10 killed, 3 wounded in racially motivated shooting at Buffalo supermarket, officials say; suspect in custody

[Dashinka 24,718]

5 hours ago, Fuerteventura said:

Pinning  the modifier"woke" as the cause of the division is what I wanted you to explain. 

 We are told if we are not woke, we are an enemy.  Seems pretty divisive to me.

[Fuerteventura 29]

2 hours ago, Dashinka said:

 We are told if we are not woke, we are an enemy.  Seems pretty divisive to me.

Let me understand your theory: intellectual elites pushing "woke" thinking have driven this young man to insanely evil action?

[Dashinka 24,718]

10 hours ago, Fuerteventura said:

Let me understand your theory: intellectual elites pushing "woke" thinking have driven this young man to insanely evil action?

Hard to say if there is a direct causation, and that was not I was alluding to.  The constant message we are getting is if one is not woke according to the moving targets by these "intellectual elites" one is labeled with what ever label these "intellectuals" seem to think is appropriate which is certainly causing a divide in this country, and this does not help with those that may in fact act in a negative way.  In the end, there will always be extremist, and trying to determine what actually pushed them over the edge will be difficult to determine, but the constant divisiveness cannot help.  From what I read, this guy had a very warped mind and there were warning signs out there from what this person made publicly available, sort of a ticking timebomb, who knows what impact the "woke" culture had on him is school, etc.  We have seen similar instances in the recent past, and I suspect we will see more in the near future.

Edited May 16, 2022 by Dashinka

[Fuerteventura 29]

Another theory on causation that sounds like common sense to me, hate thinking begats hate results

 

Buffalo shooting: Anti-racism experts condemn ‘great replacement’ conspiracy pushed by Tucker Carlson and GOP
Attack that killed 10 people at grocery store on Saturday was latest example of attacker espousing the far-right conspiracy theory

 

Tuker Carlson bee mainstream.

The shooting on Saturday left 10 people dead and others injured in a majority-Black neighborhood after an 18-year-old suspect allegedly opened fire with the intent of killing as many Black people as possible. It was just the latest in a long line of attacks inspired by far-right rhetoric concerning the issues of race and immigration.

 

In a manifesto verified by several news outlets as belonging to the shooting suspect, the 18-year-old clearly links his aims to reversing a trend that has been coined by white supremacist conspiracy theorists as the “white replacement theory”. The conspiracy in short spreads the false belief that Democrats are attempting to supplant white Americans with Hispanic immigrants and other people of colour in an attempt to radically change the US voting population.

Experts have long pointed to the theory as inspiring numerous far-right attacks, including the Christchurch mosque massacre in New Zealand in 2019 – in which 51 people were killed – as well as the shooting at a shopping centre in El Paso, Texas, later that year which saw 23 people lose their lives.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/great-replacement-tucker-carlson-buffalo-b2079611.html

 

[Dashinka 24,718]

55 minutes ago, Fuerteventura said:

Another theory on causation that sounds like common sense to me, hate thinking begats hate results

 

Buffalo shooting: Anti-racism experts condemn ‘great replacement’ conspiracy pushed by Tucker Carlson and GOP
Attack that killed 10 people at grocery store on Saturday was latest example of attacker espousing the far-right conspiracy theory

 

Tuker Carlson bee mainstream.

The shooting on Saturday left 10 people dead and others injured in a majority-Black neighborhood after an 18-year-old suspect allegedly opened fire with the intent of killing as many Black people as possible. It was just the latest in a long line of attacks inspired by far-right rhetoric concerning the issues of race and immigration.

 

In a manifesto verified by several news outlets as belonging to the shooting suspect, the 18-year-old clearly links his aims to reversing a trend that has been coined by white supremacist conspiracy theorists as the “white replacement theory”. The conspiracy in short spreads the false belief that Democrats are attempting to supplant white Americans with Hispanic immigrants and other people of colour in an attempt to radically change the US voting population.

Experts have long pointed to the theory as inspiring numerous far-right attacks, including the Christchurch mosque massacre in New Zealand in 2019 – in which 51 people were killed – as well as the shooting at a shopping centre in El Paso, Texas, later that year which saw 23 people lose their lives.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/great-replacement-tucker-carlson-buffalo-b2079611.html

 

So you agree the hate/divisive rhetoric we get from both sides drive extremism?

[Fuerteventura 29]

26 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

So you agree the hate/divisive rhetoric we get from both sides drive extremism?

There is an apparent link between what comes out of Tucker Carlson’s mouth and this kids actions, replacement theory being the common denomination.  I don't know what the other "side" theories or rhetoric you are referring to: Do you have a link to a murderous rampage you can highlight?  

[Dashinka 24,718]

4 minutes ago, Fuerteventura said:

There is an apparent link between what comes out of Tucker Carlson’s mouth and this kids actions, replacement theory being the common denomination.  I don't know what the other "side" theories or rhetoric you are referring to: Do you have a link to a murderous rampage you can highlight?  

As I stated earlier, this tragedy is not about whataboutisms.  You can search for actions taken by Left leaning extremist in your preferred search engine.  They are there.  I really do not pay much attention to Tucker Carlson, but some anti-racism activists trying to connect those dots is a bit of a stretch.  The 'great replacement' theory did not begin with Carlson, it has been the mainstay of white supremacist groups for a very long time.

[Dashinka 24,718]

20 minutes ago, Fuerteventura said:

There is an apparent link between what comes out of Tucker Carlson’s mouth and this kids actions, replacement theory being the common denomination.  I don't know what the other "side" theories or rhetoric you are referring to: Do you have a link to a murderous rampage you can highlight?  

Glenn Greenwald might be of help in your search.

 

https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-demented-and-selective-game-of?s=r

[yuna628 9,697]

18 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

As I stated earlier, this tragedy is not about whataboutisms.  You can search for actions taken by Left leaning extremist in your preferred search engine.  They are there.  I really do not pay much attention to Tucker Carlson, but some anti-racism activists trying to connect those dots is a bit of a stretch.  The 'great replacement' theory did not begin with Carlson, it has been the mainstay of white supremacist groups for a very long time.

If it's not about whataboutisms, then why is this thread full of them? I get quite leery when people make excuses, however slight, for the actions of a deranged and avowed Nazi. No one drove him to anything. We know why he did what he did. He stated why he did what he did, the ideology behind it, and even left a roadmap as to how he acquired everything for prosecutors to follow. Carlson, spews, and has always spewed these same types of ideologies for fun and ratings - but he is not the be all and end all for this ideology - he merely profits from it.

[Dashinka 24,718]

25 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

If it's not about whataboutisms, then why is this thread full of them? I get quite leery when people make excuses, however slight, for the actions of a deranged and avowed Nazi. No one drove him to anything. We know why he did what he did. He stated why he did what he did, the ideology behind it, and even left a roadmap as to how he acquired everything for prosecutors to follow. Carlson, spews, and has always spewed these same types of ideologies for fun and ratings - but he is not the be all and end all for this ideology - he merely profits from it.

So the answer is to get rid of all pundits and politicians that spew hatred that eventually leads to violence?  I suggest reading the entirety of Greenwald's analysis.  There is plenty there and in fact this Buffalo perpetrator appears to hold some very Left wing views.  It is an interesting combination.  I find it amusing that he focuses on "white" birth rate, when this has much more to do with economic factors associated with raising children than anything else particularly in the developed world.  As to "whataboutisms" please cite an example where another incident was brought forth.  The overwhelming argument I have used is the hate filled divisive rhetoric used by the politicians and pundits.  The fact that I tend to think this rhetoric is used way more by one side than the other is simply my view, but both sides do it.

 

A very vivid and particularly gruesome display of this demented game was on display on Saturday night after a white 18-year-old, Payton Gendron, purposely targeted a part of Buffalo with a substantial black population. He entered a supermarket he knew was frequented largely by black customers and shot everyone he found, killing 10 people, most of them black. A lengthy, 180-page manifesto he left behind was filled with a wide variety of eclectic political views and ideologies.

 

In that manifesto, Gendron described himself as a "left-wing authoritarian” and “populist” (“On the political compass I fall in the mild-moderate authoritarian left category, and I would prefer to be called a populist”). He heaped praise on an article in the socialist magazine Jacobin for its view that cryptocurrency and Bitcoin are fraudulent scams. He spoke passionately of the centrality and necessity of environmentalism, and lamented that “the state [has] long since heavily lost to its corporate backers.” He ranted against “corporate profits and the ever increasing wealth of the 1% that exploit the people for their own benefit.” And he not only vehemently rejected any admiration for political conservatism but made clear that he viewed it as an enemy to his agenda: “conservatism is corporatism in disguise, I want no part of it.”

