Page 105 of 113 FirstFirst ... 555809596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113 LastLast
Results 2,081 to 2,100 of 2249

Thread: Death of George Floyd and Subsequent Riots.

  1. #2081

    Default Re: Death of George Floyd and Subsequent Riots.

    I guess, FBI, DHS and Attorney General are all wrong, and Vanoi is right.

  2. #2082
    Vanoi's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    16,239

    Default Re: Death of George Floyd and Subsequent Riots.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    I guess, FBI, DHS and Attorney General are all wrong, and Vanoi is right.
    Wray's words aren't going away no matter how much you ignore them.

  3. #2083

    Default Re: Death of George Floyd and Subsequent Riots.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vanoi View Post
    Wray's words aren't going away no matter how much you ignore them.
    I wasn't the one who outright ignored all 3 agencies just to repeat same quote where he doesn't name any specific groups and just provides general definition which describes antifa and BLM perfectly: racially-motivated violent extremist group. You can perform olympic levels of mental gymnastics and grasp on as many semantic straws as you want, but it doesn't change the fact that definition is there and US officials on multiple level admitted that groups like antifa fit under that definition.

  4. #2084

    Default Re: Death of George Floyd and Subsequent Riots.

    Are you the FBI director and hiding it from all of us HH?
    One thing is for certain: the more profoundly baffled you have been in your life, the more open your mind becomes to new ideas.
    -Neil deGrasse Tyson

    Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable. Let us prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all.

  5. #2085
    Vanoi's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    16,239

    Default Re: Death of George Floyd and Subsequent Riots.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    I wasn't the one who outright ignored all 3 agencies just to repeat same quote where he doesn't name any specific groups and just provides general definition which describes antifa and BLM perfectly: racially-motivated violent extremist group. You can perform olympic levels of mental gymnastics and grasp on as many semantic straws as you want, but it doesn't change the fact that definition is there and US officials on multiple level admitted that groups like antifa fit under that definition.
    Wray's testimony isn't going away. FBI director Wray has already talked about both Antifia and BLM and does not describe them at all as RMVEs groups not terror groups. In fact he refers to anarchists when talking about Antifia, not RMVEs.

    You say they fit the definition because thats your interpretation. Your interpretation is your opinion and not fact. Unless Wray directly declares Antifia and BLM to be RMVE groups you have no argument.

  6. #2086

    Default Re: Death of George Floyd and Subsequent Riots.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vanoi View Post
    Wray's testimony isn't going away. FBI director Wray has already talked about both Antifia and BLM and does not describe them at all as RMVEs groups not terror groups. In fact he refers to anarchists when talking about Antifia, not RMVEs.

    You say they fit the definition because thats your interpretation. Your interpretation is your opinion and not fact. Unless Wray directly declares Antifia and BLM to be RMVE groups you have no argument.
    Again, Wray didn't name any groups, he only gave a definition, which describes groups like antifa and BLM. Other security agency and AG named them anyways, so the demagogic semantic point you are trying to make about my "interpretation" doesn't even stand here anyways. But feel free to repeat same mantra again, if that's your thing.

  7. #2087
    Vanoi's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    16,239

    Default Re: Death of George Floyd and Subsequent Riots.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    Again, Wray didn't name any groups, he only gave a definition, which describes groups like antifa and BLM.
    According to you it fits. Your opinion is not fact.

    Other security agency and AG named them anyways, so the demagogic semantic point you are trying to make about my "interpretation" doesn't even stand here anyways. But feel free to repeat same mantra again, if that's your thing.
    Wray's testimony is still not going away. He again discusses both BLM and Antifia and never once describes them as racially motivated violent groups.

    And your lying btw. Neither the AG nor DHS has ever described or stated that either Antifia or BLM were RMVEs.

  8. #2088

    Default Re: Death of George Floyd and Subsequent Riots.

    Again, everyone including major security organizations and Attorney General are wrong, but Vanoi's opinion is correct. Seriously dude, you should apply to CIA or something.

  9. #2089

    Default Kyle Rittenhouse-Kenosha shooter

    I know this is fairly old news, but I ended up discussing with people I know and they relayed an interesting point of view from another person we knew. The person has opposing views than I do but we get along well and have good discussions (almost always agree to disagree with politics). I have always considered him intelligent (and still do) and rational, though the last one I'm beginning to doubt, at least in a few items including this.

    The opinion of the person was that Kyle is a murderer and he basis this on the belief that Kyle shouldn't have been there and he had a gun. Hence if Kyle wasn't there the 2 guys would have been alive and none of this would have happened. Therefore Kyle is guilty of murder because he shouldn't have been there and have a gun. I have read this view on web sites (almost all left) but I just considered them trolls or those trying to blame everything on those who disagree with their ideology. You can read from the first link of people writing what I wrote above and blaming everything except the guys that got shot (Trump, NRA, etc).
    There are plenty of counter arguments to this situation, I just don't get the rational of those that are proponents of Kyle being a "murderer". Any thoughts from those that agree with the "he's a murderer" group?

