Milo Yiannopoulos. Well

[Noir]

Well it was only a matter of time before this airship came crashing down. Alt-right conservative *and* gay? That's not likely going to do at all.

So now that he is advocating that grown men who are attracted to boys/girls with 'functioning sex organs / sexually mature (which he describes as 13 years+) is something positive, are y'all ready to drop him like a sack of sand? Or is the 'alt-right' tag he carries too important?

[BoogyMan]

Well it was only a matter of time before this airship came crashing down. Alt-right conservative *and* gay? That's not likely going to do at all.

So now that he is advocating that grown men who are attracted to boys/girls with 'functioning sex organs / sexually mature (which he describes as 13 years+) is something positive, are y'all ready to drop him like a sack of sand? Or is the 'alt-right' tag he carries too important?

Of course folks are going to drop the perverted piece of garbage.

[darin]

Well it was only a matter of time before this airship came crashing down. Alt-right conservative *and* gay? That's not likely going to do at all.

So now that he is advocating that grown men who are attracted to boys/girls with 'functioning sex organs / sexually mature (which he describes as 13 years+) is something positive, are y'all ready to drop him like a sack of sand? Or is the 'alt-right' tag he carries too important?

Except he didn't advocate that. (shrug)

[Noir]

Except he didn't advocate that. (shrug)

Didnt think you'd be in the 'alt-right tag too important' lot but fair enough.

[Kathianne]

Well it was only a matter of time before this airship came crashing down. Alt-right conservative *and* gay? That's not likely going to do at all.

So now that he is advocating that grown men who are attracted to boys/girls with 'functioning sex organs / sexually mature (which he describes as 13 years+) is something positive, are y'all ready to drop him like a sack of sand? Or is the 'alt-right' tag he carries too important?

CPAC isn't 'alt-right' if that is your word for racist, sexist, and accompanying phobias.

Milo made statements that sounded most definitely like MABLA. CPAC decided that they would not let him speak, they felt that backing someone advocating pedophilia was a bridge too far. Until those video releases, he was going to speak, but not as a headliner.

There's a significant difference between canceling someone's speech for their actions and preventing someone for speaking that has been invited through violence.

[fj1200]

Except he didn't advocate that. (shrug)

Umm, did you see...


CPAC isn't 'alt-right' if that is your word for racist, sexist, and accompanying phobias.

Milo made statements that sounded most definitely sounding like MABLA. CPAC decided that they would not let him speak, they felt that backing someone advocating pedophilia was a bridge too far. Until those video releases, he was going to speak, but not as a headliner.

There's a significant difference between canceling someone's speech for their actions and preventing someone for speaking that has been invited through violence.

I find it incredible that they invited him in the first place.

[Abbey Marie]

Well it was only a matter of time before this airship came crashing down. Alt-right conservative *and* gay? That's not likely going to do at all.

So now that he is advocating that grown men who are attracted to boys/girls with 'functioning sex organs / sexually mature (which he describes as 13 years+) is something positive, are y'all ready to drop him like a sack of sand? Or is the 'alt-right' tag he carries too important?

After all these years, you still don't know us very well, do you?

[Noir]

After all these years, you still don't know us very well, do you?

I was cautious, and rightly so given DMPs reply.

[Abbey Marie]

I was cautious, and rightly so given DMPs reply.

Maybe you should re-read D's reply then. He neither said nor implied that he's ok with such thoughts. You can criticize him for not believing that MY said those statements, but you are wrong to say anymore about it. His doubts about the truth of the quotes are a separate issue.

[BoogyMan]

Except he didn't advocate that. (shrug) He DID advocate for relationships with young boys. It is sickening. He is trying to walk that back now, but he cannot fix what he broke.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moYBug9G-NE

Yiannopoulos needs to go away, far far away.

[Noir]

Maybe you should re-read D's reply then. He neither said nor implied that he's ok with such thoughts. You can criticize him for not believing that MY said those statements, but you are wrong to say anymore about it. His doubts about the truth of the quotes are a separate issue.

His 'doubts about the truth of the quotes' mean either he had not heard what Milo has said and is speaking in ignorance. Or he had heard what Milo said and thinks it's fine.

