Another Incident in Portland

[lil devils x]

Classic, though. Underdog always gets sympathy, and it's a number's game.

Um what? I don't think it is about sympathy here, it was about accuracy of the statement of a " far bigger problem" when you put it in perspective here.
Just reading through this thread, I am not seeing anyone give the murderer sympathy, or even refer to it the way the right has attempted to justify right wing extremists murdering people. It is if you are going to make a statement that there is " a far bigger problem brewing" while ignoring the actual far bigger problem that is actually brewing according to every US intelligence agency, you should be called out for it being inaccurate.

Innocent civilians being murdered are not " underdogs" in a fight. They are victims of an atrocity.

 

[Seanchaidh]

>Justifying murders as "'we' haven't killed nearly as many as 'they' have!"

We have a president who is signalling that he wants to use troops to kill protesters.

 

[Iron]

Um what? I don't think it is about sympathy here, it was about accuracy of the statement of a " far bigger problem" when you put it in perspective here.
Just reading through this thread, I am not seeing anyone give the murderer sympathy, or even refer to it the way the right has attempted to justify right wing extremists murdering people. It is if you are going to make a statement that there is " a far bigger problem brewing" while ignoring the actual far bigger problem that is actually brewing according to every US intelligence agency, you should be called out for it being inaccurate.

Innocent civilians being murdered are not " underdogs" in a fight. They are victims of an atrocity.

Yeah, you're right. On second thought, whatever I said was not relevant. I said it in general.

 

[Revnak]

>Justifying murders as "'we' haven't killed nearly as many as 'they' have!"

I’m sorry, would you rather I wear a shirt calling a shooter a hero and spend twenty thousand words inventing a defense for him?

 

[Iron]

We have a president who is signalling that he wants to use troops to kill protesters.

They're not protestors if they're insurrectionists.

 

[Dreiko]

Um what? I don't think it is about sympathy here, it was about accuracy of the statement of a " far bigger problem" when you put it in perspective here.
Just reading through this thread, I am not seeing anyone give the murderer sympathy, or even refer to it the way the right has attempted to justify right wing extremists murdering people. It is if you are going to make a statement that there is " a far bigger problem brewing" while ignoring the actual far bigger problem that is actually brewing according to every US intelligence agency, you should be called out for it being inaccurate.

Innocent civilians being murdered are not " underdogs" in a fight. They are victims of an atrocity.

I think the reason is about who is the aggressor. In this case the dead didn't have a gun to fire back with so he died, but in both cases the aggressor came from the same side.

So yeah, lets say the guy with the mace had a gun and shot at the guy who shot the mace off his hand before he could kill his friend, would he be celebrated as a hero who saved a life from an imminent atrocity? Or would people be trying to paint him as the evil one? Does someone need to die for people to admit shooting back is justifiable? Shouldn't just the risk of someone dying be sufficient, considering we do not have future-sight?


In both cases, the wrong side is the one that escalates from shouting, disagreement, blustering and provocation to literal violence.

 

[Trunkage]

I mean 4chan have been outright wrong less times than an MSM sites has blamed Same Hyde for a Mass shooting so far.

Is the average user on 4chan a good investigator / journalist?

 

[lil devils x]

I think the reason is about who is the aggressor. In this case the dead didn't have a gun to fire back with so he died, but in both cases the aggressor came from the same side.

So yeah, lets say the guy with the mace had a gun and shot at the guy who shot the mace off his hand before he could kill his friend, would he be celebrated as a hero who saved a life from an imminent atrocity? Or would people be trying to paint him as the evil one? Does someone need to die for people to admit shooting back is justifiable? Shouldn't just the risk of someone dying be sufficient, considering we do not have future-sight?


In both cases, the wrong side is the one that escalates from shouting, disagreement, blustering and provocation to literal violence.

The dead guy having a gun wouldn't have helped the situation. If he was already shot he likely wouldn't have been firing back properly anyhow so the entire statement "In this case the dead didn't have a gun to fire back with so he died" is nonsense. He would have died regardless of having a gun and him dying has no impact on him having a gun. It is a stupid statement that no one should repeat ever.

If the shooter had been trying to shoot the mace can like you stated earlier, he could have just been a dumbass who didn't think about what else would happen when he hit the can and not intentionally trying to kill anyone. It doesn't change the fact that he murdered that guy regardless. Your not going to " shoot the guy who shot the mace can" RL doesn't work like that. He already shot him, having another gun doesn't change that fact. He was already shot and going to die either way. All adding another gun to the mix is once a guy is shot he is going to suck at being able to hit whatever he is trying to shoot and more likely to shoot innocent bystanders instead.. The person who is doing the initial shooting is ALWAYS going to have the upper hand. That is why this idea that good guys with guns are the solution to bad guys with guns is so fucking stupid in the first place. People are always going to be dead first in that scenario so that is pointless.

