|
|
Post by Obsidian Edge on Nov 23, 2021 7:29:21 GMT -8
There's been a lot of heated debate over the Rittenhouse trial in this sub-forum. Now that a few days have passed and some of the facts of this incident have come to light, I think what happened in Waukesha should serve as an illustrative case study against the charge that we live in a "systemically racist" country.
Let's start with the facts. We know that at least 5 people are dead and 40 people are injured after the suspect rammed their red SUV through a Christmas parade in Waukesha, WI. The victims include young children. The suspect has a lengthy criminal record and is African American. His victims are all white. The incident comes just days after the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict in which left-biased media falsely claimed for at least a year that Rittenhouse was a white supremacist seeking to kill people affiliated with a BLM riot. Those are the facts.
There is ample reason to believe that the perpetrator deliberately targeted this parade and that his action was racially motivated. We may learn more as the case evolves.
The main thing I want to highlight is that we should consider how media coverage of this event would change if the skin color of the victims and perpetrator were swapped. Imagine a white serial criminal plowing into an all-black parade somewhere near Minneapolis immediately following the Derek Chauvin verdict. What kinds of accusations would the same media shrieking about the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict be making? And how would those of you who believe that "systemic racism" is a real thing feel? What kinds of accusations and conclusions would *you* likely make?
Please reflect on this double standard. Try to bring down your shields a little. It should, at a minimum, challenge your pre-conception that we live in a systemically racist society. It should also make you question the sources you might rely on for your information and their role in promoting racial hatred.
|
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on Nov 23, 2021 8:42:02 GMT -8
There's been a lot of heated debate over the Rittenhouse trial in this sub-forum. Now that a few days have passed and some of the facts of this incident have come to light, I think what happened in Waukesha should serve as an illustrative case study against the charge that we live in a "systemically racist" country. Let's start with the facts. We know that at least 5 people are dead and 40 people are injured after the suspect rammed their red SUV through a parade in Waukesha, WI. The victims include young children. The suspect has a lengthy criminal record and is African American. His victims are all white. The incident comes just days after the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict in which left-biased media falsely claimed for at least a year that Rittenhouse was a white supremacist seeking to kill people affiliated with a BLM riot. Those are the facts. There is ample reason to believe that the perpetrator deliberately targeted this parade and that his action was racially motivated. We may learn more as the case evolves. The main thing I want to highlight is that we should consider how media coverage of this event would change if the skin color of the victims and perpetrator were swapped. Imagine a white serial criminal plowing into an all-black parade somewhere near Minneapolis immediately following the Derek Chauvin verdict. What kinds of accusations would the same media shrieking about the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict be making? And how would those of you who believe that "systemic racism" is a real thing feel? What kinds of accusations and conclusions would *you* likely make? Please reflect on this double standard. Try to bring down your shields a little. It should, at a minimum, challenge your pre-conception that we live in a systemically racist society. It should also make you question the sources you might rely on for your information and their role in promoting racial hatred. Hey, I knew Rittenhouse would get off..and not claiming racism. My problem is a non-law enforcement dumb 17 year old kid walking into a highly charged riot situation with an AR-15 over his shoulder. In ALL other modern, advanced countries of the World, this would be considered illegal..and nuts. So where are we heading? |
|
|
|
Post by Obsidian Edge on Nov 23, 2021 9:01:42 GMT -8
There's been a lot of heated debate over the Rittenhouse trial in this sub-forum. Now that a few days have passed and some of the facts of this incident have come to light, I think what happened in Waukesha should serve as an illustrative case study against the charge that we live in a "systemically racist" country. Let's start with the facts. We know that at least 5 people are dead and 40 people are injured after the suspect rammed their red SUV through a parade in Waukesha, WI. The victims include young children. The suspect has a lengthy criminal record and is African American. His victims are all white. The incident comes just days after the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict in which left-biased media falsely claimed for at least a year that Rittenhouse was a white supremacist seeking to kill people affiliated with a BLM riot. Those are the facts. There is ample reason to believe that the perpetrator deliberately targeted this parade and that his action was racially motivated. We may learn more as the case evolves. The main thing I want to highlight is that we should consider how media coverage of this event would change if the skin color of the victims and perpetrator were swapped. Imagine a white serial criminal plowing into an all-black parade somewhere near Minneapolis immediately following the Derek Chauvin verdict. What kinds of accusations would the same media shrieking about the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict be making? And how would those of you who believe that "systemic racism" is a real thing feel? What kinds of accusations and conclusions would *you* likely make? Please reflect on this double standard. Try to bring down your shields a little. It should, at a minimum, challenge your pre-conception that we live in a systemically racist society. It should also make you question the sources you might rely on for your information and their role in promoting racial hatred. Hey, I knew Rittenhouse would get off..and not claiming racism. My problem is a non-law enforcement dumb 17 year old kid walking into a highly charged riot situation with an AR-15 over his shoulder. In ALL other modern, advanced countries of the World, this would be considered illegal..and nuts. So where are we heading? The Rittenhouse ordeal is really tangential to my point, which is that there is a blatant double standard on display here. |
|
|
|
Post by Obsidian Edge on Nov 23, 2021 16:46:11 GMT -8
Hmm. Suddenly all the most vocal social justice warriors on this forum seem awfully quiet. A pity.
|
|
|
|
Waukesha
Nov 23, 2021 19:48:13 GMT -8
via mobile
azson likes this
Post by aztecryan on Nov 23, 2021 19:48:13 GMT -8
There's been a lot of heated debate over the Rittenhouse trial in this sub-forum. Now that a few days have passed and some of the facts of this incident have come to light, I think what happened in Waukesha should serve as an illustrative case study against the charge that we live in a "systemically racist" country. Let's start with the facts. We know that at least 5 people are dead and 40 people are injured after the suspect rammed their red SUV through a Christmas parade in Waukesha, WI. The victims include young children. The suspect has a lengthy criminal record and is African American. His victims are all white. The incident comes just days after the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict in which left-biased media falsely claimed for at least a year that Rittenhouse was a white supremacist seeking to kill people affiliated with a BLM riot. Those are the facts. There is ample reason to believe that the perpetrator deliberately targeted this parade and that his action was racially motivated. We may learn more as the case evolves. The main thing I want to highlight is that we should consider how media coverage of this event would change if the skin color of the victims and perpetrator were swapped. Imagine a white serial criminal plowing into an all-black parade somewhere near Minneapolis immediately following the Derek Chauvin verdict. What kinds of accusations would the same media shrieking about the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict be making? And how would those of you who believe that "systemic racism" is a real thing feel? What kinds of accusations and conclusions would *you* likely make? Please reflect on this double standard. Try to bring down your shields a little. It should, at a minimum, challenge your pre-conception that we live in a systemically racist society. It should also make you question the sources you might rely on for your information and their role in promoting racial hatred. This isn't constructive whatsoever. (And I've been in a gym all day working, so I'm not being silent, I was actually busy) - This is so poorly framed, it's amazing it made sense to you. Using one incident, where the suspect was fleeing from another crime, to try and disprove systemic racism? Like...what? What "ample evidence" is there to determine this was racially motivated? Regarding Rittenhouse, he's been photographed with Proud Boys, who are most definitely a white supremacy group. There were also people photographed outside the courthouse that were flashing "white power" signs. Seems like you're really reaching for conclusions to disprove something you know to be reality. Why? Systemic racism is a reality. It doesn't mean the entire system *is* racist, it means that outcomes that are determined have disparate results based on racial bias. If you're trying to argue that systemic racism doesn't exist, that's just false. |
|
|
|
Post by Obsidian Edge on Nov 24, 2021 5:19:22 GMT -8
There's been a lot of heated debate over the Rittenhouse trial in this sub-forum. Now that a few days have passed and some of the facts of this incident have come to light, I think what happened in Waukesha should serve as an illustrative case study against the charge that we live in a "systemically racist" country. Let's start with the facts. We know that at least 5 people are dead and 40 people are injured after the suspect rammed their red SUV through a Christmas parade in Waukesha, WI. The victims include young children. The suspect has a lengthy criminal record and is African American. His victims are all white. The incident comes just days after the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict in which left-biased media falsely claimed for at least a year that Rittenhouse was a white supremacist seeking to kill people affiliated with a BLM riot. Those are the facts. There is ample reason to believe that the perpetrator deliberately targeted this parade and that his action was racially motivated. We may learn more as the case evolves. The main thing I want to highlight is that we should consider how media coverage of this event would change if the skin color of the victims and perpetrator were swapped. Imagine a white serial criminal plowing into an all-black parade somewhere near Minneapolis immediately following the Derek Chauvin verdict. What kinds of accusations would the same media shrieking about the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict be making? And how would those of you who believe that "systemic racism" is a real thing feel? What kinds of accusations and conclusions would *you* likely make? Please reflect on this double standard. Try to bring down your shields a little. It should, at a minimum, challenge your pre-conception that we live in a systemically racist society. It should also make you question the sources you might rely on for your information and their role in promoting racial hatred. This isn't constructive whatsoever. (And I've been in a gym all day working, so I'm not being silent, I was actually busy) - This is so poorly framed, it's amazing it made sense to you. Using one incident, where the suspect was fleeing from another crime, to try and disprove systemic racism? Like...what? What "ample evidence" is there to determine this was racially motivated? Regarding Rittenhouse, he's been photographed with Proud Boys, who are most definitely a white supremacy group. There were also people photographed outside the courthouse that were flashing "white power" signs. Seems like you're really reaching for conclusions to disprove something you know to be reality. Why? Systemic racism is a reality. It doesn't mean the entire system *is* racist, it means that outcomes that are determined have disparate results based on racial bias. If you're trying to argue that systemic racism doesn't exist, that's just false. Ah here we go. Was wondering when you would show up. I never said this one example proves systemic racism doesn't exist. I said it should challenge your belief that it does. I.e. at the very least make you think a little. Because even though it is just one example, it is a powerful one. That is if you're willing to be objective for one second. Let's set aside the fact that the Proud Boys are not a "racist organization" as you allege. Their leader is an Afro-Cuban immigrant ffs. They are a men's club that is resisting lawless rioting by Antifa and BLM, who have been vandalizing communities all over this country for *years*. They (The Proud Boys) would be playing beer pong, Madden, and crawling pubs if Antifa didn't exist. You think that Rittenhouse taking a photo with them *proves* he's a white supremacist, but all of the circumstances surrounding the Waukesha incident don't raise any flags? You then try to claim that random people outside the courthouse flashing alleged "white supremacy signs" adds any weight to your ridiculous assertion that Rittenhouse himself is a racist? Isn't it interesting that you're willing to cite the most specious examples of Kyle's "white supremacy" yet completely gloss over facts directly related to Daniel Brooks' actions in Waukesha? Yes, ample evidence. The black culprit in the Waukesha incident admits he *deliberately* targeted an all-white parade days after a major news story where people like yourself alleged a white supremacist walked free. He was also a supporter of Black Lives Matter (an actual racist organization). As the days and weeks go on, we may find out more. But there is certainly reason to believe this was an incident of domestic terrorism. "It doesn't mean the entire system *is* racist, it means that outcomes that are determined have disparate results based on racial bias."The fact that you say this unironically is hilarious. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Nov 24, 2021 9:23:46 GMT -8
This isn't constructive whatsoever. (And I've been in a gym all day working, so I'm not being silent, I was actually busy) - This is so poorly framed, it's amazing it made sense to you. Using one incident, where the suspect was fleeing from another crime, to try and disprove systemic racism? Like...what? What "ample evidence" is there to determine this was racially motivated? Regarding Rittenhouse, he's been photographed with Proud Boys, who are most definitely a white supremacy group. There were also people photographed outside the courthouse that were flashing "white power" signs. Seems like you're really reaching for conclusions to disprove something you know to be reality. Why? Systemic racism is a reality. It doesn't mean the entire system *is* racist, it means that outcomes that are determined have disparate results based on racial bias. If you're trying to argue that systemic racism doesn't exist, that's just false. Ah here we go. Was wondering when you would show up. I never said this one example proves systemic racism doesn't exist. I said it should challenge your belief that it does. I.e. at the very least make you think a little. Because even though it is just one example, it is a powerful one. That is if you're willing to be objective for one second. Let's set aside the fact that the Proud Boys are not a "racist organization" as you allege. Their leader is an Afro-Cuban immigrant ffs. They are a men's club that is resisting lawless rioting by Antifa and BLM, who have been vandalizing communities all over this country for *years*. They (The Proud Boys) would be playing beer pong, Madden, and crawling pubs if Antifa didn't exist. You think that Rittenhouse taking a photo with them *proves* he's a white supremacist, but all of the circumstances surrounding the Waukesha incident don't raise any flags? You then try to claim that random people outside the courthouse flashing alleged "white supremacy signs" adds any weight to your ridiculous assertion that Rittenhouse himself is a racist? Isn't it interesting that you're willing to cite the most specious examples of Kyle's "white supremacy" yet completely gloss over facts directly related to Daniel Brooks' actions in Waukesha? Yes, ample evidence. The black culprit in the Waukesha incident admits he *deliberately* targeted an all-white parade days after a major news story where people like yourself alleged a white supremacist walked free. He was also a supporter of Black Lives Matter (an actual racist organization). As the days and weeks go on, we may find out more. But there is certainly reason to believe this was an incident of domestic terrorism. "It doesn't mean the entire system *is* racist, it means that outcomes that are determined have disparate results based on racial bias."The fact that you say this unironically is hilarious. I debated even responding to this because you're clearly trolling and violating forum rules, but here's some *actual* evidence while you make wild assertions. www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/06/21/proud-boys-recruitment-targets-men-looking-community/7452805002/www.sun-sentinel.com/florida-jewish-journal/fl-jj-proud-boys-rebrand-20201111-kp4cr7l5pbdnxguwyb3xq4m63e-story.htmlRittenhouse claims the Proud Boys photo op was a setup and "My lawyer made me do it." Yawn. Here's Mark McCloskey, the scumbag from Missouri, posing outside the Kenosha courthouse in support of Rittenhouse with two guys flashing the "white power" signs. www.kansascity.com/news/nation-world/article255902906.htmlRegarding Brooks, there's zero evidence that this is anything more than a mentally ill man with a lengthy rap sheet committing a heinous crime. He tried to run his ex-girlfriend over less than a week earlier. Domestic terrorism is a wild leap. And I'll repost this to refute your "irony" on your last stance. www.sentencingproject.org/publications/un-report-on-racial-disparities/Enjoy your eventual forum ban. |
|
|
|
Post by azson on Nov 24, 2021 9:34:38 GMT -8
This isn't constructive whatsoever. (And I've been in a gym all day working, so I'm not being silent, I was actually busy) - This is so poorly framed, it's amazing it made sense to you. Using one incident, where the suspect was fleeing from another crime, to try and disprove systemic racism? Like...what? What "ample evidence" is there to determine this was racially motivated? Regarding Rittenhouse, he's been photographed with Proud Boys, who are most definitely a white supremacy group. There were also people photographed outside the courthouse that were flashing "white power" signs. Seems like you're really reaching for conclusions to disprove something you know to be reality. Why? Systemic racism is a reality. It doesn't mean the entire system *is* racist, it means that outcomes that are determined have disparate results based on racial bias. If you're trying to argue that systemic racism doesn't exist, that's just false. Ah here we go. Was wondering when you would show up. I never said this one example proves systemic racism doesn't exist. I said it should challenge your belief that it does. I.e. at the very least make you think a little. Because even though it is just one example, it is a powerful one. That is if you're willing to be objective for one second. Let's set aside the fact that the Proud Boys are not a "racist organization" as you allege. Their leader is an Afro-Cuban immigrant ffs. They are a men's club that is resisting lawless rioting by Antifa and BLM, who have been vandalizing communities all over this country for *years*. They (The Proud Boys) would be playing beer pong, Madden, and crawling pubs if Antifa didn't exist. You think that Rittenhouse taking a photo with them *proves* he's a white supremacist, but all of the circumstances surrounding the Waukesha incident don't raise any flags? You then try to claim that random people outside the courthouse flashing alleged "white supremacy signs" adds any weight to your ridiculous assertion that Rittenhouse himself is a racist? Isn't it interesting that you're willing to cite the most specious examples of Kyle's "white supremacy" yet completely gloss over facts directly related to Daniel Brooks' actions in Waukesha? Yes, ample evidence. The black culprit in the Waukesha incident admits he *deliberately* targeted an all-white parade days after a major news story where people like yourself alleged a white supremacist walked free. He was also a supporter of Black Lives Matter (an actual racist organization). As the days and weeks go on, we may find out more. But there is certainly reason to believe this was an incident of domestic terrorism. "It doesn't mean the entire system *is* racist, it means that outcomes that are determined have disparate results based on racial bias."The fact that you say this unironically is hilarious. Troll harder, bro! Common, you can do it! |
|
|
|
Waukesha
Nov 24, 2021 10:09:36 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by aztecryan on Nov 24, 2021 10:09:36 GMT -8
Ah here we go. Was wondering when you would show up. I never said this one example proves systemic racism doesn't exist. I said it should challenge your belief that it does. I.e. at the very least make you think a little. Because even though it is just one example, it is a powerful one. That is if you're willing to be objective for one second. Let's set aside the fact that the Proud Boys are not a "racist organization" as you allege. Their leader is an Afro-Cuban immigrant ffs. They are a men's club that is resisting lawless rioting by Antifa and BLM, who have been vandalizing communities all over this country for *years*. They (The Proud Boys) would be playing beer pong, Madden, and crawling pubs if Antifa didn't exist. You think that Rittenhouse taking a photo with them *proves* he's a white supremacist, but all of the circumstances surrounding the Waukesha incident don't raise any flags? You then try to claim that random people outside the courthouse flashing alleged "white supremacy signs" adds any weight to your ridiculous assertion that Rittenhouse himself is a racist? Isn't it interesting that you're willing to cite the most specious examples of Kyle's "white supremacy" yet completely gloss over facts directly related to Daniel Brooks' actions in Waukesha? Yes, ample evidence. The black culprit in the Waukesha incident admits he *deliberately* targeted an all-white parade days after a major news story where people like yourself alleged a white supremacist walked free. He was also a supporter of Black Lives Matter (an actual racist organization). As the days and weeks go on, we may find out more. But there is certainly reason to believe this was an incident of domestic terrorism. "It doesn't mean the entire system *is* racist, it means that outcomes that are determined have disparate results based on racial bias."The fact that you say this unironically is hilarious. Troll harder, bro! Common, you can do it! The conclusions drawn without evidence are just bonkers. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Nov 24, 2021 11:13:50 GMT -8
Troll harder, bro! Common, you can do it! The conclusions drawn without evidence are just bonkers. Will this person even make it to 100 posts? |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Nov 24, 2021 13:40:02 GMT -8
