Another "I can't breath" death: Police Reform & Protests in the USA

[BlackDruid96]

I think you could claim the guilt by association fallacy if it was just one isolated incident. But there seems to be many examples of him attending and associating himself with white supremacists and white supremacist ideals, so I doubt it would hold up in court - well, at least here in Sweden it wouldn't.

Does this mean Hillary Clinton is a part of the KKK since she was friends of Robert Byrd who was part of the KKK? I don't believe in guilt by associations is well thought out argument. I have friends that do things I don't condone but that doesn't make me a part of their culture.

[Dezerte]

Does this mean Hillary Clinton is a part of the KKK since she was friends of Robert Byrd who was part of the KKK? I don't believe in guilt by associations is well thought out argument. I have friends that do things I don't condone but that doesn't make me a part of their culture.

Read it again.

If Clinton posed with KKK, attended KKK rallies and opposed black people getting equal rights then I think it would be fair to call her a part of or at least a sympathizer of the KKK.

[Daymanmb]

Does this mean Hillary Clinton is a part of the KKK since she was friends of Robert Byrd who was part of the KKK? I don't believe in guilt by associations is well thought out argument. I have friends that do things I don't condone but that doesn't make me a part of their culture.

Oh, you mean the US Senator who renounced his white supremacist views? That Robert Byrd?

"In a 2006 CNN interview, Byrd expressed regret for the filibuster and called his time in the Klan the greatest mistake of his life"
https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile..../idUSKBN23O2K1

[Machismo]

Does this mean Hillary Clinton is a part of the KKK since she was friends of Robert Byrd who was part of the KKK? I don't believe in guilt by associations is well thought out argument. I have friends that do things I don't condone but that doesn't make me a part of their culture.

If that's the way you feel, then go prove us wrong, by hanging out with white supremacists.

[BlackDruid96]

Oh, you mean the US Senator who renounced his white supremacist views? That Robert Byrd?

"In a 2006 CNN interview, Byrd expressed regret for the filibuster and called his time in the Klan the greatest mistake of his life"
https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile..../idUSKBN23O2K1

To prove you're not a racist is to simply say you're not a racist anymore?

[Machismo]

To prove you're not a racist is to simply say you're not a racist anymore?

You are free to continue calling Byrd a racist, just like people are free to keep calling Rittenhouse a racist and white supremacist.

[BlackDruid96]

You are free to continue calling Byrd a racist, just like people are free to keep calling Rittenhouse a racist and white supremacist.

Sure people can call him that, and those in the media are free to face the consequences of their actions from slander. Calling everyone you don't like a racist weakens the word against actual racist.

[Machismo]

Sure people can call him that, and those in the media are free to face the consequences of their actions from slander. Calling everyone you don't like a racist weakens the word against actual racist.

Except, it's not slander, and you are opposing free speech.

He is a shitty white supremacist, the evidence has been presented. I don't call everyone I don't like a racist. I call racists for what they are.

Now, feel free to continue opposing the First Amendment.

[BlackDruid96]

Except, it's not slander, and you are opposing free speech.

He is a shitty white supremacist, the evidence has been presented. I don't call everyone I don't like a racist. I call racists for what they are.

Now, feel free to continue opposing the First Amendment.

I don't see him as a racist, but regardless even if he was it doesn't change the fact he shot in self defense and the media slandered him over it even though there was lots of video evidence to prove it was self defense. Maybe enough lawsuits from people like Rittinghouse and that Kentucky boy will finally start forcing them to be accountable for their lies.

[Endus]

As mentioned same energy as right winger conspiracies.
You would think you would stop coping or back down from exposed positions like those but its still just another day of online team games politics to you.

It's fascinating you think I'm on some "team", here, when I don't even play in the same league: I am not American and have no need for any political affiliation with any US party.

But apparently you can't think outside of blind partisanship, so you assume (incorrectly) the same is true of others.

[Machismo]

I don't see him as a racist, but regardless even if he was it doesn't change the fact he shot in self defense and the media slandered him over it even though there was lots of video evidence to prove it was self defense. Maybe enough lawsuits from people like Rittinghouse and that Kentucky boy will finally start forcing them to be accountable for their lies.

Great, then don't call him a racist.

I get to all him a shitty white supremacists all I like, because I have the freedom to do so, and there's evidence to back it up... which has been provided.

This is nothing more than you opposing free speech.

[BlackDruid96]

Great, then don't call him a racist.

I get to all him a shitty white supremacists all I like, because I have the freedom to do so, and there's evidence to back it up... which has been provided.

This is nothing more than you opposing free speech.

Freedom of speech isn't freedom from consequences, media companies openly slandered him and they will be handing him a payout. Freedom of speech wouldn't allow you going around calling your co-workers racist, bigots and pedophiles would it?

[Machismo]

Freedom of speech isn't freedom from consequences, media companies openly slandered him and they will be handing him a payout. Freedom of speech wouldn't allow you going around calling your co-workers racist, bigots and pedophiles would it?

It literally means freedom from consequences from the government. If you want to stop watching those media companies... great. Good for you. If you want the government to punish them, then that's not free speech.

You are openly opposing free speech.

[BlackDruid96]

It literally means freedom from consequences from the government. If you want to stop watching those media companies... great. Good for you. If you want the government to punish them, then that's not free speech.

You are openly opposing free speech.

Are you telling me that media companies are free to slander and make up lies? Does this mean you thought Alex Jones was innocent?

[Machismo]

Are you telling me that media companies are free to slander and make up lies? Does this mean you thought Alex Jones was innocent?

No, I'm saying you keep making shit up, and want to attack free speech. If you want the government to punish someone's speech, it's not free speech. And, since the evidence has been presented, you're the one supporting fascist beliefs.

But, once again, you probably refused to actually read it, like you did in the other thread.

[BlackDruid96]

No, I'm saying you keep making shit up, and want to attack free speech. If you want the government to punish someone's speech, it's not free speech. And, since the evidence has been presented, you're the one supporting fascist beliefs.

But, once again, you probably refused to actually read it, like you did in the other thread.

I think you're doing a good job defeating your own argument. Private individuals and media companies can't just go around slandering people without a chance of being held responsible. Like I said, freedom of speech is not freedom of consequences, I believe media companies won't get in trouble with the government but will be held liable for the slander they did on Rittinghouse. You won't be because you don't hold any influence, there isn't any reason for Rittinghouse to sue you.

[Machismo]

I think you're doing a good job defeating your own argument. Private individuals and media companies can't just go around slandering people without a chance of being held responsible. Like I said, freedom of speech is not freedom of consequences, I believe media companies won't get in trouble with the government but will be held liable for the slander they did on Rittinghouse. You won't be because you don't hold any influence, there isn't any reason for Rittinghouse to sue you.

Not at all, they have seen the evidence, and are able to make reasonable opinions based on that evidence. It's not slander, this is simply a lie you keep trying to perpetuate. You are simply demanding I agree with your false notion that it's slander.

So, the answer to this, and ay future responses is simple. It's not slander. You are opposing free speech.

If they are held liable, they are quite literally in trouble with the government. The government is the one that deems them "liable." Why is this so hard for you to figure out?

[BlackDruid96]

Not at all, they have seen the evidence, and are able to make reasonable opinions based on that evidence. It's not slander, this is simply a lie you keep trying to perpetuate. You are simply demanding I agree with your false notion that it's slander.

So, the answer to this, and ay future responses is simple. It's not slander. You are opposing free speech.

If they are held liable, they are quite literally in trouble with the government. The government is the one that deems them "liable." Why is this so hard for you to figure out?

Tell the CNN or Alex Jones it's freedom of speech and that they didn't have to pay out.

[Machismo]

Tell the CNN or Alex Jones it's freedom of speech and that they didn't have to pay out.

Once again, you do realize who makes them "liable," right?

It's the government.

Luckily, this is all moot, since we have ample evidence to justify calling him a white supremacist.

[Daymanmb]

To prove you're not a racist is to simply say you're not a racist anymore?

Yeh, lol its a step in the right direction. Leaving the KKK is an action that supports that premise.

Do you not believe people can reform? Or are you of the simple mind that once racist always racist?