Nikki Haley's Crazy Plan to Require Verification on Social Media

The 2024 GOP candidate has proposed something blatantly unconstitutional.

2024 GOP presidential candidate Nikki Haley wants to abolish anonymity on the internet.

In a recent appearance on Fox News, Haley said that if she were to become president, her second priority—after forcing the platforms to disclose their algorithms—would be to require name verification of all social media users.

"It's a national security threat," she said. "It gets rid of the Russian bots, the Iranian bots, and the Chinese bots. And then, you're going to get some civility, when people know their name is next to what they say."

NEW - Nikki Haley: "Every person on social media should be verified by their name" because of "national security." pic.twitter.com/bPTkYGKNin

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) November 14, 2023

Lest anyone wonder whether this clip of Haley was taken out of context, she reiterated the pledge in a statement to Washington Examiner correspondent Byron York. She also articulated the same plan in a recent podcast appearance; one of the other participants, who goes by the name Comfortably Smug on X, was notably perturbed.

Haley's enthusiasm for de-anonymizing social media is deeply misguided.

First of all, social media companies have the right to grant their users anonymity. The First Amendment prevents the federal government from meddling with the speech policies of private tech companies. If X or Facebook want to require users to verify themselves, they can do so—but the government can't force them. Merely stating that anonymity is a "national security threat" does not void the Constitution.

Moreover, anonymity is a cherished aspect of political speech, and rightly so. Sometimes, people have important truths to tell but for various reasons cannot risk attaching their names to their words. As noted by Gov. Ron DeSantis (R–Fla.) and Vivek Ramaswamy—two of Haley's rivals for the GOP nomination—anonymous speech was an integral part of the U.S.'s founding: James Madison published the Federalist Papers under a pseudonym, for instance.

You know who were anonymous writers back in the day? Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison when they wrote the Federalist Papers.

They were not "national security threats," nor are the many conservative Americans across the country who exercise their Constitutional… https://t.co/YkAGMhUVCX

— Ron DeSantis (@RonDeSantis) November 15, 2023

Given that the authors of the Constitution made abundant use of anonymous speech, it should not be surprising that Haley's proposal is blatantly unconstitutional. It is also a terrible idea. Many Americans are concerned about online privacy; they don't want to force social media companies to collect their data on behalf of the federal government.

Comments

[NOYB2]

I want to thank Nikki Haley for reminding me why I used to despise the GOP.

Because of her unconstitutional totalitarianism and her neocon war mongering, hopefully, she will never be president.

Nikki Haley, the dickless Cheney.

[TwilaMiller]

I'm making $90 an hour working from home. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning 16,000 US dollars a month by working on the connection, that was truly astounding for me, she prescribed for me to attempt it simply. Everybody must try this job now by just using this website... http://www.Payathome9.com

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

” a world made safe for democracy is a world in which no one dares to raise his voice for fear that mommy will put you away some place where you can be reeducated.”

Haley once again showing that the center-right aren't anything more than establishment taint-lickers who are more concerned with tone-policing everyone than actually advancing any sort of political agenda. Controlled opposition at its finest.

[Mother's Lament]

"the center-right aren’t anything more than establishment taint-lickers who are more concerned with tone-policing everyone than actually advancing any sort of political agenda."

Posted again for emphasis.

[Rob Misek]

Public privacy is for oxymorons

[Don't look at me!]

Go ahead , publish your real name.

[DesigNate]

That might be the Nazi fucks real name.

[MrMxyzptlk]

Prior to ANTIFA burning houses down I used to use my name and when threatened by people would provide my address and work schedule to make it easier for them to follow through on their threats.

After ANTIFA I stopped the practice.

[Rob Misek]

I understand your fear.

Criminals depend on anonymity. Honest people don’t.

By advocating for anonymity you’re enabling criminals.

We need two internets. One secured with a passport to enable secure interactions. One the Wild West where as a nobody you can say and do whatever you want. And so can every other piece of shit.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

Criminals depend on anonymity. Honest people don’t.

By advocating for anonymity you’re enabling criminals.

Magnificent circular reasoning there.

[Rob Misek]

There’s nothing to be gained by correcting you.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

Doubling down on that circular reasoning isn’t doing it, either. The hilarious part is that you're aligning with the very people who would throw you under the bus the minute you started sperging again about Israel.

[B G]

"The hilarious part is that you’re aligning with the very people who would throw you under the bus the minute you started sperging again about Israel."

That's an ambiguous category for "Misek". Most of the people who'd nod along with his anti-Israel tirades would turn on him when he got to the Holocaust denial part of it, unless he switched up from calling Christianity "the religion of truth" to putting that tag on Islam. Give the guy three paragraphs of space to freestyle, and he'll end up spouting something that would leave almost anyone on the planet distancing themselves for one reason or another; in a way it's kind of impressive.

[Rob Misek]

What neither of you fuckwits can conceive is that my objective isn’t to “align” with any group. I don’t care what you think.

While it seems to be all that you care about. You’re so insecure you constantly need reassurance from your “team” which in turn is ONLY relevant when in conflict with another.

I value truth aka reality which is the only thing we all share in peace. Neither It nor I require your recognition.

This is how I clearly and unambiguously ensure that what I say represents truth, reality.

I value the inalienable human right to free speech.

I value the supremacy of correctly applied logic and science in discerning and demonstrating truth aka reality.

I value the application of both in open debate to conclude and demonstrate that truth can never be refuted while untruths can be.

I commit that if what I say is ever refuted, I’ll never say it again.

Who else can honestly say this and back it up as I do?

[B G]

"I value truth aka reality which is the only thing we all share in peace. Neither It nor I require your recognition."

You wouldn't know objective reality if you accidentally found yourself balls-deep in it. You've repeatedly cited a cherry-picked clip of subjective anecdotes from a long talk given an avowed activist which was openly titled as being his opinions as proof of universal and objective fact simply because it happens to align with what you wanted to believe before encountering it. Also, you frequently use the term "properly applied logic" to refer to a structure of fallacies which no philosopher or logician (living or dead) would accept as being properly applied.

"This is how I clearly and unambiguously ensure that what I say represents truth, reality."

And yet you repeatedly make unsubstatiated (and unsupportable) claims which in the world you claim to dream of would have you imprisoned as a "liar".

"I value the inalienable human right to free speech."

You'd place so many encumbrances on the speech of others, including imprisonment for making statements which track with whatever information the speaker has access/knowledge of if that information is incomplete or happens to include ideas that you just don't happen to like.

The mere idea of making it a crime to "lie" while putting the entire burden of proof on the speaker and none on any potential accuser is a deep infringement on the "inalienable right". The idea that anyone who's proven to have been incorrect even if all information they had access to supports their statement and disproof was newly discovered is a criminal "liar" the moment new information is discovered whether or not they're aware of it is not only destructive to the idea of an "inalienable right", but would render the entire process of science and research impossible to conduct without everyone involved being imprisoned at some point.

Your conception of what amounts to "free speech" is no different than how the CCP or Iranian Revolutionary Council would interpret such a concept, and those regimes have and continue to use the kind of laws you'd impose everywhere to imprison dissidents merely for having expressed ideas deemed inconvenient by the totalitarian rulers, and as such the one thing you, by your own admission, can't possibly believe in is an "inalienable right to free speech"

I couldn't give a shit whether or not you care what I believe, but I might never stop being fascinated by how anyone with such a lack of self awareness could both live any kind of semi-functional life and manage to operate any device capable of accessing these comment boards.

[Rob Misek]

That ranting babble was nothing but rhetoric.

You have never refuted anything that I’ve said.

If you think you have, prove it.

Quote me and specifically refute it or also link to where anyone else has.

You won’t because you can’t because you’re a lying waste of skin.

[B G]

I'm not about to pretend that there's any possibility of "proving" anything to you. Anyone who's read any of your nonsense has a clear understanding that you're happy to take a single private letter written by some third-tier British official during WW1 as "conclusive proof" of a global conspiracy while also dismissing tens of thousands of eyewitness accounts, official government records, and confessions by hundreds of the troops who carried out the policies of the "Final Solution" as all having been fabricated (or obtained by bribery). When dealing with someone like yourself, who has such a thorough lack of comprehension around the concept of "objective vs subjective ideation" as well as a deeply malformed notion of the meaning of logic (and in particular, how and when the structure is "properly applied"), there's really no proving anything that you haven't actively chosen to believe (nor disproving anything that you do want to cling to).

I'm fully confident that any actual thinking and objective reader of both of our posts who also has a well formed concept of logic will be well aware as to which of us is operating in a mental space that's got at least some mooring in objective reality and which is a gibbering lunatic whose world-view consists almost entirely of paranoid fantasies and the willful embrace of bald-faced hate and racist cranio-rectal inversion.

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD 2: Steampunk Boogaloo]

You should publish your full contact information here if you believe that.

Are you going to do that nazi?

Probably not. A gutless Nazi like you is a coward. And you should be. You have a lot to hide.

[Rob Misek]

Hahaha

Elmer Fudd.

[TheReEncogitationer]

It's especially ironic that Nikki Haley is espousing her position out of concern for Antisemitism.

Because of historic Antisemitism, Jews frequently had to assume names popular in the larger societies of which they were a part to be even be half-way accepted.

Of course, this also perfectly explains Herr Misek's support for Nikki Haley's position.

[Rob Misek]

JEWS NEED NAZIS, or any other bogeyman to be the “bad guy” persecuting the pooor misunderstood Jews.

Jews use their lies to coerce others and create an advantage for themselves.

The moment Jews lose their bogeymen it becomes obvious that they are the worst group, team, on the planet based on their behaviour.

What Jewish behaviour would you like proof of?

Lying
Genocide
Crimes against humanity
Conning the US into WW1 for Britain’s promise of Palestine
Their religion advocates lying
Claiming being in 166 different holocausts

[Rob Misek]

Proof of Israeli plans for Genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.

Policy paper: Options for a policy regarding Gaza's civilian population" (Hebrew: נייר מדיניות : חלופות לדירקטיבה מדינית לאוכלוסייה האזרחית בעזה, dated 13 October 2023), is a ten-page policy paper drafted by the Israeli Intelligence Ministry, a minor ministry that conducts research but does not set policy, that proposes forcibly transferring Gaza Strip's 2.3 million residents to Egypt's Sinai Peninsula.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Policy_paper:_Options_for_a_policy_regarding_Gaza%27s_civilian_population

[TheReEncogitationer]

And you're the Aryan Pure Superman one to do it?

And who the Hell would be stupid enough to use your unsecured parallel "Internet" where all transactions would be open to anyone who could intercept them?

Fuck Off, Nazi!

[Paper Wasp]

"secured with a passport"

Oh, oh wait, I've heard of this one! It's called a "social credit" system. Cool.

I bet you get discounts on CT scans of your head.

[Rob Misek]

You haven’t heard of passports?

Get out much Colton?

[Sisyphus]

How exactly would that work? In order to use the 'secured' internet, would you have to somehow be deemed a 'truth teller'? By whom? Isn't that the problem we have right now? Everyone thinking that they can somehow identify the 'Truth', and trying to make sure that's all we can or should see/hear? At this point, and really as it has nearly always been, most supposed truth is merely opinion masquerading as such. You may present fact "x". It can either be shown as true or false. As soon as you start trying to tell me why, you're entering the realm of opinion. I'd rather just hang out with all the other shitheels and make my own determination as to what I believe to be 'Truth', rather than rely on anybody else to define that on my behalf.

[Rob Misek]

Are you intentionally confusing two issues?

How truth is defined is a separate issue from how to secure the internet.

Truth is only rationally determined with correctly applied logic and science.

If you and your circle jerk buddies want to do it another way, you’re simply being irrational and will be regarded as such.

As far a securing the internet, that’s simply a technical matter.

[B G]

Misek has his own fantasy version of a truthiness Gestapo, and a system in which those accused of "lying" (defined as making any statement which the "authorities" deem to be insufficiently substantiated) are then under the full burden to prove their "honesty" and the prosecution has no need to make any case of its own.

He also wholly believes that in his world, that system won't produce the kind of result which came from its use by the versions through history in which it was done under Torquemada, Robespierre, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Castro, Kim, McCarthy, or the Iranian Ayatollahs, but would in fact be its own countermeasure against those who might try to use such a regime to further their own ambition and to solidify power.

And for his most recent trick, he's now claiming to believe in an inalienable right to free speech, without any explanation as to how that could possibly square with a government which imprisons anyone accused of saying something that's deemed to be "not true"; since as the last few years have shown, the Government can be relied on as the final arbiter of what is or isn't "misinformation" without continually suppressing ideas which are increasingly being borne out by the constantly developing evidence..

Not to mention that he thinks that his standard-issue string of bits and pieces of information mixed with pure opinion as "evidence" in many cases and subjected to what he calls "properly applied logic" actually proves that the Holocaust in the 1930s-1940s never happened. Setting aside that any claim to have proved a negative runs directly counter to the proper application of actual logic, he believes the written records kept by the German government at the time must have been falsified, and that the thousands of witness accounts were obtained by bribery including soldiers in at least 4 different armies on both sides of the Cold War, as well as the confessions by those tried at Nuremberg (what does anyone use to bribe someone facing a gallows?) who didn't deny having done the crimes but only stated that they'd been ordered to do it all. He apparently believes that millions of people surrendered all of their clothing, jewelry, eyeglasses, and dental fillings and simply went into hiding for the remainder of their lives; as if 6 million people could remain undetected somewhere on earth for 20-40 years or longer.

[Rob Misek]

You can’t conceive the concept of correctly applied logic and science.

Hahaha

[B G]

That's not what I said, but only english-literate people with functioning minds would be clear about that, so I'll forgive your distortion.

I have a solid conception of both science and logic. I can't imagine how either could actually happen in the kind of world you'd create where anyone commenting on only the incomplete information currently available to humanity would be at some point deemed "dishonest" and imprisoned if new information came to light contradicting their interpretation of what they had available at the time.

[Rob Misek]

You can’t conceive not claiming as true something that you can’t prove to be with correctly applied logic and science.

Obviously.

[B G]

"You can’t conceive not claiming as true something that you can’t prove to be with correctly applied logic and science."

Big talk coming from someone who thinks that a religion which includes as a fundamental belief, an unambiguous commandment to "not bear false witness" as one that "advocates lying", and who also thinks that the "religion of truth" can be such while including within its own beliefs the same "Ten Commandments" and the primary holy scriptures of a "satanic cult" which "advocates lying".

[Rob Misek]

Clothing.

Hahaha

[B G]

Everyone who was put on a train to Auschwitz had their belongings confiscated at the destination, which included any luggage they had packed (these people were told they were going to a different ghetto, at least in the beginning), their jewelry, and after they were killed, any other valuable metals they happened to have including dental fillings (at Buchenwald, some who had "interesting" tattoos reportedly had parts of their skins removed and turned into furniture for the camp director's wife).

Speaking of the 1 million or more people who were taken to Auchwitz, I'm still waiting to see your theories as to what happened to them (aside from the 7000 who were still present when the camp was captured by Stalin's army, and who say that the rest were systematically murdered and the bodies incinerated). By your claims, you insist that it's not possible that anywhere near that number died in the camp during the entirety of the war (although your supposed "proof" is a report about typhus cases which was filed shortly before the camp was converted from forced labor to extermination as its primary purpose).

[Rob Misek]

I’ll make it easy for you.

Refute this. You have no excuses.

I’ve refuted that bullshit propaganda story countless times and to date none of you have ever refuted anything that I’ve said.

There are only two possible explanations for this.

First, I’ve shared the truth that cannot be refuted.

Second, you’re too stupid to refute what you deny.

Which is it?

The following points refute key elements of the holocaust with logic and science. Truth can’t be refuted.

There has been no objective forensic analysis at any supposed site. There is no physical evidence. Any activity that demonstrates and shares evidence to refute the holocaust is a crime in every nation where it allegedly occurred.

The fact that all evidence that refutes the holocaust is criminal in every nation where it allegedly occurred is especially relevant if you are accepting any evidence at all from those nations.

Refusing to consider evidence is the definition of bias, bigotry and a disregard for justice.

Without objective forensic evidence all we have is a story made up of piecemeal recollections of events from paid and coerced fuckwitnesses.

I refute those stories with correctly applied logic and science.

The crucial event of the story is the cyanide gassing of millions of Jews. That couldn’t have happened as claimed. The story is bullshit.

Jews have published books illustrated with pictures of themselves shirtless dragging piles of gassed bodies from the chambers to cremation ovens.

But cyanide is absorbed through the skin and NOBODY could have survived a single day of such activity much less collecting reparations into their old age reminiscing about it years later.

Those Jews lied.

Anyone who ever saw the naked body of somebody who died from cyanide asphyxiation would NEVER forget the red skin colour. The bodies necessary reaction to being unable to process oxygen.

Not a single surviving fuckwitness ever mentioned it.

Also, no dark cherry red skin discolouration was visible in any supposed photographs of bodies of so-called victims of the holocaust.

The fact is that it can’t be explained it and only bigotry prevents you from recognizing the ONLY logical conclusion.

Not a single fuckwitness testimony or alleged photograph of bodies was of anyone who died from cyanide exposure.

So much for the “evidence” of a holocaust.

And so it goes with every bullshit story told by paid and coerced lying Jews. The facts prove otherwise.

Have you ever heard of the Bletchley park decrypts of the famous German enigma machines? It was credited for turning the tide of the war as allies knew what military actions the Germans were planning.

Only released in the 1980s those translated messages included prison camp information, deaths, transfers and requests for medicines to treat illnesses. The numbers of dead don’t support the holocaust narrative of which there was also no mention of.

Here are some actual enigma decrypts from Bletchley park in 1942 when deaths were at their highest.

Covering the period 3rd Aug. 1942 – 25th Sept. 1942

A further examination is made of Concentration Camp figures; deaths from typhus have reached a very high figure in AUSCHWITZ.

A suspected case of typhus is reported from AUSCHWITZ (223b/42). It is probable that on the 6th August Nachschubkdtr. Russland Mitte requests typhus vaccine for 50 men and spottenfever serum for 20

For the first time returns are given for deaths of prisoners (223b/14,24,43,50): the figures for August are: NIEDERHAGEN 21, AUSCHWITZ 6829 (or 6889) men, 1525 women;.

Firstly the number of dead for the month are nowhere near what is necessary to support the holocaust narrative.

Secondly, notable is the concern over typhus deaths and the requests for medical supplies to treat.

Thirdly, are you willing and eager to perform the feeble mental gymnastics required to believe, as the story goes, that Germans were communicating in code about prison camps while talking plainly about their military actions with their top secret enigma machines?

That would require you to really believe that Germany INTENTIONALLY lost the war to cover up the holocaust while ostensibly leaving lying witnesses alive in the prison camps to tell their stories as they retreated.

The contradiction refutes the story.

Let’s not forget another old timey favourite.The story of Babi Yar is a popular lesson in Jewish schools described as the single largest event of the holocaust.

The lesson is that between 30,000 and 100,000 Jews were taken to a ravine in Ukraine where they were killed.

The story is told by one Jewish survivor, Dina Pronicheva, an actress who testified that she was forced to strip naked and marched to the edge of the ravine. When the firing squad shot, she jumped into the ravine and played dead. After being covered by thousands of bodies and tons of earth she dug herself out, unscathed, when the coast was clear and escaped to tell the story.

She is apparently the only person in history to successfully perform a matrix bullet dodge at a firing squad. The soldier aiming point blank at her never noticed her escape. Never walked a few steps to the edge of the ravine to finish her off.

They were stripped naked to leave no evidence. Naked she had no tools to dig herself out from under 30,000 bodies and tons of dirt.

Only after the deed was done, the nazis realized that so many bullet ridden bodies were evidence. Oops, rookie move. So they brought more Jews and millions of cubic feet of firewood to dig them up, cremate them on gravestones and scatter their ashes in surrounding fields.

There has been no forensic investigation at the site. None of the bullets allegedly burned with the bodies have been recovered. Not one shred of physical evidence of this has ever been found.

There are military aerial photographs of the area at the time but they don’t show any evidence of the narrative, no people, no equipment, no firewood, no moved earth, no tracks of any kind.

Simply stating these facts is a crime in Ukraine where the Babi Yar narrative is taught in school.

The numbers of dead from German enigma decrypts does align with Red Cross numbers.

The Red Cross was founded in 1863 with the purpose of protecting the interests of victims of conflicts.

The Red Cross regularly visited all prison camps. It was their job to report the cause of all deaths. They recorded a grand total of 271,000 among all camps for the entire war. It is a matter of record.

The holocaust fairytale requires us to believe that they were so unaware of what might be happening that they completely missed 95% of the victims in prison camps.

AND that they had not so much as an inkling that a holocaust was going on right under their noses even though allied media propaganda was reporting it and it was their sole mission to identify it. Because there is no evidence of any Red Cross document suggesting they did.

Are you performing those feeble mental gymnastics?

Zyklon B is an off the shelf insecticide used for years before and during the war widespread and throughout Europe among other places in Prison camps to delouse clothing and bedding to save lives by preventing deadly typhus. The system employed heating to release cyanide gas, fans to circulate the gas and more to exhaust the chambers to make the de loused articles safe to handle.

Pictures of this equipment and the small de lousing buildings with clothing racks still exist in Prison camps. But no evidence of any gas delivery system has ever been found in the shower houses where the bullshit holocaust allegedly occurred. In fact, the story has changed to that they just threw the heat activated pellets onto the cold drainless floors in rooms full of people.

Such an inefficient method would have taken too long to kill the required number of Jews. The pellets couldn’t be spread evenly in rooms full of people. The cold drainless floors would have delayed the release of cyanide from the pellets that people would have swept away from themselves. Any dead would have released all their bodily fluids and their bodies covering the pellets. Vomit would have been added to the floor prior to entering such a room.

According to the testimony of the so called survivor, the timing entering the chambers immediately, the details shirtless survivor, piles of bodies with unvented cyanide gas pockets in every space between bodies, death from repeated exposure as per testimony would have been necessary, not just possible.

All Jews saying they did that necessarily lied.

According to Martin Gilbert in his book, Holocaust Journey, the gas chambers at Treblinka utilized carbon monoxide from diesel engines. At the Nuremberg trial of the Nazi war criminals, the American government charged that the Jews were murdered at Treblinka in “steam chambers,” not gas chambers.

Gasoline engine exhaust contains about ten times the carbon monoxide than diesel. Diesel exhaust is relatively safe. Even if the Diesel engines were running at their maximum of 500 ppm, death would take several hours. Far too long to support the narrative.

If Germans had used gasoline engines, death would have been in a few minutes. But in the holocaust narrative for treblinka diesel was used even though Germany had plenty of gasoline for their tanks. Nuremberg still recorded that they were “steam chambers”.

Somebody is lying. They weren’t both steam chambers and diesel gas chambers. Which stupid lie is more believable? Does it even matter to you?

The story of gassing Jews began as British propaganda to turn popular opinion against Germany. It was inspired to draw attention away from Jewish Bolshevik war crimes in Russia because that would work against allied propaganda. It also served global Jewish interests to create undeserved sympathy for Jews who had publicly organized boycotts of Germany to drive Germany to war.

There is a documented letter from the head of British propaganda to the head of the war office recommending that they cease the “gassing Jews“ propaganda because there was no evidence for it and if found out would work against their propaganda efforts.

Head of British Psychological Warfare Executive (Propaganda), Victor Cavendish-Bentick in a handwritten note, wrote on Aug 27th, 1943,

“We have had a good run for our money with this gas chamber story we have been putting about, but don’t we run the risk eventually we are going to be found out and when we are found out the collapse of that lie is going to bring the whole of our psychological warfare down with it? So isn’t it rather time now to let it drift off by itself and concentrate on other lines that we are running.”

Public Record Office Document F0371/34551 revealed by Stephen Mitford Goodson, ‘Inside the South African Reserve Bank’.

Jews had been publicly claiming holocausts of 6 million Jews in various nations no less than 166 times between 1900 and 1945. Only to coerce sympathy to raise money and provide the ultimate poor Jew victim identity to be milked when required. Like the wastes of skin who fake cancer on go fund me pages.

What’s the probability after being proven lying over 166 times that the 167th claim is true? Better to buy a lottery ticket. Though the bullshiit narrative has been like a lottery bonanza for Jews.

The only thing the bullshit holocaust narrative has in common with WW2 is that they were both the creation of Jews.

These Jewish leaders are admitting it. Are they lying?

They are properly referenced quotes from Jewish leaders demonstrating that they had intended to create and force Germany into WW2.

That kind of evil is absolutely relevant when considering the character required to lie to the world about a holocaust for the 167 th time.

