B-Man Posted February 15 Author Share Posted February 15 THAT’S NOT A HUNGER STRIKE. THAT’S A WEIGHT LOSS FAST: This is why I can’t take college activists seriously. https://tomknighton.substack.com/p/this-is-why-i-cant-take-college-activists Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted February 15 Share Posted February 15 1 hour ago, B-Man said: THAT’S NOT A HUNGER STRIKE. THAT’S A WEIGHT LOSS FAST: This is why I can’t take college activists seriously. https://tomknighton.substack.com/p/this-is-why-i-cant-take-college-activists I go on a "hunger strike" every day. For 4 extra hours. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 28 Author Share Posted February 28 The “Airman” Who Set Himself on Fire for Hamas was Antifa Ex-Cult Member by Daniel Greenfield If you had told the average person that an anarchist or an airman had set himself on fire to protest Israel’s campaign against Islamic terrorists, you would get two very different reactions. Unsurprisingly the media led with the data point most likely to produce a favorable reaction. And Aaron Bushnell cynically played the same game, wearing (the wrong) uniform to his Hamas suicide attempt rather than the Antifa red in which he had been previously photographed. The Washington Post gets around to admitting that Bushnell was an “anarchist”. https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/02/26/israeli-embassy-airman-fire-death-gaza/ https://www.frontpagemag.com/the-airman-who-set-himself-on-fire-for-hamas-was-antifa-ex-cult-member/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 3 Author Share Posted March 3 Jill gets heckled. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 5 Author Share Posted March 5 Supreme Court wants $19.4 million in new funds to protect the justices and their homes Maureen Groppe, USA TODAY The Supreme Court has asked Congress for an extra $19.4 million for security to deal with “evolving risks” and a change in how the justices’ homes are protected, according to the office that administers the federal courts system. The office’s 2025 budget request for the Supreme Court includes 33 new positions to boost protection for the nine justices as threats against the judiciary have increased in recent years. “Ongoing threat assessments indicated that there are evolving risks that require continuous protection,” the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts wrote in its request to Congress. Increased funds are also needed to allow the Supreme Court Police to take over around the clock protection of the justices’ residences from the U.S. Marshals Service, the office said. https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-wants-19-4-165724843.html 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 8 Author Share Posted March 8 Toss their asses in jail ! . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 8 Author Share Posted March 8 https://twitter.com/ratlpolicy/status/1765906102015676760 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 8 Author Share Posted March 8 YEP. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 Looks like they need to start putting all paintings and sculptures behind/in glass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 8 Author Share Posted March 8 Just now, Doc said: Looks like they need to start putting all paintings and sculptures protesters behind/in glass. My two cents. . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 16 minutes ago, B-Man said: My two cents. That as well. If only. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 8 Author Share Posted March 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 16 Author Share Posted March 16 Federal Judge Nails DOJ for Giving Pass to Antifa While Selectively Prosecuting Trump Supporters VICTORIA TAFT To understand what's at stake, let's take you back. At UC Berkeley in 2017, Antifa and their local black bloc franchisees set fires and rioted to prevent Milo Yiannopoulos from speaking on campus. The anti-free speech violent protesters set off munitions, broke windows, beat people, and scared the university away from allowing any right-wing speakers to be heard on campus—unless they paid for their own security. Antifa radicals, calling themselves By Any Means Necessary (BAMN), framed themselves as brave and heroic for silencing speech of people they detested at the very birthplace of the campus free speech movement. It was the first round of the speech wars between people on the right who were trying to speak and those on the left who called them "fascists" while calling themselves "anti fascist" and using violence to literally shut them up. Several people were arrested for the melee, but guess who were the only ones prosecuted? In an opinion issued February 21, California Federal District Court Judge Cormac J. Carney stiff-armed the DOJs Terrorism and Export Crimes Section out of Los Angeles and nailed them for selective prosecution. The decision to dismiss the federal charges against two men who at some point became members of a group characterized as "white supremacist" was based on the fact that Antifa did as bad or worse that day and at other events where both groups were represented and Antifa wasn't prosecuted. {snip} He denounced violent as "always abhorrent," but noted that "violence to shut down speech is particularly dangerous and runs counter to the basic principles upon which our Nation is founded." But, he said, "Prosecuting only members of the far right and ignoring members of the far left leads to the troubling conclusion that the government believes it is permissible to physically assault and injure Trump supporters to silence speech. It is only when those tactics are deployed against those on the left that the government brings charges under the Anti-Riot Act. That is not permissible under our Constitution." https://pjmedia.com/victoria-taft/2024/03/14/federal-judge-looks-at-what-antifa-got-away-with-and-tosses-out-case-against-another-extremist-group-n4927324 . 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 21 Author Share Posted March 21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted Monday at 11:07 PM Author Share Posted Monday at 11:07 PM TRUE. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted Monday at 11:33 PM Share Posted Monday at 11:33 PM No, Kyle Rittenhouse's sin was being a white male, which the MSM gladly revealed, while making people believe that those he shot were innocent black protestors at a BLM rally. It was a common tactic by the MSM, making it seem like black people were being gunned-down for no reason, because they'd lost the "America is racist!" narrative after Barry was elected. Twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted 3 hours ago Author Share Posted 3 hours ago Anyone surprised ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts