Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » UN Peacekeepers to occupy Ferguson Missouri (Page 23)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 55 pages: 1  2  3  ...  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  ...  53  54  55   
Author Topic: UN Peacekeepers to occupy Ferguson Missouri
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Suffice it to say, I find it truly sad that there are real victims of police violence out there, even black victims, and some dumbass doped out thug became the poster child somehow.
Suffice it to say that you're comfortable drawing strong conclusions from the limited information you have available to you. Must be nice.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by D.W.:
Cards are stacked against Browns so the GJ should have taken it to trial. Now cards are stacked against the Browns so they shouldn't go to civil trial?

Not only this, but since the burden is much lower to achieve a result in a civil suit compared to a criminal trial, if they don't even think they could win a civil suit against Wilson then it really indicates that there was no chance of a criminal conviction. If the case against Wilson was even half-decent then they could at least bank on a nice settlement out of court with the police department, so if they don't go for that it's very telling. I don't know if the deciding factor is, indeed, Brown's juvi record, but either way his family don't seem the type to just sit down and not sue if they thought there was a way to get Wilson some other way.
Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Since I'm lost on our back and forth AI, Fenring's point is part of was I was alluding to with that quote. Not sure if your replies lined up with that and my brain is just failing to keep up.
Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
noel c.
Member
Member # 6699

 - posted      Profile for noel c.   Email noel c.       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
DW,

"Cards are stacked against Browns so the GJ should have taken it to trial. "...

I realize this is out of context, and not what you intend to say, but the purpose under common law was to prevent deck stacking by medieval "executives", through a firewall assembly of peers who act with broad independence in ascertaining credibility of serious criminal charges.

In a modern frame of reference that would be preventing Eric Holder, as agent for the Emperor, from wresting legal process from local jurisdiction.

Robert McCulloch acted far outside of the norm in his role as prosecutor, but paradoxically facilitated the precise function for which grand juries exist. Twelve citizens reviewed all the evidence available, and found that charges against Wilson were not merited under a very low standard of evidence.

That is why I asked Al this. :

"Do you really believe Holder was dealing in good faith when he attempted to supress Brown's robbery video? "

Al,

No, I was not "joking".

What is your answer?

[ December 03, 2014, 08:45 PM: Message edited by: noel c. ]

Posts: 3564 | Registered: Jan 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Al,

No, I was not "joking".

What is your answer?

No, seriously, I know you're joking. If you weren't you'd be open to having your opinion changed if the response didn't confirm your bias. Do you think you would consider the possibility that Holder had a legitimate reason? Seriously? If so, suggest one and I'll confirm it if I think you might be on to something.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by D.W.:
Since I'm lost on our back and forth AI, Fenring's point is part of was I was alluding to with that quote. Not sure if your replies lined up with that and my brain is just failing to keep up.

I haven't been responding to Fenring, so I'm not sure what you're referring to. Can you make it more clear?
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rafi
Member
Member # 6930

 - posted      Profile for Rafi   Email Rafi       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by jasonr:
quote:
Except that you don't know that this isn't a similar pattern to what happened in Ferguson. According to the person standing right next to Brown during the entire incident, Wilson confronted Brown because of something he thought he heard as he drove away. Explain how that was justified.
I don't intend to re-hash this with you. It occurs to me that 22 pages is more than sufficient. Suffice it to say, I find it truly sad that there are real victims of police violence out there, even black victims, and some dumbass doped out thug became the poster child somehow.
QFT. There are lots of cases that could have conceivably been used for police civil rights violations. This ain't one of them. Not even close. Why some try so hard to twist and ignore the facts to fabricate the desired narrative in this case tells us a lot more about them than any alleged racially motivated police violence.
Posts: 793 | Registered: Jul 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
AI, I meant Fenring's reply seemed to get at the gist of what I was saying (having quoted my same post). Your replies however, I don't understand as relating to my post.
Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
noel c.
Member
Member # 6699

 - posted      Profile for noel c.   Email noel c.       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Al,

Do you have an opinion on Holder's attempt to supress Brown's robbery video?

Posts: 3564 | Registered: Jan 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DJQuag
Member
Member # 3582

 - posted      Profile for DJQuag   Email DJQuag       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by D.W.:
If you threaten or perpetrate physical violence to get your way, you are a thug. I typically hear thug used as an insult in that you are suggesting someone is not intelligent enough to or not in possession of the willpower needed to reach their goals without threatened, or actual, violence.

It’s not “code” for anything. It’s not racism. It’s a label for behavior, not skin color.

This matches my experience, and how I've used and heard the word used. I've called plenty of white men thugs in my time.
Posts: 476 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DJQuag
Member
Member # 3582

 - posted      Profile for DJQuag   Email DJQuag       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
quote:
I think it became associated with black men in the mid-'90s
Specifically, it was openly picked up as code when Sen. Dole used it to characterize rappers.
I'm catching up on the thread, so ignore this if it's already been answered, but was Dole referring to ALL rappers when he said that, or just the ones who rap about life in a gang, selling drugs, beating women, that type of stuff? Because I feel quite comfortable calling THOSE rappers thugs, no matter what color they are.
Posts: 476 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Seneca
Member
Member # 6790

 - posted      Profile for Seneca   Email Seneca       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by AI Wessex:
But will you quit dancing and admit that you knew nothing about that when you decided that he deserved his fate, right? This is a post-rationalization to make it seem as if you were somehow right all along, isn't it?

No it isn't. I formed my opinion based on facts not on bias.
Posts: 6017 | Registered: Jan 2013  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
PSRT
Member
Member # 6454

 - posted      Profile for PSRT   Email PSRT   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Then you believe that the cops in Ferguson have a long track record of racial bias, and unnecessarily escalated a tense situation at a variety of critical points, as well as attacked thousands of people who had done nothing other than express their opinion, using extremely violent weapons? In addition, you realize that the evidence surrounding the killing of Michael Brown is mixed enough that a trial should have happened in most circumstances, and that the prosecutor acted in a way that was contrary to the way prosecutors usually act in such a way as to play directly into the long history of racial bias that Ferguson has?

If you say "No," to any of those things, then you aren't basing your opinions on facts. You are basing your opinions on your own biases, because the above are entirely based on the actual facts of the situation, and not the made up crap that passes for news on Fox.

[ December 04, 2014, 05:42 AM: Message edited by: PSRT ]

Posts: 2152 | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
noel c.
Member
Member # 6699

 - posted      Profile for noel c.   Email noel c.       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Since Al will not defend his certainty with quite the enthusiasm that you do PSRT, perhaps you will step up to the plate.

- Why do you believe Eric Holder tried to conceal Michael Brown's robbery video from public awareness?

- Do you think your answer has any relevance to the fact that a complete physical description of Brown had been radioed to Wilson prior to the "unnecessary escalation of the situation" (asking the two thieves, cigarillos in hand, to step onto the sidewalk)?

- Can a political agenda be inferred from manipulation of public awareness by Holder?

- Are there possible ethical implications relating to the actions of the nation's chief law enforcement officer?

- Can this corruption be said to reflect a "long track record of racial bias" in the practices of the Obama DOJ going back to March of 2011?

Posts: 3564 | Registered: Jan 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Noel, quit kidding around. The answer is really simple, as stated here:
quote:
The Department of Justice urged Ferguson police not to release surveillance video purporting to show Michael Brown robbing a store shortly before he was shot and killed by police, arguing the footage would further inflame tensions in the St. Louis suburb that saw rioting and civil unrest in the wake of the teenager’s death.
You're just looking for an opportunity to make some off-the-wall comment about a black President and a black Attorney General trying to stir up racial unrest because a white cop killed an unarmed black teenager who was walking down the middle of the road instead of on the sidewalk. But, hey, if you have a better idea, let us know in resonating prose...
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Simple. He incited arson and rioting. We have it on video.
So nothiong woudl have happened if he hadn't spoken? There was no expectation of a riot prior to him talking? Details exactly which buildings wouldn't have burned if he had stayed silent? Again we're back to the incendiary equivalence. Please show exactly what damage followed from his speech, not damage that incidentally happened afterwards, but what part of the damage can be clearly linked to his actions and not to reactions to the combination of the verdict and police gassing the crowd? I can point to at least one building that seems more plausible for a flare to have happened to land on its roof than for someone on the ground to have set fire to it- can you point to even one incident that similarly was more plausible that it only occurred because he spoke? Yes, here was damage, but that's incidental here- the police pulled in plenty of people to hold responsible for their acts in regards to that, and the protesters did their best to protect buildings from the rioters, even as they were under assault from the police. But you have yet to show any directly causative link between his behavior and the riot here. Who did he incite that had not already been incited by the failure to indict and law enforcement actions?
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ScottF
Member
Member # 6897