“We Jews are going to bring a war on Germany”. David A Brown, national chairman, united Jewish campaign, 1934.

“The Israeli people around the world declare economic and financial war against Germany …holy war against Hitlers people”

Chaim Weismann, the Zionist leader, 8 September 1939, Jewish chronicle.

The Toronto evening telegram of 26 February 1940 quoted rabbi Maurice l. Perlzweig of the world Jewish Congress as telling a Canadian audience that” The world Jewish Congress has been at war with Germany for seven years”.

[B G]

Cyanide is only absorbed through the skin in the form of liquid or highly concentrated gas. Otherwise to be rabidly fatal it needs to be ingested or inhaled. After the gas concentration in the "showers" had dissipated, the residual chemicals would have been inside the bodies being moved or in solid deposits on their skin and in that form it wouldn't be a threat to rapidly absorb through the skin of those doing the moving. Besides which, the compound they used at the death camps had been in use as a commercial pesticide for 60+ years at that point and could be safely handled before it was rendered gaseous and cleaned up after the gas settled/dissipated; any pesticide which renders an area also more or less permanently fatal to humans passing through isn't particularly useful to people.

By your "logic", anyone who's ever held a cartridge of ammunition would be severely wounded because that would be the effect of being hit by that same bullet if it were fired from a gun.

As far as different fuels being used in different places, in the initial stages of the use of gas, they used what they had on hand.

[B G]

"Jews had been publicly claiming holocausts of 6 million Jews in various nations no less than 166 times between 1900 and 1945. Only to coerce sympathy to raise money and provide the ultimate poor Jew victim identity to be milked when required. Like the wastes of skin who fake cancer on go fund me pages."

I'm going to need you to provide a link to some documented evidence of each of the supposed 166 instances (where/when a claim was made and at least the first and last name of both the person making the claim and the name of who recorded/reported it having been made).

If you can't or won't provide that detailed proof, then you are, by your own standard, a liar and nobody can or should believe anything else you say (according to the rules you'd want the whole country/world to live under).

[B G]

“The Israeli people around the world declare economic and financial war against Germany …holy war against Hitlers people”

Chaim Weismann, the Zionist leader, 8 September 1939, Jewish chronicle.

Zionists being in strong opposition to a leader who carried on the long and oft-repeated tradition of scapegoating Jewish people for the problems of his society and who openly referred to "the Jewish Problem" in response to the invasion of Poland is supposed to prove what exactly?

If you think that this statement has anything at all to do with disproving the holocaust, then you'd also have to take the genocidal language in the Hamas charter (and the group's stated intention of killing all of the Jews "from the river to the sea") as proof that claims of horrific conditions in Gaza are fabricated, which is something that literally only you yourself might be deranged enough to believe since anyone versed in actual logic would know that none of those four things are connected in any meaningful way.

[B G]

"Covering the period 3rd Aug. 1942 – 25th Sept. 1942

A further examination is made of Concentration Camp figures; deaths from typhus have reached a very high figure in AUSCHWITZ.

A suspected case of typhus is reported from AUSCHWITZ (223b/42). It is probable that on the 6th August Nachschubkdtr. Russland Mitte requests typhus vaccine for 50 men and spottenfever serum for 20

For the first time returns are given for deaths of prisoners (223b/14,24,43,50): the figures for August are: NIEDERHAGEN 21, AUSCHWITZ 6829 (or 6889) men, 1525 women;.

Firstly the number of dead for the month are nowhere near what is necessary to support the holocaust narrative."

Himmler was assigned to begin implementing the "final solution" in July of 1942, covering essentially all of the occupied territory east of the German border, starting with establishing security. Records of a typhus outbreak in the time before the mass-scale executions were begun has absolutely no bearing on whatever you think it's supposed to prove. The likelihood that Auschwitz had been converted from a work camp to an extermination camp in under 60 days from the initiation of the plan at the highest levels of government is nil even when it's Germans in charge of getting it done.

Also, records from the German government indicate that at least 1 million people were transported to Auschwitz by train during the course of the war, but only 7000 were there when the area was recaptured by Soviet forces. Where did the other 990 thousand go? Did they all just book a cruise and settle along the French Riviera without being noticed? Maybe they all scattered into the woods undetected by the advancing army? You think that because you have questions from one person's account of an event in Ukraine that nothing of the sort ever happened anywhere, but apparently have concluded that hundreds of thousands of people simply vanished from existence without explanation (since you reject the premise of the explanation given arrived at by tens of thousands of people doing years and decades of research (except for the "forensic investigation" of a patch of ground that's been open to public access for 70 years that you think would somehow produce a meaningful result)?

[B G]

"That would require you to really believe that Germany INTENTIONALLY lost the war to cover up the holocaust while ostensibly leaving lying witnesses alive in the prison camps to tell their stories as they retreated. "

The only way that Germany could have possibly "covered up" the holocaust would be to win the war. Losing the war, intentionally or otherwise, would have meant the allies getting their hands on all of the written records, and the sites of the camps (with some remaining living witnesses in them, in most cases); not to mention the well known maxim that "history is written by the victors". Intentionally creating that outcome is the farthest thing from a plan to cover up what was done that any thinking person could conceive of, short of sending Reifenstahl out to Auschwitz to shoot video documentation of the mass executions and then presenting the film reels to Churchill and Truman personally.

Again, I don't know what you think the word "logic" or the phrase "properly applied" means, but I don't think it means what you think it means. Clearly one of us understands what "logic" actually is, and one of us thinks that there could be a mental connection between losing WW2 and keeping the Holocaust from being discovered. Unfortunately, it seems like only one of us has the capacity to actually make the distinction, let alone figure out which is which.

[Rob Misek]

“After the gases had dissipated”

Without exhaust fans, the gas wouldn’t have dissipated for hours and gas pockets would have been in every space between the “piles of bodies”.

There wasn’t enough time to let the gas dissipate naturally and kill the necessary amount of people. “Survivors” describe opening the doors and dragging the bodies out.

Impossible

[Rob Misek]

Here are images from newspapers and referenced dated occurrences of Jews falsely claiming holocausts.

You’ll need to refute them all

https://wearswar.wordpress.com/2017/10/31/repeated-claims-of-6-million-jews-dying-decades-before-hitler-vs-ignored-soviet-death-camp-tolls/

[Rob Misek]

It proves that Jewish leaders declared war on Germany in 1933.

[Rob Misek]

Your reference to incomplete records certainly isn’t proof of a holocaust.

You also didn’t address the fact that the decrypted enigma numbers of dead were insufficient to support the holocaust story.

[Rob Misek]

When one persons account at Babi Yar is all we have and it is completely discredited as it has been, the story is discredited

[Rob Misek]

The mere absence of records of where people moved during a war doesn’t prove that they were killed in a holocaust.

[Rob Misek]

As I said before, You haven’t refuted anything that I’ve said.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

Goddamn, Mizerk, you flop-sweating faggot, did Bergstein bang your girlfriend or something?

[Rob Misek]

15000 Palestinian civilians including 10000 women and children have been slaughtered by Jews in Gaza. They’ve specifically targeted vulnerable civilians in refugee camps, hospitals, schools and their homes. The destruction there is total. When there is a ceasefire the world will get its first glimpse of what Jews have done with our aid.

This is the work of the Israeli government for Jews.

Our veterans didn’t die so we could be a party to this. Our support of these Israeli terrorists spits in the faces of our fallen soldiers.

You may want to be a party to this Jewish apartheid, genocide and crimes against humanity in Palestine but I don’t and will always oppose it. It’s long overdue that we stand up to and stop these terrorist Jews. We will be judged for all history by our actions or inaction.

Here is proof of the plans
they are currently implementing for all the world to recognize. Their final solution for Palestinians. It’s not a plan to rescue hostages. It’s a plan to kill and forcibly displace an entire population of people that Jews have been oppressing for 75 years.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Policy_paper:_Options_for_a_policy_regarding_Gaza%27s_civilian_population

Jews have been fantasizing about and claiming to be victims of holocausts for over 100 years. Accusing others of committing genocide and crimes against humanity against them. Only in their case to falsely raise money and sympathy to steal Palestine and oppress and terrorize Palestinians. Now they’re realizing their dream and true nature in Gaza.

They have threatened to use nukes they aren’t supposed to have and are demonstrating that they are the worst group of people on earth.

