Marjorie Taylor Greene "likes" the Mossad-did-it Theory

497 views
Skip to first unread message

davide...@gmail.com

unread,
Feb 8, 2021, 6:54:29 AMFeb 8
to
Today's politics has crossed paths with the Kennedy assassination a few
times.

First, there was candidate Donald Trump alluding to the fact that Ted
Cruz's father may have been involved with Lee Harvey Oswald in
assassinating President Kennedy.

Then Trump decided to hold back some documents (apparently at the behest
of the U.S. intelligence agencies) that were scheduled to be released.

And now we have a current congresswoman who is a conspiracy theorist (on
MANY issues) who has given a "thumbs up" (2018) to the accusation that Israel's
Mossad was behind the Kennedy assassination - not one of the particularly
popular theories on the JFK conspiracy hit parade.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-liked-a-tweet-implicating-mossad-in-jfk-assassination/

Is there anybody who thinks that Mossad was behind the Kennedy
assassination? Anybody? Anyone? Somebody? Bueller? Bueller? Yeah, I didn't
think so.

I doubt Mossad was involved because they were probably too busy working on
lasers to start the forest fires in California.

Standing by for the whataboutism responses in the never-ending false
equivalency game...

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

John McAdams

unread,
Feb 8, 2021, 6:59:14 AMFeb 8
to
On 8 Feb 2021 11:54:27 -0000, "davide...@gmail.com"
<davide...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Today's politics has crossed paths with the Kennedy assassination a few
>times.
>
>First, there was candidate Donald Trump alluding to the fact that Ted
>Cruz's father may have been involved with Lee Harvey Oswald in
>assassinating President Kennedy.
>
>Then Trump decided to hold back some documents (apparently at the behest
>of the U.S. intelligence agencies) that were scheduled to be released.
>
>And now we have a current congresswoman who is a conspiracy theorist (on
>MANY issues) who has given a "thumbs up" (2018) to the accusation that Israel's
>Mossad was behind the Kennedy assassination - not one of the particularly
>popular theories on the JFK conspiracy hit parade.
>
>https://www.timesofisrael.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-liked-a-tweet-implicating-mossad-in-jfk-assassination/
>
>Is there anybody who thinks that Mossad was behind the Kennedy
>assassination? Anybody? Anyone? Somebody? Bueller? Bueller? Yeah, I didn't
>think so.

I would not be surprised to find that these women are:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/08/21/here-is-white-houses-evidence-supporting-trumps-claims-democratic-anti-semitism/

>
>I doubt Mossad was involved because they were probably too busy working on
>lasers to start the forest fires in California.
>
>Standing by for the whataboutism responses in the never-ending false
>equivalency game...
>

It's clear why you leftists don't like "whataboutism." It shows you
to be hypocrites, who attack Republicans for things you happily
overlook from Democrats.

How about this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2002/04/12/democrat-implies-sept-11-administration-plot/258355b8-b645-43ab-b84c-d5bd500af172/

It's not "false equivalency" you fear. It's real equivalency.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

Bud

unread,
Feb 8, 2021, 9:11:25 AMFeb 8
to
On Monday, February 8, 2021 at 6:54:29 AM UTC-5, davide...@gmail.com wrote:
> Today's politics has crossed paths with the Kennedy assassination a few
> times.
>
> First, there was candidate Donald Trump alluding to the fact that Ted
> Cruz's father may have been involved with Lee Harvey Oswald in
> assassinating President Kennedy.
>
> Then Trump decided to hold back some documents (apparently at the behest
> of the U.S. intelligence agencies) that were scheduled to be released.
>
> And now we have a current congresswoman who is a conspiracy theorist (on
> MANY issues) who has given a "thumbs up" (2018) to the accusation that Israel's
> Mossad was behind the Kennedy assassination - not one of the particularly
> popular theories on the JFK conspiracy hit parade.
>
> https://www.timesofisrael.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-liked-a-tweet-implicating-mossad-in-jfk-assassination/
>
> Is there anybody who thinks that Mossad was behind the Kennedy
> assassination? Anybody? Anyone? Somebody? Bueller? Bueller? Yeah, I didn't
> think so.

I bet you think it is ok to believe the CIA was behind the Kennedy
assassination.

> I doubt Mossad was involved because they were probably too busy working on
> lasers to start the forest fires in California.
>
> Standing by for the whataboutism responses in the never-ending false
> equivalency game...

It is rarely equivalent, everything the left claims other people do they
a guilty of much worse.

> David Emerling
> Memphis, TN

John Corbett

unread,
Feb 8, 2021, 10:40:06 PMFeb 8
to
On Monday, February 8, 2021 at 6:54:29 AM UTC-5, davide...@gmail.com wrote:
We did have a CT poster who was a regular here until a few years ago who
believed Israel was behind the assassination. I can't remember what handle
he went by but I bet I would recognize it if somebody else could remember.

I participate in another unmoderated newsgroup and there is one blatantly
anti-semitic poster who seems to get his kicks by flooding it with
anti-semitic posts. I never read any of them but you can tell from the
titles and slurs what he is about. I would guess this one poster has over
half posts on any given day. Truly pathetic when you think about it.

19efppp

unread,
Feb 9, 2021, 1:56:18 PMFeb 9
to
On Monday, February 8, 2021 at 6:54:29 AM UTC-5, davide...@gmail.com wrote:
The CIA and the Secret Service and the Dallas Police and LBJ didn't need
the Mossad's help, but if it was offered, then they probably would have
accepted it. Hidell(?) Silverman was Jack Ruby's rabbi.

Anthony Marsh

unread,
Feb 10, 2021, 5:51:23 AMFeb 10
to
Or maybe just a troll. That never made any sense.

davide...@gmail.com

unread,
Feb 10, 2021, 9:11:20 PMFeb 10
to
I don't think whataboutism should play a role in any intelligent debate.
The very essence of this style of "argument" is to completely ignore
something and basically use the childish comeback, "I know I am, but what
are YOU?" It's the "Two wrongs equals a stalemate" method of arguing. For
that method of arguing to have any merit, you really have to come up with
a counter-argument that has the same weight. This is where the false
equivalency comes in. When trying to defend something by pointing out
something somebody else did that is "just as a bad" - it truly has to be
"just as bad" because, if it isn't, then it's a specious (usually,
desperate) argument.

Conservative media talking point is to say the riots that occurred this
summer in the wake of the George Floyd incident "weighs" the same as the
incident that occurred at the capitol.

Here's why this is a false equivalency - and I really shouldn't have to
point this out:

With regards to the George Floyd protests that turned into riots - were those
rioters encouraged by the President of the United States who had taken an
oath of office to defend our country? Was there really anybody of any
substantive, political standing who thought that there should be violence in
these protests? Was it really a left-wing thing? Was it really a political
thing? No! It was racial outrage, pure and simple. It wasn't the first time
- and probably won't be the last time - that such protests occur as long as
racism continues to play a significant role in American culture.

Did the summer riots threaten our democracy? No. Dumbasses taking
advantage of a protest and breaking store windows to steal a pair of New
Balance athletic shoes is hardly the same as breaking into our nation's
capitol in order to "Hang Mike Pence!" and to stop a constitutional
procedure with the intent of overturning a presidential election.

That's a false equivalency!

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

John McAdams

unread,
Feb 10, 2021, 9:39:41 PMFeb 10
to
On 11 Feb 2021 02:11:17 -0000, "davide...@gmail.com"
You think that because it shows the dishonesty of the leftists who
hate Trump.

If you had any philosophical sophistication, you would know that
"whataboutism" is the essence of serious inquiry.

It was what Socrates did. Somebody would spout off with a half baked
opinion, and Socrates would ask "what about?"

And the foolishness of the half baked opinion would be revealed.

https://schoolworkhelper.net/what-is-piety-euthyphro-socrates/


>The very essence of this style of "argument" is to completely ignore
>something and basically use the childish comeback, "I know I am, but what
>are YOU?"

No, it reveals the shallowness of your argument.

You are against storming Capitols, *until* somebody on your side of
the political spectrum does it.

Which shows you don't *really* oppose storming Capitols.

It just shows you are arguing dishonestly.

>It's the "Two wrongs equals a stalemate" method of arguing. For
>that method of arguing to have any merit, you really have to come up with
>a counter-argument that has the same weight. This is where the false
>equivalency comes in. When trying to defend something by pointing out
>something somebody else did that is "just as a bad" - it truly has to be
>"just as bad" because, if it isn't, then it's a specious (usually,
>desperate) argument.
>

How many people were killed in the George Floyd riots?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/americans-killed-protests-political-unrest-acled

https://news.yahoo.com/12-police-officers-shot-during-100000431.html


>Conservative media talking point is to say the riots that occurred this
>summer in the wake of the George Floyd incident "weighs" the same as the
>incident that occurred at the capitol.
>

Actually, they were worse.

>Here's why this is a false equivalency - and I really shouldn't have to
>point this out:
>
>With regards to the George Floyd protests that turned into riots - were those
>rioters encouraged by the President of the United States who had taken an
>oath of office to defend our country?

No, they were defended by Democrat politicians, who had taken similar
oaths.

Happens none of them were President. Happily.


>Was there really anybody of any
>substantive, political standing who thought that there should be violence in
>these protests?

Trump didn't think there should be violence at the Capitol. Some of
his supporters went wild.

But you leftists were happy with the George Floyd riots.

https://www.bostonherald.com/2020/06/05/amid-demonstrations-liberal-elites-praise-violence-as-protest-tool/

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/09/06/data-48-of-americas-50-largest-cities-hit-by-black-lives-matter-riots/


>Was it really a left-wing thing? Was it really a political
>thing? No! It was racial outrage, pure and simple.

"Racial outrage" that you leftists condone.

At least, until you figure out that it hurts you politically. Which
usually takes a while.

>It wasn't the first time
>- and probably won't be the last time - that such protests occur as long as
>racism continues to play a significant role in American culture.
>

The problem is not racism -- except for he anti-white racism of
leftist elites.

It's two thirds of black babies born out of wedlock.

And absurdly high levels of crime in black neighborhoods.

That's blacks victimizing other blacks.

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-2018/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-6.xls


>Did the summer riots threaten our democracy? No. Dumbasses taking
>advantage of a protest and breaking store windows to steal a pair of New
>Balance athletic shoes is hardly the same as breaking into our nation's
>capitol in order to "Hang Mike Pence!" and to stop a constitutional
>procedure with the intent of overturning a presidential election.
>

Nonsense. If somebody ever said "Hang Mike Pence" is was some lone
crackpot.

But killing people, and trashing businesses (mostly businesses in
black neighborhoods) is indeed a threat to democracy.

And you condone that.

>That's a false equivalency!
>

Embarrassing, isn't it.

You fuss and fume about things Trump supporters did, and then have to
face the massive chaos that leftists have caused.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

John Corbett

unread,
Feb 10, 2021, 9:51:16 PMFeb 10
to
Nobody is defending wrongdoing. People are pointing out the hypocrisy of
the left that describes left wing riots as mostly peaceful while
describing right wing riots as insurrections. There's nothing false about
that equivalency. Both have resulted in property damage and loss of life,
but the left is only outraged at the atrocities committed by one side.

>
> Conservative media talking point is to say the riots that occurred this
> summer in the wake of the George Floyd incident "weighs" the same as the
> incident that occurred at the capitol.
>

Actually, they outweigh what happened at the Capitol. The riots last
summer were far more widespread, cause far greater property damage and
caused far greater loss of life.

> Here's why this is a false equivalency - and I really shouldn't have to
> point this out:
>
> With regards to the George Floyd protests that turned into riots - were those
> rioters encouraged by the President of the United States who had taken an
> oath of office to defend our country?

Your premise is faulty. The President did not encourage his followers to
attack the Capitol. There is no evidence he did so. He specifically told
them to protest peacefully.

> Was there really anybody of any
> substantive, political standing who thought that there should be violence in
> these protests? Was it really a left-wing thing? Was it really a political
> thing? No! It was racial outrage, pure and simple. It wasn't the first time
> - and probably won't be the last time - that such protests occur as long as
> racism continues to play a significant role in American culture.

Stop it. You're rationalizing and doing it rather badly.

>
> Did the summer riots threaten our democracy? No.

Of course they did. Unchecked lawlessness is a serious threat to our
democracy. People having their businesses and their livelihoods destroyed
is a threat to our democracy. Anarchy is a threat to our democracy.

> Dumbasses taking
> advantage of a protest and breaking store windows to steal a pair of New
> Balance athletic shoes is hardly the same as breaking into our nation's
> capitol in order to "Hang Mike Pence!" and to stop a constitutional
> procedure with the intent of overturning a presidential election.
>
> That's a false equivalency!
>

BULLSHIT!!! It's not even good bullshit.

Pamela Brown

unread,
Feb 11, 2021, 6:55:55 AMFeb 11
to
Well, objectively it does. Papa Joe was a Hitler appeaser. The apple
doesn't fall far from the tree, etc etc.

Then, JFK had a balanced view toward Israel. He wanted the Palestinians to
be treated fairly.

So, the objective would be to take someone out of the way who was not
gung-ho Israel and replace that person with someone who was...

John Corbett

unread,
Feb 11, 2021, 7:47:34 PMFeb 11
to
It would have been extremely stupid for Israel to take part in any way in
the assassination of JFK. It would have turned the entire US against them
and they would have lost a much needed ally.

Bud

unread,
Feb 11, 2021, 7:47:40 PMFeb 11
to
On Wednesday, February 10, 2021 at 9:11:20 PM UTC-5, davide...@gmail.com wrote:
The left wants to dictate a narrative and not have that narrative
challenged. You want to ignore inconvenient context.

But it is good to see a leftist willing to drop all this nonsense about
"white privilege", without the "whataboutism" of racial disparities there
can be no such thing.

> The very essence of this style of "argument" is to completely ignore
> something and basically use the childish comeback, "I know I am, but what
> are YOU?"

What a bad argument. If it snows a dozen times in a winter with many
feet of snow someone could look at only at the mild days and say we had a
mild winter, and anyone who pointed out the snow would be guilty of your
"whataboutism".

> It's the "Two wrongs equals a stalemate" method of arguing.

Why don`t you think it is possible to look at different things correctly
and in the right context, and then compare those two things?

> For
> that method of arguing to have any merit, you really have to come up with
> a counter-argument that has the same weight.

Haven`t read below but I`m sure we`ll be treated with a leftist putting
his thumb on the scale.

> This is where the false
> equivalency comes in. When trying to defend something by pointing out
> something somebody else did that is "just as a bad" - it truly has to be
> "just as bad" because, if it isn't, then it's a specious (usually,
> desperate) argument.

It isn`t a specious argument when it is a correct one based on facts.
Have you seen any interest at all expressed in the media or by leftists
about white people shot by police? The left wants to write a narrative and
have that narrative not be challenged, they want it accepted without
scrutiny. They want their assumptions treated like facts, and acted upon
as if they are factual.

