Originally posted by Darth Jello
That depends, check out the latest hate crimes statistics
Lordy.
Dude, you honestly think that it wouldn't be all over the news IF there were others? You saw how retarded they got with this one guy committing suicide....but tried to pass it off as homicide.
Like I said, there are tards on both sides: libtards AND conservatards.
I'm not convinced he committed suicide. I think there are political reasons for not categorizing this as a murder (i.e. Danny Casolaro/Inslaw). As for hate crimes, I actually meant the latest 2009 statistics that have been in the news because they are going up. Not to mention the neonazi presence at tea bagger events.
Originally posted by Darth JelloOkay, well, do you have any evidence or even reason to believe that it wasn't a suicide except for your distaste for that conservative movement?
I'm not convinced he committed suicide. I think there are political reasons for not categorizing this as a murder (i.e. Danny Casolaro/Inslaw). As for hate crimes, I actually meant the latest 2009 statistics that have been in the news because they are going up. Not to mention the neonazi presence at tea bagger events.
And really what do have the statistics to do with this?
Originally posted by Darth Jello
I'm not convinced he committed suicide. I think there are political reasons for not categorizing this as a murder (i.e. Danny Casolaro/Inslaw). As for hate crimes, I actually meant the latest 2009 statistics that have been in the news because they are going up. Not to mention the neonazi presence at tea bagger events.
there is a problem with this line of reasoning though, it assumes that in the absence of any evidence we should conclude foul play.
sure, there may be suspicious circumstances, but that doesn't mean there is a murder. Its the same kind of logic that sees the 9-11 Commission Report as evidence of a US government plot to blow up the WTC
Originally posted by Darth Jello
I'm not convinced he committed suicide. I think there are political reasons for not categorizing this as a murder (i.e. Danny Casolaro/Inslaw). As for hate crimes, I actually meant the latest 2009 statistics that have been in the news because they are going up. Not to mention the neonazi presence at tea bagger events.
When you say "neonazi presence at tea bagger events", you loose all credibility, and I automatically place your comment within the conspiracy way of thinking.
to be fair, the white power movement has been highly effective in marketing itself as a conservative alternative. This is most apparent in the immigrant issue, but it certainly exists in the "America for Americans" type attitude.
It wouldn't be a surprise to me at all if there were a presence of neo-nazis at these rallies.
Originally posted by inimalist
there is a problem with this line of reasoning though, it assumes that in the absence of any evidence we should conclude foul play.sure, there may be suspicious circumstances, but that doesn't mean there is a murder. Its the same kind of logic that sees the 9-11 Commission Report as evidence of a US government plot to blow up the WTC
In this case, it's even worse. There was multiple pieces of evidence to prove that he killed himself.
Well, someone could have gone out of their way to make it seem like he killed himself in an attempt to make it not look like a homocide, but the death would have to be due to the hanging. It'd be really hard to force someone to hang themselves without hurting them just a tad. There'd be bruising, which would be nicely evident of a struggle. There's the witness also saying that he planned suicide just like he did.
So, which is more believable?
That he comitted suicide because:
1. There's clear evidence that he wrote FED on himself. (That it was written from someone looking down on his chest/belly...more likely him than someone else. They could have shown that it clearly came from his right hand, based on the markings and "strokes" taken to form the letters.)
2. The loose fitting ropes.
3. The fact that the glasses were tapped on. (Finger prints were probably all over those.)
4. The fact that he could have saved himself just be extending his feet.
5. Lack of close family and close friends.
6. Insurance policies.
7. The "witness" that said he told him he was going to do that.
Now, we have all of those pieces of evidence, and yet, you (DJ, not inimalist) still are doubting. Why?
What evidence do you have from the other direction? You don't even have evidence that there is an increased number of violent acts that are specifically politically motivated.
Why would someone kill another person and try to make it look like a suicide? Don't you think they would want to make it look like, I dunno, a homocide?
Now, it makes much more sense if the person was almost a retard and tried to make his own suicide look like a homocide. Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem, man.
Originally posted by inimalist
to be fair, the white power movement has been highly effective in marketing itself as a conservative alternative. This is most apparent in the immigrant issue, but it certainly exists in the "America for [b]Americans" type attitude.It wouldn't be a surprise to me at all if there were a presence of neo-nazis at these rallies. [/B]
Sure, there maybe an idiot or two in the crowd, but that is not the reason people are there. Now to be truthful, I've never been to a tea bag rally, but I know people who have. To call them all neonazis is just wrong. That would be like calling all liberals anarchists.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Literally? No. Inferred? Yes.
He didn't imply it either. He said: "[there is] a neonazi presence at these events." You yourself admitted that there can be "an idiot or two in the crowd." If neonazis are there then they are there, no consipiracy, no claim that "all of them" are neonazis. Indeed as inimalist pointed out there is good reason to believe that teabagger politics would appeal to neonazis and you then agreed with him.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
He didn't imply it either. He said: "[there is] a neonazi presence at these events." You yourself admitted that there can be "an idiot or two in the crowd." If neonazis are there then they are there, no consipiracy, no claim that "all of them" are neonazis. Indeed as inimalist pointed out there is good reason to believe that teabagger politics would appeal to neonazis and you then agreed with him.
Come on now. When a conservative nut job looks at a liberal demonstration, they look for the anarchists. They do this for one reason: they want to discredit the legitimacy of the protest. It also works the other way around.
There is only one reason that neonazis are talked about in connection with tea bag rallies.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Come on now. When a conservative nut job looks at a liberal demonstration, they look for the anarchists. They do this for one reason: they want to discredit the legitimacy of the protest. It also works the other way around.There is only one reason that neonazis are talked about in connection with tea bag rallies.
I guess we could jsut as inimalist his intentions then?
inimalist, for 2 ounces of Big Bud, tell us what you meant by that...to end this debate.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Come on now. When a conservative nut job looks at a liberal demonstration, they look for the anarchists. They do this for one reason: they want to discredit the legitimacy of the protest. It also works the other way around.There is only one reason that neonazis are talked about in connection with tea bag rallies.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, what's wrong with anarchists?
Re: Re: And it begins: The first reported case of tea bagger murder
More fear mongering from the left.
The liberal media is starting to feel so threatened by the new surge of conservatism in the US.
Originally posted by Bardock42
And....it turns out it was a suicide.
Well Darth Jello =