Gaslighting as in making the other believe they are crazy? How do you mean this exactly? he crowd was gaslighted into thinking they are being oppressed by an unseen elite and the media, or gaslighting as in the media are making us believe we see something that is actually not there, i.e., a violent mob invading the Capitol? — Tobias

No NOS4A2 is gaslighting you it seems.. And yes Trump is certainly gaslighting his constituency. Actually they are willing participants.. already believe anything he says.. it's more the people that aren't his constituency that he's gaslighting.. trying to make actually very corrupt deeds seem no big deal.

I once made a student almost confess a crime during a tutorial. I know how it works... (It scared me though but that aside). I only wonder why Nos is thinking what he thinks. The danger is that people do not see each other as reasoning beings anymore and do not recognize each other as such. I firmly believe we all share one rationality and can place oneself in the shoes of another. If not all communality breaks down and there is nothing left but friends and enemies.

How did they occupy the senate building, using potentially lethal force or armed in a way that might enable them to do so or not?

I am not aware if the protesters were armed. DC has very strict gun laws, and in the livestreams I saw, no one was brandishing weapons, save for perhaps some American flags.

I do not think the protests under discussion were similar in intensity. The #removeTrump protests and the disruption of the Kavanaugh hearing were heavily funded by political action committees, but I don’t think they resorted to breaking windows, just making noise, the old heckler’s veto. They berated one Senator, but I do not think he was in any danger.

The trump protesters were not organized at all, but certainly more instance. CNN is comparing this 1812. But I cannot see it. As I watched it live, the protesters were mostly meandering about the building, putting MAGA hats on statues and taking pictures. Level-headed people were yelling not to destroy anything. No statues torn down, no spray paint, no weapons, just people yelling. Then 3 or 4 protesters tried to get past the barricade, breaking windows. The woman then tried to jump through the window, unarmed, and she was executed before she could make it through. I suggest watching the raw footage and come to your own conclusions.

As to the point that this was insurrection, a coup, not protest, there is no evidence of this. There never was. I’d love to see some evidence for this, because I much rather find myself misinformed than having to believe countless people are lying. Who knows? Perhaps some Q nutter thought this was his moment, but have not seen any evidence of this.

And thanks for hearing me out despite the ad hom. They don’t want anyone to hear these arguments, let alone discuss them.

The shooter might have acted in legitimate self defense or defense of others, but her death is tragic. — Tobias

It’s called law and order: if your Dutch guy tried to storm the royal palace instead of tagging it, he might get shot at too.

This reminds me of the Hong Kong protesters waving American flags and photos of “swole Trump”. Trump’s spirit resonates worldwide.

There Is No 'Peaceful Transition'
Molly Osberg for Jezebel.com
An hour ago

This morning I woke up and immediately turned on the radio, something I do regularly but which felt particularly urgent today. I wanted to know if there were any more pipe bombs discovered in federal buildings and how many people died as a direct result of the pro-Trump coalition of conspiracy theorists and white nationalists who stormed the Capitol building to ostensibly protest legitimate election results yesterday. (The answer, at least initially, was four.)

Imagine my surprise, then, to hear a steady stream of pundits and politicians looking forward to a “peaceful transition of power” with the same breath they used to describe yesterday’s events. I might argue that peaceful transition ended at one point or another in the past few months, and that the fantasy of an orderly progression from one administration to another has been delusional for about, say, four years. But perhaps you’ve seen the photographs of the guy in the Punisher vest carrying zip ties through the Senate chamber, or the one of men waving Trump flags as they scaled the Capitol wall: What should be obvious at this point is that the “peaceful transition” is irrefutably over now.

Since the election, the impulse to filter the grotesque or previously unimaginable through the language of optimism and stability has landed us in a bizarre place, watching the coup on the horizon as people on TV act as though saying words like democracy or integrity or bipartisanship will manifest a parallel reality in which the president’s supporters haven’t already been primed extensively to commit violence in his name.

This is why, I imagine, Ted Cruz and George Bush and Joe Biden and the CEOs of Blackstone and Morgan Chase as well as Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg have all urged nearly verbatim that the transition be peaceful sometime in the last 12 hours, an outcome not only impossible on January 7th but one that many of those figures actively worked against to their significant personal gain. It’s a minor gripe given the rather extraordinary circumstances, but if there was ever a time to call something by its name it might as well be the time a crew of a losing candidate’s supporters broke into the Capitol with zip ties and guns to contest an election they’d been repeatedly encouraged to believe was a hoax.

The transition between presidents in 2021 is not peaceful. And there’s no way it’s going to be any more smooth or respectful of a process from here. There’s supposed to be an inauguration in two weeks.

