LE Leaks show treatment of pro BLM protestors vs conservative militias
|
LE Leaks show treatment of pro BLM protestors vs conservative militias
|
07-21-2020, 03:46 PM
(07-21-2020, 09:32 AM)bfine32 Wrote: With that said I need the cliff notes on the case you and SSF are debating. Correct me where I'm wrong. Okay, here is where you are wrong. The CHOP security did not chase them down. The Jeep came at them and rammed a barricade. The Jeep was not fleeing or being chased by and CHOP security vehicle. It was attacking. 
07-21-2020, 03:56 PM
(07-21-2020, 03:46 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Okay, here is where you are wrong.Well that's different. But I do know your stance on folks passing barriers. Could we just classify this as the Jeep was just driving down a city street? ![[Image: bfine-guns2.png]](https://i.ibb.co/YBkDQJV/bfine-guns2.png) ![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png) 
07-21-2020, 03:56 PM
(07-21-2020, 03:46 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Okay, here is where you are wrong. This is not a known fact. You keep making definitive statements about things that are not know facts. Objection: Assuming facts not in evidence! Sustained! 
07-21-2020, 03:58 PM
(07-21-2020, 03:56 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This is not a known fact. You keep making definitive statements about things that are not know facts. Yeah, whichever way that goes; I'd amend my stance if the CHOP were currently under attack.
07-21-2020, 04:00 PM
(07-21-2020, 03:56 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This is not a known fact. You keep making definitive statements about things that are not know facts. Yeah, whichever way that goes makes a big difference in my book.
07-21-2020, 04:11 PM
(07-21-2020, 03:58 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Yeah, whichever way that goes; I'd amend my stance if the CHOP were currently under attack. What is a known fact is the CHOP "security" was actively searching for this car instead of calling police. It is also a known fact that the concrete barriers were put in place to isolate CHOP and hinder entrance and exit for vehicles. I don't think it's much of a stretch (not a fact mind you) to say that if CHOP "security" had not chased this Jeep down and that a barrier had not potentially prevented this Jeep from leaving the area then this shooting would not have occurred. I am very intrigued by the fact that none of our more left leaning friends have addressed the "Oh, you're still alive huh?" statement followed by a pause and then a single gun shot. That's a know fact (we have video and audio proof of) that they don't seem to want to discuss.
07-21-2020, 04:29 PM
(07-21-2020, 02:23 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Google is a thing, try using it. I'm not here to educate you on the basic facts of what happened at CHAZ/CHOP. If you want to engage on the subject educate yourself on the basic facts before attempting to do so. At the very least don't expect me to hold your hand through the process. Perhaps you are the one who needs to learn how to use GOOGLE. Here are a list of statements you made in this thread that were eaisly disproved by using GOOGLE. -You claimed that the only videos you ever saw of the Proud Boys acting violent were when someone else started the violence and they just acted in self defense. If you knew how to do an unbiased GOOGLE search you could easily fund multiple examples of the Proud boys starting fights, getting charged by the police with assault, and even getting convicted of assault. -You claimed that CHOP security admitted to murder on Twitter. Never happened. -You claimed no one other than CHOP security fired shots. No evidence to back this up at all. Plenty of video evidence of shots being fired from a vehicle (in fact some of this evidence was in a video YOU posted) -Claimed shots were fired from a Silver SUV instead of the white Jeep. Not true and no evidence t support this claim. -You claimed the guns were supplied by a "self-proclaimed War Lord". Never happened. -You claimed that CHOP security "hunted down" the vehicle involved on the drive by shooting. Not true at all. Plenty of evidence video showing the Jeep attacking by ramming a barricade. -You claimed that the only evidence of unidentified federal agents abducting people off the streets were "unverified claims" when there were multiple videos showing this type of action. -You claimed Federal law enforcement policy could not be Unconstitutional because it was vetted by lawyers, but on multiple occasions the Supreme Court has found policy of Federal Law enforcement to be unconstitutional. -And even though you have not provided any proof of allegations of "murder" by CHOP security you continue to claim they "murdered" people. You try to argue that the fact that people were killed proves "murder" even though a very basic use of GOOGLE will explain the difference between "homicide" and "murder". To use your own words...... please educate yourself about basic facts before attempting to pursue this topic further. I know I would appreciate it and I'm sure others reading the thread would as well. 
07-21-2020, 04:38 PM
(07-21-2020, 04:11 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: What is a known fact is the CHOP "security" was actively searching for this car instead of calling police. It is also a known fact that the concrete barriers were put in place to isolate CHOP and hinder entrance and exit for vehicles. I don't think it's much of a stretch (not a fact mind you) to say that if CHOP "security" had not chased this Jeep down and that a barrier had not potentially prevented this Jeep from leaving the area then this shooting would not have occurred. Thanks. I'll get spun up on the case better before continuing to reply; it's why I asked to show me where I was wrong. So questions I'll look to answer: Did the vehicle in question (white/silver) crash a barricade while entering to attack or while exiting. Who emplaced the barricades. What exactly the attack consisted of Where CHOP members fearful for their lives when they killed folks Did someone really say "You're not dead yet?" and fired again. Things I feel are resolved. RAaz issued guns to members of CHOP but disputes his moniker of Warlord. We should call him Top Chop. Either way it goes I cannot see how it doesn't scare folks on both sides and make them strive for more law enforcement, not less.
07-21-2020, 04:41 PM
07-21-2020, 04:42 PM
(07-21-2020, 04:41 PM)fredtoast Wrote: What facts are not in evidence. Are you saying the Jeep did not ram the barricade?My questions: Did they ram entering or exiting? Who put up the barricades?
07-21-2020, 04:43 PM
(07-21-2020, 04:29 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Perhaps you are the one who needs to learn how to use GOOGLE. Here are a list of statements you made in this thread that were eaisly disproved by using GOOGLE. How does using google disprove that I personally had never seen a video of this sort? Quote:-You claimed that CHOP security admitted to murder on Twitter. Never happened. They admitted they shot the occupants of the Jeep. Given the evidence it strongly appears that a murder was committed. Too bad they contaminated the crime scene, which is what innocent people tend to do, right? Quote:-You claimed no one other than CHOP security fired shots. No evidence to back this up at all. Plenty of video evidence of shots being fired from a vehicle (in fact some of this evidence was in a video YOU posted) Oh wait, now you have a problem with opinions being stated as facts? This thread is replete with you engaging in this exact same conduct. You are correct though, I should have said there is no evidence that anyone but CHOP "security" fired any shots. Quote:-Claimed shots were fired from a Silver SUV instead of the white Jeep. Not true and no evidence t support this claim. No evidence other than that reported by people in the CHOP. Quote:-You claimed the guns were supplied by a "self-proclaimed War Lord". Never happened. Yes, it did. Quote:-You claimed that CHOP security "hunted down" the vehicle involved on the drive by shooting. Not true at all. Plenty of evidence video showing the Jeep attacking by ramming a barricade. How does that preclude them from having hunted down the Jeep? See, when you actively pursue someone a synonym for this behavior would be hunting/hunted. Quote:-You claimed that the only evidence of unidentified federal agents abducting people off the streets were "unverified claims" when there were multiple videos showing this type of action. A demonstrably false statement on your part. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume this was an accidental falsehood on your part. if you believe otherwise, please supply proof. Quote:-You claimed Federal law enforcement policy could not be Unconstitutional because it was vetted by lawyers, but on multiple occasions the Supreme Court has found policy of Federal Law enforcement to be unconstitutional. A demonstrably false statement on your part. I'm starting to not be able to give you the benefit of the doubt. Quote:-And even though you have not provided any proof of allegations of "murder" by CHOP security you continue to claim they "murdered" people. You try to argue that the fact that people were killed proves "murder" even though a very basic use of GOOGLE will explain the difference between "homicide" and "murder". They did murder them. They hunted them down and enacted vigilante justice. This is not a fact in dispute. Quote:To use your own words...... please educate yourself about basic facts before attempting to pursue this topic further. I know I would appreciate it and I'm sure others reading the thread would as well. This entire post has been a personal attack, Fred. I am being courteous and responding in a calm and rational manner. Please know that further personal attacks by you (this entire post of yours is a clear violation of the ToS) will not be tolerated. Thank you.
07-21-2020, 04:50 PM
(07-21-2020, 04:11 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I am very intrigued by the fact that none of our more left leaning friends have addressed the "Oh, you're still alive huh?" statement followed by a pause and then a single gun shot. That's a know fact (we have video and audio proof of) that they don't seem to want to discuss. C'mon, man. This is getting ridiculous. Not once but TWICE Post #119 (07-20-2020, 01:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The comment about "You not dead yet" could simply mean some one in the jeep was still trying to aim a gun at someone. Post #156 (07-21-2020, 08:23 AM)fredtoast Wrote: And the "Oh you're still alive" comment may have come as a shooter was still trying to raise his gun.
07-21-2020, 04:53 PM
07-21-2020, 05:30 PM
(07-21-2020, 04:50 PM)fredtoast Wrote: C'mon, man. This is getting ridiculous. Maybe the victim said he couldn't breath. 
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media0.giphy.com/media/1kwsTjL8BNqlszNtnCE/giphy.gif) Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
07-21-2020, 08:22 PM
(07-21-2020, 04:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This entire post has been a personal attack, Fred. I am being courteous and responding in a calm and rational manner. Please know that further personal attacks by you (this entire post of yours is a clear violation of the ToS) will not be tolerated. Thank you. There is not a single personal attack in that enitre post. Every comment is from this thread, and all i discuss are the issues and facts presented in our discussion. If you can't tolerate someone pointing out when you have stated falshoods or failed to support any of your claims then I guess you will have to leave.
07-21-2020, 08:32 PM
(07-21-2020, 08:22 PM)fredtoast Wrote: There is not a single personal attack in that enitre post. Every comment is from this thread, and all i discuss are the issues and facts presented in our discussion. The entire post was an attack on me, not to mention that some of the assertions were outright falsehoods. Please do try and keep things cordial. Things are working much better now, don't contribute to ruining that.
07-21-2020, 08:47 PM
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
07-21-2020, 09:12 PM
(07-21-2020, 04:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: How does using google disprove that I personally had never seen a video of this sort? I never dispouted your claim that you had never seen such a video. All i did was say that the fact you have never seen such a video shows that you are incapable of doing a proper unbiased search on GOOGLE. (07-21-2020, 04:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: They admitted they shot the occupants of the Jeep. Lots of people admit to shooting people but deny murder. So you were wrong when you said they admitted to murder. The overwhelming majority of the evidence supports the claim that the guys in the jeep were the aggressors and the CHOP security killed them in self defense. But even if you disagree with the interpretation of the evidence yuo were 100% wrong t say they admitted to murder. (07-21-2020, 04:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Oh wait, now you have a problem with opinions being stated as facts? This thread is replete with you engaging in this exact same conduct. You are correct though, I should have said there is no evidence that anyone but CHOP "security" fired any shots. If I stated an opinion as fact then quote me. And there is TONS of evidence that shots were fired from the Jeep. Multiple videos of people claiming that there were shots fired from the Jeep. How can we eevn have a discussion if you refuse to admit that these videos I posted exist. (07-21-2020, 04:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: No evidence other than that reported by people in the CHOP. When? Where? I asked you to post your source for this claim but you refused. Instead YOU posted a story that said a silver SUV drove by "without incident". I can't find anything to support this claim of shots being fired from a differenbt vehicle. Bels mentioned something abu0t a claim that had been disproven, but I did not even see that. (07-21-2020, 04:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Yes, it did. No it did not. You even thanked Bels for pointing out that this claim was not true. The person who handed out the guns was not a "self-proclaimed War Lord". (07-21-2020, 04:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: How does that preclude them from having hunted down the Jeep? See, when you actively pursue someone a synonym for this behavior would be hunting/hunted. When someone attacks you that is not the same as you "huntng them down". When you used the term "hunting down" you were claiming that it nullified any claim of self defense. In order for that to be true the assailants would have to be fleeing. Instead they assaulted a barricade of the CHOP zone. They were not fleeing. They were attacking. They were not trying to escape. They were driving toward the people in the CHOP zone. (07-21-2020, 04:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: A demonstrably false statement on your part. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume this was an accidental falsehood on your part. if you believe otherwise, please supply proof. Here is your proof. Post number 102. You replied to this The US Attorney for the Oregon District on Friday requested an investigation into the masked, camouflaged federal authorities without identification badges who are arresting protesters in Portland. The request is aimed specifically at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) personnel who have been captured on various videos arresting protesters and putting them in unmarked SUVs. with this So, more of the same, personal statements held up as 100% factually accurate. (07-21-2020, 04:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: A demonstrably false statement on your part. I'm starting to not be able to give you the benefit of the doubt. Post #90 Policy is well vetted by legal experts before being approved, it would be very odd for something as blatantly unconstitutional as you are describing to make it past all those lawyers and be enshrined in policy. Post #127 Is federal law enforcement policy, which is heavily vetted by teams of lawyers before being implemented, likely to be blatantly unconstitutional? The answer to that will answer why I responded the way I did. (07-21-2020, 04:43 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: They did murder them. They hunted them down and enacted vigilante justice. This is not a fact in dispute. Actually this fact is in very much in dispute. The CHOP security did not "hunt down" the Jeep. Based on all the evidence the Jeep attacked them. There is tons of evidence that the guys in the Jeep were the aggressors and the CHOP security just acted in self defense. I posted the videos to back this up. Even the video YOU posted had people warning the CHOP residents of the shots from the Jeep before the Jeep rammed the barricade.
07-21-2020, 09:14 PM
07-21-2020, 09:20 PM
I'm going to cease this back and forth as it is not productive and you don't appear to want to engage in a good faith discussion, instead parsing hairs, (deliberately?) misinterpreting what was said or engaging in semantic arguments. I'll be happy to reengage when that ceases.
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