> Conservative media talking point is to say the riots that occurred this
> summer in the wake of the George Floyd incident "weighs" the same as the
> incident that occurred at the capitol.

No, the George Floyd riots were worse.


> Here's why this is a false equivalency - and I really shouldn't have to
> point this out:
>
> With regards to the George Floyd protests that turned into riots - were those
> rioters encouraged by the President of the United States who had taken an
> oath of office to defend our country?

The President told the people to go and protest peacefully.

Kamala Harris was raising money to pay the bail of people arrested
during the Floyd riots.

> Was there really anybody of any
> substantive, political standing who thought that there should be violence in
> these protests? Was it really a left-wing thing? Was it really a political
> thing? No! It was racial outrage, pure and simple. It wasn't the first time
> - and probably won't be the last time - that such protests occur as long as
> racism continues to play a significant role in American culture.

So you are in favor of violence, but you want to be the one who decides
which violence is legitimate and which violence isn`t.

You are in favor of lynch mobs as long as you are on the side that
determines who gets lynched. You want the assumption of guilt without due
process.

> Did the summer riots threaten our democracy? No.

How is rule of the mob not a threat to democracy?

> Dumbasses taking
> advantage of a protest and breaking store windows to steal a pair of New
> Balance athletic shoes is hardly the same as breaking into our nation's
> capitol in order to "Hang Mike Pence!" and to stop a constitutional
> procedure with the intent of overturning a presidential election.

You agree with violence *you* think is the result of legitimate
grievances, but you are against violence that *you* think is the result of
ideas that aren`t legitimate. Because leftists are so fair and unbiased
they can be trusted to determine such things.

> That's a false equivalency!

BLM has the political power to have their sins overlooked or forgiven.
Trump supporters do not.

> David Emerling
> Memphis, TN

Pamela Brown

unread,
Feb 12, 2021, 12:14:17 AMFeb 12
to
It would be 'stupid' if it was detected. They seem to think they are
pretty smart. And the replacement would have to go along with the
cover-up.

John Corbett

unread,
Feb 12, 2021, 8:15:14 AMFeb 12
to
It would be stupid to think it would go undetected.

> They seem to think they are pretty smart.

They are which is why they never would have tried such stupid thing.

> And the replacement would have to go along with the cover-up.

Why?

19efppp

unread,
Feb 15, 2021, 6:13:58 AMFeb 15
to
I must apologize to Rabbi Silverman for misspelling his first name. Jack
Ruby's rabbi was not named Hidell Silverman. His name is Hillel Silverman.
It is a simple mistake, and I know this crowd understands when people are
mistaken, as their whole whacky theory is built upon mistakeness. And he
ministered to Ruby before he shot Oswald. And later in his jail cell when
Ruby thought that the Jews were being tortured and murdered on the floors
below, Rabbi Silverman was there with him, too. But the Jack Ruby
interlude is just one of many stories in dear old Hillel's long and
eventful life. His biography is well worth perusing if you want to plumb
the depths of Ruby's meshuggahness.

Pamela Brown

unread,
Feb 15, 2021, 6:14:00 AMFeb 15
to
I disagree.
> > They seem to think they are pretty smart.
> They are which is why they never would have tried such stupid thing.

Nothing is more important than the protection of Israel to them. Getting
rid of threats is just par for the course.

> > And the replacement would have to go along with the cover-up.
> Why?

To keep the truth hidden.

John Corbett

unread,
Feb 15, 2021, 11:02:38 AMFeb 15
to
Nothing would have been more harmful to the security of Israel than to
make an enemy of the United States. Our support is and was essential to
their survival.

> > > And the replacement would have to go along with the cover-up.
> > Why?
> To keep the truth hidden.

Why would he want to?

Pamela Brown

unread,
Feb 15, 2021, 9:23:03 PMFeb 15
to
This could not be done without consent -- correct.
> > > > And the replacement would have to go along with the cover-up.
> > > Why?
> > To keep the truth hidden.
> Why would he want to?

To protect Israel from retribution.

John Corbett

unread,
Feb 15, 2021, 11:02:28 PMFeb 15
to
Why would he want to protect Israel if they had been responsible for
assassinating our president?

Anthony Marsh

unread,
Feb 16, 2021, 3:02:40 PMFeb 16
to
LBJ ordered that ALL speculation be cut off. He did not want any rumors
about ANY country to spark a war.


Anthony Marsh

unread,
Feb 16, 2021, 3:02:43 PMFeb 16
to
It doesn't matter WHO was responsible. LBJ didn't want rumors to start
WWIII.



John Corbett

unread,
Feb 16, 2021, 6:57:30 PMFeb 16
to
Israel was going to start WWIII?

Pamela Brown

unread,
Feb 17, 2021, 5:08:18 PMFeb 17
to
Because he was in agreement with it.

Anthony Marsh

unread,
Feb 17, 2021, 5:08:51 PMFeb 17
to
WHO said that? I mever said that.


John Corbett

unread,
Feb 17, 2021, 9:49:25 PMFeb 17
to
Nobody was talking to you or about you.

Anthony Marsh

unread,
Feb 18, 2021, 11:13:43 PMFeb 18
to
Someone was replying to me. Learn how threads work.

John Corbett

unread,
Feb 19, 2021, 9:58:10 AMFeb 19
to
Everyone is free to jump into any conversation. The problems is I was
having an exchange with Pamela and I asked her a rhetorical question,
"Israel was going to start WWIII?" and you reacted as if I had attributed
that position to you. This is what happens because you never bother to
actually read the posts you respond to. You just skim through them and
when you see a phrase that jumps out at you, you fail to understand the
context in which it was written and you end up making silly assumptions
like you did above. My question was directed to Pamela. Contrary to what
you stated, I was not replying to you..

Anthony Marsh

unread,
Feb 19, 2021, 10:08:54 PMFeb 19
to
On 2/8/2021 9:11 AM, Bud wrote:
> On Monday, February 8, 2021 at 6:54:29 AM UTC-5, davide...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Today's politics has crossed paths with the Kennedy assassination a few
>> times.
>>
>> First, there was candidate Donald Trump alluding to the fact that Ted
>> Cruz's father may have been involved with Lee Harvey Oswald in
>> assassinating President Kennedy.
>>
>> Then Trump decided to hold back some documents (apparently at the behest
>> of the U.S. intelligence agencies) that were scheduled to be released.
>>
>> And now we have a current congresswoman who is a conspiracy theorist (on
>> MANY issues) who has given a "thumbs up" (2018) to the accusation that Israel's
>> Mossad was behind the Kennedy assassination - not one of the particularly
>> popular theories on the JFK conspiracy hit parade.
>>
>> https://www.timesofisrael.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-liked-a-tweet-implicating-mossad-in-jfk-assassination/
>>
>> Is there anybody who thinks that Mossad was behind the Kennedy
>> assassination? Anybody? Anyone? Somebody? Bueller? Bueller? Yeah, I didn't
>> think so.
>
> I bet you think it is ok to believe the CIA was behind the Kennedy
> assassination.
>


Are you crazy? I mever said the entire CIA. Just one man.

Anthony Marsh

unread,
Feb 19, 2021, 10:08:57 PMFeb 19
to
Not true. McAdams ofren deletes my messages to protect YOU. Did you pay him?

> having an exchange with Pamela and I asked her a rhetorical question,
> "Israel was going to start WWIII?" and you reacted as if I had attributed

Starting WWIII was not a rhetorical question. It was a real worry.
Maybe you aren't old enough to remember, but we almost had WWIII with
Russia in 1962.

> that position to you. This is what happens because you never bother to
> actually read the posts you respond to. You just skim through them and

My newsread claearly marks who said what in a thread.

> when you see a phrase that jumps out at you, you fail to understand the
> context in which it was written and you end up making silly assumptions
> like you did above. My question was directed to Pamela. Contrary to what
> you stated, I was not replying to you..
>


My newsreader shows who said what.


John Corbett

unread,
Feb 20, 2021, 12:13:07 AMFeb 20
to
When you start acting like you've actually read the posts you respond to,
I might engage in a conversation with you. Until the, adios.

davide...@gmail.com

unread,
Feb 23, 2021, 1:03:49 PMFeb 23
to
On Wednesday, February 10, 2021 at 8:51:16 PM UTC-6, John Corbett wrote:

> Nobody is defending wrongdoing. People are pointing out the hypocrisy of
> the left that describes left wing riots as mostly peaceful while
> describing right wing riots as insurrections. There's nothing false about
> that equivalency. Both have resulted in property damage and loss of life,
> but the left is only outraged at the atrocities committed by one side.

There have been riots and unrest in this country based on outrage over
racial injustice (whether real or imagined) many times before. Some have
been worse than others. In the wake of the acquittal of the officers who
beat Rodney King the city of Los Angeles was ravaged with nearly 1-billion
dollars worth of damage and over 60 deaths during a 5-day period.

Yet, what happened on January 6, 2021 took place in our nation's capitol
building with individuals intent on stopping a constitutional process and
do harm to our legislatures. "Hang Mike Pence!" "Where's Nancy?" Who riots
with zip ties and combat gear? Certainly, you must see the difference
between one type of riot and another. All violence is wrong. I don't think
any reasonable person is arguing that point. But only one of these had the
chance of toppling our government. The January 6th riot could have played
out quite differently beyond loss of life and damage to the capitol
building. We've seen unrest based on racial tension before but the
storming of the capitol building was a first with completely different
ramifications. This very significant difference makes it a false
equivalency. How one may choose to characterize the insurrection; whether
it was not-that-big-of-a-deal, it was actually Antifa, or that our
democracy was on the brink of destruction doesn't change what COULD have
happened.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

John McAdams

unread,
Feb 23, 2021, 8:24:39 PMFeb 23
to
On 23 Feb 2021 18:03:47 -0000, "davide...@gmail.com"
<davide...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, February 10, 2021 at 8:51:16 PM UTC-6, John Corbett wrote:
>
>> Nobody is defending wrongdoing. People are pointing out the hypocrisy of
>> the left that describes left wing riots as mostly peaceful while
>> describing right wing riots as insurrections. There's nothing false about
>> that equivalency. Both have resulted in property damage and loss of life,
>> but the left is only outraged at the atrocities committed by one side.
>
>There have been riots and unrest in this country based on outrage over
>racial injustice

Rioting is not a reasonable response to "racial injustice," even when
there is real racial injustice -- which is way less often than the
politically correct claim.

>(whether real or imagined) many times before. Some have
>been worse than others. In the wake of the acquittal of the officers who
>beat Rodney King the city of Los Angeles was ravaged with nearly 1-billion
>dollars worth of damage and over 60 deaths during a 5-day period.
>
>Yet, what happened on January 6, 2021 took place in our nation's capitol
>building with individuals intent on stopping a constitutional process and
>do harm to our legislatures.

But the Wisconsin legislature trying to pass Act 10 was a
"constitutional process."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/01/14/democrats-were-occupying-capitols-before-they-were-against-it/

Why was that occupation OK?

>"Hang Mike Pence!" "Where's Nancy?" Who riots

Some crazy Trump supporters engaged in violent rhetoric.

Did you object to these cases:

https://twitter.com/mattmargolis/status/1358816190076960771

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aj1Rwlztapg


>with zip ties and combat gear? Certainly, you must see the difference
>between one type of riot and another.

The only "difference" is who is doing it.

When it comes from the left, you don't mind.

>All violence is wrong. I don't think
>any reasonable person is arguing that point. But only one of these had the
>chance of toppling our government.


No, it did not, anymore than the Madison occupation had a chance of
"toppling our government."

Had the rioters actually succeeded in disrupting the Senate
proceedings, it would have merely delayed the process.

Just as the Madison rioters only delayed the enactment of Act 10.


>The January 6th riot could have played
>out quite differently beyond loss of life and damage to the capitol
>building. We've seen unrest based on racial tension before but the
>storming of the capitol building was a first with completely different
>ramifications.

You are a *slow* learner.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/01/14/democrats-were-occupying-capitols-before-they-were-against-it/
And then you had this:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/1980s-far-left-female-led-domestic-terrorism-group-bombed-us-capitol-180973904/


>This very significant difference makes it a false
>equivalency. How one may choose to characterize the insurrection; whether
>it was not-that-big-of-a-deal, it was actually Antifa, or that our
>democracy was on the brink of destruction doesn't change what COULD have
>happened.
>

As it was, several Trump supporters were killed.

That's pretty bad, but it did not "threaten democracy."

You don't really mind riots. You don't really mind disrupting a
legislature.

You don't really mind violent rhetoric.

You only mind Trump and his supporters.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

John Corbett

unread,
Feb 23, 2021, 8:44:45 PMFeb 23
to
On Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 1:03:49 PM UTC-5, davide...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 10, 2021 at 8:51:16 PM UTC-6, John Corbett wrote:
>
> > Nobody is defending wrongdoing. People are pointing out the hypocrisy of
> > the left that describes left wing riots as mostly peaceful while
> > describing right wing riots as insurrections. There's nothing false about
> > that equivalency. Both have resulted in property damage and loss of life,
> > but the left is only outraged at the atrocities committed by one side.
> There have been riots and unrest in this country based on outrage over
> racial injustice (whether real or imagined) many times before. Some have
> been worse than others. In the wake of the acquittal of the officers who
> beat Rodney King the city of Los Angeles was ravaged with nearly 1-billion
> dollars worth of damage and over 60 deaths during a 5-day period.
>
> Yet, what happened on January 6, 2021 took place in our nation's capitol
> building with individuals intent on stopping a constitutional process and
> do harm to our legislatures. "Hang Mike Pence!" "Where's Nancy?" Who riots
> with zip ties and combat gear? Certainly, you must see the difference
> between one type of riot and another.

I don't see what happened on January 6 to be any worse than attacking a
courthouse in Portland, taking over a police station in Seattle, or
burning down a police station in Minneapolis. I don't even consider it
worse that an attack on private businesses. Am I supposed to be more
outraged because it was directed at federal officials? Am I supposed to
hold them in higher regard than local officials or private citizens? I
don't.

> All violence is wrong. I don't think
> any reasonable person is arguing that point. But only one of these had the
> chance of toppling our government.

Pure hyperbole. There was no chance that attack was going to topple our
government.

> The January 6th riot could have played
> out quite differently beyond loss of life and damage to the capitol
> building. We've seen unrest based on racial tension before but the
> storming of the capitol building was a first with completely different
> ramifications.

Yes, it was Congress people who were under siege. Sorry if I don't have
more concern for them than I do for somebody running a small business that
got burned to the ground.

> This very significant difference makes it a false
> equivalency. How one may choose to characterize the insurrection; whether
> it was not-that-big-of-a-deal, it was actually Antifa, or that our
> democracy was on the brink of destruction doesn't change what COULD have
> happened.
>

More hyperbole. There was no chance our democracy was going to be
destroyed. Few of those storming the Capitol even had guns. Hell, they
even stayed between the velvet ropes. Can you imagine Antifa doing that?
Had they tried to force their way through the barricades, there would have
been a lot more than one of them getting shot. They were seriously
outgunned.

ajohnstone

unread,
Feb 24, 2021, 5:54:16 AMFeb 24
to
I recall another invasion of the Capitol.

