Journal of Other Forum Analysis (Volume II, Issue 1)

[Uncle]

Yes, that is my fake bluesky account of a male version of Brit so I can read bluesky posts.

 


Don't hate the playa, hate the game.

dawg you have to de-yellow that pic, everyone at bluesky hates AI you are super sus with a chatgpt avvy

[Hap Shaughnessy]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/deadline-andrew-schulz-anti-woke-comedian-who-had-trump-on-podcast-pre-election-cast-as-dan-in-street-fighter-movie.1229754/page-3#post-142022946

 User Banned (1 Month): Racism

It might still be better than Mortal Kombat, which felt the need to introduce a new character should grown an iron vest as his "power" and a tattoo makes you "chosen" and is indicative of ability to unlock said power. They insisted on casting Asians to be "accurate" and see how that turned out: uncharismatic Raiden, unimpressive Shang Tsung, sad sap Liu Kang and Kung Lao having zero personality.

On top of that, one of the most iconic characters was turned into a failed Flesh Pits leatherback turtle who growls in a shed and loses to the new protagonist and now decided it was a good idea to turn Baraka into a grey-skinned, blue body marked full face mouthed buffoon. Cannot wait to see how badly they messed up Shao Kahn, Quan Chi among others. Street Fighter might as least be mindless fun.

[Hap Shaughnessy]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/harvard-linked-study-finds-israel-%E2%80%98disappeared%E2%80%99-nearly-400-000-palestinians-in-gaza-half-of-them-children-report.1227519/#post-141914082

 User Banned (2 Weeks): Inflammatory Commentary

nazis

[Hap Shaughnessy]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/ron-desantis-says-floridians-have-right-to-hit-protesters-with-cars.1216692/#post-141384885

 User banned (2 weeks): inflammatory commentary

I really hope the cancer kills his wife.

[Hap Shaughnessy]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/israel-has-attacked-iran-and-declares-a-special-state-of-emergency-update-trump-bombs-iran-read-staff-post.1217310/page-63#post-141582069

Zero chance of that happening with an actively hostile populace. Israel can strike from the air but they can't occupy such huge areas for any length of time.

You're aware Israel occupied the south of Lebanon for 20 years? And the Golan heights?

https://www.resetera.com/threads/israel-has-attacked-iran-and-declares-a-special-state-of-emergency-update-trump-bombs-iran-read-staff-post.1217310/page-63#post-141582174

 User Banned (1 Month): Justifying Annexation; Account in Junior Phase

Minuscule in size compared to two full countries so not really the same. Syria in particular is fucking enormous.

"Justifying Annexation"  

[Hap Shaughnessy]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/critics-say-zohran-mamdani-is-antisemitic-he-says-he%E2%80%99s-holding-israel-accountable.1225299/page-2#post-141854712

 User banned (1 month): conflating Jews and Zionists, account in junior phase

What's your point? Anecdotally a load of the older (white) South Africans i have met or am aware of still have a belief they have more of a right to the land and power structures in South Africa than black people do, a lot of people having that belief doesn't suddenly make it not deeply racist.

I don't think a Jewish person with ancestral ties to the land who is fleeing persecution really has anything in common with a white South African that comes from a foreign land and has no ties to it beyond it being a colonial enterprise. One is minority group that is persecuted, the other is a majority group that oppresses.

My point is that if a significant portion of Jews are Zionist, then if you're attacking Zionists you are by proxy attacking Jewish folks, and while you can say it's not because they're Jewish it's because they're Zionist, functionally to a Jewish person it may not look or feel different, and that's worth unpacking/reflecting on especially as it relates to checking and critiquing Anti-Semitism on the left.

[Snoopy]

Here's the problem: the grocery store program wouldn't work in Queens simply because it's too hard to get around. It's one store, where could you possibly put it that all the people who need access would have it? In Manhattan that's an easy choice, in Queens it's an impossible one. If you put it in Astoria or LIC, then Eastern and Southern Queens don't have any real access and you're just servicing the gentrified areas. You put it in Jamaica and access grows a bit, but the Rockaways, and other neighborhoods that need it most, still have zero access. There's no central location that works, that can hit all the neighborhoods that need the help and people know that. Beyond that, they're used to the city taking away services from their neighborhoods and not giving them.

These people are used to being totally ignored, to having people run for mayor talk about the gentrified areas and Manhattan and not their neighborhoods. It's an incredibly common refrain among the people that live in this part of the city. They don't have the programs or infrastructure he spent the campaign talking about making free, in fact they've been begging for it for literally decades. Only instead of getting it they either get told to go fuck themselves, as Adams did to Canarsie when they asked for a ferry so they could actually get to Manhattan in a reasonable amount of time, or the city just takes away stuff like bus routes in the redesigns. No shit the busses have low ridership, they show up once every hour and there's like one in the neighborhood that really only seems to exist to get you to the subway so you can get to Manhattan.

Real talk, I don't think the dude that wrote that article has ever really lived in the parts of the city I'm talking about because anyone that has would know this stuff, and the history these neighborhoods have with the city, already. People talk a ton about material concerns, well here they are getting totally ignored by everyone in their analysis.

A big reason why de Blasio was so competitive in these neighborhoods when he ran was he recognized all of this and spoke to it.

[Gameboy Nostalgia]

As I've gotten older I've aged out of most of my online-atheist-edgelord positions and developed a generally conciliatory attitude towards organized religion as part of a larger belief in pluralism, but I'm starting to remember why so many of us in the late 2000s arrived at "Fuck these Christians"

The named plaintiff is Muslim. It's important to remember that not all Christian denominations are regressive, and there's plenty of non-christian religion out there that is as regressive as the worst of Christianity.

Alhamdulillah. Sorry you can't pink pill children anymore without adult permission.

[Alpacx]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/harvard-linked-study-finds-israel-%E2%80%98disappeared%E2%80%99-nearly-400-000-palestinians-in-gaza-half-of-them-children-report.1227519/#post-141914082

 User Banned (2 Weeks): Inflammatory Commentary

nazis

Outsourcing my thinking about that "study" to a random on "X" because I'm not Benji and I ain't reading shit:

Rare b-dibs win:
https://www.resetera.com/threads/harvard-linked-study-finds-israel-%E2%80%98disappeared%E2%80%99-nearly-400-000-palestinians-in-gaza-half-of-them-children-report.1227519/#post-141915987

Given the study isn't actually related to Harvard at all, and Palestinian sources dispute it, we're going to lock the thread until a better source confirms this.

[HaughtyFrank]

Of course the OP is shoot

[Alpacx]

Of course the OP is shoot

He dropped the OP and didn't reply once in the thread 

[benji]

Some Ted The Serial Killer origin lore -

What complicated things further was that my family was notorious for never buying me shit I asked for outside of Christmas and birthdays, and making me save my own money to buy anything outside of those very specific scenarios, so I never really felt rich, even though we were pretty well-off. The only thing my mom would buy me without question was books. Toys, video games, etc were all "save up your allowance for it or wait for Christmas or your birthday" kinds of things. So I often felt like I was "behind the curve" compared to my peers in the "having cool shit" department.

By comparison, some of the poorer families I knew were a lot more open with buying their kids flashy presents like Power Wheels cars and shit. Looking back on it in retrospect, I have to imagine the parents busted their ass for gifts like that so their kids wouldn't feel like they couldn't interact with their peers because they didn't have the cool stuff everybody was talking about.

Notorious with who? How'd they get that way?

Also, I'm so shocked that a prominent member on Era thinks that being "rich" means you get whatever you want no questions asked and that it's some kind of character flaw to impose constraints on your consumption. Then goes on to assume that everyone is status obsessed while not even considering the possibility that they're poor because of unconstrained consumption habits. A forum where every other member seems to confess (or not like Shreds) to having debts from consuming more than they can afford.

[Gameboy Nostalgia]

Of course the OP is shoot

He dropped the OP and didn't reply once in the thread 

it's not about engagement, it's about educating. Chud.

