Police often have to make split-second, life and death decisions — NOS4A2

Or 8 minute life and death decisions apparently.

I do not think we can deduce racism as a cause of death from the mere fact of the skin-colors of those involved, especially with the myriad other important situational factors of any police interaction. — NOS4A2

Face it, the life of a black person is not esteemed in the same way that the life of a white person is. The ideology of equity is not upheld.

They use to be Operation Coldfront. If you look through their youtube archives they're actually doing journalism/reporting and they report antifa assaults on numerous occasions (some of these are captured on camera). Are you really going to try to push the thesis that the far left just never gets out of hand? Are you really ready to die on the hill that the far left just doesn't assault journalists, ever? What are they, saints? — BitconnectCarlos

I never pushed that. I'm denying your allegation that Antifa as a group goes out of its way to target journalists. Apart from your really, really low standard of what consitutes a journalist. And let's put things in perspective here: https://www.rcfp.org/black-lives-matter-press-freedom/

Once again, the police is a bigger threat than untrained civilians.

if you're fine with mobs initiating violence against people - in this case a physically small gay minority - then I don't know what else to say here. I guess we can move on. — BitconnectCarlos

Yeah, he was totally hit for being gay and that's naturally the reason I'm not shedding any tears for him getting hit in the face! :brow:

I don't think Andy Ngo is blameless; a person that goes out of his way to pesker others, most likely even in illegal ways, precisely to get someone to do something illegal so he can push his "Antifa means the end of the USA" bullshit pretty much had it coming. Him being gay and conservative are totally irrelevant - it's about his behaviour. Don't act outraged if you actually get punched in the face when the subtext always was "punch me in the face" (so I can milk it and lie about it afterwards).

My general target here is really just the militant far left. — BitconnectCarlos

And that barely exists pace every FBI report on the issue since the mid 1990s. The FBI recognises that the threat of "right wing" domestic terrorism is much larger than that of "left wing" terrorism.

Of course, we'll see the numbers of "left wing" terrorism blow up as long as Trump remains in office, as a result of him and Barr classifying vandalism during BLM as domestic terrorism. I trust you're not falling for that sleight of hand.

I've never associated the far left with white supremacy or patriotism. — BitconnectCarlos

I know you didn't. So you agree the actual threat to the USA are far right extremists?

And that barely exists pace every FBI report on the issue since the mid 1990s. The FBI recognises that the threat of "right wing" domestic terrorism is much larger than that of "left wing" terrorism. — Benkei

Yet it acknowledges the threat.

And as the FBI defines some animal rights groups and environmental groups as terrorist groups/criminal organization just as right-wing militias, the US authorities are quite unbiased and non-aligned in how they approach any group that thinks violence and breaking the law is justified. Which I think is a good thing. And which many staunchly partisan Americans hate, because for them only one side is a threat. This non-aligned approach is evident in the testimony of the FBI director Christopher Wray (from a year ago). He does admit that there are several terrorism investigation towards people that define themselves to be Antifa:



Just to give an example how the FBI really follows this approach that director Wray above tries to explain to the partisan crowd on Capitol Hill, here's a quote from few years ago (from FBI webpage):

In recent years, the Animal Liberation Front and the Earth Liberation Front have become the most active criminal extremist elements in the United States. Despite the destructive aspects of ALF and ELF's operations, their stated operational philosophy discourages acts that harm "any animal, human and nonhuman." In general, the animal rights and environmental extremist movements have adhered to this mandate. Beginning in 2002, however, this operational philosophy has been overshadowed by an escalation in violent rhetoric and tactics, particularly within the animal rights movement. Individuals within the movement have discussed actively targeting food producers, biomedical researchers, and even law enforcement with physical harm. But even more disturbing is the recent employment of improvised explosive devices against consumer product testing companies, accompanied by threats of more, larger bombings and even potential assassinations of researchers, corporate officers and employees.

The various kinds of terrorists we have:

Ah yes, the Animal Liberation Front and Nazis, basically the same

Do black lives matter? — creativesoul

The fancy, intellectual sounding Latin phrase escapes me at present but in short this is a trick question.

A person's life matters by content of character and not color of skin. Period. MLK said that. Someone who is vile, a menace to their own neighborhood and society as a whole, who happens to be black, does not get a "free pass" of their life automatically having value due to race- that's racist. Especially if that person decides to become a violent gang member who does nothing but terrorize their own community and play into the hands of those who would see black people enslaved and forever in chains that are socioeconomic rather than physical.

I don't see how talking about black lives being lost in larger numbers just because we're not using racial conflict to stigmatize another nation we're not fond of is "changing the subject" of black lives having value. Why do you? I get this is a largely non-American site but come on guy, don't be so transparent with it.

What about other minorities in America who don't have the numbers to shut down entire metropolitan areas when someone who looks like them is killed?

I'm sure we're familiar with the fact that a slight majority of people killed by police are white (52%) while blacks who are killed are 32% of fatalities. And of course the fact that with only 13% of the population that is grossly disproportionate (black Americans are about 3x likely to be killed that white Americans).

As usual we're spending all our time, energy, and emotion on the symptom of a problem rather than the cause- and there are some people who want nothing less- because then nothing will change. There is a cultural problem in black communities and what has been fed to them as "this is my culture". Unless you have a time machine and can go back in time and prevent slavery, there's no point in getting upset over what happened to the point you riot, commit violent crimes, destroy your own neighborhoods, and then get felony charges that essentially cripple you socially for the remainder of your life if you're not locked up for the rest of it- like some people want! Do you agree or disagree?

Guy, you don't have to be my buddy it just would seem from the position you attempt to convey on this forum you should at least be a friend to positive change (or simple logic) versus the same old status quo which as shown has failed time and time again to change anything for the better. Fix the culture, lose the violent music, embrace faith, education, and the law, and participate in the system that by intent makes all men equal- yes even if it's corrupt. You can't fix it from the outside- especially if in jail or with dozens of felonies. Choice is yours.

Someone who is vile, a menace to their own neighborhood and society as a whole, who happens to be black, does not get a "free pass" of their life automatically having value due to race- that's racist. — Outlander

I don't think you're interpreting it correctly. The message broadcast by police brutality and murder is that the police can get away with it because black lives don't matter. However you might assess events on the ground, that's an impression shared by many blacks and whites: that black people are disposable, and that the only reason some cops are being held accountable is that cell phones can be used as video cameras.

So the slogan is a response to that.

What about other minorities in America who don't have the numbers to shut down entire metropolitan areas when someone who looks like them is killed? — Outlander

I understand this sentiment, but there's another way to look at it: there's no way to hold up everybody's cause at the same time. Lift your hands up for whoever is getting attention now. You know?

Fix the culture, lose the violent music, embrace faith, education, and the law, and participate in the system that by intent makes all men equal- yes even if it's corrupt. You can't fix it from the outside- especially if in jail or with dozens of felonies. Choice is yours. — Outlander

Makes sense, but we can also look at why so many people feel like giving up on the system. A lot of people think the whole thing needs a seismic adjustment.

Face it, the life of a black person is not esteemed in the same way that the life of a white person is. The ideology of equity is not upheld.

Perhaps you can name a victim from another race that produced riots and state funerals and massive corporate advertising campaigns. I can watch a video of a caucasian kid dying in nearly the exact same way as George Floyd. No riots, no international outcry, no renaming of buildings named after David Hume to his name, no protests.

Since you claim to know, and based on your pattern-reading, can you paraphrase a single racist belief or principle he holds? — NOS4A2

That's not how belief systems work... racist ones notwithstanding, but since you asked...


He single-handedly used the powers of the presidency to keep confederate monuments in public space while simultaneously(within weeks anyway) using those same powers to end the hard fought for and won federal efforts at implementing socio-economic equity in both public and private enterprise. That move preserves, glorifies, values, and honors racist parts of American history, while singlehandedly reversing - and thus, fighting against - a centuries long progress on racial justice reform.

He openly and publicly degrades, discredits, and/or vehemently denounces those who exercise their right to peaceful protest when and if those protests are about racial injustice while simultaneously offering his personal support and/or defense to an individual that murdered otherwise peaceful protestors involved in that movement.

He moves to interrupt peaceful demonstrations if and when they are about racial injustice reform, but makes no such moves to interrupt white supremacist demonstrations, all the while calling individual protestors of the former all sorts of negative names, and the latter "good people".

He does not - perhaps cannot - even acknowledge that the current movement is not against law and order. Those protestors are all for law and order:They want equal treatment under the law. They want law and order to work for blacks(and other non whites) the same way that it works for whites.

When someone is suspected and/or charged with a crime, and/or heinous act, he makes it a point to openly and publicly extend the benefit of the doubt towards them even if they are well-known white supremacists and racists(when the crime is actually against someone in the movement) while systematically refusing to extend the same courtesy to blacks and those who stand alongside blacks(when simply charged).

He has shown us that "innocent until proven guilty" is reserved in his mind for white racists/white supremacists who support him, but "guilty until proven innocent"(and even after being proven innocent) is reserved in his mind when the suspects were/are black.

He uses the powers of the presidency to suppress the right to free speech and peaceful protest/demonstration, and does not - will not - even acknowledge the racial problems and/or systemic racism that still exists in the States.

He does not acknowledge the clear and actual distinction between looters and rioters(criminals) and those who are simply exercizing their right to peaceful protest/demonstration aimed at racial justice reform. Rather, instead he publicly mischaracterizes all of them as criminals, anti-American, anarchists, socialists, enemies of the United States, or some other derogatory devaluation or admonishment.

He refuses to openly disavow and/or criticize well known racist organizations and/or white supremacy groups, but instead offers his own public support for and of them, going so far as to listen and believe what well-known advocates of white supremacy say. He even repeats many of their misguided offerings by re-tweet/repeat.



Summary:

The president of the United States of America has spent the last four years fighting for and alongside racists and white supremacists, while simultaneously using the powers of the presidency fighting against the movement for racial justice reform at every turn, going so far as to singlehandedly reverse public policies designed to implement the necessary change.

He is racial injustice incarnate.

The fancy, intellectual sounding Latin phrase escapes me at present but in short this is a trick question. — Outlander

The fact that your interpretation of that simple question causes you to hesitate on grounds of suspicion ought tell you something. That is in no way, shape, or form a trick question.

A person's life matters by content of character and not color of skin. Period. MLK said that. — Outlander

I don't think so. I mean, those words were not spoken by Dr. King, but I do agree that content of one's character is a much better standard by which to judge a person as compared/contrasted to the color of their skin.

Someone who is vile, a menace to their own neighborhood and society as a whole, who happens to be black, does not get a "free pass" of their life automatically having value due to race- that's racist. — Outlander

Well, no. That's not racist. One is not racist just because they value someone based upon the color of their skin. One is racist when they devalue someone based upon that. On my view, one's life automatically has value because they are a person.

That said, I agree with you that vile people who are a menace to society need to be removed from society and dealt with accordingly, regardless of the color of their skin. Sometimes, such people lose their life, particularly when they actually pose a threat to the life of an arresting officer.

I don't see how talking about black lives being lost in larger numbers just because we're not using racial conflict to stigmatize another nation we're not fond of is "changing the subject" of black lives having value. Why do you? I get this is a largely non-American site but come on guy, don't be so transparent with it. — Outlander

Black lives matter is all about the racial injustice in The United States of America, and the dire need for racial justice reform(equal treatment under the law). So, when someone responds by talking about something else, it is changing the subject. Pretty simple.

What about other minorities in America who don't have the numbers to shut down entire metropolitan areas when someone who looks like them is killed? — Outlander

What about them? Many people of all walks of life are active in the movement. That's part of the beauty of it all. Those who stand for racial justice reform and the movement are not just limited to standing up for racial injustice towards blacks. Rather, it's all inclusive. Solidarity. It is a fight against white racism and the residual effects/affects that persist in American society to this day as a result of a very long history of racist beliefs and practices.

I'm sure we're familiar with the fact that a slight majority of people killed by police are white (52%) while blacks who are killed are 32% of fatalities. And of course the fact that with only 13% of the population that is grossly disproportionate (black Americans are about 3x likely to be killed that white Americans).

As usual we're spending all our time, energy, and emotion on the symptom of a problem rather than the cause- and there are some people who want nothing less- because then nothing will change. There is a cultural problem in black communities and what has been fed to them as "this is my culture". Unless you have a time machine and can go back in time and prevent slavery, there's no point in getting upset over what happened to the point you riot, commit violent crimes, destroy your own neighborhoods, and then get felony charges that essentially cripple you socially for the remainder of your life if you're not locked up for the rest of it- like some people want! Do you agree or disagree? — Outlander

You're conflating a few different things here.

I agree that resorting to rioting and committing violent crimes essentially cripples someone socially for much, if not the rest, of their life. Violence is the language of the unheard.

I disagree that that is the cause of racial injustice and/or systemic racism.

Do yourself a favor, and spend a bit of time researching Jim Crow laws. Perhaps take an hour or two and watch 13 on Netflix or any one of the other readily available shows regarding the systemic racism in America. It may offer you a bit more historical insight on how we've gotten to where we are today.

Guy, you don't have to be my buddy it just would seem from the position you attempt to convey on this forum you should at least be a friend to positive change (or simple logic) versus the same old status quo which as shown has failed time and time again to change anything for the better. Fix the culture... — Outlander

That is precisely what the movement is about. What do you think that that requires? I suspect when you say "fix the culture" you're referring to 'black culture', without ever acknowledging that where we are today has been directly influenced by racist public policies and racist culture.

We all knew he was a racist before he got into office. A person has to be a racist himself if he were blind to it.

I, being who I am and all, actually offered him the benefit of the doubt by overestimating his intelligence level and granting that he may have been strategically saying things to get votes.

What's happened since then removes all doubt.

He is most certainly a racist.

Wait. So just saying racist shit to get votes doesn't count as racism?

Isn't that a bit like saying it's OK if I'd call some black person a "stupid monkey" if I did it only to get some laughs from actual racists?

I'm not following this one...

Well, one could be knowingly saying racist shit, and perpetuating racism by virtue of doing so, without being a person who devalues another based upon the color of their skin. It's a stretch... I know... however... as I said, being who I am, I extended him the benefit of the doubt at first. He also said other stuff that he clearly did not believe himself for the exact same reasons(when he adopted Bernie's language because Hillary could not). I also suspected he was someone who would say whatever he believed it would take to get what he wanted, regardless of whether or not he actually believed what he was saying.

Oh, and it's not as if I condoned such behaviour.

Ok, A lot of like BLM talk here last pages. Explain to a fellow on other side of the big waters, what has been the story for the african american(I abbreviate AA) community, generally speaking, since the days of the civil rights movements in the 60`s? I remember the death of MLK vaugely as a young kid. Then during the 70’s and earlier 80`’s one heard vaguely about poor comditions and criminality in the cities but anyhow, a vague feeling of things going in a good direction for the AA. But everything very vague.

My home country was among the poorest around 1900, I do myself come from those families, about 80% of my fellow countrymen did, many emigrated to the US. But there was a strong social democrat movement during, well, most of the 1900’s and the poor people became ... stable.

One wonder, is there such a way for the AA people in the USA? To come from poor conditions and criminality to a stable life? Supposedly a decent percentage of AA do have found the way, but seemingly, very many do remain in the lowest classes.

I come from a country no less with predjudices against different people, and I did for sure did not enter adulthood without racial predjudices. But then working multinationally for 20+ years changed all that. If you are well educated and come to a workplace the color of your skin matter for like 24 hour, and then its obvious if you are an asset or a hindrance to the team you are working with, and you will find that you have more in Common brainwise with someone from China or Eritrea than the people from your own neighbourhood.

