Politics Being a F***ed Up Hate Crime-r isn't cut-and-dried

[Lanny]

He's a political commentator, not a news reporter. Same as Don Lemming, Rachel Madcow...

I can't stand Rachel Madow. I think it has a lot to do with her constant fidgeting with papers.

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

They got this cracka ass cracka. Fuck'n white people amirite?


https://www.google.com/amp/s/newyor...brooklyn-synagogue-anti-semitic-graffiti/amp/

 

[BrianFromWA]

And you MFs can't have it both ways. You can't claim ANY NY Times story when your racist president calls them fake news...

First, I was unaware that you or the President were the authority on "claiming" anything. To that point, though, which of the direct quotes from the Chief of the NYPD Hate Crimes Task Force, or the video footage from the local NBC news affiliate, or the police reports linked to in the article, are you saying are false or skewed and unworthy of discussion? Especially since it challenges one of your deeply held views, shared with noted Political Science guru Don Lemon?

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

First, I was unaware that you or the President were the authority on "claiming" anything. To that point, though, which of the direct quotes from the Chief of the NYPD Hate Crimes Task Force, or the video footage from the local NBC news affiliate, or the police reports linked to in the article, are you saying are false or skewed and unworthy of discussion? Especially since it challenges one of your deeply held views, shared with noted Political Science guru Don Lemon?

I think I missed something. It was already known to be a black guy that did it?

 

[BrianFromWA]

I think I missed something. It was already known to be a black guy that did it?

I was quoting the response to the OP, not your newest post. But yours is another example of what I was hoping came out of the OP...messed-up people with messed-up ideologies and worldviews do this, and it's a disservice (and won't get better) by making it into a race/gender issue, which is the book definition of "racism" and "sexism".

I am, of course, biased, but I would submit that Lanny, Marazul and I (for 3) are not any more likely to be terrorists than dviss and barfo. And just because a black male from Brooklyn was the culprit in this case of hate crimes doesn't mean that black males are now the biggest Jewish threat. I understand that in general, humans try to understand their world by grouping, but the OP was meant to show that not only is this wrong, it's dangerous--especially among you of the protected racial and gender groups. And especially if you don't pick up on the fact that the "statistical outliers" tend to blow up the trendlines that you're espousing anyway.

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

I was quoting the response to the OP, not your newest post.

I was just confused for a second. Thought I missed something.

Thanks.

 

[barfo]

I was quoting the response to the OP, not your newest post. But yours is another example of what I was hoping came out of the OP...messed-up people with messed-up ideologies and worldviews do this, and it's a disservice (and won't get better) by making it into a race/gender issue, which is the book definition of "racism" and "sexism".

I am, of course, biased, but I would submit that Lanny, Marazul and I (for 3) are not any more likely to be terrorists than dviss and barfo. And just because a black male from Brooklyn was the culprit in this case of hate crimes doesn't mean that black males are now the biggest Jewish threat. I understand that in general, humans try to understand their world by grouping, but the OP was meant to show that not only is this wrong, it's dangerous--especially among you of the protected racial and gender groups. And especially if you don't pick up on the fact that the "statistical outliers" tend to blow up the trendlines that you're espousing anyway.

Sure, granny could be a terrorist. That's why we pat her down at the airport.

That doesn't mean we can't make the observation that Nazis tend to act like Nazis.

And I note that in the OP you lumped everyone at Charlottesville who wasn't a Nazi in with antifa.

barfo

 

[BrianFromWA]

Sure, granny could be a terrorist. That's why we pat her down at the airport. That doesn't mean we can't make the observation that Nazis tend to act like Nazis.

That wasn't the observation. Lemon's (and that of many on here) observation is that white men are the biggest terrorist threats, and that it's Trump and the whiteys (paraphrased) that are anti-Semites. The OP blew up that narrative. So instead of agreeing and changing it, you (among others) are doubling down and trying to parse words. It's not that tough.

And I note that in the OP you lumped everyone at Charlottesville who wasn't a Nazi in with antifa. barfo

Nope, you're reading your bias into that. It's neither what I wrote nor meant.

 

[barfo]

That wasn't the observation. Lemon's (and that of many on here) observation is that white men are the biggest terrorist threats, and that it's Trump and the whiteys (paraphrased) that are anti-Semites. The OP blew up that narrative.

You give yourself way too much credit here, Brian.

So instead of agreeing and changing it, you (among others) are doubling down and trying to parse words. It's not that tough.

You knew what you were saying, so of course it was clear to you. I found it a bit incomprehensible, towards the end.

Nope, you're reading your bias into that. It's neither what I wrote nor meant.

You implied it, when you said that Trump said that there were fine people in antifa.

barfo

 

[dviss1]

First, I was unaware that you or the President were the authority on "claiming" anything. To that point, though, which of the direct quotes from the Chief of the NYPD Hate Crimes Task Force, or the video footage from the local NBC news affiliate, or the police reports linked to in the article, are you saying are false or skewed and unworthy of discussion? Especially since it challenges one of your deeply held views, shared with noted Political Science guru Don Lemon?

Reading is fundamental.

People that support this president can't do the while quoting

"The failing NY Times"

 

[BrianFromWA]

You give yourself way too much credit here, Brian.

Well, there's you who says that, and people like the Chief of the Hate Crimes Task Force and the NYT author who point out you're wrong. I wholeheartedly understand if it doesn't matter to you that the narrative is being proven false, but that doesn't mean in isn't so.

You knew what you were saying, so of course it was clear to you. I found it a bit incomprehensible, towards the end.

If confused, you can always ask, instead of attempting to manufacture a "gotcha". I'm pretty open about what I write. In this particular case, towards the end (I'm assuming this is what you mean, since it was the climax of the post...)
If they (meaning the hate-crime purveyors) can be rounded up and prosecuted, great. But even if they can't, getting more of you to start to invoke the dialogue that it's not about racism or misogynism or anti-semitism or jihadi-ism or whatever...there will be benefit from it." I stand by that, and with the news that's come out since the OP, it's only been more confirmed through anecdotes.

You implied it, when you said that Trump said that there were fine people in antifa. barfo

Once again, your reading of implications and intent is biased and not what was written or meant.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Reading is fundamental. People that support this president can't do the while quoting "The failing NY Times"

I guess it's not universal, though. I'll try again.
"Which of the direct quotes from the Chief of the NYPD Hate Crimes Task Force, or the video footage from the local NBC news affiliate, or the police reports linked to in the article, are you saying are false or skewed and unworthy of discussion?"

 

[barfo]

Well, there's you who says that, and people like the Chief of the Hate Crimes Task Force and the NYT author who point out you're wrong. I wholeheartedly understand if it doesn't matter to you that the narrative is being proven false, but that doesn't mean in isn't so.

No one here had a 'narrative' about the avowed group membership of those who committed hate crimes against Jews in NYC during whatever time period the chief was talking about. That seems like a strawman.

If confused, you can always ask, instead of attempting to manufacture a "gotcha".

What gotcha did I attempt to manufacture?

I'm pretty open about what I write. In this particular case, towards the end (I'm assuming this is what you mean, since it was the climax of the post...)

Yes, I meant towards the end of the post.

If they (meaning the hate-crime purveyors) can be rounded up and prosecuted, great. But even if they can't, getting more of you to start to invoke the dialogue that it's not about racism or misogynism or anti-semitism or jihadi-ism or whatever...there will be benefit from it."

That seems like nonsense to me, so maybe you do need to explain it better. Hate crimes aren't about hate? Or are you saying there is no such thing as a hate crime - that there is just a lot of completely random violence?

Once again, your reading of implications and intent is biased and not what was written or meant.

Well, if you can show that Trump meant antifa when he said fine people on both sides, then I'll accept your biased interpretation.

barfo

 

[oldmangrouch]

Triple post? The ghost in the machine must really like my opinions!

 

[oldmangrouch]

Sorry, don't know why it did that.

 

[dviss1]

I guess it's not universal, though. I'll try again.
"Which of the direct quotes from the Chief of the NYPD Hate Crimes Task Force, or the video footage from the local NBC news affiliate, or the police reports linked to in the article, are you saying are false or skewed and unworthy of discussion?"

You're still not getting it... Jesus...

I'm not calling anything in the article fake.

What I'm saying is, supporters of the man who called it fake news in the first place, can't use it as a source of info.

 

[MARIS61]

Reading is fundamental.

People that support this president can't do the while quoting

"The failing NY Times"

The First Amendment is fundamental, so Americans can say whatever the fuck they want. And calling their President racist and acting out like juvenile drama queens won't win you any battle, or new voters.

Reading is a dying art thanks to the techie 1%ers and AI. Your great grand-children won't even be taught how to read as a bot will tell them "everything they need to know".

 

[MARIS61]

You're still not getting it... Jesus...

I'm not calling anything in the article fake.

What I'm saying is, supporters of the man who called it fake news on the first place, can't use it as a source of info.

You're not in charge of anyone or anything, you're not our "master".

This is a Free country, and if you are offended by being proven wrong so often about all you can do is cover your eyes and ears and go pout in the corner.

