Credit to our Right-Wingnuts

Set forth below are memes arising from CNN's Kenosha Reporting of the "Fiery But Peaceful Protests."

ridski said:

terp said:

Watch it!  It's the same thing as calling Jeffrey Dahmer a murderer.  99% of the days he was on this planet he didn't murder anyone.  So silly to focus on those outlier days where he did.

Now you understand why people are worried about a disease that doesn't immediately murder 95% of the people it comes across.

100%.  And furthermore, I support individuals taking whatever actions they deem necessary to keep themselves safe.  More to the point, I also support people taking actions to protect themselves from predators like Dahmer by carrying a weapon if they so choose.  

I'm glad we cleared that up.

terp said:

100%.  And furthermore, I support individuals taking whatever actions they deem necessary to keep themselves safe.  More to the point, I also support people taking actions to protect themselves from predators like Dahmer by carrying a weapon if they so choose.  

I'm glad we cleared that up.

Your posts also seems to suggest that you don't think it important to distinguish between Dahmer and people who aren't Dahmer, though?

Back to the issue at hand.  While I would agree there was peaceful protests in 2020, a good many were violent.  It seems that some were appropriately punished for arson, assault, etc.

What Trudeau is doing is threatening people for being associated with these protests.  It is not clear where the line is in terms of support.  This is a clear attack on speech.  It's a dangerous game to celebrate when the other guys rights are being trampled on IMO.

I'll start to worry about democracy in Canada only if the Parliament is controlled by sycophants who will allow Trudeau to assume permanent, unfettered dictatorial powers. We are so lucky that can't happen here.

terp said:

What Trudeau is doing is threatening people for being associated with these protests.  It is not clear where the line is in terms of support.  This is a clear attack on speech.  It's a dangerous game to celebrate when the other guys rights are being trampled on IMO.

This seems speculative? Most of the emergency powers seem directed at the actual people at the protests, so when you say "threatening people for being associated with these protests," I can only think you're referring to the freezing of bank accounts? I don't have any more details on that now than I did this morning, and while I hold to my general concerns there I outlined earlier, some lines "in terms of support" seem pretty clear -- it's targeted at these protests. I can't see anything to support the idea that Trudeau is, say, looking to settle political scores by going after conservative members of parliament or some other such scenario.

I'll definitely be interested to see how this all plays out in a neighboring country with close cultural affinities to the US but a different political system. As far as "celebrating," still too early to say one way or the other I think, but one clear difference already is the greater restraint on the use of force. If that keeps up, I think that will be something worth celebrating, and something I'd like to see us emulate.

PVW said:

terp said:

What Trudeau is doing is threatening people for being associated with these protests.  It is not clear where the line is in terms of support.  This is a clear attack on speech.  It's a dangerous game to celebrate when the other guys rights are being trampled on IMO.

This seems speculative? Most of the emergency powers seem directed at the actual people at the protests, so when you say "threatening people for being associated with these protests," I can only think you're referring to the freezing of bank accounts? I don't have any more details on that now than I did this morning, and while I hold to my general concerns there I outlined earlier, some lines "in terms of support" seem pretty clear -- it's targeted at these protests. I can't see anything to support the idea that Trudeau is, say, looking to settle political scores by going after conservative members of parliament or some other such scenario.

I'll definitely be interested to see how this all plays out in a neighboring country with close cultural affinities to the US but a different political system. As far as "celebrating," still too early to say one way or the other I think, but one clear difference already is the greater restraint on the use of force. If that keeps up, I think that will be something worth celebrating, and something I'd like to see us emulate.

Exactly. The situation in Canada is intolerable for the vast majority of ordinary people who don't support the "truckers". Significant economic damage was mounting as a result of their actions. So, the Canadian government declared that it was going to use additional tools, since the "truckers" weren't going to stop.

Instead of catastrophizing over theoretical actions, people should look at what actually happens.

PVW said:

terp said:

What Trudeau is doing is threatening people for being associated with these protests.  It is not clear where the line is in terms of support.  This is a clear attack on speech.  It's a dangerous game to celebrate when the other guys rights are being trampled on IMO.

This seems speculative? Most of the emergency powers seem directed at the actual people at the protests, so when you say "threatening people for being associated with these protests," I can only think you're referring to the freezing of bank accounts? I don't have any more details on that now than I did this morning, and while I hold to my general concerns there I outlined earlier, some lines "in terms of support" seem pretty clear -- it's targeted at these protests. I can't see anything to support the idea that Trudeau is, say, looking to settle political scores by going after conservative members of parliament or some other such scenario.

I'll definitely be interested to see how this all plays out in a neighboring country with close cultural affinities to the US but a different political system. As far as "celebrating," still too early to say one way or the other I think, but one clear difference already is the greater restraint on the use of force. If that keeps up, I think that will be something worth celebrating, and something I'd like to see us emulate.

a lot more restraint than in the U.S.  The BLM protests in DC were only going on a few hours before the cops started kettling and tossing flash grenades and cracking heads.

As far as exercising their rights, if thousands of Canadian protesters occupied a spot in front of the Parliament and made noise and marched and posted signs and were a general pain in the **** to Ottawans, they'd probably be allowed to protest indefinitely.

If Occupy Wall Street had decided to shut all the bridges and tunnels in and out of Manhattan, should they have been allowed to do so forever?  I'm pretty sure the Fox News hosts celebrating the "trucker" freedom protest would have been foaming at the mouth if a bunch of leftists had cut off their supply of luxury goods from outside the city.

ml1 said:

a lot more restraint than in the U.S.  The BLM protests in DC were only going on a few hours before the cops started kettling and tossing flash grenades and cracking heads.

Doesn't the data you posted earlier undercut your point here?

"In CCC data collected from May 2020 to June 2021, 94% of protests involved no participant arrests, 97.9% involved no participant injuries"

I don't see how those numbers show the demonstrators were mostly peaceful, which was your point, without also showing the police, on balance, acted reasonably. It takes two to tango. 

ml1 said:

If Occupy Wall Street had decided to shut all the bridges and tunnels in and out of Manhattan, should they have been allowed to do so forever?  I'm pretty sure the Fox News hosts celebrating the "trucker" freedom protest would have been foaming at the mouth if a bunch of leftists had cut off their supply of luxury goods from outside the city.

Occupy Wall Street hung out in the park. When Occupy Wall Street protesters did block something - the Brooklyn Bridge - they were arrested right away. 

https://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2011/10/01/occupy-wall-street-protesters-arrested-on-brooklyn

Occupy Wall Street didn't just "hang out" in the park -- they lived there and literally took it over. It became a disgusting tent city with all kinds of drugs, nastiness, filth etc. My old office was nearby so I used to walk past it twice per day from the PATH. 

It was a great day when they were rousted out of there and the park was power-washed. 

Smedley said:

Occupy Wall Street didn't just "hang out" in the park -- they lived there and literally took it over. It became a disgusting tent city with all kinds of drugs, nastiness, filth etc. My old office was nearby so I used to walk past it twice per day from the PATH. 

It was a great day when they were rousted out of there and the park was power-washed. 

They were filthy and disgusting and smelly. And all around them, everyone went to work (you, for example).

Which makes them different from the "truckers" in Canada, who disrupt business in the places they hang out.

Smedley said:

Occupy Wall Street didn't just "hang out" in the park -- they lived there and literally took it over. It became a disgusting tent city with all kinds of drugs, nastiness, filth etc. My old office was nearby so I used to walk past it twice per day from the PATH. 

It was a great day when they were rousted out of there and the park was power-washed. 

LOL

OTOH, they did a lot to raise awareness that Wall Street is a parasite.

Probably worth the assault to your nose.

Smedley said:

Doesn't the data you posted earlier undercut your point here?

"In CCC data collected from May 2020 to June 2021, 94% of protests involved no participant arrests, 97.9% involved no participant injuries"

I don't see how those numbers show the demonstrators were mostly peaceful, which was your point, without also showing the police, on balance, acted reasonably. It takes two to tango. 

unless the data said 100% of the demonstrations resulted in no participant injuries, than no. 

I mean, cmon man. 

The protests were mostly peaceful, but when they weren't...

How US police used military tactics to turn peaceful protests violent

PVW said:

terp said:

100%.  And furthermore, I support individuals taking whatever actions they deem necessary to keep themselves safe.  More to the point, I also support people taking actions to protect themselves from predators like Dahmer by carrying a weapon if they so choose.  

I'm glad we cleared that up.

Your posts also seems to suggest that you don't think it important to distinguish between Dahmer and people who aren't Dahmer, though?

My point is that a defining characteristic of something is not necessarily a characteristic that continually shows itself.  Thus, I think we should characterize people like Dahmer as something different than the norm.

PVW said:

terp said:

What Trudeau is doing is threatening people for being associated with these protests.  It is not clear where the line is in terms of support.  This is a clear attack on speech.  It's a dangerous game to celebrate when the other guys rights are being trampled on IMO.

This seems speculative? Most of the emergency powers seem directed at the actual people at the protests, so when you say "threatening people for being associated with these protests," I can only think you're referring to the freezing of bank accounts? I don't have any more details on that now than I did this morning, and while I hold to my general concerns there I outlined earlier, some lines "in terms of support" seem pretty clear -- it's targeted at these protests. I can't see anything to support the idea that Trudeau is, say, looking to settle political scores by going after conservative members of parliament or some other such scenario.

I'll definitely be interested to see how this all plays out in a neighboring country with close cultural affinities to the US but a different political system. As far as "celebrating," still too early to say one way or the other I think, but one clear difference already is the greater restraint on the use of force. If that keeps up, I think that will be something worth celebrating, and something I'd like to see us emulate.

What does this have to do with conservative members of parliament?  It is undefined.  Perhaps you attended the protest at some point.  Perhaps you donated money.  Perhaps you displayed a sign.  That's the **** point.  It means whatever they want it to mean.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_George_Floyd_protests_in_the_United_States

ml1 said:

Smedley said:

Doesn't the data you posted earlier undercut your point here?

"In CCC data collected from May 2020 to June 2021, 94% of protests involved no participant arrests, 97.9% involved no participant injuries"

I don't see how those numbers show the demonstrators were mostly peaceful, which was your point, without also showing the police, on balance, acted reasonably. It takes two to tango. 

unless the data said 100% of the demonstrations resulted in no participant injuries, than no. 

I mean, cmon man. 

Perfection or bust is a rather utopian and naive view. 

Wiki says there were more than 2,000 George Floyd protests with 15 mln - 26 mln total participants. Who knows how many hundreds of thousands of cops were present. 

There’s gonna be criminals and there’s gonna be ahole cops in those numbers, that lead to injuries and arrests. That’s not a indictment on either group’s behavior broadly speaking, it’s just reality.

But the CCC numbers you cited deflate the left’s narrative that cops were out there systematically cracking skulls.

Smedley said:

Perfection or bust is a rather utopian and naive view. 

Wiki says there were more than 2,000 George Floyd protests with 15 mln - 26 mln total participants. Who knows how many hundreds of thousands of cops were present. 

There’s gonna be criminals and there’s gonna be ahole cops in those numbers, that lead to injuries and arrests. That’s not a indictment on either group’s behavior broadly speaking, it’s just reality.

But the CCC numbers you cited deflate the left’s narrative that cops were out there systematically cracking skulls.

But the criminals get arrested, and the ahole cops face no accountability. That's a large part of what the protests were about in the first place.

If you want to argue that the media is prone to sensationalism that gives people a skewed sense of what's actually happening, then these numbers bolster that case -- the overwhelming majority of demonstrations had no injuries or property violence. But if you're arguing that there's no systematic shielding of accountability for cops using excessive and unjustifiable force, I don't think these numbers are going to do that.

Smedley said:

Perfection or bust is a rather utopian and naive view. 

Wiki says there were more than 2,000 George Floyd protests with 15 mln - 26 mln total participants. Who knows how many hundreds of thousands of cops were present. 

There’s gonna be criminals and there’s gonna be ahole cops in those numbers, that lead to injuries and arrests. That’s not a indictment on either group’s behavior broadly speaking, it’s just reality.

But the CCC numbers you cited deflate the left’s narrative that cops were out there systematically cracking skulls.

you've missed the parallel. It was between the patience shown by authorities in Canada's capital city with protesters occupying a spot in front of their parliament. In DC the cops moved in harshly within hours, not days when protesters showed up near the White House. 

ml1 said:

Smedley said:

Perfection or bust is a rather utopian and naive view. 

Wiki says there were more than 2,000 George Floyd protests with 15 mln - 26 mln total participants. Who knows how many hundreds of thousands of cops were present. 

There’s gonna be criminals and there’s gonna be ahole cops in those numbers, that lead to injuries and arrests. That’s not a indictment on either group’s behavior broadly speaking, it’s just reality.

But the CCC numbers you cited deflate the left’s narrative that cops were out there systematically cracking skulls.

you've missed the parallel. It was between the patience shown by authorities in Canada's capital city with protesters occupying a spot in front of their parliament. In DC the cops moved in harshly within hours, not days when protesters showed up near the White House. 

OK if you want to do an in-depth comparative analysis of the protest in Canada with the one protest in DC you keep referencing, then go for it, I don't have much to add. I thought there was some broader point you were trying to make, ie Canadian cops good, US cops bad. 

ml1 said:

If Occupy Wall Street had decided to shut all the bridges and tunnels in and out of Manhattan, should they have been allowed to do so forever?  I'm pretty sure the Fox News hosts celebrating the "trucker" freedom protest would have been foaming at the mouth if a bunch of leftists had cut off their supply of luxury goods from outside the city.

And if my meemaw had wheels...

Smedley said:

ml1 said:

Smedley said:

Perfection or bust is a rather utopian and naive view. 

Wiki says there were more than 2,000 George Floyd protests with 15 mln - 26 mln total participants. Who knows how many hundreds of thousands of cops were present. 

There’s gonna be criminals and there’s gonna be ahole cops in those numbers, that lead to injuries and arrests. That’s not a indictment on either group’s behavior broadly speaking, it’s just reality.

But the CCC numbers you cited deflate the left’s narrative that cops were out there systematically cracking skulls.

you've missed the parallel. It was between the patience shown by authorities in Canada's capital city with protesters occupying a spot in front of their parliament. In DC the cops moved in harshly within hours, not days when protesters showed up near the White House. 

OK if you want to do an in-depth comparative analysis of the protest in Canada with the one protest in DC you keep referencing, then go for it, I don't have much to add. I thought there was some broader point you were trying to make, ie Canadian cops good, US cops bad. 

I referenced it once before you misunderstood my point and brought it up again.  Only you tried to make it a broader point.  Maybe go back and read the comment I was responding to again.  My comment makes perfect sense in that context.

Smedley said:

ml1 said:

If Occupy Wall Street had decided to shut all the bridges and tunnels in and out of Manhattan, should they have been allowed to do so forever?  I'm pretty sure the Fox News hosts celebrating the "trucker" freedom protest would have been foaming at the mouth if a bunch of leftists had cut off their supply of luxury goods from outside the city.

And if my meemaw had wheels...

we only need to go back and read your comments here to know what people who didn't support OWS were thinking. 

PVW said:

Smedley said:

Perfection or bust is a rather utopian and naive view. 

Wiki says there were more than 2,000 George Floyd protests with 15 mln - 26 mln total participants. Who knows how many hundreds of thousands of cops were present. 

There’s gonna be criminals and there’s gonna be ahole cops in those numbers, that lead to injuries and arrests. That’s not a indictment on either group’s behavior broadly speaking, it’s just reality.

But the CCC numbers you cited deflate the left’s narrative that cops were out there systematically cracking skulls.

But the criminals get arrested, and the ahole cops face no accountability. That's a large part of what the protests were about in the first place.

If you want to argue that the media is prone to sensationalism that gives people a skewed sense of what's actually happening, then these numbers bolster that case -- the overwhelming majority of demonstrations had no injuries or property violence. But if you're arguing that there's no systematic shielding of accountability for cops using excessive and unjustifiable force, I don't think these numbers are going to do that.

I don't deny there is systematic shielding of accountability for cops. This has been the case forever unfortunately. That shielding is under siege in modern times thankfully, with the ubiquity of mobile phone cameras, but clearly there's much more to penetrate. 

But in a way we're talking about two different things. The cops who killed George Floyd were arrested (although it did take days) and Chauvin was sentenced to life -- so the justice system for the cops, worked as it should have. So I don't think that's what the protesters were protesting.

ml1 said:

Smedley said:

ml1 said:

Smedley said:

Perfection or bust is a rather utopian and naive view. 

Wiki says there were more than 2,000 George Floyd protests with 15 mln - 26 mln total participants. Who knows how many hundreds of thousands of cops were present. 

There’s gonna be criminals and there’s gonna be ahole cops in those numbers, that lead to injuries and arrests. That’s not a indictment on either group’s behavior broadly speaking, it’s just reality.

But the CCC numbers you cited deflate the left’s narrative that cops were out there systematically cracking skulls.

you've missed the parallel. It was between the patience shown by authorities in Canada's capital city with protesters occupying a spot in front of their parliament. In DC the cops moved in harshly within hours, not days when protesters showed up near the White House. 

OK if you want to do an in-depth comparative analysis of the protest in Canada with the one protest in DC you keep referencing, then go for it, I don't have much to add. I thought there was some broader point you were trying to make, ie Canadian cops good, US cops bad. 

I referenced it once before you misunderstood my point and brought it up again.  Only you tried to make it a broader point.  Maybe go back and read the comment I was responding to again.  My comment makes perfect sense in that context.

So you don't think the police response to the George Floyd protests was, on balance, substandard and overly forceful? 

It seems that has been your ongoing position so it piqued my interest when I saw the data you cited which seemed to undercut that position.  

Smedley said:

PVW said:

Smedley said:

Perfection or bust is a rather utopian and naive view. 

Wiki says there were more than 2,000 George Floyd protests with 15 mln - 26 mln total participants. Who knows how many hundreds of thousands of cops were present. 

There’s gonna be criminals and there’s gonna be ahole cops in those numbers, that lead to injuries and arrests. That’s not a indictment on either group’s behavior broadly speaking, it’s just reality.

But the CCC numbers you cited deflate the left’s narrative that cops were out there systematically cracking skulls.

But the criminals get arrested, and the ahole cops face no accountability. That's a large part of what the protests were about in the first place.

If you want to argue that the media is prone to sensationalism that gives people a skewed sense of what's actually happening, then these numbers bolster that case -- the overwhelming majority of demonstrations had no injuries or property violence. But if you're arguing that there's no systematic shielding of accountability for cops using excessive and unjustifiable force, I don't think these numbers are going to do that.

I don't deny there is systematic shielding of accountability for cops. This has been the case forever unfortunately. That shielding is under siege in modern times thankfully, with the ubiquity of mobile phone cameras, but clearly there's much more to penetrate. 

But in a way we're talking about two different things. The cops who killed George Floyd were arrested (although it did take days) and Chauvin was sentenced to life -- so the justice system for the cops, worked as it should have. So I don't think that's what the protesters were protesting.

The arrest and trial of those cops was national news because cops actually facing criminal charges for criminal activity is a rare event. Does Chauvin's trial mark a turning point, where going forward a criminal cop facing accountability is no more likely to make national news than a non-cop facing accountability? Let's hope that's where we're headed, but we're not there yet. A lot of unjustified force is still not even considered criminal.

Smedley said:

ml1 said:

Smedley said:

ml1 said:

Smedley said:

Perfection or bust is a rather utopian and naive view. 

Wiki says there were more than 2,000 George Floyd protests with 15 mln - 26 mln total participants. Who knows how many hundreds of thousands of cops were present. 

There’s gonna be criminals and there’s gonna be ahole cops in those numbers, that lead to injuries and arrests. That’s not a indictment on either group’s behavior broadly speaking, it’s just reality.

But the CCC numbers you cited deflate the left’s narrative that cops were out there systematically cracking skulls.

you've missed the parallel. It was between the patience shown by authorities in Canada's capital city with protesters occupying a spot in front of their parliament. In DC the cops moved in harshly within hours, not days when protesters showed up near the White House. 

OK if you want to do an in-depth comparative analysis of the protest in Canada with the one protest in DC you keep referencing, then go for it, I don't have much to add. I thought there was some broader point you were trying to make, ie Canadian cops good, US cops bad. 

I referenced it once before you misunderstood my point and brought it up again.  Only you tried to make it a broader point.  Maybe go back and read the comment I was responding to again.  My comment makes perfect sense in that context.

So you don't think the police response to the George Floyd protests was, on balance, substandard and overly forceful? 

It seems that has been your ongoing position so it piqued my interest when I saw the data you cited which seemed to undercut that position.  

when there was violence at protests, yes the police were often the instigators.  And that statement isn't incompatible with the notion that the demonstrations were overwhelmingly peaceful.  You seem kind of confused by all this.  It's not that hard.  

URL:  https://ccla.org/press-release/ccla-statement-on-the-emergencies-act/

Canadian Civil Liberties Association ("CCLA") Statement on Emergencies Act:

The federal government has not met the threshold necessary to invoke the Emergencies Act. This law creates a high and clear standard for good reason: the Act allows government to bypass ordinary democratic processes. This standard has not been met.

The Emergencies Act can only be invoked, according to its own terms, when a situation “seriously endangers the lives, health or safety of Canadians and is of such proportions or nature as to exceed the capacity or authority of a province to deal with it,” or “seriously threatens the ability of the Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada” and when the situation “cannot be effectively dealt with under any other law of Canada.”

The Emergencies Act is there to address these kinds of extreme threats to Canada, not to protect the economy.

ml1 said:

Smedley said:

ml1 said:

Smedley said:

ml1 said:

Smedley said:

Perfection or bust is a rather utopian and naive view. 

Wiki says there were more than 2,000 George Floyd protests with 15 mln - 26 mln total participants. Who knows how many hundreds of thousands of cops were present. 

There’s gonna be criminals and there’s gonna be ahole cops in those numbers, that lead to injuries and arrests. That’s not a indictment on either group’s behavior broadly speaking, it’s just reality.

But the CCC numbers you cited deflate the left’s narrative that cops were out there systematically cracking skulls.

you've missed the parallel. It was between the patience shown by authorities in Canada's capital city with protesters occupying a spot in front of their parliament. In DC the cops moved in harshly within hours, not days when protesters showed up near the White House. 

OK if you want to do an in-depth comparative analysis of the protest in Canada with the one protest in DC you keep referencing, then go for it, I don't have much to add. I thought there was some broader point you were trying to make, ie Canadian cops good, US cops bad. 

I referenced it once before you misunderstood my point and brought it up again.  Only you tried to make it a broader point.  Maybe go back and read the comment I was responding to again.  My comment makes perfect sense in that context.

So you don't think the police response to the George Floyd protests was, on balance, substandard and overly forceful? 

It seems that has been your ongoing position so it piqued my interest when I saw the data you cited which seemed to undercut that position.  

when there was violence at protests, yes the police were often the instigators.  And that statement isn't incompatible with the notion that the demonstrations were overwhelmingly peaceful.  You seem kind of confused by all this.  It's not that hard.  

No confusion, just thought it interesting that you frequently criticize police for being systematically brutal and out of control yet you posted data that showed 94% of BLM protests involved no participant arrests and 97.9% involved no participant injuries. 

To me those numbers indicate the police were on balance measured and reasonable during the protests, rather than systematically brutal and out of control. But I guess you need 100% to agree with that.