|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On December 17 2015 08:14 Introvert wrote:
The reasons they aren't talked about should be obvious, no? For one, they didn't kill 3000 people in a single day. They aren't talked about because they are mostly just talk. Plansix's troubles at the law firm are not of concern to most people.
Edit: and I will point out, that if there are violent incidents (or almost violent), they do make the news. Like the Bundy Ranch standoff. Thing is, that doesn't happen every day.
Might also be the case that people are quick to establish a causal relation between Islam and terrorism as soon as the perpetrator is a Muslim while at the same time not recognizing the connection between militarism and violence. Every time a school shooter goes on a killing spree people instinctively wave it off as someone being mentally unstable or whatever although many off them were part of internet communities that had radical libertarian bend. Most of the time an abortion clinic is attacked there's a radical-right connection. Plenty of violence in the US especially against officials might be motivated by beliefs that this kind of violence is 'American' and justified without it being explicitly stated.
|
United States43539 Posts
On December 17 2015 08:14 Introvert wrote:
The reasons they aren't talked about should be obvious, no? For one, they didn't kill 3000 people in a single day. They aren't talked about because they are mostly just talk. Plansix's troubles at the law firm are not of concern to most people.
Oh please. I suspect a good one in five Americans wouldn't be able to tell you what date 9/11 happened on, excluding anyone too young to remember it and the senile.
|
On December 17 2015 08:33 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2015 08:14 Introvert wrote:
The reasons they aren't talked about should be obvious, no? For one, they didn't kill 3000 people in a single day. They aren't talked about because they are mostly just talk. Plansix's troubles at the law firm are not of concern to most people.
Edit: and I will point out, that if there are violent incidents (or almost violent), they do make the news. Like the Bundy Ranch standoff. Thing is, that doesn't happen every day. Might also be the case that people are quick to establish a causal relation between Islam and terrorism as soon as the perpetrator is a Muslim while at the same time not recognizing the connection between militarism and violence. Every time a school shooter goes on a killing spree people instinctively wave it off as someone being mentally unstable or whatever although many off them were part of internet communities that had radical libertarian bend. Most of the time an abortion clinic is attacked there's a radical-right connection. Plenty of violence in the US especially against officials might be motivated by beliefs that this kind of violence is 'American' and justified without it being explicitly stated.
That's a different topic. The original idea that these domestic movements are ignored relative to their importance is incorrect. When something happens, we hear about it. But most of the time, nothing of consequence occurs.
On December 17 2015 08:44 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2015 08:14 Introvert wrote:
The reasons they aren't talked about should be obvious, no? For one, they didn't kill 3000 people in a single day. They aren't talked about because they are mostly just talk. Plansix's troubles at the law firm are not of concern to most people. Oh please. I suspect a good one in five Americans wouldn't be able to tell you what day 9/11 happened on, excluding anyone too young to remember it and the senile.
Then it should be no surprise that these other incidents are "ignored," as seems to be the claim.
|
On December 17 2015 08:46 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2015 08:33 Nyxisto wrote:On December 17 2015 08:14 Introvert wrote:
The reasons they aren't talked about should be obvious, no? For one, they didn't kill 3000 people in a single day. They aren't talked about because they are mostly just talk. Plansix's troubles at the law firm are not of concern to most people.
Edit: and I will point out, that if there are violent incidents (or almost violent), they do make the news. Like the Bundy Ranch standoff. Thing is, that doesn't happen every day. Might also be the case that people are quick to establish a causal relation between Islam and terrorism as soon as the perpetrator is a Muslim while at the same time not recognizing the connection between militarism and violence. Every time a school shooter goes on a killing spree people instinctively wave it off as someone being mentally unstable or whatever although many off them were part of internet communities that had radical libertarian bend. Most of the time an abortion clinic is attacked there's a radical-right connection. Plenty of violence in the US especially against officials might be motivated by beliefs that this kind of violence is 'American' and justified without it being explicitly stated. That's a different topic. The original idea that these domestic movements are ignored relative to their importance is incorrect. When something happens, we hear about it. But most of the time, nothing of consequence occurs. Show nested quote +On December 17 2015 08:44 KwarK wrote:On December 17 2015 08:14 Introvert wrote:
The reasons they aren't talked about should be obvious, no? For one, they didn't kill 3000 people in a single day. They aren't talked about because they are mostly just talk. Plansix's troubles at the law firm are not of concern to most people. Oh please. I suspect a good one in five Americans wouldn't be able to tell you what day 9/11 happened on, excluding anyone too young to remember it and the senile. Then it should be no surprise that these other incidents are "ignored," as seems to be the claim.
I think the point is more along the lines that one group gets wall to wall 24 hour 7 days a week coverage, and their own personal hype network while the other barely gets a headline. And let's not forget how the right's "coverage" of the Bundy ranch went... Hannity gave him his own segment and defended him, it's not like they were all law and order the whole time.
Don't get me started on the 180 they are trying to pull on heroin either.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
it was an islamist attack. fbi trying to diffuse tension, partly also to pacifier the social media privacy crew.
|
On December 17 2015 04:24 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2015 04:09 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On December 17 2015 03:04 KwarK wrote:On December 17 2015 02:52 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On December 17 2015 02:09 KwarK wrote:On December 17 2015 02:00 Gorsameth wrote:On December 17 2015 01:56 Eliezar wrote:On December 17 2015 01:42 farvacola wrote:
Quite a few Republicans refuse to even entertain the notion that Iran would make a better ally than the Saudis; this same camp similarly refuses to acknowledge the widening gap between the waning political authority of the Ayatollah relative to the increasingly Western-friendly Iranian government. Go figure. If Iran was going to be able to be our ally it would have happened under Obama. I really don't think Iran or Saudi Arabia are countries you want as allies from a moral perspective, but we definitely could use less tension with Iran than we've had ever since we meddled with their government. I think that's one thing that was good with the debate last night that multiple candidates were stating that regime change just doesn't work...it doesn't change the culture. Its been less then 40 years since they got rid of an American installed dictator and the last president (Bush) made credible threats about invading them. While Obama was working on a diplomatic deal with Iran the Republicans send a letter to them to tell em that any treaty would be null and void if they got into office. Ofcourse they aren't really looking towards being America's ally. It takes time to get over stuff like that. Then there was that time the American military shot down one of their passenger planes killing a few hundred civilians for literally no reason and Bush senior explained that he wouldn't apologize for it because, and I quote, he "doesn't apologize for America, no matter what the facts are". Then the guy who gave the order to target the civilian airliner because it wasn't responding to his demands on the military frequency got a medal. America is unequivocally the bad guy in the Iran America relationship. America staged a 9/11 style attack on them only rather than it being stateless terrorists it was people wearing uniforms with the American flag on them and then you gave out fucking medals to the sailors who did it. I'm on a phone right now but that isn't correct according to Wikipedia. Sailors mistook the plane for a fighter jet after they skirmished with Iranian boats. Bush's comments were a campaign line he'd been using before the event and wiki says he didn't use it in relation to the event. Medals were mainly standard tour of duty, and we're not given out because of the airliner. US later apologized and made restitution. The US expressed regret that the incident happened in a non apology. They made restitution because they knew damn well they'd murdered a bunch of Iranians but that's not an apology. It was a routine passenger airliner going down the US approved safe flight route it always took at the scheduled flight time. It was not doing anything that might have led anyone anywhere to believe that it was anything other than it was. Even the destroyer's Aegis Combat System recorded that rather than diving, as the crew claimed it was, it was rising and that it was squawking throughout on the civilian channels it should have been. The crew all adamantly claimed things that directly contradicted the records of their instruments to the point that the US in 2000 explained the incident as "scenario fulfillment", a mass hysteria resulting in working too long under pressure to the point that training protocols are carried out while ignoring sensory information that contradicts the scenario being fulfilled. It was a fuckup of colossal proportions. Like imagine if you're a police officer and you volunteer to go to a school to do a talk about your job and you accidentally shoot a bunch of the kids because you thought they might be ISIS. That's how bad those sailors fucked up on their day at work. That police officer would not be getting told "don't worry, these things happen" and getting a medal at the end of the year. The only appropriate response would have been to hand out court martials like candy. You don't give medals and say "these things happen". The American response to that incident was shameful and arrogant, consisting mostly of "well we're a superpower so basically you just have to eat shit because fuck you". Edit: The Navy's own inquiry had this to say "The data from USS Vincennes tapes, information from USS Sides and reliable intelligence information, corroborate the fact that [Iran Air Flight 655] was on a normal commercial air flight plan profile, in the assigned airway, squawking Mode III 6760, on a continuous ascent in altitude from take-off at Bandar Abbas to shoot-down". Edit2: The wikipedia article would be funny if it wasn't a tragedy So the Petty Officer who first picked up the plane on radar thought it was a civilian airliner so he started checking it against the records of the flights that would be happening. But it was dark so he didn't see flight 655 on the list. Seriously? Also the navy inquiry ruled out the skirmishing with Iranian gunboat explanation. There are claims that Vincennes was engaged in an operation using a decoy cargo ship to lure Iranian gunboats to a fight.[40] These claims were denied by Fogarty in "Hearing Before The Investigation Subcommittee and The Defense Policy Panel of The Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, One Hundred Second Congress, Second Session, 21 July 1992". Also, the initial claims of Vincennes being called for help by a cargo ship attacked by Iranian gunboats have been ruled out. The navy inquiry basically went with "we checked the actual recordings from the instruments, from other ships and from our intelligence in the area and all of it contradicts the story we got from those dumbasses who decided to shoot down an airliner. We can only conclude that they're fucking morons there was some kind of mass hysteria that caused them to ignore all of the actual information." So you agree that your previous post was wildly inaccurate, yes? No, yours was. You brought up the skirmish with Iranian boats which the Navy ruled wasn't a factor in the wikipedia article you cited. I said that it was for no fucking reason while the wikipedia article said it was some kind of mass hysteria which caused them to ignore all the evidence and shoot it down for no fucking reason. The Flight 655 situation was accurately described by me as a colossal and inexcusable fuckup and was inaccurately defended by you referencing things which were found not to be factors. It doesn't matter that the medals were not explicitly for the incident. Again, let's compare it to a police officer who shot and killed 66 kids because although all his senses were telling him that they were random kids he decided that they were terrorists. If the police force decided to keep that officer on the force and then, at the end of the year, give him a routine community service medal do you think the parents of the 66 children he murdered would accept that it was a medal that reflected his service generally and that his general conduct throughout the year deserved recognition? It doesn't matter if it's a routine medal, if someone kills 290 innocent civilians then not only should you not give him a medal for that specific incident, you should also not give him a medal for his service generally at the time when he was killing civilians. This isn't rocket science.
I wasn't defending the incident, but I do think you've characterized it wrong.
1) The plane was shot down because they thought it was a warplane. You know, flying in a war-zone... after the crew had come under fire and was following the ship. Characterizing this as 'for no reason' is a stretch, and characterizing a war-zone as a happy, peaceful school isn't accurate.
2) The crew tried to contact the plane on both military and civilian frequencies.
3) Bush did not say in response that he "doesn't apologize for America, no matter what the facts are."
4) The event was not staged. It was not intentional.
Shit Kwark, I don't think a single sentence in that first post was accurate.
|
On December 17 2015 08:14 Introvert wrote:
The reasons they aren't talked about should be obvious, no? For one, they didn't kill 3000 people in a single day. They aren't talked about because they are mostly just talk. Plansix's troubles at the law firm are not of concern to most people.
Edit: and I will point out, that if there are violent incidents (or almost violent), they do make the news. Like the Bundy Ranch standoff. Thing is, that doesn't happen every day.
The key is one of them has done it yet. And there are several of these cases where we were not about to move forwards because local police pushed our clients to hold off. Those escalated beyond my pay grade. But the concern and fear of the sheriffs and court staff involved was real. More real that any "ISIS".
But they won't grab headlines until one of them blows up a court house and then everyone will ask "Why didn't we see this coming?"
|
4) The event was not staged. It was not intentional.
No, but grossly negligent. At best.
|
On December 17 2015 09:33 oneofthem wrote:
it was an islamist attack. fbi trying to diffuse tension, partly also to pacifier the social media privacy crew.
Alternately, political candidates could be trying to grotesquely distort the facts in order to feed their political narrative.
*cough Planned Parenthood video description by Carly Fiorina cough*
|
On December 17 2015 11:06 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2015 09:33 oneofthem wrote:
it was an islamist attack. fbi trying to diffuse tension, partly also to pacifier the social media privacy crew. Alternately, political candidates could be trying to grotesquely distort the facts in order to feed their political narrative. *cough Planned Parenthood video description by Carly Fiorina cough*
Or you mean like everything 90% of what comes out of the candidates mouths now. When I look at the fact checking after every debate I feel like a bit of me dies. You guys are so fucked. I had to take a 30% cut on my salary to move to Canada but honestly Im so relieved.
|
United States43539 Posts
On December 17 2015 09:47 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2015 04:24 KwarK wrote:On December 17 2015 04:09 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On December 17 2015 03:04 KwarK wrote:On December 17 2015 02:52 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On December 17 2015 02:09 KwarK wrote:On December 17 2015 02:00 Gorsameth wrote:On December 17 2015 01:56 Eliezar wrote:On December 17 2015 01:42 farvacola wrote:
Quite a few Republicans refuse to even entertain the notion that Iran would make a better ally than the Saudis; this same camp similarly refuses to acknowledge the widening gap between the waning political authority of the Ayatollah relative to the increasingly Western-friendly Iranian government. Go figure. If Iran was going to be able to be our ally it would have happened under Obama. I really don't think Iran or Saudi Arabia are countries you want as allies from a moral perspective, but we definitely could use less tension with Iran than we've had ever since we meddled with their government. I think that's one thing that was good with the debate last night that multiple candidates were stating that regime change just doesn't work...it doesn't change the culture. Its been less then 40 years since they got rid of an American installed dictator and the last president (Bush) made credible threats about invading them. While Obama was working on a diplomatic deal with Iran the Republicans send a letter to them to tell em that any treaty would be null and void if they got into office. Ofcourse they aren't really looking towards being America's ally. It takes time to get over stuff like that. Then there was that time the American military shot down one of their passenger planes killing a few hundred civilians for literally no reason and Bush senior explained that he wouldn't apologize for it because, and I quote, he "doesn't apologize for America, no matter what the facts are". Then the guy who gave the order to target the civilian airliner because it wasn't responding to his demands on the military frequency got a medal. America is unequivocally the bad guy in the Iran America relationship. America staged a 9/11 style attack on them only rather than it being stateless terrorists it was people wearing uniforms with the American flag on them and then you gave out fucking medals to the sailors who did it. I'm on a phone right now but that isn't correct according to Wikipedia. Sailors mistook the plane for a fighter jet after they skirmished with Iranian boats. Bush's comments were a campaign line he'd been using before the event and wiki says he didn't use it in relation to the event. Medals were mainly standard tour of duty, and we're not given out because of the airliner. US later apologized and made restitution. The US expressed regret that the incident happened in a non apology. They made restitution because they knew damn well they'd murdered a bunch of Iranians but that's not an apology. It was a routine passenger airliner going down the US approved safe flight route it always took at the scheduled flight time. It was not doing anything that might have led anyone anywhere to believe that it was anything other than it was. Even the destroyer's Aegis Combat System recorded that rather than diving, as the crew claimed it was, it was rising and that it was squawking throughout on the civilian channels it should have been. The crew all adamantly claimed things that directly contradicted the records of their instruments to the point that the US in 2000 explained the incident as "scenario fulfillment", a mass hysteria resulting in working too long under pressure to the point that training protocols are carried out while ignoring sensory information that contradicts the scenario being fulfilled. It was a fuckup of colossal proportions. Like imagine if you're a police officer and you volunteer to go to a school to do a talk about your job and you accidentally shoot a bunch of the kids because you thought they might be ISIS. That's how bad those sailors fucked up on their day at work. That police officer would not be getting told "don't worry, these things happen" and getting a medal at the end of the year. The only appropriate response would have been to hand out court martials like candy. You don't give medals and say "these things happen". The American response to that incident was shameful and arrogant, consisting mostly of "well we're a superpower so basically you just have to eat shit because fuck you". Edit: The Navy's own inquiry had this to say "The data from USS Vincennes tapes, information from USS Sides and reliable intelligence information, corroborate the fact that [Iran Air Flight 655] was on a normal commercial air flight plan profile, in the assigned airway, squawking Mode III 6760, on a continuous ascent in altitude from take-off at Bandar Abbas to shoot-down". Edit2: The wikipedia article would be funny if it wasn't a tragedy So the Petty Officer who first picked up the plane on radar thought it was a civilian airliner so he started checking it against the records of the flights that would be happening. But it was dark so he didn't see flight 655 on the list. Seriously? Also the navy inquiry ruled out the skirmishing with Iranian gunboat explanation. There are claims that Vincennes was engaged in an operation using a decoy cargo ship to lure Iranian gunboats to a fight.[40] These claims were denied by Fogarty in "Hearing Before The Investigation Subcommittee and The Defense Policy Panel of The Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, One Hundred Second Congress, Second Session, 21 July 1992". Also, the initial claims of Vincennes being called for help by a cargo ship attacked by Iranian gunboats have been ruled out. The navy inquiry basically went with "we checked the actual recordings from the instruments, from other ships and from our intelligence in the area and all of it contradicts the story we got from those dumbasses who decided to shoot down an airliner. We can only conclude that they're fucking morons there was some kind of mass hysteria that caused them to ignore all of the actual information." So you agree that your previous post was wildly inaccurate, yes? No, yours was. You brought up the skirmish with Iranian boats which the Navy ruled wasn't a factor in the wikipedia article you cited. I said that it was for no fucking reason while the wikipedia article said it was some kind of mass hysteria which caused them to ignore all the evidence and shoot it down for no fucking reason. The Flight 655 situation was accurately described by me as a colossal and inexcusable fuckup and was inaccurately defended by you referencing things which were found not to be factors. It doesn't matter that the medals were not explicitly for the incident. Again, let's compare it to a police officer who shot and killed 66 kids because although all his senses were telling him that they were random kids he decided that they were terrorists. If the police force decided to keep that officer on the force and then, at the end of the year, give him a routine community service medal do you think the parents of the 66 children he murdered would accept that it was a medal that reflected his service generally and that his general conduct throughout the year deserved recognition? It doesn't matter if it's a routine medal, if someone kills 290 innocent civilians then not only should you not give him a medal for that specific incident, you should also not give him a medal for his service generally at the time when he was killing civilians. This isn't rocket science. I wasn't defending the incident, but I do think you've characterized it wrong. 1) The plane was shot down because they thought it was a warplane. You know, flying in a war-zone... after the crew had come under fire and was following the ship. Characterizing this as 'for no reason' is a stretch, and characterizing a war-zone as a happy, peaceful school isn't accurate. 2) The crew tried to contact the plane on both military and civilian frequencies. 3) Bush did not say in response that he "doesn't apologize for America, no matter what the facts are." 4) The event was not staged. It was not intentional. Shit Kwark, I don't think a single sentence in that first post was accurate.
The plane was not in a war zone. The plane was in the approved flight corridor for that flight doing an approved flight.
They fired a damn missile at the plane, how much more intentional can you get? They didn't trip and accidentally down a civilian airliner. They deliberately chose to target, attack and destroy what all their systems were reporting was an airliner which was increasing in altitude away from them. There was nothing accidental about that. It was really fucking stupid but it wasn't accidental.
You need to stop being such an American apologist and read the damn wikipedia article. Hell, even the rest of the navy in the area had nothing good to say about the guy who gave the order and noted the numerous times he acted aggressively beyond his mission, often violating the rules of engagement as well as Iranian territorial waters.
|
Listening to OPB (Oregon Public Broadcasting), a student was interviewed regarding black lives matter. He identifies with the group. He was explaining that black people in Portland (PSU, Portland State University) feel silenced. The interviewer asked him when he feels silenced.
He described a situation in a black studies class where his professor asked if students can recall any recent events that are similar to the MLK movement in the 60s. He said the class was quiet. He said that he was FORCED to raise his hand because no one would speak up. He said he then went on to explain the current struggles of black people. He said that because he had to be the one to speak up, he felt incredibly segregated and offended. He was so sad that he had to be the one to speak up. He said that because of this, he felt like his black identity was squelched and that he felt marginalized. He believed that his fellow students should have spoken up and explained the injustices black people face in current america. He was saying how great it is that PSU is establishing a black-only center on campus where black people can "freely express themselves" and "be who they really are without having to conform to white culture". He explained that black people are strained every day by having to not be freely black in society and that these safe places are essential to help black people feel more secure on campus.
Shocked, confused and disappointed, I tried to reflect on the fact that this guy was actually celebrating a black-only center on campus. I realized that the black lives matter movement is beyond saving. What a damn shame. He continued to rant about the fact that few professors are black and how PSU needs to double the number of black professors. Let's just ignore the fact that he is advocating for triple the percentage of PhD graduates be professors, right? Good lord. This movement is a complete joke at this point. They should have stuck to police brutality. They are deranged. So disappointing to see that what could have been a significant movement ended up essentially asking universities to make black-only clubs and hire more black professors.
|
The concept of focusing on race and class identity has been going on in universities for a long time. That black people need their own table to sit at instead of sitting at a table with every other race. As well as a really weird fixation on stopping the concept of free speech on campus's in favor of university approved speech.
|
At this point most social justice is just devolving into who feels the most offended for whatever reason they feel offended . I look forward to when it finally gets the point where different groups of people who feel oppressed face off against one another over who is the most oppressed.
What's great is it's already starting to happen. Not long now until we have Black lives matter facing off against LGBT lives matters or other variations of those two groups.
|
A lot of this dumb shit with the BLM movement (there are some very legitimate, meaningful elements) happens in college. I for one will feel orgasmic schadenfreude when these some of these whiners graduate and hit real life.
|
On December 17 2015 12:09 Mohdoo wrote:
Shocked, confused and disappointed, I tried to reflect on the fact that this guy was actually celebrating a black-only center on campus. I realized that the black lives matter movement is beyond saving. What a damn shame. He continued to rant about the fact that few professors are black and how PSU needs to double the number of black professors. Let's just ignore the fact that he is advocating for triple the percentage of PhD graduates be professors, right? Good lord. This movement is a complete joke at this point. They should have stuck to police brutality. They are deranged. So disappointing to see that what could have been a significant movement ended up essentially asking universities to make black-only clubs and hire more black professors.
BLM sprouting from police brutality is a red herring which shows why the group lost focus so quickly. Police brutality goes to everyone because the cops aren't trained properly. Police training needs to be reformed but black suffering has a more direct source.
Let us take a lesson from Spike Lee's new movie Chi-Raq, which makes the case that blacks, while suffering from police hostility, face a much harsher experience from other blacks. The movie takes place in a section of Chicago where black gangs fight each other over territory and markets, leading to significant black body counts. It is a war zone and only the gang leaders profit. BLM should be targeting gang leaders in places like Chicago if they want to not only save black lives, but improve the quality of black lives throughout cities.
|
On December 17 2015 12:52 Deathstar wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2015 12:09 Mohdoo wrote:
Shocked, confused and disappointed, I tried to reflect on the fact that this guy was actually celebrating a black-only center on campus. I realized that the black lives matter movement is beyond saving. What a damn shame. He continued to rant about the fact that few professors are black and how PSU needs to double the number of black professors. Let's just ignore the fact that he is advocating for triple the percentage of PhD graduates be professors, right? Good lord. This movement is a complete joke at this point. They should have stuck to police brutality. They are deranged. So disappointing to see that what could have been a significant movement ended up essentially asking universities to make black-only clubs and hire more black professors. BLM sprouting from police brutality is a red herring which shows why the group lost focus so quickly. Police brutality goes to everyone because the cops aren't trained properly. Police training needs to be reformed but black suffering has a more direct source. Let us take a lesson from Spike Lee's new movie Chi-Raq, which makes the case that blacks, while suffering from police hostility, face a much harsher experience from other blacks. The movie takes place in a section of Chicago where black gangs fight each other over territory and markets, leading to significant black body counts. It is a war zone and only the gang leaders profit. BLM should be targeting gang leaders in places like Chicago if they want to not only save black lives, but improve the quality of black lives throughout cities.
Every race suffers more race on race death than police on race death. That's not relevant. The issue is that cops kill way, way, way, way too many black people. I fully support the idea of trying to curb police brutality. However, the stuff I described is completely irrational. It killed the entirety of my support for the movement.
|
Poorly conceived college protest and movements are a staple of american culture. Every time someone pulls out the "And then BLM had this college student and they did something dumb" I roll my eyes into the back of my head. But then again uniform movements with no clear leadership or direction have this issue that they can't pick who represents them, so stupid shit like that happens.
|
On December 17 2015 13:56 Plansix wrote:
Poorly conceived college protest and movements are a staple of american culture. Every time someone pulls out the "And then BLM had this college student and they did something dumb" I roll my eyes into the back of my head. But then again uniform movements with no clear leadership or direction have this issue that they can't pick who represents them, so stupid shit like that happens.
It's not like this was a twitter post. It was a 10 minute interview with a local student leader who was instrumental in getting the black club room established. It was broadcasted on Oregon's public radio station which of course also partners with NPR and the like. It is not some fringe publication or something.
|
Everytime I think of BLM I think of those 2 black girls making Bernie look like a castrated weakling in Seattle. BLM lost me then and now I don't care too much for the group so this is all whatever to me. Good luck with their racial progress goals lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
