Submitted by factotum on Thu, 08/27/2020 - 11:12
Septic Tanks are going to Septic Tank
First some yucks.
"MAGA dipshits are like bad fantasy-movie villains. This guy's bad lip reading (or tweeting) is more on point than he realizes"
On a serious note...
"The sequence of events has been pieced together as such:
17 year old kid travels from out of state with a weapon he was not legally able to possess upon entering the state. Kid traveled expressly with the intent of armed vigilanteism.
Kid arrives in town and posts up with other armed people at a place of business. This place of business was not his, was not in his family's possession, it was a local rallying point.
Kid fires shots at someone, for reasons unknown. Other people there also fired rounds, allegedly. Someone shot a guy in the head. The 17 year old kid ran. This is where you most likely will see only one piece of footage, on right-wing "Wish A Motherfucker Would" websites.
The crowd chased this kid, who'd most likely just shot a protester. This is when the alleged Molotov cocktail was thrown, in reality it looks more like a burning bag than anything else but you can believe whatever you like.
The kid continued to flee and either tripped or was taken down. This is when he was hit by someone with a skateboard. The kid then started shooting again, and this is where he definitely killed someone and wounded someone else.
Same kid then walks toward police, who let him through their picket line and presumably, he flees back to his home state.
Now, you can call that self-defense but arguably, if you'd say something like "well protesters wouldn't get shot if they weren't [insert random action that may or may not be relevant]" then we'd counter with "Well if 17 year old Johnny Triggerhappy didn't shoot someone in the head he wouldn't have been beaten up by a crowd of angry protesters."
I think you might be pissing into the wind if you start posting examples of inappropriate violence as a defence of the US rioting. For every one of the above there’s dozens of examples of the riotous fascist mob thugs injuring/ killing people with no more reason than the fact that they’re unconscionable fuckwits.
Three months of destruction, violence and needless bloodshed from mob thugs and you finally got a bit of potential retaliation from ordinary people . I’m surprised it’s taken this long and has been so mild.
Let’s people know where you stand though. Not particularly surprising that you haven’t posted the details of violence dispensed by the fascist rioters.
"there’s a couple of dozen examples of the riotous mob thugs injuring/ killing people with no more reason than the fact that they’re unconscionable fuckwits."
Bullshit DSDS / blowin. Where's the evidence of multiple killings by BLM protestors? You're talking out your arse again. The killings are all done by Nazis / militias. Stop posting racist shit.
"angry online, smiley in the brine"
Go ahead, sweet Dude, you know you want to...
show us the guns killing people!
Vic local....could you please just go away mate ?
Take a look at your last post and try to realise why I’d think you’re basically brain dead. It’s the same frivolously stupid refrains over and over. They’re not even appropriate.
You may think you’re acting virtuously when you do your little barking dog routine , but to everyone else you’re as helpful and clever as the fox terrier who keeps biting houseguests and the mailman .
Gloves, AK, Go-pro head mount, on the street shooting people.
Blowin's ordinary people.
Yeh he's gone full Swellchan today.
geez I missed that "normal people" comment. Fucking hell blowin, do I need to explain to you that normal people don't fucking drive cars into crowds at high speed, get out and start shooting?
Excusing this type of shit is just next level idiocy. blowin, you're the reason Australia needs strong gun laws.
Worth reading the article that goes with the graph.
What’s been omitted from this timeline was the three months of violence, intimidation, looting, rioting and menacing of the innocent public which has been sanctioned and enabled , even sometimes promoted , by certain quarters of the US government who have a political barrow to push.
This allowance of civic breakdown has created an entirely lawless atmosphere which has left citizens feeling abandoned and unprotected by those who have been granted power to protect them.
What did you think was going to happen when innocent people are getting beaten by thugs , businesses and civic buildings burnt down , intimidation of residents in the streets and the authorities turn a purposeful blind eye and disempower the departments whose job it is to oversee the law ?
Now there’s been a single incident whereby a young person has ALLEGEDLY responded in kind to the public devastation and threat broadcast on his TV and his reality for three months straight and you’re both surprised and upset ?
Yep. I don’t think the unrest is going to be solved by US elections.
Trump wins : Democrats claim he stole election. Refuse to concede. Democratic public service “resistance “ escalates. Democrat endorsed rioting goes next level . Citizens respond . Approximation of civil war.
Democrats win : Trump claims they stole election. Refuses to concede . Trump supporters suspect coup and riot. Approximation of civil war.
The article was published in June. The analyses on which iis based go back much further. It didn't take recent events into account........it predicted them. Read the article more closely.
So Fox News' Tucker Carson has said how shocked he was "that 17 year olds with rifles decided they had to maintain order when no one else would".
If anything sums up how fucked up conservatives are the USA, there it is.
DSDS / blowin and Carson are signing from the same song sheet.
I think one issue discounted by the article is the external and internal forces that don’t want the US to succeed. They want the US to fail. The undermining of any chance of a good faith settlement has to be factored .
Wait....are you saying that it’s a fucked up conservative trait to employ uncivilised tactics to right an injustice which has been overlooked by authorities ?
Better put your tiny mind to work before you respond .
Maybe you’d better ask yourself who initially began the unrest which has since morphed into mindless mob thuggery perpetrated by witless social rejects.
" I think one issue discounted by the article is the external and internal forces that don’t want the US to succeed. They want the US to fail. The undermining of any chance of a good faith settlement has to be factored ."
The analysis doesn't really go to the causes it just looks at the trend in events. But there are definitely external forces manipulating US opinion encouraging unrest and no doubt there are internal groups who want, if not civil war then at least some sort of violents restructuring. The clashes go beyond black/white, rich/poor or Republican/Democrat. The US is fracturing along a whole series of lines and neither of the candidates look like having the capability to pull the nation back together. If Trump loses it is hard to imagine he will not encourage violent dissent. If he wins the US has to deal with another four years of chaotic rule.
Nobody doubts that there's going to be some serious violence no matter what the election result is. The big question is, how do you stop it.
BLM's main, and justifiable, grievance is the police brutality that disproportionately impacts African Americans. This violence can be solved with genuine dialogue, improved police training and a justice system that holds police to account if they kill unnecessarily.
On the other hand, how the fuck do you deal with the unhinged mob of militias, Qanon, and Boogaboo? It's not like these people are even remotely rational. It's not like a new Biden administration can go arresting pedos who are part of some non existing global cabal and free slave children not living underground in various cities around the world.
Trump has encouraged these heavily armed nutters, and the orange arse-hole shows no signs of trying to unscramble that omelette.
"Nobody doubts that there's going to be some serious violence no matter what the election result is. The big question is, how do you stop it."
Well that's the question exercising plenty of minds in the US right now. Trump will have planned this in depth. If he loses will be ready to seize on any issue that can be manufactured out of the results.....and he will have his support ready. If he wins there will be a renewal of protests from BLM and other organisations.
If Trump loses there is a good chance he will try to divide the military. I would think the pentagon already has a plan to impose order if Trump attempts to inspire a rebellion against the results. The key question is will all the regional commands follow those orders? If the military divides then it is civil war, complicated by the numerous heavily armed militias each with their own paranoid fantasies. If it happens it will be much messier then their previous civil war as this time the battle lines will not be drawn along state boundaries but will run right through the heart of every community. Imagine the break up of Yugoslavia only bigger, messier and uglier. But you know I am a well known pessimist so perhaps, if Trump loses, he will man up, congratulate Joe, and go back to reality TV.
If it is a civil war, the battle lines will be the six inches between people's ears. On the one side you'll have the rationals, the other side will be the religious extremists, conspiracy theorists, Trump cult members, and random heavily armed crackpots. And they will all be living in the same cities and towns. To make matters worse, there's a shit load of different law enforcement agencies and some have already thrown their support behind the orange lunatic.
This could get seriously ugly, seriously quickly. It will make Yemen look like a tidy civil war.
On the other side of the ledger ....the rejection of the basic tenets of democracy employed by the Democrats ( including the Russiagate / Impeachment coup attempts ) to unseat the President has set the public commitment to democratic norms at an unprecedented low. Hillary has already publicly incited Biden not to concede an election loss. On top of orchestrated civil unrest , promotion and enabling and encouragement of violent and riotous behaviour , the past four years of undemocratic “ resistance “ by Anti Trumpers at all levels of government and public service don’t bode well for the future under a Trump victory.n
Either way , it could get really ugly irrespective of who ever wins. There’s some proper one-eyed , unthinking morons on both sides who believe it’s their duty to physically attack those who tick the ballot box for the other team.
"Hillary has already publicly incited Biden not to concede an election loss. " Well I have tried a few searches and I can't find anything that even vaguely suggests that this is true. Maybe you should help me out and provide the source (or sources) you rely on in making this assertion.
"Hillary has already publicly incited Biden not to concede an election loss." That's just blowin being DSDS again. Exaggeration and no context.
She didn't say don't concede if you lose. She just said don't concede on election night. Given the election is being held during a pandemic, and given there will be a record number of postal votes (favouring those who actually believe in social distancing ie Democrats), and given the postal service has been hobbled, Clinton has a point. The result may not be known for days or weeks, maybe even a month (unless Trump is already behind on the night).
Not that blow blow would admit that. He's too busy lying.
Look, Vic Local, if you insist on replying when I wish you wouldn’t can you at least drop the “ lies , racist , bullshit “ stuff ? Honestly, you sound like a fucken fruitloop. More importantly....it’s just boring , repetitive shit which does nothing to add impact or credence to anything you say or believe .
Lots of people disagree with you but do they carry on with this “ liar , bullshit , liar , bullshit , Nazi , racist , “ crap or whichever version they think you deserve ? No ....cause they’re not four years old and / or mentally retarded.
Vic, implying that rational/intelligent people can only be found on one side of the political divide, and crackpots on the other is only going to fuel the fire/further drive the wedge. There are reasonable, smart people on both sides, as there are idiots. Surely better to find common ground, common interest, and rational debate where they can't be found rather than keep up the sh*t slinging?
Perhaps I'm being too optimistic and the US is already past the point where they can return to that, that discourse really has devolved into footy-team bararcking, but you'd have to try wouldn't you?
He who hesitates is lost
"Joe Biden should not concede under any circumstances because I think this is going to drag out, and eventually, I do believe he will win if we don't give an inch and if we are as focused and relentless as the other side is," Clinton told former aide Jennifer Palmieri on Showtime's "The Circus."
"I think that [Republicans] have a couple of scenarios that they are looking toward. One is messing up absentee balloting. They believe that helps them so that they then get maybe a narrow advantage in the Electoral College on Election Day," Clinton, the 2016 Democratic nominee, alleged. "So we've got to have a massive legal operation, and I know the Biden campaign is working on that.”
This is the statement she made. The most straightforward interpretation is that she is saying he should not concede in the case of a disputed election as she believes he would win when the legal issue was resolved. But it is not clear and could be interpreted the other way.
More to the point, given that US and international media are increasingly expressing concern about Trump accepting the result if he loses, he has a clear responsibility to state that he will accept the result of a fair, properly conducted election. This would give him plenty of latitude to dispute any irregularities that might occur. It might also act to calm hot heads on both sides. Will it happen? Probably not. His track record is not good on the issue of violence. He often does not threaten it directly, he just suggests that it will happen if he, or the Republicans lose elections. This is a clear incitement to the intemperate elements amongst Republican voters. This is repeated behaviour. So one unclear, probably unwise statement from a Democrat not standing in the election versus numerous suggestions that Republican losses are likely to cause violence from the incumbent President.
Pops, I agree with you to a point, but that's a pretty optimistic view of the USA.
I lived there for 6 years so know how the place ticks.
Conspiracy theories have always been pretty big over there, but the last decade has been off the charts. The birther movement was the start of widespread nuttiness.
Trump has encouraged some seriously unhinged movements. There wasn't "fine people on both sides" at the Unite the Right rally. The Proud Boys are nothing more than racist thugs, Qanon is batty as fuck, and the Boogaboo mob are even scarier.
I have literally know idea how anyone could find common ground with organisations and followers who want to overthrow the US government, and save non-existent kids living in non-existent bunkers under cities.
It's not like you can have a rational conversation with these people. Chuck in the second amendment and there's not much you can do to placate these people.
The only thing that could prevent mass violence after the election is for one very apologetic farewell speech by Trump. And I can't see that happening. He still claims his inauguration crowd was the biggest in history.
OMG, I just clicked blowin / DSDS's link and here's the headline folks,
Clinton Tells Biden: ‘Don’t Concede’, Echoing Podesta’s Strategy In Soros/CCP-Backed Election War Game
Yes I am rolling my eyes at you blowin.
Sure, but to throw out any attempt at discourse with the entire right on the basis of the nutter groups would be a mistake.
