Remove this Banner Ad

Society/Culture Kyle Rittenhouse

  • Thread starter Thread starter RedVest4
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Soft Downhill Skier said:
fu** me sideways.




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Click to expand...

This was just all about upholding the rule of law I seem to recall and not a right wing cause celebre as his defenders would have yet looky what we have here. Not that this wasn't sadly predictable.
 
Rittenhouse's actions might not have necessarily been the product of racist views, but they're certainly being celebrated, and profiteered, by racists.

And you're not seeing that be admonished by his defenders who took a special interest in this case because of "rule of law" or whatever shit they have come up with.

But it's not political for them though. It was only political when lefty snowflakes wanted him to face consequences for his actions.

Rittenhouse has effectively set himself up for life by killing two people. What a ****ed up world we live in.
 
Taylor said:
Juxtaposed against the person who drove the car through the Christmas parade.
Click to expand...
One loon running down people with a car and a bunch of racists gathering for a glorified KKK rally is a strange comparison.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Soft Downhill Skier said:
Might need to bump the posts admonishing others for ‘politicising’ an open and shut and shut self defence case.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Click to expand...

How has anything changed? Who cares if any political group is using him or the verdict for their benefit? Should the verdict have been different because of that?
 
scoman said:
How has anything changed? Who cares if any political group is using him or the verdict for their benefit? Should the verdict have been different because of that?
Click to expand...
In this thread there was shit all debate about whether or not he was guilty by the letter of the law, it was predominantly about whether or not he should face consequences for his actions.

And what have those consequences been? He's been lionised by political groups that are against the BLM movement, and is presumably set-up for life, because he killed 2 people participating in a social movement which threatens those political groups.

Continuing to try to move the debate back towards the application of the law is an awfully convenient way to avoid talking about those consequences, though.
 
SSwans2011 said:
In this thread there was sh*t all debate about whether or not he was guilty by the letter of the law, it was predominantly about whether or not he should face consequences for his actions.

And what have those consequences been?
Click to expand...
If he didn't break the law, what consequences do you want him to face? Imprisonment despite being found innocent? Vigilante justice? The kid's a hero mate.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

SSwans2011 said:
In this thread there was sh*t all debate about whether or not he was guilty by the letter of the law, it was predominantly about whether or not he should face consequences for his actions.

And what have those consequences been? He's been lionised by political groups that are against the BLM movement, and is presumably set-up for life, because he killed 2 people participating in a social movement which threatens those political groups.

Continuing to try to move the debate back towards the application of the law is an awfully convenient way to avoid talking about those consequences, though.
Click to expand...
I'd say there was lots of debate about it, because so much of the posting was conflating the legality of what happened with outrage fuelled by political persuasion.

Both things can be true - Rittenhouse was used by both extremes of politics for their own gain while having acted legally according to the laws of the day.

That one political side "won" and are now exploiting him is a related but separate issue.
 
ShanDog said:
I'd say there was lots of debate about it, because so much of the posting was conflating the legality of what happened with outrage fuelled by political persuasion.

Both things can be true - Rittenhouse was used by both extremes of politics for their own gain while having acted legally according to the laws of the day.

That one political side "won" and are now exploiting him is a related but separate issue.
Click to expand...

you forgot the russian and chinese trolls whose sole purpose is to create division in western society.

no doubt they’ve had a field day with this case.
 
Lethality said:
It wasn't too long ago that the same people were against Greta Thunberg being used for political purposes.
Click to expand...
Is the only similarity between the two that they are both 18 now?

One was thrust into the spotlight to be the figurehead for a movement and then any criticism of her was dismissed because you can't say that about a child, the other had a circumstance thrust upon them and then agitated by a media that was still spreading convenient mistruths for themselves that worked people up to make more content for them.

Again, the juxtaposition is the guy who drove his car through a Christmas parade and the Charlottesville car attack. Look into the background of both and ask why one was terrorism and one was an accident.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Taylor said:
he other had a circumstance thrust upon them and then agitated by a media that was still spreading convenient mistruths for themselves that worked people up to make more content for them.
Click to expand...

You could say the same about Greta. Climate change is a circumstance thrust upon her, and a lot of mistruths have been told by the media about that and about her.

Again, the juxtaposition is the guy who drove his car through a Christmas parade and the Charlottesville car attack. Look into the background of both and ask why one was terrorism and one was an accident.
Click to expand...

Darrell Brooks is being charged with many counts of homicide, and I think the media described it as more than an accident given his criminal history. Is there something political about his history that would make this an act of terror?
 
Lethality said:
You could say the same about Greta. Climate change is a circumstance thrust upon her, and a lot of mistruths have been told by the media about that and about her.
Click to expand...
She wasn't special in that though, what she was is chosen to spread a message because she was a child and would get media attention. Funded by external motivators.
Now that she is 18 I don't see her as much.

Lethality said:
Darrell Brooks is being charged with many counts of homicide, and I think the media described it as more than an accident given his criminal history. Is there something political about his history that would make this an act of terror?
Click to expand...
Prior to his social media being scrubbed he was full of black supremacy and aggressively anti-white content. Violently so. It's one of those ones where if the positions were reversed, the white guy running his car into the black people would be the biggest hate criminal ever.
 
Taylor said:
She wasn't special in that though, what she was is chosen to spread a message because she was a child and would get media attention. Funded by external motivators.
Now that she is 18 I don't see her as much.
Click to expand...

Activists are often not special, or self-funded. Maybe her youth is a problem because she might not know what she's talking about, but then why idolise the likese of Rittenhouse and his decision to bring an AR-15 to a protest?

Taylor said:
Prior to his social media being scrubbed he was full of black supremacy and aggressively anti-white content. Violently so. It's one of those ones where if the positions were reversed, the white guy running his car into the black people would be the biggest hate criminal ever.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Maybe his priors indicated that this was just his usual criminal behaviour.
 
Last edited:
Lethality said:
Activists are often not special, or self-funded. Maybe her youth is a problem because she might not know what she's talking about, but then why idolise the likese of Rittenhouse and his decision to bring an AR-15 to a protest?
Click to expand...
I don't think they are comparable.

I think one is a product of a machine and one was the attempted victim of another machine.

Both are problematic. Both are effectively used by bigger powers over bigger issues.

We have Hollywood people crying over child rapists dying because they are so anti gun.

The biggest issue though is how quick the media and political scene is to label white people as white supremacist, but don't carry the same standard for other racial groups as we discussed earlier.

It's almost like the whole fake narrative collapses.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom