1. Your cunt

1. Your cunt
2. Does people in your cunt forget, ignore or distort history?

>flag
>very often

people here don't care about their national history because it's so sad and pathetic that they'd rather just forget it

The only instance I can think of that is contrary to this is the Japanese internment camps in WW2, which were doubtlessly a violation of their rights.

In a more general sense I think that it's obvious that the people are routinely abused by the government.

Do you often ignore literal statements like "Shall not be infringed", or do you just intentionally forget or distort what they mean?

Why should japs count as "the people"?

Sometime I feel like WW2 was the only thing that happened in Finnish history. Fucking sick and tired of hearing about it.

They don't teach fatass history it in school here but even I've heard of jap internment camps

>Does people in your cunt forget, ignore or distort history?

No, because it's actually illegal to do so.

Because they were Americans of Japanese descent.

Yes
>In charge of the largest empire on the planet in ww2
>routinely act like we were the underdogs
Along with many other things.

>The only instance I can think of that is contrary to this is the Japanese internment camps in WW2
Forces migration of native americans. Instead of camps we used """settlements""".
Prison camps during the civil war. Usually had inhumane conditions.

Legally speaking both of those instances involved individuals whose citizenship status is incredibly confusing at best. (pseudo independent individuals in natives and rebels on the other hand).

In his current post he says "people", so I'll give you that. But logically one would have to assume it means Americans, or the second amendment wouldn't be relevant to the statement. So that makes natives very complicated - and the rebels had guns and did fight back. I think you'd have a hard time saying we just crushed them and marched them off to camps. The confederates rebelled and lost.

No such thing

>Do you often ignore literal statements like "Shall not be infringed", or do you just intentionally forget or distort what they mean?
The whole infringed quote has lost it's entire purpose and has become a parody.
This line is only used when the term "gun control" comes into play.
It's never used when talking about the unconstitutional use of wiretapping by the NSA. In fact, the "shall not infringe" people brand Snowden as a traitor.
It's never used when stop and frisk is brought up.
It's never used when American prisons have horrid living conditions and practices.
It's never used people are bullied because they pray to a make believe sky monster differently than their neighbor.

So please. Spare me. Constitutional rights are violated daily. But for most of the right wing, they only care about the second and sometimes the first.

>flag
We like to forget the genocide programs.

We are probably the last western country to stop genocide. It was illegal for sami to reproduce until 1975. All sami women were sterilized after puberty.

Just because right wingers are retarded and hypocritical doesn't mean you should be too. You need to either advocate for following all of the constitution or none of it. Picking and choosing only what you like best is not how a constitutional republic works, and is going to end us in a very bad state of affairs.

The fact that all of those violations you stated happen should disgust you. The fact that any right is violated should disgust you. Even the ones you don't absolutely love. Because of this thing called precedent, which means that when one right is violated it becomes more acceptable to erode the others.

>genocide
calm down sami

(((Jacob Would)))

Fuck my phone

(((Jacob Wohl)))

Ah the famous anglo relativism. Other countries really should do it.
When North Korea killed their america prisonner, instead of finding excuses and say they were not responsible, they should have gone the anglo way. "Yes we killed him, but you see we have the moral highground and it was justified because ".

Ah the famous french universalism. Seriously do you think you can share the same rights in a democracy with non-natives? Because to use the jap internment thing as an example there were japs who gave info to their homeland at the expense of the us

So if you admit that having constitutional rights à la carte is acceptable, I assume you see nothing wrong with the 100 miles borders around the US where those rights are already barely relevant, right?

I dont even get what youre trying to say lol

>hey don't teach fatass history it in school here
They do though? American civil war is taught almost as in depth as Russian one.