George Floyd dies after police knelt on his neck (MOD NOTE IN POST #1)

Outlaw Pete

joe40 wrote: »

The farmers in Dublin weren't tear gassed or shot with rubber bullets.

They were pepperballed because they were being aggressive, throwing missiles etc - that's not "peaceful" protesting.

Don't recall the farmers behaving in a similar manner. Any footage?

joe40

2u2me wrote: »

Gen z are 'virtue signalling' apparently on 'tiktok'. They want to disown their parents. You have democrats and celebrities funding looter's bail. You have the media and activists promoting violence.
Everyone is losing trust in the police and they no longer want to turn up.
There is no clear agenda.

If they don't have a civil war they might be lucky if the mafia takes over.



https://www.insider.com/tiktok-george-floyd-black-lives-matter-teens-parents-racist-views-2020-6

Seriously, teenagers disagreeing with their parents....
That means the US heading for civil war.

2u2me

joe40 wrote: »

Seriously, teenagers disagreeing with their parents....
That means the US heading for civil war.

How does a civil war begin?

joe40

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

They were pepperballed because they were being aggressive, throwing missiles etc - that's not "peaceful" protesting.

Don't recall the farmers behaving in a similar manner. Any footage?

Plenty of the BLM protests were not engaging in violence, but were still attacked by police. Events outside Whitehouse were perfect example.

2u2me

What's happening now at the NYT was seen at gamer-gate, Atheism plus, Evergreen college, Ravelry, the knitting forum, Young Adult Fiction, Romance Fiction, is happening nationwide in the U.S.

https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1268390818173325312?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1268390818173325312&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.boards.ie%2Fvbulletin%2Fshowthread.php%3Ft%3D2058063402%26page%3D59

joe40

2u2me wrote: »

How does a civil war begin?

They're all unique and complex. Stroppy teenagers aren't usually the cause.

Carfacemandog

weldoninhio wrote: »

I believe she felt threatened when the man called her dog over and stated “I’m going to do something that you are not going to like”.

Despite the fact that the guy clearly wants to keep a distance between himself and her, stating "please don't come close to me" at the start of thed video, what I asked was if you think she was correct to call the cops and tell them "there is an African American man threatening my life"?

weldoninhio wrote: »

You said “Trump supporters began threatening to boycott the league over players kneeling for the anthem (despite peaceful protest being a 1st amendment right)“ as if they were somehow impinging on CK’s first amendment rights.

And so I never said what you claimed. Nobody stopped the anti protesters from threatening to boycott, as is their first amendment right. The league did however stop the players from protesting, as in kind is their first amendment right.

People who were opposed to this peaceful protesting from the players that over the last two weeks have made claims along the line of "why can't they just protest peacefully, I would be perfectly ok with that" do however deserve to be called out on their hypocrisy as they very much did have an issue with peaceful protesting when that is all it was.

The NFL seem to be very aware of how bad the optics on this are in hindsight with all that has transpired in the past fortnight, hence their official apology yesterday.

joseywhales

2u2me wrote: »

Gen z are 'virtue signalling' apparently on 'tiktok'. They want to disown their parents. You have democrats and celebrities funding looter's bail. You have the media and activists promoting violence.
Everyone is losing trust in the police and they no longer want to turn up.
There is no clear agenda.

If they don't have a civil war they might be lucky if the mafia takes over.



https://www.insider.com/tiktok-george-floyd-black-lives-matter-teens-parents-racist-views-2020-6

Sounds like 20% of teenagers , we have all ranted about leaving home at some point or some other such teenage outcry, now we just have more social media. Every generation rails against their parents conservatism.

Medical equipment is not weaponry, it does not imply that the owner is preparing to create violence, it is an insurance plan, should we destroy the red cross?

joseywhales

You won't have a revolution unless it's a military coup, the civilians are so out powered they only way they could change things is politically.

Carfacemandog

2u2me wrote: »

Why would they have a medical tent set up if they were peaceful protestors?

Probably because the police have been attacking peaceful protesters quite regularly over the last few weeks, including the media, medical staff, elected government officials, and members of thd clergy.

I'm not saying all the protesters are well intentioned, but all of the police certainly are not either and there have been ample footage of examples of each.

If I were organising a peaceful protest in the US right now, I would definitely be looking to have medical assistance on hand.

2u2me

joseywhales wrote: »

should we destroy the red cross?

If they set up behind a terrorist organization absolutely.

joe40

2u2me wrote: »

If they set up behind a terrorist organization absolutely.

What terrorist organization are you talking about.

2u2me

joe40 wrote: »

What terrorist organization are you talking about.

It's a hypothetical question. If the red cross set up behind a terrorist organization I would have no problem them being shut down.

joe40

Carfacemandog wrote: »

Probably because the police have been attacking peaceful protesters quite regularly over the last few weeks, including the media, medical staff, elected government officials, and members of thd clergy.

