georgenorman
Member
- Country
England
Your wife has that much influence?
US Politics
- Topic starter Stirlingsays
- Start date
- Country
-
England
As far as I'm aware there is only 1 live bullet and nobody knows who has it. That's how they remove any psychological guilt from being on the squad, and remove any accusations of murder.
- Country
-
England
Effectively this already happens as explained above
- Country
-
England
Meanwhile in the world of compassion and humanity
7.37 is the best. Fired from Microsoft, but what did he do there? His job was to run DEI which he "built from scratch" in Microsoft. So after excluding people because they didn't meet a minority demographic whilst making everyone dance his dance or be fired, he complains about him losing his livelihood.
c***.
7.37 is the best. Fired from Microsoft, but what did he do there? His job was to run DEI which he "built from scratch" in Microsoft. So after excluding people because they didn't meet a minority demographic whilst making everyone dance his dance or be fired, he complains about him losing his livelihood.
c***.
Last edited:
tips hat
Some people are just thick. You lose your job because you said something inappropriate on social media. It probably happens more often then the media reports, person gets drunk or they have just split up with someone and are angry etc. or more likely they get into an internet spat with someone and go over the top.
It can happen, so what do these thickos do, delete their account and keep a low profile? Nope "I know I will go on social media and tell everyone sniff I've lost my job sniff, because sounding off on social media has worked really well so far". Gimme a break.
Stupid is as stupid does.
Forest Hillbilly
Member
- Location
- in a hidey-hole
- Country
Wales
A lot of potential employers screen candidates social media platforms before deciding who comes to interview. It's called Due Diligence.
The fact media posts are brought to employers notice, is just continuing the monitoring process that employees aren't bringing disrepute to their employers.
I am hoping there might be wider implications for groups promoting their own sectarian interests, at the expense of others,... and particularly for the hate-preachers who seemingly actively promote violence against others.
The fact media posts are brought to employers notice, is just continuing the monitoring process that employees aren't bringing disrepute to their employers.
I am hoping there might be wider implications for groups promoting their own sectarian interests, at the expense of others,... and particularly for the hate-preachers who seemingly actively promote violence against others.
Last edited:
PalazioVecchio
Member
- Location
- south pole
- Country
Netherlands
Stirlingsays
Member
- Country
-
England
He represents a section of the left who want major conservatives dead.....as evidenced by the mountain of support online.
I fear we have not seen the end of this, I think public speakers of both sides have genuine reason to fear now.
Stirlingsays
Member
- Country
-
England
Some quality words about Charlie Kirk from the atheist right.
eaglesdare
Member
- Country
-
England
JD Vance currently hosting the charlie Kirk show if anyone is interested:
Wisbech Eagle
Member
- Location
- Truro Cornwall
- Country
-
England
It’s extremely helpful. It stops us doing things because one group believes them. It stops impulsive, precipitative actions that are later regretted.
Stirlingsays
Member
- Country
-
England
Teddy Eagle
Member
- Country
Scotland
How does it help me change the law as per the instruction?
What you actually mean is vote for someone who might change the law provided they don't get
A. Sacked or
B. Change party after a few months.
Wisbech Eagle
Member
- Location
- Truro Cornwall
- Country
-
England
There have been a lot of comments in the days since Charlie Kirk’s murder seeking to blame the “left” for it. When the truth seems to be it was committed by a single person whose motives and inspiration remain unknown. Whether or not he had more sympathy for leftist ideas than right is irrelevant. What is important is what caused him to kill.
So what could that be? Charlie Kirk appears to have been an extremely divisive character. Loved by those who agreed with his politics and loathed by those who don’t.
The left are the group which doesn’t just tolerate social diversity. They recognise it’s existence as factual and accept everyone having the right to decide such things for themselves.
The right, or at least some of it, in contrast, will reluctantly tolerate social diversity when it’s demanded by the law. Otherwise the default is often rejection.
Homosexuals, tolerated. Transgenders, rejected. Abortion, accepted by some, tolerated by others yet rejected by many.
The right’s tendency to be less tolerant than the left is what lies at the root of this event. Not the left. Especially when the President of the USA is actively stoking the intolerance.
The righ’s intolerance leads to them wishing to impose their own social standards on others, rather than encouraging freedom of choice. Which is ironic given their enthusiasm for free speech.
This results in people feeling marginalised and angry. When intolerant people disregard who you are you are likely to become a little intolerant yourself.
Most will contain that, content in the knowledge it will pass, but some may not especially if they have problems. With the free availability of powerful guns, disasters such as we have seen can be the result.
This isn’t to excuse anyone or anything, it’s to try to understand and explain it.
Divisiveness and intolerance lie at the root of this issue. The root of the divisiveness and intolerance lies with Trump and those who blindly follow him. Not the left.
Trump needs to look in the mirror when seeking to apportion blame for the death of his friend.
So what could that be? Charlie Kirk appears to have been an extremely divisive character. Loved by those who agreed with his politics and loathed by those who don’t.
The left are the group which doesn’t just tolerate social diversity. They recognise it’s existence as factual and accept everyone having the right to decide such things for themselves.
The right, or at least some of it, in contrast, will reluctantly tolerate social diversity when it’s demanded by the law. Otherwise the default is often rejection.
Homosexuals, tolerated. Transgenders, rejected. Abortion, accepted by some, tolerated by others yet rejected by many.
The right’s tendency to be less tolerant than the left is what lies at the root of this event. Not the left. Especially when the President of the USA is actively stoking the intolerance.
The righ’s intolerance leads to them wishing to impose their own social standards on others, rather than encouraging freedom of choice. Which is ironic given their enthusiasm for free speech.
This results in people feeling marginalised and angry. When intolerant people disregard who you are you are likely to become a little intolerant yourself.
Most will contain that, content in the knowledge it will pass, but some may not especially if they have problems. With the free availability of powerful guns, disasters such as we have seen can be the result.
This isn’t to excuse anyone or anything, it’s to try to understand and explain it.
Divisiveness and intolerance lie at the root of this issue. The root of the divisiveness and intolerance lies with Trump and those who blindly follow him. Not the left.
Trump needs to look in the mirror when seeking to apportion blame for the death of his friend.
eaglesdare
Member
- Country
-
England
Knew we would get there eventually.......blaming Trump for Charlie Kirks death. 🙄