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

[davide...@gmail.com]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Or maybe just a troll. That never made any sense.

[davide...@gmail.com]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Why would he want to protect Israel if they had been responsible for
assassinating our president?

[Anthony Marsh]

LBJ ordered that ALL speculation be cut off. He did not want any rumors
about ANY country to spark a war.

[Anthony Marsh]

It doesn't matter WHO was responsible. LBJ didn't want rumors to start
WWIII.

[John Corbett]

Israel was going to start WWIII?

[Pamela Brown]

Because he was in agreement with it.

[Anthony Marsh]

WHO said that? I mever said that.

[John Corbett]

Nobody was talking to you or about you.

[Anthony Marsh]

Someone was replying to me. Learn how threads work.

[John Corbett]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

>>>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]

I can't remember where I read this but as I recall Oswald started
gravitating toward Marxism in his early teens.

[davide...@gmail.com]

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]

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]

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]

>>>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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

It already was destroyed by Trump. We are trying to rebild it.

[Anthony Marsh]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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."

>
> 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.

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]

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 percent of BLM demonstrations turned violent
and the police intervened in 10% that means they were intervening in only
4% of the non-violent ones.

[Bud]

Very little of what Democrats think is true is actually true.

> >> Republican Party's Trump supporters. They have there own agenda and
> No, they said Trump told them to do it.

Quote him.

> >> 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?

May 30th, 2020.

https://americanmilitarynews.com/2020/06/60-secret-service-agents-injured-in-assaults-from-violent-rioters/

[John Corbett]

Come on, Bud. That was a mostly peaceful riot.

[Bud]

On Friday, February 26, 2021 at 5:10:17 PM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:

> 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' .

Actually it is an excellent reason to dismiss it, left wing sources are
never honest.

Let us look again at what I quoted from the guardian...

"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."

This tells me that they might choose to see the murder of David Dorn as
*criminal* rather than *political* violence.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/03/david-dorn-st-louis-police-captain-killed-amid-floyd-protest/3133037001/

Never trust a leftists source to relate information honestly.

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

I went. Seemed you had to download their data, I wasn`t that interested.
It is clear that their *goal* was to downplay BLM violence.

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

The title betrays the bias, "standing by" was something Trump said.

Before the elections businesses across this country were boarding up
their properties for fear of a *left wing* backlash if Trump was
re-elected.

> 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.

Of course there were candlelight vigil type demonstrations across the
country in universities, sit-ins and whatnot that were not violent. The
shear number of these can in no way be used to downplay the extreme
violence and destruction which were the result of BLM riots.

*My* Walmart was gutted twice. *My* Target was gutted twice. My city was
trashed twice. To you sitting in a foreign country passing judgment these
things might be some abstract aberration, to me the reality is quite
different.

> 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.

How many brick and pieces of concrete or bricks were thrown at cops in
BLM protests compared to right wing protests? How many molotov cocktails
were thrown at police during left wing demonstrations versus right wing
demonstrations? As long as you stand on your head to look at these things
incorrectly you are just blowing smoke.

> 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)

Is the effort to hurt cops the same in left wing demonstrations as right
wing demonstrations? You look at things but leave out the most important
context in which to view them. Left wingers never have any interest in the
reality of things, they play silly games with numbers to contrive results
that satisfy them.

> 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

Ordinary citizens being set upon by BLM mobs. You`ll notice it is always
the *other* people who have to show restraint, BLM mobs can do whatever
they like.

> 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

The tremendous power of the media and the tremendous power of the tech
giants were used to full effect and were able to eek out a slim victory in
order to oust Trump. That is what occurred. Now people are getting a
taste of a Biden presidency, forty days in and we are bombing other
countries. They portrayed Trump as a war monger when all he ever did was
pull American troops out of these hot spots. Trump`s presidency will soon
be seen as "the good old days", leftist lies won`t endure forever.

[Bud]

To hear ajohnstone tell it, BLM had the police turned loose on them.
"up" is always "down" with leftists, all they do is rewrite history into a
form they are comfortable with.

[Anthony Marsh]

WRONG.
Your article Says:

outside the White House.

Not the same thing. Get a map.
Have YOU ever been to Washington?

> https://americanmilitarynews.com/2020/06/60-secret-service-agents-injured-in-assaults-from-violent-rioters/
>

[Anthony Marsh]

And not at the capitol.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/27/2021 3:33 PM, Bud wrote:
> On Friday, February 26, 2021 at 5:10:17 PM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:
>> 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' .
>
> Actually it is an excellent reason to dismiss it, left wing sources are
> never honest.
>
> Let us look again at what I quoted from the guardian...
>

> "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."
>
> This tells me that they might choose to see the murder of David Dorn as
> *criminal* rather than *political* violence.
>
> https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/03/david-dorn-st-louis-police-captain-killed-amid-floyd-protest/3133037001/
>
> Never trust a leftists source to relate information honestly.
>
>> I very much doubt the actual website was visited and explored.
>
> I went. Seemed you had to download their data, I wasn`t that interested.
> It is clear that their *goal* was to downplay BLM violence.
>
>> Their survey of right-wing militias
>> https://acleddata.com/2020/10/21/standing-by-militias-election/
>
> The title betrays the bias, "standing by" was something Trump said.
>
> Before the elections businesses across this country were boarding up
> their properties for fear of a *left wing* backlash if Trump was
> re-elected.
>
>> 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.
>
> Of course there were candlelight vigil type demonstrations across the
> country in universities, sit-ins and whatnot that were not violent. The
> shear number of these can in no way be used to downplay the extreme
> violence and destruction which were the result of BLM riots.
>
> *My* Walmart was gutted twice. *My* Target was gutted twice. My city was
> trashed twice. To you sitting in a foreign country passing judgment these
> things might be some abstract aberration, to me the reality is quite
> different.
>
>> 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.
>
> How many brick and pieces of concrete or bricks were thrown at cops in
> BLM protests compared to right wing protests? How many molotov cocktails
> were thrown at police during left wing demonstrations versus right wing
> demonstrations? As long as you stand on your head to look at these things
> incorrectly you are just blowing smoke.
>
>> 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)
>
> Is the effort to hurt cops the same in left wing demonstrations as right
> wing demonstrations? You look at things but leave out the most important

No. Do you even realize that some of the terrorists who attacks the cops
at the capitol were actually former cops themselves. Can you find any such
examples in the left wing? Of course not.

[Bud]

So only cop violence matters. Same as your approach to black violence,
as long as the blacks in Chicago, Detroit and Baltimore are being killed
by other blacks and not cops you don`t care.

[Bud]

You missed your calling, Tony, you should have gotten a job working for
the mainstream media...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Capitol#/media/File:US_Capitol_west_side.JPG

https://www.breakingnewstoday.co.uk/trump-rushed-to-white-house-bunker-amid-protests/

https://www.the-sun.com/news/913001/trump-secure-bunker-friday-george-floyd-protests-white-house/

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/fire-and-tear-gas-outside-the-white-house-on-sixth-day-of-protests-following-george-floyd-s-death-in-custody

Interesting to watch the main stream media tie itself in knots trying to
draw distinctions that don`t exist.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/false-equivalency-black-lives-matter-capitol-siege-experts/story?id=75251279

Both groups are frustrated and think the system has abandoned them, and
that they aren`t getting a fair shake. The only real distinction is that
the left has decided that one group is justified and the other isn`t.

[Bud]

That BLM rioters attacked the capitol.

> outside the White House.

Moving the goalposts, Tony?

Do you think that Mexicans weren`t really attacking the Alamo until they
got inside?

[John Corbett]

On Sunday, February 28, 2021 at 2:35:07 PM UTC-5, Bud wrote:
> On Saturday, February 27, 2021 at 9:58:29 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:

> > No. Do you even realize that some of the terrorists who attacks the cops
> > at the capitol were actually former cops themselves. Can you find any such
> > examples in the left wing? Of course not.

> So only cop violence matters. Same as your approach to black violence,
> as long as the blacks in Chicago, Detroit and Baltimore are being killed
> by other blacks and not cops you don`t care.

Nor does the mainstream media nor does the Democrat leadership.

[Anthony Marsh]

No, YOU made a false claim

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/28/2021 2:35 PM, Bud wrote:

Most cop violence is white cops killing black people.
I know of only one case up here where a white cop killed another white
cop and that was because they were arguing about how to split the money
they had stolen from the bank.

> as long as the blacks in Chicago, Detroit and Baltimore are being killed
> by other blacks and not cops you don`t care.
>

I have always cared about cops. I have had many friends who were/are cops.
I used to play in the Boston Police band and partied with cops. I once
gave a ride to the head of the black cops organization. I don't want to
scare you too much, but you may not even be aware of the fact that many
cops are Liberals.

>>> context in which to view them. Left wingers never have any interest in the
>>> reality of things, they play silly games with numbers to contrive results
>>> that satisfy them.
>>>
>>>> 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
>>>
>>> Ordinary citizens being set upon by BLM mobs. You`ll notice it is always

Such as? How many deaths?

[Bud]

<snicker> Why do liberals struggle so much with facts?

https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race/

> I know of only one case up here where a white cop killed another white
> cop and that was because they were arguing about how to split the money
> they had stolen from the bank.

There was a case here where a school teacher killed another school
teacher. Nobody rioted because nobody likes school teachers.

> > as long as the blacks in Chicago, Detroit and Baltimore are being killed
> > by other blacks and not cops you don`t care.
> >
> I have always cared about cops.

But no concern for the black on black carnage in the black community.

>I have had many friends who were/are cops.
> I used to play in the Boston Police band and partied with cops. I once
> gave a ride to the head of the black cops organization. I don't want to
> scare you too much, but you may not even be aware of the fact that many
> cops are Liberals.

In their rookie year, maybe. The reality of the streets will make a
Trump supporter out of anyone.

> >>> context in which to view them. Left wingers never have any interest in the
> >>> reality of things, they play silly games with numbers to contrive results
> >>> that satisfy them.
> >>>
> >>>> 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
> >>>
> >>> Ordinary citizens being set upon by BLM mobs. You`ll notice it is always
> Such as? How many deaths?

I`ll help you out, since you are unable to google...

https://youtu.be/cq7uPGkI9Lo

https://youtu.be/iPcIoT_0E0s

One with a cop car, I like the look on the guys face...

https://youtu.be/31sdAohmW1w

https://youtu.be/OXECb1DPa1g

This is why you should plow through them without stopping, because they
think they can beat you up, steal from you and wreck your property,
because, you know, George Floyd...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_UDZ4a53Bo

How many minutes of police work were spent trying to find the Floyd
protester who punched this guy in the face (even though it was filmed)?
ZERO! If this isn`t a civil rights violation, what is? Yet the FBI won`t
study the film and track the offender down, because it is leftist violence
and we have two standards in this country these days.

https://youtu.be/WE3eMEtMTpY

I remember this fatal one...

https://youtu.be/0jtXAP06qzA

My parents taught me never to play in the street.

To liberals like you and ajohnstone the BLM protesters are victims
because they should be able to do whatever they want to whoever they want.
Even though they are violent much of the time, you are supposed to stop
and trust them not to beat you up. Some people haven`t signed off on this.

[John Corbett]

On Sunday, February 28, 2021 at 10:42:16 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:

> Most cop violence is white cops killing black people.

Wrong as usual.

Nearly twice as many white people are killed by cops than black people
killed by cops. More whites are killed by cops than any minority group.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race/

But don't let facts get in the way of your claims.

[John Corbett]

On Monday, March 1, 2021 at 12:55:45 PM UTC-5, Bud wrote:
> On Sunday, February 28, 2021 at 10:42:16 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:

> > Most cop violence is white cops killing black people.
> <snicker> Why do liberals struggle so much with facts?
>
> https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race/

Looks like you beat me to this one, Bud. I posted the same link but mine
hasn't posted yet.

[Bud]

We likely both did the same thing, knew what Tony said was false, did a
quick search and used the first search result that came up.

Now if you do a search for "are white cops prone to shoot blacks" you`ll
get results like this...

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/07/white-cops-dont-commit-more-shootings/

"It turns out that white officers are no more likely than black or
Hispanic officers to shoot black civilians. It is a racial group’s
rate of violent crime that determines police shootings, not the race of
the officer. The more frequently officers encounter violent suspects from
any given racial group, the greater the chance that members of that racial
group will be shot by a police officer. In fact, if there is a bias in
police shootings after crime rates are taken into account, it is against
white civilians, the study found."

"A 2015 Justice Department study of the Philadelphia Police Department
found that black officers were 67 percent more likely than white officers
to mistakenly shoot an unarmed black suspect; Hispanic officers were 145
percent more likely than white officers to mistakenly shoot an unarmed
black suspect. Whether lowered hiring standards are responsible for those
disparities was not addressed."

The Democrats have been throwing fuel on the "white cops
disproportionately shoot black suspects" myth for political gain for
years. They don`t care if the whole country is engulfed in riots and burns
as long as it helps them get in and keep power by promoting this
falsehood. They need to keep these myths alive.

[John Corbett]

There you go letting the facts get in the way of Tony's narrative. Cut it
out.

There are of course cop shootings of civilians which are not justified but
these are the exceptions and the cops should be held accountable when this
happens. The myth is that it happens disproportionally to blacks and other
minorities. That myth is fostered by the mainstream media who only
sensationalize the story when it is a white cop shooting a black suspect.

[davide...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, February 25, 2021 at 7:04:04 AM UTC-6, John Corbett wrote:
> 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,
> > > >> 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."
> >
> 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.

You say that because the attack on the capitol failed. They did NOT stop
the constitutional process - only disrupted it. They did NOT get to the
legislators they were seeking to ... what? Hang them? Beat them? Kidnap
them? Torture them? But it wasn't for the want of trying. This was an
attack on our government, not Champ Sports, Best Buy or Dunkin' Donuts.

These dumbshits storm into the capitol, can't find whom their looking for
and ran out of ideas of what to do next. They broke windows, stole
podiums, name plates off doors, took selfies and took photographs of
documents that they didn't even understand. It reminds me of that scene in
the Will Ferrell movie "Old School", where Will Ferrell gets drunk and
wants to go group streaking. He leads the charge but then figures out that
nobody is following and runs out of ideas of what to do next.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgL95-90quM&t=0m31s

The disparity in the POTENTIAL for harm cannot be compared. It's fortunate
that all our legislators were ushered out of there to safety. Imagine how
that would've played out had they stormed in more quickly while all were
present and in session. Like I said, we've had racially-motivated riots
before. The the capitol thing was something completely new and far more
dangerous to our democracy. It was, quite literally, an attack on
democracy. I think that's far worse. You obviously disagree.

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

[Bud]

Not just Tony`s narrative but the narrative of the Democratic Party and
the main stream media.

Trump is held responsible for the "insurrection" (even though he told
the people to "protest peacefully"), he was held responsible any time a
trans or gay person was beat up in the country for "fostering a climate of
hate", yet they never stop encouraging the violence we saw all summer with
the lies they tell, and they are never held accountable.

> There are of course cop shootings of civilians which are not justified but
> these are the exceptions and the cops should be held accountable when this
> happens. The myth is that it happens disproportionally to blacks and other
> minorities. That myth is fostered by the mainstream media who only
> sensationalize the story when it is a white cop shooting a black suspect.

Also not newsworthy is the disproportionate number of instances of
blacks shooting police.

[Anthony Marsh]

No. The organized because they are victims of racism.

> Even though they are violent much of the time, you are supposed to stop

No proof, just make wild allegations to deflect. I know you are, but
what am I? Why don't you claim that the Jews had bigger concentration
camps than the Nazis?

[Anthony Marsh]

Maybe because there are more white people than black prople.

Also break it down by who is armed. more unarmed black people are shot and
killed for Jay Walking than blacks.

[John Corbett]

As I said earlier, I don't hold Congress people in any higher regard than
people who own businesses like Champ Sports, Best Buy, or Dunkin Donuts. I
don't regard an attack on any of these to be more egregious that any
others. On the other hand, since you do think an attack on Congress is
more egregious than those on private businesses, was it any more egregious
then the mob that threatened to breech the fence around the White House
last summer. That one forced the Secret Service to take Trump to the White
House shelter. That was Antifa and BLM at work. Are you going to claim
that is a false equivalency too? Because if you do, you are an even bigger
hypocrite than I thought.

>
> These dumbshits storm into the capitol, can't find whom their looking for
> and ran out of ideas of what to do next. They broke windows, stole
> podiums, name plates off doors, took selfies and took photographs of
> documents that they didn't even understand. It reminds me of that scene in
> the Will Ferrell movie "Old School", where Will Ferrell gets drunk and
> wants to go group streaking. He leads the charge but then figures out that
> nobody is following and runs out of ideas of what to do next.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgL95-90quM&t=0m31s

Compared to the destruction wreaked during left wing protests last summer,
the property damage was minimal. I'll bet if you tallied it all up, it
wouldn't amount to 1% of the damage that was done in rioting last summer.

>
> The disparity in the POTENTIAL for harm cannot be compared. It's fortunate
> that all our legislators were ushered out of there to safety. Imagine how
> that would've played out had they stormed in more quickly while all were
> present and in session. Like I said, we've had racially-motivated riots
> before. The the capitol thing was something completely new and far more
> dangerous to our democracy. It was, quite literally, an attack on
> democracy. I think that's far worse. You obviously disagree.
>

You are being melodramatic. You are way overstating the danger that mob
posed. Those in Congress were in no more danger than Trump was last
summer. Both were ushered to safety as a precaution. The Capitol police
had far more firepower than the rioters. Had they forced the issue, there
would have been a lot more than just the one rioter shot dead.

It really comes down to one thing. You are willing to excuse left wing
rioters but not right wing rioters because you sympathize with the former.

[Bud]

Did it? I saw politicians shitting their pants, that has to count for
something.

> They did NOT stop
> the constitutional process - only disrupted it.

I`m sure you didn`t mind when the Kavanagh hearings were disrupted.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I68re6SCCxY

> They did NOT get to the
> legislators they were seeking to ... what? Hang them? Beat them? Kidnap
> them? Torture them?

One could only hope. Thousands of people were injured in the BLM riots
by being beat up by violent mobs, many people lost everything they owned,
many people were terrified and these folks didn`t give a shit. We`re
supposed to worry when they get a small taste of it?

But I don`t remember any leftists being much bothered when the autistic
Trump supporter was kidnapped and tortured...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Chicago_torture_incident

Black Lives Matter, the Democratic Party and the Main Stream Media
created the climate for this to occur. They all benefit by inflaming
racial passions.

>But it wasn't for the want of trying. This was an
> attack on our government, not Champ Sports, Best Buy or Dunkin' Donuts.

What did Best Buy do? Where was the outrage by leftists when this
carnage was going on long before the phony "insurrection"?

And why wouldn`t these political protesters think it was alright to be
lawless after watching what the left got away with for months?

> These dumbshits storm into the capitol, can't find whom their looking for
> and ran out of ideas of what to do next. They broke windows, stole
> podiums, name plates off doors, took selfies and took photographs of
> documents that they didn't even understand.

<snicker> They should have brought some BLM geniuses to explain them to
them.

Here is a photo of some of the "terrorists" walking respectably between
the velvet ropes...

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.informationliberation.com%2Ffiles%2Fcapitol-protests-2021.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

Note the photo of the dangerous terrorist on the right.

If this was BLM the place would have been trashed, all the statues would
be destroyed, all the paintings would be destroyed.

> It reminds me of that scene in
> the Will Ferrell movie "Old School", where Will Ferrell gets drunk and
> wants to go group streaking. He leads the charge but then figures out that
> nobody is following and runs out of ideas of what to do next.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgL95-90quM&t=0m31s
>
> The disparity in the POTENTIAL for harm cannot be compared.

The ACTUAL harm of the BLM riots was much worse.

> It's fortunate
> that all our legislators were ushered out of there to safety. Imagine how
> that would've played out had they stormed in more quickly while all were
> present and in session. Like I said, we've had racially-motivated riots
> before.

Yes, all summer.

>The the capitol thing was something completely new and far more
> dangerous to our democracy.

No, it wasn`t, and no, it isn`t.

The real danger is BLM riots every time something happens that the
violent mobs don`t like. The real danger is the decriminalization of these
riots, insuring they will occur again and again. The real danger is the
government that is suppose to protect against such violence actively
supporting it.

> It was, quite literally, an attack on
> democracy. I think that's far worse. You obviously disagree.

The left overstates the one and completely ignores the other.

> David Emerling
> Memphis, TN

[Bud]

Then I guess white people better start organizing themselves...

https://youtu.be/Z-hgnST8tks

> > Even though they are violent much of the time, you are supposed to stop
> No proof, just make wild allegations to deflect.

Head in the sand liberalism. As long as you don`t look you won`t see.

> I know you are, but
> what am I? Why don't you claim that the Jews had bigger concentration
> camps than the Nazis?

This is why liberals need to shut down ideas, they can`t discuss them to
save their lives. All emotionalism and wild accusations, no substance.

[Bud]

Liberals and their endless string of false narratives.

[John Corbett]

Did you hear the latest. They want to boycott Hyatt Hotels because they
had the nerve to host CPAC. You can't make this stuff up.

https://hotair.com/archives/jazz-shaw/2021/03/01/liberals-try-cancel-hyatt-hotels-hosting-cpac/

One clown said he'd rather sleep on the streets than stay at a Hyatt
hotel. I'd rather he sleep on the streets too. In fact, I wouldn't be
surprised if he does.

You know people are intellectually bankrupt when they are forced to try to
stifle those with opposing viewpoints.

[John McAdams]

On 2 Mar 2021 21:13:49 -0000, "davide...@gmail.com"

<davide...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thursday, February 25, 2021 at 7:04:04 AM UTC-6, John Corbett wrote:
>> 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:
>> > >
>> >
>> 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.
>
>You say that because the attack on the capitol failed. They did NOT stop
>the constitutional process - only disrupted it. They did NOT get to the
>legislators they were seeking to ... what? Hang them? Beat them? Kidnap
>them? Torture them? But it wasn't for the want of trying. This was an
>attack on our government, not Champ Sports, Best Buy or Dunkin' Donuts.
>

If "an attack on our government" is bad, what about the leftists who
occupied the state Capitol in Madison, WI?

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

What about attempts to burn down the Federal Building in Portland?

https://www.thedailybeast.com/portland-protesters-set-fire-to-federal-courthouse-cops-declare-demonstration-a-riot

What about bombing the US Capitol?

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

>
>The disparity in the POTENTIAL for harm cannot be compared. It's
>fortunate that all our legislators were ushered out of there to safety.
>Imagine how that would've played out had they stormed in more quickly
>while all were present and in session. Like I said, we've had
>racially-motivated riots before. The the capitol thing was something
>completely new and far more dangerous to our democracy. It was, quite
>literally, an attack on democracy. I think that's far worse. You
>obviously disagree.
>

You only call it an "attack on democracy" because you hate Trump and
Trump supporters.

You don't mind similar things going on if they come from the left.

And rioting and burning is an "attack on democracy."

The obligation of government to protect life, liberty and property is
even more fundamental than democratic government. Democracy is
something you can have if government does those things.

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

[Bud]

Conservatives (or like minded-people who want to put a stop to
businesses caving in to the demands of leftist cancel culture) need to
band together and play the same game. Never go to Disneyland, never buy
Coke products (with their indoctrination program to make their white
employees "less white"), ect. Walmart, Target, Coke and dozens of other
companies gave millions to Black Lives Matter to reward them for
rioting.

I think the Trump supporters and the Bernie supporters should join
forces and push to have *all* the money taken from the Walton family and
Bezos and the rest of them, and divide that money among black people as
reparations. That way everyone gets what they want (I get left alone
because it doesn`t impact me, blacks get free money) at the cost to a
handful of people who only want to use race as a PR campaign. Republicans
and Democrats would both shit a brick as these are the people who own
them.

[ajohnstone]

Election fraud found...oops, it was by operatives of the Republican Party

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/four-people-including-justice-of-the-peace-arrested-on-150-counts-of-voter-fraud/ar-BB1dZivx

But the electoral system's safeguards appear to work

[John Corbett]

The problem with that argument is we don't know how many people didn't get
caught.

[John Corbett]

I'll do my part by boycotting Target. I can't get by without Coke and
Walmart.

[Bud]

On Wednesday, March 3, 2021 at 9:18:19 PM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:

> Election fraud found...oops, it was by operatives of the Republican Party

All the people charged with rioting in the last year have been on the
right wing also. What does that tell you?

> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/four-people-including-justice-of-the-peace-arrested-on-150-counts-of-voter-fraud/ar-BB1dZivx

The headline makes it sound as if there were 150 fraudulent votes cast,
a careful reading of the charges shows it could have been less than 10.

> But the electoral system's safeguards appear to work

How does that follow?

[Bud]

I went to Walmart the other day, I noticed all the prices of the things
I commonly buy went up a little bit. Have to pay for all those stores that
got gutted and those generous donation to BLM. And since they used the
C-virus to hammer the little guy and kill competition they can now simply
raise prices without worrying about losing customers.

[John Corbett]

Businesses act in their own self interest, just like everybody else.
That's what makes capitalism work. Buyers and sellers make voluntary
transactions at a price that is acceptable to both. If it is not
acceptable, the transaction won't be made. Walmart's contributions to BLM
were a public relations ploy. They are betting in the long run it will
benefit their bottom line.

I shop an Walmart for one simple reason. They give me my money's worth and
I know they will stand behind their products. For over a century that was
the way Sears operated. They seem to have forgotten that which is why the
company is teetering on insolvency. I think they started to go downhill
when they bumped off Roebuck.

[ajohnstone]

A useful summary of Walmart's business practices, some good, some bad.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/011815/how-walmart-model-wins-everyday-low-prices.asp

[Bud]

The double standard is really stark in this case....

https://hotair.com/archives/jazz-shaw/2021/02/25/nyc-molotov-cocktail-lawyers-offered-plea-deal/

These two were filmed trying to pass out molotov cocktails to the crowd.
They were filmed throwing a molotov cocktail into a police vehicle. They
were filmed espousing violence.

The FBI has a slam dunk case but is offering a plea deal (this is the
only time I can remember them not saying what the plea deal is). Why?
Because they are leftists all the most serious charges that the feds could
clearly easily win in court will be dropped. They will probably be allowed
to continue to practice law.

She was born in Pakistan, he was born in Jamaica but they come here and
throw bombs.

[John Corbett]

On Thursday, March 4, 2021 at 9:09:15 PM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:
> A useful summary of Walmart's business practices, some good, some bad.
>
> https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/011815/how-walmart-model-wins-everyday-low-prices.asp

Its no concern of mine how Walmart keeps their prices low. It only matters
to me that they do. What they pay their employees is between them and
their employees. It's just another side to free enterprise capitalism. The
employer and the employee voluntarily enter into an agreement for a wage
and benefits that is acceptable to both. Anyone who thinks they are being
underpaid at Walmart is free to seek employment elsewhere. If they can't
land a job elsewhere, maybe their job skills aren't worth that much to
begin with.

[John Corbett]

If the bar association has any guts, they will disbar these two.

[ajohnstone]

And that there is no even playing field, so who cares, eh? Let the
heavyweight boxer challenge the feather-weight boxer. After all, it is the
same sport and the same rules, isn't it?

As mentioned in the link, suppliers are forced to lower their wages bill,
lay off staff or out-source over-seas to meet the low price demands of
Walmart. Sweat-shops in the US or Myanmar, why care?

Walmart signs up businesses for contracts where the company then produces
the material ordered. Walmart then demands a lower price and leverages
another company against them. It is a race to the bottom for the
suppliers.

And the impact is upon all those mom and pop stores that aren't able to
compete. These are eventually put out of business, main street shopping
dries up and small towns shrivel up.

Certainly don't apply any government regulation to level things up.

I do find the Walmart field to fork logistics approach appealing,
displaying how easy allocation of resources can easily be directed to
where demand is.

[John Corbett]

On Friday, March 5, 2021 at 9:44:09 AM UTC-5, ajohnstone wrote:
> And that there is no even playing field, so who cares, eh?

Is there supposed to be? Life is inherently unfair. That's why we need
wheelchairs.

> Let the
> heavyweight boxer challenge the feather-weight boxer. After all, it is the
> same sport and the same rules, isn't it?

I remember the golfer Sam Snead saying there is no such thing as an even
match. One side or the other always had an advantage. He figured, "It
might as well be Old Sam.". Major college football teams regularly
schedule teams that aren't even in their same class. Both play the game by
the same rules yet it is not an even contest. Whether it is sports or
business, the idea is to win. It is not the job of the strong to be
concerned about the weak. It is up to the weak to get stronger if they
want to compete.

>
> As mentioned in the link, suppliers are forced to lower their wages
> bill,

The aren't forced to do anything. They choose to do that as a business
strategy.

> lay off staff or out-source over-seas to meet the low price demands of
> Walmart. Sweat-shops in the US or Myanmar, why care?
>

If the people in Myanmar aren't happy with their wages or conditions, it
is up to them to do something about it. I'm betting they prefer having
those "sweatshop" jobs to not having a job at all. Would those people be
better off if companies didn't locate their factories in Myanmar?

> Walmart signs up businesses for contracts where the company then produces
> the material ordered. Walmart then demands a lower price and leverages
> another company against them. It is a race to the bottom for the
> suppliers.

Pretty smart of Walmart. Buying from the lowest seller makes sense.
Whether it is done an a large scale or a small one, transactions are
voluntary agreements between a buyer and a seller at a price that is
acceptable to both. If manufacturers don't like the price Walmart is
offering for their goods, they don't have to sell to them. Since the do
choose to sell to them, they are making the decision it is in their best
interest to sell for what Walmart offers.

>
> And the impact is upon all those mom and pop stores that aren't able to
> compete. These are eventually put out of business, main street shopping
> dries up and small towns shrivel up.

That's the way it is. People vote with their dollars. The mom and pop
stores are largely an anachronism. They started losing that battle many
decades ago. There are exceptions. Some small locally owned stores are
able to keep a loyal clientele by offering superior service. One such
example is a local hardware store in Mt. Vernon, Oh about 15 minutes from
where I live. It's one of those old fashioned hardware stores with the
creaky wooden floors. I sometimes choose them over Lowe's for several
reasons. It's about another 5 minutes to get to Lowe's. When I walk in the
door, a sales clerk will usually meet me immediately so I don't have to
spend 10-15 minutes looking for it. If I need a handful of screws to
complete a project, I don't have to buy a box of 50 or more. The actually
sell screws, nuts, bolts, etc. by the piece so if I need 8, I get 8. They
charge these items by weight. I'm sure one a per piece basis, I pay a
little more but I don't have to buy way more than I need. The Lowe's came
to Mt. Vernon about the same time I moved to this area about 20 years ago.
The local hardware store is still in business and there are always cars in
their parking lot when I go there.

>
> Certainly don't apply any government regulation to level things up.

Absolutely not. It's not the role of government to make things even any
more than it is the role of a sports official to call more fouls on the
stronger team to make the game more even. Neither sports officials nor
governments should decide who the winners and losers are. It is up to the
contestants to do that. If one team is much stronger than the other,
that's just too damn bad.

>
> I do find the Walmart field to fork logistics approach appealing,
> displaying how easy allocation of resources can easily be directed to
> where demand is.

Obviously Walmart has been doing things right for a very long time. Amazon
is another company which is thriving although for not as long. The future
is not guaranteed. Sears & Roebuck began in the late 19th century and for
the early part of 20th century they were probably as strong a company as
Amazon is today. You could buy just about anything from Sears, even a
house, and many people did. Sears became the retailer of choice for many
who lived in small towns and rural America because they would deliver to
those places. Not as fast as Amazon of course, but fast for their day. In
the last few decades, Sears has lost their way and is hanging on by a
thread because they didn't react to the changing marketplace. The same
thing might happen to Walmart or Amazon in a hundred years. Right now they
are doing things right and Walmart's online shopping is starting to rival
Amazon's. If I need a small item, I don't have to drive 15 minutes into
town to get it. I just order it online from either Walmart or Amazon and
there is a good chance it will arrive the next day. A couple days ago I
needed a very special Sharpie. I found it right away on Amazon, ordered
it, and it was in my mailbox the next day. I pay $100 a year for prime
service which means I don't have to pay shipping charges on any item I buy
direct from them. Walmart has eliminated shipping on most items as well.
They used to have a minimum order for that but that has been waived. Sears
and J.C. Penney's could have have been players in this new way of
retailing but they were too complacent and continued to rely on store
sales and snail mail catalog orders. Now both a struggling to stay alive.

[John McAdams]

On 5 Mar 2021 14:44:07 -0000, ajohnstone <alanjjo...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

>And that there is no even playing field, so who cares, eh? Let the
>heavyweight boxer challenge the feather-weight boxer. After all, it is the
>same sport and the same rules, isn't it?
>
>As mentioned in the link, suppliers are forced to lower their wages bill,
>lay off staff or out-source over-seas to meet the low price demands of
>Walmart. Sweat-shops in the US or Myanmar, why care?

And the suppliers are all poor, cottage industries whose owners can
barely survive.

>
>Walmart signs up businesses for contracts where the company then produces
>the material ordered. Walmart then demands a lower price and leverages
>another company against them. It is a race to the bottom for the
>suppliers.
>

It's a prod to require efficient operation.

> And the impact is upon all those mom and pop stores that aren't able to
>compete. These are eventually put out of business, main street shopping
>dries up and small towns shrivel up.
>

And poor people in big cities can buy things cheaply, and live on a
modest income.

>Certainly don't apply any government regulation to level things up.
>

Government regulation virtually always advantages somebody, and it's
usually some rich interest against some other rich interest.

Example: "renewable energy."

>I do find the Walmart field to fork logistics approach appealing,
>displaying how easy allocation of resources can easily be directed to
>where demand is.
>

Efficiency has big payoffs.

Both for the rich who find a way to operate more efficiently (think
Jeff Bezos) and people of modest incomes who can get buy.

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

[Bud]

They would be automatically disbarred if convicted of a felony, which is
why you can be sure the plea deal will not include any, even though it
would be an easy conviction.

But think about it, they were filmed distributing molotov cocktails to
an angry mob. Presumably the idea is that they would be thrown at police
by that angry mob.

Now these two were let right out on bail, but watch Rachel Maddow mock
the guy who had his feet up on Pelosi`s desk for complaining about
unfairness...

https://www.aol.com/news/not-fair-man-put-feet-220523247.html

So for distributing bombs to burn cops alive you get right out, but if
you put your feet up on a desk, you are held without bail.

There are two sets of laws in this country these days, one for people on
the left and one for people on the right.

People are being hunted down for participation in the incident at the
Capitol....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-2ZmG2hPMk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOxlZdL4rmQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00wZyDcp7SE

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceH9sMvbqVE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1H2BW7CavZM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Td4KOAeXchE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRsf-MYO8DA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuqHGW1VFxA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDKVyDQcft0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1mc69vtgkU

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V84R_jqd1aE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F67VbRYYbEQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GnyL4Xg9sLA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IWt6w2CB4Y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EyKQfiBMnU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbcnKr9Tb_0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqSQ50D2Udw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOcNa_NmtQ4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbaEAAm9Ogw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8XMGMceEeU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-D6Hfw72Oj4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rp9oNr6HCxw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9_hGYHFLYE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fl9wlcdQIas

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IP6ezC5C2kU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEye_N0POTU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmEPHoh9hs4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suVYrcVC8YE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=em_aIfi8NYc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-YW32Nzomw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaW0G2pOH9s

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

Many, many more. Notice how efficient the FBI is when it involves this
particular political incident, but totally inept it is against leftist
violence. Either that or is is part of a politically motivated vendetta
against anyone seen as a Trump supporter. When the full weight of the US
Government is only used against *certain* people with *certain* viewpoints
this country is in big trouble.

Meanwhile case after case involving Antifa are being dismissed.

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

[ajohnstone]

>>> Life is inherently unfair. That's why we need wheelchairs... It's not
>>> the role of government to make things even...

It is why we have statutes about making public buildings accessible to
wheelchairs by having them install ramps and buses to have elevators to
accommodate the needs of wheelchairs. Common humanity and decency pushes
back against the unfairness of the system.

Self-interest is the motivating force that drives capitalism and your
posts acknowledges this. Each person seeks his or her own maximum gain in
an never-ending struggle. The very nature of capitalism means one company
defeats its rivals, and swallows them up by either driving it to
bankruptcy or forcing into mergers . Marxists have always held that the
progress of capitalism has involved the inevitable trend towards
concentration into bigger enterprises (oligopoly).

But then as some capitalists lose out they seek the intervention of the
State.

Trump (and also Biden) advocate protectionism to stop rival nations
applying the exact same commercial logic to international trade as you
reflect domestically.

Also governments pass various anti-trust legislation which has a long
history going back to Theodore Roosevelt and such as now being proposed
globally against Big Tech.

But in reality the State sanctions such concentration and centralisation
of capital. Why else is the suggestion of lifting patents and intellectual
ownership over the coronavirus vaccine is being so vehemently opposed?