The San Jose Terrorist Attacks

[Vigilante]

Conservative Review ^ | 6-3-2016 | Phil Shiver
Mark Levin came out firing in response to the disgusting street riots in San Jose last night outside a Donald Trump rally. The protesters were carrying Mexican flags, burning American flags, and assaulting Trump supporters as well as police officers. Levin said, at this point, its not only an attack on the right, or on Trump, but "an attack on America." Levin spent the first 10 minutes of his radio program absolutely eviscerating the rioters...AUDIO at link!

They should be more bitched out. They should be JAILED, and the Mayor should be JAILED, for not jailing them.

THIS brings a smile to my face...Fighting back where it could actually have some MONETARY consequences!

twitter.com/Cernovich ^ | 1:22 PM - 4 Jun 2016 | Mike Cernovich ‏@Cernovich
We are actively looking for plaintiffs to sue the city of San Jose for failure to protect its people. Mike Cernovich (@Cernovich) June 4, 2016

 

[Vigilante]

out of 50 states, why can't there be at least one that's just for white people and at least one that's just for black people, then there is a place to resort whenever issues come up. so what if it's racist, people are racist, it's the nature of people, just have to accept it, can't force anyone to be something they're not otherwise no one will ever be good enough to satisfy whatever ideals of perfection that the libtards have. just a thought, anyways.

The ignorance and stupidity of this post is as ignorant and as stupid as the thread premise.

Every American has the fundamental Constitutional right to move freely about the country, live wherever he so desires, and to expect his rights and protected liberties to be acknowledged and respected regardless his jurisdiction of residence.

That conservatives have contempt for this fundamental right comes as no surprise.

The black shyster has turned into a sheep and the Manchurian muslim's favorite play thing!....Everything that isn't subject to the approval of the Commie/socialist is ignorant and stupid.... kettle<>pot!

 

[protectionist]

The ignorance and stupidity of this post is as ignorant and as stupid as the thread premise.

Every American has the fundamental Constitutional right to move freely about the country, live wherever he so desires, and to expect his rights and protected liberties to be acknowledged and respected regardless his jurisdiction of residence.

That conservatives have contempt for this fundamental right comes as no surprise.

But in doing that, one LOSES the right to live in a culturally, homogeneous environment. So it looks like you are the one who is advocating the more RESTRICTIVE scenario. Ozone's suggestion allows TWO OPTIONS >> for both integration AND segregation to be OPTIONS for folks (of any race) who want them.

On the other hand, your approach only allows for ONE option > integration. By imposing your limited scenario on everyone, you are restricting liberty.

It's just like here in Florida, when families with children complained that apartment complexes were adult only, and thus were discriminating against families with children. So they passed a law banning that discrimination. In so doing, those legislators then became the discriminators, against all those people who wish to live in a child-free environment (AKA adult only environment)

 

[protectionist]

THIS brings a smile to my face...Fighting back where it could actually have some MONETARY consequences!

twitter.com/Cernovich ^ | 1:22 PM - 4 Jun 2016 | Mike Cernovich &#8207;@Cernovich
We are actively looking for plaintiffs to sue the city of San Jose for failure to protect its people. Mike Cernovich (@Cernovich) June 4, 2016

Absolutely. Don't let them get away with it. Make them PAY.

 

[JimBowie1958]

NewsBusters ^ | June 3, 2016 | P.J. Gladnick
Esquire magazine writer Charles Pierce must be in a state of panic after the events following yesterday's Donald Trump rally in San Jose, California when anti-Trump protesters violently attacked Trump supporters. Last week Pierce wrote that such attacks only help Trump, make him that much STRONGER, and that has him extremely worried. Unfortunately for him, even some his fellow liberal journalists such as Emmett Rensin, who was today suspended from Vox, still haven't got a clue on just how incredibly counter-productive such riots are.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/06/anti-trump-riots-and-the-war-over-liberalism.html
But not only is violence unlikely to prevent his election as a practical matter (it makes Trump a figure of sympathy, and at any rate, his supporters are far more heavily armed). It would also be a disaster as a moral matter. Suppose that Trump’s election could be prevented by breaking up his speeches and intimidating his supporters. Such a “victory” would actually constitute the blow to democracy it purports to stop, eroding the long-standing norm that elections should be settled at the ballot box rather than through street fighting.

To be sure, the advocates of violence against Trump would disagree with this conclusion. And that disagreement lies at the heart of a deeper ideological fissure that has opened up on the left over the last couple of years. Liberalism sees political rights as a positive good — rights for one are rights for all. “Democracy” means political rights for every citizen. The far left defines democracy as the triumph of the subordinate class over the privileged class. Political rights only matter insofar as they are exercised by the oppressed. The oppressor has no rights.

“Free speech, while an indispensable principle of democracy, is not an abstract value,” as one fairly representative left-wing polemicist explained. “It is carried out in the context of power disparities, and has real effects on peoples’ lives. We can defend freedom of speech — particularly from state crackdowns — while also resolutely opposing speech that scapegoats the most vulnerable and oppressed people in our society.” A liberal sees Trump’s ability to deliver a speech before supporters as a fundamental political right worth defending. A radical sees this “right” as coming at the expense of subordinate classes, and thus not worth protecting.

I started writing about this resurgent phenomenon at the beginning of last year. The pushback on the left has evolved from an outright denial that any such trend exists to an acknowledgement that it may exist, but it’s just the antics of some goofy college kids. But the campus was merely the staging ground for most displays of left-wing ideological repression because it is one of the few places the illiberal left has the power to block speakers and writers deemed oppressive.

The now-routine appearance of this illiberal ideology on the presidential-campaign stage (previous displays having occurred in places like Chicagoand Arizona) ought to sharpen the irreparable contradiction between two styles of politics. Does the future of the Democratic Party and the progressive movement lie in building a revolution, or in the continued work of (small-d) democratic liberalism?

 

[Little-Acorn]

Definition of "Domestic Terrorism":
Under current United States law, acts of domestic terrorism are those which:
.......(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
.......(B) appear to be intended—
...............(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
...............(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
...............(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
.......(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States."[2]

(from "FDsys - Browse Public and Private Laws" (PDF). Frwebgate.access.gpo.gov.)

Bingo. The San Jose leftist thugs and women-beaters fulfill the definition of "Domestic Terrorists" perfectly.

 

[Vigilante]

Definition of "Domestic Terrorism":
Under current United States law, acts of domestic terrorism are those which:
.......(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
.......(B) appear to be intended—
...............(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
...............(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
...............(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
.......(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States."[2]

(from "FDsys - Browse Public and Private Laws" (PDF). Frwebgate.access.gpo.gov.)

Bingo. The San Jose leftist thugs and women-beaters fulfill the definition of "Domestic Terrorists" perfectly.

Wonder when there will be a BEHEADING, as they seem to be taking lessons from the muslim scum.....of interest....

Cybercast News Service ^ | June 3, 2016 | 5:44 AM EDT | Susan Jones
The U.S. State Department’s annual Country Reports on Terrorism 2015, released on Thursday, counts 11,774 terrorist attacks in 92 countries last year, but it says that’s an improvement over 2014. “The total number of terrorist attacks in 2015 decreased by 13% and total deaths due to terrorist attacks (28,328) decreased by 14%, compared to 2014,” the report says. “This was largely due to fewer attacks and deaths in Iraq, Pakistan, and Nigeria. This represents the first decline in total terrorist attacks and deaths worldwide since 2012.” […] The State Department report notes that the global terrorist threat “continued to evolve...

 

[Ozone]

out of 50 states, why can't there be at least one that's just for white people and at least one that's just for black people, then there is a place to resort whenever issues come up. so what if it's racist, people are racist, it's the nature of people, just have to accept it, can't force anyone to be something they're not otherwise no one will ever be good enough to satisfy whatever ideals of perfection that the libtards have. just a thought, anyways.

The ignorance and stupidity of this post is as ignorant and as stupid as the thread premise.

Every American has the fundamental Constitutional right to move freely about the country, live wherever he so desires, and to expect his rights and protected liberties to be acknowledged and respected regardless his jurisdiction of residence.

That conservatives have contempt for this fundamental right comes as no surprise.

this is the libtard mindset at work, the feigned moral high ground when insulting others. the egalitarian elitist, absolutely racist against anything it deems as racist, the idea that somehow it's more evolved because it believes in equality. the difference between us, buddy, i can survive your gulag.

 

[Dale Smith]

San Jose was terrorism but Tim McVeigh wasn't?

Watch this and then tell me that McVeigh and "John Doe #2" did this alone and that your beloved "gubermint" wasn't not only complicit in the attack but covered it up and killed people like OKC officer Terry Yeakey that knew the official story was a load of shit. I personally met with former Brigadier General Benton Partin in August of 2004 and he was emphatic that the OKC bombing had planted explosives in the columns. He is an expert when it comes to explosions and their causes. He was sent to Beirut in 1983 to investigate the bombing of the Marines...so I guess you could say that he knows more than you.

 

[Ozone]

San Jose was terrorism but Tim McVeigh wasn't?

so was tim mcveigh using mexicans to terrorize americans in san jose or something?

 

[Clementine]

I'm sure these parents think it's so adorable to see their little girl spouting such ugly things. They must be teaching her to be a future thug for hire. She is saying they are going to kill Trump. These parents don't deserve to have children since they are going to raise her to be full of hate. No wonder generations of people haven't elevated. They pass along the same ignorant mindset.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

LogCabinRepublicans ^ | 12:14 PM - 3 Jun 2016 | LogCabinRepublicans
Last night in San Jose, CA. an angry mob attacked a gay Latino Trump supporter & Log Cabin Republicans member Juan Hernandez pic.

You people hate gays, so what's the problem?

 

[Yarddog]

If the wetbacks are so proud of their heritage, why are they here instead of going back to their country and protesting for change?

They would get doggs and rubber hoses back in Mexico, thrown in prison for a year before they could talk to a Lawyer, the list goes on and on. They never had it better than here

 

[Clementine]

They would get doggs and rubber hoses back in Mexico, thrown in prison for a year before they could talk to a Lawyer, the list goes on and on. They never had it better than here

If they have it better here, why are they still waving Mexican flags while stomping and burning ours?

 

[Yarddog]

They would get doggs and rubber hoses back in Mexico, thrown in prison for a year before they could talk to a Lawyer, the list goes on and on. They never had it better than here

If they have it better here, why are they still waving Mexican flags while stomping and burning ours?

because they have no respect, not all Mexicans obviously. mostly just young punks high on feeling part of something important

 

[Little-Acorn]

You people hate gays, so what's the problem?

You can tell when these liberal fanatics are losing debate after debate. The volume and desperation of their lies keeps increasing without bound. It's the only thing they know, once people stop accepting what they say.