than 'no' time) before it, like most other threads, inevitably gets related to Trump and veers the conversation into a new direction.
And the OP could have started that conversation by posting a comment along with their link to the horror. And, are there now rules about when or at what point a poster’s comments are deemed appropriate, knowing the OP lacked any comments at all? It’s not lost on some of us that the US has no moral leadership at this point in time and, was my post more moronic than that of Team Trump Treason’s first tweet regarding the horror? A link to Breitbart with no further comment? Normalization is well entrenched. Give it five and a half more years and see what that gets you (you in the general sense).
And for clarity purposes, the second post wasn’t about what Team Trump Treason would do about it, but rather, what he would say about it. Would he condemn it? Stick up for Muslims in some way, shape or form? No, it was to link to Breitbart with no comments at all. Disgusting.
If you're bringing up rules, we're not going to reach common ground. My idea of what's appropriate in discourse would be to not hijack everything under the sun and immediately relate it back to Trump. My rationale is that it's not fair to the other topics that usually just get left behind while the media black hole sucks everything else up yet again. Your idea of what's appropriate doesn't agree with that, and I have no reason to claim my opinion is any more or less valid than yours, so I'll move on.
I appreciate that you took the time to respond but I’ll have to say that we’ll agree to disagree. Have a great rest of your weekend.
Same to you, my friend!
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
The kid took a couple of good shots to the noggin...hope the egg was worth the assault charge.
I bet it was.
(Though I read he wasn't charged I think? If not, probably very much worth the risk, lol)
The boy with the egg was not charged.. and that scummy racist politician should be ashamed of himself for attacking a child.
Sydney, Australia - March 12, 1998; Sydney, Australia - February 14, 2003; Sydney, Australia - November 8, 2006; Sydney, Australia - November 25, 2006; Brisbane, Australia - November, 2009; Gold Coast, Australia - January, 2014, Gold Coast, Australia - November 2024
Halifax, you must send your T's and P's before criticizing a man spouts xenophobic rhetoric daily helping foster and normalize such nationalism
Post one: a link to a news article about a shooting in New Zealand Post two: a comment about what Trump will do about it Post three: a comment about what Trump did about it Post four: a comment about what Trump's comments symbolize to the world
It's fair and reasonable to say that a conversation about a shooting should at least be allowed to exist about a shooting for some amount of time (preferably more than 'no' time) before it, like most other threads, inevitably gets related to Trump and veers the conversation into a new direction.
And the OP could have started that conversation by posting a comment along with their link to the horror. And, are there now rules about when or at what point a poster’s comments are deemed appropriate, knowing the OP lacked any comments at all? It’s not lost on some of us that the US has no moral leadership at this point in time and, was my post more moronic than that of Team Trump Treason’s first tweet regarding the horror? A link to Breitbart with no further comment? Normalization is well entrenched. Give it five and a half more years and see what that gets you (you in the general sense).
And for clarity purposes, the second post wasn’t about what Team Trump Treason would do about it, but rather, what he would say about it. Would he condemn it? Stick up for Muslims in some way, shape or form? No, it was to link to Breitbart with no comments at all. Disgusting.
If you're bringing up rules, we're not going to reach common ground. My idea of what's appropriate in discourse would be to not hijack everything under the sun and immediately relate it back to Trump. My rationale is that it's not fair to the other topics that usually just get left behind while the media black hole sucks everything else up yet again. Your idea of what's appropriate doesn't agree with that, and I have no reason to claim my opinion is any more or less valid than yours, so I'll move on.
I appreciate that you took the time to respond but I’ll have to say that we’ll agree to disagree. Have a great rest of your weekend.
Same to you, my friend!
Although, it is interesting to me that certain posters join a Pearl Jam fan club a little over a year ago and all they post is “the news,” with little to no comment. Funny to me because Pearl Jam and their music hasn’t really been relevant for six years or so. Late bloomer? Stumbled along and found them? But they rarely post anywhere else on the forum and yet their overtly political. Odd? Then again maybe they were banned and came back with a new user name/avatar or maybe their a bot/troll. Lots of links, rare comments but I guess that’s more desirable than 24/7 Team Trump Treason? To each their own.
Halifax, you must send your T's and P's before criticizing a man spouts xenophobic rhetoric daily helping foster and normalize such nationalism
Post one: a link to a news article about a shooting in New Zealand Post two: a comment about what Trump will do about it Post three: a comment about what Trump did about it Post four: a comment about what Trump's comments symbolize to the world
It's fair and reasonable to say that a conversation about a shooting should at least be allowed to exist about a shooting for some amount of time (preferably more than 'no' time) before it, like most other threads, inevitably gets related to Trump and veers the conversation into a new direction.
And the OP could have started that conversation by posting a comment along with their link to the horror. And, are there now rules about when or at what point a poster’s comments are deemed appropriate, knowing the OP lacked any comments at all? It’s not lost on some of us that the US has no moral leadership at this point in time and, was my post more moronic than that of Team Trump Treason’s first tweet regarding the horror? A link to Breitbart with no further comment? Normalization is well entrenched. Give it five and a half more years and see what that gets you (you in the general sense).
And for clarity purposes, the second post wasn’t about what Team Trump Treason would do about it, but rather, what he would say about it. Would he condemn it? Stick up for Muslims in some way, shape or form? No, it was to link to Breitbart with no comments at all. Disgusting.
If you're bringing up rules, we're not going to reach common ground. My idea of what's appropriate in discourse would be to not hijack everything under the sun and immediately relate it back to Trump. My rationale is that it's not fair to the other topics that usually just get left behind while the media black hole sucks everything else up yet again. Your idea of what's appropriate doesn't agree with that, and I have no reason to claim my opinion is any more or less valid than yours, so I'll move on.
I appreciate that you took the time to respond but I’ll have to say that we’ll agree to disagree. Have a great rest of your weekend.
Same to you, my friend!
Although, it is interesting to me that certain posters join a Pearl Jam fan club a little over a year ago and all they post is “the news,” with little to no comment. Funny to me because Pearl Jam and their music hasn’t really been relevant for six years or so. Late bloomer? Stumbled along and found them? But they rarely post anywhere else on the forum and yet their overtly political. Odd? Then again maybe they were banned and came back with a new user name/avatar or maybe their a bot/troll. Lots of links, rare comments but I guess that’s more desirable than 24/7 Team Trump Treason? To each their own.
Is that comment directed at me, or who is it directed? Or are you drunk posting. Anyways, if that is directed at me thank you. At least I goit better things to do than to argue with someone for 5 pages on the same Trump topic...
Why does someone need to comment on a news story that had happened within the hour, or at all? H2M just wants people to comment so he can pick apart the comments to start an argument...correct??? Some people want to sit and argue all day on here, well actually one...
Give Peas A Chance…
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,300
Why does someone need to comment on a news story that had happened within the hour, or at all? H2M just wants people to comment so he can pick apart the comments to start an argument...correct??? Some people want to sit and argue all day on here, well actually one...
I would have to argue with you on that but I only argue during the even hours of the day and it's in the eleventh hour in on the west coast on this fine Saturday evening. If I'm still up at 12, I'll give you a run for your money!
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Why does someone need to comment on a news story that had happened within the hour, or at all? H2M just wants people to comment so he can pick apart the comments to start an argument...correct??? Some people want to sit and argue all day on here, well actually one...
I would have to argue with you on that but I only argue during the even hours of the day and it's in the eleventh hour in on the west coast on this fine Saturday evening. If I'm still up at 12, I'll give you a run for your money!
LOL. That's confusing as hell.
Give Peas A Chance…
0
goldrush
everybody knows this is nowhere Posts: 7,578
The kid took a couple of good shots to the noggin...hope the egg was worth the assault charge.
I bet it was.
(Though I read he wasn't charged I think? If not, probably very much worth the risk, lol)
The boy with the egg was not charged.. and that scummy racist politician should be ashamed of himself for attacking a child.
The kid is 17, he is no child.
As much as Fraser Anning is a racist piece of shit, there’s no excuse for attacking someone in public office. What if the kid had a knife instead of an egg? Worst case scenario then is a political assassination, and the piece of shit becomes a martyr.
“Do not postpone happiness”
(Jeff Tweedy, Sydney 2007)
“Put yer good money on the sunrise”
(Tim Rogers)
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,300
Why does someone need to comment on a news story that had happened within the hour, or at all? H2M just wants people to comment so he can pick apart the comments to start an argument...correct??? Some people want to sit and argue all day on here, well actually one...
I would have to argue with you on that but I only argue during the even hours of the day and it's in the eleventh hour in on the west coast on this fine Saturday evening. If I'm still up at 12, I'll give you a run for your money!
LOL. That's confusing as hell.
Simple logic, my friend. Arguing during even hours at least gives you an even chance of winning the argument. Arguing during odd hours give the impression that you are an odd ball and so you've lost before you even get out of the gate.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
"Try to not spook the horse."
-Neil Young
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,300
The kid took a couple of good shots to the noggin...hope the egg was worth the assault charge.
I bet it was.
(Though I read he wasn't charged I think? If not, probably very much worth the risk, lol)
The boy with the egg was not charged.. and that scummy racist politician should be ashamed of himself for attacking a child.
The kid is 17, he is no child.
As much as Fraser Anning is a racist piece of shit, there’s no excuse for attacking someone in public office. What if the kid had a knife instead of an egg? Worst case scenario then is a political assassination, and the piece of shit becomes a martyr.
Yeah, at best it was a dumb move. Attacking a politician? That's just not going to gain anything. The kid will be lucky if he isn't charged with assault. There have to be better ways of calling out racist pigs than to lower oneself to doing stupid things.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
The kid took a couple of good shots to the noggin...hope the egg was worth the assault charge.
I bet it was.
(Though I read he wasn't charged I think? If not, probably very much worth the risk, lol)
The boy with the egg was not charged.. and that scummy racist politician should be ashamed of himself for attacking a child.
The kid is 17, he is no child.
As much as Fraser Anning is a racist piece of shit, there’s no excuse for attacking someone in public office. What if the kid had a knife instead of an egg? Worst case scenario then is a political assassination, and the piece of shit becomes a martyr.
Agreed. I tend to think the 17-year-old was looking for attention, he found it.
The kid took a couple of good shots to the noggin...hope the egg was worth the assault charge.
I bet it was.
(Though I read he wasn't charged I think? If not, probably very much worth the risk, lol)
The boy with the egg was not charged.. and that scummy racist politician should be ashamed of himself for attacking a child.
The kid is 17, he is no child.
As much as Fraser Anning is a racist piece of shit, there’s no excuse for attacking someone in public office. What if the kid had a knife instead of an egg? Worst case scenario then is a political assassination, and the piece of shit becomes a martyr.
But he didn't have a knife. Clearly his intention wasn't to do harm, it was to crack an egg on his head, signifying 'you're a piece of shit." Which he is, and it isn't 'which side of the political spectrum do you fall on?' question. It's a morality question. The kid also exposed him for being a short-fused, violent asshole. Hopefully it ends his political career, but the people who vote for a person like that tend to get excited by violent actions.
Halifax, you must send your T's and P's before criticizing a man spouts xenophobic rhetoric daily helping foster and normalize such nationalism
Post one: a link to a news article about a shooting in New Zealand Post two: a comment about what Trump will do about it Post three: a comment about what Trump did about it Post four: a comment about what Trump's comments symbolize to the world
It's fair and reasonable to say that a conversation about a shooting should at least be allowed to exist about a shooting for some amount of time (preferably more than 'no' time) before it, like most other threads, inevitably gets related to Trump and veers the conversation into a new direction.
And the OP could have started that conversation by posting a comment along with their link to the horror. And, are there now rules about when or at what point a poster’s comments are deemed appropriate, knowing the OP lacked any comments at all? It’s not lost on some of us that the US has no moral leadership at this point in time and, was my post more moronic than that of Team Trump Treason’s first tweet regarding the horror? A link to Breitbart with no further comment? Normalization is well entrenched. Give it five and a half more years and see what that gets you (you in the general sense).
