|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Ferguson and its implications
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
Barnabas62 - I did read the article and I appreciate your response, but neither the article nor your post seem particularly responsive to my question. I understand you think "The major significance is not the degree of injury" but the degree of injury depicted in the photos was precisely the point of Orfeo's complaint, which you supported, and to which I objected. Apparently I haven't succeeded in communicating this, but I can't think of any way to state the point more clearly, so I won't trouble you with it again.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Dave W.
Point taken. The truth is that I sympathise with orfeo's reaction but feel it was a bit of an overreaction! Frustration can do that to any of us. My sympathy did not arise from careful analysis!
I liked mousethief's response re Fox. If the facts are inconvenient to your purpose, ignore and keep on asserting.
I think orfeo's obvious frustration comes from that sense of "been here before". Generally, I'm a very patient person. Temperamentally, it takes an awful lot to get me to that point. But I have my limits and my patience ran out with Fox News and the UK Daily Mail a long time ago. Contempt and distrust set in.
[Late ETA. What is also worth saying is I appreciate we all have limits; orfeo realised he'd reached his and took himself back to HellHosting rather than get Hellish here. That was a good move.
After sympathising, I found I could put my analytical hat back on, decided to hang in to the debate and test Eigon's post against the published trial information.
So my sequence of posts demonstrates two different moods.]
[ 29. November 2014, 07:41: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Charlie Rose had a good interview with Brown's parents a couple of days ago. (I had problems bringing it up at PBS.org or at Charlie's site, but I found it here.)
His parents were sad, angry, and very self-controlled. His mom unconsciously rocked, now and then.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eigon
Shipmate
# 4917
|
Posted
Just to say that I based my post about Officer Wilson's injuries on the article in Huffington Post - I haven't read any further.
What really concerns me though, is that the Ferguson Police Department laid themselves wide open to conspiracy theories by the incompetent manner they dealt with the case. I'd like to know who the police chief is, and what he has to say about his department. He must have superiors somewhere, and if I were them, I'd be asking some very serious questions about the way he runs his department generally.
--------------------
Laugh hard. Run fast. Be kind.
Posts: 3710 | From: Hay-on-Wye, town of books | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
It was a good interview, handled with great sympathy by Charlie Rose. The parents were very dignified and sincere in their answers to questions. Clearly they do not believe Officer Wilson's testimony. Some of the things they said they thought had happened did seem in conflict with the forensic evidence. My heart went out to the mother, particularly when she made the "18 seconds of video v 18 years of knowing her son" comment. I think seeing that last image of her son when he was alive must have been desperately hurtful in itself.
I think the serious assertion their lawyer made was that the grand jury process didn't look sufficiently critically at evidence and testimonies in conflict. He argued strongly that a full trial would have been a better way of handling the conflicts of evidence. He didn't obviously disagree with the opinion that the grand jury finding was reasonable on the basis of the evidence presented to it and the way it was presented, but, like the parents, was very sceptical about the behaviour of the prosecutor in presenting this evidence. I think he's also reserved judgment over any further legal proceedings which may be made.
The family lawyer also referred to differences between Officer Wilson's initial statements and his testimony. His formal, recorded, initial interview was actually presented to the grand jury.
Here it is. It is dated a couple of days after the shooting and cites an earlier unrecorded interview. There is also a preliminary synopsis by a detective which can be found on page 2 of this document.
I guess you can draw your own conclusions about whether this information in the initial interview and the earlier preliminary report differs substantially from his testimony to the grand jury. I haven't done a line by line comparison but "five year old v the Hulk" doesn't appear in the initial formal interview.
On the essential issue of the Missouri State Law standard, he has made a consistent claim from this second day after the shooting that Michael Brown was the first aggressor, that there was a struggle for the gun in the car, that the fatal shots were fired as Michael Brown was advancing towards him, and that he feared for his life because of the earlier struggle.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
Lastly, re: Doublethink's concern about coverup: the complete evidence presented to the grand jury has been released and is available to anyone who cares to read it.
To some, this may look like transparency.
To others, including me, this could be a version of coverup. The average American adult, I recently read somewhere, spends about 4 and 1/2 minutes a day reading anything. If you seriously want to cover something up, release it in print, in dense and copious quantities. It will remain safely ignored by the vast majority of the populace.
