Crime Two Minnesota Lawmakers Shot

[Confucamus]

Are you browsing or are you being force fed partisan propaganda?
Also there is a difference between what an appointee and an associate and clearly this guy chose his words the way he did for a reason as it implies a much more close relationship. And the semantics are definitely working as there are many people in this thread that are trying to use this connection to say this is the responsibility of the left. But at least you had the decency to consider the people in this thread trying to push the narrative that this is the responsibility of the left as sick fucks as well.

Can we all agree that the responsibility lies solely with the asshole who committed these murders? Possibly his wife too, but that hasn't been confirmed.

 

[idrankyourbeer]

Nobody just repeats facts, in this context these facts are cited as possible clues as to what his political affiliation and motivation were.

To point out that he was appointed by Walz and that the targeted lawmakers voted against their party a few days ago is to imply that he was a Democrat party loyalist who attacked these lawmakers for being disloyal to the party.

That's misleading though. The board he was appointed to has 60 seats, is non-partisan, and the suspect had been appointed by the previous governor which would suggest Walz was retaining an appointee that was installed by a previous governor rather than having some special relationship to him. And there's no indication that the vote being pointed to by right wing Twitter had anything to do with the shooting.

Instead one can look to the fact that his roommate claims he's a Trump voter and pro-life and that the two lawmakers are pro-choice with other pro-choice targets on the list, based off which its likely that he's an anti-abortion extremist.

don't use any of this logic, facts, or reasoning. the maga pukes will just ignore it and continue rambling on with their whackadoodle narrative.

 

[Confucamus]

Nobody just repeats facts, in this context these facts are cited as possible clues as to what his political affiliation and motivation were.

To point out that he was appointed by Walz and that the targeted lawmakers voted against their party a few days ago is to imply that he was a Democrat party loyalist who attacked these lawmakers for being disloyal to the party.

I posted several tweets indicating that there was no confirmation their votes were the reason they were targeted. It was blatant misinformation.

That's misleading though. The board he was appointed to has 60 seats, is non-partisan, and the suspect had been appointed by the previous governor which would suggest Walz was retaining an appointee that was installed by a previous governor rather than having some special relationship to him. And there's no indication that the vote being pointed to by right wing Twitter had anything to do with the shooting.

Instead one can look to the fact that his roommate claims he's a Trump voter and pro-life and that the two lawmakers are pro-choice with other pro-choice targets on the list, based off which its likely that he's an anti-abortion extremist.

I'm skeptical about that roommate, but there's definitely strong evidence Boelter was an anti-abortion extremist.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I posted several tweets indicating that there was no confirmation their votes were the reason they were targeted. It was blatant misinformation.

Right and that's my point, you can use true facts to tell a lie. There's no reason to think his time on the Workforce Development Council is relevant at all here.

I'm skeptical about that roommate, but there's definitely strong evidence Boelter was an anti-abortion extremist.

Why are you skeptical of the roommate?

 

[KAZSoliloquy]

What violence was necessary in this case?

Approval of any political violence is abhorrent

in this case? none at all. in almost all cases, none at all. in the case of an uprising trying to bring back slavery by force? i think it would be justified in that case.

 

[Confucamus]

Right and that's my point, you can use true facts to tell a lie. There's no reason to think his time on the Workforce Development Council is relevant at all here.

I agree with this.

Why are you skeptical of the roommate?

I don't get a very honest feeling from him, but I could be wrong. Time will tell.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I don't get a very honest feeling from him, but I could be wrong. Time will tell.

What makes you say that? Have you even seen him on video or are you basing that off his quoted statements?

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

I read that they captured the lunatic. Don't see where the police have mentioned any statements on motivation yet.

 

[Confucamus]

What makes you say that? Have you even seen him on video or are you basing that off his quoted statements?

The video of him talking to the media.

 

[SKYNET]

in this case? no violence is necessary at all. in almost all cases, no violence is necessary at all.

in the case of an uprising trying to bring back slavery by force? i think it would be justified in that case.

So basically paranoid delusions are the best reasons you can find to justify political violence.

 

[KAZSoliloquy]

So basically paranoid delusions are the best reasons you can find to justify political violence.

i mean these are things that have historical precedence. you realize an entire war was fought over that in this country right? regardless, if you think it's nothing more than a paranoid delusion of an example, then it sounds like i don't approve of political violence very much, does it?

do you not approve of the actions of abolitionist john brown? should he have tried to talk plantation owners into releasing their slaves instead?

 

[SKYNET]

you realize an entire war was fought over that in this country right?

Yeah 99% of Americans understand that was 2 centuries ago and when they hear someone try to use "slavers are coming to take us by force" in order to make a relevant justification for the use of political violence, they think, holy fuck this person is a paranoid schizophrenic.

 

[KAZSoliloquy]

Yeah 99% of Americans understand that was 2 centuries ago and when they hear someone try to use "slavers are coming to take us by force" in order to make a relevant justification for the use of political violence, they think, holy fuck this person is a paranoid schizophrenic.

you can respond to the rest of that post. i believe in you. again, do you disapprove of the actions of john brown, the abolitionist?

 

[Satsui Ryu]

Can we all agree that the responsibility lies solely with the asshole who committed these murders? Possibly his wife too, but that hasn't been confirmed.

I agree with that. I'm not pinning this on any large group. But my biggest pet peeve with politics is how the vast majority of information these days is presented in a biased manner and even worse the awful and usually hypocritical logic that is used to analyze the information by people.

 

[Sinister]

So basically paranoid delusions are the best reasons you can find to justify political violence.

No, you are being purposefully obtuse as is your wont from time to time. He specifically said violence in response to violence was justified, then provided a hypothetical. Governments all over the World have violently oppressed citizens, created legal frameworks that have allowed them to do so, and then called any movement against them "terrorism" or whatever. The Selma Marches are good real life examples being as they were classed as violent acts and the State responded with heavy force. It's no coincidence we are STILL seeing political operatives declaring marches and protests as riots and chaps regardless of how minuscule the unlawfulness of the protestors was compared to the size of the protests.

Police officers literally often get away with criminal activity in the street, up to and including murders. Politicians are using the indirect violence of removing health care, natural disaster aid, food accessibility. Citizens dont owe it to a Government to sit still on a sidewalk during pre-determined tolerable hours and die holding cardboard signs. Im much more of a reformist than a Revolutionary and even I know that, so did MLK.

 

[Crazy Source]

Can we all agree that the responsibility lies solely with the asshole who committed these murders? Possibly his wife too, but that hasn't been confirmed.

Not solely. Stop running interference for your team.

 

[SKYNET]

you can respond to the rest of that post. i believe in you. again, do you disapprove of the actions of john brown, the abolitionist?

Obviously not lol. Pretty sure a things have happened since then, that kind of ruins the need to justify violent political uprisings... quite a reach.

I'm forming a posse to hunt and kill the Cylops and Medusa, want in?

My point stands In this case, (and to your point, most cases, violence isn't necessary)

Approval of political violence in modern society is abhorrent.

 

[KAZSoliloquy]

Obviously not lol. Pretty sure a things have happened since then, that kind of ruins the need to justify political uprisings... quite a reach.

I'm forming a posse to hunt and kill the Cylops and Medusa, want in?

My point stands In this case, (and to your point, most cases, violence isn't necessary)

Approval of political violence in modern society is abhorrent.

so, like i said, political violence is fine when you think the cause is just. i agree.

 

[SKYNET]

No, you are being purposefully obtuse as is your wont from time to time. He specifically said violence in response to violence was justified, then provided a hypothetical. Governments all over the World have violently oppressed citizens, created legal frameworks that have allowed them to do so, and then called any movement against them "terrorism" or whatever. The Selma Marches are good real life examples being as they were classed as violent acts and the State responded with heavy force. It's no coincidence we are STILL seeing political operatives declaring marches and protests as riots and chaps regardless of how minuscule the unlawfulness of the protestors was compared to the size of the protests.

Police officers literally often get away with criminal activity in the street, up to and including murders. Politicians are using the indirect violence of removing health care, natural disaster aid, food accessibility. Citizens dont owe it to a Government to sit still on a sidewalk during pre-determined tolerable hours and die holding cardboard signs. Im much more of a reformist than a Revolutionary and even I know that, so did MLK.

More like you freaks have no argument and all of the sulking is getting to you.

You found another sociopath who lives in the dark ages, lol. Neither one of you raging duds is able to justify this nonsense.

Approval of political violence is abhorrent.

 

[Islam Imamate]

The video of him talking to the media.

What about the video have you that impression?