Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
And start whacking some — you know, not to make it political — but whole leftist, corrupt, pedophile, this evil thing that's taken over Nashville,
Hmm, yes, it's the left that need to tone down the rhetoric.
Let's see, start from the conclusion that liberals are satanic pedophiles. Use non-law enforcement to identify liberals who must also be pedophiles. Entrap them and use whatever means necessary to take these evil satanic pedophiles off the streets.
Sure, what could go wrong?
They are just desperate to find a Liberal child molester
And that's because...
53 pages, 1325 entries. So far.
Kinda funny how the party that isn't sexually repressive or regressive doesn't prey on children. I wonder what inferences could be drawn between conservative rhetoric and the sheer number of conservatives busted for child abuse. Is it just the power imbalance?
I think there are many reasons. For one thing, they have the Christian vote locked up, and the sort of Christianity they preach is one where you can do any manner of atrocious things, ask forgiveness, be forgiven, then repeat the cycle. So many clergy that are even in prison for being sex offenders still get defended by their former parishioners.
Another is definitely a power imbalance thing, especially when there is a lot of evidence tying psychopathy to business success. Lacking any real moral code is fine when you're a rich CEO. As Trump said, "when you're wealthy, they let you do it."
A third is that there are a lot of Republican voters who are so rabidly anti-left that they will literally elect a sex offender (Jim Jordan) over a Democrat.
I'm sure people can suggest others.
I think it is rather that conservatism has nothing to do with being conservative really at the end of the day, that is just the team colors these people wear to identify what team they are on.
Conservatives are conservative so they can hate without guilt and so they can control and possess with violence and be rewarded for it. From this angle the synergy heinous shitheads see in being a Republican and being a pedophile (but also defining your public persona completely around hating pedophiles too) is pretty straightforward in my opinion. Also probably the most pathetic thing on the face of the earth.
Here's the thing. I really believe that the Republican party is loaded to the gills with criminal creeps. However, if I were to share this list with any of my right-wing Christian acquaintances or (sigh) family, they'll respond with "Democrats are worse!"
Is there a similar list of Democrat Sexual predators, abusers, and enablers?
Without a corresponding list, it makes it look like it's just trying to make Republicans look bad (as opposed to just showing what they are).
Why not just ask them to provide one? If they're even worse, it should be easy to find supporting information.
I'd rather have both lists, and be able to point at the 53 pages of Republican predators and two pages of Democrat predators and say, "see the difference?"1
Like they would accept it as being non-bias.
Just because your audience doesn’t listen to reason, it doesn’t mean that presenting a good argument is worthless.
At least your doing things in good faith, we could leave it to the individual to decide if they want to take the moral high ground.
Maybe I should invest in cyanide tablets for when Trump wins again.
Or, hear me out:
A radical leftist militia
The best way to not be caught as a child predator is to pretend you are fighting them.
I don't care if Republicans are Kidnapping their Neighbors and Torturing them. The LEFT needs to COOL it with their Violence!
NewsChannel 5 Investigates discovered hours and hours of videos where Shawn Taylor has appeared on podcasts associated with the widely discredited QAnon conspiracy theories.
Source: link in the OP article to part one of an eight part series.
Editorial: A local news station investigated, uncovered evidence, and appear to be interviewing those involved about what they find analyzing the evidence, then reporting in a series of lengthy articles full of direct quotes. True journalism lives.
Are they CC'ing the DOJ? please tell me they are.
Why would you want dissemination of truth in the hands of the department of "order over justice"? They've been fucking us for decades just like the other two branches of governance. These journalist are risking their lives for truth. I trust them much more than any politician.
That's why it's a CC, not just letting them sit on the information themselves. If we know they have the information, and they know we know, then pressure to conduct a criminal investigation vastly increases.
You've the wrong agency responsible for investigation, I think.
I'm talking about Truth and Justice the principles. I trust these journalists to serve us more effectively than any government agency despite their lack of authority.
So who would you suggest the journalists send the results of their investigation to?
We the People, just as they've been doing. No one else gives a fuck about our best interests. Why ask for some assholes to get involved. We'd do just fine taking care of this one on our own.
So what then? You just want to read about it and be mad? Nothing else? No arrests, no trials, no accountability?
Arrests and trials rarely lead to accountability, particularly for law enforcement. If you want order then call the government. If you want justice then pick up your rifle. No agency gives a fuck about us.
Okay cool. I'll be over here and you can stand way over there.
You'll sing a different song when I'm reinforcing the picket line that matters. It's all good with neolibs until someone's willing to do something meaningful.
If your something meaningful is political violence then no thank you. I've seen that, it's nothing but tortured shop keepers and dead school children. No thank you.
Reinforcing a strike's picket line is "political violence"?
You need history. Lots of history.
You need guns. Not idiots with guns like the cult. Wise and disciplined people of principle who agree they'd rather not use them. We don't even need to fire a round. Call the bluff: "Kill us, then."
They won't. The people will come when we call. Or, it'll end like Les Mis. Either way it'll be done with dignity.
There was nothing dignified about Les mis. Didn't you get that message? Did you watch the whole thing? The kids dying for nothing? Or did you stop at the marching song?
You don't need a rifle on the picket line for a strike. This isn't the 1800's.
For fuck's sake those of us who have seen what you're calling for are trying to tell you it will not end the way you think it does. It will however obliterate the soul of the country and cause needless death and suffering. Just because you couldn't put your ego away for two fucking seconds and talk to each other.
Watch? I read it.
For nothing? Ask the French.
Don't need guns? Never been beaten by a cop, huh?
Then you did miss the point entirely. And the French got mass murder, 26 years of war, and then the return of the Ancien Regime. To be clear they did not just guillotine nobles or rich people. They were killing any dissidents so fast they had to chain them to barges and sink the barges, every day. It's not called the Reign of Terror because they were upstanding and moral. They killed political rivals inside the revolution at a rate that makes Stalin blush.
And cops, really? Like I said. Stand over there. Way over there.
I hope the threat of proletariat violence prevails as it usually does in history. Revolution is always a bloody mess.
I didn't miss the point. I choose non-violent change over a bloody mess. Where we seem to differ is that, as a last resort, I choose a bloody mess over the status quo.
The system has had centuries to right its wrongs. Most of us have no hope of a life of dignity. We're already dead. We'll set the timetable for our freedom. Or, we won't. Things will go on as they are. And, the next generation will shoot their shot.
I choose to believe now is our time.
And yes, beaten by a cop. Happens all the time. Some of them even make the news.
I hate people who make a big show of being "outraged" over child abuse as a way to cover for their own repugnant, violent beliefs and behaviors.
It's the same way some prisoner who murdered an entire family will beat or kill pedophiles in prison because he thinks he somehow redeems him on some level by having a "code". In reality he's still a massive piece of shit.
It's deeply self-serving exploitation of a very serious issue.
There's a little more to prisoners beating up pedophiles. Many of them are themselves victims of child abuse. It's revenge.
Either way it's intellectually dishonest, hypocritical and inherently anti-justice.
If I get robbed by someone, and then later go to prison and find out some random prisoner is a thief, I'm not morally entitled to attack that person (who is already serving their time).
Prison justice is 100% bullshit.
No, they don't care if you were a thief outside. They care if you're a thief inside. They're not doing it just because of a code, they're defending the tiny amount of property they're allowed to have. We also wouldn't even blink if a homeowner beat up a thief in their house, so this is a bit hypocritical.
No, they don’t care if you were a thief outside. They care if you’re a thief inside.
I'm not talking about if someone steals from you in prison (not that it's justifiable to be violent because someone stole something from you in prison anyway).
The analogy here is getting robbed at some point and then beating up some other entirely random thief who never robbed you (who's already getting punished for their crime in prison). When a pedophile is put in prison, there are no children for them to victimize, they are being punished for the crime they committed. They are not trying to rape the adult prisoners, so those prisoners can't claim they were victimized by that person.
Prisoners are not fit to administer justice, they are there to serve for their own crimes and moral failings, not play at being judge and jury for fellow criminals.
Dude, most of the people in prison are there for drugs and robbery. That's not even feasible. I don't know where you heard that's a thing, but it isn't.
What's not feasible? Not violently assaulting other prisoners?
It would be infeasible for the prison justice code to include thievery done outside prison. Your example is ridiculous and meant to minimize the impact sexual predators have on people's lives.
It would be infeasible for the prison justice code to include thievery done outside prison.
What are you talking about? Why is this so difficult for you to understand? If Joe steals from you, that doesn't give you a moral right to take it out on Bill because Bill also stole from someone before.
Likewise, if you were sexually abused by Joe, you don't have a moral right to take it out on Bill because he sexually abused someone. Especially when Bill is already serving prison time for his crime.
I don't know how I can make it any simpler for you.
Your example is ridiculous and meant to minimize the impact sexual predators have on people’s lives.
No. It's not, and you know it's not. It's too illustrate how revenge is not transferrable and is mot an acceptable form of justice. The pedophiles that are attacked in prison are already recieving their punishment as handed down by the justice system by being in prison. The prisoners are not agents of our justice system, they are fucking criminals who are in prison for breaking the law. They don't get the right to hurt anyone
What you're advocating is that everyone is entitled to administer whatever extrajudicial punishment they want because it makes them feel good.
Prisoners do not have a legal or moral right to administer their own justice, regardless of whether or not they were victims of some crime in the past.
There you again. Equating sexual predation to taking a bag of chocolates.
No one is equating anything. But I think you understand this, you're just being dishonest.
Answer me this: If a murderer is tried and goes to prison, do any of the prisoners (or guards for that matter) have a moral right to kill him if they feel like it?
Murder is a really bad crime, right? It's certainly not stealing a bag of chocolates. If someone murdered my friend, does that give me a right to kill any murderer in prison I want to?
Depends, did they murder a child?
Because morally speaking, there are absolutely moral frameworks that would say yes.
Ok, so you literally just don't believe in a justice system based on impartiality and laws. Just whatever arbitrarily feels right to someone at the time based on whatever line they draw for themselves.
That's all I needed to know. What a completely incoherent way to run a society. Good bye.