|
|
Post by aztecryan on Nov 21, 2021 15:20:05 GMT -8
I'd like you to actually respond to the theme of injustice and admit you're not interested in impartial truth. Quit deflecting. What makes you think that I, in any way, am not in favor of impartial truth and a just judicial system? The hard part is for the vast majority of a population to agree on what constitutes a just system. To me, is clear to me that some on the far-Left and I have very different definitions of justice. AzWm What makes me think that way? Your entire posting history on this board. I'll wait for your apology for attacking Biden since you stand for the jury system, which is what he said verbatim yesterday in support of the verdict. Yes, I have actual views on what justice really is and not half-hearted platitudes. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Nov 21, 2021 15:20:55 GMT -8
The irony here is staggering as there have been numerous instances of Black citizens shot on their own property (Breonna Taylor, Atatiana Jefferson, Cameron Lamb) You lose the right to self-defense when you interject yourself into a dangerous situation looking for trouble with intentions to hurt people. That is NOT self-defense. And make no mistake, Rittenhouse's comments both before and after were obvious to his motives as well. Could not disagree further. He's George Zimmermann all over again. White supremacy reigns in the justice system. (And you'll immediately jump on that thinking I'm talking about the KKK or something, but no, two different concepts at work here) I don't agree. Anybody can go anywhere they want and protect themselves. If you're not the aggressor and the one physically starting the fight, then you have every right to protect yourself in any manner available. If Rittenhouse was there, and he didn't have a gun, he may have been killed himself. He was physically attacked and had a gun pointed at him FIRST. What don't you get here? If you're going to say that he shouldn't have had his gun with him in the first place, you would be wrong. He had every legal right to have it on him. Leave him alone, and don't attack and everything would have been fine. I'm not going to go out there with a gun, but he had every right to if he wanted to, just as the violent rioters had the right to go out there as well, but they didn't have the right to physically attack him and point a gun at his head. The other's had zero right to attack him first, and that goes for all of the human race. Period. If you go looking for trouble, you deserve to find it. Self-defense is what happens when a victim defends themselves or their property. If I drive to Los Angeles with an AR-15, instigating violence, I'm smart enough to know to expect violence. He had absolutely zero business as a 17 year old to play fantasy cop/medic/terrorist/whatever he decides he wants to be. Rittenhouse is NOT a victim. He's a privileged white male who out and out flaunted his privilege on camera and video. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Nov 21, 2021 15:21:31 GMT -8
aztecryan, what "happened in actuality"? Have you watched what happened on tape? Did you watch much of the trial? If you really are interested in "justice" then you should be happy that an innocent man did not go to jail. Don't let Ideology blind you to reality. You will become (maybe you already have?) the thing that you are supposably against. Not interested in mental gymnastics. I watched the trial. Not guilty and innocent, again, are not the same thing. I watched (and have the video clips) of the judge berating a prosecuting attorney, establishing bias right away with the use of "rioters" and "looters" and painting Rittenhouse as a victim rather than the people he shot. Your idea of "justice" is a sham, so I'm perfectly okay being opposite of that. Based on my (admittedly non-professional) knowledge of the law, the judge's admonishments were deserved. And, if I am correct, he removed the jury from the court room so they would not here his comments to the prosecutor. AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by sdsuball on Nov 21, 2021 15:25:43 GMT -8
The irony here is staggering as there have been numerous instances of Black citizens shot on their own property (Breonna Taylor, Atatiana Jefferson, Cameron Lamb) You lose the right to self-defense when you interject yourself into a dangerous situation looking for trouble with intentions to hurt people. That is NOT self-defense. And make no mistake, Rittenhouse's comments both before and after were obvious to his motives as well. Could not disagree further. He's George Zimmermann all over again. White supremacy reigns in the justice system. (And you'll immediately jump on that thinking I'm talking about the KKK or something, but no, two different concepts at work here) I don't agree. Anybody can go anywhere they want and protect themselves. If you're not the aggressor and the one physically starting the fight, then you have every right to protect yourself in any manner available. If Rittenhouse was there, and he didn't have a gun, he may have been killed himself. He was physically attacked and had a gun pointed at him FIRST. What don't you get here? If you're going to say that he shouldn't have had his gun with him in the first place, you would be wrong. He had every legal right to have it on him. Leave him alone, and don't attack and everything would have been fine. I'm not going to go out there with a gun, but he had every right to if he wanted to, just as the violent rioters had the right to go out there as well, but they didn't have the right to physically attack him and point a gun at his head. The other's had zero right to attack him first, and that goes for all of the human race. Period. I think that this incident displayed why it's dangerous to allow people to carry around assault rifles in cities. Brandishing an assault rifle in a politically charged situation is not only stupid, it's deadly. Regardless of if he was guilty or not under the letter of the law, it's unreasonable for people to carry around assault rifles in public. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Nov 21, 2021 16:00:36 GMT -8
Why not accelerate the inevitable population reduction? Open carry SDSU, Viejas..why not? Man if they had that when I went to school..the frat houses would have looked like Swiss cheese. My first reaction is to point out that in your hypothetical scenario, there is no violent riot going on, no houses burning on 55th Street, no business being looted on College Avenue, etc. I'm sure that if you openly carried a firearm in that area, you would get a lot of concerned looks, but I doubt anyone would start chasing you. The situation in Kenosha was much different. It was chaos and violence, which is par for the course when a riot gets going. I have been trying to point out that when local officials do not take decisive action to stop riots quickly, lots of bad things happen. Kyle Rittenhouse, a 17 year-old with obviously poor judgement, would have been somewhere else, doing whatever normal 17 year-olds do these days. More importantly, the terrible damage done to local businesses and those who depend on them for their pay checks, would not have happened. www.foxbusiness.com/economy/damage-rioting-kenosha-50-millionI notice that many who are responding in this thread but seem indifferent to the damage done to this small Wisconsin town. Sad. It's simple. No riot = no Rittenhouse trial. Come on, even grade school rids could figure that out. AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Nov 21, 2021 16:11:50 GMT -8
You do recall the Sagon Penn trial here in San Diego, don't you? His Constitutional right to justified self defense allowed him shoot and kill one cop, shoot and run over another cop with a stolen squad car and also shoot a completely innocent and non-threatening civilian ride along. And all while he was a person of color. It is just woke idiocy that says if Kyle was a person of color that he would be convicted of murder, etc. How little you think of your/our fellow Americans. Oh wait...rather, its how little you actually think and how much you just repeat what you are told to say. I can't think of anyone I could care to hear from less on this topic. Come on, Ryan, I fear for you. I had hoped that you had broken yourself of using the nolo contendere defense.  AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Nov 21, 2021 16:15:21 GMT -8
How many of those names listed weren't prior violent offenders, with drugs or alcohol in their system several times legal or fatal limits, trying to take weapons from the cops, ignoring screams to desist, and/or in the process of actually assaulting a cop? Exactly, and just about any time a white man kills a person of color the radicals come out and automatically make it a race issue. Heck, even if it's a white on white crime they'll find a way to make it a race issue as evidenced in the Rittenhouse case. Ridiculous and SO irresponsible. My black friend is also fed up with how watered down the term racism has become. These liberal radicals are making everything out to be out race. Horrible. That's pretty obvious. AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Nov 21, 2021 16:15:43 GMT -8
Why not accelerate the inevitable population reduction? Open carry SDSU, Viejas..why not? Man if they had that when I went to school..the frat houses would have looked like Swiss cheese. My first reaction is to point out that in your hypothetical scenario, there is no violent riot going on, no houses burning on 55th Street, no business being looted on College Avenue, etc. I'm sure that if you openly carried a firearm in that area, you would get a lot of concerned looks, but I doubt anyone would start chasing you. The situation in Kenosha was much different. It was chaos and violence, which is par for the course when a riot gets going. I have been trying to point out that when local officials do not take decisive action to stop riots quickly, lots of bad things happen. Kyle Rittenhouse, a 17 year-old with obviously poor judgement, would have been somewhere else, doing whatever normal 17 year-olds do these days. More importantly, the terrible damage done to local businesses and those who depend on them for their pay checks, would not have happened. www.foxbusiness.com/economy/damage-rioting-kenosha-50-millionI notice that many who are responding in this thread but seem indifferent to the damage done to this small Wisconsin town. Sad. It's simple. No riot = no Rittenhouse trial. Come on, even grade school rids could figure that out. AzWm What a strange view. And if Jacob Blake wasn't shot in the back, if George Floyd wasn't murdered with a knee to his carotid artery, if Tamir Rice wasn't shot by an unstable officer, if Alfred Olango had gotten mental health access instead of a bullet...You seem largely indifferent to human life, but sure seem to care a lot about businesses that are protected by insurance. Why were there riots again? What caused the riots in the first place? Were people just bored? Talk about a completely tonedeaf response. You have to be better than this. We ALL do. Stop blaming the aftermath and start finding the root of the problem. Start there. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Nov 21, 2021 17:08:35 GMT -8
Exactly, and just about any time a white man kills a person of color the radicals come out and automatically make it a race issue. Heck, even if it's a white on white crime they'll find a way to make it a race issue as evidenced in the Rittenhouse case. Ridiculous and SO irresponsible. My black friend is also fed up with how watered down the term racism has become. These liberal radicals are making everything out to be out race. Horrible. That's pretty obvious. AzWm Obvious to whom? Those who have no clue on how to properly contextualize privilege? Maybe just sit this one out. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Nov 21, 2021 17:11:24 GMT -8
I don't agree. Anybody can go anywhere they want and protect themselves. If you're not the aggressor and the one physically starting the fight, then you have every right to protect yourself in any manner available. If Rittenhouse was there, and he didn't have a gun, he may have been killed himself. He was physically attacked and had a gun pointed at him FIRST. What don't you get here? If you're going to say that he shouldn't have had his gun with him in the first place, you would be wrong. He had every legal right to have it on him. Leave him alone, and don't attack and everything would have been fine. I'm not going to go out there with a gun, but he had every right to if he wanted to, just as the violent rioters had the right to go out there as well, but they didn't have the right to physically attack him and point a gun at his head. The other's had zero right to attack him first, and that goes for all of the human race. Period. If you go looking for trouble, you deserve to find it. Self-defense is what happens when a victim defends themselves or their property. If I drive to Los Angeles with an AR-15, instigating violence, I'm smart enough to know to expect violence. He had absolutely zero business as a 17 year old to play fantasy cop/medic/terrorist/whatever he decides he wants to be. Rittenhouse is NOT a victim. He's a privileged white male who out and out flaunted his privilege on camera and video. This is another thing I don't understand. He deserved it? Wow. You try to come across as someone who is for equal rights and for people in general who have been mistreated, etc, but in all actuality, you only care about CERTAIN people and you pick and choose who they are. Not for everyone. You think he DESERVED to be hit over the head with a skateboard and have a gun put to his face? Ryan, admit it, you only care about injustice that occurs to certain individuals. You pick and choose. That's horrible Ryan. Wrong is wrong when it comes to assault, period. So, if a black man goes to a riot with a gun and can't wait to use it, you would be ok if he was assaulted just like Rittenhouse was? I would bet my last dollar you would be in a huge uproar claiming racism, white privilege and the other popular terms. Come on now. See the discrepancies in your philosophy in this matter? |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Nov 21, 2021 17:13:17 GMT -8
I don't agree. Anybody can go anywhere they want and protect themselves. If you're not the aggressor and the one physically starting the fight, then you have every right to protect yourself in any manner available. If Rittenhouse was there, and he didn't have a gun, he may have been killed himself. He was physically attacked and had a gun pointed at him FIRST. What don't you get here? If you're going to say that he shouldn't have had his gun with him in the first place, you would be wrong. He had every legal right to have it on him. Leave him alone, and don't attack and everything would have been fine. I'm not going to go out there with a gun, but he had every right to if he wanted to, just as the violent rioters had the right to go out there as well, but they didn't have the right to physically attack him and point a gun at his head. The other's had zero right to attack him first, and that goes for all of the human race. Period. I think that this incident displayed why it's dangerous to allow people to carry around assault rifles in cities. Brandishing an assault rifle in a politically charged situation is not only stupid, it's deadly. Regardless of if he was guilty or not under the letter of the law, it's unreasonable for people to carry around assault rifles in public. I can agree with this. It's reckless in my opinion, but it's legal in certain areas. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Nov 21, 2021 17:21:38 GMT -8
If you go looking for trouble, you deserve to find it. Self-defense is what happens when a victim defends themselves or their property. If I drive to Los Angeles with an AR-15, instigating violence, I'm smart enough to know to expect violence. He had absolutely zero business as a 17 year old to play fantasy cop/medic/terrorist/whatever he decides he wants to be. Rittenhouse is NOT a victim. He's a privileged white male who out and out flaunted his privilege on camera and video. This is another thing I don't understand. He deserved it? Wow. You try to come across as someone who is for equal rights and for people in general who have been mistreated, etc, but in all actuality, you only care about CERTAIN people and you pick and choose who they are. Not for everyone. You think he DESERVED to be hit over the head with a skateboard and have a gun put to his face? Ryan, admit it, you only care about injustice that occurs to certain individuals. You pick and choose. That's horrible Ryan. Wrong is wrong when it comes to assault, period. Spare me the moral outrage and this idiocy, please. He. Is. Not. A. Victim. He willingly and knowingly carried a gun to a dangerous, racially inflamed protest he had absolutely no business being at other than to create and instigate violence. I only care about injustice that happens to certain individuals? Yeah, actual victims. That should be...common sense? Victims don't comment on video that they would start shooting people given the chance. To borrow your own word: Duh? |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Nov 21, 2021 17:24:32 GMT -8
I think that this incident displayed why it's dangerous to allow people to carry around assault rifles in cities. Brandishing an assault rifle in a politically charged situation is not only stupid, it's deadly. Regardless of if he was guilty or not under the letter of the law, it's unreasonable for people to carry around assault rifles in public. I can agree with this. It's reckless in my opinion, but it's legal in certain areas. Lynching isn't a federal crime. The law in Wisconsin is so antiquated, it might as well be from the Civil War. |
|
|
|
Post by Fishn'Aztec on Nov 21, 2021 18:01:00 GMT -8
Lynching should disappear from our vocabulary. Not that we should forget or try to hide what occurred in our history but the word shouldn't conjur up the disgusting, heart wrenching image that it refers to. The word should be buried with the poor souls that unfortunately lost their lives!! JMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Nov 21, 2021 18:28:25 GMT -8
This is another thing I don't understand. He deserved it? Wow. You try to come across as someone who is for equal rights and for people in general who have been mistreated, etc, but in all actuality, you only care about CERTAIN people and you pick and choose who they are. Not for everyone. You think he DESERVED to be hit over the head with a skateboard and have a gun put to his face? Ryan, admit it, you only care about injustice that occurs to certain individuals. You pick and choose. That's horrible Ryan. Wrong is wrong when it comes to assault, period. Spare me the moral outrage and this idiocy, please. He. Is. Not. A. Victim. He willingly and knowingly carried a gun to a dangerous, racially inflamed protest he had absolutely no business being at other than to create and instigate violence. I only care about injustice that happens to certain individuals? Yeah, actual victims. That should be...common sense? Victims don't comment on video that they would start shooting people given the chance. To borrow your own word: Duh? He deserved it. Three words: Shame on you. Really bad look on your part. By the way, you're the one that spews false morality. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Nov 21, 2021 18:41:56 GMT -8
Spare me the moral outrage and this idiocy, please. He. Is. Not. A. Victim. He willingly and knowingly carried a gun to a dangerous, racially inflamed protest he had absolutely no business being at other than to create and instigate violence. I only care about injustice that happens to certain individuals? Yeah, actual victims. That should be...common sense? Victims don't comment on video that they would start shooting people given the chance. To borrow your own word: Duh? He deserved it. Three words: Shame on you. Really bad look on your part. By the way, you're the one that spews false morality. You confuse "false morality" with "actual common sense." This faux outrage is straight out of the conservative playbook, seemingly trying to hold the moral high ground. Of course you think he's a victim, but have so far not commented on his videotaped motives, his alleged ties to white supremacists or anything else that would seemingly obviously discredit that narrative. I've seen people try to compare this to women deserving to be raped based on the outfit they wear, which is categorically sick. Pretty ironic that he stated he supports the BLM movement on Tucker's show. There goes his base of support before he can even cash in as the face of the party. Once you realize that much of this was just to continue to uphold the corruption of a broken system, it becomes easier to recognize. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Nov 21, 2021 18:58:59 GMT -8
Exactly, and just about any time a white man kills a person of color the radicals come out and automatically make it a race issue. Heck, even if it's a white on white crime they'll find a way to make it a race issue as evidenced in the Rittenhouse case. Ridiculous and SO irresponsible. My black friend is also fed up with how watered down the term racism has become. These liberal radicals are making everything out to be out race. Horrible. What's horrible is your ignorance and the fact you perpetuate blind idealism. "My black friend" doesn't give a rat's ass about your lack of integrity. You're not black, you have no earthly idea. You're just trying to use that as a crutch to insinuate you have some semblance of a notion on what racial struggle is like. You're better off just not saying anything. Not only is it offensive and demeaning, it's grossly irresponsible. Your lack of understanding on this topic is glaring - You're trying to use false characterizations here to justify your bogus outrage. Failing miserably. What was said has nothing to do with Rittenhouse specifically. It has EVERYTHING to do with a culture of inequality and a broken system where people of color are inherently at risk at a much higher rate. That's a fact. It's not even arguable. It's statistics, plain and simple. I mean, you could do just a TINY bit of research and have some kind of clue here, but you'd prefer to just echo other people's racism. Oscar Grant was on parole after serving time for gun possession. He was shot by an officer in Oakland. He was unarmed. He was held down with a knee to the face. That officer served a whopping 11 months for involuntary manslaughter, 5 months SHORTER than Grant's sentence for possessing a gun. Please, continue to lecture me on how this is somehow just and deserved. This is one of most objectionable remarks in the 12 years since this website was founded. Seriously. Among other things (going to school, raising two kids, more or less growing up...  ) I have spent most of the past 70 years studying World War II. I am probably one of the few people who can recite the names of the five R-Class battleships of the Royal Navy, or the popular name for the Japanese Type-93 torpedo, or the type of planes used to shoot down the plane carrying Admiral Yamamoto in 1943. Beyond the factoids listed above, I have learned one very crucial fact. That is the following: one of the factors that led to the murder of millions of innocent people was the successful effort by the initiators of those murders to convince their populations that certain individuals were less than human and had no rights. You say, "You're not black, you have no earthly idea..." Ryan, no one is black, no one is white, no one is brown, no one is yellow, etc. We are all human beings, period. I reject totally and categorically deny that people can or should be identified was being members of a certain race. People can be identified in terms of nationalities, ethnicities, gender, language groups, occupations, etc. Michael Jordan can be identified as male, American, a retired athlete, a public figure, a father, and so on. African-American? Okay, if you must. In that case, you might identify me as European-American. But not white. My skin is not the color of computer printer paper. Can I have an idea of what it's like to be an African-American? Let me ask another question. Can I have an idea of what a woman goes through during childbirth? Well, not exactly, of course. But even a man can appreciate, at least to agree, by observing childbirth and by hearing the testimony of mothers who know what it is like. In the same fashion, I was never in a battle but have seen photos and films of battles and read the horror stories of men who survived war. Based on all that information, I have a strong belief that I do not ever want to find myself in the middle of a shooting war. No, I'm sure I don't have as strong an impression as those who were actually there. In any case, I am human enough to have sympathy for the what soldiers go through when they are in danger. Whether we speak of childbirth or the horrors of war, only a person totally without human emotions and imagination could possibly fail to appreciate the situations of people who have been in situations that we either have not been in, or could not be ever be in. Speaking of "race" (hate to use that word), only a person totally without human emotions or imagination could fail to feel sympathy for African-Americans who have been victims of prejudice based on their color. In that regard, I would like to share a story from my own past. I am a great fan of jazz music. I've been collecting records (LPs, 45s, DVDs, cassettes) since 1953. Mostly as a result of that interest, I have encountered many stories of the prejudice faced by jazz musicians. Here is one that made an especially strong impression on me. Roy Eldridge, whose nickname was Little Jazz, was a trumpet player who is considered the major link between Louis Armstrong and Dizzy Gillespie. In 1941 he joined Gene Krupa's band; this made him one of the first African-American musicians to join a "white" band. In 1944 be joined Artie Shaw's band. In that group he was also the victim of prejudice. In '45, the band was playing in California; possibly in Sacramento, although I'm not sure exactly which city. One evening, Eldridge showed up, trumpet case in hand, at the entrance to the venue where the band was scheduled to play. The man at the door would not let him in, clearly not in sympathy with Roy's color. "But I'm playing here tonight." The door man was unmoved. "Look, here's my trumpet." History does not record the door man's response. Roy stepped back a couple of steps and pointed up to the venue's marquee. "See what it says? Artie Shaw's orchestra featuring Roy Eldridge. I'm Roy Eldridge." Well, somehow Shaw, who was already inside, heard of the problem and came out. Eldridge was let in. Shaw got the door man fired. But the damage to Roy Eldridge, one of the 20th Century's outstanding jazz musicians, was done. I could recite a number of similar stories. I've never forgotten that and the other stories. Why do I tell this story? It's because I am sick and tired of people claiming that the color of one's skin determines what that person can or cannot understand about people who do not look the same. Here's the thing. Any person with humanity and integrity can appreciate, to at least a degree, the problems of other human beings, be they near or far. I do not have to be a citizen of Afghanistan, Cambodia, or the Congo to be troubled by the lack of fresh water in those countries. I do not have to live in the south side of Chicago to be appalled by the fear the honest people of that community feel, wondering whether a random gang shooting is going to kill one of their children. In short, there may be insensitive people in this and every society, but that is on individuals, not whole groups of people who happen to share skin color, preferred language, or ethnicity. I believe in what Martin Luther King Junior believed. It appears to me that some, especially on the Left, have rejected King's message. That bodes ill for this country. AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Nov 21, 2021 19:17:41 GMT -8
What's horrible is your ignorance and the fact you perpetuate blind idealism. "My black friend" doesn't give a rat's ass about your lack of integrity. You're not black, you have no earthly idea. You're just trying to use that as a crutch to insinuate you have some semblance of a notion on what racial struggle is like. You're better off just not saying anything. Not only is it offensive and demeaning, it's grossly irresponsible. Your lack of understanding on this topic is glaring - You're trying to use false characterizations here to justify your bogus outrage. Failing miserably. What was said has nothing to do with Rittenhouse specifically. It has EVERYTHING to do with a culture of inequality and a broken system where people of color are inherently at risk at a much higher rate. That's a fact. It's not even arguable. It's statistics, plain and simple. I mean, you could do just a TINY bit of research and have some kind of clue here, but you'd prefer to just echo other people's racism. Oscar Grant was on parole after serving time for gun possession. He was shot by an officer in Oakland. He was unarmed. He was held down with a knee to the face. That officer served a whopping 11 months for involuntary manslaughter, 5 months SHORTER than Grant's sentence for possessing a gun. Please, continue to lecture me on how this is somehow just and deserved. This is one of most objectionable remarks in the 12 years since this website was founded. Seriously. Among other things (going to school, raising two kids, more or less growing up... ) I have spent most of the past 70 years studying World War II. I am probably one of the few people who can recite the names of the five R-Class battleships of the Royal Navy, or the popular name for the Japanese Type-93 torpedo, or the type of planes used to shoot down the plane carrying Admiral Yamamoto in 1943. Beyond the factoids listed above, I have learned one very crucial fact. That is the following: one of the factors that led to the murder of millions of innocent people was the successful effort by the initiators of those murders to convince their populations that certain individuals were less than human and had no rights. You say, "You're not black, you have no earthly idea..." Ryan, no one is black, no one is white, no one is brown, no one is yellow, etc. We are all human beings, period. I reject totally and categorically that people can or should be identified was being members of a certain race. People can be identified in terms of nationalities, ethnicities, gender, language groups, occupations, etc. Michael Jordan can be identified as male, American, a retired athlete, a public figure, a father, and so on. African-American? Okay, if you must. In that case, you might identify me as European-American. But not white. My skin is not the color of computer printer paper. Can I have an idea of what it's like to be an African-American? Let me ask another question. Can I have an idea of what a woman goes through during childbirth? Well, not exactly, of course. But even a man can appreciate, at least to agree, by observing childbirth and by hearing the testimony of mothers who know what it is like. In the same fashion, I was never in a battle but have seen photos and films of battles and read the horror stories of men who survived war. Based on all that information, I have a strong belief that I do not ever want to find myself in the middle of a shooting war. No, I'm sure I don't have as strong an impression as those who were actually there. In any case, I am human enough to have sympathy for the what soldiers go through when they are in danger. Whether we speak of childbirth or the horrors of war, only a person totally without human emotions and imagination could possibly fail to appreciate the situations of people who have been in situations that we either have not been in, or could not be ever be in. Speaking of "race" (hate to use that word), only a person totally without human emotions or imagination could fail to feel sympathy for African-Americans who have been victims of prejudice based on their color. In that regard, I would like to share a story from my own past. I am a great fan of jazz music. I've been collecting records (LPs, 45s, DVDs, cassettes) since 1953. Mostly as a result of that interest, I have encountered many stories of the prejudice faced by jazz musicians. Here is one that made an especially strong impression on me. Roy Eldridge, whose nickname was Little Jazz, was a trumpet player who is considered the major link between Louis Armstrong and Dizzy Gillespie. In 1941 he joined Gene Krupa's band; this made him one of the first African-American musicians to join a "white" band. In 1944 be joined Artie Shaw's band. In that group he was also the victim of prejudice. In '45, the band was playing in California; possibly in Sacramento, although I'm not sure exactly which city. One evening, Eldridge showed up, trumpet case in hand, at the entrance to the venue where the band was scheduled to play. The man at the door would not let him in, clearly not in sympathy with Roy's color. "But I'm playing here tonight." The door man was unmoved. "Look, here's my trumpet." History does not record the door man's response. Roy stepped back a couple of steps and pointed up to the venue's marquee. "See what it says? Artie Shaw's orchestra featuring Roy Eldridge. I'm Roy Eldridge." Well, somehow Shaw, who was already inside, heard of the problem and came out. Eldridge was let in. Shaw got the door man fired. But the damage to Roy Eldridge, one of the 20th Century's outstanding jazz musicians, was done. I could recite a number of similar stories. I've never forgotten that and the other stories. Why do I tell this story? It's because I am sick and tired of people claiming that the color of one's skin determines what that person can or cannot understand about people who do not look the same. Here's the thing. Any person with humanity and integrity can appreciate, to at least a degree, the problems of other human beings, be they near or far. I do not have to be a citizen of Afghanistan, Cambodia, or the Congo to be troubled by the lack of fresh water in those countries. I do not have to live in the south side of Chicago to be appalled by the fear the honest people of that community feel, wondering whether a random gang shooting is going to kill one of their children. In short, there may be insensitive people in this and every society, but that is on individuals, not whole groups of people who happen to share skin color, preferred language, or ethnicity. I believe in what Martin Luther King Junior believed. It appears to me that some, especially on the Left, have rejected King's message. That bodes ill for this country. AzWm ....Jazz music, World War II, Martin Luther King...and a pointless dig at the "Left" from a supposed Libertarian....Feels like I'm reading a novel from someone who can't make up their mind and just wants to ramble. Believe it or not, being human often isn't enough. This thread is a case study personifying that because NOBODY but myself has actually addressed the real issues here. Nobody has even commented, except to lie, on the statistical evidence of racial bias in our criminal system. This thread may as well just be a glorification of Kyle Rittenhouse rather than useful discussion for meaningful change. If you really think that one sentence is the most objectionable thing on this website, I can only laugh. It's not even the worst statement in this thread, let alone a website that you supposedly are the moderator of. Start with the conspiracy theories you let run rampant here and the posters you seemingly don't care to call out (besides me, of course) - No lo comprende. What bodes ill for this country by the way is the continued spread of ignorance and perpetuating fairy tales while not addressing actual systemic root causes for the things you're so fond of soapboxing about - Jobs, buildings, protests....not a single word about what led to those events. Not one. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Nov 21, 2021 19:21:02 GMT -8
What's horrible is your ignorance and the fact you perpetuate blind idealism. "My black friend" doesn't give a rat's ass about your lack of integrity. You're not black, you have no earthly idea. You're just trying to use that as a crutch to insinuate you have some semblance of a notion on what racial struggle is like. You're better off just not saying anything. Not only is it offensive and demeaning, it's grossly irresponsible. Your lack of understanding on this topic is glaring - You're trying to use false characterizations here to justify your bogus outrage. Failing miserably. What was said has nothing to do with Rittenhouse specifically. It has EVERYTHING to do with a culture of inequality and a broken system where people of color are inherently at risk at a much higher rate. That's a fact. It's not even arguable. It's statistics, plain and simple. I mean, you could do just a TINY bit of research and have some kind of clue here, but you'd prefer to just echo other people's racism. Oscar Grant was on parole after serving time for gun possession. He was shot by an officer in Oakland. He was unarmed. He was held down with a knee to the face. That officer served a whopping 11 months for involuntary manslaughter, 5 months SHORTER than Grant's sentence for possessing a gun. Please, continue to lecture me on how this is somehow just and deserved. This is one of most objectionable remarks in the 12 years since this website was founded. Seriously. Among other things (going to school, raising two kids, more or less growing up... ) I have spent most of the past 70 years studying World War II. I am probably one of the few people who can recite the names of the five R-Class battleships of the Royal Navy, or the popular name for the Japanese Type-93 torpedo, or the type of planes used to shoot down the plane carrying Admiral Yamamoto in 1943. Beyond the factoids listed above, I have learned one very crucial fact. That is the following: one of the factors that led to the murder of millions of innocent people was the successful effort by the initiators of those murders to convince their populations that certain individuals were less than human and had no rights. You say, "You're not black, you have no earthly idea..." Ryan, no one is black, no one is white, no one is brown, no one is yellow, etc. We are all human beings, period. I reject totally and categorically deny that people can or should be identified was being members of a certain race. People can be identified in terms of nationalities, ethnicities, gender, language groups, occupations, etc. Michael Jordan can be identified as male, American, a retired athlete, a public figure, a father, and so on. African-American? Okay, if you must. In that case, you might identify me as European-American. But not white. My skin is not the color of computer printer paper. Can I have an idea of what it's like to be an African-American? Let me ask another question. Can I have an idea of what a woman goes through during childbirth? Well, not exactly, of course. But even a man can appreciate, at least to agree, by observing childbirth and by hearing the testimony of mothers who know what it is like. In the same fashion, I was never in a battle but have seen photos and films of battles and read the horror stories of men who survived war. Based on all that information, I have a strong belief that I do not ever want to find myself in the middle of a shooting war. No, I'm sure I don't have as strong an impression as those who were actually there. In any case, I am human enough to have sympathy for the what soldiers go through when they are in danger. Whether we speak of childbirth or the horrors of war, only a person totally without human emotions and imagination could possibly fail to appreciate the situations of people who have been in situations that we either have not been in, or could not be ever be in. Speaking of "race" (hate to use that word), only a person totally without human emotions or imagination could fail to feel sympathy for African-Americans who have been victims of prejudice based on their color. In that regard, I would like to share a story from my own past. I am a great fan of jazz music. I've been collecting records (LPs, 45s, DVDs, cassettes) since 1953. Mostly as a result of that interest, I have encountered many stories of the prejudice faced by jazz musicians. Here is one that made an especially strong impression on me. Roy Eldridge, whose nickname was Little Jazz, was a trumpet player who is considered the major link between Louis Armstrong and Dizzy Gillespie. In 1941 he joined Gene Krupa's band; this made him one of the first African-American musicians to join a "white" band. In 1944 be joined Artie Shaw's band. In that group he was also the victim of prejudice. In '45, the band was playing in California; possibly in Sacramento, although I'm not sure exactly which city. One evening, Eldridge showed up, trumpet case in hand, at the entrance to the venue where the band was scheduled to play. The man at the door would not let him in, clearly not in sympathy with Roy's color. "But I'm playing here tonight." The door man was unmoved. "Look, here's my trumpet." History does not record the door man's response. Roy stepped back a couple of steps and pointed up to the venue's marquee. "See what it says? Artie Shaw's orchestra featuring Roy Eldridge. I'm Roy Eldridge." Well, somehow Shaw, who was already inside, heard of the problem and came out. Eldridge was let in. Shaw got the door man fired. But the damage to Roy Eldridge, one of the 20th Century's outstanding jazz musicians, was done. I could recite a number of similar stories. I've never forgotten that and the other stories. Why do I tell this story? It's because I am sick and tired of people claiming that the color of one's skin determines what that person can or cannot understand about people who do not look the same. Here's the thing. Any person with humanity and integrity can appreciate, to at least a degree, the problems of other human beings, be they near or far. I do not have to be a citizen of Afghanistan, Cambodia, or the Congo to be troubled by the lack of fresh water in those countries. I do not have to live in the south side of Chicago to be appalled by the fear the honest people of that community feel, wondering whether a random gang shooting is going to kill one of their children. In short, there may be insensitive people in this and every society, but that is on individuals, not whole groups of people who happen to share skin color, preferred language, or ethnicity. I believe in what Martin Luther King Junior believed. It appears to me that some, especially on the Left, have rejected King's message. That bodes ill for this country. AzWm Great post. Also, my black friend has articulated to me many times in the past about racism that he gone through, but he has decided not to let it affect him, and he judges people by the content of their character, and not of their skin color. While I may not have gone through his exact injustices, I certainly felt as though I did, since he can paint a very good picture when he speaks. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Nov 21, 2021 19:21:42 GMT -8
John, I honestly suggest you just not engage with Ryan on this topic. I'm sure he feels likewise. Both of us have presented arguments ad-nauseum, but at the end of the day, he's not going to change his beliefs and you're just wasting your time. Despite very cogent arguments challenging his worldview that our police are dyed in the wool racists out to get all black people (a claim that when you think about it is absurd), he is a true believer and probably won't budge. So go enjoy your Sunday. Ryan, a parting thought: real privilege certainly exists in our justice system. But it's reserved for the politically well-connected regardless of their race. I recommend you focus your righteous anger on that rather than getting distracted by skewed, poorly contextualized events and statistics designed to redirect your energies away from the real issues facing our society and electing the very people who benefit most from the privilege you claim to hate. I hear ya. |
|
) I have spent most of the past 70 years studying World War II. I am probably one of the few people who can recite the names of the five R-Class battleships of the Royal Navy, or the popular name for the Japanese Type-93 torpedo, or the type of planes used to shoot down the plane carrying Admiral Yamamoto in 1943.