Current Riots in America (June 2020)


Recommended Posts

On 6/5/2020 at 2:38 PM, Strictlylogical said:

Nice sarcasm there

There was no sarcasm. You are not logical. You are subjective and emotional. 

edit I enjoyed a class in anthropology and learned a lot. If you want to understand what I was saying, type in the search words "tropical nose." I think my topic was IQ's and making scientific judgements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I think the Floyd case was handpicked from a whole slew of candidates (by some people high up on the dark side but hidden) because it had just enough ambiguity and the appearance of cold-blooded murder through abuse of cop power, it could spark outrage.

Initially there was ambiguity. Even though the image of the bullying by cop was clear (which is another ingredient I forgot to mention), people know how easy it is to edit videos and how much the mainstream news does that, so the ambiguity was nurtured by the videos of the incident presented in the mainstream being chopped up. Also, the cop car was hiding the other cops. And so on.

But it looks like this was cold-blooded murder. It looks like the cop Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd in cold blood out of a power trip.

And if this ends up being the case, I think the Obama race riot propaganda machine fucked up. Why? Because Trump people are for law and order, not for white supremacy like the Obama race riot propaganda machine tries to spread. If there is a clear case of murder, Trump people will reign down the law on the perpetrator with no mercy. And once they do that and everybody is on board with it, the ambiguity that keeps the topic hot ends up fizzling out and the race-baiting dwindles to the fringe. 

My own view on this incident until last night was colored by Scott Adams, who has looked at it from many different angles. I think that kind of critical thinking is great since it uncovers things others want to remain hidden.

But Judge Jeanine has seen about as much of the evidence that does not get into the mainstream as is possible for someone not legally assigned to the case and she went ballistic against Chauvin in the open to her show last night. She wants the charges bumped up to Murder One, that is murder with premeditation. She certainly convinced me (and gave a magnificent example of evidence-based prosecutorial storytelling at that).

She also called for the media spotlight to shine on the recent murder of retired St. Louis Police Captain David Dorn by riot looters. And she wants the full weight of the law to hammer down on his killers.

Both lives matter.

You can see it below

Part 1:

Part 2:

 Man, I would not want to be on the shit end of her stick in court. 

 

As a complement, lookee here.

On 6/5/2020 at 9:13 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I didn't think it possible, but we are witnessing a fake news mainstream media assault against Trump and Trump supporters that dwarfs the 3+ years of the "Muh Russians" hoax.

The problem for these ruling class elitist idiots is they are few. They make themselves look like many, but they are few.

Now a word from our president:

And:

The fizzle I mentioned above is already kicking in. Let's see if it keeps up...

🙂

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am an acquaintance of with many Internet marketers and friends of several.

They NEVER talk politics (well, once in a long while, one will go off, but it is really rare).

They think politics is bad for sales and they want to sell to everybody.

But now I am seeing more and more Internet marketers do things like the following.

This particular meme came from a guy named Mark Hess, who is specialized in affiliate marketing and WordPress plugins.

image.png 

🙂 

Unless nuclear war breaks out with China or something like that, I see a landslide coming in November and it's going to be a big-ass one.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/6/2020 at 2:31 AM, Peter said:

Floyd was no hero. He was a low life criminal.

Every human is an individual.

Absolutely agree.

On 6/6/2020 at 2:31 AM, Peter said:

Was FLOYD'S  behavior, appearance, response to conflict, in any way consistent with what police see, react to, and BELIEVE to be the truth, EVERY DAY?

That “some people are dangerous criminals” ... of course it’s true and the vast majority of police see that.  What are you trying to say?

On 6/6/2020 at 2:31 AM, Peter said:

Are you seriously saying everybody is the same?

That came from nowhere.  Of course each    individual is different. It would be an error to think all people of any group (or in general all people) are the same because it ignores the content of each person’s character which IS different.

On 6/6/2020 at 2:31 AM, Peter said:

A cop can't respond to a situation and not observe and react to what he knows are the facts of ANY traffic stop?