It was when members of the environmentalist movement Sunrise occupied
Nancy Pelosi’s office. Over 250 protesters were involved, with 50
being arrested by Capitol Police.

Another occasion about a month later 1000 Sunrise protesters showed up for
a sit-in at the Capitol with 140 arrested.

No talk of it being an insurrection. No talk of AOC conducting an coup by
actively assisting the protesters. But the intent was to pressure
law-makers to accede to Sunrise demands.

I doubt very much if any protests of a similar kind will happen again in
a long time.

“…officials said that the rioters “came prepared for war” with weapons, radios and climbing gear…
…Ex-Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund said he had prepared for a protest, not “a military-style coordinated assault”…”

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56174168

Many will view this as confirmation of the idea that this was a coup and
an insurrection. I see it more as senior officials' desperation to pass
the buck and disguise their inefficiency and incompetence.

However, if there was a conspiracy, it could have been pro-Trumpers in
law-enforcement who were intent upon facilitating a headline-seeking
incident to embarrass the Democratic Party by purposefully employing less
security than they had for the previous year’s BLM protests in
Washington DC and the long delay in mobilizing the city police department
and the National Guard when events got out of hand. Possibly a publicity
stunt gone wrong and not the insurrection it was portrayed as by the very
Biden-bias media. But i merely idly speculate.

As JC commented the unruly mob was unusually respectful. For a start, they
did not defy the local Washington DC ordinances on carrying fire-arms. One
participant said he didn't bring his guns because his mom told him not to.
(am reminded of the Life of Brian, he is a very naughty boy clip
https://youtu.be/3_kKAeh6qyc )

Radical reporter, Glen Greenwald, who has no brief with the Right,
commented: “anyone who tries to correct these falsehoods is
instantly attacked with the cynical accusation that if you want only
truthful reporting about what happened, then you’re trying to
“minimize” what happened and are likely an apologist for
if not a full-fledged supporter of the protesters themselves.”
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-false-and-exaggerated-claims

If this was premeditated and not opportunistic they were woefully
unprepared for any stand-off. They had no idea of the lay-out of the
Capitol and didn’t know where they were going and were easily
re-directed away from crucial areas.

And the fact is that no new anti-insurrection laws are required by the
USA. It still has on the statute book the 1940 Smith Act which could be
re-activated. How easy it would be to define Black Lives Matters or
Sunrise as a subversive movements not protected by the First Amendment if
a precedent is created by pursuing those on the Right such as the Proud
Boys or Oath Keepers.

John McAdams

unread,
Feb 24, 2021, 6:44:53 AMFeb 24
to
On 24 Feb 2021 10:54:15 -0000, ajohnstone <alanjjo...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
Surprise! That's a sensible observation. Although you do seem more
protective of leftist groups.

Wanting groups on the other side of the political spectrum labeled
"terrorists" or such is standard political rhetoric.

People on the left want this done to white supremacists:

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/04/white-supremacists-terror-threat-dhs-409236

And on the right, to Antifa:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52868295

One gains nothing by having government label groups.

BTW, I don't mind surveilling groups that are demonstrably prone to
violence -- or subversion.

In the 1950s, the FBI had both the Klan and the CPUSA thoroughly
penetrated. Klan types were violence-prone, and the CPUSA was
essentially an arm of the USSR.

Today, that might mean law enforcement should keep an eye on white
supremacists, Antifa, Muslim mosques that seem to be centers of
radicalism (not many), and so on.

But any such needs to be based on a demonstrated tendency to use
violence, not on some political label.

Thus the CPUSA could not be successfully prosecuted. Their Marxist
rhetoric was protected speech. When a communist actually engaged in
espionage, he could be prosecuted.

And Klan types could rant and rave all they wanted, also protected
speech. But if they killed a civil rights activist, they could be
prosecuted.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

John Corbett

unread,
Feb 24, 2021, 1:43:06 PMFeb 24
to
I am pleasantly surprised I find we are largely in agreement about this.
The media has attempted to sensationalize this story both for their own
ratings and to smear Trump supporters. This was not an insurrection. It
was a protest that got out of hand. I would wager that most of the people
who marched to the Capitol did so with no intention of invading the
building. There were obviously a few instigators that went there intending
to do more than just protest and once they forced their way into the
Capitol, a lot of other people just went along with it. That's the way it
works with a mob. It doesn't take much to get them going.

I remember when I was a student at Ohio State and very much a far left
liberal. In the spring of 1970 there was a student strike which began
about one week before Nixon invaded Cambodia which set off protests across
the nation that culminated with the Kent State massacre. I can't even
remember what the strike was about but once it started, I joined in the
sit ins, the picketing, and the chanting. At one point I followed a mob
that barged into one of the buildings where classes were being conducted
and we went up on stage and there was some minor property damage being
done. I got caught up in it and kicked over a podium. It seemed like a
good idea at the time. I hadn't gone the with the intent of wreaking
havoc. I just went along with it when it began. I suspect that 95+% of the
protesters had no intention of storming the Capitol but once it started, a
lot of people just got caught up in the emotion of the moment and went a
long with it. If this was an insurrection, it was the most half-assed
insurrection in history.

ajohnstone

unread,
Feb 24, 2021, 1:43:33 PMFeb 24
to

>>>When a communist actually engaged in espionage, he could be prosecuted.

I have read that it was the trial and execution of the Rosenbergs that
triggered the youthful LHO's radicalization.

Exactly why he should sympathize with them is something we'll probably
never know other than he empathized perhaps with what seemed like a
witch-hunt or persecution, later reflected in his attitude to the
treatment of Castro's Cuba. A romantic affinity to the under-dog, maybe?

John Corbett

unread,
Feb 24, 2021, 9:18:19 PMFeb 24
to
I can't remember where I read this but as I recall Oswald started
gravitating toward Marxism in his early teens.

davide...@gmail.com

unread,
Feb 24, 2021, 10:03:08 PMFeb 24
to
On Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 7:24:39 PM UTC-6, John McAdams wrote:
> On 23 Feb 2021 18:03:47 -0000, "davide...@gmail.com"
> <davide...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Wednesday, February 10, 2021 at 8:51:16 PM UTC-6, John Corbett wrote:
> >
> >> Nobody is defending wrongdoing. People are pointing out the hypocrisy of
> >> the left that describes left wing riots as mostly peaceful while
> >> describing right wing riots as insurrections. There's nothing false about
> >> that equivalency. Both have resulted in property damage and loss of life,
> >> but the left is only outraged at the atrocities committed by one side.
> >
> >There have been riots and unrest in this country based on outrage over
> >racial injustice

> Rioting is not a reasonable response to "racial injustice," even when
> there is real racial injustice -- which is way less often than the
> politically correct claim.

> .John
> ----------------------- http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

I didn't say it was reasonable nor justified. I simply made the point that
that kind of unrest was historically far more common than the storming of
our capitol building. Well, the "capitol incident" (as it's called in the
conservative media) was actually a first. Starting fires in dumpsters,
breaking windows and taking looting - as bad as it is - is not even close
to being the same thing as storming the capitol with demands to get to
certain legislatures and stop a constitutional process for the sake of a
single individual who was letting go of power like a cat with its claws in
the carpet - and all based on what is rightfully being called "The Big
Lie."

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

John Corbett

unread,
Feb 25, 2021, 8:04:04 AMFeb 25
to
Far more harm was done to this country by the riots of last summer than
anything that was done on January 6. It is laughable for you to try to
make the case that what happened in DC was far worse than last summer's
uprising. There is no false equivalency. There is only double standards.

Bud

unread,
Feb 25, 2021, 8:04:11 AMFeb 25
to
On Wednesday, February 24, 2021 at 10:03:08 PM UTC-5, davide...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 7:24:39 PM UTC-6, John McAdams wrote:
> > On 23 Feb 2021 18:03:47 -0000, "davide...@gmail.com"
> > <davide...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >On Wednesday, February 10, 2021 at 8:51:16 PM UTC-6, John Corbett wrote:
> > >
> > >> Nobody is defending wrongdoing. People are pointing out the hypocrisy of
> > >> the left that describes left wing riots as mostly peaceful while
> > >> describing right wing riots as insurrections. There's nothing false about
> > >> that equivalency. Both have resulted in property damage and loss of life,

Maybe not...

https://youtu.be/3OIDWiSMKW4

> > >> but the left is only outraged at the atrocities committed by one side.
> > >
> > >There have been riots and unrest in this country based on outrage over
> > >racial injustice
>
> > Rioting is not a reasonable response to "racial injustice," even when
> > there is real racial injustice -- which is way less often than the
> > politically correct claim.
> > .John
> > ----------------------- http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>
> I didn't say it was reasonable nor justified. I simply made the point that
> that kind of unrest was historically far more common than the storming of
> our capitol building. Well, the "capitol incident" (as it's called in the
> conservative media) was actually a first. Starting fires in dumpsters,
> breaking windows and taking looting - as bad as it is - is not even close
> to being the same thing as storming the capitol with demands to get to
> certain legislatures and stop a constitutional process for the sake of a
> single individual who was letting go of power like a cat with its claws in
> the carpet - and all based on what is rightfully being called "The Big
> Lie."

Basically this is just your bias talking, you agree with the motivations
of one group so you aren`t appalled at their actions and you disapprove of
the motivations of another group so you feel it is worse.

A few hours of unrest versus months and months of carnage. And all this
concern about the sanctity of a constitutional process when a cabal of
special interest groups, including the mainstream media and big tech
decided it was a done deal the day after the election, as Time magazine
(not Qanon) uncovered.

https://youtu.be/Lx6OfAdl-UU

> David Emerling
> Memphis, TN

ajohnstone

unread,
Feb 25, 2021, 12:41:15 PMFeb 25
to
>>>months and months of carnage.

Yet again tarring all protests with the same brush.

Certainly the BLM campaign was more a political threat to the government
than the Capitol riot because it involved thousands of events and millions
of participants.

https://time.com/5886348/report-peaceful-protests/

https://acleddata.com/2020/09/03/demonstrations-political-violence-in-america-new-data-for-summer-2020/

Show me any similar study that claims the opposite from this organization
that holds wide respect across the world

Seattle and Portland are not typical of every city and town and Antifa
isn't identical to BLM.

Rachelle Dixon, who heads Portland’s Black Lives Matter , says
that the activists had nothing to do with the social justice movement. She
said that in the minds of the public, anarchists have “melded with
Black Lives Matter, but they’re 90% white and they don’t
reach out to Black organizations.”

https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-11-16/portland-protests-anarchists-backlash

Such a thing, though, is made possible because neither Antifa nor BLM are
structured unified organisations.

"The loose structure of Black Lives Matter has contributed to confusion in
the press and among activists, as actions or statements from chapters or
individuals are sometimes attributed to "Black Lives Matter" as a whole" -
Wikipedia

Such a lack of organizational responsibility has been critiqued by my own
party for decades who highlight Jo Freedman's "The Tyranny of
Structurelessness' explaining the fundamental lack of democratic
accountability of that model.

I do not suggest that the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers represent the
Republican Party's Trump supporters. They have there own agenda and
independent motives. Antifa may jump on the BLM bandwagon but they do not
reflect the aims of the BLM movement, nor employ the same non-violent
tactics. Attaching the anarchist label to BLM is a political move to
diminish its credibility and undermine its case.

John Corbett

unread,
Feb 25, 2021, 9:13:21 PMFeb 25
to
On Thursday, February 25, 2021 at 12:41:15 PM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:
> >>>months and months of carnage.
> Yet again tarring all protests with the same brush.
>
> Certainly the BLM campaign was more a political threat to the government
> than the Capitol riot because it involved thousands of events and millions
> of participants.
>
> https://time.com/5886348/report-peaceful-protests/
>
> https://acleddata.com/2020/09/03/demonstrations-political-violence-in-america-new-data-for-summer-2020/
>
> Show me any similar study that claims the opposite from this organization
> that holds wide respect across the world
>

Count me among those who does not respect BLM. I think you misinterpret
fear for respect. People and companies are afraid to speak out against BLM
for fear of being branded as racists. I don't have a problem with the
concept of black lives matter but I have a real problem with the BLM
organization. The very first paragraph on their website says a lot about
BLM.

https://blacklivesmatter.com/about/

Trayvon Martin was not murdered. His death was a justifiable homicide
because he attacked George Zimmerman and put him in danger of death or
great bodily harm. A jury of Zimmerman's peers so ruled.

There is also no systematic targeting of black people. There are racist
individuals but it is not systematic.

> Seattle and Portland are not typical of every city and town and Antifa
> isn't identical to BLM.

No, just the big cities which allow these groups to wreak havoc.

>
> Rachelle Dixon, who heads Portland’s Black Lives Matter , says
> that the activists had nothing to do with the social justice movement. She
> said that in the minds of the public, anarchists have “melded with
> Black Lives Matter, but they’re 90% white and they don’t
> reach out to Black organizations.”
>
> https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-11-16/portland-protests-anarchists-backlash
>
> Such a thing, though, is made possible because neither Antifa nor BLM are
> structured unified organisations.
>
> "The loose structure of Black Lives Matter has contributed to confusion in
> the press and among activists, as actions or statements from chapters or
> individuals are sometimes attributed to "Black Lives Matter" as a whole" -
> Wikipedia
>
> Such a lack of organizational responsibility has been critiqued by my own
> party for decades who highlight Jo Freedman's "The Tyranny of
> Structurelessness' explaining the fundamental lack of democratic
> accountability of that model.
>
> I do not suggest that the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers represent the
> Republican Party's Trump supporters. They have there own agenda and
> independent motives. Antifa may jump on the BLM bandwagon but they do not
> reflect the aims of the BLM movement, nor employ the same non-violent
> tactics. Attaching the anarchist label to BLM is a political move to
> diminish its credibility and undermine its case.

There are people in big cities across the country whose businesses were
destroyed who might dispute that BLM is non-violent.


Bud

unread,
Feb 25, 2021, 9:13:33 PMFeb 25
to
On Thursday, February 25, 2021 at 12:41:15 PM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:
> >>>months and months of carnage.
> Yet again tarring all protests with the same brush.
>
> Certainly the BLM campaign was more a political threat to the government
> than the Capitol riot because it involved thousands of events and millions
> of participants.
>
> https://time.com/5886348/report-peaceful-protests/

The usual crooked kind of study the left produces...

"ACLED found that the overwhelming majority of the more than 9.000 Black
Lives Matter demonstrations that took place across the US after the
killing of George Floyd have been peaceful. News reports at the height of
demonstrations over Floyd’s killing cited dozens of deaths in
connection with protests, but many of those turned out to be examples of
deadly crimes carried out in the vicinity of protests, rather than
directly related to the demonstrations themselves, the researchers
concluded. ACLED’s dataset only focuses on political violence."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/americans-killed-protests-political-unrest-acled

How many people were beat up in the "vicinity" of these so-called
peaceful protests is anyone guess, because unless they shout "This is for
George Floyd!" when they punch you it is unclear whether it is political
violence or just violence that just *happened* to be in the vicinity of
the peaceful protests.

Anthony Marsh

unread,
Feb 25, 2021, 9:13:53 PMFeb 25
to
Trump style false equivalency.

What violence from the left is the same as the attack on the capitol? I've
actually head some kooks claim that Antifa was part of the attack on the
capitol. But they can't show me any Amtifa signs of costumes and refuse to
provide any ptoof at all for their claims.

In other words they are just making up shit to try to make themeslves look
better. Try claiming that in the Beer Hall pusch rhere were as many
Communists attacking as Nazis.

>> All violence is wrong. I don't think

So you are attacking the American Revolution. You say if we had jus
written a letter to the King of England he would have given us our
freedom? Is that the kind of crap that you teach your studens?

Never any need for violence? Just let Hitler keep killing the Jews. That's
your plan?

>> any reasonable person is arguing that point. But only one of these had the
>> chance of toppling our government.
>
>
> No, it did not, anymore than the Madison occupation had a chance of
> "toppling our government."
>

Ever hear of the Civil War?

> Had the rioters actually succeeded in disrupting the Senate
> proceedings, it would have merely delayed the process.
>

They did and there was. So you think it would have been OK if they
killed the Vice Pesident and a few senators?

Maybe that way they wouldn't have enough votes to certify the election.
How many did you tell ehtm they needed to kill?
Only 4? Maybe 5?

> Just as the Madison rioters only delayed the enactment of Act 10.
>
>
>> The January 6th riot could have played
>> out quite differently beyond loss of life and damage to the capitol
>> building. We've seen unrest based on racial tension before but the
>> storming of the capitol building was a first with completely different
>> ramifications.
>
> You are a *slow* learner.
>
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/01/14/democrats-were-occupying-capitols-before-they-were-against-it/
> And then you had this:
>
> https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/1980s-far-left-female-led-domestic-terrorism-group-bombed-us-capitol-180973904/
>
>
>> This very significant difference makes it a false
>> equivalency. How one may choose to characterize the insurrection; whether
>> it was not-that-big-of-a-deal, it was actually Antifa, or that our
>> democracy was on the brink of destruction doesn't change what COULD have
>> happened.
>>
>
> As it was, several Trump supporters were killed.

So sad. I heard that during our evolution some British were killed.
You mourn when traitors are killed, but not when blacks are killed.

Anthony Marsh

unread,
Feb 25, 2021, 9:13:55 PMFeb 25
to
Which rioting? Name nmes. You mean they used gas on protestors so rhat
Trump could hold up the Bible? Wht weaons did the protestors have? Rubber
bans?

Anthony Marsh

unread,
Feb 25, 2021, 9:13:59 PMFeb 25
to
It already was destroyed by Trump. We are trying to rebild it.

Anthony Marsh

unread,
Feb 25, 2021, 9:14:02 PMFeb 25
to
On 2/24/2021 1:43 PM, ajohnstone wrote:
>
>>>> When a communist actually engaged in espionage, he could be prosecuted.
>
> I have read that it was the trial and execution of the Rosenbergs that
> triggered the youthful LHO's radicalization.
>
> Exactly why he should sympathize with them is something we'll probably
> never know other than he empathized perhaps with what seemed like a

Maybe, but it was more like a tipping point.

> witch-hunt or persecution, later reflected in his attitude to the
> treatment of Castro's Cuba. A romantic affinity to the under-dog, maybe?
>


Not just the wich hunt. They WERE spies.
The death sentence.


John McAdams

unread,
Feb 25, 2021, 10:36:00 PMFeb 25
to
On 25 Feb 2021 17:41:13 -0000, ajohnstone <alanjjo...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

> >>>months and months of carnage.
>
>Yet again tarring all protests with the same brush.
>
>Certainly the BLM campaign was more a political threat to the government
>than the Capitol riot because it involved thousands of events and millions
>of participants.
>
>https://time.com/5886348/report-peaceful-protests/
>
>https://acleddata.com/2020/09/03/demonstrations-political-violence-in-america-new-data-for-summer-2020/
>
>Show me any similar study that claims the opposite from this organization
>that holds wide respect across the world
>

So the protests were "mostly peaceful."

https://i2.wp.com/www.nationalreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/CNN-Mostly-Peaceful.jpg?w=960&ssl=1

Klan rallies are mostly peaceful.

This ocean voyage was mostly peaceful:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EgdTv9PXYAEEI2r?format=jpg&name=900x900

This was a mostly peaceful flight:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EgdEQd1XgAE-VxZ?format=jpg&name=medium

>Seattle and Portland are not typical of every city and town and Antifa
>isn't identical to BLM.
>

Yes, Seattle and Portland are cities were BLM and Antifa are strong.

>Rachelle Dixon, who heads Portland’s Black Lives Matter , says
>that the activists had nothing to do with the social justice movement. She
>said that in the minds of the public, anarchists have “melded with
>Black Lives Matter, but they’re 90% white and they don’t
>reach out to Black organizations.”
>
>https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-11-16/portland-protests-anarchists-backlash
>
>Such a thing, though, is made possible because neither Antifa nor BLM are
>structured unified organisations.
>
>"The loose structure of Black Lives Matter has contributed to confusion in
>the press and among activists, as actions or statements from chapters or
>individuals are sometimes attributed to "Black Lives Matter" as a whole" -
>Wikipedia
>

BLM is a toxic bunch of leftist authoritarians:

http://mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2017/09/black-lives-matter-radical-cop-haters.html

http://mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2017/08/black-lives-matter-lauded-fidel-castro.html


>Such a lack of organizational responsibility has been critiqued by my own
>party for decades who highlight Jo Freedman's "The Tyranny of
>Structurelessness' explaining the fundamental lack of democratic
>accountability of that model.
>

In the posts above, I cite Tweets tweeted or *retweeted* by the
national organization.

>I do not suggest that the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers represent the
>Republican Party's Trump supporters. They have there own agenda and
>independent motives. Antifa may jump on the BLM bandwagon but they do not
>reflect the aims of the BLM movement, nor employ the same non-violent
>tactics. Attaching the anarchist label to BLM is a political move to
>diminish its credibility and undermine its case.

Attaching the label "toxic, nasty radical leftists" is fair. See
above.

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

ajohnstone

unread,
Feb 26, 2021, 5:10:17 PMFeb 26
to
The analysis is from a respected study and it to nobody's credit to simply
dismiss ACLED's findings as from a 'crooked and leftist' .

I very much doubt the actual website was visited and explored.

Their survey of right-wing militias
https://acleddata.com/2020/10/21/standing-by-militias-election/

ACLED records more than 10,330 demonstrations associated with the BLM
movement across more than 2,730 locations in all 50 states and Washington,
DC. States with the most events: California (1,151); New York (615);
Florida (487); Illinois (430); Texas (425)

The vast majority of these events — 94% — involved no
violent or destructive activity. Nevertheless, over 9% of all BLM-linked
demonstrations — or nearly one in 10 events — were met
with intervention by police or other authorities, compared to just 4% of
right-wing demonstrations.

The report on policing differences here
https://acleddata.com/2020/12/10/the-future-of-stop-the-steal-post-election-trajectories-for-right-wing-mobilization-in-the-us/

When responding to BLM-linked demonstrations, authorities used force more
than 51% of the time, compared to just 33% for right-wing demonstrations.
2,350 right-wing demonstrations took place across more than 1,070
locations in all 50 states and Washington, DC . States with the most
events: California (229); Florida (165); New York (140); Pennsylvania
(137); Texas (135)

Oh, we can all come up with anecdotal evidence to advance our personal
beliefs. I could cite the number of car-rammings against BLM
demonstrators

Wiki reportS the casualties both pro- and anti-BLM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_and_controversies_during_the_George_Floyd_protests#Events_within_the_United_States

America is a deeply polarized and divided society and always has been. It
has also be a society where the media has rarely had a record of unbias
reporting. Here on this forum the preponderance of opinion is that it
liberal, yet any thinking person outside the USA does not recognize the
American mainstream media as liberal. Rachel Maddow - Lou Dobbs
---tweedledum and tweedledummer.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/soledad-o-e2-80-99brien-calls-out-rachel-maddow-lawrence-o-e2-80-99donnell-for-russia-conspiracies-at-disinformation-hearing/ar-BB1dZ4tv

John Corbett

unread,
Feb 26, 2021, 8:28:59 PMFeb 26
to
I remember a long time ago, NBC had a late night news show and Linda
Ellerbee responded to viewer complaints that the networks only reported
bad news. She said that news by definition is the exception. News
organizations don't report how many planes landed safely each day. So it
is with these protests. It doesn't matter how many of them were peaceful.
What matters is how many turned violent. Way too many of them turned
violent last summer and way too many times, law enforcement was told to
stand down by the Democrat mayors who run these cities.

John Corbett

unread,
Feb 26, 2021, 8:29:02 PMFeb 26
to
On Thursday, February 25, 2021 at 10:36:00 PM UTC-5, John McAdams wrote:
> >
> So the protests were "mostly peaceful."
>
> https://i2.wp.com/www.nationalreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/CNN-Mostly-Peaceful.jpg?w=960&ssl=1
>

"Fiery but mostly peaceful"??? Who was the stooge who put up that banner?

Great background visual as well.

BT George

unread,
Feb 26, 2021, 8:29:33 PMFeb 26
to
Your second to last sentence is dead on. It's ancient, and well known,
that crowds have a kind of "vortex" effect that tend to drag people along
with them. Which explains why an injunction in one of the more ancient
books of the Bible.

"You shall not follow a crowd to do evil..." Exodus 23:2

Anthony Marsh

unread,
Feb 26, 2021, 8:46:45 PMFeb 26
to
On 2/25/2021 9:13 PM, Bud wrote:
> On Thursday, February 25, 2021 at 12:41:15 PM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:
>>>>> months and months of carnage.
>> Yet again tarring all protests with the same brush.
>>
>> Certainly the BLM campaign was more a political threat to the government
>> than the Capitol riot because it involved thousands of events and millions
>> of participants.
>>
>> https://time.com/5886348/report-peaceful-protests/
>
> The usual crooked kind of study the left produces...
>
> "ACLED found that the overwhelming majority of the more than 9.000 Black
> Lives Matter demonstrations that took place across the US after the
> killing of George Floyd have been peaceful. News reports at the height of
> demonstrations over Floyd???s killing cited dozens of deaths in
> connection with protests, but many of those turned out to be examples of
> deadly crimes carried out in the vicinity of protests, rather than
> directly related to the demonstrations themselves, the researchers
> concluded. ACLED???s dataset only focuses on political violence."
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/31/americans-killed-protests-political-unrest-acled
>
> How many people were beat up in the "vicinity" of these so-called
> peaceful protests is anyone guess, because unless they shout "This is for
> George Floyd!" when they punch you it is unclear whether it is political
> violence or just violence that just *happened* to be in the vicinity of
> the peaceful protests.
>
>> https://acleddata.com/2020/09/03/demonstrations-political-violence-in-america-new-data-for-summer-2020/
>>
>> Show me any similar study that claims the opposite from this organization
>> that holds wide respect across the world
>>
>> Seattle and Portland are not typical of every city and town and Antifa
>> isn't identical to BLM.
>>
>> Rachelle Dixon, who heads Portland???s Black Lives Matter , says
>> that the activists had nothing to do with the social justice movement. She
>> said that in the minds of the public, anarchists have ???melded with
>> Black Lives Matter, but they???re 90% white and they don???t
>> reach out to Black organizations.???
>>
>> https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-11-16/portland-protests-anarchists-backlash
>>
>> Such a thing, though, is made possible because neither Antifa nor BLM are
>> structured unified organisations.
>>
>> "The loose structure of Black Lives Matter has contributed to confusion in
>> the press and among activists, as actions or statements from chapters or
>> individuals are sometimes attributed to "Black Lives Matter" as a whole" -
>> Wikipedia
>>
>> Such a lack of organizational responsibility has been critiqued by my own
>> party for decades who highlight Jo Freedman's "The Tyranny of
>> Structurelessness' explaining the fundamental lack of democratic
>> accountability of that model.
>>
>> I do not suggest that the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers represent the

Because you're not brave enough to to do that. But you know it's true.

>> Republican Party's Trump supporters. They have there own agenda and


No, they said Trump told them to do it.

>> independent motives. Antifa may jump on the BLM bandwagon but they do
>> not reflect the aims of the BLM movement, nor employ the same
>> non-violent tactics. Attaching the anarchist label to BLM is a
>> political move to diminish its credibility and undermine its case.
>


When did BLM or Antifa attack the US capitol?


Anthony Marsh

unread,
Feb 26, 2021, 8:46:53 PMFeb 26
to
On 2/25/2021 10:35 PM, John McAdams wrote:
> On 25 Feb 2021 17:41:13 -0000, ajohnstone <alanjjo...@yahoo.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>>>> months and months of carnage.
>>
>> Yet again tarring all protests with the same brush.
>>
>> Certainly the BLM campaign was more a political threat to the government
>> than the Capitol riot because it involved thousands of events and millions
>> of participants.
>>
>> https://time.com/5886348/report-peaceful-protests/
>>
>> https://acleddata.com/2020/09/03/demonstrations-political-violence-in-america-new-data-for-summer-2020/
>>
>> Show me any similar study that claims the opposite from this organization
>> that holds wide respect across the world
>>
>
> So the protests were "mostly peaceful."

Yeah and JFK's motorcade was "mostly peaceful."
Today or always? You claim they never lynched anybody

>
> This ocean voyage was mostly peaceful:
>
> https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EgdTv9PXYAEEI2r?format=jpg&name=900x900
>
> This was a mostly peaceful flight:
>
> https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EgdEQd1XgAE-VxZ?format=jpg&name=medium
>
>> Seattle and Portland are not typical of every city and town and Antifa
>> isn't identical to BLM.
>>
>
> Yes, Seattle and Portland are cities were BLM and Antifa are strong.



Tell me how many members and show me BLM in Seatle and Portand. Those
are very liberal cities.

>
>> Rachelle Dixon, who heads Portland???s Black Lives Matter , says
>> that the activists had nothing to do with the social justice movement. She
>> said that in the minds of the public, anarchists have ???melded with
>> Black Lives Matter, but they???re 90% white and they don???t
>> reach out to Black organizations.???
>>

John Corbett

unread,
Feb 27, 2021, 8:12:49 AMFeb 27
to
A key stat missing from your analysis is how many right wing protests
turned violent. Police don't need to, nor should they, intervene in
peaceful protests. Could it be the reason they intervene less often in
right wing protests is because those are less apt to become violent?

Using your statistics, if 6 perc