Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Over the weekend, Bernie Sanders had a rally shut down by a group of BLM protesters. I find the irony, and self-serving idiocy delicious there.

Looks like this "group" is pretty much just two people, who are known for being idiots. Looks like the main BLM group made it pretty clear what they thought about them calling out Sanders and asking him "what have you done for black people".

 Frazzled wrote:
They are going to build a bomb.

Israeli Intelligence says their not, which is saying something.

Unless they were just trying to embarrass Netanyahu... Which isn't an outlandish notion.

 d-usa wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Over the weekend, Bernie Sanders had a rally shut down by a group of BLM protesters. I find the irony, and self-serving idiocy delicious there.

Looks like this "group" is pretty much just two people, who are known for being idiots. Looks like the main BLM group made it pretty clear what they thought about them calling out Sanders and asking him "what have you done for black people".

One of them at least, appears to be a for hire protestor. Funny when Hilrary doesn't show up protestors crash the show.

I don't know what it is specifically but I think this election race looks fishy.

 Frazzled wrote:

If you belong to a religious subsect that believes in the very real pending Armaggedon and you want to trigger it off, how is this a bad thing?

Islamic eschatology, especially within the Twelver tradition, is extremely complicated. But one broadly consistent principle is that resurrection, and final judgment, will only come to pass after the emergence of The Madhi; and event signaled by great Muslim conquests. Prior to that*, all the traditional prohibitions against suicide and the wasting of Muslim lives apply.




*And claiming to be The Madhi, or that someone else is The Madhi, is viewed in much the same way as similar messianic declarations are viewed in Christianity.

 dogma wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

If you belong to a religious subsect that believes in the very real pending Armaggedon and you want to trigger it off, how is this a bad thing?

Islamic eschatology, especially within the Twelver tradition, is extremely complicated. But one broadly consistent principle is that resurrection, and final judgment, will only come to pass after the emergence of The Madhi; and event signaled by great Muslim conquests. Prior to that*, all the traditional prohibitions against suicide and the wasting of Muslim lives apply.




*And claiming to be The Madhi, or that someone else is The Madhi, is viewed in much the same way as similar messianic declarations are viewed in Christianity.

It is a quandary.

 BrotherGecko wrote:

One of them at least, appears to be a for hire protestor.

If true, that makes their actions make a bit more sense.

Funny story, Back when I was in school, I actually saw one of these "professional protesters" in Portland, OR. Or rather, I saw them on the news. I honestly don't remember the bill that was being protested, but it was over a "controversial" law that was trying to be passed. Anyhow, there was a "pro-" rally on a thursday, which was on the 5 o'clock news where I saw a very distinct hair do on this lady standing right at the front. Then, on Friday, there was an "anti-" rally, and I saw her again, this time her hair was slightly pulled up but still unmistakable

Ahh, if only social media had been around back then


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:

 dogma wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

If you belong to a religious subsect that believes in the very real pending Armaggedon and you want to trigger it off, how is this a bad thing?

Islamic eschatology, especially within the Twelver tradition, is extremely complicated. But one broadly consistent principle is that resurrection, and final judgment, will only come to pass after the emergence of The Madhi; and event signaled by great Muslim conquests. Prior to that*, all the traditional prohibitions against suicide and the wasting of Muslim lives apply.




*And claiming to be The Madhi, or that someone else is The Madhi, is viewed in much the same way as similar messianic declarations are viewed in Christianity.

It is a quandary.

So, what you're saying is that it's kind of like saying the "Z-word" in a zombie movie??

What?

 Frazzled wrote:
What?

You know... in serious zombie movies, no one is "allowed" to say the word zombie.

I mean, it's one thing to claim that you are "the Madhi", but to also have rules stating that others cannot claim that you are the Madhi seems a bit like the zombie movie thing.

I don't like anyone this time around, not that I ever like anyone anyway.

I'm voting PROHIBITION PARTY because feth you.

Ain't no party like a Prohibition party because a Prohibition party don't stock...liquor.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
What?

You know... in serious zombie movies, no one is "allowed" to say the word zombie.

I mean, it's one thing to claim that you are "the Madhi", but to also have rules stating that others cannot claim that you are the Madhi seems a bit like the zombie movie thing.

I hear Mahdi and I get images of giant sandworms.

Well, Dune was a big metaphor about oil and the middle east. Too bad nobody but geeks learned the lessons within it, though.

 BrotherGecko wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Over the weekend, Bernie Sanders had a rally shut down by a group of BLM protesters. I find the irony, and self-serving idiocy delicious there.

Looks like this "group" is pretty much just two people, who are known for being idiots. Looks like the main BLM group made it pretty clear what they thought about them calling out Sanders and asking him "what have you done for black people".

One of them at least, appears to be a for hire protestor. Funny when Hilrary doesn't show up protestors crash the show.

I don't know what it is specifically but I think this election race looks fishy.

I'm seeing this a lot today in my feed.

BLM Activist Who Shut Down Sanders is Radical Christian, Sarah Palin Supporter

 ProtoClone wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Over the weekend, Bernie Sanders had a rally shut down by a group of BLM protesters. I find the irony, and self-serving idiocy delicious there.

Looks like this "group" is pretty much just two people, who are known for being idiots. Looks like the main BLM group made it pretty clear what they thought about them calling out Sanders and asking him "what have you done for black people".

One of them at least, appears to be a for hire protestor. Funny when Hilrary doesn't show up protestors crash the show.

I don't know what it is specifically but I think this election race looks fishy.

I'm seeing this a lot today in my feed.

BLM Activist Who Shut Down Sanders is Radical Christian, Sarah Palin Supporter

From what I've seen the woman with the longer hair has protested in Seattle as a Palestinian not too long ago.

Also the pair of them apparently claim co-founding Seattle's BLM movement despite there being a BLM movement that predates theirs. They managed to create a FB page for their group while there is already a BLM Seattle page. Seemed like people were not happy with them co-opting their BLM movement. There is also the the original BLM movement leadership that had no idea that the protest was going to be staged.

I'm not big on conspiracy theory but with Soros funding BLM protestors, Bernie not accepting Soros's money and Hilary somehow escaping these protests and being Soros's girl you have to wonder a little.

Mix that with the Trump theories floating around and Hilary having a history of doing anything to achieve her goals and things get weirder lol.

 BrotherGecko wrote:

 ProtoClone wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Over the weekend, Bernie Sanders had a rally shut down by a group of BLM protesters. I find the irony, and self-serving idiocy delicious there.

Looks like this "group" is pretty much just two people, who are known for being idiots. Looks like the main BLM group made it pretty clear what they thought about them calling out Sanders and asking him "what have you done for black people".

One of them at least, appears to be a for hire protestor. Funny when Hilrary doesn't show up protestors crash the show.

I don't know what it is specifically but I think this election race looks fishy.

I'm seeing this a lot today in my feed.

BLM Activist Who Shut Down Sanders is Radical Christian, Sarah Palin Supporter

From what I've seen the woman with the longer hair has protested in Seattle as a Palestinian not too long ago.

Also the pair of them apparently claim co-founding Seattle's BLM movement despite there being a BLM movement that predates theirs. They managed to create a FB page for their group while there is already a BLM Seattle page. Seemed like people were not happy with them co-opting their BLM movement. There is also the the original BLM movement leadership that had no idea that the protest was going to be staged.

I'm not big on conspiracy theory but with Soros funding BLM protestors, Bernie not accepting Soros's money and Hilary somehow escaping these protests and being Soros's girl you have to wonder a little.

Mix that with the Trump theories floating around and Hilary having a history of doing anything to achieve her goals and things get weirder lol.

Found this article as well.
The two women who stormed Bernie Sanders’ stage are not members of #BlackLivesMatter

The part that stuck out to me the most was:
According to a group familiar with BLM operations on the ground in Seattle, Johnson and fellow protester Mara Jacqueline are “opportunists” from a group called Outside Agitators 206 who co-opted the BLM label — an easy thing to do considering that BLM is essentially a leaderless movement.

It does reek of some sort of political character assassination. Not only that, it confuses the image of the real BLM movement and causes more people to associate them in a negative way. My first thought was that they were trying to discredit the BLM by acting in this way.

Bernie would do well to not get in the way or walk away. Both course of actions only makes himself look bad in the bigger picture. He should have stuck it out and listened to them and then thanked them when he got on the mic, how ever long that would take.

Whether hired or rogue BLM members, they sought to sew confusion and draw attention.

I thought #blacklivesmatter was just a hashtag, didn't realize it was an organization.

Anything that becomes political will become organized, because someone somewhere is making money off it.

 Ahtman wrote:
I thought #blacklivesmatter was just a hashtag, didn't realize it was an organization.

In that second article they mentioned that BLM is an organization but one without a real leader and as a result of that you get incidents like the two women in question.

This is also a good article as to why this rogue version of the BLM is not gaining traction.

Black Lives Matter and The Failure to Build a Movement.

It seems to be loose associations of people rather than an organization. So people claiming BLM are paid by outside individuals to rabble rouse.

This whole election gives me the creeps.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
Well, Dune was a big metaphor about oil and the middle east. Too bad nobody but geeks learned the lessons within it, though.

Also religion but lets not go there......For I have Awaken the Sleeper and killed it (Sleeper Raid, Everquest, back in the day)

 BrotherGecko wrote:
It seems to be loose associations of people rather than an organization. So people claiming BLM are paid by outside individuals to rabble rouse.

This whole election gives me the creeps.

We can take those creeps away. Vote Wiener Dog 2016. A treat in every bowl!

 Frazzled wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:
It seems to be loose associations of people rather than an organization. So people claiming BLM are paid by outside individuals to rabble rouse.

This whole election gives me the creeps.

We can take those creeps away. Vote Wiener Dog 2016. A treat in every bowl!

If you can provide more entertainment then Madman Stumpin Trumpin then NO

In all serious though from what being said on some media news outlet that the more likely reason that Trump leading in the polls is that majority being polled are a bit tired of career politicians. I'm one of those who is tired of "career politicians"

I am VERY tired of career politicians, especially incumbent congress critters with decades of congress crittership to their names.

Having said that, I watched the debate and I was much less than impressed with Trump. He comes across as petty and petulant to me. Even if you chuck out the fact that politically he is not near the conservative candidate I would prefer he just does not seem to have a grasp on what the term 'presidential' means when used as an adjective describing a person and not a hotel suite.

I can see him using the IRS or NSA to harass/dig up dirt on people who piss him off, and frankly I don't care if you go with a D or an R by your name, that is wrong.

The current 'Last Name Paul' candidate/savior of Libertarians everywhere also comes across as petty and petulant. I like his politics better than Trump's but 'spoiled child' is how he comes off to me.

 dogma wrote:

 whembly wrote:

Oh c'mon man.

The defense for Obama ya'll trying to spin is getting nauseating.

I'm not spinning anything. I'm pointing out that your characterization of Obama's words is not reflective of what Obama actually said. Stating that one group of people has found common cause with another group of people does not indicate that the speaker believes that they are the same, or even necessarily comparable.

Really? Here's his double-down on CNN's interview:


Uh... no... not a mischaracterization. It's a tactic to paint the oppositions as an extreme viewpoint, as it's agreed that the hardliners in Iran are far away extreme themselves.



The oppositions are for multitude of reasons... namely:
a) very pro-Israel
b) the idea of "negotiating" with a terrorist state with US servicemen's blood on their hands
c) 'rewarding' Iran for relinquishing held money (billions)
d) gakky deal all round


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:
How is it remote. They are going to build a bomb.

They need a shipping container or just a large box depending on how big it is.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:
How is it remote. They are going to build a bomb.

They need a shipping container or just a large box depending on how big it is.

How do you prove they did it?
Would any one believe you?
Would the religious leaders care?

If a nuke or dirty bomb is detonated... the intelligence agencies (world wide) can figure out the source of the nuclear materials. They can figure out where it's likely mined and estrapolate the source.

And?

 Frazzled wrote:
And?

And then we draw another Red Line since the one about nuking us was crossed.

And we'll be Very Serious about the new Red Line!

Thats my fear.
Alternatively Israel attacks and the world blames Israel for being the aggressor.

 CptJake wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
And?

And then we draw another Red Line since the one about nuking us was crossed.

And we'll be Very Serious about the new Red Line!

What difference does it make????

Oh damn... that was quick ya'll.

 whembly wrote:

 dogma wrote:

 whembly wrote:

Oh c'mon man.

The defense for Obama ya'll trying to spin is getting nauseating.

I'm not spinning anything. I'm pointing out that your characterization of Obama's words is not reflective of what Obama actually said. Stating that one group of people has found common cause with another group of people does not indicate that the speaker believes that they are the same, or even necessarily comparable.

Really? Here's his double-down on CNN's interview:

Spoiler:

Uh... no... not a mischaracterization. It's a tactic to paint the oppositions as an extreme viewpoint, as it's agreed that the hardliners in Iran are far away extreme themselves.



The oppositions are for multitude of reasons... namely:
a) very pro-Israel
b) the idea of "negotiating" with a terrorist state with US servicemen's blood on their hands
c) 'rewarding' Iran for relinquishing held money (billions)
d) gakky deal all round

Did you actually watch and listen to the video? He's not factually wrong.
It's simple logic:
Group A opposes a thing + Group B opposes same thing = common cause

The reasons for opposing it are irrelevant to that equation, the simple fact of opposition is what is relevant to the comparison. Was it a bad choice of words, intended solely to provoke and antagonize? YES, but it still does not change the fact that many of those opposing the deal did so before the deal was completed, before they even knew the details, solely because those politicians are in the pockets of special interest groups.

 whembly wrote:

Uh... no... not a mischaracterization. It's a tactic to paint the oppositions as an extreme viewpoint, as it's agreed that the hardliners in Iran are far away extreme themselves.

Yes, that is indeed what Obama is trying to do, but that it isn't how you originally characterized what he said. You stated that he called the Republicans "Iranian Hardliners", when he in fact merely stated that the GOP had found common cause with that group (ie. reflexively opposing the agreement). As has been pointed out these are two entirely different comments, with entirely different meanings.

 whembly wrote:

The oppositions are for multitude of reasons... namely:
a) very pro-Israel
b) the idea of "negotiating" with a terrorist state with US servicemen's blood on their hands
c) 'rewarding' Iran for relinquishing held money (billions)
d) gakky deal all round.

Only A has any diplomatic significance, B and C amount to political posturing in an election year, while D is nothing more than a nondescript melange of positions taken by others. Additionally, it should be noted that the focus for the Republican opposition has centered on B and C, with D only being trotted out by politicians who need to pass a litmus test and lazy observers who have very strong feelings, but very little information.