George Floyd murder / Derek Chauvin guilty of murder

[Bigga]

I see. That's not recent events. That's what I explained to you about 6 pages ago. The first shooting is not new event. There is video of that too.

If you think that's recent events. I had better update you coz you are a little behind.

1. There is tape of the first shooting.

2. Like the second shooting, the first person he shot also was pursuing him. And threw a bag of rubbish at him as RH ran ( just like in the 2nd shootings) This is caught on video.

3. We have a fuller picture now as to what happened prior to the video of Roseburg chasing Rittenhouse.

4. There was a reporter interviewing Rittenhouse before the first shooting. If you watch the first shooting video, he is the guy who took of his shirt to try to help the guy who had been shot.

4. That reporter, has a video on YouTube describng the incident. Btw he is also on the DA witness list.

5. According to him, he was interviewing Rittenhouse when Roseburg and a few others approached Rosenberg tried to grab Rittenhouse gun, Rittenhouse "did a juke move" to Avoid his gun being grabbed turned and started running. Rosenberg gave chase. And the reporter followed.

5. The rest we've seen on video. But according to the reporter he followed RH and RB as RB chased down RH, a gun blast went off and the reporter said he ducked. That original gin blast was not from Rittenhouse who was still running away at the time.

6. At that point you can see Rittenhouse turn and fire 4 shots then run behind the car as Rosenberg slumps.

7. While they were too far to be seen on the video, other eyewitnesses claimed Rosenberg grabbed at the riffle when he caught up to Rittenhouse in the parking lot and Rittenhouse turned to face him before Rittenhouse shot him.

Anyway, those are the most current developments.

There is so much video on the events of that night in Kenosha, that one would really have to be trying hard to not find all the information they need.

Also, perhaps I should note, Rittenhouse didn't carry a weapon over state lines. The gun belonged to a Kenoshan.

Also, I didn't know this but it turns out Rittenhouse actually works in Kenosha and normally hangs out there. Even though he lives 20 minutes away in Illinois, Kenosha is the big city around him.

Anyway, I'll provide you updates as they come in.

I'd have read your post if you'd have understood my words and maybe I will once you understand my post. So, let me explain some English to you (after all, I can't tell if you've finished schooling to be fair).

Here's what I said:

" That would make that "recent events" in comparison to the order the footage came. "

So, again, let me simplify what that means for you. If the first footage shown on BM, for example, is the vid of the guy shooting another, that becomes the first narrative to work off.

If one is a bright person, one would wait to see if other footage appeared before casting a real opinion on the situation as a whole, rather than the snippet available.

So let's look at it like a jigsaw. Let's assume you cannot make a whole picture from a singular jigsaw piece as it could turn out to be anything in the end, but we have that very assumption constantly, from judges like yourself.

Our paths, every so often, will cross where our thinking aligns. I accept that, but your judgement in police shooting or police violence cases, as a whole, is something we will probably never agree on especially when you ignore the police motto "to protect and serve"! So, who are they protecting and who are they serving?

Maybe critical thinking were classes you skipped in education...?

I don't know, but it's boring and I have a LOT of patience...

 

[Bigga]

You just couldn't admit that my "judgements" had serious caveats right from the start. And because of that we had to go down the Bigga Brick Road until you found a way out

Re-read your own posts, not just the one you [poorly] caveated.

 

[Bigga]

I just don't see why we are so keen to import US issues into our own culture - I'm sure we have our own to deal with. I think most people are all for humanity and equality tbh and you are seeking a fight where it largely doesn't exist.

If I'm "seeking a fight" for the betterment for Human beings, so be it.

That would be me fighting for the better treatment of you included, should you have been highlighted on BM and you lived in Outer Mongolia.

You would be the subject matter at hand.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

If I'm "seeking a fight" for the betterment for Human beings, so be it.

That would be me fighting for the better treatment of you included, should you have been highlighted on BM and you lived in Outer Mongolia.

You would be the subject matter at hand.

I appreciate the sentiment, but there is probably a sensible middle ground somewhere between ignoring issues in the US, and seeking to import them into our society just to start a fight. We probably just disagree on exactly where that centre ground lies. For what it's worth I'm rather keen on the idea of black people being treated fairly and not seeing them executed on the streets.

 

[Bigga]

People tend to question their nationality amongst other things when they don't get their own way. It's the frustration that is building up in people and it's spread across all spectrums where eventually no-one is innocent.

On the other side people are saying "I don't recognise my country anymore", "this is a white country", it's an identity and cultural crisis. You potentially have two types of people in America, people who remember the days when black people sat on different sections of the bus, and then people who don't just find that disgusting but feel violent protest is required to argue against anyone who agrees with it.

This is why much of the western world is on the brink of civil war, the change has been so quick and people have struggled to adapt. I agree with the changes, it is disgraceful to even consider to have black people sat in different sections on a bus but there will be older generations who honestly disagree. Then there are sections in society who aren't bothered and will argue against because it's how they were brought up and they feel the 80's or 90's was how society should be because that's how it was for them.

Here in the UK, the massive increase in migration over the last 20 years has seen some feel like we are being invaded. It has challenged peoples views, people who for 30-40 years of their lives barely saw a black person, or a Muslim. Now those people are seeing many on their streets and they feel it's an assault on their identity and their country.

I disagree with any racist view but there is a reason why all of this is happening and it's because traditional human behaviour is to oppose change and view 'unknown' people with suspect. There's no excuse for it but it's ingrained deeply in human nature and it isn't something you can just argue against or type against on Twitter.

So, there's a reason why I agree with you.

I think the flip side of what your talking about is the indoctrination and contradiction of what is cited as 'equality' and what people are told in light of that. These are done for selfish monetary gain purposes.

Let's look at the constant contradiction of the US: One is 'encouraged' to pledge allegiance to the Flag [no matter how it treats you], one should sing the National Anthem [but forget the paragraph that lords slavery], one can look forward to the American Dream [whilst being denied it or forgetting to warn of the American Nightmare].

As 'Founding Fathers', how can one write about 'all men being equal' and yet have a bunch of slaves in your back room as you write those words?

I mean, this is how the US built their country; on a lie. Why would anyone be confused about the state of the US??

There are many versions of these kinds of rules all over the world.

I could write a long post on this, but I will resist the temptation, so I will touch upon things only.

 

[Bigga]

I appreciate the sentiment, but there is probably a sensible middle ground somewhere between ignoring issues in the US, and seeking to import them into our society just to start a fight. We probably just disagree on exactly where that centre ground lies. For what it's worth I'm rather keen on the idea of black people being treated fairly and not seeing them executed on the streets.

Whilst I appreciate your post, it cannot be overstated that there are systemic problems all over the world.

And, yes, whilst there are our own issues to deal with, one cannot think by highlighting an issue of similarity to some demographics (however one can relate), it is "importing" that issue here.

At that point, I would have to disagree with you.

 

[inbetween]

So, there's a reason why I agree with you.

I think the flip side of what your talking about is the indoctrination and contradiction of what is cited as 'equality' and what people are told in light of that. These are done for selfish monetary gain purposes.

Let's look at the constant contradiction of the US: One is 'encouraged' to pledge allegiance to the Flag [no matter how it treats you], one should sing the National Anthem [but forget the paragraph that lords slavery], one can look forward to the American Dream [whilst being denied it or forgetting to warn of the American Nightmare].

As 'Founding Fathers', how can one write about 'all men being equal' and yet have a bunch of slaves in your back room as you write those words?

I mean, this is how the US built their country; on a lie. Why would anyone be confused about the state of the US??

There are many versions of these kinds of rules all over the world.

I could write a long post on this, but I will resist the temptation, so I will touch upon things only.

The funny thing in all of this is some view themselves as patriots however many of these people have no comprehension of history, let alone the view they take on it. History and a country is not defined by the social, cultural norms of the day which is often how extreme nationalists nowadays draw the lines.

The UK for example is a great example of multiple cultures melted together into one big pot. I see myself as British however I see an Indian man born here as equally British as I am. Going and eating fish and chips is as British to me as celebrating Eid with my brother in law. Some so called nationalists see this differently but that is because of their fears and prejudices which are founded in racism, not factual nationalism.

I think we can love our countries, the flags and many aspects of our past but we must respect the right to yes criticise it but also to love it. In previous wars people died for that right, they didn't die for any narrow view of what that flag means or some hopelessness of being bogged down by it's past. Many minorities (Indians, black people and even Muslims) also died fighting for that.

 

[The perfect fumble]

I think we can love our countries, the flags and many aspects of our past but we must respect the right to yes criticise it but also to love it. In previous wars people died for that right, they didn't die for any narrow view of what that flag means or some hopelessness of being bogged down by it's past. Many minorities (Indians, black people and even Muslims) also died fighting for that.

No they didn't.

No war has ever been fought for that.

 

[Bigga]

The funny thing in all of this is some view themselves as patriots however many of these people have no comprehension of history, let alone the view they take on it. History and a country is not defined by the social, cultural norms of the day which is often how extreme nationalists nowadays draw the lines.

The UK for example is a great example of multiple cultures melted together into one big pot. I see myself as British however I see an Indian man born here as equally British as I am. Going and eating fish and chips is as British to me as celebrating Eid with my brother in law. Some so called nationalists see this differently but that is because of their fears and prejudices which are founded in racism, not factual nationalism.

I think we can love our countries, the flags and many aspects of our past but we must respect the right to yes criticise it but also to love it. In previous wars people died for that right, they didn't die for any narrow view of what that flag means or some hopelessness of being bogged down by it's past. Many minorities (Indians, black people and even Muslims) also died fighting for that.

Pretty excellent response, I must say!

 

[Bigga]

No they didn't.

No war has ever been fought for that.

So... What do war vets mean when they say they 'fought for the right for people to be free'...?