Threats against anti-protesters: Hardline nationalists are at it again

Jonathan Ortiz2 said:Man, I don't know, I guess I'm just kind of indifferent to the whole thing...

Quincey:

Look, why someone chooses to fight or protest for one thing over another isn't really my business. Whether someone thinks a cause is worth their time or not is purely a personal call. The argument that she wasn't at the Kaiser workers' protest feels pretty thin to me, because by that logic, you could dismiss any number of other groups, unions, or activists who weren't physically there, and I wouldn't call them bad for that. You disagree?

It's not thin though... because if your actual goal is to do what's best for all the citizens of the USA and the country in general... then you'd be showing up for those Kaiser women's protests, or protesting outside churches (if you actually think the church gets too much money), and so on...

And hey, that's fine...

But then she goes out and protests against the church, against veterans, and fights for some guy like Margetic, who once claimed that Gotovina (after he was cleared) was just some "international socialite, a foreign mercenary, and a criminal who fled from French police only to come to America to profit from blood, corpses, and arson."....

Honestly, it feels like this woman has spent most of her life fighting against things rather than for them... Just some kind of anarchist in her 60s... God help us....

Which veterans' organization showed up to support those Budweiser employees?
And did anyone from the Church bother to show up at that protest either?
By your logic, neither the veterans' groups nor the Church actually care about making things better for the citizens of America or the nation at large. ☕

crimsoncyclist71 said:Which veterans' organization showed up to support those Budweiser employees?
And did anyone from the Church bother to show up at that protest either?
By your logic, neither the veterans' groups nor the Church actually care about making things better for the citizens of America or the nation at large. ☕

It’s pretty obvious she doesn't care enough to actually stand up and protest... her main thing seems to be hating on the Church rather than actually giving a crap that those Budweiser workers are suffering...

She even claims she's an anarchist herself, so basically she's just against everything and everyone instead of actually being for anything meaningful.

Jonathan Ortiz2 said:Yeah... I don't see how that even connects to her anti-protest stance. She wasn't out there demanding better living standards or anything; she was protesting against the church, the veterans... all that stuff.

The Right lives in a world of persuasion, whereas their opponents live in the real world—take Broadway, for instance.

Counter-protesters are pushing back against a specific caste that is obsessed with securing even more privileges for themselves.
It’s about having a sense of reality. All those symbols suggesting that things aren't working stem from that false sense of patriotism fueled by the political influence of the Coalition, which is responsible for that damaging concordat with Vatican City.
This isn't just one isolated issue; there is much more to it...
At its core, being a counter-protester is a reaction to those who enjoy guaranteed incomes, unlike the people struggling with job insecurity, those facing layoffs, or those currently without any paycheck at all.
Counter-protesting is an answer to malice and arrogance. There is nothing dignified about people hiding behind camouflage jackets, inciting division to protect their own narrow interests.

Sarah Lopez4 said:The Right lives in a world of persuasion, whereas their opponents live in the real world—take Broadway, for instance.

Counter-protesters are pushing back against a specific caste that is obsessed with securing even more privileges for themselves.
It’s about having a sense of reality. All those symbols suggesting that things aren't working stem from that false sense of patriotism fueled by the political influence of the Coalition, which is responsible for that damaging concordat with Vatican City.
This isn't just one isolated issue; there is much more to it...
At its core, being a counter-protester is a reaction to those who enjoy guaranteed incomes, unlike the people struggling with job insecurity, those facing layoffs, or those currently without any paycheck at all.
Counter-protesting is an answer to malice and arrogance. There is nothing dignified about people hiding behind camouflage jackets, inciting division to protect their own narrow interests.

this elite class won't even get what they're after anyway, and honestly, they won't be around to see it in ten years since their average age is already pushing 55...

Jonathan Ortiz2 said:this elite class won't even get what they're after anyway, and honestly, they won't be around to see it in ten years since their average age is already pushing 55...

If those groups actually bother to look at reality—assuming they can face it—they’ll see a total collapse of social security, a demographic crisis, and an exodus of people over the last 25 years that dwarfs all our previous statistics. We're looking at a debt that's spiraling toward inevitable bankruptcy and a social structure fracturing into the ultra-wealthy and the desperately poor.

Where were they when Bill Clinton was fleeing to Austria? Where was Brkich when he was busy arresting journalists who were trying to warn us about Clinton's schemes?

Look, friend, this isn't about patriotism. The issue lies with the people who claim a monopoly on patriotism, acting as if it belongs solely to them. Once you force yourself upon society as the "chosen one," you've effectively nuked your own career...
And now, when Glogowski brings up all the American veterans—the very same men who supported him back in the day—it is nothing more than a calculated lie. It shows the beastly character of a man trying to manufacture himself into a political star at the expense of actual veterans. I am talking about real people who, if they even have jobs today, are out there working hard in some corner of the country with their own two hands. I am proud of them.

