• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Baton Rouge

There was a plot to shoot and kill police. Then later, police was shot and killed. There is no evidence to link one to the other.
Hence me using "another plot".
Some might say you're using common sense to make the link, so I guess (or is it a guess?), you went with b.
I didn't make the link, but the hypothesis that the shooter was somebody angry at police over Alton Sterling is a reasonable one.
 
Raw story

NBC and CBS News identified the gunman as Gavin Eugene Long of Kansas City, who was born on July 17, 1987. Long was killed in the attack. Local authorities said there is no longer an “active shooter” in the area.
Without mentioning him by name, the Wall Street Journal reported that Long was part of an anti-government group called the New Freedom Movement.

New Freedom Movement is a right winged outfit. Not some sort of BLM outfit.
 
Raw story

NBC and CBS News identified the gunman as Gavin Eugene Long of Kansas City, who was born on July 17, 1987. Long was killed in the attack. Local authorities said there is no longer an “active shooter” in the area.
Without mentioning him by name, the Wall Street Journal reported that Long was part of an anti-government group called the New Freedom Movement.

New Freedom Movement is a right winged outfit. Not some sort of BLM outfit.
What I am racing about the New Freedom Movement is left-wing militant crap. Although I might be reading tracts from a different group.
 
New Freedom Movement is a right winged outfit. Not some sort of BLM outfit.
And him travelling to Baton Rouge to kill police officers is what, a big coincidence?
What do you mean by, "to?" That signifies purpose.

I went to the store and bought candy, but I didn't go to the store to buy candy. Even if we accept as fact that he travelled to Baton Rouge and killed police officers, we cannot soundly conclude that he traveled to Baton Rouge to kill police officers.

It may be a coincidence, or it may not be a coincidence. It either is or isn't. What does the evidence suggest?
 
And him travelling to Baton Rouge to kill police officers is what, a big coincidence?
What do you mean by, "to?" That signifies purpose.

I went to the store and bought candy, but I didn't go to the store to buy candy. Even if we accept as fact that he travelled to Baton Rouge and killed police officers, we cannot soundly conclude that he traveled to Baton Rouge to kill police officers.

It may be a coincidence, or it may not be a coincidence. It either is or isn't. What does the evidence suggest?

I think you are fooling yourself re candy. :tonguea:
As far as evidence, him having been in Nation of Islam and ranting against 'crackers' and about Anton Sterling etc. does not suggest a right-wing sovereign citizen to me.
 
You are not fooling anyone but yourself.
Those that claim that he was some sort of 'right winger' just to deflect blame from #BLM are not fooling anybody, not even yourselves.

I guess you've got a ready-made answer as to why someone dedicated to the idea that Black Lives Matter would shoot this guy?

160717183445-officer-montrell-jackson-baton-rouge-victim-medium-plus-169.jpg
 
You are not fooling anyone but yourself.
Those that claim that he was some sort of 'right winger' just to deflect blame from #BLM are not fooling anybody, not even yourselves.
I have no idea what prompted this asshole to kill police officers. The difference between people like you and me is that you are jumping to evidence-free conclusions based on your biases while I am simply awaiting actual evidence. At this point, there is not much evidence in, but the little there is, points to something other than some "#BLM" motive.
 
Those that claim that he was some sort of 'right winger' just to deflect blame from #BLM are not fooling anybody, not even yourselves.
I have no idea what prompted this asshole to kill police officers. The difference between people like you and me is that you are jumping to evidence-free conclusions based on your biases while I am simply awaiting actual evidence. At this point, there is not much evidence in, but the little there is, points to something other than some "#BLM" motive.
According to CNN/his social media it was to take revenge upon police. He is an ex-Marine, so could be a mix of both right and left-wing anti-government militia nonsense.
 
Those that claim that he was some sort of 'right winger' just to deflect blame from #BLM are not fooling anybody, not even yourselves.
I have no idea what prompted this asshole to kill police officers. The difference between people like you and me is that you are jumping to evidence-free conclusions based on your biases while I am simply awaiting actual evidence. At this point, there is not much evidence in, but the little there is, points to something other than some "#BLM" motive.

One of the dead BRPD officers is black, so it's clear that whatever his motives were, not all black lives mattered to him.
 
I have no idea what prompted this asshole to kill police officers. The difference between people like you and me is that you are jumping to evidence-free conclusions based on your biases while I am simply awaiting actual evidence. At this point, there is not much evidence in, but the little there is, points to something other than some "#BLM" motive.

One of the dead BRPD officers is black, so it's clear that whatever his motives were, not all black lives mattered to him.

He might just be shooting at the uniform.
 
I guess you've got a ready-made answer as to why someone dedicated to the idea that Black Lives Matter would shoot this guy?
Wouldn't black radicals think of black police officers as race traitors, sellouts and even "house negroes"?

- - - Updated - - -

One of the dead BRPD officers is black, so it's clear that whatever his motives were, not all black lives mattered to him.
Fits the MO of #BLM to the t. Not all black lives matter to them either, but only those killed by police.
 
I have no idea what prompted this asshole to kill police officers. The difference between people like you and me is that you are jumping to evidence-free conclusions based on your biases while I am simply awaiting actual evidence. At this point, there is not much evidence in, but the little there is, points to something other than some "#BLM" motive.
First of all, I am not jumping to a conclusion buy rather I arrive at a tentative working hypothesis, amenable to change pending further evidence. Second, it is not "evidence-free" because we already have evidence - his tweets, his Youtube channel ...
 
First of all, I am not jumping to a conclusion buy rather I arrive at a tentative working hypothesis, amenable to change pending further evidence.
Your language in the posts is not that of a tentative working hypothesis. You are not fooling anyone but yourself.
Second, it is not "evidence-free" because we already have evidence - his tweets, his Youtube channel ...
Those have nothing to do with "#BLM". You are not fooling anyone but yourself.
 
Back
Top Bottom