Department of Homeland Security? Or Department of Orthodoxy Enforcement?

[The Question]

I read the article. It's sound and fury, signifying absolutely nothing. Much like most of your posts.

And there we are: It was Option B, just as I said it was several posts back.

 

[LotusBud]

And there we are: It was Option B, just as I said it was several posts back.

You're posturing and misrepresenting reality. You do not actually know what happened and you are just joining in with the general righty tendency to catastrophize fucking every little thing that doesn't support you in your quest for some sort of faux ideal of liberty. A quest that makes you feel self important in a mutant sort of way. You are a pathetic construct.

 

[Admin.]

I don't 'claim' anything. On the other hand, I won't hesitate to point out when you're arguing based on partisanship rather than based on principle, which is basically all I've ever seen you do.

Government suppression of dissent is wrong. Doesn't matter who in government is doing it, doesn't matter why. It's always wrong and should never be tolerated.

"I don't claim anything, but...................etc etc etc yadda yadda yadda and so on!"

 

[The Question]

You're posturing and misrepresenting reality.

How am I misrepresenting anything? I presented an article; you demand specifics which were not provided, and based on not receiving those specifics, hand-wave what was presented.

Here's some more reading you can pretend to have done:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Jack]

His brilliance? Are you joking, jack? He blows more smoke than almost anyone I've ever seen, then claims brilliance. It's a miracle he can function day to day.

Well, I've known him a lot longer than you. I haven't known you a long time, but I get you and will enjoy getting to know you more. I'm also not him and am my own person/persona. Who I like and who I dont is not tribal like X,Prowler,Hitler. etc. It's based on YOU.

Yep, he blows smoke, I agree. Edgar's and my exchanges are quite legendary i some instances so yeah, that's my opinion. Like what he says or violently disagree I do thin he's brilliant.

He's a hell of a writer. His grasp of the foundation of what drives his posts are remarkable.

But he is an irritating asshole a lot, sarcastic and condescending. Guess it just comes with the package. I notice you don't have any issues going toe to toe with him and he responds to you, so I guess he's "listening" but that's not my concern.

Edgar brings a meal to the dinner table every evening, for better or worse.

 

[LotusBud]

How am I misrepresenting anything? I presented an article; you demand specifics which were not provided, and based on not receiving those specifics, hand-wave what was presented.

Here's some more reading you can pretend to have done:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I'm talking about your take on the article, you obfuscator. I'm not going to read any more right-wing rants. When I can find a factual article I'll read it.

 

[Admin.]

I read the article. It's sound and fury, signifying absolutely nothing. Much like most of your posts.

To me it read like a Supermarket Tabloid, that is always a red flag to me. The Law Firm filing suit on her behalf is a rabid right wing anti Gay and Anti freedom for woman muckraking law firm.


The Thomas More Society is a conservative

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

based in

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The group has been engaged in many "

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

" issues, promoting its

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

beliefs through litigation.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The society filed cases as part of Donald Trump's

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, in which Trump was defeated.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

...and they're election deniers, what else do you need to know?

 

[LotusBud]

Well, I've known him a lot longer than you. I haven't known you a long time, but I get you and will enjoy getting to know you more. I'm also not him and am my own person/persona. Who I like and who I dont is not tribal like X,Prowler,Hitler. etc. It's based on YOU.

Yep, he blows smoke, I agree. Edgar's and my exchanges are quite legendary i some instances so yeah, that's my opinion. Like what he says or violently disagree I do thin he's brilliant.

He's a hell of a writer. His grasp of the foundation of what drives his posts are remarkable.

But he is an irritating asshole a lot, sarcastic and condescending. Guess it just comes with the package. I notice you don't have any issues going toe to toe with him and he responds to you, so I guess he's "listening" but that's not my concern.

Edgar brings a meal to the dinner table every evening, for better or worse.

He's a hell of a bullshitter. I also like people based on their individuality. I'm pals with many a rightie. Obfuscator in Chief Courier will probably not be one of them. He is nasty and judgmental. I don't like him at this point. I do like you.

 

[Jack]

Well, I've known him a lot longer than you. I haven't known you a long time, but I get you and will enjoy getting to know you more. I'm also not him and am my own person/persona. Who I like and who I dont is not tribal like X,Prowler,Hitler. etc. It's based on YOU.

Yep, he blows smoke, I agree. Edgar's and my exchanges are quite legendary i some instances so yeah, that's my opinion. Like what he says or violently disagree I do thin he's brilliant.

