2 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

No, because that's from a completely unrelated event.  But if you tried to tell me that his grievances justified his actions or that the destruction wasn't that bad?  Then, yeah, obviously you'd be a supporter of Bin Laden.  It's not that hard.  Don't spin for terrorists or those that encourage them.  Not sure why the right is having so much trouble with that at the moment.

What if I told you bin Laden wasn’t responsible for the string of Anthrax attacks that followed?

8 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

Would you say I was a supporter of Osama bin Laden if I merely tried to explain to you he was not responsible for the Oklahoma City bombing?

What bombing? Are you talking about the fertilizer spill?

Just now, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

What if I told you bin Laden wasn’t responsible for the string of Anthrax attacks that followed?

Again, the Anthrax attacks didn't take place during the 911 attack.  If there was an Anthrax attack carried out a week or so after 1/6 by an unrelated political movement, I certainly wouldn't blame the Trump terrorists for it.  

Just don't spin for actual terrorists (the hijackers, the capitol rioters) or those that inspire/encourage terrorism (Bin Laden, Trump).  It's not that hard.  Terrorists are scum.  I would hope we all agreed on that.

1 minute ago, Toastrel said:

What bombing? Are you talking about the fertilizer spill?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing

Just now, VanHammersly said:

Again, the Anthrax attacks didn't take place during the 911 attack.  If there was an Anthrax attack carried out a week or so after 1/6 by an unrelated political movement, I certainly wouldn't blame the Trump terrorists for it.  

Just don't spin for actual terrorists (the hijackers, the capitol rioters) or those that inspire/encourage terrorism (Bin Laden, Trump).  It's not that hard.  Terrorists are scum.  I would hope we all agreed on that.

But people did blame al Quaeda for those  anthrax attacks

2 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

But people did blame al Quaeda for those  anthrax attacks

Did Greenwald write an article absolving Bin Laden from blame for the anthrax attacks?  Did you desperately plead with everyone not to blame him for it?  

But I mean, basically, who gives an F.  We're talking about terrorist scum here, like Bin Laden and Trump.  They're beneath contempt (hey, I just came up with that!).

6 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

Again, the Anthrax attacks didn't take place during the 911 attack.  If there was an Anthrax attack carried out a week or so after 1/6 by an unrelated political movement, I certainly wouldn't blame the Trump terrorists for it.  

Just don't spin for actual terrorists (the hijackers, the capitol rioters) or those that inspire/encourage terrorism (Bin Laden, Trump).  It's not that hard.  Terrorists are scum.  I would hope we all agreed on that.

Btw I forgot

The anthrax attacks WERE carried out a week or so after 9/11

1 minute ago, VanHammersly said:

Did Greenwald write an article absolving Bin Laden from blame for the anthrax attacks?  Did you desperately plead with everyone not to blame him for it?  

But I mean, basically, who gives an F.  We're talking about terrorist scum here, like Bin Laden and Trump.  They're beneath contempt (hey, I just came up with that!).

As with Greenwald, I did not learn to distrust the media until it became clear they lied about WMD in Iraq in the late 2000s

I admit I once was ignorant 

2 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

Btw I forgot

The anthrax attacks WERE carried out a week or so after 9/11

Right, so it fits in exactly with what I said.  If they were carried out at a different time by a different movement, then it's unrelated.  

1 minute ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

As with Greenwald, I did not learn to distrust the media until it became clear they lied about WMD in Iraq in the late 2000s

I admit I once was ignorant 

That really has nothing to do with what we're talking about, but okay.  Also, why are you speaking for Greenwald here?  Also, I don't believe you.

Just now, VanHammersly said:

Right, so it fits in exactly with what I said.  If they were carried out at a different time by a different movement, then it's unrelated.  

I’m trying to come up with that perfect historical example that fits better than OJs glove did so you won’t get duped like OJs jury did, but there’s no perfect example I can provide

all I can say is people like you get stirred up and manipulated by the media to your own detriment

1 minute ago, VanHammersly said:

That really has nothing to do with what we're talking about, but okay.  Also, why are you speaking for Greenwald here?  Also, I don't believe you.

Because Greenwald is the man

Just now, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

I’m trying to come up with that perfect historical example that fits better than OJs glove did so you won’t get duped like OJs jury did, but there’s no perfect example I can provide

all I can say is people like you get stirred up and manipulated by the media to your own detriment

You can't think of a comp because there isn't one.  If someone died in the WTC on 9/11 of a heart attack from the stress of the situation before the buildings fell no one would bother trying to absolve Bin Laden of responsibility in his death.  They'd just say he was responsible.  The only reason you (or anyone else) is trying desperately to nit-pick accountability here is because your Lord-Emperor Trump is involved, so in your mind he can't possibly be responsible (even though he obviously is).

2 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

You can't think of a comp because there isn't one.  If someone died in the WTC on 9/11 of a heart attack from the stress of the situation before the buildings fell no one would bother trying to absolve Bin Laden of responsibility in his death.  They'd just say he was responsible.  The only reason you (or anyone else) is trying desperately to nit-pick accountability here is because your Lord-Emperor Trump is involved, so in your mind he can't possibly be responsible (even though he obviously is).

But I’m not saying an innocent person would have died in the WTC attacks.  It’s as if one of the hijackers died of a heart attack in the attacks and you turning him into the martyr you need and ignore the other deaths

1 minute ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

But I’m not saying an innocent person would have died in the WTC attacks.  It’s as if one of the hijackers died of a heart attack in the attacks and you turning him into the martyr you need and ignore the other deaths

No, it's not like that at all.  Sicknick was not one of the attackers.  We was an innocent victim.  And I'm not ignoring any other death.  The rest of them shouldn't have died either and wouldn't have if not for Trump encouraging the terrorist attack. 

2 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

But I’m not saying an innocent person would have died in the WTC attacks.  It’s as if one of the hijackers died of a heart attack in the attacks and you turning him into the martyr you need and ignore the other deaths

No, it is as if the hijackers beat a cop who later died, but you love bin Laden, so you say about the cop, "It was just his time."

1 minute ago, VanHammersly said:

No, it's not like that at all.  Sicknick was not one of the attackers.  We was an innocent victim.  And I'm not ignoring any other death.  The rest of them shouldn't have died either and wouldn't have if not for Trump encouraging the terrorist attack. 

Sicknick is the only non Trump supporter casualty from that day

it is clear that he did not die of a fire extinguisher that day, and it is also clear from a text message later that night that he was in good spirits

we don’t know how he died

Just now, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

Sicknick is the only non Trump supporter casualty from that day

it is clear that he did not die of a fire extinguisher that day, and it is also clear from a text message later that night that he was in good spirits

we don’t know how he died

According to reports it was either from being attacked or from poisoning from some sort of chemical (pepper spray?).  The autopsy hasn't been completed as far as I know.  So, you don't know how he died and neither do I, but he was a young man and we can both agree that if the attack hadn't happened there's a 99.99% chance he'd still be alive.  Again, no one would ever nitpick accountability for any other terrorist attack like the right is doing with this one.  Everyone would agree that it was awful and those that carried it out and inspired it should be brought to justice.  But Trump's the one that inspired it, so instead of cutting the terrorism wing of the Republican Party loose, you guys are doubling down.  It's disgusting.

On 2/16/2021 at 9:46 AM, Kz! said:

They were armed with something far more dangerous than weapons. They were armed with right wing ideals. Scary.

11 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

Sicknick is the only non Trump supporter casualty from that day

it is clear that he did not die of a fire extinguisher that day, and it is also clear from a text message later that night that he was in good spirits

we don’t know how he died

way to downplay an act of terrorism where cops were assaulted, you shithead. 

11 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

Sicknick is the only non Trump supporter casualty from that day

it is clear that he did not die of a fire extinguisher that day, and it is also clear from a text message later that night that he was in good spirits

we don’t know how he died

PICK A POSITION

1. it is clear that he did not die of a fire extinguisher that day

2. we don’t know how he died

 

The two are NOT compatible.

2 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

According to reports it was either from being attacked or from poisoning from some sort of chemical (pepper spray?).  The autopsy hasn't been completed as far as I know.  So, you don't know how he died and neither do I, but he was a young man and we can both agree that if the attack hadn't happened there's a 99.99% chance he'd still be alive.  Again, no one would ever nitpick accountability for any other terrorist attack like the right is doing with this one.  Everyone would agree that it was awful and those that carried it out and inspired it should be brought to justice.  But Trump's the one that inspired it, so instead of cutting the terrorism wing of the Republican Party loose, you guys are doubling down.  It's disgusting.

According to reports which have also proven to have previously provided false information

He was 42.  He had grey hair.

If 100 other innocent people had died then you’re right, I wouldn’t nitpick about one guy.  But he is literally the only friendly connected to a death in this incident and already we have found untrue reporting about his death

so no I would not agree there’s a 99% chance.  Maybe 50 50

Just now, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

According to reports which have also proven to have previously provided false information

He was 42.  He had grey hair.

If 100 other innocent people had died then you’re right, I wouldn’t nitpick about one guy.  But he is literally the only friendly connected to a death in this incident and already we have found untrue reporting about his death

so no I would not agree there’s a 99% chance.  Maybe 50 50

 

I'm 42.  42 isn't old.

It's absolutely 99.99% chance that he died directly based on the attack.  Again, stop desperately spinning for terrorists.  It's F'ing disgusting.  

4 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

 

I'm 42.  42 isn't old.

It's absolutely 99.99% chance that he died directly based on the attack.  Again, stop desperately spinning for terrorists.  It's F'ing disgusting.  

42 is one thing, but he had grey hair, grey i say !!!!!!

3 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

 

I'm 42.  42 isn't old.

It's absolutely 99.99% chance that he died directly based on the attack.  Again, stop desperately spinning for terrorists.  It's F'ing disgusting.  

Coincidentally I was reading about Al Capone this past weekend.  He was released early from prison at the age of 40 due to failing health.

If you don’t take care of yourself you can die relatively young