The conclusions drawn without evidence are just bonkers. Will this person even make it to 100 posts? Yeah. It's hard to get banned. |
|
|
|
Waukesha
Nov 24, 2021 13:54:11 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by uwphoto on Nov 24, 2021 13:54:11 GMT -8
Will this person even make it to 100 posts? Yeah. It's hard to get banned. I think you have to get into a major blowout directly with one of the Mods..ie: Crazy Joe and Bob Forsythe... bit worried about Davesid. Although we were world's apart politically..I did like his presence..but he was really old. |
|
|
|
Post by Obsidian Edge on Nov 24, 2021 13:59:35 GMT -8
Ah here we go. Was wondering when you would show up. I never said this one example proves systemic racism doesn't exist. I said it should challenge your belief that it does. I.e. at the very least make you think a little. Because even though it is just one example, it is a powerful one. That is if you're willing to be objective for one second. Let's set aside the fact that the Proud Boys are not a "racist organization" as you allege. Their leader is an Afro-Cuban immigrant ffs. They are a men's club that is resisting lawless rioting by Antifa and BLM, who have been vandalizing communities all over this country for *years*. They (The Proud Boys) would be playing beer pong, Madden, and crawling pubs if Antifa didn't exist. You think that Rittenhouse taking a photo with them *proves* he's a white supremacist, but all of the circumstances surrounding the Waukesha incident don't raise any flags? You then try to claim that random people outside the courthouse flashing alleged "white supremacy signs" adds any weight to your ridiculous assertion that Rittenhouse himself is a racist? Isn't it interesting that you're willing to cite the most specious examples of Kyle's "white supremacy" yet completely gloss over facts directly related to Daniel Brooks' actions in Waukesha? Yes, ample evidence. The black culprit in the Waukesha incident admits he *deliberately* targeted an all-white parade days after a major news story where people like yourself alleged a white supremacist walked free. He was also a supporter of Black Lives Matter (an actual racist organization). As the days and weeks go on, we may find out more. But there is certainly reason to believe this was an incident of domestic terrorism. "It doesn't mean the entire system *is* racist, it means that outcomes that are determined have disparate results based on racial bias."The fact that you say this unironically is hilarious. I debated even responding to this because you're clearly trolling and violating forum rules, but here's some *actual* evidence while you make wild assertions. www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/06/21/proud-boys-recruitment-targets-men-looking-community/7452805002/www.sun-sentinel.com/florida-jewish-journal/fl-jj-proud-boys-rebrand-20201111-kp4cr7l5pbdnxguwyb3xq4m63e-story.htmlRittenhouse claims the Proud Boys photo op was a setup and "My lawyer made me do it." Yawn. Here's Mark McCloskey, the scumbag from Missouri, posing outside the Kenosha courthouse in support of Rittenhouse with two guys flashing the "white power" signs. www.kansascity.com/news/nation-world/article255902906.htmlRegarding Brooks, there's zero evidence that this is anything more than a mentally ill man with a lengthy rap sheet committing a heinous crime. He tried to run his ex-girlfriend over less than a week earlier. Domestic terrorism is a wild leap. And I'll repost this to refute your "irony" on your last stance. www.sentencingproject.org/publications/un-report-on-racial-disparities/Enjoy your eventual forum ban.
"https://www.sun-sentinel.com/florida-jewish-journal/fl-jj-proud-boys-rebrand-20201111-kp4cr7l5pbdnxguwyb3xq4m63e-story.html."You ignored my earlier comment that the national *leader* of the Proud Boy brand is a black Cuban. The founder of the organization, Gavin McGinnis, specifically created it as a fraternity. Instead, you cite an anecdote behind a paywall and an example that contradicts your point. How can a supposed Proud Boys leader be "changing" his chapter toward racism if his chapter is already racist (as you claim)? What is he changing it from? "Here's Mark McCloskey, the scumbag from Missouri, posing outside the Kenosha courthouse in support of Rittenhouse with two guys flashing the "white power" signs."
That's not a symbol patented by racists. Sorry. It's more likely that the guys in this photo are being churlish and getting a kick out of triggering people. Show me excerpts of things they've said, actions they've done, or more significant symbolism. "Regarding Brooks, there's zero evidence that this is anything more than a mentally ill man with a lengthy rap sheet committing a heinous crime. He tried to run his ex-girlfriend over less than a week earlier. Domestic terrorism is a wild leap."So you're just going to completely disregard that this was a deliberate black on white crime following a nationally televised racially charged trial? Ok. But Rittenhouse is definitely a racist because of his proximity to people flashing the 'ok' sign and a black-led fraternity? I guess we need to delve deeper. Let's have a look at something Darrell Brooks actually said: "In one Facebook post screencapped by the Daily Mail, Brooks - aka 'MathBoi Fly' - wrote: 'LEARNED ND TAUGHT BEHAVIOR!! so when we start bakk knokkin white people TF out ion wanna hear it...the old white ppl 2, KNOKK DEM TF OUT!! PERIOD.'Source: www.zerohedge.com/political/black-supremacist-darrell-brooks-rapped-about-being-terrorist-and-called-violence-againstThere's also a smattering of anti-Semitic stuff and references to Hitler on Brook's Twitter page for good measure. "And I'll repost this to refute your "irony" on your last stance."
The irony is that you claim systemic racism is a "reality," but that it doesn't have to encompass the whole society. The thing is, that's what systemic racism *is*. It is, by definition, system-wide. Therefore, a mostly racist society is a prerequisite for systemic racism to exist. Otherwise it's just an example of racism, but not necessarily systemic. "https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/un-report-on-racial-disparities/"The thing about statistics is you have to actually dissect the methodology used and how the data is presented. I pointed this out in a previous thread. And sometimes, the authors just hide important information in their studies that is inconvenient to the larger narrative they are trying to tell. Such as the report you cited above. " [geographic location] accounts for a substantial portion of African Americans’ increased likelihood of committing certain violent and property crimes." The authors admit that just being poor in a concentrated urban area is a main driver of crime and that African American's actually have an increased likelihood of committing crimes on a per capita basis. That's kind of significant, don't you think? In another report you've previously cited, I can confirm that the study did not include any geographic considerations aside from the State where the crime was committed. Are whites committing the same crime in Brooklyn, NY sentenced substantially different than blacks in Brooklyn, NY? We don't know because only the state of New York as a whole is considered. Conditions are not the same in New Castle Town, NY as they are in Brooklyn. Judges in a crime-ridden area are more likely to pass harsher sentences for minor offenses than judges in a quiet suburb. And as I've pointed out previously, the sentencing study above also inexplicably shows that black females are getting lighter sentences than white males, which shouldn't be the case if systemic racism is king. "Enjoy your eventual forum ban."I'm trying to understand the forum rules better now that I've received a warning. Are statements like this not considered trolling? |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Nov 24, 2021 14:58:03 GMT -8
"https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/06/21/proud-boys-recruitment-targets-men-looking-community/7452805002/
"https://www.sun-sentinel.com/florida-jewish-journal/fl-jj-proud-boys-rebrand-20201111-kp4cr7l5pbdnxguwyb3xq4m63e-story.html."You ignored my earlier comment that the national *leader* of the Proud Boy brand is a black Cuban. The founder of the organization, Gavin McGinnis, specifically created it as a fraternity. Instead, you cite an anecdote behind a paywall and an example that contradicts your point. How can a supposed Proud Boys leader be "changing" his chapter toward racism if his chapter is already racist (as you claim)? What is he changing it from? "Here's Mark McCloskey, the scumbag from Missouri, posing outside the Kenosha courthouse in support of Rittenhouse with two guys flashing the "white power" signs."
That's not a symbol patented by racists. Sorry. It's more likely that the guys in this photo are being churlish and getting a kick out of triggering people. Show me excerpts of things they've said, actions they've done, or more significant symbolism. "Regarding Brooks, there's zero evidence that this is anything more than a mentally ill man with a lengthy rap sheet committing a heinous crime. He tried to run his ex-girlfriend over less than a week earlier. Domestic terrorism is a wild leap."So you're just going to completely disregard that this was a deliberate black on white crime following a nationally televised racially charged trial? Ok. But Rittenhouse is definitely a racist because of his proximity to people flashing the 'ok' sign and a black-led fraternity? I guess we need to delve deeper. Let's have a look at something Darrell Brooks actually said: "In one Facebook post screencapped by the Daily Mail, Brooks - aka 'MathBoi Fly' - wrote: 'LEARNED ND TAUGHT BEHAVIOR!! so when we start bakk knokkin white people TF out ion wanna hear it...the old white ppl 2, KNOKK DEM TF OUT!! PERIOD.'Source: www.zerohedge.com/political/black-supremacist-darrell-brooks-rapped-about-being-terrorist-and-called-violence-againstThere's also a smattering of anti-Semitic stuff and references to Hitler on Brook's Twitter page for good measure. "And I'll repost this to refute your "irony" on your last stance."
The irony is that you claim systemic racism is a "reality," but that it doesn't have to encompass the whole society. The thing is, that's what systemic racism *is*. It is, by definition, system-wide. Therefore, a mostly racist society is a prerequisite for systemic racism to exist. Otherwise it's just an example of racism, but not necessarily systemic. "https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/un-report-on-racial-disparities/"The thing about statistics is you have to actually dissect the methodology used and how the data is presented. I pointed this out in a previous thread. And sometimes, the authors just hide important information in their studies that is inconvenient to the larger narrative they are trying to tell. Such as the report you cited above. " [geographic location] accounts for a substantial portion of African Americans’ increased likelihood of committing certain violent and property crimes." The authors admit that just being poor in a concentrated urban area is a main driver of crime and that African American's actually have an increased likelihood of committing crimes on a per capita basis. That's kind of significant, don't you think? In another report you've previously cited, I can confirm that the study did not include any geographic considerations aside from the State where the crime was committed. Are whites committing the same crime in Brooklyn, NY sentenced substantially different than blacks in Brooklyn, NY? We don't know because only the state of New York as a whole is considered. Conditions are not the same in New Castle Town, NY as they are in Brooklyn. Judges in a crime-ridden area are more likely to pass harsher sentences for minor offenses than judges in a quiet suburb. And as I've pointed out previously, the sentencing study above also inexplicably shows that black females are getting lighter sentences than white males, which shouldn't be the case if systemic racism is king. "Enjoy your eventual forum ban."I'm trying to understand the forum rules better now that I've received a warning. Are statements like this not considered trolling? No, it's a compliment telling you to enjoy your ban when it comes. Your entire posting history, albeit brief, has been a consistent theme of baiting and disingenuous posts to draw reactions. You're not trying to promote genuine discussion. |
|
|
|
Post by Obsidian Edge on Nov 24, 2021 15:12:38 GMT -8
There's an entire page-long brick of text you actually quoted where I meticulously responded to every one of your points.
Care to respond to any of that?
|
|
|
|
Waukesha
Nov 24, 2021 15:52:43 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by aztecryan on Nov 24, 2021 15:52:43 GMT -8
There's an entire page-long brick of text you actually quoted where I meticulously responded to every one of your points. Care to respond to any of that? Not particularly, given the amount of fallacies you posted in response. You're trying to tell me that the "OK" symbol isn't used to promote racist views? The ADL would disagree. It's been designated a symbol of hate nearly 3 years now. This seems obvious to me, but every element of every organization doesn't have to be "white" to be considered white supremacist. It's irrelevant what the group was originally set up as, it's what it has evolved into that really matters here, but again, you know that. Regarding Brooks, there's absolutely nothing to indicate that he targeted specific people. He wanted to kill as many as possible. Waukesha is nearly 90% white, so this isn't earth-shattering levels of anything. It's extremely presumptuous to indicate domestic terrorism, certainly. Kyle Rittenhouse stated on Tucker Carlson, the arbiter of truth and a stand up guy, obviously, that he supports the Black Lives Matter movement. That's a terrorist organization, according to you, so, I mean... I'm just really not interested in the spin that systemic racism doesn't exist. It's ingrained in the justice system, point blank. There's zero argument against that if we're being truthful with our argument here. |
|
|
|
Post by Obsidian Edge on Nov 24, 2021 16:17:56 GMT -8
There's an entire page-long brick of text you actually quoted where I meticulously responded to every one of your points. Care to respond to any of that? Not particularly, given the amount of fallacies you posted in response. You're trying to tell me that the "OK" symbol isn't used to promote racist views? The ADL would disagree. It's been designated a symbol of hate nearly 3 years now. This seems obvious to me, but every element of every organization doesn't have to be "white" to be considered white supremacist. It's irrelevant what the group was originally set up as, it's what it has evolved into that really matters here, but again, you know that. Regarding Brooks, there's absolutely nothing to indicate that he targeted specific people. He wanted to kill as many as possible. Waukesha is nearly 90% white, so this isn't earth-shattering levels of anything. It's extremely presumptuous to indicate domestic terrorism, certainly. Kyle Rittenhouse stated on Tucker Carlson, the arbiter of truth and a stand up guy, obviously, that he supports the Black Lives Matter movement. That's a terrorist organization, according to you, so, I mean... I'm just really not interested in the spin that systemic racism doesn't exist. It's ingrained in the justice system, point blank. There's zero argument against that if we're being truthful with our argument here. I guess advocating for violence against white people wasn't enough for ya. "Kyle Rittenhouse stated on Tucker Carlson, the arbiter of truth and a stand up guy, obviously, that he supports the Black Lives Matter movement. That's a terrorist organization, according to you, so, I mean..."Is this supposed to be an "I gotcha" moment? I don't think Rittenhouse is a black supremacist committing acts of terror against white people if that's what you're insinuating. His "support" for BLM is purely rhetorical.
"I'm just really not interested in the spin that systemic racism doesn't exist. It's ingrained in the justice system, point blank. There's zero argument against that if we're being truthful with our argument here."You keep repeating this. Why don't you address the issues I've highlighted with the studies you've provided? There's plenty of room to argue this, you're just ignoring the counter points. |
|
|
|
Waukesha
Nov 24, 2021 20:39:03 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by aztecryan on Nov 24, 2021 20:39:03 GMT -8
Not particularly, given the amount of fallacies you posted in response. You're trying to tell me that the "OK" symbol isn't used to promote racist views? The ADL would disagree. It's been designated a symbol of hate nearly 3 years now. This seems obvious to me, but every element of every organization doesn't have to be "white" to be considered white supremacist. It's irrelevant what the group was originally set up as, it's what it has evolved into that really matters here, but again, you know that. Regarding Brooks, there's absolutely nothing to indicate that he targeted specific people. He wanted to kill as many as possible. Waukesha is nearly 90% white, so this isn't earth-shattering levels of anything. It's extremely presumptuous to indicate domestic terrorism, certainly. Kyle Rittenhouse stated on Tucker Carlson, the arbiter of truth and a stand up guy, obviously, that he supports the Black Lives Matter movement. That's a terrorist organization, according to you, so, I mean... I'm just really not interested in the spin that systemic racism doesn't exist. It's ingrained in the justice system, point blank. There's zero argument against that if we're being truthful with our argument here. I guess advocating for violence against white people wasn't enough for ya. "Kyle Rittenhouse stated on Tucker Carlson, the arbiter of truth and a stand up guy, obviously, that he supports the Black Lives Matter movement. That's a terrorist organization, according to you, so, I mean..."Is this supposed to be an "I gotcha" moment? I don't think Rittenhouse is a black supremacist committing acts of terror against white people if that's what you're insinuating. His "support" for BLM is purely rhetorical.
