# Democrats blame "White surpremacists" and "Islamophobes" for Boulder Shooting.



## Elvasat (Mar 26, 2021)

According to the Democrats, white supremacists are responsible for most shootings. The boulder shooter is, according to them, a victim of islamophobia and a tragically misunderstood individual who should not be in prison. Democrats, as far i know, have petitioned Governor Polis to pardon that man or else they will make sure to get him kicked out of the party.

I heard similar stuff about Jacob Blake in Kenosha, where they want Governor Evers to pardon him if he gets convicted for sexual assault and domestic abuse.

I dont understand how White supremacists are to blame for the boulder shooting when the shooter came from Syria and when the FBI already knew about his criminal past and that he was a risk.


----------



## Silent_Gunner (Mar 27, 2021)

Aww, poor @DinohScene. We could have a friendly chat about what I said, as I only vaguely remember what was said, and really don't know why it is you're censoring my post when the rules say that things should be kept civil, and here you are, shutting things down with the reason being "stfu." Maybe you could elaborate? Because this isn't the first time you censored my posts. You even shut down a post of mine because I posted multiple videos. So what the fuck happened? Or do I have to go to SHAUN! SHAAAAUUUUUNNNN! or Costello to get a better explanation?


----------



## DinohScene (Mar 27, 2021)

Silent_Gunner said:


> Aww, poor @DinohScene. We could have a friendly chat about what I said, as I only vaguely remember what was said, and really don't know why it is you're censoring my post when the rules say that things should be kept civil, and here you are, shutting things down with the reason being "stfu." Maybe you could elaborate? Because this isn't the first time you censored my posts. You even shut down a post of mine because I posted multiple videos. So what the fuck happened? Or do I have to go to SHAUN! SHAAAAUUUUUNNNN! or Costello to get a better explanation?



Unnecessary personal attacks.
You're free to post but don't simply go into a thread, tag a user and slap a personal attack on it.

Further more, moderating actions are not up for debate or discussion. Making posts about any moderating decisions are unwelcome and disrespectful.


----------



## Silent_Gunner (Mar 27, 2021)

DinohScene said:


> Unnecessary personal attacks.
> You're free to post but don't simply go into a thread, tag a user and slap a personal attack on it.
> 
> Further more, moderating actions are not up for debate or discussion. Making posts about any moderating decisions are unwelcome and disrespectful.



"Personal attacks!?" What, like this cringe?



I was inviting a SJW to a challenge to prove the strength of his beliefs. Clearly, he reported it, knowing that you or someone on the moderation team like you would act on it. And I don't think I was being that harsh, especially compared to 4chan and certain banned subreddits!

And making posts about moderator's decisions is disrespectful? Well, gee, sorry that I believe in freedom of speech and the right to petition the authority.


----------



## DinohScene (Mar 27, 2021)

Silent_Gunner said:


> "Personal attacks!?" What, like this cringe?
> 
> *snip*
> 
> ...



Cry about freedom of speech all you want, you shouldn't have signed up on a moderated forum then :')


----------



## Hanafuda (Mar 28, 2021)

I'm sorry, what was the topic again?


----------



## PityOnU (Mar 28, 2021)

Lol, the strawman cometh.

Why is this being politicized? Just remove the word "democrats" and replace with "people." 

"Out of the billions of people on the internet, at least a few of them have unreasonable opinions!" Goodness me! Such a statistical improbability has surely never occurred before in the history of the human race. To fight back, we should not only extrapolate this and assume it is the default baseline opinion for a huge and diverse group of people, but also give it more attention so that its impact is amplified! Surely that will cause anyone I have shotgun-blast labelled as "big bad" to stop, reflect, and calmly and reconsider the error of their ways.

What this asshole did was wrong. Evil and wrong. I don't think any reasonable person out there would argue otherwise. If they are arguing that, then they are unreasonable and you shouldn't be giving them any of your time.

By extension, by giving it (and the shooter) this much attention, you are actively making the problem worse.



Personally, I don't want to see this guy's face in any of my news feeds anymore. He doesn't deserve an ounce of my time or attention as a reward for what he did.


----------



## Silent_Gunner (Mar 28, 2021)

PityOnU said:


> Lol, the strawman cometh.
> 
> Why is this being politicized? Just remove the word "democrats" and replace with "people."
> 
> ...




Would you be saying the same thing if the shooter's skin was white? Because there's journalists on Twitter who are all disappointed that the shooter wasn't, if you can believe it.

...but then again, it's Twitter.


----------



## PityOnU (Mar 28, 2021)

Silent_Gunner said:


> Would you be saying the same thing if the shooter's skin was white? Because there's journalists on Twitter who are all disappointed that the shooter wasn't, if you can believe it.
> 
> ...but then again, it's Twitter.



I... I... I honestly have no idea how to respond to this. Of course I would say the same thing regardless of the person's race? Why would you think that impacts any of this? Why would you even ask that?

Jesus Christ, this country these days. I honestly can't believe it.


----------



## Silent_Gunner (Mar 28, 2021)

PityOnU said:


> I... I... I honestly have no idea how to respond to this. Of course I would say the same thing regardless of the person's race? Why would you think that impacts any of this? Why would you even ask that?
> 
> Jesus Christ, this country these days. I honestly can't believe it.



I'm not asking for myself. I was testing you. Your last line is what I think, too. And your questions is what every honest citizen in this country should ask journalists in person as to why they make it about every -ism in the book.


----------



## PityOnU (Mar 28, 2021)

Silent_Gunner said:


> I'm not asking for myself. I was testing you. Your last line is what I think, too. And your questions is what every honest citizen in this country should ask journalists in person as to why they make it about every -ism in the book.



Modern journalism and the media is based entirely on views/engagement. It is in their best interest to intentionally produce polarizing content. The fact that you are engaging with it so viscerally is what guarantees they will keep doing it.

USA has laws related to free speech, which means that (within limits) they can publish/broadcast whatever the hell they want. Which, as businesses, is generally whatever will make them the most money. We do not have a nanny state here - the government isn't meant to protect our precious baby ears from bad words. Instead, as educated and free citizens, it is our personal responsibility to understand how things work and adjust our behavior accordingly.

If you want it to go away, stop giving it attention and being outraged that some people (and some monetarily-benefitting businesses) present things in an unreasonable way. They are doing it intentionally.


----------



## Arko (Mar 28, 2021)

> white supremacists are responsible for most shootings.



Muslim guy here, please render unto caesar. Don't let the yt thief us out of our well earned credit.

This was a muslim shooting and I hate when the self hating, blue haired, pink assed macaques shift the glory from us to their conservative ilk.


----------



## scroeffie1984 (Mar 28, 2021)

fals flags ,the mass shooting are happening again because the elite want to take away your rights to have weapons to protect your selfs ,they want to change or replace the constitution of the united states !
fear is power


----------



## Silent_Gunner (Mar 28, 2021)

PityOnU said:


> Modern journalism and the media is based entirely on views/engagement. It is in their best interest to intentionally produce polarizing content. The fact that you are engaging with it so viscerally is what guarantees they will keep doing it.
> 
> USA has laws related to free speech, which means that (within limits) they can publish/broadcast whatever the hell they want. Which, as businesses, is generally whatever will make them the most money. We do not have a nanny state here - the government isn't meant to protect our precious baby ears from bad words. Instead, as educated and free citizens, it is our personal responsibility to understand how things work and adjust our behavior accordingly.
> 
> If you want it to go away, stop giving it attention and being outraged that some people (and some monetarily-benefitting businesses) present things in an unreasonable way. They are doing it intentionally.



That's why these companies can be sued for defamation, slander, and outright lying.

And trust me, I ain't giving these companies clicks. They're already starving themselves, what with implementing paywalls that people who are tech savvy can get around easily, and using archive links to make them lose money and everything. I'm more laughing at the blatant hypocrisy of the media-entertainment complex that has become so big and corporate that anything made with true heart and passion gets ignored while they just put out cheap cash grabs that only the most gullible end up buying.

My big problem with the majority of Twitter users and whoever still active on Tumblr these days is their fake moral grandstanding; they'll post a picture of them going to a poor part of Africa, or post something decrying capitalism, and meanwhile, they're posting pictures of them drinking Coca-Cola, taking sponsorships from other companies taking part in the things they criticize so much.

These people, be they journalists, YouTubers, music producers, etc. will decry racism one moment, while promoting a company that uses child labor to get at least some of the materials for Coca-Cola. All so they can get so much money that they won't even know what to do with it. It's hypocritical, and the fact that even the Internet is commercialized the way that it is sickens me. 

Remember back when someone would upload a piece of music to YT, and then they'd have the higher quality version of the file in the description to DL? Now, you have people taking compositions of songs and posting them up, but if you want access to the higher quality versions of the files nowadays, you have to support their Patreon?


----------



## PityOnU (Mar 28, 2021)

Silent_Gunner said:


> That's why these companies can be sued for defamation, slander, and outright lying.
> 
> And trust me, I ain't giving these companies clicks. They're already starving themselves, what with implementing paywalls that people who are tech savvy can get around easily, and using archive links to make them lose money and everything. I'm more laughing at the blatant hypocrisy of the media-entertainment complex that has become so big and corporate that anything made with true heart and passion gets ignored while they just put out cheap cash grabs that only the most gullible end up buying.
> 
> ...



I will not argue with any of your statements here. I think they are all valid topics in and of themselves.

However, using the deaths of however many innocent people (from this shooting) as your jumping off point to start a conversation about a topic as mundane as the moral ramifications of modern media and social influencers seems somewhat misguided at best, and completely tone deaf and disrespectful at worst.

I would encourage you to start some threads on those topics here, but disconnected from this shooting. I would actually love to have a discussion about all of that. I just refuse to do so while it is being tied back to this tragedy.


----------



## Silent_Gunner (Mar 28, 2021)

PityOnU said:


> I will not argue with any of your statements here. I think they are all valid topics in and of themselves.
> 
> However, using the deaths of however many innocent people (from this shooting) as your jumping off point to start a conversation about a topic as mundane as the moral ramifications of modern media and social influencers seems somewhat misguided at best, and completely tone deaf and disrespectful at worst.
> 
> I would encourage you to start some threads on those topics here, but disconnected from this shooting. I would actually love to have a discussion about all of that. I just refuse to do so while it is being tied back to this tragedy.



I don't see how it's tone deaf considering that this happened while Congress is debating axing the second amendment. If anything, the media's reaction to this can be a tell for how our leaders are going to react. After all, those who run these media conglomerates all funded Biden's campaign and probably get payouts for their participation in furthering the narrative his administration wants pushed.

These aren't mundane ramifications, either. When the government takes over the media, the news organizations become propaganda arms for the state like they did in Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, North Korea, China, and the United States.

But alas, I don't feel like starting threads. This particular part of the forum is the just like the worst circlejerks of Reddit.


----------

