U.S. Riots of May 2020 over George Floyd and others - ITT: a bunch of faggots butthurt about worthless internet stickers

Status
Not open for further replies.
The media's job is not to inform, but to inflame. They want to keep your eyes glued to their show or to get you to click their links, so they have to create controversy to get their bullshit to go viral.

There's certainly a lot of truth to this, but why do they only want to inflame one side? And why is it only "creating controversy" when it's (allegedly) white on black violence, but they will completely suppress and ignore the far more common instances of black on white violence?

A few years ago, we had a very disgusting case where a black male in his 20s executed some white kid in broad daylight. Made him get out of his car, told his black passenger to run away because he was black, then made the white kid get down on his knees in the middle of the street, then proceeded to empty his pistol into the back of his head. The local prosecutor said it was the most vile case he'd ever seen in his 25 years of being a prosecutor. And yet he refused to release any of the confiscated cell phone footage because "it would be too inflammatory" and he had to be "sensitive to the black community."

Even the local media suppressed it. And it sure as shit didn't get ANY national attention.

One can only imagine the reaction would've been had the races been reversed.

I would imagine, then, that the media could whip up just as much inflammation and controversy by covering black on white violence too...but they never do.
 
There's certainly a lot of truth to this, but why do they only want to inflame one side? And why is it only "creating controversy" when it's (allegedly) white on black violence, but they will completely suppress and ignore the far more common instances of black on white violence?

A few years ago, we had a very disgusting case where a black male in his 20s executed some white kid in broad daylight. Made him get out of his car, told his black passenger to run away because he was black, then made the white kid get down on his knees in the middle of the street, then proceeded to empty his pistol into the back of his head. The local prosecutor said it was the most vile case he'd ever seen in his 25 years of being a prosecutor. And yet he refused to release any of the confiscated cell phone footage because "it would be too inflammatory" and he had to be "sensitive to the black community."

Even the local media suppressed it. And it sure as shit didn't get ANY national attention.

One can only imagine the reaction would've been had the races been reversed.

I would imagine, then, that the media could whip up just as much inflammation and controversy by covering black on white violence too...but they never do.

I would argue it depends on which ever side is easier to outrage at the time.

Like leading up to the Iraq war, the New York Times lent their credibility to the WMD story which conservatives ate up.

Now we could have class warfare but instead the media is stirring up a race war to keep the proverbial crab bucket going.

It's about keeping half the population too rabid to be reasoned with lest we challenge the status quo.
 
There's certainly a lot of truth to this, but why do they only want to inflame one side? And why is it only "creating controversy" when it's (allegedly) white on black violence, but they will completely suppress and ignore the far more common instances of black on white violence?
Because that will lead to the wrong kind of controversy.
 
I like that both Black people and White people look at an albino African and all their facial recognition instincts just fuckin bluescreen and their brains shut down. None of our brains know how to process a white nigga.

That's why the authentic African way of dealing with them is to turn them into magic soup to take their inhuman powers for yourself.
 
There's certainly a lot of truth to this, but why do they only want to inflame one side? And why is it only "creating controversy" when it's (allegedly) white on black violence, but they will completely suppress and ignore the far more common instances of black on white violence?

A few years ago, we had a very disgusting case where a black male in his 20s executed some white kid in broad daylight. Made him get out of his car, told his black passenger to run away because he was black, then made the white kid get down on his knees in the middle of the street, then proceeded to empty his pistol into the back of his head. The local prosecutor said it was the most vile case he'd ever seen in his 25 years of being a prosecutor. And yet he refused to release any of the confiscated cell phone footage because "it would be too inflammatory" and he had to be "sensitive to the black community."

Even the local media suppressed it. And it sure as shit didn't get ANY national attention.

One can only imagine the reaction would've been had the races been reversed.

I would imagine, then, that the media could whip up just as much inflammation and controversy by covering black on white violence too...but they never do.

There are plenty of instances of this, situations where if the races were reversed, it would attain national wall-to-wall coverage and be commentated on ad nauseam.

Cannon Hinnant is the most recent one.
Channon Christian and Chris Newsom, for another example.
And wasn't there a rather recent case of a mentally disabled white kid getting taunted, beaten and tortured by a bunch of black kids?

