Messages

I mean, in actual factual reality, how different is this from saying legitimate fascists who killed a woman have as many fine people as the people saying "go the fuck away and leave us in peace"?

Trump is equating murder (and now potential mass murder) with wanting to survive (and now telling the truth). It's a "proportionate response" so to speak, if you check the subtext. So yeah, not surprised.

Hm. Does anyone know how the extreme fringe is responding to this? Milo Yappyfuck said it's a shame the bombs didn't murder people, and Instagram had to be publicly shamed into removing it, but he's essentially a nobody to everybody by now. I'm more concerned by the groups that descended from the doomsday prepper shitbags, or the same sort of Nazi street fighting thug circles as the Proud Boys. I'm curious to see if the stupid fucks are talking publicly anywhere about whether they plan to double down on this, or etc.

I just saw that. As a trans woman myself, it's good one of the biggest public figures has finally wised the hell up.

It's also fucking disgusting it took this long, and that she has consistently undermined every attempt to point out that our Arch-Shitbaboon has as much to do with LGBT rights as Mussolini did with communism in the meantime. It sucks to say that she's also the best goddamn shot we have at making any serious change for the better from within our own wider community, or I'd say "and now she can race headlong into a running thresher."

She can still do that of course, she just first has the Sisyphean task of rolling the rights and respect for LGBT people back uphill where she helped dislodge it from. An old friend of mine would put it, "making her build a woodshed for the express purpose of taking her behind it." And if she fails, who really needs the woodshed? We'll all be subhuman down there anyway.

Genuinely not surprised. I fully expected him to say something that would legitimize political violence after his advisors stopped choking him until he said good things. It's the pattern he follows consistently.

Hedging on the subject like he does is more about "the big win" and a fallback plan in case that fails. Making it up lets people say "at least there weren't any people actually at risk!", it's a weaker narrative, to be used only if "false flag" fails to stick because it just makes the left liars, not pure goddamn evil. If they could get away with blaming child sacrifices to satan on the left as a whole, they would. I'm not entirely remembering but I think that may have even been one narrative thread of the whole stupid fucking Pizzagate thing.

I don't see these things as the same because the end effects are different.

As much as I want to say you're right, LMNO, the right simply don't gain from that particular twist in the story as much as the false flag tall tale. As they've amply demonstrated, they very specifically speak to what they think is most good for their political side. So when faced with "Weakens Dems but doesn't make them look outright hideously evil" and "Paints the left as cartoon mustache twirling villains gone bad, somehow," they'll pick that second one every time.

The fact only a few of their creatures haven't gotten the memo and have been spouting other lines makes it obvious this is the case, in my opinion.

WRT speculation on where this goes: I can't help but think that yes, this /is/ a lone crazy radical, not an organized group action. The problem is that abortion clinic bombings and murders (LOL at this "hurrr Republicans don't do this" bullshit tubefeed they're trying to ram into the public sphere) similarly began with lone crazies created by extreme public discourse. And it escalated from there. I foresee the same thing here, unfortunately, especially since the right is essentially portraying the left as not caring about anyone's lives, not even their own side's. It's similar to the extreme rhetoric of the anti-abortion activists in the 80s, and the results are likely to be similar or worse, I would guess.

Votes on him not mentioning it at all?

He's already jabbering about how we'll get the bad guys.

Anyone else think McGinnes was in on this?  It fits his general air of incompetence.

FWIW, I don't think the Proud Boys as a group are behind the others.

They're a streetfighting group, it's all about proving their "manly virility" by shoving their fist in some poor bastard's face as part of a 10 vs 1 beatdown.  Bombs just don't have the same effect, it's a different psychological profile with different motivations.

The timing is suspicious, I will agree, but otherwise it doesn't fit.  The bomber's almost certainly from a far-right milieu though, so he may be a "fan" of the Proud Boys, even if he's not a member himself or getting help from them.

I'd say the quotes sound appropriate there. My first guess was a member of a rival group from the Proud Boys. If the one package was from the same individual, I'd buy that all the way instead of just having the suspicion.

I love you grouchy bastards anyway.

Ah, makes sense. Thanks for the heads up, I've forgotten everyone but the core cast of characters here.

For a bombing attempt 2mweeks before an election this is pretty much a best-case scenario, nobody got hurt, and it will generate sympathy for the democrats while painting the republicans in a bad light and putting focus on non-islamic terrorism.

You're forgetting two words:

"False flag."

As in, "The Democrats knew they were going to lose the election so they sacrificed their own people in a false flag attack to get the sympathy vote! They're sickos!"

As in, "I normally consider myself a centrist but those democrats went too far with that false flag bomb attack. It even had that one senators name on the return address!"

You're foolish to believe this is a sympathy win for democrats. Anyone right of, oh, say, Bill Clinton (far from a true leftist, but not quite a centrist either) is going to be at risk for the opposite, a baseless disgust vote against the left.

This thread is the first I've heard of this. I'm remembering Transmet here, which both comforts and worries me. I need an expert opinion on where this goes next.

Well, this happened.

https://apple.news/Au-KjGa2jT-iEjChIcCvv4A

I am legitimately surprised that it took this long and yet ever happened at all. I figured it would have been all or nothing for this fucking swine.

I guess he's letting us know where we're heading. Barbed wire and ammunition futures truly are the smart investments, boys and girls.

https://twitter.com/JeremyPoxon/status/1053037595771338753?s=19

Worth actually reading the paper. There's no bad or shaky conclusions being drawn here, it's legitimately the case. Hard to say showing support for "a strong leader" who "ignores parliament/congress" isn't showing authoritarian beliefs.

UK spags might be interested in seeing the horrormirth of the chart of UK attitudes in one of the appendices: everyone else has a v notch on a near linear line, or an overall M shaped response to the questions.

The UK has a goddamn U shaped graph. Only the self identified political fringes are sane on (I forget what topic, I think immigration or civil rights?), anyone who doesn't describe themselves as far-left/right cannot be trusted. It was like a 10% drop between far right and center right for fucks sake.