Media Bias

[Brian Peacock]

Rittenhouse? Is that the young chap who was set upon by a convicted pedophile named Rosenbaum?

How did that go for the pedophile?

...

That's quite a claim Chuckles. Quite a claim indeed. Can you back it up though?

I didn't make much of a claim there. Reports are that Rosenbaum, a convicted pedophile, set upon him.

Well, videos, rather than reports. He is the little bald chap here saying 'shoot me' with a racial epithet.
https://nypost.com/2020/08/28/kenosha-s ... armed-men/

I doubt that you can. I doubt that you're even interested in backing it up or whether it's actually true or not. Am I right?

Looking up whether he confronted the kid earlier? I can just look at the video.

What is it you think happened?

What's probably more important is that it's a story which the far-Right find comforting, because it casts Rittenhouse as a brave hero who took the law into his own hand to do society a favour - even if his actions amounted to an extrajudicial killing, or as that is sometimes referred to, a lynching.

Was Rosenbaum and his gang trying to lynch Mr. R?

See, if you don't think people should be allowed to defend themselves, it's easy to treat this as 'extrajudicial killing' or some such bullshit.

If you accept that he was being attacked, and defended himself, it gets a lot tougher to take the side of the racist pedophile you saw shouting in the video there.

Do you think people should be applauded for taking the law into their own hands and doing society a favour by permanently removing undesirables and wrong doers like this - or is it that people just don't have much of a reason to complain (if any) when something like this happens?

Asking for a friend.

If someone attacks you, or youer loved ones, should you be allowed to defend yourself? Or should you just take a knee.

Asking for a friend.

I understand that you take the side that CNN tells you to take, but don't have any reason to think you know anything other than their narrative.

I don't not watch CNN. I don't have a TV and I don't watch them online. You need to ask your pals on Parlour for more Brit-specific windup lines. Anyway...

You claimed that Rittenhouse shot a convicted criminal, and have just done so again: " ... Rosenbaum, a convicted pedophile, set upon him.". Now, of course, people have a right to defend themselves, but let's not forget the context, which nobody really disputes (though feel free to give it a bash if you like), that is: Rittenhouse crossed a state line specifically to attend a BLM protest, which he disagreed with, with an assault style weapon, and at some point after he arrived he walked into the crowd armed with said weapon.

Now that's out of the way, to the matter at hand - can you back up your claim that Rosenbaum was a convicted pedophile, or that either of the two people Rittenhouse shot and killed that day in two separate incidents, or the person he shot and wounded, were criminals or had convictions for non-trivial offenses? My prediction is that you cannot back those claims up, and therefore you will not, and instead you will try and change the subject. I also said that you're probably not concerned whether claims are actually true or not. Am I right about that too?

Always happy to be proven wrong of course.

[Brian Peacock]

Chuckles?

He must think it sounds cute.

What IS cute is that he is not aware of the story, or simply can't tell certain parts of it.

THAT is a pretty big chuckle.

Is that 'story' as in fiction or 'story' as in factual account? Time for you to embarrass me by proving me wrong eh?

[Brian Peacock]

Chuckles?

It's a mild colloquial Northern UK term, sometimes used affectionately, for a frivolous person.

[Cunt]

Rittenhouse? Is that the young chap who was set upon by a convicted pedophile named Rosenbaum?

How did that go for the pedophile?

...

That's quite a claim Chuckles. Quite a claim indeed. Can you back it up though?

I didn't make much of a claim there. Reports are that Rosenbaum, a convicted pedophile, set upon him.

Well, videos, rather than reports. He is the little bald chap here saying 'shoot me' with a racial epithet.
https://nypost.com/2020/08/28/kenosha-s ... armed-men/

I doubt that you can. I doubt that you're even interested in backing it up or whether it's actually true or not. Am I right?

Looking up whether he confronted the kid earlier? I can just look at the video.

What is it you think happened?

What's probably more important is that it's a story which the far-Right find comforting, because it casts Rittenhouse as a brave hero who took the law into his own hand to do society a favour - even if his actions amounted to an extrajudicial killing, or as that is sometimes referred to, a lynching.

Was Rosenbaum and his gang trying to lynch Mr. R?

See, if you don't think people should be allowed to defend themselves, it's easy to treat this as 'extrajudicial killing' or some such bullshit.

If you accept that he was being attacked, and defended himself, it gets a lot tougher to take the side of the racist pedophile you saw shouting in the video there.

Do you think people should be applauded for taking the law into their own hands and doing society a favour by permanently removing undesirables and wrong doers like this - or is it that people just don't have much of a reason to complain (if any) when something like this happens?

Asking for a friend.

If someone attacks you, or youer loved ones, should you be allowed to defend yourself? Or should you just take a knee.

Asking for a friend.

I understand that you take the side that CNN tells you to take, but don't have any reason to think you know anything other than their narrative.

I don't not watch CNN. I don't have a TV and I don't watch them online. You need to ask your pals on Parlour for more Brit-specific windup lines. Anyway...

You claimed that Rittenhouse shot a convicted criminal, and have just done so again: " ... Rosenbaum, a convicted pedophile, set upon him.". Now, of course, people have a right to defend themselves, but let's not forget the context, which nobody really disputes (though feel free to give it a bash if you like), that is: Rittenhouse crossed a state line specifically to attend a BLM protest, which he disagreed with, with an assault style weapon, and at some point after he arrived he walked into the crowd armed with said weapon.

Now that's out of the way, to the matter at hand - can you back up your claim that Rosenbaum was a convicted pedophile, or that either of the two people Rittenhouse shot and killed that day in two separate incidents, or the person he shot and wounded, were criminals or had convictions for non-trivial offenses? My prediction is that you cannot back those claims up, and therefore you will not, and instead you will try and change the subject. I also said that you're probably not concerned whether claims are actually true or not. Am I right about that too?

Always happy to be proven wrong of course.

Wow, that's quite a story.

You skipped a lot of it, of course, but then you probably have to.

If you ever describe it honestly, you'll have to consider what you would do. Use empathy.

Until you can tell the story more honestly, I'll simply assume that your keepers, or your ignorance, prevents you.

I saw the videos of the convict Rosenbaum saying 'shoot me', and using a racial slur. I understand you are siding with him, seeing him as 'the victim', but I don't buy it.

Mostly because I know you can't tell the awkward parts of the story. It certainly isn't as you paint it. It's almost like you decided before any evidence was in, which side you were on.

And it is the side of the pedophile shouting 'shoot me n*****'

[Cunt]

Oh, and I noticed that you ignored all my questions, while posing your own. How stupid of me to treat this as a discussion. Go on with your ignorant proselytizing. It's soothing, like CNN or BBC telling about how racist your people are.

[Brian Peacock]

My prediction came true! Looks like it's probably a good day for me to get a lottery ticket as well.

[Brian Peacock]

Oh, and I really don't think I left anything out.
You claimed Rittenhouse shot a convicted pedo who set upon him. Check.
I asked you to back that up. Check.
You didn't back it up. Check.

[Joe]

Chuckles?

It's a mild colloquial Northern UK term, sometimes used affectionately, for a frivolous person.

Ah, thanks for the explanation. It is a cute term for him, as is Daggles.

Were I to nickname our member from Yellowknife, I'd call him Cooter. I'll leave it to him to figure out why.

[Cunt]

Your government and the BBC has told me about how racist certain people are. Maybe it's time to stop dismissing their accusations.

I certainly can see your predelictions here. Taking the side of the gibbering racist rioter instead of the victim.

https://thenewamerican.com/court-record ... ld-rapist/

Court records reveal that Joseph Don Rosenbaum (shown), the convicted sex offender whom Kyle Rittenhouse shot to death on August 25 in Kenosha, Wisconsin, was a pervert who molested five small kids, two of whom were brothers.

Initial reports about Rosenbaum, 36, based on his sex-offender registration in Wisconsin, said only that he had “sex with a minor.”

But yesterday, a fuller portrait of the deceased sociopath emerged. He was a child rapist who committed unspeakable crimes.

If you can't tell me why Rosenbaum was pissed off, and chasing Rittenhouse, I can dismiss you as ignorant, or willingly lying.

Your turn, handsome!

[Brian Peacock]

Have you checked the veracity of your source? I think you should double check - particularly after that ham-fisted CNM crack.

[Cunt]

Have you checked the veracity of your source? I think you should double check.

No, I'm checking the veracity of you.

Your dodging of the awkward questions reveals your shallow understanding. Your BBC is probably right about you.

[Seabass]

OF COURSE Cunt sides with the little fascist shit who drove to another state with a gun for a chance to shoot black civil rights protesters.

[Cunt]

OF COURSE Cunt sides with the little fascist shit who drove to another state with a gun for a chance to shoot black civil rights protesters.

I haven't heard any understanding of the facts from him or you. You sound like cheerleaders.

That's ok though, I already knew.

[Seabass]

OF COURSE Cunt sides with the little fascist shit who drove to another state with a gun for a chance to shoot black civil rights protesters.

I haven't heard any understanding of the facts from him or you. You sound like cheerleaders.

That's ok though, I already knew.

And you're a cheerleader for white nationalists, alt-rightists, homophobes, murderous right-wing thugs, and laws that legalize vehicular manslaughter against black protestors.

And you oppose black civil rights movements.

You're a real swell guy, you Cunt.

[Cunt]

I know your judgement around who is 'white nationalist', or such, is pretty muddy, so I don't care.

It would be like being insulted by a cartoon character.