independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Sat 23rd Mar 2019 9:27am
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > The D.C. Controversy
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 2 of 4 <1234>
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #30 posted 01/28/19 12:10pm

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Tim Wise basically called them a bunch of Maga racists.

All you others say Hell Yea!! woot!
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #31 posted 01/28/19 12:17pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

2freaky4church1 said:

Tim Wise basically called them a bunch of Maga racists.


No comment on Jimmy Dore's opinions?

"I've made up my mind. Don't try to confuse me with the facts." - Harry J. Anslinger
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #32 posted 01/28/19 12:20pm

2freaky4church
1

avatar

You know Dore can be a dolt.

All you others say Hell Yea!! woot!
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #33 posted 01/28/19 12:40pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

2freaky4church1 said:

You know Dore can be a dolt.


So when you share Dore's videos, they're to be given consideration. When I do, he's a dolt. Got it.

"I've made up my mind. Don't try to confuse me with the facts." - Harry J. Anslinger
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #34 posted 01/28/19 12:50pm

happinessinits
uncutform

Funniest thing about this video is just that 17-year-old Catholic school boy wearing a MAGA hat. I mean...can it get any more typical than this lol? To a repressed teenage boy, a brave straightforward figure like Trump who just grabs pussy when he wants it of course looks like a hero.

🎵
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #35 posted 01/28/19 1:01pm

CynicKill

happinessinitsuncutform said:

Funniest thing about this video is just that 17-year-old Catholic school boy wearing a MAGA hat. I mean...can it get any more typical than this lol? To a repressed teenage boy, a brave straightforward figure like Trump who just grabs pussy when he wants it of course looks like a hero.

Eh.

Funny thing is if he would've had a back and forth with this guy everyone would still be upset.

He could've walked away but then again tell that to every living human being who might get into a potential stand-off.

Instead he didn't engage and guess what? Everyone is still upset.

I don't personally know what anyone in DC was thinking that day because I can't read minds and I don't thought-police, but its obvious that because of that MAGA hat (a piece of clothing that I understand the students bought last minute from some vendor outside) nothing he would've done would make anyone happy.

It is what it is.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #36 posted 01/28/19 1:17pm

happinessinits
uncutform

CynicKill said:

happinessinitsuncutform said:

Funniest thing about this video is just that 17-year-old Catholic school boy wearing a MAGA hat. I mean...can it get any more typical than this lol? To a repressed teenage boy, a brave straightforward figure like Trump who just grabs pussy when he wants it of course looks like a hero.

Eh.

Funny thing is if he would've had a back and forth with this guy everyone would still be upset.

He could've walked away but then again tell that to every living human being who might get into a potential stand-off.

Instead he didn't engage and guess what? Everyone is still upset.

I don't personally know what anyone in DC was thinking that day because I can't read minds and I don't thought-police, but its obvious that because of that MAGA hat (a piece of clothing that I understand the students bought last minute from some vendor outside) nothing he would've done would make anyone happy.

It is what it is.

Well these kids(although looking way older) were there at the indigenous people's march wearing MAGA hat for a REASON. You know it I know it everyone knows it. I'm not saying he deserves death threats but anyone who thinks this kid is a victim needs to wake up and smell the reality. He was there to protest and to make a point with an agenda. Surely in the video he doesn't say anything but him being there with a bunch his creepy friends wearing the hat - the point is pretty clear.

[Edited 1/28/19 13:18pm]

🎵
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #37 posted 01/28/19 2:00pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

happinessinitsuncutform said:

CynicKill said:

Eh.

Funny thing is if he would've had a back and forth with this guy everyone would still be upset.

He could've walked away but then again tell that to every living human being who might get into a potential stand-off.

Instead he didn't engage and guess what? Everyone is still upset.

I don't personally know what anyone in DC was thinking that day because I can't read minds and I don't thought-police, but its obvious that because of that MAGA hat (a piece of clothing that I understand the students bought last minute from some vendor outside) nothing he would've done would make anyone happy.

It is what it is.

Well these kids(although looking way older) were there at the indigenous people's march wearing MAGA hat for a REASON. You know it I know it everyone knows it. I'm not saying he deserves death threats but anyone who thinks this kid is a victim needs to wake up and smell the reality. He was there to protest and to make a point with an agenda. Surely in the video he doesn't say anything but him being there with a bunch his creepy friends wearing the hat - the point is pretty clear.

[Edited 1/28/19 13:18pm]


The kids were not at the indigenous people's march, they were at the right to life march, then they were waiting for their bus. Mr. Phillips brought his march to them, they were not expecting it.

"I've made up my mind. Don't try to confuse me with the facts." - Harry J. Anslinger
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #38 posted 01/28/19 2:22pm

happinessinits
uncutform

djThunderfunk said:

happinessinitsuncutform said:

Well these kids(although looking way older) were there at the indigenous people's march wearing MAGA hat for a REASON. You know it I know it everyone knows it. I'm not saying he deserves death threats but anyone who thinks this kid is a victim needs to wake up and smell the reality. He was there to protest and to make a point with an agenda. Surely in the video he doesn't say anything but him being there with a bunch his creepy friends wearing the hat - the point is pretty clear.

[Edited 1/28/19 13:18pm]


The kids were not at the indigenous people's march, they were at the right to life march, then they were waiting for their bus. Mr. Phillips brought his march to them, they were not expecting it.

Surely they peacefully attended the march and after the rally, for some convinient reason like "having to wait for the bus", they just stood still waited for the bus and did nothing to provoke the group. No smirking, no pointing fingers, no laughing, just like that teenger said, they're the victims. That's a believable story of a group of catholic teenagers who support Trump as the rightful leader, of course.

🎵
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #39 posted 01/28/19 3:48pm

CynicKill

happinessinitsuncutform said:

djThunderfunk said:


The kids were not at the indigenous people's march, they were at the right to life march, then they were waiting for their bus. Mr. Phillips brought his march to them, they were not expecting it.

Surely they peacefully attended the march and after the rally, for some convinient reason like "having to wait for the bus", they just stood still waited for the bus and did nothing to provoke the group. No smirking, no pointing fingers, no laughing, just like that teenger said, they're the victims. That's a believable story of a group of catholic teenagers who support Trump as the rightful leader, of course.

Just for the sake of arguement what if all this happened?

From what I saw on the video the Phillips guy marched across the park and started beating his drum in the kids face.

When was the last time you confronted a gang of teenagers?

Smart adults are trying their best to avoid them.

I'm not a MAGA supporter or detractor. It's America you can wear what you want (within reason). I'm not of the group that is being socially engineered to be triggered by this hat.

What it looks like to me is an unfortunate case of fake news, something that is a main part of Trump's platform. It's ironic to say the least.

Because people don't seem to have the full story, know it, and yet are set in their ways about the narrative that was presented to them.

It's 2019. We can all do better people.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #40 posted 01/28/19 5:01pm

happinessinits
uncutform

CynicKill said:

happinessinitsuncutform said:

Surely they peacefully attended the march and after the rally, for some convinient reason like "having to wait for the bus", they just stood still waited for the bus and did nothing to provoke the group. No smirking, no pointing fingers, no laughing, just like that teenger said, they're the victims. That's a believable story of a group of catholic teenagers who support Trump as the rightful leader, of course.

Just for the sake of arguement what if all this happened?

Then that Nathan Phillips is a hero. Confronting hate with some peaceful drum playing.



CynicKill said:

From what I saw on the video the Phillips guy marched across the park and started beating his drum in the kids face.

Way to inject some culture to these Catholic kids don't you think? What's so deadly or threatening or offensive about an older man playing the drums anyway IF you think the kid didn't do anything wrong by just standing still.



CynicKill said:

When was the last time you confronted a gang of teenagers?

A few years ago when I was in college, 4 or 5 young teenage boys were throwing garbage at my grandma's church friend's truck. I yelled "what the hell is wrong with yall" and they scrammed. I regret it though, should've grabbed them by their pasty chubby arms. made them pick up every piece of garbage out of the truck they threw in...If you're one of those people who think "kids can't do no wrong" or it's not right to confront kids when they're clearly in the wrong, I feel sorry for you.



CynicKill said:

It's America you can wear what you want (within reason). I'm not of the group that is being socially engineered to be triggered by this hat.

What it looks like to me is an unfortunate case of fake news, something that is a main part of Trump's platform. It's ironic to say the least.

Because people don't seem to have the full story, know it, and yet are set in their ways about the narrative that was presented to them.

It's 2019. We can all do better people.

Here's the bottom line; I'm not saying Phillips didn't do anything wrong, or the kid should be criticized for just wearing that hat. BUT people conveniently leaving out some of the context to this event to defend this kid is laughable. Do you honestly, believe that the kid's behavior was normal? "Normal" would be saying sth like "Sir, do you have a problem with me?" to the guy who all of a sudden came to you and started playing drums at you as if he was trying to convey a message.


The guy didn't act surprised or normal in any way when he was approached, which makes me think his friends or he had provoked him previously - they were expecting the elder guy to react in some way. And that kid took it as some sort of challenge. He was aware of his creepy friends filming the confrontation and you can clearly see him enjoying the whole thing. Now the kid's all over the press crying "death threats" or "I was praying for him"...it's just disgusting to watch the whole thing. And the extent that people go to, to keep painting this kid as the victim, though not shocking, but seriously is disconcerting.

[Edited 1/28/19 17:01pm]

🎵
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #41 posted 01/28/19 6:39pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

happinessinitsuncutform said:

djThunderfunk said:


The kids were not at the indigenous people's march, they were at the right to life march, then they were waiting for their bus. Mr. Phillips brought his march to them, they were not expecting it.

Surely they peacefully attended the march and after the rally, for some convinient reason like "having to wait for the bus", they just stood still waited for the bus and did nothing to provoke the group. No smirking, no pointing fingers, no laughing, just like that teenger said, they're the victims. That's a believable story of a group of catholic teenagers who support Trump as the rightful leader, of course.


They were nowhere near the other march. You could watch the video and see for yourself or you can continue making assumptions that are disproven by the footage.

"I've made up my mind. Don't try to confuse me with the facts." - Harry J. Anslinger
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #42 posted 01/28/19 6:43pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

happinessinitsuncutform said:

And the extent that people go to, to keep painting this kid as the victim, though not shocking, but seriously is disconcerting.



The extent that people go to, to stick to a certain narrative in the face of video and audio evidence which proves that narrative wrong, though not shocking, is seriously disconcerting.

"I've made up my mind. Don't try to confuse me with the facts." - Harry J. Anslinger
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #43 posted 01/28/19 7:05pm

happinessinits
uncutform

djThunderfunk said:

happinessinitsuncutform said:

Surely they peacefully attended the march and after the rally, for some convinient reason like "having to wait for the bus", they just stood still waited for the bus and did nothing to provoke the group. No smirking, no pointing fingers, no laughing, just like that teenger said, they're the victims. That's a believable story of a group of catholic teenagers who support Trump as the rightful leader, of course.


They were nowhere near the other march. You could watch the video and see for yourself or you can continue making assumptions that are disproven by the footage.

Did you not see the part where one kid takes off his shirt and then the whole gang of students then laugh, do weird chants, dance moves and just be loud and obnoxious? And btw I didn't say they were near the march, I said they 'attended' the march as in the march for life. But upon watching the video again I found out they weren't that far away from the indigenous march either. Maybe you should consider watching the video.

🎵
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #44 posted 01/28/19 7:19pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

happinessinitsuncutform said:

djThunderfunk said:


They were nowhere near the other march. You could watch the video and see for yourself or you can continue making assumptions that are disproven by the footage.

Did you not see the part where one kid takes off his shirt and then the whole gang of students then laugh, do weird chants, dance moves and just be loud and obnoxious? And btw I didn't say they were near the march, I said they 'attended' the march as in the march for life. But upon watching the video again I found out they weren't that far away from the indigenous march either. Maybe you should consider watching the video.


I watched the videos. All of them.


The school sports chant was to drown out the the slurs and hate speech from the black hebrew israelites. Are school sport chants loud and obnoxious? Absolutely! So what? It was better than if they took the bait from the black hebrew israelites and attacked them back.

Maybe you should watch the videos.

"I've made up my mind. Don't try to confuse me with the facts." - Harry J. Anslinger
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #45 posted 01/28/19 7:33pm

happinessinits
uncutform

djThunderfunk said:

happinessinitsuncutform said:

Did you not see the part where one kid takes off his shirt and then the whole gang of students then laugh, do weird chants, dance moves and just be loud and obnoxious? And btw I didn't say they were near the march, I said they 'attended' the march as in the march for life. But upon watching the video again I found out they weren't that far away from the indigenous march either. Maybe you should consider watching the video.


I watched the videos. All of them.


The school sports chant was to drown out the the slurs and hate speech from the black hebrew israelites. Are school sport chants loud and obnoxious? Absolutely! So what? It was better than if they took the bait from the black hebrew israelites and attacked them back.

Maybe you should watch the videos.

So if they could be publicly annoying and obnoxious as a collective, why can't an old native American play the drums and be obnoxious? The slurs didn't come from the native American guy, but the kids clearly countered them by doing whatever it is that made sense to them but was obnoxious to others who were there to peacefully carry on their march.

🎵
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #46 posted 01/29/19 1:59am

BombSquad

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

13cjk13 said:

Fuck any person that wears a MAGA hat. Especially these self entitled little racist assholes.

maybe go read the red text in the top post...

why? the red text is adressing org rules which are applying to ORG MEMBERS

but 13cjk13 was namecalling people OUTSIDE the org


[What happens OUTSIDE of the org has nothing to do with what goes on INSIDE the org. Keep thread on topic snip - luv4u]

Trump turns from 'whining' grief to pathetic midterm sissy moaning and squealing.
weakest pussy crybaby ever to hold office LMFAO
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #47 posted 01/29/19 3:52am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

....

[Edited 1/29/19 3:52am]

What if half the things ever said
Turned out 2 be a lie
How will U know the Truth?
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #48 posted 01/29/19 9:18am

13cjk13

BombSquad said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

maybe go read the red text in the top post...

why? the red text is adressing org rules which are applying to ORG MEMBERS

but 13cjk13 was namecalling people OUTSIDE the org

[What happens OUTSIDE of the org has nothing to do with what goes on INSIDE the org. Keep thread on topic snip - luv4u]



[Wrong thread snip - luv4u]

"Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost".
-Thomas Jefferson
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #49 posted 02/04/19 7:27am

djThunderfunk

avatar

The Covington teens' lawyer has released a video that breaks down the events in D.C.

"I've made up my mind. Don't try to confuse me with the facts." - Harry J. Anslinger
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #50 posted 02/04/19 1:23pm

IanRG

djThunderfunk said:

The Covington teens' lawyer has released a video that breaks down the events in D.C.

.

Thank you for this. It is a timely reminder and warning that skillfully edited videos with a calming but directing female voiceover and subtitles can be used by biased people such as the lawyer of one of the parties to appear to demonstrate what that lawyer wants you to believe about their client. Note the lawyer's voiceover never says the boys did not say build the wall, just that she never heard this said on any video. She replays where a BHI person says to the boys "Build that wall? Build that wall? Why don't you build that damn wall?" This could very easily be that he was imitating what he heard some of the boys say and was turning this chant against them. She ignores the video of where the boys are doing just what they were accused of by dismissing it because it is short and audio is not very clear - it is clear that the boys were doing what the BHI were doing to passersby, just with their pro-Trump slogans . Whilst build the wall is not heard in that 8 seconds, it is a common pro-Trump slogan very likely to be said by people wearing maga hats.

.

Does the video show the real timeline? It claims the boys left for the bus as soon as Sandmann gestured to boy arguing with other man. However, other videos show some remained and were listening to the BHI after the tension had been successfully broken.

.

The thing your video demonstrated to me is exactly what I saw and said before: The school supervisors and chaperones failed these children and exposed them to undue threats. The children should never have been allowed to wear delberately provocative symbols in an uncontrolled situation whilst representing the school. The worst part of this is something presented by this video - The supervisors may have been so negligent in their duties to protect their children that the woman working for the teen's lawyer claimed that it was the children who requested of their chaperones that they be allowed to do something to drown out the BHI hate speech. Of course, this could be lawyer's spin, but, if it is true, this confirms what I said before: The people who allowed this visit, allowed the children to act as they were acting and left them exposed to the immediare threats at the park and the subsequently threats are the second most to blame for this after the BHI.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #51 posted 02/04/19 4:43pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

IanRG said:

Thank you for this. It is a timely reminder and warning that skillfully edited videos with a calming but directing female voiceover and subtitles can be used by biased people such as the lawyer of one of the parties to appear to demonstrate what that lawyer wants you to believe about their client.

This whole thing started with a "skillfully edited video". Luckily for you, several unedited videos are available if you wish to compare. If you discover any deception in the editing of this video, please share.

Note the lawyer's voiceover never says the boys did not say build the wall, just that she never heard this said on any video. She replays where a BHI person says to the boys "Build that wall? Build that wall? Why don't you build that damn wall?" This could very easily be that he was imitating what he heard some of the boys say and was turning this chant against them.

Sure, it could also "very easily be" the only time anyone present said the words "build the wall".

She ignores the video of where the boys are doing just what they were accused of by dismissing it because it is short and audio is not very clear - it is clear that the boys were doing what the BHI were doing to passersby, just with their pro-Trump slogans . Whilst build the wall is not heard in that 8 seconds, it is a common pro-Trump slogan very likely to be said by people wearing maga hats.

Considering this whole thing started with an out of context, edited video clip, why would anyone give any credence to another out of context, short clip?

Can you identify anyone in the 8 second clip that is also in any of the other videos? Can you tell what the boys in the 8 second clip are saying? Do you know what they are responding to? What exactly do you think the 8 second clip proves?

Are you aware that the girl that posted the 8 second clip has said a bunch of racist things in her twitter threads? Look it up.

.

Does the video show the real timeline? It claims the boys left for the bus as soon as Sandmann gestured to boy arguing with other man. However, other videos show some remained and were listening to the BHI after the tension had been successfully broken.

.

The thing your video demonstrated to me is exactly what I saw and said before: The school supervisors and chaperones failed these children and exposed them to undue threats.The children should never have been allowed to wear delberately provocative symbols in an uncontrolled situation whilst representing the school.

Would you say the same thing about David Hogg and all the high school students that went to DC to protest for more gun control? Many of them were provocative, wore provocative slogans on clothes, and said provocative things to people.

Why should the students from Covington not be able to do the same thing?


The worst part of this is something presented by this video - The supervisors may have been so negligent in their duties to protect their children that the woman working for the teen's lawyer claimed that it was the children who requested of their chaperones that they be allowed to do something to drown out the BHI hate speech. Of course, this could be lawyer's spin, but, if it is true, this confirms what I said before: The people who allowed this visit, allowed the children to act as they were acting and left them exposed to the immediare threats at the park and the subsequently threats are the second most to blame for this after the BHI.

