Too late...y’all have already taught me how we treat unnamed sources.Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
|
|
|
|
|
Too late...y’all have already taught me how we treat unnamed sources.
What your article misses is the fact that the guy that was at the BLM protest was there as a Trump supporting counterprotestor. He is also a vocal proponent of Qanon.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/mashabl...tol-debunk.amp
CONFIRMED!
Antifa operatives are the ones who led the violence and were the ones responsible for the breach into the capitol building. Now, it is also true some angry Trump supporters followed their lead and got swept up in the violence. This happens in a mob environment...
back in 1977 a severe snowstorm hit Ruston and shut down the campus for a couple of days. People, students, went nutso. What started out as rather harmless snowball fights escalated into something much worse. I won't callout the specific group(s) but it was alarming...no, frightening! to see otherwise upstanding students sink to such lows. A car was flipped over in one incident.
Not to excuse it, but these things happen in the relative anonymity of a large group. BUT! make no mistake about it, it was Antifa operatives who caused the worst of the mess yesterday. The "followers" who willingly went along were stupid...
Worked fine for 4 years. Your media depended on it and you bought it all hook, line, and sinker.
But that’s what “lightweights” do.
The company cited in Frisco's link, XRVision has now come out and said that this report is completely false.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...on-times-false
My apologies to any "lightweights" who believed it.
Time is your friend. Impulse is your enemy. -John Bogle
Doesn't change the fact that eyewitnesses have said that they have seen the same professional protesters at other left-wing events. But I'm sure certain "deadweights" here won't buy it.
The tactics used are obvious. A few infiltrators helped to instigate much of what happened yesterday. That doesn't excuse any of what happened. But it does raise questions.
In one obvious example in a widely distributed video, why the the Capitol Police remove barricades? Once the barricades were removed, someone in the foreground was jumping up and down to urge the crowd to move forward. Who is this person?
The initial breaches of the building recorded on video where windows were broken were done by people dressed in black wearing hoods. Those people were being booed and there were shouts of "Antifa" coming from the crowd. Who are these people and what were their motives?
In the early stage, video from Statuary Hall showed groups of people moving through peacefully between barricades that were established. What (or who) triggered the violence? That is still unclear.
Sounds like you’re trying to convince yourself.
An unarmed white woman was killed yesterday by the Capitol police. Is there outrage?
Do white lives matter?
Were you there?
Sedition isn't my thing. A claim was made here and it was refuted. There is literally NO evidence that Antifa was involved yesterday. There is literally NO evidence of widespread voter fraud that would change the result of the election. You can't make a statement and then say "prove me wrong"...there's no evidence.
Time is your friend. Impulse is your enemy. -John Bogle
Believed what?
In this hyper-political environment, you shouldn't believe anything you hear.
Just know that debate is being shut down on social media and in the courts, and debate is what keeps violence from happening. I know you don't want to hear any opinion but your own (or the opinion that's given to you by those you view as your savior, and I don't mean Christ), but squelching debate will only lead to more violence. I hear Pelosi even changed house rules to silence Republican opposition.
You are so full of hate you cannot see any of this.
Now you’re projecting.
I watch Fox News and listen to Rush and/or Hannity daily...just FYI
The DC Chief of Police just outed Antifa, showing the pics of those thugs with the Antifa tatoos. He said "we don't care who they are or where they're from, they will be found and arrested." Literally you are so braindead....literally.
I feel like there is a familiar pattern here.
Assertion:
Plus additional speculation (they look like antifa? really?):
Followed by credible debunking:
Which is cast as false not based on its assertions but its source (incorrectly labeled in this case, which is also fairly common):
Oh - Counter-evidence!
Which is also debunked:
Followed by "never mind all that I'm still factually correct even though the evidence I presented has been demonstrated to be false, not because I have new evidence, but because I just know it."
I mean, look, of course more details will come out. And who knows what will be uncovered? But y'all really need to look into my boy Willy from Ockham. If a big group walks over from a Trump "stop the steal" rally waving Trump flags and consisting of pro-Trump rightest groups (who aren't exactly hiding who they are) and takes action, it's probably them. I mean, they publicly planned it, and aren't exactly being coy at any point.
We don't have to dream of far-fetched theories to excuse them and/or include other groups to blame. Even the bad ones. If the police reports end up saying something surprising (as they sometimes do) then that's the time to rethink what happened. But when it looks like a duck, etc. . .
But really the details concern me less than the pattern. It's the same thing that the 18 page voter fraud thread is full of.
1. Assertion
2. Totally debunked.
3. No mention of "oops, you're right"
4. New assertion (wilder and less likely than the last one)
5. New evidence debunking it
6. Personal attacks and denial of credibility of debunking evidence (not based on the actual evidence being presented, but on the source or . . .just "because")
7. Rinse and repeat
The pattern has become so predictable and reliable, you can set your watch to it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote