ANSWERS: 13
  • 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).
    • Hulk70166
      Here is what Wikipedia says about them (or is Wikipedia a Marxist Conspiracy too) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proud_Boys
    • Hulk70166
      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?
    • Hulk70166
      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/
    • Hulk70166
      Proof of the Proud Boys being racist is literally all over the internet but again you don't buy it because of your prejudices.
    • Hulk70166
      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.
    • 1465
      "have already testified in open court have OPENLY ADMITTED UNDER OATH that their organization is racist and supports White Supremacist values and activities. " - You do have a link that supports this, correct? * "You probably have an Adolf Hitler shrine in your home" - Nope. I was at the rally and missed getting one of those when they were being passed out. They aren't as big as the Karl Marx shrine. But then you'd know that already. No, I'm an advocate for proving everything I say. If you can prove me wrong to my satisfaction (your opinion doesn't carry any weight), I'll admit when I'm wrong.
    • 1465
      You define "patriot" as someone with a squeaky-clean record. Did you know that the original patriots - the founding fathers, were ALL criminals? You might want to think about that before you point fingers. And on the subject of "criminals", shall we put Biden and his crime family under the microscope - or how about Hillary and her money laundering "Clinton Foundation"? And let's not forget Obama who has never provided a valid birth certificate to prove his legitimacy.
    • Hulk70166
      1465 If you believe in truth, tell me again how the Democrats started Covid>lol
    • Hulk70166
      You love to make shit up, don't you - "or how about Hillary and her money laundering "Clinton Foundation"? And let's not forget Obama who has never provided a valid birth certificate to prove his legitimacy." or "the founding fathers were all criminals" - You can't prove any of that. And how about Hillary and Michael Moore operating a pizzeria in Philly where they chop small kids into bits and add it to the sausage and ham. lol
    • Hulk70166
      And the Proud Boys is racist : https://ctc.usma.edu/pride-prejudice-the-violent-evolution-of-the-proud-boys/
  • 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".
    • Hulk70166
      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/
    • Hulk70166
      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.
    • Hulk70166
      LOL
  • 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.
    • Hulk70166
      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.
    • Hulk70166
      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.
    • Hulk70166
      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!!!
    • Hulk70166
      Dalcocono, he might have a legal right to carry a gun but he has to accept the consequences of his stupid choice.
    • Hulk70166
      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.
    • Hulk70166
      LOL, thanks Bob. lol
    • 1465
      Do I refute evidence? Only when the facts are wrong. And Left-leaning media sources don't know the meaning of "bonafide".
    • Hulk70166
      Dalcono, I'm pretty sure the gun was a violence magnet. It said "I'm armed, I dare you to attack" and they did.
    • dalcocono
      It was no such thing. Otherwise you would have to say the same thing about the guy that was chasing him with a drawn weapon. When an person armed with a rifle is running away from his attackers, it is a sure sign he doesn't want to have to shoot anybody. Otherwise, he would have stood his ground and opened fire and the outcome would have been a lot bloodier than it was. Instead he ran from them, and those fools decided to chase him down and attack him when he fell. Even knowing he had a rifle. They attacked him, and he defended himself, and he was acquitted and adjudicated INNOCENT of all charges. All you have against him is political rancor and ill conceived opinion, IMHO.
    • Hulk70166
      wow, you must go the same Proud Boys meeting as 1465 https://ctc.usma.edu/pride-prejudice-the-violent-evolution-of-the-proud-boys/
    • dalcocono
      I don't go to proud boys meetings. I'm not part of their organization. Simply disagreeing with your biased left slanted opinion and disputing your inaccurate rhetoric doesn't make me anything political at all. I believe KR had the absolute right to defend himself against the attacks by that mob.
    • Hulk70166
      Dalcocono RE (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) When the police need help the call the National Guard or another police force. They don't call the Proud Boys or the skinheads, or a terrorist group that is wanted by the FBI. lol You are funny.
    • dalcocono
      You seem obsessed with those proud boys. I don't know much about them, except that the left hates them. As far as I'm concerned, they have as much right to attend a riot as any other group. Your continuing complaints about KR being exonerated is what's funny.
  • Just like OJ, he had better lawyers.
  • 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.
  • Don't worry about what the jury who actually heard the facts thought. Are you a real person or a propaganda bot? Doesn't he have the same rights as everyone else? The Second Amendment? When did it become a right to riot destroy property and attack people? Do you think he should of stood there and let his attackers kill him? You sir are a fool.
    • Hulk70166
      Stevie, he was the only person with a gun and the only person who got shot. That should tell you something.
    • Hulk70166
      And since when did you hear the police asking the public for help? Did they ask for Kyle Rittehouse or the Proud Boys to show with loaded guns to kill the protesters? If they did please play a link.
    • Hulk70166
      When the police need help they call the National Guard, not the Proud Boys. lol
  • Nothing you say is relevant. Period. He didn't attack anyone, HE WAS ATTACKED. If there is any reason for the second amendment, this it. Thank fully self defense is still legal in this country.
  • Trial by media says he is guilty. Trial in court says he's not. This is an example why you shouldn't ever try to predict what happens until the case is tried in court
  • The jury found him not guilty.
  • He was "let go" because he didn't break any laws. He shot three people who intended to kill him; it's what you call "self defence." Haven't you seen the footage? In what way was he "waysis"

Copyright 2020, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy