Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?
-
@george-k said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
Who shot her?
What was the justification?
Why has the name of the shooter not been released?Who shot her? Someone in law enforcement while in the line of duty. But we knew that already.
What was the justification? She was a part of an unlawful mob that was rampaging through the Capitol Bldg vandalizing property and, apparently, threatening the Vice President and other elected officials. Whether she was armed or not is irrelevant.
Name of the shooter? Can't tell you. But if it was a Secret Service agent who fired the shot, we do not have a need to know, now do we?
-
@george-k said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
Who shot her?
What was the justification?
Why has the name of the shooter not been released?Who shot her? Someone in law enforcement while in the line of duty. But we knew that already.
What was the justification? She was a part of an unlawful mob that was rampaging through the Capitol Bldg vandalizing property and, apparently, threatening the Vice President and other elected officials. Whether she was armed or not is irrelevant.
Name of the shooter? Can't tell you. But if it was a Secret Service agent who fired the shot, we do not have a need to know, now do we?
@renauda said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
Who shot her? Someone in law enforcement while in the line of duty. But we knew that already.
What was the justification?There are very high standards for a LEO shooting someone. Watch the video, and explain the imminent threat to life that this unnamed officer experienced. "In the line of duty" is a wide brush. By that standard, a cop who stops a DUI is entitled to shoot.
apparently, threatening the Vice President and other elected officials.
Did the mob do that? Perhaps. Did SHE? You'll have to prove it. Good luck.
vandalizing property
The statues of Andrew Jackson, Jefferson Davis, and the courthouse in Portland would weep, if they could.
Whether she was armed or not is irrelevant.
No. It is precisely relevant. If she is unarmed, she poses no immediate threat to the officer who shot her. That's the standard in the US. The Canadian standard might be different, and I'd love to learn of what is a justified shooting by Canadian police.
Name of the shooter? Can't tell you.
Yup. And yet, the names of all the police officers who encountered and killed ARMED protestors are all over the media. Why is that?
That's another rhetorical question.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
Zero deaths. Exploding during night hours. I’d say the January 6th attack, invasion, insurrection...much worse. Plus a few deaths, too.
-
@george-k said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
Who shot her?
What was the justification?
Why has the name of the shooter not been released?Who shot her? Someone in law enforcement while in the line of duty. But we knew that already.
What was the justification? She was a part of an unlawful mob that was rampaging through the Capitol Bldg vandalizing property and, apparently, threatening the Vice President and other elected officials. Whether she was armed or not is irrelevant.
Name of the shooter? Can't tell you. But if it was a Secret Service agent who fired the shot, we do not have a need to know, now do we?
@renauda said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
@george-k said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
Who shot her?
What was the justification?
Why has the name of the shooter not been released?Who shot her? Someone in law enforcement while in the line of duty. But we knew that already.
What was the justification? She was a part of an unlawful mob that was rampaging through the Capitol Bldg vandalizing property and, apparently, threatening the Vice President and other elected officials. Whether she was armed or not is irrelevant.
Name of the shooter? Can't tell you. But if it was a Secret Service agent who fired the shot, we do not have a need to know, now do we?
I was with you until the anonymous shooter part.
You can't kill an American citizen even in a line of duty legal shooting and remain anonymous.
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
If you name Secret Service agents, then it's not a very secret service, is it?
To be honest, I'm surprised more of these knobheads weren't killed. The idea that you can go rampaging through government buildings acting like a total cock seemed to be fairly commonplace among them. In a number of countries, there'd have been considerably more use of government weaponry to combat these cretins.
-
Honestly the attempts to minimize and resort to whattaboutism are ultimately a type of wagon circling or weak defense.
It’s pretty liberating to just be able to criticize these guys the way they deserve without any “buts” or “it just thats” added on.
Think back to people ‘contextualizing’ 9/11 or comparing it to this or that US led attack from history.
“I fully condemn the attacks on the trade center, but whattabout Iran in 1956...”.
“I don’t support the attacks on NY and the Pentagon, it’s just that...”
You were warned.
-
IRA apologists occasionally used to talk about the atrocities committed by Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658)
-
@renauda said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
Who shot her? Someone in law enforcement while in the line of duty. But we knew that already.
What was the justification?There are very high standards for a LEO shooting someone. Watch the video, and explain the imminent threat to life that this unnamed officer experienced. "In the line of duty" is a wide brush. By that standard, a cop who stops a DUI is entitled to shoot.
apparently, threatening the Vice President and other elected officials.
Did the mob do that? Perhaps. Did SHE? You'll have to prove it. Good luck.
vandalizing property
The statues of Andrew Jackson, Jefferson Davis, and the courthouse in Portland would weep, if they could.
Whether she was armed or not is irrelevant.
No. It is precisely relevant. If she is unarmed, she poses no immediate threat to the officer who shot her. That's the standard in the US. The Canadian standard might be different, and I'd love to learn of what is a justified shooting by Canadian police.
Name of the shooter? Can't tell you.
Yup. And yet, the names of all the police officers who encountered and killed ARMED protestors are all over the media. Why is that?
That's another rhetorical question.
@george-k said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
Whether she was armed or not is irrelevant.
No. It is precisely relevant. If she is unarmed, she poses no immediate threat to the officer who shot her. That's the standard in the US. The Canadian standard might be different, and I'd love to learn of what is a justified shooting by Canadian police.
To be honest I do not know what the standard is here. I can ask though, a very close friend of mine is retired from the Calgary Police Force and served on the tactical unit and riot squad for several years.
I do know however, that people personnel on what we call the Integrated Intelligence Unit which is made up of select RCMP, municipal police, Military and CSIS would remain anonymous in the event they were ever engaged in a similar fracas and shooting that occurred in the Capitol that day.
-
@renauda said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
@george-k said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
Who shot her?
What was the justification?
Why has the name of the shooter not been released?Who shot her? Someone in law enforcement while in the line of duty. But we knew that already.
What was the justification? She was a part of an unlawful mob that was rampaging through the Capitol Bldg vandalizing property and, apparently, threatening the Vice President and other elected officials. Whether she was armed or not is irrelevant.
Name of the shooter? Can't tell you. But if it was a Secret Service agent who fired the shot, we do not have a need to know, now do we?
I was with you until the anonymous shooter part.
You can't kill an American citizen even in a line of duty legal shooting and remain anonymous.
@jolly said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
@renauda said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
@george-k said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
Who shot her?
What was the justification?
Why has the name of the shooter not been released?Who shot her? Someone in law enforcement while in the line of duty. But we knew that already.
What was the justification? She was a part of an unlawful mob that was rampaging through the Capitol Bldg vandalizing property and, apparently, threatening the Vice President and other elected officials. Whether she was armed or not is irrelevant.
Name of the shooter? Can't tell you. But if it was a Secret Service agent who fired the shot, we do not have a need to know, now do we?
I was with you until the anonymous shooter part.
You can't kill an American citizen even in a line of duty legal shooting and remain anonymous.
so do you have need to know? And if so what is it?
Elbows up!
-
Honestly the attempts to minimize and resort to whattaboutism are ultimately a type of wagon circling or weak defense.
It’s pretty liberating to just be able to criticize these guys the way they deserve without any “buts” or “it just thats” added on.
Think back to people ‘contextualizing’ 9/11 or comparing it to this or that US led attack from history.
“I fully condemn the attacks on the trade center, but whattabout Iran in 1956...”.
“I don’t support the attacks on NY and the Pentagon, it’s just that...”
@jon-nyc said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
Honestly the attempts to minimize and resort to whattaboutism are ultimately a type of wagon circling or weak defense.
https://www.idiomsandslang.com/circle-the-wagons/
No one here is defending these asshats.
No one.
What I am doing is criticizing all those who defended (no one here, afaik) or at least ignored the violence that killed more people and destroyed more property, governmental and public, than occurred on Jan 6.
And killed people.
By targeted acts.
Your effort at painting me as a defender of these clowns is misguided at best, and dishonest at worst.
Remember "Occupy Wall Street?" I remember you coming out against that group of idiots. But, they didn't burn police stations, churches and private businesses. They set up stupid drum circles and were annoying at best. This summer, driving through my suburbs, I didn't see drum circles. I saw boarded-up liquor stores and other businesses.
And yet, those asshats were encouraged by our betters in the media and government. VP Harris: "They SHOULD continue."
So, yeah, it's whataboutism.
Whataboutism is all about calling out hypocrisy. And I fail to see that calling-out occur by the likes of Harris, Biden, and Jerry "It's just an idea" Nadler.
So spare me the outrage.
Whatever capital was supposedly earned on January 6th was rendered non-negotiable during the summer.
-
@jolly said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
@renauda said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
@george-k said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
Who shot her?
What was the justification?
Why has the name of the shooter not been released?Who shot her? Someone in law enforcement while in the line of duty. But we knew that already.
What was the justification? She was a part of an unlawful mob that was rampaging through the Capitol Bldg vandalizing property and, apparently, threatening the Vice President and other elected officials. Whether she was armed or not is irrelevant.
Name of the shooter? Can't tell you. But if it was a Secret Service agent who fired the shot, we do not have a need to know, now do we?
I was with you until the anonymous shooter part.
You can't kill an American citizen even in a line of duty legal shooting and remain anonymous.
so do you have need to know? And if so what is it?
@renauda said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
@jolly said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
@renauda said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
@george-k said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
Who shot her?
What was the justification?
Why has the name of the shooter not been released?Who shot her? Someone in law enforcement while in the line of duty. But we knew that already.
What was the justification? She was a part of an unlawful mob that was rampaging through the Capitol Bldg vandalizing property and, apparently, threatening the Vice President and other elected officials. Whether she was armed or not is irrelevant.
Name of the shooter? Can't tell you. But if it was a Secret Service agent who fired the shot, we do not have a need to know, now do we?
I was with you until the anonymous shooter part.
You can't kill an American citizen even in a line of duty legal shooting and remain anonymous.
so do you have need to know? And if so what is it?
Yes, I have a need to know, as does the general public. Just because you are Secret Service (and we really don't know) does not mean you can discharge your weapon without an investigation.
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
Honestly the attempts to minimize and resort to whattaboutism are ultimately a type of wagon circling or weak defense.
It’s pretty liberating to just be able to criticize these guys the way they deserve without any “buts” or “it just thats” added on.
Think back to people ‘contextualizing’ 9/11 or comparing it to this or that US led attack from history.
“I fully condemn the attacks on the trade center, but whattabout Iran in 1956...”.
“I don’t support the attacks on NY and the Pentagon, it’s just that...”
@jon-nyc said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
Honestly the attempts to minimize and resort to whattaboutism are ultimately a type of wagon circling or weak defense.
It’s pretty liberating to just be able to criticize these guys the way they deserve without any “buts” or “it just thats” added on.
Think back to people ‘contextualizing’ 9/11 or comparing it to this or that US led attack from history.
“I fully condemn the attacks on the trade center, but whattabout Iran in 1956...”.
“I don’t support the attacks on NY and the Pentagon, it’s just that...”
Oh I agree it was next level. But I also think the level below needs harsh treatment. Toleration is not good. Broken windows and all that.
-
The insurrection can't be minimized enough
The idea that these clowns planned to take over anything or had any chance of taking over anything is pure doofusery
Really
I guess some of the arguments are cute in a sadly political way, but I think we can all agree the insurrection never really existed
-
-
Honestly the attempts to minimize and resort to whattaboutism are ultimately a type of wagon circling or weak defense.
It’s pretty liberating to just be able to criticize these guys the way they deserve without any “buts” or “it just thats” added on.
Think back to people ‘contextualizing’ 9/11 or comparing it to this or that US led attack from history.
“I fully condemn the attacks on the trade center, but whattabout Iran in 1956...”.
“I don’t support the attacks on NY and the Pentagon, it’s just that...”
@jon-nyc said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
Honestly the attempts to minimize and resort to whattaboutism are ultimately a type of wagon circling or weak defense.
It’s pretty liberating to just be able to criticize these guys the way they deserve without any “buts” or “it just thats” added on.
So, do you believe the rejection of the "coup" or "insurrection" rhetoric is a weak defense or disingenuous wagon circling?
-
While it is sometimes okay to look at past incidents for guidance, there is also a strong reason not to do so, and treat each individual incident as a "stand alone" incident.
Does the action of the people on January 6 be excused because of what happened in another city or in another time?
Absolutely not.
But, it does seem like some try to justify the people on January 6 by saying "well, this happened in city X or Y, or this happened here many years ago and nothing was done about them."
Example
My friend stole a pair of clothes from the store in another state. He was caught and had to apologize but was let go.I stole a pair of clothes and got caught and got to jail.
Does it matter that I talk about my friend in another state to justify my crime? No.
-
While it is sometimes okay to look at past incidents for guidance, there is also a strong reason not to do so, and treat each individual incident as a "stand alone" incident.
Does the action of the people on January 6 be excused because of what happened in another city or in another time?
Absolutely not.
But, it does seem like some try to justify the people on January 6 by saying "well, this happened in city X or Y, or this happened here many years ago and nothing was done about them."
Example
My friend stole a pair of clothes from the store in another state. He was caught and had to apologize but was let go.I stole a pair of clothes and got caught and got to jail.
Does it matter that I talk about my friend in another state to justify my crime? No.
@taiwan_girl said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
While it is sometimes okay to look at past incidents for guidance, there is also a strong reason not to do so, and treat each individual incident as a "stand alone" incident.
Does the action of the people on January 6 be excused because of what happened in another city or in another time?
Absolutely not.
But, it does seem like some try to justify the people on January 6 by saying "well, this happened in city X or Y, or this happened here many years ago and nothing was done about them."
Example
My friend stole a pair of clothes from the store in another state. He was caught and had to apologize but was let go.I stole a pair of clothes and got caught and got to jail.
Does it matter that I talk about my friend in another state to justify my crime? No.
The rhetoric is what is disagreed upon. Of course conservatives on this forum are given no credit whatsoever for admitting that the people who violated the Capitol were insane and should be prosecuted. But beyond being given no credit whatsoever for that, they are then accused of essentially defending them, joining them.
It's unfortunate for lots of Trump haters here that they really can't use their words very well.
-
@jon-nyc said in Worst attack on the Capital since 1812?:
What insurrection?
I agree.
To me, an insurrection implies either a sustained resistance or an armed response to a government's authority. The January 6th riot does not fit my definition.
The media likes to use the word, because they want to craft a narrative, which they have been somewhat successful at doing.
