George Floyd murder / Derek Chauvin guilty of murder

[Bigga]

All I can do is imagine how i'd feel if I was continously persecuted in the same manner, and in that stance I do find that the reaction is justifable, BUT at the same time I also question the consequences of it or how it affectively brings about the change that is desired wiothout appearing to be a perperator.

Like a father who kills his child's murderer. How is he any better than the situation he was aggrieved by. That's my moral compass at play. From that sense I do understand the frustrations; having to place faith and judgement in a system that has long been opposed to you to bring about a change that should have been implemented from day one according to the system itself!

To sum up my position, I agree and accept that change must happen. Do I approve of and accept the methods beign employed currently to bring about such change? This is where I have an issue. Examples like confronting restauranteurs to "raise the fist" and chastising them if they don't. This is what you're average observer sees (thanks to the media), and it is portrayed as the main message of the movement that turns others off, even when I know it's not the core message.

My anger is portrayed at the false narrative, those who report on it, and the minority of advocates who think they are doing th wider movement a service.

Yes, I get this.

This is why this conversation is not easy. Who is to judge the position of the aggrieved? We can't judge a lost love to another person. I, myself, would raze Hell down should my child be taken away from me by another, badge or no.

I would admire someone's ability to forgive and love them deeply for it, but I don't think I could do it, sadly.

As for the restaurateurs, it bothered me to see the appropriation of 'BLM' taken over to the diners. I was actively looking for Black faces at the front of this crowd.

Was I looking at the wrong video...?

I know people mean well, but I'd much rather White people march with us, not FOR us...

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

We are in agreement here. See not so different afterall :)
I'll disagree slightly on why I get flak. I think it's coz I don't bend the knee to whatever the prevailing view is here when I think a point is wrong. But I'll accept you think otherwise.

But to illustrate my point, let's take your view of what you think I do from above (i.e. I don't acknowledge why actions come about and simply mirror Trump's MO.). Fair enough. Now you've concluded that the kid shouldn't have been there. Period. Yet at no point did you acknowledge why he was there. You have in essence done the very thing you've accused me of doing. I.e defending ( in this case, attacking) one sides actions without acknowledging why it came about.

I point the above out to show you that the claim of not acknowledging (X) or dismissing (Y) is often an argumentation trick. One that can be lobbed at anyyone. Often including those lobbing it.


You are well within your rights to hold any view of Trump. And I'd never ask you to apologise for it. And I even agree with some of those views about Trump.
But the difference between me and many here is that my opinion of Trump seldom clouds my judgment about what the facts are. And when those facts don't support an Anti- Trump conclusion, I don't back down to the twisted viewpoint.
Trump is a politician, so you can always assume he'll say things to suit his agenda.
But here's the fact: 102 of the 175 people arrested were Not from Kenosha. That's not conjecture or supposition. It's a fact.




Again, I have addressed this many times. There is a penchant here for purposely conflating correcting erroneous claims with 'defending' Trump.

Whatever I say about a fact or claim is either true or false. You can objectively reach that conclusion without ever broaching the topic of whether I'm supporting, attacking or defending Trump.

But just to make getting to the facts easier, let's all assume I am defending Trump at all times. So we can all skip the detective work of trying to decipher what I'm doing and simply focus on whether what I've said is right or wrong, and why.

Of you read, most of my responses it follows that factual pattern. I see something I think is wrong, I say it's wrong then give reason for why I believe it's wrong. I am either right or wrong about my claim, the evidence I provided as support or the conclusions I reached.

Again, the point wasn't to believe or disbelieve an assumption. That would be stupid of me. It's an assumption. There is nothing to believe or disbelieve. I am sure you have assumed that in good faith. My only objection was that it was labelled a fact. We both now agree it wasn't. As to the assumption, I'd have concluded the opposite and here's why:

If every known fact about the shooter that night was true about a black kid, he almost definitely would NOT have been shot.

Again, knowing what the facts are is KEY here!

At the risk of being accused of humanizing the shooter, I'd provide some of those facts here.

The cops who were patrolling that night knew almost all the Militia guys. The cops were clearly overwhelmed the first 2 days and there are videos of them giving water to Militia men and thanking them for helping with keeping things calm. There are videos of Militia men talking to reporters about how the cops would funnel protestors away from unguarded places to areas where Militia men were guarding.
There are videos of the shooter getting water thrown to him by cops.
Earlier in the day he was amongst the communty clean up team clearing the debry and grafitti from the prior day's 'protest'. The point of the above statements is to show you the cops knew the Militia men well

Now imagine if there was a black guy in the Militia who had interacted that much with cops and was in essence backups for he cops, he'd be easily the most recognizable of the group and ALL the officer's would know him and definitely would not have been shooting him.

But I admit, you'd have to be aware of these facts to start with. And if you are not, you are more likely to reach the conclusion you have.

Quite comprehensive as usual but your conclusion misses the point of why I bothered writing in the Trump thread in the first place.
In my view that is where it still should reside, not in here where I have no interest in being, as it is a critique of what Trump creates not anything to do with the latest incidents that have provoked a BLM response.

That’s not your fault, however.

Getting back to the point. I’m not having a go at you. I’m not trying to convince you or anyone else in here of anything in particular. That goes for any comment I have made in the Trump thread.

I cannot and have no interest in confirming what you say is fact or anyone else in here contradicting you either for that matter, as it is not really of any interest to me.
I hope that doesn’t come across as rude, as that’s not my intention either.

I just feel from the little bit I’ve read that you tend to get very much involved in minutiae of detail of certain elements of an argument that can very much direct the conversation, quite skilfully at times, away from where your opposite debater wanted to go.

I guess in my own personal post example I am saying that my point is most definitely my view of America not solely from this one event.
It is not solely from getting an American version of the news from CNN, who obviously are not overly fond of Trump. Even I’ve worked that out. But I really couldn’t stomach Fox.

I genuinely do feel empathy for that kid with the rifle as I don’t think he is the product of what I would consider a normal upbringing. I don’t need to know much about him to figure that out.
I have an 18 year old son of my own and the thoughts of him finding himself in a situation like that is just so foreign to me. I just do not understand how that can be normalised in the US.
The thoughts of civilians walking around with guns is totally foreign to me. But that’s America.

I will pass something on to you about something I do know more about.
Take it whatever way you like. Racism and Sectarianism aren’t that far removed from each other and we have plenty of experience of that here in Ireland.
You can pick apart the facts of any incident you like but if you choose to consistently ignore the civil rights of any minority element of your community then you will be met with Peaceful protest.
If you consistently ignore peaceful protest you open the door to more radical elements which will defend their community, rightly or wrongly.

My view is Trump has no allegiance to anyone but himself and no principles and is using his core support to push this issue as he sees it as a way of being re-elected.
I believe he does this not through any particular racism in himself but the recognition of certain traits like that in his core support.
He doesn’t see that he can swing the vote in those that may have been in the fence last time around, so he is mobilising those he can appeal to to create division and chaos.

Chaos suits him and to hell with the consequences to these communities.

I have no interest in convincing anyone in here of this. My contributions are purely voyeuristic and I have no influence to change anything in America, not living there and not having a vote.

So take it or leave it.
To me this this firmly sits in the Trump thread and I don’t have any real interest in where the overall BLM thread is going.

 

[SebastianBlue]

Quite comprehensive as usual but your conclusion misses the point of why I bothered writing in the Trump thread in the first place.
In my view that is where it still should reside, not in here where I have no interest in being, as it is a critique of what Trump creates not anything to do with the latest incidents that have provoked a BLM response.

That’s not your fault, however.

Getting back to the point. I’m not having a go at you. I’m not trying to convince you or anyone else in here of anything in particular. That goes for any comment I have made in the Trump thread.

I cannot and have no interest in confirming what you say is fact or anyone else in here contradicting you either for that matter, as it is not really of any interest to me.
I hope that doesn’t come across as rude, as that’s not my intention either.

I just feel from the little bit I’ve read that you tend to get very much involved in minutiae of detail of certain elements of an argument that can very much direct the conversation, quite skilfully at times, away from where your opposite debater wanted to go.

I guess in my own personal post example I am saying that my point is most definitely my view of America not solely from this one event.
It is not solely from getting an American version of the news from CNN, who obviously are not overly fond of Trump. Even I’ve worked that out. But I really couldn’t stomach Fox.

I genuinely do feel empathy for that kid with the rifle as I don’t think he is the product of what I would consider a normal upbringing. I don’t need to know much about him to figure that out.
I have an 18 year old son of my own and the thoughts of him finding himself in a situation like that is just so foreign to me. I just do not understand how that can be normalised in the US.
The thoughts of civilians walking around with guns is totally foreign to me. But that’s America.

I will pass something on to you about something I do know more about.
Take it whatever way you like. Racism and Sectarianism aren’t that far removed from each other and we have plenty of experience of that here in Ireland.
You can pick apart the facts of any incident you like but if you choose to consistently ignore the civil rights of any minority element of your community then you will be met with Peaceful protest.
If you consistently ignore peaceful protest you open the door to more radical elements which will defend their community, rightly or wrongly.

My view is Trump has no allegiance to anyone but himself and no principles and is using his core support to push this issue as he sees it as a way of being re-elected.
I believe he does this not true any particular racism in himself but the recognition of certain traits like that in his core support.
He doesn’t see that he can swing the vote in those that may have been in the fence last time around, so he is mobilising those he can appeal to to create division and chaos.

Chaos suits him and to hell with the consequences to these communities.

I have no interest in convincing anyone in here of this. My contributions are purely voyeuristic and I have no influence to change anything in America, not living there and not having a vote.

So take it or leave it.
To me this this firmly sits in the Trump thread and I don’t have any real interest in where the overall BLM thread is going.

Just wanted to clarify that the various posts, including yours, were moved because the discussion was and is largely not about Trump but specifically about the Kenosha shootings, and thus the follow up from many different posters had moved the thread off topic and that was a trend not likely to change if the discussion remained in the Trump thread (meaning the thread would have stayed largely off topic, with others struggling to discuss trump as the pages filled with discussion related to the Kenosha Shootings).

It’s a good discussion but this is just the more appropriate thread for the main thrust of it and participation from other posters.

Happy to see you back in the Trump thread otherwise.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

Just wanted to clarify that the various posts, including yours, were moved because the discussion was and is largely not about Trump but specifically about the Kenosha shootings, and thus the follow up from many different posters had moved the thread off topic and that was a trend not likely to change if the discussion remained in the Trump thread (meaning the thread would have stayed largely off topic, with others struggling to discuss trump as the pages filled with discussion related to the Kenosha Shootings).

It’s a good discussion but this is just the more appropriate thread for the main thrust of it and participation from other posters.

Happy to see you back in the Trump thread otherwise.

That’s fine Seb. But as I explained my point whether lost in the amount of detail in the reposte or not was very much embedded in Trump and the election push and where America is now or perhaps is going.

I may cast my observations back in there again occasionally but at a quick glance it is accelerating towards nowhere again, quicker than the Brexit thread.

Maybe back to the transfer forum, but that’s getting even more Messi.

 

[SebastianBlue]

That’s fine Seb. But as I explained my point whether lost in the amount of detail in the reposte or not was very much embedded in Trump and the election push and where America is or perhaps going.

I may cast my observations back in there again occasionally but at a quick glance it is accelerating towards nowhere again, quicker than the Brexit thread.

Maybe back to the transfer forum, but that’s getting even more Messi.

Fair enough, mate. I did see your main points, it was just a judgement call to keep each thread on topic.

And quite a lot of the Politics threads tend to have circular discussions, as each one usually has a core group that are especially interested in the topic, with others popping in, engaging, and moving on. It’s compounded by it being the offseason, with other world events turning people to BM and COVID keeping many from their normal holidays, causing a lot of us be generally bored out of our minds. ;-)

Anyway, see you in the Messy Messi thread.

 

[Dax777]

That’s fine Seb. But as I explained my point whether lost in the amount of detail in the reposte or not was very much embedded in Trump and the election push and where America is now or perhaps is going.

I may cast my observations back in there again occasionally but at a quick glance it is accelerating towards nowhere again, quicker than the Brexit thread.

Maybe back to the transfer forum, but that’s getting even more Messi.

Touche :)

 

[Silva_Spell]

Don't recall you drawing from any source at the point of my reply.

Now you're boring me as you can tell as I respond to you less and less.

I have lost interest in dialogue with you.

yea, because no-one had yet posted an opinion article based upon a specific source.

That's a pity, I was just getting used to looking beyond all the obfuscating and bloviating

 

[Bigga]

yea, because no-one had yet posted an opinion article based upon a specific source.

That's a pity, I was just getting used to looking beyond all the obfuscating and bloviating

At this point you have have clearly lost where you were in the 'discussion' and have been, ironically, "obfuscating and bloviating" for a while trying to spin plates you can't control. You don't make any points that hit home, but rather continue to paw out a jab or two, here and there.

There have been a couple of other posters on here that have brought me to a point where I have to think in other means. That actually interests me.

That's the difference in my having expanded conversations with other people, whilst the likes of yourself and @Dax777 (you have now reverted back to type) lead on to dead ends, the majority of the time.

It's tiresome to keep treading water. It gets boring watching the same scenery. In fact, it gets boring full stop. I'm fooking bored.

Wait...

Yes, I'm officially I'm bored of you.

By all means, though, reply all you want but I would have to exhaust every other aspect of interest to reply back.

 

[Dax777]

I see the disease of resisting arrest is catching on. Even dumb middle aged Mayors can't resist the urge to be stupid. :(

 

[I'm With Stupid]

Another cop suspended for killing someone who was having a mental health episode. His own brother phoned the police for help and that ended up being a death sentence. This is exactly what everyone has been arguing for. The police are called to deal with a naked man running around in the snow. You can't get any more of an obvious mental health problem than that, and yet they're shown to be completely incapable of dealing with it. If just one of those cops was replaced with someone who's actually qualified in that field, then this could have been prevented. And it's not even as if you wouldn't still need to cops there to potentially restrain the man, but the point is that the cops by themselves are often a blunt and completely unsuitable instrument for the job who in many cases get an overwhelming amount of funding compared to things like mental health intervention.

But again, not arrested on suspicion of murder or manslaughter, suspended, for a case in March that has only just come to light and as always, it turns out the police chief blatantly lied about it and tried to cover it up. The most corrupt institution in America.