07-10-2021, 05:50 PM
(07-10-2021, 05:33 PM)Clang McFly Wrote:(07-10-2021, 04:37 PM)rothschild Wrote:(07-10-2021, 04:21 PM)Clang McFly Wrote:(07-10-2021, 03:18 PM)rothschild Wrote: I could edit that video and you wouldn't think to call it an "insurrection". If you try to tell me it's "unedited" video, you're totally ignorant of how videography works in newscasting. They're using *multiple* vidcams, and the editors decide which ones to incorporate into what is televised. It could be edited to downplay whatever violence occurred, it could be edited to focus entirely on the violence, etc., etc.
Calling that event an "insurrection" is pure propaganda, because there was no intention on the part of the protestors to take control of the US government, and BOTH parties were negligent with respect to security. It could very easily -- and fairly -- be asserted that the violence was entirely the result of negligence and incompetence on the part of those officials responsible for maintaining security at the Capitol.
Yeah right. That's bullshit. Let's not call it an insurrection because they only showed the violent parts and not that most of the people were there for a peaceful "tour" of the Capitol.I guess the news should forget the truth and focus on the boring stuff.
If you think context is "bullshit", you may be the one who's had a lobotomy. When the shoe's on the other foot you sing an entirely different tune, e.g., "peaceful protests". There's your bullshit, clangy, a big, fat shit sandwich, otherwise known as a double standard. Enjoy.
I'm all for context. As long as it doesn't involve living in Trump's Naziesque fantasy land.
Which is a textbook example of confirmation bias. You're "all for context" as long as it doesn't conflict with your bias, which means context is irrelevant and reason and logic are out the window. Your mind is made up and there's nothing to discuss. End of.
Maybe you and Duchess should go find a sandbox to play in.