The madness of Fergerson

[Turtle]

Sporting event 'celebrations' sometimes don't include looting and burning businesses to the ground.

Oh, good grief. Yes, sometimes they don't. Sometimes it gets as crazy as people popping the cork on a champagne bottle and drinking the champagne. But I wasn't talking about sporting even 'celebrations', I specifically and quite clearly said, "Post sporting event rioters and looters..." I promise you, ever single post-sporting looting always contains looting by looters. They also usually, but not always, contain a fire or multiple fires of some sort, and frequently result in one or more businesses being burned to the ground.

When they do, it's thuggish behavior and is usually called that.

Yep, and "thuggish" is about as harsh as the media gets about it.

Sometimes it involves burning a couch in the street(from some Frat house) or drunken disorderly conduct. Not necessarily the same thing.Its about the degree of the incident.

Well, no, it's not about the degree of the incident. Drunk and disorderly, or burning a couch in front of a frat house isn't even remotely in the category of "rioting and looting" that I described in my post.

BTW, the 'college kids' include blacks as well as whites so your point isn't really relevant.

Actually, that makes my point. When it's mostly blacks involved, the press (among others) are quick to demonize the the participants. When it's mostly white kids involved, the press (among others) backs off a lot and gives them a virtual pass on it. I don't know how anyone can be so unobservant as to not pick up on this stuff.

You changed the entire premise of my post. creating a straw man, so that you could then disagree with it and berate me for it. Why would you do that?

 

[Turtle]

Case n point. I defend my race I get personally attacked, you defend this forum you're the hero of the year. Thanks for the ally-op (oops basketball term thats the Russian in me) HOME RUN HOME RUN thanks for throwing the home run pitch.

Inpoint of fact, no one has personally attacked you. At most people have disagreed with you, but disagreeing is not the same as attacking. It's not even in the ballpark, so your home run was a little short.

On a completely unrelated topic, what's with this Russian and black thing? I have never heard of blacks being called Russian. Be that as it may, even if it is a thing, it's not going to catch on in the world of trucking or on EO, because "Russian" already has a very specific meaning in trucking, and in expediting in particular. The meaning is quite literal, that of people from Russia and the former Soviet bloc countries.

 

[ripnrunning]

You know what it is.

 

[usafk9]

Here we go again! When do I get to be offended. Everybody else gets to be. I want to be offended.

Don't you have some soiled linens to go get?





How'd I do?

 

[usafk9]

Defending your race? Only a fool does that, IMHO.

Wait......are you my stepdaughter's.....ummmm.....boyfriend?

 

[ripnrunning]

The shoe fits so I'm wearing it. If someone puts me in the same category as the trash in MO I'm gonna say **** that.Yeah I'm your stepdaughter's man.

Turtle what exactly are people disagreeing with me about? That us blacks aren't all the same?

 

[muttly]

Oh, good grief. Yes, sometimes they don't. Sometimes it gets as crazy as people popping the cork on a champagne bottle and drinking the champagne. But I wasn't talking about sporting even 'celebrations', I specifically and quite clearly said, "Post sporting event rioters and looters..." I promise you, ever single post-sporting looting always contains looting by looters. They also usually, but not always, contain a fire or multiple fires of some sort, and frequently result in one or more businesses being burned to the ground.

Yep, and "thuggish" is about as harsh as the media gets about it.

Well, no, it's not about the degree of the incident. Drunk and disorderly, or burning a couch in front of a frat house isn't even remotely in the category of "rioting and looting" that I described in my post.

Actually, that makes my point. When it's mostly blacks involved, the press (among others) are quick to demonize the the participants. When it's mostly white kids involved, the press (among others) backs off a lot and gives them a virtual pass on it. I don't know how anyone can be so unobservant as to not pick up on this stuff.

You changed the entire premise of my post. creating a straw man, so that you could then disagree with it and berate me for it. Why would you do that?

Most of the 'press ' bend over backwards NOT to demonized the participants.
Thuggish behavior can be black or white. It's not exclusive. The term thug is synonymous with hoodlum or gangster. Certain union brass were sometimes called thugs because of the tactics they used.The majority of them are white.
If someone is going to destroy another person's property, steal, or cause physical harm to another, they're acting like a thug. It's not about anyone demonizing the behavior, it's just describing exactly what it is.

 

[Turtle]

Calling people thug-ish is different from calling them thugs, Mr Wordsmith.

You still haven't answered my question of why you changed the entire premise of my post to straw man it.

 

[Bruno]

Bring Back Doug Travels. Doug wasn't this bad.

 

[muttly]

Calling people thug-ish is different from calling them thugs, Mr Wordsmith.

You still haven't answered my question of why you changed the entire premise of my post to straw man it.

Good grief...and there is different types of riots. Some that don't even include burning businesses/buildings to the ground. Look up the definition.
Disagree with your premise. College kids, whether they be all lily white, who burn businesses down, or loot, are thugs. It is not exclusively saved for only blacks when they do the same.
BTW,here is a link about some 'thugs' (they appear all white) The story even has the title with THUG in it. It also has the word GOON in it. The anchorman also uses the word 'VICIOUS' in his description of what happened.

Boston thugs celebrate Red Sox championship with violent brawl - NY Daily News

 

[Turtle]

Good grief...and there is different types of riots. Some that don't even include burning businesses/buildings to the ground. Look up the definition.

Yes, I know there are different types, and not all of them include burning businesses to the ground. I specifically did not try to include any and all possible disturbances, and instead chose to limit the parameters to the typical rioting and looting that is similar to what we saw in Ferguson, since that is the most relevant context of the thread. You, on the other hand, felt the need to look for examples far outside of those parameters, even to the point of redefining mine, by equating "sporting event celebrations" with "post-sporting event rioters and looters" which are two totally different events, contexts and conditions.

Disagree with your premise.

Of course you do, that's why you had to change the premise and create a straw man argument so that you come back and try to smack me down with it by disagreeing with what I posted. You got your azz handed to you on the grand jury and the role of the prosecutor discussion, so you had to come back with something, anything to disagree with me about, even if you had to completely alter the premise to do it.

College kids, whether they be all lily white, who burn businesses down, or loot, are thugs.

That's your opinion, but it's not how the media refers to them in general. Yes, there are exceptions, and those exceptions can certainly be found, but the exceptions do not negate the generality of the rule, namely, the media goes a lot easier on white kids than they do on black kids for doing the same exact things. If you haven't picked up on that, then it should seem clear that when I stated that I don't know how anyone can be so unobservant as to not pick up on this stuff, I wasn't thinking of you specifically, because you obviously are that unobservant.

It is not exclusively saved for only blacks when they do the same.

Exclusively? No. Generally and typically? Yes.

BTW,here is a link about some 'thugs' (they appear all white) The story even has the title with THUG in it. It also has the word GOON in it. The anchorman also uses the word 'VICIOUS' in his description of what happened.

Boston thugs celebrate Red Sox championship with violent brawl - NY Daily News

Stellar example there, Einstein. A) there was no rioting or looting going on, so it's just another lame example that's not even remotely similar to the premise to begin with. You might as well have used a domestic abuse incident, or two kids fighting at recess as an example. B) it's got nothing to do with the Red Sox celebration parade, it was an argument between individuals, one of whom was "talking smack about my buddy and it kinda got out of hand." C) it was a bar fight that spilled out onto the street. And D) to New Yorkers, and thus the NY media, everyone in Boston is a thug, especially if they can somehow tie them to the Red Sox.

 

[muttly]

Yes, I know there are different types, and not all of them include burning businesses to the ground. I specifically did not try to include any and all possible disturbances, and instead chose to limit the parameters to the typical rioting and looting that is similar to what we saw in Ferguson, since that is the most relevant context of the thread. You, on the other hand, felt the need to look for examples far outside of those parameters, even to the point of redefining mine, by equating "sporting event celebrations" with "post-sporting event rioters and looters" which are two totally different events, contexts and conditions.

Of course you do, that's why you had to change the premise and create a straw man argument so that you come back and try to smack me down with it by disagreeing with what I posted. You got your azz handed to you on the grand jury and the role of the prosecutor discussion, so you had to come back with something, anything to disagree with me about, even if you had to completely alter the premise to do it.

That's your opinion, but it's not how the media refers to them in general. Yes, there are exceptions, and those exceptions can certainly be found, but the exceptions do not negate the generality of the rule, namely, the media goes a lot easier on white kids than they do on black kids for doing the same exact things. If you haven't picked up on that, then it should seem clear that when I stated that I don't know how anyone can be so unobservant as to not pick up on this stuff, I wasn't thinking of you specifically, because you obviously are that unobservant.

Exclusively? No. Generally and typically? Yes.

Stellar example there, Einstein. A) there was no rioting or looting going on, so it's just another lame example that's not even remotely similar to the premise to begin with. You might as well have used a domestic abuse incident, or two kids fighting at recess as an example. B) it's got nothing to do with the Red Sox celebration parade, it was an argument between individuals, one of whom was "talking smack about my buddy and it kinda got out of hand." C) it was a bar fight that spilled out onto the street. And D) to New Yorkers, and thus the NY media, everyone in Boston is a thug, especially if they can somehow tie them to the Red Sox.

Sigh, roll eyes ,sigh, roll eyes, repeat.
While some people might disagree with the Ferguson demonstrations( marching with signs) Most haven't described them as 'vicious thugs' UNTIL some of them started burning and stealing from businesses.and resorting to violence. You still wouldn't hear those terms generally in the media towards blacks because it would be politically incorrect and be accused of using code words like thug as a racial slur. So I disagree with your premise that they are generally more likely to be described as such. The media in generally go out of their way not to use such harsh descriptions towards them. Now, the example I gave of the bar fight in the street, was a spillover from a sport celebration parade. It also took about 10 seconds on a google search to find something with your description of 'vicious thugs', lol. It just happened to be a bunch of white dudes, lol. Imagine the uproar if the news anchor was describing the same incident, but they were black dudes. He would immediately be called a racist and asked to apologize.

 

[Turtle]

Sigh, roll eyes ,sigh, roll eyes, repeat.

Excellent!

Now, the example I gave of the bar fight in the street, was a spillover from a sport celebration parade.

The parade was several blocks away, and the fight had nothing to do with the parade or the celebration.

It also took about 10 seconds on a google search to find something with your description of 'vicious thugs', lol.

Yes, thank God for Google. I do think Google should be paying me a referral fee, cause every time I post something you seem to feverishly wear it out looking for something, anything, any ammunition at all to use as a retort.

It just happened to be a bunch of white dudes, lol. Imagine the uproar if the news anchor was describing the same incident, but they were black dudes. He would immediately be called a racist and asked to apologize.

Obviously you're not that familiar with the New York local media, especially when it comes to anything Boston related, and particularly if they can tie it to Red Sox fans. Why do you think the NY media even covered a meaningless bar fight in Boston, which, incidentally, is a completely different city in a completely different market? It ain't because it was news.

Black Men in Ferguson Say Lives Marked By Fear and Perception - NBC News

 

[RLENT]

Barf,

You post some really funny shizz ... keep 'em comin' ... I need my daily entertainment.

 

[muttly]

Excellent!

The parade was several blocks away, and the fight had nothing to do with the parade or the celebration.

Yes, thank God for Google. I do think Google should be paying me a referral fee, cause every time I post something you seem to feverishly wear it out looking for something, anything, any ammunition at all to use as a retort.

Obviously you're not that familiar with the New York local media, especially when it comes to anything Boston related, and particularly if they can tie it to Red Sox fans. Why do you think the NY media even covered a meaningless bar fight in Boston, which, incidentally, is a completely different city in a completely different market? It ain't because it was news.

Black Men in Ferguson Say Lives Marked By Fear and Perception - NBC News

It wasn't feverish at all. Like I said it took 10 seconds to find a story of a bunch a white dudes being called GOONS and THUGS. It was on the 1st page of results.lol Just think what these white dudes would be called if they actually burned a building or rioted. You implied that there is some double standard being used. I can see how some might feel that way if they view everyone as having racist views. They'll probably view any criticism or description as being racist. It's just wrong, man.
BTW, regarding my azz handed to me regarding The Grand Jury subject. lol
Turtle said --The Grand Jury is a trial.

 

[muttly]

Barf,

You post some really funny shizz ... keep 'em comin' ... I need my daily entertainment.

Okey donkey, Lentil

 

[davekc]

Should we consult ripnrunning?

 

[Ragman]

Should we consult ripnrunning?

Trouble maker.

 

[Turtle]

It wasn't feverish at all. Like I said it took 10 seconds to find a story of a bunch a white dudes being called GOONS and THUGS. It was on the 1st page of results.lol

Well, yeah, when you Google "goons thugs white guys" it's bound to turn up on the first page. LOL

You implied that there is some double standard being used.

I didn't imply it, I stated it outright. The entire point of my statement was to point out the double standard in the media coverage.

I can see how some might feel that way if they view everyone as having racist views. They'll probably view any criticism or description as being racist.

Or they could just be observant. How many posts just here on EO have we seen stating that is this guy or that guy had been white then the media wouldn't have even covered it, or posts complaining about the double standard lack of outrage over this or that incident? We saw a lot of those posts about Zimmerman, and about the knockout game.

BTW, regarding my azz handed to me regarding The Grand Jury subject. lol
Turtle said --The Grand Jury is a trial.

Whether I said that or not is irrelevant to the fact that everything you said about the grand jury process, and about the Ferguson grand jury and Wilson's testimony in particular was incorrect. Everything you tried to school me on was incorrect.

Show me the link to where I said that a grand jury is a trial in the same sense and context of a jury trial with a judge. If I said it at all, it was in the broad context of "trial" in being the process of finding fact for a decision (to indict or not), as in a test of suitability. It was not in the context of deciding guilt or innocence of a standard criminal or civil trial.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, I don't know why I bother to engage you in conversation. You have your own definitions of words, and you don't understand what you read. You read things that aren't even there, because you want them to be there, and you change the context of what's there to suit your needs. You think a bar fight blocks away from a victory parade is not only connected to the parade, but is also the same as looting and rioting, and you think a defendant has the right to testify in front of a grand jury, despite the fact that until the grand jury chooses to indict, there is no defendant.

Go to a Google search and type in "do a barrel roll"
That should keep you busy for hours.
When you get bored with that, search for "tilt"

 

[cheri1122]

Not buying a lot of this or the excuses for a poor failed community. Some of it applies but the reality is a breakdown of these families and the government enabling too many of them. They are enabled with too much free stuff and teacher unions that have destroyed public schools.
We spend more than any other country on education, yet have the poorest performance. Most inner city schools spend time and resources on everything but teaching kids what they need to know to succeed.
I also don't buy that most are poor. As I have said before, people here in the US are mainly clueless as to what poor really is. Some just have to admit, that many don't want to work. Are they really poor? Many receive all kinds of benefits, and it doesn't seem to stop many from getting that big screen, high dollar phones, clothes and shoes, jewelry, tattoos and the list goes on. Just a matter of what many make as a priority.
If I am wrong, why don't they have the same problem in the Asian communities? Yep, family structure is much different and you never hear them blame everyone else for problems. You also don't hear of violence and them killing each other either.
Most have the opportunities right in front of them. They just need some guidance to get there. Too many success stories to indicate otherwise.

The conservative image of lazy people collecting welfare [free rent, cell phones, heating, food stamps, etc] because they don't want to work is not supported by facts.
The teachers' union, like all unions, does not have the final say or the ultimate power in negotiations - if they get 'too much', it's because someone agreed to give it to them.
And as long as schools are dependent upon property taxes, poorer areas will never be able to compete with more prosperous ones.
I agree that our poor people are affluent compared to someone in, say, Bosnia, but is that relevant, really? It sounds like "They should be glad they have anything at all to eat!"
The comments about the big screen tvs, tattoos, cellphones, etc, are a dead giveaway, because there's nothing to support that beyond the anecdotal. Which is as reliable as any urban legend. [Reagan's infamous "welfare queen" was entirely made up, too]
WTH do "the Asians" have to do with it? Their culture is not American, [though we could sure learn some good from them], and in their own country, they certainly do commit violence & kill each other - ever hear of Tongs & Triads?