 - posted      Profile for ScottF         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I can see why your narrative of "an unarmed black teenager killed for walking down the middle of the road instead of on the sidewalk." would stir up protesters, because it throws away everything else the majority of witnesses reported led to the shooting.

But why would showing the video of Brown robbing the store make the protesters even more angry? Wouldn't that actually dilute some of the outrage of the "teenager just out for a stroll and minding his own business" narrative?

Posts: 177 | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pyr: Inciting to riot is not the same thing as causing a riot. Someone can be guilty of inciting to riot and yet have been entirely unsuccessful in their attempt to incite. Seneca does not need to show one single piece of evidence that he actually escalated the riot; the video already shows him inciting to riot in the proper sense.

The question of whether to prosecute him would lie in a few areas, none of which has to do with whether he fits the qualifications for inciting to riot:

-Do they want to drag out this affair through a potential trial?
-Will the press be bad?
-Will life in Ferguson be made worse by such a trial, rather than better?
-Will his aggrieved status lead to the obvious defence of temporary insanity, which they may not want to deal with?

Maybe there are other issues, but denying that he incited to riot in a strict sense is pretty lame.

Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by DJQuag:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
quote:
I think it became associated with black men in the mid-'90s
Specifically, it was openly picked up as code when Sen. Dole used it to characterize rappers.
I'm catching up on the thread, so ignore this if it's already been answered, but was Dole referring to ALL rappers when he said that, or just the ones who rap about life in a gang, selling drugs, beating women, that type of stuff? Because I feel quite comfortable calling THOSE rappers thugs, no matter what color they are.
You mean the ones that rap about the conditions that most poor black people have to navigate to survive? Or the ones that acted _in response_ to that characterization, by playing up what they were being accused of and trying to reclaim it to some degree in order to confound the attempt to transform it into a racial slur. Tupac Shakur formed Thug Life as a response to the proliferation of political figures, including Dole starting the characterize black youth and rappers in particular as thugs, including putting forward the definition I responded with above.

A large portion of the modern thug image comes from playing up the transformation of the word into a slur in order to someone mitigate the damaging effects it had- in order to kid kids that it was being slapped onto a way to actually find hope and some sense of agency from it instead of letting it have the power to pigeonhole them right back into the onging cycle of poverty and violence.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jasonr
Member
Member # 969

 - posted      Profile for jasonr   Email jasonr   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
A large portion of the modern thug image comes from playing up the transformation of the word into a slur in order to someone mitigate the damaging effects it had- in order to kid kids that it was being slapped onto a way to actually find hope and some sense of agency from it instead of letting it have the power to pigeonhole them right back into the onging cycle of poverty and violence.
And how's that working for them?
Posts: 7629 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
[quote[Maybe there are other issues, but denying that he incited to riot in a strict sense is pretty lame.[/quote]
And we move closer to the turth. The entire bracnh of argument that tries to cast the protestors as people just out to get in on looting when riots happened is pretty lame. BLaiming the riots on the protestors as a way to diminish the issue that they're trying to communicate about and give a pass to the way law enforcement and injustice were the primary provocations here is lame. We have clear evidence that the police were firing flares and tear gas, so denying that they had any culpability for damage and unrest that doing so causes is lame as well.

Whether this guy should be prosecuted absolutely does come down to the question of whether there is any net community benefit from doing so, but the entire question is a distraction and derailment from the relevant issue of the free pass that police get on misconduct, particularly toward minorities. So dodging that issue and trying to tar the protests over the actions of a few outraged individuals that went overboard is exceptionally lame. Saying that it's not worth putting out foot down and actually taking significant action to correct rampant abuse of power by law enforcement just because a particular victim isn't sympathetic enough is lame.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ScottF:
I can see why your narrative of "an unarmed black teenager killed for walking down the middle of the road instead of on the sidewalk." would stir up protesters, because it throws away everything else the majority of witnesses reported led to the shooting.


How would it throw away rampant abuse of power by law enforcement? Or are you trying to sell the false notion that the protests are specifically about Brown?

quote:
But why would showing the video of Brown robbing the store make the protesters even more angry?
Because it would give trolls ammo to try to dismiss and devalue the protests, to try to paint them as specifically about Brown, and generally increase the sense that the voices of the people protesting are both ignorable and being ignored.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
A lot of us are buying what he's selling Pyrtolin. Your revisionist history is a harder sell.

[ December 04, 2014, 11:13 AM: Message edited by: D.W. ]

Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by jasonr:
quote:
A large portion of the modern thug image comes from playing up the transformation of the word into a slur in order to someone mitigate the damaging effects it had- in order to kid kids that it was being slapped onto a way to actually find hope and some sense of agency from it instead of letting it have the power to pigeonhole them right back into the onging cycle of poverty and violence.
And how's that working for them?
Much better than suffering in silence so that other people can happily dwell in their fallacious subscriptions to the just-world hypothesis.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
[quote]
Whether this guy should be prosecuted absolutely does come down to the question of whether there is any net community benefit from doing so, but the entire question is a distraction and derailment from the relevant issue of the free pass that police get on misconduct, particularly toward minorities. So dodging that issue and trying to tar the protests over the actions of a few outraged individuals that went overboard is exceptionally lame. Saying that it's not worth putting out foot down and actually taking significant action to correct rampant abuse of power by law enforcement just because a particular victim isn't sympathetic enough is lame.

No, Pyr, you've got it wrong. Whether he should be prosecuted has nothing to do with the reasons I cited, which related to why they might choose not to. A person should be prosecuted if he's committed a crime; we have some evidence that this is what happened. But the state might choose not to prosecute for strategic reasons not to do with the stepfather even though he, as an individual, should be prosecuted.

I'm still waiting to hear from you about Jewish thug culture and how it is a direct result of oppression against Jews.

[ December 04, 2014, 11:12 AM: Message edited by: Fenring ]

Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I'm still waiting to hear from you about Jewish thug culture and how it is a direct result of oppression against Jews.
I responded to that- just read the old testament. The fact that it doesn't have modern cultural trappings is completely irrelevant. Moses didn't need to be a rap star to fight the man by visiting plagues on the Egyptians. Read the Merchant of Venice if you want to see similar prejudices and reactions to them at play from the medieval era. The entire notion that the only way for an oppressed people to stay alive was to be ready and willing to fight to defend it at all times. Trying to nitpick about the features of a particular manifestation given the surrounding cultural and social environment that it's reacting to is just hand-waving away from the overriding pattern.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
A person should be prosecuted if he's committed a crime; we have some evidence that this is what happened.
Even when there would be no benefit to anyone in doing so? Just earlier people arguing strongly that we allow prosecutors discretion to not pursue charges where they don't see a benefit to it. But now, suddenly it's a black guy in question and charges must be pursued regardless of benefit?

You certainly have illustrated why there's a perception of bias in the system.

Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
PSRT
Member
Member # 6454

 - posted      Profile for PSRT   Email PSRT   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Shtetl culture had some pronounced overtones of violence to it. That transferred to the states and there was in fact a Jewish mafia
Posts: 2152 | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by jasonr:
quote:
Except that you don't know that this isn't a similar pattern to what happened in Ferguson. According to the person standing right next to Brown during the entire incident, Wilson confronted Brown because of something he thought he heard as he drove away. Explain how that was justified.
I don't intend to re-hash this with you. It occurs to me that 22 pages is more than sufficient. Suffice it to say, I find it truly sad that there are real victims of police violence out there, even black victims, and some dumbass doped out thug became the poster child somehow.
By that logic, it's totally Browns fault he died when that sixth bullet hit him. If he was being responsible, he should have just taken it and picked a more convenient time to die.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Seneca:
No it isn't. I formed my opinion based on facts not on bias.

Except that your bias directly informs what you decide to consider a fact. That's true for everyone, unless you can magically show how you're special in that regard.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ScottF
Member
Member # 6897

 - posted      Profile for ScottF         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
By that logic, it's totally Browns fault he died when that sixth bullet hit him. If he was being responsible, he should have just taken it and picked a more convenient time to die.

The GJ implicitly determined it was Brown's fault he was hit by any bullets at all. You don't like that decision, or agree with the witnesses who backed it up, but that was it's determination.
Posts: 177 | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jasonr
Member
Member # 969

 - posted      Profile for jasonr   Email jasonr   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Much better than suffering in silence so that other people can happily dwell in their fallacious subscriptions to the just-world hypothesis.
Uhhh huh, that's what I thought [Smile]
Posts: 7629 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
quote:
A person should be prosecuted if he's committed a crime; we have some evidence that this is what happened.
Even when there would be no benefit to anyone in doing so? Just earlier people arguing strongly that we allow prosecutors discretion to not pursue charges where they don't see a benefit to it. But now, suddenly it's a black guy in question and charges must be pursued regardless of benefit?

You certainly have illustrated why there's a perception of bias in the system.

People earlier argued that the prosecutor exercises discretion to not pursue cases that can't be won. No one said anything about a prosecutor not pursuing a case because he didn't see a benefit to it. Get the difference? The state doesn't prosecute criminals "to benefit" anyone, it does so because that's what we have commissioned the state to do. The prosecutor uses his discretion to see to it that state resources are used wisely, and that people who won't be convicted aren't brought to trial unnecessarily. We assume this system achieves its goal and benefits society, but the prosecutor in no way has any right to decide what will or will not benefit society and no one here claimed he does.

You come out with these ideas from left field, like prosecuting criminals having anything to do assessing whether there is a "benefit" to doing so. And then you go on to use this logic to show that my comment is indicative of a biased system. Maybe the bias lies in those who continually frame sets of facts to suit their preconceived ideas.

Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
quote:
I'm still waiting to hear from you about Jewish thug culture and how it is a direct result of oppression against Jews.
I responded to that- just read the old testament. The fact that it doesn't have modern cultural trappings is completely irrelevant. Moses didn't need to be a rap star to fight the man by visiting plagues on the Egyptians. Read the Merchant of Venice if you want to see similar prejudices and reactions to them at play from the medieval era. The entire notion that the only way for an oppressed people to stay alive was to be ready and willing to fight to defend it at all times. Trying to nitpick about the features of a particular manifestation given the surrounding cultural and social environment that it's reacting to is just hand-waving away from the overriding pattern.
I'm happy you replied, although your reply is in no way whatever an answer. I'll ask again: Where is the thug culture that emerged as a result of oppression against Jews during the Middle Ages, Renaissance and times after that? I never asked anything about the Jewish people in 500 B.C.

I'll also assume you know that citing one fictional play and one possibly fictional book (the Old Testament) is not relevant to this discussion? I'm still waiting to hear about the Jewish cultural songs about disrespecting the police and treating women like meat.

Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AI Wessex
Member
Member # 6653

 - posted      Profile for AI Wessex   Email AI Wessex   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
ScottF:
quote:
I can see why your narrative of "an unarmed black teenager killed for walking down the middle of the road instead of on the sidewalk." would stir up protesters, because it throws away everything else the majority of witnesses reported led to the shooting.
Do you think the witnesses who watched from afar were as well-informed as Johnson, who stood right next to Brown during the entire confrontation?
quote:
But why would showing the video of Brown robbing the store make the protesters even more angry? Wouldn't that actually dilute some of the outrage of the "teenager just out for a stroll and minding his own business" narrative?
Because that event had nothing to do with the shooting, and releasing the video was clearly intended to create an impression of wrong-doing by Brown that could somehow be construed to justify his shooting, even though Wilson did not stop him for what happened in the store. It's also important to note that the complete video from the store appears to show Brown paying for something, and it's important that the shopkeeper has not claimed that Brown shoplifted and never reported a crime.

What you need to understand (for the umpteenth time) is that the police played it out to make Wilson look like a hero and Brown look like, well, a thug, a beast, drug-addled, a present threat who was twice Wilson's size who "blew out his eye socket" and reached into the patrol car to take Wilson's weapon, presumably to kill him with it.

All of that is disputed as pejorative and/or misstated or outright fabrications.

What *everyone* who argues against this sort of demonization is saying is that we will never know the truth about what happened because Brown is dead and the GJ whitewashed its investigation to make sure Wilson would never face cross-examination.

Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I'm still waiting to hear about the Jewish cultural songs about disrespecting the police and treating women like meat.
Why would they be singing about aspects of the oppressive conditions that modern society puts our poor and minorities in instead about the ones that were relevant in their time, particularly those referenced in the historical record they put together of the ways they have struggled against oppression and to maintain their cultural identity?
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pyrtolin
Member
Member # 2638

 - posted      Profile for Pyrtolin   Email Pyrtolin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ScottF:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
By that logic, it's totally Browns fault he died when that sixth bullet hit him. If he was being responsible, he should have just taken it and picked a more convenient time to die.

The GJ implicitly determined it was Brown's fault he was hit by any bullets at all. You don't like that decision, or agree with the witnesses who backed it up, but that was it's determination.
Which is something that was out of its preview to decide. The GJ had no business making any decisions relating to Brown, only about whether Wilson's actions merited a fully and formal legal examination at trial.
Posts: 11997 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
NobleHunter
Member
Member # 2450

 - posted      Profile for NobleHunter   Email NobleHunter   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
When 'kill them all, God will know his own' is considered a valid a response to resistance, violent responses to oppression tend to be short lived. 'Thug culture' as resistance requires the expectation of restraint by the oppressor.

Also, I don't know if we have Jewish cultural songs from the pre-modern period. Most of the music we have from the time is church music, and our selection of secular music is pretty uneven.

Posts: 2581 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
D.W.
Member
Member # 4370

 - posted      Profile for D.W.   Email D.W.   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
quote:
Originally posted by ScottF:
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
By that logic, it's totally Browns fault he died when that sixth bullet hit him. If he was being responsible, he should have just taken it and picked a more convenient time to die.

The GJ implicitly determined it was Brown's fault he was hit by any bullets at all. You don't like that decision, or agree with the witnesses who backed it up, but that was it's determination.
Which is something that was out of its preview to decide. The GJ had no business making any decisions relating to Brown, only about whether Wilson's actions merited a fully and formal legal examination at trial.
I'm not very knowledgeable when it comes to grand juries but... WHAT?

If it seems that the results of a trail are a foregone conclusion because the shooting will be ruled self defense, they absolutely have purview to decide it was "Brown's fault". That was the whole point of the grand jury. Is there a strong enough chance that this wasn’t justifiable use of force to warrant a trial? They decided no. They decided in large part by determining if it was “Brown’s fault”. Absent cause provided by the person shot, then you go to trial. (and almost certainly reach a conviction)

Posts: 4308 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fenring
Member
Member # 6953

 - posted      Profile for Fenring   Email Fenring       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pyrtolin:
quote:
I'm still waiting to hear about the Jewish cultural songs about disrespecting the police and treating women like meat.
Why would they be singing about aspects of the oppressive conditions that modern society puts our poor and minorities in instead about the ones that were relevant in their time, particularly those referenced in the historical record they put together of the ways they have struggled against oppression and to maintain their cultural identity?
So the oppressive conditions that modern society puts our poor and minorities in involves treating women like meat? And that's why rap music has so much content involving disrespect of women?

And what is this "historical record" you're talking about? Are we still on about the Old Testament? When will you get around to answering my question about oppression against Jews in the Middle Ages and later? You've said that thug culture is a direct result of oppression, and I'm trying to understand how this applies to the Jews, as an example. Now if you were to choose to take back your statement that thug culture was a necessary reaction to oppression then obviously we could dispense with this line.

Posts: 1636 | Registered: Oct 2014  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 55 pages: 1  2  3  ...  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  ...  53  54  55   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1