Our next hangout will be June 11, 2020 17hrs GMT to 19hrs GMT in Discord
The link is here: discord.com/invite/nhZvH6T
About Police Shootings (in America, Duh)
In November, members of Black Lives Matter (BLM) met behind closed doors with Democracy Alliance, a coterie of wealthy liberals who have pledged to fund leftist organizations.
The donor club was founded by former Clinton Treasury official Rob Stein. Members include the billionaire “philanthropist” George Soros, Taco Bell silver spoon baby Rob McKay, uber liberal Norman Lear, “meathead” Rob Reiner, co-founder of Tides Network Drummond Pike, SEIU boss Anna Burger (members of the union like to beat up opponents), and former Rockefeller Family Fund president Anne Bartley.
“The DA, as the club is known in Democratic circles, is recommending its donors step up check writing to a handful of endorsed groups that have supported the Black Lives Matter movement. And the club and some of its members also are considering ways to funnel support directly to scrappier local groups that have utilized confrontational tactics to inject their grievances into the political debate,” Politico reported.
Investigative journalist James Simpson has exposed connections between BLM and a constellation of leftist and Marxist groups, a number of them established as fronts by the Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO).
“BLM is one of many projects undertaken by the FRSO,” writes Simpson. He points out that FRSO and BLM receive funding through the National Domestic Workers Alliance (NDWA). “FRSO/BLM organizations are generously supported by a universe of wealthy foundations. Some, like those employing BLM founders [Alicia Garza and Opal Tometi] receive money directly.”
Many FRSO connected leftist and Marxist groups are also funded by other wealthy individuals, foundations, and corporations, including Kellogg, Ben & Jerry’s, Soros Funds, Hewlett, Rockefeller, Heinz, and others.
The Ford Foundation tops the list of NDWA financial contributors. It has funded CIA cultural fronts since the 1950s.
“At times it seemed as if the Ford Foundation was simply an extension of Government in the area of international cultural propaganda. The Ford Foundation had a record of close involvement in covert actions in Europe, working closely with Marshall Plan and CIA officials on specific projects,” writes the author of The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters, Frances Stonor Saunders.
It may seem contradictory for the state and wealthy liberals—many undoubtedly brainwashed dupes—to support organizations and individuals calling for abolishing capitalism and advocating the most severe form of Marxist ideology.
As the late Gary Allen so eloquently pointed out (None Dare Call It Conspiracy), socialism is a perfect mechanism for controlling humanity.
“If one understands that socialism is not a share-the-wealth program, but is in reality a method to consolidate and control the wealth, then the seeming paradox of superrich men promoting socialism becomes no paradox at all. Instead it becomes the logical, even the perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs. Communism, or more accurately, socialism, is not a movement of the downtrodden masses, but of the economic elite.”
No doubt a problem with abuse of enforcement powers exists, and no doubt its an issue that needs to be addressed yesterday.... but has BLM worked, and is it making it worse are some of the questions I have... and I wish the movement had been done a different way somehow, to be more effective while being more specific to the actual root of the problem.
Adi wrote: It's more likely the photo was just taken... because it just happened to be taken, not because it was set up with some kind of agenda aiming to show "one side of the story." It was taken by a Reuters photojournalist.
Anyway, if you want to know the story , or "the truth" as it were: the short version is that she was standing on a road the police were clearing by force, not moving or speaking, and the police rushing toward her in the photograph detained her — according to the photographer, other eyewitnesses and the woman herself. Sometimes there is only one side to a story.
Thank you for the link Adi. Context really helps with any photo. A photo is never a complete story by itself, there's always more.
I will say though that there is ALWAYS more than one side to a story. Unless of course you're locked in a room by yourself by your own choosing. But then again, there would also be the stories of the people who would otherwise be seeing you and the stories of what happened to you to cause you stay in the room alone which would almost certainly involve other people who would have a side to tell, but this is getting off topic.
I will say that if police are currently clearing an area and you purposely step into the area after knowing that they're clearing it you literally just asked them to move you. From what I read it sounds like she was completely unharmed, the photo just makes it look like there is the potential for violence after the fact. Again, it's a powerful and beautiful photo, it just does not tell the whole story all by itself.
Per fraternitate consurgamus
sometimes you stand your ground and make them move you because thats the only power that you have
If you cant breath then none of us can.
Goken wrote: I will say though that there is ALWAYS more than one side to a story. Unless of course you're locked in a room by yourself by your own choosing. But then again, there would also be the stories of the people who would otherwise be seeing you and the stories of what happened to you to cause you stay in the room alone which would almost certainly involve other people who would have a side to tell, but this is getting off topic.
Those are interpretations, not stories. While Nietzsche, Mr. "There are no facts, only interpretations", would disagree, I tend to think the facts are the real story. Anything else is just an interpretation of it. The story here is relatively simple. Like you said (and like I said, and like the article said), the police were clearing an area (a road) and this woman decided to stand against them in silent, unmoving, nonviolent protest. The photo shows that. There's no other way to tell that story from the facts available. The "story" is added by other accounts: that the woman was immediately detained and that was what the police officers were rushing to do. That the woman did not say a single word. etc. But that is still "just the facts, ma'am."
Now, the interpretations could be anything: the woman was a dangerous protestor defying the rule of law and was rightly arrested by the onrushing, heavily-armoured police officers in the photo. The police officers were responding to a peaceful, beautiful expression of American defiance with an armoured fist and a pair of handcuffs. Or anything in-between. But the story is relatively simple. In our post-facts society, in the world where Donald Trump can make other politicians look like bastions of honesty and truth and yet still storm through the polls, in the world where narratives and memes are more important to people than facts and evidence, I can see why you might *think* those interpretations are the story. But in this case, they're really not.
Without love, deeds, even the most brilliant, count as nothing. - Thérèse of Lisieux ✞
"The youngest black professor ever to receive tenure at Harvard and recipient of an economics prize for “most promising American economist under 40” has just upended the conventional wisdom on police shootings.
There is no racial bias when officers fire on suspects, according to a new study by Prof. Roland Fryer – black suspects are actually less likely to be shot than other suspects."
All lives matter. These recent series of events are all blown out of proportion and then picked up by useful idiots to champion a worthless cause that only divides us and brings us all down to serve the agenda of the truly racist and powerful elites.
LOL this guy is truly on point especiall toward the end and should be in charge of slapping these protestors with a large raw fish.
Silas Mercury wrote: And I'm fed up of gun toting americans hating the man who is trying to help them and get your country run by appropriate people like bernie not bush (you guys arent gun toting americans, that was purely for the idiots in your country, of which, no offence and i hate to say, there are a lot of)
Gun owning Americans hating a man trying to help them, with socialism? Wow and after Comrade Sanders anti-Wall St rhetoric he comes out and supports Hillary the ultimate NEOCON and 100% Wall St backed, oh the irony. Who is appropriate is just opinion and for me Trump is the only appropriate choice even though he's too brutally honest about the issues and runs off out the mouth.
America was different
In Europe, government tyranny has broken out like a rash with unerring regularity.
In the UK, for example, you are so used to not really owning anything (you have to pay taxes on anything of value you think you own, and when you die the government taxes it all over again) and having no means of defense (if you try defending yourself against attack you are likely to go to prison) you don’t even know that it can be any other way.
But America was – and to some extent still is – different. In America the common man retains the right of the nobility in many states: he can own a gun and defend himself and his country against the government using it.
But that last vestige of freedom is being chipped away at.
The United States is already usurpacious. Americans have had almost everything taken from them. The laws on posse comitatus have been circumvented and the police has been morphed into a militarized organization which sees the population as the enemy.
Freedom of speech as a basic right – unless one is agitating for a sanctioned agenda item – is a thing of the past; banned except in so-called free-speech zones.
A full-on domestic spy agency is in place which would make the Stasi seem small-time, and torture is defended and advocated by people in senior positions.
Rather than the home of the brave and the land of the free, the US has become the place not to go on holiday if you don’t want a gruelling or groping by the TSA or a full-on beating or tasing by the steroid-head police force; the range of oppression you can face at the hands of America’s soda-guzzling, pizza-eating Blue Shirts grows daily more bizarre.
The political process is a sham and the media is weaponized, serving undeclared interests and poisoning the body politic. And the FBI will find you innocent of major crimes if you serve the system long enough for it to hand you the baton as the next President.
If this is not indicative of usurpacious government, then what is?
The one thing remaining to America from its frontiersman, self-reliant origins – the one thing standing between that diminishing portion of the US citizenry still capable of rational thought and open tyranny – is the fact that when the militarised police start shooting at the people, the people can shoot back.
The gun question boils down to core views on responsibility: who do you want to take responsibility for your life – you or the government?
Liberals are fundamentally collectivistic and statist. Like Stalin or Hitler, they want to legislate personal initiative and responsibility out of the equation and render all people dependent on government. They believe in collective punishment. If one man somewhere kills a cat with a tin-opener, then prosecuting that one man is not the answer. No, all must be punished: tin-openers must be banned.
At the same time, the liberal insists that weakness is the only morally defensible position; like a silly young girl he believes that if he is loving enough, life will love him back. It is the victory of hope over experience; of utopia over reality; and rather then step up to meet the shortfall between reality and dream himself, he wants government to do it for him – and for everyone else – by giving all power to the state. He is, in short, a born peon, a slave.
The individual accepts that bad things happen and believes that it is his responsibility as a grown-up to deal with them. While he does not insist that the liberal concur with him, he also does not allow the liberal to dictate to him. To him, what the majority has been conditioned to think it wants is not of fundamental importance. Rather, if the individual does not have rights which trump those of the majority, then there are no rights at all. He believes in what America once used to represent: freedom.
America was built by the individuals; it is being co-opted by the statist liberal collectivists. All that stands between the America of the individual and a communitarian, crypto-Stalinist state with a McDonald's front end is the belief in the minds of some Americans that they can – and should – retain their arms.
If the liberals, the suborned fourth estate, and those who direct them succeed in undermining the Second Amendment, along with the rest of America’s founding principles, then the usurpation of America will be complete.
I suppose to get back on topic I will just say that all these police shootings are business as usual, but the method to finally get everyone to bend over and submit to socialism is to fuel a race war to bring about the chaos that will violenty force a change of the system in the typical leftist fashion. Now the police will rapidly militarize even more, maybe they'll get better training and deal with situations better but now everyone is riled up it's not going to stop it's going to get worse. Someone who promises free healthcare, education, housing, and all the goodies is making empty promises for votes and support, the end game is always the same: take from one group and give to another, it never has worked and won't without extreme measures by the state that makes everyones lives worse.