But we know the answer when we consider who owns the media, additionally there's another reason, those kind of cases don't attract eyeballs which in turn means the media won't make as much money on it.
Remember all of the coverage dedicated to Casey Anthony, Laci Peterson, Madeleine McCann and god forbid, fucking OJ Simpson?

That kind of shit happens constantly, especially children going missing under suspicious circumstances, but if it bleeds it leads so to speak.

But I'd rather not derail this thread into sperging about ((them)) for a three-hundredth time, so I'll leave it there.
 
There are plenty of instances of this, situations where if the races were reversed, it would attain national wall-to-wall coverage and be commentated on ad nauseam.

Cannon Hinnant is the most recent one.
Channon Christian and Chris Newsom, for another example.
And wasn't there a rather recent case of a mentally disabled white kid getting taunted, beaten and tortured by a bunch of black kids?

But we know the answer when we consider who owns the media, additionally there's another reason, those kind of cases don't attract eyeballs which in turn means the media won't make as much money on it.
Remember all of the coverage dedicated to Casey Anthony, Laci Peterson, Madeleine McCann and god forbid, fucking OJ Simpson?

That kind of shit happens constantly, especially children going missing under suspicious circumstances, but if it bleeds it leads so to speak.

But I'd rather not derail this thread into sperging about ((them)) for a three-hundredth time, so I'll leave it there.
I would argue it depends on which ever side is easier to outrage at the time.

Like leading up to the Iraq war, the New York Times lent their credibility to the WMD story which conservatives ate up.

Now we could have class warfare but instead the media is stirring up a race war to keep the proverbial crab bucket going.

It's about keeping half the population too rabid to be reasoned with lest we challenge the status quo.
Makes me think of Jessica Lynch, that young soldier who was taken POW during the invasion of Iraq. The media hyped her up as either a) girl rambo or b) a Missing White Woman being ravaged by feral camel jockeys.

Lynch herself eventually came forward and said she was used for propaganda, that a lot of tales about her were bullshit, and that she just wanted to put the whole ordeal behind her.

Just goes to show, the Lugenpresse have no shame, so long as it serves them.
 
There are plenty of instances of this, situations where if the races were reversed, it would attain national wall-to-wall coverage and be commentated on ad nauseam.

Cannon Hinnant is the most recent one.
Channon Christian and Chris Newsom, for another example.
And wasn't there a rather recent case of a mentally disabled white kid getting taunted, beaten and tortured by a bunch of black kids?

But we know the answer when we consider who owns the media, additionally there's another reason, those kind of cases don't attract eyeballs which in turn means the media won't make as much money on it.
Remember all of the coverage dedicated to Casey Anthony, Laci Peterson, Madeleine McCann and god forbid, fucking OJ Simpson?

That kind of shit happens constantly, especially children going missing under suspicious circumstances, but if it bleeds it leads so to speak.

But I'd rather not derail this thread into sperging about ((them)) for a three-hundredth time, so I'll leave it there.
Not to veer too off topic but I just want to post about Kori Muhammad since no one really mentions him. Back in 2017 he murdered a bunch of white guys, explicitly stating that he killed them for being white. Spoiler below is just a large passage from the Wiki page regarding the shootings that he carried out after he had already murdered a security guard at a motel.

After being identified as a suspect in Williams' murder, Muhammad decided that he would not "go down for one murder" and that he "might as well take out as many white men" as he could.[28] Hours after the identification, several shootings were reported in downtown Fresno. Muhammad first approached a Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) utility truck at approximately 10:45 a.m. and fired four shots into it, critically wounding an employee seated in the passenger seat. The passenger of the vehicle was identified to be Zachary Randalls.[29] The driver of that truck was spared from being shot, since Muhammad deemed him Hispanic and thus non-white. The driver managed to drive away unharmed and took Randalls to the Fresno Police Department headquarters, where he alerted officers. Randalls was taken to Community Regional Medical Center, where he later died.[15][30][31][32][33]

