Not a riot
-
@Jolly said in Not a riot:
Bottom line?
When the Secret Service asks you to move, move.
Apparently, they don't ask twice.
There's a lesson to be learned here about how to deal with law enforcement in general, but then mentioning that there are two sides to law enforcement interactions is a wrong side of history thing to say.
-
@George-K said in Not a riot:
@Aqua-Letifer said in Not a riot:
No fires were set there then, and nothing was thrown at police.
https://www.nps.gov/subjects/uspp/6_2_20_statement_from_acting_chief_monahan.htm
United States Park Police acting Chief Gregory Monahan.
On Monday, June 1, the USPP worked with the United States Secret Service to have temporary fencing installed inside Lafayette Park. At approximately 6:33 pm, violent protestors on H Street NW began throwing projectiles including bricks, frozen water bottles and caustic liquids. The protestors also climbed onto a historic building at the north end of Lafayette Park that was destroyed by arson days prior. Intelligence had revealed calls for violence against the police, and officers found caches of glass bottles, baseball bats and metal poles hidden along the street.
You're saying the Chief of Police for the Park Service is mistaken?
You said this earlier:
Sorry, no.
Clinton said that tear gas was fired into the crowd.
Park Police Chief says no.
One of the two (as I posted) is not true. I suppose you can choose which one you choose to believe.At Lafayette, June 1, 6:30pm. I guess you're going to tell me these are fires set by the protesters?
-
You pointed out that the fire that I talked about (in the context of what constitutes a riot, not the specific incident you tend to conflate it with - the photo op) was a
daynight earlier. I acknowledge that.Your photo doesn't address my point about the
demonstratorsprotestorsrioters being violent, as the Chief of Police stated.Are you calling him a liar?
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
@George-K said in Not a riot:
You pointed out that the fire that I talked about (in the context of what constitutes a riot, not the specific incident you tend to conflate it with - the photo op) was a
daynight earlier. I acknowledge that.Your photo doesn't address my point about the
demonstratorsprotestorsrioters being violent, as the Chief of Police stated.Are you calling him a liar?
I can't speak for every single person who was at the protest, and neither can the police chief, you, or anyone else. So I can't say that absolutely, to a person, no one engaged in any violence.
What I can say is that yeah, he's a damn liar, in that he appears to be trying to paint a picture that's completely untrue. I use social media for photo stuff, and so a lot of the folks I know through there are photographers, and they were there because they wanted to cover the event. With every single video I've watched from TikTok and Instagram, and from what people have told me who were there at the time, the crowd was just standing around. (And it wasn't even that huge of a crowd, comparatively speaking.) It wasn't LA in '65, which appears to be what this guy is trying to imply.
-
-
@Loki said in Not a riot:
I’m not following the debate. There is no question there has been mayhem and wholesale destruction in DC. Are we just talking the moment where Trump had the crowd moved so he could do his photo op?
Pretty much. What I think happened, was that there were several departments involved (not just 2), and the White House didn't properly coordinate with all of them. So it wasn't handled the best to put it mildly.
But what I'm also saying is that everything going on, everything across the country and now in other cities around the world, is not only and exclusively rioters and "lemmings seeking catharsis." That's precisely as ignorant as "All Cops Are Bastards."
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in Not a riot:
@Loki said in Not a riot:
I’m not following the debate. There is no question there has been mayhem and wholesale destruction in DC. Are we just talking the moment where Trump had the crowd moved so he could do his photo op?
Pretty much. What I think happened, was that there were several departments involved (not just 2), and the White House didn't properly coordinate with all of them. So it wasn't handled the best to put it mildly.
But what I'm also saying is that everything going on, everything across the country and now in other cities around the world, is not only and exclusively rioters and "lemmings seeking catharsis." That's precisely as ignorant as "All Cops Are Bastards."
No doubt that the vast majority of protesters are sincere and peaceful. The problem is that they are being used as human shields and pawns and the peaceful protesters seem to be okay with that. You can’t easily skirt that accountability.
Covid, death and hundreds of millions of dollars of destruction be damned!
-
I really do not think Trump handles the operational details of his Secret Service folks. I'm also not sure there was any way they could have handled it that would not have resulted in some form of the interpretation we see today. The audience is too willing to believe.
-
@Loki said in Not a riot:
No doubt that the vast majority of protesters are sincere and peaceful. The problem is that they are being used as human shields and pawns and the peaceful protesters seem to be okay with that. You can’t easily skirt that accountability.
Now you're just making stuff up.
These "rioters" fought to protect a Miami CVS from looters:
These "rioters" did the same in NYC:
I'm sure you've seen this one, right? The "rioters" who protected the separated police officer?
Or how about this one? Do these "rioters" look like they're throwing caustic chemicals on cops to you?
More "rioters" protecting stores:
Can we all admit this is a complicated situation and that the crowd is (1) changing hour by hour and (2) not at all on the same page, or are we still stuck on demonizing protesters and glorifying all police?
-
My $0.02 about all of it—which everyone is free to criticize of course: the protests are primarily about BLM, which I think isn't even close to factual. Systemic racism is a problem coming from the odd dumbshit, not "the police," "the system," "white people" or whatever.
Gladwell's "Talking to Strangers" is about the best diagnosis of the problem I've come across. You've got some communities where the police are either in an impossible position, or where the town council is more impressed by drug and gun roundups than they are lower crime stats. So there's a lot of strung-out, overworked, underfunded police forces employing Kansas City-style "look beyond the ticket" enforcement. Which is a great way to destroy relations with the local community. Meanwhile, when that same community actually needs the police, they're nowhere to be found, because again, they're overworked and underfunded.
Oh and those poor communities are almost always minority communities, because poor white communities have an equally shitty but different dynamic. (But I think that's a whole other thing.)
Black guy gets 8 tickets for sitting in his car, but when his cousin is shot, no police in sight. And the nicer, whiter communities seldom have these stories. On the surface, how in the hell can you not call that systemic racism? It isn't, but I can certainly understand the conclusion. And then sure, yeah, you have cops who say "well you know, all the guys who ever shot at me were black, so..." They might not be wrong but again, wrong conclusion to draw. I think it's poverty and income inequality. There's no sociological phenomenon that has a higher correlation than income inequality and violent crime. None. It's a thing. And not only has no one ever solved it, the Pareto distribution continues to skew more extreme.
I may be wrong about all of it. But I refuse to believe poor, inner city communities are not having a bad time of it, whatever the reason. So yeah, they've got some shit to protest about. And a ton of them are trying to be lawful about it.
-
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in Not a riot:
@Loki said in Not a riot:
No doubt that the vast majority of protesters are sincere and peaceful. The problem is that they are being used as human shields and pawns and the peaceful protesters seem to be okay with that. You can’t easily skirt that accountability.
Now you're just making stuff up.
These "rioters" fought to protect a Miami CVS from looters:
These "rioters" did the same in NYC:
I'm sure you've seen this one, right? The "rioters" who protected the separated police officer?
Or how about this one? Do these "rioters" look like they're throwing caustic chemicals on cops to you?
More "rioters" protecting stores:
Can we all admit this is a complicated situation and that the crowd is (1) changing hour by hour and (2) not at all on the same page, or are we still stuck on demonizing protesters and glorifying all police?
I understand they mean well but you can’t explain away the lost lives and destruction. It’s just not possible.
-
They'd say exactly the same thing about George Floyd. And I'm not explaining it away and neither are they. It's a tough situation to say the least.
-
@Larry said in Not a riot:
If They're out there protesting, they are douche bags whether they're violent or not. This wasn't anything that merited a protest march to start with.
If mainstream peace loving society is going to be held hostage to a zero tolerance policy for individual bad cops acting badly, or else the rioting will commence, the situation seems untenable.
Gosh I just had a martial law curfew imposed on me for the first time in my life. Nary a peep about anything that caused that profoundly fvcked up situation other than the one bad cop doing a bad thing in Minnesota. And now I can't leave my house after 8pm under penalty of arrest. I guess it's the butterfly effect.
-
On the local news here in Portland:
W00t!! The people of Happy Valley are marching in protest, perhaps a thousand taking part in a march. Now we're talking!!Thing is, Happy Valley is 70% white, around 18% Asian, and wealthy. I know the area very well, and have dealt with their leadership e.g., mayor, city council, etc. over many years.
I can't stand Happy Valley. It's just as pretentious and fake as its name. They took a beautiful area, and in 10 years bulldozed and scoured all the forests and put in wall to wall homes for wealthy whites/asians that work for high tech.
What are they protesting in Happy Valley? If I pull back, like backing away on Google Earth, eventually I come to a common denominator, regardless of their chants of anti-racism (but listen to their perspectives behind the scenes when we encouraged low-cost housing, bringing people of color into their demographic, NIMBY!!!).
It's mostly all about Trump. Unstated, but that's what it boils down to. Everything is a facade to that fundamental: Trump. Hate. Hate Trump.
But in Happy Valley, everyone is happy all the time, and we're so concerned about yada yada yada did you hear about the fee increases at Persimmon Country Club, and did you know we named our new high school after a sitting black supreme court judge -- we are SO progressive but please don't forget the NIMBY, our real estate prices, don't cha know. I've heard so much crap from that community. -
@Aqua-Letifer said in Not a riot:
They'd say exactly the same thing about George Floyd. And I'm not explaining it away and neither are they. It's a tough situation to say the least.
You don't even know if the color of his skin had anything to do with it. I read today that Floyd and the cop knew each other and both of them moonlighted at a nearby club. Maybe that had something to do with it. Every day, a million white policemen go to work and at the end of their shift have not killed a black man. But it seems like every day a black man kills a cop somewhere. Should we declare all black men dangerous thugs? No. Should we kiss their asses because they're black and pretend like all of them are intelligent, productive citizens capable of functioning in civil society? He'll no. But that's what you're doing.
I think killing the man is a shame. I don't know why he did it, or if race played a part in it. But black lives matter is a bunch of fucking fools, and they can kiss my red ass just like their white cou her past the KKK. speaking of the KKK, do you think there were any polite, well meaning klansmen someone could point to to use as an example of why they should be respected? I'll betcha there were. They were still racists, just like black lives matter members are.
-
@Mik said in Not a riot:
I really do not think Trump handles the operational details of his Secret Service folks. I'm also not sure there was any way they could have handled it that would not have resulted in some form of the interpretation we see today. The audience is too willing to believe.
Easy! Don't clear the crowd, don't walk across to the church, don't do the photo-op at the church. Just do his speech from within the WH.
See how easy that is?
