[skinster]

[blackjack21]

Why do non-whites seek the proximity of whites? Why are they not able to create their own functioning countries and neighbourhoods?

That is a really interesting question. If white people are such horrible racists, why do blacks want to be around whites at all? Wouldn't segregation be a benefit if white people are so bad? And isn't it interesting that it is black people these days who are the ones calling for segregation?

And why do Commies not just move to Commie- Countries, like North Korea?

Why do they always try to destroy still functioning countries?

Well that's an easier one. Commies are thieves. They can't redistribute wealth in communist societies, because there is none. They need to be around rich productive people in order to pilfer what they want from others.

And...OH MY GAWD...he HAD to watch people with swastika flags and chanting anti-Jew stuff. Wait...he didn't HAVE to watch.

Yeah, and neither did BLM or Antifa.

At some level, Occam's razor needs to be deployed. Is it more likely that there are white supremacists in the United States and one of them did something tragic, or that there is an elaborate international conspiracy that wants to make people on this board feel sad?

I don't think there is any international conspiracy going on here. It's merely the same cabal of DNC and media groups trying to get people to dislike Trump, because he beat all of the establishment candidates. So they are trying to tie Trump to the neo-Nazis, while ignoring the fact that his own daughter, son-in-law and grandchildren are all Jews. This is largely a non-story based upon what happened. By contrast, 410 shot, 74 fatally in Chicago in July 2017, police say. It's safer to be around neo-Nazis or fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan than it is to be strolling around the South side of Chicago. In Chicago, a person is shot, on average, every two hours and eighteen minutes. A person is murdered, on average, every 12 hours and 14 minutes. Neo-Nazis really aren't as big a threat as black people in the inner cities.

Homicides In Chicago Eclipse U.S. Death Toll In Afghanistan And Iraq

Since 2001, Chicago has experienced 7,916 murders (as of September 06, 2016). The number of Americans killed in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq was 2,384 and 4,504 respectively since 2001.

See? War isn't as dangerous as black neighborhoods in Chicago. Neo-Nazis are far less dangerous than either war or South and West Chicago.

Did your friend witness Heyer's death though?

My question is simple; where is Heyer in any videos or photos. The jury is going to have to have the answers to these questions in order to convict the guy they said hit her.

Exactly. So far, I haven't heard any autopsy report yet. Has anyone else heard of one? It would be kind of weird to have a murder trial and a victim with no autopsy report.

We have now had two demonstrations in Boston and Berkley where there were no LARPing Nazis or KKK people in attendance, yet you still had hordes of deranged people screaming about Nazis and viciously attacking random people.

Right, and they don't condemn it. They only condemn violence against them or violence perpetrated by people they don't like.

My friend was there. He watched Nazi flags in Charlottesville. He didn't see the woman die, but hundreds of others were there.

Ford Fischer was also there--just as he was at Ferguson, MO and Baltimore, MD. Wherever there's a riot, it seems Ford Fischer is there. He managed to record both the blocking minivan and the car that crashed into other cars 5 minutes before the incident ostensibly resulting in Heather Heyer's death.

And you are complicit in this death by trying to deny that it happened or obfuscate what happened.

No. Denying that something happened doesn't make anyone complicit in anything. I'm not trying to deny it happened. I just think the whole thing is a bit fishy.

This has been determined by the media.

Yeah, like their prediction Hillary Clinton would win. They aren't exactly stellar at determining things.

The sole possible reason for anyone to doubt this man's guilt is because of political bias.

Guilt as a legal concept requires proving both act and intent. If he is even marginally mentally ill, chances are he won't be found guilty because he is insane.

Yes, and I have been a juror.

This one is clear. There are hundreds of witnesses. Case closed.

We have politically motivated people on all sides, and the defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty. A crime is a union of act and intent. We haven't even heard a psychological assessment of the perpetrator yet. We haven't been given an autopsy report or any forensic evidence at this point. People claimed "Hands up, don't shoot" too in the Ferguson case, but it wasn't consistent with the forensic evidence which matched the police officer's testimony.

[maz]

It is because it is blatantly clear what happened and it is blatantly clear that this denial and obfuscation and doubt is driven by blatant political agenda.

This has been determined by the media. It has been determined by the medical professionals. It has been determined by the police. It has been witnessed by hundreds of people.

This was a murder. This man is on trial. It is simple. The sole possible reason for anyone to doubt this man's guilt is because of political bias.

Yeah well, good luck with your hope for a conviction if you can't even verify basic facts about the said incident that you have invested yourself in. Although if you have a jury of people who have bought into the secret Nazi hysteria and moral panic, it probably won't be too hard to get a conviction.



But for the sake of the argument, we will just assume that this fat woman in the green is Heather Heyer since no one has really confirmed it and a lot of people people on the internet are just assuming that this was indeed Heyer.

There have now been two entities that have been unpersoned from at least parts of the internet due to tasteless jokes made about Heyer, assuming she is really the one in the green there.

That would be the satirical joke site The Daily Stormer and now the cartoonist, alternative media personality and IRL troll Emily Youcis.

Daily Stormer, which has been extremely racist and offensive for three years now only got banned after some Jewish woman on Twitter sent Go Daddy a tweet about an offensive post from the site about Emily Heyer.

Emily Youcis made a tasteless, but fairly funny meme on Twitter about Heather Heyer and got banned for it. I won't post the tweet here but you can find it here.

The Stormer also made an interesting point about rapper Eminem having won critical acclaim and even a Grammy when his album featured lyrics making jokes about fat white women, wanting fat women to cook and do the dishes as opposed to a skinny women that did neither, raping fat trailer park women, raping and killing women in general etc.

So this is where we are now in society? Getting banned from the internet over jokes?

This is an absurd moral panic we are all suffering under.

[skinster]

Take that shit to 4chan.

[Hindsite]

There was a rally to "unite the right," explicitly including Nazis and the Klan.

Someone whose teachers and friends said he was into white supremacy; and who bragged about being part of a white supremacist group, drove into counter-protesters—

And the right is like:

Are you trying to turn this into a conspiracy theory too?

[One Degree]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4233368/c ... t-picture/

I don't think the woman in green is Hyer. The photos in the link show this woman bandaged and being carried off. It also shows some shoes directly behind the car. That would be my guess where
Hyer may have been.

[Bulaba Khan Jones]

Are you trying to turn this into a conspiracy theory too?

Yeah TIG, it's you who is spreading insane conspiracy theories about this!

Great post, Hindsite, good job!

[skinster]

I wonder if the car existed.

Actually I'm wondering if this is all a dream.

What is reality anyway?

[Seeker8]

Always a mistake to ask some people to think. There is no need of a conspiracy. Posters are simply pointing out the media and many people may be jumping to conclusions.
One question is why is there no actual video of the woman being hit? It is simply a legitimate thing to wonder about. Why do you object to intellectual discussion of the actual facts or lack there of? Getting outraged because someone wants to discuss details that do not go along with the political view you want to be correct is pretty close minded.

Why is it in threads about Muslim extremist terrorist attacks you never bring up the question of the guilt of the attackers? A lot of which have less evidence than this case.

Hundreds of witnesses and a clear video of the incident, there couldn't be much more evidence.

[Bulaba Khan Jones]

I wonder if the car existed.

Actually I'm wondering if this is all a dream.

What is reality anyway?

How do we know the video is real? Were any of us physically there to see what happened? Since no one on PoFo actually saw the event take place, how do we know it actually occurred? I found this interesting article on Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_hysteria

Apparently a whole group of folks can imagine they've witnessed something extraordinary. Since we know Nazis are not violent people who want to do violent things to certain groups of people, doesn't it seem like the most likely and plausible explanation for what happened was a mass hallucination, and fake video/images posted by a liar?

[One Degree]

Why is it in threads about Muslim extremist terrorist attacks you never bring up the question of the guilt of the attackers? A lot of which have less evidence than this case.

Hundreds of witnesses and a clear video of the incident, there couldn't be much more evidence.

Please point out what posts of mine you used to make your assumption about my view of Muslim guilt.
You actually quoted me saying he would be found guilty, yet you post this?
What is it you don't understand about our judicial system?
What is it you don't understand about my above explanation of wanting to speculate?
Where is the clear video of her being hit? Without it, you are simply speculating without facts.
Yes, it appears he may have hit her. I will not say he is positively guilty with what I know so far though, because that is not what we are suppose to do in this country.

[Hindsite]

Please point out what posts of mine you used to make your assumption about my view of Muslim guilt.
You actually quoted me saying he would be found guilty, yet you post this? :?:
What is it you don't understand about our judicial system?
What is it you don't understand about my above explanation of wanting to speculate?
Where is the clear video of her being hit? Without it, you are simply speculating without facts.
Yes, it appears he may have hit her. I will not say he is positively guilty with what I know so far though, because that is not what we are suppose to do in this country.

It appears that the left wingers believe in vigilante justice when it fits their agenda.

[B0ycey]

Where is the clear video of her being hit? Without it, you are simply speculating without facts.
Yes, it appears he may have hit her. I will not say he is positively guilty with what I know so far though, because that is not what we are suppose to do in this country.

Firstly you are assuming that there is no video of the lady getting hit. Why would the police send out evidence to the media that would jeopardise the case? Second, the lady will have impact marks that will link to the car. Thirdly the footage and eye witness accounts. Fourth common sense. Didn't you call someone out for an erroneous assumption in another thread? This post of yours is the definition of an erroneous assumption.

[blackjack21]

There was a rally to "unite the right," explicitly including Nazis and the Klan.

Yes, and it was organized by a guy who voted for Barack Obama and attended at least one Occupy Wall Street rally. He goes through some mysterious political transformation and becomes a white supremacist? Or, is this how Barack Obama deploys his community organizing skills post-presidency?

Someone whose teachers and friends said he was into white supremacy; and who bragged about being part of a white supremacist group, drove into counter-protesters—

Indeed. And he flunked out of the Army as well. I think this is going to be a tricky one, since the defendant is evidently crazy. Charlottesville driver previously accused of beating, threatening his mother

In another incident in 2010, Bloom said that Fields smacked her in the head and locked her in the bathroom after she told him to stop playing video games. Bloom told officers Fields was on medication to control his temper.

He would have been about 13 years old.

Fields also confided that he had been diagnosed with schizophrenia when he was younger and had been prescribed an anti-psychotic medication, Weimer said.

So there you have it... If that's true, it starts to look a lot like other acts committed by someone mentally ill.

They've arrested Ramos too. Why is a man with a Hispanic surname hanging out with white supremacists?

Why is it in threads about Muslim extremist terrorist attacks you never bring up the question of the guilt of the attackers? A lot of which have less evidence than this case.

When it is treated as an act of war, the laws of war apply, not civil law.

Hundreds of witnesses and a clear video of the incident, there couldn't be much more evidence.

Lots of people say they saw Fields drive the car into the other car, and hitting people. I haven't heard anyone say, "I was standing right next to Heyer when she was hit and killed."

[One Degree]

Firstly you are assuming that there is no video of the lady getting hit. Why would the police send out evidence to the media that would jeopardise the case? Second, the lady will have impact marks that will link to the car. Thirdly the footage and eye witness accounts. Fourth common sense. Didn't you call someone out for an erroneous assumption in another thread? This post of yours is the definition of an erroneous assumption.

What? My posts were clearly not making any assumption other than "innocent until proven guilty ". Why does that bother you? It is absolutely amazing the number of people who believe it is a requirement that others agree with their idiocy or should be attacked. Unbelievable.

[maz]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4233368/charlottesville-white-supremacist-rally-virginia-woman-killed-car-heather-heyer-first-picture/

I don't think the woman in green is Hyer. The photos in the link show this woman bandaged and being carried off. It also shows some shoes directly behind the car. That would be my guess where
Hyer may have been.

Good catch. Still don't know who this woman was but it's clearly not important because Nazis.

[B0ycey]

What? :?: My posts were clearly not making any assumption other than "innocent until proven guilty ". Why does that bother you? It is absolutely amazing the number of people who believe it is a requirement that others agree with their idiocy or should be attacked. Unbelievable.

You are on a forum. Deal with people replying to your posts. I don't post often unless the poster has typed in complete bullshit. You have literally implied that we cannot know that the car hit the lady without video evidence. I have given you four examples to suggest this is false (erroneous). Do you need video evidence for a fact to be true by the way? How do you know you were born? Have you seen the video?

[ingliz]

Why does that bother you?

Because that is not all you have been doing.

[One Degree]

You are on a forum. Deal with people replying to your posts. I don't post often unless the poster has typed in complete bullshit. You have literally implied that we cannot know that the car hit the lady without video evidence. I have given you four examples to suggest this is false (erroneous). Do you need video evidence for a fact to be true by the way? How do you know you were born? Have you seen the video?

Your so called 'evidence ' would result in a likelihood of him being found innocent if that is all you have. You have 'circumstantial ' evidence. A prosecutor prefers more than that to go to court.

[B0ycey]

Your so called 'evidence ' would result in a likelihood of him being found innocent if that is all you have. You have 'circumstantial ' evidence. A prosecutor prefers more than that to go to court.

Since when is eye witness accounts circumstantial? Is the car circumstantial? How about the footage of the car driving at speed. Is that circumstantial? Perhaps the dead body. That surely must be circumstantial right? And the impact marks of the car. Totally circumstantial? All we need now is a statement of guilt and a guilt plea and this guy will definitely be walking free with circumstantial evidence.