But if you grow up where things are shit you will be shit. I am not without it, growing up in a humble suburb where everyone worked daytime or was unemployed. No slum but also no dreams.

I did good in school and in work, and landed in a rather posh area. My wife, my kids, all my neighbours have those dreams. And frankly, I am worse than them, even though I may score higher in work, our equivalent ov SAT and stuff. I am more dishonest, more greedy, tougher to my kids, pretty much like the mean father in Dead Poets Society. Not anything like Robin Williams teacher of dreams.

And well, living in the slum will probably do not do you better. Thats nothing racist, thats class. So - if a big part of the AA are Heidegger way thrown into the slum, how can they get out of it?

Because - if a lot of AA are in the slum, a lot of those guys will be bad people and that will increase racist feelings among middle class white people - with good reasons. So you do have to kind of break that evil circle in some way.

One thing - I dont think the gangsta culture do much to improve stuff. We see it here, amongst immigrant kids. I recognise it from my own childhood. Being tough gave kudos. But its to its root bad. Understandable but bad. Naively but still true - To contribute to society should be the only thing that gave kudos.

Wait. So just saying racist shit to get votes doesn't count as racism?

Isn't that a bit like saying it's OK if I'd call some black person a "stupid monkey" if I did it only to get some laughs from actual racists? — Benkei

Me neither. If you enable the bad behaviour you are contributing to it. I'm maybe okay with certain things being done ironically for the sake of satire or historical accuracy, in a way that clearly demonstrates what the bad behaviour is through its narrative structure. Like white actors who play slave owners and slave minders who are scripted to say the N word before a whipping, in order to clearly show the harsh reality of slavery in an educational way. Even bystander apathy is a chosen act of non action. If Trump were saying nothing racist at all but still ignoring the racist problem while coning down on anti-racist sentiment in all it's forms, he would still be acting in a way that benefits racists.

Ok, A lot of like BLM talk here last pages. Explain to a fellow on other side of the big waters, what has been the story for the african american(I abbreviate AA) community, generally speaking, since the days of the civil rights movements in the 60`s? — Ansiktsburk

Mass incarceration and demonization.

Go back further.

So wait. While we're expecting a bad flu season with covid on top, republicans are going to invalidate mail-in ballots in swing states. That's just evil. Ok I'm up to speed.

republicans are going to invalidate mail-in ballots in swing states. That's just evil. — frank

Republicans have been evil for a while now.

Yea, but that's like Penguin level evil, maybe not quite at Joker level.

You put a lot of effort into your post, but none of it proves to me Trump holds racist beliefs or racially discriminated against others. Worse, it suppresses the evidence in favor of the smear.

No policy of Trump’s discriminates against one race or another. In fact, his policies, his proclamations, his speeches are explicitly pro-“African American”. Simply search for the phrase “African American” in his speeches, proclamations, policy announcements, and it’s nothing but praise and support. One can do the same with the term “racism” and find nothing but anti-racist sentiment. Exactly zero of his rhetoric expresses anti-black sentiment.

There is no evidence Trump has ever equated criminals, rioters, agitators and anarchists with black people. These criminals are of many races. It is in fact yourself who makes that connection, pretending that when Trump criticizes violent activity, looting and rioting, he is speaking about a race of people.

He has condemned white supremacist groups.

He has defended all statues, including the statues of the first African American regiment, abolitionists, and Frederick Douglass. He wants MLK, Harriot Tubman, Booker T Washington, Frederick Douglass, Jackie Robinson in his “heroes park”.

He won the Bipartisan Justice Award for justice reform.

His support and funding for HBCUs is more than the last administration could muster.

He has had many roundtables with “black leaders” and black supporters.

These are the actions of a racist president? Or have we left reality?

That was off the top of my head; no work really. That said...



To answer your question...

Assuming what you say here is true(that's probably a stretch, but for the sake of argument), sure those are the actions of a racist president. A racist president today cannot publicly admit it(yet), but will instead claim to support the black community in their fight for racial justice reform in public spaces while simultaneously doing all of the things I mentioned above. Which leads us back to that...

