What actual policy did VP Biden influence or change as it related to Ukraine while Hunter was on the board of Burisma?
I’d appreciate a credible link to actual policy or legitimate news reports. Considering how nefarious and well known this scandal is, there must be something in the public record, right? State Department docs released under FOIA? Repub congressional investigation? Records requested from someone somewhere? Maybe a lawsuit from a repub “think” tank?
I look forward to two years of house repub hearings and investigation leaks, sprinkled with threats of impeachment beginning in January 2023.
Yep. And nothing will be done about the actual corruption by high ranking government officials from the previous administration .
Previous as well as current!
What corruption by the current admin? Please be specific.
Hunter's laptop...obvi
I thought it was Hillary’s emails from the Oval as she’s really in charge. Lets go Brenda!
My favorite are the Let's Go Brandon stickers I see on vehicle windshields now. There sure are some extreme people out there. It's like their way of signaling to other assholes like them that they're on the same page. The cult fervor is unlike any I've ever seen.
Or guy in my hood with the F**K JOE BIDEN flag....the asterisks are on the flag but still. How white fucking trash can you get?
As much as these fuckers used to say that dems put Obama on a pedestal I sure as fuck don't remember seeing any Obama flags or hats. I loved Obama and all I have is a shot glass.
Guy down the road from me flies that flag and the Don't Blame me I voted for Trump flag. This coupled with his drunk driving plates on his truck and that he regularly does burn outs in front of our drunken red neck neighbor's house in his Chrysler Sebring with the top down speaks volumes.
What are drunk driving plates?
when busted for dui and you retain privileges to drive to work etc, at least in ohio they give you safety yellow plates to alert LE of your restricted status. think of it as a sort of scarlet letter.....
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
What actual policy did VP Biden influence or change as it related to Ukraine while Hunter was on the board of Burisma?
I’d appreciate a credible link to actual policy or legitimate news reports. Considering how nefarious and well known this scandal is, there must be something in the public record, right? State Department docs released under FOIA? Repub congressional investigation? Records requested from someone somewhere? Maybe a lawsuit from a repub “think” tank?
I look forward to two years of house repub hearings and investigation leaks, sprinkled with threats of impeachment beginning in January 2023.
Yep. And nothing will be done about the actual corruption by high ranking government officials from the previous administration .
Previous as well as current!
What corruption by the current admin? Please be specific.
Hunter's laptop...obvi
I thought it was Hillary’s emails from the Oval as she’s really in charge. Lets go Brenda!
My favorite are the Let's Go Brandon stickers I see on vehicle windshields now. There sure are some extreme people out there. It's like their way of signaling to other assholes like them that they're on the same page. The cult fervor is unlike any I've ever seen.
Or guy in my hood with the F**K JOE BIDEN flag....the asterisks are on the flag but still. How white fucking trash can you get?
As much as these fuckers used to say that dems put Obama on a pedestal I sure as fuck don't remember seeing any Obama flags or hats. I loved Obama and all I have is a shot glass.
Guy down the road from me flies that flag and the Don't Blame me I voted for Trump flag. This coupled with his drunk driving plates on his truck and that he regularly does burn outs in front of our drunken red neck neighbor's house in his Chrysler Sebring with the top down speaks volumes.
What are drunk driving plates?
when busted for dui and you retain privileges to drive to work etc, at least in ohio they give you safety yellow plates to alert LE of your restricted status. think of it as a sort of scarlet letter.....
Sorry, forgot most states don't make their drunks display their drunkenness.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT MINNESOTA WHISKEY PLATES & DWI
If you do not work in law enforcement and have never had a DUI, you might not ever know what whiskey plates are, and that’s for the best. However, if you live in Minnesota then it is likely that you have at least seen them while driving the roadways. The term whiskey plate is used to describe a special license plate that those involved in certain DWI incidents in Minnesota will be forced to use on their vehicles. They are plain white with blue or black lettering and the plate number always begins with a W, leading to the term “whiskey” plates.
What Do Whiskey Plates Do?
The idea of whiskey plates are not for simple humiliation of a driver. In fact, most drivers don’t even know the difference between a whiskey plate and a regular license plate. The true purpose of whiskey plates are for law enforcement. Cars with these plates are considered of special interest. It signifies that you have been in DWI incident before and are at risk for it again.
While there was a time that the simple act of having whiskey plates meant police could pull you over at their will, the Supreme Court has since put rules in place that even drivers with whiskey plates still have to display probable cause in order to be stopped. Unfortunately, if you drive with whiskey plates, you will find that police officers show distinctly more interest in following your vehicle around.
What DWI Charges Result in Whiskey Plate?
If you are a first time DWI offender, most likely you will not have to register for whiskey plates. You only need to register for them if you commit any of the following:
You had a blood-alcohol content of double the legal limit (.16) at the time of your DWI arrest.
You had a DWI or refused a blood, urine, or breath test for the second time in a ten year span.
You committed a DWI with a child 16 years or younger in the vehicle.
You are arrested for a DWI after a cancellation, suspension, or revocation of your license.
But first, a story: I grew up as an extremely impoverished kid, with an abusive, single, alcoholic, crackhead mother who worked in a redneck bar that my grandmother owned. As you can imagine, I was called "white trash" a lot. It hurt then, and it still stings when I hear or read the phrase anywhere to this day.
That's only my story, but I'm sure there are others on this site, perhaps just reading, who have a similar story and a similar negative reaction to the term. Maybe just no one ever wanted to speak up because the shame from being called something like that for an entire childhood can be silencing. So if you don't particularly care for me, you could still inadvertently be compounding shame and silence upon someone you do happen to like a lot.
I remember seeing trash king extraordinaire John Waters in an interview, and he asked the interviewer to refrain from using the term to describe his art, calling it "the last politically correct racist term." I felt like rushing the stage and hugging him, and as anyone who knows me can attest, I am not a hugger.
Now, the favor: Could we please make a conscious effort not to use that hurtful phrase in our discourse here? I think we're all better than that.
But first, a story: I grew up as an extremely impoverished kid, with an abusive, single, alcoholic, crackhead mother who worked in a redneck bar that my grandmother owned. As you can imagine, I was called "white trash" a lot. It hurt then, and it still stings when I hear or read the phrase anywhere to this day.
That's only my story, but I'm sure there are others on this site, perhaps just reading, who have a similar story and a similar negative reaction to the term. Maybe just no one ever wanted to speak up because the shame from being called something like that for an entire childhood can be silencing. So if you don't particularly care for me, you could still inadvertently be compounding shame and silence upon someone you do happen to like a lot.
I remember seeing trash king extraordinaire John Waters in an interview, and he asked the interviewer to refrain from using the term to describe his art, calling it "the last politically correct racist term." I felt like rushing the stage and hugging him, and as anyone who knows me can attest, I am not a hugger.
Now, the favor: Could we please make a conscious effort not to use that hurtful phrase in our discourse here? I think we're all better than that.
Thanks for reading and considering.
ok.
Serious question though, why is redneck not the same?
What actual policy did VP Biden influence or change as it related to Ukraine while Hunter was on the board of Burisma?
I’d appreciate a credible link to actual policy or legitimate news reports. Considering how nefarious and well known this scandal is, there must be something in the public record, right? State Department docs released under FOIA? Repub congressional investigation? Records requested from someone somewhere? Maybe a lawsuit from a repub “think” tank?
I look forward to two years of house repub hearings and investigation leaks, sprinkled with threats of impeachment beginning in January 2023.
Yep. And nothing will be done about the actual corruption by high ranking government officials from the previous administration .
Previous as well as current!
What corruption by the current admin? Please be specific.
Hunter's laptop...obvi
I thought it was Hillary’s emails from the Oval as she’s really in charge. Lets go Brenda!
My favorite are the Let's Go Brandon stickers I see on vehicle windshields now. There sure are some extreme people out there. It's like their way of signaling to other assholes like them that they're on the same page. The cult fervor is unlike any I've ever seen.
Or guy in my hood with the F**K JOE BIDEN flag....the asterisks are on the flag but still. How white fucking trash can you get?
As much as these fuckers used to say that dems put Obama on a pedestal I sure as fuck don't remember seeing any Obama flags or hats. I loved Obama and all I have is a shot glass.
Guy down the road from me flies that flag and the Don't Blame me I voted for Trump flag. This coupled with his drunk driving plates on his truck and that he regularly does burn outs in front of our drunken red neck neighbor's house in his Chrysler Sebring with the top down speaks volumes.
What are drunk driving plates?
when busted for dui and you retain privileges to drive to work etc, at least in ohio they give you safety yellow plates to alert LE of your restricted status. think of it as a sort of scarlet letter.....
Sorry, forgot most states don't make their drunks display their drunkenness.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT MINNESOTA WHISKEY PLATES & DWI
If you do not work in law enforcement and have never had a DUI, you might not ever know what whiskey plates are, and that’s for the best. However, if you live in Minnesota then it is likely that you have at least seen them while driving the roadways. The term whiskey plate is used to describe a special license plate that those involved in certain DWI incidents in Minnesota will be forced to use on their vehicles. They are plain white with blue or black lettering and the plate number always begins with a W, leading to the term “whiskey” plates.
What Do Whiskey Plates Do?
The idea of whiskey plates are not for simple humiliation of a driver. In fact, most drivers don’t even know the difference between a whiskey plate and a regular license plate. The true purpose of whiskey plates are for law enforcement. Cars with these plates are considered of special interest. It signifies that you have been in DWI incident before and are at risk for it again.
While there was a time that the simple act of having whiskey plates meant police could pull you over at their will, the Supreme Court has since put rules in place that even drivers with whiskey plates still have to display probable cause in order to be stopped. Unfortunately, if you drive with whiskey plates, you will find that police officers show distinctly more interest in following your vehicle around.
What DWI Charges Result in Whiskey Plate?
If you are a first time DWI offender, most likely you will not have to register for whiskey plates. You only need to register for them if you commit any of the following:
You had a blood-alcohol content of double the legal limit (.16) at the time of your DWI arrest.
You had a DWI or refused a blood, urine, or breath test for the second time in a ten year span.
You committed a DWI with a child 16 years or younger in the vehicle.
You are arrested for a DWI after a cancellation, suspension, or revocation of your license.
When do you get saddled with the scarlet "W"? And do you have them for the remainder of your driving life?
Here in VA, a DUI (I don't think we differentiate between DUI and DWI) will essentially get you a year suspension with no work privileges. However, you can ride a moped. And so you see a fair amount of them around. We call them "Liquor Cycles" (pronounced "sickle). When you see a grown ass man on moped/scooter, you pretty much know why.
But first, a story: I grew up as an extremely impoverished kid, with an abusive, single, alcoholic, crackhead mother who worked in a redneck bar that my grandmother owned. As you can imagine, I was called "white trash" a lot. It hurt then, and it still stings when I hear or read the phrase anywhere to this day.
That's only my story, but I'm sure there are others on this site, perhaps just reading, who have a similar story and a similar negative reaction to the term. Maybe just no one ever wanted to speak up because the shame from being called something like that for an entire childhood can be silencing. So if you don't particularly care for me, you could still inadvertently be compounding shame and silence upon someone you do happen to like a lot.
I remember seeing trash king extraordinaire John Waters in an interview, and he asked the interviewer to refrain from using the term to describe his art, calling it "the last politically correct racist term." I felt like rushing the stage and hugging him, and as anyone who knows me can attest, I am not a hugger.
Now, the favor: Could we please make a conscious effort not to use that hurtful phrase in our discourse here? I think we're all better than that.
Thanks for reading and considering.
“Snowflake favor” 😅
But seriously, I don’t use the term anyway. It feels wrong to me.
And while I’ve always dug Waters, I now see him as you did. Thanks for that.
But first, a story: I grew up as an extremely impoverished kid, with an abusive, single, alcoholic, crackhead mother who worked in a redneck bar that my grandmother owned. As you can imagine, I was called "white trash" a lot. It hurt then, and it still stings when I hear or read the phrase anywhere to this day.
That's only my story, but I'm sure there are others on this site, perhaps just reading, who have a similar story and a similar negative reaction to the term. Maybe just no one ever wanted to speak up because the shame from being called something like that for an entire childhood can be silencing. So if you don't particularly care for me, you could still inadvertently be compounding shame and silence upon someone you do happen to like a lot.
I remember seeing trash king extraordinaire John Waters in an interview, and he asked the interviewer to refrain from using the term to describe his art, calling it "the last politically correct racist term." I felt like rushing the stage and hugging him, and as anyone who knows me can attest, I am not a hugger.
Now, the favor: Could we please make a conscious effort not to use that hurtful phrase in our discourse here? I think we're all better than that.
Thanks for reading and considering.
ok.
Serious question though, why is redneck not the same?
Thanks.
Maybe it's regional, but being called a redneck is a badge of honor where I'm from. In fact, one isn't really even called a redneck; rather it's a term they/we would use for them-/ourselves. I've never known anyone to be offended by the term because it implies hard work (OK, and perhaps a bit of ignorance when it comes to sun damage ). Seriously, I think the most popular songs on the jukebox at the bar my grandma owned all had the word "redneck" in the title. I've always used the term freely wherever I've lived and worked, and this is the first time anyone has ever asked this question.
I did just check my M-W dictionary, though, and it has both "sometimes disparaging" and "often disparaging" for the entry. Now you have me wondering if I've offended anyone. And if I have, I apologize. (I certainly didn't offend any of those folks I referred to who drank at my grandma's bar, though, I can tell you that much.)
Actually, when reading over my post, I was more worried about the term "crackhead," which is, of course, not very mindful and obviously written with angst. I'll keep trying to be better.
But first, a story: I grew up as an extremely impoverished kid, with an abusive, single, alcoholic, crackhead mother who worked in a redneck bar that my grandmother owned. As you can imagine, I was called "white trash" a lot. It hurt then, and it still stings when I hear or read the phrase anywhere to this day.
That's only my story, but I'm sure there are others on this site, perhaps just reading, who have a similar story and a similar negative reaction to the term. Maybe just no one ever wanted to speak up because the shame from being called something like that for an entire childhood can be silencing. So if you don't particularly care for me, you could still inadvertently be compounding shame and silence upon someone you do happen to like a lot.
I remember seeing trash king extraordinaire John Waters in an interview, and he asked the interviewer to refrain from using the term to describe his art, calling it "the last politically correct racist term." I felt like rushing the stage and hugging him, and as anyone who knows me can attest, I am not a hugger.
Now, the favor: Could we please make a conscious effort not to use that hurtful phrase in our discourse here? I think we're all better than that.
Thanks for reading and considering.
ok.
Serious question though, why is redneck not the same?
Thanks.
Maybe it's regional, but being called a redneck is a badge of honor where I'm from. In fact, one isn't really even called a redneck; rather it's a term they/we would use for them-/ourselves. I've never known anyone to be offended by the term because it implies hard work (OK, and perhaps a bit of ignorance when it comes to sun damage ). Seriously, I think the most popular songs on the jukebox at the bar my grandma owned all had the word "redneck" in the title. I've always used the term freely wherever I've lived and worked, and this is the first time anyone has ever asked this question.
I did just check my M-W dictionary, though, and it has both "sometimes disparaging" and "often disparaging" for the entry. Now you have me wondering if I've offended anyone. And if I have, I apologize. (I certainly didn't offend any of those folks I referred to who drank at my grandma's bar, though, I can tell you that much.)
Actually, when reading over my post, I was more worried about the term "crackhead," which is, of course, not very mindful and obviously written with angst. I'll keep trying to be better.
It's difficult not to use slang that we've used our whole lives.
But first, a story: I grew up as an extremely impoverished kid, with an abusive, single, alcoholic, crackhead mother who worked in a redneck bar that my grandmother owned. As you can imagine, I was called "white trash" a lot. It hurt then, and it still stings when I hear or read the phrase anywhere to this day.
That's only my story, but I'm sure there are others on this site, perhaps just reading, who have a similar story and a similar negative reaction to the term. Maybe just no one ever wanted to speak up because the shame from being called something like that for an entire childhood can be silencing. So if you don't particularly care for me, you could still inadvertently be compounding shame and silence upon someone you do happen to like a lot.
I remember seeing trash king extraordinaire John Waters in an interview, and he asked the interviewer to refrain from using the term to describe his art, calling it "the last politically correct racist term." I felt like rushing the stage and hugging him, and as anyone who knows me can attest, I am not a hugger.
Now, the favor: Could we please make a conscious effort not to use that hurtful phrase in our discourse here? I think we're all better than that.
Thanks for reading and considering.
ok.
Serious question though, why is redneck not the same?
Thanks.
Maybe it's regional, but being called a redneck is a badge of honor where I'm from. In fact, one isn't really even called a redneck; rather it's a term they/we would use for them-/ourselves. I've never known anyone to be offended by the term because it implies hard work (OK, and perhaps a bit of ignorance when it comes to sun damage ). Seriously, I think the most popular songs on the jukebox at the bar my grandma owned all had the word "redneck" in the title. I've always used the term freely wherever I've lived and worked, and this is the first time anyone has ever asked this question.
I did just check my M-W dictionary, though, and it has both "sometimes disparaging" and "often disparaging" for the entry. Now you have me wondering if I've offended anyone. And if I have, I apologize. (I certainly didn't offend any of those folks I referred to who drank at my grandma's bar, though, I can tell you that much.)
Actually, when reading over my post, I was more worried about the term "crackhead," which is, of course, not very mindful and obviously written with angst. I'll keep trying to be better.
It's difficult not to use slang that we've used our whole lives.
That’s true. Please don’t take it personally dan (something I tell myself, often unsuccessfully, about a current long term stresser for me). And yes, I autocorrected apple’s capital d there.
What actual policy did VP Biden influence or change as it related to Ukraine while Hunter was on the board of Burisma?
I’d appreciate a credible link to actual policy or legitimate news reports. Considering how nefarious and well known this scandal is, there must be something in the public record, right? State Department docs released under FOIA? Repub congressional investigation? Records requested from someone somewhere? Maybe a lawsuit from a repub “think” tank?
I look forward to two years of house repub hearings and investigation leaks, sprinkled with threats of impeachment beginning in January 2023.
Yep. And nothing will be done about the actual corruption by high ranking government officials from the previous administration .
Previous as well as current!
What corruption by the current admin? Please be specific.
Hunter's laptop...obvi
I thought it was Hillary’s emails from the Oval as she’s really in charge. Lets go Brenda!
My favorite are the Let's Go Brandon stickers I see on vehicle windshields now. There sure are some extreme people out there. It's like their way of signaling to other assholes like them that they're on the same page. The cult fervor is unlike any I've ever seen.
Or guy in my hood with the F**K JOE BIDEN flag....the asterisks are on the flag but still. How white fucking trash can you get?
As much as these fuckers used to say that dems put Obama on a pedestal I sure as fuck don't remember seeing any Obama flags or hats. I loved Obama and all I have is a shot glass.
Guy down the road from me flies that flag and the Don't Blame me I voted for Trump flag. This coupled with his drunk driving plates on his truck and that he regularly does burn outs in front of our drunken red neck neighbor's house in his Chrysler Sebring with the top down speaks volumes.
What are drunk driving plates?
when busted for dui and you retain privileges to drive to work etc, at least in ohio they give you safety yellow plates to alert LE of your restricted status. think of it as a sort of scarlet letter.....
holy shit I didn't know that...OH does love to humiliate their convicts though
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
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
What actual policy did VP Biden influence or change as it related to Ukraine while Hunter was on the board of Burisma?
I’d appreciate a credible link to actual policy or legitimate news reports. Considering how nefarious and well known this scandal is, there must be something in the public record, right? State Department docs released under FOIA? Repub congressional investigation? Records requested from someone somewhere? Maybe a lawsuit from a repub “think” tank?
I look forward to two years of house repub hearings and investigation leaks, sprinkled with threats of impeachment beginning in January 2023.
Yep. And nothing will be done about the actual corruption by high ranking government officials from the previous administration .
Previous as well as current!
What corruption by the current admin? Please be specific.
Hunter's laptop...obvi
I thought it was Hillary’s emails from the Oval as she’s really in charge. Lets go Brenda!
My favorite are the Let's Go Brandon stickers I see on vehicle windshields now. There sure are some extreme people out there. It's like their way of signaling to other assholes like them that they're on the same page. The cult fervor is unlike any I've ever seen.
Or guy in my hood with the F**K JOE BIDEN flag....the asterisks are on the flag but still. How white fucking trash can you get?
As much as these fuckers used to say that dems put Obama on a pedestal I sure as fuck don't remember seeing any Obama flags or hats. I loved Obama and all I have is a shot glass.
Guy down the road from me flies that flag and the Don't Blame me I voted for Trump flag. This coupled with his drunk driving plates on his truck and that he regularly does burn outs in front of our drunken red neck neighbor's house in his Chrysler Sebring with the top down speaks volumes.
What are drunk driving plates?
when busted for dui and you retain privileges to drive to work etc, at least in ohio they give you safety yellow plates to alert LE of your restricted status. think of it as a sort of scarlet letter.....
Sorry, forgot most states don't make their drunks display their drunkenness.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT MINNESOTA WHISKEY PLATES & DWI
If you do not work in law enforcement and have never had a DUI, you might not ever know what whiskey plates are, and that’s for the best. However, if you live in Minnesota then it is likely that you have at least seen them while driving the roadways. The term whiskey plate is used to describe a special license plate that those involved in certain DWI incidents in Minnesota will be forced to use on their vehicles. They are plain white with blue or black lettering and the plate number always begins with a W, leading to the term “whiskey” plates.
What Do Whiskey Plates Do?
The idea of whiskey plates are not for simple humiliation of a driver. In fact, most drivers don’t even know the difference between a whiskey plate and a regular license plate. The true purpose of whiskey plates are for law enforcement. Cars with these plates are considered of special interest. It signifies that you have been in DWI incident before and are at risk for it again.
While there was a time that the simple act of having whiskey plates meant police could pull you over at their will, the Supreme Court has since put rules in place that even drivers with whiskey plates still have to display probable cause in order to be stopped. Unfortunately, if you drive with whiskey plates, you will find that police officers show distinctly more interest in following your vehicle around.
What DWI Charges Result in Whiskey Plate?
If you are a first time DWI offender, most likely you will not have to register for whiskey plates. You only need to register for them if you commit any of the following:
You had a blood-alcohol content of double the legal limit (.16) at the time of your DWI arrest.
You had a DWI or refused a blood, urine, or breath test for the second time in a ten year span.
You committed a DWI with a child 16 years or younger in the vehicle.
You are arrested for a DWI after a cancellation, suspension, or revocation of your license.
When do you get saddled with the scarlet "W"? And do you have them for the remainder of your driving life?
Here in VA, a DUI (I don't think we differentiate between DUI and DWI) will essentially get you a year suspension with no work privileges. However, you can ride a moped. And so you see a fair amount of them around. We call them "Liquor Cycles" (pronounced "sickle). When you see a grown ass man on moped/scooter, you pretty much know why.
lol...we call them DUIs....pronounced dew ee
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
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
But first, a story: I grew up as an extremely impoverished kid, with an abusive, single, alcoholic, crackhead mother who worked in a redneck bar that my grandmother owned. As you can imagine, I was called "white trash" a lot. It hurt then, and it still stings when I hear or read the phrase anywhere to this day.
That's only my story, but I'm sure there are others on this site, perhaps just reading, who have a similar story and a similar negative reaction to the term. Maybe just no one ever wanted to speak up because the shame from being called something like that for an entire childhood can be silencing. So if you don't particularly care for me, you could still inadvertently be compounding shame and silence upon someone you do happen to like a lot.
I remember seeing trash king extraordinaire John Waters in an interview, and he asked the interviewer to refrain from using the term to describe his art, calling it "the last politically correct racist term." I felt like rushing the stage and hugging him, and as anyone who knows me can attest, I am not a hugger.
Now, the favor: Could we please make a conscious effort not to use that hurtful phrase in our discourse here? I think we're all better than that.
Thanks for reading and considering.
come on..."crackhead" "redneck"
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
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
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
Redneck is a derogatory term chiefly, but not exclusively, applied to white Americans perceived to be crass and unsophisticated, closely associated with rural whites of the Southern United States.
Great news this president kills people too…glad he’s got it in him. Hope 20 years of collateral damage was worth it.
You don't support killing one of the guys responsible for 9/11?
I don't support killing. Eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind and all of that. Surely those wars have killed enough people to get justice for the 2,994 victims and then some. Not to mention the fact that this didn't happen in a vacuum of hate for Americans. There were many moves(read: Blunders) in the Middle East up to 9/11 that led to the anti-american sentiment in the region, including the 1953 CIA backed coup in Iran, The US, Russia proxy war in Afghanistan where we trained and supplied arms to many Muhjahideen that later became al qaida, generally using the entire area as if we own the oil and backing whatever side in any conflict that will favor us. And now we are still doing the same thing, the questionable legality of toppling Libya and the awful aftermmath, Supporting the war in Yemen, backing MBS and the Saudis. All the while we still haven't seen all of the connections between 9/11 and the Saudis due to our special relationship with them. I see this as nothing more than a timed killing to promote some US jingoism at a time when our public support of our current proxy war is flagging.
You didn't support the killing of Osama either then?
No I did not support that or the way it was done, I am not a fan of state sanctioned extra judicial killings against civilians or foreigners, and wayyyyyyy back when I did not support the invasion and occupation of Iraq or Afghanistan. There was a minute during september-oct 2001 where I got swept up in a patriotic fervor like everyone else, but luckily I pulled my head out of my star spangled ass long enough to not do something stupid like join the service and rush off to kill Afghani civilians and instead joined local anti war movements.
What do you suggest then? Let terrorists go unpunished and free to commit more world crimes? Or risk the lives of even more military and civilians to make sure all are taken alive and sent to trial?
Redneck is a derogatory term chiefly, but not exclusively, applied to white Americans perceived to be crass and unsophisticated, closely associated with rural whites of the Southern United States.
Great news this president kills people too…glad he’s got it in him. Hope 20 years of collateral damage was worth it.
You don't support killing one of the guys responsible for 9/11?
I don't support killing. Eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind and all of that. Surely those wars have killed enough people to get justice for the 2,994 victims and then some. Not to mention the fact that this didn't happen in a vacuum of hate for Americans. There were many moves(read: Blunders) in the Middle East up to 9/11 that led to the anti-american sentiment in the region, including the 1953 CIA backed coup in Iran, The US, Russia proxy war in Afghanistan where we trained and supplied arms to many Muhjahideen that later became al qaida, generally using the entire area as if we own the oil and backing whatever side in any conflict that will favor us. And now we are still doing the same thing, the questionable legality of toppling Libya and the awful aftermmath, Supporting the war in Yemen, backing MBS and the Saudis. All the while we still haven't seen all of the connections between 9/11 and the Saudis due to our special relationship with them. I see this as nothing more than a timed killing to promote some US jingoism at a time when our public support of our current proxy war is flagging.
You didn't support the killing of Osama either then?
No I did not support that or the way it was done, I am not a fan of state sanctioned extra judicial killings against civilians or foreigners, and wayyyyyyy back when I did not support the invasion and occupation of Iraq or Afghanistan. There was a minute during september-oct 2001 where I got swept up in a patriotic fervor like everyone else, but luckily I pulled my head out of my star spangled ass long enough to not do something stupid like join the service and rush off to kill Afghani civilians and instead joined local anti war movements.
What do you suggest then? Let terrorists go unpunished and free to commit more world crimes? Or risk the lives of even more military and civilians to make sure all are taken alive and sent to trial?
I’m not sure how I feel about the whole “death by drone” thing. Happy others around who may be innocent weren’t harmed due to precision but that’s not always the case. Honestly, I believe that death is the lesser of two evils. Which leaves torture/confinement.
Kind of like that Susan Smith chick who drowned her kids. I always thought she should be strapped in car with a seatbelt that doesn’t unbuckle and dunked in a very deep pool of water - then just when she’s ready to pass out she’s lifted out of the water and that happens to her everyday…and since she blamed a black man it should be a black man lifting the car in and out of the water, that way she gets to feel everyday what those children felt. Death sometimes is too good for evil people.
Great news this president kills people too…glad he’s got it in him. Hope 20 years of collateral damage was worth it.
You don't support killing one of the guys responsible for 9/11?
I don't support killing. Eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind and all of that. Surely those wars have killed enough people to get justice for the 2,994 victims and then some. Not to mention the fact that this didn't happen in a vacuum of hate for Americans. There were many moves(read: Blunders) in the Middle East up to 9/11 that led to the anti-american sentiment in the region, including the 1953 CIA backed coup in Iran, The US, Russia proxy war in Afghanistan where we trained and supplied arms to many Muhjahideen that later became al qaida, generally using the entire area as if we own the oil and backing whatever side in any conflict that will favor us. And now we are still doing the same thing, the questionable legality of toppling Libya and the awful aftermmath, Supporting the war in Yemen, backing MBS and the Saudis. All the while we still haven't seen all of the connections between 9/11 and the Saudis due to our special relationship with them. I see this as nothing more than a timed killing to promote some US jingoism at a time when our public support of our current proxy war is flagging.
You didn't support the killing of Osama either then?
No I did not support that or the way it was done, I am not a fan of state sanctioned extra judicial killings against civilians or foreigners, and wayyyyyyy back when I did not support the invasion and occupation of Iraq or Afghanistan. There was a minute during september-oct 2001 where I got swept up in a patriotic fervor like everyone else, but luckily I pulled my head out of my star spangled ass long enough to not do something stupid like join the service and rush off to kill Afghani civilians and instead joined local anti war movements.
What do you suggest then? Let terrorists go unpunished and free to commit more world crimes? Or risk the lives of even more military and civilians to make sure all are taken alive and sent to trial?
I’m not sure how I feel about the whole “death by drone” thing. Happy others around who may be innocent weren’t harmed due to precision but that’s not always the case. Honestly, I believe that death is the lesser of two evils. Which leaves torture/confinement.
Kind of like that Susan Smith chick who drowned her kids. I always thought she should be strapped in car with a seatbelt that doesn’t unbuckle and dunked in a very deep pool of water - then just when she’s ready to pass out she’s lifted out of the water and that happens to her everyday…and since she blamed a black man it should be a black man lifting the car in and out of the water, that way she gets to feel everyday what those children felt. Death sometimes is too good for evil people.
that's some medieval shit right there
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
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
Great news this president kills people too…glad he’s got it in him. Hope 20 years of collateral damage was worth it.
You don't support killing one of the guys responsible for 9/11?
I don't support killing. Eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind and all of that. Surely those wars have killed enough people to get justice for the 2,994 victims and then some. Not to mention the fact that this didn't happen in a vacuum of hate for Americans. There were many moves(read: Blunders) in the Middle East up to 9/11 that led to the anti-american sentiment in the region, including the 1953 CIA backed coup in Iran, The US, Russia proxy war in Afghanistan where we trained and supplied arms to many Muhjahideen that later became al qaida, generally using the entire area as if we own the oil and backing whatever side in any conflict that will favor us. And now we are still doing the same thing, the questionable legality of toppling Libya and the awful aftermmath, Supporting the war in Yemen, backing MBS and the Saudis. All the while we still haven't seen all of the connections between 9/11 and the Saudis due to our special relationship with them. I see this as nothing more than a timed killing to promote some US jingoism at a time when our public support of our current proxy war is flagging.
You didn't support the killing of Osama either then?
No I did not support that or the way it was done, I am not a fan of state sanctioned extra judicial killings against civilians or foreigners, and wayyyyyyy back when I did not support the invasion and occupation of Iraq or Afghanistan. There was a minute during september-oct 2001 where I got swept up in a patriotic fervor like everyone else, but luckily I pulled my head out of my star spangled ass long enough to not do something stupid like join the service and rush off to kill Afghani civilians and instead joined local anti war movements.
What do you suggest then? Let terrorists go unpunished and free to commit more world crimes? Or risk the lives of even more military and civilians to make sure all are taken alive and sent to trial?
I’m not sure how I feel about the whole “death by drone” thing. Happy others around who may be innocent weren’t harmed due to precision but that’s not always the case. Honestly, I believe that death is the lesser of two evils. Which leaves torture/confinement.
Kind of like that Susan Smith chick who drowned her kids. I always thought she should be strapped in car with a seatbelt that doesn’t unbuckle and dunked in a very deep pool of water - then just when she’s ready to pass out she’s lifted out of the water and that happens to her everyday…and since she blamed a black man it should be a black man lifting the car in and out of the water, that way she gets to feel everyday what those children felt. Death sometimes is too good for evil people.
that's some medieval shit right there
Hahaha so true. Definitely Old Testament! I really only feel completely passionate about any type of abuse of children and really believe that it’s the ultimate, ugly crime deserving of retribution in like. There’s a reason convicts rape pedaphiles in prison and why someone like Epstein knew kill yourself or be tortured the rest of your life.
Great news this president kills people too…glad he’s got it in him. Hope 20 years of collateral damage was worth it.
You don't support killing one of the guys responsible for 9/11?
I don't support killing. Eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind and all of that. Surely those wars have killed enough people to get justice for the 2,994 victims and then some. Not to mention the fact that this didn't happen in a vacuum of hate for Americans. There were many moves(read: Blunders) in the Middle East up to 9/11 that led to the anti-american sentiment in the region, including the 1953 CIA backed coup in Iran, The US, Russia proxy war in Afghanistan where we trained and supplied arms to many Muhjahideen that later became al qaida, generally using the entire area as if we own the oil and backing whatever side in any conflict that will favor us. And now we are still doing the same thing, the questionable legality of toppling Libya and the awful aftermmath, Supporting the war in Yemen, backing MBS and the Saudis. All the while we still haven't seen all of the connections between 9/11 and the Saudis due to our special relationship with them. I see this as nothing more than a timed killing to promote some US jingoism at a time when our public support of our current proxy war is flagging.
You didn't support the killing of Osama either then?
No I did not support that or the way it was done, I am not a fan of state sanctioned extra judicial killings against civilians or foreigners, and wayyyyyyy back when I did not support the invasion and occupation of Iraq or Afghanistan. There was a minute during september-oct 2001 where I got swept up in a patriotic fervor like everyone else, but luckily I pulled my head out of my star spangled ass long enough to not do something stupid like join the service and rush off to kill Afghani civilians and instead joined local anti war movements.
What do you suggest then? Let terrorists go unpunished and free to commit more world crimes? Or risk the lives of even more military and civilians to make sure all are taken alive and sent to trial?
Interesting you bring up the lives of civilians when our state sanctioned terrorist actions have taken far more civilian lives than any leader of any terrorist group involved with 9/11.
A good place to start would be to stop trying to dominate other countries by toppling governments and backing regimes that are friendly to us but unfriendly to their own people and see where that goes as far as lowering the incidents of terrorism. Most of the countries involved in terrorism have some grievance against the US and it's past policies and contrary to government and mass media opinion, they don't just hate us because " america is the most exceptional country in all the world and they are jeoulus and we are infidels" We have a long history of depleting countries of their resources and backing brutal right wing governments to continue to keep the resources flowing to us.
If the so called terrorist is not directly engaged in an act of terror and has no weapon I would say that you should at least try to take them in to face justice before just deciding that killing them is justice, when in fact that is really more a form of vengence and completely unrelated to any sense of justice. Of course then you involve getting boots on the ground in a sovereign country again.
Coming back to the 300,000+ civilians killed in the aftermath of 9/11. How does that number not bring justice to the 2994 people killed on 9/11? Are all those lives lost the fault of the 19 mostly Saudi attackers who were orchestrated by OBL and al-Zawahiri? Are you suggesting that one american life is worth more than 121 civilian lives in the middle east? Or are you suggesting that one incident claiming 2994 lives justifies 20 years of a failed war and that we shouldn't look at our contributions to the staggering middle eastern death toll as acts of terrorism against the region that are destined to continue the status quo?
Here we are again invading a sovereign country via an unmanned aerial vehicle and killing an unarmed man while we hold an entire countries resources hostage in the name of future crime. I'm sure it is all their fault. Also I find it dubious that the use of 2 hellfire missiles didn't lead to any collateral damage especially since this news was delivered by the same government that just a year ago claimed no civilians were killed in an airstrike against ISIS-K when in fact only civilians were killed and 7 were children.
It's not as simple to me as killing the bad man, as that does not provide justice, which is a very necessary component of peace in a just society. Violence begets violence begets....No wonder people think it's ok to stand their ground for french fries over here.
Great news this president kills people too…glad he’s got it in him. Hope 20 years of collateral damage was worth it.
You don't support killing one of the guys responsible for 9/11?
I don't support killing. Eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind and all of that. Surely those wars have killed enough people to get justice for the 2,994 victims and then some. Not to mention the fact that this didn't happen in a vacuum of hate for Americans. There were many moves(read: Blunders) in the Middle East up to 9/11 that led to the anti-american sentiment in the region, including the 1953 CIA backed coup in Iran, The US, Russia proxy war in Afghanistan where we trained and supplied arms to many Muhjahideen that later became al qaida, generally using the entire area as if we own the oil and backing whatever side in any conflict that will favor us. And now we are still doing the same thing, the questionable legality of toppling Libya and the awful aftermmath, Supporting the war in Yemen, backing MBS and the Saudis. All the while we still haven't seen all of the connections between 9/11 and the Saudis due to our special relationship with them. I see this as nothing more than a timed killing to promote some US jingoism at a time when our public support of our current proxy war is flagging.
You didn't support the killing of Osama either then?
No I did not support that or the way it was done, I am not a fan of state sanctioned extra judicial killings against civilians or foreigners, and wayyyyyyy back when I did not support the invasion and occupation of Iraq or Afghanistan. There was a minute during september-oct 2001 where I got swept up in a patriotic fervor like everyone else, but luckily I pulled my head out of my star spangled ass long enough to not do something stupid like join the service and rush off to kill Afghani civilians and instead joined local anti war movements.
What do you suggest then? Let terrorists go unpunished and free to commit more world crimes? Or risk the lives of even more military and civilians to make sure all are taken alive and sent to trial?
Interesting you bring up the lives of civilians when our state sanctioned terrorist actions have taken far more civilian lives than any leader of any terrorist group involved with 9/11.
A good place to start would be to stop trying to dominate other countries by toppling governments and backing regimes that are friendly to us but unfriendly to their own people and see where that goes as far as lowering the incidents of terrorism. Most of the countries involved in terrorism have some grievance against the US and it's past policies and contrary to government and mass media opinion, they don't just hate us because " america is the most exceptional country in all the world and they are jeoulus and we are infidels" We have a long history of depleting countries of their resources and backing brutal right wing governments to continue to keep the resources flowing to us.
If the so called terrorist is not directly engaged in an act of terror and has no weapon I would say that you should at least try to take them in to face justice before just deciding that killing them is justice, when in fact that is really more a form of vengence and completely unrelated to any sense of justice. Of course then you involve getting boots on the ground in a sovereign country again.
Coming back to the 300,000+ civilians killed in the aftermath of 9/11. How does that number not bring justice to the 2994 people killed on 9/11? Are all those lives lost the fault of the 19 mostly Saudi attackers who were orchestrated by OBL and al-Zawahiri? Are you suggesting that one american life is worth more than 121 civilian lives in the middle east? Or are you suggesting that one incident claiming 2994 lives justifies 20 years of a failed war and that we shouldn't look at our contributions to the staggering middle eastern death toll as acts of terrorism against the region that are destined to continue the status quo?
Here we are again invading a sovereign country via an unmanned aerial vehicle and killing an unarmed man while we hold an entire countries resources hostage in the name of future crime. I'm sure it is all their fault. Also I find it dubious that the use of 2 hellfire missiles didn't lead to any collateral damage especially since this news was delivered by the same government that just a year ago claimed no civilians were killed in an airstrike against ISIS-K when in fact only civilians were killed and 7 were children.
It's not as simple to me as killing the bad man, as that does not provide justice, which is a very necessary component of peace in a just society. Violence begets violence begets....No wonder people think it's ok to stand their ground for french fries over here.
To refer to al-Zawahiri as unarmed is just a bit misleading? This photo is for dramatic purposes only, as I am referring to the death and hatred he initiated with his words and actions. He decided to initiate a war against America and the taliban leadership protected him. Perhaps it was his responsibility to consider the 121/1 ratio before he initiated the 9/11 wars by attacking my city.
You attack unarmed American civilians then refuse to cooperate with the investigation, you are requesting hell on earth for your people.
Great news this president kills people too…glad he’s got it in him. Hope 20 years of collateral damage was worth it.
You don't support killing one of the guys responsible for 9/11?
I don't support killing. Eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind and all of that. Surely those wars have killed enough people to get justice for the 2,994 victims and then some. Not to mention the fact that this didn't happen in a vacuum of hate for Americans. There were many moves(read: Blunders) in the Middle East up to 9/11 that led to the anti-american sentiment in the region, including the 1953 CIA backed coup in Iran, The US, Russia proxy war in Afghanistan where we trained and supplied arms to many Muhjahideen that later became al qaida, generally using the entire area as if we own the oil and backing whatever side in any conflict that will favor us. And now we are still doing the same thing, the questionable legality of toppling Libya and the awful aftermmath, Supporting the war in Yemen, backing MBS and the Saudis. All the while we still haven't seen all of the connections between 9/11 and the Saudis due to our special relationship with them. I see this as nothing more than a timed killing to promote some US jingoism at a time when our public support of our current proxy war is flagging.
You didn't support the killing of Osama either then?
No I did not support that or the way it was done, I am not a fan of state sanctioned extra judicial killings against civilians or foreigners, and wayyyyyyy back when I did not support the invasion and occupation of Iraq or Afghanistan. There was a minute during september-oct 2001 where I got swept up in a patriotic fervor like everyone else, but luckily I pulled my head out of my star spangled ass long enough to not do something stupid like join the service and rush off to kill Afghani civilians and instead joined local anti war movements.
What do you suggest then? Let terrorists go unpunished and free to commit more world crimes? Or risk the lives of even more military and civilians to make sure all are taken alive and sent to trial?
Interesting you bring up the lives of civilians when our state sanctioned terrorist actions have taken far more civilian lives than any leader of any terrorist group involved with 9/11.
A good place to start would be to stop trying to dominate other countries by toppling governments and backing regimes that are friendly to us but unfriendly to their own people and see where that goes as far as lowering the incidents of terrorism. Most of the countries involved in terrorism have some grievance against the US and it's past policies and contrary to government and mass media opinion, they don't just hate us because " america is the most exceptional country in all the world and they are jeoulus and we are infidels" We have a long history of depleting countries of their resources and backing brutal right wing governments to continue to keep the resources flowing to us.
If the so called terrorist is not directly engaged in an act of terror and has no weapon I would say that you should at least try to take them in to face justice before just deciding that killing them is justice, when in fact that is really more a form of vengence and completely unrelated to any sense of justice. Of course then you involve getting boots on the ground in a sovereign country again.
Coming back to the 300,000+ civilians killed in the aftermath of 9/11. How does that number not bring justice to the 2994 people killed on 9/11? Are all those lives lost the fault of the 19 mostly Saudi attackers who were orchestrated by OBL and al-Zawahiri? Are you suggesting that one american life is worth more than 121 civilian lives in the middle east? Or are you suggesting that one incident claiming 2994 lives justifies 20 years of a failed war and that we shouldn't look at our contributions to the staggering middle eastern death toll as acts of terrorism against the region that are destined to continue the status quo?
Here we are again invading a sovereign country via an unmanned aerial vehicle and killing an unarmed man while we hold an entire countries resources hostage in the name of future crime. I'm sure it is all their fault. Also I find it dubious that the use of 2 hellfire missiles didn't lead to any collateral damage especially since this news was delivered by the same government that just a year ago claimed no civilians were killed in an airstrike against ISIS-K when in fact only civilians were killed and 7 were children.
It's not as simple to me as killing the bad man, as that does not provide justice, which is a very necessary component of peace in a just society. Violence begets violence begets....No wonder people think it's ok to stand their ground for french fries over here.
To refer to al-Zawahiri as unarmed is just a bit misleading? This photo is for dramatic purposes only, as I am referring to the death and hatred he initiated with his words and actions. He decided to initiate a war against America and the taliban leadership protected him. Perhaps it was his responsibility to consider the 121/1 ratio before he initiated the 9/11 wars by attacking my city.
You attack unarmed American civilians then refuse to cooperate with the investigation, you are requesting hell on earth for your people.
So you think our response and the killing of 300,000 plus civilians was totally justified and has no basis in history or our foreign policy failures in the region? By your logic any strike against the USA based on past geopolitical outcomes is also justified. So who is more justified here? I'm sure that killing and fucking around in the middle east will lead to no further problems here in the USA and if it does, well it is obviously all their fault.
Edit: to add that Al Z was an Egyptian and I would assume that would mean that the Egyptians are his people and to my knowledge Egypt escaped the 9/11 wars pretty unscathed. Or are you suggesting that his people still need to pay a price of hell on earth?
Great news this president kills people too…glad he’s got it in him. Hope 20 years of collateral damage was worth it.
You don't support killing one of the guys responsible for 9/11?
I don't support killing. Eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind and all of that. Surely those wars have killed enough people to get justice for the 2,994 victims and then some. Not to mention the fact that this didn't happen in a vacuum of hate for Americans. There were many moves(read: Blunders) in the Middle East up to 9/11 that led to the anti-american sentiment in the region, including the 1953 CIA backed coup in Iran, The US, Russia proxy war in Afghanistan where we trained and supplied arms to many Muhjahideen that later became al qaida, generally using the entire area as if we own the oil and backing whatever side in any conflict that will favor us. And now we are still doing the same thing, the questionable legality of toppling Libya and the awful aftermmath, Supporting the war in Yemen, backing MBS and the Saudis. All the while we still haven't seen all of the connections between 9/11 and the Saudis due to our special relationship with them. I see this as nothing more than a timed killing to promote some US jingoism at a time when our public support of our current proxy war is flagging.
You didn't support the killing of Osama either then?
No I did not support that or the way it was done, I am not a fan of state sanctioned extra judicial killings against civilians or foreigners, and wayyyyyyy back when I did not support the invasion and occupation of Iraq or Afghanistan. There was a minute during september-oct 2001 where I got swept up in a patriotic fervor like everyone else, but luckily I pulled my head out of my star spangled ass long enough to not do something stupid like join the service and rush off to kill Afghani civilians and instead joined local anti war movements.
What do you suggest then? Let terrorists go unpunished and free to commit more world crimes? Or risk the lives of even more military and civilians to make sure all are taken alive and sent to trial?
Interesting you bring up the lives of civilians when our state sanctioned terrorist actions have taken far more civilian lives than any leader of any terrorist group involved with 9/11.
A good place to start would be to stop trying to dominate other countries by toppling governments and backing regimes that are friendly to us but unfriendly to their own people and see where that goes as far as lowering the incidents of terrorism. Most of the countries involved in terrorism have some grievance against the US and it's past policies and contrary to government and mass media opinion, they don't just hate us because " america is the most exceptional country in all the world and they are jeoulus and we are infidels" We have a long history of depleting countries of their resources and backing brutal right wing governments to continue to keep the resources flowing to us.
If the so called terrorist is not directly engaged in an act of terror and has no weapon I would say that you should at least try to take them in to face justice before just deciding that killing them is justice, when in fact that is really more a form of vengence and completely unrelated to any sense of justice. Of course then you involve getting boots on the ground in a sovereign country again.
Coming back to the 300,000+ civilians killed in the aftermath of 9/11. How does that number not bring justice to the 2994 people killed on 9/11? Are all those lives lost the fault of the 19 mostly Saudi attackers who were orchestrated by OBL and al-Zawahiri? Are you suggesting that one american life is worth more than 121 civilian lives in the middle east? Or are you suggesting that one incident claiming 2994 lives justifies 20 years of a failed war and that we shouldn't look at our contributions to the staggering middle eastern death toll as acts of terrorism against the region that are destined to continue the status quo?
Here we are again invading a sovereign country via an unmanned aerial vehicle and killing an unarmed man while we hold an entire countries resources hostage in the name of future crime. I'm sure it is all their fault. Also I find it dubious that the use of 2 hellfire missiles didn't lead to any collateral damage especially since this news was delivered by the same government that just a year ago claimed no civilians were killed in an airstrike against ISIS-K when in fact only civilians were killed and 7 were children.
It's not as simple to me as killing the bad man, as that does not provide justice, which is a very necessary component of peace in a just society. Violence begets violence begets....No wonder people think it's ok to stand their ground for french fries over here.
I’m not understanding your argument. I said that strikes like this will help prevent civilian deaths. Sending armed forces in to try to capture him alive will almost certainly lead to casualties on both sides, including civilians. So if you’re trying to minimize civilian casualties, why are you against taking out a known terrorist leader?
We’ve definitely made mistakes with air and drone strikes. But the design behind them is to minimize casualties other than the identified target. This was a successful use of a drone strike. There was zero collateral damage. But you’d rather forces go in, risk their lives, probably lose a few, kill others involved, including the kids that pick up a rifle, just so they can take this guy alive? I’m okay with they way this one turned out.
Great news this president kills people too…glad he’s got it in him. Hope 20 years of collateral damage was worth it.
You don't support killing one of the guys responsible for 9/11?
I don't support killing. Eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind and all of that. Surely those wars have killed enough people to get justice for the 2,994 victims and then some. Not to mention the fact that this didn't happen in a vacuum of hate for Americans. There were many moves(read: Blunders) in the Middle East up to 9/11 that led to the anti-american sentiment in the region, including the 1953 CIA backed coup in Iran, The US, Russia proxy war in Afghanistan where we trained and supplied arms to many Muhjahideen that later became al qaida, generally using the entire area as if we own the oil and backing whatever side in any conflict that will favor us. And now we are still doing the same thing, the questionable legality of toppling Libya and the awful aftermmath, Supporting the war in Yemen, backing MBS and the Saudis. All the while we still haven't seen all of the connections between 9/11 and the Saudis due to our special relationship with them. I see this as nothing more than a timed killing to promote some US jingoism at a time when our public support of our current proxy war is flagging.
You didn't support the killing of Osama either then?
No I did not support that or the way it was done, I am not a fan of state sanctioned extra judicial killings against civilians or foreigners, and wayyyyyyy back when I did not support the invasion and occupation of Iraq or Afghanistan. There was a minute during september-oct 2001 where I got swept up in a patriotic fervor like everyone else, but luckily I pulled my head out of my star spangled ass long enough to not do something stupid like join the service and rush off to kill Afghani civilians and instead joined local anti war movements.
What do you suggest then? Let terrorists go unpunished and free to commit more world crimes? Or risk the lives of even more military and civilians to make sure all are taken alive and sent to trial?
Interesting you bring up the lives of civilians when our state sanctioned terrorist actions have taken far more civilian lives than any leader of any terrorist group involved with 9/11.
A good place to start would be to stop trying to dominate other countries by toppling governments and backing regimes that are friendly to us but unfriendly to their own people and see where that goes as far as lowering the incidents of terrorism. Most of the countries involved in terrorism have some grievance against the US and it's past policies and contrary to government and mass media opinion, they don't just hate us because " america is the most exceptional country in all the world and they are jeoulus and we are infidels" We have a long history of depleting countries of their resources and backing brutal right wing governments to continue to keep the resources flowing to us.
If the so called terrorist is not directly engaged in an act of terror and has no weapon I would say that you should at least try to take them in to face justice before just deciding that killing them is justice, when in fact that is really more a form of vengence and completely unrelated to any sense of justice. Of course then you involve getting boots on the ground in a sovereign country again.
Coming back to the 300,000+ civilians killed in the aftermath of 9/11. How does that number not bring justice to the 2994 people killed on 9/11? Are all those lives lost the fault of the 19 mostly Saudi attackers who were orchestrated by OBL and al-Zawahiri? Are you suggesting that one american life is worth more than 121 civilian lives in the middle east? Or are you suggesting that one incident claiming 2994 lives justifies 20 years of a failed war and that we shouldn't look at our contributions to the staggering middle eastern death toll as acts of terrorism against the region that are destined to continue the status quo?
Here we are again invading a sovereign country via an unmanned aerial vehicle and killing an unarmed man while we hold an entire countries resources hostage in the name of future crime. I'm sure it is all their fault. Also I find it dubious that the use of 2 hellfire missiles didn't lead to any collateral damage especially since this news was delivered by the same government that just a year ago claimed no civilians were killed in an airstrike against ISIS-K when in fact only civilians were killed and 7 were children.
It's not as simple to me as killing the bad man, as that does not provide justice, which is a very necessary component of peace in a just society. Violence begets violence begets....No wonder people think it's ok to stand their ground for french fries over here.
I’m not understanding your argument. I said that strikes like this will help prevent civilian deaths. Sending armed forces in to try to capture him alive will almost certainly lead to casualties on both sides, including civilians. So if you’re trying to minimize civilian casualties, why are you against taking out a known terrorist leader?
We’ve definitely made mistakes with air and drone strikes. But the design behind them is to minimize casualties other than the identified target. This was a successful use of a drone strike. There was zero collateral damage. But you’d rather forces go in, risk their lives, probably lose a few, kill others involved, including the kids that pick up a rifle, just so they can take this guy alive? I’m okay with they way this one turned out.
I am not advocating for the death of civilians in order to bring someone to justice. I do not support extra judicial killings. I do not believe that death by unmanned aircraft is justice, it is more killing. I am not sure what effect if any this extra judicial killing will have on future terrorist strikes that will come from our last 20+ years of completely wreaking havoc on the Middle East, if anything it will probably inspire a supporter of the ideology or perhaps a family member.
Great news this president kills people too…glad he’s got it in him. Hope 20 years of collateral damage was worth it.
You don't support killing one of the guys responsible for 9/11?
I don't support killing. Eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind and all of that. Surely those wars have killed enough people to get justice for the 2,994 victims and then some. Not to mention the fact that this didn't happen in a vacuum of hate for Americans. There were many moves(read: Blunders) in the Middle East up to 9/11 that led to the anti-american sentiment in the region, including the 1953 CIA backed coup in Iran, The US, Russia proxy war in Afghanistan where we trained and supplied arms to many Muhjahideen that later became al qaida, generally using the entire area as if we own the oil and backing whatever side in any conflict that will favor us. And now we are still doing the same thing, the questionable legality of toppling Libya and the awful aftermmath, Supporting the war in Yemen, backing MBS and the Saudis. All the while we still haven't seen all of the connections between 9/11 and the Saudis due to our special relationship with them. I see this as nothing more than a timed killing to promote some US jingoism at a time when our public support of our current proxy war is flagging.
You didn't support the killing of Osama either then?
No I did not support that or the way it was done, I am not a fan of state sanctioned extra judicial killings against civilians or foreigners, and wayyyyyyy back when I did not support the invasion and occupation of Iraq or Afghanistan. There was a minute during september-oct 2001 where I got swept up in a patriotic fervor like everyone else, but luckily I pulled my head out of my star spangled ass long enough to not do something stupid like join the service and rush off to kill Afghani civilians and instead joined local anti war movements.
What do you suggest then? Let terrorists go unpunished and free to commit more world crimes? Or risk the lives of even more military and civilians to make sure all are taken alive and sent to trial?
Interesting you bring up the lives of civilians when our state sanctioned terrorist actions have taken far more civilian lives than any leader of any terrorist group involved with 9/11.
A good place to start would be to stop trying to dominate other countries by toppling governments and backing regimes that are friendly to us but unfriendly to their own people and see where that goes as far as lowering the incidents of terrorism. Most of the countries involved in terrorism have some grievance against the US and it's past policies and contrary to government and mass media opinion, they don't just hate us because " america is the most exceptional country in all the world and they are jeoulus and we are infidels" We have a long history of depleting countries of their resources and backing brutal right wing governments to continue to keep the resources flowing to us.
If the so called terrorist is not directly engaged in an act of terror and has no weapon I would say that you should at least try to take them in to face justice before just deciding that killing them is justice, when in fact that is really more a form of vengence and completely unrelated to any sense of justice. Of course then you involve getting boots on the ground in a sovereign country again.
Coming back to the 300,000+ civilians killed in the aftermath of 9/11. How does that number not bring justice to the 2994 people killed on 9/11? Are all those lives lost the fault of the 19 mostly Saudi attackers who were orchestrated by OBL and al-Zawahiri? Are you suggesting that one american life is worth more than 121 civilian lives in the middle east? Or are you suggesting that one incident claiming 2994 lives justifies 20 years of a failed war and that we shouldn't look at our contributions to the staggering middle eastern death toll as acts of terrorism against the region that are destined to continue the status quo?
Here we are again invading a sovereign country via an unmanned aerial vehicle and killing an unarmed man while we hold an entire countries resources hostage in the name of future crime. I'm sure it is all their fault. Also I find it dubious that the use of 2 hellfire missiles didn't lead to any collateral damage especially since this news was delivered by the same government that just a year ago claimed no civilians were killed in an airstrike against ISIS-K when in fact only civilians were killed and 7 were children.
It's not as simple to me as killing the bad man, as that does not provide justice, which is a very necessary component of peace in a just society. Violence begets violence begets....No wonder people think it's ok to stand their ground for french fries over here.
To refer to al-Zawahiri as unarmed is just a bit misleading? This photo is for dramatic purposes only, as I am referring to the death and hatred he initiated with his words and actions. He decided to initiate a war against America and the taliban leadership protected him. Perhaps it was his responsibility to consider the 121/1 ratio before he initiated the 9/11 wars by attacking my city.
You attack unarmed American civilians then refuse to cooperate with the investigation, you are requesting hell on earth for your people.
So you think our response and the killing of 300,000 plus civilians was totally justified and has no basis in history or our foreign policy failures in the region? By your logic any strike against the USA based on past geopolitical outcomes is also justified. So who is more justified here? I'm sure that killing and fucking around in the middle east will lead to no further problems here in the USA and if it does, well it is obviously all their fault.
Edit: to add that Al Z was an Egyptian and I would assume that would mean that the Egyptians are his people and to my knowledge Egypt escaped the 9/11 wars pretty unscathed. Or are you suggesting that his people still need to pay a price of hell on earth?
The majority of the 300k casualties, almost 90%, was in Iraq, a war I did not support at that time, nor any time since. That war was the unfortunate result of a murderous, aggressive and anti American leader in that region. Is any war justified? No. But when a country provokes the US, it is taking a dangerous risk. Regarding Afghanistan, they directly supported the people responsible for 9/11, which was unprovoked, as OBLs justification was entirely absurd. To call 9/11 “a strike” is a complete misrepresentation. 9/11 was the execution of defenseless American civilians. Would you punch a lion? Well, the world now know what happens when you choose to do so.
Great news this president kills people too…glad he’s got it in him. Hope 20 years of collateral damage was worth it.
You don't support killing one of the guys responsible for 9/11?
I don't support killing. Eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind and all of that. Surely those wars have killed enough people to get justice for the 2,994 victims and then some. Not to mention the fact that this didn't happen in a vacuum of hate for Americans. There were many moves(read: Blunders) in the Middle East up to 9/11 that led to the anti-american sentiment in the region, including the 1953 CIA backed coup in Iran, The US, Russia proxy war in Afghanistan where we trained and supplied arms to many Muhjahideen that later became al qaida, generally using the entire area as if we own the oil and backing whatever side in any conflict that will favor us. And now we are still doing the same thing, the questionable legality of toppling Libya and the awful aftermmath, Supporting the war in Yemen, backing MBS and the Saudis. All the while we still haven't seen all of the connections between 9/11 and the Saudis due to our special relationship with them. I see this as nothing more than a timed killing to promote some US jingoism at a time when our public support of our current proxy war is flagging.
You didn't support the killing of Osama either then?
No I did not support that or the way it was done, I am not a fan of state sanctioned extra judicial killings against civilians or foreigners, and wayyyyyyy back when I did not support the invasion and occupation of Iraq or Afghanistan. There was a minute during september-oct 2001 where I got swept up in a patriotic fervor like everyone else, but luckily I pulled my head out of my star spangled ass long enough to not do something stupid like join the service and rush off to kill Afghani civilians and instead joined local anti war movements.
What do you suggest then? Let terrorists go unpunished and free to commit more world crimes? Or risk the lives of even more military and civilians to make sure all are taken alive and sent to trial?
Interesting you bring up the lives of civilians when our state sanctioned terrorist actions have taken far more civilian lives than any leader of any terrorist group involved with 9/11.
A good place to start would be to stop trying to dominate other countries by toppling governments and backing regimes that are friendly to us but unfriendly to their own people and see where that goes as far as lowering the incidents of terrorism. Most of the countries involved in terrorism have some grievance against the US and it's past policies and contrary to government and mass media opinion, they don't just hate us because " america is the most exceptional country in all the world and they are jeoulus and we are infidels" We have a long history of depleting countries of their resources and backing brutal right wing governments to continue to keep the resources flowing to us.
If the so called terrorist is not directly engaged in an act of terror and has no weapon I would say that you should at least try to take them in to face justice before just deciding that killing them is justice, when in fact that is really more a form of vengence and completely unrelated to any sense of justice. Of course then you involve getting boots on the ground in a sovereign country again.
Coming back to the 300,000+ civilians killed in the aftermath of 9/11. How does that number not bring justice to the 2994 people killed on 9/11? Are all those lives lost the fault of the 19 mostly Saudi attackers who were orchestrated by OBL and al-Zawahiri? Are you suggesting that one american life is worth more than 121 civilian lives in the middle east? Or are you suggesting that one incident claiming 2994 lives justifies 20 years of a failed war and that we shouldn't look at our contributions to the staggering middle eastern death toll as acts of terrorism against the region that are destined to continue the status quo?
Here we are again invading a sovereign country via an unmanned aerial vehicle and killing an unarmed man while we hold an entire countries resources hostage in the name of future crime. I'm sure it is all their fault. Also I find it dubious that the use of 2 hellfire missiles didn't lead to any collateral damage especially since this news was delivered by the same government that just a year ago claimed no civilians were killed in an airstrike against ISIS-K when in fact only civilians were killed and 7 were children.
It's not as simple to me as killing the bad man, as that does not provide justice, which is a very necessary component of peace in a just society. Violence begets violence begets....No wonder people think it's ok to stand their ground for french fries over here.
To refer to al-Zawahiri as unarmed is just a bit misleading? This photo is for dramatic purposes only, as I am referring to the death and hatred he initiated with his words and actions. He decided to initiate a war against America and the taliban leadership protected him. Perhaps it was his responsibility to consider the 121/1 ratio before he initiated the 9/11 wars by attacking my city.
You attack unarmed American civilians then refuse to cooperate with the investigation, you are requesting hell on earth for your people.
So you think our response and the killing of 300,000 plus civilians was totally justified and has no basis in history or our foreign policy failures in the region? By your logic any strike against the USA based on past geopolitical outcomes is also justified. So who is more justified here? I'm sure that killing and fucking around in the middle east will lead to no further problems here in the USA and if it does, well it is obviously all their fault.
Edit: to add that Al Z was an Egyptian and I would assume that would mean that the Egyptians are his people and to my knowledge Egypt escaped the 9/11 wars pretty unscathed. Or are you suggesting that his people still need to pay a price of hell on earth?
The majority of the 300k casualties, almost 90%, was in Iraq, a war I did not support at that time, nor any time since. That war was the unfortunate result of a murderous, aggressive and anti American leader in that region. Is any war justified? No. But when a country provokes the US, it is taking a dangerous risk. Regarding Afghanistan, they directly supported the people responsible for 9/11, which was unprovoked, as OBLs justification was entirely absurd. To call 9/11 “a strike” is a complete misrepresentation. 9/11 was the execution of defenseless American civilians. Would you punch a lion? Well, the world now know what happens when you choose to do so.
Is the lion blind? Last I checked, it seemed to have missed a certain country and assailed another in the name of eventual "justice".
I have huge issues with teh Iraq war, but no issues with a successful drone strike to take out someone involved in 9/11. I don't care that it's extra judicial. It would be different if this guy was in our control or in control of an ally, but he wasn't and he sure wasn't going to be extradited.
I have huge issues with teh Iraq war, but no issues with a successful drone strike to take out someone involved in 9/11. I don't care that it's extra judicial. It would be different if this guy was in our control or in control of an ally, but he wasn't and he sure wasn't going to be extradited.
The tech still isn't fool proof but it is getting amazingly accurate. They took this fucker out sitting on his balcony. They were able to confirm that it was him via drone video.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
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
Was al-Zawahiri legally charged with a crime? Was anyone charged and tried for any crime involving 9/11? Did the killing of al-Zawahiri or for that matter OBL make the world a safer place? Did the killing of al-Zawahiri make the US safer in any measurable way? Have any outside organizations not funded by the US or it's subsidiaries been able to verify that there was in fact no collateral damage from 2 hellfire missiles?
Comments
when busted for dui and you retain privileges to drive to work etc, at least in ohio they give you safety yellow plates to alert LE of your restricted status. think of it as a sort of scarlet letter.....
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
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT MINNESOTA WHISKEY PLATES & DWI
If you do not work in law enforcement and have never had a DUI, you might not ever know what whiskey plates are, and that’s for the best. However, if you live in Minnesota then it is likely that you have at least seen them while driving the roadways. The term whiskey plate is used to describe a special license plate that those involved in certain DWI incidents in Minnesota will be forced to use on their vehicles. They are plain white with blue or black lettering and the plate number always begins with a W, leading to the term “whiskey” plates.
What Do Whiskey Plates Do?
The idea of whiskey plates are not for simple humiliation of a driver. In fact, most drivers don’t even know the difference between a whiskey plate and a regular license plate. The true purpose of whiskey plates are for law enforcement. Cars with these plates are considered of special interest. It signifies that you have been in DWI incident before and are at risk for it again.
While there was a time that the simple act of having whiskey plates meant police could pull you over at their will, the Supreme Court has since put rules in place that even drivers with whiskey plates still have to display probable cause in order to be stopped. Unfortunately, if you drive with whiskey plates, you will find that police officers show distinctly more interest in following your vehicle around.
What DWI Charges Result in Whiskey Plate?
If you are a first time DWI offender, most likely you will not have to register for whiskey plates. You only need to register for them if you commit any of the following:
But first, a story: I grew up as an extremely impoverished kid, with an abusive, single, alcoholic, crackhead mother who worked in a redneck bar that my grandmother owned. As you can imagine, I was called "white trash" a lot. It hurt then, and it still stings when I hear or read the phrase anywhere to this day.
That's only my story, but I'm sure there are others on this site, perhaps just reading, who have a similar story and a similar negative reaction to the term. Maybe just no one ever wanted to speak up because the shame from being called something like that for an entire childhood can be silencing. So if you don't particularly care for me, you could still inadvertently be compounding shame and silence upon someone you do happen to like a lot.
I remember seeing trash king extraordinaire John Waters in an interview, and he asked the interviewer to refrain from using the term to describe his art, calling it "the last politically correct racist term." I felt like rushing the stage and hugging him, and as anyone who knows me can attest, I am not a hugger.
Now, the favor: Could we please make a conscious effort not to use that hurtful phrase in our discourse here? I think we're all better than that.
Thanks for reading and considering.
Serious question though, why is redneck not the same?
Here in VA, a DUI (I don't think we differentiate between DUI and DWI) will essentially get you a year suspension with no work privileges. However, you can ride a moped. And so you see a fair amount of them around. We call them "Liquor Cycles" (pronounced "sickle). When you see a grown ass man on moped/scooter, you pretty much know why.
But seriously, I don’t use the term anyway. It feels wrong to me.
And while I’ve always dug Waters, I now see him as you did. Thanks for that.
Maybe it's regional, but being called a redneck is a badge of honor where I'm from. In fact, one isn't really even called a redneck; rather it's a term they/we would use for them-/ourselves. I've never known anyone to be offended by the term because it implies hard work (OK, and perhaps a bit of ignorance when it comes to sun damage
I did just check my M-W dictionary, though, and it has both "sometimes disparaging" and "often disparaging" for the entry. Now you have me wondering if I've offended anyone. And if I have, I apologize. (I certainly didn't offend any of those folks I referred to who drank at my grandma's bar, though, I can tell you that much.)
Actually, when reading over my post, I was more worried about the term "crackhead," which is, of course, not very mindful and obviously written with angst. I'll keep trying to be better.
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
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
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
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
White trash is a derogatory racial and class-related slur[1][2] used in American English to refer to poor white people, especially in the rural southern United States.
crackhead
redneck = white trash
edit: I'm not trying to make light of your sensitivity...just pointing out that the redneck term is basically the same as white trash
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
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
A good place to start would be to stop trying to dominate other countries by toppling governments and backing regimes that are friendly to us but unfriendly to their own people and see where that goes as far as lowering the incidents of terrorism. Most of the countries involved in terrorism have some grievance against the US and it's past policies and contrary to government and mass media opinion, they don't just hate us because " america is the most exceptional country in all the world and they are jeoulus and we are infidels" We have a long history of depleting countries of their resources and backing brutal right wing governments to continue to keep the resources flowing to us.
If the so called terrorist is not directly engaged in an act of terror and has no weapon I would say that you should at least try to take them in to face justice before just deciding that killing them is justice, when in fact that is really more a form of vengence and completely unrelated to any sense of justice. Of course then you involve getting boots on the ground in a sovereign country again.
Coming back to the 300,000+ civilians killed in the aftermath of 9/11. How does that number not bring justice to the 2994 people killed on 9/11? Are all those lives lost the fault of the 19 mostly Saudi attackers who were orchestrated by OBL and al-Zawahiri? Are you suggesting that one american life is worth more than 121 civilian lives in the middle east? Or are you suggesting that one incident claiming 2994 lives justifies 20 years of a failed war and that we shouldn't look at our contributions to the staggering middle eastern death toll as acts of terrorism against the region that are destined to continue the status quo?
Here we are again invading a sovereign country via an unmanned aerial vehicle and killing an unarmed man while we hold an entire countries resources hostage in the name of future crime. I'm sure it is all their fault. Also I find it dubious that the use of 2 hellfire missiles didn't lead to any collateral damage especially since this news was delivered by the same government that just a year ago claimed no civilians were killed in an airstrike against ISIS-K when in fact only civilians were killed and 7 were children.
It's not as simple to me as killing the bad man, as that does not provide justice, which is a very necessary component of peace in a just society. Violence begets violence begets....No wonder people think it's ok to stand their ground for french fries over here.
There are no kings inside the gates of eden
You attack unarmed American civilians then refuse to cooperate with the investigation, you are requesting hell on earth for your people.
Edit: to add that Al Z was an Egyptian and I would assume that would mean that the Egyptians are his people and to my knowledge Egypt escaped the 9/11 wars pretty unscathed. Or are you suggesting that his people still need to pay a price of hell on earth?
There are no kings inside the gates of eden
There are no kings inside the gates of eden
I have huge issues with teh Iraq war, but no issues with a successful drone strike to take out someone involved in 9/11. I don't care that it's extra judicial. It would be different if this guy was in our control or in control of an ally, but he wasn't and he sure wasn't going to be extradited.
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
Was anyone charged and tried for any crime involving 9/11?
Did the killing of al-Zawahiri or for that matter OBL make the world a safer place?
Did the killing of al-Zawahiri make the US safer in any measurable way?
Have any outside organizations not funded by the US or it's subsidiaries been able to verify that there was in fact no collateral damage from 2 hellfire missiles?
There are no kings inside the gates of eden