BLM, or WLM? [MOD WARNING: FIRST POST]

kildare lad

Overheal wrote: »

Each of the 3? All of them engaged in a crime? committing arson? assault? Let's be specific please.

Still looking for excuses.....

Deebles McBeebles

kildare lad wrote: »

Still looking for excuses.....

I'm still looking for an answer. Do you agree Andy Ngo is not a trustworthy or balanced source of news?

He does seem to be a favourite on this thread from what I've seen. I've even tried speaking to other users about him on this thread before.

Overheal

kildare lad wrote: »

Still looking for excuses.....

Actually I am asking for clarity. What were each of the 3 victims doing before and during the shooting incidents?

You said Kyle Rittenhouse should get a medal. Why? Do you think more Americans should be encouraged to roam the streets with firearms? Is this model behavior?

Danzy

Overheal wrote: »

Why, you might ask, on Columbus/Indigenous Peoples Day?

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/lincoln-dakota/

note: that's not me agreeing with or endorsing it, just sharing their 'rationale' for something otherwise seemingly bizarre

As if that has any relevance to them.

Danzy

Overheal wrote: »

Actually I am asking for clarity. What were each of the 3 victims doing before and during the shooting incidents?

You said Kyle Rittenhouse should get a medal. Why? Do you think more Americans should be encouraged to roam the streets with firearms? Is this model behavior?

It was model working class behaviour and he should be lauded for standing up for his community and class.

Real working class a activism rather than middle class activism.

Overheal

Danzy wrote: »

As if that has any relevance to them.

...uhm, yes. Yes, it was. It was literally spray painted onto the statue, turns out. That piece of information was the main thematic attraction to the act of vandalism, actually:

The group then turned to the nearby Abraham Lincoln statue, pulling it to the ground at 8:59 p.m. Spray-painted on the base of the statue was “Dakota 38,” a reference to 38 Dakota men executed after the Dakota-U.S. War of 1862 in the largest mass execution in a single day in American history. (Lincoln commuted the same sentence, handed down by a military tribunal, for 265 others.)

https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2020/10/protesters-topple-portland-statues-of-theodore-roosevelt-abraham-lincoln-in-day-of-rage.html

Overheal

Danzy wrote: »

It was model working class behaviour and he should be lauded for standing up for his community and class.

Real working class a activism rather than middle class activism.

So the New Model for the Working Class American is roaming the streets of America to gun down criminals?

I strongly disagree with that. I'd still like Kildare_Lad's response though, as they made the original statement nominating him for a generic medal.

What are you defining as Middle Class and Working Class and how are you attempting to differentiate them?

kildare lad

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

I'm still looking for an answer. Do you agree Andy Ngo is not a trustworthy or balanced source of news?

He does seem to be a favourite on this thread from what I've seen. I've even tried speaking to other users about him on this thread before.

What untrustworthy about him ?? He posting pictures of people that got arrested and videos of what's happening on the ground in Portland or is he just making it all up . Most media is left wing and when someone post anything from a different opinion they get attacked , quiet literally in andy Ngôs case.

Overheal

kildare lad wrote: »

What untrustworthy about him ?? He posting pictures of people that got arrested and videos of what's happening on the ground in Portland or is he just making it all up . Most media is left wing and when someone post anything from a different opinion they get attacked , quiet literally in andy Ngôs case.

It doesn't bother you that he embeds himself with right wing protesters and doesn't report on their activity? How confident are you that he is not an active participant?

Deebles McBeebles

kildare lad wrote: »

What untrustworthy about him ??

His history of posting selectively edited videos, his history with Patriots Prayer and Proud Boys, multiple sources describing him as focusing on his feeling rather than fact checking, a right-wing provocateur and his history of "sharing misleading and inaccurate information to paint antifa activists as violent, and to underplay the violence of the far-right".

What would you say is trustworthy about him?

nolivesmatter

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

His history of posting selectively edited videos, his history with Patriots Prayer and Proud Boys, multiple sources describing him as focusing on his feeling rather than fact checking, a right-wing provocateur and his history of "sharing misleading and inaccurate information to paint antifa activists as violent, and to underplay the violence of the far-right".

What would you say is trustworthy about him?

Why don't you just focus on discrediting the clips and reports rather than attempting to discredit the person? If you know what's being reported to be inaccurate then you should be able to reflect that.

Deebles McBeebles

nolivesmatter wrote: »

Why don't you just focus on discrediting the clips and reports rather than attempting to discredit the person? If you know what's being reported to be inaccurate then you should be able to reflect that.