I offered nine different paragraphs setting out Trump's behaviour and the only reasonable conclusion drawn from what he has actually done. You neglected to directly address any of them, in lieu of proposing a defense for three charges that I did not make. Which paragraph, if any, are you claiming is not true?

Oh for fucks sake. Brown nose4a2 isn't going to admit to anything because he's a little racist bitch himself. The Obama Birth certificate things is enough evidence for anyone living in 2010.

You may be right. That's not the only agenda possible though. I'm certain that there are many who tolerate Trump in spite of his being racist and an imbecile due to their number one priority being profit, and the belief that Trump will pass through the system without damaging their interests. He's been a tremendous benefit to such people in some ways.

He has defended all statues, including the statues of the first African American regiment, abolitionists, and Frederick Douglass. He wants MLK, Harriot Tubman, Booker T Washington, Frederick Douglass, Jackie Robinson in his “heroes park”. — NOS4A2

Have you ever heard of politics? Do you know how they work? Have you ever heard of manipulation? Do you know what it means to be politically naive? Tell me what Trump has done wrong? Has he done anything wrong according to you?

These are the actions of a racist president? — NOS4A2

No, these are the actions of a political president.

Of course. And plenty of Conservatives voted for him because of that. But those conservatives aren't defending Trump's racism or delude themselves he isn't racist. They don't need to because they made a cold political calculation.

He has defended all statues

He won the Bipartisan Justice Award for justice reform

He has had many roundtables with “black leaders” and black supporters. — NOS4A2

I agree, Donald Trump cannot be racist. He has defended black statues, some of which he has counted among his closest friends. He reformed justice, it's been reformed, so all the protestors can go home now. He has spent 45 minutes in the same room as several black people and has even shaken hands with some. Would a racist do that? Absolutely not. Donald Trump has said "Martin Luther King Jr." at least four times in his life, not including actual MLK Day. That's impressive. He has seen the first 30 minutes of Do The Right Thing (he realized he was in the wrong theater, he wanted to see Back to the Future II since he was told he was in it). Does anyone sincerely think a racist can do all that?

Assuming what you say here is true(that's probably a stretch, but for the sake of argument), sure those are the actions of a racist president. A racist president today cannot publicly admit it(yet), but will instead claim to support the black community in their fight for racial justice reform in public spaces while simultaneously doing all of the things I mentioned above. Which leads us back to that...

I offered nine different paragraphs setting out Trump's behaviour and the only reasonable conclusion drawn from what he has actually done. You neglected to directly address any of them, in lieu of proposing a defense for three charges that I did not make. Which paragraph, if any, are you claiming is not true?

Your spin is not true, or at least born of fantasy. You could name a single racist policy, racist belief, act of racial discrimination, and we could examine whether that is true. I’ll let you cherry pick all you want.

Sigh.

Trump's thoughts and beliefs about racism and it's effects/affects, just like everyone else's, directly influence his language and behaviour regarding those things. That's how belief systems work. We need only to look at what he says and what he does regarding the current political movement to know, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Trump devalues the movement and it's participants. He is a racist. Hence, the evidence currently under consideration consists of his language and actions concerning it. What I put forth earlier were very brief reports of Trump's actual behaviours and language regarding that much. It was not a full account.

Here's some very inconvenient truth for you...

Trump's actual language regarding the movement for racial justice reform in the United States is chock full of statements, none of which offer support, or even acknowledge that there is a problem with racial injustice and/or systemic racism in America. There has never been a single statement out of Trump's mouth that honors the movement, honors the plight of black Americans, and/or acknowledges the injury black Americans have sustained throughout American history at the hands of racist beliefs and practices.

Not one!

To quite the contrary, all of Trump's statements about the movement for racial justice reform are against it... and vehemently so!

All of them!

What more evidence could anyone possibly need?

I still extend the offer to quote and discuss which, if any, of the statements within the nine aforementioned paragraphs you are claiming is not true.