| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6596 Posts
and it seems like the shop owner herself posted on social media asking for people to come and protect her store because she had heard it would be targeted by vandals. (she didn't follow the coronavirus lockdown and tried to open early) People jumping to a whole lot of conclusions based on a 20 second clip which looks pretty bad in the 20 second edit but the full thing makes way more sense and seems much less sinister. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23669 Posts
On June 06 2020 05:06 Mohdoo wrote: People are saying police are tone deaf. They aren't. They are holding tighter to their unjust grip on power. They are scoundrels. It is sickening to see. Typically I laugh about the absurdity of this stuff, because crying over the futility of getting people giving a damn is just depressing but I feel like there's something about a mild case of police brutality happening to an old white man that really resonates with people. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28747 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15742 Posts
On June 06 2020 05:16 GreenHorizons wrote: Typically I laugh about the absurdity of this stuff, because crying over the futility of getting people giving a damn is just depressing but I feel like there's something about a mild case of police brutality happening to an old white man that really resonates with people. Yes, it is interesting to see people saying "Ok, enough is enough" after that. | ||
|
Dav1oN
Ukraine3164 Posts
Police violence isn't something new, it's a horrible widespread fenomena. Yes, changes obviously must happen to the local police force. Disbanding is a recipe for apocalypse, modern human civilisation has no clue how to sustain peacefully without such force. Who will combat generic crimes instead, who will investigate it all? Damaging/looting shops in your city/town is not a solution, this makes things worse, it can backfire in many unpredictable ways. Protesting in front of governmental institutions/police department is a better choice rather then marching/blocking the streets without any particular strategy/idea how to change the current situation and as a result - causing even more social problems then before. Once again, imo - the main reason is social inequality, and it's not like no one knows about it, just take a look at LA in recent years. Well, and having many ghettos also does not help in unifying the country | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
On June 06 2020 05:06 OmniEulogy wrote: To back Travis up a bit here, full video can be seen here: https://www.facebook.com/jared.richert/videos/10222653771794061/?d=n and it seems like the shop owner herself posted on social media asking for people to come and protect her store because she had heard it would be targeted by vandals. (she didn't follow the coronavirus lockdown and tried to open early) People jumping to a whole lot of conclusions based on a 20 second clip which looks pretty bad in the 20 second edit but the full thing makes way more sense and seems much less sinister. Honestly, it doesn't matter that she asked for them to be there. It just means they weren't trespassing. The issue is that police treated a group of armed proto-Nazis much better than they did peaceful protestors a block or two away. People from the area are saying that it's common knowledge that it was the proud boys (especially as the area is something of a political hotspot, given the owner's decision to re-open against the Governor's orders), and I see no reason why the police wouldn't have known. If they really didn't know(99% chance they did), that doesn't make it much better - it means that they treat armed people better, and sends a message that everyone should go to the protests armed. On June 06 2020 05:20 Mohdoo wrote: Yes, it is interesting to see people saying "Ok, enough is enough" after that. Honestly, I think people are shocked to see how poorly the police are treating EVERYONE at these protests. Everyone knows there are some racist cops, so it (sadly) is no longer really that shocking to see a cop beat a black person out of the way needlessly. An old white guy who was clearly no threat, though? | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23669 Posts
On June 06 2020 05:23 Nevuk wrote: Honestly, it doesn't matter that she asked for them to be there. It just means they weren't trespassing. The issue is that police treated a group of armed proto-Nazis much better than they did peaceful protestors a block or two away. People from the area are saying that it's common knowledge that it was the proud boys (especially as the area is something of a political hotspot, given the owner's decision to re-open against the Governor's orders), and I see no reason why the police wouldn't have known. If they really didn't know(99% chance they did), that doesn't make it much better - it means that they treat armed people better, and sends a message that everyone should go to the protests armed. Honestly, I think people are shocked to see how poorly the police are treating EVERYONE at these protests. Everyone knows there are some racist cops, so it (sadly) is no longer really that shocking to see a cop beat a black person out of the way needlessly. An old white guy who was clearly no threat, though? I think I actually saw a clip of the shock real time + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6596 Posts
On June 06 2020 05:19 Liquid`Drone wrote: I mean it still features the segment where he is talking to them and saying 'we're really going to enforce the city wide curfew and it would be good if you guys are somewhere where it's not a violation so it looks like we're not playing favorites'. It gives context to why the guys are there, it does not give context to why the police officer feels these people should be favored over regular protesters. You're right, absolutely. Although I would argue it is the police's job in that situation to try to defuse any potential problems before they start. I would hope the police would also be telling the protesters to clear out before curfew as well which is an assumption on my end sadly and if they didn't do that you're absolutely right they are playing favourites. But it's hard to condemn them for trying to get people off the streets and out of their way in advance, especially when those people are armed and probably way too willing to shoot some people who come too close to the store. edit: I suppose this is a good enough response to you as well Nevuk xD | ||
|
Trainrunnef
United States601 Posts
On June 06 2020 05:06 OmniEulogy wrote: To back Travis up a bit here, full video can be seen here: https://www.facebook.com/jared.richert/videos/10222653771794061/?d=n and it seems like the shop owner herself posted on social media asking for people to come and protect her store because she had heard it would be targeted by vandals. (she didn't follow the coronavirus lockdown and tried to open early) People jumping to a whole lot of conclusions based on a 20 second clip which looks pretty bad in the 20 second edit but the full thing makes way more sense and seems much less sinister. actually if you listen (at least from what I can hear) it sounds like the officer is happy they are there to protect the property, and wanted them there. My understanding of the context is that the officer had full intention of letting the proud boys be there to protect the property whether inside or out, but that by asking the "big favor" of them going inside cars or the stores, and playing the "semantics" game the department wouldn't have to look like they were playing favorites and leaving them out past curfew to protect the property. the full context is actually rather worse, maybe less "sinister" and obvious in its intention, but much more clearly defines how far they are willing to go to play sides without looking like they are playing sides. My 2c FWIW. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15742 Posts
On June 06 2020 05:23 Dav1oN wrote: Damaging/looting shops in your city/town is not a solution, this makes things worse, it can backfire in many unpredictable ways. Protesting in front of governmental institutions/police department is a better choice rather then marching/blocking the streets without any particular strategy/idea how to change the current situation and as a result - causing even more social problems then before. It is important to continue pointing out that this is not true. The most relevant example is the Civil Rights Act being passed after 6 days of riots when MLK was assassinated. History is full of examples where progress has been ripped from the hands of oppressors in a very rowdy way. | ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9175 Posts
Now to play devil's advocate, there is a slim chance that even though that's what his words mean, the cop in question and the unit he represents do not feel that way and only used the camaraderie angle to manipulate that group into going inside and not being a problem. However, that none of you are arguing this and instead are doing the whole 'let's pretend we forgot everything about linguistics' shtick just like with all lives matter is incredibly lazy. | ||
|
Dav1oN
Ukraine3164 Posts
On June 06 2020 05:33 Mohdoo wrote: It is important to continue pointing out that this is not true. The most relevant example is the Civil Rights Act being passed after 6 days of riots when MLK was assassinated. History is full of examples where progress has been ripped from the hands of oppressors in a very rowdy way. History is full of lessons indeed. Although I have hard time to imagine it goes this way in modern America. | ||
|
Trainrunnef
United States601 Posts
On June 06 2020 05:33 Dan HH wrote: In that context, "so we don't look like we're playing favorites" can only mean one thing and that is: if your group was to violate curfew we wouldn't want to treat you like we do the protesters so you better go inside as to avoid displaying that. Now to play devil's advocate, there is a slim chance that even though that's what his words mean, the cop in question and the unit he represents do not feel that way and only used the camaraderie angle to manipulate that group into going inside and not being a problem. However, that none of you are arguing this and instead are doing the whole 'let's pretend we forgot everything about linguistics' shtick just like with all lives matter is incredibly lazy. Completely agree that its possible, but in the face of how the police are treating unarmed protesters for not obeying curfews, using the kid gloves on the armed civilians flouting the curfew laws just reeks of actually playing favorites. Shit is wild out there. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23669 Posts
On June 06 2020 05:41 Dav1oN wrote: History is full of lessons indeed. Although I have hard time to imagine it goes this way in modern America. I do think there is some value in this in that it denotes just how far right the Democrat party has gone since then. There's nothing remotely as bold on the national scene to address the clear and indisputable police brutality pandemic. Last I heard they were talking about voting for Biden and going on vacation? | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On June 06 2020 05:23 Nevuk wrote: Honestly, it doesn't matter that she asked for them to be there. It just means they weren't trespassing. The issue is that police treated a group of armed proto-Nazis much better than they did peaceful protestors a block or two away. How do you know that? | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15742 Posts
