4 ms·

From your own source: > Numerous Secret Service agents were injured, fires set by rioters blazed near the White House and authorities were searching for car bo

by edbob 6y ago

From your own source: > Numerous Secret Service agents were injured, fires set by rioters blazed near the White House and authorities were searching for car bombs > The official initially put the number of agents injured at over 50, but that may have referred to the weekend toll; the Secret Service has since said the number injured on Sunday was 14. 50 people injured is a serious attack. It's interesting that leftists are allowed to continue their violent attacks for days, weeks, or months while right-wing movements are immediately suppressed. Yet we're supposed to be afraid of right-wing violence. Right.

BoorishBears 6y ago
You dodged the question with expert precision and ignored your very dishonest insinuation that this wasn't treated as a big deal. I linked multiple sources precisely to show it's your own fault you didn't know. No one hid or censored it.: > Does that sound like the scene at the Capitol where Congresspeople were hidden behind a makeshift barricade while an officer was forced to shoot a woman dead literal steps away from them? When even the Secret Service is referring to them as injuries at a demonstration and saying that despite the injuries (for which 11 people needed medical attention, none of them with life threatening injury) no protectees were ever in harms way... who are you to overrule them? - And are you seriously complaining that the movement that actually breached the Capitol was... immediately shut down? Are you daft? You think if the May protestors had actually gotten into the White House they'd just be fine? - The irony here is delicious, one group was fought tooth and nail from even entering the grounds of the White House. They were teargassed for even being on public property for a photo op! An old man was given a TBI that left him bleeding from the ears and unable to walk for trying to return a police helmet near the _stairs_ to a government building The other group literally walked into the Capitol and had cops taking selfies with them. And yet you want to paint the former group as having gotten off easy? It'd be funny if it wasn't so sad. Imagine trying to paint being against political violence as a partisan issue.
- edbob 6y ago
  I think you got me confused with someone else. I don't have any other comments in this thread. How can you honestly say "Imagine trying to paint being against political violence as a partisan issue." while doing absolutely everything you can to minimize and excuse left-wing violence?
  - BoorishBears 6y ago
    You read my comment before you replied right? You completely dodged the one thing that is actually asked of the reader and tried to jump over the fact this entire thread is based on insinuating an abject lie: that anyone downplayed the George Floyd protests or what happened on Pennsylvania Avenue in any way. - And how is saying that a successful breach of the Capitol Building while congress was trying to certify a new president that resulted in Congresspeople being subject to a clear and eminent danger... should naturally be a bigger deal than people the Secret Service of all organizations are saying never posed a threat... excusing the latter? It's saying call a spade a spade. Some people just can't handle that though. They need to act like it's not that big of a deal and the fact breaching the Capitol building tends to turn up the heat more than a group that never made it to the fence of the White House is a conspiracy. If you can't handle the heat, don't breech the Capitol with Congress in session.
    - tomp 6y ago
      Surely the biggest difference between successful breach of the Capitol and an unsuccessful attack on the White House is the defence? Clearly the attackers/rioters had malicious intent both times, clearly they very extremely violent. The only real difference is the success/failure of the security forces.
      - BoorishBears 6y ago
        That's one of the biggest differences, yes... did I imply otherwise? The other two are the trigger and the timing. The trigger being the President, and the timing, while Congress was in session trying to confirm the next President were what took it even further into the public consciousness.
jancsika 6y ago
> It's interesting that leftists are allowed to continue their violent attacks for days, weeks, or months while right-wing movements are immediately suppressed. Why the passive voice here? Who exactly is doing the "allowing?" From what I saw both Capitol police and Secret Service were doing the dual job of trying to de-escalate while securing the premises. The obvious difference is that a) there weren't enough Capitol police so the Capitol got breached, and b) we still don't know why that was nor who may have aided the trespassers in breaching it. That's the stuff of cheapo action movie plots. If there's a persuasive argument for believing group.chooseAtRandom() similarly breaching the White House wouldn't generate the same amount of outrage and fear, I haven't read it.

by edbob 6y ago

BoorishBears 6y ago

You dodged the question with expert precision and ignored your very dishonest insinuation that this wasn't treated as a big deal. I linked multiple sources precisely to show it's your own fault you didn't know. No one hid or censored it.: > Does that sound like the scene at the Capitol where Congresspeople were hidden behind a makeshift barricade while an officer was forced to shoot a woman dead literal steps away from them? When even the Secret Service is referring to them as injuries at a demonstration and saying that despite the injuries (for which 11 people needed medical attention, none of them with life threatening injury) no protectees were ever in harms way... who are you to overrule them? - And are you seriously complaining that the movement that actually breached the Capitol was... immediately shut down? Are you daft? You think if the May protestors had actually gotten into the White House they'd just be fine? - The irony here is delicious, one group was fought tooth and nail from even entering the grounds of the White House. They were teargassed for even being on public property for a photo op! An old man was given a TBI that left him bleeding from the ears and unable to walk for trying to return a police helmet near the _stairs_ to a government building The other group literally walked into the Capitol and had cops taking selfies with them. And yet you want to paint the former group as having gotten off easy? It'd be funny if it wasn't so sad. Imagine trying to paint being against political violence as a partisan issue.

edbob 6y ago
I think you got me confused with someone else. I don't have any other comments in this thread. How can you honestly say "Imagine trying to paint being against political violence as a partisan issue." while doing absolutely everything you can to minimize and excuse left-wing violence?
- BoorishBears 6y ago
  You read my comment before you replied right? You completely dodged the one thing that is actually asked of the reader and tried to jump over the fact this entire thread is based on insinuating an abject lie: that anyone downplayed the George Floyd protests or what happened on Pennsylvania Avenue in any way. - And how is saying that a successful breach of the Capitol Building while congress was trying to certify a new president that resulted in Congresspeople being subject to a clear and eminent danger... should naturally be a bigger deal than people the Secret Service of all organizations are saying never posed a threat... excusing the latter? It's saying call a spade a spade. Some people just can't handle that though. They need to act like it's not that big of a deal and the fact breaching the Capitol building tends to turn up the heat more than a group that never made it to the fence of the White House is a conspiracy. If you can't handle the heat, don't breech the Capitol with Congress in session.
  - tomp 6y ago
    Surely the biggest difference between successful breach of the Capitol and an unsuccessful attack on the White House is the defence? Clearly the attackers/rioters had malicious intent both times, clearly they very extremely violent. The only real difference is the success/failure of the security forces.
    - BoorishBears 6y ago
      That's one of the biggest differences, yes... did I imply otherwise? The other two are the trigger and the timing. The trigger being the President, and the timing, while Congress was in session trying to confirm the next President were what took it even further into the public consciousness.

jancsika 6y ago

> It's interesting that leftists are allowed to continue their violent attacks for days, weeks, or months while right-wing movements are immediately suppressed. Why the passive voice here? Who exactly is doing the "allowing?" From what I saw both Capitol police and Secret Service were doing the dual job of trying to de-escalate while securing the premises. The obvious difference is that a) there weren't enough Capitol police so the Capitol got breached, and b) we still don't know why that was nor who may have aided the trespassers in breaching it. That's the stuff of cheapo action movie plots. If there's a persuasive argument for believing group.chooseAtRandom() similarly breaching the White House wouldn't generate the same amount of outrage and fear, I haven't read it.