"I've made up my mind. Don't try to confuse me with the facts." - Harry J. Anslinger
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #52 posted 02/04/19 5:54pm

IanRG

djThunderfunk said:

IanRG said:

Thank you for this. It is a timely reminder and warning that skillfully edited videos with a calming but directing female voiceover and subtitles can be used by biased people such as the lawyer of one of the parties to appear to demonstrate what that lawyer wants you to believe about their client.

This whole thing started with a "skillfully edited video". Luckily for you, several unedited videos are available if you wish to compare. If you discover any deception in the editing of this video, please share.

Note the lawyer's voiceover never says the boys did not say build the wall, just that she never heard this said on any video. She replays where a BHI person says to the boys "Build that wall? Build that wall? Why don't you build that damn wall?" This could very easily be that he was imitating what he heard some of the boys say and was turning this chant against them.

Sure, it could also "very easily be" the only time anyone present said the words "build the wall".

She ignores the video of where the boys are doing just what they were accused of by dismissing it because it is short and audio is not very clear - it is clear that the boys were doing what the BHI were doing to passersby, just with their pro-Trump slogans . Whilst build the wall is not heard in that 8 seconds, it is a common pro-Trump slogan very likely to be said by people wearing maga hats.

Considering this whole thing started with an out of context, edited video clip, why would anyone give any credence to another out of context, short clip?

Can you identify anyone in the 8 second clip that is also in any of the other videos? Can you tell what the boys in the 8 second clip are saying? Do you know what they are responding to? What exactly do you think the 8 second clip proves?

Are you aware that the girl that posted the 8 second clip has said a bunch of racist things in her twitter threads? Look it up.

.

Does the video show the real timeline? It claims the boys left for the bus as soon as Sandmann gestured to boy arguing with other man. However, other videos show some remained and were listening to the BHI after the tension had been successfully broken.

.

The thing your video demonstrated to me is exactly what I saw and said before: The school supervisors and chaperones failed these children and exposed them to undue threats.The children should never have been allowed to wear delberately provocative symbols in an uncontrolled situation whilst representing the school.

Would you say the same thing about David Hogg and all the high school students that went to DC to protest for more gun control? Many of them were provocative, wore provocative slogans on clothes, and said provocative things to people.

Why should the students from Covington not be able to do the same thing?


The worst part of this is something presented by this video - The supervisors may have been so negligent in their duties to protect their children that the woman working for the teen's lawyer claimed that it was the children who requested of their chaperones that they be allowed to do something to drown out the BHI hate speech. Of course, this could be lawyer's spin, but, if it is true, this confirms what I said before: The people who allowed this visit, allowed the children to act as they were acting and left them exposed to the immediare threats at the park and the subsequently threats are the second most to blame for this after the BHI.

.

Just childish with the layout and red yelling, but this is all we can ever expect from you.

.

No, the issues started with social media responses (including your's but not mine) to a poorly edited video. In no way did it compare to a carefully crafted video full of spin prepared by lawyers to present their client in the best possible light and everyone else as poorly as possible. The lawyer even tweak the timeline. Nothing I have seen in any video demonstates the supervisors and chaperones as acting professionally or responsibly in keeping these children out of danger.

.

Your guess about "built the wall" is not entirely impossible. However, this does not make it likely. Why does the voice say twice "build the wall?" and follow this up with advice that is responding directly to his audience (the children) in a way that is perfectly consistent with being a response to some of them having chanted build the wall?

.

In regards to th 8 sec video, you are deliberately missing the point to justify selectively ignoring the evidence. The children were yelling pro-maga slogans at passersby. You have third party people who were actually there confirming they were doing this. So, all you can do is say it is hard to see each individual and it is hard to hear exactly what they were yelling at passersby. The parts that are clearly heard are pro-maga things.

.

The fact that a person has made bad twitter posts does not change the content of the 8 sec video. This is an incredibly poor argument. It is like getting a criminal off because an accuser did some unrelated thing.

.

In regards to you re-bringing up the comparision to the gun control protests from the previous locked thread - I have answered this in that locked thread - Look it up. The very same answer I gave you was applied to both circumstances consistently. It was based on the difference between effective supervision, chaparoning and security management vs the mess that is still exposing the Covington children to undue risks today.

.

The failing is with the supervisors and chaperones of the children for exposing them to the threats at the event and thereafter by their missmanagement of an increasingly potentially dangerous situation - This is my position from the first post I made in the locked thread to today. Nothing you have said excuses these supervisors and chaperones from this responsibility.

[Edited 2/4/19 17:58pm]

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #53 posted 02/04/19 6:18pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

IanRG said:

Just childish with the layout and red yelling, but this is all we can ever expect from you.

It's "childish" to repeatedly complain about it. I told you why I prefer it. You disagreed. So what? I should just do it your way then? "red yelling", gimme a break, yelling is all caps, the red is to differentiate, it shows up better than other colors, as you can see here.

.

