De #Antifa gaat niet in op de oproep van de politie om te vertrekken... | #Rotterdam, #Erasmusbrug, #BlackLivesMatter pic.twitter.com/SSIdkJmnT1
— Ken Stash (@KenStash) June 3, 2020
It's every bit submission as the useless facemasks are wrt to Covid-19.
I agree me too. Plus, the army is supposed to protect people. I don't understand why they knee. Why? To show they are good guys? They believe in God? I think we are entering a very strange dimension. A dead zone.I agree, except possibly if all parties (black and white) were kneeling to pray. Otherwise, the kneeling with bowed head, the lying down prostrate is submission. The only action that would be worse would be lying on back with belly showing as dogs do to show submission.
I have no agenda, that was just my gut reaction to seeing those videos.
The point here (and always) is the context in which the kneeling is done. Kneeling in this context by police and random people is clearly a submission to and acceptance of the ideology that "black lives matter". Why would anyone ever have to kneel down to accept that "black lives matter", or any other self-evident statement? Do you accept that the sky is blue on a cloudless day? If so, you must prove it by kneeling down in front of me. Does that make sense?
A: Level playing field eventually. Just wait for the current to begin to flow!
So, there’s a protest going on here in Mexico bc a cop killed an innocent man for not wearing a mask. Apparently some cops are dickheads everywhere. We will not tolerate this. #JusticeForGiovanni pic.twitter.com/8TAYTni6hw
— Dana (성화's version) ✨ (@SantasticWoo) June 5, 2020
Tucker Carlson addressed all of this last night and, as usual, he is entirely on point.
The context for a lot of people in the US is from 2016 when during the playing of the national anthem before a football game, a time when customarily people stand up and take off their hats to respect the flag, football player Kaepernick decided to sit instead. So it started as sitting instead of standing for the flag, and then Kaepernick talked with a military veteran football player who convinced him to kneel for the flag instead of sitting, because somehow kneeling was less disrespectful to the flag than sitting.The point here (and always) is the context in which the kneeling is done.
Here we go, today... a bunch of.. . people went today to Palace Government of Jalisco to "demand justice" of the murder of the person who was arrested for not wearing a mask. There seem to be few but, some were very violent, destroying, burning police car etc..problem is, it can be expanded to other cities.So, the curious detail that happened on May 4th and, today it went viral, seems to me quite suspicious. Today, social media calling for justice, also a petition in change org and, the hashtag Justicia para Giovanni, being right now 1st in Top Twitter Trending worldwide and in México
— Adrián Montiel G. (@adrianmontiel_g) June 4, 2020
Between that and soldiers 'taking the knee' at protests, Trump likely can't rely on the military to follow orders in this situation.
He's on his own. Thus the people who support him/expect him to take charge of the situation are also on their own. Between this and Corona-1984, govt has abandoned ship.
The following may become an increasingly familiar scene; gated/rural/suburban communities doing their own security:
America do you have any idea how insane this looks the outside https://t.co/O0FpVrSN4q
— James Felton (@JimMFelton) June 3, 2020
It seems like you are sticking with the fine point of police violence against minorities in your writing. Okay, so the statistics don't bear out the idea that cops disproportionately kill blacks/minorities over whites. But I don't think that is only what people are upset about and protesting over. It's police targeting, harassing, unconstitutional search and seizures, etc. against blacks in the US. Right off the top of my head I am thinking of NYC's awful stop-and-frisk policy, which most certainly targeted blacks (and NY police were likely trained by the intel agencies). There are many other examples as well, including Ferguson, MO, but all around the US.
So I think you are missing the forest for the trees in regards to why people are so upset towards police in the US. It's not just about white cops killing black people. It's about mistreatment, it's about harassment, it's about having their constitutional rights taken away from them almost on a daily basis. These things are definitely happening, and people should rightly be demanding accountability over those illegal actions. They haven't been getting that for years through other means, so at some point the anger will build up. Certainly there are groups like Antifa or BLM which are probably controlled opposition created to channel all this anger towards something that the elites want.
But there is, IMO, righteous anger out there and I don't see it as an illusion created by the media or hystericization - although some of that is occurring as well. It seems you are so focused on the specific point of police violence that you are missing out on the above points and that's creating a separation in seeing the situation objectively that other members see as black and white thinking.
Perhaps Tucker uses WaPo stats because his audience thinks them valid, so he's using a source that they trust. If one provides information on too many topics, especially if the audience isn't receptive, the point one wants to make is easily lost. Better to focus on one particular message, which already may be one more message than the audience is ready to accept. An alternative explanation is that Tucker accepts WaPo stats. He's good, on fire sometimes, but he does have a certain perspective on things. We all have biases and blind spots, and external factors can come into play, like preserving ones livelihood.I also appreciated the video, but have my questions about it. The numbers he is crunching comes from the Washington Post, as he admits. What is your view on (1) the trustworthiness of WaPo, and (2) Tucker's use of WaPo stats alone?
It is important in these times to be as intellectually honest as possible. In this sense, Tucker (if he 'truly exists' beyond the captivating FOX TV personality that he appears as) may be 'on point' - but the point he is making is based on WaPo data.
I also appreciated the video, but have my questions about it. The numbers he is crunching comes from the Washington Post, as he admits. What is your view on (1) the trustworthiness of WaPo, and (2) Tucker's use of WaPo stats alone?
It is important in these times to be as intellectually honest as possible. In this sense, Tucker (if he 'truly exists' beyond the captivating FOX TV personality that he appears as) may be 'on point' - but the point he is making is based on WaPo data.
Why do you keep saying this? It's kind of silly.