And for clarity purposes, the second post wasn’t about what Team Trump Treason would do about it, but rather, what he would say about it. Would he condemn it? Stick up for Muslims in some way, shape or form? No, it was to link to Breitbart with no comments at all. Disgusting.
If you're bringing up rules, we're not going to reach common ground. My idea of what's appropriate in discourse would be to not hijack everything under the sun and immediately relate it back to Trump. My rationale is that it's not fair to the other topics that usually just get left behind while the media black hole sucks everything else up yet again. Your idea of what's appropriate doesn't agree with that, and I have no reason to claim my opinion is any more or less valid than yours, so I'll move on.
I appreciate that you took the time to respond but I’ll have to say that we’ll agree to disagree. Have a great rest of your weekend.
Same to you, my friend!
Although, it is interesting to me that certain posters join a Pearl Jam fan club a little over a year ago and all they post is “the news,” with little to no comment. Funny to me because Pearl Jam and their music hasn’t really been relevant for six years or so. Late bloomer? Stumbled along and found them? But they rarely post anywhere else on the forum and yet their overtly political. Odd? Then again maybe they were banned and came back with a new user name/avatar or maybe their a bot/troll. Lots of links, rare comments but I guess that’s more desirable than 24/7 Team Trump Treason? To each their own.
If by "no comment" you mean that threads like this one are started with a simple link, and a simple description of an event, and lets people take it from there - I don't see what the problem is to define a topic to the community before espousing an opinion. I consider that immensely more desirable than an immediate pivot to relate a shooting in New Zealand to Trump, though like you said - to each their own.
As for what people are here for - I don't really care. I've seen a good amount of shows, and just committed to Ohana to see Eddie later this year, but I haven't seen the band in a few years and that's the reality with them not having the appetite to tour these days. If people are here and engaging fairly and we're all learning and teaching, why does it matter? We should hold them (and ourselves) to account if we're failing on any of those fronts, and preserve this as a good place to engage.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Just saw the interviews with witnesses and I feel sick. That poor little 4 year old boy shot in the head and his father carried him out and collapsed from bullet wounds to his legs. That piece if shit shooter waa from Grafton NSW Aus just 4 hours away from me. 😭
Just saw the interviews with witnesses and I feel sick. That poor little 4 year old boy shot in the head and his father carried him out and collapsed from bullet wounds to his legs. That piece if shit shooter waa from Grafton NSW Aus just 4 hours away from me. 😭
Disgusting human specially anybody who sympathize’s with any hate groups ...
Comments
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Was the douche in the white hat the politician's neo nazi strong arm?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
(Jeff Tweedy, Sydney 2007)
“Put yer good money on the sunrise”
(Tim Rogers)
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
The kid also exposed him for being a short-fused, violent asshole. Hopefully it ends his political career, but the people who vote for a person like that tend to get excited by violent actions.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/chelsea-clinton-confronted-at-nyu-vigil-for-mosque-victims-over-her-remarks-about-omar?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A%20foxnews%2Fpolitics%20%28Internal%20-%20Politics%20-%20Text%29&utm_content=Yahoo%20Search%20Results
Another article. Please read them both.
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/chelsea-clinton-being-confronted-students-194500901.html
twitter is a cesspool...
As for what people are here for - I don't really care. I've seen a good amount of shows, and just committed to Ohana to see Eddie later this year, but I haven't seen the band in a few years and that's the reality with them not having the appetite to tour these days. If people are here and engaging fairly and we're all learning and teaching, why does it matter? We should hold them (and ourselves) to account if we're failing on any of those fronts, and preserve this as a good place to engage.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Why are we getting post event opportunities for this loser to continue to demonstrate his madness?
Black toddlers are getting shot for playing with toy guns on park benches, but white mass murderers command restraint?
He is a lower form of life than a maggot and we have no problems cleansing ourselves of maggots.
Save the ‘due process’ comments. This guy is a piece of shit and should have been shot dead on the spot.