Double Standard: Black/'woke' privilege compared to Patriots

[Failzero]

That you would label anybody entering the capitol building on J6 a terrorist but do not consider people who commit vandalism, arson, assaulting, murdering, blocking traffic, terrorizing home and business owners or just people trying to drive through an area to be terrorists.

1/6 Lasted Hours , The CHOP / CHAZ Midsommar of Love lasted almost a Year

 

[Foxfyre]

1/6 Lasted Hours , The CHOP / CHAZ Midsommar of Love lasted almost a Year

Yes. And while violence and/or vandalism of any kind is never defensible, Patriots killed or seriously injured nobody on J6. The BLM/ANTIFA riots killed, blinded, severely injured many including many police officers, at least 25 people were killed, billions of dollars of damage including one assault on the White House itself requiring Secret Service personnel and DC police to use riot gear to prevent the surging crowd from getting to the White House.

Had the D.C., Capitol Police, Secret Service been equally prepared as they should have been, there would have been no J6 protesters/idiots whatever entering the Capitol building that day.

 

[Failzero]

Yes. And while violence and/or vandalism of any kind is never defensible, Patriots killed or seriously injured nobody on J6. The BLM/ANTIFA riots killed, blinded, severely injured many including many police officers, at least 25 people were killed, billions of dollars of damage including one assault on the White House itself requiring Secret Service personnel and DC police to use riot gear to prevent the surging crowd from getting to the White House.

Had the D.C., Capitol Police, Secret Service been equally prepared as they should have been, there would have been no J6 protesters/idiots whatever entering the eds Capitol building that day.

Hundreds died in over 57 Cities unrest ( In direct ways related to the Civil Unrest )

 

[Foxfyre]

Hundreds died in over 57 Cities unrest ( In direct ways related to the Civil Unrest )

I'm sure that's possible. The number I mentioned are those who were shot, beaten or bludgeoned to death.

 

[IM2]

I don't agree, they both had reasons even if they were bad reasons. Also, when it crosses the line from peaceful protest to violence...no reason matters.

There was no stolen election Coyote. So there really was no reason for 1-6. I am not condoning the vandalism, but sometimes you do have to fight back against people wanting to harm you. The Floyd protests were tracked and that tracking shows that a lot of violence was instigated by people who support police killing blacks and they were looking for trouble.

.

 

[IM2]

Hundreds died in over 57 Cities unrest ( In direct ways related to the Civil Unrest )

BS.

 

[Coyote]

There was no stolen election Coyote. So there really was no reason for 1-6.

I agree, BUT people believed it, so that Is a reason even though wrong.

I am not condoning the vandalism, but sometimes you do have to fight back against people wanting to harm you. The Floyd protests were tracked and that tracking shows that a lot of violence was instigated by people who support police killing blacks and they were looking for trouble.

There were thousands of protests around the country most of which were peaceful but no one heard much about them because of that. I think the causes of the violence are varied. There are those taking advantage of a situation to steal, destroy, loot; there were outside groups who came in with their own agendas, and there outside agitators who instigated violence between factions so I get that. But if a movement decides that violence, destruction and looting are a valid means of “fighting back” they are likely to alienate a good many who would otherwise support their message.

 

[IM2]

I agree, BUT people believed it, so that Is a reason even though wrong.



There were thousands of protests around the country most of which were peaceful but no one heard much about them because of that. I think the causes of the violence are varied. There are those taking advantage of a situation to steal, destroy, loot; there were outside groups who came in with their own agendas, and there outside agitators who instigated violence between factions so I get that. But if a movement decides that violence, destruction and looting are a valid means of “fighting back” they are likely to alienate a good many who would otherwise support their message.

I stated that I did not condone the vandalism. What I was talking about was the physical confrontations started by right wing counte-rprotestors.

 

[Failzero]

I stated that I did not condone the vandalism. What I was talking about was the physical confrontations started by right wing counte-rprotestors.

What I was getting at was whole sections of Cities burned and people murdered and Police Stations sacked & Torched & Federal Courthouses blockaded and set alight with folks trapped inside ...

 

[Coyote]

That you would label anybody entering the capitol building on J6 a terrorist but do not consider people who commit vandalism, arson, assaulting, murdering, blocking traffic, terrorizing home and business owners or just people trying to drive through an area to be terrorists.

I think you missed what I've said, and have said repeatedly in multiple threads.

Not everyone who entered the Capitol that day is a terrorist (or even a rioter)...that is why many were let off with light penalties.

You had people who got carried away in the mob madness. They aren't terrorists. But in there you also had a cohort of people that PREPARED for violence and and organized with a specific goal in mind. They are terrorists.

In terms of the Floyd rioters..is every rioter a terrorist? No. There was no coordinated activity there. But that doesn't the destruction is somehow more a ceptable because they aren't terrorists. And, like J6, the Floyd protests and riots contained all kinds of people.

I don't see a double standard here.

But this is where I DO see a double standard.

When it comes to the Floyd protests, the majority were peaceful. IMO, those were legitimate protests. The moment they started destroying property, looting or laid a hand on a police officer, that changed and they lost lost their legitimacy. I fully support holding those acountable for their actions, and the arrests that followed.

The J6 protests. It started with a rally of thousands ... those people are peacefull protesters. A portion of them marched to the Capital. Again, peacefull protestors. Upon coming to the Capitol, the peaceful protestors stopped short of breaking in. Those that broke in lost their claim to being peaceful protesters and it was those who subsequently faced charges.

Here is where I see the double standard.
No one on the left called those who rioted "patriots".
No one on the left called jailed rioters "political prisoners".

Sure, there were bail and legal fee crowdfunding pleas, but so was there for the J6 rioters.



Double standard?

 

[Foxfyre]

I think you missed what I've said, and have said repeatedly in multiple threads.

Not everyone who entered the Capitol that day is a terrorist (or even a rioter)...that is why many were let off with light penalties.

You had people who got carried away in the mob madness. They aren't terrorists. But in there you also had a cohort of people that PREPARED for violence and and organized with a specific goal in mind. They are terrorists.

In terms of the Floyd rioters..is every rioter a terrorist? No. There was no coordinated activity there. But that doesn't the destruction is somehow more a ceptable because they aren't terrorists. And, like J6, the Floyd protests and riots contained all kinds of people.

I don't see a double standard here.

But this is where I DO see a double standard.

When it comes to the Floyd protests, the majority were peaceful. IMO, those were legitimate protests. The moment they started destroying property, looting or laid a hand on a police officer, that changed and they lost lost their legitimacy. I fully support holding those acountable for their actions, and the arrests that followed.

The J6 protests. It started with a rally of thousands ... those people are peacefull protesters. A portion of them marched to the Capital. Again, peacefull protestors. Upon coming to the Capitol, the peaceful protestors stopped short of breaking in. Those that broke in lost their claim to being peaceful protesters and it was those who subsequently faced charges.

Here is where I see the double standard.
No one on the left called those who rioted "patriots".
No one on the left called jailed rioters "political prisoners".

Sure, there were bail and legal fee crowdfunding pleas, but so was there for the J6 rioters.



Double standard?

And 99+% of Patriot rallies and protests are peaceful. That is immaterial in how the MSM, DOJ/FBI, Democrats in front of microphones and some others treat the two. Patriots denied bail--not so ANTIFA and BLM protesters. Patriots held in solitary confinement for months on end. Not so ANTIFA and BLM protesters. Patriots ravaged and demonized in the press and on social media. Not so BLM and ANTIFA protesters.

I think we may be arguing two different things here and we are unlikely to see this in the same way and that's okay. We can agree to disagree.

 

[Failzero]

And 99+% of Patriot rallies and protests are peaceful. That is immaterial in how the MSM, DOJ/FBI, Democrats in front of microphones and some others treat the two. Patriots denied bail--not so ANTIFA and BLM protesters. Patriots held in solitary confinement for months on end. Not so ANTIFA and BLM protesters. Patriots ravaged and demonized in the press and on social media. Not so BLM and ANTIFA protesters.

I think we may be arguing two different things here and we are unlikely to see this in the same way and that's okay. We can agree to disagree.

Not really , Far Left & Left use revisionist history and “ Their Truth over Facts “ to cement a narrative .

 

[Foxfyre]

Not really , Far Left & Left use revisionist history and “ Their Truth over Facts “ to cement a narrative .

Not all. They are rare, but there are a few leftists around who are capable of and do think critically.

In this case the J6 rally was 'terrorist' because some 'planned' to break the law. But that ignores all the social media communications etc. via BLM & ANTIFA, stacks/piles of bricks placed ahead of rallies, intent to disrupt traffic, etc.

Is vandalism, arson, assault, terrorist activity wrong no matter who does it? Absolutely. But to suggest J6 was somehow worse than the BLM/ANTIFA riots is really stretching point of view into absurdity.

 

[Foxfyre]

Not all. They are rare, but there are a few leftists around who are capable of and do think critically.

In this case the J6 rally was 'terrorist' because some 'planned' to break the law. But that ignores all the social media communications etc. via BLM & ANTIFA, stacks/piles of bricks placed ahead of rallies, intent to disrupt traffic, etc.

Is vandalism, arson, assault, terrorist activity wrong no matter who does it? Absolutely. But to suggest J6 was somehow worse than the BLM/ANTIFA riots is really stretching point of view into absurdity.