Why would I bother when I can show he is biased?

I have neither the time nor the inclination to go through this thread discrediting every video on it. I don't know its inaccurate but none of you know its accurate, you see his version and believe it whole-heartedly, in this little echo chamber... I'll wait for the facts. That particular person, however, is not balanced or trustworthy. I've already shown you its not related to BLM or antifa.

He pops up a lot so is worthy of discussion as to what his agenda may be, that agenda becomes fairly clear after a little digging, why should he be believed? What is trustworthy about him? My point is that people like him only report their version of the facts, left and right. I don't care what side its on, its nonsense, and spreading it online is misleading to anyone who views it.

nolivesmatter

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

I have neither the time nor the inclination to go through this thread discrediting every video on it. I don't know its inaccurate but none of you know its accurate, you see his version, I'll wait for the facts. That particular person, however, is not balanced or trustworthy

He pops up a lot so is worthy of discussion as to what his agenda may be, that agenda becomes fairly clear with him after a little digging, why should he be believed? What is trustworthy about him? My point is that people like him only report their version of the facts, left and right. I don't care what side its on, its nonsense, and spreading it online is misleading to anyone who views it.

That's the lazy answer and is exactly the problem here.

Deebles McBeebles

nolivesmatter wrote: »

That's the lazy answer and is exactly the problem here.

Why would I bother when I can show he is biased? What is trustworthy about him? Can you disprove that he is incredibly biased toward one side?

I admire your deflection but if you're not going to be serious here, I'll wait for an answer from the poster I was talking to.

nolivesmatter

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

Why would I bother when I can show he is biased? What is trustworthy about him? Can you disprove that he is incredibly biased toward one side?

I admire your deflection but if you're not going to be serious here, I'll wait for an answer from the poster I was talking to.

You're position is clear. Why bother engage with the content someone reports when you can discredit their character. You're making my case here for me.

Deebles McBeebles

nolivesmatter wrote: »

You're position is clear. Why bother engage with the content someone reports when you can discredit their character. You're making my case here for me.

So you can't answer any of my questions? You're sadly typical of this thread.

nolivesmatter

nolivesmatter wrote: »

That's the lazy answer and is exactly the problem here.

It is also very trumpian. Just shout fake news at stories you don't like.

They are becoming that which they hate

BattleCorp

Overheal wrote: »

Actually I am asking for clarity. What were each of the 3 victims doing before and during the shooting incidents?

I'll answer this. Each of the three victims were attacking Rittenhouse immediately before and during the shooting incidents. It's on video.



Now I'll ask you a question if you don't mind.

Did the three people who were shot attack Kyle Rittenhouse?

SexBobomb

BattleCorp wrote: »

I'll answer this. Each of the three victims were attacking Rittenhouse immediately before and during the shooting incidents. It's on video.



Now I'll ask you a question if you don't mind.

Did the three people who were shot attack Kyle Rittenhouse?

It was an assaulty but mostly peaceful exchange.

Sand

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

So you can't answer any of my questions? You're sadly typical of this thread.

Ironically, you're demonstrating your own bias so why should anyone listen to your views or your evidence when you are biased?

Everyone has bias. How we deal with bias is we examine the evidence objectively. Regardless of Ngo's own views, he is a valuable source of evidence which can be reviewed and challenged by anyone. Otherwise we'd be stuck with kafkaesque media narratives such as the BBC's legendary "27 police officers injured during largely peaceful protests".

20Cent

Bias is one thing outright lying is another.
He regularly shares video that have been edited to change the context and lies about events.
It is foolish to believe such a person, he assumes his followers are gullible, (which they are).
People need to get more serious about the media they consume and share.

Biker79

Leftists are particularly vulnerable to media manipulation because time after time they demonstrate no ability for critical thinking.

They would rather surrender their faculties to the collective.

TomTomTim

Biker79 wrote: »

Leftists are particularly vulnerable to media manipulation because time after time they demonstrate no ability for critical thinking.

They would rather surrender their faculties to the collective.

The list of things that they've been right about is far shorter than the list of things that they've been wrong about. I honestly can't remember the last time anyone on the left made an accurate prediction about anything. It's beyond pitiful that they are somehow still righteous and smug, when they've been swimming in a pool of delusion the last 5 years.

Sand

TomTomTim wrote: »

The list of things that they've been right about is far shorter than the list of things that they've been wrong about. I honestly can't remember the last time anyone on the left made an accurate prediction about anything. It's beyond pitiful that they are somehow still righteous and smug, when they've been swimming in a pool of delusion the last 5 years.

You should never ever give the benefit of the doubt to accounts by "progressives", which at this point includes the mainstream media. Always seek out the primary evidence and make your own decision. It's not even that they are 'wrong', as if they make honest mistakes. These are not mistakes.

Clear as day, people on this thread are completely dismissing primary evidence because they don't like who was holding the camera. From their perspective, the evidence must be made to fit the narrative.

Deebles McBeebles

Sand wrote: »

Ironically, you're demonstrating your own bias so why should anyone listen to your views or your evidence when you are biased?

Aren't you the guy who said far-right militia groups are just an FBO meme? Laughable! Of course you believe Andy Ngo, hook, line and sinker. Yeah, you'll get thanks from the usual crowd and the brand new accounts but I haven't shown bias here, I've been questioning the bias on here.

This is why no one bothers interrupting the far-right circle jerk this thread has become. Its pointless, you'll believe anything Andy from Twitter serves up to you. Its like speaking to children. Thankfully its a small minority and the most gullible are kept in one thread. One straight answer is all I've had, the rest is nonsense.

Deebles McBeebles

20Cent wrote: »

Bias is one thing outright lying is another.
He regularly shares video that have been edited to change the context and lies about events.
It is foolish to believe such a person, he assumes his followers are gullible, (which they are).
People need to get more serious about the media they consume and share.

They don't care, they've made up their mind. Its fairly sad actually.

Biker79 wrote: »

Leftists are particularly vulnerable to media manipulation because time after time they demonstrate no ability for critical thinking.

They would rather surrender their faculties to the collective.

Pot, kettle, black. Bloody "rightists" eh :rolleyes:

20Cent

Biker79 wrote: »

Leftists are particularly vulnerable to media manipulation because time after time they demonstrate no ability for critical thinking.

They would rather surrender their faculties to the collective.

Think the opposite myself,
Have a look at all the right wing grifters out there making money spewing rubbish. Katie Hopkins, Alex Jones, Paul Watson, Milo etc etc.
Don't see the same thing on the left.

The joke about left wing meetings, first order of business is the split has some truth in it. They are far more likely to critisise their own. Fake stories and news spreads far more quickly on the right.
Can see it in the US election they are going crazy about some conspiracy theory involving Hunter Biden which is based on absolutely nothing.
Don't see similar on the left.

Sand

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

Aren't you the guy who said far-right militia groups are just an FBO meme? Laughable! Of course you believe Andy Ngo, hook, line and sinker. Yeah, you'll get thanks from the usual crowd and the brand new accounts but I haven't shown bias here, I've been questioning the bias on here.

I don't unthinkingly accept the FBI narrative or Ngo's narrative. I look at the primary evidence and make my own determination. I get that might seem unusual to some. The real contradiction is why you unthinkingly accept the FBI narrative despite well known issues with their 'investigations', whereas you refuse to accept anything Ngo records or photographs because you dont like Ngo.

This is why no one bothers interrupting the far-right circle jerk this thread has become. Its pointless, you'll believe anything Andy from Twitter serves up to you. Its like speaking to children. Thankfully its a small minority and the most gullible are kept in one thread. One straight answer is all I've had, the rest is nonsense.

The real reason is you have nothing of interest to say on the topic. It's just hyperbole, personal attacks and a completely unfounded smugness. That's alright though, the discussion can continue without your "contributions".

Deebles McBeebles

Sand wrote: »

It's just hyperbole, personal attacks and a completely unfounded smugness. That's alright though, the discussion can continue without your "contributions".

Thats exactly what this thread is. Which is why Andy off Twitter is the poster boy. I have no doubt the "discussion" will continue, it always does, pages of the same nonsense. I hope it always does so we know exactly where it is.

Biker79

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

They don't care, they've made up their mind. Its fairly sad actually.



Pot, kettle, black. Bloody "rightists" eh :rolleyes:

Rubbish. There was never any ' rightists '. This is an invented term ( one of them ) by the media to deflect from the many holes in the progressive, leftist ideology.

What is referred to as the right, or ( God help us ) the ' far right ' is actually the default state of human beings for the vast majority of human history. We have evolved under Darwinian selection to be conservative because resources such as food, energy, shelter and medicine were scarce.

So spare us that nonsense about ' the right ' . On the other hand... ' the left ' are a product of the very success of traditional values. That at least should soften their cough somewhat. But they don't have such levels of self awareness, so we wont hold our breath.