Parler, Big Tech, Debate on Online Speech

[Marionumber1]

So what, substantially, is the disagreement here? It certainly was a coup attempt to some, and Trump's language was deliberately stirring up that sentiment among the useful idiot fascists who followed him, regardless of the whether Trump himself intended it as a coup or part of some deeper agenda (though given his personality and actions up to that point, I am inclined towards the former, with handlers of Trump who did have a deeper agenda egging him on). And there are decent indications that spooks were managing the event too, as seen through individuals like the obvious faux-left wing agitator John Sullivan. It's not as simple as saying there was one reason for the Capitol riot and/or denying someone's hypothesized reason in favor of one's own interpretation, because evidently different parts of the power structure were seeking different things out of the event. It likely was a coup attempt and a broader social engineering op too. In that respect, it is very much like 9/11, with a lot of factions backing various agendas that all coalesced into the tragedy that day.

[Belligerent Savant]

.

Couple other follow-up questions, as I'm now reading your (JRiddler's) replies:

I used the term 'violence' too narrowly -- yes, people were hurt, as thay are in most 'protests'/'riots', as we've seen over the past ~12 months alone. But my key point is that (despite initial attempts by the media to increase the death count), the lone death occurred at the hands of a reported Capitol Police officer -- yet to be named -- shooting an un-armed protester, Ashli Babbit (also a former security forces agent: the Air National Guard said that when Babbitt separated, she was with the 113th Security Forces Squadron of the DC Air National Guard which is stationed at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland; this squadron participated in training to “execute civil disturbance missions” at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, on Oct. 17, 2020, just before the 2020 election. See my prior RI link upthread).

The potential for covert ops on this day is not without merit.

JR:
...you might actually say something new on this oft-repeated saw that, effectively, regardless of intent, apologizes for political movement fascists violently seizing a parliament (carrying nooses and screaming death-threats against specific persons) in an attempt to overturn an election that their leader had lost.

You are misrepresenting. I'm not apologizing for it. I object with your premise as to the root cause, even if a fair amount of the participants may have carried out their acts with the mindset you suggest.

-----


Let's assume for a moment that there were indeed terrorists in the hijacked planes on 911 (and maybe there were actual terrorists on that plane - we may never know), ready to die for 'Allah'/do their part to inflict pain on the American Infidels, etc.

Or as another example, a young American soldier during the first Iraq war, who enlisted to 'protect our freedoms'/'democracy', etc.

In both cases, these individuals earnestly believed they were undertaking their acts for the reasons they've been led to believe. But for those directing them... or more accurately, for those directing those that are directing them (2 or 3 layers removed): what do those at the upper levels believe in? Certainly not in Allah, or Jihad, or 'democracy' as understood by the typical soldier.

[Belligerent Savant]

So what, substantially, is the disagreement here? It certainly was a coup attempt to some, and Trump's language was deliberately stirring up that sentiment among the useful idiot fascists who followed him, regardless of the whether Trump himself intended it as a coup or part of some deeper agenda (though given his personality and actions up to that point, I am inclined towards the former, with handlers of Trump who did have a deeper agenda egging him on). And there are decent indications that spooks were managing the event too, as seen through individuals like the obvious faux-left wing agitator John Sullivan. It's not as simple as saying there was one reason for the Capitol riot and/or denying someone's hypothesized reason in favor of one's own interpretation, because evidently different parts of the power structure were seeking different things out of the event. It likely was a coup attempt and a broader social engineering op too. In that respect, it is very much like 9/11, with a lot of factions backing various agendas that all coalesced into the tragedy that day.

Indeed -- this largely resonates with me, given the info available to us at this point. Though I maintain my doubt that a 'coup' was an earnest objective by the planners that day.