I'm not saying all the protesters are well intentioned, but all of the police certainly are not either and there have been ample footage of examples of each.

If I were organising a peaceful protest in the US right now, I would definitely be looking to have medical assistance on hand.

Or even just been a journalist covering it.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/06/george-floyd-protests-reporters-press-teargas-arrested

Freedom of the press is a fundamental pillar of democracy around the world.

joseywhales

2u2me wrote: »

It's a hypothetical question. If the red cross set up behind a terrorist organization I would have no problem them being shut down.

It's your hypothetical question that you answered yourself. I just asked if you would destroy the red cross.

2u2me

joe40 wrote: »

They're all unique and complex. Stroppy teenagers aren't usually the cause.

https://twitter.com/MNateShyamalan/status/1268694072060936195



https://twitter.com/natamoo/status/1269141946540396544

https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1269122664855199745

2u2me

joseywhales wrote: »

It's your hypothetical question that you answered yourself. I just asked if you would destroy the red cross.

I thought you were reasonable josey, my opinion has now changed.

You asked me a hypothetical question.

joseywhales wrote: »

should we destroy the red cross?

It was your hypothetical question. Hypothetical questions get hypothetical answers.

joseywhales

I feel like there are three key points that not all law enforcement have at the core of their service.

1.) They are employed by the people to serve all the people including those they may feel are bad people.

2.) Their word is not the law. Because they request something or issue an order, it is not unlawful to disobey that order. For example I would not let a police officer into my house no matter how much he demands it and him entering would be unlawful.

3.) Use minimum effective force to uphold the law. It is not a police officers job to control by intimidation or overuse of force, in fact the opposite is true, their job is to illicit willfull compliance to the law where possible.

I suppose it is just human nature that the perceived authority goes to your head but they need to be checked.

*Warrant withstanding

joe40

2u2me wrote: »

https://twitter.com/MNateShyamalan/status/1268694072060936195



https://twitter.com/natamoo/status/1269141946540396544

https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1269122664855199745

What is your point, two people having an argument with their family.
Sounds like a typical Saturday in my house.

joseywhales

2u2me wrote: »

I thought you were reasonable josey, my opinion has now changed.

You asked me a hypothetical question.



It was your hypothetical question. Hypothetical questions get hypothetical answers.

Your hypothetical question was would you destroy the red cross if they were set up behind a terrorist organisation. That was not my question clearly.

Your feelings about me are irrelevant, I respect you as a human

2u2me

joe40 wrote: »

What is your point

We are seeing a breakdown in society on the level of the family. Gen Z have largely been indoctrinated by education which has been flooded with intersectionality.

They are being told to disown their families.

I think that is disgusting. What do you think?
We are seeing a flip to a shaming culture play out before our very eyes.

iguana

2u2me wrote: »

How does a civil war begin?

Not usually by teenagers disagreeing with their parents. My political views formed along a very similar line to my parents' but when I was young I still managed to have huge arguments with them because they weren't radical enough for me. It's a normal part of growing up, unfortunately today's social media can make it something much bigger than it really is, but it's the family relationships that has the worst impact on, not it's likelihood to start a war.

However, America has radical elements on both sides. I am constantly wondering what all of the nutjobs with assault rifles are doing right now. The state's measures to protect people from a deadly virus sparked enough outrage in them to have them storm Michigan's Capitol building brandishing their big guns. How close are we to even one of those people snapping and escalating the unrest to a whole new level? We saw what happened to the nutter with the crossbow last week but someone armed like Stephen Paddock was would be a completely different matter. It just takes one heavily armed person to snap to potentially turn this into something unimaginably worse. Not necessarily a civil war because I firmly the believe the majority of people in the US aren't that polarised. But still something awful.

joe40

2u2me wrote: »

We are seeing a breakdown in society on the level of the family. Gen Z have largely been indoctrinated by education which has been flooded with intersectionality.

They are being told to disown their families.

I think that is disgusting. What do you think?
We are seeing a flip to a shaming culture play out before our very eyes.

I teach in a large secondary school with 1600 teenagers, the reality is nothing like you have described.

I think there is still a large disconnect between the noise on social media and reality.

Padre_Pio

jibber5000 wrote: »

Providing employment for minorities living in America is such a terrible thing.

Build that wall.

2u2me

joe40 wrote: »

I teach in a large secondary school with 1600 teenagers, the reality is nothing like you have described.

I think there is still a large disconnect between the noise on social media and reality.

The only reason I'm so vocal is because I saw this play out before my eyes before. I was an avid gamer going back 22 years ago, particularly good in one RTS game, I became heavily involved in gaming communities.
There I saw the problems with calling everyone sexist: gamergate. It ruined gaming communities, the culture between gamers and developers...etc..became toxic and remains so to this day.

Then I was involved in a community "New Atheism" which unfortunately also became about intersectionality, and eroded to "Atheism +" a shadow of it's former self.

I have seen it play out at Evergreen college.
It's happening right now to The New York Times.

The reality is that this happens time and time at the most liberal institutions and this time I believe it is playing out also on a nation stage.

joe40

iguana wrote: »

Not usually by teenagers disagreeing with their parents. My political views formed along a very similar line to my parents' but when I was young I still managed to have huge arguments with them because they weren't radical enough for me. It's a normal part of growing up, unfortunately today's social media can make it something much bigger than it really is, but it's the family relationships that has the worst impact on, not it's likelihood to start a war.

However, America has radical elements on both sides. I am constantly wondering what all of the nutjobs with assault rifles are doing right now. The state's measures to protect people from a deadly virus sparked enough outrage in them to have them storm Michigan's Capitol building brandishing their big guns. How close are we to even one of those people snapping and escalating the unrest to a whole new level? We saw what happened to the nutter with the crossbow last week but someone armed like Stephen Paddock was would be a completely different matter. It just takes one heavily armed person to snap to potentially turn this into something unimaginably worse. Not necessarily a civil war because I firmly the believe the majority of people in the US aren't that polarised. But still something awful.

Yes I agree with that. I don't think conditions exist for a civil war, but with the number of heavily armed right wing militia types on the streets the possibility of a mass shooting event is very real. Like the bow and arrow guy you mentioned.

joseywhales

For what it's worth I am living in the us and I am feeling the social pressure to participate in peaceful protest but I am undecided because I have watched the demands made in my city and they are unrealistic. It's blm mixed with free health and education and everything else we ever wanted. It's not focused, not clear enough. Defunding police and funding social programs added in now. I just don't see the impact there. Now increase inheritance tax to break generational wealth and I see an impact but that's just me.

Christy42

2u2me wrote: »

The only reason I'm so vocal is because I saw this play out before my eyes before. I was an avid gamer going back 22 years ago, particularly good in one RTS game, I became heavily involved in gaming communities.
There I saw the problems with calling everyone sexist: gamergate. It ruined gaming communities, the culture between gamers and developers...etc..became toxic and remains so to this day.

Then I was involved in a community "New Atheism" which unfortunately also became about intersectionality, and eroded to "Atheism +" a shadow of it's former self.

I have seen it play out at Evergreen college.
It's happening right now to The New York Times.

The reality is that this happens time and time at the most liberal institutions and this time I believe it is playing out also on a nation stage.

Gaming was and is famously toxic long before gamer Gate outside of some smaller communities. Many gamers are nice but it is an area that allows ***hats to flourish. Nothing to do with calling people sexist (though many women do avoid identifying themselves simply to avoid abuse).

We see similar in buffalo. Police are taking action to protest for their right to shove over old men. That culture didn't pop up because of the protests. It was there already. A light has been cast over it now which is better than letting it fester.

2u2me

joseywhales wrote: »

For what it's worth I am living in the us and I am feeling the social pressure to participate in peaceful protest but I am undecided because I have watched the demands made in my city and they are unrealistic. It's blm mixed with free health and education and everything else we ever wanted. It's not focused, not clear enough. Defunding police and funding social programs added in now. I just don't see the impact there. Now increase inheritance tax to break generational wealth and I see an impact but that's just me.

Agree yet I'm starting to consider many of the activists don't want reform, I wish that were the focus.

James Lindsay (of the grievance studies affairs- working on this a long time) says that it always happens the same way.

• 1) pack the court with enough sympathizers (~15% is enough)
• 2) find or manufacture precipitating event
• 3) RAISE HOLY HELL about it
• 4) divide and conquer: racists vs. antiracists with no neutral allowed (on team racist)
• 5) press until owned or dead.

A greater distinction between what is actually racist would help a lot. Too many people are being thrown into the racist category. Slogan's like 'ally or enemy' 'white silence is violence' are pretty inflammatory and I believe are not helping the situation. One's opinions are labelled as the enemy, even if they also support the cause, although with a bit of nuance.
Have you heard of Bret Weinstein, do you know what happened to him?
(I take back what I said earlier and apologize)

2u2me

Christy42 wrote: »

. A light has been cast over it now which is better than letting it fester.

I'd say it's more dumping a tanker load of gasoline onto a single lighting match and wondering why you have no hair left.


1/4million likes from this tweet. 80k reteweets. I'm not on twitter but this is substantial right. Someone posted up a link to police reform stating that was the protestors goals few days ago, that tweet had 1k likes.
https://twitter.com/bonexreader/status/1268620915127906305