Posted by tangplay on 11/14/2021 11:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/14/2021 8:21:00 PM (view original):

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

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

^^^ classic example of the danger of glorifying Rittenhouse as a hero (not saying that strikeout is doing this, but many on the right are)

You don't want more vigilantes going out in their communities with guns during protests.

Especially now that the vast majority of the right believes (incorrectly) that most BLM protests lead to violence. This is only going to escalate things. It's a real worry.

The statistic the left likes to cite is that 93% of protests were peaceful. Yes, by definition that is the “vast majority”. But, if my memory serves me correctly, there were something like 8000 protests across cities for “racial justice.” 560 protests that included carnage and destruction is quite a substantial amount.

The 560 includes protests in which any violence or property destruction took place. A substantial portion of that 7% are protests that individually were overwhelmingly peaceful but had some small violence/damage.

This was the largest protest movement in American history, during a pandemic where many are unemployed/frustrated, right after a viral video of a cop killing a black person. Obviously people are going to be upset, and it is honestly impressive that the overwhelming majority were peaceful; I would expect even more violence.

Even then, right wingers still managed to kill more people at BLM PROTESTS than BLM supporters, which is honestly impressive.

Making it seem like BLM is a violent movement as a whole is far more misleading than any characterization you've claimed the media has made.

You are so full of it.

Sorry I can't link past live broadcasts. You acknowledge "a bit misleading" but then shrug them off cause they're not "actual news articles".

Most of what's broadcasted today is really opinion pieces masquerading as news reporting.

Then you also agree that they are "playing up the racial element". Yeah that's one way to put it. Kyle Rittenhouse has been portrayed as the poster boy for white supremacists by the left. You should be working for CNN.

You can look to this very thread and see how misinformed Bob was as an example.

The basic narrative by the MSM (whether it was said verbatim or only alluded to or "played up" if you prefer) was an under age white supremacist illegally purchased an AR15, carried it across state lines coming all the way from Chicago, to a town he had no ties to, simply looking for a reason to mow down BLM protesters and successfully shot 3 killing 2.

Let's not forget, THIS particular BLM "protest" was ALREADY on fire. I posted links to video of the old man beaten when he tried defending his business which had been set on fire. Kyle didn't show up at one of the 7000+ random non violent BLM protests. He was going into a place that was in anarchy where many places were on fire and many had already suffered violence.

Posted by laramiebob on 11/15/2021 10:10:00 AM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/15/2021 8:44:00 AM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 11/15/2021 8:11:00 AM (view original):
And HE (You're buddy "Kyle") had NO business being there, and was packing a military style attack weapon (ILLEGALLY!) and following people around on the street!

He thought He was "Dirty Harry" and you MIGHT ask yourself WHY was He there?

Why did Kyle not have a right to be there? Also, why did he not have a right to defend himself with a gun against other people ACTUALLY carrying an illegal weapon? By the way, the evidence is still fuzzy on whether he was actually carrying that gun illegally. That charge may be dropped today.

Last I knew. Vigilantism (sp?) is NOT Legal.

Where are the vigilante charges Bob?

Based on everything else "you knew" about this case so far, I might be inclined to actually check on other stuff I think I know...

LOL. Got me?
I think the whole trial stinks from what I've heard (mostly around here.)
More like a spectacle.

I have an idea. You could watch the trial and make a decision for yourself on whether or not the trial stinks instead of letting other people form your opinion for you.

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/15/2021 8:40:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 11/14/2021 11:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/14/2021 8:21:00 PM (view original):

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

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

^^^ classic example of the danger of glorifying Rittenhouse as a hero (not saying that strikeout is doing this, but many on the right are)

You don't want more vigilantes going out in their communities with guns during protests.

Especially now that the vast majority of the right believes (incorrectly) that most BLM protests lead to violence. This is only going to escalate things. It's a real worry.

The statistic the left likes to cite is that 93% of protests were peaceful. Yes, by definition that is the “vast majority”. But, if my memory serves me correctly, there were something like 8000 protests across cities for “racial justice.” 560 protests that included carnage and destruction is quite a substantial amount.

The 560 includes protests in which any violence or property destruction took place. A substantial portion of that 7% are protests that individually were overwhelmingly peaceful but had some small violence/damage.

This was the largest protest movement in American history, during a pandemic where many are unemployed/frustrated, right after a viral video of a cop killing a black person. Obviously people are going to be upset, and it is honestly impressive that the overwhelming majority were peaceful; I would expect even more violence.

Even then, right wingers still managed to kill more people at BLM PROTESTS than BLM supporters, which is honestly impressive.

Making it seem like BLM is a violent movement as a whole is far more misleading than any characterization you've claimed the media has made.

Easy there. I never said that the BLM movement was violent. I essentially said that you would be foolish to tie the Rosenbaum’s of the world to the BLM movement. A bunch of white, leftist militants saw the protests as an opportunity to do destruction. Like I said, so-called “white allies” don’t go around screaming the n-word from my understanding.

But if you’re going to make the claim that there are racial undertones with the Rittenhouse situation claiming that he was there because it was a BLM protest then you are now tying the Rosenbaum’s and other white, leftist militants to the protests and must own the damage and destruction that they cause.

I think you're missing my point somewhat. I'm not arguing that the racial element was in who Rittenhouse killed; Rittenhouse didn't target people in specific. The racial element isn't about Rosenbaum or any individual besides Rittenhouse. The racial element is Rittenhouse deciding it would be a good idea to take a gun to a BLM protest thinking he could "protect the community" or some bullshit.

While there certainly were the Rosenbaum's of the world who were there for destruction, there were also many there who were not.

Sorry I can't link past live broadcasts. You acknowledge "a bit misleading" but then shrug them off cause they're not "actual news articles".

Most of what's broadcasted today is really opinion pieces masquerading as news reporting.

BROADCASTED, yes, you should assume everything on CNN, MSNBC, FOX, etc is essentially just opinion. I was given print articles, where there is an actual distinction between opinion and news. And both the misleading headlines were OPINION PIECES, not news articles. I will remind you that your original claim was that the MSM made it seem like Rittenhouse killed black people. You have given nothing to even suggest that. Don't make broad claims that you can't back up, sorry.

I'm not missing your point at all. Your point is just wrong or at least without evidence. You keep saying that there are racial undertones because it was a BLM protest. The only way there could be racial undertones is if Rittenhouse was at the event because it was a BLM protest. I have not seen a shred of evidence to support that that was the reason he was there. The evidence actually supports that BLM hosting the protest didn't matter at all.

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/15/2021 2:17:00 PM (view original):
I have an idea. You could watch the trial and make a decision for yourself on whether or not the trial stinks instead of letting other people form your opinion for you.

No can do. I don't do TV.
Besides, it would be an even worse waste of my time than commenting about it broadly, because IT'S NOT MY business/affair.
It's a Wisconsin matter generally.
A big deal for a few lawyer types holding positions of responsibility (and a few getting paid handsomely to defend the kid) and a matter of legal principles and theory's of intent, etc for the Court system----but for most, even MOST Wisconsinites it's just the latest news/noise.

My opinions on the matter don't matter a bit.
It's (as I mentioned earlier) for a legally (and PROPERLY) impaneled jury of (the accused's) peers to decide.
THEIR viewpoints matter.
Mine? Not a bit.

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/15/2021 2:41:00 PM (view original):
I'm not missing your point at all. Your point is just wrong or at least without evidence. You keep saying that there are racial undertones because it was a BLM protest. The only way there could be racial undertones is if Rittenhouse was at the event because it was a BLM protest. I have not seen a shred of evidence to support that that was the reason he was there. The evidence actually supports that BLM hosting the protest didn't matter at all.

OK, I think we've reached our fundamental disagreement and we might just have to agree to disagree. There's no way to objectively determine what Rittenhouse's motivations were. I don't buy that he would have shown up at just any protest if he saw a risk of property damage; I think it being a BLM protest is relevant.

Posted by laramiebob on 11/15/2021 2:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/15/2021 2:17:00 PM (view original):
I have an idea. You could watch the trial and make a decision for yourself on whether or not the trial stinks instead of letting other people form your opinion for you.

No can do. I don't do TV.
Besides, it would be an even worse waste of my time than commenting about it broadly, because IT'S NOT MY business/affair.
It's a Wisconsin matter generally.
A big deal for a few lawyer types holding positions of responsibility (and a few getting paid handsomely to defend the kid) and a matter of legal principles and theory's of intent, etc for the Court system----but for most, even MOST Wisconsinites it's just the latest news/noise.

My opinions on the matter don't matter a bit.
It's (as I mentioned earlier) for a legally (and PROPERLY) impaneled jury of (the accused's) peers to decide.
THEIR viewpoints matter.
Mine? Not a bit.

You would be correct if we lived in a rational society. But since we don’t, cities are preparing for mass chaos if the jury doesn’t come to the “correct” conclusion.

Posted by tangplay on 11/15/2021 2:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 11/15/2021 2:41:00 PM (view original):
I'm not missing your point at all. Your point is just wrong or at least without evidence. You keep saying that there are racial undertones because it was a BLM protest. The only way there could be racial undertones is if Rittenhouse was at the event because it was a BLM protest. I have not seen a shred of evidence to support that that was the reason he was there. The evidence actually supports that BLM hosting the protest didn't matter at all.

OK, I think we've reached our fundamental disagreement and we might just have to agree to disagree. There's no way to objectively determine what Rittenhouse's motivations were. I don't buy that he would have shown up at just any protest if he saw a risk of property damage; I think it being a BLM protest is relevant.

You most certainly can come to a reasonable conclusion that the type of protest didn’t matter by just following the timeline and the facts. You can agree to disagree if you want to, but then you would be factually wrong. Nothing illegal against being wrong. That’s your choice. I’ll respect you whether you choose to be wrong or right.

Strikeout taking the tang approach. I'll take the L on this one, respectfully.

Lol. +1 for me. Yay!

To point to this chaos as "a BLM protest" is just really misleading in itself. In fact, if you Google it Wiki calls it "Kenosha unrest".

There were definitely peaceful protests during the day, but AT NIGHT arson and mayhem. At least 3 garbage trucks and a trolley car were set fire to. A used car dealership had over 100 cars set on fire. A police officer was knocked out with a brick to the face.

The next NIGHT "protesters" launched fireworks at police while trying to breach the public safety building. Buildings set on fire on NIGHT #2 included the dept. of corrections, a furniture store, several homes and residential apartments. Law enforcement believes "these people are not from Kenosha and are not here to protest".

The following NIGHT Rittenhouse shows up. Not to showdown against BLM protesters during the day, but rather to help protect against the mayhem and destruction being caused AT NIGHT by out of towners with no desire to protest.

The fact that BLM protests were being held during the day should have no bearing on what took place that NIGHT.

UNLESS BLM "protesters" were the ones burning **** and wreaking havoc on the town, and I don't think anyone on this message board believes that to be the case.

By far, the most boring part about the trial so far was listening to the jury’s instructions from the judge earlier today. Ironically, it might be the important part of the trial.