|
Post by robeiae on Jan 23, 2019 16:30:23 GMT -5
Thought experiment, for everyone. I've posed it earlier, in a rough version, but I've fleshed it out to more closely parallel the situation here. I've posed a few questions at the end, which I think are worth everyone considering. A group of 100 black teens from a Bronx public school goes down to a Kentucky Black Lives Matters protest wearing Antifa t-shirts. While there, 5 Westboro Baptists are screaming their usual crazy shit at everyone. [FYI for those who didn't watch all the tapes, one thing the tapes make clear is that as usual, the Black Israelites group was yelling abuse at everyone who stood still long enough, including the Native American group. They are like the Westboro Baptists in that regard.] This includes a nearby Evangelical group holding an enthusiastic pro-life rally, in which they bang drums, sing loud hymns praising Jesus, and shout about how Jesus loves unborn babies, but do not yell any abuse at the black teens. The Evangelical group is led by an elderly pastor, who may or may not have been deployed to Vietnam, but who did serve in the Marine Corp. for several years during the Vietnam era. (To the extent his military history is even relevant, really, since no one would know about it who was there at the time. However, take as read that he is obviously elderly.) The Westboro Baptists have plenty of nasty names for the Evangelical group, too. It is clear that the Westboro Baptists and Evangelicals are not together or doing the same thing. The 100 black teens surround the 5 Westboro Baptists, listening to their screeching, eventually, when the Westboro Baptists aim some ugly their way (as they will if you stand around listening long enough), start to interact with them. When the Westboro Baptists yell "You're all niggers -- no crackers among you" The black teens pull out the one white teen with them and yell "We have a cracker! We have another cracker at our school, too, but he didn't come today." Things escalate. The chaperones are down the block at a bus stop, drinking coffee. Or maybe they're right there. In any case, they do not step in. The Evangelical group sees things escalating between the Westboro Baptists and the black teens. Because they're all about Jesus's peace, they step between the two groups (remember, the Westboro Baptists had been yelling abuse at them, too), banging their drums and singing about Jesus and love, with the goal of stopping the escalation between the teens and the WB group. The WB group recognizes that this is the goal of the Evangelical pastor, yelling "oh, here comes Daddy." (If you don't know what I'm talking about here, you didn't watch the videos.) The black teens begin to jeer and mock the Evangelical group, surrounding them singing mocking chants about Christians. The Evangelical group intends to march through the group of kids and to the top of a set of steps, to broadcast their message more broadly and dominate over the melee the WB group is having with the teens. Many of the black teens let them pass, but the group eventually gets to one black teen who stands in front of the pastor, grinning. The other black teens yell "yeah! ha! you can't move him!" while continuing their mocking chants about Jesus and making the sign of the cross in a derisive way. Let us assume that Fox News released a 3-minute clip leaving out the WB group, showing only the Black teens jeering the elderly evangelical pastor. Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson scream about Antifa and black teens being disrespectful animals and how Christianity is under fire. (Are you seriously telling me this wouldn't happen?) Later, a longer clip emerged showing the earlier interactions with the WB group. Also, video emerged showing the black teens being rowdy and obnoxious at other points during the field trip. Questions:(1) I asked this before. Does what the WB group did excuse the way the black teens acted towards the Evangelical pastor and his group? (I say no.) (2) Would the right wing media and Trump supporters, once the longer tape came out, be saying "oh, the black teens were totally justified. We really misjudged this situation." (Oh fucking come on. NO, they would not. It's only the left that plays right into the MAGA handbook this way -- the right never does. Even if tape came out showing that the Evangelicals themselves had been nasty to the kids, they'd trash the black teens until the end of time. And OMG, if you don't think Fox News, Brietbart, the Federalist, etc. would have been showing the clip of the black teens until the end of time...if you don't think the WSJ and National Review wouldn't have been using it to bemoan the lack of "civility" by the left, and the bias against Christianity, I don't know where you've been living the last few years.) (3) Would President Trump -- or President Obama -- be inviting the black teens to the White House? (Oh, fucking please.) Would the Today Show have the kids on as guests. (Under this fact pattern? No. Maybe if the police had stepped in with tear gas or beaten some of the kids up.) (4) Would c.e.lawson and Vince be saying "oh, those poor black teens were totally justified in what they were doing with the Evangelical group. The right-wing media is so unfair!" Would Vince be defending the chaperones? (They can speak for themselves, but my bet is no. I also am betting that the WB abuse would not be justification for the teens' behavior because "everyone knows the WB are assholes; that had nothing to do with the Evangelist group.") (5) If HuffPo and Daily Kos later reported that while Fox News had initially reported that the Evangelical Minister was a Vietnam vet, in fact the Evangelical pastor merely served for 4 years in the Marine Corp. during the Vietnam era, would Vince be jumping on this as something that exonerates the black teens? (See parenthetical above. Seriously, what possible difference does this make to the fact pattern? The kids wouldn't know shit about his military service. They would be able to see that he was elderly, and that he hadn't been yelling names at them.) (6) Here's one for you: Under this fact pattern, do you think *I*would be arguing that the black teens were angels and totally justified in their behavior to the evangelical group? If your answer to the last is "yes," fuck you, you're wrong. I'd be saying exactly what Prozyan and I agreed on above: that yes, the media had made too much of it, but yes, the teens were jerks and not justified in their behavior to the Evangelical group just because the WB group were asshats. And if the left-wing media and the Obama White House tried to make heroes out of the black teens for their behavior to the Evangelical group, I'd be pretty fucking exasperated. If you think otherwise, you haven't paid attention to my posts over the last several years most of you have known me. Changing the nature of the various parties involved doesn't impact my position(s) at all. If anything, in your hypothetical I'd have more sympathy for the teens (as opposed to the Covington teens) because "nigger" is a lot more of a loaded term than "cracker." And sure, talking heads and partisan people/sources would--by and large--flip their scripts completely. But then, I never thought of this so much as a left/right issue as I did a social media "outrage" issue. Both sides have done this same sort of thing before and will continue to do into the future, as long as enough sheeple on twitter and FB eat such stuff up, like it, and repost it. Sure.But in both scenarios, the other groups are equal players in my view and are composed entirely of adults. You are--in my view--assuming givens which I don't think should be assumed. I doubt most people know a thing about the Hebrew Israelites. I've never encountered them. And regardless, they shouldn't get what amounts to a full pass for their bullshit simply because they're wackadoos. Ditto for the WB. They should be held accountable for their words/actions to the same degree as everyone else. But that didn't happen. The vid that went viral--and all of dogpiling outrage--was all about the kids, as if they were the only ones who did something worthy of criticism. You're also assuming that the actions and purposes thereof of the Evangelical group (and by extension the Native American group) should have been recognized by the black teens immediately, and that they should have thereof respected this out of hand. I think that's unfair, particularly in your scenario, as a group of black teens who are being called "nigger" by a bunch of white "Christians" can hardly be expected to make a path for another bunch of white "Christians" who want to walk through them. Which again is another reason why--in your scenario--I'd have more sympathy for the teens. Really, I think you would, too. The flip side: if this hadn't all started with the widespread and public attempt to humiliate the teens alone, along with the threats and calls to dox them, all based on an incomplete video, I don't think there'd be any need to defend them or otherwise add context to the story, as it would never have been a story, since again nothing all that significant actually happened. True, it continues to be a story partly because there are people presenting the teens as "heroes" (which I think is ridiculous). But it also continues to be a story because a lot of the people who jumped on the initial outrage train refuse to allow that maybe they overreacted and in many cases are--in fact--doubling down on their outrage by expanding it to cover other incidents--some real, some not--involving the school.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2019 16:30:26 GMT -5
As far as Red Hat Native American guy goes, they are clearly in the midst of discussing the wall -- we're cutting halfway into that discussion -- and he's got a decent point, imo -- most of us have only been here a couple of generations. We booted his people out of their land. That's how we became a nation, frankly. Yet here are some of us advocating putting up a wall to keep everyone out. Ironically lots of those people the Wall is supposed to keep out descend from indigenous Americans.
But then, I think the wall is bullshit, so yes, I have a bias here.
But again -- why is that extremely loud conversation not audible in the other videos I've seen of the interaction between Phillips and the kid? And why can't you hear the laughing and war whooping in this one? Other than the drumming and chanting, they do not sound to me like they're happening in the same place.
|
|
|
Post by prozyan on Jan 23, 2019 16:35:40 GMT -5
Yeah. Scotomisation is at work in most of these videos.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Jan 23, 2019 16:39:51 GMT -5
If that is a splice job, I'll hire the person that did it in a heartbeat. Pay them very well too.... Forget MAGA kid and the drum beater....the dude in the red hat is the biggest idiot I've seen in any of these videos. Agreed. Doesn't look spliced or doctored to me, at all. And the guy in the red hat is just...not smart, even though he's been here for "a million fucking years." And he does tell the kid to go back to Europe, is pretty nasty to the kid, in fact. I think this vid is just more evidence that none of the groups are blameless.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2019 16:47:25 GMT -5
I'll agree that no one is a model of gentility and courtesy.
And I'm still on team "where the hell were the chaperones," who I still hold most accountable for all of this. Whether you are familiar with the Black Israelites or not, surely when you bring a gang of teenagers to a large city specifically to engage in a political protest, you are aware that there will be contentious stuff going on. They come every year. This cannot be a surprise.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Jan 23, 2019 17:01:07 GMT -5
While I think the chaperones could have maybe done better, I think it fair to point out that "red hat guy" is an adult, who is berating and cursing a kid (and simultaneously mocking proven history, to the extent that I wouldn't be surprised to discover he is a flat-earther). He's hardly trying to defuse the situation and he doesn't deserve any sort of pass for his behavior, either.
And just because there is "contentious stuff" going on, it doesn't mean that one has to automatically step away from the people who are engaging in it, in my view. Public space is still public space, free speech is still free speech.
Would the kids have been better served had they been instructed to avoid this area? Perhaps. But the fact that they didn't doesn't mean they should shoulder the majority of the blame/criticism here, imo.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2019 17:30:29 GMT -5
While I think the chaperones could have maybe done better, I think it fair to point out that "red hat guy" is an adult, who is berating and cursing a kid (and simultaneously mocking proven history, to the extent that I wouldn't be surprised to discover he is a flat-earther). He's hardly trying to defuse the situation and he doesn't deserve any sort of pass for his behavior, either. And just because there is "contentious stuff" going on, it doesn't mean that one has to automatically step away from the people who are engaging in it, in my view. Public space is still public space, free speech is still free speech. Would the kids have been better served had they been instructed to avoid this area? Perhaps. But the fact that they didn't doesn't mean they should shoulder the majority of the blame/criticism here, imo. I don't disagree with you on this, really. That said, though, if one chooses not to step away from people spewing vile stuff in a public space, one shouldn't use it as justification for one's own bad behavior. That's why I still don't think the Black Israelite shit, as vile as it was, justifies the kids doing Tomahawk chops. I don't have a problem with Phillips marching and drumming -- that does not amount to bad behavior in my book -- but I will certainly agree that yelling and arguing with kids, as Red Hat Native American is doing, is something an adult shouldn't do. My perspective on the Black Israelite stuff. is certainly shaped by the fact that I hear vile stuff being spewed in public spaces all the time. I used to work in a building in Times Square -- what you are looking at in that video is my lunch hour, every day. Protests and marches are regular events, and every day there are an assortment of people screaming stuff on every corner. At this point, unless someone tries to physically accost me, I shrug and keep walking. (The last time I stopped for a couple of minutes to listen to the Black Israelites was a few years ago -- I had a friend visiting who wanted to stop and hear them. She wanted to stop and hear everything. Can't blame her. But she had enough of them in a few minutes.) Besides the various proselytizers, I get people yelling shit at me on a daily basis. It's part of life in the big city, especially as a woman. It's not fun, but it also doesn't justify me being a jerk to anyone else. Those kids didn't actually look traumatized and upset by the Black Israelites to me -- they look like they're downright enjoying it, actually. So yeah, they were part of a larger melee in which many acted badly, but they weren't sweet little innocents, and they sure as fuck weren't heroes. To note, assuming that video is in fact legit and not doctored, I am guessing it was not taken at the same time as the other video but from another angle; it must have been after it. (I've watched it and paused it, and watched and paused the other one, 6 or 7 times now -- I'm anal that way.) It just doesn't fit. But if it were taken starting a few minutes after, that could explain many of the things that bother me about it -- e.g., the sound not matching up. That said, it still mystifies me that none of the kids' mainstream defenders seem to be circulating it. Lord knows I've seen several videos, and I've seen various defenders of the kid as well as critics picking them apart second by second to justify or attack him or the Native Americans. But not that video. It's odd. As far as I can see, Hannity isn't running with it, for example. Why not? I am strongly considering tweeting it myself to get reactions. It would be murder on my mentions, but I might get more info. And if it's real, it should be circulated -- seriously. If true, the kid looks like at a minimum he had at least some second thoughts about whether his group was acting appropriately, and I think that's a mitigating circumstance, at least with regard to him.
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Jan 23, 2019 17:38:09 GMT -5
I’d like to note that the kid being yelled at and cursed at by the guy in the red hat also kept his composure pretty well, at least from what I could see and hear. No return of f-bombs, listened pretty politely considering, then gave a fairly reasoned response referencing what he’d learned about early man and migration of peoples.
Could these kids have all made the BEST choices in how to respond to all of these complex interactions? Probably not, given their age and lack of life experience, and the weirdness and nuances and unfamiliarity with what was happening. But a lot of them made pretty good choices, considering, and that’s why I don’t that they, especially Sandmann, should be called jerks or any other derogatory terms, nor as I’ve repeated above, receive the hate they’ve received.
Also, the wall Trump is asking for is not to keep “everyone” out. It’s to keep drugs and human traffickers and criminals and those who want to enter illegally, out. Big difference.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2019 17:59:59 GMT -5
LOL! Okay, to the tremendous detriment of my work day, I found another video that sheds light on a few things! (I will be working all night. I'm an idiot.) And robeiae will like this -- it casts some negative light on both sides. (1) First, c.e.'s video is indeed legit, though it also misses acrucual context that is evident in the longer video below. It looks like my guess in my last post is correct, btw -- ce's video occurred not at the same time as the video I posted, but after, which explains the sound difference issue I noted. And I guess the weird jerkiness in the YouTube video was likely that it's just a shitty video, which happens. So -- my apologies to celawson for doubting whether the video is legit. I also, after watching the video below, now get why ce's video hasn't been circulated all over hell and back by Sandmann's supporters -- see (3) below -- so everything that bothered me is clear now. (2) LOL -- you can hear more from Red Hat Native American guy, and yeah, I'll agree with prozyan , absolutely, he was an asshole. I wouldn't care if he were talking to an adult, but he's talking to a kid. Kid was an asshole too, but he's a kid, so asshole Red Hat Native American guy is more at fault in that exchange. I'm actually still okay with Phillips here, but not Mr. Red Hat. (3) But on the crucial gesture... alas, Sandmann is not shushing his classmates because he fears they are being disrespectful to Phillips. In this video, at around 2:15, during and after the gesture, you can see what apparently is one of the chaperones coming through and apparently trying to belatedly corral the kids. You can see her coming towards Sandmann and the argument, looking pretty pissed off (and if you listen, you can hear her before you can see her on the video) -- Sandmann gestures to his friend to stop arguing with Red Hat Native American Dude, and then glances back at the chaperone, and his expression says, as clearly as any expression ever did, "oh, shit!" In other words, that gesture was a "cheese it! the chaperone is here!" not a "guys, we're not being respectful to the Native Americans" gesture. And THAT makes sense with what we can see in the rest of the interaction on ALL the videos! The appearance of the chaperone between the end of my video and the kid's gesture completely explains the disconnect in tone, sound, expressions, etc., that was bugging me between ce's video and mine. Watch for yourself! Pay special attention starting at 2:15. You may need to watch a second time to catch exactly where you can start to hear and then see the chaperone and the various reactions spinning out from her appearance. The argument kind of dominates, so it becomes clearer once you know where to look/listen for it. Seriously, it's funny. Tell me it's not an "oh, shit, the chaperone" face the kid makes. Here it is: vimeo.com/312411257For some reason I feel less grumpy now. I think most of you will agree the kids weren't angels. I'm happy to agree that the Black Israelites were, as always, asshats, and that Red Hat Native American guy was being an asshat. I'm also happy to agree this got blown way the hell out proportion, given that it involved teens, though I'd add that the people turning them into victims and heroes, like our President, for example, are contributing to it being way out of proportion. And wholeheartedly, I'll agree that anyone sending death threats to the kids should be lined up against a wall and shot. (Or at least, they should be appropriately punished for sending death threats.) ETA: LOL! I think no one on either side of that video is eagerly circulating it, because frankly nearly everyone comes off rather badly in it to some extent, including the chaperone! ETA: LOL! It totally explains why you no longer hear the kids laughing and doing war whoops in ce's clip! They saw the chaperone coming before Sandmann and argument kid did, as she pushed through them. As I guessed, the clip came just after mine. You can hear them trailing off in this one. Hilarious to see chaperone over Sandmann's shoulder as he does the "cheese it!" gesture! Also clear that a number of people try to complain about the kids to chaperone and indicate she hasn't been doing her job at the end, and that chaperone is all "I am responsible for mySELF and my life and I live a very good life." I nominate her as the biggest asshole of the bunch, because yeah, fuck you lady -- you're responsible for these kids, like it or not. But I agree there is a lot of assholishness going on here. ETA: And now at last I understand what some kid defenders mean when they say Sandmann looked serious, scared,unsure etc. To be sure, he did -- then, when the chaperone showed up. Watch him in my video, which happened first. He isn't looking down and biting his lip in uncertainty, as Vince524 's blogger says -- he stares straight at Phillips unnblinkingly with a smirk and sometimes an outright grin. His friends aren't shouting "what's going on?" They're cheering him and mocking the Native Americans.. Watch it. But yeah, when he hears that chaperone, he looks nervous as fuck. He's doesn't want to back off, but his whole face changes. The kids all around him change tone. Watch my first video a few posts back, and then the one I posted here. It explains a lot. ETA: LOL! If you go back and look at c.e.'s video,you can see Sandemann pointing off to his right as he tells his friend to cheese it. He's not pointing at Phillips... He's gesturing at the chaperone.
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Jan 23, 2019 19:44:30 GMT -5
Did you watch all the videos, c.e.? Showing the groups from different perspectives? From your comments, no, I know you did not. Tell me, would my group of Antifa t-shirt wearing teens owe an apology to the Evangelist preacher they ridiculed? For the record, I think "yes, yes they would." And that's regardless of his Vietnam record. If they gave it, I'd be way more inclined to say "leave them the heck alone--they're kids who behaved badly, and they've learned their lesson." Hard for me to give that pass to the group of Covington teens, when they and you think they owe no apology, and right wing media and the president are hailing them as heroes and victims. If I'd been on the Today show under these circumstances, you can bet my mom and dad would have had me lead with a goddamn apology. ETA: I knew, by the way, that you would not answer my questions, and instead would just try to diss minor elements of the hypothetical. I can pretty easily imagine the thread you'd start bemoaning the lack of civility the left was teaching its teens and how Christianity was under attack, were anything close to my hypothetical to happen. ETA: Vince524 , I missed your response until now. Thank you for engaging with my hypo. For the record, I don't disagree with you that a lot of people would flip their answers to take the reverse of the positions they are taking now. But yeah, I have a problem with that. I'd be just as exasperated as I am now, just at a different group of people. Also for the record, though if I were the parents, I'd probably not be thrusting my kid further into the limelight, but if for some reason I DID, I'd have them lead with "I'm sorry. I was being kind of a jerk to the Native American elder and I should have shown more respect." Then they could go on to, "I'm really not a racist jerk, I was just kind of hyped up after those BHI guys and my friends and I got carried away into being jerky and stupid ourselves, we didn't really realize how jerky it looked until the videos came out, and for what it's worth, here's more context on the moment and the day." Then, fwiw, I'd be Team Live the Damn Kids Alone. I'm already on Team Leave the Damn Kids Alone, actually -- but that includes not making them into heroes or poor widdle angels. ETA: Also for the record -- IMO Mr. Phillip's credibility is irrelevant to the behavior of the kids. I'm going on my views of the videos, not the word of Mr. Phillips, with possibly one exception -- his motives for stepping between the kids and the Black Israelites. But to note: that view seems consistent with the videos, and indeed seems to be how the Black Israelites viewed their motive (.e.g., "oh, here comes Daddy!" etc.) Moreover, that motive is also irrelevant to me -- what matters is what actually happened. Also worth noting that other bystanders believed that was Phillip's motive, and also perceived him as trying to get to the top of the steps, and that the kid was deliberately engaging in a stand-off with him. But again, the motive doesn't matter to me so much as what actually happened. Thus, I actually don't give a tinker's damn whether he served in Vietnam or was just a Marine corp veteran who served during that era (which doesn't seem to be disputed). It's not about his word. It's about what I saw on the video. On the "school cheer" thing c.e. is so hot on, I'm interested that a school with a southern colonel as it's mascot has Native American war whoops for school cheers. In this day and age, those are widely regarded as offensive even for teams that have a native American mascot. Also I roll my eyes at the idea that the kids would innocently bring such chants out without seeing why they'd look derisive when directed at a Native American. As c.e. would say "sorry", I don't buy it. If you don't think the kids were doing tomahawk chops and Indian war chants at the Native Americans, while laughing and jeering, you did not watch the videos. That's directed at you, c.e.lawson, with your repeated reiteration of the "school cheers". His credibility matters because he is saying he was trying to get by, as opposed to intentionally going up to these kids and beating a drum in their, particularly Sandmann's face while chanting. He's told two different narratives on this.
If you believe MAGA kid specifically stepped in his way and blocked him, then you believe he was being an undeniable dickhead.
If you believe that MAGA kid was reacting to someone getting in his face, beating a drum and chanting and he stood there and smirked. That changes the entire context.
I might say 'Shove it up your ass' to another person. That's hostile and I might sound like a jerk. But if that other person just insulted me, my family, told me to perform sexual acts upon myself that are not possible, and I say that, suddenly I'm not the jerk.
Could I have handled it better? Sure. Could these kids, and for that matter the school, use a lesson in sensitivity training and understanding how things might get interpreted. Sure.
But that doesn't justify the mob attack. (Again, I know you aren't part of that.) But what I keep coming back to, is why you or anyone at this point think the only or biggest ones at fault at the kids.
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Jan 23, 2019 19:50:37 GMT -5
Here's a thread on it by a blogger that I think lays it out pretty good.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2019 19:59:39 GMT -5
LOL! The kid's statement on the "gesture" kind of leaves out the chaperone coming along! Come on, watch the video in my last post. That conversation went on a few minutes without Sandmann feeling any need to "calm down tensions". He felt the need to "calm down tensions" because a chaperone (finally) appeared on the scene. I mean, obviously the statement was done by a PR thing, trying to make the best of it, but I think we have as much reason to suspect the kid's statement as to his motivations as we do Phillips. Anyway. I wouldn't diss the statement if the kid admitted that he and his friends were jerky too. I can agree with him that there was a lot of crazy and some bad behavior all round. But he really does an Eddie Haskell.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2019 20:08:49 GMT -5
Did you watch all the videos, c.e.? Showing the groups from different perspectives? From your comments, no, I know you did not. Tell me, would my group of Antifa t-shirt wearing teens owe an apology to the Evangelist preacher they ridiculed? For the record, I think "yes, yes they would." And that's regardless of his Vietnam record. If they gave it, I'd be way more inclined to say "leave them the heck alone--they're kids who behaved badly, and they've learned their lesson." Hard for me to give that pass to the group of Covington teens, when they and you think they owe no apology, and right wing media and the president are hailing them as heroes and victims. If I'd been on the Today show under these circumstances, you can bet my mom and dad would have had me lead with a goddamn apology. ETA: I knew, by the way, that you would not answer my questions, and instead would just try to diss minor elements of the hypothetical. I can pretty easily imagine the thread you'd start bemoaning the lack of civility the left was teaching its teens and how Christianity was under attack, were anything close to my hypothetical to happen. ETA: Vince524 , I missed your response until now. Thank you for engaging with my hypo. For the record, I don't disagree with you that a lot of people would flip their answers to take the reverse of the positions they are taking now. But yeah, I have a problem with that. I'd be just as exasperated as I am now, just at a different group of people. Also for the record, though if I were the parents, I'd probably not be thrusting my kid further into the limelight, but if for some reason I DID, I'd have them lead with "I'm sorry. I was being kind of a jerk to the Native American elder and I should have shown more respect." Then they could go on to, "I'm really not a racist jerk, I was just kind of hyped up after those BHI guys and my friends and I got carried away into being jerky and stupid ourselves, we didn't really realize how jerky it looked until the videos came out, and for what it's worth, here's more context on the moment and the day." Then, fwiw, I'd be Team Live the Damn Kids Alone. I'm already on Team Leave the Damn Kids Alone, actually -- but that includes not making them into heroes or poor widdle angels. ETA: Also for the record -- IMO Mr. Phillip's credibility is irrelevant to the behavior of the kids. I'm going on my views of the videos, not the word of Mr. Phillips, with possibly one exception -- his motives for stepping between the kids and the Black Israelites. But to note: that view seems consistent with the videos, and indeed seems to be how the Black Israelites viewed their motive (.e.g., "oh, here comes Daddy!" etc.) Moreover, that motive is also irrelevant to me -- what matters is what actually happened. Also worth noting that other bystanders believed that was Phillip's motive, and also perceived him as trying to get to the top of the steps, and that the kid was deliberately engaging in a stand-off with him. But again, the motive doesn't matter to me so much as what actually happened. Thus, I actually don't give a tinker's damn whether he served in Vietnam or was just a Marine corp veteran who served during that era (which doesn't seem to be disputed). It's not about his word. It's about what I saw on the video. On the "school cheer" thing c.e. is so hot on, I'm interested that a school with a southern colonel as it's mascot has Native American war whoops for school cheers. In this day and age, those are widely regarded as offensive even for teams that have a native American mascot. Also I roll my eyes at the idea that the kids would innocently bring such chants out without seeing why they'd look derisive when directed at a Native American. As c.e. would say "sorry", I don't buy it. If you don't think the kids were doing tomahawk chops and Indian war chants at the Native Americans, while laughing and jeering, you did not watch the videos. That's directed at you, c.e.lawson, with your repeated reiteration of the "school cheers". His credibility matters because he is saying he was trying to get by, as opposed to intentionally going up to these kids and beating a drum in their, particularly Sandmann's face while chanting. He's told two different narratives on this.
If you believe MAGA kid specifically stepped in his way and blocked him, then you believe he was being an undeniable dickhead.
If you believe that MAGA kid was reacting to someone getting in his face, beating a drum and chanting and he stood there and smirked. That changes the entire context.
I might say 'Shove it up your ass' to another person. That's hostile and I might sound like a jerk. But if that other person just insulted me, my family, told me to perform sexual acts upon myself that are not possible, and I say that, suddenly I'm not the jerk.
Could I have handled it better? Sure. Could these kids, and for that matter the school, use a lesson in sensitivity training and understanding how things might get interpreted. Sure.
But that doesn't justify the mob attack. (Again, I know you aren't part of that.) But what I keep coming back to, is why you or anyone at this point think the only or biggest ones at fault at the kids.
Again. The Black Israelites said those things. Not Mr. Phillips. You are conflating them to make your justification of the kids And I think it's pretty obvious the Native Americans were a different group (race alone kinds gives that away, no?). Again, you've said, per my hypothetical, that the Westboro Baptists yelling stuff wouldn't justify saying jeering anti-Christian stuff to the Evangelical pastor. And that's what we have here. I do agree that the post-viral video mob attack on the kids was out of hand. I do condemn the people sending death threats. I called out a facebook friend for saying something really ugly about the kids. But the side exonerating the kids and turning them into heroes is also out of hand. And if it weren't for the latter, I wouldn't bother pointing out the kids acted like little jerks -- I feel compelled to do so because so many are saying they weren't doing rude racist things when in fact they were. Then too, if the kids themselves admitted some degree of "yeah, we were jerks, too" I'd feel softer-hearted towards them. In a weird way, watching the kid get scared when the chaperone came through softened my heart a little -- until I went back and read kid's statement where he decidedly mischaracterized the motive behind his gesture! LOL, watch my video and the timing of it -- no WAY was his desire to hush his friend not about "oh shit, the chaperone!" Nope, he's happy to be turned into a right-wing hero, go on the Today show and to the White House. And yeah, no. That doesn't justify death threats, obviously, and it doesn't make the Black Israelites swell guys, but it ain't right.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Jan 23, 2019 21:17:42 GMT -5
Look at all the weasel words. Look at this bending over backwards to find a way to excuse and pardon and rationalize for an act of blatant and unequivocal racism as "tradition." They're not weasel words. See, unlike some people out there, I actually try to be precise and intellectually honest in my posts and arguments. I'm so happy for you that you found a Black guy and a Brown guy you can relate to. Now when Black History Month and Hispanic History Month comes around you'll have a special token buddy you can eat black-eyed peas and tortillas with. What a stroke of luck for you in a time when over 75 percent of White Americans have NO friends of color, you got two. You lucky ducky! Though I must confess to being mildly curious as to why you felt it necessary to point out that a BLACK guy and a BROWN guy feel the way you do? Was there something about their skin color you thought was important to bring to everyone's attention? That said, I'm a bit disappointed you seem to believe pulling two nobodies I've never heard of until you trolled You Tube to dig up their obscure asses is going to mean something to me. Whoa. Some Black Guy is riding shotgun wit Opty. I'd better back up and regroup my position! You should know by now a Black man like me is not going to be impressed because you found a Black man that agrees with you. There's always been guys like Some Black Guy who say stuff that makes White Guys feel better about themselves. That's as desperate a reach as celawson name-checking Kanye West's delusional, psychotic, over-medicated ass for being down with the MAGA because he visited the Whitest House to drop a "motherfucker" to the sorry motherfucker in the Oval Office. You'd have to look long and hard to find where I ever said every Person of Color thinks like me (Thank Allah!), Opty. When everybody thinks alike nobody is thinking all that much. I find unanimity of opinion to be boring as hell. My wife and kids don't think like me and they know and love me. Why the fuck would anyone think like me when they don't know me or what I think, and for the record, neither do you. Especially not you. No person of color should ever need or want your hope. You can neither impede what Black people need to do nor can you help it succeed. The most you can do is stay in your lane and wait until somebody asks you for your advice, aid or assistance. Until that time, don't you worry your little head about what Blacks, Asians, Hispanics, Latinos or Indigenous people are up to. When you need to know, you'll be told. Until then, you wanna hope about something? Hope those little pukes from Covington Catholic don't grow up to be the smug fucks they seem destined to be. Handle your business, Opty and come get your kids. I'm handling my business and already got mine. Oh, you mean like when you say anyone who doesn't have an agenda should be seeing shit the way you do through your brown-colored glasses? The ref is throwing the Bullshit Flag on that one, so sing that song for someone who doesn't know how much you enjoy getting your humblebrag on about how open-minded and fair and balanced you are and if only everyone thought like you, that would be "optimal." You've made it quite clear you hold no one in higher esteem than you do yourself, but for God's sake, please stop with the auto-fellatio, sir. It's impolite and unseemly. Nasty, too. Sports fans? Yeah....that's probably not as good an example as you might believe. Like here: Nevermind, let's move on. How about this one? Oh, shit...that one's kind of black-faceish, wasn't it? You know, because the paint's black and it's on some of their faces. Based on the full context provided in this picture, this was obviously taken at a klan rally. My mistake! Um...okay...how about this one? I can help you that. All "woke" means to a shallow, superficial, so-called "liberal" like you is the past tense of "wake" and nothing more. You make for a lousy ally, Opty, but you are an excellent enemy and truth be told, I'd trade your worthless ass for the Aryan Brotherhood, David Duke, and every other nigger-hatin' White douchebag because at least they are up front and honest with their ignorance and bigotry. That sort of candor is much more preferable to an "academic" poseur who boasts about his minimal grasp of race and is oblivious to just so far up his own ass he is. Shucks, Opty. I never said "Whitey always bad." I mean YOU are always bad and getting worse, but I'd rather spend an hour discussing my differences with a celawson than I would wasting one minute on an arrogant blowhard who is miffed his version of liberalism ain't hittin' high on the charts no mo'. I should add I don't think you're a "privileged White devil" at all. I think you're a pompous White doofus who thinks he's a liberal, but strangely and oddly enough, finds himself constantly siding with race-baiting bigots, defending drunk men who rape women because women can rape men too, vociferously championing anti-diversity, KKK-slurping snowflakes like James "The Lame" Damore, proclaiming dreadlocks are "disgusting" and "stink" and besides long before the Rastafarians and Black Americans started wearing them, White folks in Greece had beat 'em to it first so when people of color wear dreads they are culturally appropriating from Whites. Got that? Please note that at no time does Opty produce even one SHRED of evidence or proof to back his bullshit up beyond, "Whitesplaining Shit." Liberal? YOU? You got jokes. If I were trying to insult you I would never call you "Whitey." Remember what I said about buying a calendar? This is 2019, not 1979 and "Whitey" is even more played out than "Woke." I doubt you have any friends.
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Jan 23, 2019 21:34:28 GMT -5
His credibility matters because he is saying he was trying to get by, as opposed to intentionally going up to these kids and beating a drum in their, particularly Sandmann's face while chanting. He's told two different narratives on this.
If you believe MAGA kid specifically stepped in his way and blocked him, then you believe he was being an undeniable dickhead.
If you believe that MAGA kid was reacting to someone getting in his face, beating a drum and chanting and he stood there and smirked. That changes the entire context.
I might say 'Shove it up your ass' to another person. That's hostile and I might sound like a jerk. But if that other person just insulted me, my family, told me to perform sexual acts upon myself that are not possible, and I say that, suddenly I'm not the jerk.
Could I have handled it better? Sure. Could these kids, and for that matter the school, use a lesson in sensitivity training and understanding how things might get interpreted. Sure.
But that doesn't justify the mob attack. (Again, I know you aren't part of that.) But what I keep coming back to, is why you or anyone at this point think the only or biggest ones at fault at the kids.
Again. The Black Israelites said those things. Not Mr. Phillips. You are conflating them to make your justification of the kids And I think it's pretty obvious the Native Americans were a different group (race alone kinds gives that away, no?). Again, you've said, per my hypothetical, that the Westboro Baptists yelling stuff wouldn't justify saying jeering anti-Christian stuff to the Evangelical pastor. And that's what we have here. I do agree that the post-viral video mob attack on the kids was out of hand. I do condemn the people sending death threats. I called out a facebook friend for saying something really ugly about the kids. But the side exonerating the kids and turning them into heroes is also out of hand. And if it weren't for the latter, I wouldn't bother pointing out the kids acted like little jerks -- I feel compelled to do so because so many are saying they weren't doing rude racist things when in fact they were. Then too, if the kids themselves admitted some degree of "yeah, we were jerks, too" I'd feel softer-hearted towards them. In a weird way, watching the kid get scared when the chaperone came through softened my heart a little -- until I went back and read kid's statement where he decidedly mischaracterized the motive behind his gesture! LOL, watch my video and the timing of it -- no WAY was his desire to hush his friend not about "oh shit, the chaperone!" Nope, he's happy to be turned into a right-wing hero, go on the Today show and to the White House. And yeah, no. That doesn't justify death threats, obviously, and it doesn't make the Black Israelites swell guys, but it ain't right. Do we have that here? Nick Sandmann, as far as I can tell, just smiled, or smirked or whatever you want to call it. He didn't use horrible language.
No, whatever happened with BI doesn't justify any bad things the kids did to Phillips. However, why does Phillips get a pass for getting in their faces?
Let's pretend the Native American's weren't involved, and it was just the BI. Are the kids wrong for starting school chants and not moving away? (Yes, we can argue the chaperone should have moved them, but put that to the side)
So if they saw Phillips as getting in their face, and all they did was smirk, or even if they did jeer him, why are we only calling out their behavior and not his? He didn't try to get by them, he specifically walked into their personal space and got into Sandmann's face.
|
|