Rightwingers really need to stop comparing the summer riots to the Jan 6th insurrection and here is why

I already did many times.

You never did, not even once.

The intent of the 1906 Hague Conventions that turned into the Geneva Conventions, was motivated by trying to stop the old Medieval practice of starving cities out into surrendering.

So starving civilians is a war crime, what about economic sanctions?
Post your proof, just once.

If someone is making a living doing business with a foreign entity, then with imposed economic sanctions, the US government is illegally taking from them without compensation.

Congress can regulate commerce with foreign nations. Still not a war crime.

Here is another reference, from the 1958 Geneva Conventions.
However, I am not sure if the US ever signed that one?

{...
Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
COMMENTARY OF 1958
ARTICLE 23 [ Link ] . -- CONSIGNMENTS OF MEDICAL SUPPLIES, FOOD AND
CLOTHING

[p.178] GENERAL BACKGROUND

In consequence of the growing economic interdependence of States the blockade has become a most effective weapon. A ban on all trade with the enemy or with any country occupied by the enemy, strict regulations governing trade with neutral countries, and a extension of the idea of "war contraband" are measures whose object is to place the adverse party in a state of complete economic and financial isolation; such measures cause suffering to the population as a whole, as they affect combatants and non-combatants indiscriminately.
After the First World War several International Red Cross Conferences discussed this problem and recommended that combatants should come to an agreement to allow medicaments, medical equipment, food and clothing through any blockade when they were intended for certain categories of the civilian population (1).
From the very beginning of the Second World War the International Committee of the Red Cross tried to persuade the authorities responsible to relax the blockade in order to relieve the distress among millions of human being who were exposed to famine or epidemics. Undaunted by the difficulties and the many refusals, the Committee made untiring efforts which were finally rewarded when it was able [p.179] to arrange for relief supplies to pass through the blockade to the civilian population which had been tried most sorely -- in Greece, the Channel Islands, the Netherlands, the "pockets" on the Atlantic coast etc. This assistance was given almost entirely to the populations of occupied countries: help could not be brought to those of the belligerent countries themselves until hostilities ended (2).
In order to provide a legal basis for future action of this kind, the International Committee proposed inserting in the new Civilian Convention provisions designed to save certain categories of civilian from the unfortunate consequences of the blockade, the categories in question being the most vulnerable and most worthy of protection and assistance. The Committee prepared a draft Article prescribing free passage for any consignment of medicaments or medical equipment on its way to another contracting State, even an enemy. A second paragraph provided for the free passage of any consignment of food, clothing and tonics for the exclusive use of children under fifteen and expectant mothers, subject to supervision by the Protecting Powers as a safeguard for the interests of the State authorizing passage.
The Committee's draft was approved by the XVIIth International Red Cross Conference (3) and submitted to the Diplomatic Conference in 1949. After lengthy discussion the Diplomatic Conference adopted the general principle but considerably expanded the stipulations concerning supervision.

PARAGRAPH 1. -- RIGHT TO FREE PASSAGE

1. ' Principle -- Distinction between two kinds of consignment '

The right to free passage means that the articles and material in question may not be regarded as war contraband and cannot therefore be seized.
...}
 
1860 and event known as War Between the States part of your extensive history knowledge and insights?
Meanwhile we can expect you to relocate to which better country ?

First of all, the Civil War was technically started by the South, firing on Ft. Sumter.
Second is that no one suggested the division of the US should not be done with mutual agreement.

Are you suggesting that a large monolithic and centralized government is better at providing rights than smaller and more local units?
 
Correll wrote: An interest does not deprive other people of anything. 22JAN1-POST#584

NFBW wrote: One of Trump’s potential crimes is the federal crime of Seditious Conspiracy that is set out in 18 United no States Code §2384. Which states:
If two or more persons . . . conspire . . . by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States . . .they shall each be fined or imprisoned not me ore than 20 years, or both.​
The conspiracy interest is ‘stop the steal’ by pressure applied on Pence based on lies to refuse to count the certification of the electors from Arizona Nevada Wisconsin Michigan Pennsylvania and Georgia. - - - Not counting those six states that Biden won is a conspiratorial manipulation of the electoral college numbers based on lies and fraud resulting in Pence officially gaveling Trump the winner. - - - Had it worked Correll every single citizen in the six not-counted states are deprived of their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to have their votes count. - - - The Conspiracy to manipulate the laws of the electoral college process failed because Pence refused to participate. The conspiracy does not need to succeed to be a crime. It’s the intent and engagement in a conspiracy to deprive voters in Georgia Wisconsin Michigan Pennsylvania Arizona Nevada the right to choose a President. 22JAN1-POST#587


Wow. Sounds very serious when you put it like that. And your focus on the intent is interesting.