No, the issues started with social media responses (including your's but not mine) to a poorly edited video. In no way did it compare to a carefully crafted video full of spin prepared by lawyers to present their client in the best possible light and everyone else as poorly as possible. The lawyer even tweak the timeline. Nothing I have seen in any video demonstates the supervisors and chaperones as acting professionally or responsibly in keeping these children out of danger.

.

Your guess about "built the wall" is not entirely impossible. However, this does not make it likely. Why does the voice say twice "build the wall?" and follow this up with advice that is responding directly to his audience (the children) in a way that is perfectly consistent with being a response to some of them having chanted build the wall?

.

In regards to th 8 sec video, you are deliberately missing the point to justify selectively ignoring the evidence. The children were yelling pro-maga slogans at passersby. You have third party people who were actually there confirming they were doing this. So, all you can do is say it is hard to see each individual and it is hard to hear exactly what they were yelling at passersby. The parts that are clearly heard are pro-maga things.

What "evidence"? Please do tell, what do YOU see in the video that you think is relevent? Why do you think these are the same kids? What do you think these kids are saying? Why do you think they said it? What do you think is in the 8 sec video that is relevent to the videos on the steps?

.

The fact that a person has made bad twitter posts does not change the content of the 8 sec video. This is an incredibly poor argument. It is like getting a criminal off because an accuser did some unrelated thing.

It is always relevent to consider the character of someone that is offering testimonial evidence.

.

In regards to you re-bringing up the comparision to the gun control protests from the previous locked thread - I have answered this in that locked thread - Look it up. The very same answer I gave you was applied to both circumstances consistently. It was based on the difference between effective supervision, chaparoning and security management vs the mess that is still exposing the Covington children to undue risks today.

.

The failing is with the supervisors and chaperones of the children for exposing them to the threats at the event and thereafter by their missmanagement of an increasingly potentially dangerous situation - This is my position from the first post I made in the locked thread to today. Nothing you have said excuses these supervisors and chaperones from this responsibility.


I don't think the kids did anything wrong. Therefore, I don't think the chaperones should be condemned for allowing the kids to do anything. The kids only "crime" is wearing a hat with a political slogan that triggers some people. Yeah? So? That's on the triggered people, not the kids wearing the hats.

"I've made up my mind. Don't try to confuse me with the facts." - Harry J. Anslinger
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #54 posted 02/04/19 7:35pm

IanRG

djThunderfunk said:

IanRG said:

Just childish with the layout and red yelling, but this is all we can ever expect from you.

It's "childish" to repeatedly complain about it. I told you why I prefer it. You disagreed. So what? I should just do it your way then? "red yelling", gimme a break, yelling is all caps, the red is to differentiate, it shows up better than other colors, as you can see here.

.

No, the issues started with social media responses (including your's but not mine) to a poorly edited video. In no way did it compare to a carefully crafted video full of spin prepared by lawyers to present their client in the best possible light and everyone else as poorly as possible. The lawyer even tweak the timeline. Nothing I have seen in any video demonstates the supervisors and chaperones as acting professionally or responsibly in keeping these children out of danger.

.

Your guess about "built the wall" is not entirely impossible. However, this does not make it likely. Why does the voice say twice "build the wall?" and follow this up with advice that is responding directly to his audience (the children) in a way that is perfectly consistent with being a response to some of them having chanted build the wall?

.

In regards to th 8 sec video, you are deliberately missing the point to justify selectively ignoring the evidence. The children were yelling pro-maga slogans at passersby. You have third party people who were actually there confirming they were doing this. So, all you can do is say it is hard to see each individual and it is hard to hear exactly what they were yelling at passersby. The parts that are clearly heard are pro-maga things.

What "evidence"? Please do tell, what do YOU see in the video that you think is relevent? Why do you think these are the same kids? What do you think these kids are saying? Why do you think they said it? What do you think is in the 8 sec video that is relevent to the videos on the steps?

.

The fact that a person has made bad twitter posts does not change the content of the 8 sec video. This is an incredibly poor argument. It is like getting a criminal off because an accuser did some unrelated thing.

It is always relevent to consider the character of someone that is offering testimonial evidence.

.

In regards to you re-bringing up the comparision to the gun control protests from the previous locked thread - I have answered this in that locked thread - Look it up. The very same answer I gave you was applied to both circumstances consistently. It was based on the difference between effective supervision, chaparoning and security management vs the mess that is still exposing the Covington children to undue risks today.

.

The failing is with the supervisors and chaperones of the children for exposing them to the threats at the event and thereafter by their missmanagement of an increasingly potentially dangerous situation - This is my position from the first post I made in the locked thread to today. Nothing you have said excuses these supervisors and chaperones from this responsibility.


I don't think the kids did anything wrong. Therefore, I don't think the chaperones should be condemned for allowing the kids to do anything. The kids only "crime" is wearing a hat with a political slogan that triggers some people. Yeah? So? That's on the triggered people, not the kids wearing the hats.

.

So what you are saying is you don't care that people have regularly criticised you for how you childishly structure your replies. You lack of care is no excuse. Just like Super's use of yelling here, but not in other Prince.Org forums, it is a tactic - an obvious and pointless tactic.

.

In regards to the 8 sec video, I see what is there and this is consistent with how this explained by the people actually there. That the lawyers working for their client were unable to say this was not the boys and these lawyers show some of what is heard as being maga slogan related by their captions is because you spin is not even sustainable by their clearly biased client-serving standards.

.

This is not a court and you are not a defense attorney seeking to sway a jury. Seriously, everything a person says after they post unrelated bad tweets must be considered wrong because of those posts? This is only convincing to someone so easily convinced by a lawyer's publicly released social media manipulation video because it fits with their political allegiance.

.

You really don't get acting professionally and responsibility when in charge of children's safety. Imagine if it did go south telling the children's parents "Sure he died or was injured, but he did not do anything wrong so I felt Ok with leaving him exposed to people that were doing something wrong". Obviously, it is not a matter of did the children do anything wrong, it is about keeping the children safe. I have stated a number of times that the BHI is the most wrong and the school's supervisors and chaperones are the next most responsible. I have not laid any blame below these two including not at the children. You are so obsessed with making this a pro-Trump issue you are missing what I am saying and defending the indefensible. You want it to be just because of the hats, but is not: It is about appropriate and effective management of a situation the supervisors and chaperones let get out of hand - The children should not have been yelling at passersby. They should not have been allowed to wear any party political slogans when representing a school on a school trip, They should not have been the ones seeking to get the chaperones to do their jobs and help them break the building tension with a school chant. They should not have been allowed to engage with BHI how the lawyer's video shows they were engaging with BHI or how the lawyer's video implies they were engaging with BHI or how they were shown engaging with passersby in the 8 sec video. This would never happen in Australia, the supervisors and chaperones would have seen to that.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #55 posted 02/04/19 7:39pm

SuperFurryAnim
al

avatar

IanRG said:



djThunderfunk said:


The Covington teens' lawyer has released a video that breaks down the events in D.C.



.


Thank you for this. It is a timely reminder and warning that skillfully edited videos with a calming but directing female voiceover and subtitles can be used by biased people such as the lawyer of one of the parties to appear to demonstrate what that lawyer wants you to believe about their client. Note the lawyer's voiceover never says the boys did not say build the wall, just that she never heard this said on any video. She replays where a BHI person says to the boys "Build that wall? Build that wall? Why don't you build that damn wall?" This could very easily be that he was imitating what he heard some of the boys say and was turning this chant against them. She ignores the video of where the boys are doing just what they were accused of by dismissing it because it is short and audio is not very clear - it is clear that the boys were doing what the BHI were doing to passersby, just with their pro-Trump slogans . Whilst build the wall is not heard in that 8 seconds, it is a common pro-Trump slogan very likely to be said by people wearing maga hats.


.


Does the video show the real timeline? It claims the boys left for the bus as soon as Sandmann gestured to boy arguing with other man. However, other videos show some remained and were listening to the BHI after the tension had been successfully broken.


.


The thing your video demonstrated to me is exactly what I saw and said before: The school supervisors and chaperones failed these children and exposed them to undue threats. The children should never have been allowed to wear delberately provocative symbols in an uncontrolled situation whilst representing the school. The worst part of this is something presented by this video - The supervisors may have been so negligent in their duties to protect their children that the woman working for the teen's lawyer claimed that it was the children who requested of their chaperones that they be allowed to do something to drown out the BHI hate speech. Of course, this could be lawyer's spin, but, if it is true, this confirms what I said before: The people who allowed this visit, allowed the children to act as they were acting and left them exposed to the immediare threats at the park and the subsequently threats are the second most to blame for this after the BHI.



Skillfully edited videos????? Stop and think right there what this controversy is over.
What are you outraged about today? CNN has not told you yet?
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #56 posted 02/04/19 7:47pm

IanRG

SuperFurryAnimal said:

IanRG said:

.

Thank you for this. It is a timely reminder and warning that skillfully edited videos with a calming but directing female voiceover and subtitles can be used by biased people such as the lawyer of one of the parties to appear to demonstrate what that lawyer wants you to believe about their client. Note the lawyer's voiceover never says the boys did not say build the wall, just that she never heard this said on any video. She replays where a BHI person says to the boys "Build that wall? Build that wall? Why don't you build that damn wall?" This could very easily be that he was imitating what he heard some of the boys say and was turning this chant against them. She ignores the video of where the boys are doing just what they were accused of by dismissing it because it is short and audio is not very clear - it is clear that the boys were doing what the BHI were doing to passersby, just with their pro-Trump slogans . Whilst build the wall is not heard in that 8 seconds, it is a common pro-Trump slogan very likely to be said by people wearing maga hats.

.

Does the video show the real timeline? It claims the boys left for the bus as soon as Sandmann gestured to boy arguing with other man. However, other videos show some remained and were listening to the BHI after the tension had been successfully broken.

.

The thing your video demonstrated to me is exactly what I saw and said before: The school supervisors and chaperones failed these children and exposed them to undue threats. The children should never have been allowed to wear delberately provocative symbols in an uncontrolled situation whilst representing the school. The worst part of this is something presented by this video - The supervisors may have been so negligent in their duties to protect their children that the woman working for the teen's lawyer claimed that it was the children who requested of their chaperones that they be allowed to do something to drown out the BHI hate speech. Of course, this could be lawyer's spin, but, if it is true, this confirms what I said before: The people who allowed this visit, allowed the children to act as they were acting and left them exposed to the immediare threats at the park and the subsequently threats are the second most to blame for this after the BHI.

Skillfully edited videos????? Stop and think right there what this controversy is over.

.

Stop and think yourself: the new video is a professionally prepared defense video by retained lawyers working for one of the parties. The original video is just a missing context issue leading to people like DJ misreading a look on a boy's face. The new one is skillfully edited, the old on is edited but not skillfully - look at the issues and confusion it has created.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #57 posted 02/04/19 7:56pm

SuperFurryAnim
al

avatar

IanRG said:



SuperFurryAnimal said:


IanRG said:


.


Thank you for this. It is a timely reminder and warning that skillfully edited videos with a calming but directing female voiceover and subtitles can be used by biased people such as the lawyer of one of the parties to appear to demonstrate what that lawyer wants you to believe about their client. Note the lawyer's voiceover never says the boys did not say build the wall, just that she never heard this said on any video. She replays where a BHI person says to the boys "Build that wall? Build that wall? Why don't you build that damn wall?" This could very easily be that he was imitating what he heard some of the boys say and was turning this chant against them. She ignores the video of where the boys are doing just what they were accused of by dismissing it because it is short and audio is not very clear - it is clear that the boys were doing what the BHI were doing to passersby, just with their pro-Trump slogans . Whilst build the wall is not heard in that 8 seconds, it is a common pro-Trump slogan very likely to be said by people wearing maga hats.


.


Does the video show the real timeline? It claims the boys left for the bus as soon as Sandmann gestured to boy arguing with other man. However, other videos show some remained and were listening to the BHI after the tension had been successfully broken.


.


The thing your video demonstrated to me is exactly what I saw and said before: The school supervisors and chaperones failed these children and exposed them to undue threats. The children should never have been allowed to wear delberately provocative symbols in an uncontrolled situation whilst representing the school. The worst part of this is something presented by this video - The supervisors may have been so negligent in their duties to protect their children that the woman working for the teen's lawyer claimed that it was the children who requested of their chaperones that they be allowed to do something to drown out the BHI hate speech. Of course, this could be lawyer's spin, but, if it is true, this confirms what I said before: The people who allowed this visit, allowed the children to act as they were acting and left them exposed to the immediare threats at the park and the subsequently threats are the second most to blame for this after the BHI.



Skillfully edited videos????? Stop and think right there what this controversy is over.

.


Stop and think yourself: the new video is a professionally prepared defense video by retained lawyers working for one of the parties. The original video is just a missing context issue leading to people like DJ misreading a look on a boy's face. The new one is skillfully edited, the old on is edited but not skillfully - look at the issues and confusion it has created.



Good! If it points out the truth so be it.
What are you outraged about today? CNN has not told you yet?
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #58 posted 02/04/19 8:02pm

IanRG

SuperFurryAnimal said:

IanRG said:

.

Stop and think yourself: the new video is a professionally prepared defense video by retained lawyers working for one of the parties. The original video is just a missing context issue leading to people like DJ misreading a look on a boy's face. The new one is skillfully edited, the old on is edited but not skillfully - look at the issues and confusion it has created.

Good! If it points out the truth so be it.

.

It points to a truth, not necessarily the truth. It is what it is - a client-serving public release by a retained legal firm to manipulate social media and popular opinion.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #59 posted 02/04/19 8:13pm

SuperFurryAnim
al

avatar

IanRG said:



SuperFurryAnimal said:


IanRG said:


.


Stop and think yourself: the new video is a professionally prepared defense video by retained lawyers working for one of the parties. The original video is just a missing context issue leading to people like DJ misreading a look on a boy's face. The new one is skillfully edited, the old on is edited but not skillfully - look at the issues and confusion it has created.



Good! If it points out the truth so be it.

.


It points to a truth, not necessarily the truth. It is what it is - a client-serving public release by a retained legal firm to manipulate social media and popular opinion.



Think outside the machine.
What are you outraged about today? CNN has not told you yet?
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 2 of 4 <1234>
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > The D.C. Controversy