Illinois teen arrested in fatal shooting at Kenosha protest, police say

Do I? What would suggest that? Or is this just your wall of never ending questions again?

 

Call it a conspiracy or whatever you want. You can roll on the floor giggling like a little girl......it doesn't make a difference. The FACT remains, BLM looters and rioters are highly financed and Soros is just one of them.https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politi...o-fund-the-riots-and-so-did-taxpayers-n487939

 

It is not polite to answer a question with a counter question, but I still have to do it ...
Is an open society generally bad ... and are activist groups generally bad?

Both can have bad elements, no question! But the bad can also be politically left and politically right in both cases.
Not only lefties like to demand an open society, right-wing extremists - not to say anti-Semites / Nazis - like to do so, for example, and both then use the constitutional freedom of expression as an argument. And the same is true of activist groups ...

As a foreigner, quite frankly:
I find it amusing how right people are blind to the right eye with all these things and only see the evil in this regard with the left ... and just as then the left are blind in the left eye and only see the evil in something like this with the right .

Yes ... the eternal struggle left against right and right against left. Of course there is also in my country given ... but far less intense and aggressive than in the USA!
That may be because there are not only 2 parties for us, but on average 6 of importance and in Parliament and thus the difference "left and right" is more broadly distributed among various parties than with you in the USA ... none Idea.

 

And right here we have the problem, that there is NO FACT ...

- only assertions without evidence ...
- only arguments and personal views ...
- only half truths and facts, where the part that doesn't fit so well is kept silent ...
- also often enough lies

And then something is put together from all of this in the poison kitchen, which is then presented as the proof and the whole story behind it.

Sorry ... you can curl up on the floor and sell the conspiracy however you want ... woe to scratch the facade of the conspiracy building! It then collapses like a house of cards!
Everyone is free to believe in something or not ... everyone has the right. However, the one who believes in it should not demand that everyone follow their belief and commit the mistake of portraying others as deluded and ignorant. That always ends quickly in a heated argument.

Since I got the conspiracy theorists on 9/11 for example in the Pentagon's case pinned down with fact-based questions about their claim it wasn't a Boing 757 and Flight AA77 ... it ended up with accusing and insulting to me that I am a paid FBI / CIA / NSA agent for the Deep States to spread disinformation. Of course ... ROFL!

 

So you have no idea what Open Society is.. I'm not surprised.

 

O dear ... of course I know ...

Do you know what the term open society is? Obviously not in total and only a part ... shall I now be surprised?

What you mean is the open society foundation of Soros, isn't it?

9 facts about this...

1.
The Open Society Foundations now comprise more than 20 national and regional foundations. Each foundation is equipped with its own advisory board, whose members monitor the work and set funding priorities.

2.
The first foundation was established in Hungary in 1984 and the most recent in Myanmar in 2016.

3.
The Foundation will provide no more than 33 percent of funding to the majority of the organizations they work with. This is to ensure that they remain independent and build solid funding for their activities.

4.
With a deposit of around $ 18 billion, the foundations are the third largest philanthropic fund in the world after the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Wellcome Trust in Great Britain.

5.
The Foundation is the largest private donor that supports the Roma minority in Europe ... which of course also has conflict potential.

6.
Starting in 1993, the Open Society Foundations donated tens of millions for humanitarian aid and relief efforts during the wars in the countries of the former Yugoslavia, especially in besieged Sarajevo.

7.
The foundation has been working in the United States since 1996. There, for example, it supports the reform of the criminal justice system and drug laws and the strengthening of co-determination rights.

8.
The Foundation does not shy away from controversial political disputes. The Foundation prides itself on working with people who are marginalized from society just because they are who they are ... which of course has a high potential for conflict with the opponents.

9.
The name goes back to the influence that the philosopher Karl Popper had on the founder (Soros). In his book “The Open Society and Its Enemies” Popper argues that no philosophy or ideology is the ultimate bearer of truth and that societies can only thrive if they guarantee democratic government, freedom of expression and respect for individual rights.

Which of these facts do you contradict now please?

 

Copy and paste is not impressive specially when you break copy right infringement laws in doing so.


But thank you for posting

The Foundation does not shy away from controversial political disputes. The Foundation prides itself on working with people who are marginalized from society just because they are who they are ... which of course has a high potential for conflict with the opponents.


Aka groups like BLM and Antifa

 

Packing minorities into low income housing? That is a GOP policy.

"Trump claimed in a tweet that the “suburban housewife” would vote for him out of fears that “low income housing would invade their neighborhood” under Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee."
https://thehill.com/policy/finance/...peal-to-suburban-housewife-with-racist-tropes

Also... your reply has nothing to do with the state of the US, and mainly the state of the US police. Totally militarized. And nobody is going to believe a story that when the shots are fired, that an armed black man gets passed the police, since they just shot an unarmed black men with 7 bullets in his back. That's just as adorable as how a nazi who shot up a church full with black people was treated a Burger King, while they choke to death some black guy selling some dozen cigarettes without the taxes. Sure, these are examples but it's all systemic. You see it in the statistics in unarmed people being killed by cops, to how long black people get sentenced under the same circumstances. Driving while black is also a statistically fact that's totally true. And too many white people deny this reality of facts. It's the sad world the people in the US live in.

 

Ehm ... what? No ideae of what you are talking about with copy paste ... Anyway ...

BLM is supported, ANTIFA not ... and this righty claim is simply bullshit. Righties even don't know that ANTIFA is no group with a somehow head of and leadership in local or international point.

 

Does it ever bother you that your world view is so limited? Democrats run a lot of the cities. A GOP voice hasn't been heard in those cities for decades. You couldn't point to a single metropolitan area that produced section 8 housing that was impacted, or altered in any meaningful way that was advocated for, or by a republican voice. The fact that you now want to run away from that is laughable.

And frankly, explain how outsourcing section 8 housing into the suburbs is the answer, other than to make room for more gentrification that section 8 housing limits in the blooming downtown environments... Why do you suppose AOC was so angry about Amazon? You folks need to get on the same page as a party. This "wasn't our fault" BS is just that. Democrats wear the anchor of their past decisions, and frankly the rest of us aren't seeing any evidence that y'all have changed at all since the 1960s.

 

See above.

Look in the mirror...

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/portland-shooting-leaves-1-dead-as-pro-trump-group-clashes-with-blm.577706/page-12#post-1072009435​

 

Yes he claimed he was one.. What is your issue?

I DID NOT SAY HE WAS ONE...

So your little gotcha moment is gone now what?

 

I said he isn't one. Then you chimed in with, "Then he was pretending to be one....."

I see. You served up a meaningless comment.

Playing "gotcha" with one-liners is your shtick.

 

Hang on... you claimed that stacking minorities is bad and that's a thing of the DEMS,
while I sourced it's Donald who promotes that idea. You need to address that one before moving on.

 

Limbaugh is particularly good today......... because he repeated what I've been saying for weeks, the Left is trying to gin up a race war, and we should have no part of it..

To hell with those idiot rioting.. I want their masters.

 

You were unaware of what he was doing.. Yes he was helping people. Yes he treated people. Yes he claimed he was an EMT. No he is not an EMT.

Your ignorance on the topic does seem along with your posts on the matter do seem meaningless. My fault for trying to help you discuss the topic.

 

Illinois teen arrested in fatal shooting at Kenosha protest,

The people who chased Rittenhouse down, assaulted him and tried to shoot him - were they arrested?
Why not?

 

What problem are you trying to solve with section 8 housing is the better question. There are plenty of low paying jobs in the suburbs. By providing affordable housing for those workers, they can spend less on commuting and have access to different public schools. That less time and money spent commuting is money they can save to move into the house of the dreams, which isn't section 8 housing, or to further their skills and education to get a better paying job, etc. etc.

And there are plenty of republican voices in cities. They may not be in the majority or be the mayor, but most city councils have a range of voices from liberal to conservative. The idea that conservatives have zero say in how cities are run is wrong.

 

Well, one died so that's a tricky arrest. The other, so far, hasn't been proven to have committed any crime.

Remember, Rittenhouse ALREADY killed someone when they chased him. The crowd, and Rittenhouse, already identified himself as the shooter/killer. So by your standard, why should they be arrested? They were chasing, as far as they knew, a murderer.

 

Ah... the smell of social engineering. How awesome does that sound to suburbs who frankly exist because the engineering worked out so well in the metro areas..... Doesn't it ever occur to you that folks leave for a reason? And that reason isn't racism. It's quality of life. Can you guarantee that low income mandates in suburbs aren't going to bring crime with it? For those suburban areas that enjoy low crime, and frankly don't have public transportation for the most part, how do you expect said low income folks to populated the jobs you're just said you envy? Make suburbs pay for expensive low use BS transportation? How do you suppose suburbs will handle the influx of under performing students from metro areas? Do you expect that metro areas will ceed funds back to suburbs they dump their underperforming students on? Many of these metro areas also represent entirely different counties, and cities, so how do you suggest sublimation of tax revenue from the cities to those impacted suburban areas is going to work? Or do you just expect suburbs to shoulder the cost themselves? If suburbs don't get additional funding, all you've accomplished is diluting the quality you also seem to envy and destroy the efficacy of the suburban schools. Why would you want that? To make them suck just as badly as metro schools?

Your over generalizations are puerile. Your suggestions would lead to the ruination of quality for those who actually ran away to get it. To escape the hunger of democratic programatic bulk. You clearly don't see it, but the rest of us do.

How about this. As an example, most suburban schools in my area spend less money on kids per student than the large cities around us. How is that possible then that the large cities who spend so much more per student produce such a poor outcome? If suburbs generally produce say 90% off to college prospects, and the metro areas produce less than 70%, where is the efficacy of forcing the same crap on suburban areas?

