Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 3456789 LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 124

Thread: Can you name one time in History where it was a good thing to ban or burn books?

  1. #91 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    86,919
    Thanks
    35,051
    Thanked 21,761 Times in 17,091 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,342 Times in 2,261 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cordeela View Post
    Its simple; You just look at who is doing the banning and burning. You have to do tit for tat. Thats the problem with the people who support the good - freedom - rights et al. such people do not fight back.
    The problem to day is for example, ALL big tech is owned by lefties who all want Biden in office. There is no alternative to Facebook - Twitter - Amazon - google - they are all anti Mr Trump. I cancelled my Twitter - Watsap - Amazon - Paypal accounts on principle. I admit communication processes were easier when I used them but I can't support such evil, controlling anti my rights organisations.
    Why would I?
    You never fail to make me laugh.

  2. #92 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Posts
    787
    Thanks
    131
    Thanked 171 Times in 135 Posts
    Groans
    1
    Groaned 28 Times in 26 Posts

    Default


    LIFE IS SHORT - SMILE WHILE YOU STILL HAVE TEETH.

    we must all learn to hear what we do not like - the questions is not, "is it pleasant?" but, "is it true?"

  3. #93 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Anchorage, AK. Waikoloa, HI
    Posts
    18,756
    Thanks
    6,477
    Thanked 11,419 Times in 7,538 Posts
    Groans
    17
    Groaned 270 Times in 253 Posts
    Blog Entries
    25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    The Nazis thought it was a good thing.

    Anyway, there is no ban on Dr. Seuss books. They're still at libraries and you can still order copies.
    Isn’t Mark Twain cancelled?

  4. #94 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Anchorage, AK. Waikoloa, HI
    Posts
    18,756
    Thanks
    6,477
    Thanked 11,419 Times in 7,538 Posts
    Groans
    17
    Groaned 270 Times in 253 Posts
    Blog Entries
    25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatOwlWoman View Post
    I think that removing certain books is not right. But one of the best things about a country with free media is that we have the right to learn about when certain books are banned from library shelves. Burning books implies total eradication so using that word is inflammatory, so to speak. lol Certain books have been publicized as banned since before I was born. The cool thing about publicizing that is that it makes free and intelligent minds want to read them. It has always been so, throughout human history. I've read dozens of them myself. You?
    You are obviously a rayciss.

  5. #95 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    183,528
    Thanks
    71,923
    Thanked 35,503 Times in 27,049 Posts
    Groans
    53
    Groaned 19,565 Times in 18,156 Posts
    Blog Entries
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dutch Uncle View Post
    There's a long history of concern about government censorship. It's a legitimate concern, but that's not what's happening here.

    Now, when businesses choose a different strategy, some groups of people take it upon themselves to bitch about it. What concerns me is when these groups start pushing the Federal government "to do something".

    You and I both know that underneath this is the "Tech Lord" conspiracy theory and the demand that Trump's free account on Twitter be reinstated.

    The bitching about the Dr. Seuss books is just chipping away at "cancel culture", which now means anything the Republicans like.
    Conflating facts is a tool in the Republican playbook and has been for decades


    The Republican voter is just duped ....waiting for lies to protect their feelings so they dont have to admit they have been wrong all their lives


    It’s why the “own the libs” resonates with them


    All their lives people on the left that they know in real life have destroyed their debates in person


    So they HATE their nephew or niece

    They can’t stand aunt Betty

    They can’t stand their shift mate at work

    Their second cousin can’t be correct


    That means they don’t have the FACTS to win that debate in person


    So OWNING THAT DEBATE is impossible


    So they watch fox spew FAKE takes on what the left believes and the crap fox concocts to “OWN” the libs


    So they NEVER have to admit to themselves that they have been wrong all along


    Stupid silly childish crap instead of facts

    Pathetic thinking


    Guess where all that gets them


    Bad information in means bad decisions out


    They have committed their lives to being failed losers

  6. #96 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    64,533
    Thanks
    65,160
    Thanked 38,093 Times in 25,664 Posts
    Groans
    5,815
    Groaned 2,614 Times in 2,498 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Damocles View Post
    There has never been a "head mod"... All moderators are equal.
    But you're the first among equals?


    “What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
    ― Charles Dickens

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to christiefan915 For This Post:

    Doc Dutch (03-06-2021)

  8. #97 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    183,528
    Thanks
    71,923
    Thanked 35,503 Times in 27,049 Posts
    Groans
    53
    Groaned 19,565 Times in 18,156 Posts
    Blog Entries
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Damocles View Post
    Comey thought so but was overcome by the pressure from the AG, his boss, and the President. I believe that even you know that her gross negligence would have put me in prison because I would not have an AG and a President on my side. Political power, and IMHO corruption, saved her where nobody would have acted like that in my behalf if I had been even partially as irresponsible with SCI as she was.
    Crap


    Conjuncture

    Imaginings


    All designed to harm Hilary who cant fully kill because government secrecy


    Made up crap damo

  9. #98 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    64,533
    Thanks
    65,160
    Thanked 38,093 Times in 25,664 Posts
    Groans
    5,815
    Groaned 2,614 Times in 2,498 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Legion View Post
    Because his #2 changed the terms.

    Strzok, who served as the No. 2 official leading the probe into the Clinton email server, has been thrust into the center of controversy after news of his dismissal from Comey's team. In July 2016, Comey said that Clinton's use of a private email server while secretary of State was "extremely careless," but he added that "no reasonable prosecutor" would charge her. Strzok changed the language from "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless".

    https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/363194-former-fbi-agent-changed-comeys-language-of-clinton-email-use-to
    Maybe because it didn't meet the legal definition of gross negligence.

    gross negligence

    n. carelessness which is in reckless disregard for the safety or lives of others, and is so great it appears to be a conscious violation of other people's rights to safety. It is more than simple inadvertence, but it is just shy of being intentionally evil. If one has borrowed or contracted to take care of another's property, then gross negligence is the failure to actively take the care one would of his/her own property. If gross negligence is found by the trier of fact (judge or jury), it can result in the award of punitive damages on top of general and special damages.

    https://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=838


    “What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
    ― Charles Dickens

  10. #99 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    107,358
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 19 Times in 18 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    Maybe because it didn't meet the legal definition of gross negligence.
    So you say.

  11. #100 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    53,520
    Thanks
    252
    Thanked 24,566 Times in 17,093 Posts
    Groans
    5,280
    Groaned 4,575 Times in 4,254 Posts

    Default

    Another stupid righty thread. Can anyone show a book being burned? They are kids books. They are not political books. They were just written at a time that some racist caricatures were common. The people who owned them thought they were doing something wrong and decided to stop publishing them. The left had nothing at all to do with it. It was a Suess family decision. The left did not know it was happening until it did and then we were told it was our fault. Want a hoax, this is a good one.

  12. #101 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    136,602
    Thanks
    46,752
    Thanked 68,624 Times in 51,916 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,506 Times in 2,463 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Legion View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    Maybe because it didn't meet the legal definition of gross negligence.

    gross negligence

    n. carelessness which is in reckless disregard for the safety or lives of others, and is so great it appears to be a conscious violation of other people's rights to safety. It is more than simple inadvertence, but it is just shy of being intentionally evil. If one has borrowed or contracted to take care of another's property, then gross negligence is the failure to actively take the care one would of his/her own property. If gross negligence is found by the trier of fact (judge or jury), it can result in the award of punitive damages on top of general and special damages.

    https://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=838
    So you say.
    The legal definition in the link says it does, dumbass. You should try reading the links, Legion. It makes you look fucking stupid when you don't.

    Like you looked fucking stupid on the SF tent thread when you claimed the tents were paid for by Federal taxes or your idiotic Anonymous threads:

    Quote Originally Posted by Legion View Post
    Everyone who pays federal taxes is paying for them, angry boi.

    The majority of the costs will be reimbursed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. [/SIZE][/B]https://www.sfchronicle.com/local/article/S-F-pays-61-000-a-year-for-one-tent-to-house-16001074.php [/marquee]
    God bless America and those who defend our Constitution.

    "Hatred is a failure of imagination" - Graham Greene, "The Power and the Glory"

  13. #102 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    107,358
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 19 Times in 18 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Butch Uncle View Post
    The legal definition in the link says it does, dumbass.
    The "legal definition in the link" isn't germane to this issue, angry boi.

    Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18): With lawful access to highly classified information she acted with gross negligence in removing and causing it to be removed it from its proper place of custody, and she transmitted it and caused it to be transmitted to others not authorized to have it, in patent violation of her trust.

    https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/fbi-rewrites-federal-law-let-hillary-hook/

  14. #103 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    136,602
    Thanks
    46,752
    Thanked 68,624 Times in 51,916 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 2,506 Times in 2,463 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by evince View Post
    Crap


    Conjuncture

    Imaginings


    All designed to harm Hilary who cant fully kill because government secrecy


    Made up crap damo
    Hillary was corrupt but not a killer except by negligence.
    God bless America and those who defend our Constitution.

    "Hatred is a failure of imagination" - Graham Greene, "The Power and the Glory"

  15. #104 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    183,528
    Thanks
    71,923
    Thanked 35,503 Times in 27,049 Posts
    Groans
    53
    Groaned 19,565 Times in 18,156 Posts
    Blog Entries
    16

  16. #105 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    183,528
    Thanks
    71,923
    Thanked 35,503 Times in 27,049 Posts
    Groans
    53
    Groaned 19,565 Times in 18,156 Posts
    Blog Entries
    16

    Default

    Many other did exactly what Hilary did with a server


    For some fucking reason it was only treated as a crime when she did it


    Hum weird

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 166
    Last Post: 09-20-2020, 04:38 PM
  2. A day for the history books
    By Guno צְבִי in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-05-2019, 03:01 PM
  3. An Event For The History Books
    By Robo in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 09-04-2018, 05:46 PM
  4. This is one for the History Books: Jeff Flake's speech
    By Bourbon in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 01-18-2018, 08:23 AM
  5. Ugly Side of America - "Burn the Books!" at Tea Parties
    By ib1yysguy in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 04-14-2009, 09:29 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •