The people behind the violence in the American protests of George Floyd.
- Thread starter hanimmal
- Start date
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Probably would make a better one than most of the existing ones, George never burned anybody at the stake. In a way he functioned as a saint, his cruel murder will lead to real and enduring change for his people. He helped lead them out of the wilderness, his life and death made a difference to many and will in the future. He filled the streets and eyes with tears, opened hearts while breaking many, open hearts lead to open minds.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
See, we have morons too, perhaps this asshole would like to skip his vaccine?
God people like you make me sick.
Let's not kid ourselves anymore, all the jerks that have been radicalized over the last 30 years of hate radio and hate mongers on TV and radio, and at least 10 years of online trolling (that the Russian's hijacked along regardless of what the political ideology trap they fell into that drove them to hate the 'other'), are the ones exciting the rioting that is occurring in the cover of dark. Now they are using the pain to increase their attack on our democracy, and Trump is fanning the flames using his cults branded trigger words like "ANTIFA".
Trump's online army has been spreading the fear of this group for years online for just this sort of occasion.
These homegrown terrorists are blending in with these peaceful protesters and causing the mayhem so that Trump can use this as a re-election platform.
Because if he can sell it as 'the radical left' is the ones causing this, and his militant portion of his cult can trick a large enough portion of the public that there is some truth to it, he might pull off a re-election. If people are scared enough to fall for his con.
Trump militarized trolls (foreign and domestic) are out in force trying to re-write the history as it is happening so that it is confusing and he can sneak past his presidencies failures for as long as possible. Please don't let that happen, understand that it is not just one side of any issue that is being attacked, it is by every side on every issue. When talking with friends and family about this, the tensions will be high and bubbles people are in will explode when they get popped, so be prepared.
Trump has been asking his cult to be violent all along, at this point I would not be surprised if the reason that the cop kept kneeling on George Floyd's corpse while fully aware that he was being filmed, and that he did it to trigger this national response to his murder.
Best of luck everyone, hold your love-ones close. And know that anyone caught in Trump's cult will be very difficult to talk to when they get upset about the information that you are giving them and tend to lash out when you hit the trigger words they have been brainwashed into responding poorly to (like 'racist'), so be patient, they have been programmed to not accept any reality outside of what Trump/Putin have created for them using very sophisticated online data tools.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Why do you say that?
blu3bird
Well-Known Member
He probably doesn't like truth, reality or facts
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
No, yer already sick.
hanimmal
Well-Known Member
People that point out to be aware of the attack on our nation using the very real racism that exists in our society and extremely potent data analysis so that they can find everyone (very easily) that will fall for their propaganda that they will then be spammed with?
Are you an American, and if so are you ok with the attack that the Russian military has been conducting on our society?
Prosecution should call it what it is- being pressed to death, a centuries old way of torture and death that Chauvin decided to wheel out even after George was dead. in 1692 when Giles Gorey died at least they took the stones off.
The most famous case in the United Kingdom was that of Roman Catholic martyr St Margaret Clitherow, who (in order to avoid a trial in which her own children would be obliged to give evidence) was pressed to death on March 25, 1586, after refusing to plead to the charge of having harboured Catholic (then outlawed) priests in her house. She died within fifteen minutes under a weight of at least 700 pounds (320 kg). Several hardened criminals, including William Spigott (1721) and Edward Burnworth, lasted a half hour under 400 pounds (180 kg) before pleading to the indictment. Others, such as Major Strangways (165
and John Weekes (1731), refused to plead, even under 400 pounds (180 kg), and were killed when bystanders, out of mercy, sat on them.[10]
The only death by peine forte et dure in American history was Giles Corey, who was pressed to death on September 19, 1692, during the Salem witch trials, after he refused to enter a plea in the judicial proceeding. According to legend, his last words as he was being crushed were "More weight", and he was thought to be dead as the weight was applied. This is referred to in Arthur Miller's political drama The Crucible (1953), where Giles Corey is pressed to death after refusing to plead "aye or nay" to the charge of witchcraft. In the 1996 film version of this play, the screenplay also written by Arthur Miller, Corey is crushed to death for refusing to reveal the name of a source of information.
In medieval Europe, the slow crushing of body parts in screw-operated "bone vises" of iron was a common method of torture, and a tremendous variety of cruel instruments were used to savagely crush the head, knee, hand, and, most commonly, either the thumb or the naked foot. Such instruments were finely threaded and variously provided with spiked inner surfaces or heated red-hot before their application to the limb to be tortured.
en.wikipedia.org
The most famous case in the United Kingdom was that of Roman Catholic martyr St Margaret Clitherow, who (in order to avoid a trial in which her own children would be obliged to give evidence) was pressed to death on March 25, 1586, after refusing to plead to the charge of having harboured Catholic (then outlawed) priests in her house. She died within fifteen minutes under a weight of at least 700 pounds (320 kg). Several hardened criminals, including William Spigott (1721) and Edward Burnworth, lasted a half hour under 400 pounds (180 kg) before pleading to the indictment. Others, such as Major Strangways (165
and John Weekes (1731), refused to plead, even under 400 pounds (180 kg), and were killed when bystanders, out of mercy, sat on them.[10]The only death by peine forte et dure in American history was Giles Corey, who was pressed to death on September 19, 1692, during the Salem witch trials, after he refused to enter a plea in the judicial proceeding. According to legend, his last words as he was being crushed were "More weight", and he was thought to be dead as the weight was applied. This is referred to in Arthur Miller's political drama The Crucible (1953), where Giles Corey is pressed to death after refusing to plead "aye or nay" to the charge of witchcraft. In the 1996 film version of this play, the screenplay also written by Arthur Miller, Corey is crushed to death for refusing to reveal the name of a source of information.
In medieval Europe, the slow crushing of body parts in screw-operated "bone vises" of iron was a common method of torture, and a tremendous variety of cruel instruments were used to savagely crush the head, knee, hand, and, most commonly, either the thumb or the naked foot. Such instruments were finely threaded and variously provided with spiked inner surfaces or heated red-hot before their application to the limb to be tortured.
Crushing (execution) - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
captainmorgan
Well-Known Member
Revealed: the Facebook loophole that lets world leaders deceive and harass their citizens
A Guardian investigation exposes the breadth of state-backed manipulation of the platform
www.theguardian.com
hanimmal
Well-Known Member
Wow that graphic is exactly what I have been looking for thank you.Revealed: the Facebook loophole that lets world leaders deceive and harass their citizens
A Guardian investigation exposes the breadth of state-backed manipulation of the platform
It is sick what people are being conned with on these platforms.
I had a thought for a business owner earlier as a example of how to explain to people how perverse this is.
If I owned a company, it would be super easy for me to send my employees an email with some hidden malware that when they opened it I could access all of their website visited/read their screens to know who they were posting as, and set up sock puppet accounts on the main ones they visit.
Shit I could even make it a hired position.
And this way I can help nudge them to be better employees by doing things like knowing when they are burnt out or hurting to give them a day off or honor them at work with some bullshit performance award or something.
Just a bullshit idea I am still thinking through, just figured I would put that out into the world. Because if we allow our politicians and advertising companies to do this to us all, what is to stop a employer from taking the next step?
hanimmal
Well-Known Member
Yesterday's feed:
Today's live feed:
And a couple raw video of the protesting overnight in Brooklyn Center over the shooting of Daunte Wright.
MSNBC was having a very hard time reporting on it last night if anyone caught it. I did notice some more white guys all riot geared up throwing water bottles at the cops from behind the lines.
Today's live feed:
And a couple raw video of the protesting overnight in Brooklyn Center over the shooting of Daunte Wright.
MSNBC was having a very hard time reporting on it last night if anyone caught it. I did notice some more white guys all riot geared up throwing water bottles at the cops from behind the lines.
hanimmal
Well-Known Member
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/police-reform-push-sputters/2021/05/15/5e075848-b426-11eb-a3b5-f994536fe84a_story.html
One of the top candidates for mayor of New York is a former police captain who has said addressing the city’s surging violent crime rate will be his highest priority.
In New Mexico, a Democrat running for Congress in a left-of-center suburban district has been put on the defensive for supporting a measure to cut spending on law enforcement.
And in Philadelphia, the country’s most prominent liberal district attorney is facing a vigorous challenge from a police-union-backed prosecutor he once fired.
It has been less than a year since George Floyd was murdered by a police officer in Minneapolis, spawning a national movement to reimagine the American criminal justice system and end race-based abuses.
Yet with shootings spiking in cities nationwide during the pandemic, there are growing signs that the thirst for change is being blunted by fears of runaway crime.
Critical tests of just how far the pendulum has swung will come in the next several days and weeks, with a nationwide flurry of elections for mayor, district attorney and members of Congress. Although Republicans have long been skeptical of reform efforts, the races are concentrated in big cities and other areas that are friendly terrain for Democrats. They should offer, at least in theory, fertile ground for the sort of systemic overhauls that protesters who flooded the streets last summer were demanding.
Yet the proposals on offer from leading candidates have tended to be more modest. Some top contenders have even positioned themselves in opposition to the calls of activists for radical change, arguing that police and prosecutors need to be permitted to do their jobs so crime can be brought under control.
In New York, the idea of a police veteran and former Republican who has pledged to carry a gun in City Hall leaping to the front of a crowded Democratic mayoral field might have seemed unlikely at the height of the movement against police brutality last year.
Other leading contenders in the June 22 primary also have distanced themselves from some of the more far-reaching changes sought by critics of the status quo. At a debate Thursday night, former presidential candidate Andrew Yang offered support for greater police accountability, while volunteering that “defund the police is the wrong approach.”
That’s consistent with the overall tone of the campaign, with core questions that animated protesters last summer being given short shrift by the major candidates.
New York’s Black Lives Matter activists have been wary of Democrats embracing its brand without adopting its agenda. Last month, when Yang joined a 150-cyclist vigil for a Minneapolis man killed by police, he was heckled and labeled “pro-cop” until he left. (Adams had shown up for the vigil but did not try to join it.)
For decades, Democrats and Republicans alike touted their law-and-order credentials. Republican mayors such as Rudolph W. Giuliani embraced the “broken windows” theory of policing, taking a zero-tolerance approach even to petty crimes. Joe Biden, as a senator, shepherded the 1994 crime bill into law, which, among its provisions, introduced mandatory life sentences for repeat violent offenders.
But liberal criminal justice reformers have been ascendant in recent years. In cities across the country, candidates — most of them Democrats — have campaigned and won on platforms of ending mass incarceration, holding police accountable and transforming systems of cash bail. National Democratic leaders, such as Biden, have walked back their previous hard-line stands.
Voters have yet to unseat those reformers in any major race. But seams have begun to show.
In 2016, Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx won 72 percent of the vote, putting a reform-minded prosecutor in charge in Chicago.
Four years later, amid surging crime, Foxx won reelection, but with just 54 percent of the vote following a bruising Democratic primary.
Another contentious intraparty fight has emerged this spring in Philadelphia, where Democrats on Tuesday will choose whether to retain Larry Krasner as district attorney.
Four years ago, the shock victory of the longtime civil rights lawyer was a signal accomplishment in the reform community.
Since then, Krasner has delivered on an array of promises, including exonerating 20 peoplewhose convictions were marred by misconduct, ending prosecution for many low-level crimes and mandating that prosecutors disclose how much jail sentences will cost city taxpayers.
The changes have thrilled liberals but also have spawned a backlash — particularly among the police.
In recent months, Philadelphia’s police union has poured its energies into supporting challenger Carlos Vega and defeating Krasner. John McNesby, who leads the union, said that as rates of violent crime have climbed, more and more residents have joined the push to unseat the crusading district attorney.
“A year or two ago, it was just us out there screaming and yelling and banging our chests about Larry Krasner,” McNesby said. “And now it’s the whole city.”
Not everyone, of course. Krasner still has more than his share of allies.
Nicholas O’Rourke, a Black pastor who ran for city council in 2019, said that Krasner had brought activists into high-level meetings, incorporating ideas that were ignored by the prosecutors who regularly used to win the office of district attorney.
“We’ve seen some stuff that has been pretty revolutionary come out of this district attorney’s office,” said O’Rourke, who is now the Pennsylvania director of the left-wing Working Families Party.
Krasner’s work with Black Lives Matter in 2017 gave him credibility with Black and White liberal voters. But the movement is more fractious, and less focused on electoral politics, than the police unions trying to unseat Krasner.
Analysts say the connection between his policies and the surge in crime is tenuous, at best.
“You read the newspaper every day and it’s a body count,” said Jules Epstein, a longtime Philadelphia defense lawyer who directs advocacy programs at Temple University’s law school. “But I don’t think much of any of that can fairly be attributed to a district attorney’s policies.”
Still, Vega, a veteran of the district attorney’s office who was laid off when Krasner took over, has tried.
In forums and debates, the challenger has been unafraid to blame Krasner for rising crime.
“I’ve never heard him say … ‘Maybe I dropped the ball on this,’ ” Vega said of Krasner.
In an interview, Krasner scoffed at his opponents’ arguments, saying they were in denial about how skeptical voters had grown of policing since last summer’s protests. The rising crime rate, he argued, could be explained best by the “shutdown in the fabric of society” caused by the coronavirus pandemic, with more Philadelphians out of work, and more cultural and sports activities closed off.
State Sen. Mark Moores, the GOP’s nominee, began running ads accusing Stansbury of wanting to “defund the police.”
“We’re living in one of the most violent cities in the country right now,” Moores said in an interview after a campaign stop this month. Supporting the BREATHE Act, he said, “sends the wrong message.”
Stansbury called Moores’s claim “outrageous,” pointing out that she had directed millions more in funding for public safety in the city. In two debates with Moores, as the Republican highlighted BREATHE Act components such as closing federal prisons, the Democrat pivoted back to her record. In the second debate, Moores pointed to the widower of a murder victim who was seated in the audience, challenging Stansbury to explain her position to him.
In a statement to The Washington Post, her campaign walked back her comments on the BREATHE Act, noting that the legislation has not been introduced in Congress and saying she would “look to other solutions” if the act was “wrong for New Mexicans.”
In recent days, she began running a TV ad that might have been unlikely for a Democrat had it come in the heat of last year’s Black Lives Matter protests: a retired Albuquerque police officer, defending Stansbury’s record on law enforcement.
