American Breakdown

Daze

Superstar
Joined
Jun 28, 2020
Messages
5,823

Personally I don't know much about this guy / trial myself as i don't watch MSM. But it seems he is on trial for killing a man in self defense.
I remember when this happened, it was self defense as he shot a man who was coming at him with a gun.

I guess what surprises me about it is why The Ministry of Truth cares?

What is this world gonna be like in 10 years? People will not stop using these openly censoring websites so how can it possibly get better? Just "evil" and corruption everywhere you turn these days.
 

UnderAlienControl

Superstar
Joined
Mar 27, 2017
Messages
7,964
 
Last edited:

UnderAlienControl

Superstar
Joined
Mar 27, 2017
Messages
7,964
 
Last edited:

TempestOfTempo

Superstar
Joined
Jan 29, 2018
Messages
8,076
Apparently the famous footage of the fellow hanging on for dear life, then falling to his death was of a talented soccer player and all around good guy? Leave it the TPTB to ensure someone like that was killed as tragically and publicly as possible... while who-knows-who just waltzed right on in eh?
 

DesertRose

Superstar
Joined
May 20, 2017
Messages
7,596
The War Against Self Defense: Muslim Reflections on the Rittenhouse Case

The Rittenhouse trial not only saw the full force of the corporate media mobilize to slander and demonize a teenager for engaging in clear self defense, but it also featured prosecutorial misconduct that highlights the injustice of the secular legal order.
The liberal regime has always clamoured to take away the ability of the people to defend themselves, and this trial served to highlight some of their most nefarious methods.
Kyle was part of a group that organised to protect their community after police refused to respond to the 2 days of looting and arson for political reasons, which resulted in upwards of $50 million in damage to private property. This affected small local businesses the most, and while the political effort to eliminate small independent businesses is also to be highlighted, it is the topic for another day.
While protecting a local business from would be arsonists, Kyle was isolated by the mob and attacked by several rioters, who hit him over the head, attacked him with blunt objects, attempted to grab his gun and drew a gun to his head.
The two assailants he killed in self defense turned out to be a pederast with five victims ages ranging from nine to eleven, and a repeat domestic abuser who told his brother that if he didn’t start cleaning a room in his house he was going to “gut him like a pig” while holding a 6-inch butcher’s knife to the brother’s stomach. The third assailant, who pointed a gun at Kyle and got his bicep vaporised, also turned out to be an ex-felon associated with a group called “The People’s Revolution” who was not permitted to carry that weapon.
None of these assailants were black men, as some media outlets mistakenly reported.
The events of that day were captured on camera from many different angles, which allowed for legal commentators to analyse the action thoroughly.
It was telling even before the case that while independent legal commentators with integrity, including Andrew Branca, the preeminent legal expert on self defense law, concluded that the acts fit perfectly within legal self defense, the commentators on mainstream media sought to forge a narrative around villainising him being on the scene in the first place.
This was also present in the court room, which featured such hits from the prosecution as “everybody takes a beating,” by which the prosecutor tried to shame Kyle for not dropping his gun and allowing the assailants to beat him to a pulp.
This was the least of the prosecution’s evils, as the trial featured them violating Kyle’s constitutional rights in several ways. AP News reported:
Prosecutors brought up a prior incident the judge had previously ruled could not be raised at trial. Judge Bruce Schroeder admonished prosecutor Thomas Binger when he tried to raise it in front of the jury.
The judge also chided Binger, during cross-examination of Rittenhouse, for a line of questioning that the judge said was a commentary on Rittenhouse’s constitutional right to invoke silence after his arrest. “This is a grave constitutional violation for you to talk about the defendant’s silence,” Schroeder told the prosecutor. “You’re right on the borderline. And you may be over. But it better stop.”
Rittenhouse’s attorneys said prosecutors gave the defense a copy of the video in a lower quality, smaller file that made it less clear than what the state had. They argued the video was the “linchpin” to the prosecutors’ case and it was inconceivable that they wouldn’t provide the defense with the same quality version.
It is important to highlight the brazenness of the prosecutors, even in this highly publicised case which was broadcast live. One can only imagine the injustices visited upon people in cases where there is no public scrutiny and live coverage. While this bastion of “enlightened western rule of law” claims to afford many rights and procedural protections to the accused, in reality the state tramples over all of them whenever they want.
RELATED: The Intolerance, Brutality, and Burden of Secular Law
RELATED: Vaccine Religious Exemptions: Secular Law Won’t Protect You
This is why, even though Kyle was rightfully acquitted, the right to self defense is still under siege. Kyle had the advantage of his self defense having been captured on camera, almost $3 million raised for his bail and legal defense, and appearing before a seemingly sympathetic jury. It is unlikely that the next person who shoots in self defense will be afforded the same, and having seen what we have seen in court, it is unlikely that one can prevail without these advantages. This is certainly not by accident.
The co-prosecution, both in the court by the state and in the court of public opinion by the corporate media, is indicative of the disdain by which liberal western thought has come to abhor the concept of people being able to defend themselves. Even the president and the vice president of the United States have expressed their displeasure at the verdict.
This kind of demonization of anyone who dares to protect themselves or their property is nothing new, as the McCloskeys learned the hard way that you aren’t even allowed to arm yourself to deter violent rioters away from your house.
The secular state is always in search for more power, as it is the resulting tool of people who in submission to their greed and ego refuse to submit to their Maker. A monopoly of force, which would result naturally from the erosion of the right to defend oneself, one’s family and community, is for them both a goal in itself and a powerful tool: A population that cannot defend itself can be ruled through fear and abused into submission regarding anything else the state might want to impose.
The event that started all of this, the Kenosha riots, and the refusal by the state to deploy police, highlights that it is foolish to assume the state will reliably protect you, as the secular state operates on political expediency, not justice.
Our every other article on MuslimSkeptic also shows that there are many things that secular states want to impose upon you, your family, and your communities. These should serve as powerful reminders to safeguard your right to be armed and right to self defense.
حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ يَزِيدَ، حَدَّثَنَا سَعِيدٌ ـ هُوَ ابْنُ أَبِي أَيُّوبَ ـ قَالَ حَدَّثَنِي أَبُو الأَسْوَدِ، عَنْ عِكْرِمَةَ، عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عَمْرٍو ـ رضى الله عنهما ـ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَقُولُ ‏ “‏ مَنْ قُتِلَ دُونَ مَالِهِ فَهُوَ شَهِيدٌ ‏”‏‏.‏
I heard the Prophet (ﷺ) saying, “Whoever is killed while protecting his property then he is a martyr.” [Sahih al-Bukhari 2480]
 

TempestOfTempo

Superstar
Joined
Jan 29, 2018
Messages
8,076
The War Against Self Defense: Muslim Reflections on the Rittenhouse Case

The Rittenhouse trial not only saw the full force of the corporate media mobilize to slander and demonize a teenager for engaging in clear self defense, but it also featured prosecutorial misconduct that highlights the injustice of the secular legal order.
The liberal regime has always clamoured to take away the ability of the people to defend themselves, and this trial served to highlight some of their most nefarious methods.
Kyle was part of a group that organised to protect their community after police refused to respond to the 2 days of looting and arson for political reasons, which resulted in upwards of $50 million in damage to private property. This affected small local businesses the most, and while the political effort to eliminate small independent businesses is also to be highlighted, it is the topic for another day.
While protecting a local business from would be arsonists, Kyle was isolated by the mob and attacked by several rioters, who hit him over the head, attacked him with blunt objects, attempted to grab his gun and drew a gun to his head.
The two assailants he killed in self defense turned out to be a pederast with five victims ages ranging from nine to eleven, and a repeat domestic abuser who told his brother that if he didn’t start cleaning a room in his house he was going to “gut him like a pig” while holding a 6-inch butcher’s knife to the brother’s stomach. The third assailant, who pointed a gun at Kyle and got his bicep vaporised, also turned out to be an ex-felon associated with a group called “The People’s Revolution” who was not permitted to carry that weapon.
None of these assailants were black men, as some media outlets mistakenly reported.
The events of that day were captured on camera from many different angles, which allowed for legal commentators to analyse the action thoroughly.
It was telling even before the case that while independent legal commentators with integrity, including Andrew Branca, the preeminent legal expert on self defense law, concluded that the acts fit perfectly within legal self defense, the commentators on mainstream media sought to forge a narrative around villainising him being on the scene in the first place.
This was also present in the court room, which featured such hits from the prosecution as “everybody takes a beating,” by which the prosecutor tried to shame Kyle for not dropping his gun and allowing the assailants to beat him to a pulp.
This was the least of the prosecution’s evils, as the trial featured them violating Kyle’s constitutional rights in several ways. AP News reported:

It is important to highlight the brazenness of the prosecutors, even in this highly publicised case which was broadcast live. One can only imagine the injustices visited upon people in cases where there is no public scrutiny and live coverage. While this bastion of “enlightened western rule of law” claims to afford many rights and procedural protections to the accused, in reality the state tramples over all of them whenever they want.
RELATED: The Intolerance, Brutality, and Burden of Secular Law
RELATED: Vaccine Religious Exemptions: Secular Law Won’t Protect You
This is why, even though Kyle was rightfully acquitted, the right to self defense is still under siege. Kyle had the advantage of his self defense having been captured on camera, almost $3 million raised for his bail and legal defense, and appearing before a seemingly sympathetic jury. It is unlikely that the next person who shoots in self defense will be afforded the same, and having seen what we have seen in court, it is unlikely that one can prevail without these advantages. This is certainly not by accident.
The co-prosecution, both in the court by the state and in the court of public opinion by the corporate media, is indicative of the disdain by which liberal western thought has come to abhor the concept of people being able to defend themselves. Even the president and the vice president of the United States have expressed their displeasure at the verdict.
This kind of demonization of anyone who dares to protect themselves or their property is nothing new, as the McCloskeys learned the hard way that you aren’t even allowed to arm yourself to deter violent rioters away from your house.
The secular state is always in search for more power, as it is the resulting tool of people who in submission to their greed and ego refuse to submit to their Maker. A monopoly of force, which would result naturally from the erosion of the right to defend oneself, one’s family and community, is for them both a goal in itself and a powerful tool: A population that cannot defend itself can be ruled through fear and abused into submission regarding anything else the state might want to impose.
The event that started all of this, the Kenosha riots, and the refusal by the state to deploy police, highlights that it is foolish to assume the state will reliably protect you, as the secular state operates on political expediency, not justice.
Our every other article on MuslimSkeptic also shows that there are many things that secular states want to impose upon you, your family, and your communities. These should serve as powerful reminders to safeguard your right to be armed and right to self defense.

Its obvious why you are here slinging more of your lies... however the Muslim-owned car dealership Rittenouse's defense tried to employ as justification testified under oath that they never asked him to defend anything. That dice roll came up snake eyes shibshib, and your compromised flip-flops become more glaring by the post.

For the rest of yall... this was an opportunity to divide and conquer. There were no "good/bad" guys here... only a situation gone mad. An opportunity to exploit, and so many fell for it... as usual.
 

TempestOfTempo

Superstar
Joined
Jan 29, 2018
Messages
8,076

UnderAlienControl

Superstar
Joined
Mar 27, 2017
Messages
7,964
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 30, 2017
Messages
3,578
Trying to decide where to put this. From the video description:

"I believe the world is changing in big ways that haven’t happened before in our lifetimes but have many times in history, so I knew I needed to study past changes to understand what is happening now and help me to anticipate what is likely to happen.
I shared what I learned in my book, Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order, and my hope is that this animation gives people an easy way to understand the key ideas from the book in a simple and entertaining way. In the first 18 minutes, you’ll get the gist of what drives the “Big Cycle” of rise and decline of nations through time and where we now are in that cycle. If you give me 20 minutes more to watch the whole thing, and I will show you how the big cycle worked across the last 500 years of history—and what the current world leading power, the United States, needs to do to remain strong."


Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order by Ray Dalio (43:42 mins)
 

Maes17

Superstar
Joined
Jul 27, 2017
Messages
6,521
I think covid and the lockdowns were actually a cover up for this.

Me thinks the government had a year plan to try to mass produce food while we were locked down but it didn’t go accordingly. It would be bad if they came out and told society “we’re low on resources, expect inflation and starvation”

Once the word starvation is thrown in society will collapse. People panic bought in early 2020 over a glorified flu. Imagine the scale if you tell them food is low
 
Top