was epstein on the plane? On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 4:53 PM Mark - Myakka Technologies <[email protected]> wrote:
> A plane crashes in a field. There is raw video footage of the burning > ruble. There are no survivors. Truly a very sad event. Everyone turns > into their news network of choice. All networks can agree that a plane has > crashed, there are no survivors, and there is no evidence to tell us why. > However, that story is good for about only 5-10 minutes of air time. The > networks must fuel that 24/7 news. They start bringing in the "experts". > > Network A is pushing the narrative the plane was shoot down with a > missile. They bring on "expert" after "expert" explaining how this could > have happened. They show graphs and do cheesy cartoonish re-enactments. > They get leaked documents from unnamed sources saying they heard chatter > about a major event that was about to happen. > > Network B is pushing mechanical error. They bring on "expert" after > "expert" explaining how this could have happened. They show graphs and do > cheesy cartoonish re-enactments. They get whistle-blower documents from > unnamed sources showing repair history of the plane. > > Network C is pushing pilot error. They bring on "expert" after "expert" > explaining how this could have happened. They show graphs and do cheesy > cartoonish re-enactments. They get whistle-blower documents from unnamed > sources showing pilot's past history. They interview the pilot's > ex-girlfriend that broke up with him the day before. > > This continues for days or weeks. It moves from the networks to social > media and blog sites. At the beginning all could agree a plane crashed in > a field and everyone died. But now after weeks of being bombarded by > multiple "expert" theories, people have taken sides. > > 2 months later the report comes out, the plane flew into a large flock of > birds that blew its engines. A one in a million stroke of bad luck for the > people on the plane. But it doesn't matter. > > Some people will believe it was a missile and the government is covering > it up to protect (fill in the blank) > Some people will believe it was a mechanical error and the government is > covering it up to protect the plane builder > Some people will believe it was a suicidal pilot and the government is > covering it up to protect the airlines > Some people will believe that the whole thing was staged and never happened > > All of the above people will agree on one thing. If you don't agree with > them, your are an idiot. > All of the above people will continue to argue with each other for > months. They may disown family members that don't agree with them. They > may vandalize property of people that don't agree with them. They may harm > people that don't agree with them. But in their minds they are right and > the others a idiots, it is all acceptable. > > There is a small amount of people that will realize a plane crash in a > field, everyone died and there was a 2 month investigation. They will > accept the results and move on with their lives. > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Mark mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]> > > Myakka Technologies, Inc. > www.Myakka.com > > ------ > > Monday, July 20, 2020, 5:06:47 PM, you wrote: > > > Most of the people saying "do your own research" are really just googling > for the answer they wanted and then reading blogs they already agreed > with. Watching live streams of current events as they unfold would be on a > whole other level, but I definitely do not have time in my day for that. I > don't know how you manage it. One problem with that approach though is you > can't cite any of it. I have to take your word for what you saw and how > you interpreted it, and that's not actually different from choosing to > believe in whatever any given news agency presents me with. > I'd 95% agree with premise A, with the 5% being that there are always grey > areas. You could always imagine scenarios where we must choose to infringe > one person's rights over another's (The Trolley Problem, or any of 10,000 > variations). Definitely protesters blocking traffic without a permit is > not ok. > Covid or not, screaming in someone's face will instigate or escalate > violence. Yes that's not ok. > Destruction of property, also not ok. > But the conclusion: "That eliminates the vast majority of these > "protests"". Huh? There are still several orders of magnitude more people > marching than there are people damaging property, blocking traffic, etc. > I won't go point by point in the characterization of what deputized > federal agents are or aren't doing in Portland.....I think you are largely > correct in what they're doing and that they have the authority to do it. > The question is whether they should be exercising that authority in this > time and place, especially when local authorities are asking them not to. > I'm not saying I have all the answers, but I have trouble accepting this > hardline interpretation. > > On 7/20/2020 3:04 PM, Steve Jones wrote: > > Watch the skateboards. > I dont watch news footage, or much released video of the happenings, > because its all edited for predetermined context. I watch live streams as > things happen from the ground. > > A. stopping anyones freedom of movement without permit is not peaceful, > period. That makes every instance of blocking traffic non peaceful. Your > rights end where mine begin, mine end where yours begin, there is no grey > area, no overlap and nothing to discuss, it is simply fact. I mention > permit because as a civilized society we have accepted the fact that we > will occasionally give up some liberty for sanctioned events following an > agreed upon protocol, hence permits. Whether that be a protest, fair, > carnival, concert, road show. > B. Given the covid nonsense, screaming in someones face is in fact > violence (in illinois if spiddle hits, its aggravated battery right now). > Once again, not non violent. > C. Destruction/defacement of public property is not nonviolent. public > property belongs to all people, not just those who belive that they are the > only ones in "We the People". "street art" is not an acceptable form of > protest as it is defacement of public property. > > That eliminates the vast majority of these "protests" > > Now, back to the skateboards. If you watch livestreams, the skateboads are > new this riot season/election year. I couldnt figure out when this season > started where all the usual occupy mob was at. Then I realized they brought > about new tactics. The skateboards. They offer mobility, they are an > excellent cudgel weapon, they can be handled even when jumping fences > without losing transport. And best yet, there is no surface that holds > fingerprints well. > > If you watch livestreams, or can find unedited footage (good luck with > that) youll see the skateboards present when the violence starts. In almost > all instances, the first broken window is a hooded gimp in the periphery > smashing a window and slinking off. The mob instinctively follows. By > design. > > The first tagging, skateboard gimp tags and drops cans of paint, then > slinks off. (but you have to ask where the rest of the cans come from. you > dont bring spray paint to a "peaceful" protest. > > Tow straps are part of a peaceful protest? I didnt realize, but theyre all > there ready to pull statues down, regardless of the history of the statues. > > CHAZ/CHOP/CHUMP was a summer of love, remember? remember the locals loved > it. totally peaceful. Except for the fact the locals were held hostage and > have actually filed lawsuit as such.... not peaceful, we wont even discuss > the murders, rapes, and theft. > > When local governments dont protect their citizens from lawless > "protesters" infringing on their liberties, the federal government has the > responsibility to liberate the citizens under siege. Or the citizen has the > right to aptly address those who would infringe. You dont get to decide the > level of threat another person feels by your choice to infringe. period, > its not up for discussion. If you think it is, you are the epitome of a > fascist, that is not how liberty works. > > As for these "jackboots" being unidentified, that is a lie, they are > identified as police, and nowhere in the constitution does it say the > government is mandated to tell you anything about what they are doing to > others. The use of "unmarked vehicles" is also a lie A. those vehicles have > license plates. B. Nowhere does it say transportation must be identified as > law enforcement. As a matter of fact existing caselaw specifically states > otherwise. > > These "peaceful protesters" being snatched up and whisked away to > locations are having their minds wiped? nope. They know where they went, > who took them and why. Just because they give a media interview stating > otherwise doesnt make it so. If thatat is the case in isolated incidents, > that will ultimately be handled as an egregious violation of rights... > wanna bet CNN doesnt do any follow ups with these "victims" though? > > so to anyone calling this bullshit "peaceful" I say ROTFLMAO, because > there is no way to have any real discussion with anyone not operating in > reality. > > Fact of the matter is, local and state government inept response and their > actively condoning the infringement of citizens personal liberties by one > group over another in an enlightened 2020 is what is going to lead to > bloodshed, much sooner than later. It wont have anything to do with skin > tone or who lays with who either. > > > On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 10:52 AM Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote: > > People can disagree. If we can do it politely then we won't need lent > rules. Instead of laughing, tell me what the fault in my reasoning is and > explain yours. Or tell me what my incorrect fact is with a citation > showing what the correct fact is. We'd be in better shape if we could do > that without lashing out. > I feel like we (the country) can't even talk about this stuff anymore. > We've removed all nuance from discussing complex topics and reduced it to > meme politics. We express an opinion with a picture and a one liner, and > whether you agree or disagree puts you on one team or another. Then we > angrily shriek at each other about it. THAT fatigues me more than ongoing > protests ever could. No vote we can make will change any of that, but > maybe we can all change that part of ourselves. > > On 7/20/2020 11:32 AM, Steve Jones wrote: > > ROTFLMAO > > On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 10:26 AM Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote: > > Oh I don't know about that. If a bunch of angry people assemble > peacefully, it wouldn't take much for them to stop being peaceful. > There are accelerationists who absolutely want to start a civil war, but > they're a fringe movement and giving them too much credit is the same > mistake as giving "Antifa" too much credit. IMO. > > On 7/20/2020 10:57 AM, Bill Prince wrote: > > The BLM protestors are almost completely peaceful. It's groups like > boogaloo who are creating all the ruckus. > bp > <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> > > On 7/20/2020 7:49 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > Federal Hitler tactics are just a recent thing, these kids have been going > nuts for a couple of months. > I respect anyone’s right to PEACEFULLY assemble and to protest. > (Between 9:00 am and 5:00 pm M-F, holidays excluded, not on streets, must > provide porta potties) > > I don’t respect defacing or harming anyone’s property, public or not. > Burning, occupying etc. > > I really don’t know what their cause is. Other than against police > brutality. That is a good cause. > Will setting fire to the police building help their cause? > > I wonder if you can buy those rubber bullet claymore mines they tested out > on Jackass? > Perhaps install a fire suppression system under the awning of your store > but plumb it up to pepper spray. > > > *From:* Jaime Solorza > *Sent:* Monday, July 20, 2020 8:35 AM > *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT - political > > Hitler tactics by Bunker Boy...there , I said it. > > On Sun, Jul 19, 2020, 2:49 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > > Not trying to break lent, but I am lacking understanding. > > What are the young white kids rioting about in Portland? > > I am from Oregon, I remember protests in the 60s and 70s over Vietnam. > I also remember a line of State Police walking through a park downtown and > busting heads of those that did not clear out. Actually one of my first > telco bosses had been one of those State Bull Cops. > > Are young white kids just aching for a chance at anarchy? I don’t get it. > Misbehaving while trying to wrap some kind of noble cause around you is > pretty childish. > -- > AF mailing list > [email protected] > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > ------------------------------ > -- > AF mailing list > [email protected] > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com -- > AF mailing list > [email protected] > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com -- > AF mailing list > [email protected] > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > -- > AF mailing list > [email protected] > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >
-- AF mailing list [email protected] http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
