January 6, 2021: Insurrection or “normal tourist” visitation?

[old salt]

Former FBI Asst Director for CounterIntell, Frank Figluzzi on MSNBC, after analyzing the just released NY Times video compilation :

3 key takeaway's from this product...

The influence of Trump that day, & leading up to that day. ...you see people literally echoing, regurgitating, the language they heard moments ago, moments previously on the Elipse. ...they're telling the police the exact words used by Trump & other speakers.

The power of the crowd. ...this was not some highly sophisticated, highly organized & coordinated event.
The small enough presence of some Oath Keepers, some Proud Boys, & some 3% 'ers, was enough to incite this crowd to extreme violence.
It didn't take more than a handful of them to incite hundreds, if not thousands of people to enter & then breach security.

The cops, the police. ...8 different locations of breaching the security at the Capitol. ...note how quickly they were able to dispatch this crowd, once they had the enough equipment & resources on hand. ...if they had had those resources there in the first place, they would have repelled this crowd.

The power of Trump, the power of the crowd & the failure of the police that day.

[seacoaster]

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/30/us/j ... e=Homepage

Absolutely worth watching. Tourist visit.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Potential new recruits are going to make a career decision & not to enlist because a few Army bases were named after a obscure Confederate Generals. ...as if this generation recognizes those names any more than past generations who served there & were clueless as to who the base was named for.

FTR -- I was all for renaming those bases & suggested they be named after Soldiers who were awarded the Medal of Honor who had some connection to that base,

“Was”

Was = that's what I posted months ago, when the subject first came under discussion here. ...but you knew that.

“Am” would be the word you are not looking for…that’s what I know.

No. I was pointing out that I expressed that opinion in the past, when it was first raised here. "Am" does not convey that.

No. You choose your words. “Stated earlier that I was…. Blah blah blah” would do it. Your statement is more akin to someone that changed their mind….

Yes. I chose my words to accurately reflect my position. You chose to distort their meaning.
I've posted nothing to indicate that i changed my position on this or that i was stating a new position.

Other than using a past tense….. I noticed you didn’t type “I haven’t changed my position….”. You practice law at all….the right words are there but you leave room for an out (or mind interpretation). Easy just to say, “I support eliminating confederate names from US Military bases”

[Farfromgeneva]

But I fail to see what value “common parlance” has with respect to any subject of control and allocation of resources within a society or community. That’s just air. The substance is in the dialectic not the heuristics.

That was my original point -- "white rage" is a recently emerging buzzword, used to hype an orchestrated narrative that Jan 6th was caused by "white rage".

Before Gen Milley's outburst, how often had you read the term "white rage" without attribution to Carol Anderson.
Now watch how often you read or hear it going forward, without attribution to it's author.

It's right out of the Dem's playbook -- attribute everything to race. Continue to promote tribal divisions & resentment.
Then when there's pushback, shout "racist" & "angry old white man". Tedious & predictable. It's wearing people out.

So it’s not about this growing minority majority because the term is new? That’s exactly what the coup attempt was about. Fear of losing a privileged position due almost exclusively to race. Dave Chappelle has a joke in a more recent stand up special where he was honest and funny saying he’d rather be a poor white dude than a rich black guy. Sad but funny with how he delivered it. I’m sure you don’t believe it or would find a way to dismiss it and everything many black people would tell you but that means something important to society. I’d understand not getting it as I’m sure I don’t really get it fully but with empathy and introspection I see that there’s an imbalance that’s not based on anything other than race. Defining the nature, depth and value/cost of it could be debated but blanket rejection like your position is untenable without circular logic and stretching the definitions of words and linguistic gymnastics along with marketing and heuristics to arrive at. Ride the wave and see how you might be able to leverage it for the benefit of yourself and greater good of society rather than rage against the tide my man.

The supposed "coup" was about Trump losing the election, nothing more. Given the nature of your posts, you seem to be the one dealing with rage. I've been immersed in our changing society for the past 5 decades, doing what I could, in my military & civilian positions, to alter the imbalance & make equal opportunity & affirmative action real, rather than just HR slogans. I'm proud of the progress our nation has made, as articulated in the video clips of Shelby Steele which I linked. That progress is being jeopardized by the divisiveness which is being stoked for partisan political advantage. The violence & crime are counter productive & hurt the cause. Past grievances are being used to rationalize violence & condone criminal activity. It's driving our society further apart.

+1 great post OS. IMO this should be nominated for the fanlax post of the year. It probably contains too much wisdom and common sense for that to ever happen.

Agreed. Not bad, coming from the forum "cult" member.

I'm a cult member? Who knew? Am I a victim of FLP outrage? Can I sue someone??

Sorry C&S, was referring to OS who's been compared to a cult victim/member on here due to his unacceptable views.

My bad, most of the OS detractors never in their lifetimes were willing to write that check. They have the audacity to think their FLP college degrees empowered them with knowledge and wisdom that life experience never bestowed upon them. I am under the belief that is why they believe themselves to have more military knowledge than OS. I personally enjoy reading them making idiots of themselves with their ignorance and stupidity. The never get tired of being taken out behind the woodshed.

Yep. Unless someone has skin in the game, it's all just opinion/speculation.

huh? who doesn't have "skin in the game" on the insurrection?

And are you really saying that only those who served some decades ago in the military have 'skin in the game' on how the military is run???

Or are you saying that the military should ignore civilian "opinions"?

Listen, I argue over and over and over again that we should look to experts who are part of institutions and institutional processes that test and validate their expertise, test their 'knowledge' on a continuing basis...not whack jobs who claim false expertise and are unwilling to be part of such of institutional processes...and that includes how the military is run, national defense issues, etc.

So you say look to the opinion of experts and then you are argumentative every step of the way with possibly the most knowledgeable expert in this forum.

No, actually I'm quite happy to defer to him in his actual areas of expertise.

I just don't think that extends to issues outside of his expertise.

Not to mention that one actually learns through empirical skepticism, which requires understanding through questioning, observations and review.

[cradleandshoot]

Potential new recruits are going to make a career decision & not to enlist because a few Army bases were named after a obscure Confederate Generals. ...as if this generation recognizes those names any more than past generations who served there & were clueless as to who the base was named for.

FTR -- I was all for renaming those bases & suggested they be named after Soldiers who were awarded the Medal of Honor who had some connection to that base,

“Was”

Was = that's what I posted months ago, when the subject first came under discussion here. ...but you knew that.

“Am” would be the word you are not looking for…that’s what I know.

No. I was pointing out that I expressed that opinion in the past, when it was first raised here. "Am" does not convey that.

No. You choose your words. “Stated earlier that I was…. Blah blah blah” would do it. Your statement is more akin to someone that changed their mind….

Yes. I chose my words to accurately reflect my position. You chose to distort their meaning.
I've posted nothing to indicate that i changed my position on this or that i was stating a new position.

Other than using a past tense….. I noticed you didn’t type “I haven’t changed my position….”. You practice law at all….the right words are there but you leave room for an out (or mind interpretation). Easy just to say, “I support eliminating confederate names from US Military bases”

FTR as I have said before, changing the name of Ft Bragg to Ft Ridgeway would honor a former commander of the 82nd airborne and would be an appropriate thing to do.

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view ... ajaxserp=0

When was the last time anybody ever saw a 4 star general with a hand grenade clipped on his LBE? For you civilians LBE stands for Load Bearing Equipment.

[Farfromgeneva]

Potential new recruits are going to make a career decision & not to enlist because a few Army bases were named after a obscure Confederate Generals. ...as if this generation recognizes those names any more than past generations who served there & were clueless as to who the base was named for.

FTR -- I was all for renaming those bases & suggested they be named after Soldiers who were awarded the Medal of Honor who had some connection to that base,

“Was”

Was = that's what I posted months ago, when the subject first came under discussion here. ...but you knew that.

“Am” would be the word you are not looking for…that’s what I know.

No. I was pointing out that I expressed that opinion in the past, when it was first raised here. "Am" does not convey that.

No. You choose your words. “Stated earlier that I was…. Blah blah blah” would do it. Your statement is more akin to someone that changed their mind….

Yes. I chose my words to accurately reflect my position. You chose to distort their meaning.
I've posted nothing to indicate that i changed my position on this or that i was stating a new position.

TLDa statement prior is “positive” yours is “normative”. Do you understand the difference. You’re applying dialectic in yours. He’s stating an observation.

I guess that’s a distortion too.

[seacoaster]

McCarthy, and the quest for a personal cover-up:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewsole ... 6abca42082

"House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy on Wednesday threatened to strip committee assignments from any House Republicans who allow House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to appoint them to a newly created select committee to investigate the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, two GOP aides told Forbes.

The comment was made to a group of Republican freshmen, according to congressional newsletter Punchbowl News, with McCarthy noting that Republicans get their assignments from GOP leadership.

If Republicans take a position from Pelosi, the top Democrat in the House, they will have to get all their other assignments from her as well, McCarthy reportedly said.

Reps. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) and Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), the only two Republicans to vote for the committee, are widely viewed as the most likely candidates to get a nod from Pelosi.

Pelosi will be able to appoint all 13 of the committee’s members with only five in consultation with McCarthy – but she is “strongly considering” a Republican, her aide told Forbes.

Forbes has reached out to McCarthy’s office for comment."

[Farfromgeneva]

Kinzinger isn’t a civilian. How dare McCarthy!

[dislaxxic]

Cheney joins the January 6 Insurrection Committee ranks. WOW!

Pass the popcorn...

..

[youthathletics]

Ramping up of the 22' rhetoric.

[CU88]

r's members lose committee positions for bipartisanship and gain leadership positions for supporting the Big Lie.

MAGA

[seacoaster]

Ramping up of the 22' rhetoric.

Have you watched the NY Times video compilation?

[youthathletics]

Ramping up of the 22' rhetoric.

Have you watched the NY Times video compilation?

Yes, which is part and parcel to my comment.

[seacoaster]

Ramping up of the 22' rhetoric.

Have you watched the NY Times video compilation?

Yes, which is part and parcel to my comment.

Please explain.

[old salt]

Potential new recruits are going to make a career decision & not to enlist because a few Army bases were named after a obscure Confederate Generals. ...as if this generation recognizes those names any more than past generations who served there & were clueless as to who the base was named for.

FTR -- I was all for renaming those bases & suggested they be named after Soldiers who were awarded the Medal of Honor who had some connection to that base,

“Was”

Was = that's what I posted months ago, when the subject first came under discussion here. ...but you knew that.

“Am” would be the word you are not looking for…that’s what I know.

No. I was pointing out that I expressed that opinion in the past, when it was first raised here. "Am" does not convey that.

No. You choose your words. “Stated earlier that I was…. Blah blah blah” would do it. Your statement is more akin to someone that changed their mind….

Yes. I chose my words to accurately reflect my position. You chose to distort their meaning.
I've posted nothing to indicate that i changed my position on this or that i was stating a new position.

TLDa statement prior is “positive” yours is “normative”. Do you understand the difference. You’re applying dialectic in yours. He’s stating an observation.

I guess that’s a distortion too.

No. It is assuming facts not in evidence. Bad Faith discussion.

My last previous post on this issue :

Perhaps Salty will suggest that DOPUS DICKWAD name a military installation after him (as with all the others who received that honor for similar acts of sedition and treason against the government and Constitution of the United States) - after all he has to be a better commander than Braxton Bragg.

Then you all have to start going after all of those streets on those army posts named after southern generals. Every paratrooper at Ft Bragg has made that long hump down Longstreet Rd to get back to the barracks.

My solution (posted before) is to rename those 10 Army posts for heroic soldiers who had some connection to those bases, or the units now based there. Probably limited to Medal of Honor recipients. They could also be used to name streets & buildings.

[dislaxxic]

Ramping up of the 22' rhetoric.

Have you watched the NY Times video compilation?

Yes, which is part and parcel to my comment.

Please explain.

Truth and reconciliation (read: prosecution) will out. MAGA Nation and their GOP toadies have no one to blame but themselves. The present-day GOP is toasting itself before our eyes.

Jump ship while the jumping is good, Magats.



..

[Farfromgeneva]

Potential new recruits are going to make a career decision & not to enlist because a few Army bases were named after a obscure Confederate Generals. ...as if this generation recognizes those names any more than past generations who served there & were clueless as to who the base was named for.

FTR -- I was all for renaming those bases & suggested they be named after Soldiers who were awarded the Medal of Honor who had some connection to that base,

“Was”

Was = that's what I posted months ago, when the subject first came under discussion here. ...but you knew that.

“Am” would be the word you are not looking for…that’s what I know.

No. I was pointing out that I expressed that opinion in the past, when it was first raised here. "Am" does not convey that.

No. You choose your words. “Stated earlier that I was…. Blah blah blah” would do it. Your statement is more akin to someone that changed their mind….

Yes. I chose my words to accurately reflect my position. You chose to distort their meaning.
I've posted nothing to indicate that i changed my position on this or that i was stating a new position.

TLDa statement prior is “positive” yours is “normative”. Do you understand the difference. You’re applying dialectic in yours. He’s stating an observation.

I guess that’s a distortion too.

No. It is assuming facts not in evidence. Bad Faith discussion.

My last previous post on this issue :

Perhaps Salty will suggest that DOPUS DICKWAD name a military installation after him (as with all the others who received that honor for similar acts of sedition and treason against the government and Constitution of the United States) - after all he has to be a better commander than Braxton Bragg.

Then you all have to start going after all of those streets on those army posts named after southern generals. Every paratrooper at Ft Bragg has made that long hump down Longstreet Rd to get back to the barracks.

My solution (posted before) is to rename those 10 Army posts for heroic soldiers who had some connection to those bases, or the units now based there. Probably limited to Medal of Honor recipients. They could also be used to name streets & buildings.

How so?

[youthathletics]

Ramping up of the 22' rhetoric.

Have you watched the NY Times video compilation?

Yes, which is part and parcel to my comment.

Please explain.

Maj. Leader D-Pelosi taps R-Cheney to serve on committee, creating distance from McCarthy/party...no issues with that, solid professional chess move. And with the last name Cheney...she needs to soften the edges anyhow. This next mid-term has consequences, and this helps Pelosi and Cheney.

[seacoaster]

Ramping up of the 22' rhetoric.

Have you watched the NY Times video compilation?

Yes, which is part and parcel to my comment.

Please explain.

Maj. Leader D-Pelosi taps R-Cheney to serve on committee, creating distance from McCarthy/party...no issues with that, solid professional chess move. And with the last name Cheney...she needs to soften the edges anyhow. This next mid-term has consequences, and this helps Pelosi and Cheney.

Why do you think the Senate and House GOP leadership chose to veto the bipartisan (Meaning near equal representation on the committee) committee, when they knew the Speaker had the power to do this?

[youthathletics]

Ramping up of the 22' rhetoric.

Have you watched the NY Times video compilation?

Yes, which is part and parcel to my comment.

Please explain.

Maj. Leader D-Pelosi taps R-Cheney to serve on committee, creating distance from McCarthy/party...no issues with that, solid professional chess move. And with the last name Cheney...she needs to soften the edges anyhow. This next mid-term has consequences, and this helps Pelosi and Cheney.

Why do you think the Senate and House GOP leadership chose to veto the bipartisan (Meaning near equal representation on the committee) committee, when they knew the Speaker had the power to do this?

Might be because McCarthy has reasons beyond our understanding and/or he might be flexing for a more prominent future role.