Kyle Rittenhouse Legal Proceedings - Come for the trial, stay for….

What do you think will happen?

  • Guilty on all charges

    Votes: 282 8.8%
  • Full Acquittal

    Votes: 1,077 33.7%
  • Mistral

    Votes: 264 8.3%
  • Mixture of verdicts

    Votes: 479 15.0%
  • Minecraft

    Votes: 213 6.7%
  • Roblox

    Votes: 132 4.1%
  • Runescape

    Votes: 203 6.3%
  • Somehow Guilty Of Two Mutually Exclusive Actions

    Votes: 514 16.1%
  • KYLE WILL SUBMIT TO BBC

    Votes: 35 1.1%

  • Total voters
    3,199
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
So here's something I don't get. Closing arguments disagreed on points of LAW, not just fact. For example, duty to retreat. Fatty Arbuckle said Kyle had one, Hard R said he didn't. Now, Hard R is right, BUT. How does the jury determine that? Do they simply have to know the law already? Will the judge clarify? Or what?
 
Which side do the athiest "ethnic Jews" who support gay pride and derkaderkastan "Palestine" stand on the issue?

I think it was dug up earlier in the thread that the OP from that post was active like 1994-2000 or something.
So unless he was involved with the black ops shit in Africa & Latin America, its unlikely he saw combat at all.
The only place in the world that I would think serving in 1994-2000 might induce any sense of risk(beyond your obvious sand terrorist campaigns that were mostly handled by spec-ops) is maybe the Korean DMZ, while the famine was in full swing within North Korea. Venezuela had a coup in the 90's, including the only instance of dogfighting with modern aircraft, but I don't think any American was worried about that.
 
I mean no matter what, the hard core progressive douchenozzles will say that a murderer was let free by a biased judge if it happens. Ain't shit all you can do about that. When the fucking news flat out lies constantly, and straight up false shit is all over social media... it won't go away. But you know what, fuck them. Their agony will sustain me...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Basil Julep
So here's something I don't get. Closing arguments disagreed on points of LAW, not just fact. For example, duty to retreat. Fatty Arbuckle said Kyle had one, Hard R said he didn't. Now, Hard R is right, BUT. How does the jury determine that? Do they simply have to know the law already? Will the judge clarify? Or what?
It should be in the instruction that the duty to retreat only applies if they buy the magic photo, but, well >38 pages
 
So here's something I don't get. Closing arguments disagreed on points of LAW, not just fact. For example, duty to retreat. Fatty Arbuckle said Kyle had one, Hard R said he didn't. Now, Hard R is right, BUT. How does the jury determine that? Do they simply have to know the law already? Will the judge clarify? Or what?
People acted like the judge slapped him down, but I didn't see it. The jury instructions (of which a written copy will be provided in addition to the judge reading them) state that duty to retreat isn't a thing unless provocation.
I thought this was the worst thing that happened today by far.
 
It's hard to explain but it's not actually a battle between non-practicing/practicing . It actually comes from an ideological split in zionism in the late 19th century. Without going into too much jew sperging its basically that one side thinks the physical state of israel is the most important thing where the other thinks the soul of the jewish people is more important and that a physical state is nothing without saving the soul of the jewry. It is as you might imagine way more complicated than that and I actually think there is a third and possibly forth faction but without reading hebrew it's kinda hard to research.

Take a look at the work of Achad Ha'am particularly "Lo Zu Haderekh" it gives a good idea of the divide and the timeline it formed in.
Not entirely accurate. It's a split between practicing/non practicing but slightly more complex. The TLDR version is that there are 4 groups

Zionism here is defined as wanting a Jewish State in the ancestral Jewish homeland.

1. Orthodox Anti Zionists: Many Haredim/Hasidim believe Israel shouldn't exist and ones that live in Israel refuse to recognize the government or serve in the military (but are happy to get gibs from Israel). Hate leftist bullshit other than gibs. Many believe they don't want a Jewish state, however that is not correct. They want a Jewish theocracy in the Jewish homeland when the Jewish Messiah comes, before then they believe there's no reason to create a state, esp not one that's secular.
2. Orthodox Neutral/Pro Zionists/Average Israeli: Support Israel and lean conservative, hate the leftist stuff being pushed. In the case of the Israeli, bitches about the Orthodox Anti Zionists taking gibs from the state and refusing to serve in the military.
3. Secular Pro Zionist/Israel: Quickly dying breed, these are secular Jews who are Zionists and support Israel. Think Sheldon Adelstein, Haim Saban, AIPAC. Generally good relationship with Israel and don't demand much.
4. Secular Anti Zionist/Leftist Israeli: Vastly expanding thanks to social media, these are secular Jews who are anti zionist for a variety of reasons. They operate a lot of false "pro peace" organizations like J Street, If Not Now, and so on. Regularly ally with anti semitic Palestinian/Arabs, often hate religious Judaism, and constantly push the woke shit that you see all over. The biggest one is George Soros who funds most of the secular anti Zionists which is why whenever you call out Soros for his bullshit, American secular Jews lose their shit while Israelis will agree with you. Groups 1,2,3 aren't always at peace and often have scuffles but all of them look down on group 4 as scum of the earth (which they are)
 
