3 ms·
We're in a topic about tear gas being used to attack protestors. You yourself opened up this thread by saying that tear gas isn't the right answer, so it doesn'
by mindslight 9mo ago
We're in a topic about tear gas being used to attack protestors. You yourself opened up this thread by saying that tear gas isn't the right answer, so it doesn't seem like you're denying this activity is happening. The only remaining angle I see is that you're claiming that the bulk of protestors who have been attacked were doing something illegal to prompt it? That is a tall claim, but I am of course open to evidence.
Because to me, it looks like you're merely doing whataboutism to the latest spectacle your media bubble is showing you. That you add "If that was actually happening, I would be opposed to it" is most concerning as it indicates how far your cognitive dissonance is able to be stretched.
- philwelch 9mo ago> We're in a topic about tear gas being used to attack protestors. You say protestors, I say rioters and organized physical resistance to legitimate law enforcement. If you think that’s a “tall claim” you’re the one in a media bubble.
- mindslight 9mo agoSo to be clear, you are claiming that every person at every protest where ICE has attacked the crowd was looking to actively physically impede law enforcement?
- philwelch 9mo agoThat’s never been the standard for riot control, but frankly I would be skeptical of anyone who was in the middle of a rioting mob who claimed they were minding their own business and playing candy crush on their phone.