AgTalk Home
AgTalk Home
Search Forums | Classifieds (118) | Skins | Language
You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )

So if you would bring a gun to a riot for protection
View previous thread :: View next thread
   Forums List -> AgTalk CafeMessage format
 
WYDave
Posted 11/21/2021 09:10 (#9332393 - in reply to #9332336)
Subject: RE: gray, lot's not mentioned


Wyoming

Lots of people didn't and don't want to examine the actual facts of the case. This is why some people are hyperventilating over the verdict. I see the head of the NAACP calling this decision "worse than Emmitt Till" (despite the fact that there were no black men involved), I see lots of liberals hyperventilating about "racism" in this case (despite the fact that everyone involved was, uh, white), I see lots of people ignoring the fact that the gun never crossed state lines, or where Rittenhouse started out, etc, etc.

All of these falsehoods were supplied by the news media.

And yet, people continue to believe anything else they see on the news media - about COVID, politics, economic issues, whatever.

What people need to realize about the news media is that the vast majority of reporters today are mental children - they're not even as smart or self-aware as teenagers. The typical media writer is white, female and has a mental age of 12 or so. They're graduates of worthless colleges with worthless degrees, who know literally nothing about anything substantive and/or tangible. On top of that, much of what people read is "curated" by outfits like Facebook, who we know is in the business of spreading falsehoods and censoring content to their gullible users. 

People who should know better (ie, the rest of American citizenry) continue to listen to these twerps.

Stop doing that.

If you wanted to find out the facts of the Ritttenhouse case, all you had to do was watch the trial. In a trial, you can expect the facts that will matter will be brought out - at $250 to $1000 per hour of court time, paid by the defendant.  If you had watched the trial, you'd have learned that almost everything you saw or heard in the press was false. That's why the jury voted to acquit - the facts, as actually established in court (often by the prosecution, in epic moments of bolstering the defense's case), are at wide variance with what has been reported in the press.

There are actual newspapers in the UK that have reported, even after the trial, that Rittenhouse shot three black men. 

Top of the page Bottom of the page


Jump to forum :
Search this forum
Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread

(Delete cookies)