He's a hell of a writer. His grasp of the foundation of what drives his posts are remarkable.

But he is an irritating asshole a lot, sarcastic and condescending. Guess it just comes with the package. I notice you don't have any issues going toe to toe with him and he responds to you, so I guess he's "listening" but that's not my concern.

Edgar brings a meal to the dinner table every evening, for better or worse.

@George from Pizza Hut there, I took that half second you were bitching about to correct all the grammatical errors/spelling/syntax, etc.

Would love to find out more about you. You seem to be an anomaly here.

Ignore my petulant demands when I was feeling insulted.

 

[LotusBud]

@George from Pizza Hut there, I took that half second you were bitching about to correct all the grammatical errors/spelling/syntax, etc.

Would love to find out more about you. You seem to be an anomaly here.

Ignore my petulant demands when I was feeling insulted.

????

 

[The Question]

I'm talking about your take on the article, you obfuscator. I'm not going to read any more right-wing rants. When I can find a factual article I'll read it.

You mean when you can find an article that supports your preconceived position on the matter. Reason does not produce 'right-wing rants', unless you're so fringe left that anything not featured in the CPUSA newsletter is 'right-wing' to you.

 

[Lily]

I've read a couple of things now, I don't understand what the military did to her. It's not clear to me what she alleges was done to her.

 

[Jack]

I do like you.

Me as well. I like you. We are kindred in many ways (imo) Don't let my liking/acknowledging/tolerating of Edgar affect that.

he and I are old friends/bookends. As well as adversaries. In that regard he is much more tolerant of my outbursts than I am of his.

 

[The Question]

To me it read like a Supermarket Tabloid, that is always a red flag to me. The Law Firm filing suit on her behalf is a rabid right wing anti Gay and Anti freedom for woman muckraking law firm.


The Thomas More Society is a conservative

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

based in

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Ad hominem. Facts are facts regardless of who states them.

 

[LotusBud]

You mean when you can find an article that supports your preconceived position on the matter. Reason does not produce 'right-wing rants', unless you're so fringe left that anything not featured in the CPUSA newsletter is 'right-wing' to you.

You don't get to tell me what I mean, ever. I have asked for facts, you fuck. You know, her actual posts. If I could see them, and then the actual chain of events after, I would draw my own conclusions, unlike you, who buy into all the right-wing hysteria with none of the facts.

 

[LotusBud]

Me as well. I like you. We are kindred in many ways (imo) Don't let my liking/acknowledging/tolerating of Edgar affect that.

he and I are old friends/bookends. As well as adversaries. In that regard he is much more tolerant of my outbursts than I am of his.

Enjoy him. I do not.

 

[Jack]

????

That was to @George from Pizza Hut...She (he?) and I are having an exchange. I was bringing her attention to something.

 

[Lily]

Ad hominem. Facts are facts regardless of who states them.

That's crap and we all know it.

 

[Lily]

You don't get to tell me what I mean, ever. I have asked for facts, you fuck. You know, her actual posts. If I could see them, and then the actual chain of events after, I would draw my own conclusions, unlike you, who buy into all the right-wing hysteria with none of the facts.

She seems to have been outing the school and the activities to a larger audience over a school activity she disagreed with. I've seen the things the kids drew, hardly perverse, unless flags and non-pornographic words are "perverse". Some families felt unsafe after what she did, so her activities were reported as a safety concern.

How is that the government coming down on her?

 

[LotusBud]

Ad hominem. Facts are facts regardless of who states them.

Since when does this type of law firm deal in facts?

 

[Admin.]

I've read a couple of things now, I don't understand what the military did to her. It's not clear to me what she alleges was done to her.

She doxxed a bunch of people that disagreed with her views on a public FB page, an Officer of the local base that sends kids to the school in question asked that her incendiary doxxing be removed to protect the safety of his people.

It's Cat 5 Hurricane in a thimble.

 

[The Question]

I've read a couple of things now, I don't understand what the military did to her. It's not clear to me what she alleges was done to her.

From the Reason piece:

Reading's post quickly drew the ire of military personnel at nearby Joint Base McGuire-Dix Lakehurst, some of whom had children at the School. Major Chris Schilling was especially fixated on the post. In an email to local parents, Schilling complained that Reading's post was "filled with too many logical fallacies to list." He accused her of "try[ing] to over sexualize things" to "give her arguments more power," insisting that she did "not hav[e] the proper resources and/or education on the matter." Schilling was "very concern[ed]" that Reading served as a local school board member.

Writing from his personal email account, Schilling also worried that Reading would "stir[ ] up right wing extremists." He raised this alarm in another email to parents, warning that Reading's post "could needlessly injure the school and others in the community." He encouraged parents to speak out against Reading and to "keep the pressure on until her disruptive and dangerous actions cease."
The controversy grew when Schilling elevated his concerns to the leadership at Joint Base McGuire-Dix Lakehurst. Now writing from his military email account, Schilling cautioned Major Nathaniel Lesher that Reading's post could "give[ ] a road map to anyone looking to make a statement, political, ideological, or even violent." In response, Major Lesher promised to forward the issue to Robert Duff, the Chief of Police for Hanover Township. After Reading's post gained modest traction online, Schilling once again contacted Lesher, who vowed to "push this again" to Duff..
Instead of de-escalating the matter to the Hanover Township Police, the situation intensified when more military personnel got involved. Air Force Antiterrorism Program Manager Joseph Vazquez wrote that Reading's post "really gets under my skin for sure." He assured Major Schilling that he was "sending this to our partners with NJ Office of Homeland Security and Preparedness as well as the NJ State Police Regional Operations Intelligence Center," which "keep an eye on far right/hate groups." And Lieutenant Colonel Megan Hall advised two local school superintendents, including Defendant Helen Payne, that Reading's posts "have created a concern for the safety of our military children and families." She worried that they "could become targets from extremist personnel/groups."
Major Schilling reported his colleagues' involvement to parents in the community. In an email sent from his personal account, Schilling explained that he had been "actively working with the base leadership over the past few days" and that "they are working to support us in our efforts."
Schilling's efforts bore fruit. On November 30, Chief Duff successfully convinced Nicole Stouffer, the administrator of "NJ Fresh Faced Schools," to remove Reading's post from the page. As Stouffer described the episode,

While professing that he was not actually ordering me to take the post down, Duff intimidated me into doing so by telling me that the post, and Mrs. Reading, were under investigation by Homeland Security because of the supposed potential for the post to cause a school shooting like the one that had occurred at Uvalde Texas, or a mass shooting like the one that had occurred at a gay nightclub in Colorado. Duff told me that the "threat" posed by this innocuous post was such he had had to provide extra security for the North Hanover schools because of the threat of violence. He was clearly and unequivocally pressuring me to censor the post while trying to pretend that he was not doing so.

Schilling used the levers of government to censor a private citizen.

As previously stated, government censorship is unacceptable no matter who in government is doing it or to whom it's being done.

At least: On principle. Someone operating on partisan motives, on the other hand, would likely be just fine with government suppression of free speech, so long as it's being done to "the other guys."

 

[Admin.]

Ad hominem. Facts are facts regardless of who states them.

OK Clarence Darrow, show us on this doll where everybody was mean to the Law Student, former School Board Member, and Mom of Liberty.

 

[Lily]

She doxxed a bunch of people that disagreed with her views on a public FB page, an Officer of the local base that sends kids to the school in question asked that her incendiary doxxing be removed to protect the safety of his people.

It's Cat 5 Hurricane in a thimble.

Yeah, that's what I got out of it. Edgar Friendless posts as if J. Edgar Hoover was resurrected and oppressing this woman personally.

A crock of shit.

 

[The Question]

I have asked for facts, you fuck.

And you've been provided them, then promptly ignored them, you rusty hubcap.

 

[The Question]

She doxxed a bunch of people that disagreed with her views on a public FB page

She didn't dox anyone.

 

[Lily]

From the Reason piece:


Schilling used the levers of government to censor a private citizen.

As previously stated, government censorship is unacceptable no matter who in government is doing it or to whom it's being done.

At least: On principle. Someone operating on partisan motives, on the other hand, would likely be just fine with government suppression of free speech, so long as it's being done to "the other guys."

So anytime someone contacts the authorities, any authority, we're using the levers of government to oppress people?

Well, we should get rid of 9-1-1 dispatch. I mean really, if you feel unsafe how dare you report it!

 

[Jack]

Yeah, that's what I got out of it. Edgar Friendless posts as if J. Edgar Hoover was resurrected and oppressing this woman personally.

A crock of shit.

Good point.

 

[LotusBud]

OK Clarence Darrow, show us on this doll where everybody was mean to the Law Student, former School Board Member, and Mom of Liberty.

He posts bullshit, then gets all huffy when everyone doesn't buy it. I am sooooooooooooo sick of this kind of poster.

 

[Jack]

She didn't dox anyone.

No they doxxed her IIRC in response to her complaints. Isn't that the premise to this thread?