What's the opposite of "Owning the Libs"?

  • JS
  • JS's Avatar
  • User is blocked
  • User is blocked
More
1 week 5 days ago #11 by JS
FBI Seeking Information Related to Violent Activity at the U.S Capitol Building

The FBI is seeking information that will assist in identifying individuals who are actively instigating violence in Washington, DC. The FBI is accepting tips and digital media depicting rioting and violence in the U.S. Capitol Building and surrounding area in Washington, DC, on January 6, 2021.

tips.fbi.gov/digitalmedia/aad18481a3e8f02

Seriously, the FBI does not know who instigated the violence when the only one who benefited from it is Don the Con?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 week 5 days ago #12 by dst11

golan wrote: Also shocking is the lack of arrests after law enforcement got control of the situation. ... Everybody who went past security barriers should have been arrested, searched, investigated and charged as appropriate.

Those actions are for left wing protesters only. Compare Minneapolis or Portland to Washington or Lansing.
The following user(s) said Thank You: jamielih

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 week 5 days ago #13 by dst11

JS wrote: The FBI is seeking information that will assist in identifying individuals who are actively instigating violence in Washington, DC.

The hypocrisy is so thick you need a tank to pass through it.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 week 5 days ago #14 by Isamorph
"We spend $750 billion annually on "defense" and the center of American government fell in two hours to the duck dynasty and the guy in the chewbacca bikini"

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 week 5 days ago #15 by jamielih
I believe it took a physical threat to the person in order for some congresspersons to adjust their tune..

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 week 5 days ago - 1 week 5 days ago #16 by rolandh

JS wrote: FBI Seeking Information Related to Violent Activity at the U.S Capitol Building

Seriously, the FBI does not know who instigated the violence...



 

Seriously, in the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombing some seven plus years ago now, the FBI released photos of the two suspects (brothers) asking for the public's help in identifying them. This was three days after the fact. As it turns out, the older brother was or should have been known to federal law enforcement if not the FBI specifically. I happen to have grown up in Watertown, Massachsetts just outside of Boston and where the older brother was killed and the younger captured. It was every bit as surreal as what I watched yesterday watchng that small town placed under essentially albeit necessary military occupation while the younger brother was located.

In no way am I attempting to excuse what happened yesterday or those who played a role in inciting it. Nevertheless, it's been said "never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity" (a/k/a Hanlon's razor). The preceding presumes one is referring to the mob itself. If one is referring to President Trump (and sadly he does remain in office), what he said when speaking to the mob may or may not rise to the level of the legal definition of incitement. I'm content to leave that judgement to legal scholars of which I'm not one nor have I seen any here. Morally, there's no question of his guilt.

Rather obviously, what I wrote in my intial post to this thread was overtaken by yesterday's deplorble events. That said, it appears American democracy has survived. I'll conclude by reiterating my point that it's time to scale back the overheated rhetoric and relearn the skill of being able to disagree without being disagreeable.
The following user(s) said Thank You: KentE

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 week 5 days ago #17 by KentE

rolandh wrote: ... disagree without being disagreeable.
 

This struck a chord with me:  Although I don't see it in the current version of the Forum Rules, I know that this is one of the guiding principals espoused by our forum host, Hungryghost.   I liked it when HG first voiced it, and I like it now.
 
The following user(s) said Thank You: rolandh

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • golan
  • golan's Avatar Topic Author
  • User is blocked
  • User is blocked
More
1 week 4 days ago - 1 week 4 days ago #18 by golan

rolandh wrote:

 it's time to scale back the overheated rhetoric and relearn the skill of being able to disagree without being disagreeable.

Can you be more specific about how someone can disagree about an attempted violent coup without being disagreeable to those who support the coup?

Maybe an example can help: Here is what Liz Cheney and AG Bill Barr have said:

Liz Cheney: We just had a violent mob assault the Capitol in an attempt to prevent those from carrying out our Constitutional duty. There is no question that the President formed the mob, the President incited the mob, the President addressed the mob. He lit the flame.

AG Bill Barr: AP: Former Attorney General William Barr says President Donald Trump's conduct as a violent mob of his supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol was a "betrayal of his office and supporters." Barr said Thursday that "orchestrating a mob to pressure Congress is inexcusable."

Some of the responses to this were that they are traitors. It seems that supporters of the coup found their comments "disagreeable".

So was it up to Liz Cheney and AG Bill Barr to have framed what they said in a less disagreeable way so that the feelings of the coup supporters would have been spared?
The following user(s) said Thank You: KentE, uhthisb

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • JS
  • JS's Avatar
  • User is blocked
  • User is blocked
More
1 week 4 days ago #19 by JS
Everybody knows Don the Con is a worthless ignorant lying piece of crap. Republicans party officials knows this. His current and former cabinet members know. His employees know. Faux News, Newsmax, and OAN all know that as well. Yet, everyone of them have supported and propped up his ego. What, the country's democracy is worth less than stroking a con man's ego?

Everyone of those outlets say nothing when he basically makes nonsense crap up which ultimatelly demonstrates and reinforces the fact that he is a moron.

When is Don the Con ever going to be accountable for anything he says or does? How many people have required personal security because the con man is so insecure that he has to insult them? For instance, Don the Con hated Dr. Fauci because Fauci was more popular than he was. So, Dr. Fauci ended up needing protection. Don the Con has incited his brainless mob to harass government officials, former cabinet members, election workers, and who knows how many more groups of people.

Anybody else who is responsible for the non-stop instigating of death threats would be in jail by now. For Don the Con, he somehow gets a never-ending free pass. Worse of course is the fact that there are nutcases who worship him. Something is definitely wrong here. We as a group must figure out why it was allowed to continue for so long and fix it so nobody in the future (who is actually competent) can repeat the playbook and destroy our democracy.
The following user(s) said Thank You: golan

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 week 4 days ago - 1 week 4 days ago #20 by rolandh

golan wrote:

rolandh wrote:

 it's time to scale back the overheated rhetoric and relearn the skill of being able to disagree without being disagreeable.

Can you be more specific about how someone can disagree about an attempted violent coup without being disagreeable to those who support the coup?

Maybe an example can help: Here is what Liz Cheney and AG Bill Barr have said:

Liz Cheney: We just had a violent mob assault the Capitol in an attempt to prevent those from carrying out our Constitutional duty. There is no question that the President formed the mob, the President incited the mob, the President addressed the mob. He lit the flame.

AG Bill Barr: AP: Former Attorney General William Barr says President Donald Trump's conduct as a violent mob of his supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol was a "betrayal of his office and supporters." Barr said Thursday that "orchestrating a mob to pressure Congress is inexcusable."

Some of the responses to this were that they are traitors. It seems that supporters of the coup found their comments "disagreeable".

So was it up to Liz Cheney and AG Bill Barr to have framed what they said in a less disagreeable way so that the feelings of the coup supporters would have been spared?



 

No one and certainly not I suggested one should avoid hurtng the feelings of those who would engage in insurrection. I suspect you know that but just enjoy being provocative. You created this thread prior to yesterday's events. My initial post in the thread was also prior to yesterday's events.

When I say it would be best to tone down the rhetoric, I was and am talking about moving forward. As deplorable as yesterday's events were, they failed. They failed because though challenged our institutions held. That is something all Americans should be able celebrate. Alas, if we're unable to get past despising one another (and again to be clear I'm not talking about insrectionists), I don't see how that happens. What many fail to appreciate is Trump is as much symptom of our sick political culture as cause. Yes, he poured gasoline on every available fire but the fires were already there and have been for some time.

This will likely be my last post in this topic. I'm looking for less diviseness not more.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.