I tend to go with Vic on this one Pops. The only way Trump supporters can be identified as rational and intelligent is if you add "unethical" to the description. That done, then you can include all the senior Republicans who have enabled and covered for him, plus numerous others further down the food chain. Once you get to the general public then surely "rational and intelligent" includes the capacity to distinguish valid reliable sources from the toxic bullshit that drives Trump supporters.
" Sure, but to throw out any attempt at discourse with the entire right on the basis of the nutter groups would be a mistake."
The right began the process of driving rational discourse out of the public arena in the Reagan era, ramped up their efforts through the tea party era and now have completed the task with Trump. Over that time they have been aided and abetted by various media organisations and more recently by Russia ....and probably other nations.
Geez Blowin, I'm seriously worried about your mental health after reading your work today, you are WAY down the conspiracy lane way. I do wonder how long you have to trawl the internet for to find news stories and sources that support your view.
I echo the sentiment of others on here in being extremely glad and thankful for our gun laws.
The real craziness started with Newt Gingrich in the back half of the 90s. The GOP had very little control of congress in the previous decades, so when they had it, Gingrich played the contrarian card all the time no matter what the consequences were. Clinton was his target and bipartisanship was dead. Truth in politics on the GOP side has never returned. Trump has just upped the ante a billion percent.
In the last couple of pages I’ve read a couple of posters state that they believe there is :
Foreign states controlling the president.
Armed militias of Nazis operating on secret signals from the same president.
If the President loses the election he will divide the military and lead a violent military coup.
The postal service has been hobbled.
White teenagers who set fire to businesses , bash and maim innocent people and roam the streets in predatory mobs are normal people expressing justified grievances.....
And you think I’ve got crackpot ideas .
I thought the right wingers and gun toters where supporters of the big orange fascist and the BLM rioters and the looters where the looney left.
Numpty politics sure is confusing!
Not sure why Fox would need to photoshop anything from the riots ? It’s all there to see plain as day.
Don’t trust the media ....what a surprise.
From another thread and another time:
"Speaking of knots (and acronyms), how does this upcoming US election bode for the GOP ya think?
Maybe Mike Moore isn't too far off the mark?
Its complete dissolution. Well, as we know it.
A radical splintering has been at hand since the GW Bush 'tea party insurgence'. Probably in the wings since the Reagan 'revolution'.
Hey, it's possible. Happened to the Whig Party (nothing to do with Trumpy or Nick Cave!)
Dems could be on the road to a 'Sanderscene conversion' from within too. Hopefully, the road isn't too long. The US and us can't afford to wait."
ps for those unaware, Newt Gingrich was a special kind of cunt. Ye olde Southern fried bigot.
Probably the same reason they photoshopped trumpy out of that photo with Mr Epstein.
Oh come on JQ, every knows that was an accidental rectangle select, crop, attach, and send.
Is QAnon the same as Alcos Anon?
Here you go folks, example A of the nightmare MAGA nutter. These fuckwits aren't going to take a Trump loss well.https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8668207/Kyle-Rittenhouse-bragge...
As opposed to these three upstanding citizens :https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1298833015548739587?s=20https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1298848184228143104?s=20https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1298851037982334976?s=20
Here’s a possibility you’ve completely overlooked in your desperate urge to label good vs evil .....what if all these people are dickheads ?
What if this kind of activity attracts weirdos fullstop. What if it’s not a Republican/ Democrat , White / Black , Coke / Pepsi divide which consists entirely of rational good guys on one side and aggressive freaks on the other .
I understand it’s a strange concept to get your head around. Particularly for such a rational , normal person as yourself.
"He has a criminal record that includes being intoxicated & armed w/a gun."
I reckon thats pretty normal for the US of A.
But shooting him is fair enough ...by a 17 year old dickless dweeb.
Can you imagine whats gonna happen when it really starts cranking up?
I would not want to be anything but a rich, white honky in that country living in a gated community full of other ignorant selfish scum.
Note to self:- I must stop watching this mind poison!!!
Cheers and have a great day.
DSDS, nothing justifies the actions of that kid. Self-defence does not extend to property of others, in a different State. He’d already shot 1 person when he was set upon. By your reasoning mass-shooter a la Christchurch could claim self-defence if he shot someone who was trying to stop him mid-massacre.
It’s BS. Murder, straight up.