So a stooge for globalist politics and still an idiot after all that training and experience, bizarre.
Are you some kind of might-makes-right fag lad
Not when summary justice is dispensed without any actual inquiry into the facts of the matter. But I suppose it's ok as long as it's happening to someone else.
Neo is a good lass, even if she does hate me, I'm not going to dox her, sorry lad.
I didn't say I had to be irrational to ignore or violate irrational or obviously targeted and oppressive laws. What do you think you're doing right now criminal scum?
that's the whole point
He would have objected to the execution of the Duke of Somerset by some Kent lads
You would have a leg to stand on if the current state of the justice system wasn't fucked.
>Now it was the governor’s custom at the festival to release a prisoner chosen by the crowd. At that time they had a well-known prisoner whose name was Jesus Barabbas. So when the crowd had gathered, Pilate asked them, “Which one do you want me to release to you: Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus who is called the Messiah?” For he knew it was out of (((self-interest))) that they had handed Jesus over to him. While Pilate was sitting on the judge’s seat, his wife sent him this message: “Don’t have anything to do with that innocent man, for I have suffered a great deal today in a dream because of him.” But the (((chief priests and the elders))) persuaded the crowd to ask for Barabbas and to have Jesus executed. “Which of the two do you want me to release to you?” asked the governor. “Barabbas,” they answered. “What shall I do, then, with Jesus who is called the Messiah?” Pilate asked. They all answered, “Crucify him!” “Why? What crime has he committed?” asked Pilate. But they shouted all the louder, “Crucify him!”
tbh, that was the crowd that was there at the time. Overall support in Jerusalem might have been for Christ
We're an elitist institution SA no one is saying the masses are smart or should lead or make judgement calls.
Just because the current judicary is compromised doesn't mean we should completely do away with the rule of law. I would argue that there is a difference between -Breaking the law in an emergency to remove the poison currently in the judiciary (which is an action targeted solely at self-evident wrogndoing - in other words, the actual existence of the bad laws is the proof that they have been created, and the creators are publicly accountable so we know who they are already), and -Forming a vigilante gang to target an accused and let mob rule decide his fate, without even entertaining the possibility that he is innocent
Dissenter? So a thief or a murderer shouldn't be punished because they're merely exercising a right of dissent from the legal system? Unironically what did you mean by this?
Fair enough, I don't think anyone on here is advocating for a permanent state of vigilante mobs- but if we were to seek to redress the balance right now there has to be blood spilled in the streets. The police are compromised, the state is in on the injustice, if the mob is not the answer then what is?
Yes I understand that I was just advocating against blind obedience to authority, any authority.
Plaintext on a pastebin if you don't want to email it to me.
We can direct it through hatred of pedos tbh.
Anyone who has the ability to define the rules is a ruler.
Our disagreement is contextual tbh
pastebin it is, should be ready soon
I'm not sure I understand lad
This would actually make a decent blog post, assuming that's not what this lad is doing already
How far has their Brit/pol/ collapsed now?
They won't make the jump from Paedos to pakis, I'm basically waiting for the ethnic gangs phase like the crime wave in London but directed outwards, that'll force people to acknowledge the problem at long last.