Place your bets:
>Joined the Army to avoid jail time
>Signed on for college, but 80 IQ left him only able to go infantry
>POG that had a mortar shell land a half-mile away from him, got a CAB slapped on his chest
There's a small but vocal minority of the latter that loves to preface whatever dumb progressive babble they're about to spout off with 'as a veteran', so I'm betting on that.
 
Not entirely accurate. It's a split between practicing/non practicing but slightly more complex. The TLDR version is that there are 4 groups

Zionism here is defined as wanting a Jewish State in the ancestral Jewish homeland.

1. Orthodox Anti Zionists: Many Haredim/Hasidim believe Israel shouldn't exist and ones that live in Israel refuse to recognize the government or serve in the military (but are happy to get gibs from Israel). Hate leftist bullshit other than gibs. Many believe they don't want a Jewish state, however that is not correct. They want a Jewish theocracy in the Jewish homeland when the Jewish Messiah comes, before then they believe there's no reason to create a state, esp not one that's secular.
2. Orthodox Neutral/Pro Zionists/Average Israeli: Support Israel and lean conservative, hate the leftist stuff being pushed. In the case of the Israeli, bitches about the Orthodox Anti Zionists taking gibs from the state and refusing to serve in the military.
3. Secular Pro Zionist/Israel: Quickly dying breed, these are secular Jews who are Zionists and support Israel. Think Sheldon Adelstein, Haim Saban, AIPAC. Generally good relationship with Israel and don't demand much.
4. Secular Anti Zionist/Leftist Israeli: Vastly expanding thanks to social media, these are secular Jews who are anti zionist for a variety of reasons. They operate a lot of false "pro peace" organizations like J Street, If Not Now, and so on. Regularly ally with anti semitic Palestinian/Arabs, often hate religious Judaism, and constantly push the woke shit that you see all over. The biggest one is George Soros who funds most of the secular anti Zionists which is why whenever you call out Soros for his bullshit, American secular Jews lose their shit while Israelis will agree with you. Groups 1,2,3 aren't always at peace and often have scuffles but all of them look down on group 4 as scum of the earth (which they are)
>the anti semites are the evil Jews

Oh cool, thanks for the breakdown moshe.
 
Screenshot_20211115-184823.jpg

I double checked and the math is good.
 
The only place in the world that I would think serving in 1994-2000 might induce any sense of risk(beyond your obvious sand terrorist campaigns that were mostly handled by spec-ops) is maybe the Korean DMZ, while the famine was in full swing within North Korea. Venezuela had a coup in the 90's, including the only instance of dogfighting with modern aircraft, but I don't think any American was worried about that.
Actually the Ethiopian-Eritrean War had MiG-29's pitted against Su-27's in a very interesting battle of Soviet design bureaus, but I digress.
 
-Self-defense
-Emotional distress at taking human life
-Due process
-Asking questions
-Facts
-Empathy

These are now all fascism. Good Christ.
Ha ha, no they aren't. Some illiterate nobody who's probably never so much as read a book using "fascist" just to mean anything they don't like or think is "right wing" doesn't mean shit in the real world. The moron in question is probably a fascist, or at least the type of irrelevant and unthinking idiot that a "fascist" ideology would find useful.

If you want to whine about something, whine about social media platforms giving uneducated idiots a soapbox to spread their illiteracy for the comic relief of rational people, when we'd be better off just putting them in jail for spewing their misinformation about our law and justice systems to other equally illiterate morons..
 
Place your bets:
>Joined the Army to avoid jail time
>Signed on for college, but 80 IQ left him only able to go infantry
>POG that had a mortar shell land a half-mile away from him, got a CAB slapped on his chest
He was doxxed, iirc he's a felon and his army service was from 1995-1999. Peacetime soldier who can count the number of times he's touched a gun post basic on his hands.
 
Ha ha, no they aren't. Some illiterate nobody who's probably never so much as read a book using "fascist" just to mean anything they don't like or think is "right wing" doesn't mean shit in the real world. The moron in question is probably a fascist, or at least the type of irrelevant and unthinking idiot that a "fascist" ideology would find useful.

If you want to whine about something, whine about social media platforms giving uneducated idiots a soapbox to spread their illiteracy for the comic relief of rational people, when we'd be better off just putting them in jail for spewing their misinformation about our law and justice systems to other equally illiterate morons..
I mean according to the modern "progressive"™ worldview that is textbook fascism and needs to be violently surpressed.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back