ANSWERS: 9
  • How is it that you can criticize the Proud Boys for being a racist organization (which they're not - they're a patriot organization...which is only a "racist" organization to someone who throws out the word "racist" more often than a Jersey girl gets asked out on a date) and defend Black Lives matter - which *IS* a racist organization. You're continuing to spew false information again. Rittenhouse is not a member of the Proud Boys and he threatened to shoot no one - he only shot in self-defense (being a BLM groupie, you wouldn't know what that is).
    • Hulk70156
      Coming from the biggest Nazi on this website I'm not suprised you said that. BTW Here is whatw Wikipedia says about them (or is Wikipedia a Marxist Conspiracy too) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proud_Boys
    • Hulk70156
      And here is a pic of Rottenhouse with the Proud Boys : https://imgur.com/a/YdoLK1N
    • 1465
      1) Wikipedia is not a trusted source since articles can be uploaded by anyone - including far-Left authors. However, I did do some reading on the Wiki page. To save space, I'll just touch on a few items. "Ultranationalism" - what's wrong with that? Are you ashamed of your own country? Do you wish that we were taken over by some other country? That's how wars start - are you wanting to see America in a war? Such an idea makes you ANTI-American. No wonder you hate the Proud Boys. They're also "Anti-communism", "Anti-feminism", "Anti-immigration" (Anti ILLEGAL immigration - not "anti-immigration"), "Anti-LGBT", and "Anti-Semitism" (this term is thrown out by people who don't even know what it means). All of these things are associated with moral and patriotic behavior. I've seen your posts and you seem you be against all of these. You also have another characteristic shared by all people on the Left- you're full of hate. 2) As to the photo, I don't see anything in the photo that identifies anyone as the Proud Boys - other than the power of suggestion being used by the one who created it. And more importantly, there's something else missing that is central to your argument: Kyle Rittenhouse - please be good and point him out. Finally, the Proud Boys are being identified as "racist" - how can you be a racist group when several of your members are of the race you supposedly oppose?
    • Hulk70156
      Okay here is the Washington Post but you don't believe it because you only trust fascist media. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/01/14/kyle-rittenhouse-proud-boys-bar/
    • Hulk70156
      Proof of the Proud Boys being racist is literally all over the internet but again you don't buy it because of your prejudices.
    • Hulk70156
      And 1465 Sticking up for HItler is considered racist, just so you know.
    • 1465
      You may trust the Washington Compost, but I don't. "Proof of the Proud Boys being racist is literally all over the internet." - yeah, in the Liberal media. "Literally" means that there is no proof to back it up. "Sticking up for Hitler"? - No, it's called "educating myself on the facts" - you ought to try it sometime. But let me warn you - it takes initiative...the kind where you have to think for yourself and not let the majority propaganda influence you. You're unable to do this.
    • BobJones5000
      "How is it that you can criticize the Proud Boys for being a racist organization (which they're not - they're a patriot organization..." Well, except for the FACT that the Proud Boy members who have already testified in open court have OPENLY ADMITTED UNDER OATH that their organization is racist and supports White Supremacist values and activities. Nice try, little fella. You probably have an Adolf Hitler shrine in your home... One of their own "leaders" was an FBI Informant for several years, who has also provided mountains of evidence that clearly reverses your nonsense comments. But, let me guess -- you're one of those people who believe in everything UNPROVEN, and anything with evidence is false -- right? You probably still spout the TRUMP BIG LIE - which, after MORE THAN A YEAR, has shown us NOHTING of ANY SUBSTANCE to support those claims. RIGHT?
    • BobJones5000
      By the way, these wonderful PATRIOTS of yours have had dozens of their members convicted for organized criminal activity, many under the RICO statutes, for drugs, gambling and human trafficking. Yeah, some REAL patriots there! No surprise that Trump called them out publicly - he probably gets his prostitutes from them.
  • It's because the people he shot ***attacked him***. In two of the cases, physically. In the third case: pointed a gun at him. Yes, he is a whackadoodle who went there TO shoot people - not good for his case - but he ended up ONLY shooting people who attacked HIM. One of the shooting victims (the one with the gun) admitted this in court. Yes, he went there for the purpose of committing violent acts, but as it turned out he only acted violently AFTER violence was perpetrated against HIM FIRST. That's self-defense, regardless of whether or not you "are looking for a fight".
    • Hulk70156
      How does a person being attacked with a plastic bag full of toilet paper need a gun to defend himself? https://www.reuters.com/world/us/how-kyle-rittenhouse-went-cleaning-graffiti-shooting-3-people-2021-11-11/
    • Hulk70156
      Here is the news article: * Around 11:45 p.m. Rosenbaum chases Rittenhouse into a used-car lot as Rittenhouse yells "Friendly, friendly, friendly." Rosenbaum throws a plastic bag containing toiletries at Rittenhouse. * Rittenhouse testified that Rosenbaum grabbed his gun. A journalist for the Daily Caller, a conservative website, testified that Rosenbaum lunged for the rifle. Rittenhouse fires his gun at Rosenbaum, hitting him four times and killing him.
    • www.bible-reviews.com
      The guy chased after him for blocks and when he caught him began trying to wrest his firearm from him. That was a VERY imminent threat to his life.
    • 1465
      Let's sort this thing out, shall we? Rosenbaum threw a bag of toiletries (not "toilet paper") at Rittenhouse - where did Rosenbaum get this bag of toiletries? Did he bring them from home? Does he always carry a bag of toiletries when he goes out to riot? I wouldn't think so. So that means that he looted some store to get them. Point-of-fact: he was a criminal. Rittenhouse identified himself as a "friendly" - which the aforementioned criminal Rosenbaum obviously doesn't like since he threw his bag of toiletries at him. The next question is, WHY did Rosenbaum throw the bag of toiletries at Rittenhouse? Most likely, it was to create a momentary distraction so he could grab Rittenhouse's gun. This possibility is supported by the fact that he had his hand on the gun when Rittenhouse fired at him. So the conclusion here is that he did try to take the gun away from Rittenhouse, and Rittenhouse fired in self-defense. Class is dismissed.
    • BobJones5000
      "Does he always carry a bag of toiletries when he goes out to riot?: No, just firearms...
  • He was found innocent of all charges by a jury of his peers. They reaffirmed that self defense is still a human right in the US. The rioters and looters could have stayed home too, or they could have decided against chasing him down and attacking him.
    • Hulk70156
      With a Kalashnikov? Why does he need a hi-tech Russian Military weapon to defend himself? And why does he need to display it? He went to get in a fight and he got one. And he's a sissy for crying so much. I felt like slapping him silly, lol
    • dalcocono
      He didn't have a "Kalashnikov" he had a Smith& Wesson AR copy. He took it for defense against violent rioters looters and anarchists. As it turned out, he needed it. He was not the one "looking for a fight". He was the one running for his life away from the lynchmob that was chasing him down and howling for his blood. He was the intended victim.
    • Hulk70156
      Nobody in the BLM protest was rioting until you racists got involved. They were protesting a white policeman shooting an unarmed Black man 7 times in the BACK. And if he didn't take the American version of the AK47 Nobody would have given him a second thought but because he was a Proud Boy, an organization that gives the Nazi salute and yelling "white power", the BLM people attacked him, Hello, what is wrong with this picture. You're probably one of them yourself or you would see the ridiculousness of you position.
    • dalcocono
      Bullshyt. We all saw the looting and rioting and anarchy going on. You are just a fountain of misinformation on this story. the AR is not an "American version of the AK". It is a different style altogether. If those rioters hadn't decided to run him down, they would have lived to loot another day. I am not "one of them" and all I see here is the ridiculousness of your position.
    • Hulk70156
      They ran him down because he was carrying a gun and was looking for an excuse to kill l him. He was a White Supremacist in the middle of a Black Lives Matter protest. What do you think would happen. Get you facts straight.
    • dalcocono
      Don't be obtuse, he has a constitutional right to carry a gun. The bill of rights makes no age distinction. The people who attacked him had no legal right to riot burn loot and assault citizens. Those people were the criminals in this situation. My facts are straight. The people he shot were also white and one of them had a drawn pistol in his hand. You and Joe and the rest of the left accuse him of "white supremacy" without any proof at all. Simple rancor and conjecture. As I said before; he was running away, they were looking for an excuse to kill him! Self defense, just like the jury said.
    • 1465
      "He was a White Supremacist in the middle of a Black Lives Matter protest." - What evidence do you have that he was a white supremacist? The three involved in the Kyle Rittenhouse segment were all white. You're calling him a white supremacist because that's what the far-Left media is calling him (another example of letting others do your thinking for you) - and it was nothing but lies based on hate from them also. As to the Black Lives Matter protest aspect, your advocacy of terrorism and destruction doesn't validate your credibility. It only enhances the innocence of Kyle Rittenhouse - he was helping to protect the community against the civil unrest and was attacked for it.
    • 1465
      "Nobody in the BLM protest was rioting until you racists got involved. They were protesting a white policeman shooting an unarmed Black man ..." - LMFAO. Since when is destroying private businesses "peaceful protests?" You are a prize...LOL!!!
    • Hulk70156
      Dalcocono, he might have a legal right to carry a gun but he has to accept the consequences of his stupid choice.
    • Hulk70156
      1465 - since when is shooting an unarmed Black Man not murder? He could have let him go, he could have shot him in a non lethal place. Police are trained to use non lethal force, They didn't follow their training and because of this someone died. What is so hard to figure out? I don't get you Connies.
    • 1465
      Rittenhouse had nothing to do with "shooting an unarmed black man". As for that incident, I believe it was deemed "justified". If you're upset over that, you should address it in the proper context and not use it to accuse someone who was never involved in it. "UNARMED"??? Jacob Blake was armed with a knife. He had been tasered but it failed to restrain him - that means he was resisting arrest. Officers had every right to protect themselves against a lethal weapon under these circumstances.
    • 1465
      "Dalcocono, he might have a legal right to carry a gun but he has to accept the consequences of his stupid choice." - WHAT'S THIS? Now you admit that Rittenhouse had a legal right to carry a gun? There goes half of your case out the window. LOL
    • dalcocono
      Yup there you have it. KR did NOT shoot "an unarmed black man" either. He shot 3 white guys that ran him down and tried to beat him. One of the had a drawn pistol in his hand. KR was the victim. His attackers were not victims.
    • BobJones5000
      What evidence do you have that he was a white supremacist? -- Since when do YOU adhere to bona fide evidence? What a joke - you ask for evidence, only to refute it with garbage from your silly religion sites and conspiracy theory nonsense.
  • Just like OJ, he had better lawyers.
    • BobJones5000
      That is the deal - right there.
  • A veritable fountain of misinformation. He was "let go" because he was exonerated at trial by a duly sworn jury of his peers. Adjudicated innocent of all charges. That is how the justice system work. Protesting and complaining about it is useless. The jury got it right too, IMHO
  • Because the jury believed it was self defense. You are legally allowed to kill in self defense. That's why trial by media is so bad. People make decisions based on media trials. But jurors have access to information that media doesn't. Also you know it was quite chaotic with riots and protests -- you can't tell anything. That worked in his favor. If protest is needed -- don't do it on the streets -- it never works -- do it politically.
  • The judge and prosecutor were incompetent. American justice is as screwed up as American healthcare. The quality of what you get depends on the state you are in.
    • 1465
      True statement. If he were in a Conservative state, it never would have gone to trial.
  • He was innocent. Period.
  • "How is it that you can criticize the Proud Boys for being a racist organization (which they're not - they're a patriot organization..." Well, except for the FACT that the Proud Boy members who have already testified in open court have OPENLY ADMITTED UNDER OATH that their organization is racist and supports White Supremacist values and activities. Nice try, little fella.

Copyright 2020, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy