Read 49236 times

Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #200 on: January 07, 2021, 02:55:52 pm »
: a violent uprising against an authority or government.
Do you consider Antifa crap an insurrection?

This was Redtifa. They stormed a building, waved some flags, and then the police moved in and dealt with them. Now they'll go home.

Sit down Chicken Little.


Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #201 on: January 07, 2021, 02:56:04 pm »
A yes or no would suffice!
Yes, you are ignorant.


Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #202 on: January 07, 2021, 02:57:17 pm »
A bit hyperbolic, sure, but... so is your usage of "glorified".  :smiley:
But yeah, it *was* an attempt to overturn/hinder/negate electoral results, right? It falls vaguely in that direction. Even if it was cringey, disorganized, and relatively non-violent (thankfully).
Hopefully nothing more will come of it, but it *is* a noteworthy attempt at undermining American democracy, and has drawn the attention of world leaders.
Whataboutism fallacies aside, France stumbles, people shrug. America stumbles, the world gets nervous.
The world isn't going to care about this by the time Champions League quarterfinals roll around.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2021, 08:50:09 am by Kyndo »


  • Adel
  • Hero of Waygookistan

    • 1608

    • January 30, 2015, 12:50:26 am
    • The Abyss
    more
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #203 on: January 07, 2021, 02:58:39 pm »
Yes, you are ignorant.
Do you consider Antifa crap an insurrection?

This was Redtifa. They stormed a building, waved some flags, and then the police moved in and dealt with them. Now they'll go home.
 
4 deaths and a 6pm curfew! 
You illiterate fool. I pity your students.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2021, 03:06:40 pm by Adel »


  • tylerthegloob
  • The Legend

    • 2952

    • September 28, 2016, 10:46:24 am
    • Busan
    more
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #204 on: January 07, 2021, 03:15:36 pm »
They stormed a building

they stormed the capitol building not "a building"

idk how much time you've spent in or around the capitol building, but it's not a small deal. they at least pretend to take themselves seriously. but i guess whatever "no nonsense" attitude capitol security pretended to have was just for interns and tourists and not for people trying to break in.

what if one of those pipe bombs they found nearby had made it's way into the building? you're the one who loves hypotheticals. capitol security was shown to be either a joke or complicit (porque no los dos?). i guess we're lucky more people didn't get hurt
more gg more skill


Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #205 on: January 07, 2021, 04:04:24 pm »
4 deaths and a 6pm curfew! 
You illiterate fool. I pity your students.
Yes, and? A serious coup it was not. Stop trying to turn this into something huge for political purposes.


Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #206 on: January 07, 2021, 04:05:32 pm »
they stormed the capitol building not "a building"

idk how much time you've spent in or around the capitol building, but it's not a small deal. they at least pretend to take themselves seriously. but i guess whatever "no nonsense" attitude capitol security pretended to have was just for interns and tourists and not for people trying to break in.

what if one of those pipe bombs they found nearby had made it's way into the building? you're the one who loves hypotheticals. capitol security was shown to be either a joke or complicit (porque no los dos?). i guess we're lucky more people didn't get hurt
You know the Capitol has been "stormed" before, yes? Like Kavanaugh and other times.


  • Savant
  • The Legend

    • 2814

    • April 07, 2012, 11:35:31 pm
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #207 on: January 07, 2021, 04:25:19 pm »
You know the Capitol has been "stormed" before, yes? Like Kavanaugh and other times.

Have you really stuck all your eggs in the deplorable basket? I really thought you had a glimmer of intelligence left.


Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #208 on: January 07, 2021, 04:54:36 pm »
Have you really stuck all your eggs in the deplorable basket? I really thought you had a glimmer of intelligence left.
Stop trying to turn this into something it isn't.

Tens of thousands were there. A few thousand rush the building, of those a few hundred did more than just mill about. Of those few hundred maybe like a dozen tried to commit actual violence rather than lame vandalism.

Mostly peaceful protest. You live by that standard, you die by that standard.


  • Mr C
  • The Legend

    • 3023

    • October 17, 2012, 03:00:40 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #209 on: January 07, 2021, 10:38:47 pm »
Have you really stuck all your eggs in the deplorable basket? I really thought you had a glimmer of intelligence left.

What on earth gave you that idea?!?!?  Haven't been here in a while?


  • Mr C
  • The Legend

    • 3023

    • October 17, 2012, 03:00:40 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #210 on: January 07, 2021, 10:53:22 pm »
You know the Capitol has been "stormed" before, yes? Like Kavanaugh and other times.

At least you had the decency to put "stormed" in "quotes".  Because they indicate that the Kavanaugh protestors simply sat down and refused to budge, did not have a single firearm, no Molotov cocktails or pipe bombs were found.  And no one was killed. 

So really, you're disingenuously, AS ALWAYS, comparing things that aren't really comparable.  AT ALL.  Right?


  • gogators!
  • Waygook Lord

    • 5245

    • March 16, 2016, 04:35:48 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #211 on: January 08, 2021, 01:25:01 am »
No need to make a new thread. Just put it in the Fridayís pointless ramblings thread. Or just leave it here. America hating Aussie Adel was trying to say the USA is a banana republic. (Which itís not.) Instead of dignifying that with a response, we discussed bananas.
It's getting there, make no mistake.


  • gogators!
  • Waygook Lord

    • 5245

    • March 16, 2016, 04:35:48 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #212 on: January 08, 2021, 01:26:14 am »
By the Super Bowl, this will all be forgotten. If this happened in France, no one would bat an eye. You had tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands there. Several hundred went stupid, one person was shot. Then everyone went home.

Yawn.
Wrong, as usual.


  • gogators!
  • Waygook Lord

    • 5245

    • March 16, 2016, 04:35:48 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #213 on: January 08, 2021, 01:30:14 am »
Coup d'etat?  Seriously? This is a slightly glorified Whiskey Rebellion.

They must have you so wrapped around their finger if you think THIS is a serious coup attempt and Trump-Russia was just a legitimate investigation.

France has had worse. UK had a 70 year domestic terrorist campaign that eventually saw part of it granted legitimacy and diplomatic recognition.

Heck, Vietnam was way worse. This is a fart in the wind compared to then. People legit thought the country was on the verge of revolution.
Armed insurrection in support of overturning a lawful election. An attempted coup.

What the f&cK do you know about the Vietnam protests?  Chanting outside the White House is a far cry  from what happened yesterday.


  • gogators!
  • Waygook Lord

    • 5245

    • March 16, 2016, 04:35:48 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #214 on: January 08, 2021, 01:34:39 am »
The Trump-Russia stuff was a soft coup and the fact you cant see that shows how brainwashed you are.

They took non-evidence and flimsy reports to justify an intense PR and investigative campaign against the President simply because they disagreed with his policies.
No, there was and is serious concern about trump's connections to putin. Russia did interfere in the 2016 election. Trump did several times obstruct justice. 

Is all you've got the big lie method of propaganda? Is that you, Herr Goebbels?


  • gogators!
  • Waygook Lord

    • 5245

    • March 16, 2016, 04:35:48 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #215 on: January 08, 2021, 01:35:55 am »
Yes, and? A serious coup it was not. Stop trying to turn this into something huge for political purposes.

Those people were dead serious.


  • Adel
  • Hero of Waygookistan

    • 1608

    • January 30, 2015, 12:50:26 am
    • The Abyss
    more
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #216 on: January 08, 2021, 05:20:35 am »
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/jake-angeli-qanon-shaman-stormed-capitol-b1784091.html

It shouldn't be very difficult to track down these dropkicks. A lot of them took selfies and posed for the cameras.
One wonders why the FBI is seeking help for their identification.




It's hard to believe there's been so few arrest so far.  This riot was quite a contrast from the arrests made at BLM protests.

 https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2021/01/07/figures-show-stark-difference-between-arrests-at-dc-black-lives-matter-protest-and-arrests-at-capitol-hill/?sh=103403725706
« Last Edit: January 08, 2021, 05:45:47 am by Adel »


  • CO2
  • Waygook Lord

    • 7541

    • March 02, 2015, 03:41:14 pm
    • Uiwang
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #217 on: January 08, 2021, 07:41:52 am »
One wonders why the FBI is seeking help for their identification.

Because............ ... The FBI don't know these people personally? hahaha What?


  • 745sticky
  • Hero of Waygookistan

    • 1855

    • March 26, 2020, 01:52:57 pm
    • Korea
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #218 on: January 08, 2021, 07:43:52 am »
Because............... The FBI don't know these people personally? hahaha What?
What are you talking about, C02? His picture is right there! Arrest the man already  >:( /s


  • Mr C
  • The Legend

    • 3023

    • October 17, 2012, 03:00:40 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Potential for Violence
« Reply #219 on: January 08, 2021, 07:48:19 am »
Because............... The FBI don't know these people personally? hahaha What?

well, had it been a BLM protest, they would identify the man from his personal effects ... once they got them from the morgue.