A woman and her friend - living in Montana - were just out to buy groceries when a Border Patrol Agent asked them for ID - just because they were speaking Spanish. They showed ID but after 17 minutes the officer still had their ID, so they asked for it to be returned. It took another 18 minutes before they were allowed to do. The women sued for unlawful detention. The woman in the video also recorded the latter part of the incident and posted it on social media.
The officer’s behaviour in itself is bad enough - a sign of the obsession with illegal immigrants. Yet, since posting the video and launching the lawsuit, the woman has received so much harassment that she felt that she had to return to Texas.
You can find similar reports as well as video from the walkout on Fox news if it would be more believable to you. The issue was the announcement at the beginning that he would not have time for Q&A which angered some in the crowd. Also points out some infighting amongst factions within the hard right on the direction that movement will go.
You doubt most true things that don't comport with your worldview. In this case you can watch it happening. This one is edited down to just the key portions:
This one is an MSNBC news report. At one point there's video of the audience of Trump supporters shouting "Q&A, Q&A" in unison. Apparently the cancelling of the Q&A session was not popular:
Some on the Right are quick to call out Electoral Fraud when they don’t like the outcome of a vote (e.g. Hilary Clinton winning the popular vote over Donald Trump). But the evidence is rarely, if ever forthcoming.
The Right are quick to call for voter ID checks, which would make it harder to vote. But the evidence that such restrictions are justified seems to be absent.
When it comes to securing voting machines - which should be far less controversial - the Right tend to vote the measures down.
And when it comes to proven cases of electoral fraud - guess which side it tends to be. What a surprise!
It is a rational reaction to overpopulation, it doesn't mean it will continue until there is no population. When populations exceed the carrying capacity of their ecology, the population adjusts by reducing population.
I think he means, and I would agree, that what it does to nation states is problematic to their survival. Japan is having a rough go of it and it doesn't take an economist to see how an inverted pyramid with a declining working class can realistically sustain a growing aging population.
China has tried to right the ship by lifting their one-child (male, only) policy. Except there's now a generation of males who have no suitors of the same age because they were systematically exterminated.
It's not only women declining to have children, but men as well, often choosing smaller families than their spouses would like.
This has become very popular among Western societies. In terms of overall population it certainly could be problematic for ecological reasons to not diminish the population. In the shorter term (50 year periods) the decline in population could be bad. The US has been able to buffer against it through immigration. Japan has remained insular and isolationist, to a fault.
Even with the drop in population among many nations, the Malthusian population curve is still increasing. Obviously there is a limit to what the Earth can sustain. Its tough. In either direction there will be existential problems.
"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine
quote:Trump Jr.'s appearance was marked by an argument between him and the audience over why he would not take questions, The Guardian newspaper reported. Trump was greeted with shouts of "USA! USA!" when he first appeared on the stage of a lecture hall, but members of the audience eventually turned to louder, openly hostile chants of "Q and A! Q and A!" after they were told he would not take questions, the newspaper reported.
The Guardian said that Trump Jr. told the audience that taking questions from the floor risked creating soundbites that left-wing social media posters would abuse and distort.
quote:But the appearance backfired when his own supporters, diehard Make America Great Again conservatives, raised their voices most loudly in protest and ended up drowning him out barely 20 minutes into an event scheduled to last two hours.
The audience was angry that Trump Jr and his girlfriend, Kimberly Guilfoyle, would not take questions. The loud shouts of USA! USA! that greeted Trump when he first appeared on the stage of a university lecture hall to promote his book Triggered: How The Left Thrives on Hate and Wants to Silence Us quickly morphed into even louder, openly hostile chants of Q and A! Q and A!
Sorry this is just too fishy. Are you unaware of all the leftist infiltrations of conservative events over the last few years?
Oh gosh, I guess we aren't allowed to talk about all that at EvC are we? Nope, can't use the word "Leftist" or anything that identifies the Left as the evil force it is in today's world. Nope.;l
Fox News evidently trusted the Guardian enough that they passed its reporting on to their own readers. What criteria are you applying to determine the trustworthiness of a source, besides whether or not it pleases you?
Sorry this is just too fishy. Are you unaware of all the leftist infiltrations of conservative events over the last few years?
Pretty much.
Oh gosh, I guess we aren't allowed to talk about all that at EvC are we? Nope, can't use the word "Leftist" or anything that identifies the Left as the evil force it is in today's world. Nope.
I think just engaging in discussion instead of excoriation would be nice.
Actual reporting from the mainstream press has to be better than your prejudices. Especially as you know nothing about the background to the event and don’t seem interested in it.
Thinking about it the Right’s rejection of accurate reporting is another count against them.
quote:Sorry this is just too fishy. Are you unaware of all the leftist infiltrations of conservative events over the last few years?
I bet you aren’t aware of many actual cases of that,
And I’ve seen a number of reports of conflicts within the Right involving Fuentes and his supporters. Why is it surprising that it would spill over into a book launch ?
Especially when their purpose in coming to the event was being thwarted.
What criteria are you applying to determine the trustworthiness of a source, besides whether or not it pleases you?
One reason why I by and large trust the new York Times and Washington Post is because I was taught that having accurate sources was a demand by the editors of these publications. Some of the smaller and more extreme news services are more interested in gaining and keeping an audience.
I suppose that theoretically we all are charged to question everything--especially in today's world. There is no reason to doubt a reputable source, however. Otherwise what ends up happening is what I have mentioned before: A Global War of Ideas and Ideology. Do you see this happening, Percy or am I being delusional?
Percy writes:
I think just engaging in discussion instead of excoriation would be nice.
I had to look that word up. Do we tend to pick at each others skin?
Edited by Thugpreacha, : No reason given.
Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " ~"We, humans, are engaged in an ongoing war of ideologies. I see it in this microcosm of EvC Forum just as I see it in the governments and attitudes of people throughout the world. Take your pick: Oppression or Seduction . "~Thugpreacha
You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
As the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, so the denial of God is the height of foolishness. ? R.C. Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith
™ Version 4.2
