Sign in to follow this  
Mid

Black Lives Matter

Recommended Posts

If trump and the public in general would have listened to and respected Kapernicks peaceful protest we wouldn't be in this situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Mike G said:

If trump and the public in general would have listened to and respected Kapernicks peaceful protest we wouldn't be in this situation.

Respected?  Did someone send the police in to beat and gas him or what?  He is free to have his opinion, and everyone else is free to criticism him including calling for his dismissal.  The NFL is an entertainment business.  If the customers are not entertained, then he isn't doing his job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

I am starting to think you are afraid to answer a simple question.

I'm starting to think you're afraid of reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mark K said:

Oh...watch those goal-posts dance! Doing the Funky Chicken now.   

In which Mark attempts to change the subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, jzk said:

Respected?  Did someone send the police in to beat and gas him or what?  He is free to have his opinion, and everyone else is free to criticism him including calling for his dismissal.  The NFL is an entertainment business.  If the customers are not entertained, then he isn't doing his job.

Yeah, respected.

Calling him a son of a bitch isn't respecting his opinion, or even his right to protest.

It's not the start of Trumps racism, but it's where it got a lot of steam with the racist part of the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jzk said:

And if the wall of moms are blocking the highway, they need to be removed.  And they will determine how much force is necessary to remove them.

If the Moms got arrested for blocking the street, shouldn't the Feds also be arrested?  That fence is in the street.

3 hours ago, Dog said:

“Federal authorities have assembled a force of 114 federal officers to protect U.S. government buildings in Portland, Ore., in response to ongoing protests, unrest and violence there, as part of a mission dubbed “Operation Diligent Valor."

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/22/federal-government-assembles-force-portland-unrest-377785

Yeah, and when Chad Wolf tried to provide examples of such, in Portland, the examples he presented were... graffitti.

2 hours ago, jzk said:

Right after the George Floyd killing was there not looting, rioting, and murdering?  We can start with the flat screen TVs being looted out of the Target or the David Dorn killing.  Or, I think there are about 27 other deaths for you to choose from.

Wasn't there a Minneapolis police station set on fire by the peaceful protesters?  Whats that Trump's goons?

Note that none of this has anything to do with the appropriateness of the federal government sending in personnel.  This is about the role of the government to protect the people from violent people.  

Minneapolis is Portland?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jzk said:

Respected?  Did someone send the police in to beat and gas him or what?  He is free to have his opinion, and everyone else is free to criticism him including calling for his dismissal.  The NFL is an entertainment business.  If the customers are not entertained, then he isn't doing his job.

So, the Wall Of Moms are not free to have their opinions?

Some of them got shot in the face.

By unidentified Federal agents

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

So, the Wall Of Moms are not free to have their opinions?

Some of them got shot in the face.

By unidentified Federal agents

- DSK

What's crazy is that Suburban women enabled Trump to eke out his win in 2016. They really were the difference. His little change in a low-income housing law isn't going to keep them voting for him. Not after other suburban women, protecting their cubs, are shot in the face.  Trump will basically have the racists and the white, non-college educated men >45 years old. 

That ain't a winning coalition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mike G said:

Yeah, respected.

Calling him a son of a bitch isn't respecting his opinion, or even his right to protest.

It's not the start of Trumps racism, but it's where it got a lot of steam with the racist part of the country.

You think he should be exempt from being called a "son of a bitch?"  Why him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

So, the Wall Of Moms are not free to have their opinions?

Some of them got shot in the face.

By unidentified Federal agents

- DSK

Who made that claim?  Stop making shit up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dog said:
4 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

I am starting to think you are afraid to answer a simple question.

I'm starting to think you're afraid of reality.

What, are you in 4th grade?  That sounds exactly like "I know you are.  But, what am I?"

What do think about the man who was shot in the head, while holding aloft a speaker?  

Here, I'll throw you a bone - the claim from the federales is he threw a gas canister back at the officers (clearly a lie, based on the video evidence).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, jzk said:

You think he should be exempt from being called a "son of a bitch?"  Why him?

Thats just a weird thing for you to say to my comments. Both times.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jzk said:
42 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

So, the Wall Of Moms are not free to have their opinions?

Some of them got shot in the face.

By unidentified Federal agents

 

Who made that claim?  Stop making shit up.

Unfortunately, it's true. If you paid the slightest attention to actual real-world news, you would have seen it.

google "wall of moms" and "shot in face"

https://www.newsweek.com/portland-mom-shot-face-protest-1520620

It's surprising that a person who is so-o in favor of limits on authoritarianism, on citizens liberty, is in favor of unidentified 'federal agents' shooting moms... so far the best justification you've come with is that they must have been blocking the street.

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Unfortunately, it's true. If you paid the slightest attention to actual real-world news, you would have seen it.

google "wall of moms" and "shot in face"

https://www.newsweek.com/portland-mom-shot-face-protest-1520620

It's surprising that a person who is so-o in favor of limits on authoritarianism, on citizens liberty, is in favor of unidentified 'federal agents' shooting moms... so far the best justification you've come with is that they must have been blocking the street.

- DSK

The lie is you saying what I favor or dont favor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, frenchie said:

Yeah, and when Chad Wolf tried to provide examples of such, in Portland, the examples he presented were... graffitti.Minneapolis is Portland?

Just curious...When rioters throw bottles, rocks, fire works, knives and flash lasers at federal officers who in your mind is responsible for those actions?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jzk said:

The lie is you saying what I favor or dont favor.

So, you don't actually favor shooting moms in the face, for peacefully demonstrating?

Even if they're blocking the street?

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

So, you don't actually favor shooting moms in the face, for peacefully demonstrating?

Even if they're blocking the street?

- DSK

If they are blocking the street, it is not peaceful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jzk said:

If they are blocking the street, it is not peaceful.

Um.........:lol:

What a moran.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ishmael said:

Um.........:lol:

What a moran.

Given your inability to understand what an ice age is, I am hardly surprised you don't know what peaceful is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jzk said:

If they are blocking the street, it is not peaceful.

Is kneeling during the national anthem "peaceful"?

I'm working on a list of things that you believe are deserving of getting shot in the face by jackbooted gov't thugs.

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, jzk said:

If they are blocking the street, it is not peaceful.

Shoot the bastards! Ehh jerkie boy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dog said:

In which Mark attempts to change the subject.

I'm still on the subject of cops being called cheese-eating surrender monkeys if they fail to prevent any and all damage in a large demonstration.  Hasn't changed for me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From my absolute favorite magazine Texas Monthly - How the cop who shot Levi Ayala was indentified

 

By the time Brendan Walsh reached the top of the downtown Austin parking garage near the Texas Capitol, the blazing June sun was beating down and his short sleeve button-up shirt was covered in sweat. He took in the sweeping view, analyzing the overlapping arrangement of buildings, trees, and power lines before comparing the panorama before him with a screenshot from a video he’d saved on his phone.

Over the past few hours, he’d done the same at several other locations, without much success. This time seemed different. “This could be the spot,” he told me, pointing to a grassy hillside sandwiched between several office buildings about a half-mile in the distance. “From this angle, a camera would have a direct view of him when it happened.”

Walsh was referring to the Austin police shooting of sixteen-year-old Brad Levi Ayala with a beanbag round in late May, an incident captured by an unidentified camera, with an unknown operator, in a video clip that has gone viral. The grainy sequence, filmed from behind police, captures a key moment at the May 30 demonstration over the killing of George Floyd. An officer raises and fires a rifle moments before Ayala crumples to the ground, barely conscious and bleeding, a round lodged in his forehead. The teenager had been watching protesters from a hill overlooking the I-35 access road, about thirty yards from where the police were trying to clear the interstate.

If you want to know all the details going to have the click the link.  This is one of the worst abuses of police power in recent memory https://www.texasmonthly.com/politics/levi-ayala-austin-protest/   This is the story of who he is and how he came to be on the hill that day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, jocal505 said:

Hey, take your current wisdom on improving racial relations to the Black Lives Matter thread.


Well OK, we could probably do without people who think that

On 5/4/2015 at 2:35 PM, jocal505 said:

The immature, short-sighted desire for gunpower is amplified, and more volatile, among blacks. Even more deadly than among whites.


Happy now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Cacoethesic Tom said:


Well OK, we could probably do without people who think that


Happy now?

You clipped my post, and did a fail. After you claimed, earlier today, to be in touch with the issues faced by the NAACP in our emerging republic, my request was for you to bring us all up to speed, on the pertinent thread.

The search function indicates that you have name-dropped the NAACP 166 times on our boards. You are in the know, you say, so please share where THEY are coming from, without dogballs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, jzk said:

If they are blocking the street, it is not peaceful.

200615-edmund-pettus-bridge-john-lewis-1

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

What, are you in 4th grade?  That sounds exactly like "I know you are.  But, what am I?"

What do think about the man who was shot in the head, while holding aloft a speaker?  

Here, I'll throw you a bone - the claim from the federales is he threw a gas canister back at the officers (clearly a lie, based on the video evidence).

From what we see in the video it looks like some federal agent fucked up.

You view the federal agents protecting the court as a "occupying force" as such violent resistance against them is justified. This is not reality, it's a contorted rationalization for rioting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dog said:

From what we see in the video it looks like some federal agent fucked up.

You view the federal agents protecting the court as a "occupying force" as such violent resistance against them is justified. This is not reality, it's a contorted rationalization for rioting.

I see the federal forces, who display no identifying information and operate outside the parameters typically followed by a police force as being brought in as a show of power.  President Trump wants to be perceived as a "wartime President" and Erik Prince seems like just the guy to make that happen.  That was exemplified by the clubbing, gassing, and shooting of US citizens - all captured on videotape.  The violence grew out of their presence.  The Mayor and the Governor asked them to leave, knowing their presence and actions were incendiary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Sean said:

This -

 

7D73135E-8511-444E-9B08-C132F23C99C0.jpeg

If you don't agree with my socialist ideology, then you are a racist.  Same song, different day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

:lol: guy championing the communist party line towards protesters lamenting socialism

You are a lying sack of shit.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

:lol: guy championing the communist party line towards protesters lamenting socialism

You take issue that I trade with Chinese people because you are a racist?  You don't like Chinese people?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

I see the federal forces, who display no identifying information and operate outside the parameters typically followed by a police force as being brought in as a show of power.  President Trump wants to be perceived as a "wartime President" and Erik Prince seems like just the guy to make that happen.  That was exemplified by the clubbing, gassing, and shooting of US citizens - all captured on videotape.  The violence grew out of their presence.  The Mayor and the Governor asked them to leave, knowing their presence and actions were incendiary.

The first violent rioting occurred on May 29 following protests against the systemically racist police and long before the occupation by the fascist federal storm troopers.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, jzk said:

If you don't agree with my socialist ideology, then you are a racist.  Same song, different day.

She is simply pointing out the hypocrisy of that particular right wing trope. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, jzk said:

You take issue that I trade with Chinese people because you are a racist?  You don't like Chinese people?

There's a lot more than "race"

If that's the only thing, or the primary thing you see, then you are a racist

I take issue with you proclaiming the joys of capitalism (in the stupidest, least correct way possible) while profiting from Chinese labor abuse and pollution.

And you apparently believe that citizens do not have the right to protest without getting shot in the face by unidentified federal agents.

Perhaps you should simply go and live in China, it's a better fit.

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks as if she needs to use the thumb to hold down her index finger or it doesn’t work.

116017212_10223099863353731_532440962173

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Dog said:

The first violent rioting occurred on May 29 following protests against the systemically racist police and long before the occupation by the fascist federal storm troopers.

