Supreme Court Self-Immolation

[Chao Tse-Tung]

On Friday, 4/22, Earth day, Wynn Alan Bruce, a climate activist, burned himself alive outside of the Supreme Court building in Washington D.C. As he performed this sacrificial act of protest, inside the doors of the Supreme Court, the case being deliberated was West Virginia V. The EPA.

Here's a Facebook post he made in 2020, showing clear planning and motive:


View: https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10158735911776489&id=827241488


Now, if you'd notice, here is a small collection of MSM articles on this event:

Man dies after setting himself on fire outside Supreme Court Building, officials say

A person apparently attempted to set themselves on fire outside of the U.S. Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C., on Friday.

abcnews.go.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/04/22/man-fire-supreme-court-plaza/

Man dies after setting himself on fire on Supreme Court steps in DC

A medical helicopter landed in the plaza in front of the Supreme Court Building and the man was taken to a hospital on Friday, authorities said.

www.businessinsider.com

Man dies after setting himself on fire in front of Supreme Court building

The Metropolitan Police Department identified the man as Wynn Bruce, of Boulder, Colorado.

www.nbcnews.com

Now, I don't expect anyone to sit here and read five articles on the same event, so to save your time, I'll lay out what you would notice: NONE OF THEM MENTION A MOTIVE. NONE OF THEM SAY WHY. They all emphasize that "there was no public safety threat," he was burned, taken by a helicopter, and died. That's it. One article even goes as far as to say they DON'T KNOW WHY.

This is genuinely sickening. This is what it's like to live in a world where certain ideas are dangerous and so therefore excluded from public discourse entirely. There are actually people who believe that the MSM exists to inform, or (even more hilariously) to push society to the left. What we see here is a clear-as-day example of what they really exist for: to hold public discussions to the Status Quo, to "non-threatening" ideas.

Notice how the articles, while all not mentioning why he did it, emphasize that there was no threat to public safety?
He was literally trying to bring poignant attention to the fact that we are, in fact, facing a massive fucking threat to public safety.

It really just bothers me to see police department statements and msm articles act like they can't figure out shit about this with their massive amounts of resources and intelligencia. It's obvious, at that point, that it is direct journalistic malpractice, literally lying via omission.

I'm sure most everyone here already mistrusts the MSM. This is just an example for those who believe the MSM is "leftist," or believes in anything other than creating a mildly-left but still-capitalist controlled opposition to the Status Quo to avoid any real dissenting ideas or movements gaining traction.

If any of you conspiracy nuts doubt climate change because the mass media performs virtue-signalling to college-educated liberals/demsuccs, let this go to show that they really do seek to supress the urgency of the truth. The real conspiracy isn't the one that THEY literally want you to believe is the conspiracy.

 

[Deleted member 1930]

On Friday, 4/22, Earth day, Wynn Alan Bruce, a climate activist, burned himself alive outside of the Supreme Court building in Washington D.C. As he performed this sacrificial act of protest, inside the doors of the Supreme Court, the case being deliberated was West Virginia V. The EPA.

Here's a Facebook post he made in 2020, showing clear planning and motive:


View: https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10158735911776489&id=827241488


Now, if you'd notice, here is a small collection of MSM articles on this event:

Man dies after setting himself on fire outside Supreme Court Building, officials say

A person apparently attempted to set themselves on fire outside of the U.S. Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C., on Friday.

abcnews.go.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/04/22/man-fire-supreme-court-plaza/

Man dies after setting himself on fire on Supreme Court steps in DC

A medical helicopter landed in the plaza in front of the Supreme Court Building and the man was taken to a hospital on Friday, authorities said.

www.businessinsider.com

Man dies after setting himself on fire in front of Supreme Court building

The Metropolitan Police Department identified the man as Wynn Bruce, of Boulder, Colorado.

www.nbcnews.com

Now, I don't expect anyone to sit here and read five articles on the same event, so to save your time, I'll lay out what you would notice: NONE OF THEM MENTION A MOTIVE. NONE OF THEM SAY WHY. They all emphasize that "there was no public safety threat," he was burned, taken by a helicopter, and died. That's it. One article even goes as far as to say they DON'T KNOW WHY.

This is genuinely sickening. This is what it's like to live in a world where certain ideas are dangerous and so therefore excluded from public discourse entirely. There are actually people who believe that the MSM exists to inform, or (even more hilariously) to push society to the left. What we see here is a clear-as-day example of what they really exist for: to hold public discussions to the Status Quo, to "non-threatening" ideas.

Notice how the articles, while all not mentioning why he did it, emphasize that there was no threat to public safety?
He was literally trying to bring poignant attention to the fact that we are, in fact, facing a massive fucking threat to public safety.

It really just bothers me to see police department statements and msm articles act like they can't figure out shit about this with their massive amounts of resources and intelligencia. It's obvious, at that point, that it is direct journalistic malpractice, literally lying via omission.

I'm sure most everyone here already mistrusts the MSM. This is just an example for those who believe the MSM is "leftist," or believes in anything other than creating a mildly-left but still-capitalist controlled opposition to the Status Quo to avoid any real dissenting ideas or movements gaining traction.

If any of you conspiracy nuts doubt climate change because the mass media performs virtue-signalling to college-educated liberals/demsuccs, let this go to show that they really do seek to supress the urgency of the truth. The real conspiracy isn't the one that THEY literally want you to believe is the conspiracy.

The media is extreme leftist. Status quo societies always have been

 

[Chao Tse-Tung]

The media is extreme leftist. Status quo societies always have been

Then why, as an extreme leftist, do I disagree and take issue with almost everything the media and our society does? Checkmate, thuddite.

 

[Deleted member 1930]

Then why, as an extreme leftist, do I disagree and take issue with almost everything the media and our society does? Checkmate, thuddite.

Because you're probably not actually left wing

 

[Chao Tse-Tung]

Because you're probably not actually left wing

What is left wing?

 

[h00]

The media is extreme leftist. Status quo societies always have been

leftist!=liberal

 

[Outer Heaven]

If any of you conspiracy nuts doubt climate change because the mass media performs virtue-signalling to college-educated liberals/demsuccs, let this go to show that they really do seek to supress the urgency of the truth. The real conspiracy isn't the one that THEY literally want you to believe is the conspiracy.

Climate change is real because the media didn't want to report on some dude lighting himself on fire??? If they did it would be a knock against their own propaganda because he was posting Carl Sagan quotes and talking about Thunberg. The narrative if this was any other story was that he was radicalized by the climate agenda. He was an NPC fag with a Ukraine avatar that believed all of their climate talk and lit himself on fire to get them to act on it.

 

[Deleted member 1930]

leftist!=liberal

Not in actuality, but leftism has corrupted the meaning of many words

the great deciever and all

 

[h00]

Not in actuality, but leftism has corrupted the meaning of many words

the great deciever and all

And knowing this, you choose to use, and thus agree with, their definition? Do better.

---

To add more to the thread than a disagreement in vocabularly:
I guess they feared a reaction similar to what Thích Quảng Đức brought

Strange that they leave the reason out when those outlets frequently post doom and gloom about Climate change

I wonder if they omitted it out of laziness (most publications just re-report anyways), or because it falls out of the narrative.

Headlines of doom and gloom promote apathy
Headlines of great sacrifice promote social reaction

My take on it is it falls out of their narrative, and their timescale.
They want to be the drivers of change, and they want to be in charge when it happens. By underreportting this, they minimize chances of any accute social reaction, and minimize any potential protests/revolutions

Interestingly, CNN and Fox haven't reported on it at all.

 

[Chao Tse-Tung]

Climate change is real because the media didn't want to report on some dude lighting himself on fire??? If they did it would be a knock against their own propaganda because he was posting Carl Sagan quotes and talking about Thunberg. The narrative if this was any other story was that he was radicalized by the climate agenda. He was an NPC fag with a Ukraine avatar that believed all of their climate talk and lit himself on fire to get them to act on it.

Climate change is real because its literally actively happening. If you doubt that because the media half-ass admits that to keep people complacent, you should realize how severely they underreport both the severity of the situation, and how uneasy the average person is becoming to these concepts if they do the research instead of just listening to the MSM "yeeahh something could happen but it's okay bcuz look climate agreement that no one will adhere to, and look fancy new billionaire has a solution, and look it's just natural cycles that'll kill us so we shouldn't work to mitigate it regardless of the cause"

 

[deepfreeze]

The climate change deniers do make a good point that I often wonder about myself. The way climate change is covered by the MSM doesn't make any sense. They talk about it enough to keep it in the public awareness while also censoring events like this and scientist protest a week or two ago, downplaying the severity of the problem, and promoting obviously absurd hopium that is never going to work. What is the intended outcome? If they don't want to talk about climate change why not suppress the story completely? If they want to use climate change to promote some agenda, why aren't they doing that?

 

[h00]

The climate change deniers do make a good point that I often wonder about myself. The way climate change is covered by the MSM doesn't make any sense. They talk about it enough to keep it in the public awareness while also censoring events like this and scientist protest a week or two ago, downplaying the severity of the problem, and promoting obviously absurd hopium that is never going to work. What is the intended outcome? If they don't want to talk about climate change why not suppress the story completely? If they want to use climate change to promote some agenda, why aren't they doing that?

They talk about it enough so you'll listen to them about it, but conservatively enough so that you don't do anything about it. That way they remain in control of the issue.

 

[SolidStateSurvivor]

Friendly reminder that the oil industry funded and marketed the idea of a personal carbon footprint to shift the blame for pollution away from themselves.

I guess they feared a reaction similar to what Thích Quảng Đức brought [...] They want to be the drivers of change, and they want to be in charge when it happens. By underreportting this, they minimize chances of any accute social reaction, and minimize any potential protests/revolutions

Absolutely this.

Spoiler: Reposting this classic in case anyone hasn't seen it yet

View: https://youtu.be/D9rbHpA_6W4

 

[Chao Tse-Tung]

The climate change deniers do make a good point that I often wonder about myself. The way climate change is covered by the MSM doesn't make any sense. They talk about it enough to keep it in the public awareness while also censoring events like this and scientist protest a week or two ago, downplaying the severity of the problem, and promoting obviously absurd hopium that is never going to work. What is the intended outcome? If they don't want to talk about climate change why not suppress the story completely? If they want to use climate change to promote some agenda, why aren't they doing that?

I'd mostly agree with h00, but I would have to add that in this internet era, it would be impossible to keep the cat in the bag by this point when the average person can test their local rivers and streams for plastic and pollutants and then broadcast those results to the world, or when the wrong daddy's boy yuppie takes a trip to the 3rd world for a virtue signal vlog series and ends up learning from the locals that they're facing famine due to an unprecedented change in their climate, or when any old bozo can clearly recognize that a cat 3 hurricane does more damage/is bigger/lasts longer than they did before, and so on. If they keep the information released on their basis, then there's never any mass "holy SHIT this is happening" to the public, they instead get to cover it on the basis of their agenda, usually either "you must change your own life to save the planet," "you shouldn't worry at all because bigger things than you will solve it," or, as much as rightoids like to pretend that their beloved fox and cspan or whatever and so on aren't also MSM, the classic "it's not happening/it's just natural cycles."

The result is that there is no large faction in public discourse that believes in large-scale collective and corrective action. People either think you're evil for participating in the society that you're born into, think you're a terrorist for wanting to hold the responsible parties accountable, or think you're dumb and crazy for believing a fact. This allows the upper class to continue to extract wealth from the planet while the rest of us continue to either be okay with it, or be resigned to the idea that we can't do shit.


That's my take on it, or rather, my own expansion on h00's take.


Correction edit: I meant Newsmax not cspan but claiming to cspan is rightwing is too funny to remove

 

[Outer Heaven]

I guess they feared a reaction similar to what Thích Quảng Đức brought

What this guy did is a cheap mockery of Duc and it would not have gotten any real reaction out of anyone even if it was publicized more.

Climate change is real because its literally actively happening. If you doubt that because the media half-ass admits that to keep people complacent, you should realize how severely they underreport both the severity of the situation, and how uneasy the average person is becoming to these concepts if they do the research instead of just listening to the MSM "yeeahh something could happen but it's okay bcuz look climate agreement that no one will adhere to, and look fancy new billionaire has a solution, and look it's just natural cycles that'll kill us so we shouldn't work to mitigate it regardless of the cause"

Ill start caring when billionaires stop buying homes on beaches that are supposed to be submerged in a few years. I don't trust science or the media one bit. To think that the scientific consensus would be political bs on an issue like covid but also trust it blindly on climate change is naive. I could bring you thousands of predictions made in the 60s and 70s about how wed all be dead by now because of climate change that never happened. Pollution is real, the ozone layer is real, climate change is dubious, at least the way its generally understood.

Friendly reminder that the oil industry funded and marketed the idea of a personal carbon footprint to shift the blame for pollution away from themselves.

This is the only solid take. It has nothing to do with climate change. The problem is that smog and pollution in urban areas is 99% of the time industrial in origin. Corporations don't want to take the blame or reduce their profit margin by having to put filters in their chimneys and stop dumping in rivers so they blame normal people. Instead of the issue being that factories are clouding the sky with emissions, its the average person's carbon footprint.

The whole thing is a scam that will eventually be used to monitor and control the daily lives of citizens through a social credit system with the excuse of saving the planet. Retards will accept this because they will see it as the government finally taking action and not virtue signalling anymore about climate change. I will bet any amount of money that people in this thread would go along with it because its a necessary evil to protect the environment.

 

[SolidStateSurvivor]

when the average person can test their local rivers and streams for plastic and pollutants and then broadcast those results to the world, or when the wrong daddy's boy yuppie takes a trip to the 3rd world for a virtue signal vlog series and ends up learning from the locals that they're facing famine due to an unprecedented change in their climate, or when any old bozo can clearly recognize that a cat 3 hurricane does more damage/is bigger/lasts longer than they did before, and so on.

You give the common person too much credit. If it is not presented by a fancy production from an established mainstream source or celebrity, then they're not going to care. To them, most anything outside of that just falls along the same lines of the town hobo ranting about how they're being gangstalked. I feel these days even trying to level with personal acquaintances mono y mono is hardly effective, as someone here (if I recall) stated in a prior thread, a lot of people have gone from "having mere differences in opinion" to adamantly protecting the established narrative at all costs, to the point where they're cutting off friends and family. There could be undeniable proof right in their face, and they will not acknowledge it because the man on their news TV channel of choice is saying it's not true. And even if the average person bothers to do independent research on the internet, they'll mainly get hit with bias results, "fact checks," or maybe just end up in some flat earth tier Facebook group. But I'm a pessimist so don't take my perspective as gospel ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

rightoids like to pretend that their beloved fox and cspan or whatever and so on are MSM, the classic "it's not happening/it's just natural cycles."

I'm a bit skeptical of manmade global warming myself, but I doubt one can deny fossil fuel pollutants are by any means good for the environment. The main hypocrisy that irks me with so called nationalists is how much they neglect protecting the natural beauty of the lands they claim to take so much pride in. I've seen some really beautiful areas get turned into McMansion communities over the years and it is frustrating.

The whole thing is a scam that will eventually be used to monitor and control the daily lives of citizens through a social credit system with the excuse of saving the planet. Retards will accept this because they will see it as the government finally taking action and not virtue signalling anymore about climate change.

After watching the Covid lockdown nonsense play out I can safely bet that you're not wrong. At this point I'm all for bugmen willingly entering condensed pod living quarter cities if that means there will still be decent land outside of that left over for those who want it.

 

[mydadiscar]

Should have sent a few special parcels to those he deemed responsible for climate change, that is what they used to do back in the day.

 

[vale-aroma]

The karmic weight of self-immolation is immense. More than any other form of suicide that doesn't take down others. It's a incredibly violent act, a pure, explosive utter-passion directed at another. A metaphysical missile.

 

[Outer Heaven]

The karmic weight of self-immolation is immense. More than any other form of suicide that doesn't take down others. It's a incredibly violent act, a pure, explosive utter-passion directed at another. A metaphysical missile.

Killing myself to own ... global warming

 

[Chao Tse-Tung]

Killing myself to own ... global warming

More virtuous than killing yourself day by day, bite by bite, sip by sip, puff by puff to be owned by the Capitalist overlords.