Antifa Urges Members To Take Up Arms After Rittenhouse Verdict

a reply to: TheRedneck

While I certainly disagree with the verdict, as I suspect most intelligent people do (all sides were in the wrong in that confrontation, and should have not been anywhere near there), you are right in that it is over and done with. Where you are wrong, or at least what you might not have considered, is that people are worried that other people might take it into their heads to arm themselves and shoot people with even less cause. Even if you do agree with the Rittenhouse verdict, the next guy that comes along might be even more of a loose cannon, and THAT is the kind of people that are scary, far more so than Rittenhouse.

a reply to: DragonsDemesne

Most intelligent people disagree with the verdict?

Going to require a source there.

What do you mean next guy? The next guy to go to a protest?

The next guy to defend themselves?

What a bunch of hogwash

a reply to: JinMI

I'm talking about the next guy who thinks he's Kyle Rittenhouse and shoots people. Regardless of whether K.R. is in the right or wrong, somebody else might decide to shoot somebody with less justification, thinking they're in the right. At least in K.R's case, he only bore half the blame in that situation (the other half of the blame belongs to the people he shot), but somebody else might not even have that justification.

a reply to: DragonsDemesne

Who thinks he is Kyle and defend himself against harm and likely death?

He is in the right. 12 jurors said so after a full investigation and a rollout of the facts.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: DragonsDemesne

Who thinks he is Kyle and defend himself against harm and likely death?

He is in the right. 12 jurors said so after a full investigation and a rollout of the facts.

You might as well be pointing this out to a stack of BLM bricks. The poster doesn't understand excuses, and is making plenty of them themselves. They're brushing off a potential future offender's personal responsibility & choices, and outright attempting to blame someone else pre-emptively.

That's the hallmark of an enabler.

They do not see what they support, as negative, but are deluded enough to see it as some twisted cockamamie injustice or offense to the soft & delicate sensibilities.

a reply to: Nyiah

Folks have been brainwashed

The objective facts are being ignored to justify some stance that has no bearing in reality.

a reply to: DragonsDemesne

While I certainly disagree with the verdict, as I suspect most intelligent people do

Well, thats not condescending. People who understand or agree with the verdict, were those who watched..I suspect.

a reply to: DragonsDemesne

Where you are wrong, or at least what you might not have considered, is that people are worried that other people might take it into their heads to arm themselves and shoot people with even less cause.

I would hope you can see the error in that analysis.

Antifa has been steadily becoming more and more violent with each episode of riots that goes unopposed. The very subject of this thread is a threat that Antifa is going to start shooting people who oppose their riots. if anyone has demonstrated a constant inclination to increase their violence, it is Antifa and BLM.

To now claim that because someone legally defended themselves from overt, blatant attacks by the groups increasing their violent propensities, it follows that self-defense is going to become more widespread... well, that's just insane. Or it indicates someone who blindly supports the riots. I won't speculate on which might be the case.

Irregardless, I heard for years that the riots were "peaceful" and legal because no one had been convicted of illegality. By that exact same reasoning, there can be no claim that Rittenhouse did anything illegal. Someone is going to find a definition and stick to it.

Er... actually, someone just did: the Kyle Rittenhouses of the nation. It looks like Antifa may have three choices now: stop rioting, start working on their aim, or die. There is one wise choice there. I hope they choose wisely.

TheRedneck

a reply to: DragonsDemesne

The jury disagreed.

Innocent on all counts.

Seems they disagreed with you.

a reply to: TheRedneck


Wow, have you been hanging out with DB lately?

I read the entire post before looking at who wrote it and was 100% certain it was him, guess I'm not quite as good at that as I thought.

That is an enormous compliment btw.


The ONLY thing I would personally change is directly naming the Democrat Party instead of only their Antifa & BLM departments.

That part particular "What, I din do nuffn" from democrats doesn't fly with me.

a reply to: Nyiah

Yeah, I know... I tried. Not everybody is informed enough to see what's happening out there. Kyle and his victims all bear responsibility for the result of that day. None of them should have been there. Was there an element of self defense? Sure. But both sides were provoking the other, and bloodshed was the result. Perhaps the jury feared repercussions if they found Kyle guilty or partially guilty? Who knows. Regardless, the kid's life is probably ruined, anyway; nobody's going to want to hire him or want him around or anything, but if someone makes their bed that way, they have to lie in it. Kyle did, and so did those he shot.

originally posted by: DragonsDemesne
a reply to: Nyiah

Yeah, I know... I tried. Not everybody is informed enough to see what's happening out there. Kyle and his victims all bear responsibility for the result of that day. None of them should have been there. Was there an element of self defense? Sure. But both sides were provoking the other, and bloodshed was the result. Perhaps the jury feared repercussions if they found Kyle guilty or partially guilty? Who knows. Regardless, the kid's life is probably ruined, anyway; nobody's going to want to hire him or want him around or anything, but if someone makes their bed that way, they have to lie in it. Kyle did, and so did those he shot.

Are you intentionally lying?

Kyle was there after several nights of violence and destruction to protect HIS neighborhood and offer medical assistance to injured democrat rioters, which he was doing until attacked by those 'victims'.

A 17 year old that was a lifeguard in kenosha for several years and was currently enrolled in the school a few hundred yards from this incident to eventually become a police officer.

Kyle was NOT instigating anything.

So why the deception here?

a reply to: Ghostsdogood

Actually, I think DB has been hanging around me. I was here first.

The ONLY thing I would personally change is directly naming the Democrat Party instead of only their Antifa & BLM departments.

One problem with that: I don't think (at least I hope not) most Democratic members even realize exactly what the leaders in the party are doing. I think they are simply too busy with day-to-day stuff to pay much attention past what those pixels on the TV screen tell the they should think. So if I implicate the Democratic Party, then i also include all those folks who, if they only knew what was really going on, wouldn't be so accepting of what they think is going on.

The problem is not a particular party... the problem is one large segment of a party that has acquired so much power they are now becoming brazen about promoting their agendas. BLM and Antifa are not even among those... BLM and Antifa are simply brainwashed useful idiots. They're cannon fodder for the DNC leaders. The people pulling the strings know that a shooting war will break out; they've been trying to instigate one for a decade or more now. They just make sure that when that shooting war starts, it will be BLM and Antifa, not themselves, in the crosshairs.

The Republican Party is just as susceptible to corruption and bad behavior as the Democrat Party. Never forget that. The only difference is that, at this one moment in time, the leaders of the Republican Party don't have the power (or the intestinal fortitude) to do the things the leaders of the Democratic Party are trying to do.

Don't play into their hands. Keep your eye on the true enemy, not their lackeys.

TheRedneck

a reply to: DragonsDemesne

Not everybody is informed enough to see what's happening out there.

Yes, you seem to be illustrating that point quite well.

Kyle and his victims all bear responsibility for the result of that day.

Of course that's what the MSM wants you to think, now that Kyle has been acquitted. Had he been convicted, the same people who tell you now that all were in the wrong would have been holding the victims up as heroes and martyrs.

In truth, they were thugs who tried to kill Kyle before Kyle killed them.

None of them should have been there.

All of them had a legal right to be there. Kyle and his victims. The difference is that none of them had the right to attack another person. Kyle did not attack another person; Kyle defended himself against an attack, three separate times. Each of his victims did attack Kyle.

That was proven in a court of law. One of the victims, the one that lived, actually admitted on the stand that he drew a gun on Kyle before Kyle shot him! That is the definition of an attack (drawing a gun first when one's life is not in danger) and self-defense (responding to having a gun drawn on one with appropriate force).

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck


It was meant as sort of a double-play compliment.

I enjoy trying to be creative like that, but I'm not all that good at it yet.


I am 100% certain that MOST folks calling themselves democrat, have NO idea what the democrat party has been doing in their name.

Some actually don't see it through the brainwashing, some are willfully ignorant, and others don't care since they assume both parties are equally dishonest.

This is the exact reason for my current visit here.

Democrats will have to either publicly agree with what their party has been doing, disagree, or be ridiculed for their dishonesty.

Nobody gets a free pass for claiming ignorance anymore.

If politicians weren't swayed by lobby and special interest groups then opposing groups called subversive or terrorist to those agendas wouldn't arise.