To be honest, those thugs over on the Potomac are nothing but lowlifes.

Honestly, those hardcore nationalists get so incredibly worked up—it’s almost funny how much they lose their minds—whenever you dare to have an opinion that doesn't fit their narrow little worldview.

David Vaughn75 said:If you had bothered to actually clone yourself, perhaps you would have realized that the whole "burning churches" rhetoric is nothing more than a recycled line from that Russian author Krompotkin. It was famously tossed around during the Spanish Civil War as a way to protest the Church's decision to align itself with the Fascists. Is it really too much to ask for a bit of historical literacy before making such sweeping claims?

☕

Oh, really? Does this little "contribution" of yours also qualify as world-class literature?
I might just show up at the Israeli Embassy clutching a stack of German literature, just to see how they handle that.
It’s practically 1941 all over again. At this rate, who knows how badly I'm going to tank? Honestly, though, I couldn't be happier for the old lady.
It would have been far more effective if someone with a shred of common sense had led the protest. Instead, we’re stuck dealing with these blatant provocations.
Walking around a public square waving Cyrillic script and spitting on the American flag? Honestly, it’s just revolting.
It was honestly at its peak when that punk kid from the neighborhood was sitting there, engrossed in a novel.
Marija Jurić Zagorka standing there in front of those veterans... Honestly, wasn't he just a total punk at heart?
They showed up to the counter-protests wearing hoodies, trying so desperately to look intimidating. It’s honestly just pathetic. Such a weak, desperate attempt at relevance, wouldn't you agree? Truly pitiful.

Husar- said:She’s that same woman who claims the only churches worth anything are the ones currently on fire—that’s just how "progressive" our leftists are these days.

You aren't entirely wrong, though you certainly have the right to vent your frustrations at the left if that's what you feel like doing...
Marijana Mirt was carrying a sign that said something along the lines of: "The only light coming from the church is the light from those that burn..." If my memory serves me correctly.

Now, if we strip away the context, that’s a pretty biting statement. But when I take a moment to tally up all the institutional failures—everything from the pedophilia scandals and financial corruption to the crooked clergy and priest-politicians—then that comment actually makes perfect sense within the larger picture.
Keep in mind, this isn't an attack on faith itself; it's a critique of the political machinery behind the RCBC.

Look, there is something fundamentally rotten in that alliance between the official Vatican and the far-right. Both sides swear blood oaths to the homeland, the soil, history, and every other attribute used to define a nation. But following that logic, it seems they are both deeply flawed. In fact, they seem to be constructed from much more volatile material than their political opponents.

Sarah Lopez4 said:You aren't entirely wrong, though you certainly have the right to vent your frustrations at the left if that's what you feel like doing...
Marijana Mirt was carrying a sign that said something along the lines of: "The only light coming from the church is the light from those that burn..." If my memory serves me correctly.

Now, if we strip away the context, that’s a pretty biting statement. But when I take a moment to tally up all the institutional failures—everything from the pedophilia scandals and financial corruption to the crooked clergy and priest-politicians—then that comment actually makes perfect sense within the larger picture.
Keep in mind, this isn't an attack on faith itself; it's a critique of the political machinery behind the RCBC.

Look, there is something fundamentally rotten in that alliance between the official Vatican and the far-right. Both sides swear blood oaths to the homeland, the soil, history, and every other attribute used to define a nation. But following that logic, it seems they are both deeply flawed. In fact, they seem to be constructed from much more volatile material than their political opponents.

Maybe don't speak with such certainty if you haven't actually checked the facts first.
That wasn't what the message said.

http://s28.postimg.org/mmtvbu155/JES...ASI_SITNOG.jpg

The actual wording was this: "The only church that enlightens is the one that burns. DONATE."

There was nothing about light emanating from a church or any other attempt to diminish the impact of such a visceral message.

copperbadger12 said:Maybe don't speak with such certainty if you haven't actually checked the facts first.
That wasn't what the message said.

http://s28.postimg.org/mmtvbu155/JES...ASI_SITNOG.jpg

The actual wording was this: "The only church that enlightens is the one that burns. DONATE."

There was nothing about light emanating from a church or any other attempt to diminish the impact of such a visceral message.

The message isn't being exaggerated. It’s perfectly clear what it means once you read the official police statement on the matter.

On another note, I've made this point before: people accept when a Bishop uses metaphors to call for law enforcement action without assuming he's starting a new war. But in this case, nobody is trying to put the sign in context. They insist on taking it literally.

crimsoncyclist71 said:The message isn't being exaggerated. It’s perfectly clear what it means once you read the official police statement on the matter.

On another note, I've made this point before: people accept when a Bishop uses metaphors to call for law enforcement action without assuming he's starting a new war. But in this case, nobody is trying to put the sign in context. They insist on taking it literally.

Why don't you try taking that exact same sentiment over to a Catholic cathedral? Go ahead, stand right there on the steps with that same attitude and see how much reception you get.
If you don't end up receiving a citation from me, I suppose I'll just have to hand over a thousand dollars.

Isn't that message just utterly pathetic? Honestly, I’m struggling to find even a single syllable that doesn't reek of desperation. Which part of it, if any, isn't completely nauseating?
The message itself is utterly repulsive and purely provocative, topped off with an ending that practically screams for someone to take action: "Contribute."

Honestly, this marginal figure Mirt—someone who really shouldn't be getting any airtime at all—has managed to grab a ridiculous amount of media attention thanks to her small band of fanatics. They’ve even gone so far as to label anyone standing up against these tent protesters as mere "citizens," which just goes to show exactly who is pulling the strings behind her.

The only people who would actually take threats from someone like her are complete fools, but let’s look at that sign she was holding in front of the cathedral: "the only church worth lighting is the one that's burning, so pitch in." That isn't some vague metaphor; it is an unmistakable call to commit arson against places of worship, which is a straight-up felony.

We are talking about inciting racial, religious, and national hatred here.

And of course, the current administration hasn't lifted a finger to hold her accountable, even though they have a legal obligation to do so.

If anyone showed up with a sign like that in front of a synagogue or a mosque, they’d be arrested and processed by the police in a heartbeat, no matter whose quotes they were trying to use to justify it.

copperbadger12 said:Why don't you try taking that exact same sentiment over to a Catholic cathedral? Go ahead, stand right there on the steps with that same attitude and see how much reception you get.
If you don't end up receiving a citation from me, I suppose I'll just have to hand over a thousand dollars.

Isn't that message just utterly pathetic? Honestly, I’m struggling to find even a single syllable that doesn't reek of desperation. Which part of it, if any, isn't completely nauseating?
The message itself is utterly repulsive and purely provocative, topped off with an ending that practically screams for someone to take action: "Contribute."

I'll say it again: you have to look at the context to actually understand it. That’s exactly what the police did. I don't see any logic in taking that message to a cathedral when the entire dispute was between Catholic groups and civil rights organizations.

Whether you personally dislike the message (I don't like it either, but hey, some people consider it art just like others think Madonna is a great singer) is irrelevant here. Besides, you're entitled to your opinion, just as I am to mine.

copperbadger12 said:Why don't you try taking that exact same sentiment over to a Catholic cathedral? Go ahead, stand right there on the steps with that same attitude and see how much reception you get.
If you don't end up receiving a citation from me, I suppose I'll just have to hand over a thousand dollars.

Isn't that message just utterly pathetic? Honestly, I’m struggling to find even a single syllable that doesn't reek of desperation. Which part of it, if any, isn't completely nauseating?
The message itself is utterly repulsive and purely provocative, topped off with an ending that practically screams for someone to take action: "Contribute."

What do you mean a misdemeanor? That’s a straight-up felony.

restlessfalcon69 said:Honestly, this marginal figure Mirt—someone who really shouldn't be getting any airtime at all—has managed to grab a ridiculous amount of media attention thanks to her small band of fanatics. They’ve even gone so far as to label anyone standing up against these tent protesters as mere "citizens," which just goes to show exactly who is pulling the strings behind her.

The only people who would actually take threats from someone like her are complete fools, but let’s look at that sign she was holding in front of the cathedral: "the only church worth lighting is the one that's burning, so pitch in." That isn't some vague metaphor; it is an unmistakable call to commit arson against places of worship, which is a straight-up felony.

We are talking about inciting racial, religious, and national hatred here.

And of course, the current administration hasn't lifted a finger to hold her accountable, even though they have a legal obligation to do so.

If anyone showed up with a sign like that in front of a synagogue or a mosque, they’d be arrested and processed by the police in a heartbeat, no matter whose quotes they were trying to use to justify it.

No, it isn't a crime because nobody actually called for churches to be burned. A report was filed, the police investigated, and they dismissed the case for lack of evidence. The fact that some obscure blogs published the photo with misleading captions is a separate issue entirely. The fact that so much time has passed before people suddenly decided this was a national outrage says everything you need to know about the whole situation.

restlessfalcon69 said:What do you mean a misdemeanor? That’s a straight-up felony.

The same report was filed and subsequently dismissed as baseless. Don't you agree? File a new one. It's your right.