Current Affairs General US politics (ie, not POTUS related)

[tsubaki]

Yes. In the same way Elliot Rodger did for incels.

or George Zimmerman

 

[Zatara]

That reads like you've been on a right wing subreddit and taken the points straight from there- I guess they were all deaf and were signing to each other, yeah?

I could picture it that a group of people went up to him, asked if he liked Trump and to copy Trumps hand gesture for a photo.

Maybe im just innocently taking things at face value seeing as theres no evidence to suggest otherwise lol too many assumptions. If anything it seems like those people tricked him.

Dont use reddit, just read the facts of the case. Its quite easy to follow.

As I stated, I’m not talking about legality. But again, saying it’s an enormous stretch that he’s a white supremacist when he posed with white supremacist throwing a wildly accepted white supremacist hand gesture is deliberately obtuse. Which is setting off massive alarm bells.

Ive not just said its an enormous stretch about the white supremacy accusation.

I think its an enormous stretch that people in 'power' have:

A: Stated that his mum drove him across state lines

B: Stated that he was carrying a gun illegally

C: Called him a domestic terrorist

D: Claimed he executed people (as if that was his intention)

E: Brought race into it

F: Called him a white supremacist


All false statements (at this time)


Theres no evidence to support any of it, hence hes been found not guilty when acting in self defence.

Not sure what you mean by "legality / alarm bells".

If youre looking at the evidence and not coming to the conclusion that Biden (and many others) made false accusations which have damaged his reputation then...

...I find it quite peculiar.

Shouldnt matter what your (or anyones) personal opinion is about someone when it comes to making public statements which are false and misleading.

 

[mill]

Ive not just said its an enormous stretch about the white supremacy accusation.

I think its an enormous stretch to say he is a white supremacist based on a photo with strangers.

Sorry have I misunderstood in some way?

 

[Zatara]

Sorry have I misunderstood in some way?

Not just / Not ONLY said.

It seems im one of the only people in this thread thats even read the facts of the case.

Not opinions, facts.

 

[mill]

Not just / Not ONLY said.

It seems im one of the only people in this thread thats even read the facts of the case.

Not opinions, facts.

I’m sorry but where I have disputed facts? I’m not disputing the verdict. I’m aware of the facts of the case. I’m aware that there is alot of incorrect information going around.

But the facts remain that he travelled to a riot. He placed himself in danger. He armed himself with an assault rifle. He may have been found ‘not guilty’ but let’s not try to pretend he is innocent in all of this. The fact that what I’ve just described is legal for a child (who isn’t deemed mature enough to vote or drink alcohol) is what I have a problem with.

You gave an opinion that it was an enormous stretch to infer that rittenhouse was a white supremacist based on a photo with ‘strangers’.

Except those ‘strangers’ are known white supremacists and the hand gesture he makes is well associated with white supremacy.

I dispute that it’s an enormous stretch to infer that rittenhouse himself is a white supremacist.

And so I think you are being deliberately obtuse about those circumstances because it’s convenient for your narrative.

 

[Zatara]

I’m sorry but where I have disputed facts? I’m not disputing the verdict. I’m aware of the facts of the case. I’m aware that there is alot of incorrect information going around.

But the facts remain that he travelled to a riot. He placed himself in danger. He armed himself with an assault rifle. He may have been found ‘not guilty’ but let’s not try to pretend he is innocent in all of this. The fact that what I’ve just described is legal for a child (who isn’t deemed mature enough to vote or drink alcohol) is what I have a problem with.

You gave an opinion that it was an enormous stretch to infer that rittenhouse was a white supremacist based on a photo with ‘strangers’.

Except those ‘strangers’ are known white supremacists and the hand gesture he makes is well associated with white supremacy.

I dispute that it’s an enormous stretch to infer that rittenhouse himself is a white supremacist.

And so I think you are being deliberately obtuse about those circumstances because it’s convenient for your narrative.

So your opinion is that Biden + many others in positions of power should not be held accountable for making false statements and accusations about a 17 year old boy?

My "narrative" is that ALL the evidence which has come to light (not to mention the not guilty verdict) has proven those people to have made libellous statements.

At the very least they need to be held accountable.

I dont have any interest in anything but the above. Not sure how anyone who understands the facts can agree with defaming someone -- then those persons being found to be lying.

 

[JimmyJeffers]

Zat should really stick to commentating on things that he actually knows about. Like saying we should sign Tom Ince and Ravel Morrison

 

[mill]

So your opinion is that Biden + many others in positions of power should not be held accountable for making false statements and accusations about a 17 year old boy?

My "narrative" is that ALL the evidence which has come to light (not to mention the not guilty verdict) has proven those people to have made libellous statements.

At the very least they need to be held accountable.

I dont have any interest in anything but the above. Not sure how anyone who understands the facts can agree with defaming someone -- then those persons being found to be lying.

Where did I say that? Can you point that out please. You are trying to have an argument over things I’ve not mentioned.

I have a problem with you trying to make out it’s a stretch that he’s a white supremacist. Even though he hangs out with them in bars and uses hand signals linked to white supremacy. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to infer based on those two facts.

 

[TN Toffee]

I’m sorry but where I have disputed facts? I’m not disputing the verdict. I’m aware of the facts of the case. I’m aware that there is alot of incorrect information going around.

But the facts remain that he travelled to a riot. He placed himself in danger. He armed himself with an assault rifle. He may have been found ‘not guilty’ but let’s not try to pretend he is innocent in all of this. The fact that what I’ve just described is legal for a child (who isn’t deemed mature enough to vote or drink alcohol) is what I have a problem with.

You gave an opinion that it was an enormous stretch to infer that rittenhouse was a white supremacist based on a photo with ‘strangers’.

Except those ‘strangers’ are known white supremacists and the hand gesture he makes is well associated with white supremacy.

I dispute that it’s an enormous stretch to infer that rittenhouse himself is a white supremacist.

And so I think you are being deliberately obtuse about those circumstances because it’s convenient for your narrative.

Not to mention, that was the picture where he was wearing the “Free as ****” t-shirt. So I’m to believe a kid who has just been bailed out after killing two protestors at a BLM protest, wears that shirt, in the company of those people, makes that hand gesture, and it’s all a harmless coincidence? Give me a ****ing break.

 

[tsubaki]

So your opinion is that Biden + many others in positions of power should not be held accountable for making false statements and accusations about a 17 year old boy?

My "narrative" is that ALL the evidence which has come to light (not to mention the not guilty verdict) has proven those people to have made libellous statements.

At the very least they need to be held accountable.

I dont have any interest in anything but the above. Not sure how anyone who understands the facts can agree with defaming someone -- then those persons being found to be lying.

er - this is quite clearly a "narrative", you are posting that false statements and accusations were made and that therefore the were proven to have made libellous statements.

For a start, as should be obvious that they were libellous hasn't been determined yet, so that "proven" bit is manifestly rubbish. Nor is there that much evidence that at least one of them (Biden's) that it was false anyway.

 

[Zatara]

Where did I say that? Can you point that out please. You are trying to have an argument over things I’ve not mentioned.

I have a problem with you trying to make out it’s a stretch that he’s a white supremacist. Even though he hangs out with them in bars and uses hand signals linked to white supremacy. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to infer based on those two facts.

Ive been saying all along that this kid should sue. Thats based on the facts at this time.

Youre posting opinonated comments to argue with that sole "narrative".

Ergo youre disagreeing with my point and dont find any issue with people in power making false statements.

Incidentally, theres no way those persons could have known anything factual about the 17 year old when they posted.

er - this is quite clearly a "narrative", you are posting that false statements and accusations were made and that therefore the were proven to have made libellous statements.

For a start, as should be obvious that they were libellous hasn't been determined yet, so that "proven" bit is manifestly rubbish. Nor is there that much evidence that at least one of them (Biden's) that it was false anyway.

Of course false statements were made, based upon the time of the posts and what information would have been available to those people.

Youre right that its not been proven.

The facts point to defamation, slander and libel which in this case dont need to be malicious....

 

[mill]

Ive been saying all along that this kid should sue. Thats based on the facts at this time.

Youre posting opinonated comments to argue with that sole "narrative".

Ergo youre disagreeing with my point and dont find any issue with people in power making false statements.

Incidentally, theres no way those persons could have known anything factual about the 17 year old when they posted.

again you are making stuff up.

All I’m disagreeing with is your comment that it’s a stretch to infer white supremacy. That’s it.

 

[tsubaki]

Of course false statements were made, based upon the time of the posts and what information would have been available to those people.

Youre right that its not been proven.

The facts point to defamation, slander and libel which in this case dont need to be malicious....

No, the facts do not point to that. Why don't we see whether he actually sues someone first, never mind actually wins.

 

[Zatara]

again you are making stuff up.

All I’m disagreeing with is your comment that it’s a stretch to infer white supremacy. That’s it.

Show me where this has been proven?

It hasnt. Its just an opinion whether a photo is enough, which it cant be as it can be argued both ways.

Im not commenting on opinions aside from my own that he should find a pro bono lawyer to take his case.

Then sue a lot of people.

No, the facts do not point to that. Why don't we see whether he actually sues someone first, never mind actually wins.

If someone were to go online and post that a stranger is a white supremacist, racist, vigilante AND post false information about an ongoing case.

Youre saying that this (whilst not malicious) is also not going to be actionable as a case?

That Biden (and others) could simply claim its not defamation and somehow explain why they posted this information online and gave interviews stating this information?


That would be an interesting watch.

The kid may not win but he'd be taking settlements left and right.

 

[coollino]

People call football fans idiots but I'm proud that we have so many experts in not only overly complicated US but also the even more complicated self defence AND libel etc