It seems we have stumbled onto the issue in this discussion. Proudboys involvement as neonazis is well understood to many people on this board Proudboys involvement with Oregon police is well understood to many people on this board Oregon police interactions with Oregon protestors is well understood to many people on this board You are clearly extremely uninformed and have no context. Because of that, you are wildly confused by what feels like an assumption to you. It is not our job to spoon feed you basic information that has been discussed not only here but many other places for quite some time. To further iterate: It is not our job to bring you up to speed. You are not our pupil. It isn't appropriate for you to sit here demanding information be given to you. | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
I've been reading accounts of people from the area. Obviously not total proof, though (2nd hand accounts that could be faked, mostly just have to verify that they're all saying similar things). I think some people in the thread are from there? I think GH and Mohdo are in the pacific NW. I'm starting to read some conflicting information on the distance (some say this area was really far from the protests, some say it was a couple blocks. Not necessarily contradictory, as to some people 2 blocks is a long way, and a couple can mean like, 20 to others). Sorry about any misinformation there. It's definitely true that it was different from how the peaceful protestors in the city have been treated on average (there's plenty of photographic proof and arrest records as proof of that). | ||
FlaShFTW
United States10325 Posts
On June 06 2020 04:09 travis wrote: Where is the part where he said all of those extra words, and where is the part where you know how he interacts with and what conversations he has had with other protestors? Where did he say anything about tear gas? The tear gas part seems so important so I must just be dumb and missed it. So far, the only thing I have seen is a 20 second video where one man is saying completely reasonable things to some other people. Then on the top the of the video it says that he is saying things that isn't in the video. That's the only thing I have seen yet. Well, other than the other video which also included a bunch of men talking about completely reasonable stuff. It seems, from your viewpoint and your need for evidence, which is commendable btw, that you take beyond a reasonable doubt very seriously and literally. That being said, I think you are asking for more evidence than is required. Of course if you asked the officer that he would tell you this was standard procedure and there was no bias. Are you going to trust his word? When someone says that they are playing favorites, you ask for evidence that they treated the protestors one block away the same. The problem with this is that through the countless pieces of evidence in the past week, it is clear that the police, for the most part, do not care about the wellbeing of the protestors. If anything, they want excuses to arrest them and put them in jail. When you add up all the evidence against the police and how they treat the protestors, it seems like a very reasonable approach to say that the police here are showing favoritism and that yes, they are biased and treating them better than the protestors. Beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean if you have any doubt that someone is innocent, it means that if you have some doubt that is seemingly very unlikely, that you still rule a verdict of guilty. The evidence laid before you clearly proves clear and convincing evidence, and I believe it clears beyond a reasonable doubt. How much evidence do you need to find these actions reprehensible? | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On June 06 2020 05:55 Mohdoo wrote: It seems we have stumbled onto the issue in this discussion. Proudboys involvement as neonazis is well understood to many people on this board Proudboys involvement with Oregon police is well understood to many people on this board Oregon police interactions with Oregon protestors is well understood to many people on this board You are clearly extremely uninformed and have no context. Because of that, you are wildly confused by what feels like an assumption to you. It is not our job to spoon feed you basic information that has been discussed not only here but many other places for quite some time. I believe in proving guilt, not the other way around. I find most of you disturbing. To further iterate: It is not our job to bring you up to speed. You are not our pupil. It isn't appropriate for you to sit here demanding information be given to you. Demanding? You mean when I ask questions like normal people do in debate and discussion? Just as all of you have done for literally thousands of pages of posts? There seems to be very little good faith discussion to be found here. I suspect you will all continue to confirm your beliefs with each other indefinitely. It's clear that most who disagree with the various consensuses have realized it's a waste of time to be here (or have been banned). I do wish you all well though! | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3304 Posts
| ||
| ||
|
|
Monday Night Weeklies
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
The PondCast
KCM Race Survival
Replay Cast
Ultimate Battle
Light vs ZerO
Replay Cast
CranKy Ducklings
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