Perhaps you should start addressing those problems, instead of trying to outsource them to make room for all that gentrification and increased tax base you lust after first.

 

Full disclosure: I live in a the king of all Denver suburbs. We have a Panera on every corner and very little diversity. In fact, the most ethnic thing we have, is Panera's "spicy" black bean soup. A Cuba Cuba! opened up and people went nuts. So you may want to rethink your lecture...too late...

No one can guarantee that, but have you ever considered why there is less crime in suburbs? It's because there's more wealth. People moving to suburbs don't do so to eradicate those advantages. Your vision that Urban, criminal king pins would eye the suburbs as an opportunity is silly. They already sell their drugs in the suburbs. Why? Because our kids can afford all the drugs! So what's for them to gain by ruining that? Nothing.

I have a bus stop that I can walk to from my house. I have a light rail station about 2 miles from my house from which I can get to downtown, the airport, the west side, the tech center, all over. What were you saying again?

Half of my neighbors ride/rode the light rail pre-Covid. Most of us now work from home. So again, what is it you think you know about all suburbs?

When you surround low performers with high performers, they improve. It's actually proven out time and time again. It's why sports teams pay so much for Tom Brady, because he makes any team he's on better. More over, suburbs have their own under-performing students. I know of two that live next door. They nearly failed three of their classes. I know they aren't the only ones.

School funding is done at the state level AND the local level. Local school funding is filled it by enrollment at the state level. So that's how the metro areas will "cede" funding back to the suburbs. If your state doesn't work that way, well it should. To not do that is stupid as hell.

The rest of us? No, the rest of us aren't on your side, buddy.

And I don't think you know where people are running to. I can't afford to live in the core of my metro area. Literally, it would take nearly a million more to buy less than what I have now. So are you so certain white flight is still a thing? Also, my jokes aside, my suburb is more diverse than it's ever been.

I don't believe you.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...s for city students,a recent study by EdBuild.

Unless you live in one of the red states on this map, and that's not a partisan color, even then, you will have prove this funding disparity you claim exists. But even then, the explanation has been known since at least 2001.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-GAO-03-234/html/GAOREPORTS-GAO-03-234.htm

Yes, nothing gets me hotter than an increased tax base. I live in Douglas County Colorado, so naturally, like all rich people, I do lust for more wealth and will use any means to get it. It's the American way.

Please skip my detailed yet puerile rebuttal of your fictional claims and answer me these questions only:

1. Do you support vouchers to pay poor students to leave under-performing schools to attend high performing ones?
2. Do you support parents CHOOSING which public schools their kids attend because theirs is under-performing?
3. If you do, where the hell do you think they will spend that voucher money to go? And which public schools do you think they will want to send their kids too? I live within walking distance of one the best private schools, and most expensive, in Colorado. So it's not just the better public schools that are here sometimes...
4. And if they choose to go there, why do you expect their parents not have the opportunity to live closer to the school their children get to attend to?
5. If you support taking money and giving it some under-performing student can afford a better school, and since by your argument all the better schools are in the suburbs, then why don't you support giving tax payer money to let their parents live near those schools...?

Give it some thought...

 

"Rittenhouse was then chased by protestors and fell, according to the complaint. At that point, Huber tried to pull Rittenhouse's gun away when he was allegedly shot and killed, according to the complaint. Rittenhouse then allegedly shot Grosskreutz, who had his hands in the air, in the right arm, according to the complaint."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/US/social-media-posts-linked-alleged-gunman-wisconsin-investigation/story?id=72644720

This is probably the most blatantly biased paragraph of media I've ever read. No mention of the skateboard or the gun pointed at his face.

But that article is in the top results on Google.

 

I've seen the a number of videos of the two incidents and the kid seems to have a good case of self-defense. It matters not that he was or wasn't an EMT, or delivering first aid.

See above.

 

You need to prove someone committed a crime before you can arrest them?
The video shows, clearly and without question, they assaulted him. - that, in and of itself, is sufficient evidence for an arrest.
So... where's the arrest?

 

Usually we arrest people on the middle of commission of a crime. Like being out after curfew and illegally carrying a firearm, as an example.

No, it shows a trash bag being thrown at him, then he kills that person, THEN they chase him down and he fires into the crowd killing one and wounding another. That’s what happened based on the video. No video shows three people randomly and unprovoked attacking him.

So if someone got into a fight with you and a friend in the street, and the person shot your friend and ran, and you chased him down and hit him with a skateboard and pistol in your hand, should you be arrested? The answer might be yes, but would you stand by that conclusion if it wasn’t black lives matters protesters is the question?

There’s no rush to arrest the guy Kyle shot. He’s in the hospital last I saw. They can arrest him at their leisure. Just like they did with Rittenhouse, letting him walk away and go home before bothering to arrest him. If they can wait that long to arrest on homicide charges, what’s another day or two on what, aggravated assault at best? I’m willing to bet he faces some consequence legal and civil for his part in the mess.