In Muhammad's murder trial, the driver of the PG&E utility truck testified that the truck was in park when Muhammad approached them sitting in it. From Muhammad's facial expression, the driver said Muhammad had a "cold, dark look" which the driver found to be unnerving. The driver nodded to Muhammad as a gesture from his window, to which Muhammad was unresponsive. Muhammad walked past the driver's left fender and then stopped, looking into the truck again. The driver told Randalls that he was suspicious of Muhammad's behavior at this moment. Muhammad then reached into his jacket, prompting the driver to immediately put the truck in reverse. Muhammad fired his gun a few times at the passenger's side, where Randalls was sitting, as the driver was backing up. As the driver backed up a sufficient distance from Muhammad, Muhammad fired off one last shot which hit the headrest of Randall's seat. Randalls told the driver that he was shot. The driver called 9-1-1 emergency and drove to the police station because he did not know where the closest hospital was.[29] The driver stated that Randalls lost consciousness on the way to the police station.[21]

Seconds after shooting four rounds into the PG&E truck on N. Van Ness and mortally wounding Randalls, Muhammad proceeded south to Mildreda, turning west. Muhammad fired two more shots at a 59-year-old man coming out of his house, but the shots missed. The second shot hit a residential dwelling on the other side of the street.[15] Muhammad then reloaded his revolver in the alley between Van Ness and Fulton. Muhammad stated that he considered pursuing the 59-year-old man, believing he had gone back inside his house, but changed his mind. Muhammad then turned onto N. Fulton St heading south, where he fired once at a vehicle containing a woman, her adult daughter, and her four-year-old granddaughter, but stopped shooting after realizing they were Latino. No one in the vehicle suffered any gunshot wounds.[15][27][34][35]

Muhammad then walked down the opposite direction, where he spotted a man, Mark Gassett, walking out of a Catholic Charities USA building. He shot Gassett once in the chest; he then killed him with two more shots after he had fallen to the ground.[36][37] Muhammad then reloaded at a bus stop and fired at three white men. Two of them escaped unharmed, but Muhammad chased the third man, David Jackson.[38] Muhammad followed Jackson, who was the heaviest and oldest of the three white men, into the parking lot of a Catholic Charities USA building. There, Muhammad fired six shots: two that killed Jackson, two that struck parked vehicles, one that struck a nearby building, and a sixth that was apparently never recovered. Witnesses said that Muhammad shouted obscenities as he fired.[15][27][30][39][34]

Officers responding to shotspotter reports found Muhammad running down the street and managed to arrest him.[30] During the arrest, Muhammad shouted, "Allahu Akbar!"[40] Several bullets and speedloaders for a .357 Magnum revolver were recovered from his person, but no firearm was found.[30] According to Chief Jerry Dyer, the gun was wrapped in clothing and picked up by a Hispanic male who had met up with Muhammad shortly after the shootings and then fled the scene.[15][27] Dyer also said a total of seventeen shots were fired in 90 seconds during these shootings.[27][9][8] Four minutes had passed between the first shots and Muhammad's arrest.[15] Several streets and county government buildings were put on lockdown during the shootings, with people being ordered to shelter in place.[41][42]
 
Makes me think of Jessica Lynch, that young soldier who was taken POW during the invasion of Iraq. The media hyped her up as either a) girl rambo or b) a Missing White Woman being ravaged by feral camel jockeys.

Lynch herself eventually came forward and said she was used for propaganda, that a lot of tales about her were bullshit, and that she just wanted to put the whole ordeal behind her.

Just goes to show, the Lugenpresse have no shame, so long as it serves them.
The press embarrassed themselves completely over Jessica Lynch and ignored Lori Piestewa, who was the first female US soldier killed in combat. tsk.
 
Fyi - 2019 numbers are not complete yet so showing those of 2018.
- In total 2925blacks were murdered, 2600 (89%) of them by other blacks and 234 (8%) of them by white people.
So yeah, if BLM would care so much about black people as they say then they would have other priorities.

Edit: In total 2925 were killed not 3177 as I first stated.

View attachment 1627666


View attachment 1627671 View attachment 1627672 View attachment 1627675 View attachment 1627678
I did my own little stat study using various sources (all from 2018 )

Police shooting stats.
FBI Homicide Tables
Census (re-reading I realize that I might have used 2019 stats, but I don't feel the population numbers would be that far off, I can't find the original link I used.)

.0002% of the White population was killed by police shooting, Whites accounting for for either 60% or 76.3% of the population (depending on what number rom the census website during the year of 2018 you use. They account for around 30% of homicides.

.0005% of the Black population was killed by police shooting, Blacks accounting for about 13.4% of the population account for about 39% of all homicides, mostly black on black violence.

In total, only .0003% of America's population was killed via police shooting in 2018.

The numbers of police shootings are no where near as extreme as the media makes it out to be, and yes, it's a problem that 13% of America's population commits 39% of recorded homicides.
 
Last edited:
There are plenty of instances of this, situations where if the races were reversed, it would attain national wall-to-wall coverage and be commentated on ad nauseam.

Cannon Hinnant is the most recent one.
Channon Christian and Chris Newsom, for another example.
And wasn't there a rather recent case of a mentally disabled white kid getting taunted, beaten and tortured by a bunch of black kids?

But we know the answer when we consider who owns the media, additionally there's another reason, those kind of cases don't attract eyeballs which in turn means the media won't make as much money on it.
Remember all of the coverage dedicated to Casey Anthony, Laci Peterson, Madeleine McCann and god forbid, fucking OJ Simpson?

That kind of shit happens constantly, especially children going missing under suspicious circumstances, but if it bleeds it leads so to speak.

But I'd rather not derail this thread into sperging about ((them)) for a three-hundredth time, so I'll leave it there.
Yeah, they filmed the incident with the disabled boy on Facebook Live. It's fun and games to them. That's the one case people avoid because they were clearly in the wrong. With the others, they can say "he said the gamer word!" Disabled boy? Not so.

Here's the one. https://www.cnn.com/2017/01/05/us/chicago-facebook-live-beating/index.html
 
Exactly, 7 people at the time said the police never announced themselves

Two of the officers said they don't remember announcing themselves but said they're sure they did

The entire "corroboration" is based on the testimony of one witness who backs up the police accounts.
How many people "corroborated" the "hands up, don't shoot" narrative until they got put under oath and admitted that Michael Brown did no such thing. Just because "eye-witnesses" gave a hysterical interview to the first camera they saw doesn't mean they're telling the truth. Alot of stories are likely to change if their testimony is needed. Either way, I'm waiting on this one to form an opinion of who was in the wrong. I abandoned my objectivity for the first time with the George Floyd case in the first couple of days, and look how that's turned out four months later.
 
The numbers of police shootings are no where near as extreme as the media makes it out to be, and yes, it's a problem that 13% of America's population commits 39% of recorded homicides.
From what I recall, not a lot of black women are out there murderin' so hypothetically we can prolly chop that number to 7% and still keep the 39%... Just sayin'.
 
Screen Shot 2020-09-28 at 5.53.01 PM.png

I kind of hate this catholic retard for being deranged in favor of Barrett when she has objectively attackable qualities. Still hope this hints at Kyle getting freed.
 
Here's a baseline, released a few hours ago and covering pre-riot 2019:

Today, the Federal Bureau of Investigation released its 2019 edition of Crime in the United States, which showed that violent crime decreased nationwide for the third consecutive year. After decreases in both 2017 and 2018, the violent crime rate dropped an additional one percent this past year and the property crime rate decreased 4.5 percent.

Since 1930, the FBI has tracked nationwide data on crimes and publishes its compilation each year. Submitting data to the FBI is a collective effort on the part of city, county, state, tribal, and federal law enforcement agencies to present a nationwide view of crime.

“For the last three years the Department of Justice has worked tirelessly with our federal, state, local, and tribal partners to pursue those violent criminals, cartels, and gangs who seek to harm our communities,” said Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen. “We are steadfast in our commitment to protect the public safety of citizens and communities across the United States through violent crime initiatives like Project Safe Neighborhoods, Project Guardian and, most recently, Operation Legend. Violent crime rates had been increasing during 2015-2016, so I am proud of the hard work by all prosecutors and law enforcement agents across the nation who have reduced violent crime rates during each of the last three years. I look forward to continuing our joint efforts to protect the American public from the violence of criminals.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back