Who could ever again be coerced by the term antisemitism? Jews have earned that recognition with their genocide and crimes against humanity in gaza. It’s recorded for all time never to be obfuscated or forgotten.

Fuck you piece of shit lying waste of skin terrorist Jews.

[B G]

"The mere absence of records of where people moved during a war doesn’t prove that they were killed in a holocaust."

The absence of records of them being taken somewhere else, in combination with the fact that none were ever seen alive again anywhere on the planet after the war and the admission by the soldiers who operated the camp that they'd systematically executed people by the thousands and incinerated the bodies under orders from their chain of command, combines to make a strong enough case that anyone who understands the concept of logic would believe that the people in question had been killed and incinerated; not to mention the large stores of personal belongings (clothing, jewelry, eyeglasses, gold dental fillings, etc) found at the liberated camps.

Even if there weren't multiple corroborating accounts and data points all leading to the same conclusion, the lack of "detailed forensic analysis" (what they're supposed to analyze in the ash from the incinerators, I have no idea) proves absolutely nothing. Absence of proof doesn't equal proof of absence; one of the first and most basic precepts of logic is one that you're repeatedly ignoring in the process of pretending to have somehow "properly applied" the process to the rat's nest of your thought process.

[KeelyRaphael]

Do you want to earn money without investing money. That’s how I started this job and Now I am making $200 to $300 per hour for doing online work from home.
Apply Now here———>>> http://Www.Smartcareer1.com

[The Last American Hero]

She must be Reason’s preferred candidate since she doesn’t get the daily bashing that Trump or Desantis get.

[Butler T. Reynolds]

Nat-Cons are always the poor victims, aren't they?

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

And right on cue to prove my point:

Bullies, trolls, and propagandists love not having any retribution…reputation or otherwise. We’ve set up this all-consuming aspect of our lives where people see no consequence for being horrible individuals. To contrast what goes on in most internet comment threads with the Founding Fathers and the Federalist Papers is amusingly inapt. It’s also amusing to think that free speech will be crushed if you have to put your actual name to what you opine on the internet. Letters to the editor used to require it. I’ll admit that it’s a big step given that people have grown accustomed to anonymity…but I favor some broader requirement. I think it will raise the quality of interaction.
AJ_Liberty (5f05c3) — 11/15/2023 @ 12:39 pm

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

These are the same people who pontificate about “muh principles,” mind you. When the rubber hits the road, they can’t wait to start tasting boot leather. And for the cherry on top, this dipshit is notably not posting using his real name.

[Charlene G. Ring]

I am making money from home with Facebook. I received $15000 in this month for doing easily home job. I work in my part time only 3 to 4 hours a day on Facebook. Everyone can earn more cash easily from home. For more information visit below this website…….

This Website➤———–➤ http://Www.Pay.Salary49.Com

[Public Entelectual]

Modi in five inch heels.

[Diane Reynolds (Paul.)]

Because of her unconstitutional totalitarianism and her neocon war mongering, hopefully, she will never be president.

You're making Shrike hard.

[Truthteller1]

All the trolls are outraged.

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD 2: Steampunk Boogaloo]

She’s not our concern. She has a very small constituency.

[The Last American Hero]

She has the backing of the mic. That’s not nothing.

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD 2: Steampunk Boogaloo]

She has zero chance of being the nominee. Unless her only opponent is Krispy Kreme.

[NOYB2]

If Trump drops out, she has a good chance of being the nominee: boomer billionaires love her and DeSantis is being eliminated.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

Yeah, but if Trump actually did drop out (or was forced out somehow), his voters would just go over to DeSantis. D’s not getting traction mainly because Trump is in the race, and his voters aren’t going to care about DeSantis’s Trumpian policies if they’ve already got the real thing.

So ultimately, Haley won't be the nominee barring some 2012 Romney-style reindeer games at the convention. And if she’s actually the nominee, she’s going to lose anyway because the Trump voters would simply abstain from voting for her in the general. She needs them to actually win, and she’s too dumb to understand that.

[GraniteLiberty303]

I don't know about that. The Democrats are just plain awful, Biden looks like a walking corpse, so if it isn't him its Harris (awful) or maybe Newsom (vomit). Anything could happen at this point. If Trump is forced out, DeSantis implodes, and Vivek doesn't catch on, well.......

God help us.

[JohnZ]

God knows how much Adderall they have to inject into that corpse just to get it in motion. Electro shock tremens? Speed,? Who knows what else.
The problem is that as the disease progresses it requires more and more medication until it is no longer effective. Joe becomes a mannequin.
The it's off to the slaughterhouse.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

I guarantee the same center-right figures currently saying in full-throat that they'll vote for Democrats if Trump is the nominee, would be absolutely livid if Trump voters decided to vote for Biden if Haley gets the nomination.

[ErinS]

100 percent! Working on behalf of the warmongering international elites, in no way having an in interest American lives.

[JohnZ]

There you go. You nailed it. The only thing Haley wouldn't be able to accomplish is the brutal rape of Cathy O'Brien or shoot someone.

[One-Punch_Man]

Come on. We know the websites ask you if you are 18 that's enough.

Honestly, I could care less about social media. It's a vacuum chamber for narcissists mostly. I do understand her point, you can say anything on there like "Trump is a Russian asset", or "Biden is a genius" and people take it as real. Facebook and others ban opposing view points as misinformation when it's not.

How about making it so you have to show valid ID to vote first? Wait, Democrats saw that's racist? Why? I can't buy a gun or liquor without an id but I can vote.

[Nardz]

"you can say anything on there like “Trump is a Russian asset”, or “Biden is a genius” and people take it as real."

Yea, CNN, NYT, and the rest of corporate media lie with impunity.
That was her point, right?

[NOYB2]

How about making it so you have to show valid ID to vote first?

An establishment Republican neocon globalist like Nikki Haley would NEVER agree to such an offensive, crazy, racist idea!

[MrMxyzptlk]

I hate to do this but "I could care less" means you do care, at least a little. The proper phrase to indicate you absolutely do not care about the issue is "I couldn't care less." It's a small detail and while we may argue about the meaning of decimate, should and shouldn't do not mean the same thing. If we let that happen we may as well just grunt at each other instead of use a language.

[LIBertrans]

Pick up on the DC Comics lexicography embalmer!

[conservative]

Exactly. What little base she had, is now lost. Just another shill for the political machine.

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD 2: Steampunk Boogaloo]

If the RNC somehow forced her on the party it would be the end of them. She’s not wanted.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

It would just be a repeat of 2012. She might win independents, but too many GOP voters would be pissed at her for pushing out their preferred candidate and simply not show up. And she'd probably come up with some clusterfuck of an organizing and vote-canvassing operation like Romney did with Orca, too.

[NOYB2]

My guess is that most independents despise her.

She appeals to the geriatric Republicans who thought Bush was smart and Cheney was dreamy.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

My guess is that most independents despise her.

Some polls are showing her ahead of Biden, which you don't really get unless you have a lot of independent support. But that won't matter if she can't convince Trump voters to actually support her, which they won't. They'll take the devil they know over some early 2000s-neocon avatar who's more intent on making them be nice than actually advancing a political agenda that's in their interests.

She appeals to the geriatric Republicans who thought Bush was smart and Cheney was dreamy.

Absolutely. And that ought to give most GOP voters pause, especially after this dumb stunt of hers.

[A Thinking Mind]

Then once she has a list of names, she can draft all of them to send to Palestine to fight Hamas.

How can she be this terrible?

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

She's a center-right corpo dick-sucker, nearly all of them are the drizzling shit.

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD 2: Steampunk Boogaloo]

Center maybe, but not ‘right’.

[Dillinger]

she just wants to know who still thinks she's hot.

[SRG2]

Did anyone?

[Dillinger]

lid for every pot? I can see it if you're into the 80s sitcom mom look

[SRG2]

Fair point.

[DesigNate]

When I met her 10 years ago I totally would, but definitely not so much now.

[Jefferson Paul]

I could have misread it, but didn't ChemJeff say something in yesterday's Roundup about wanting her to do adult films if she didn't get the nomination?

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD 2: Steampunk Boogaloo]

That ship has sailed. And on policy she’s hardly the next Thatcher.

[Nardz]

https://twitter.com/shoe0nhead/status/1724623064334323772?t=CLlhdIiCVKAA7JekU_iRmg&s=19

Nikki Haley saw one mean tweet from like HitlerBussy420 and is now on a crusade against internet anonymity

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

June's character arc the last few years has been a great source of amusement.

[Nardz]

I've only been exposed to her on Twitter, and just a couple years, but she seems fairly sensible.
Hilarious to see all the tankies in her comments seethe.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

She’s one of the more well-known Internet dramacows, although I admit she can be entertaining in small doses. She tends to adopt the political positions of whomever she’s sleeping with at the time. I think her husband is actually some MAGA-hat wearing Catholic, which is why she's ranged from a rad-left socialist to a Tucker Carlson-adjacent centrist over the years.

[ErinS]

I know, and most current candidates did seem smart, but they seem to change ideas when they run for President, and she definitely seems to have changed. But she’s saying what she currently thinks and it’s not good. I despise a person that changes fundamental ideology, nuance is okay, but not ‘I’m not saying what I used to.’ That indicates a person that will buy whatever she’s sold, and there is no shortage of lobbyists.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

[Brandybuck]

I remember in my youth, when people were debating the "penumbra" of privacy rights, people (boaf sides) would say, "Why do you need privacy if you have nothing to hide?"

Decades of thinking about this, the answer is clear to me: Because nothing everything that you want to hide is illegal, or should be illegal. And the people who want you to disclose it probably want to regulate or ban it. Example: A sexual affair. Not illegal. Your spouse would strongly object, but it's not illegal. So why is it any of the government's business?

Should Ashley Madison dox all of its users by law? Uh no!

But it's not just sexual affairs. Maybe you just want to post a contrarian opinion on a forum, such as Hit and Run. Now there are posters here who I am sure would love to enforce a conformity of political opinion. Should the real world identity of the commentariat be disclosed? Don't forget, Reason was sued to try to acquire the identity of the "woodchipper" poster.

Or perhaps you're a poster on Steam forums, and you utter the opinion that you think Starfield is a good game. Do you really want the unhinged rage-aholic maniacs knowing who you actually are? Holy shit!

Or maybe you don't want you boss knowing you're ragging on the company online.

Tons of reasons for privacy and anonymity.

And gosh dammit, I have to agree with DeSantos here, anonymity is a core principle of this nation.

[sarcasmic]

The authors of the Federalist Papers used pseudonyms.

[damikesc]

Rather solid point.

[Don't look at me!]

And they ended up being part of a revolution that threw off the government for a new one.
That’s why she thinks anonymity is bad.

[sarcasmic]

I doubt anyone is concerned about people throwing off the government any time soon.

[conservative]

Naive, aren't you.

[R Mac]

Did you miss the reaction to 1/6?

[LIBertrans]

That's true. Monarchy in France, England and Qing China measured political power in terms of pyramids of severed heads.

[DesigNate]

The 9th and 10th did a fine job of covering our privacy rights, no need for emenations and penumbras. Just sayin.

[B G]

In theory, they at least delegate privacy rights to the individual States. In practice, FDR all but repealed them with the New Deal, and LBJ nailed the box shut with the Great Society.

The self-proclaimed "liberals" in the country will no longer tolerate the existence of a court in this country that might be willing to rule on almost anything based on 9A or 10A (just look at the reaction to Dobbs). Way too many dogmatic statists in the USA now consider themselves to be "guardians of Freedom", and use a version of newspeak in which whatever they want to impose on everyone is, by definition, "liberal" simply because they buy into it.

[I, Woodchipper]

she is a moron and a petty tyrant but... it doesnt matter. Because Trump is going to be the nominee for the R party

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

It's not GOP voters she's trying to appeal to with this shit. It's NeverTrumper conservatives who've always supported the surveillance state and will vote Democrat if Trump is the GOP nominee, like Patterico and Allahpundit, and liberals like Nina Janckowicz, Amy Klobuchar, Elizabeth Warren, and Francis Haugen who want the government to use tech companies as de jure propaganda organs for the Democratic Party.

[Eeyore]

liberalsfascists

[SRG2]

NeverTrumo conservatives are still often enough GOP voters, though, unless you wish to claim that regardless of registration or membership, if you're not a Trump supporter you're not a GOP voter.

[Mother's Lament]

"NeverTrumo conservatives are still often enough GOP voters"

All twelve of them.

The rest will yet again regretfully vote for Biden.

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD 2: Steampunk Boogaloo]

Anyone voting for Biden at this point is a traitor.

[SRG2]

There are about 40 million registered Republicans and about 75% of them support Trump, I think.

[B G]

Will they still do it when it's clear that a vote for Biden is a vote for Kamala?

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

To be fair, not nearly as much anymore unless the nominee is a globalist neocon.

[DesigNate]

I think if you vote for Biden (especially now) because you’re a butt hurt Republican that Trump is the GOP nominee, no, you’re not a real conservative or GOP voter.

If they were real conservatives they’d vote for the constitution party or write in someone.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

If they were real conservatives they’d vote for the constitution party or write in someone.

Exactly.

[JohnZ]

Well, voting may not matter much at this point, not after dementia Joe's latest gaff during his meeting with Xi.
Next week, Taiwan is invaded by China and sleepy Joe will only be able to shit his Depends.

[kaxago]

I AM Making a Good Salary from Home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing, under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone. go to home media tech tab for more detail reinforce your heart.

This Website-------------->  https://www.dailypro7.com

[NOYB2]

Anybody with an ounce of decency would vote for Joe Biden over Nikki Haley: they are both totalitarian a--holes hell-bent on destroying America. But if you vote for Biden, at least the Democrats have to own it.

[The Last American Hero]

Do they? They haven’t had to own shit so far.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

Voting for Haley wouldn't make a dime's worth of difference anyway; she's there to be a punching bag for Democrats, not be the next Reagan.

[charliehall]

Trump himself doesn't want a surveillance state; he wants full fascism with his political opponents in concentration camps or deported, and due process denied. Yet the same people who (correctly) complain about Haley's unconstitutional overreach are silent about Trump's even more dangerous outrages.

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD 2: Steampunk Boogaloo]

What a bunch of insane bullshit, completely disconnected from reality. You have a sitting president who is using government entities, including FBI, DoJ, etc. as political weapons. Including illegal prosecutions of a former president. But you say ‘nothing to see there’.

At the same time you attack the man being persecuted. Who did none of those things during his four years in office.

You are a massive hypocritical liar.

[MrMxyzptlk]

I say this as a friend and with all the love in the world, many of the decafinated brands have all the full flavor you've come to expect from regular coffee.

[SRG2]

Nope - but Starbuck's Cafe Verona is one of the best decaf blends I've found.

[Paper Wasp]

Peet's French Roast decaf, for sure.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

LOL, yeah, let us know when Schedule F gets implemented. In the meantime, Haley would actually do this with the full support of the mass media and the political establishment.

[Zeb]

I'm not sure what I think about the president having complete discression to fire civil servants, but when they are actively working in opposition to a president, there is a real problem. The president is the only elected person in the executive branch, it should not be run by unelected, mostly anonymous bureaucrats.

[R Mac]

It was a coup.

[SRG2]

It's the Trump Exception again. Trump can go all ausrotten for his enemies and call the left vermin in language best written in Fraktur but that doesn't show any authoritarian impulses whatsoever.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

LOL, bitch, he didn't practice a single ounce of riot supression in 2020 when he had every resource to do so. The government is chocked to the gills with marxist-influenced commissars, including the military's top brass, who gleefully posted department-identified "resistance" twitter accounts.

No, I'm not worried about Trump's shit-talking even if he's actually elected (spoiler alert: he won't be) because 1) the evidence is pretty clear he's not going to follow through, and 2) no one in the offices is going to listen to him, anyway.

[NOYB2]

The Nazis hated Fraktur because it was old-fashioned. The Nazis were progressives.

The people who "go all ausrotten for their enemies" in the US are progressives: they have been weaponizing the legal system against their political enemies and their young thugs go around beating up anybody who disagrees with progressive policies while being protected from prosecution by a legal system filled with progressive operatives.

The US does have a fascism and Nazi problem: just look in the mirror.

[R Mac]

Still waiting on your examples of pogroms in Florida dipshit.

[DesigNate]

Hahahahahahahaha

Goddamn man.

[NOYB2]

The U.S. Supreme Court has not established that non-citizens seeking to stay in the U.S., particularly in the context of visa applications or initial entry, have due process rights equivalent to those in other legal contexts, such as criminal proceedings. The denial of a visa is generally not seen as a deprivation of "life, liberty, or property" under the Fifth Amendment.

[LIBertrans]

That is a popular thing with Christian national socialists. Look at how Germany went after Bert Hoover helped them in 1931.

[Brandybuck]

Nominating Trump would be a guaranteed win for the Democrats. You can argue all you want that he's the only True(tm) Republican, and you might be right. But we all know every Republican will vote for him, and no Democrat will. But the biggest bloc of voters is still unaffliated and independents. How do you get their votes? They aren't the party faithful, how do you convince them to vote for Trump.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

How do you convince Trump voters to vote for Haley? Hell, for that matter, how do you convince GOP voters who prefer DeSantis or Ramaswamy to vote for her now?

She's fully confirmed here that she's just another surveillance state shill and can't be trusted. Whether she wins independents or not is immaterial; Romney won independents in 2012 and Obama still kicked his ass. Haley and every other non-Trump candidate needs to convince Trump voters, who make up the majority of the party's electorate, that they'll advance the GOP political agenda in the face of disingenuous, bad faith political opposition from the Democrats and won't be asking them "pretty please" every time they need to get something done.

Haley, like most of the center-right, is too worried about policing her own party's voters instead of taking on the people who will gleefully submarine her agenda every chance they get.

[LIBertrans]

How did the Gee Oh Pee and Warren Commission convince voters to vote for Lyndon?

[Spiritus Mundi]

Why can't there ever be good candiates? Where is the "I want to leave everybody the fuck alone" option?

[sarcasmic]

Where is the “I want to leave everybody the fuck alone” option?

Nobody wants that.

People get elected by promising to stick it to some enemy.

[Idaho-Bob]

Sad but true.

[charliehall]

Yup. The Republicans are promising simultaneous wars with Mexico and Iran.

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD 2: Steampunk Boogaloo]

Biden has got us into this, you stupid bitch.

[The Last American Hero]

Better than China and Russia!

[JFree]

Disagree. Almost every voter wants that. Pols simply choose to be lazy and put everything in good v evil terms.

I'll agree that those terms are much easier to just trigger an emotional response from people. To engage the unthinking instinct-driven lizard brain that we all have.

But I'm getting sick of the fatalism that basically asserts that we are all lizards and we deserve all the ways we are manipulated.

[NOYB2]

You aren't being manipulated. Americans get what they vote for, good and hard: wars, debt, totalitarian government.

[JohnZ]

And the looming collapse.

[LIBertrans]

Enter the advantage of libertarian spoiler votes. Those give a LEVERAGED opportunity for anyone with sense or guts to stick it to the initiatiors of force right where it hurts most! Spoiler votes COUNT! Just ask Hillary.

[Homer Thompson]

no one will pay money to lobby for that

[mad.casual]

Assuming such a thing exists. Maybe Vermin Supreme wants to leave everyone alone, maybe he doesn't. That's got nothing to do with whether he's a good candidate or not.

[MrMxyzptlk]

A ballot that does not contain an option for "none of the above" with real consequences if such an option gets a majority of votes, is not a just ballot and the election results are suspect.

[LIBertrans]

In 1928 there were 8 parties on the ballot. People voted to let Jesus Freaks kick in their doors and shoot them over beer. They got what they asked for and deserved, and posse comitati were hunting down the door-kickers by 1932. FDR prolly saved the lives of a great many jackbooted minions by getting elected.

[Bill Godshall]

I suspect that comments at Reason would decline by 95% if all the trolls who post here actually had to use their real names.

[InsaneTrollLogic]

SPB2 would be doxxed and handed over for posting CP.

[NOYB2]

Yes. Just like people were afraid to criticize the Nazi regime and various communist regimes with their true names. This surprises you?

[Eeyore]

Forcing people to use their birth names is transphobic.

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD 2: Steampunk Boogaloo]

Probably because I would be targeted by democrat harassment groups, and targeted by government agencies like FBI! IRS, etc.. that’s the real goal of such a plan. To ensure that we can’t fight back if we say something a Party member doesn’t like.

We really need to reduce the surplus population of leftists in this country. The current number is no longer manageable.

[Bill Godshall]

As one who regularly posts comments at the WSJ (and who used to regularly post them here at Reason), I much prefer the WSJ's policy of requiring real names of those who post (as it keeps the posts and conversations more civil).

But I hate the WSJ policy of censoring posts that contain words and terms WSJ censors don't want the readers to see.

The WSJ still bans the term "Trump Derangement Syndrome" and even the acronym "TDS", even as their Editorial Board and several of its columnists have defamed Trump weekly since 2016.

[Dillinger]

call it "Banana Pudding" see if it catches on.

[sarcasmic]

Is the term "Biden Derangement Syndrome" applicable to those who weekly or daily defame the president or his son?

[Mother's Lament]

Wut?

[sarcasmic]

Chanting "Go Brandon" and "Fuck Joe Biden" isn't deranged?

[Michael Ejercito]

Fuck Joe Biden

[Mother's Lament]

No more so than pussy hats or five years of "Fuck Trump".

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD 2: Steampunk Boogaloo]

No pussy, it’s not. Although I know such things are distressing to you.

[DesigNate]

You know there’s a difference between the two, right?

[R Mac]

Lol.

[NOYB2]

It's impossible to "defame the president or his son". Literally impossible.

[Minadin]

'BDS' is already a political term currently in use.

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD 2: Steampunk Boogaloo]

You’re such a vile little pussy. Of course you want to protect Hunter. He’s your idol.

[NOYB2]

The WSJ still bans the term “Trump Derangement Syndrome” and even the acronym “TDS”, even as their Editorial Board and several of its columnists have defamed Trump weekly since 2016.

So their censorship agrees with their political preferences?

I mean, I give the WSJ credit for not being batshit insane leftists, but they are neocons, globalists, and establishmentarians.

[charliehall]

Neocon ideology keeps us free and globalist ideology keeps us prosperous.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

Ah, it's Opposite Day today, it seems.

[NOYB2]

Neocon ideology keeps us free and globalist ideology keeps us prosperous.

If by “us”, you mean a small American political and social elite, you are correct.

Most Americans, however, don’t benefit.

[Nardz]

The WSJ is totalitarian globalist garbage

[Butler T. Reynolds]

How about the Everybody Is Always Dogpiling on Trump For No Good Reason Syndrome?

[Dillinger]

Ken Schultz hardest hit.

[Mother's Lament]

Was Ken a Nikki! fan?

I miss his essays sometimes.

[Dillinger]

if everyone has to use their names Ken won't be special anymore. and yes I enjoyed his posts. he would talk sports with me.

[Michael Ejercito]

What happened to him?

[A Thinking Mind]

The extent that I know is that he was very pro-Ukraine on the Ukraine/Russia war, without being willing to acknowledge the degrees to which Ukraine is overflowing with corruption itself. He got into many fights here and eventually stopped showing up.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

Yeah, he went full tard-rage over the idea that it was possible to dislike both Russia and Ukraine, and left in a snit.

[Dillinger]

I heard he lives @wapo

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD 2: Steampunk Boogaloo]

Why would a human do that to themselves? WaPo isn’t for humans. It’s for democrats.

[Naime Bond]

If she believes in this will mandatory doxxing be next on her agenda to 'save' America?

[R Mac]

Good question, if that is your real naime.

[Public Entelectual]

The latest TDS sufferer to defame Trump is his Chief of Staff:

https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2023/11/mick-mulvaney-harvard

[Michael Ejercito]

Snitching is an act of betrayal.

[charliehall]

Claus von Stauffenberg betrayed Hitler. Would that more had. Not that Trump has moved full steam into actual Nazi rhetoric, can you seriously suggest that Mulvaney isn't right?

[Mother's Lament]

So I often hear Nazi rhetoric this, and racist talk that, but when I ask for an example you guys never give me one or come up with already debunked BS like "Trump called White Supremacists 'fine people' you know".

Do you have any concrete example of Trump being Hitler?

[R Mac]

That retard claimed there were pogroms occurring in Florida the other day.

[JohnZ]

The more these terms are used the less currency they have.

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD 2: Steampunk Boogaloo]

If you want to see a Nazi follower, look in a mirror. Your regime is pure evil, and by extension, so are you.

[NOYB2]

He's desperate for a job.

[Jerry B.]

"The 2024 GOP candidate has proposed something blatantly unconstitutional."

So has the Democratic candidate, several times, but you don't hear Democrats griping about it.

[The Last American Hero]

Or Reason!

[GraniteLiberty303]

Ah yes, the "sane" Republican. Republican establishment candidates just keep getting worse and worse every election cycle.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/37g4n4uu19I

[LIBertrans]

As are their platforms.

[mad.casual]

So… with one “side” demanding names of those posting offensive material on the internet…

And the other side insisting that we need anonymity for people posting offensive material on the internet…

We can all agree that Section 230 has utterly failed to block and screen offensive material on the internet and that it was a dumb idea to begin with, right?

[NOYB2]

Section 230 served its purpose: it helped Google, Facebook, and a few other big corporations, as well as the politicians they support.

[Davy C]

No, we can't. It was never going to block all offensive material, but it helped block some of it. And liabilitywise It's way better than "either you have to just not look at what your users are posting at all, or you have to be responsible for every single thing they post".

[Nardz]

No it isn’t. It allows platforms to be publishers and control perception via what views are allowed and which are censored without having to take any responsibility for their actions.
It’s Soviet shit.

[mad.casual]

I'd ask if you realize the vast majority of S230 cases are actually cases where the Service Provider published something the users thought shouldn't be published or publish something and then, in violation of their TOS, but according to internal policies, redact, demonetize, derank, or otherwise blacklist or shadowban after publishing, rather than blocking something the user's thought should be published... but, given your retarded false dichotomy it's pretty obvious your grasp on reality is tenuous at best.

Pro-retard, anti-free speech... blessed are the shitposters for they are more virtuous than mendacious dumbasses like you.

[JFree]

Well it's about time that the opportunity for Karens was extended to all women in their 50's and not just white women in their 50's.

[Eeyore]

Cucking for Zuck.

[BadLib]

At least under Nikki Haley's regime we might not have to suffer from the likes of KeelyRaphael, TwilaMiller, Charlene G. Ring, kaxago here as they (it?) could be banned once and forever even with Reason's non-existent moderation for spam.

(Has anyone ever seen a spam post that has been reported here via Flag Comment actually disappear?)

[MrMxyzptlk]

They are usually gone when I come back to check the replies after a day or so. Maybe that's a function of my own account so I don't see flagged comments. I don't know.

[Nardz]

I just immediately mute them

[TJJ2000]

Nikki Haley = Republican In Name Only.
Hint, hint: LIMITED government - Not Surveillance State.

[Butler T. Reynolds]

When has the GOP been limited government? Even lip-service to that notion is a thing of the past. Nope, Nikki is indeed a Republican.

[Red Rocks White Privilege]

Turns out being anti-government isn’t a good recipe for actually running a complex society, especially when your opponents use that principle against you to advance all kinds of rad-left bullshit.

[TJJ2000]

Not as-if the last Republican trifecta had a De-Regulation committee or anything right? Or not as-if the Democrats weren't constantly pushing for growing 'environmentalist' regulation right? Or not as-if one exited the Paris Accord and the other Re-instated it right? Or not as-if one repealed hundred of E.O.'s while the other Re-instated them all and added another hundred right? Or not as-if the Democrats didn't constantly push for gun regulation right?

[West Texas]

Some of those anonymous founding fathers absolutely were national security threats.... to the empire that wanted to retain its power.

Gee, that sounds familiar.

[RickAbrams]

The NAACP Supreme Court case guarantees that a person's membership in an organization, such as the NAACP, maybe kept secret in order to avoid retaliation for belonging to a group with unpopular views. People in Los Angeles take advantage of this law with a group called HELP (Hollywoodians Encouraging Logical Planning). The city retaliates against people who challenge it corrupt land use decisions. Thus, the membership is secret. It seems that Freedom of Speech includes freedom not to say who you are. When words becomes criminal, then it is not speech. Forced identification is a type of advance censorship.

[mjs_28s]

"Nikki Haley: "Every person on social media should be verified by their name" because of "national security.""

Um...what?

so because of a few bad actors hundreds of millions of people have to give up their privacy online?

Screw you, sweetie.

What was it that was said about giving up freedom for security? The person that is willing to do so deserves neither.

[Longtobefree]

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

This was first used by Franklin for the Pennsylvania Assembly in its "Reply to the Governor" (11 Nov. 1755)

[Thegreatone]

The sad part of this is everyone sees it as Republican policy. Most of us reject this type of insane censorship. Haley represents only the RINOs who would tear down our country for their own gain.

[Elmer Fudd the CHUD 2: Steampunk Boogaloo]

She needs to be knocked out of the primaries as soon as possible.

[Nardz]

Hm.

https://twitter.com/CWBOCA/status/1724868476861301153?t=y75Vc_ixx9hOFJg84ZL99A&s=19

To the cowards hiding behind the anonymity of the internet and posting "Hitler was right":

You got something you want to say? Why dont you say it to our faces…

[Video]

[tekcoyote]

"The First Amendment prevents the federal government from meddling with the speech policies of private tech companies."

Really? Where does it say that? What it says is that people have, with few exceptions, the right to say and publish what they want. I can't seem to find the part that says that the gov can't "meddl[e] with the speech policies of private tech companies." I don't see that it lacks the ability to require that people stand up for what they say.

Help me find those clauses.

[TJJ2000]

Congress shall make no law ... prohibiting the *free exercise* thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.

Pretending that meddling with speech policy of the 'press' or pretending that tech companies today are completely not an entity of the 'press' is just a flat out deceptive lie.

[Butler T. Reynolds]

Your hate for Zuck is sticking out.

[Sequel]

Robbie Soave is a brilliant defender of Free Speech. It is remarkable that he can explain the atrocity of what Nikki Haley said without engaging in bombast.

I just wish he would stop interrupting Bri so much on their discussion show The Hill Rising. She has excellent points that are often more intricately explained than his, thanks in part to his superior gifts of succinctness ... but her points often get derailed because of that.

[B G]

What about those of us with super common names? The last time I had my real name on a comment section login (Slate, I think, logged in using my google account), I almost immediately got accused of being a "Russian Bot" account.

Even with two commonly used spellings of both my first and last names, I've maybe been the only one with my exact name in a particular zip code once (living in rural Gallatin County, MT for 2 years of grade school) in my lifetime, and since the exact spelling combination has been made famous by someone I've never met (and probably never will), I even have a hard time finding myself via google search.

The "John Smith"s of the world wouldn't have total anonymity, but we'd all have a level of deniability if first/last name were the only required identifiers used for such purposes.

[JohnZ]

Haley is a Zionist neo-con who shills for endless wars that benefit the MIC and Israel. How much American blood has been spilled in the last 60 years that benefited only those two. The time has come for her and those who support that evil female likeness to go away.
She can take Bill Kristol, Vicky Nudelman, Max Boot, the Kagans and the rancid rest of the lot with her.
Put 'em all on a ship then sink it.

[LIBertrans]

Who cares? I just wish Reason would doxx all of that harridan's whacko infiltrators here. All normal and honest newspapers require an address and real name. Maybe they're on to something.

[Anastasia Beaverhausen]

"If X or Facebook want to require users to verify themselves, they can do so"

...and Reason ought to do the same - or at the very least, use a Facebook-linked commenting platform so that users are identified. Anonymous commenting has destroyed this comment section, to the point where 90% of comments are made by people I've muted for prior vile hateful commenting.

[Religion and Politics, my life]

This is very much like the Kamala Harris strategy in CA, deplored by most everyone, incl ACLU

Supreme Court Protects Non-Profit Donors From Kamala Harris’s Unconstitutional Disclosure Requirements
https://alec.org/article/supreme-court-protects-non-profit-donors-from-kamala-harriss-unconstitutional-disclosure-requirements/

"In general, California’s policy was so bad, and the 9th Circuits decision protecting the policy so off the beaten legal path that the ACLU, Council on American-Islamic Relations, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation all filed briefs supporting AFP. All broadly supported the proposition that government compelled disclosure of donor information has an unconstitutional chilling effect on free speech. All fear that governments and their political allies will use the lists to target and harass donors of causes unfriendly to the predominant political power in a state."

[LIBertrans]

Letters to Reason Magazine were verified back when I was a new subscriber. Today every girl-bullying bigot has several identities boosting National Socialism and Orange Hitler here 24/7. Maybe the idea isn't so bad, despite the Gee-Oooh-Pee harridan pushing it.