Posted by bagchucker on 11/13/2021 9:06:00 PM (view original):
i did not know that was his town

i thought he crossed state lines with an illegally obtained firearm

yes in order to protect property

but i did not know it was his hometown he was protecting

Posted by tangplay on 11/13/2021 11:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/13/2021 3:01:00 PM (view original):
It’s more the fact that MSM has made this a racial issue just like they do with everything. It’s quite deceiving to the normal person that only reads headlines. I could link you dozens of articles that do that.

Can you link the worst offender of these articles?

And it's quite a sad state when the "normal" is only reading the headlines. The media isn't all to blame for that.

Posted by tangplay on 11/13/2021 11:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/13/2021 6:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/13/2021 3:16:00 PM (view original):
I don't understand the stance that it's not related to racial issues. The dude showed up to a BLM rally with a weapon that's really only useful for killing human beings. Even if he was hoping to go home without discharging said weapon, his intent was not peaceful towards BLM protesters. That doesn't make it murder. It does make the racial undertones unavoidable.

If this was about BLM protests, he would have been out there the first or second night of the protests. He went out there after a car lot was burned to the ground. Based on all available evidence, he was out there to protect the town that his family lived in and that he worked in. Also, if this was racial, there were plenty of black people he could have shot. The only people that he had an issue with were the 4 people that attacked him (all of them white).

If you don't think through the details of the situation, its easy to come to the conclusion that there was at a minimum racial undertones. When you actually think about all of the details, there is literally nothing about this that is racial other than the looters and arsonists happened to be at a BLM event. They were not there in support of the BLM event. They were there because they were criminals that saw an opportunity to wreak havoc. BLM protestors don't go around screaming the n-word.

This is why it's so dangerous for MSM to exploit every situation as racist.

What's funny to me about the left using Rittenhouse as their poster-child against white supremacy and vigilantilism is there is a case that is going on simultaneously that clearly has a racial element where a black person was actually shot and killed that is receiving only a fraction of the media attention that the Rittenhouse trial is receiving. This is why no one trusts the media.

It is absolutely not a sane or rational decision for an unsupervised 17 year old kid to bring a firearm to a protest at night. You don't do that if you don't have the intention of harming people, sorry. I know he thought he was there to "protect the community" or some ****. How'd that go for him? Rittenhouse is a ******* moron - not a murderer, but a moron.

It is not your job, as a ******* untrained kid who has no idea what they are doing, to bring your gun to a protest with dangerous people. And why he chose to do so absolutely has racial undertones. It's a white person bringing a gun to protect their community from a BLM protest.

Calling Rittenhouse himself racist or saying that he shot the people for racist reasons - that's unfair and if the MSM was doing that, I wholeheartedly condemn it. But saying that the case as a whole has racial undertones is not controversial.

I agree completely that the Arbery case should get more attention, because that case has racial overtones. It's more important and more newsworthy than the Rittenhouse case. I've said it before and I'll say it again - the broader media atmosphere prioritizes sensationalism and attention more than they do a political bias.

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/14/2021 8:31:00 AM (view original):
Well, Bob. I guess it’s safe to assume that you haven’t actually researched the case at all beyond the articles that pop from MSM that pop up in your news feed.

Fair enough. I wouldn’t actually expect a person to sit down and watch over a week of trial as I have. I’m not normal.

But your characterization is completely wrong. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/14/2021 8:31:00 AM (view original):
Well, Bob. I guess it’s safe to assume that you haven’t actually researched the case at all beyond the articles that pop from MSM that pop up in your news feed.

Fair enough. I wouldn’t actually expect a person to sit down and watch over a week of trial as I have. I’m not normal.

But your characterization is completely wrong. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

Posted by tangplay on 11/14/2021 1:42:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bruceleefan on 11/14/2021 12:44:00 AM (view original):
https://nypost-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/nypost.com/2020

https://www.tmz.com/2020/05/31/dallas-man-beaten-kicked-for-defending-storefront-with-sword/

The first video happened in Kenosha 5 days before Kyle's incident.

The second shows "protesters" stomping a business owner (from the Dallas "protests").

Ah yes, the Dallas "business owner" (never actually proven that the business in question was owned by him, I'm pretty sure it was just a bar he liked lmao) who "defended" the store by chasing around a kid with a sword... the same sword that the DAY BEFORE he bragged on Twitter could kill people, and the same guy who previously said that "aggression is extremely useful.. scare the daylights out of them and they'll surrender."

In reality what the BLM protesters did in Dallas could be characterized as self defense. You have no IDEA what was going on before, all we know is that the guy was chasing someone else around with a sword with intent to kill.

I can't watch the other video. I'm sure it's not some weak attempt to characterize the BLM protests as violent or whatever when in reality the only death caused by a BLM supporter was the one in Portland and there were many more killed by police and right wingers than by left wingers at the protests last summer.

Posted by lostnfound74 on 11/14/2021 10:02:00 AM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/14/2021 8:31:00 AM (view original):
Well, Bob. I guess it’s safe to assume that you haven’t actually researched the case at all beyond the articles that pop from MSM that pop up in your news feed.

Fair enough. I wouldn’t actually expect a person to sit down and watch over a week of trial as I have. I’m not normal.

But your characterization is completely wrong. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

He is on their side??

Posted by lostnfound74 on 11/14/2021 9:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/14/2021 8:31:00 AM (view original):
Well, Bob. I guess it’s safe to assume that you haven’t actually researched the case at all beyond the articles that pop from MSM that pop up in your news feed.

Fair enough. I wouldn’t actually expect a person to sit down and watch over a week of trial as I have. I’m not normal.

But your characterization is completely wrong. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

But we love to demonize the righteous. In this case, this is not ANYONE who was looting and burning buildings. If they get shot dead in the process; so be it

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/14/2021 8:31:00 AM (view original):
Well, Bob. I guess it’s safe to assume that you haven’t actually researched the case at all beyond the articles that pop from MSM that pop up in your news feed.

Fair enough. I wouldn’t actually expect a person to sit down and watch over a week of trial as I have. I’m not normal.

But your characterization is completely wrong. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/14/2021 11:21:00 AM (view original):
You can’t claim to know the basics of the trial, and then get the basics of the trial wrong. That proves that you don’t know the basics of the trial and you’re letting MSM form your opinion for you.