Especially in light of how you dismissed the talk of voter fraud. I believe you said something like, there was "no evidence of significant fraud",


Implying that you accepted that there was some fraud, but interestingly, the INTENT of the fraudsters, would have been the same as you characterize Trump's intent, ie to "deprive the citizens of their CONSTITUTTIONAL RIGHT TO HAVE THEIR VOTES COUNT".


Yep. When the person doing it, is one of yours, you suddenly have no interest or outrage about their "INTENT" or their being "fascists" or them being "White" or not.


Indeed, I tried to get you to clarify your position on them before, and you completely ignored me. YOu just don't care about the crimes of people, or the rights of people, if you can't use it to smear people you hate.
 
Here is another reference, from the 1958 Geneva Conventions.
However, I am not sure if the US ever signed that one?

{...
Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
COMMENTARY OF 1958
ARTICLE 23 [ Link ] . -- CONSIGNMENTS OF MEDICAL SUPPLIES, FOOD AND
CLOTHING

[p.178] GENERAL BACKGROUND

In consequence of the growing economic interdependence of States the blockade has become a most effective weapon. A ban on all trade with the enemy or with any country occupied by the enemy, strict regulations governing trade with neutral countries, and a extension of the idea of "war contraband" are measures whose object is to place the adverse party in a state of complete economic and financial isolation; such measures cause suffering to the population as a whole, as they affect combatants and non-combatants indiscriminately.
After the First World War several International Red Cross Conferences discussed this problem and recommended that combatants should come to an agreement to allow medicaments, medical equipment, food and clothing through any blockade when they were intended for certain categories of the civilian population (1).
From the very beginning of the Second World War the International Committee of the Red Cross tried to persuade the authorities responsible to relax the blockade in order to relieve the distress among millions of human being who were exposed to famine or epidemics. Undaunted by the difficulties and the many refusals, the Committee made untiring efforts which were finally rewarded when it was able [p.179] to arrange for relief supplies to pass through the blockade to the civilian population which had been tried most sorely -- in Greece, the Channel Islands, the Netherlands, the "pockets" on the Atlantic coast etc. This assistance was given almost entirely to the populations of occupied countries: help could not be brought to those of the belligerent countries themselves until hostilities ended (2).
In order to provide a legal basis for future action of this kind, the International Committee proposed inserting in the new Civilian Convention provisions designed to save certain categories of civilian from the unfortunate consequences of the blockade, the categories in question being the most vulnerable and most worthy of protection and assistance. The Committee prepared a draft Article prescribing free passage for any consignment of medicaments or medical equipment on its way to another contracting State, even an enemy. A second paragraph provided for the free passage of any consignment of food, clothing and tonics for the exclusive use of children under fifteen and expectant mothers, subject to supervision by the Protecting Powers as a safeguard for the interests of the State authorizing passage.
The Committee's draft was approved by the XVIIth International Red Cross Conference (3) and submitted to the Diplomatic Conference in 1949. After lengthy discussion the Diplomatic Conference adopted the general principle but considerably expanded the stipulations concerning supervision.

PARAGRAPH 1. -- RIGHT TO FREE PASSAGE

1. ' Principle -- Distinction between two kinds of consignment '

The right to free passage means that the articles and material in question may not be regarded as war contraband and cannot therefore be seized.
...}

Thanks.

Where did that help your claim about war crimes?
 
Correll wrote: Wow. Sounds very serious when you put it like that. And your focus on the intent is interesting. - - - especially in light of how you dismissed the talk of voter fraud. 22JAN12-POST#643

NFBW wrote: I dismiss the talk of unproven election fraud. Is there a reason anyone should spend one second of time talking to anybody about unproven election? I’ll get further to the rest of your latest commentary, but first I need you to acknowledge that do not dismiss real prosecutable voter fraud from either side. Anyone who does it must be charged and do time and pay fines It is a serious crime. Is that clear? 22JAN12-POST#645

Then there is Pillow Guy:
"And you talk about evidence," Lindell added. "We have enough evidence to put everybody in prison for life, 300 and some million people. Mike Lindell says he has 'enough evidence' to put '300 million' Americans in jail for election fraud. - - - We have that all the way back to November and December.​

If Pillow Guy proves In a real court that I committed voter fraud I will handcuff myself to the front door at MAR A LAGA wearing a MAGA Hat and call the cops to come get me.
 
