The Political Discussion Thread

[Falcon Horus]

One thing I'm wondering about though. I skimmed a number of articles about this, and no one is saying what race the arrested officers are. Gotta wonder about that.

It's particularly fascinating to me that color of one's skin is still such a big issue in such a developed country as the USA.

It's not just in the USA, but they are in the news the most these days.

Now as far as I can tell both these groups / people are doing a damn fine impersonation of the Taliban. This is just the kind of thing the Taliban would be doing and everyone would be up in arms over it, but because they are Christians it seems to be all OK.

IS (or ISIS, or whatever they call themselves these days) are a better comparison I think. It's a bit quiet on the side of the Taliban. They lost their hot-topicness when ISIS came to the forefront.

Christians have their own version of sharia law, so no it doesn't surprise me one bit that these things happen.

Also, found an interesting bit on the ever so popular and reaccuring "sanctity of marriage".

[Coco Pops]

It's particularly fascinating to me that color of one's skin is still such a big issue in such a developed country as the USA.

It's not just in the USA, but they are in the news the most these days.



IS (or ISIS, or whatever they call themselves these days) are a better comparison I think. It's a bit quiet on the side of the Taliban. They lost their hot-topicness when ISIS came to the forefront.

Christians have their own version of sharia law, so no it doesn't surprise me one bit that these things happen.

Also, found an interesting bit on the ever so popular and reaccuring "sanctity of marriage".

That whole argument of "the sanctity of marriage" It just gives me headaches. we are in the 21st Century and the world is now a far different place to the 17th Century. Why can't we all realize this and adapt?

The other thing that makes me wonder is this.

In other countries like the countries of the Middle East christianity isn't the dominant religion but it is tolerated in some of those countries. But there are places where being a christian will get you killed yet in the USA and other countries this won't happen so how can you claim you are being truly persecuted?

[Falcon Horus]

That whole argument of "the sanctity of marriage" It just gives me headaches. we are in the 21st Century and the world is now a far different place to the 17th Century. Why can't we all realize this and adapt?

You mean the 11th century... ... but what's a few hundred years when it comes to this particular discussion.

[Coco Pops]

You mean the 11th century... ... but what's a few hundred years when it comes to this particular discussion.

True...

Haha just as you replied I was waiting for my edit to be saved it was taking forever and your reply just shows up hehe.

I edited my post and added more.

[Coco Pops]

You mean the 11th century... ... but what's a few hundred years when it comes to this particular discussion.

True...

Haha just as you replied I was waiting for my edit to be saved it was taking forever and your reply just shows up hehe.

I edited my post and added more.

[Coco Pops]

You mean the 11th century... ...but what's a few hundred years more in this discussion.

Did you double post?

I edited my reply and yours showed up before mine had saved the forum is lagging..

[Falcon Horus]

Seems the forum is lagging, so it's double post galore.

The other thing that makes me wonder is this.

In other countries like the countries of the Middle East christianity isn't the dominant religion but it is tolerated in some of those countries. But there are places where being a christian will get you killed yet in the USA and other countries this won't happen so how can you claim you are being truly persecuted?

IS executes Christians and Muslims alike - they don't differentiate between one religion or the other. You don't follow their laws, you're a dead and, most of the time, headless human.

However, in regions that aren't controlled by IS, or countries where Islam/Christianity is the major religion other relgions are indeed tolerated to a point, I think. Cause I don't think we see the full scope of their impact on the societies. There's rarely anything in the news about intolerance so we automatically assume they share a peaceful co-existence.

[Annoyed]

Quote Originally Posted by Annoyed View Post
One thing I'm wondering about though. I skimmed a number of articles about this, and no one is saying what race the arrested officers are. Gotta wonder about that.

It's particularly fascinating to me that color of one's skin is still such a big issue in such a developed country as the USA.

Well, in this case, race is a factor as accusations of racial bias on the part of the police force was the so called justification for the riots, looting and such.

Turns out 3 of the 6 officers involved were black themselves, including the driver, which pretty much destroys the racial bias aspect to this.

Are all those rioters and looters going to return the stuff they stole & rebuild what they destroyed at their own expense?

[Annoyed]

The other thing that makes me wonder is this.

In other countries like the countries of the Middle East christianity isn't the dominant religion but it is tolerated in some of those countries. But there are places where being a christian will get you killed yet in the USA and other countries this won't happen so how can you claim you are being truly persecuted?

The U.S. is one of the most tolerant places on Earth when it comes to religious freedom or most other kinds of freedom.
But some people here have some pretty strange ideas about "equality". Many people here feel that unless a particular group of people is granted special protections under the law, set-asides, quotas and other forms of preferential treatment they are being discriminated against and persecuted.

[Womble]

Seems the forum is lagging, so it's double post galore.



IS executes Christians and Muslims alike - they don't differentiate between one religion or the other.

That's just plain not true.

However, in regions that aren't controlled by IS, or countries where Islam/Christianity is the major religion other relgions are indeed tolerated to a point, I think. Cause I don't think we see the full scope of their impact on the societies. There's rarely anything in the news about intolerance so we automatically assume they share a peaceful co-existence.

Saudi Arabia is not controlled by IS but state law prohibits the practice of any religion other than Islam. Bibles and crosses are banned, and people can be detained and imprisoned for practicing Christianity or any non-Muslim faith in their own home. Officially, there are no Christians in Saudi Arabia ar all. Unofficially, there's approximately one million Christians living under these conditions, most of them guest workers from the Philippines.

[Falcon Horus]

Are all those rioters and looters going to return the stuff they stole & rebuild what they destroyed at their own expense?

If they are as lucky as the protesters over here a while back, they'll be recognized on street cams and/or surveillance videos and end up with criminal charges. So yeah, I hope there will be expensive consequences to deal with.

[SGalisa]

The police and the city reacted as they should have. The blame isn't on them.
. . .
They wanted to give protesters their space, but rioters ended up taking advantage of that. . . . It's short sighted to want to blame anyone but the criminals themselves.

Yeah the whole Baltimore thing seems totally messed up. Did the Mayor actually tell police to back off and let people destroy stuff?

Not sure about the police backing down, since there are 2 versions of that circulating.
As for letting people destroy stuff -- Yes she did say something to that effect, but later denied saying she ever said such a thing, and blamed everyone else for twisting her words around.

Really? That's not what the people who heard the audio and saw the videos were saying.

Found 3 separate articles basically time-lining the whole fiasco from beginning to her statement of denial.
OMG! Read the comments at the end of each article -- especially the first one. Utterly priceless, especially in light of the mega-consequential damages done by now.

Spoiler:

from the Blaze (article which is probably archived by now)

"Baltimore Mayor Stuns With Remarks on Violent Freddie Gray Protesters Who 'Wished to Destroy'"
by Jason Howerton
Apr. 26, 2015 7:30pm

...Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake confirmed that the protesters were being given "space" to "destroy."

"While we tried to make sure that they were protected from the cars and the other things that were going on," the mayor said of the protesters. "We also gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well. And we work very hard to keep that balance and to put ourselves in the best position to deescalate, and that's what you saw."

Watch her remarks below at around 7:40:

Seriously??! Did she really say
"We also gave those who wished to destroy -- space to do that as well."
Yes she said that. It was heard numerous times on the radio (in the actual news blurbs), as well, and also in the full context of whatever else she was saying on other programs replaying her statements. She may try to rephrase whatever she said, but she cannot change the past. What's done is done.

Spoiler:

"Listen to How Baltimore Mayor Is Clarifying Her Controversial Remarks on Protesters Who 'Wished to Destroy'"
by Jason Howerton
Apr. 27, 2015 10:15pm

Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake strongly condemned the violent "thugs" who were rioting in the city streets on Monday, issuing a mandatory curfew and clarifying her recent remarks about protesters who wish to "destroy."
...
"I made it very clear that we balance a very fine line between giving peaceful protesters space to protest. What I said is, in doing so, people can hijack that and use that space for bad," the mayor said. "I did not say that we were accepting of it, I did not say we were passive to it. I was just explaining how property damage can happen during a peaceful protest. It is very unfortunate that members of your industry decided to mischaracterize my words and try to use it as a way to say that we are inciting violence, there is no such thing."
...

Those persons who went out "destroying" didn't need any extra words to be incited. Obviously, somewhere in time, those people ran with the Mayor's words and just went on a FREE-FOR-ALL destructive SPREE..! Smashing police cars, public and private property, starting fires, looting, the works.

Spoiler:

NOTE: the readers comments at the end of the article says it all!

"Baltimore Mayor: 'I Never Said... That We Are Giving People Space To Destroy Our City'"

April 28, 2015 6:42 AM
CBS, DC
©2015 CBS Local Media, a division of CBS Radio Inc. All rights reserved.

Of course she never said her administration was giving the people space to destroy their city. She simply said "We also gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well."
The problem is that she did NOT specify what could or might be destroyed. So, however way or method that the info got passed on to those who actually vandalized, is now in the interpretation of the vandals. It would be amazing if no one who was arrested doesn't turn around and claim the Mayor gave them room enough so they could go "destroy" ...and so they did exactly that..!

Ohhhhhhhhhhhh, be VERY careful what (generic) you say and how you say it!
Someone somewhere is bound to interpret it differently than it was supposed to be intended. This ended up being a very costly statement, regardless of how it was phrased..!


When I first heard her comments and read everything in written form, I was like
"Whhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat???????! ...did she just say what I thought she said??"
After 3 times of reading the first night's article, OMG!!! Sure enough, yeppers.

And to add to the insanity, the first day of the Baltimore riots, a very popular, secular discussion forum (not here) was discussing the events moment by moment saying that at least no one started any fires yet.
Well, sure enough, the very next day, there were not only multiple fires started by rioters, but to add insult to injury, one of fire hoses got slashed, while the firemen were trying to put one of the bigger fires out! It almost seemed like these riots are suddenly turning into a game to see which group of vandals could do the worst damage?
Simple watching *fictional TV and movies doing pretend damage* aren't satiating enough any more?

And who is paying for the damages to be repaired? City and gov't funds come from the taxpayers. Every resident taxpayer is going to pay, except for the ones who caused the destruction.

It's a wonder the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) doesn't step in and slap the book (of fines) at the (actual) vandals for wrecking more damages to the environment, etc., than what already exists. Especially with water becoming a critical resource in more places than the general public realizes (be it contaminated by flood or vanishing by drought).

And some people wonder why prices keep going up and up -- higher and higher..?!

[Falcon Horus]

I'm inclined to believe the mayor had no intention to give the vandals "space to destroy". That was an unfortunate choice of wording in which I'm sure she forgot to add a few subjects in the heat of the moment.

Knowing protesters, there are always those who will use any given space to destroy property and get away with it too. Only a few months ago, we got to see that very same thing happening during peaceful protests in the capital, where anarchists mingled with the protesters and destroyed public and private property.

Same as how Cameron (UK) misspoke and called the next elections important to his career, after which he corrected himself and made it Britain instead of his career.

[Coco Pops]

Cameron seems like your usual right wing nutty person

[mad_gater]

I'd just like to watch these rioters try to destroy property in Texas...where they REALLY like the 2ns Amendment