Fez
Frequenter
Posts: 472
|
Post by Fez on Jun 1, 2020 22:20:13 GMT
I've also seen plenty of these videos. Here in Indianapolis we have had an 8pm curfew the past couple of days, and continuing. Last evening at the protest in the centre of the city, police began teargassing peaceful protesters (including "worship groups") at Monument Circle *before* the curfew, and pepper-spraying general passers-by at bus stops etc - including children and members of the press, who are also being arrested for performing their Constitutionally protected work. It seems to be the cops, the National Guard and infiltrators like the "Proud Boys" who are instigating some if not much of the violence and property damage. The Rude Man in the White House will of course ignore that and attack Antifa, because those are "his people" and he has consistently encouraged harm to those he considers "other" - and not just during this presidency. By the way, he has no power in law or the Constitution to declare Antifa (or any group) a terrorist organisation. Nevertheless, it is inevitable that he would try to label anti-fascists as such, and not actual fascists. It's what he is; but also he is a useful puppet for those who are *really* pulling the strings in the shadows, who strive for an autocratic white oligarchy in perpetuity. I was encouraged yesterday to see pictures and videos of police kneeling and walking with protesters; until I discovered today that in many cases, once the cameras were off the order were given to start teargassing. Your comment about the "white power" cop is revealing. Meanwhile, the president hides in his cellar, switches off the White House lights and makes a call to his buddy (or blackmailer) Putin. There was a snippet of a call on CNN before of Trump speaking to some governors criticising the way in which they’re dealing with it all. God knows how they managed to get hold of it but news channels over there don’t hold back in the slightest with their reporting. Trump really isn’t a liked man by many over there is he? Unfortunately he is still liked by too many, or at least put up with and excused by many of them. Note that he seems only to publicly be criticizing the Democratic governors. And he wants to be like the bullying autocrats he so admires, like Putin and Kim Jong-un. It chafes him that the US is, up to now, a democracy with checks and balances (although, scarily, that is is rapidly changing). At one level, do you remember how he told police how, when arresting suspects, they they should be more rough, and not protect their heads ducking into squad cars? And in 2017: “When you see these thugs being thrown into the back of a paddy wagon, you just see them thrown in, rough — I said, ‘Please don’t be too nice,’” Then before that in 1990 he praised China for its militaristic and fatal responses to the Tiananmen Square demonstrations: “When the students poured into Tiananmen Square, the Chinese government almost blew it,” he said. “Then they were vicious, they were horrible, but they put it down with strength. That shows you the power of strength." Ironic, given how weak and pampered he is - five deferments from duty in Vietnam, for example. He has a hard-on for the military and brutality, as cowards often do.
|
|
|
Post by scfc73 on Jun 2, 2020 4:54:03 GMT
I see the family asked for a 2nd independent autopsy & it's come back that he did die of asphyxiation caused by the pressure to his neck & pressure applied to his back by another officer & that George Floyd didn't have any underlying medical conditions that resulted in his death, whereas the initial autopsy carried out by the state medical examiner implied he had a heart condition & intoxicants in his system that contributed to his death. Looks like the family were right not to trust the states original examination. I think it's blatantly obvious to anyone that's seen the shocking footage what it was that led to the passing of Mr. Floyd.
|
|
|
Post by Mozzer on Jun 2, 2020 6:26:49 GMT
How about this though?
I get why they're pissed off, and obviously Trump is an appalling individual on several levels, but that's not the rhetorical question the priest thinks it is...😐
|
|
|
Post by Henry Pratt on Jun 2, 2020 8:23:50 GMT
I know this has gone completely off topic but all lives matter. Rioting, looting and looking to harm someone else is going to be of zero help. Respectfully, please don't use the phrase "all lives matter." It's massively loaded and was coined by some of the worst of humanity.
|
|
|
Post by CB1883 on Jun 2, 2020 8:59:58 GMT
I know this has gone completely off topic but all lives matter. Rioting, looting and looking to harm someone else is going to be of zero help. Respectfully, please don't use the phrase "all lives matter." It's massively loaded and was coined by some of the worst of humanity. Respectfully, I will use whichever phrase I wish. I’m not using it in the same context as some of the worst in humanity. It’s anything but loaded. I don’t care if someone is black, white, young, old, male or female. If it’s wrong for one, it’s wrong for all.
|
|
Fez
Frequenter
Posts: 472
|
Post by Fez on Jun 2, 2020 9:04:35 GMT
How about this though?
I get why they're pissed off, and obviously Trump is an appalling individual on several levels, but that's not the rhetorical question the priest thinks it is...😐 That's a hollowed-out Bible, secreting a Big Mac and fries.
|
|
Fez
Frequenter
Posts: 472
|
Post by Fez on Jun 2, 2020 9:11:50 GMT
Respectfully, please don't use the phrase "all lives matter." It's massively loaded and was coined by some of the worst of humanity. Respectfully, I will use whichever phrase I wish. I’m not using it in the same context as some of the worst in humanity. It’s anything but loaded. I don’t care if someone is black, white, young, old, male or female. If it’s wrong for one, it’s wrong for all. Just as respectfully, Henry Pratt is correct. While understanding it's far from your intent, it is a phrase that it is good to avoid. It is used by other individuals to deny the *particular* fact that there is a systemic issue with African Americans suffering greater rates of injury, death (and incarceration) at the hands of authorities, and of verbal and physical attacks (and homicides) by "privileged" white folks. I posted this before and it bears repeating:
|
|
|
Post by Henry Pratt on Jun 2, 2020 9:12:57 GMT
Respectfully, please don't use the phrase "all lives matter." It's massively loaded and was coined by some of the worst of humanity. Respectfully, I will use whichever phrase I wish. I’m not using it in the same context as some of the worst in humanity. It’s anything but loaded. I don’t care if someone is black, white, young, old, male or female. If it’s wrong for one, it’s wrong for all. "It's anything but loaded"? Balls.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2020 9:19:19 GMT
Respectfully, I will use whichever phrase I wish. I’m not using it in the same context as some of the worst in humanity. It’s anything but loaded. I don’t care if someone is black, white, young, old, male or female. If it’s wrong for one, it’s wrong for all. Just as respectfully, Henry Pratt is correct. While understanding it's far from your intent, it is a phrase that it is good to avoid. It is used by other individuals to deny the *particular* fact that there is a systemic issue with African Americans suffering greater rates of injury, death (and incarceration) at the hands of authorities, and of verbal and physical attacks (and homicides) by "privileged" white folks. I posted this before and it bears repeating: www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/celebrity/stop-making-everything-about-you-billie-eilish-denounces-all-lives-n1221216
|
|
|
Post by timberwolf on Jun 2, 2020 9:22:50 GMT
all this will cause at the end of the day even more recruits and not less for both white and black power groups.
|
|
Fez
Frequenter
Posts: 472
|
Post by Fez on Jun 2, 2020 9:30:01 GMT
Thank you. She states it well. I came across this a couple of years ago - several other ways of making the same point: www.vox.com/2016/7/11/12136140/black-all-lives-matterHere's one of the explanations (from a law professor's response to a student): And another one: Imagine that you're sitting down to dinner with your family, and while everyone else gets a serving of the meal, you don't get any. So you say "I should get my fair share." And as a direct response to this, your dad corrects you, saying, "everyone should get their fair share." Now, that's a wonderful sentiment -- indeed, everyone should, and that was kinda your point in the first place: that you should be a part of everyone, and you should get your fair share also. However, dad's smart-ass comment just dismissed you and didn't solve the problem that you still haven't gotten any! The problem is that the statement "I should get my fair share" had an implicit "too" at the end: "I should get my fair share, too, just like everyone else." But your dad's response treated your statement as though you meant "only I should get my fair share", which clearly was not your intention. As a result, his statement that "everyone should get their fair share," while true, only served to ignore the problem you were trying to point out. That's the situation of the "black lives matter" movement. Culture, laws, the arts, religion, and everyone else repeatedly suggest that all lives should matter. Clearly, that message already abounds in our society. The problem is that, in practice, the world doesn't work the way. You see the film Nightcrawler? You know the part where Renee Russo tells Jake Gyllenhal that she doesn't want footage of a black or latino person dying, she wants news stories about affluent white people being killed? That's not made up out of whole cloth -- there is a news bias toward stories that the majority of the audience (who are white) can identify with. So when a young black man gets killed (prior to the recent police shootings), it's generally not considered "news", while a middle-aged white woman being killed is treated as news. And to a large degree, that is accurate -- young black men are killed in significantly disproportionate numbers, which is why we don't treat it as anything new. But the result is that, societally, we don't pay as much attention to certain people's deaths as we do to others. So, currently, we don't treat all lives as though they matter equally. Just like asking dad for your fair share, the phrase "black lives matter" also has an implicit "too" at the end: it's saying that black lives should also matter. But responding to this by saying "all lives matter" is willfully going back to ignoring the problem. It's a way of dismissing the statement by falsely suggesting that it means "only black lives matter," when that is obviously not the case. And so saying "all lives matter" as a direct response to "black lives matter" is essentially saying that we should just go back to ignoring the problem. TL;DR: The phrase "Black lives matter" carries an implicit "too" at the end; it's saying that black lives should also matter. Saying "all lives matter" is dismissing the very problems that the phrase is trying to draw attention to.
|
|
|
Post by CB1883 on Jun 2, 2020 9:54:01 GMT
How does someone come to the conclusion that it’s ignoring the issue by saying All Lives Matter? Don’t see how it’s ignoring the issue in the slightest.
Comparing it to asking for an equal share of food is ridiculous.
Does All Lives Matter not encourage a togetherness and equality message that is the only solution to the issue?
|
|
Fez
Frequenter
Posts: 472
|
Post by Fez on Jun 2, 2020 10:01:39 GMT
How does someone come to the conclusion that it’s ignoring the issue by saying All Lives Matter? Don’t see how it’s ignoring the issue in the slightest. Comparing it to asking for an equal share of food is ridiculous. Does All Lives Matter not encourage a togetherness and equality message that is the only solution to the issue? No, it does not. If you don't get it from these very clear and exhaustive explanations and metaphors then I don't know what to tell you. I would just advise you not to use it in company as a riposte to "Black Lives Matter" if you want to make friends.
|
|
|
Post by timberwolf on Jun 2, 2020 10:05:16 GMT
That's the situation of the "black lives matter" movement. Culture, laws, the arts, religion, and everyone else repeatedly suggest that all lives should matter. Clearly, that message already abounds in our society. TL;DR: The phrase "Black lives matter" carries an implicit "too" at the end; it's saying that black lives should also matter. Saying "all lives matter" is dismissing the very problems that the phrase is trying to draw attention to. so why wasn,t the slogan finished on the too word if that was what it really meant. like all piecefull protests they have been highjacked by some with a more sinister agenda. on the subject. these things will never go away until the world looks at a person as the person themselves and not the colour of their skin. there are dicks, racists , world reformers of all skins and give any of them an inch and they,ll take over.
|
|
|
Post by Imposter on Jun 2, 2020 10:10:42 GMT
That's the situation of the "black lives matter" movement. Culture, laws, the arts, religion, and everyone else repeatedly suggest that all lives should matter. Clearly, that message already abounds in our society. TL;DR: The phrase "Black lives matter" carries an implicit "too" at the end; it's saying that black lives should also matter. Saying "all lives matter" is dismissing the very problems that the phrase is trying to draw attention to. so why wasn,t the slogan finished on the too word if that was what it really meant. like all piecefull protests they have been highjacked by some with a more sinister agenda. on the subject. these things will never go away until the world looks at a person as the person themselves and not the colour of their skin. there are dicks, racists , world reformers of all skins and give any of them an inch and they,ll take over. To be fair the world should be reformed so I wouldn't lump a world reformer in with racists and dickheads.
|
|