Faked Protests

[askandanswer]

Were there events similar to/comparable with the interaction between George Floyd and Derek Chauvin during the Obama era, and if so, did they result in a similar/comparable outcome? I'm just curious and am not trying to take a particular side.  

[Carborendum]

28 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

Were there events similar to/comparable with the interaction between George Floyd and Derek Chauvin during the Obama era, and if so, did they result in a similar/comparable outcome? I'm just curious and am not trying to take a particular side.  

Michael Brown (Ferguson, MO) was about the same, except the cop in that instance was cleared of wrong-doing.  Even though the cop appeared to be innocent of wrong-doing and showed a great level of restraint, it still started the BLM movement.  Lots of protests.  And they still hold that as their founding influence.

Micah Johnson and Dallas police officers was the other way around.  As far as I understood it, a gang of BLM guys decided to kill a bunch of cops.  This was shortly after Obama gave a speech about how racist cops tend to be.  But MSM ignored any "inciting" influence from his rhetoric to the behavior of these BLM "activists".  He gave all the proper disclaimers.  He even said "all lives matter" and "blue lives matter" and praised them for putting their lives on the line, and "most cops are good..." just to cover himself.  But it still happened.  I wonder why the media was so one-sided on the "inciting" issue.

Henry Louis Gates and a Massachussets Police Officer.  No one was killed.  But a "wrongful arrest" was threatened.

Trayvon Martin was similar, but the guy who shot him wasn't a cop.  He was a neighborhood watch guy.  It still made national news and Obama had to weigh in on it.

 

Three of the above made national news and Obama commented on it in support of the Black man expressing how systemic racism played a role.  In each of cases, the black man was actually guilty of what they were arrested of or killed over, and no racism was discovered as the motivating force behind anything the police did.  He even said the famous phrase (re: Gates) 

Quote

... the Cambridge police acted stupidly...

The Micah Johnson case made big news.  Some were saying that Obama incited it.  But it was nowhere near the level of "blame" that they heap on Trump for things Trump actually spoke against.  Eventually, Obama spoke out against it.  He called it a hate crime.  It was a terrible massacre.  But then he had to take measures to soften it.  It wasn't about racism.  It was about a "troubled mind." and to soften any accusations of racism, he compared it to Dylan Roof (who was also a racist with a troubled mind).

Does that help answer your question?

[Just_A_Guy]

Also Freddie Gray and Eric Garner, both on Obama’s watch.

[Vort]

34 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Trayvon Martin

Obama overtly politicized this with his comment "If I had had a son, he would have looked like Trayvon Martin." The press absolutely crucified Obama for making such a stupid, unnecessary, inflammatory remark.

And if you believe that part about the media crucifixion, please talk to me about a great deal I can make you on a bridge.

[Guest MormonGator]

1 hour ago, Traveler said:

This happened with a discussion I was involved with (a cool dude from Florida).  Anyway, as we were discussing he felt that the horse had left the barn and no way to get him back.  I made a sarcastic remark that the horse may had gone to Florida but that the cool dude would have noticed.  The cool dude said that they would not only have noticed but ate the horse - and they provided the picture.  

 

The Traveler

Thanks bud!! Nothing but love! 

[Carborendum]

1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Also Freddie Gray and Eric Garner, both on Obama’s watch.

That's right.  There was one where I thought the police were at fault but were let off.  And I'll actually give props to Obama for his reaction to it.  I thought it was actually level-headed and showed appropriate language in both the condemnation of the event as well as a call to respect the rule of law.

I think it was a travesty that they police didn't get any sentence for this.

While, I'm not saying this to condemn Obama, I think it strange and ironic that the one time Obama showed restraint, he would have been fully justified in saying more inflammatory things.  But the other times he said inflammatory things, he was just plain wrong.

[Guest Scott]

16 hours ago, Traveler said:

One thing I am having the most difficult time finding any logic - Why are there protest (including riots and property damage) against the police here is Salt Lake City, Utah about something that happened in Minnesota?

What is the logic in demonstrating against excessive force - with excessive force?

My own thought is that a lot of people don't really care about the cause that people are supposedly protesting, but that they are just using it as an excuse to commit crimes.

Looting stores and burning cop cars in Salt Lake City really has little to do with what happened in Minnesota and certainly won't make things better.

I hope that they are caught and prosecuted.

[Traveler]

2 minutes ago, Scott said:

My own thought is that a lot of people don't really care about the cause that people are supposedly protesting, but that they are just using it as an excuse to commit crimes.

Looting stores and burning cop cars in Salt Lake City really has little to do with what happened in Minnesota and certainly won't make things better.

I hope that they are caught and prosecuted.

What I fear the most is that there is a lot of pend up anger about the COVID-19 lock-down and many people are getting frustrated because they are not getting back to work and supporting their families.  When jobs are lost forever and it becomes difficult to find new jobs because of damages and losses due to violent demonstrations now taking place - that our society will become more angry and vengeful toward one another in open violent confrontation.  This would not be a civil war with well defined territories but citizens angry towards each other on so many levels that civil authority will breakdown.

If war was just limited to those intent in fight it - then war would not nearly be so bad.  The worse part of war are those that want to live in peace but are caught up in the divisions of violence and cycle of revenge.

 

The Traveler

[anatess2]

... and just like that, the USA stopped caring about covid-19.  slow clap.

[person0]

Pallets of bricks being strategically left in areas of riot:  Article      Video Clip

I suspect that this is likely more than what it is being made out to be!  Gadianton Robbers come to mind.  Remember, the Book of Mormon was written for our day!

[Guest Godless]

13 minutes ago, person0 said:

Pallets of bricks being strategically left in areas of riot:  Article      Video Clip

I suspect that this is likely more than what it is being made out to be!  Gadianton Robbers come to mind.  Remember, the Book of Mormon was written for our day!

This has happened in several places. Absolutely sickening.

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

15 hours ago, Carborendum said:

it still started the BLM movement. 

Am I the only one who thinks "What does the Bureau of Land Management have to do with this" whenever I see this acronym?

[Carborendum]

1 minute ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

Am I the only one who thinks "What does the Bureau of Land Management have to do with this" whenever I see this acronym?

LOL!  No, when it started, that is exactly what I thought of the initialism.

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

15 minutes ago, Godless said:

This has happened in several places. Absolutely sickening.

Yes, because I have never seen a pallet of bricks being used to I don't know, make a wall or build a facade. This is not a conspiracy no matter how much you want it to be. When the riots are all over the place then any stack of stone items can be seen as a planned event. Nope.

[Carborendum]

1 hour ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

Yes, because I have never seen a pallet of bricks being used to I don't know, make a wall or build a facade. 

No, you haven't.  Bricks have not been used for actual building construction in many many years.  That's what makes this a lot more suspicious than it seems.

• Brick veneers are most often used in building faces.  Those bricks are not veneer bricks.
• Brick facades (different than veneers) use a different kind of brick.  Those are not the correct bricks.
• These bricks are most often used for landscaping and similar finish work nowadays.  But there was no such work being done in any of the locations I've seen that are related to these brick locations.
• Bricks are NOT dropped off one day and used the next, especially in the middle of a city.  A foolish contractor and his money are soon separated.

There are some sites where construction was happening.  But of the sites I saw, they were not using these bricks for the construction at hand.

While not "clear and convincing", to someone familiar with construction, it is very suspicious to have multiple instances of such carelessness at riot locations.

Edited June 1, 2020 by Carborendum

[anatess2]

59 minutes ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

Yes, because I have never seen a pallet of bricks being used to I don't know, make a wall or build a facade. This is not a conspiracy no matter how much you want it to be. When the riots are all over the place then any stack of stone items can be seen as a planned event. Nope.

 

47 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

While not "clear and convincing", to someone familiar with construction, it is very suspicious to have multiple instances of such carelessness at riot locations.

It's one thing to not bite on random conspiracy theory.  It's another thing to bury one's head in the sand.

This is a video of a PROTESTER who took a video of the pile of bricks to make sure he is not counted with whoever is inciting the violence.  Because, this is now turning into Charlottesville - there are multiple groups involved and they all don't have the same intentions.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/0HkMq3Nu0dAH/

[Emmanuel Goldstein]

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

While not "clear and convincing", to someone familiar with construction, it is very suspicious to have multiple instances of such carelessness at riot locations.

One of the stacks of bricks have been at the site since February, how is that placing bricks for violent use?

[anatess2]

7 minutes ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

One of the stacks of bricks have been at the site since February, how is that placing bricks for violent use?

Ahh... so because one of the stacks are reportedly there since February, then ALL of the stacks - even those that magically appeared inside the mall - can't possibly have been planned to smash through a store window...

What's that saying?  Only the Sith deals in absolutes?

[Carborendum]

20 minutes ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:

One of the stacks of bricks have been at the site since February, how is that placing bricks for violent use?

1) Show me the source for that.

2) I didn't say it was.  I said it was foolish to leave a stack of bricks like that in a public place.  I specifically said it was not clear and convincing.  I said it was suspicious.

3) One location.  How many stacks have been found?  Honest question.  I don't know of any source that has been counting.

Edited June 1, 2020 by Carborendum

[JohnsonJones]

21 hours ago, anatess2 said:

... and just like that, the USA stopped caring about covid-19.  slow clap.

This seems to be what is occurring.  I wonder if in a week or two there will be a surge in cases due to the gathering of people in the protests.

[Guest Godless]

Interesting tidbit from yesterday. Look, I have no love for Antifa. They're violent. They escalate things unnecessarily. And in this case, they're possibly using the black community as cover for their actions, which is beyond disgusting. All that being said, how does Mr. Kilmeade, and Trump by extension, know that there weren't white "supremests" involved in property destruction as well? I'm sure there's plenty of good ol' boys who would love to wreck some black neighborhoods and ignite an all-out race war. I could be wrong, though. There's still a LOT of arrests to process and backgrounds to investigate. Why so quick to exonerate white supremacists, specifically, based almost entirely on speculation? 

[Carborendum]

17 minutes ago, Godless said:

how does Mr. Kilmeade, and Trump by extension, know that there weren't white "supremests" involved in property destruction as well?

1) Barr stated that they "have intelligence" that it was mostly far left groups like ANTIFA.  Say what you will about Trump, but I tend to trust Barr when it comes to being even-handed politically.

2) Trump did not say there weren't any.  He said he didn't see any indication (evidence) of it.

17 minutes ago, Godless said:

I'm sure there's plenty of good ol' boys who would love to wreck some black neighborhoods and ignite an all-out race war. I could be wrong, though. There's still a LOT of arrests to process and backgrounds to investigate. Why so quick to exonerate white supremacists, specifically, based almost entirely on speculation? 

OK, now you're guilty of the same thing you're accusing Trump of.  What evidence do you have that they WERE there?  Speculation?  Why so quick to blame it on the alt-right?

Don't become the thing you hate.

[Guest Scott]

22 hours ago, anatess2 said:

... and just like that, the USA stopped caring about covid-19.  slow clap.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/coronavirus-updates-us-reports-over-21-000-cases-092845880--abc-news-topstories.html

[Guest Godless]

41 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

1) Barr stated that they "have intelligence" that it was mostly far left groups like ANTIFA.  Say what you will about Trump, but I tend to trust Barr when it comes to being even-handed politically.

That makes one of us.

Quote

2) Trump did not say there weren't any.  He said he didn't see any indication (evidence) of it.

Fair enough. But it still begs the question of why he would want to go out of his way to name-drop white supremacists like that during a time of race-driven crisis. Seems like a pretty loud dog whistle if you ask me, but I'll admit that my biases have been hard to contain recently. 

Quote

OK, now you're guilty of the same thing you're accusing Trump of.  What evidence do you have that they WERE there?  Speculation?  Why so quick to blame it on the alt-right?

Don't become the thing you hate.

I'm not blaming anyone right now. I merely stated a possible reason for white supremacists being present in some of these places. I also stated reasons why Antifa involvement could be likely. Yes, it's all speculation. Perhaps I should be more restrained on that until more facts come out. And perhaps the President of the United States should as well. 

 

Edited June 2, 2020 by Godless

[Carborendum]

3 minutes ago, Godless said:

That makes one of us.

Fair enough.

3 minutes ago, Godless said:

Fair enough.

Hey!  Look at that.  

3 minutes ago, Godless said:

But it still begs the question of why he would want to go out of his way to name-drop white supremacists like that during a time of race-driven crisis.

There were two groups of people out there that we currently know of:

1) People wanting justice for Floyd.  Most of them were peaceful, wanting a peaceful protest.
2) Agitators just wanting to destroy and loot.

It is the second category that he was describing.  It was the second category that was NOT with the people protesting racial bigotry. They were simple anarchists.

Even I want to make that clear.  Why wouldn't the President?

3 minutes ago, Godless said:

Seems like a pretty loud dog whistle if you ask me, but I'll admit that my biases have been hard to contain recently. 

This is all about bias, isn't it?  When Obama says things to incite racial divides, then softens it with disclaimers like "most police are good honest people trying to do the right thing..." it is easy to focus on one side without admitting that the other statements were actually said.

Likewise Trump says some things that can easily be taken as racist.  But he tends to have enough statements in the body of his public words that shows he's not.  Which side are you going to listen to?

Most people will hear both sides, but react with their gut and decide which was the THRUST of the words.  In the end, bias will decide, not facts.  That's what dog whistles are about, reinforcing your own biases.

3 minutes ago, Godless said:

I'm not blaming anyone right now. I merely stated a possible reason for white supremacists being present in some of these places. I also stated reasons why Antifa involvement could be likely. Yes, it's all speculation. Perhaps I should be more restrained on that until more facts come out. And perhaps the President of the United States should as well. 

That's actually very mature of you to admit that.  I also admit my own biases.  But I really try to see the other side when I can.

I see your point here.  But you may be more wrong than right.  I don't know of ANY conservative who jumped over to Obama's side.  I do know of many who were disappointed in him and did not vote for him the 2nd time.

Trump has not only won over many never-Trumpers, but he's also winning over lifetime Democrat voters.  He has really reached out to the black voter in policies, legislation, and political outreach.  And many of them are responding positively.

No one can get 100%.  Nowadays, not even close.  But Trump has been quite impressive in winning people over that absolutely hated him before.