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

Heard you quit comedy SlyPokerDog.

Cuz you were tired of bombing!!!

OMG SlyPokerDog is a terrorist jokes kill me.

Oh shit maybe cuz he's a terrorist.

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

How many terrorists does it take to screw in a light bulb?

I don't know, maybe SlyPokerDog can ask at the next meeting.

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

SlyPokerDog grandson saw a bald eagle and asked his gramps why he couldn't fly. Before he could answer, his grandson said "I know, you don't have wings"

Maris smiled and said "yes, and I'm also on the no fly list"

 

[MarAzul]

What I'm saying is, supporters of the man who called it fake news in the first place, can't use it as a source of info.

Can you link to the axiom? Or is this just something you reach around an grab in your hand from the backside?

 

[MarAzul]

I was quoting the response to the OP, not your newest post. But yours is another example of what I was hoping came out of the OP...messed-up people with messed-up ideologies and worldviews do this, and it's a disservice (and won't get better) by making it into a race/gender issue, which is the book definition of "racism" and "sexism".

I am, of course, biased, but I would submit that Lanny, Marazul and I (for 3) are not any more likely to be terrorists than dviss and barfo. And just because a black male from Brooklyn was the culprit in this case of hate crimes doesn't mean that black males are now the biggest Jewish threat. I understand that in general, humans try to understand their world by grouping, but the OP was meant to show that not only is this wrong, it's dangerous--especially among you of the protected racial and gender groups. And especially if you don't pick up on the fact that the "statistical outliers" tend to blow up the trendlines that you're espousing anyway.

Yeah, not likely to become a terrorist. But I could possible see my way to becoming part of a clean up detail. Not being apposed to hard work and all.

 

[dviss1]

Can you link to the axiom? Or is this just something you reach around an grab in your hand from the backside?

Don't say stupid things. I don't need to link SHIT for you.

Your orange fat HUTT has consistently called one of the most reliable news organizations "fake news" and "the failing NY Times".

Since y'all support the piece of SHIT that said that, you can't simultaneously claim a NY times story as true because it fits your narrative.

This whole thread was started through that same hypocrisy.

I don't know if @BrianFromWA voted for Drumpf, but IMO using the organization he calls "fake news" as a source ONLY because it fits your narrative is disingenuous at best.

In closing, Fuck Donald Trump. I don't care how YOU feel about how I feel about your NAZI SYMPATHIZER.

 

[H.C.]

Hey I learned something, or rather it reaffirmed why some people are part of the problem.
'Left-center media' is fake news unless it fits your agenda. Which case it's 100% factual and great reporting.

One of these days people will stop doing this nonsense.

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

Hey I learned something, or rather it reaffirmed why some people are part of the problem.
'Left-center media' is fake news unless it fits your agenda. Which case it's 100% factual and great reporting.

One of these days people will stop doing this nonsense.

Ummmmmm. Trump voter posts Fox news link and result is...

Lolololololololol Faux News!!!!!

Posts NYT article......

Lolololololol you don't get to post what your Orange Hutt calls fake news!!!!!!!

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

Hey @BrianFromWA please post your voting records.

The "liberals" demand you show Z Papers!

 

[H.C.]

Ummmmmm. Trump voter posts Fox news link and result is...

Lolololololololol Faux News!!!!!

Posts NYT article......

Lolololololol you don't get to post what your Orange Hutt calls fake news!!!!!!!

The point is.
The Red voter who constantly posts x organization is fake news.
Looks pretty silly when they then try to use what they call 'fake news' as a legit news source.

They can post whatever they want, but it's impossible to take someone seriously when they cite NY times as fake news.
Only to use NY times as a legit source because an article fits their agenda.

People like this are part of the problem.

It would be the same if a Blue voter constantly called FNN fake news. Only to turn around and cite an article on FNN as legit because it fit their agenda.

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

The point is.
The Red voter who constantly posts x organization is fake news.
Looks pretty silly when they then try to use what they call 'fake news' as a legit news source.

They can post whatever they want, but it's impossible to take someone seriously when they cite NY times as fake news.
Only to use NY times as a legit source because an article fits their agenda.

People like this are part of the problem.

It would be the same if a Blue voter constantly called FNN fake news. Only to turn around and cite an article on FNN as legit because it fit their agenda.

Gonna have to explain to me how that fits here. Brian posted it. Not Maris.

 

[H.C.]

Gonna have to explain to me how that fits here. Brian posted it. Not Maris.

I didn't ask you to explain your mocking post.
Why do I have to explain mine?

TL;DR I'm not going to explain it.
I found it comical, and that's the end of it.
Don't like it? I guess too bad.