Right Wing Terrorism

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I see you moved the goalpost. Here's what Joe claimed:



Now compare that to what you're now talking about:



You changed "violent mob" to "crowd", you changed "storm" with "march to" and "fight like hell". And even that "fight like hell" is taken out of context. Why don't you actually quote him? Oh, who am I kidding, I know exactly why you don't quote him. But I will.

Let's address the "fight like hell" bit. First, Trump used the word "fight" 20 times. And there's a consistent pattern of using it metaphorically, which is normal. For example:

"For years, Democrats have gotten away with election fraud and weak Republicans. And that's what they are. There's so many weak Republicans. And we have great ones. Jim Jordan and some of these guys, they're out there fighting. The House guys are fighting. But it's, it's incredible."

Now what's important here isn't whether or not Trump is right about Democrats. What's important here is the use of the word "fight". And it very obviously doesn't refer to physical combat. That's consistent throughout the entire speech.

Here's another one (well, more than one) use of the word from that speech:

"The American people do not believe the corrupt, fake news anymore. They have ruined their reputation. But you know, it used to be that they'd argue with me. I'd fight. So I'd fight, they'd fight, I'd fight, they'd fight. Pop pop. You'd believe me, you'd believe them. Somebody comes out. You know, they had their point of view, I had my point of view, but you'd have an argument."

Again, obviously not talking about physical fights. But let's look at the specific part you referred to:

"I think one of our great achievements will be election security. Because nobody until I came along had any idea how corrupt our elections were.

And again, most people would stand there at 9 o'clock in the evening and say I want to thank you very much, and they go off to some other life. But I said something's wrong here, something is really wrong, can have happened.

And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore."

So not only is "fight like hell" STILL not referring to physical combat, it's not even a command! He's not even telling the crowd to fight, he's describing what he and other Republicans already do, metaphorically. Again: description, NOT command.

Now let's get to some of what you left out. First:

"I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."

So if you want to argue that Trump intended his descriptions as commands, then you have to include this in your considerations, which you obviously didn't.

Now, what did he directly command the crowd to do?

So we're going to, we're going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. I love Pennsylvania Avenue. And we're going to the Capitol, and we're going to try and give.

The Democrats are hopeless — they never vote for anything. Not even one vote. But we're going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones because the strong ones don't need any of our help. We're going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.

So let's walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.

My GOD! He told people to WALK! Does his villainy know no bounds?

And that's what counts for you as "order[ing] a violent mob to storm the Capitol". Yeah, no. That's not what happened. You are spreading misinformation.

Funny I knew from his Fake Election lies and his Tweet on December 19th 20/20 That the Violence at the Capitol was going to happen on the 6th.
Yes he did Put national Security in Jeopardy on the 6th of January 2021, his March was doomed to be violent from the start.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw

Funny I knew from his Fake Election lies and his Tweet on December 19th 20/20 That the Violence at the Capitol was going to happen on the 6th.
Yes he did Put national Security in Jeopardy on the 6th of January 2021, his March was doomed to be violent from the start.

Perhaps. But doomed or not, that's still not what Joe claimed. Joe claimed that Trump ordered a mob to storm the Capitol. You aren't actually claiming that he did.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Perhaps. But doomed or not, that's still not what Joe claimed. Joe claimed that Trump ordered a mob to storm the Capitol. You aren't actually claiming that he did.

From all the evidence he did he knew he lost or he is insane one of the Two there can be no doubt in that. Him winning the election would Violate the Laws of physics, the Claims were that stupid just like his Birther Claims.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Perhaps. But doomed or not, that's still not what Joe claimed. Joe claimed that Trump ordered a mob to storm the Capitol. You aren't actually claiming that he did.

The use of the Word Peaceful by Trump sounds like someone pre-planning to have Plausible Deniabilty for an Illegal action.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Originally Posted by arayder

Nice post, Joe.

My question is whether the far right of the Republican Party is contributing to these terror attacks by, what some say, is a failure to roundly condemn them?

Do calls to abolish the FBI and fantasies around the IRS coming with AR-15s to get tax payers feed anti-governmet hate and violence?

Anything Anti Government, and Conspiratorial,Fuels it.

[TheGoldcountry]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I see you moved the goalpost. Here's what Joe claimed:



Now compare that to what you're now talking about:



You changed "violent mob" to "crowd", you changed "storm" with "march to" and "fight like hell". And even that "fight like hell" is taken out of context. Why don't you actually quote him? Oh, who am I kidding, I know exactly why you don't quote him. But I will.

Let's address the "fight like hell" bit. First, Trump used the word "fight" 20 times. And there's a consistent pattern of using it metaphorically, which is normal. For example:

"For years, Democrats have gotten away with election fraud and weak Republicans. And that's what they are. There's so many weak Republicans. And we have great ones. Jim Jordan and some of these guys, they're out there fighting. The House guys are fighting. But it's, it's incredible."

Now what's important here isn't whether or not Trump is right about Democrats. What's important here is the use of the word "fight". And it very obviously doesn't refer to physical combat. That's consistent throughout the entire speech.

Here's another one (well, more than one) use of the word from that speech:

"The American people do not believe the corrupt, fake news anymore. They have ruined their reputation. But you know, it used to be that they'd argue with me. I'd fight. So I'd fight, they'd fight, I'd fight, they'd fight. Pop pop. You'd believe me, you'd believe them. Somebody comes out. You know, they had their point of view, I had my point of view, but you'd have an argument."

Again, obviously not talking about physical fights. But let's look at the specific part you referred to:

"I think one of our great achievements will be election security. Because nobody until I came along had any idea how corrupt our elections were.

And again, most people would stand there at 9 o'clock in the evening and say I want to thank you very much, and they go off to some other life. But I said something's wrong here, something is really wrong, can have happened.

And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore."

So not only is "fight like hell" STILL not referring to physical combat, it's not even a command! He's not even telling the crowd to fight, he's describing what he and other Republicans already do, metaphorically. Again: description, NOT command.

Now let's get to some of what you left out. First:

"I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."

So if you want to argue that Trump intended his descriptions as commands, then you have to include this in your considerations, which you obviously didn't.

Now, what did he directly command the crowd to do?

So we're going to, we're going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. I love Pennsylvania Avenue. And we're going to the Capitol, and we're going to try and give.

The Democrats are hopeless — they never vote for anything. Not even one vote. But we're going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones because the strong ones don't need any of our help. We're going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.

So let's walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.

My GOD! He told people to WALK! Does his villainy know no bounds?

And that's what counts for you as "order[ing] a violent mob to storm the Capitol". Yeah, no. That's not what happened. You are spreading misinformation.

My back would snap like a twig if I tried to twist this much.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Wake me up when they start flying jumbo jets into skyscrapers...then they will have caught up with the hot ticket from two decades ago. Of course, those folks are largely "peace-loving". But not these right-wingers, I'll tell ya.

Originally Posted by Warp12

Huh? I referenced 9/11 to show how liberals are using a clear double-standard in their characterization of conservatives as a terrorist threat...I clearly presented that point. I never raised the topic of BLM, at all.

Sigh. Quote for me one single liberal who has called the 9/11 hijacker terrorists "peace-loving" or even "largely peace-loving". Then, and only then, will you have a credible argument.
The topic is "right-wing TERRORISM"; it is not about conservatives in general. Or do you think that right-wingers who commit terrorist acts should be called "peace loving"?

It's gotten to the point where a knee-jerk reaction follows any perceived criticism of the right no matter how well justified. That is followed by further knee-jerk claims or allusions of being somehow 'victimized'. It got old a long time ago,

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Perhaps. But doomed or not, that's still not what Joe claimed. Joe claimed that Trump ordered a mob to storm the Capitol. You aren't actually claiming that he did.

According to some who did storm the Capitol, that's exactly what they felt Trump was telling them to do:

Quote:

“I was there because he called me there and he laid out what was happening,” one rioter is heard saying.

Robert Schornak, another rioter, said what got him interested in going to the Capitol that day was Trump’s request for his supporters to be there.

You know, Trump only asked me for two things. He asked me for my vote. He asked me to come on January 6,” Schornak said.

Quote:

On the same day of Trump's tweet, Kelly O'Brien of Pennsylvania posted on Facebook, according to prosecutors:

"CALLING ALL PATRIOTS! Be in Washington D.C. January 6th. This wasn't organized by any group. DJT has invited us and it's going to be 'wild.'

Quote:

Oath Keepers leader from Florida named Kelly Meggs sent a series of messages on Facebook that referenced Trump's tweet.

"Trump said It's gonna be wild!!!!!!! It's gonna be wild!!!!!!! He wants us to make it WILD that's what he's saying. He called us all to the Capitol and wants us to make it wild!!! Sir Yes Sir!!! Gentlemen we are heading to DC pack your s***!!"

Quote:

A man who pleaded guilty to breaching the Capitol building, Stephen Ayres, testified to the committee that Trump's social media posts encouraged him to attend the rally on Jan. 6. "​​He basically put out, you know, come to the 'Stop the Steal' rally, you know, and I felt like I needed to be down here," Ayres testified.

Quote:

Gina Bisignano of California replied directly to Trump's "will be wild" tweet, and posted, "I'll be there," according to federal court records.

On Jan. 6, 2021, Bisignano allegedly entered Capitol grounds and filmed herself saying, "we are storming the Capitol. And I'm going up in there, I'm going to break into Congress."

At one point, she allegedly shouted through a megaphone "break the window!" at a person hammering at a Capitol window, and "You are not going to take away our Trumpy bear!"

Quote:

On Dec. 20, 2020, Reffitt messaged members of the Texas Three Percenters, a far-right militia group he belonged to, "Our President needs us. ALL OF US...!!! On January 6th. We The People owe him that debt. He Sacrificed for us and we must pay that debt. Cutting the head of the demon and demanding Constitutional expulsion of corrupt congressional officials." A week later, he wrote, "The fuel is set. We strike the match in DC on the 6th."

Quote:

Allan Hostetter: "Late last night President Trump tweeted that all patriots should descend on Washington, D.C. on Wednesday 1/6/2021," Hostetter wrote on Instagram on Dec. 19, 2020. "I will be there, bullhorns on fire, to let the swamp dwellers know we will not let them steal our country from us. I hope you can join me!!"

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politic...g-jan-6-attack

[Susheel]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

According to some who did storm the Capitol, that's exactly what they felt Trump was telling them to do:

No...no...you don't get it. You have to point out exactly where and when Trump said the exact words "Go mob the Capital and make me president."












https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politic...g-jan-6-attack[/quote]

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Originally Posted by Susheel

No...no...you don't get it. You have to point out exactly where and when Trump said the exact words "Go mob the Capital and make me president."












https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politic...g-jan-6-attack

[/quote]

It was the word Wild in the December 19th Tweet.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Susheel

No...no...you don't get it. You have to point out exactly where and when Trump said the exact words "Go mob the Capital and make me president."

It doesn't matter even if Trump did say those exact words, his cult members would still lie and say he never said it.

[gnome]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

It doesn't matter even if Trump did say those exact words, his cult members would still lie and say he never said it.

Right after saying he did and that it was justified.

[wareyin]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

I see you moved the goalpost. Here's what Joe claimed:



Now compare that to what you're now talking about:



You changed "violent mob" to "crowd", you changed "storm" with "march to" and "fight like hell". And even that "fight like hell" is taken out of context. Why don't you actually quote him? Oh, who am I kidding, I know exactly why you don't quote him. But I will.

Let's address the "fight like hell" bit. First, Trump used the word "fight" 20 times. And there's a consistent pattern of using it metaphorically, which is normal. For example:

"For years, Democrats have gotten away with election fraud and weak Republicans. And that's what they are. There's so many weak Republicans. And we have great ones. Jim Jordan and some of these guys, they're out there fighting. The House guys are fighting. But it's, it's incredible."

Now what's important here isn't whether or not Trump is right about Democrats. What's important here is the use of the word "fight". And it very obviously doesn't refer to physical combat. That's consistent throughout the entire speech.

Here's another one (well, more than one) use of the word from that speech:

"The American people do not believe the corrupt, fake news anymore. They have ruined their reputation. But you know, it used to be that they'd argue with me. I'd fight. So I'd fight, they'd fight, I'd fight, they'd fight. Pop pop. You'd believe me, you'd believe them. Somebody comes out. You know, they had their point of view, I had my point of view, but you'd have an argument."

Again, obviously not talking about physical fights. But let's look at the specific part you referred to:

"I think one of our great achievements will be election security. Because nobody until I came along had any idea how corrupt our elections were.

And again, most people would stand there at 9 o'clock in the evening and say I want to thank you very much, and they go off to some other life. But I said something's wrong here, something is really wrong, can have happened.

And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore."

So not only is "fight like hell" STILL not referring to physical combat, it's not even a command! He's not even telling the crowd to fight, he's describing what he and other Republicans already do, metaphorically. Again: description, NOT command.

Now let's get to some of what you left out. First:

"I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."

So if you want to argue that Trump intended his descriptions as commands, then you have to include this in your considerations, which you obviously didn't.

Now, what did he directly command the crowd to do?

So we're going to, we're going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. I love Pennsylvania Avenue. And we're going to the Capitol, and we're going to try and give.

The Democrats are hopeless — they never vote for anything. Not even one vote. But we're going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones because the strong ones don't need any of our help. We're going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.

So let's walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.

My GOD! He told people to WALK! Does his villainy know no bounds?

And that's what counts for you as "order[ing] a violent mob to storm the Capitol". Yeah, no. That's not what happened. You are spreading misinformation.

Oh, my, he said to "peacefully" storm the capitol to fight like hell or we won't have a country any more. Gosh, you've convinced me that the crowd wasn't a violent mob directed by the sitting President to attack the Capitol building!

Oh, wait a minute, unlike you I'm aware of the testimony from the Jan 6th hearings that demonstrated that Trump knew members of this "peaceful" violent mob were armed even before he directed them to storm the Capitol building. The SS also knew the crowd was a violent mob because they refused to allow Trump to go to the Capitol building with his violent, armed mob despite his temper tantrums.

Unlike you, I'm also not ignoring that his own supporters in that violent mob have also said that Trump directed them to storm the Capitol.

It is you, Zig, who is spreading misinformation.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Originally Posted by wareyin

Oh, my, he said to "peacefully" storm the capitol to fight like hell or we won't have a country any more. Gosh, you've convinced me that the crowd wasn't a violent mob directed by the sitting President to attack the Capitol building!

Oh, wait a minute, unlike you I'm aware of the testimony from the Jan 6th hearings that demonstrated that Trump knew members of this "peaceful" violent mob were armed even before he directed them to storm the Capitol building. The SS also knew the crowd was a violent mob because they refused to allow Trump to go to the Capitol building with his violent, armed mob despite his temper tantrums.

Unlike you, I'm also not ignoring that his own supporters in that violent mob have also said that Trump directed them to storm the Capitol.

It is you, Zig, who is spreading misinformation.

Zig must not have seen all those BLM leaders telling people too stay away from Washington DC on the 6th, he must have been trapped in a cave on some deserted Island somewhere with no Comunication, on December 19 2020.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw

From all the evidence he did he knew he lost or he is insane one of the Two there can be no doubt in that. Him winning the election would Violate the Laws of physics, the Claims were that stupid just like his Birther Claims.

This has nothing to do with Joe's claim.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

This has nothing to do with Joe's claim.

Literally nobody is falling for your "The Mob boss just said it was a nice store and it would be a shame if anything happened to it" routine.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by wareyin

Oh, my, he said to "peacefully" storm the capitol

He didn't tell anyone to storm the capitol. None of your evidence actually indicates he did. You've got arguments about him acting stupidly, and even whipping up the crowd, but that's still not the claim that was made. That actual claim you have no evidence for.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

He didn't tell anyone to storm the capitol. None of your evidence actually indicates he did. You've got arguments about him acting stupidly, and even whipping up the crowd, but that's still not the claim that was made. That actual claim you have no evidence for.

Dude Trump doesn't love you. He doesn't care that you're willing to look this ridiculous to defend him.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Literally nobody is falling for your "The Mob boss just said it was a nice store and it would be a shame if anything happened to it" routine.

