Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
“We found him to be a civic-minded patriot with a history of helping his community as an EMT and fireman in training, in his removing hate graffiti earlier that day from a local school, and ultimately in volunteering to protect a business during the night of August 25th in Kenosha"
“Our first hand impressions of Kyle were materially different from those we had previously formed based on media reports and opinion pieces that we had consumed.”
“I have always been frustrated to read an inaccurate press report about a subject I know well, yet somehow I continue to believe other articles in the same newspaper about subjects I know less well. Media and political bias are dividing our country and destroying lives. While we have not heard the entire trial, based on our assessment of Kyle on the stand, we believe that he will be found innocent by the jury.”
"Kyle Rittenhouse’s life is at risk. Justice demands a fair trial. Society would benefit greatly if politics did not enter the court room and convict innocent people."
...
"Just got a call from the media asking if my Twitter account was hacked. That is, the reporter couldn’t conceive of the idea that I could believe that Kyle is innocent because I am not a right winger. Crazy."
"Just got a call from the media asking if my Twitter account was hacked. That is, the reporter couldn’t conceive of the idea that I could believe that Kyle is innocent because I am not a right winger. Crazy."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Ackman#Philanthropy wrote:Ackman endorsed Michael Bloomberg as a prospective candidate for President of the United States in the 2016 presidential election.[86] He is a longtime donor to Democratic candidates and organizations, including Richard Blumenthal, Chuck Schumer, Robert Menendez, the Democratic National Committee, and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.[87]
Marionumber1 » 19 Nov 2021 07:39 wrote:
I am torn about the Kyle Rittenhouse case; while I see the merits of his side, I still doubt it's as clear-cut as the alt media is gleefully presenting it. He has a good case for self-defense, though it's reasonable to believe that all of his victims after Rosenbaum (and possibly Rosenbaum, though it is less certain) were going after him because they thought he was an active shooter, in which case they'd have had equally good cases for using deadly force against Rittenhouse. And I find it hard to believe that a Blue Lives Matter supporter brandishing a rather obvious rifle at this event was not in some way trying to send a message to protesters whom he clearly opposed. His known viewpoint of believing it's justified to shoot people over property theft suggests a willingness to kill people for lesser reasons than would justify self-defense, particularly "looters" who are of course associated with those who he opposes politically. Indeed, this shows he possesses a rather warped ideology of valuing property over human life. Obviously, evidence like this is prejudicial and was rightfully not part of the legal case over self defense, but in the broader sense of weighing Rittenhouse's actions, he's still pretty clearly an awful person who may (although it's likely unprovable) have come looking for a fight.
Other things about the case make me question if it was a black op of some kind, designed to inflame both sides of the political divide while ultimately culminating in a "crazed protesters/heroic young conservative" narrative. Given his Blue Lives Matter support, background as a police cadet, and ability to literally turn himself into police after the shootings yet be allowed to leave, I have wondered if Rittenhouse was a police agent of some kind. The dropping of the weapons charge, the most unequivocal thing against Rittenhouse in the trial, makes me feel like the fix continued to be in for him; there was seemingly a technicality in the law that benefited Rittenhouse, but the prosecutors should have been more vigilant in clarifying the law at an appellate court and the judge shouldn't have waited until the trial was basically over to suddenly drop his ruling. I also wonder about whether some of the alleged protesters were provocateurs. The first victim Joseph Rosenbaum being a convicted pedophile jumped out, as it seemed almost tailor-made to turn Rittenhouse into a heroic figure for killing him, and the association between intelligence operations and pedophiles is a long and storied one. I'd also want to find out more about Joshua Ziminski, who may well have instigated everything: he fired a gun in the air just before everything went down, and then, per Rittenhouse's testimony, egged Rosenbaum on to attack him, making me wonder if Ziminski had tried to deceive everyone in the protester crowd into believing Rittenhouse fired the first shot.
stickdog99 » 19 Nov 2021 09:55 wrote:Look, I don't think KR is blameless. But this is just one kid who did something stupid that definitely contributed to the deaths of 2 people who were also clearly not blameless.
So really, what is this single case supposed to prove?
I have slowly come to the conclusion that roughly 99% of the non-stories that our corporate media outlets try to hype are broadcast to keep the 99% fighting among themselves while the 1% continues to destroy our planet, to destroy our health, and to ratchet up their authoritarian control while robbing us all blind.
Anything story that would unify everyone, such as lowing prescription drug prices in the US, is totally ignored, while non-stories that can inflame and divide people, such as Kyle Rittenhouse's case and Dave Chappell's jokes are transgendered individuals are constantly hyped up.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests