United States Corrupt Twattery

[SilverHood]

Went for ice cream with the girlfriend yesterday around 17.30. On the way back, walked right into a 1000+ person protest on the way to the mayors residence. Looked it up, and there's still multiple protests every day across NYC. I wish the media would cover these, doesn't have be live coverage, but an acknowledgement that they happened, they were peaceful, and the minimal NYPD presence (8 officers on bicyles) were enough to keep things civil.

 

[georgie]

2 weeks for peeing through a fence.

Out of curiosity, why call it "peeing through a fence"? I think anyone with eyes can see the river of piss running between his legs.

 

[Job]

I'm sure that came up court, was the urine flowing across the pavement or down the rungs of the fence m'lud, because it doesnt actually matter when we are kangaroo courting him with a dystopian catch all decency law, because peeing in the street isnt illegal.

 

[Job]

And there you go....tazers can kill, so copper full rights to shoot back.

'I could so easily have died': Wretch 32's father on being shot with Taser

Millard Scott was shot during a raid police said was drug-related but says officers did not search his house for drugs

www.theguardian.com

 

[Job]

This is pretty hard to find in the UK news for obvious reasons.

French leader rejects racism but colonial statues to remain

French President Emmanuel Macron has vowed Sunday to stand firm against racism but also praised police and insisted that France wouldn't take down statues of controversial, colonial-era figures, as he addressed the issues for the first time since George Floyd's death in the U.S. In a televised...

www.yahoo.com

 

[Scouse]

I wondered how long it would take before you reached for that bullshit tazer argument. Took your time didn't you. I ain't entertaining it though.


I've always been against Tazers being introduced in the UK. Criminals tend to arms-race, and cops have form for over-tazering - using them as a form of torture (just a more all-over painful one than the good old-fashioned shoeing they usually dole out - and also, happily for the cops - tazers involve less bruising).

 

[Job]

Bit of Chechen scrapping going on in Dijon.


View: https://www.gettyimages.com.au/detail/news-photo/gendarmes-walk-in-a-street-in-the-gresilles-area-of-dijon-news-photo/1220234420

 

[Job]

I wondered how long it would take before you reached for that bullshit tazer argument. Took your time didn't you. I ain't entertaining it though.


I've always been against Tazers being introduced in the UK. Criminals tend to arms-race, and cops have form for over-tazering - using them as a form of torture (just a more all-over painful one than the good old-fashioned shoeing they usually dole out - and also, happily for the cops - tazers involve less bruising).

As usual the tiresome.
Oh here you go again with facts.

Tazers can kill...
Its a fact and you cant have it both ways, I was just waiting for a blackman to say it.

 

[caLLous]

Out of curiosity, why call it "peeing through a fence"? I think anyone with eyes can see the river of piss running between his legs.

That's how @Job operates. If it's some (white) knucklehead pissing on/against/near a memorial to a policeman who died trying to stop a terrorist attack he'll leap to their defence but if it's a (black) man literally murdered by a policeman, he'll go to the ends of the earth to tarnish his character. Even now he's trying to justify the police executing the other (black) man.

Tazers can kill...

They're not deadly weapons in Georgia.

 

[Job]

So....youre....comparing pissing through a fence with scrapping with two armed officers and grabbing one of their weapons and trying to use it on them.

 

[Scouse]

And he'd already shot it, and it still doesn't justify it, and shot in the back, yadda yadda yadda...

 

[Job]

I'm waiting for the Guardian to respond to this doozy.

The glorious reality that the paper was founded by a Manchester cotton trader who strongly supported the confederacy, despised Lincoln and printed endless articles supporting slavery, reprinting confederacy propaganda and slating emancipation while attacking mill workers who refused to process US cotton.
Every other Northern paper supported the anti slavery movement, the Guardian stood out as a militant pro slavery publication.
Which is whatever, but I just want to see them worm their way out of it in the most hypocritical way possible.

If you search the terms all you get is how Britain needs to start paying back...investigate historical wrongs.
Blah de blah.

Not a fucking mention of their own direct link.

 

[DaGaffer]

And there you go....tazers can kill, so copper full rights to shoot back.

'I could so easily have died': Wretch 32's father on being shot with Taser

Millard Scott was shot during a raid police said was drug-related but says officers did not search his house for drugs

www.theguardian.com

So let's get this straight; tazers can kill but cops can use them as "non-lethal" weapons, but if someone gets hold of one they immediately become "lethal"? Who's trying to have it both ways here?

Given the fact that a fucking pencil can be a lethal weapon in the right hands, the police can pretty much use any justification they like to shoot someone. Maybe the whole running away thing was going to lead the cops into a hidden bear trap so shooting him in the back saved their lives?

 

[caLLous]

The lawyer representing the family even said he's had clients in the past where that same police force has defended the use of tasers as non-lethal.

 

[Job]

Yes yes.
But we live in a post truth world.
So just shout it out and move on.
Both sides want it both ways.
Its a toy..then its a gun.
I mean its not me saying it..its a black man....a black man.

 

[Embattle]

So let's get this straight; tazers can kill but cops can use them as "non-lethal" weapons, but if someone gets hold of one they immediately become "lethal"? Who's trying to have it both ways here?

Given the fact that a fucking pencil can be a lethal weapon in the right hands, the police can pretty much use any justification they like to shoot someone. Maybe the whole running away thing was going to lead the cops into a hidden bear trap so shooting him in the back saved their lives?

Especially in the hands of John Wick.

 

[Job]

You said I'd find it and here it is hidden away in an obscure local paper.

Rayshard Brooks
Mr. Barbine believes officers “prejudged” his son by the color of his skin and his criminal record, which shows several charges of theft, obstructing an officer, battery on a family member, and other misdemeanors.

I dont agree,.because the cam footage shows the officer considering leaving him there to sleep it off.
He acted because he was drunk driving.

 

[dysfunction]

And yet no link....

Or you can watch the video captures of the shotting

Rayshard Brooks' final moments were caught on video. Here's what the footage shows

The death of Rayshard Brooks at the hands of a white Atlanta police officer has already resulted in a litany of consequences for the city.

edition.cnn.com

 

[DaGaffer]

I'm waiting for the Guardian to respond to this doozy.

The glorious reality that the paper was founded by a Manchester cotton trader who strongly supported the confederacy, despised Lincoln and printed endless articles supporting slavery, reprinting confederacy propaganda and slating emancipation while attacking mill workers who refused to process US cotton.
Every other Northern paper supported the anti slavery movement, the Guardian stood out as a militant pro slavery publication.
Which is whatever, but I just want to see them worm their way out of it in the most hypocritical way possible.

If you search the terms all you get is how Britain needs to start paying back...investigate historical wrongs.
Blah de blah.

Not a fucking mention of their own direct link.

John Edward Taylor was NOT a cotton trader, he was a junior partner in cotton mill (which is not the same thing at all), but had left commerce by the time he founded the Manchester Guardian, and was largely disillusioned by trade because other mill owners were refusing to improve workers' conditions (he'd witnessed the Peterloo Massacre and exposed the subsequent whitewashed public enquiry as a sham to Parliament)

The Guardian was NOT pro-Confederacy, at all, and was absolutely not pro-slavery, this is an out and out lie. But neither was it pro-Union, mainly because it considered the Emancipation Proclamation was insincere and done in the interests of "American Empire" rather than any desire to actually help the slaves, which given both Lincoln's own words that he "wouldn't free a single slave" if it meant it would preserve the Union, and post-Civil War events where the southern states were allowed to effectively turn former slaves into serfs (plus deny voting rights etc.); the Manchester Guardian was entirely correct in its assessment.

The Guardian came in for lots of criticism from other regional papers (and some of the London press) because it wouldn't toe the line on unequivocal support for the North after the Emancipation Declaration; before that point there had been plenty of British press criticism of the North, but afterwards, when the war became "a cause" the Guardian still refused to back the Northern cause uncritically, and it was right to do so. But that does not mean it was supporting the CSA because it wasn't.

 

[Job]

Nice try.
Maybe they should post that in the front page to prove how they had nothing to do with it

 

[DaGaffer]

Nice try.
Maybe they should post that in the front page to prove how they had nothing to do with it

Go fuck yourself.

 

[dysfunction]

Nice try.
Maybe they should post that in the front page to prove how they had nothing to do with it

You're wrong. Fact. No matter what other bullshit you come up with to justify your thinking

 

[Scouse]

Nice try.
Maybe they should post....

Maybe you should post your fucking sources - rather than getting people like @DaGaffer to engage with you in good faith just before you flip them the bird?


I never thought I'd say this - but I'm coming round to the opinion that every time you throw up an unsourced claim like it's fact you should automatically receive a 3-day ban.

It wouldn't silence your voice and would give you the option of "be a cunt who says shit which he refuses to back up" (and then we get a few days breathing space from your twattery) or you could actually enter into debate on this forum. - a forum literally being a space to exchange ideas and learn from one another - something you clearly have zero interest in doing.

 

[Job]

Go and look it up yourself and draw your own conclusions, I cant put up a single aource without looking biased.
Start with wiki
I means gaff searched..or did he have that detailed knowledge to hand.

From the wiki which is hardly right wing

Support for the Confederate States of America during the American civil war
The Guardian took a pro-Confederate position during the American Civil War [167] [168][169] unlike other Northern working-class newspapers who opposed the pro-slave ownership Confederacy (including Manchester Examiner, Newcastle Chronicle, Leeds Mercury, Bradford Advertiser, Preston Guardian, Carlisle Examiner, Dundee Advertiser, Edinburgh Caledonian Mercury and the Belfast Northern Daily Whig) [170].

The Guardian adopted a harsh editorial line against Abraham Lincoln writing on October 10, 1862 "It was an evil day both for America and the world when he was chosen President of the United States." [171] publishing upon his death a scathing obituary "of his rule, we can never speak except as a series of acts abhorrent to every true notion of constitutional right and human liberty". [172].

 

[DaGaffer]

Fuck's sake.

You can read about Taylor's bio in loads of places.

 

[Job]

Yes..its called the internet.

 

[DaGaffer]

Yes..its called the internet.

Read actual sources that wikis link to you moron. Wiki articles should always be treated with a grain of salt

 

[Job]

So now youve read a slightly different spin on events, do you think the Guardian can proudly announce their history to the world after telling everyone else how bad they are.

 

[DaGaffer]

So now youve read a slightly different spin on events, do you think the Guardian can proudly announce their history to the world after telling everyone else how bad they are.

Read it. With actual original quotes from the newspaper that directly contradict your claim that the Manchester Guardian was pro-slavery, with actual fucking words from the newspaper. Original sources numbnuts.

 

[Scouse]

Original sources numbnuts.

To be fair to @Job (rather than just jumping on him) - actual digging through of sources to find out worthwhile information is an action that is taught.

One of the hardest bits for a lot of uni students is proper sourcing, explanation of sources, referencing etc. But Job doesn't know the difference between opinion that's emotionally-led and one that's based on at least some research.

I cant put up a single aource without looking biased.

Then you know your failing - you're taking your information from biased sources, ergo you're biased.