You will never, ever apply this standard to a Democrat.

[wareyin]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

He didn't tell anyone to storm the capitol. None of your evidence actually indicates he did. You've got arguments about him acting stupidly, and even whipping up the crowd, but that's still not the claim that was made. That actual claim you have no evidence for.

The claim was made that it was a violent mob. Do you dispute that?

The claim was made that they stormed the Capitol building. Do you dispute that?

Another part of the claim was that they were directed to do so by Trump. You've admitted that he whipped the crowd up and told them to go to the Capitol building. Are you trying to claim that whipping up a violent mob (that you know is armed) and telling them where to go isn't an "order"? Because if so, remember why that crowd is angry. (aside from Trump and allies lying to them to make them angry). Trump is telling them he is their leader and they are agreeing that he is their leader. When a leader tells their followers what to do, that's an order.

[Lurch]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

You will never, ever apply this standard to a Democrat.

The other side is bad so we must be bad, too. Lookit what you make us do.

I think they call this projection. Every accusation is a confession.

Dems are a lot harder on theirs than Repubs are on their own. Compare and contrast the treatment of Al Franken and Roy Moore. Sitting Senator Franken got the boot over a silly pic of a faux grope while on-the-ballot Moore had the wagons circling in his defense in spite of allegations of misconduct with teens.

[wareyin]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

You will never, ever apply this standard to a Democrat.

You will never, ever apply this standard to someone who didn't do what my guy did! That's such an unfair, double standard, not treating the innocent person the same as the guilty person! <stamps foot and slams on MAGA hat>

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

You will never, ever apply this standard to a Democrat.

Because Democrats don't order mobs to storm the Capital.

"Reality is just a liberal bias" is yet another act nobody is falling for anymore.

[Regnad Kcin]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Huh? I referenced 9/11 to show how liberals are using a clear double-standard in their characterization of conservatives as a terrorist threat...I clearly presented that point. I never raised the topic of BLM, at all.

Nice little generalization you got there. Cute. Cuddly.

[The Great Zaganza]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

You will never, ever apply this standard to a Democrat.

Because Dems don't pull that kind of ****.
Only Republicans consider calls for violence part of campaigning.

[JoeMorgue]

Image simping for Trump so hard you actually argue "Oh yeah well why don't you spend as much time criticizing people who don't do bad things?" as if not doing bad things is just some unfair advantage you shouldn't get credit for.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

He didn't tell anyone to storm the capitol. None of your evidence actually indicates he did. You've got arguments about him acting stupidly, and even whipping up the crowd, but that's still not the claim that was made. That actual claim you have no evidence for.

Apparently, you missed post #128 above. Or are you claiming because Trump didn't use the words "storm the Capitol" that all these insurrectionists just misinterpreted what Trump wanted them to do?

[Upchurch]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Apparently, you missed post #168 above. Or are you claiming because Trump didn't use the words "storm the Capitol" that all these insurrectionists just misinterpreted what Trump wanted them to do?

#128, but yes. Zig is once again being very fast and loose with context to distort the facts he finds inconvenient.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Upchurch

#128, but yes. Zig is once again being very fast and loose with context to distort the facts he finds inconvenient.

Thanks. Corrected in original post.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

You will never, ever apply this standard to a Democrat.

I apply the same standard too all, Trump's people were telling the Crowd exactly what they needed to to incite them into an Insurection and that's why one Occured.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

You will never, ever apply this standard to a Democrat.

Tell ya what...if you can give me an example of a Democrat president doing what Trump has done with his Big Lie, his tweets calling people to the Capitol on Jan. 6, and then encouraging those people to Stop the Steal by marching down to the Capitol, then I'll condemn that POTUS the same way I've condemned Trump. Until then, cut the crap.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Tell ya what...if you can give me an example of a Democrat president doing what Trump has done with his Big Lie, his tweets calling people to the Capitol on Jan. 6, and then encouraging those people to Stop the Steal by marching down to the Capitol, then I'll condemn that POTUS the same way I've condemned Trump. Until then, cut the crap.