Your train of thought insofar as it is, does not follow from anything I’ve said.  This discussion is going off the rails but I will just respond by saying that a cop must react to the facts and carry out his duties to the best of his abilities to act in accordance with objective principles of law enforcement to protect individual rights.

On 6/6/2020 at 2:31 AM, Peter said:

Police records garnered from the name he gave or license plate number show his record and prior arrests. and reveal the police's  prior knowledge of the perp His later autopsy reveals fentynol SP? a synthetic opiate and meth in his bloodstream which DID affect his behavior JUST AS the arresting cops observed.  Fioyd's prior brain and experiences,  plus drugs, plus stressful situation predestined his behavior that day,. Could Floyd have volitionally changed things?

I’m not sure what this is all about.

The quote from Ayn Rand I posted is not a statement about free will of an individual contradicting the nature of that particular individual (such is impossible ... choice is free but cannot violate metaphysical identity).

The quote from Ayn Rand I posted is not about ignoring any relevant factual aspect of a person in front of you.  I understand her idea of justice to require a man to respond to others according to what they deserve...  this in no way implies treating an innocent deserving individual less than what they deserve nor does it imply treating a criminal individual any better than they deserve.

Ayn Rand’s point was about the errors of racism.  It’s in The Virtue of Selfishness.

It’s a good read.

I recommend it, highly.

 

 

but I am not here to explain it too you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My wife had a conversation yesterday with a woman who has been living with TDS for the last three years. Both of her sons are state troopers, both have desk jobs but are now assigned to protester looter control and she was terrified for them. One of them had to come to her house to calm her down and reassure her that police departments and law enforcement were not about to be defunded. Part of what he told her was that they knew the President has their best interest at heart and all this will be over soon.

After he left, she and her husband did what they never do and turned on Fox and she could not believe they were for the police and sanity, I'm not sure what she expected to see and hear, but since she reflexively refused to ever watch their content prior to that, she must not have either .

And although she says she still hates the President , the person, she now sees his administration as the only choice and hope for civility and a push back against the violence and lunacy of the far left. And that it was obvious to her now that CNN, MSNBC and the rest of the MSM are aiding and abetting the far left.

Obviously an anecdotal one off, and it should be pointed out this story should be taken with a grain salt, considering it may, hypothetically , have occurred between two criminals , as it may have occurred in a salon that is currently illegal to operate. Now I doubt you will be seeing Jean Doe at a rally, but I guarantee in the privacy of a voting booth there will be only one lever she'll be looking for.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Strictlylogical said:

I’m not sure what this is all about.

Perhaps we ARE on the same page. 1/ Say you are driving down the road and from the car in front of you, a food wrapper is tossed out the window. 2/ A police officer is driving down the road and from the car in front of him, a food wrapper is tossed out the window. If you are an objectivist or any reasonable person you make value judgements about every person you meet though you may not immediately or always act on those value judgements. Even here on OL and other web sites, every o’ist and every human being judges who they are reading or corresponding to.

A police officer is no different but the police have a more critical perspective as explained below. If the police are about to make an arrest they evaluate how the arrest will go. What are the perp’s physical attributes and metal demeanor if an arrest must be made?  What are the risks? Peter

Notes. By FindLaw Staff | Reviewed by Kellie Pantekoek, Esq. | Last updated June 02, 2020. When the police arrest someone, they take away that person's fundamental right to freedom. Consequently, there are several procedures the police must follow before they can make a legal arrest so that our rights remain protected. Many states and police departments add extra procedures. These extra procedures might be designed to: protect police officers' physical safety, help the officer document the arrest, or help the officer avoid making a legal mistake which could ruin the prosecution's case. Police arrest-procedures differ from one department to the next, so if you have questions about the procedures used in your area, it's best to contact your local police. The following is a general discussion of the procedures police must follow while making an arrest.