I find this very hard to follow. You put all the evidence out in the public domain and because few people will read it all, there's been a cover-up??????
Maybe you have to live here to understand this phenomenon, but I'll try expressing it.
As has been discussed at length on this thread in various ways, it's not so much about what people actually do, but about how those actions are perceived.
It's hard to overestimate the amount of fear and mistrust that average, mostly-undereducated disadvantaged people here have of officialdom -- not just their politicians and police, but their schools, their town clerks, their zoning boards . . . There's a deep, wide streak of anti-officialdom in US culture which mistrusts complexity, nuance, and verbiage. The more complicated or many-sided an issue, the more explaining that issue requires, and the more explaining that goes on, the more the issues is perceived as a deliberate effort on somebody's part to mislead and obfuscate.
Hence releasing all this data will be perceived by many as a hollow PR gesture meant to distract people from the core problem, i.e., Wilson (in the view of these folks) should be indicted and wasn't. Behind the "He's a white rogue cop who shot an unarmed teenager" narrative that seems to exist in many people's heads, there's another underlying narrative that arises in response to the release of volumes of testimony, which runs something like this:
"I can't read all this sh*t (because I can barely read to start with, because I'm working 18 hour days to put food on the table, because I have an undiagnosed and untreated learning problem, because I quit 6th grade at age 14 to help my family survive, because fill-in-the-blank), and you-the-man ought to KNOW I can't read all this sh*t."
"When you put all this sh*t out KNOWING it means nothing to me, you're just rubbing my face in everything that gets in my way and has always got in my way and which I'm pretty sure you deliberately PUT in my way, I know you're just putting more sh*t in my way to try to shut me up and keep me quiet."
It's a version of "I don't understand this, so it can't be right."
The acrobatics I have to go through to assist family members of my clients to understand the (often contradictory and extremely unhelpful) rules and regs which screw up their family member's life (and often theirs as well) is daunting. I deal with this unspoken narrative a lot in my work.
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D
Finally, I cannot understand the arson and other violence carried out by those protesting. One photograph shown here was of a burnt-out shop, with a sign saying Beauty resting agains ruins. We were told that that had been a beauty salon. Why was it burnt? Was the proprietor a member of the KKK? And the same for other damaged property, the wrecked cars, the smashed windows.
AIUI most of the destroyed and vandalized businesses were owned by blacks who were supporting themselves and their families.
I saw a video of a black woman whose cake shop had been vandalized. There were tears streaming down her cheeks. She had scraped together the money to open her shop by selling cakes wherever she could, including flea markets. The shop was opened in June and thoroughly trashed Monday night. This woman was supporting herself and her children.
There is a happy ending to her story. People all over the country sent money to help her, and she can repair the damage and get back in business. I hope that someone sets up a program to accept donations for all the businesses that were damaged.
I don't understand at all why this behavior is tolerated. When people are frustrated they feel like destroying something, but destroying the property of people who belong to the same discriminated-against group as you makes no sense.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
[...] I don't understand at all why this behavior is tolerated. When people are frustrated they feel like destroying something, but destroying the property of people who belong to the same discriminated-against group as you makes no sense.
Moo
This is exactly why I get so mad at apologists (and they do exist, like in the article I linked). Do the rioters go attack station houses and charge police lines? (Not hit and run, full on charge, with intent to fight to the death.) No, they know full and well it'd be suicide, so they take anger out on innocent people who suffer the exact same feelings. They're making their lives miserable.
We don't get no justice, so you don't get no peace. But they achieve this by inflicting injustice on innocents. The people suffering aren't the people responsible for no billing the indictment. The most basic rule of justice is to focus on the guilty party. If they're motivated by justice, how can they not see this?
If they want to take out their anger, then OK, I can empathize, but I empathize a heckuva lot more with their victims.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
I don't understand at all why this behavior is tolerated. When people are frustrated they feel like destroying something, but destroying the property of people who belong to the same discriminated-against group as you makes no sense.
Moo
I don't know about it being "tolerated;" after all, there were many arrests (more than 60, IIRC) the night the indictment was announced.
Again, though, we're down to perceptions. First, there's the issue of what the looters/vandalizers "know." I walk down my town's Main Street pretty often; do I know who owns what among the local shops? I know a few; most, I've got no clue about. I don't patronize the businesses, or I've only interacted with hired help, not the business owners, or what-have-you.
Second, according to rumors, there were many out-of-towners present. They won't know who's who or what's what.
Third, when a group is routinely discriminated against, discrimination is usually accompanied by deep mistrust. They're not "single moms receiving public assistance," they're "welfare queens." They're not "people with disabilities," they're "fakers living off the taxpayer." They're not "economically, culturally, and educationally-deprived African-Americans," they're lazy, resentful good-for-nothings always playing the race card in order to avoid taking responsibility for their own problems."
These are real public perceptions that get voiced regularly in the media by private citizens. The audience for these statements is the general public, which is partly comprised of members of the discriminated-against group, who are as susceptible to buying into this crap as anybody else.
So there's anger -- But "I'm not like that" and there's also deep suspicion and mistrust of your own community members -- "but maybe she's like that." There's also resentment, envy, and jealousy when someone else's struggles somehow pay off when your own do not. So anybody who manages to claw themselves out of the hole you're all in gets attacked.
Fourth, mobs don't think. Expecting "sense" of mob action is a waste of energy.
Many years ago, I was involved in an effort to organize welfare moms in my state to respond to proposed cuts in welfare benefits (already down to cheese-parings). The prejudice against these women by non-group members paled to nothingness in comparison with the prejudice the women in my group had for one another.
[ 29. November 2014, 13:46: Message edited by: Porridge ]
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
[...] mobs don't think.
People do. If they go intending to protest peacefully, they choose not to leave when it turns ugly. If they turn up with the intent to commit crimes, that intent carries over.
Besides, rioters have been interviewed: "We don't get no justice, you don't get no peace." That's not someone caught up in the heat of the moment, lost to instinct. It's a person articulating a conscious and deliberate choice to use violence for political ends.
It'd do them a disservice to present them as people lost to mob instinct.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
Of course people think, Byron. But have you ever been in a mob?
First, if it's a big enough crowd, you may not realize when things turn ugly -- you're not close enough to that action to hear or see what's happening; there's too much racket in your immediate surroundings. By the time you DO realize what's going on, you may not be able to escape; the crowd's headed one way, and you get swept along with it however much you try to elbow your way out.
Second, sure. There are those who'll offer the "no peace" response even when such justice as can be rendered has been rendered, because they don't recognize it as justice. And there are assholes in every group. Doesn't mean everyone in the group is an asshole.
Third, what people say about their actions afterward may have little to do with what was going on inside their heads (assuming anything was) during.
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
Yeah, I have, protest turned bad, and I got the hell out soon as possible.
Besides, this doesn't look the same. I don't see anyone penned in, but people attacking stores on open streets. I'm not directing any comments at folk who got caught up in a crowd.
If anyone truly lost control in a mob, I guess they should be allowed to argue irresistible impulse at trial, although Missouri doesn't appear to allow that defense.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Byron:
Yeah, I have, protest turned bad, and I got the hell out soon as possible.
Besides, this doesn't look the same. I don't see anyone penned in, but people attacking stores on open streets. I'm not directing any comments at folk who got caught up in a crowd.
If anyone truly lost control in a mob, I guess they should be allowed to argue irresistible impulse at trial, although Missouri doesn't appear to allow that defense.
Most of us (that is, those not actually present at the action) see only what TV cameras show us. How likely is it that the cameras will be trained on people trying to leave the scene, or masses of people penned in, vs. people hurling rocks, bottles, breaking windows, flames. etc.?
Those in the action will have equally partial sight & sound.
Good for you for managing to escape. I'm a relatively short and relatively slight (well, I was then, anyway -- now not so much;) woman. I couldn't escape. I couldn't see over the heads around me; I couldn't hear or understand any official efforts at crowd control; and I literally at times did not have my feet on the ground, actually being lifted and carried along in the press of bodies around me. It was so terrifying that even now, years later, I hesitate long and hard before putting myself into any crowded situation. No parades, no live concerts, and if I demonstrate, I stay far in the fringes of the crowd.
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
If people acted as individuals, we would have significantly fewer problems in this world. Politics are fucked because people do not think as individuals, racism happens because people do not think as individuals. Genocide happens because people do not think as individuals.*
Group behaviour affects individual behaviour. This is highly studied and completely obvious. That everyone will be proof against it ignores evolution and cultural development.
This, of course, does not obviate personal responsibility. But to deny the group as an entity is silly.
*Obviously, not the only cause or factor.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
[...] Good for you for managing to escape. I'm a relatively short and relatively slight (well, I was then, anyway -- now not so much;) woman. I couldn't escape. I couldn't see over the heads around me; I couldn't hear or understand any official efforts at crowd control; and I literally at times did not have my feet on the ground, actually being lifted and carried along in the press of bodies around me. It was so terrifying that even now, years later, I hesitate long and hard before putting myself into any crowded situation. No parades, no live concerts, and if I demonstrate, I stay far in the fringes of the crowd.
I've had exactly that experience in crowds, and it's terrifying. It makes anyone realize their limitations and vulnerability. No criticism whatsoever for people who found themselves in that situation in Ferguson. Someone breaking into a shop and looting it, or committing arson, is, surely, so different it bears little comparison. Being trapped in a crowd isn't a voluntary act.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
Second, according to rumors, there were many out-of-towners present. They won't know who's who or what's what.
I doubt this was much of a factor. It's pulled out every time there's a riot to explain the exact paradox that you're responding to-- the fact that whenever there's this sort of unrest, the rioters end up damaging their own community, rather than the (perceived or real) oppressors. It happened here in L.A in my lifetime in both the Watts riots and in the Rodney King riots, and seems to be the pattern whenever and wherever this occurs. I'm not sure I fully understand the psychology of it either, but I know that "outside agitators" is not really the answer.
In terms of Ferguson in particular, the same charge was made earlier this year in the unrest following the shooting. Virtually all the "outsiders" were journalists, including my son-in-law who was "detained" by the Ferguson police for 6 hours w/o cause.
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
Fourth, mobs don't think. Expecting "sense" of mob action is a waste of energy.
Many years ago, I was involved in an effort to organize welfare moms in my state to respond to proposed cuts in welfare benefits (already down to cheese-parings). The prejudice against these women by non-group members paled to nothingness in comparison with the prejudice the women in my group had for one another.
These two points, in my experience, are spot-on. As well as the deep American suspicion noted upthread of anything complex or nuanced.
[ 29. November 2014, 17:04: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
oops-- sorry for the broken HTML. Editing time ran out. : (
[sorted]
[ 29. November 2014, 17:05: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
lillBuddah quote:
Group behaviour affects individual behaviour. This is highly studied and completely obvious. That everyone will be proof against it ignores evolution and cultural development.
This, of course, does not obviate personal responsibility. But to deny the group as an entity is silly
I wonder what you understand by "personal responsibility" in that it is difficult to decontextualize; and whether culpability and consequent sanctions necessarily vary. For example, is opportunistic theft in a non-riot context more heinous than when an individual, otherwise law-abiding, decides to join looters on the spur of the moment?
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kwesi:
For example, is opportunistic theft in a non-riot context more heinous than when an individual, otherwise law-abiding, decides to join looters on the spur of the moment?
I'm wasn't attributing any level of wrong in my statement, just describing dynamics/mechanism.
However, exploring it, I am not certain.
My personal feeling is that there is an equal level of wrong.
Being part of a mob is a reason one might commit an act which otherwise one would not. It is not inherently an excuse.
That said, an action as part of a mob/riot is not necessarily carried out with the same level of reasoning that a simple theft or act of violence is.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
The various problems mentioned with demonstrations going bad is why I avoid them. There always seems to be someone who loses it (on whatever side), or self-proclaimed anarchists who infiltrate the protests. (Around here, they tend to wear masks and black clothing.) Sometimes, cops will warn the protesters ahead of time that, if bad stuff breaks out, to quickly get away. Of course, that's not always possible. And the cops can't necessarily tell who's who. (Other than the masked folks.)
Then there are cops who use unnecessarily brutal force on peaceful protesters--e.g., protesters have fastened themselves to stationary objects, and aren't otherwise disturbing anyone, and the cops *swab pepper spray into their eyes*. It's happened a couple of times around here. How much effort would it take to get bolt cutters??
And, of course, you get folks like some of those here in SF, last night, who went from "act up" sorts of protest (chaining themselves to public transit so that it couldn't move, and storming into stores in a posh shopping district) to throwing things at cops--one cop had to get stitches. ISTM that if you want cops to treat people more humanely, bricks and bottles aren't the way to do it.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
I don't understand at all why this behavior is tolerated. When people are frustrated they feel like destroying something, but destroying the property of people who belong to the same discriminated-against group as you makes no sense.
Moo
I don't know about it being "tolerated;" after all, there were many arrests (more than 60, IIRC) the night the indictment was announced.
It's the job of the police to arrest those who commit arson and vandalism. My point is that I have never heard a black leader point out to rioters that they are inflicting tremendous pain on other blacks.
quote:
Again, though, we're down to perceptions. First, there's the issue of what the looters/vandalizers "know." I walk down my town's Main Street pretty often; do I know who owns what among the local shops? I know a few; most, I've got no clue about. I don't patronize the businesses, or I've only interacted with hired help, not the business owners, or what-have-you.
If the hired help are black and the business is destroyed, they are thrown out of work. Moreover, businesses in predominantly black neighborhoods are patronized mostly by black people. If these businesses are destroyed, their customers have to travel out of the neighborhood to get the goods and services they want.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
I don't understand at all why this behavior is tolerated. When people are frustrated they feel like destroying something, but destroying the property of people who belong to the same discriminated-against group as you makes no sense.
Moo
I don't know about it being "tolerated;" after all, there were many arrests (more than 60, IIRC) the night the indictment was announced.
It's the job of the police to arrest those who commit arson and vandalism. My point is that I have never heard a black leader point out to rioters that they are inflicting tremendous pain on other blacks.
]If the hired help are black and the business is destroyed, they are thrown out of work. Moreover, businesses in predominantly black neighborhoods are patronized mostly by black people. If these businesses are destroyed, their customers have to travel out of the neighborhood to get the goods and services they want.
Perhaps you're just too distant from the action. Here in US, African-American leaders have been making these points, as well as urging peaceful protest, all the way back to MLK. I remember many, many explicit pleas making these points at the time of both the Watts riots and the Rodney King riots. More recently, in the lead up to the verdict, African-American leaders in Ferguson made these points repeatedly while calling for peace. It certainly is not a new insight or one that is lost on the leadership.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
I have heard of many black leaders asking people to protest peacefully, but I have never heard one saying that predominantly black neighborhoods and businesses should not be trashed because of the pain that inflicts on other blacks.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Maybe because if they said it that way, they might sound like they were OKing smashing businesses of other groups? A peaceful protest would be peaceful towards African-American businesses, too.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
I have heard of many black leaders asking people to protest peacefully, but I have never heard one saying that predominantly black neighborhoods and businesses should not be trashed because of the pain that inflicts on other blacks.
Moo
'Cause not trashing anything is part of protesting peacefully?
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
Why protest in predominantly black neighborhoods at all, whether peacefully or otherwise? The people who oppress blacks are not in those neighborhoods.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
Darren Wilson has resigned from the Ferguson police force. It seems the police department as a whole was under threat if they didn't fire him and he says he didn't want to endanger his fellow officers.
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
No surprise there.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
Why protest in predominantly black neighborhoods at all, whether peacefully or otherwise? The people who oppress blacks are not in those neighborhoods.
Moo
Sadly, some of the people who oppress blacks are themselves black. Oppressors come in all colors. Isn't violence a form of oppression? And, as you note, both the perpetrators and the victims of violence in Ferguson are predominantly African American.
I have never been to Ferguson, Missouri, but the town’s website indicates that out of a population of 21,203 (2010 census, so probably out-of-date now), a grand total of 6,206 residents identified as white.
About 67% of the town identifies as African American; about 29% identify as white; there’s a smattering of other groups, including self-identified biracial or multiracial residents.
There may be no “white” neighborhoods in Ferguson; the city itself is predominantly African American. It may be that the minority white residents are simply interspersed among everybody else.
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
Why protest in predominantly black neighborhoods at all, whether peacefully or otherwise?
Because if they moved the protest to a white neighborhood, they'd stand a good chance of getting mown down.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
Porridge, I think I now understand the logic behind the statement that giving full information is a cover-up. AIUI, if the full dossier of evidence is given, complaint is made that this is too much for the average person to comprehend, that as a consequence none will be read, and this is a cover-up. On the other hand, if only a précis is given, complain is made that in the reduction, relevant material has been excluded and that this is a cover-up. I don't know about the US, but that sort of argument here is much how the Trots behave.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
I've asked this before. How can one rationally any concept of peaceful protest in a place where firearms are freely available, widely both available and carried? Isn't claiming it does, a sort of well-meaning self-delusion?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Peaceful protest along Gandhi-MLK lines is very powerful when facing an armed authority. Where is becomes difficult is when there are two groups of protesters arguing on opposite sides of a issue and both are out there together.
The counter-demonstration is always a attempt to break up the effectiveness of a planned peaceful demonstration. You get more heat than light and clashes between groups seems to make a better story for the media. I'm not sure that the massive Civil Rights demonstrations culminating in the iconic "I have a dream" could happen today. Having see how effective that was, a counter protest woul be mobilised to make the clash the news rather tha the protest message the news.
I'm not sure what the answer to that is. Particularly if means of policing is a major part of the process.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
I note Darren Wilson has described resigning as "the hardest thing" he's ever had to do. Apparently, then, shooting people is easier. Implying this so publically is not helpful.
[ 30. November 2014, 08:24: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I've asked this before. How can one rationally any concept of peaceful protest in a place where firearms are freely available, widely both available and carried? Isn't claiming it does, a sort of well-meaning self-delusion?
AFAIK no one has been shot during the protests. People have been hit with various objects, and buildings have been trashed and set afire, but I have not heard of any gunshots.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
passer
Indigo
# 13329
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
I note Darren Wilson has described resigning as "the hardest thing" he's ever had to do. Apparently, then, shooting people is easier. Implying this so publically is not helpful.
I'm sure some supportive group will find a role for him soon.
Posts: 1289 | From: Sheffield | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
I note Darren Wilson has described resigning as "the hardest thing" he's ever had to do. Apparently, then, shooting people is easier. Implying this so publically is not helpful.
I suspect that shooting people is far, far too easy in a place awash with guns. So much so that the first line of defence seems to be 'shoot to kill' ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
I have heard of many black leaders asking people to protest peacefully, but I have never heard one saying that predominantly black neighborhoods and businesses should not be trashed because of the pain that inflicts on other blacks.
Moo
Again, it might be your geographic distance, but the point has been made, many times, going back to the riots in the 60s.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
I saw a picture of five or six black men with guns standing in a line in front of a gas station. The story that went with the picture said that the gas station belonged to a white man who treated his black employees and customers very well.
The men decided they would make sure no one burned the place down.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I've asked this before. How can one rationally any concept of peaceful protest in a place where firearms are freely available, widely both available and carried? Isn't claiming it does, a sort of well-meaning self-delusion?
AFAIK no one has been shot during the protests. People have been hit with various objects, and buildings have been trashed and set afire, but I have not heard of any gunshots.
Moo
That's good, but it isn't quite the question I was asking.
If the authorities are policing a population that is habitually armed, faced with a protest, and not knowing whether protesters will suddenly start shooting or not, how can one expect the authorities to treat some protests as peaceful and some as violent, rather than all as violent?
Besides, even if no one has been shot, people being hit with various objects, and buildings being set on fire is not peaceful protest. Faced with that, the authorities have little option but to put down the riot by applying overwhelming force. The reason for the riot, whether we sympathise with it or not, becomes irrelevant. IMHO rioters have no grounds for complaint if they get hurt.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
I note Darren Wilson has described resigning as "the hardest thing" he's ever had to do. Apparently, then, shooting people is easier. Implying this so publically is not helpful.
This should ease the pain:
quote:
ABC offered Darren Wilson a “mid-to-high” six-figure payment to give his first and only public interview on the network, according to the website Got News. An unnamed source from NBC reportedly told the website that both networks engaged in a bidding war to score the first interview with Wilson but NBC backed out after its rival “upped the ante.”
Add that to the reputed half a million dollars Wilson allegedly received from people contributing to a fund for his legal defense (which he no longer has to spend for legal defense, except in the unlikely event of a federal civil rights suit or civil suit by Michael Brown's family) and ex-Officer Wilson seems to have suddenly come into about a million dollars. Factoring in his new marketability as a Fox News talking head or adding his by-line to ghost written books by Regnery Publishing, why would anyone be surprised that he quit his day job harassing the black citizens of Ferguson?
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
. . . the authorities have little option but to put down the riot by applying overwhelming force. The reason for the riot, whether we sympathise with it or not, becomes irrelevant. IMHO rioters have no grounds for complaint if they get hurt.
Which raises yet again the many questions about where all the extra forces ordered up by MO's governor, etc. were on the night the no-indictment announcement was made, why the announcement was made at prime TV time to an assemblage apparently primed to riot, etc.
--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!
Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
Which raises yet again the many questions about where all the extra forces ordered up by MO's governor, etc. were on the night the no-indictment announcement was made, why the announcement was made at prime TV time to an assemblage apparently primed to riot, etc.
A cynic might suspect that one factor of the timing was that it's harder to tell what's going on if the tear gas starts flying under cover of darkness.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
If the authorities are policing a population that is habitually armed, faced with a protest, and not knowing whether protesters will suddenly start shooting or not, how can one expect the authorities to treat some protests as peaceful and some as violent, rather than all as violent?
You assume that people who have no guns are unarmed. IIRC during the rioting in August, Molotov cocktails were thrown. Just about anyone can make a Molotov cocktail.
The police should treat protests as peaceful until they prove otherwise. However the police need to be prepared in case the Molotov cocktails start flying.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
I saw a picture of five or six black men with guns standing in a line in front of a gas station. The story that went with the picture said that the gas station belonged to a white man who treated his black employees and customers very well.
The men decided they would make sure no one burned the place down.
Moo
Doesn't that implicitly answer your question then? Clearly here are 5 black leaders who understand the issue and are non-verbally speaking out about it.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
If the authorities are policing a population that is habitually armed, faced with a protest, and not knowing whether protesters will suddenly start shooting or not, how can one expect the authorities to treat some protests as peaceful and some as violent, rather than all as violent?
There are ways of presenting a presence, of being prepared, that are less likely to provoke a violent reaction. You treat all as potential, but do not show that you are expecting it. You do not put people on the defencive at the beginning of an encounter. That is priming the well.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
If the authorities are policing a population that is habitually armed, faced with a protest, and not knowing whether protesters will suddenly start shooting or not, how can one expect the authorities to treat some protests as peaceful and some as violent, rather than all as violent?
You assume that people who have no guns are unarmed. IIRC during the rioting in August, Molotov cocktails were thrown. Just about anyone can make a Molotov cocktail.
The police should treat protests as peaceful until they prove otherwise. However the police need to be prepared in case the Molotov cocktails start flying.
Moo
Again, my son-in-law was part of the August protests as a journalist covering them. What he saw and reported bears little resemblance to the way it's being depicted here.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
If the fires were not started by Molotov cocktails, how were they started?
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
If the fires were not started by Molotov cocktails, how were they started?
Moo
The two fires that were part of the August protests were indeed apparently started by Molotov cocktails. The protests went south after 4 days of peace protests were met with a provocative and arguably illegal response from the Fergusan PD. Certainly not acceptable, but what I was objecting to is the depiction of the protests as violent rioting from day one. The vast majority of the Ferguson protestors in August were non-violent the entire time. African-American leaders worked closely with the protestors (as MLK did back in the 60s the entire time). There were acts of violence and rioting, but were limited in scope. Some helpful points have been made upthread about the mix of people you find in these sorts of protests, with differing agenda, methods, etc. and the difficulty in separating oneself when it goes south. That was very much the case back in August-- as well, I am guessing, with this week. I certainly would not object to anything anyone has said here to denounce the violence and looting or the impact it has on African American business owners. What I object to is the characterization that this represents accurately the whole of the protests or the majority of the protestors. (The fault though probably lies with the media as much as anyone).
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
@ Croesos
Have Fox News actually offered Darren Wilson some kind of a job as a free lance talking head. Or are you just speculating that it's only a matter of time?
Presumably the Brown family and the lawyers for the Browns and Darren Wilson are also receiving fees for TV appearances?
I think Darren Wilson is getting no financial settlement from the police force so perhaps cashing in short term on his unwanted 'fame' is all he's got, Presumably his lawyers have to be paid?
I wouldn't have thought Darren Wilson's prospects of living safely or getting a 'normal job' were very good. And he doesn't qualify for anything like witness protection new life deals.
Apart from a bit of short term cashing in, courtesy of 'the American way' he doesn't appear to have all that many options, Ah well, I suppose that's what happens when you get 'inconveniently' acquitted in the US.
Wonder how safe the grand jury members are?
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