[benji]

[Gameboy Nostalgia]

"This is a good show I don't see what the issue is. You're just being weird."

I'll be sure to keep that in reserve for the HBO Harry Potter show.

[benji]

Real telling how one thread has more replies than the other

https://www.resetera.com/threads/by-a-6%E2%80%933-vote-the-court-upholds-age-verification-laws-for-online-porn-holding-that-they-are-only-subject-to-intermediate-scrutiny.1230204/

Your points make sense in the context of creating a system of regulating social media use and access. The problem is that this isn't that, this is an attempt at allowing a soft ban on pornography by requiring some kind of public account and consent to monitoring, all of which is hoping that you will be too ashamed to bother using it.

 

Entire point of this is eventual queer erasure and hopefully more people start to realize that.

1000%

Yeah, the next step is claiming anything LGBTQA+ is porn and we have their true end game. It's not actually about the porn.

Also, how long till the registries of porn sites you sign up for, that have your ID, are then used to decide who is a pervert or not and who now should also be jailed? What that? You looked at something gay? Jail time.

This. Good point made earlier about this being intended as a way of banning LGBT+ material, though make no mistake they will push this onto furries and other forms of "sexual deviancy" as well. Because that's the ultimate goal of these hard-religious types: to deem any sexual activity beyond intercourse for conception as sinful and thus deserving of punishment and scorn.

I flipping hate the right and their twisting of words

I'll be honest here, this is for the best and I wish I could turn back time and stop me from consuming this shit endlessly when I was younger. To this day porn probably played a huge part in making me a dysfunctional adult.

So every man, woman, in-between and non conforming sex worker must suffer for your lack of control?

Then ban alcohol, social media, cigarettes, weed, And honestly every thing that makes us people.

Porn is getting banned nationwide in the US within the next three years.

Strange, why isn't Nepenthe, Messofanego and others in this thread lecturing these people that being anonymous on the internet needs to end?

[Gameboy Nostalgia]

Porn addicts crying about needing to show their ID.

America is an Islamic country now, degens.

[benji]

Moreover, it's bad because taking these kinds of rules from people who have made it clear they are actively pursuing a christo-fascist ban on pornography as a whole is a bad idea. You give them an inch, they'll take a foot. Stop them before they take one step toward the thing they want and have openly said they are trying to do.

Oh, so you can't give them just this ONE THING? You can't perform a little basic human decency?

[simiansmarts]

Porn addicts crying about needing to show their ID.

America is an Islamic country now, degens.

wtf I love Sharia Law now!?

[benji]

Which raises questions on shit like, say, data security. How much of a concern is them potentially getting hacked? Would they potentially see getting hacked as a boon, in hopes that it just applies further societal pressure and shame unto you? Questions that really shouldn't be asked when we're talking about allowing invasion into one's personal privacy, especially with arguably one the most personal and private things to a person - their sexual tendencies.

The guy at the gas station making a pervert database in his head is different than a service provider creating an actual pervert database with unknown privacy controls, cybersecurity, and proprietorship. I suspect the industry for verification was created by is heavily invested into by the people pushing for these laws, though it's just a personal conspiracy theory… i have no proof of this.

Frankly the worry about these databases being hacked is almost secondary given they'd absolutely just sell the data to the highest bidder without needing to be compromised if given the opportunity

I love that these guys don't even think about the state having this information and enforcement powers as they're writing warnings about the Christo-fascist plot to create Gilead just like in their animes. Doesn't even enter their head when they're talking about the law.

[benji]

Porn addicts crying about needing to show their ID.

America is an Islamic country now, degens.

wtf I love Sharia Law now!?

[Gameboy Nostalgia]

Porn addicts crying about needing to show their ID.

America is an Islamic country now, degens.

wtf I love Sharia Law now!?

Inshallah, brother.

[Gameboy Nostalgia]

Porn addicts crying about needing to show their ID.

America is an Islamic country now, degens.

wtf I love Sharia Law now!?

It should be a Sunni one.

[simiansmarts]

Porn addicts crying about needing to show their ID.

America is an Islamic country now, degens.

wtf I love Sharia Law now!?

Don't threaten me with a good time.

[Gameboy Nostalgia]

FREE FREE FREE PALESTINE
FROM THE RIVER TO THE SEA

[Gameboy Nostalgia]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/happy-pride-month.1204056/

Only three pages? 

[Gameboy Nostalgia]

The ADL made a Twitter thread demanding Mamdani call out random Twitter accounts he had zero association with for either making anti-Zionist statements, jokes about the "global intifada" panic or posts invoking conspiracy theories of Israel orchestrating 9/11. They also slipped in posts from random Facebook and Telegram accounts too.

Utterly delusional. Never seen this standard given to any other American politician.

Funny enough, the tweets are 10 hours old and only have likes in the low double digits. This is levels of washed I have never expect to see from the ADL.

FUCK THE ADL*

*unless they say something bad about Trump

[Cauliflower Of Love]

woo boyandgirlandtheotheroneandtheotherotherone

For the amount of heinouse shit happening on the state level, era seems to be absent as fuck. I hope they are actually finally not just online and in person.

[imsotired]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/critics-say-zohran-mamdani-is-antisemitic-he-says-he%E2%80%99s-holding-israel-accountable.1225299/page-2#post-141854712

 User banned (1 month): conflating Jews and Zionists, account in junior phase

What's your point? Anecdotally a load of the older (white) South Africans i have met or am aware of still have a belief they have more of a right to the land and power structures in South Africa than black people do, a lot of people having that belief doesn't suddenly make it not deeply racist.

I don't think a Jewish person with ancestral ties to the land who is fleeing persecution really has anything in common with a white South African that comes from a foreign land and has no ties to it beyond it being a colonial enterprise. One is minority group that is persecuted, the other is a majority group that oppresses.

My point is that if a significant portion of Jews are Zionist, then if you're attacking Zionists you are by proxy attacking Jewish folks, and while you can say it's not because they're Jewish it's because they're Zionist, functionally to a Jewish person it may not look or feel different, and that's worth unpacking/reflecting on especially as it relates to checking and critiquing Anti-Semitism on the left.

What is the statute of limitations on being a foreign colonial settler?  The Cape Colony was established in the 17th century.  If it applies when your ancestors moved there centuries ago then like half the world is a colonist.  Does China need to go back to its Ming borders?

[benji]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/supreme-court-allows-trump-to-move-forward-with-his-policy-to-end-birthright-citizenship.1230096/#post-142026912

So basically, if you're the child of immigrants and live in a red state, you're screwed?

Remind me never to move to a red state...

I mean, how far does that go back? What if you're the grandchild of immigrants?

You go back 150 years or so and a couple of hundred million would lose citizenship.

No, the ruling had nothing to do with birthright citizenship. Everyone still has their citizenship, the Supreme Court ruled on this over a century ago.

So we're not saying you can strip people's citizenship, just that each and every person you do it to will have to sue individually, and zero preventative action can ever be taken to stop it

No, they're not saying you can strip anyone's citizenship. They did not rule on the executive order.

So much power is being transferred by this court that I don't know how they'll allow a Democrat into office to use it. They wouldn't dare suffer that to pass.

The people should still try but this is scary as shit.

They don't have to worry about a Democrat using it, not because there will never be another one, but because Democrats care about the rule of law.

My dude they'll IMMEDIATELY reverse course on this shit when it's a Dem President. Did they do this shit when Biden tried forgiving student loans?

So the actual ruling here is "the courts can no longer protect the people from the President unless we say so"

Taking a hammer and breaking the union into pieces

Yeah, they basically just broke any way of preserving basic federal rights.

Democrats were opposed to nationwide injunctions during Biden's term. This has been a bipartisan complaint and legal commentators of all sides did not believe they were important or necessary. They only came about a few years ago and were increasing in number leading many to believe they needed to be stopped.

Yeah I don't think elections matter anymore. We'll get President Vance, Don Jr or the corpse of Trump pooping in his diaper by 2028. And the country will cheer for it.

That's the spirit.

No.. not just red states

If you're ANYWHERE in the US and you aren't an actual plaintiff in a lawsuit against the government, you are screwed, even if you are within a district that a federal judge rules against the government

This decision is absolutely disastrous

And if you do sue you have to be willing and able to sue all the way up to SCOTUS because SCOTUS is the only court that will have any sense of permanent weight. And because it's SCOTUS whatever they rule against you is effectively law.

This isn't the full-on nuclear option but if I'm reading it right it basically paves the way in gold for Trump to push the button with absolutely nothing to stop him. So of course he fucking will.

IANAL but this is my take as well. They're making it very hard to oppose the Executive.

This goes way beyond birthright citizenship. Anything Trump does and you oppose, you'll have to fight personally in court, after the fact. This obviously can't work.

  Are these dudes just figuring out courts work and have always worked?

Ending the Constitution by legal gridlock one amendment at a time

This has always been the plan.

If ICE disappears you in the middle of the night I'm not sure how you're going to be able to join as a plaintiff to really anything unless you have family or friends that can do it on your behalf

And if you join as a plaintiff is the federal government required to bring you back to the country?

What a mess

How exactly do you think you were going to oppose it before this ruling if they disappeared you?  

It's basically permission for a president to do *anything*, while creating a process so cumbersome to undo any of it that even someone who can afford to do so will take years to get through the process, and even then will only be able to get restitution for themselves, not reversal of the illegal policy.

Like by this logic, Trump could launch a policy of sending out the national guard to shoot a handful of random citizens every day, and all you could do is sue to claim that your relative's *particular* shooting was illegal and you're owed restitution, not stop the program. It's insane.

No, that's not how it works at all. Presidents are not granted powers they do not have. Why do you guys keep thinking this with every ruling?

Just break the fucking country apart at this point. There's no point in the US if the rule of law is nonexistent.

The entire concept of the Union doesn't work when every single system of government rolls over for one man with a blind hatred of everyone who isn't himself. Just end the experiment.

Well now we suddenly oppose the state.

Also, Dems need to be abusing this ruling to its fullest extent. Go to states and sue about mifepristone access since that dipshit Judge Kacsmaryk there issued a nationwide injuction about it. Start passing gun bans and make each state sue.

What the fuck does this even mean you drunk? A state passes a gun ban and then sues itself to overturn it? WHAT ARE YOU EVEN SAYING?

Er....I thought it was a slam dunk even for this court to say this was unconstitutional?

I can understand why people would think that, but never underestimate the ability for the GOP to choose the worst option for the country at any given point.

Or maybe you should understand that the question of birthright citizenship wasn't before the court.

I genuinely believe lower courts should defy this ruling and continue making nationwide injunctions anyway.

Okay? Nobody will follow them.

This seems a foundation for breaking the union. There's no point to being part of an alliance that doesn't have a mechanism to protect everyone in it.

Their ultimate goal is a unitary king who can do what he wants with no effective constitution. And a high court of wizard judges who, after the fact, make tweaks to the king's edicts that protect anyone they wish to retain franchise and favor.

 

I have always thought that any Supreme Court Ruling that changes existing Laws should by Law trigger review and vote by Congress. It would be a way to ensure Congress actually acts in cases where the Court is changing something and force the check.

This would just be eliminating judicial review and substituting legislative review.

This is an idiotic ruling and should be distinguished from those in which the court at least has some legal foundation to fall back upon as tenuous as it may be. We've had a few cases like that where yes, the Supreme Court has the ability to give legal deference to the executive, while conveniently ignoring that Trump is the worst good-faith actor imaginable.

But this, this is insanity. This is perhaps one of the most obvious quintessential examples where nothing but a nationwide injunction will suffice to address the harm. To do otherwise means a legal citizen of a state that upheld birthright citizenship may go into labor while traveling in a state that rejected it, and after giving birth they and their child may be considered illegals and subject to deportation. A legal framework where your citizenship flips on and off as you cross imaginary borders.

This is lunacy, the court is quite literally allowing for us to have birthright states and non-birthright states, like the good old 1800s.

Correct, and if you're a red state, they would not join the suit and therefore we would have half a country with birthright citizenship, half without.
We have a country where people are going to be crossing borders to end/have births.

This was not the case in the 1800s and is not the case now, the Court's old ruling on birthright citizenship still says Trump's executive order is invalid and states cannot determine citizenship.

Honestly at this point armed conflict is inevitable. The only question is when, not if.

Today everyone — except the made men of Trump and his king's court — became an outlaw. This is Middle Ages shit.

The government is attempting to eliminate birthright citizenship in order to block a common pathway to legal residency and eventual citizenship for immigrant families. By doing so, they aim to reduce the incentive for undocumented immigrants to come to the US in hopes that their US born children, who are currently granted automatic citizenship, could later sponsor them. An added benefit, removing birthright citizenship would also make it easier for authorities to deport entire families, since they no longer have to deal with the due process issues afforded to a US citizen.

All of this is unconstitutional but SCOTUS doesn't seemed phased by the power they are conceding.

The Supreme Court didn't rule any of that is constitutional.

Fuck SCOTUS.

These motherfuckers are complicit. If nothing matters, if the constitution doesn't matter, fuck everything, right? Fuck ICE, fuck Trump fuck all of these fascist motherfuckers!

Keep fighting this shit. Don't let these motherfuckers take your neighbors. Your friends. Your family.

FUCK. THEM!!

Keep fighting, America. Keep protesting. Keep gathering folks. These motherfuckers won't win!

Court that barely is in session will make all legal decisions on individual lawsuits. Definitely sustainable.

Guy who definitely knows how courts currently work.

So basically if they come and pick you up they can basically do whatever they want as long as they keep you from individually suing?

That's what they're hoping for, too. Because they'll blacksite your ass the moment they grab you and then pretend they don't know where you are so your lawyer won't even be able to find you to file the legal paperwork on your behalf.

So if someone gets snatched ICE on the grounds of being accused of being an illegal immigrant, even if they are a legal citizen, the only thing saving them is suing your way to the Supreme Court?

No, same as always, sue ICE in the relevant court.

Kinda crazy how you can effectively make more than half of America illegal citizens due to this.

Right now everyone is illegal. No one can help anyone. There are no automatic protections. If you are gone'd, you have no rights because you can't fight to prove you have any and no one else can defend on your behalf.

Fucking ballgame. We're all on Trump's lawn.

Is he or PlanetSmasher going to win?

At which point nobody is American except people Trump likes.

Which is again, why I'm saying there's no point in the Union anymore. If protective law doesn't apply to anyone, why follow ANY federal law? The entire concept of the nation is a complete and utter failure in the face of these kinds of rulings, so states shouldn't even bother considering themselves part of it anymore.

Just let it all fall apart. Let it die, and let Trump go down in history as the man who killed the US.

It means functionally unchallengeable authority over people who have zero rights.

Project 2025 in full, bass-boosted swing.

Which also has a boomerang effect of - if nobody has any protection, nobody is going to feel any reason to follow any existing laws because the country isn't providing the basic rule of law protection to its people that's supposed to be endemic to the entire concept of a nation in the first place.

Project 2025 thinks that it's going to result in a world where they have total Christofascist control of everything and everyone, but in reality it's basically going to result in absolute chaos. Once it becomes clear that nobody has anything left to lose, violence is going to start erupting everywhere.

I'm not American, so please bear with me. But isn't this almost union-breaking? There are going to be red states actually hunting their own citizens and blue states trying to keep them.

It's not almost union-breaking, it's blatantly union-breaking.

I think he's got it.

Kinda crazy how you can effectively make more than half of America illegal citizens due to this.

Without Birthright Citizenship exactly zero people are Citizens of the US. It would mean there exists no Citizenship in the US. In theory wouldn't it also mean the US Government has authority over nobody? Without a replacement of how Citizenship is defined this makes no sense. Additionally you would also need an Amendment to define that since an Amendment already defines it which will never happen in the current environment.