Of the letter by the letter and for the letter is the one declaring independence of such dependencies... Knowing the U.S. does not need such dependencies to remain independent and that such allegiances do nothing for the common wealth of the entire nation? Then why allow or make such a pledge(S) before or after going into political office?

One is supposed to pledge allegiance to the flag for which "it" stands that IT means "Liberty".

Doing things to subvert the constitution is not defending independence or liberty.

But what do I know?

a reply to: Ghostsdogood

It was meant as sort of a double-play compliment.

I like trying to be creative like that, but I'm not all that good at it yet.

I know. But you have to understand that DB has this masochistic streak when it comes to compliments. You have to disguise them as insults and sneak them in.

I am 100% certain that MOST folks calling themselves democrat, have NO idea what the democrat party has been doing in their name.

I agree, obviously.

Interesting trivia. Many people think I am a Republican. Nope! I'm an independent, always have been. My family used to be Democrats until Carter; they dropped that party and went Independent as well.

Most people on here think I am a conservative. Not really. I support marijuana legalization (even though I don't mess with the stuff myself), I have no problem with equal LGBTQRSTwhatever (can they just pick some letters and stick with them?) rights (heavy emphasis on equal, as in not superior), I oppose racism and bigotry in all its forms, I support social assistance programs (I even support increasing them, if we can fix the bugs at the same time), and I would love to see a Universal Healthcare initiative provided it actually works (as opposed to Obamacare, which is a Universal Insurance program). Those are not traditional "conservative" values!

We try way too hard to put labels on others. Most people don't fit and that's the problem. I go by issues, not labels.

Democrats will have to either publicly agree with what their party has been doing, disagree, or be ridiculed for their dishonesty.

The way I see it, ridicule only serves to intensify stubbornness. If we the people are to ever make a positive change, it will require all of us working together. That's hard to do when some of us are ridiculing others over a label.

I mean, look at the Georgia Bulldogs for proof of that. They knew, and of course the Crimson Tide fans all knew, that they didn't have the chance of a snowball in Miami during a summer heat wave of actually beating Alabama! But we do tend to have a small (very small, minuscule even) arrogance streak, so we tend to ridicule the poor puppies. And then they get all uppity and start thinking they can win trophies and stuff.

Nobody gets a free pass for claiming ignorance anymore.

Even the truly ignorant?

TheRedneck

a reply to: Crowfoot

But what do I know?

Apparently more than the idiots running the country.



I pledge allegiance to the flag

A flag is a symbol of a country and its people

Of the United States of America

50 sovereign states acting in the best interests of all

And to the Republic for which it stands

Not a democracy; a republic which can guarantee rights to all regardless of mob sentiment

One nation, under God, indivisible

Referring to the passage in the bible that a house divided against itself will fall

With Liberty and Justice for all.

The purpose, the reason why we swear allegiance to the symbol, for by doing so we swear allegiance to the ideal that all in this country shall be free and not live in fear of tyranny.

Sounds pretty knowledgeable to me.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I'm not going to comment anymore on the Cowboy for now.

I have most of the same beliefs as you, and first registered as Republican in 2012, something I never thought I would do, but by that point I had already realized enough of the democrat's plans and tactics that no other action would have been sufficient.

Unfortunately, many of those 'CTs' are now reality.

I have publicly stood against some on my own 'side' on many of the social issues you mentioned in previous ATS lives, and will likely see the need to do so this time as well.


Yes, the risk of just causing my opponent to dig in for a fight is well understood.

A very wise observation.

I have a specific strategy and several tactics that I hope will reduce this effect, and will try to improve as I go, but don't see any other option anymore.

We cannot continue, and there is no direction forward as a nation, as long as such a significant portion of our population is so brainwashed that they are living in a completely fictional reality.


I try to start slow in some discussions in case I run into someone who is honestly ignorant, or just incapable of certain things.

I consider them off limits for direct ridicule, and only try to help with kid gloves.

But will certainly screw it up sometimes.

a reply to: Ghostsdogood

I'm not going to comment anymore on the Cowboy for now.

Awwww, but it's so much fun!


(But, I agree... more fun when he's here anyway. DB is a good guy, all joking aside.)



We must each follow our own paths that seem right to us. My purpose is not to change your path, but to give you the tools you may need on it.

I believe I may have successfully done so this time.

Good luck.

TheRedneck