[jimnyc]

Milo was/is unique in the way he addressed certain subjects. That was about it for me. Some seem to think there is a secret 'alt-right' group out there. :dunno:

But more comical is watching thread after thread of trying to toss things out there... and finding out that we aren't liberals... :laugh:

Again, I liked him as a speaker of sorts at times - but not surprising that his homosexual activities lead him to support this kind of crap.

[Elessar]

His 'doubts about the truth of the quotes' mean either he had not heard what Milo has said and is speaking in ignorance. Or he had heard what Milo said and thinks it's fine.

You are on both sides of the fence. Of course it boils down to either / or.
Which side do YOU favor?

Pedophiles need to be shot!

[Abbey Marie]

His 'doubts about the truth of the quotes' mean either he had not heard what Milo has said and is speaking in ignorance. Or he had heard what Milo said and thinks it's fine.


You cannot say D's post implied the bolded. As I'd said above, it clearly did not. And you really need to stop implying that it did. You are now at the point of defaming his character.

[jimnyc]

Looks like the fruity dangerous faggot is done, for now at least. His book publisher has now stated his book deal is done. Cpac appropriately dis-invited him from speaking. And he has now resigned, rightfully of course, from Breitbart news. Adios, Milo!! :laugh:

Gay supporters of old can't seem to understand why folks on the right aren't supporting Milo after this stuff was leaked. Too funny.

[jimnyc]

You cannot say his post implied the bolded. As I'd said above, it clearly did not. And you really need to stop implying that it did. You are now at the point of defaming his character.

That started many many moons ago with a signature you had, and the attempts to get little digs in against you haven't ceased ever since, at least in my opinion. Or he's in love maybe? :dunno: :coffee:

[pete311]

Milo has resigned
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2017/02/21/milo-resigns-breitbart-news/

[jimnyc]

Milo has resigned
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2017/02/21/milo-resigns-breitbart-news/

Beat ya to it a few posts back... and I'm glad, although I think they should probably have fired him instead. I'm sure that's what this is anyway, firing via resignation.

[jimnyc]

I've read that perhaps Soros is the one who funded and took down Milo? I suppose it doesn't matter.

Flynn was 'taken' down from the inside. No doubt Hillary's career was taken off course by inside information coming out in various ways. We saw similar with Podesta. We saw a bunch with Trump. I suppose this kind of stuff has always been around to an extent, but much more so getting out there now with the internet and social media coming out in full force.

Every last one of them are bad eggs, no doubt about that. The information about them, the "truth", bringing them down, is karma.

But long term effects, and how do we handle it?

All different ways here too. We have our own intel agencies gathering information, in various ways, depending on who you listen to. Then you have internal leaks, whoever that may be, and confidential information ending up on websites like Wikileaks. You have hacking on illegal servers. Then you have the servers themselves. Then you have flaming homos having their own stupid words recorded and then used against them down the line.

I suppose these few lines I've wrote can be discussed for about 7,000 pages now, depending on what your angle is. :)

[Trigg]

The alt-right a term made up by democrats, because they just LOVE labeling people.

[pete311]

The alt-right a term made up by democrats, because they just LOVE labeling people.

"White supremacist Richard Spencer, who runs the National Policy Institute, a tiny white supremacist think tank, coined the term “Alternative Right” as the name for an online publication that debuted in 2010."
http://www.adl.org/combating-hate/domestic-extremism-terrorism/c/alt-right-a-primer-about-the.html

[Trigg]

"White supremacist Richard Spencer, who runs the National Policy Institute, a tiny white supremacist think tank, coined the term “Alternative Right” as the name for an online publication that debuted in 2010."
http://www.adl.org/combating-hate/domestic-extremism-terrorism/c/alt-right-a-primer-about-the.html


Hillary and her ilk decided last year to label all republicans/people who didn't like her/people who disagreed with her as a member of the "alt-right" a term NO ONE had heard of outside of apparently white nationalist circles. It's a meaningless term thrown around by democrats who HOPE to discredit people who disagree with their politics. Sadly, that is business as usual with the MSM.

[Noir]

You cannot say D's post implied the bolded. As I'd said above, it clearly did not. And you really need to stop implying that it did. You are now at the point of defaming his character.

So he isn't okay with what 'isn't being advocated'? He can't have it both ways.

[jimnyc]

"White supremacist Richard Spencer, who runs the National Policy Institute, a tiny white supremacist think tank, coined the term “Alternative Right” as the name for an online publication that debuted in 2010."
http://www.adl.org/combating-hate/domestic-extremism-terrorism/c/alt-right-a-primer-about-the.html

Funny, I tried pointing this out to Gabby just way too many times - as she claimed over and over and over that the term was made up by Milo and Breitbart.

[Abbey Marie]

So he isn't okay with what 'isn't being advocated'? He can't have it both ways.

Huh?

[fj1200]

Hillary and her ilk decided last year to label all republicans/people who didn't like her/people who disagreed with her as a member of the "alt-right" a term NO ONE had heard of outside of apparently white nationalist circles. It's a meaningless term thrown around by democrats who HOPE to discredit people who disagree with their politics. Sadly, that is business as usual with the MSM.

Umm no, it was embraced by Milo and others and posted on Breitbart. And it's not a meaningless term to those who embrace it.

[Trigg]

Umm no, it was embraced by Milo and others and posted on Breitbart. And it's not a meaningless term to those who embrace it.

Really??? Because any video I've seen with regards to Milo and the alt-right he is denying having anything to do with it. Which makes sense since it, apparently, started on a white national site. I don't think those guys are fond of gays who sleep with black guys.

[gabosaurus]

All the various rats that cuddled up to Milo during his vile hate-filled reign are now rapidly deserting his sinking ship. :cool:

[Abbey Marie]

All the various rats that cuddled up to Milo during his vile hate-filled reign are now rapidly deserting his sinking ship. :cool:

As they should. Noir would have us believe that Republicans will defend any one in their party no matter what they do. (Which ironically sounds more like Hillary supporters than anyone).

[aboutime]

All the various rats that cuddled up to Milo during his vile hate-filled reign are now rapidly deserting his sinking ship. :cool:


gabby. Looks like you are trying to work your way out of the Liberal Dangers you created....NOW...YOU are up that creek, without a paddle, since Milo merely repeated the same VILE, HATE-FILLED, DNC talking points...You and the other Libs use, under your breath, while pretending to be upset about the treatment of THE LGBTQ gangs you support with your phony Tolerance.

[fj1200]

Really??? Because any video I've seen with regards to Milo and the alt-right he is denying having anything to do with it. Which makes sense since it, apparently, started on a white national site. I don't think those guys are fond of gays who sleep with black guys.

I don't think it's a secret that he published this on Breitbart.
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/03/29/an-establishment-conservatives-guide-to-the-alt-right/

And I don't think hrc put him up to it.

[gabosaurus]

As they should. Noir would have us believe that Republicans will defend any one in their party no matter what they do. (Which ironically sounds more like Hillary supporters than anyone).

I think it is overstated on both sides. If Hillary supporters would have defended her no matter what, she would be president right now.

[Abbey Marie]

I think it is overstated on both sides. If Hillary supporters would have defended her no matter what, she would be president right now.

Plenty did. Y'all did win that popular vote, right?

Others were apparently just not moved enough to get out and vote. Still others no doubt switched to Trump but would never admit it. But those who did support her turned a blind eye to her many "misbehaviors".

[Black Diamond]

Plenty did. Y'all did win that popular vote, right?

Others were apparently just not moved enough to get out and vote. Still others no doubt switched to Trump but would never admit it. But those who did support her turned a blind eye to her many "misbehaviors".
If every American had been forced to vote, trump
still would have won.

[gabosaurus]

Plenty did. Y'all did win that popular vote, right?

Others were apparently just not moved enough to get out and vote. Still others no doubt switched to Trump but would never admit it. But those who did support her turned a blind eye to her many "misbehaviors".

That is exactly my point. If everyone who pledged to support Hillary had voted for her, she would have won easily. Trouble is, some switched and others didn't vote at all. Which is why Trump won.
I am not contested his win. I never have. I am merely holding him accountable for his actions. Which, to this point, entirely favor the rich and powerful. In Trump World, if you don't earn millions per year and make corporate level decisions, you can go pound sand.