Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Race became a topic for the gun rally because white supremacists were planning to attend.
Did they show up?
The only people who said white supremacists were planning to show up were the mainstream media. The same people who told us there would be bloodshed today. The same people who said two weeks ago that we'd be in world war three with China and Russia over Iran. The same people who told us we would have a historic stock market crash within days after Trump winning the election.
Those are the people who said white supremacists were coming to Richmond.
Facts!
Fact - the #1 media source (doesn't get more mainstream than that!), FoxNews, reported yesterday:
"Also seen Sunday roaming the Capitol grounds was Alex Jones, the conspiracy theorist behind InfoWars.
Members associated with the Light Foot Militia, some of whom were banned from Charlottesville, Va., following the deadly 2017 "Unite the Right" rally, are expected to attend Monday's protest. Richard Spencer, a prominent white nationalist, has also indicated he might make an appearance."
https://www.foxnews.com/us/security-measures-heightened-as-thousands-head-to-richmond-for-large-gun-rights-rally
Here is the difference. Fox was reporting facts. Who was there... who may attend.
Other media hyped the "white supremacist" angle of this story as seen in the montage posted earlier.
The difference cannot be more stark.
I was just disputing the quote from PP:
"The only people who said white supremacists were planning to show up were the mainstream media"
Which is clearly untrue.
And FoxNews LOVES to stir up trouble,
even included this quote in bold: "All of our freedoms as Americans are under attack. We have to stand up for our rights."
Um. That was the whole point of this rally. Appropriate for that quote to be highlighted.
Please explain how
ALL of your freedoms as Americans are under attack? Bonus points if you can do it without sounding paranoid or hyperbolic.
It's absurd to even argue that liberties aren't under attack. Speech, privacy, property, expression, religion, due process, RKBA, they are ALL under attack from various interests, mostly the ever growing surveillance state, and those who would abet it for their own devices.
But at the end of the day, it is the implied power of an armed population that keeps a govt in check, by having the ability to challenge that govt by force and violence, in streets, if that govt pushes too hard against the will of the governed. The other enumerated rights secure and define a quality a freedom. The second amendment is the teeth behind all the others. And the Founders knew exactly what they were doing when they ensured the Citizenry be armed.
This isn't China. If our govt ordered the Army to drive tanks over hundreds of unarmed protesters as happened in Tienamen Square, that president and any members of congress who supported them would be gone in days, and if not, they'd find themselves under seige and being shot at until they fled the country. Look at what happened in Kent State. That was 4 students murdered by overzealous national guardsmen 50 years ago, and it helped bring down a president. People STILL talk about it today. What do you think would happen if a president ordered hundreds of protesters killed?
What really puzzles me about it all is this: if Trump is as bad as y'all say he is, then why on earth would you want to be disarmed against someone like that? If you really think the police officers of this country are bloodthirsty racist killers, then why in the hell would you want a world where those guys are the only ones with guns?
I've never understood this. It makes no sense at all.
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}