He Won't, because he Can't.
Yes, there has been violent rhetoric from some loons on extreme left..the wannabe revolutionaires, but I have not seen any Democratic Poiticians embrace them the way some GOPers have embraced right wing violent rhetoric, or even indulges in it themselves.

[Susheel]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Tell ya what...if you can give me an example of a Democrat president doing what Trump has done with his Big Lie, his tweets calling people to the Capitol on Jan. 6, and then encouraging those people to Stop the Steal by marching down to the Capitol, then I'll condemn that POTUS the same way I've condemned Trump. Until then, cut the crap.

"...but...but Al Gore....
".

[Warp12]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

Because Dems don't pull that kind of ****.
Only Republicans consider calls for violence part of campaigning.

Dems don't often directly call for violence; instead, they passively encourage it and celebrate the results as a victory for social cause.

[Susheel]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Dems don't often directly call for violence; instead, they passively encourage it and celebrate the results as a victory for social cause.

Provide an instance of this. Trumplicans foaming at the mouth and indulging in violence at what they perceive as "liberalism gone mad" is not necessarily Dem responsibility.

"It's all your fault that I hit you," is not really a valid argument.

[Warp12]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Dems don't often directly call for violence; instead, they passively encourage it and celebrate the results as a victory for social cause.

Originally Posted by Susheel

Provide an instance of this. Trumplicans foaming at the mouth and indulging in violence at what they perceive as "liberalism gone mad" is not necessarily Dem responsibility.

"It's all your fault that I hit you," is not really a valid argument.

We all know this is true, and at least one glaring example of such has already been presented in this thread. 2020 isn't that long ago. But hey, this thread is about how bad conservatives are. Anything else might be considered a derail. So, I am not going to debate the point with you.

[smartcooky]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Dems don't often directly call for violence; instead, they passively encourage it and celebrate the results as a victory for social cause.

[The Great Zaganza]

Originally Posted by Warp12

We all know this is true, and at least one glaring example of such has already been presented in this thread. 2020 isn't that long ago. But hey, this thread is about how bad conservatives are. Anything else might be considered a derail. So, I am not going to debate the point with you.

YOU think you know this, because you live in a bubble which always takes Democrats out of context to suit the Narrative.

Ask anyone not from the US about which Party is inherently more supportive of violence, and the answer will be Republicans.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Warp12

Dems don't often directly call for violence; instead, they passively encourage it and celebrate the results as a victory for social cause.

Yet another claim you fail to provide evidence for.

I suspect this is a reference to the protests a couple of years ago over the murder of George Floyd. Protests that were overwhelmingly peaceful:

Quote:

The vast majority of demonstration events associated with the BLM movement are non-violent (see map below). In more than 93% of all demonstrations connected to the movement, demonstrators have not engaged in violence or destructive activity. Peaceful protests are reported in over 2,400 distinct locations around the country. Violent demonstrations,6 meanwhile, have been limited to fewer than 220 locations — under 10% of the areas that experienced peaceful protests. In many urban areas like Portland, Oregon, for example, which has seen sustained unrest since Floyd’s killing, violent demonstrations are largely confined to specific blocks, rather than dispersed throughout the city.

Quote:

Despite the media focus on looting and vandalism, however, there is little evidence to suggest that demonstrators have engaged in widespread violence. In some cases where demonstrations did turn violent, there are reports of agents provocateurs — or infiltrators — instigating the violence.

https://acleddata.com/2020/09/03/dem...r-summer-2020/

Among these agents who instigated the violence was a man "identified as a member of the Hells Angels linked to the Aryan Cowboys, a white supremacist prison and street gang" who " “wanted to sow discord and racial unrest”, and " on 29 May in Detroit, a number of non-residents reportedly traveled to the city to engage in violent behavior during a demonstration, leading to multiple arrests," (Ibid)

[Susheel]

Originally Posted by Warp12

We all know this is true, and at least one glaring example of such has already been presented in this thread. 2020 isn't that long ago. But hey, this thread is about how bad conservatives are. Anything else might be considered a derail. So, I am not going to debate the point with you.

Ah yes...the BLM bogie...