TimHauck

And here is DHS saying definitively that he was a terrorist

It doesn’t say the team he played for was here. And you still haven’t answered my previous question. Do you think that entering the country illegally (which of course this guy didn’t), should be punishable by being sent to a terrorist prison? The concern here is that he (and now we know several others), were sent to CECOT because of the Alien Enemies act because of dubious at best claims that they were in Tren de Aragua. You shouldn’t be asking me for evidence of his employment, you should be asking the government for more evidence than a tattoo of a crown that he’s in Tren de Aragua.

Professional soccer player that entered the country legally and had no criminal record and was sent to CECOT because of a tattoo inspired by Real Madrid and a photo on social media, tells of being beaten and used for propaganda (more evidence the “margaritas” were propaganda if anyone needed any). Bukele may be a piece of sh1t, but he’s not dumb. He didn’t want all these guys with no criminal record in his terrorist prison. https://abcnews.go.com/US/dreaming-soccer-coach-deported-tattoo-celebrates-release-cecot/story?id=124075548

And if I made the thread title something like ”Nazis are getting more comfortable showing their faces these days” …you’d probably say I was race baiting or something

I’m still a bit confused about this reply. Are you doubting the legitimacy of the video of the Israeli hostage being held by Hamas that was forced to dig his own grave?

By “baiting,” do you mean trying to get people to open the thread? If so, you got me. Yes I want people to open the thread I started. My point in bringing up Sweeney was, again, agreeing that neither she nor American Eagle are Nazis. So I agree that any outrage against that ad (which wasn’t a common leftist opinion, but yes some were saying it) is misplaced. And it should instead be directed at the real Nazis out there, who seem to be getting more open with it. Edit: Of course you are free to post whatever you want in whatever thread you want, but since there is already a specific thread where there is specific discussion about Sweeney, your link would probably be better served in there.

Bump

Yes. And like I said, I realize you probably can’t see the x post from the OP anymore but it was not about Sweeney, so I’ll excuse your initial post about her, and also the second if you made that one before seeing my first reply to you. The thread title and first sentence were saying that Sydney Sweeney and American Eagle are NOT Nazis, but that it seems like more people are becoming more comfortable sharing that they are one. The x post from the OP was an example of a woman who makes repeated Nazi comments.

Wrong thread

Also @Strike this was the post that seemed to start @supermike80’s tangent. He was trying to make it about the first amendment, and I was simply stating that taking away her (or anyone’s) verified status wouldn’t violate the first amendment. Nothing about whether or not I was “ok with it.”

I know the x post from the OP can’t be shown now, but it wasn’t about Seeeney.

Actually that part wasn’t really a question. I answered the only part of the post that had a question mark. HTH

I said they can do it.

I didn’t say I would like it. And I’d call Musk a hypocrite since he also said x would be “politically neutral.” But he’d be free to do it. I can’t remember exactly what happened but there were similar discussions on here when something happened to a lefty on Twitter after Musk took over and posters here said things like “ha now how do you like it libs!” And I pointed out the hypocrisy because they were basically acknowledging that there was still a bias, but now it went the other way.

Yes.

Sure, and no one is forced to pay her. Like Elon said from the beginning, he wanted x to have “freedom of speech, not freedom of reach.” The girl in the OP had a verified account. That means 1) her posts get boosted by the algorithm, and 2) she is eligible to be paid for them. It wouldn’t violate anyone’s freedom of speech if Nazi’s (or anyone x decided for that matter) couldn’t have verified accounts.

Meh, if it’s just threatening then it’s NBD according to some of the earlier posters in this thread

Quote from article: In-N-Out, known for paying competitive wages, would need to raise its hourly rate to $23 or $24 to maintain its service quality in California. This isn’t really clear. What was the hourly rate at In N Out before the law change? If it was already over $20, then they’d be a weird example to use. I do believe that this law likely resulted in less jobs. I don’t believe it’s the primary reason any particular store went out of business though.

Well for one this one isn’t really that old. And as I just said, @EternalShinyAndChrome seems to have increased his frequency of calling people gay combined with other insults. So just wanted to point out his hypocrisy since he was trying to claim in here that it wasn’t being used as an insult. We all know it was being used as an insult, you guys can stop trolling now.

Did you see @Horseman bring up a 9 year old discussion the other day? Lol

The recent bump wasn’t really because of Gaines. But I’ve noticed that @EternalShinyAndChrome in particular has been calling people gay (well, “ghey”) a lot recently, often combined with other insults. And I thought that was ironic since he was one of the folks in this thread trying to claim that calling someone gay wasn’t meant as an insult.

Are you sticking with no as the answer to the question I quoted? Lol if so

Do you think Riley Gaines and @EternalShinyAndChrome were using gay as an insult?

She can say it. But giving her the opportunity to be paid for saying it isn’t ideal.

Oh the irony…