Last edited:
Those who riot and loot are criminals. - Throw the book at them and lock them up.

Those who conspire to instigate political violence at or near a peaceful protest by either side should be treated as domestic terrorists - including Individuals within Boogaloo Bois, Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and Three Percenters who do it

That being said - The summer of Chauvin riots was about a police murder

Jan6 was about an imaginary stolen election

So when you ask yourself what sparked both riots - they both were sparked by white men in positions of authority / Donald Trump and Derek Chauvin
I cannot argue with the truth.
 
Did the jury say that because it was the right decision...or did they say that because they were afraid of the riots that would have happened if they didn't? That verdict was predetermined by a main stream media that made a piece of shit drug addict into a martyr. George Floyd died because he ingested a lethal amount of drugs. If he hadn't he'd be alive today.

The evidence showed Chauvin was guilty. The medical examiner did not make the determination you make and he examined the body. You're just a racist mad because a white man was sent to prison for killing somebody black.
 
Yeah, it's unfortunate that the media didn't cover those 93%. Instead, they covered the parts that were violent and destructive.

As far as the claim that it was counter protests who did the destruction. There have been claims that some of the instigators may have been from far right groups, but your telling me that all those hours of video, with all the thousands of protesters we've been seeing, all of them were right wingers? Even most of them were right wingers? Do we have anything that shows where all of those people were all associated with right wing groups, and not with antifa and blm?
The evidence from police reports I have also read from NYC, Chicago, LA,, Denver, and Dallas all say that most of the violence was caused by people not associated withh BLM. I am not saying that none was done by BLM, but I am saying that a majority of it was done by such groups.
 
That issue is about police brutality and police brutality only. It is about nothing else related to left wing politics. It simply happens to be an issue that the left wing cares about. It does not somehow represent the behavior of liberals or democrats. Most of the people dead (13) from those riots were the black people involved.

The insurrection a year ago today was directly related to Trump and Republican politics. Their intentions were related to keep Trump in power. 4 people died and 4 capitol police officers committed suicide following the event.

Thinking error; justifying
 
The evidence from police reports I have also read from NYC, Chicago, LA,, Denver, and Dallas all say that most of the violence was caused by people not associated withh BLM. I am not saying that none was done by BLM, but I am saying that a majority of it was done by such groups.
Mormons???
 
The evidence showed Chauvin was guilty. The medical examiner did not make the determination you make and he examined the body. You're just a racist mad because a white man was sent to prison for killing somebody black.
What level of Fentanyl did the autopsy find in Floyd's body, IM2?
 
Sure, as I said, both sides have their faults. There have been car ramming, as you have pointed out, but I'm referring to the 2 years of coverage we have of violence, destruction, blocking freeways, chaz/chop.

Out of over 2,500 locations violence occurred in just over 200. You only saw what the media showed, because the media shows things to catch our attention. There has not been 2 years of George Floyd protests and during the time there was, for every situation you want to focus on, there were basically 10 non violent, peaceful events.

White supremacists are caught on tape settung fires and bustling windows. They started fights and Kyle Rittenhouse killed 2 protesters himself because the police decided it was OK to let private citizens act as law enforcement.

Both sides did NOT create the conditions that caused the frustration by those blacks who rioted. Blocking highways are a non violent tactic of direct confrontation. Perhaps if whites in America had listened way back when Edward Garner got gunned down when he was unarmed instead of giving police an excuse to use when they kill people, this would not have happened.

MLK said that riots were the language of the unheard. Some of us remain deaf but want to condemn rioters instead of the conditions that made them riot.
 
That issue is about police brutality and police brutality only. It is about nothing else related to left wing politics. It simply happens to be an issue that the left wing cares about. It does not somehow represent the behavior of liberals or democrats. Most of the people dead (13) from those riots were the black people involved.

The insurrection a year ago today was directly related to Trump and Republican politics. Their intentions were related to keep Trump in power. 4 people died and 4 capitol police officers committed suicide following the event.

You don't think gunning down an unarmed female is police brutality? Kiss my ass.
 
If you're going to use words like "insurrection", and those definitions apply just as well to BLM "riots" as they do the jan 6 "riots" (my preferred nomenclature)

They were lighting federal buildings on fire, lol

There is no special carve out for the WH, capitol, or important federal functions (which by the way did not delay the transition of power, the actual transition happened about 10 days later as was always planned)

Rebellion would also be more accurate than insurrection.
There was no insurrection by BLM. The 1-6 insurrection was done over an imaginary situation that never happened.
 

Forum List

Back
Top