Jump to content

Domestic terrorism planned against Democrats, planners arrested


cr47t
 Share

Recommended Posts

To be honest, this is probably just a good read and a boat load of propaganda. On the off chance it is true, arresting somebody for their political beliefs is in violation of the constitution. So more wasted tax dollars I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Immaculate Lord CowCow said:

what....how did you get that at all from this?

Because we live in a time were having having the american flag on your property is considered an act of domestic terrorism. So yeah, likely, just somebody disagreeing with some democrats who got butthurt and called the police.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Horu said:

Because we live in a time were having having the american flag on your property is considered an act of domestic terrorism. So yeah, likely, just somebody disagreeing with some democrats who got butthurt and called the police.

Did you not read the article? Cause like

cef1602c550c35845bfcfccee72d122e.png

Just one part of it

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Horu said:

To be honest, this is probably just a good read and a boat load of propaganda. On the off chance it is true, arresting somebody for their political beliefs is in violation of the constitution. So more wasted tax dollars I guess.

 

1 hour ago, Horu said:

Because we live in a time were having having the american flag on your property is considered an act of domestic terrorism. So yeah, likely, just somebody disagreeing with some democrats who got butthurt and called the police.

 

if you read the article it's clear this is not a case of dissent bad in action. as cowcow pointed out they were literally planning political genocide

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Immaculate Lord CowCow said:

Did you not read the article? Cause like

cef1602c550c35845bfcfccee72d122e.png

Just one part of it

Yeah, this is definitely a targeted statement. But is there any political motive behind this? Or is this more of a hate thing? I mean "terrorism" by definition is the use of voilence/threats to gain a political advantage. His statement, while targeted, feels more the lines of generalized hate/anger as opposed to terrorism. Regardless, he would likely be better off in the funny farm.

12 minutes ago, cr47t said:

 

 

if you read the article it's clear this is not a case of dissent bad in action. as cowcow pointed out they were literally planning political genocide

I'm not saying it is. But I am pointing out the fact that stuff like this has been done before. However, as I said above, guy needs time away from the world to re-evaluate his life. On one hand, I hope the story is legit and not just a half decent read full of anti-republican propaganda. On the other hand, I hate the thought that somebody could outright murder folks because of their political beliefs and would honestly prefer the story to be nothing but propaganda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/17/2021 at 7:20 AM, Horu said:

... I hate the thought that somebody could outright murder folks because of their political beliefs ...

On 7/17/2021 at 7:20 AM, Horu said:

... stuff like this has been done before. 

not going to give names b/c i dont want to give the fame of said people a new lease on life, but i'm sure you can find a few with small effort.

also, reading your first/second and third posts, i wouldn't have known they were from the same guy if they weren't all tagged as yours. we've established political beliefs wasn't the basis for arrest, but how TF did you get that conclusion in the first place? when they had plans and equipment and all in their possession and communications? reminder that if they succeeded this would have been not just terrorism but actual political genocide

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/16/2021 at 11:30 PM, The Immaculate Lord CowCow said:

what....how did you get that at all from this?

I think it's likely that he deliberately chose not to read the article and was calling it propaganda only because of the title of this thread. The only time he directly commented on the article itself was when you posted a screenshot from it. He assumed that this must be anti-Republican propaganda, despite Republicans not being mentioned until the very end, in a fairly neutral statement.

"The memo says Copeland and Rogers were infuriated after Joe Biden was declared the winner of the 2020 presidential election, and they “understood they would be viewed as domestic terrorists” if they carried out their vision to overturn the US government."

They knew they were planning terrorism. In this case, they were not arrested for their own political beliefs, but they were planning to murder people for their political beliefs. When their plan includes blowing up a building, the arresting officers are not doing so because of what these two believe.

Horu, for once I would like you to focus on the subject at hand, rather than projecting your frustration with other circumstances onto something else. Asking this story to be more than "anti-Republican propaganda", but actually wishing that it was is forcing a question about this story that no rational person should be demanding.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Phantom Roxas said:

I think it's likely that he deliberately chose not to read the article and was calling it propaganda only because of the title of this thread. The only time he directly commented on the article itself was when you posted a screenshot from it. He assumed that this must be anti-Republican propaganda, despite Republicans not being mentioned until the very end, in a fairly neutral statement.

The thing is, a lot of anti-republican stuff has been circulating lately. But I'm sure this story will be twisted in all sorts of directions once other media sources can sink their teeth into it.

5 hours ago, Phantom Roxas said:

"The memo says Copeland and Rogers were infuriated after Joe Biden was declared the winner of the 2020 presidential election, and they “understood they would be viewed as domestic terrorists” if they carried out their vision to overturn the US government."

So Biden won. No reason to go blow up buildings and kill a bunch of innocent people. Just wait the four years and vote again.

5 hours ago, Phantom Roxas said:

They knew they were planning terrorism. In this case, they were not arrested for their own political beliefs, but they were planning to murder people for their political beliefs. When their plan includes blowing up a building, the arresting officers are not doing so because of what these two believe.

Yes. The officers were doing their jobs. I still think it's disgusting to outright murder people simply based off of their political views. Never mentioned the arrest being based on politics. Just expressed my disgust for the people that were going to commit genocide because the people they wanted to kill were democrats.

5 hours ago, Phantom Roxas said:

Horu, for once I would like you to focus on the subject at hand, rather than projecting your frustration with other circumstances onto something else. Asking this story to be more than "anti-Republican propaganda", but actually wishing that it was is forcing a question about this story that no rational person should be 

Yes, Roxas, I want this story be propaganda. Mostly because I find it disgusting to kill people because of their race, religion, political views, etc.

Those aren't legitimate reasons for not liking somebody. Much less to kill them. 

But yes, I do believe their goal was start a political war. I mean, what other reason would you have to attack a democrat building?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Horu said:

Never mentioned the arrest being based on politics.

On 7/17/2021 at 12:33 AM, Horu said:

On the off chance it is true, arresting somebody for their political beliefs is in violation of the constitution. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Horu said:

The thing is, a lot of anti-republican stuff has been circulating lately. But I'm sure this story will be twisted in all sorts of directions once other media sources can sink their teeth into it.

That's nice, but all the media is doing is just reporting that these guys were arrested. If you have an issue with a trend of articles critical of Republicans, it isn't relevant to this discussion.

1 hour ago, Horu said:

So Biden won. No reason to go blow up buildings and kill a bunch of innocent people. Just wait the four years and vote again.

I agree with this. I have no further comment to add, I just wanted to address each point individually and thought that it would be bad form to leave this part out.

1 hour ago, Horu said:

Yes. The officers were doing their jobs. I still think it's disgusting to outright murder people simply based off of their political views. Never mentioned the arrest being based on politics. Just expressed my disgust for the people that were going to commit genocide because the people they wanted to kill were democrats.

I was wondering when you'd blatantly lie about how you totally never said something in this thread, except I can directly quote you saying exactly that.

On 7/16/2021 at 9:33 PM, Horu said:

On the off chance it is true, arresting somebody for their political beliefs is in violation of the constitution. So more wasted tax dollars I guess.

So yes, you did mention the arrest being based on politics. You were explicitly trying to accuse the arrest of being based on politics. If you want to argue against my point, you can do so without lying. Note that I quoted your first post from this thread, so you were talking about arresting them based on politics and accusing this story of just being propaganda before ever expressing disgust with their plans.

1 hour ago, Horu said:

Yes, Roxas, I want this story be propaganda. Mostly because I find it disgusting to kill people because of their race, religion, political views, etc.

Those aren't legitimate reasons for not liking somebody. Much less to kill them. 

But yes, I do believe their goal was start a political war. I mean, what other reason would you have to attack a democrat building?

How is reporting that two men were arrested propaganda? https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndca/pr/two-charged-conspiracy-scheme-attack-democratic-headquarters-sacramento

I'm sorry, but saying that they were arrested for planning to blow up a building is just a statement of fact. Wishing for this to be propaganda is just denying reality on a very basic level.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apologies for my mistake there, @cr47t and @Phantom Roxas. I did mention that bit. Must of forgotten about that. Clearly my opinion shifted once Cow pointed out that bit about them wanting to slaughter people because of politics.

 

@Ryusei the Morning Star I tend to be very skeptical of the government because I was part of it and the agencies outright lie to their own agents. But at best, this will be another Sandy Hook incident that'll be forgotten and at worst, it'll serve as fuel for democrats to openly attack republicans. Only time will tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Ryusei the Morning Star said:

People trust the FBI after operation crossfire? LMAO, rip to two likely innocent turkeys for the cause

I'm not at all surprised that you still sympathize with domestic terrorists, and now you want to pretend that they're martyrs for your "cause".

14 hours ago, Horu said:

Apologies for my mistake there, @cr47t and @Phantom Roxas. I did mention that bit. Must of forgotten about that. Clearly my opinion shifted once Cow pointed out that bit about them wanting to slaughter people because of politics.

 

@Ryusei the Morning Star I tend to be very skeptical of the government because I was part of it and the agencies outright lie to their own agents. But at best, this will be another Sandy Hook incident that'll be forgotten and at worst, it'll serve as fuel for democrats to openly attack republicans. Only time will tell.

Your opinion shifted because Cow literally had to post a screenshot of the article for you, since you weren't going to read the article otherwise. Maybe you should have actually just read the article from the beginning instead of making assumptions about it just because Republicans get criticized for other things.

Both men were members of the Three Percenters, and contacted the Proud Boys. If anything, those connections have been emphasized far more than whether they're Republicans. They support Trump, but despite the significant overlap, Trump supporters are not always Republicans, and vice versa. The only part that's relevant is that they supported Trump and were planning to murder people just because Trump lost.

If you're uncomfortable with how you believe this story could be "twisted", then can we at least agree that the Three Percenters and Proud Boys are domestic terrorists? While both groups are on the far right, I don't think you'd like to see anyone use them to judge Republicans as a whole. I don't think it's rational to dismiss this as "anti-Republican propaganda" when they are connected with terrorist groups.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Phantom Roxas said:

Your opinion shifted because Cow literally had to post a screenshot of the article for you, since you weren't going to read the article otherwise. Maybe you should have actually just read the article from the beginning instead of making assumptions about it just because Republicans get criticized for other things.

I won't argue with you on this as I originally assumed the article was more anti-republican propaganda.

28 minutes ago, Phantom Roxas said:

Both men were members of the Three Percenters, and contacted the Proud Boys. If anything, those connections have been emphasized far more than whether they're Republicans. They support Trump, but despite the significant overlap, Trump supporters are not always Republicans, and vice versa. The only part that's relevant is that they supported Trump and were planning to murder people just because Trump lost.

True. But Trump outright rebukes support from hate groups and even goes as far as refusing to accept their votes and endorsements. Also, Trump has done quite a bit to protect minorities that the current administration is trying to overturn (more on this later or you can message me and I'll explain the details).

28 minutes ago, Phantom Roxas said:

If you're uncomfortable with how you believe this story could be "twisted", then can we at least agree that the Three Percenters and Proud Boys are domestic terrorists? While both groups are on the far right, I don't think you'd like to see anyone use them to judge Republicans as a whole. I don't think it's rational to dismiss this as "anti-Republican propaganda" when they are connected with terrorist groups.

Agreed. Though I think they fell off a long time ago and it's ironic that these hate groups are so supportive of the guy that continues to shut them down. Seems like a bit of a lost cause. But yeah, I'd be game for getting rid of domestic terrorists regardless. Then again, a terrorist is a terrorist in my book, regardless of their race, color, religion, political views, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/19/2021 at 9:08 AM, Horu said:

True. But Trump outright rebukes support from hate groups and even goes as far as refusing to accept their votes and endorsements. Also, Trump has done quite a bit to protect minorities that the current administration is trying to overturn (more on this later or you can message me and I'll explain the details).

Strange that there's absolutely no such protections that were implemented by Trump and overturned by Biden. If anything, I think Trump has done far more to restrict and condemn minorities, and Biden is overturning them to protect minorities from Trump's policies.

Not that it matters. If you want to talk about those protections, there's a thread for the Biden administration's actions here. Or you could make a new thread instead of trying to derail this discussion with something that we've already beaten to death in other threads.

54 minutes ago, Ryusei the Morning Star said:

Congratulations, Winter, you have made the most worthless post in this thread so far. A non-sequitur about a separate FBI investigation into a different group of MAGA domestic terrorists is irrelevant to this discussion. This is about as helpful as telling someone not to eat apples, and attempting to justify your position by pointing to some oranges without elaborating on anything. Like with Horu, complaining about something else is just going to derail the discussion.

Ian Rogers and Jarrod Copeland have no grounds for claiming entrapment, so your false equivalence means nothing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/trump-administration-accomplishments/

Here is a list of Trump's accomplishments while in office. A simple google search and the white house archives are the top result. Enjoy.

 

Anyway, back on topic. I see this becoming another Sandy Hook incident for some reason and this bugs me. I'm sure you're all familiar with the Sandy Hook school massacre that was only mentioned that day and somehow forgotten and never spoken about again.

Edited by Horu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump patting himself on the back really doesn't support your argument.

That's not at all what happened with Sandy Hook. It's literally one of the most significant examples people continue to point to when discussing mass shootings. Again, you still need to learn how to make an argument without lying.

https://abc7ny.com/sandy-hook-shooting-elementary-school-memorial-newtown/10905382/

For crying out loud, we are only now getting a memorial constructed for the people murdered at Sandy Hook, and that was because people were persistent in ensuring that it was remembered. It's genuinely disgusting that you would invoke it just to treat it as something that was "forgotten and never spoken about again", just because you want to deny reality and wish that two men getting arrested for plotting to blow up building was propaganda, all because you're afraid of how this story could reflect on a wider group.

If anything, this topic is like Sandy Hook because it did in fact happen, but conspiracy theorists are denying it happened at all, just to be contrarian.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My initial point is I'd prefer propaganda over a massacre. But yeah, if the story is legit, the propaganda will ensue anyway. And another point is that planning a massacre based on politics is just disgusting in itself and these 2 should just be deported to North Korea. Honestly wish there was an effective measure to get rid of all the hate groups in America but so long as there is a way to divide people, it will be done time and time again. Also, my point with Sandy Hook was that something bad happened and the media just used their pain to get a story and never bothered to mention it again after that day. So yeah, in terms of media, Sandy Hook was forgotten until they started to build a memorial because "oh look, something's happening over there". See what I'm saying? The media only covers something if it fits a certain narrative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Phantom Roxas said:

Strange that there's absolutely no such protections that were implemented by Trump and overturned by Biden. If anything, I think Trump has done far more to restrict and condemn minorities, and Biden is overturning them to protect minorities from Trump's policies.

Not that it matters. If you want to talk about those protections, there's a thread for the Biden administration's actions here. Or you could make a new thread instead of trying to derail this discussion with something that we've already beaten to death in other threads.

Congratulations, Winter, you have made the most worthless post in this thread so far. A non-sequitur about a separate FBI investigation into a different group of MAGA domestic terrorists is irrelevant to this discussion. This is about as helpful as telling someone not to eat apples, and attempting to justify your position by pointing to some oranges without elaborating on anything. Like with Horu, complaining about something else is just going to derail the discussion.

Ian Rogers and Jarrod Copeland have no grounds for claiming entrapment, so your false equivalence means nothing.

I mean the Michigan fellows didn't have grounds to claim entrapment until the stuff about the main bomb maker and planner being an FBI agent came out

 

At the very least you cannot argue that the FBI is above this stuff. I'm going to wait and watch rather than cast stones right away

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Ryusei the Morning Star said:

I mean the Michigan fellows didn't have grounds to claim entrapment until the stuff about the main bomb maker and planner being an FBI agent came out

 

At the very least you cannot argue that the FBI is above this stuff. I'm going to wait and watch rather than cast stones right away

So you're gonna play the "let's wait and see" game? That makes sense because further coverage often tells the legitimacy of the story. So I'd assume we're all in that boat with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Horu said:

My initial point is I'd prefer propaganda over a massacre. But yeah, if the story is legit, the propaganda will ensue anyway. And another point is that planning a massacre based on politics is just disgusting in itself and these 2 should just be deported to North Korea. Honestly wish there was an effective measure to get rid of all the hate groups in America but so long as there is a way to divide people, it will be done time and time again. Also, my point with Sandy Hook was that something bad happened and the media just used their pain to get a story and never bothered to mention it again after that day. So yeah, in terms of media, Sandy Hook was forgotten until they started to build a memorial because "oh look, something's happening over there". See what I'm saying? The media only covers something if it fits a certain narrative.

"If the story is legit" What more do you need before you'll accept that this story is legitimate? Two men were plotting to blow up buildings and murder people over politics. If you're concerned what people will make of their support for Trump and their connections to extremist militias, then that's not the fault of the media's coverage. You seem to be getting mad at the media for potential coverage you've projected onto them, rather than anything they've actually done yet.

You're lying about the reaction to Sandy Hook so you can make this about your own vendetta against "the media". Sandy Hook wasn't "forgotten" until the memorial. It's just you claimed that it was forgotten, but then I showed you that the memorial is under construction. Since your initial position was that it was forgotten, and you don't want to change your position or admit that you were wrong, you moved the goalpost so your latest lie is that it was only now remembered because of the memorial. You keep mentioning narratives, but what other narrative is there beyond just informing people that the memorial is under construction? As soon as you're told that a memorial is being created - specifically so it won't be forgotten - you act like "the media" has some nefarious agenda.

Sandy Hook was not a part of this discussion at first. That's not because it was forgotten or anything; it was just not pertinent to this discussion. You're the only one here taking advantage of Sandy Hook to fit an a narrative. You invented a trend, used a fictitious version of "the media's" coverage of Sandy Hook as an example of it, and so you're pretending to warn us how the coverage of this story will continue that false "trend". You have a preexisting bias against "the media", so you're not talking about what you expect to happen. You're talking about how you want the story to be covered because you hope that will confirm your biases against that media. However, you already dismissed the articles presented to you in this thread as propaganda without even looking at them. Not because the substance of their stories actually qualifies as propaganda, but because you appear to automatically dismiss any article from arbitrarily selected sources as propaganda. You had no intention of even reading the stories before judging what they must be. And that's all because you're afraid of what "the media" will say because two men were charged with plotting an attack. Why do you need "the media" to prove your confirmation bias when you were already going to consider this story "propaganda" no matter what?.

13 minutes ago, Ryusei the Morning Star said:

I mean the Michigan fellows didn't have grounds to claim entrapment until the stuff about the main bomb maker and planner being an FBI agent came out

 

At the very least you cannot argue that the FBI is above this stuff. I'm going to wait and watch rather than cast stones right away

No, it just seems that you're fishing for a reason to absolve them of guilt. Two men were caught plotting acts of domestic terrorism, and your gut instinct is to "wait and watch".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...