EDIT: Also I am not seeing anyone here have sympathy for either party in this really. The guy macing people was the aggressor right? Regardless he still didn't need to be murdered even if it was a dumbass attempt at shooting a can that caused it. Evil paints itself, it doesn't need to be painted for them.

 

[Iron]

Is the average user on 4chan a good investigator / journalist?

Even since CNN blackmailed a dude for a meme I can't take journalists seriously.
I'd trust the ****** at /pol/ more than journalists.

 

[Trunkage]

Even since CNN blackmailed a dude for a meme I can't take journalists seriously.
I'd trust the ****** at /pol/ more than journalists.

So all journalists are bad?

 

[Iron]

So all journalists are bad?

Real journalists die in a car bomb in Malta.
Modern "Journalists" are glorified bloggers googling stuff. I can do it myself. They should learn how to code when they lose their jobs.

 

[Trunkage]

Real journalists die in a car bomb in Malta.
Modern "Journalists" are glorified bloggers googling stuff. I can do it myself. They should learn how to code when they lose their jobs.

I mean, journalist have always been that way. Eg. Yellow journalism was just journalist being propagandist for Capitalism way more than what they do now. The news regularly lied about the Civil Rghts movement and particularly minorities which sent many of them to jail. News I'm gnd 80s just plain lied for Reagan regularly. Journalists are way less biased than what they used to be. (I'm not saying they aren't biased, it's a spectrum)

I know that 2003 was the biggest turning point for US media. Finally all the lies caught up to the media. I do think some chaners have more integrity that the average journalist. But the average journalist has more integrity than a 4chaner

 

[Iron]

I mean, journalist have always been that way. Eg. Yellow journalism was just journalist being propagandist for Capitalism way more than what they do now. The news regularly lied about the Civil Rghts movement and particularly minorities which sent many of them to jail. News I'm gnd 80s just plain lied for Reagan regularly. Journalists are way less biased than what they used to be. (I'm not saying they aren't biased, it's a spectrum)

I know that 2003 was the biggest turning point for US media. Finally all the lies caught up to the media. I do think some chaners have more integrity that the average journalist. But the average journalist has more integrity than a 4chaner

True. You need to write what sells otherwise you can't keep the newspaper running. Technology changed it.
They're (establishment media) trying to fight back, and the degradation of youtube is shining example of it. EE, the aussie youtuber, is fighting the good fight in his corner of the world against traditional media.
I honestly believe many of those journalists, especially in the DC and NYC swaps, know each other and have their own cliques. They'd be gatekeeping the profession and making sure the 'right people' got employed.
Those big media corporations fired and removed any dissent for the Invasion of Iraq. They were in on the whole game.

 

[Revnak]

Real journalists die in a car bomb in Malta.
Modern "Journalists" are glorified bloggers googling stuff. I can do it myself. They should learn how to code when they lose their jobs.

Well there are still actual war journalists and the like, they tend to be the most disdained for their political biases due to the bias one develops from being shot at. Also they don’t get money because Americans don’t care about foreign wars.

 

[Iron]

Well there are still actual war journalists and the like, they tend to be the most disdained for their political biases due to the bias one develops from being shot at. Also they don’t get money because Americans don’t care about foreign wars.

I don't understand this sentence - "Also they don’t get money because Americans don’t care about foreign wars."
Can you elaborate

 

[Seanchaidh]

They're not protestors if they're insurrectionists.
View attachment 687

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Does the shooter eat soy or something? WTF?

It's a newish bizarre insult. Hippy lefty weedy types drink soy milk. Real men drink milk, cause milk is white (wink wink) and they aren't lactose intolerant because that's more likely in certain ethnicities.

Also, soy rhymes with boy, so "soy boy" is almost catchy.

 

[Revnak]

I don't understand this sentence - "Also they don’t get money because Americans don’t care about foreign wars."
Can you elaborate

Sure, Americans don’t care about what’s happening outside of America. If there’s a war going on, even if America is involved, most only care for a couple seconds to file it into “good” or “bad” columns then move on until something happens to make them reconsider.
If I were to be more analytical, it’s more that accurately covering conflicts doesn’t easily fit in the culture war swamp that major news networks get all their money from. There’s rarely an absolute villain and hero when looked at closely, so you can’t grant the moral catharsis that cable news is meant to.

 

[Iron]

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable.

War in the Vendée - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Drownings at Nantes - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Liberte, Egalite, Fratenite.
Revolution to the people, but not to the people that oppose me, they need to die.

The Gulag Archipelago - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Free the Worker!
Unless they oppose the revolution, then we send them to the gulag.


Go make a violent revolution.

 

[Gergar12]

And now someone on the right-wing got shot and killed by an Anti-fascist. We are officially shooting each other.

In terms of races, this is basically a proxy war between African Americans, class-conscious Caucasians vs right-wing Caucasians.

Whoever wins the election will have to deal with a crisis.

If Biden wins we will face an onslaught of right-wing protests and agitation convoys in liberal cities, and if Trump wins there will be even more protests with a minority being riots.

It's like the 1960s.