"I'm just really not interested in the spin that systemic racism doesn't exist. It's ingrained in the justice system, point blank. There's zero argument against that if we're being truthful with our argument here."You keep repeating this. Why don't you address the issues I've highlighted with the studies you've provided? There's plenty of room to argue this, you're just ignoring the counter points.Because you're not arguing in good faith and you're not being serious. Your first sentence kills your entire post. Not sure if it was an attempt to be funny, but it missed the mark. I'd rather just not waste my time. Regarding your last point - I'm not sure what you're trying to illustrate. There are a multitude of factors that go into the criminal justice system's processes - The end result is racial disparity in criminal sentences. There's numerous sources on this topic. |
|
|
|
Post by Obsidian Edge on Nov 25, 2021 4:35:43 GMT -8
"You're trying to tell me that the "OK" symbol isn't used to promote racist views? The ADL would disagree. It's been designated a symbol of hate nearly 3 years now."That's like me citing Glenn Beck as support that Obama was born in Kenya. In any case, this is a person that Rittenhouse associated with. I gave you an actual quote of Darrell talking about knocking white people out... "Regarding Brooks, there's absolutely nothing to indicate that he targeted specific people."I guess advocating for violence against white people wasn't enough for ya. "Kyle Rittenhouse stated on Tucker Carlson, the arbiter of truth and a stand up guy, obviously, that he supports the Black Lives Matter movement. That's a terrorist organization, according to you, so, I mean..."Is this supposed to be an "I gotcha" moment? I don't think Rittenhouse is a black supremacist committing acts of terror against white people if that's what you're insinuating. His "support" for BLM is purely rhetorical.
"I'm just really not interested in the spin that systemic racism doesn't exist. It's ingrained in the justice system, point blank. There's zero argument against that if we're being truthful with our argument here."You keep repeating this. Why don't you address the issues I've highlighted with the studies you've provided? There's plenty of room to argue this, you're just ignoring the counter points. Because you're not arguing in good faith and you're not being serious. Your first sentence kills your entire post. Not sure if it was an attempt to be funny, but it missed the mark. I'd rather just not waste my time. Regarding your last point - I'm not sure what you're trying to illustrate. There are a multitude of factors that go into the criminal justice system's processes - The end result is racial disparity in criminal sentences. There's numerous sources on this topic.
I guess diving into statistical studies you've provided and drawing out methodological oversights or omissions isn't arguing in good faith? Line by line pointing out your numerous contradictions and flimsy evidence isn't either apparently. "Your first sentence kills your entire post. Not sure if it was an attempt to be funny, but it missed the mark."
Well when you're the butt of the joke, I imagine you wouldn't find the analogy funny. The ADL is an extraordinarily biased organization. So using their *opinion* on what constitutes racist symbolism is... a joke. Hence the comparison. "Regarding your last point - I'm not sure what you're trying to illustrate. There are a multitude of factors that go into the criminal justice system's processes."
What don't you understand about my last point? Not really sure how else I could state it. You're ignoring my counter points and arguments to the studies you provided supposedly proving systemic racism exists. And you're ignoring a lot of what else I've said on the original topic of this thread. Specifically, why have you not addressed Darrell Brooks' comments about knocking out white people in relation to his crime of driving an SUV through a crowd of white people following the Rittenhouse verdict? This is the third time I've asked. "I'd rather just not waste my time."
The feeling's mutual. And I've long observed that's basically what's happening here. In actuality, you clearly aren't the person arguing in good faith because, as any casual observer can see, you're not open to new ideas or perspectives. Or really even responding to challenges against your own for that matter. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Nov 25, 2021 9:58:36 GMT -8
Because you're not arguing in good faith and you're not being serious. Your first sentence kills your entire post. Not sure if it was an attempt to be funny, but it missed the mark. I'd rather just not waste my time. Regarding your last point - I'm not sure what you're trying to illustrate. There are a multitude of factors that go into the criminal justice system's processes - The end result is racial disparity in criminal sentences. There's numerous sources on this topic.
I guess diving into statistical studies you've provided and drawing out methodological oversights or omissions isn't arguing in good faith? Line by line pointing out your numerous contradictions and flimsy evidence isn't either apparently. "Your first sentence kills your entire post. Not sure if it was an attempt to be funny, but it missed the mark."
Well when you're the butt of the joke, I imagine you wouldn't find the analogy funny. The ADL is an extraordinarily biased organization. So using their *opinion* on what constitutes racist symbolism is... a joke. Hence the comparison. "Regarding your last point - I'm not sure what you're trying to illustrate. There are a multitude of factors that go into the criminal justice system's processes."
What don't you understand about my last point? Not really sure how else I could state it. You're ignoring my counter points and arguments to the studies you provided supposedly proving systemic racism exists. And you're ignoring a lot of what else I've said on the original topic of this thread. Specifically, why have you not addressed Darrell Brooks' comments about knocking out white people in relation to his crime of driving an SUV through a crowd of white people following the Rittenhouse verdict? This is the third time I've asked. "I'd rather just not waste my time."
The feeling's mutual. And I've long observed that's basically what's happening here. In actuality, you clearly aren't the person arguing in good faith because, as any casual observer can see, you're not open to new ideas or perspectives. Or really even responding to challenges against your own for that matter. I don't think the media will be all over the fact that Brooks said that he will knock TF out of white people. Call me crazy, but I just don't see that happening, for a multitude of reasons. |
|