When an Officer May Make an Arrest There are only a very limited number of circumstances in which an officer may make an arrest: The officer personally observed a crime; The officer has probable cause to believe that person arrested committed a crime; The officer has an arrest warrant issued by a judge. An officer cannot arrest someone just because she feels like it or has a hunch that someone might be a criminal. Police officers have to be able to justify the arrest usually by showing some tangible evidence that led them to probable cause.

Requirements of Police: Arrest Procedures The rules regarding what an officer must do while making an arrest vary by jurisdiction. Generally, an arrest happens when the person being arrested reasonably believes that she is not free to leave. The officer need not use handcuffs, or place the arrestee in a police cruiser, although police often use these tactics to protect themselves. Police also do not have to read Miranda Rights at the time of arrest. However, the police must read a suspect their rights before an interrogation, so many police departments recommend that Miranda Rights be read at the time of arrest. This way, they can start questioning right away, and any information volunteered by a suspect can be used against them.

Finally, although police will almost always tell an arrestee why they're under arrest, they may not necessarily have any legal obligation to do so. This depends on both the jurisdiction and the circumstances of the arrest. Police Arrest Procedures and Excessive Force Police aren't allowed to use excessive force or treat the arrestee cruelly; this is universal and protected by the U.S. Constitution. Generally, police officers are only allowed to use the minimum amount of force necessary to protect themselves and bring the suspect into police custody. This is why people are advised to never resist an arrest or argue with police, even if they believe the arrest is wrongful since resistance could lead to the use of more force. If the arrestee thinks the arrest is unjustified or incorrect, they can always challenge it later with the help of an attorney and, if warranted, bring a civil rights case . . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Peter said:

Perhaps we ARE on the same page. 1/ Say you are driving down the road and from the car in front of you, a food wrapper is tossed out the window. 2/ A police officer is driving down the road and from the car in front of him, a food wrapper is tossed out the window. If you are an objectivist or any reasonable person you make value judgements about every person you meet though you may not immediately or always act on those value judgements. Even here on OL and other web sites, every o’ist and every human being judges who they are reading or corresponding to.

A police officer is no different but the police have a more critical perspective as explained below. If the police are about to make an arrest they evaluate how the arrest will go. What are the perp’s physical attributes and metal demeanor if an arrest must be made?  What are the risks? Peter

Notes. By FindLaw Staff | Reviewed by Kellie Pantekoek, Esq. | Last updated June 02, 2020. When the police arrest someone, they take away that person's fundamental right to freedom. Consequently, there are several procedures the police must follow before they can make a legal arrest so that our rights remain protected. Many states and police departments add extra procedures. These extra procedures might be designed to: protect police officers' physical safety, help the officer document the arrest, or help the officer avoid making a legal mistake which could ruin the prosecution's case. Police arrest-procedures differ from one department to the next, so if you have questions about the procedures used in your area, it's best to contact your local police. The following is a general discussion of the procedures police must follow while making an arrest.

When an Officer May Make an Arrest There are only a very limited number of circumstances in which an officer may make an arrest: The officer personally observed a crime; The officer has probable cause to believe that person arrested committed a crime; The officer has an arrest warrant issued by a judge. An officer cannot arrest someone just because she feels like it or has a hunch that someone might be a criminal. Police officers have to be able to justify the arrest usually by showing some tangible evidence that led them to probable cause.

Requirements of Police: Arrest Procedures The rules regarding what an officer must do while making an arrest vary by jurisdiction. Generally, an arrest happens when the person being arrested reasonably believes that she is not free to leave. The officer need not use handcuffs, or place the arrestee in a police cruiser, although police often use these tactics to protect themselves. Police also do not have to read Miranda Rights at the time of arrest. However, the police must read a suspect their rights before an interrogation, so many police departments recommend that Miranda Rights be read at the time of arrest. This way, they can start questioning right away, and any information volunteered by a suspect can be used against them.

