#Kyle rittenhouse trial

[godisarepublican]

They honestly are coming for you

This is real. I'm going to explain it and you will know that it's true...

If we hold an honest election then Trump wins. And if that happens the Left will go mental, rioting and burning our cities. The left will be the bad guys. The left will be the democracy hating fascists. The left will be the violent, intolerant scum. But..

But if they steal the election, and the more obvious this theft, the more egregious their crime, then the RIGHT will rise up. Then the RIGHT will be the bad guys. The RIGHT will be the "Enemy of the state." The RIGHT will be the democracy hating fascists who need to be contained. The right will need to be put under control.

In 2020 they went INSANE over every last conservative protest demanding constitutional government. But they had ZERO issues with leftists rioting, looting and burning down our cities. Because in the end it was the conservative who were challenging them. The right challenged their status, their privilege.

They are coming for you. They view you as the enemy. They are protecting the radical left and disposing of conservatives.

[grayheartart]

One and a half hour video of a lawyer going through the civil lawsuit of convicted child rapist Joseph Rosenbaum's estate, filed in court by attorney Kimberly Motley of Matthews, NC. The lawyer examining this civil lawsuit proceeds to tear it apart and call it out for what it is. Deceitful Law-fare that preys upon the general public's unfamiliarity with Rittenhouse's criminal trial. It is standard practice of the left and Democrats to deliberately misunderstand why they are wrong and openly lie, even to the courts, about settled facts that have been tested and supported.

[trendingnews25]

Killing of Jordan Neely

Read more

[odinsblog]

I told y’all about the Krassenstein brothers: Elon Musk has monetized their twitter accounts and now they’re singing the “both sides” bullshit for clicks. It’s only a matter of time until they round the corner into Libertarian, GOP-lite, Bill Maher + Glenn Greenwald territory.

As far as the Kyle Rittenhouse case goes, it’s extremely disingenuous for Ed to omit the fact that the judge bent over backwards to help Rittenhouse, and inexplicably threw out the charges that would he would have almost certainly been found guilty of—as a minor, 17-year-old Rittenhouse did not, by law, have a legal right to have that gun on his person. Not to mention, he crossed state lines to “protect” 🙄 a store where he was recorded days earlier saying how he wished he had a chance to shoot Black Lives Matter protesters. (Judge Schroeder didn’t allow that part in either).

Does anyone else remember how Judge Bruce Schroeder allowed Rittenhouse to hand pick his jurors??

Or does anyone else remember how Bruce Schroeder casually allowed a person who killed two people to stand directly behind him—without handcuffs? Tell me that image didn’t influence the jurors.

There was sO fucking much wrong with that case. The judge practically instructed the jurors to find Rittenhouse not guilty. It was anything but a fair trial.

Anyway, it might take years for the Krassenstein’s to completely show their true conservative neoliberal colors, but 1) it IS coming, and 2) don’t say you weren’t forewarned.

Related posts beneath the cut

👉🏿 https://www.tumblr.com/odinsblog/722670201637896193/finally-someone-put-it-into-words-they-want-to

👉🏿 https://www.tumblr.com/odinsblog/725376945094787072/mark-this-on-a-calendar-the-krassenstein-brothers

👉🏿 https://www.tumblr.com/odinsblog/711429140382990336/imagine-calling-other-people-disgusting

👉🏿 https://www.tumblr.com/odinsblog/668456167955185664

👉🏿 https://www.tumblr.com/odinsblog/668436797559341056

👉🏿 https://www.tumblr.com/odinsblog/668350399412060161

[lunarcovehq]

POPPY REED (REBECCA RITTENHOUSE) IS LOOKING FOR...

Connection: Younger Sister

Suggested Name: First name UTP, but last name would be Reed. They should have a nature based name like their other siblings - Poppy, Linden Jasmine (Who is their half sibling

Age Range: 29-34

Species: Witch or newly turned vampire/werewolf

Suggested FCs: UTP; We would prefer a blonde fc and some suggestions are Elizabeth Lail, Brianne Howey, Grace Van Patten, Virginia Gardner, Margot Robbie, Halston Sage, Jenny Boyd, Britt Robertson, Olivia Holt, Lily James, Josephine Langford, Madelyn Cline

Connection Description:

The twins were 6 they were taken away from Boston and memory wiped by their mother to forget Silas. They also had their last names changed to their mother’s surname. Your character would have been a baby/toddler still so most likely wouldn’t be subjected to as strong or any memory wiping at all.

They have a half sibling named Jasmine Chamberlain, that they were unaware of until 3 years ago when she came to town and told them of her existence.

Alyssa Reed remarried quickly to Miles Hale who would be their step dad as they grew up. Likely it was possible that they were close to Miles, since they would be the youngest and didn’t have a father figure already in their life.

Your character would always be have been treated as the baby of the family by the twins and their parents. They would be the one constantly protected and sheltered from the darkness of the world around them.

After the twins went away when they turned eighteen they were probably put even more on a lockdown by Miles and Alyssa and weren’t allowed to leave Lunar Cove. Wanting to prevent the family image from further being tarnished/losing another child.

When Miles and Yasmin (the former supreme) both died in 2022. Alyssa shaped your character up to be the next supreme even though they never wanted it. Thankfully they failed out of the trial pretty quickly, which cause discourse with Alyssa. Especially when Poppy later became Supreme.

In June 2023, Poppy was murdered by Kyle Kane. It caused an uproar in the coven which all present members (and non coven members) voted that she be brought back. Jasmine brought Poppy back, but as a result for bringing a her back Alyssa Reed died in her place.

Your character would also be aware Silas Chamberlain is their father since he was in town during December 2023, and he was turned into a werewolf by Nico Castillo. The family is still unsure where he is now, but they know someone like Silas doesn’t just die.

Please be sure to contact the player before applying:

Kourtney is available for DMs on @moonglowmagic !!

[grayheartart]

I am also okay with Colion Noir shooting a pedophile.

More to the point, I'm also okay with a "black Kyle Rittenhouse" shooting three men in self defense.

Because asserting your human rights isn't dependent on skin color.

Its a difficult lesson for Left Wingers to understand, I know.

[reasoningdaily]

As the world braced for the verdict of the Chauvin trial, in Columbus, Ohio, there was another fatal shooting of 16-year-old Black girl named Ma’Khia Bryant. Many who watched the graphic and gut-wrenching bodycam video have decried the officer who deemed it necessary to use lethal force to defuse a physical altercation involving the Black teenager.

When juxtaposing what feels like a never-ending pattern of police brutality against Black people with the treatment of white perpetrators, there is an obvious disparity that highlights the pervasive nature of systemic racism. White gunmen who commit heinous crimes are often treated differently, with police being able to apprehend white suspects and bring them safely into custody.

Three recent examples of this: 21-year-old Dylann Roof, who was safely arrested after entering Emanuel African Methodist Church in Charleston, South Carolina and killing nine people in 2015. What’s even more disturbing is reports that police brought Roof Burger King following his arrest. In 2020, during protests of the shooting of Jacob Blake in Kenosha, Wisconsin, a 17-year-old gunman, Kyle Rittenhouse, used an AR-15 assault rifle to kill two people and injured a third. Law enforcement apparently offered Rittenhouse and a group of militia members water at some point before the shooting took place.

In March 2021, after a gunman shot and killed eight people, with six of them being Asian, Cherokee County Sheriff’s Office Director of Communications remarked that the shooter was having a “really bad day.” These comments drew public outrage at the humanization of the mass shooter. Black youth aren’t given the opportunity to be humanized, with a number of tragic stories illustrating this.

Over a decade ago, 7-year-old Aiyana Stanley Jones was fatally shot by Detroit police who were looking for a murder suspect. In 2012, the world was gripped by the killing of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, who was shot by neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman, who thought Martin looked suspicious. In 2014, a Black youth named Tamir Rice was shot by police. Rice, who was only 12 years old, was thought to be 20 years old. In 2015, a video of McKinney, Texas police officer Eric Casebolt went viral. Casebolt was filmed yelling at Black teenagers and threw one teenage girl to the ground while kneeling on her back. The video sparked rightful outrage at the excessive force used on the young girl.

Examining patterns of police treatment towards Black youth highlights a prominent issue: the adultification bias, which is the phenomenon where adults perceive Black youth as being older than they actually are. When the adultification bias was examined, one study found that Black girls as young as five years old were perceived as being less needing of protection and nurturing, compared to their white counterparts.  

Research indicates that Black boys are perceived as older and less innocent when compared to their white counterparts. “Black boys can be seen as responsible for their actions at an age when white boys still benefit from the assumption that children are essentially innocent,” shared Phillip Atiba Goff, Ph.D., who authored a study examining this phenomenon in more detail. Black girls are treated disparately compared to their white counterparts and are more likely to be seen as older, while having to navigate the combined effects of racism and sexism.

The adultification bias contributes to the continued harm and abuse that Black youth face, not just at the hands of law enforcement, but also in the education system. When Black women and girls are mistreated, harmed and abused, it is less likely to be reported on. The Say Her Name campaign co-founded by scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw was designed to bring greater awareness to this issue.

Disrupting the adultification bias must first begin with awareness that this problem even exists. Despite the wealth of evidence detailing the ways it manifests, greater understanding is necessary. Training about the adultification bias should be mandatory, especially for folks working with and around Black youth populations. Understanding the ways that the adultification bias manifests as well as how to mitigate this type of bias is imperative.

Although research indicates that those who are marginalized are likely to internalize some of the biases and stereotypes about their own identity group, it is likely that having more Black people working with Black youth populations would lessen the occurrence of the adultification bias. One can assume that having experience and exposure to Black youth may increase one’s understanding, and limit the adultification bias from taking place. Resources must be allocated to support education about the adultification bias and how it can be interrupted. Lastly, rather than resorting to punitive measures when dealing with Black youth, we must encourage the learning of de-escalation and conflict resolution strategies.

[offender42085]

Post 0583

Dominick David Black, Wisconsin inmate 717987, Kenosha County (Wisconsin) inmate 161466, born 2001; released to probation August 2023

Vehicle Operator Flee/Elude Officer

Dominick Black, a friend of Kyle Rittenhouse who faced two felony charges for buying a rifle used by Mr. Rittenhouse, has agreed to plead no contest to lesser charges in a deal.

Mr. Black, 20, bought an AR-15-style rifle in May 2020 for Mr. Rittenhouse, who was then 17 and too young to buy the gun legally. Mr. Rittenhouse used the rifle when he killed two people and wounded a third during an altercation amid protests in Kenosha, Wis. Mr. Rittenhouse, who was acquitted of homicide and other charges after a trial, testified that he was acting in self-defense when he fired the weapon.

Mr. Black, who was a witness for the prosecution in Mr. Rittenhouse’s widely followed homicide trial, was initially charged with two counts of intent to sell a dangerous weapon to a minor, a felony. Under the agreement made public, Mr. Black agreed to plead no contest to a noncriminal county ordinance violation of contributing to the delinquency of a minor, his lawyer, Anthony Cotton, said during a brief hearing.

In the Kenosha courtroom where Mr. Rittenhouse’s trial took place, Judge Bruce Schroeder of Kenosha County Circuit Court accepted the plea agreement and imposed a fine of $2,000.

Thomas Binger, an assistant district attorney in Kenosha, said in court that he believed it was appropriate to dismiss the felony charges, given Mr. Black’s willingness to cooperate in the case, and to impose a fine.

“I believe that does serve as a form of punishment and a deterrence to anyone going forward into the future,” Mr. Binger said. “I do want to close by saying that I do believe that it is a serious offense to purchase a firearm for someone who is not legally able to do so. Our office will continue to vigorously prosecute those offenses. And it is still our office’s position that 17-year-olds should not go armed with firearms.”

During Mr. Rittenhouse’s trial, Mr. Black told the court that he bought the gun on a trip with Mr. Rittenhouse to northern Wisconsin, where Mr. Black’s family owned a hunting property, and stored it at his stepfather’s house in Kenosha for Mr. Rittenhouse. He said that on the day of the shooting in August 2020, as protests were unfolding in Kenosha, he and Mr. Rittenhouse brought their guns from Mr. Black’s stepfather’s house and drove downtown, where they cleaned graffiti and, at night, guarded used-car lots.

Mr. Black got to know Mr. Rittenhouse when he was dating McKenzie Rittenhouse, one of Mr. Rittenhouse’s sisters.

Subsequent to the Rittenhouse events, Mr Black has been arrested 4 times, three times in 2022 and once in 2023,  He has been charged with operating a vehicle with a suspended license, operating an unregistered vehicle, operating without insurance, fleeing LEO, bail jumping, operating at excessive speeds,  As of June 1, 2023 he is in jail on a conviction related to fleeing an LEO.  He was sentenced to 6 months. He was released to probation in August 2023.

3u

Last reviewed September 2024

[beardedmrbean]

I’m guessing not because he’s not being charged but suits against Rittenhouse wouldn’t count as double jeopardy, right?

Ya, it's not a trial to determine criminal responsibility.

I'm not too up on how the whole thing works because it's confusing as hell, but the idea is to try and determine civil liability.

He's not criminally responsible for the kiddy diddler getting stopped from diddling another minor, but they want to determine how much responsibility Kyle has for the fact that the gross pedophile got dead.

Whole social media world for that one was wild too, you got to see people that would send death threats to folks on here or twitter or reddt for drawing a picture they don't like because they think the fictional character is to young calling for the execution of someone who in self defense took out a real life pedo. Almost like some of them don't actually care about anything other than being bullies.

That carries a dollar amount no jail time, it's like when people sue police departments over anything they do even if the jury finds for the cops that may well have acted in self defense someone still want's to make a buck or 3 so they sue and it's usually cheaper to settle them out.

At times it's the only measure of justice a family can get.

and other times it's a nuisance cash grab from a estranged family that is actually partly responsible for the way the person turned out.

Either way there's no jail time, unless you don't pay the bill.

[newx-menfan]

I don't know why people still rage on and on about Kyle Rittenhouse. The trial confirmed that one of the guys pointed his gun at Kyle before Kyle pointed his gun at him and shot him in the arm; and that the first "victim" told people "if I catch any of you guys alone tonight, I'm going to fucking kill you". This is clearly a regrettable case of killing in self defense.

Three people are a “regrettable case of killing in self defense”….?

I mean let’s start with the fact that he was a Trump supporter who brought an AK-15 to a protest for the killing of Jacob Blake, whose using essentially the murders of these people to now create a career with the alt-right, who ONLY REALLY got off because he lucked out that the people he shot had prior criminal charges…😬

At a time where police brutality against POC is still heavily happening and ties back into the history of slavery, lynching, and Jim Crowe…

No matter what your political ideology is- I think everyone should frankly find the fact that he’s essentially using “killing people” as his source to fame frankly disgusting and distasteful. We live in a society- you don’t get to kill people simply because you disagree with them.

[godisarepublican]

[forthoseinterested]

Enduring falsehoods about Warren, Clinton

It’s generally more work to refute a false claim than to perpetuate it. And by the time somebody’s got around to figuring out why a claim is false, the audience has already heard about it and moved on to the next thing, because people don’t always bother verifying things before passing them along. There’s an old adage that says ‘a lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth can get its boots on’.

A related problem is how even after somebody investigates a false claim, the falsehood may linger in people’s minds because the correction doesn’t get as many views as the initial reporting. The result is that misinformation is often sticky, resistant to refutation.

For example, back when Kyle Rittenhouse was on trial, misinformation—claims of an unclear origin that had already been demonstrated to be false months earlier—was still being repeated on television, including by acting politicians. If you just watched the news, you may have heard people repeating that he illegally brought a gun across state lines, even though by that point it was known to be false. A surprising number of people had never seen the footage of the shooting even, a year after the event and with the trial ongoing, but still somehow managed to have strong opinions about it. I spoke with many people who mistakenly thought Rittenhouse had killed three black people, when every person he shot was white. Regardless of what you think about US gun law, there was something about that story that resulted in people having a difficult time getting the story straight.

There’s a story about Donald Trump that I considered misinformation from the day one, but which still lingers in the minds of people across the world years later: that he called a bunch of neo-Nazis ‘very fine people’—or rather said there are ‘very fine people on both sides’ when one of the two sides in question were a bunch of neo-Nazis. That’s obviously not the sort of thing you’d want the President to say, so of course people are upset, but this has always been a distortion of what was said that day, which was not unclear.

When Trump said “both sides” in that quote, the two sides he’s referring to weren’t “normal people and Nazis”. He meant people who wanted to take down the statue of Robert E. Lee and the people who opposed taking it down. That’s what the protest was originally about, and there were people defending the statue who weren’t Nazis. But Nazis showed up in the town to capitalize on the event, and ended up taking over the evening, turning it into their own thing. Trump said there were very bad people in the pro-statue group, like white supremacists, but some of them were very fine people who just opposed taking down a representation of their state history.

Here’s the relevant part of the transcript from the Politico. And the video footage is easy to find is easy to find online, if you want to listen to it instead.

REPORTER: Do you think what you call the alt left is the same as neo-Nazis? TRUMP: Those people – all of those people, excuse me – I’ve condemned neo-Nazis. I’ve condemned many different groups, but not all of those people were neo-Nazis, believe me. Not all of those people were white supremacists by any stretch. … Those people were also there because they wanted to protest the taking down of a statue [of] Robert E. Lee. … This week, it’s Robert E. Lee. I noticed that Stonewall Jackson’s coming down. I wonder, is it George Washington next week? … … [reporters then ask about other topics, before one brings it up again] … REPORTER: The neo-Nazis started this thing. They showed up in Charlottesville. TRUMP: Excuse me, they didn’t put themselves down as neo-Nazis, and you had some very bad people in that group. But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group—…. I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down, of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name. REPORTER: George Washington and Robert E. Lee are not the same. TRUMP: George Washington was a slave owner. … So will George Washington now lose his status? … How about Thomas Jefferson? What do you think of Thomas Jefferson? You like him? Okay, good. Are we going to take down his statue? He was a major slave owner. Are we going to take down his statue? You know what? It’s fine, you’re changing history, you’re changing culture, and you had people – and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally – but you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists, okay? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly. REPORTER: I just didn’t understand what you were saying. You were saying the press has treated white nationalists unfairly? TRUMP: No, no.

If you look at any big news reporting of the day before that march at night with the tiki torches, it does seem like there was a big crowd of normal people standing around. Can we say those guys were fine people? Not that I know anything about them, so maybe they’re not fine people, but at least they don’t seem like Nazis.

By the way, call it a broken clock, but Trump was right about people coming after statues of George Washington, and various other historical figures for that matter, many of them not clearly ‘bad guys’ like many of us view the American Confederates. That’s just where it started. We were going through some kind of ‘historical figure purity mania’. It seems to be over by now, but that was the atmosphere at the time.

The only way I can see somebody thinking Trump called Nazis fine people is if they just read that one sentence out of context. They read a Nazi rally happened, and they see a headline: “Trump on Charlottesville: ‘Very fine people’ on both sides”. Then they don’t bother looking into it at all.

But do you realize what’s happening here? What am I doing? Why are we wasting our time trying to grant Trump some level of charitability? Even if you subtract all of this from the public record, it’s not like you’re going to do a 180 and decide you like Trump now. It’s like having an argument about whether or not Hitler beat his wife. The fact he didn’t call Nazis fine people doesn’t matter when it’s in the shadow of all the other terrible things Trump has said. So I have little practical reason to care.

Nor does it even vindicate his response to this one event. Think about it: a literal neo-Nazi rally just happened in modern America. Why would your main concern be pointing out that some of the people who were on the same side as the Nazis on some local political issue aren’t so bad? This is obviously a failure of your duty to condemn hatred and extremism. Look at how other Republicans responded:

“The Nazis and Klansmen and white supremacists who gathered there — they’re racists, they’re bigots, they’re idiots, and they’re spreading lies.” — Ted Cruz “America must always reject racial bigotry, anti-Semitism, and hatred in all forms.” — statement by George W. Bush and his father George H. W. Bush “We must be clear. White supremacy is repulsive. This bigotry is counter to all this country stands for. There can be no moral ambiguity.” — Paul Ryan

Imagine a mirrored scenario. It’s 2022 and there’s a conflict in some American city. Let’s say a city government plans on taking down something public that left-leaning people favour. To match the controversy aspect, let’s say it’s a statue of somebody with a complicated past, like Harvey Milk or Huey P. Newton. A left-wing protest is planned, right-wing couter-protesters show up, and then a bunch of communists and antifa show up and win the day, culminating in a big ol’ communist march where people with torches go around chanting death to America, we hate Christianity, we’re coming for your children (because yes, left-wing activists have literally chanted that before). The next day, videos of masked figures with pictures of Mao Tse-tung and signs with slogans like “liberals get the bullet too” circulate on the news and flood social media.

How do you think Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Nancy Pelosi, Gavin Newsom, Chuck Schumer, and any other major Democratic Party figure you can think of, would respond the next day? Where would their focus be? What kind of language would they use?

It feels insane to ‘defend’ Donald Trump by pointing out his bad, stupid, irresponsible response wasn’t quite as bad as people think. There are better people worth defending.

Let’s explore an example.

Elizabeth Warren didn’t pretend to be an American Indian

If a person has done 100 things wrong, and you learn 1 of those things was misreported, your overall opinion of them is likely not significantly changed, because they’ve still done 99 things wrong. This is going to be the case with a figure like Donald Trump who’s done a great many things to upset people and impugn his own character, but sometimes just one or two lies can dominate the reputation of an otherwise reputable person, meaning if they were to be refuted, your opinion about them could significantly change.

Such is the case with Elizabeth Warren. She’s been a US Senator from Massachusetts since 2013 and gained significant publicity from her 2020 bid for the Democratic Party presidential nomination. In terms of her political positions, she’s somebody many Americans will find disagreeable, but in terms of her conduct and character has always been a respectable and honest actor. Despite this, there are many people whose knowledge and impression of her consists mostly of the following story:

she claimed to be a Native American,

Trump called her out on it publicly,

she took a DNA test that confirmed she was lying, and was only like 0.1 percent Native or something,

and then had to issue an apology to the actual Native Americans.

How embarrassing!

It was reported that Warren did write ‘American Indian’ on a form at some point decades earlier, but it didn’t seem to confer any advantage in her schooling or work—it was just an optional write-in for data collection. The Boston Globe also investigated the matter and reported that in ‘documents and interviews’ there was not only no evidence of anybody thinking of Warren as a Native American, but clear counter-evidence, indicating Warren was always viewed and considered a white woman by those who hired her.

I can’t find the original text, but apparently Warren also contributed to a ‘local cookbook’ in 1984 called Pow Wow Chow, which was meant to feature Indigenous themed recipes, and she’s billed as Elizabeth Warren, Cherokee. Did she just say her family had Cherokee ancestry, so she figured some old family recipes could basically be considered Cherokee recipes? Supposedly she contributed recipes for sugar cake and peach cobbler, and the book was made by a cousin of hers back in Oklahoma, where Warren was born. Publications like The Daily Mail ran articles about this cookbook, claiming Warren’s recipes weren’t proper Cherokee dishes, or weren’t really generational family recipes, and she probably just copied them from a newspaper! And hey, maybe she did. Maybe she thought it was just a cookbook and didn’t think anyone would really care or look into it. Maybe they’re wrong and these were all recipes that her grandmother taught her, so she figured they counted as Cherokee recipes. There’s barely any info to go off, so I don’t know, and I don’t think I care.

Wouldn’t it be nice if people paid this much attention to every random thing a Republican politician lied about? Why was so much poured into this, of all things? It wasn’t even something Warren brought up on the campaign trail. It’s not like she got on stage and said “elect me and I’ll be the first Native American senator” or something like that. It was never part of her public persona. Nobody knew or cared about it until her opponent brought it up, and it’s somehow been a defining part of Warren’s public image ever since. It’s one of the worst cases I know of an undeservedly bad reputation.

Trump got wind of it and started adding to the dishonest telling of events, because of course. Warren pretends to be a Native American, he says, but she’s not really, so let’s all sarcastically call her ‘Pocahontas’. Trump then brought up the notion of her getting a DNA test, claiming that he would pay a million dollars to a charity of her choice if she got a test result that says she’s Indian. And to everyone’s surprise, Warren did just that, and asked Trump to give the money to the American Indigenous Women’s Resource Center. He didn’t.

Let’s take a step back, though.

What did Warren actually claim about herself?

For one, it wasn’t that she’s genetically Native. Nor did she claim to have tribal citizenship, or call herself a member of an Indian tribe, or even say she knew somebody who was a tribal member. The only thing she ever really said was she remembers, while growing up, she and her brothers being told their family had Native ancestry, and this connection was ‘part of [their] story’ as a result. What does that mean? For some people it’s obvious, but for others maybe not.

We all have four grandparents, but it’s normal for our grandparents to have very different levels of influence on our lives. Let’s say your granddad on your father’s side is from Japan—but your father’s mum died when he was young, and your mother’s parents aren’t around much. I know a person in this exact situation. He’s genetically a quarter Japanese, but being Japanese is a big part of how he views himself, because he grew up in a household whose internal culture was largely influenced by Japanese media, he grew up knowing how to speak the language, and he had the constant presence of his Japanese grandfather.

And it can get worse. Imagine if we found out that genetically, that grandfather was only half-Japanese himself. What if he grew up in Japan, with one Japanese parent and one parent whose family was from Brazil, of Hungarian descent? But he looked Japanese, only spoke Japanese, never went to Hungary or Brazil, and only thought of himself as a Japanese person. And if he went to Japan, that’s how he would be viewed and treated. Now that friend would only be 1/8 Japanese genetically. So if he claims to have Japanese heritage, is he lying?

The point is when you’re talking about culture, upbringing, identity, and stories, things are a little hazy. It’s entirely plausible Warren had an old relative, like a great-grandfather, who the rest of the family considered to be a Native American, and that grandfather could’ve had a big influence on their family at some point. That wouldn’t be detectable on a DNA test, but could still influence how a family views itself and how they talk about their identity with their kids growing up.

“I knew it was part of our family. … It was part of what we talked about. … It was just part of who we were.” — Elizabeth Warren, speaking in 2012

Reporters called Warren’s extended family back in 2012 to ask about their memory of this matter. Her second cousin (i.e. their grandparents were siblings), Ina Mapes, 77, said it was her father who had Native American roots, and that his father agreed he was one-quarter tribal blood, as they put it. Meanwhile, all of Elizabeth Warren’s siblings came forward issuing a statement in her defense, saying “we grew up listening to our mother and grandmother and other relatives talk about our family’s Cherokee and Delaware heritage” (Delaware here refers to the Delaware Tribe in Oklahoma, not the US state of Delaware).

Oklahoma is one of the US states with the highest percentage of people who claim to have Native Indian ancestry, and experts think the number could be far higher than reported due to widespread intermixing (somebody who’s half-Indian genetically is still ‘a person with Indian ancestry’, so the more intermixing that happened, the more people can say that about theirselves) and historical racism against Indians that caused some Indians who had light enough skin they could pass as white, or just convince a US census-taker they were, to do so and to go on. This could cause disagreement as to whether somebody was really an Indian or not—and in the past, there were benefits to denying it. This causes a lot of ambiguity later on, when kids are trying to figure out if their father was part-Indian or if he wasn’t. They might know a person who claims he wasn’t, but they also know people could just be saying that out of shame and because Indians were looked down on in the state at the time.

The geneticist who did the test confirmed Warren was mostly of European DNA, but with signs of an ‘unadmixed’ (i.e. not part-European) Indian ancestor 6 to 10 generations ago. That sounds like a wide range because it is—these tests are generally imprecise and suck. There was also some question about the validity of this test because the database used mostly Natives from Central and South America, with a lack of samples from American tribes. Not interested in getting into this level of detail, most people just saw that ‘6 to 10 generations ago’ statement and ran with it, claiming her test results confirmed she was 1/64 to 1/1024 Indian. That’s 1.56% to 0.1%, an amount so trivial that claiming to be Native American would be taken as tantamount to a falsehood, which is how a lot of them thought the story ended.

The problem with this whole conversation is tribal identity isn’t genetic. That’s what Warren actually apologized for—not claiming to be Native, but talking about Native identity as though it’s a genetic phenomenon and as though ‘being Indian’ was a question of your DNA in the first place. Chuck Hoskin Jr, then-secretary of the Cherokee Nation, made public statements indicating his displeasure not with her claiming to be Indian but with how the topic was being framed. In the mainstream of white America, being ‘Native American’ is often talked about like a race, like being black, but that’s not how they view it, and that’s not how they want us to view it either. Imagine it’s the 17th century and a member of an Indian tribe has children with a European. In the Indians’ view, those children aren’t ‘half-members’. They’re just members. They grow up among them, they identify as one of them, they are one of them. It was even possible for people with no genetic connection to any Indian tribe to become members. By comparison, would you use a DNA test to determine whether somebody is an American citizen? No, because it fundamentally couldn’t determine that. And to even take a DNA test for that reason implies something wrong about what it means to be an American and could cause offense.

Elizabeth Warren understands this. And she realized the act of releasing a DNA test—albeit one that people more ignorant on the topic had demanded—helped cause further confusion about the concept of tribal citizenship. That’s why she apologized, and tried to clarify to the press that she’s not a member of any tribe—something she never claimed, but realized people were mistaking her claim to have been. That apology played all over the internet, where people misinterpreted it as being her admitting she was factually wrong to ever claim she had Native ancestry. Warren apologized because she has a conscience and cares about this issue. And she is still, on the whole, viewed positively by the American Indian community. After this whole ordeal, Deb Haaland, the first American Indian elected to the US Congress, called Warren a great partner for Indian Country, endorsing her for President.

Let’s state this, in conclusion: Elizabeth Warren didn’t claim to have Native ancestry to advance her career in law or politics. Nor did she lie about having Native ancestry at all—except maybe exaggerating it for a cookbook back in 1984, that she probably didn’t think any of us would ever read. The public statements she made about her ancestry since getting into politics have all turned out to be true. And the DNA test she took didn’t disprove her story. It confirmed it.

Taking a step back, realize that Warren’s opponents had to focus on this bullshit smear because they had nothing else on her. She had no other obvious weaknesses or controversies, beyond actual policy disagreements, and god forbid anyone talk about policy in politics. That won’t work. What other criticism of her can you recall anybody making, ever? They found this one thing and latched onto it as hard as they could, repeating it until it dominated the conversation. The right-wing media played into it, and then the Republican president played into it. She couldn’t get away.

But Warren isn’t the woman in American politics who’s been most unfairly defamed over the years. That title has to go to one Hillary Clinton, first lady of the US in 1993–2001, Senator from New York in 2001–2009, secretary of state for the Obama administration in 2009–2013, and the Democratic Party’s nominee for the 2016 presidential election.

Hillary Clinton and her damn emails

The story, as many people now remember it, is that some number of years ago Hillary Clinton was subpoenaed for some reason—something about how she was handling classified information, maybe?—and then she responded by deleting all of her emails off her private email server, which she wasn’t even supposed to have anyway. The nerve! And who knows how many crimes she hid by doing so.

I can’t think of any other story that has been so overblown politically. The Republican Party brought this up as often as they could. In the Trump Cinematic Universe, “but what about Hillary’s email server?” became a magical sentiment, and carte blanche for them to engage in any corruption and criminality they wanted. Because who cares? Hillary did it. If she can be corrupt, then so can we!

The most powerful force in politics in recent decades is disillusionment. Not convincing us the bad guys are great, but convincing us the good guys aren’t so great. If everyones bad, if we all crime and we all sin and we’re all terrible, then what’s the difference? Why lift a finger to fight evil if everyone is evil? This is the effect that’s helped normalize the latest incarnation of the Republican Party, and Hillary Clinton was a centrepiece of that strategy. (The same tactic motivates people to argue that Churchill was actually the villain of World War II.)

What’s true? Clinton and her team used a private email server, which means an email server that wasn’t the official state department email. Then Clinton and her team mishandled classified documents via email. Is that a problem? Yes, of course—but it’s also a broad problem, not only with Clinton but with seemingly all top-level American executives. That’s why the Trump administration had similar issues (link) (another link) (and another), and now we’re seeing them again in the second Trump administration. Even the FBI director that investigated Clinton has made similar mistakes. The reality is these older people in government all prefer to use their own devices and not bother thinking about security, which is why the FBI has to go around trying make them follow the rules. It only became a huge story worthy of a national spotlight when Clinton was the one being targeted.

In 2016, the FBI director stated there was no evidence to suggest Clinton had deliberately done anything wrong, and that no reasonable prosecutor would bring criminal charges against her if she coöperated. That’s usually how cases like this played out. It’s resistance to enforcement of these rules that gets you into serious trouble, not making a mistake but then allowing it to be corrected when somebody contacts your office about it.

(In 2022, when the FBI launched an investigation into Trump for his mishandling of classified info after his presidency, the issue there was he actively disobeyed and fought with the FBI, tried to hide the documents he knew he had, instructed his lawyers to lie to investigators, and other malicious actions that are very much the opposite of coöperation. Nothing like this happened in Clinton’s case—nor in Joe Biden’s similar classified documents case the following year.)

In February, Clinton publicly argued she didn’t send anything that was classified, but admitted things may have been classified retroactively. Let’s think: if I send you a document and then it’s declared classified the next day, who’s coming to your house and marking that as classified on your email server, or deleting it from your server if you no longer have a right to view it? I don’t know how that’s handled. Is classified stuff just never supposed to be emailed? But what about things that are made classified after it’s been emailed already?

In July, after the FBI had looked into this more, they revealed Clinton’s defense was partially true: thousands of emails containing classified info were classified after they were sent. But hundreds more contained info that was classified at time of sending, some of it explicitly labelled as such and some not. It’s possible Clinton or members of her team didn’t realize things they were sending were classified, and that the marking system being used was unclear. That’s when the FBI director said there was no evidence of wrongdoing and that no reasonable prosecutor would charge Clinton with anything.

But that wasn’t the end of it, because then once again, in late October 2016, the FBI notified Congress it had found more emails and was reöpening their investigation, looking into the matter once more. This turned up nothing—but the announcement, less than two weeks before an election, couldn’t have been less talked about. This controversy about Hillary Clinton’s email server received more media coverage than any other topic or issue throughout the whole year-long election season. As a reminder, the man she was running against was on record saying climate change was a hoax invented by China.

What about her deleting all her emails once they were subpoenaed?

That part was always a lie. There was no evidence for it, they knew there was no evidence for it, but they asserted it anyway, repeatedly, and millions believe it.

It’s normal procedure for large organizations to delete emails every so often, and to destroy electronic devices every so often. It’s the same way organizations don’t hold onto paperwork forever. If the police try to find your emails and it turns out they’d been deleted, that doesn’t necessarily mean anything. There would need to be evidence the emails were deleted after the fact, in response to the subpoena, to avoid being found. Then you might have something. And that’s not at all what happened here.

For their email, Clinton and her team used servers provided by some networking company. They had been configured to automatically delete emails every so often. In 2014, somebody who worked for Clinton requested to shorten the retention period to a few months to clear out personal emails they no longer needed. The technician at the company, for some reason, didn’t bother. Perhaps he forgot. The following year, a House committee issued a subpoena, somebody who worked for Clinton contacted that company, and the employee realized he hadn’t made that change like they requested months ago, so he instantly deleted all the emails that were supposed to have been deleted the year before.

Despite many other emails being recovered, and despite Clinton herself having no connection to the deletion, her Republican opponent got on stage and claimed Clinton deleted all her emails after a subpoena to hide evidence, and right-wing voices across the country echoed the claim ad nauseam. By late October, when the FBI director said he was reöpening the investigation, the public was primed to interpret that as confirmation of everything the Republicans had been alleging.

It was openly suggested the mere fact Clinton was under investigation at all was a strong reason to not elect her president. How quaint that seems now in hindsight, no?

Hillary Clinton at worst accidentally mishandled some classified documents. And she isn’t supposed to be using a private email server at all, according to rules about that sort of thing for government officials, and she probably knew better. This is one of those things that ‘everybody’ does wrong, though—not that it excuses her, but it makes focusing on her in particular unjustified. And then everything else you’ve heard about the email server scandal has been misinformation.

Wait, what about Benghazi?

Why was Hillary Clinton even being subpoenaed to begin with? It has something to do with Benghazi, a city in Libya. The US had facilities there, and in 2012 an Islamic militant groups attacked on September 11 (yes, deliberately, because of 9/11). This led to four Americans dying, including the US Ambassador to Libya.

There were various Congressional committees that investigated the matter, and none were able to produce anything substantive to charge either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton with any kind of improper behaviour. Obama and Clinton both acted properly while being investigated, including Clinton giving testimony before a committee under oath three separate times. The third one lasted for 11 hours. After the hearing, the Republican in charge of it told the press they hadn’t uncovered anything noteworthy. (link) (link) An enormous amount of time and energy was poured into trying to get her on something, anything—and it all failed.

Whose fault was the attack, really? I don’t know. But neither do the people who wanted you to think it was all Hillary Clinton’s fault. That was all for show.

Hillary became a lightning rod for right-wing dissatisfaction with ‘the establishment’. The angle of attack was that she had been in politics for so long—being the wife of a US president, then being a senator, then working as secretary of state, always so close to power—that she must be corrupt, and is therefore to blame for the present state of the country. They held hearings about Benghazi over and over because they wanted to create the illusion that she must’ve done something wrong pertaining to Benghazi, despite all their investigations and hearings amounting to nothing.

Today, baseless conspiracy theories have become open and accepted on the right. Back in 2016, it was only the beginning, and much of it began around Hillary Clinton. In addition to all the lies about her email server and the irresponsibility of the media and the FBI to not mislead the public about that story, another major point that affected her campaign was an organization called 'WikiLeaks' facilitating Russian hackers targeting John Podesta, Clinton's campaign chairman, and releasing his emails to the public. It was later revealed the Trump campaign was in direct contact with both WikiLeaks (link) (second link) and with Russian operatives.

This led to conspiracy theories online about Democratic Party leaders engaging in satantic rituals and pedophilia—theories which WikiLeaks itself helped promote—including the infamous ‘pizzagate’ conspiracy theory, in which it was alleged that ‘pizza’ was being used as a coded message in these emails to hide a human trafficking and child sex ring in plain site. This led some believers in the theory to attack random pizzerias in Washington D.C.

During this time, people on the internet were calling her ‘Killary’ and fantasizing about her assassinating all her political opponents, or people who were involved in these leaks, or people at WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks even tried to push a fabricated quote of Hillary advocating to kill Julian Assange (the company’s founder and director) in a drone strike.

Marie Antoinette

Finally, while we’re on the topic of women who an undeservedly negative reputation (well, I only mentioned two people and they were both coincidentally women, but three’s a crowd), let’s give an honourable mention to Marie Antoinette (1755–1793), who is now most remembered as the speaker of a fabricated quote: when told the poor could not afford bread, it’s said she replied, “then let them eat cake” (the idea being that when she was out of bread, she simply ate something else instead—why don’t they?).

An Austrian princess, Marie Antoinette was born ‘Maria Antonia’, but chose to use the French version of her name after being married off at age 14 to Louis Auguste, who was not yet King of France, but heir apparent under the reigning Louis XIV. They would ascend to the throne a mere four years later. The fact she was from Austria was used against her throughout her life, as the two countries were during this period not on the best of terms.

The revolutionaries wanted to stoke anger in France to incite the public to revolt. For them, Marie Antoniette became a symbol of everything they believed was wrong with France. In addition to making up this quote, intended to portray her as so clueless and privileged as to be completely out of touch with the reality faced by most common people, they also claimed she had illegitimate children, told stories about her stealing from the palace, and blamed the country’s financial difficulties on her lavish personal spending (for, like other French noblewomen, she had rather nice things). The “let them eat cake” attribution doesn’t even make sense, for we know rather well that Marie was not ignorant of the conditions of the poor, nor the relative value of bread and cake. It was a cartoonish exaggeration.

Though she wasn’t without any political agency, and did take action designed to help preserve the monarchy—as one should expect of a noblewoman who has known no life but the one she was given—Marie Antoinette was essentially an innocent woman, a victim of circumstance, a scapegoat. She died at age 37, executed in public by decapitation after being accused of all sorts of things. Her last recorded words are said to have been “Pardon me, sir, I did not do it on purpose”, after stepping on her executioner’s shoe—something far more in character for a woman who was as much a paragon of high society as she. (I lean towards those actually being her last words, because it seems like a strange thing for the revolutionaries to have just made up.)

[terriwriting]

Is Kyle Rittenhouse a secret transgender agent of the deep state? QAnon investigates.

On Telegram channels from prominent Q pushers, the claim Rittenhouse was at Sandy Hook continued, alongside conspiracy theories about his trial. “Did you know that the courtroom he was in had green screen fails all over it? He was also one of the kids that was shot in Sandy Hook. Same exact kid,” wrote one comment. “Paid operative of the deep state,” replied another other.

Totally not a cult!

[youhavethewrong]

Hey Yui, that post you reblogged about 30 mins ago is kyle rittenhouse. Just wasnt sure if you were aware. Jic context needed alt right fuck that like. Killed people

Yeah, I'm aware of who he is. The fucker who cried fake tears during trial and it worked.

The thing with those memes is that, the way I see it, they're pretty much about calling him dumb. Like the joke is that he's defending stupid things with stupid arguments. They're at his expense.

But if it's something that you guys think it's inappropriate or makes you uncomfortable still let me know

[mineofilms]

Compromises to Freedom: IV

“Is evil something you are? Or is it something you do?” ~Patrick Bateman in Bret Easton Ellis’s, American Psycho (1991).

“There is an idea of peace, some kind of abstraction, but there is no real peace, only an entity, something illusory, and though we can hide our cold gaze and we can shake our heads and feel love, hate and maybe we can even sense our lives may actually be comparable: we simply are not there. We are not listening. We do not care. We have all the characteristics of human beings—flesh, blood, skin, hair—but our tendencies to depersonalize our feelings about a thing, a person or groups of people, is so intense, had gone so deep, that our normal ability to feel compassion and empathy has been eradicated, the victim of a slow, purposeful erasure of humanity, life, love and then death. We are simply imitating reality, a rough resemblance of human beings, but not human beings. Monsters, with only a dim corner of our minds, bodies and souls functioning like a normal person.” ~Me, inspired by American Psycho.

Israel vs Palestine - My opinion has been well documented. I have posted two previous blogs specific to this subject and another four in the “Compromises to Freedom” series that started with my blog “…Perhaps…” and “Compromises to Freedom: One.” “…Perhaps…” is a comparison to how Hitler and the Nazis gained, consolidated and executed power to how woke-progressivism is nearly the same thing, conceptually. This was during the BLM/Georg Floyd riots. “Compromises to Freedom: Two” is about the frustration with the lack of constructive logical debate that uses common sense and critical thinking surrounding nonsensical issues like the Kyle Rittenhouse trial, what the extreme-woke-left perception of minority issues displayed as majority issues and those issues be labeled as normal and/or everyday ‘FACTS,’ with no debate whatsoever on the validity of that logic. "Compromises to Freedom: Three" digs into the pressing concerns surrounding the restricting of free expression on platforms such as Twitter. It has logic and insight on instances of censorship and draws striking parallels to historical events like Nazi propaganda and authoritarian regimes bent on misery for its citizens. I consistently emphasize the significant importance of raising a diverse range of perspectives and simplifying meaningful debate so we can solve problems. How can one be calm, use their mind to solve a problem, any problem, when they are heavily emotionally-compromised? I have researched heavily on the disdain both groups have for one another. If you want a full recap on this history lesson you are going to have to read those blogs. I am only going to paraphrase here. I am more focused on how some think of Hamas as some real government, that is considered by most of the world as a terrorist group, invading a sovereign country, killing its innocent citizens, kidnapping the ones they didn’t kill, murdering of young children and the raping of Israeli women; and have those acts celebrated as some sort of important claim to independence for Palestinians. Most agree this is and was a horrible act committed, but now we have a faction that feels the Palestinians of Hamas are just for executing these actions in this fashion. The blogs on the history and my feelings up to that point can be found below.

—See— —Eradicatio— Latin for Eradication https://mineofilms.me/121-2/ —See— —War of Bantha Poodoo— https://mineofilms.me/127-2/

—Historical Topics That Are Relevant, See— • 1000 BC – Roman Empire rebranding the territory ‘Palestine’ as an insult. • 1923 – Britain. When we finally get to “modern-day.” • 1948 – "al-Nakba" – Creation of the state of Israel. • 1967 – 6-Day War. • 1987-1993 – The First Intifada. • 2000-2005 – The Second Intifada. • 2018 – The relocation of the US embassy to Jerusalem. • 2023 – 10/7/2023, the first invasion of Israeli territory since 1948.

There has not been much change in the conflict abroad. Israel continues to flatten the Gaza Strip while planning another incursion to finish off the hierarchy of Hamas, but sentiment over here in the United States has turned downright hostile as Hamas-support framed as ‘Free-Palestine-support’ becomes even more desperate as Israeli forces move toward their goal of the utter dismantling of Hamas. Colleges around the country have seen an influx of violent and anti-Semitic protests aimed at Jewish students and Jewish people altogether. The college protests started semi-peaceful; as students were protesting the war's death toll of innocent casualties of war and are calling for universities to separate themselves from any companies that are advancing Israel's military efforts in Gaza. The protest movement was sparked at New York's Columbia University on April 17th 2024 when students pitched tents in the middle of campus and began rallying in support of Palestinians in Gaza. The protests turned from semi-peaceful to downright violent and anti-Semitic when crisis-actors and ‘professional protesters/rioters’ began showing up and leading the charge. College campus encampments across the country have become synonymous to riots as anger grows ever more idiotic over their demands. Pro-Palestinian activists want their colleges to 'divest,' or deprive Jews. Divestment, for many of the protesters, means cutting those endowments' ties to Israeli companies or ones that do business with Israel. Many also want their universities to end academic relationships with Israeli institutions. Protests have spread across more than 60 university campuses in the United States, resulting in more than 2,000 arrests in two weeks. The “Compromises to Freedom” series always talks about how fiction and/or history can always either happen or happen again if we are not careful with how slowly we are giving up our freedoms to make compromises for others, sometimes, even lessor minds. No one is the same over here in America. We are not a communist country where everyone has nothing and it is that nothing that is the only thing they have in common while the governing state has everything. The “Compromises to Freedom” series was meant to be short warnings, touching on politics but not being solely about politics, but like I have been seeing over the years, overlapping conceptual understanding was inevitable. These blogs get longer and longer when they are supposed to be really short. I write these more/less to remember my feelings and how I remember things. I never want to forget how I feel about my reality around me because if we ever do we will never really believe reality is even real. If you remember something happening but it actually didn’t happen that way, did it happen at all as we remember it?

History Lesson:

…Perhaps…6/2020

“You have a large pool of people. 10%, perhaps, of them are there for the right reasons. The other 90%, perhaps, are just there to be a terrorist for their own purposes. With the umbrella of that will create change…”��~Me, 6/1/2020

Just imagine if the law worked how it works in Judge Dread. A cop has the legal right to arrest you, sentence you and execute you right there on the spot with no lawyer to defend you… Or you can try your luck in an American society was that of the show "The Man in High Castle," where the US loses World War II due to conservatives slowing down atomic bomb research. Where the Nazis develop the bomb first and destroy Washington DC. The United States is divided between a Nazi-run East and Middle and Japan occupies the West Coast. We all would be singing a different tune living under this Nazi States of America. In the show, Blacks and Jews are murdered off in Nazi America in the same fashion as they are in Poland. Gathered up, robbed, worked till they die or off to the gas chamber they go. In the West Coast Jews are murdered and Blacks are treated as if it were the year 1900. In the show this is law and society accepts it.

Point: We need change but be careful in which how we go about that change…

Compromises to Freedom: One6/2020

There are lots of reasons to be concerned about the state of society and the potential dangers of unchecked extremism. The United States is teetering on the brink of Germany 1933 territory. This could all happen, all over again, here in the US.  What people are willing to accept these days without really having a conversation about it? People want change so much, but they must be careful for which how they go about that change. Gain power, consolidate power and then dictate power... That is very plausible right now. It’s been already happening slowly. The seeds planted around 2020. It takes a few year to grow. Took a decade in Germany too. We’re making more and more Compromises to Freedom, Freedom Thinking, Experiencing Freedom… The more divided we are, the weaker we are, the more desperate we become, the more we need gov’t to tell us what is safe and what is bad. Take millions of people, ruled by a few. Let the few decide everything for the millions of people. Let’s take the millions of people, herd them all together, put them in squares/rectangles, and stack them on top of one another, call’em ‘cities.’ It’s all messed up…

Compromises to Freedom: Two11/2021

1.45 years later more parallels to the rise of Nazi Germany but from the progressive mob saying they are for freedom, but really taking it away. I am extremely disappointed in the lack of unity during crises and those who resort to rhetoric (smart talk with made up facts) rather than engaging in constructive logical problem solving. The importance of relying on verifiable facts (real-stuff) rather than imaginative narratives shaped by media biases that grossly distorts logic and the facts as they are. There’s a divergence of society, both extreme left and right factions lack rational common sense, logic and resort to BS rhetoric disguised as semantics. Always question the narratives presented by media and their political agendas. The law is black and white till it’s not…

Compromises to Freedom: Three11/2022

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former.” ~Albert Einstein. Don’t Matters, Generation Asshole or Generation Zero. These are just labels that describe their behavior… All the triggering hateful shit these people use as their counter-argument, literally equals, ZERO. Hence, Generation Zero… The politics of both sides lack the ability to take a piece of poop, dress it up, remove the smell and then present that as food for human consumption. Either side will NEVER be able to convince me that the POOP they serve is anything other than POOP… LOL, Literally; AKA POOP Logic… Cancel Culture this, WOKE that, Good, Bad, Right, Wrong, For, Against, Moral, Immoral, Gay, Straight, Black, White, Asian, Privileged, Livin’ on the Streets, Islamophobe, anti-Semitic, FK You Already Karen…

If we change what happened before to seem lesser by rewriting history or downplaying its significance, we will absolutely repeat it and its looking that way.” ~Me, on rewriting history…

Challenging Societal Norms:

I often question societal norms and growth. 1999 seems so long ago now and it actually is. A quarter of a century now. “The Matrix” (1999) still holds up pretty good dealing with the ultimate lie we see every day, we call reality. We saw all sorts of media at the end of the century dealing with future politics, technology, social issues. All of it. “In a highly systematic Society just merely considering going against the grain will label one a traitor to said Society. One becomes ostracized; a cross-bearer with those who used to be their friends, throwing stones at them, keeping up with the religious similes. People born into religious organizations have their lives centered on these doctrines of faith and all their friends, family, and acquaintances are part of this religious-based binary information system. The person who manages to escape will be deemed a heretic. It's easier to label a non-believer a heretic than it is to explain to others why they are the heretic. It's the same thing with politics; one cannot question the actions of their political leaders. It doesn't matter if one is a firm believer in what their party claims to stand for. If one does, one will immediately be labeled as being part of the opposite party and here in lies perhaps the most lamentable fact. If one tries to free someone else from an erroneous ideology they may turn against them to defend the system. They will smear their image, belittle them, insult them, and break all ties with them. They will pretend like they never knew them. Some may even try to physically harm them, and those closest to them. They will go after their Social Circle(s) and Strong-arm them into stopping them from having any relations with those people. No matter what, they have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged and many of them are so hopelessly dependent on the system, but they will fight to protect it if they are not one of the believers, they are against them by default. No other option exists in this binary information system. We see this kind of human mistreatment all the time on social media. You, me, those who fight against any system of Oppression. We all run the risk of getting cancelled for our beliefs.” ~Paraphrased by YouTube Channel ‘Matrix Explained’ – https://www.youtube.com/@MatrixExplained

The misguided journey to acquire freedom leads some weak-minded people to realize that their lifelong beliefs are wrong. What was thought to be worth fighting for is part of a larger and evil system of control. Binary in 3D turns into 3 points of logic, not 2. Think about this for a moment. The people that make up this Woke-Mob-Rules-Mentality don't care if their struggle is real or not they simply want to live in the comforts of their BS-False-Narrative-Simulation-Bubble. Just as the Analyst said in “Matrix Resurrections” (2021): “you don't give a about facts, it's all about fiction. The only world that matters is the one in here (points at our heads/brains/minds) and you people believe the craziest shit.” Reflecting on recent events, the 2020 Presidential campaign President Biden made statements particularly regarding what has been dubbed the "fine people hoax." The deliberate misinterpretation, misquoted and/or misreported of former President Trump's remarks, falsely portraying him as sympathizing with white supremacists. The President's more recent remarks condemning anti-Semitism and Islamophobia highlight a similar trend. However, there's a fundamental flaw of logic to this. Islamophobia doesn’t currently exist as a forefront belief in the United States. Keyword, “currently…” It's evident that Jewish individuals have consistently faced discrimination and abuse, yet the President's inability to unequivocally denounce anti-Semitism for what it is -is concerning. Instead of addressing it head-on, it's often been contextualized within broader issues like the Free Palestine movement. Is there Islamophobia in the United Stated of America? Sure, but not nearly at the same levels as it was after 9/11/2001 and even by that standard isn’t nearly as dominant as it has been. It should be. Americans should still feel unsafe and harbor ill-will towards extreme-Islamic factions. They simply cannot be trusted. Not all but a large majority of those that follow this faith want anyone and everyone dead if they do not also believe in their religion. Any religion that mentions violence and hate as part of its faith is a false faith. That simple. If a group of Americans stepped into a time machine from 2002 to 2024 and saw even “some” Americans supporting Palestinians in 2024 they would have believed they literally entered “the Twilight Zone.”

Turning to recent terror attacks at colleges around the country, cough, I mean ‘peaceful protests.’ You know… The ones that have been on the news that involve violence and anti-Semitic sentiments, striking how little attention that receives that this is not a peaceful protest. In the Star Trek: The Next Generation, season 6, episode 11, "Chain of Command," Captain Picard says "There are four lights" to his torturer, Gul Madred. The Cardassian interrogator then asks Picard to say there are five lights, which would indicate that Picard is accepting the reality of the torture. This is based on a concept from Orwell's 1984, where another torture says that they can make someone believe 2 + 2 = 5. That is what the woke do. Try to take illogical-nonsense and spin that as normal, everyday, facts… While counter-protesters appear composed and put-together, those involved in the protests, many of them young women, often seem disheveled and lost. Hair a mess, all have a bewildered look on their face when you can see their face because they are hiding behind masks and isn’t because they are afraid to get sick. They do not want to be identified. They seem energetic but deeply unwell. Like; they have a lot of energy, but they look physically sick and weak. They almost all wear eye glasses, have no muscle tone. Have more fat jiggling around than most people. Like Arnold Schwarzenegger says, "It's simple, if it jiggles, it's FAT." You can apply that to one's inflated sense of influencer-self-belief in themselves and their faith that by the definition of faith only needs belief to make it even real... 😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆 I believe it is because they are physically and spiritually infected by a lack of serious self-love and love in general in their lives, because they are operating from a punishing of illogic for an ideology, any ideology. This reflects a trend in our society, where Leftist-Woke-Ideologies seem to drive young women towards a sense of purpose rooted solely in being outraged all of the time, about nothing, yet, everything, all at once. Their activism often lacks logical coherence and serves only to undermine their own futures and well-being. I mean, who is going to hire these people even at 7-Eleven? If I were a hiring manager and a resume came across my desk and this person has an arrest on their record for this protest. They would not be getting a phone call back, even to say we went with someone else. They would get met with silence, just like a member of Generation-Zero earned. They did the work. Why does hard work always get labeled with a positive outcome just because work to get there was hard? Tell that to person with lung cancer that smoked for 30+years… Do they deserve to die like this? No, of course not… However, they “earned” it… They did the hard work to get there.

Digging deeper, it becomes evident that these protests are often led by instigators rather than genuine activists caring about the misfortune of others. There is suspicions of external funding and manipulation, yet the media remains silent on these matters and more interested in trying to convict Trump of a crime that doesn’t even exist to the majority of people who actually study the law. They focus on trivial, minor issues, neglecting the larger picture of performance-outrage and its consequences. This movement, labeled as a peaceful protest, is perhaps one of the worst in American history. It will go down in the books as the worst, senseless and ineffective protest in US history. What makes it so cringe-worthy is not just the physical debris left behind, as these people are usually screaming about the environment but the underlying zombie-ideology driving it. When an ideology promotes violence and intolerance in the form of the execution of gay, non-virgin women, we can say it is bad, wrong, evil, brutal, and causes suffering. We aren't seeing people being executed, yet. The ideology behind these protests is unmistakable. It breeds a conviction of hate and blinds individuals to logic, reason, and empathy. It sows the seeds of hatred and division. Singing; “Sowing the seeds, of love, seeds of love, sowing the seeds…” ~Tears for Fears

The equation of anti-Semitism with Islamophobia only serves to muddy the waters further. Their actions stem from a deep-seated hatred and confusion, reflecting the worst aspects of human nature. The protesters appear energetic yet profoundly unwell, a manifestation of both physical and spiritual decay. This decay is not limited to physical appearance but extends to the soul, their very being. Their essence… It's not about Islam or any specific religion, but rather an ideology that perverts them all. All of them are bad for human societal evolution. At its core, it's a quest for power masked as righteous indignation. Those involved in these protests are not driven by a desire to create or build but by a destructive impulse to destroy what we built here. Their ugliness reflects not just physical attributes but the darkness within humanity which has not changed since the first war ever was waged, human vs human. It’s in our divine nature to hate and kill and it not be for a real reason other than we can. The protesters are the pussification of evil. Evil intentions with NO real Power to make their evil happen, but damn, they are trying. The Nazi ideals are well and alive in 2024 within Islam and the Woke-Progressive-Ideologies. These individuals are infected by a lack of self-love, a destructive ideology, and any real love whatsoever that masquerades as righteousness. They seek to destroy rather than build, driven by a sense of perpetual misery and outrage. These protesters need booze and sex… Booze and sex fixes everything and if it doesn’t, have another beer and fuck another person till it does. That is the American way. You don’t like it, vote it out or get the FK out… The protesters and people like them; their reality is a nightmare from which they cannot awaken, and their actions only serve to perpetuate this cycle of hate, despair, and violence. More than half are not students, they are organized sure, but sloppily at that. They had to bring in outsiders to fill in the bodies. They couldn’t even get the student bodies at each college behind the cause at a high level. Some sure, but not the majority, “minority.” Remember what minority actually means. Not many, not most, not all, but some. I minor amount of the whole, which is the majority.

Protests against the Israeli-Palestinian conflict puts unwanted pressure on President Joe Biden. It is now coming out that these protests and protesters have received financial support from influential liberal figures in America, such as Bill Gates and George Soros. This money might not have been intended to go to these groups, but monies did go to these groups. Where else would they get all professionally made/printed up signs filled with hateful anti-Semitic messages and brand new, mostly the same manufacturer-tents? While Gates claims their donations are no longer active, other notable donors include Susan Pritzker and David Rockefeller. There's a push in Congress to legally define antisemitism to hold individuals legally accountable for their anti-Semitic statements. Bernie Sanders compares the situation to Vietnam, warning against abandoning support for Israel and the rest of the right media is jumping all over this. This is sticking and Bernie is right for a change, this will be a crushing blow to the Democrats chance to keep the Presidency. Last time I checked that pull out of Vietnam didn’t look so great and it still doesn’t 51 years later.

"Three great forces rule the world: stupidity, fear and greed. There is no vaccine against stupidity. Stupidity is a personal achievement which transcends national boundaries. Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity. Fear or stupidity has always been the basis of most human actions. I see only with deep regret that God punishes so many of His children for their numerous stupidities, for which only He Himself can be held responsible; in my opinion, only His nonexistence could excuse Him." ~A series of quotes about stupidity from Albert Einstein...

Compromises to Freedom: IV by David-Angelo Mineo 5/6/2024 3,966 Words

Other Blogs in the Compromises to Freedom series:

…Perhaps… https://mineofilms.me/perhaps/

Compromises to Freedom: One https://mineofilms.me/compfreeone/

Compromises to Freedom: Two https://mineofilms.me/79-2/

Compromises to Freedom: Three https://mineofilms.me/102-2

[jheselbraum]

Also for non-us people: Kyle Rittenhouse is the guy who shot and killed two people during a civil rights protest in Wisconsin following the police shooting of Jacob Blake in 2020, and was acquitted in a fucking sham of a trial in 2021.

In other news, a FOI request found out it appears that Kyle Rittenshouse failed the USMC entry exam so badly he's perma-banned from ever joining the USMC

Dude must be a grade A psyche case of the fucking MARINES dont want him.