[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

And just because you choose to see what you want to see does not mean it is.

Racial violence - what does that mean - does it show us who instigated such violence? I repeat the violence I have seen was from Clinton supporters who were doing a lot more than peaceful protest. No amount of wishful thinking and biased interpretation will change that.

Except you only need to look on Google to see that I'm right and that racially motivated incidents have been on the rise since the election.

I only know of one reported incident involving Hillary supporters so trying to paint that incident as indicative of all Hillary Supporters is ridiculous. One incident is not a pattern.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Except you only need to look on Google to see that I'm right and that racially motivated incidents have been on the rise since the election.

I only know of one reported incident involving Hillary supporters so trying to paint that incident as indicative of all Hillary Supporters is ridiculous. One incident is not a pattern.

You state there has been 'an increase in racially motivated incidents since the election' - but where is the proof of who exactly instigated any such 'incident'.

I for one won't simply be taking your word for that as your views are clearly not unbiased.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

You state there has been 'an increase in racially motivated incidents since the election' - but where is the proof of who exactly instigated any such 'incident'.

I for one won't simply be taking your word for that as your views are clearly not unbiased.

I've just posted three separate stories above your post.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I've just posted three separate stories above your post.

I have read the three examples you provided but I'm sorry I see no real proof in any of it. It is mainly hearsay, second-hand accounts of allegations made, one woman was actually discredited for having made false allegations. Who is to say others did not do the same? What is it they say motive, opportunity etc - all the ingredients are there.

It is also perfectly feasible that some did things like painting messages on churches etc in order to blame Trump supporters. There is a lot of anger out there on both sides and a lot of motivation to blame others. Without solid evidence most should be taken with a pinch of salt.

We saw Clinton protestors causing chaos on TV smashing windows etc which you described as 'peaceful protest' so find it pretty ironic that you just expect others to give any credibility to such vague accounts.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I have read the three examples you provided but I'm sorry I see no real proof in any of it. It is mainly hearsay, second-hand accounts of allegations made, one woman was actually discredited for having made false allegations. Who is to say others did not do the same? What is it they say motive, opportunity etc - all the ingredients are there.

It is also perfectly feasible that some did things like painting messages on churches etc in order to blame Trump supporters. There is a lot of anger out there on both sides and a lot of motivation to blame others. Without solid evidence most should be taken with a pinch of salt.

We saw Clinton protestors causing chaos on TV smashing windows etc which you described as 'peaceful protest' so find it pretty ironic that you just expect others to give any credibility to such vague accounts.

Ah, so you're rejecting those articles because they don't suit your version of events. Okay.

The media loves a good riot, look at the London Riots and the protests after every police shooting in the US. All started peacefully, all got hijacked by people looking to fight and riot and the media tarred the protesters with the same brush as the rioters because it made for a more interesting story.

Fact, Incidents of racial violence and discrimination has gone up in the US since the election. Fact, the same thing happened in the wake of Brexit. You can dispute it all you like but I could keep bringing out articles that proves what I'm saying all night long.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Ah, so you're rejecting those articles because they don't suit your version of events. Okay.

The media loves a good riot, look at the London Riots and the protests after every police shooting in the US. All started peacefully, all got hijacked by people looking to fight and riot and the media tarred the protesters with the same brush as the rioters because it made for a more interesting story.

Fact, Incidents of racial violence and discrimination has gone up in the US since the election. Fact, the same thing happened in the wake of Brexit. You can dispute it all you like but I could keep bringing out articles that proves what I'm saying all night long.

That depends on your definition of proof. It isn't quantity that counts - only quality. You can bring out as many articles as you like but unless they provide definitive proof of significant involvement in Hate crimes perpetrated by Trump supporters you have no case.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

That depends on your definition of proof. It isn't quantity that counts - only quality. You can bring out as many articles as you like but unless they provide definitive proof of significant involvement in Hate crimes perpetrated by Trump supporters you have no case.

Yeah, respected publifications aren't good enough sources, let me go find one of those youtube videos with a clickbait title like 'SJW HILLARY SUPPORTERS ARE RETARDED!'. That's surely a better source....

Keep denying what you know is true, it doesn't bother me in the slightest.