This is why they kneel

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpecialFNK

if he was resisting, the involvement and actions of the other officers would be more acceptable?

---

How? Would it have changed the 8 plus minutes that they stood around while chauvin had his knee on his neck?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ManRam

Antifa is a boogeyman bro. It's embarrassing how you still buy into it. You'd think Trump calling that 75 year old pacifist in Buffalo "Antifa" would maybe enlighten you to the nonsense you're being fed, but no...you are exactly as stupid as people like Trump hope you are. Their methods are so effective at riling you guys up because you eat it up like cake. Open your eyes.

Antifa is a a belief (anti-fascist). There's no organization to "Antifa". You couldn't name one person in it. And you probably think there are actually Anitfa boot camps :laugh:

It's like calling Hong Kong protesters "Freedom", and vilifying them for it.

You support so much more violence in so many more ways than I do so get off your stupid high horse :laugh:



EDIT: "I condemn Antifa!". Are you happy? I did the thing you do all the time where you make it very clear you feel a certain way but say something like "I support what he's protesting" once in a while, then constantly remind people you said it while continuing to prove time and time again you don't actually believe it. Even if I thought leftist/indiscriminate violence was OK, me saying "I condemn Antifa's violence" wouldn't change a single thing about how you think of me or what any of my arguments have been about. But that's less importance than you thinking a group that isn't even a group and hasn't killed a single person in this era is the greatest threat to this country. That's astounding and you should be mocked for it daily. Especially when you gloss over right-wing terrorism, an ACTUAL threat, like it's nothing. Because you are a white nationalist.

---

Antifa are them socialist man, evil ****ers!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by benny01

How? Would it have changed the 8 plus minutes that they stood around while chauvin had his knee on his neck?

---

no. which is what I'm saying. even if at some point George Floyd was resisting before, it would not have changed that the officer was clearly wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ccugrad1

You can rename BLM We Pick and Choose Which Black Lives Matter and the moment they started looting, burning down businesses, etc., they lost all credibility in my eyes and those that loot and burn down businesses should be in jail right next to the police officers. The police officers should be arrested and convicted; I don't think anyone disputes that.

Everyone wants to protest and loot for George Floyd, but where were they when other black people were killed innocently before this?

Plus, I think a bunch of this is staged anyways, considering 99.9% of the riots and looters are in Democratic States, who have been promising utopia for years. They are supposedly going to fix the problems, but never do. George Floyd died in a deep blue city in a deep blue state with a Democratic governor. And now people want to blame White Supremacists and Donald Trump?

---

Talk about a purity test.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sluggo1

How can you possibly get from what I wrote being about winners and losers.

Someone asked me when I experienced tear gas and I explained the whys and wherefores. And you drift towards winners and losers.

As Lieutenant Kaffee said to Colonel Jessup………Can you explain that?

---

I believe your personal story. I was commenting on your stance about how if the protester didn’t want to get gassed they should have gotten the hell out of the way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So the Press Secretary said that the police action was somewhat or wholly justified based on the statements this 75 year old man made online.

I want to know if the same applies about comments regarding the FBI? Can the FBI rough Trump up based on his comments about them? Or is it a one way street where one side is protected by law enforcement and the other is put under heel by them?

Also is it just me or do both those blondes look the same? Is Fox cloning blondes now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbroncos78087

So the Press Secretary said that the police action was somewhat or wholly justified based on the statements this 75 year old man made online.

I want to know if the same applies about comments regarding the FBI? Can the FBI rough Trump up based on his comments about them? Or is it a one way street where one side is protected by law enforcement and the other is put under heel by them?

Also is it just me or do both those blondes look the same? Is Fox cloning blondes now?

---

Bolded…hope so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ewing

I believe your personal story. I was commenting on your stance about how if the protester didn’t want to get gassed they should have gotten the hell out of the way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

If I don't want to get wet, I'll stay out of the rain.

Point is (like anyone here will see it) ……not much good happens around riots and protests. They are good places to stay away from.

I'm not saying the old guy should not have been shoved (I personally like old guys…they are the
salt of the earth). Nor am I saying the police acted inappropriately. None of us know what was transpiring at the time. I am saying that it is best to avoid these situations whenever and wherever possible. Same with the woman whose kid got mace or tear gas on her. What was she there at all????

I had to go somewhere in Tampa on Sunday and the best way to get there was to go through downtown. But there was a "meeting of demonstrators" going on so I went another way. The demonstration was peaceful, but why take a chance. Seems like going another way that adds 10 minutes to the trip was the wiser choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sluggo1

If I don't want to get wet, I'll stay out of the rain.

Point is (like anyone here will see it) ……not much good happens around riots and protests. They are good places to stay away from.

I'm not saying the old guy should not have been shoved (I personally like old guys…they are the
salt of the earth). Nor am I saying the police acted inappropriately. None of us know what was transpiring at the time. I am saying that it is best to avoid these situations whenever and wherever possible. Same with the woman whose kid got mace or tear gas on her. What was she there at all????

I had to go somewhere in Tampa on Sunday and the best way to get there was to go through downtown. But there was a "meeting of demonstrators" going on so I went another way. The demonstration was peaceful, but why take a chance. Seems like going another way that adds 10 minutes to the trip was the wiser choice.

---

there was nothing that COULD have been transpiring that makes him being shoved as he was appropriate...nothing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by valade16

Because you said “I don’t know if he knows, I don’t know if he doesn’t. We just don’t know”, which is a pretty 50/50 statement. You didn’t even acknowledge you believe he probably knows until later.

The controversial part is that you think there’s a more than minuscule chance he doesn’t know. If he knows he should apologize? Why even seriously entertain the idea that he doesn’t know at this point?

The chances of him not knowing are extremely small at this point.

---

You applied your own percentages not me. And I didn't say more than minuscule, you did.

So, basically because I said "if" because I wasn't certain you decided to make this a back and forth. I'm still not certain and you haven't even tried to prove it to me. I said he probably knows but that's not good enough for you either. What do you want from me since a completely logical "if" has you so agitated?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flips333

That wasn't simple deescalation.

---

I didn't say it was. I said that police are not trained in any deescalation anymore ... it takes time and intelligence to learn deescalation it's much easier to teach "control the situation".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpecialFNK

so you were wrong, cleared up.

---

Right, people should step up and admit when they were wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiteWolf

there was nothing that COULD have been transpiring that makes him being shoved as he was appropriate...nothing

---

Wow!!!

You were there???? Keep us informed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scoots

You applied your own percentages not me. And I didn't say more than minuscule, you did.

So, basically because I said "if" because I wasn't certain you decided to make this a back and forth. I'm still not certain and you haven't even tried to prove it to me. I said he probably knows but that's not good enough for you either. What do you want from me since a completely logical "if" has you so agitated?

---

What was the point of this post?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scoots

The part about this one that bugs me a bit is that police all over the country have been using similar tactics on peaceful protesters but this one is getting a ton of extra coverage because Trump, more coverage than other worse behavior by police.

Trump Trumps and Trumps and the media jumps to yell TRUMP. Trump wins again. Twas it ever thus.

---

The reason it was a bigger deal is what everyone is pointing out about the photo op for Trump and so on. I think anyone with a brain and not set in defending him is going to admit the obvious that he knows by now at the very least about everything that happened even if you wanna play the he didn't at the time. So where has he spoken out about it? This is a major reason this issue is treated differently is what everyone is trying to point out to you based on your initial post here and seeming to not get that aspect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mngopher35

What was the point of this post?



The reason it was a bigger deal is what everyone is pointing out about the photo op for Trump and so on. I think anyone with a brain and not set in defending him is going to admit the obvious that he knows by now at the very least about everything that happened even if you wanna play the he didn't at the time. So where has he spoken out about it? This is a major reason this issue is treated differently is what everyone is trying to point out to you based on your initial post here and seeming to not get that aspect.

---

He came at me for saying "if" so I was just responding to what he was saying.

I don't know that he knows and probably you don't either. I don't know what's wrong with using softening language when something is not known. Do you prefer "assuming he knows he should apologize"?

I'm just tired of the obsession with Trump. He hasn't really changed since day 1, he loves to hear his name and we just keep lapping it up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scoots

He came at me for saying "if" so I was just responding to what he was saying.

I don't know that he knows and probably you don't either. I don't know what's wrong with using softening language when something is not known. Do you prefer "assuming he knows he should apologize"?

I'm just tired of the obsession with Trump. He hasn't really changed since day 1, he loves to hear his name and we just keep lapping it up.

---

Yes when later in your defending of that post you said "if" he knew.

The issue isn't just the language it is the language used after a post like I quoted asking why this situation is being treated as a big deal. That is related to the POTUS being an instigator with his photo op and whether or not he 100% knows everything that is going on do you actually think it is worth defending him in this overall way based on the chance he doesn't know by this point? Even then wouldn't ignorance/lack of empathy/inability to understand how actions affect others in any way/awareness to what is going on in this country and so on would be massive issues for this POTUS that would be covered? The reason it's covered more is the context overall makes it a bigger issue with POTUS involved.

This got more coverage and so on due to the bad way it was handled at the top. The POTUS should know about this by now either way and if he doesn't it leads to tons and tons of more issues that would mean this deserves even more attention I would say. You can say if but it still doesn't explain that initial post I quoted and the overall context is likely why people actually are responding to you (and have been since that post).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mngopher35

Yes when later in your defending of that post you said "if" he knew.

The issue isn't just the language it is the language used after a post like I quoted asking why this situation is being treated as a big deal. That is related to the POTUS being an instigator with his photo op and whether or not he 100% knows everything that is going on do you actually think it is worth defending him in this overall way based on the chance he doesn't know by this point? Even then wouldn't ignorance/lack of empathy/inability to understand how actions affect others in any way/awareness to what is going on in this country and so on would be massive issues for this POTUS that would be covered? The reason it's covered more is the context overall makes it a bigger issue with POTUS involved.

This got more coverage and so on due to the bad way it was handled at the top. The POTUS should know about this by now either way and if he doesn't it leads to tons and tons of more issues that would mean this deserves even more attention I would say. You can say if but it still doesn't explain that initial post I quoted and the overall context is likely why people actually are responding to you (and have been since that post).

---

I just don't need more data about Trump to know he's an *******. He's not doing anything new. The ongoing outrage over everything he does isn't healthy. I've been saying this from the beginning. He's divisive, but his fuel is attention and being singled out for everything he says and does. Trump has an expiration date, the people doing bad things elsewhere don't and they are getting much less light on them. We have more news coverage bandwidth than ever in history but less diversity in the stories we get hosed at us.

I genuinely think the us vs them, the contempt and the obsession is unhealthy for individuals and our society.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sluggo1

If I don't want to get wet, I'll stay out of the rain.

Point is (like anyone here will see it) ……not much good happens around riots and protests. They are good places to stay away from.

I'm not saying the old guy should not have been shoved (I personally like old guys…they are the
salt of the earth). Nor am I saying the police acted inappropriately. None of us know what was transpiring at the time. I am saying that it is best to avoid these situations whenever and wherever possible. Same with the woman whose kid got mace or tear gas on her. What was she there at all????

I had to go somewhere in Tampa on Sunday and the best way to get there was to go through downtown. But there was a "meeting of demonstrators" going on so I went another way. The demonstration was peaceful, but why take a chance. Seems like going another way that adds 10 minutes to the trip was the wiser choice.

---

I don’t know what the forecast in DC was for that day but I’m sure it did not call for tear gas and beatings

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scoots

I just don't need more data about Trump to know he's an *******. He's not doing anything new. The ongoing outrage over everything he does isn't healthy. I've been saying this from the beginning. He's divisive, but his fuel is attention and being singled out for everything he says and does. Trump has an expiration date, the people doing bad things elsewhere don't and they are getting much less light on them. We have more news coverage bandwidth than ever in history but less diversity in the stories we get hosed at us.

I genuinely think the us vs them, the contempt and the obsession is unhealthy for individuals and our society.

---

Ignoring the POTUS isn't healthy for the country. Downplaying bad things from the POTUS the way you do isn't healthy imo. That it isn't new is an even bigger problem, people like yourself not holding certain people accountable and defending like that post is part of why it is acceptable today. If he can just keep doing this and you are just going to keep acting like it's not a big deal because he might not have known and so on then why wouldn't he keep doing it? That is the point people are making, we need accountability at the top not an ignorance of what is going on because bad things have become acceptable (to many this is only going to last until parties change then opposite approach will be taken).

I agree the us vs them mentality is unhealthy. Pointing out obvious logical issues in context/reality related to our leaders and especially POTUS is not solely an us vs them argument. You are just seeing everything as us vs them it seems which is actually a major part of the problem (and leads to often both sidesing issues without context because your focus is that there are two teams and not separating things based on facts/context but those teams instead).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ewing

I don’t know what the forecast in DC was for that day but I’m sure it did not call for tear gas and beatings

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Question I will ask (again)……

Do you think the police went out there and just started shooting tear gas (and it was smoke, not tear gas) and pepper bullets or do you think they asked the crowd to move back (most likely several times) and the crowd would not move???

Seriously…what do you think happened????

And if your answer was they were protesting on public property…just save it. They could have protested on public property 50 yards back. As it was, they were blocking access to the church.

Just like if a few hundred people stood on the street (public space) in front of your driveway blocking access, the police would be called to move them.

It is always best, and by far easiest, to do what the police tell you to do.

Why don't ypu just say that you don't like the police???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiteWolf

there was nothing that COULD have been transpiring that makes him being shoved as he was appropriate...nothing

---

So you were there too.

Great. Eye witness.

Keep us posted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mngopher35

Ignoring the POTUS isn't healthy for the country. Downplaying bad things from the POTUS the way you do isn't healthy imo. That it isn't new is an even bigger problem, people like yourself not holding certain people accountable and defending like that post is part of why it is acceptable today. If he can just keep doing this and you are just going to keep acting like it's not a big deal because he might not have known and so on then why wouldn't he keep doing it? That is the point people are making, we need accountability at the top not an ignorance of what is going on because bad things have become acceptable (to many this is only going to last until parties change then opposite approach will be taken).

I agree the us vs them mentality is unhealthy. Pointing out obvious logical issues in context/reality related to our leaders and especially POTUS is not solely an us vs them argument. You are just seeing everything as us vs them it seems which is actually a major part of the problem (and leads to often both sidesing issues without context because your focus is that there are two teams and not separating things based on facts/context but those teams instead).

---

I'm holding Trump accountable the only way I can. I'm not voting for him.

I'm NOT us vs them ... I'm fighting back on us vs them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scoots

I'm holding Trump accountable the only way I can. I'm not voting for him.

I'm NOT us vs them ... I'm fighting back on us vs them.

---

That is not the only way but it is one that you can use sure, glad you at least have some standards then. You could also call him out for bad individual actions but choose not to and instead push a team game narrative.

You made a logical point into an us vs them argument, the context itself has nothing to do with it needing to be an us or a them it is a common sense point. Holding the POTUS accountable for their actions is not a team game aspect but YOU are seeing it that way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scoots

You applied your own percentages not me. And I didn't say more than minuscule, you did.

So, basically because I said "if" because I wasn't certain you decided to make this a back and forth. I'm still not certain and you haven't even tried to prove it to me. I said he probably knows but that's not good enough for you either. What do you want from me since a completely logical "if" has you so agitated?

---

You only said he probably knows after I responded. You probably never would have said he probably knows without backing you into it.

What I want from you is to stop your 50/50 middle ground attempts.

You’re in another thread saying nobody knows anything about Covid and there’s no experts, you’re in here saying we don’t know if Trump is aware about one of the biggest news stories entirely about him for the past week.

You trying to play middle man in these cases makes you look like a naive doofus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ccugrad1

You can rename BLM We Pick and Choose Which Black Lives Matter and the moment they started looting, burning down businesses, etc., they lost all credibility in my eyes and those that loot and burn down businesses should be in jail right next to the police officers. The police officers should be arrested and convicted; I don't think anyone disputes that.

Everyone wants to protest and loot for George Floyd, but where were they when other black people were killed innocently before this?

Plus, I think a bunch of this is staged anyways, considering 99.9% of the riots and looters are in Democratic States, who have been promising utopia for years. They are supposedly going to fix the problems, but never do. George Floyd died in a deep blue city in a deep blue state with a Democratic governor. And now people want to blame White Supremacists and Donald Trump?

---

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...afbd800682.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scoots

He came at me for saying "if" so I was just responding to what he was saying.

I don't know that he knows and probably you don't either. I don't know what's wrong with using softening language when something is not known. Do you prefer "assuming he knows he should apologize"?

I'm just tired of the obsession with Trump. He hasn't really changed since day 1, he loves to hear his name and we just keep lapping it up.

---

If someone criticized Trump for believing in Santa Claus, would you respond with “If Trump doesn’t believe in Santa Claus. That attack is not true”? No, you’d tell them that attack is stupid because Trump doesn’t believe in Santa Claus. Now do you have any proof he doesn’t believe in Santa Claus? No, you have common sense.

Trump DOES believe in Santa Claus, tho
He just thinks it's HIM

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mngopher35

That is not the only way but it is one that you can use sure, glad you at least have some standards then. You could also call him out for bad individual actions but choose not to and instead push a team game narrative.

You made a logical point into an us vs them argument, the context itself has nothing to do with it needing to be an us or a them it is a common sense point. Holding the POTUS accountable for their actions is not a team game aspect but YOU are seeing it that way.

---

What good does complaining to your family do about the actions of the squirrel in the yard? Only action matters, and the only legal action I can take is with my vote.

Do you think Trump Derangement Syndrome is a real thing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sluggo1

Question I will ask (again)……

Do you think the police went out there and just started shooting tear gas (and it was smoke, not tear gas) and pepper bullets or do you think they asked the crowd to move back (most likely several times) and the crowd would not move???

Seriously…what do you think happened????

And if your answer was they were protesting on public property…just save it. They could have protested on public property 50 yards back. As it was, they were blocking access to the church.

Just like if a few hundred people stood on the street (public space) in front of your driveway blocking access, the police would be called to move them.

It is always best, and by far easiest, to do what the police tell you to do.

Why don't ypu just say that you don't like the police???

---

No I won’t save it. You are wrong. So wrong it is obvious you would fine a justification for almost any action against protesters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sluggo1

Question I will ask (again)……

Do you think the police went out there and just started shooting tear gas (and it was smoke, not tear gas) and pepper bullets or do you think they asked the crowd to move back (most likely several times) and the crowd would not move???

Seriously…what do you think happened????

And if your answer was they were protesting on public property…just save it. They could have protested on public property 50 yards back. As it was, they were blocking access to the church.

Just like if a few hundred people stood on the street (public space) in front of your driveway blocking access, the police would be called to move them.

It is always best, and by far easiest, to do what the police tell you to do.

Why don't ypu just say that you don't like the police???

---

In that regard, why don't you just say you're madly in love with the police???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by valade16

You only said he probably knows after I responded. You probably never would have said he probably knows without backing you into it.

What I want from you is to stop your 50/50 middle ground attempts.

You’re in another thread saying nobody knows anything about Covid and there’s no experts, you’re in here saying we don’t know if Trump is aware about one of the biggest news stories entirely about him for the past week.

You trying to play middle man in these cases makes you look like a naive doofus.

---

You are still trying to tell me what I think and thought.

I've always figured he probably knew, I still don't think it has bearing on me saying "if".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by valade16

You trying to play middle man in these cases makes you look like a naive doofus.

---

Bingo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spliff(TONE)

In that regard, why don't you just say you're madly in love with the police???

---

Don’t ever question when the authority tells you to do something, just do it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scoots

You are still trying to tell me what I think and thought.

I've always figured he probably knew, I still don't think it has bearing on me saying "if".

---

Would you ever start a sentence with “If Trump believes Santa is fake” because you don’t have conclusive evidence?

Or are there some things that are overwhelmingly likely to be true to the point where an “if” is unnecessary?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scoots

What good does complaining to your family do about the actions of the squirrel in the yard? Only action matters, and the only legal action I can take is with my vote.

Do you think Trump Derangement Syndrome is a real thing?

---

Are you suggesting the POTUS is similar to a squirrell and my family is the entire US? I have no idea why I would ever have an opinion on what a squirrel should be doing nor do I think it has the same standards as the POTUS. What is this even supposed to be saying lol?

Yes I do think TDS is a real thing when people go over the top. Do you think extreme bias in favor of Trump is a thing and downplaying bad things to protect him happens? I don't have this cool word like snowflake or TDS to call it but do you think it exists?

This is pretty ridiculous at this point the level to which you will dig in. As I said YOU are making about these teams, one does not have to be an extremist to have basic standards for the POTUS. Often those making it into this are doing so for very obvious reasons due to their own bias (whether that be TDS or what I laid out). This is what you have seemingly done here in a special manner. The reason this got more attention is it went against some basic common sense standards many have in this country and was specifically done by our government (including POTUS at the top). It can be that simple when you aren't always focused on one side vs another and care about common sense over everything being both sides.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sluggo1

So you were there too.

Great. Eye witness.

Keep us posted.

---

Everything I needed to see to make that judgment, I could see in that video. So in that respect yes, eye witness.
He wasn't threatening, there was no show of force, he could have been yelling obscenities about their mothers and there was no justification for shoving him. They obviously didn't view him as posing a threat or they wouldn't have just kept walking...so again, yes, saw all I needed to.

What is it you think we potentially couldn't see that could change that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ewing

I don’t know what the forecast in DC was for that day but I’m sure it did not call for tear gas and beatings

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I dunno, those wacky weathermen ya know

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ewing

No I won’t save it. You are wrong. So wrong it is obvious you would fine a justification for almost any action against protesters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Your answer tells me exactly what you do not get………

if there is a need for "action against protestors" than the protestors are the cause of that need. If they were just peacefully protesting, then no action would be needed. The police just do not go out there looking for trouble, or just looking to give the protestors a hard time. The police are reacting to what they are shown.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiteWolf

Everything I needed to see to make that judgment, I could see in that video. So in that respect yes, eye witness.
He wasn't threatening, there was no show of force, he could have been yelling obscenities about their mothers and there was no justification for shoving him. They obviously didn't view him as posing a threat or they wouldn't have just kept walking...so again, yes, saw all I needed to.

What is it you think we potentially couldn't see that could change that?

---

You saw the police show the old guy. The police may have been told to clear the street, the may have (and probably did) tell the old guy to move along. The police line was in morion. he was in the way. Not a good place to be.