    For those unfamiliar with the story (this was going to be a different story and these below are mostly notes):
    The news article I’m using for this completely surprised me considering their political bias, but in this case I found it very informative, straight to the point and most of all fact based:
    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/27/u...ing-video.html
    The other one from a conservative site which gives a possible origin to how this began:
    https://www.ammoland.com/2020/09/why...d-and-charged/
    It seems Kyle put out a dumpster fire that was lit by the “protesters”, and that made some unhappy, but that is speculation. But what is known is that people started chasing Kyle and this is how the rest of the story unfolded.
    Now the problem I have with this situation is those who somehow say it wasn’t self defense. As seen in this retailing of the event, I just don’t see it any other way:
    https://heavy.com/news/2020/08/kyle-rittenhouse/
    Article after article show Kyle was trying to help people with his “med-kit” , protecting property or cleaning up damage done by the “peaceful” protesters. The conservative Town Hall as well as others say such things:
    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethba...nosha-n2575328
    Then on the other side, the liberal outlets you have the victimization of the 3 that were shot:
    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/victi...b64f17e13a9546
    Two men killed at a protest for Jacob Blake were a father and a skater who tried to disarm the shooter. A third injured man was a volunteer medic.
    And then you have another liberal “news” which has eye witness’s:
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ke/5675987002/
    Even in this article Kyle is trying to help people, but of course one eyewitness knew he was bad news. But here is an important part of one of the “eyewitness’s”
    "He knew he messed up," Jeremiah said. "He panicked. Even his people knew what he did was wrong. They were all shouting at him, 'What are you doing? What are you doing?' I saw it in their faces. I saw it in their body language."
    Yet none of this is in any of the videos, as Kyle was not with the others in his group as he was being chased. I’m not going to get into the criminal records of the 3 “victims” who were shot it is irrelevant to the events of that night. But for me it was their own actions that cost them their own lives.
    What justification is there for accusing Kyle Rittenhouse of murder when it was clearly self defense? I have seen some people write that he shouldn’t have been there, and that he was 17 and shouldn’t have been there. I actually agree with these statements, it was illegal for him to have that fire arm and a 17 year old shouldn’t be in that situation.
    Conversely though, not one of those rioters are without excuse for being a part of people who were damaging property, intimidation and hurting people. Kyle had as much right as the rioters for being there. At least Kyle went there to protect, not damage, to offer aid and not a beat down. 3 grown men chased him down and 2 died for it. Where is the justification for the murder charges against Kyle?
    https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/28/k...iminal-records
    My apologies for errors as I didn't get to proof read this as much I normally do.

    -Similar threads merged. ~Abdülmecid I
    Last edited by Abdülmecid I; September 20, 2020 at 05:31 AM. Reason: Clarification added.

  10. #2090
    Cope's Avatar 777777777777777
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    5,207

    Default Re: Kyle Rittenhouse-Kenosha shooter

    So far as I understand the wording of WI's self-defence laws, Rittenhouse did not forfeit his right to self-defence by being at the location or by being armed (even if criminally so). Any provocation on his part (if it can even be proved) will likely be overcome by the fact that he was retreating whilst being pursued and reasonably believed that he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm.

    The statute (939.48 (2)(a) and (b)) is as follows:

    (2) Provocation affects the privilege of self-defense as follows:

    (a) A person who engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her and thereby does provoke an attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense against such attack, except when the attack which ensues is of a type causing the person engaging in the unlawful conduct to reasonably believe that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. In such a case, the person engaging in the unlawful conduct is privileged to act in self-defense, but the person is not privileged to resort to the use of force intended or likely to cause death to the person's assailant unless the person reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant.

    (b) The privilege lost by provocation may be regained if the actor in good faith withdraws from the fight and gives adequate notice thereof to his or her assailant.

    Wisconsin Legislature, statute 939.48.
    Notwithstanding, this thread should be moved to the George Floyd thread where the Rittenhouse case has already been discussed.
    Last edited by Cope; September 21, 2020 at 06:48 AM.

  11. #2091
    Cookiegod's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In Derc's schizophrenic mind
    Posts
    3,522

    Default Re: Kyle Rittenhouse-Kenosha shooter

    It's clearly ridiculous that a country deems its citizen as too immature to drink alcohol until they're 21 but mature enough to carry (semi-)automatic rifles with lethal ammunition around.

    All that said and done, all the mistakes one can accuse Kyle of happened preshoot-out. Mainly the fact that he decided to go there in the first place. Once the mob descended upon him it would have been clearly self-defence anywhere in the world. Including in Europe. Whether the weapon was carried legally or not does not matter in the context of them descending down on him. It is also a tragedy and another prime example as to how much the Mass Media is flouting any standards and commitment to truth that we can see across the board, including the nigh-absolute media blackout of the Assange case.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    From Socrates over Jesus to me it has always been the lot of any true visionary to be rejected by the reactionary bourgeoisie
    Qualis noncives pereo! #justiceforcookie #egalitéfraternitécookié #CLM

  12. #2092
    Settra's Avatar the Imperishable
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nehekhara
    Posts
    14,802

    Default Re: Death of George Floyd and Subsequent Riots.

    ^ this. If people were not allowed to carry what is effectively war weaponry, cops would not need to be armed like other military's' light infantry units and 99% of death just would not happen.
    Under the patronage of Pie the Inkster Click here to find a hidden gem on the forum!


  13. #2093

    Default Re: Death of George Floyd and Subsequent Riots.

    I don't see an issue with people carrying guns, I see an issue with absence of rule of law, where partisan DAs would outright refuse to charge the leftist looters or not charge them corresponding to seriousness of what they did, essentially establishing selective lawlessness.

  14. #2094

    Default Re: Kyle Rittenhouse-Kenosha shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by Frostwulf View Post
    What justification is there for accusing Kyle Rittenhouse of murder when it was clearly self defense? I have seen some people write that he shouldn’t have been there, and that he was 17 and shouldn’t have been there. I actually agree with these statements, it was illegal for him to have that fire arm and a 17 year old shouldn’t be in that situation.
    Conversely though, not one of those rioters are without excuse for being a part of people who were damaging property, intimidation and hurting people. Kyle had as much right as the rioters for being there. At least Kyle went there to protect, not damage, to offer aid and not a beat down. 3 grown men chased him down and 2 died for it. Where is the justification for the murder charges against Kyle?
    See? This is the problem. You're relieving any responsibility from Rittenhouse while trying to find fault with the people that were shot down. Rittenhouse created a situation illegally and discriminatory treatment by cops made it possible. Normally, the cops that he waved and passed by should have confiscated his weapon as it was illegal for him to carry. Even after he shot 3 people with others yelling at the cops to arrest him for shooting someone the cops didn't do anything. Were the protesters that chased Rittenhouse rioters? I haven't seen any evidence to that. Have you? If not, why portray them as looters? Every one of them simply tried to take the gun away from Rittenhouse. They were of the opinion that Rittenhouse could harm people with that rifle. Saying that Rittenhouse shot them in self defense with a gun he shouldn't have in a place he shouldn't have been doesn't sound right.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  15. #2095

    Default Re: Kyle Rittenhouse-Kenosha shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    Normally, the cops that he waved and passed by should have confiscated his weapon as it was illegal for him to carry.
    Did the cops know it was illegal for him to carry?
    Every one of them simply tried to take the gun away from Rittenhouse.
    Every one of them, hmm...
    So, all of them were aggressing on him.
    Saying that Rittenhouse shot them in self defense with a gun he shouldn't have in a place he shouldn't have been doesn't sound right.
    "Every one of them simply tried to take the gun away..."

  16. #2096

    Default Re: Kyle Rittenhouse-Kenosha shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by Infidel144 View Post
    Did the cops know it was illegal for him to carry?
    They would have if they checked his ID. They were supposed to that since he wasn't supposed to be out on the street at that hour and he wasn't supposed to open carry a gun in that state.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  17. #2097

    Default Re: Kyle Rittenhouse-Kenosha shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    They would have if they checked his ID. They were supposed to that since he wasn't supposed to be out on the street at that hour and he wasn't supposed to open carry a gun in that state.
    Were the cops stopping and checking everyone's ID?
    Open carry is allowed in Wisconsin.

  18. #2098

    Default Re: Kyle Rittenhouse-Kenosha shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by Infidel144 View Post
    Were the cops stopping and checking everyone's ID?
    Open carry is allowed in Wisconsin.
    Not for those under 18.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  19. #2099

    Default Re: Kyle Rittenhouse-Kenosha shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    Not for those under 18.
    So, that would be a no the cops did not know he was under 18, and a no the cops were not stopping and checking everyone's ID.
    While Rittenhouse was being aggressed on ("Every one of them simply tried to take the gun away...").
    .

  20. #2100

    Default Re: Kyle Rittenhouse-Kenosha shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by Infidel144 View Post
    So, that would be a no the cops did not know he was under 18, and a no the cops were not stopping and checking everyone's ID.
    While Rittenhouse was being aggressed on ("Every one of them simply tried to take the gun away...").
    .
    Yes, the cops were supposed to check his ID.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

Posting Permissions

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