I only wonder why Nos is thinking what he thinks. The danger is that people do not see each other as reasoning beings anymore and do not recognize each other as such. — Tobias

To the best of my ability to tell, NOS does not actually believe most of the things he posts. Most of the time, he is exactly repeating the current pro-Trump propaganda. There have been several instances where he actually started posting it before it was reported by mainstream news.

I consider it fairly likely that NOS is a profile of a professional troll.

This reminds me of the Hong Kong protesters waving American flags and photos of “swole Trump”. Trump’s spirit resonates worldwide. — NOS4A2

All they need is a martyr.

I am not aware if the protesters were armed. DC has very strict gun laws, and in the livestreams I saw, no one was brandishing weapons, save for perhaps some American flags. — NOS4A2

Everything could be considered being armed if the force wielded is strong enough. The agent running scared and the reporter behind him certainly feared the crowd. Moreover the police present was overwhelmed, what more evidence of an asymmetric ratio of 'fire power' do you need?

I do not think the protests under discussion were similar in intensity. The #removeTrump protests and the disruption of the Kavanaugh hearing were heavily funded by political action committees, but I don’t think they resorted to breaking windows, just making noise, the old heckler’s veto. They berated one Senator, but I do not think he was in any danger. — NOS4A2

Agreed and though that might be 'too much' protest it is not threatening existing institutions.

The trump protesters were not organized at all, but certainly more instance. CNN is comparing this 1812. But I cannot see it. As I watched it live, the protesters were mostly meandering about the building, putting MAGA hats on statues and taking pictures. Level-headed people were yelling not to destroy anything. No statues torn down, no spray paint, no weapons, just people yelling. Then 3 or 4 protesters tried to get past the barricade, breaking windows. The woman then tried to jump through the window, unarmed, and she was executed before she could make it through. I suggest watching the raw footage and come to your own conclusions. — NOS4A2

Well the point is not to physically destroy something. The aim is to conquer and they succeeded. I am sure you are aware of the picture below. Why is it such a strong picture, because it is the picture of conquest. Short lived maybe, but the message is stark, your force might not prevail, we will if we want. That is what makes it such a disgrace. The intent of conquest is not the problem, the success of it is. The message to everyone is, the police will not or cannot do much, we are the ones that wield control. That is why the slogan "you did not take back control, we gave it back" is meaningful. The maga hats on statues were similar signs. Everyone who has ever played a strategic war game, from 'stratego' to "Medieval" knows about capturing the flag. A state institution can never let that happen unwillingly.

As to the point that this was insurrection, a coup, not protest, there is no evidence of this. There never was. I’d love to see some evidence for this, because I much rather find myself misinformed than having to believe countless people are lying. Who knows? Perhaps some Q nutter thought this was his moment, but have not seen any evidence of this. — NOS4A2

Well, as Hume famously pointed out the fact that you see a billiard ball move after it has been struck by another billiard ball is no logical evidence of one billiard ball moving the other. Here you see a president telling his followers to march to the capitol because nothing has ever been achieved by weakness and the crowd cheering "stop the steal" while they were interfering in the exact meeting in which Biden would be certified. Of course maybe they just wanted to buy tickets to the next Yankees game but it is not likely. They wanted four more years of Trump. They were there to insist on it happening. I do not know how much more evidence you want or how much would convince you. People are not lying. They might see or interpret things differently from you, but of course they are not lying. That is the exact oddness of your position and that of those so angry at you. You take issue with that, this black and white distinction. However, you buy into it too, they must be lying when they see things differently.

They don’t want anyone to hear these arguments, let alone discuss them. — NOS4A2

Who is 'they'? I think those arguments are heard, actually quite loudly. These arguments got this horde on the steps of the Capitol in the first place no? If no one wanted those arguments to be heard they would not have been. I think they are actually heard way too loud.

And thanks for hearing me out despite the ad hom. — NOS4A2

They might have gotten into this game too many times. There might be a reason for it, I know most to be sensible people. But well, I do not mind tough debate, including the odd ad hominem sometimes.

It’s called law and order: if your Dutch guy tried to storm the royal palace instead of tagging it, he might get shot at too. — Olivier5

Well if a Dutch guy would storm the royal palace all by himself he would not be shot. He would be looked at with incredulity. He might well be shot if he would storm the royal palace together with a whole violent gang. That would be tragic, because someone caught up in a feverous frenzy at the wrong time and place does not deserve to die, even if the shooting might be justified.

(I seem not to be able to copy an image or paste it... too bad, but it is the image of the many sitting at Pelosi's desk, I think you saw it 1000 times.)

I consider it fairly likely that NOS is a profile of a professional troll. — Echarmion

A troll I do not know, but he might well be a pro, I do not know. either way... even if he wields Trump propaganda I am still interested in who NOS is and why he think the way he does. (Or offers trump's spin).

Facial recognition firm claims antifa infiltrated Trump protesters who stormed Capitol — NOS4A2

lol The Washington Times has retracted this story after the firm they cited, XRVision, provided a Cease and Desist: "XRVision didn’t generate any composites or detections for the Washington Times or for any “retired military officer,” nor did it authorize them to make any such claims or representations. Additionally, The Washington Times never attempted to contact XRVision to verify their false claim prior publication. "

Just ban the guy!

I should perhaps clarify that I am using "troll" in the more modern sense of:

someone intentionally trying to disrupt or manipulate online conversations and communities.

Facial recognition firm claims antifa infiltrated Trump protesters who stormed Capitol
— NOS4A2

I heard antifa fucked your girlfriend — Maw

Lol.

I should perhaps clarify that I am using "troll" in the more modern sense of:

someone intentionally trying to disrupt or manipulate online conversations and communities. — Echarmion

It might well be, but I am also puzzled at the defensive reactions. I remember PF long ago and the battles with Baron Max and Darkcrow, they were far more vicious.

Everything could be considered being armed if the force wielded is strong enough. The agent running scared and the reporter behind him certainly feared the crowd. Moreover the police present was overwhelmed, what more evidence of an asymmetric ratio of 'fire power' do you need?

If they have no weapons it means they are unarmed, not armed, which is my only point. I'm not going to say the mob wasn't menacing and loud, but even metaphorically it makes no sense to say they were armed. Although I wouldn't be surprised if someone had a weapon.

Well, as Hume famously pointed out the fact that you see a billiard ball move after it has been struck by another billiard ball is no logical evidence of one billiard ball moving the other. Here you see a president telling his followers to march to the capitol because nothing has ever been achieved by weakness and the crowd cheering "stop the steal" while they were interfering in the exact meeting in which Biden would be certified. Of course maybe they just wanted to buy tickets to the next Yankees game but it is not likely. They wanted four more years of Trump. They were there to insist on it happening. I do not know how much more evidence you want or how much would convince you. People are not lying. They might see or interpret things differently from you, but of course they are not lying. That is the exact oddness of your position and that of those so angry at you. You take issue with that, this black and white distinction. However, you buy into it too, they must be lying when they see things differently.

It's true they want four more years of Trump, just as the anti-Trump protesters wanted Trump removed. And sure they would insist, as all protesters do, for this or that action. This to me isn't evidence of insurrection, however. So why, exactly, are we pretending this is insurrection? And to hear this after months and months of violent riots throughout America, to the point that entire city blocks were literally seized and occupied by armed groups, boggles my mind.

I don't believe people are lying. My theory is they are gripped in a moral panic.

Who is 'they'? I think those arguments are heard, actually quite loudly. These arguments got this horde on the steps of the Capitol in the first place no? If no one wanted those arguments to be heard they would not have been. I think they are actually heard way too loud.

Only those on this forum who project and fantasize that I am operating in bad faith.

Yeah, it seemed too suspicious. Fake news.

Trump has completely f***ed himself now. He will forever be outcaste on account of what he did yesterday. The remainder is only denouement.

I like that you show sympathy for how these people have been duped and manipulated, since that "war for hearts and minds" really is where the battle needs to be fought; but lots of people fighting for lots of bad causes have been duped and manipulated into thinking they are good causes, and that doesn't make their actions okay. — Pfhorrest

This cuts to one of the more important issues. In my own rage, I have to remind myself that these people really do believe the election was stolen, among other false things.

This level of brainwashing was taken to a new level by Trump, but as you know it's been going on for a long time -- in talk radio, in Fox News, and in print. Propaganda goes back much farther than the last 40 years, but it's especially pronounced during this era.

Combined with the simultaneous neoliberal assault from the business class and its results on the bottom 80% of the population, who turn for answers to these propaganda channels, and there's no wonder why 35%-45% of Americans believe the election was stolen, that Trump is a savior, that there's a deep state, etc.

At the core of all this, I think, is irrationality, in the sense of belief without evidence. This has always been around, but I can't help but think that religion, the education system, the fascination with sports (blind loyalty to the home team), jingoism, etc., all help contribute to making people ripe for a charlatan who's clever enough to take advantage. On a smaller scale it's called a cult, but on a larger scale it's called the Trumpism and the like.

Plenty of examples even on this thread. Pretty scary indeed. How do we counter all this?

unlawfully storming the Capitol building?
— Pfhorrest

How do you define that? What law are you referring to? — Brett

any restricted building

Is it a restricted building? — Brett

Drop the act of being objective or truly interested in any way. Just jump right to the complete rationalization of what happened yesterday. Spare yourself the mental gymnastics.

He might well be shot if he would storm the royal palace together with a whole violent gang. That would be tragic, because someone caught up in a feverous frenzy at the wrong time and place does not deserve to die, even if the shooting might be justified. — Tobias

There are far worse tragedies in this world. I see this one more as a ‘what did they except’ kind of tragedy, like when a drunken fool tries to walk on top of a train or to give a blow job to a bear... Darwin award material.

The woman then tried to jump through the window, unarmed, and she was executed before she could make it through. — NOS4A2

If I recall correctly, you've said that unarmed BLM rioters shot in the street were killed in self-defense, but when an unarmed rioter is shot storming the nation's capital you say that they were executed. Is your view based on white privilege?

Yeah, it seemed too suspicious. Fake news. — NOS4A2

I wouldn’t doubt it.

The police let them in, they got their photo-op of “democracy under attack”, killed a veteran, and dipped — NOS4A2

????????????

The only difference is how these people are being portrayed in the gutter press: one group as terrorists, a violent mob, and the rest as concerned protesters and activists. I do not remember congress or the senate saying it was an attack on democracy when protesters occupied, disrupted and sometimes accosted its members.
— NOS4A2

There is a difference between fighting, looting and rioting because of perceived social injustice (looting and rioting being criminal of course, do not get me wrong) and storming a government building with the aim of seizing power for your own preferred strong man. The first is civil disorder, the other an attempt at toppling the democratic state. The difference is that the legal order is shocked in the first instance, but not itself in danger, whereas in the second instance it is itself under threat.

In the same vein there is a difference between political protest and rioting at the Kavanaugh hearing, where the seats of power have not been breached and the storming of the capitol where they have been. The threat to the legal order is much larger where such actions succeed than where they do not and the shock to the legal order is consequently much more severe.

I know US criminal law is not used to thinking in terms of 'the legal order', it is a rather German / Dutch conception, but there must be something similar. The same rationale applies when terrorist intent is punished harsher than ordinary street crime, which holds under US criminal law. It is not 'the gutter press' just doing something, in reporting differently about these two instances. The difference is similar to the way attempted murder is reported and actual murder is. The second presenting the more severe shock to the legal order and therefore warranting much more coverage and indeed condemnation.. — Tobias

A cultist like NOS4A2 doesn't deserve such an articulate response. Don't waste your time -- he's a dead end mentally.

Moral of the story, Trump trolls will never concede even the most obvious facts and are not worth engaging. — Baden

↪NOS4A2

You didn’t get any impression of rioting? — praxis

s
— NOS4A2

Huh? They intended to stop the proceedings which would have proclaimed Biden the president elect... or was it just coincidental and does it happen every odd Monday morning? — Tobias

↪Tobias Don't waste your time on the Trumptard. — Benkei

No NOS4A2 is gaslighting you it seems.. — schopenhauer1

Yes indeed. Glad I'm far from the only one who notices.

I only wonder why Nos is thinking what he thinks. The danger is that people do not see each other as reasoning beings anymore and do not recognize each other as such. — Tobias

Because when someone is no longer swayed by truth, by evidence, by reasons -- then they are in fact no longer a rational being. Still a human being, but not rational. When this irrationality threatens you, me, our children, and the future of the planet, then I also consider them enemies. I'm left no choice.

Trump supporters say that antifa members disguised as one of them infiltrated the protesters who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday.

Reminds me of The Walking Dead, a show about a zombie apocalypse. In one episode there's a group of survivors who call themselves the 'whisperers'. They disguise themselves as zombies, infiltrate the herd, and subtly guide them to wherever they want, usually to attack a rival group of survivors.

I imagine that any group that worships Trump could be easily mislead. You might only need some shiny object or perhaps some deep-fried tweekies to lure them around.

And thanks for hearing me out despite the ad hom. They don’t want anyone to hear these arguments, let alone discuss them. — NOS4A2

You're right -- yesterday was just a normal protest. Not a big deal. Media playing it up too much. So are the Republicans. No weapons, no one was hurt, no police were hurt, no property was vandalized, etc. It is the people's house, after all.

There. Now you can go back to your Newsmax message boards. You've done your duty here.

Had she been attacking him, perhaps. But she wasn’t. The shooter was under no threat.

Only those on this forum who project and fantasize that I am operating in bad faith. — NOS4A2

Not at all. We believe that you believe every word. Which makes you even more of a cancer.