No, you're just ignorant of the facts.
Pretty sure I stated the facts.
Rittenhouse tried to stay on the scene of the first shooting before being chased away, and tried to turn himself in to police immediately after the next two. The police reacted to the greater threat, a mob attacking one man (one with a skateboard and one of them holding a gun, mind you).
Rittenhouse shot dead his first victim after the unarmed man threw a plastic bag at him and tried to grab his gun, the complaint alleges. His second victim was allegedly killed after trying to grab Rittenhouse’s gun while swinging at the teen with a skateboard. An extradition hearing has been postponed to September 25. [https://bit.ly/2Zija9Y]
Were more plastic bags about to be thrown?
Doesn't the NRA suggest that when confronted with a shooter, you use whatever is on hand to try to disarm him?
Rittenhouse's victims tried to disarm an active shooter.
Rittenhouse had no business being there. He drove from out of state and town to be there with his guns and was hyped up when talking to the media before he murdered 2 people. He went to the protest while armed, broke the law in the process, because this was the event he wanted to happen.
We are talking about a man who had no qualms in ganging up on a girl and beating the shit out of her .. And like the cowardly little snot that he is, he attacked her from behind.
So aside from him technically violating curfew (tacitly approved of by the police), which was obviously enacted to stop vandalism from those equally in violation of curfew, you seem to be completely ignorant of what actually happened. He wouldn't have had to shoot anyone if they hadn't been chasing and physically assaulting him. But I know you Aussies don't understand self-defense any more than you understand freedom of speech.
He crossed state lines with a gun, broke curfew, and killed two people and seriously injured a 3rd .. He went out of his way to do this. The threat wasn't at his door. He went out of his way to attack people.
But hey, you're the one who is defending a murderer and coward who beats up women from behind. I can understand why you might have issues in understanding how his actions are actually wrong.
Not to mention illegal.
Now compare Rittenhouse to hundreds of millions in property damage, over 30 people killed, over 14,000 arrests, hundreds of police casualties, etc.. So yeah, it looks like violent rioters have been getting a free pass, with cover from Democrat mayors, governors, congressmen, and media, who either expressly supported or obtusely denied it for months.
Well, white murderer with a gun is not deemed a threat.. He gets a high 5 and a bottle of water and thanks.
Unarmed black men? Such a threat that they are gunned down willy nilly. Same thing with unarmed black women and children.
That's the difference, isn't it? A white man murders 2 people in front of police and he's not deemed a threat. And who got the free pass? Murder 2 people and then be allowed to go home..
Honestly, your argument is so ridiculous that one cannot take you seriously at all..
No, that's just and ignorant caricature. Not that I expect any better from a foreigner.
Foreigner..
Tell me, do you hiss that at people who look foreign as you walk down the street? Do you often call people with brown skin foreigner?
Your racism is a caricature that deserves to be mocked Vociferous. You are dribbling over yourself defending white supremacism and a murderer.
How's that tiki torch?
Only when you're intellectually dishonest and intentionally cherry-pick.
Facts are facts.
There is no harmful rhetoric in simply being proud of your heritage. Nor does that pride condone any white supremacy. But moron leftists can't manage to understand the very simple concept that a place, name, or thing doesn't forever represent the worst of its history. That's the idiocy of postmodernism.
We are talking about white supremacism and racism and
this is your response?
Roundly debunked as a complete lie, even by just the context of the original remark, according to Politifact.
White supremacists weren't marching and chanting?
Or Trump did not compare them as being "nice people"..?
I'm 100% sure that you are demonstrably ignorant.
The irony of this is that you froth at the mouth reporting every single person who calls you dumb, an idiot, etc and you expect us to take you and your reports seriously?
So you're not only ignorant of your own laws but you're also unable to figure out which parts of your own laws apply to hate speech.
This was already addressed.
Really, you have issues.
Ecnarongi?
I didn't cherry pick anything. I gave you all the relevant upheld cases from the wiki.
Ya, you cherry picked.
And the funniest thing is that you picked cases that made you look gormless.
I did read, and they do prove my point. You just have the Aussie ignorance of what real freedom of expression actually entails, in an actual free country.
To the one, you are applying an American concept of Freedom of Speech to a completely different country with proper sets of laws and case law to back it up.
To the other, every single case you flung back to where instances where people were racist and harmful in what can and are interpreted as being public areas or could be heard and/or seen from a public space.
What makes your position and argument even more ridiculous is that your very own country and government is at present trying to extradite an Australian journalist who outed the actions of US soldiers in your war on terror and in your search for WMD's that didn't actually exist..
Case history proves it restricts speech without discriminating against anyone. But then, you Aussies probably have some vague, slippery definition of "discriminate" that manages to include speech, and thus refute your own claim that "it isn't a restriction".
As I said. In Australia and in most other countries with a functioning legal system.. You can be the racist twat that you are as much as you please so long as it's in private and does not affect others.
Oh don't worry.
I know this is your hill and you're on it, dying while gripping a tiki torch..
Pregnant woman arrested in Ballarat for creating anti-lockdown protest event on Facebook
[snip]
If you think words, themselves, cause harm, you're not an adult ("...but words will never hurt me"). "Incitement"? To what, hold a peaceful rally? Isn't that what you've been defending in American protests? Hypocrite.
You want to know how and why I know you died on the hill a long time ago?
Because this was your go to. This is your "hill"..
1. Ms Buhler claimed complete ignorance that Victoria and in particular Melbourne was in level 4 - this is despite said news of lockdown being on every radio, tv, social media sources, newspaper - for weeks.
2. Ms Buhler had a Facebook post that incited people to break the law and risk the health and lives of other people around them. Victoria is in the midst of a horrific outbreak that's killed dozens of people and left thousands sick.
So here you are on this hill, thinking that inciting others to break the law should be legal? If someone incites another person to harm others, that would be illegal. Ms Buhler was inciting others to break the law and cause and risk the health and lives of others in the process. Not to mention her post was "inflammatory propaganda"
..
Again, you're conflating s.18C and 18D. 18C restricts speech, while 18D is only about exceptions to that restriction. So the second you go talking about anyone supplying evidence under 18D, you've already admitted that their speech has been deemed illegal.
And what motivations anyone may have in any hearing is immaterial to whether the government tried to restrict their speech, which it obviously did.
And it's just like an ignorant leftist to conflate defense of the principle of free speech with defense of any particular speech itself. There are no principles in only defending the rights of people you agree with.
I linked you the actual case. You should read it for yourself. You know, before making an even bigger arse of yourself.
Jeez. Since when is freedom of speech only a secret, private right? Oh right, ignorant Aussies.
Reading and comprehension is difficult for you, isn't it? Or are you such a dishonest hack that this is how low you sink?