 

Were the state and local officials overwhelmed and requested Federal help?  No.  They weren't, and they didn't.

President Trump said he would "dominate" these cities.  I guess that tough talk sends a tingle up your leg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

There's a lot more than "race"

If that's the only thing, or the primary thing you see, then you are a racist

I take issue with you proclaiming the joys of capitalism (in the stupidest, least correct way possible) while profiting from Chinese labor abuse and pollution.

And you apparently believe that citizens do not have the right to protest without getting shot in the face by unidentified federal agents.

Perhaps you should simply go and live in China, it's a better fit.

- DSK

Try making a case for something without lying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jzk said:

Try making a case for something without lying.

You've changed your mind?

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Steam Flyer said:

You've changed your mind?

- DSK

Of course I have changed my mind.  A few years ago, I changed my mind about immigration.  But what does that have to do with you being a lying sack of shit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/28/2020 at 2:49 PM, Steam Flyer said:

So, how many people in your family have been lynched? How many times has your family's home been burned to the ground, and they (you) fled with nothing? How many times has your family had a business burned? How many years has your family paid excessive interest rates because banks knew they could refuse you altogether? Or paid excessive rent because landlords etc etc? College etc etc....

The black/white disparity in wealth and income is very largely a result of white supremacy and white privilege

- DSK

Are you seriously suggesting that the lack of occurrence is indicative of extra privilege?   Not being similarly disadvantaged != being privileged. 

I think that you're being myopic if you think that financial institutions only took/take advantage of minorities - even today, banks and unscrupulous lenders are preying on anyone, w/out regard to race, doing what you're trying to ascribe as "white privilege".     Just stop. We can agree that our nation and its institutions have a sordid history of repression and exploitation.  We don't agree that that history means that everyone who's not black enjoyed some extra privilege. There's an awful lotta poor struggling white people too.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Are you seriously suggesting that the lack of occurrence is indicative of extra privilege?   Not being similarly disadvantaged != being privileged. 

I think that you're being myopic if you think that financial institutions only took/take advantage of minorities - even today, banks and unscrupulous lenders are preying on anyone, w/out regard to race, doing what you're trying to ascribe as "white privilege".     Just stop. We can agree that our nation and its institutions have a sordid history of repression and exploitation.  We don't agree that that history means that everyone who's not black enjoyed some extra privilege. There's an awful lotta poor struggling white people too.  

Well, sure. Not EVERY black family has had a home or business burned out.

BTW this didn't just happen, oops. This was a deliberate assault on black people, as a group.

Yes, there are a lot of struggling poor white people.

However, as a group, there is a big gap in wealth and income, and there is a big LOSS on the part of one group that the other did not have.... inflicted on them by the other....

This is the raw basic facts. Don't like it, tough. Hard to deal with reality when you keep sticking your head in the sand.

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Well, sure. Not EVERY black family has had a home or business burned out.

BTW this didn't just happen, oops. This was a deliberate assault on black people, as a group.

Yes, there are a lot of struggling poor white people.

However, as a group, there is a big gap in wealth and income, and there is a big LOSS on the part of one group that the other did not have.... inflicted on them by the other....

This is the raw basic facts. Don't like it, tough. Hard to deal with reality when you keep sticking your head in the sand.

- DSK

The reality that you seem to be avoiding is that somehow or another every person not of color is responsible for the plight of every person of color, without regard to any other consideration of circumstance or behavior.  It's that attitude that I challenge. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bus Driver said:

Were the state and local officials overwhelmed and requested Federal help?  No.  They weren't, and they didn't.

President Trump said he would "dominate" these cities.  I guess that tough talk sends a tingle up your leg.

They didn't need an invitation to do their job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

They didn't need an invitation to do their job.

Policing cities is the job of the Federal government?  That's news to me.  And, to folks far more knowledgeable about the US Constitution than either of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How Trump’s Use of Federal Forces in Cities Differs From Past Presidents

This moment is notably different from 1968, when local officials requested federal troops to restore order in Washington, Chicago and Baltimore because they believed they could not do it themselves. It’s different from Oxford, Miss., in 1962, or Little Rock in 1957, when local officials were openly defying federal court orders to desegregate.

“I don’t think there’s anywhere near the same kind of consensus at the federal level that federal authority is actually being subverted” today, said Stephen Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin. “What’s new and troubling here is we have a very, very contested factual predicate. And it’s not remotely clear to me what federal laws are going unenforced.”

If the federal presence in Portland were meant to restore order, it would have made more sense to send in National Guard officers, who have served and trained for such a role, not Customs and Border Protection agents, Mr. Vladeck said. Confrontations there have escalated since the arrival of federal forces, with a line of protesting mothers facing tear gas, and then, Wednesday night, Mayor Ted Wheeler of Portland experiencing the same.

“This is the very thing that scared the heck out of the framers of the Constitution,” said Barry Friedman, a law professor at New York University. “There’s been an over-tendency to cry wolf,” he said of the president’s critics over the past four years. “Well, this is wolf. This is it.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Policing cities is the job of the Federal government?  That's news to me.  And, to folks far more knowledgeable about the US Constitution than either of us.

Protecting federal property is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

Protecting federal property is.

Are you of the opinion they stayed on Federal property and limited their actions to protecting Federal property?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Federal Agents Push Into Portland Streets, Stretching Limits of Their Authority

Federal agents are venturing blocks from the buildings they were sent to protect. Oregon officials say they are illegally taking on the role of riot police.

Isn't the federal jurisdiction described by the borders of the country?   Seems to me that they aren't bound by the geographical boundaries that state/local PDs are.  So - I'd posit that "venturing blocks away" isn't really the issue, but would agree that interfering in local enforcement actions w/out being asked to do so is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:
1 hour ago, Steam Flyer said:

However, as a group, there is a big gap in wealth and income, and there is a big LOSS on the part of one group that the other did not have.... inflicted on them by the other....

This is the raw basic facts. Don't like it, tough. Hard to deal with reality when you keep sticking your head in the sand.

 

The reality that you seem to be avoiding is that somehow or another every person not of color is responsible for the plight of every person of color, without regard to any other consideration of circumstance or behavior.  It's that attitude that I challenge. 

You're ain't "challenging" shit, you're just continuing to deny and play up your sense of white victimhood.

Poor you, you feel like you're getting blamed when you never owned a single slave, never burned a single black family's house. Maybe if you did, you'd feel better about getting blamed for it?

When a disaster befalls a group of people, the human thing to do is to at the very least extend sympathy.

Unless you don't see them as human.

Getting mad at the people who acknowledge it is a shitty reaction.

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Isn't the federal jurisdiction described by the borders of the country?   Seems to me that they aren't bound by the geographical boundaries that state/local PDs are.  So - I'd posit that "venturing blocks away" isn't really the issue, but would agree that interfering in local enforcement actions w/out being asked to do so is. 

How about the lack of identity

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Isn't the federal jurisdiction described by the borders of the country?   Seems to me that they aren't bound by the geographical boundaries that state/local PDs are.  So - I'd posit that "venturing blocks away" isn't really the issue, but would agree that interfering in local enforcement actions w/out being asked to do so is. 

There is broad agreement among legal scholars that the federal government has the right to protect its buildings. But how far that authority extends into a city — and which tactics may be employed — is less clear.

Robert Tsai, a professor at the Washington College of Law at American University, said the nation’s founders explicitly left local policing within the jurisdiction of local authorities.

He questioned whether the federal agents had the right to extend their operations blocks away from the buildings they are protecting.

“If the federal troops are starting to wander the streets, they appear to be crossing the line into general policing, which is outside their powers,” Professor Tsai said.

Homeland Security officials say they are operating under a federal statute that permits federal agents to venture outside the boundaries of the courthouse to “conduct investigations” into crimes against federal property or officers.

But patrolling the streets and detaining or tear-gassing protesters go beyond that legal authority, said David Lapan, the former spokesman for the agency when it was led by John Kelly, Mr. Trump’s first secretary of homeland security.

 

“That’s not an investigation,” Mr. Lapan said. “That’s just a show of force.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

You're ain't "challenging" shit, you're just continuing to deny and play up your sense of white victimhood.

Poor you, you feel like you're getting blamed when you never owned a single slave, never burned a single black family's house. Maybe if you did, you'd feel better about getting blamed for it?

When a disaster befalls a group of people, the human thing to do is to at the very least extend sympathy.

Unless you don't see them as human.

Getting mad at the people who acknowledge it is a shitty reaction.

- DSK

There's a HUGE difference between "offering sympathy" ( and I don't think that sympathy is the appropriate reaction - EMPATHY is) and refuting an absolute BS narrative that incites opposition to what should be a universally supported cause.   I don't have any sense of "white victimhood" - and my disagreeing with the concept of "white privilege" and the way that that phrase is being used today doesn't in any way equate to what you allege. Funny how you think you know what every one else is feeling/thinking/doing, and how they should move to what YOU think they should be feeling/thinking/doing.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

How about the lack of identity

- DSK

In all sincerity - I don't know *what* the law says about that, but I think that if they expect to be afforded the consideration of a legitimate law enforcement entity, that they oughta be wearing SOME external indication of being a member of that entity. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

There's a HUGE difference between "offering sympathy" ( and I don't think that sympathy is the appropriate reaction - EMPATHY is) and refuting an absolute BS narrative that incites opposition to what should be a universally supported cause.   I don't have any sense of "white victimhood" - and my disagreeing with the concept of "white privilege" and the way that that phrase is being used today doesn't in any way equate to what you allege. Funny how you think you know what every one else is feeling/thinking/doing, and how they should move to what YOU think they should be feeling/thinking/doing.   

OK, so you have EMPATHY for black people, and that's why you think they don't have 2A rights, and why it pisses you off to mention that they have suffered lynching and mob violence, inflicting on them tremendous social and economic costs that continue to this day.

And instead of acknowledging this, you get mad when it's mentioned... that's how much EMPATHY you appear to have

Thanks for clearing that up.

- DSK

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

OK, so you have EMPATHY for black people, and that's why you think they don't have 2A rights, and why it pisses you off to mention that they have suffered lynching and mob violence, inflicting on them tremendous social and economic costs that continue to this day.

And instead of acknowledging this, you get mad when it's mentioned... that's how much EMPATHY you appear to have

Thanks for clearing that up.

- DSK

Where in the world do you come up with this BS?  I've NEVER said anything even remotely like that.  Mebbe you oughta try slowing down on your replies, to give yourself at least a few seconds to read and understand what was written before you rub more of the paint off the keyboard. 

Look up the definition of each word, and tell me which one you think is more appropriate, and why.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Where in the world do you come up with this BS?  I've NEVER said anything even remotely like that.  Mebbe you oughta try slowing down on your replies, to give yourself at least a few seconds to read and understand what was written before you rub more of the paint off the keyboard. 

Look up the definition of each word, and tell me which one you think is more appropriate, and why.  

If you have expressed something recognizable as EMPATHY for the tremendous losses inflicted on black people in America, by white people, then I apologize. I have not read every single one of your posts, ever.

But the ones I do read, you express anger that it is even mentioned. If that's not your intention, perhaps you should think a little more about what you're trying to communicate, and do it better. My reading comprehension, or your poor writing? Dunno, but in all honesty, I have never seen you post ANYTHING that suggests you have "empathy" for the inequities black Americans are burdened with.

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Where in the world do you come up with this BS?  I've NEVER said anything even remotely like that.  Mebbe you oughta try slowing down on your replies, to give yourself at least a few seconds to read and understand what was written before you rub more of the paint off the keyboard. 

Look up the definition of each word, and tell me which one you think is more appropriate, and why.  

What you actually say is of no consequence to SF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jzk said:

You are a lying sack of shit.

You love you some hard-ass police tactics against people interfering with traffic.

Chicom started, Trump continues

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

If you have expressed something recognizable as EMPATHY for the tremendous losses inflicted on black people in America, by white people, then I apologize. I have not read every single one of your posts, ever.

But the ones I do read, you express anger that it is even mentioned. If that's not your intention, perhaps you should think a little more about what you're trying to communicate, and do it better. My reading comprehension, or your poor writing? Dunno, but in all honesty, I have never seen you post ANYTHING that suggests you have "empathy" for the inequities black Americans are burdened with.

- DSK

Probably a combination of both.   I suspect that you equate my haranguing on the posters in here who ( I think wrongly) project their own personal prejudices as someone else's sinister intent w/a lack of understanding and empathy.  I get that - and appreciate the push.  I *do* have empathy, and an understanding based upon spending several of my childhood years living in the projects outside Baltimore after my folks split up, and remaining in contact to this day with several of the families I met back then. 

So - I understand the inequities.  I haven't lived them personally, but, I've lived with the folks who did.

While it's a factor, I disagree with the suggestion that in the past 50 years that intentional discrimination is the biggest contributor to those inequities, while intentionally discounting any other contributing factor.   Are folks experiencing the impact of post-civil war era discrimination, felt exponentially thru generations?  No doubt.  

If we waved a magic wand and made everyone color blind tomorrow, those inequities would persist, because we haven't done enough to address any of the other causalities.  I also think, and based upon the many people I've seen rise above the circumstances of their childhood, that addressing those other causalities would have a bigger positive impact in personal outcomes.  That improvement in personal outcomes also results in a reduction of discrimination.  SO - I can understand how you think that my focus on those other causalities would seem like a lack of empathy, but, what it really is is a different idea about the best way to help change things to improve personal outcomes by addressing the causal factors, and while many of those are systemic, a good many are individual as well.  

So - the discussion, IMHO, shouldn't be "are you a racist because...."  it should instead be: How do we identify and correct any discriminatory barriers, while simultaneously identifying and discussing solutions for the other causalities that I mention, while being careful not to dilute either focus by conflating the two. 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bus Driver said:
1 hour ago, Dog said:

Protecting federal property is.

Are you of the opinion they stayed on Federal property and limited their actions to protecting Federal property?

Waiting....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Waiting....

I believe their operations have been atypical for a occupying force. Early on they operated in the area around the court and more recently have stayed on federal property itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

I believe their operations have been atypical for a occupying force. Early on they operated in the area around the court and more recently have stayed on federal property itself.

So, you admit they strayed from Federal property.  There may be hope for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bus Driver said:
3 minutes ago, Dog said:

I believe their operations have been atypical for a occupying force. Early on they operated in the area around the court and more recently have stayed on federal property itself.

So, you admit they strayed from Federal property.  There may be hope for you.

Lotta wiggle room in that statement.

But it was not a blatant and obvious fuckin' lie.

Good Dog

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

So, you admit they strayed from Federal property.  There may be hope for you.

Federal agents do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bus Driver said:

Are they permitted to do that?

Of course. They do it every day all across this country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

Of course. They do it every day all across this country.

They operate as law enforcement on non-federal property "every day all across the country"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bus Driver said:

They operate as law enforcement on non-federal property "every day all across the country"?

Absolutely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

When did non violent protest become a federal crime?

When Wm Barr took over as AG? What do I win?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dog said:
6 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

They operate as law enforcement on non-federal property "every day all across the country"?

Absolutely.

Amazing how an architect believes he has a better grasp of limitations brought about by the Constitution than Law professors and Constitutional scholars.

Maybe you could contact some of those scholars who don't get it featured in the link I provided In Post #2123 and straighten them out. 

I am sure they would appreciate the correction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Amazing how an architect believes he has a better grasp of limitations brought about by the Constitution than Law professors and Constitutional scholars.

Maybe you could contact some of those scholars who don't get it featured in the link I provided In Post #2123 and straighten them out. 

I am sure they would appreciate the correction.

I don't know about that but I do know federal agents are at work today all across this country enforcing laws and making arrests. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Dog said:

I don't know about that but I do know federal agents are at work today all across this country enforcing laws and making arrests. 

He's playing with you gents, at some point he'll say "The FBI works all over the USofA"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Dog said:

I don't know about that but I do know federal agents are at work today all across this country enforcing laws and making arrests. 

On that point, I would agree.  They are also identifiable and follow due process. 

Much different than what has been happening in Portland.

I trust even you can see the difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

On that point, I would agree.  They are also identifiable and follow due process. 

Much different than what has been happening in Portland.

I trust even you can see the difference.

Not so, many are undercover.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arrests are made when warrants are issued. My BIL is retired federal marshall. They have rules they abide by.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dog said:

Not so, many are undercover. 

Identification is not limited to a name badge.

Do they hide their identity (even refusing to do so) when throwing people in unmarked vehicles for transport to undisclosed locations without Mirandizing them?

Asking for people interested in the Rule of Law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Dog said:

Not so, many are undercover.

:lol::lol:

Post of the week here..... federal cops HAVE to be undercover when protecting federal property from graffiti....

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Legal eagle on YouTube has a long and comprehensive video on the laws regarding federal police activity. Solid analysis. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Raz'r said:

You love you some hard-ass police tactics against people interfering with traffic.

Chicom started, Trump continues

Just enough force to remove them.  They can decide how much that is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bus Driver said:

Identification is not limited to a name badge.

Do they hide their identity (even refusing to do so) when throwing people in unmarked vehicles for transport to undisclosed locations without Mirandizing them?

Asking for people interested in the Rule of Law.

Do you think it is required to read the Miranda rights to every suspect?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a very easy solution to the issue of Federal troops in PDX...... the protesters can stop their attempts at destroying or defacing federal property and the Fed troops will go home.  Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, jzk said:
2 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

Identification is not limited to a name badge.

Do they hide their identity (even refusing to do so) when throwing people in unmarked vehicles for transport to undisclosed locations without Mirandizing them?

Asking for people interested in the Rule of Law.

Do you think it is required to read the Miranda rights to every suspect?

When they are being arrested, yes.

But, these goons weren't arresting anyone.  What they did was akin to kidnapping.

Do you think the paramilitary corps in Portland was acting as undercover federal officers, like Dog suggests?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Burning Man said:

There's a very easy solution to the issue of Federal troops in PDX...... the protesters can stop their attempts at destroying or defacing federal property and the Fed troops will go home.  Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

Because graffiti justifies unidentifiable Fed agents kidnapping American citizens... on top of all the beating and gassing and rubber-bullet-shooting that went on....

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

When they are being arrested, yes.

But, these goons weren't arresting anyone.  What they did was akin to kidnapping.

Do you think the paramilitary corps in Portland was acting as undercover federal officers, like Dog suggests?

This is no obligation or right to be read Miranda rights.  Only if the police want to be able to question the suspect while in custody and admit the suspect's statements as evidence does Miranda need to be read.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jzk said:

This is no obligation or right to be read Miranda rights.  Only if the police want to be able to question the suspect while in custody and admit the suspect's statements as evidence does Miranda need to be read.  

These unidentifiable goons took those protesters, using unmarked vehicles, to undisclosed locations, and started asking them questions without reading them Miranda. 

You cool with that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

5 years? Get a fucking life, or at least graduate out of middle school , anonymous moron. 

Tom's, like, the least anonymous person here.  He's posted under his real name, he's posted pictures of himself, I know what part of Florida he lives in... like, seriously, WTF?

 

 

7 hours ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Not being similarly disadvantaged != being privileged. 

Well, actually... Privilege just means you have rights or immunities that others don't.  So... yes.  Not being similarly disadvantaged IS a type of privilege, pretty much by definition

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites