SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
When the church doors open, only white people will be allowed inside.
That’s the message the Asatru Folk Assembly in Murdock, Minnesota, is sending after being granted a conditional use permit to open a church there and practice its pre-Christian religion that originated in northern Europe.
Murdock council members said they do not support the church but were legally obligated to approve the permit, which they did in a 3-1 decision.
“We were highly advised by our attorney to pass this permit for legal reasons to protect the First Amendment rights," Mayor Craig Kavanagh said. "We knew that if this was going to be denied, we were going to have a legal battle on our hands that could be pretty expensive.”
City Attorney Don Wilcox said it came down to free speech and freedom of religion.
“I think there’s a great deal of sentiment in the town that they don’t want that group there," he said. "You can’t just bar people from practicing whatever religion they want or saying anything they want as long as it doesn’t incite violence.”
After permit approved for whites-only church, small Minnesota town insists it isn't racist
(Score: 3, Interesting) by takyon on Wednesday December 23 2020, @02:29AM (15 children)
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/12/22/trump-issues-batch-of-11th-hour-pardons-450196 [politico.com]
That's cold.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday December 23 2020, @03:54AM
That's one of those things that Trump isn't smart enough to have his own opinion on. I'm sure he relied on advisers, some of whom were rewarded handsomely.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 23 2020, @07:15AM (9 children)
I always thought Blackwater should have continued on, without any name change. Own it. FUCK YEAH, `MURICA
I'm going to miss Trump. He was the only president in many decades to really get it, fighting for the American worker instead of just for corporations and unions. The powerful hated him because he interfered with the outsourcing, the H1B and illegal immigrants, and most other ways of impoverishing American workers. He also interfered with their corruption, with the Biden family scheme in Ukraine being just the tip of an iceberg. (we don't pay our senate enough to get non-corrupt members) For the powerful people that Trump fought, that was like pissing in their breakfast cereal. They were furious.
Our nation has some dark says ahead, with a senile Chinese asset in the whitehouse.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 23 2020, @09:06AM
Ouch, so gullible.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by barbara hudson on Wednesday December 23 2020, @01:59PM (7 children)
The total dead may exceed the civil war (especially if the anti-Vaxxers don't clue up).
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 5, Informative) by cmdrklarg on Wednesday December 23 2020, @04:58PM (6 children)
Trump fights for one person: himself. Literally nothing else matters to him.
Answer now is don't give in; aim for a new tomorrow.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 23 2020, @06:59PM (3 children)
Of course, that is why he put himself through two campaigns against the candidates of the self-regarded elite and their mass media, four years of constant struggle against the same forces, put his assets in trust, donated his salary to charity, negotiated peace deals with sides stalled for decades, attracting vindictive partisan state prosecution efforts - as a septuagenarian who could otherwise have had a carefree life on Epstein's Island like the elites.
All purely just fighting for himself.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 23 2020, @11:22PM (2 children)
Trump is one of the elites, you sick, brainwashed dumbfuck.
You can't get any more elite or any more corrupt than Donald J. Trump. He had one, and only one, reason to run for office: To greedily shovel as much American cash into his pockets as quickly as possible. And he did quite an excessive job of that.
Meanwhile, his slobbering moron supporters applauded and screamed "Thank you, Orange Messiah!!11!1" as he reached around and grabbed each of their wallets and sucked it dry.
Donald J. Trump is the Deep State.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 24 2020, @04:49AM (1 child)
He is clearly some form of "elite", but "elite" was clearly meant to mean the sort of DC insider who looks down on normal Americans. That isn't Trump.
Corrupt? Seriously, WTF. Pondering this one, I can take a few guesses. It could be that you simply can't imagine a non-bribed person wanting to eliminate regulations. (get a clue: half of America wants that desperately) It could be a failure to understand the magnitude of numbers or that revenue is not profit, so that a foreigner paying market rate to stay in a Trump hotel seems like a scandalous bribe that could influence a man with a few billion dollars. After expenses, the profit (which Trump donated) comes to about 1/100000000 of Trump's assets. It could be the false claim that it was Trump (not Biden) who threatened to withhold foreign aid from the Ukraine in exchange for a personal favor. (yes, Biden did that and even bragged about it on video, and Trump got impeached for it -- we're in crazytown here)
I'm really not seeing Trump gain any money from being president. His wealth has gone down, to the tune of a billion dollars. He donated his whole salary.