Finally, although police will almost always tell an arrestee why they're under arrest, they may not necessarily have any legal obligation to do so. This depends on both the jurisdiction and the circumstances of the arrest. Police Arrest Procedures and Excessive Force Police aren't allowed to use excessive force or treat the arrestee cruelly; this is universal and protected by the U.S. Constitution. Generally, police officers are only allowed to use the minimum amount of force necessary to protect themselves and bring the suspect into police custody. This is why people are advised to never resist an arrest or argue with police, even if they believe the arrest is wrongful since resistance could lead to the use of more force. If the arrestee thinks the arrest is unjustified or incorrect, they can always challenge it later with the help of an attorney and, if warranted, bring a civil rights case . . . .

What you say here seems correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael, I wrote:

On June 6, 2020 at 3:46 PM, Ellen Stuttle said:

Is your idea that there was a plan to start riots somehow, and it would have been a different pretext if the Floyd incident hadn't happened serendipitously?

You start off appearing to answer "No":

On June 6, 2020 at 4:53 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Serendipity? I don't think so. Two-bit criminals, black, white, gay, Asian, Latino, illegal alien, you name it, are killed everyday in America. Lots of 'em. There is no lack of cases.

But then you continue:

On June 6, 2020 at 4:53 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I think the Floyd case was handpicked from a whole slew of candidates (by some people high up on the dark side but hidden) because it had just enough ambiguity and the appearance of cold-blooded murder through abuse of cop power, it could spark outrage. But make no mistake, had it not been Floyd, it would have been someone else. The Democrats are in a panic about losing the blacks through their open borders policies. They needed a race riot to get the blacks back on board.

So I conclude that, yes, your idea is that there was a pre-existent plan to get race riots going and that some other incident would have been used if the Floyd incident hadn't happened.

Ellen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ellen,

By serendipity, I took you to mean nobody was planning to do anything, but suddenly out of nowhere, one incident happened (the George Floyd killing) and the bad guys thought, "Hmmmm... maybe we can do something with this." So they went into high gear and did a nationwide race riot.

In fact, that's not far from the image they try to portray in the public mind.

I keep noticing the effectiveness in propaganda of two contradictory stories running at the same time. For some damn reason, it works. For example, the killing of George Floyd was such an egregious abnormal event, it inflamed the entire country. While at the same time, the killing of people like George Floyd is an everyday occurrence of the white oppressors, i.e., the cops. Two opposing stories. A is not A. And the public swallows it.

From that frame, I put serendipity on the unique side. The killing of a two-bit criminal by a cop is not a serendipitous event in my understanding of the term. It's a common event that happens many times a day in America and I would never use the word serendipity to describe that.

Anyway, I always thought these race riots going back to Obama and beyond were planned. Even in an earlier post in this very thread I called the current race riot "Stage 2."

So we probably mean different things by serendipity. I take serendipity to mean something along the lines of "happy accident." Something unplanned.

It sounds like you understand serendipity to mean something else.

I won't begrudge you your meaning, though. 🙂 

4 hours ago, Ellen Stuttle said:

So I conclude that, yes, your idea is that there was a pre-existent plan to get race riots going and that some other incident would have been used if the Floyd incident hadn't happened.

That is exactly what I believe.

I also believe there is an Obama machine well-oiled to pull this off, too. Look at how many times Al Sharpton visited the White House when Obama was president. And how many times that creep from Chicago, Creamer (Jan Schakowsky's husband), who James O'Keefe caught on video admitting to staging riots, visited Obama's White House. And so many others relevant to race riots...

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another curve ball, one that I find hilarious.

Awhile back, James O'Keefe through Project Veritas invaded the Bernie campaign. He got several hardcore communist Bernie people to admit that if Bernie did not win the nomination, they would burn cities down and, if I remember correctly, they would start with Minneapolis. They literally said they were going to do this. They said it several times through several different people.

Helloooooo...

🙂

(Hat tip to Styxhexenhammer666 for this. If you want to see his video, go here. I highly recommend it.)

In other words, these race riots might not be Stage 2, but instead two power-hungry authoritarian factions (the Big Vaccine globalists and the communists) getting in each others way. 

The more I think about it, the more I think this is true, at least partly. The protests and race riots blew the pandemic scare (social distancing, etc.) out of the water. Now the globalist reaction is going to happen and I think Big Vax is not amused.

But I also think the other things I talked about is true, including the Obama race riot machine.

So if I'm right, it looks like all the bad guys started scrambling for a piece of the American Pie once the shutdown happened and now they're playing demolition derby with each other.

This is turning out to be one big fat mess instead of one big-ass deadly attack--all with the fake news mainstream media yapping and barking like junk yard dogs and chasing their tails in public.

🙂

Outside of keeping damage to a minimum, I think President Trump may be looking at all this, letting it run and laughing. These idiots are all self-destructing when they are not destroying each other. They are doing President Trump's job for him and putting themselves on camera to boot so the clean up for law enforcement will be easy.

🙂 

btw - That silly Defund the Police crap is reality TV posturing as news and nothing more. If a local government gets stupid enough to try it for real, we will get quite a show as they get run over by gangs and the only thing that will spread across the country is the sound of people laughing their asses off.

🙂 

Michael

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

btw - That silly Defund the Police crap is reality TV posturing as news and nothing more. If a local government gets stupid enough to try it for real, we will get quite a show as they get run over by gangs and the only thing that will spread across the country is the sound of people laughing their asses off.

🙂 

I dunno Michael. I saw a MSN headline that said Mini-apple-us, Minnie-soda is disbanding its police department. I have been there twice, which I mentioned years ago. The first time I went things seemed peaceful and hardly any "people of color" seemed to live there, except for native Americans . The Mall of America seemed monochromatically white too. The second time I went, a few years later, it seemed more like Detroit with the local news showing black people protesting something.  I was advised to not go into some parts of Minnie-apple-us  or St. Paul. Well how about that. America's anarchists may find paradise yet in a lawless Minnesota. Have gun, will travel.       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

In other words, these race riots might not be Stage 2, but instead two power-hungry authoritarian factions (the Big Vaccine globalists and the communists) getting in each others way. 

The more I think about it, the more I think this is true, at least partly. The protests and race riots blew the pandemic scare (social distancing, etc.) out of the water. Now the globalist reaction is going to happen and I think Big Vax is not amused.

But I also think the other things I talked about is true, including the Obama race riot machine.

So if I'm right, it looks like all the bad guys started scrambling for a piece of the American Pie once the shutdown happened and now they're playing demolition derby with each other.

This is turning out to be one big fat mess instead of one big-ass deadly attack--all with the fake news mainstream media yapping and barking like junk yard dogs and chasing their tails in public.

Michael,

All I meant by "serendipitously" was that the Floyd indecent happening just when it did was lucky from the standpoint of people planning to provoke a race riot somehow.  I wanted to be sure I was understanding correctly that indeed you thought that there was a plan to get a race riot going one way or another.

My next question would have addressed your idea that race riots were "Stage 2" - an idea which implies that you think (or thought) that the same people were behind both the pandemic plan and the race rioting.

The way I see it is the way you're indicating now - different power-grabbing factions interfering with each other.

I don't see how it could be in the interests of people who want a focus on the need for a vaccine to have attention diverted to a different crisis.  My bet is that Bill Gates and his co-conspirators are gnashing their teeth about the spotlight being shifted.

Ellen

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Ellen Stuttle said:

The way I see it is the way you're indicating now - different power-grabbing factions interfering with each other.

I don't see how it could be in the interests of people who want a focus on the need for a vaccine to have attention diverted to a different crisis.  My bet is that Bill Gates and his co-conspirators are gnashing their teeth about the spotlight being shifted.

Ellen,

Actually, I am now indicating both.

I think we are in a mess. 

Big Vax is not as uniform as it may seem. For a simple division, it is made up of (1) globalists who would love nothing more than to rule the world through dictatorship by a cartel of technocrats, and (2) the Chinese Communist Party. No doubt there are other major players, but these two are the biggest from what I see. While the technocratic globalists will be gnashing their teeth over the race riots (I love that image of yours--I can see Bill Gates doing that 🙂 ), I imagine the Chinese Communist Party insiders are popping champagne. They want to rule the world through dictatorship by the Chinese Communist Party itself, vaccine or no vaccine. Riots mean division and that creates new opportunities to exploit vulnerabilities.

On the race riot side, I see one huge division that has the appearance of being united, (1) the Antifa Bernie bros and (2) the Obama race riot machine (which mostly supports the establishment Democratic Party faction). These are not friends, but foes who hate each other.

I have no doubt there are other factions we can't see too clearly because of a fake "fog of war" image the fake news mainstream press is trying to convey (there actually is no war). Don't forget the elitists of all stripes in general, Islamic terrorists, neocons, and so on. None of these people went away.

At any rate, at first I feared the current assault on America and the world was centralized in a big way. From what I see right now, it isn't. It's a bunch of different factions who all have a common enemy, President Trump and people who think like him.

Here's a great symbol of what unites the current anti-Trump people who are causing trouble and who they hate.

All the anti-Trumpers in all their different factions demand you take a knee.

President Trump and people who think like him will never take a knee.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the Antifa side, here is an excellent article I just read from a place I never heard of before, Centipede Nation.

THE NEO-PROGRESSIVE MACHINE - Part 3 - Exposing Antifa, The Crypto-Radicals, And The Takedown Of Their Agenda

I found some of the connections implied rather than stated, but that's probably because this is Part 3 and the historical information I was curious about was given before. (In fact, I skimmed Parts 1 and 2 and I saw much of it mentioned.)

In the Obama years, I used to like to watch Glenn Beck because he made the kinds of connections I read here in this article. What I mean by connections is where and with whom modern political actors learned, boards and organizations where many of them serve together, family members and where they work and promote activism, and things like that. Also, Glenn used to supply video and reported evidence of statements by them. 

A modern person who does this that I like is Polly. I have a few others I like.

I am going to read more articles at Centipede Nation and, if they are like the one above, I will have found another place. Some of it is curated news from other places, and some, like the article above, is in a section called Analysis and Reports.

Here is a quote from the article above (with embedded video), the end section.

Quote

Trump Deceiving The Enemy
Now with these latest riots, things seem to be coming to a head. Trump has classified Antifa as a domestic terrorist organization while AG Barr has stated that 56 regional FBI Joint Terrorism Task Forces would be used to identify criminal organizers and instigators to help coordinate federal resources with state and local partners.

While trump was distracting the media by shuffling a couple of military units around, Trump and Barr were coordinating with multiple federal agencies by setting up tactical units around the nation. As per Barr’s news conference, the DOJ has deployed all available law enforcement components for this mission, including the FBI, the ATF, the DEA, the Bureau of Prisons and the US Marshal Service. During the press conference, the directors from these federal agencies stepped up and explained how they are taking their tactical units to track and arrest the violent radicals.

The one thing that the globalists wanted, was to bait Trump to enforce Martial law. This was obvious to anyone who was paying attention. This would have canceled out the constitution and all our rights, thus giving the Democrats a narrative on a silver-platter that exposes Trump as ‘literally Hitler’. Here’s the thing, Military intervention requires the permission from State Governors and City Mayors. When it comes to Federal Agencies, they don’t need any permission. As soon as Antifa started attacking Federal buildings and Trump classified them as a Domestic Terrorist Organization, all bets were off. As Barr explained at the conference, the fact that violent radicals attacked federal property, even going as far as killing a federal agent, it is Barr’s duty to take action using his capacity as the head of the DOJ to squash these mobs.

So basically, the insurrection Act dangled by Trump, was just a dog and pony show used to keep the Democrats and the fake news media occupied, while they positioned their assets across the nation.

“Let your plans be dark and impenetrable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunderbolt.”
― Sun Tzu

 This post only scratches the surface of these crypto-radicals and their organizations that have weaved a tangled web. We encourage all our readers to keep researching and calling out these bad actors seeking to bring down our great republic.

From everything I have seen since the beginning, this is how President Trump works.

I have little doubt he is doing this--in a different way--with Big Vax, too.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I think we are in a mess. 

Michael wrote: Where is Congress reenacting the shooting deaths or stabbing deaths of black people, or any people for that matter?

That would be a laugh: Pelosi and Schumer reenacting stabbing their brethren. Take that bitch! Or reenacting a lynching. AAAAghhh sputter.

What does it seem black mothers are teaching their children? Hey, you little mother#$%^&!’s. You will call everybody by their correct name which is “mother#$%^&!’”. If you see someone you don’t like, you stab the mother#$%^&! Never get married. And don’t get me started on how you should beat your girlfriends and abuse your kids. You already knows dat from my example. Don’t do no fancy talk. You speaks ebonics.  And yourn profession? You mother#$%^&!’’s should be in the honorable profession of robbery, specializing in violent hold ups and maybe some shoplifting. If you is apprehended by da Poleece for crimes, call dem by their right names and you resist arrest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Big Vax is not as uniform as it may seem. For a simple division, it is made up of (1) globalists who would love nothing more than to rule the world through dictatorship by a cartel of technocrats, and (2) the Chinese Communist Party. No doubt there are other major players, but these two are the biggest from what I see. While the technocratic globalists will be gnashing their teeth over the race riots (I love that image of yours--I can see Bill Gates doing that 🙂 ), I imagine the Chinese Communist Party insiders are popping champagne. They want to rule the world through dictatorship by the Chinese Communist Party itself, vaccine or no vaccine. Riots mean division and that creates new opportunities to exploit vulnerabilities.

I don't see the ChiComs as part of the wanna-be technocrat-rulers Big Vax coalition.  The ChiComs were collaborating with Gates in producing the virus, but not for the same goals as Gates' objectives.  I said somewhere in a post that from the ChiCom perspective, the deaths in China were good to get rid of some economic deadweight elderly people but the major goal was the resultant havoc in the West when the virus got lose (with a belated warning by the ChiComs to be sure the West wasn't prepared).

At that point (I didn't say this before) Gates' goals were on a different path - the path toward use of a vaccine as means to his technocratic elitist objectives.

So it was collaborators for one part of the proceedings, the initial virus-production part.  But then separate pursuits thereafter.

I agree in imagining the ChiComs as "popping champagne" over the riots - while Gates and his cohorts gnash their teeth (glad you like the image).

As you say, "a mess."

14 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

At any rate, at first I feared the current assault on America and the world was centralized in a big way. From what I see right now, it isn't. It's a bunch of different factions who all have a common enemy, President Trump and people who think like him.

I've thought all along that what we face is a bunch of different factions, sometimes working together, sometimes not, united only by the "common enemy, President Trump and people who think like him."

Ellen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

U.S. Marshals.

After the ones cuffing the lady on the ground picked her up and threw her into the car, and the ones in the foreground started backing off, one of them tells the screeching lady:

Quote

If you follow us you will get shot. Understand me?

That's what happens when you belong to a terrorist organization, unmarked car and all.

The ANTIFA part of this should start winding down pretty soon.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

U.S. Marshals.

After the ones cuffing the lady on the ground picked her up and threw her into the car, and the ones in the foreground started backing off, one of them tells the screeching lady:

That's what happens when you belong to a terrorist organization, unmarked car and all.

The ANTIFA part of this should start winding down pretty soon.

Michael

Beautiful video. I keep watching it again and increasing the volume. Her song is so sweet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now