 

But by far the overarching and dominant theme of his worldview — the ideology that he repeatedly emphasized was the animating cause of his murder spree — was his anger and fear that white people, which he defines as those of European descent, were being eradicated by a combination of low birth rates and mass immigration. He repeatedly self-identified as a "racist” and expressed admiration for fascism as a solution. His treatise borrowed heavily from, and at times outright plagiarized, large sections of the manifesto left behind by Brenton Tarrant, the 29-year-old Australian who in 2019 murdered 51 people, mostly Muslims, at two mosques in New Zealand. Gendron's manifesto included a long list of websites and individuals who influenced his thinking, but made clear that it was Tarrant who was his primary inspiration. Other than extensive anti-Semitic sections which insisted that Jews are behind most of the world's powerful institutions and accompanying problems, it was Tarrant's deep concern about what he perceived is the disappearance of white people that was also Gendron's principal cause:

 

[yuna628 9,697]

32 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

So the answer is to get rid of all pundits and politicians that spew hatred that eventually leads to violence?  I suggest reading the entirety of Greenwald's analysis.  There is plenty there and in fact this Buffalo perpetrator appears to hold some very Left wing views.  It is an interesting combination.  I find it amusing that he focuses on "white" birth rate, when this has much more to do with economic factors associated with raising children than anything else particularly in the developed world.  As to "whataboutisms" please cite an example where another incident was brought forth.  The overwhelming argument I have used is the hate filled divisive rhetoric used by the politicians and pundits.  The fact that I tend to think this rhetoric is used way more by one side than the other is simply my view, but both sides do it.

 

I said nothing of the sort and not sure why you assume such things. Greenwald's complain-fest has been regurgitated around the internet as another whataboutism and excuse for the Nazi's actions. He tends to do that on a regular basis as if his opinion on these things really matters as much as Carlsons these days. Why are we trying to say "he has some left wing views" and overlook the rest? Seems whataboutish to me. Why do we turn to "what about wokeness"? "What about the other side doing it?" "What about I *think* X side is doing it more, so overlook the whataboutism i'm going to do because the other side does it?" Why do we "what about Fox News and Carlson"? It's almost every single time on every single thread about these crimes. What about, what about, what about. The man espoused white supremacist views and made no murkiness about it. I don't need Greenwald's pundit analysis to read his malfeasance, his evil, and his love of white supremacism. I don't need pundits to tell me how I should think, what conclusions I should have, or how angry/faux outraged I should get based upon their thoughts. That is the very essence of what is wrong in media on every side. It's a game I don't care to play. Individuals like Carlson live off of such games. Their lifestyle and need for fame depend upon it. I could pick out endless passages of Greenwald's pieces and tell you why he's wrong, full of himself, or is being disingenuous . Does that matter? If I pick apart or am critical of his opinion, you seem to think I'm picking apart your opinion or I don't have a right to be critical of his opinion because to do so is to be assumed to be skewed a certain way. I'd like to know your opinion, without Greenwald's opinion. If they are the same, fine.

 

The man murdered many people, for the simple fact he hated their skin color and had multiple conspiracy theories and delusions to keep his stupid brain positively reinforced by that hatred. He, like many of the sycophants before him, believes it will make him the next great Nazi hero. He's not the first and he won't be the last. People will endlessly search for excuses and reasons why for clicks and likes and attention, and I'm simply saying we don't need that or endless pages of analysis to come to a conclusion if we really need one. He's confessed to the crime and his reasons why. All that's left is to rule if he is insane or not and throw away the key.

Edited May 16, 2022 by yuna628

[Dashinka 24,718]

1 hour ago, yuna628 said:

I said nothing of the sort and not sure why you assume such things. Greenwald's complain-fest has been regurgitated around the internet as another whataboutism and excuse for the Nazi's actions. He tends to do that on a regular basis as if his opinion on these things really matters as much as Carlsons these days. Why are we trying to say "he has some left wing views" and overlook the rest? Seems whataboutish to me. Why do we turn to "what about wokeness"? "What about the other side doing it?" "What about I *think* X side is doing it more, so overlook the whataboutism i'm going to do because the other side does it?" Why do we "what about Fox News and Carlson"? It's almost every single time on every single thread about these crimes. What about, what about, what about. The man espoused white supremacist views and made no murkiness about it. I don't need Greenwald's pundit analysis to read his malfeasance, his evil, and his love of white supremacism. I don't need pundits to tell me how I should think, what conclusions I should have, or how angry/faux outraged I should get based upon their thoughts. That is the very essence of what is wrong in media on every side. It's a game I don't care to play. Individuals like Carlson live off of such games. Their lifestyle and need for fame depend upon it. I could pick out endless passages of Greenwald's pieces and tell you why he's wrong, full of himself, or is being disingenuous . Does that matter? If I pick apart or am critical of his opinion, you seem to think I'm picking apart your opinion or I don't have a right to be critical of his opinion because to do so is to be assumed to be skewed a certain way. I'd like to know your opinion, without Greenwald's opinion. If they are the same, fine.

 

The man murdered many people, for the simple fact he hated their skin color and had multiple conspiracy theories and delusions to keep his stupid brain positively reinforced by that hatred. He, like many of the sycophants before him, believes it will make him the next great Nazi hero. He's not the first and he won't be the last. People will endlessly search for excuses and reasons why for clicks and likes and attention, and I'm simply saying we don't need that or endless pages of analysis to come to a conclusion if we really need one. He's confessed to the crime and his reasons why. All that's left is to rule if he is insane or not and throw away the key.

 

2 hours ago, yuna628 said:

If it's not about whataboutisms, then why is this thread full of them? 

This was the first thing you said when you made your comment.  As to Greewald, I saw nothing in his writing that excused the events in Buffalo, and he did not excuse the "replacement theory" espoused by the Buffalo shooter.  The article was simply about why does the media ignore the rhetoric from one side and attack the rhetoric on the other side?  For that matter, if you are reading or have read this manifesto, why are you solely focused on only one aspect.  If you believe Carlson thrives off these types of tragedies, then do you say the same thing about the likes of Rachel Maddow or Joy Reid?  The simple fact like many other tragedies that have occurred in the recent past and will occur in the near future that have a political tinge to them, you can thank the divisive nature of our current culture, and in my opinion, at the head of the great divide is the woke ideology that is pervasive.

[Fuerteventura 29]

3 hours ago, Dashinka said:

Glenn Greenwald might be of help in your search.

 

https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-demented-and-selective-game-of?s=r

I really don't need to waste time with Greenwald et al, I have hobbies already. If you cannot name any murderous rampages tied to CRT, Woke, 1691 project or antifa motivations  off the top of your head, I will assume you have none. 

[yuna628 9,697]

6 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

 

This was the first thing you said when you made your comment.  As to Greewald, I saw nothing in his writing that excused the events in Buffalo, and he did not excuse the "replacement theory" espoused by the Buffalo shooter.  The article was simply about why does the media ignore the rhetoric from one side and attack the rhetoric on the other side?  For that matter, if you are reading or have read this manifesto, why are you solely focused on only one aspect.  If you believe Carlson thrives off these types of tragedies, then do you say the same thing about the likes of Rachel Maddow or Joy Reid?  The simple fact like many other tragedies that have occurred in the recent past and will occur in the near future that have a political tinge to them, you can thank the divisive nature of our current culture, and in my opinion, at the head of the great divide is the woke ideology that is pervasive.

The article therefore was a 'whataboutism', yes? I do not need to focus on one aspect or any aspect at all. What we see is what we see. What he did is what he did, and he spells out the whys clearly, even if those whys are evil. Even if he borrows aspects of his 'philosophies' (if you can even call it that) from a variety of influences - his main reason is the same as any white supremacist is. Life is never about being consumed entirely by one political side or the other and that's all there is. People are often complicated shades of grey, but killers like this always have what boils down to a single motivating factor. Gay people didn't make him do it. Black people didn't make him do it. Jews didn't make him do it. A classroom book that hurt his feel feels didn't make him do it. All of it is excuses. We know what made him do it. All of it is excuses to be an attempt to justify the brutal.

 

Do I need to say the same thing about those other media pundits? It is their job to thrive off of these tragedies and much more. The people that provide them the attention, funds, and clicks fuels this. It is why political hacks shill for money off of every tragedy, write books, and tweet insane ridiculously long threads. Carlson has always done what he's always done, because he knows it works. He doesn't actually have to believe half of the things he may say, just so long as people keep tuning in. I have always not much cared for Joy Reid, and she's certainly not influential on Carlsons sphere. Maddow has done decent pieces over the years, but her time is fast fading - and she's found new ways to stay relevant. Carlson has always been desperate for relevance, any way he can. He often tries to posit that we are somehow more divided, or that there is a perception that we are a more divided nation than ever. Goodness, I honestly think some people could stand to sit in history class more often. I only think that we have become more ignorant and less empathetic. Then again we once had brutal slavery, no civil rights or bodily autonomy, police beat the peaceful, fought a civil war, duels were had, political parties collapsed, Presidents were assassinated, political rivals would often post the most unthinkable in papers, and senators were once physically assaulted by other representatives. We have always been divided and people have always used things as excuses for their crimes - what's new? There were always ideologies challenging 'status quos' or even plain ignorance. We are a better nation for it.

[Dashinka 24,718]

13 minutes ago, Fuerteventura said:

I really don't need to waste time with Greenwald et al, I have hobbies already. If you cannot name any murderous rampages tied to CRT, Woke, 1691 project or antifa motivations  off the top of your head, I will assume you have none. 

I guess it is better to ignore those hate crime events tied to Rachel Madow, or BLM, or antifa, or Black power, it does not fit a certain political narrative.  You can find them if you wish, but it appears you would prefer to think this is all about Tucker Carlson.  Now in the other thread you were asking how the Fox News reporter knew the folks on the DHS unmarked buses were illegal aliens, so I will do that here.  How do you know that this shooter even knew of Tucker Carlson, or any of his views?