Why do you even pretend to care about corruption? Presumably you support Biden. Biden takes a 50% cut of the fantastic investments and do-nothing employment that his crackhead son miraculously gets. Somehow the Biden family got rich on a senate salary, but that pays less than a FAANG software developer. (currently just under $200,000) We don't know of any legitimate way that Biden got rich, and he's somehow supposed to be less corrupt than Trump? At least Trump has a 100% legitimate excuse for being rich.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Saturday January 02 2021, @04:30AM
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 25 2020, @04:40AM (1 child)
I could say that of Hillary Clinton. It's not a bad fit for any democrat politician, really.
If I pretend you are correct, so what? The evidence shows that Trump fought for the things I wanted. That could be coincidence. What does it matter? He did what I wanted, no matter what his motive may have been.
But I look at it this way: he put himself in a hazardous job (assassination of presidents is common) and lost about a billion dollars. Until that virus hit, he had gotten unemployment down to record lows. He got rid of all sorts of things that were annoying and unfair. Neither you nor I can ever hope to see into the mind of another person, but it sure looks like Trump was fighting for me. If he wasn't, oh well, it worked out the same.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 25 2020, @08:57PM
Your stupid is leaking
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday December 23 2020, @04:24PM
More chilling is the lack of opposition. Only 13 lost reelection
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by Arik on Friday December 25 2020, @05:19AM (2 children)
It makes sense from a sociopathic point of view.
I don't know, I was taught to do my best to empathize with the opponent, to understand him, before bringing him down.
I have a hard time understanding this one though. Most issues, you bring up the 'conservative' position and if no one else will defend it, and we want a debate, sure, I can do it. Even issues where I am profoundly convinced they are wrong, and dangerously wrong - I can still see some decent points, I could still defend myself in a debate on the subject even if forced to take the 'wrong' point of view.
But this is truly evil. I could go so far as to offer a defense for treating them all the same - all little fish who did what they were told and then were hung out to dry for crimes that were ordered by the chain of command, and for which the chain of command faces no consequences whatsoever.
But singling out the one of the lot who showed remorse and attempted to repent, that's just pure evil.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 25 2020, @08:58AM
That one person threw his fellow Americans to the wolves. He's a traitor.
He's also out of jail anyway. Pardoning him would be for what purpose, to make sure he can have guns? :-)
Also, excluding him was funny, and it sends the right message.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 26 2020, @05:03AM
In wars there have always been two enemies: the enemy, and traitors. And traitors have invariably been seen as the worst, by far, of the two. This is why treason is almost universally treated with the death penalty, whereas enemies when captured tend (at least in ideal circumstances - emotion is a hell of drug) to be treated fairly, and frequently end up being released once the war is over. Their only real crime is being on the losing side of a war of which they may not have even agreed with. The man who gave testimony in this case may have been doing so because he felt it was the ethical thing to do, but it's generally much more likely that he agreed to say whatever the state asked him to say in exchange for immunity.
When you look at what actually happened in this case it's not so black and white:
1) The guards work to clear the road in preparation for an embassy convoy coming through.
2) One car starts driving towards the secured section even after policy initially tried to stop it and the guards fired warning shots at the vehicle.
3) From the perspective of the guards it appeared that a policeman was helping to move the car towards them. They found it a credible threat of a car bomb.
4) The people within the vehicle are shot and killed, as well as the policeman that was behind the vehicle moving towards them.
5) Other police within the area begin firing on the guards.
6) Guards return fire and begin launching flashbangs and other non-lethal munitions to clear the area.
7) One guard begins indiscriminately firing, even after multiple calls to cease fire, likely due to a psychological episode.
8) Above guard only stops firing once another guard points his weapon at the guard and threatens to shoot him as well.
The trials in general were also complete shit shows. In the trial the ballistic as well as radio evidence supported the claims of the guards. They reported in exactly as events were happening. And while many bullets were found at the scene, ballistics did not match them to the guard's weapons. Ultimately the conviction largely hinged on one of the guards who turned state witness and said whatever was requested of him in exchange for complete immunity. This actually led to the initial convictions against them being overturned. And after the state retried the case, it led to a hung jury. And this process repeated for several iterations (with the next trial again yielding convictions) until the present where Trump finally pardoned all of them.
I'm in no way defending the actions of the men. What I am stating is that the event is not the black and white scenario the media has portrayed it as, as well as the various legal issues surrounding the case.