ADVERTISEMENT

Capitol in lockdown

If off duty police were involved in that mob I expect that the harshest sentences are given to them.
Could it be that police reactions to the various protests has more to do with the political ideology of the protestors than the color of their skin? I think once an investigation is concluded, there may be some shocking discoveries about what happened, but we will have to wait and see.

The Police’s Tepid Response To The Capitol Breach Wasn’t An Aberration

 
Could it be that police reactions to the various protests has more to do with the political ideology of the protestors than the color of their skin? I think once an investigation is concluded, there may be some shocking discoveries about what happened, but we will have to wait and see.

The Police’s Tepid Response To The Capitol Breach Wasn’t An Aberration

I read that article the other day. I read the study they referenced and wasn’t impressed. Nevertheless it concedes that BLM protests have turned violent against police and the cosplay larpers never did before.
 
Not sure really what that has to do with anything, but there are several minorities and mixed. Why?
Several? Really? That wasn't my experience when I attended IU. I didn't do the Greek thing because I couldn't afford it and also because, with some exceptions, most of the Greeks I met weren't great people. Except for the black fraternity, can't remember the letters, all the frats and sororities were pretty much exclusively white. My wife was in a sorority when she was at IU (she was three years after me and I didn't know her then) and a few times when we've visited IU we've visited her house or at least drove by and all I saw was white women in her house and on the street. However, I left IU in ancient times (1983) and I don't think we've visited her house for at least 10 years so things might have changed. I checked IU's Panhellenic Association website and it doesn't seem that it has changed all that much. I looked at several of the chapter pages and saw very little diversity. Most of the sororities appear to be 100% white, kind of like this one

fullsizeoutput_137f.jpeg


and this one

IMG_0409.jpg


Of course it's not surprising because greek life is expensive and many from black families probably have the same resource scarcity I did. I'm not claiming discrimination in any way. However, it surprises me that you said you have "several" AAs in your sorority. I didn't look at every chapter page, but I don't see any with several AAs among their membership. Most seem to have zero and very few other girls of color. However, I'm sure they're full of "woke" girls who know what it's like to be poor and minority. Good on you for working with a diverse sorority. Which one is yours?
 
Last edited:
Asymmetrical response utilizing non-military resources to effect retribution against government murders of unarmed citizens, including women and children.
Do you applaud killing 169 men, women and children in that asymmetrical response?
 
Several? Really? That wasn't my experience when I attended IU. I didn't do the Greek thing because I couldn't afford it and also because, with some exceptions, most of the Greeks I met weren't great people. Except for the black fraternity, can't remember the letters, all the frats and sororities were pretty much exclusively white. My wife was in a sorority when she was at IU (she was three years after me and I didn't know her then) and a few times when we've visited IU we've visited her house or at least drove by and all I saw was white women in her house and on the street. However, I left IU in ancient times (1983) and I don't think we've visited her house for at least 10 years so things might have changed. I checked IU's Panhellenic Association website and it doesn't seem that it has changed all that much. I looked at several of the chapter pages and saw very little diversity. Most of the sororities appear to be 100% white, kind of like this one

fullsizeoutput_137f.jpeg


and this one

IMG_0409.jpg


Of course it's not surprising because greek life is expensive and many from black families probably have the same resource scarcity I did. I'm not claiming discrimination in any way. However, it surprises me that you said you have "several" AAs in your sorority. I didn't look at every chapter page, but I don't see any with several AAs among their membership. Most seem to have zero and very few other girls of color. However, I'm sure they're full of "woke" girls who know what it's like to be poor and minority. Good on you for working with a diverse sorority. Which one is yours?
Lmao!!!!!! The struggle’s real
 
Do you applaud killing 169 men, women and children in that asymmetrical response?
FBI HRT 'sniper' Lon Horiuchi shot and killed an unarmed 14-year old boy, then shot and killed Randy Weaver's wife while she was holding an infant in her arms.
75 people died in Waco including 25 children.
Do you applaud these murders?
 
FBI HRT 'sniper' Lon Horiuchi shot and killed an unarmed 14-year old boy, then shot and killed Randy Weaver's wife while she was holding an infant in her arms.
75 people died in Waco including 25 children.
Do you applaud these murders?
You didn't answer my question. I have no reason to answer yours until you do.

You disrespect me, I'll disrespect you.

You want respect, show respect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aloha Hoosier
Several? Really? That wasn't my experience when I attended IU. I didn't do the Greek thing because I couldn't afford it and also because, with some exceptions, most of the Greeks I met weren't great people. Except for the black fraternity, can't remember the letters, all the frats and sororities were pretty much exclusively white. My wife was in a sorority when she was at IU (she was three years after me and I didn't know her then) and a few times when we've visited IU we've visited her house or at least drove by and all I saw was white women in her house and on the street. However, I left IU in ancient times (1983) and I don't think we've visited her house for at least 10 years so things might have changed. I checked IU's Panhellenic Association website and it doesn't seem that it has changed all that much. I looked at several of the chapter pages and saw very little diversity. Most of the sororities appear to be 100% white, kind of like this one

fullsizeoutput_137f.jpeg


and this one

IMG_0409.jpg


Of course it's not surprising because greek life is expensive and many from black families probably have the same resource scarcity I did. I'm not claiming discrimination in any way. However, it surprises me that you said you have "several" AAs in your sorority. I didn't look at every chapter page, but I don't see any with several AAs among their membership. Most seem to have zero and very few other girls of color. However, I'm sure they're full of "woke" girls who know what it's like to be poor and minority. Good on you for working with a diverse sorority. Which one is yours?
IU's student pop is only 3.5% black. i knew it had to be small but very surprised to learn just how small
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Aloha Hoosier
I’m not sure how it is so difficult to understand. How many of your friends have you discussed this with? Maybe you have, maybe you haven’t. For the hundredth time I am conveying what I am seeing from my social media friends. I’m truly sorry that conveying what I am seeing from some of my black friends is considered race baiting to all the white guys here. And no doubt, you all should be the judge of what is racist and what is race baiting, no doubt. We have such a diverse community here , you know, all the minorities, all the women....


Black people are no more monolithic than white. And diversity is not just a color thing. Your friends may have a diversity of color but based on what you say about them, they are one of the least diverse groups based on thoughts and opinions (the real diversity that matters).
 

Black people are no more monolithic than white. And diversity is not just a color thing. Your friends may have a diversity of color but based on what you say about them, they are one of the least diverse groups based on thoughts and opinions (the real diversity that matters).
That’s a good read. I disagree with his down playing of the events of that day as we don’t know what would’ve happened if they would’ve actually gotten to lawmakers. But overall the message is on point.
 
That’s a good read. I disagree with his down playing of the events of that day as we don’t know what would’ve happened if they would’ve actually gotten to lawmakers. But overall the message is on point.

I think his point with the downplaying is that you cannot say on one hand that group A's violence is speech while on the other declaring that Group B's speech is violence. Comparatively, the optics of that may have been bad but given this summer, what happened was mostly peaceful and was not much different then what the left did during the Kavanaugh hearings and the riots that surrounded Trump's inauguration. You can argue severity semantics and have points in favor of each side, but at the end of the day there are many similarities.

There was an article I read earlier this week that said that the tolerance for political violence has to be 0.0 for everyone. I made allusions to that this summer as well. You cannot have one set of rules for this type of political violence and another set for that. And saying, "Of course I don't support rioting and looting" while contributing to funds to bail out rioters and looters is not truly zero tolerance.

I saw people on here that were arguing that protests that resulted in billions of dollars of damage were mostly peaceful this summer, then saying that they wanted the people on the 6th to get machine gunned. If allowing for even the slightest bit of political violence on one side enters the equation, then the other side WILL respond in kind eventually. It is an inevitability.

So after the last 4 years we can try and understand each other, each side having folks who have behaved badly, or we can keep turning up the political heat. For what it is worth, deplatforming a bunch of sites for "inciting violence" because they happen to be conservative is not a good start when you did not do the same for those who were inciting riots this summer. I am not exactly with the people who stormed the Capitol, I understand their frustration but that was a bad idea, BUT...what is happening in the aftermath is not going to make me likely to try and be a voice of reason should these things continue.

Full stop, I will not accept a country where it is one rule for these people and another for these. So we all need to get together and figure out what our social norms are going to be when it comes to political discourse and then strictly enforce them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jet812
I think his point with the downplaying is that you cannot say on one hand that group A's violence is speech while on the other declaring that Group B's speech is violence. Comparatively, the optics of that may have been bad but given this summer, what happened was mostly peaceful and was not much different then what the left did during the Kavanaugh hearings and the riots that surrounded Trump's inauguration. You can argue severity semantics and have points in favor of each side, but at the end of the day there are many similarities.

There was an article I read earlier this week that said that the tolerance for political violence has to be 0.0 for everyone. I made allusions to that this summer as well. You cannot have one set of rules for this type of political violence and another set for that. And saying, "Of course I don't support rioting and looting" while contributing to funds to bail out rioters and looters is not truly zero tolerance.

I saw people on here that were arguing that protests that resulted in billions of dollars of damage were mostly peaceful this summer, then saying that they wanted the people on the 6th to get machine gunned. If allowing for even the slightest bit of political violence on one side enters the equation, then the other side WILL respond in kind eventually. It is an inevitability.

So after the last 4 years we can try and understand each other, each side having folks who have behaved badly, or we can keep turning up the political heat. For what it is worth, deplatforming a bunch of sites for "inciting violence" because they happen to be conservative is not a good start when you did not do the same for those who were inciting riots this summer. I am not exactly with the people who stormed the Capitol, I understand their frustration but that was a bad idea, BUT...what is happening in the aftermath is not going to make me likely to try and be a voice of reason should these things continue.

Full stop, I will not accept a country where it is one rule for these people and another for these. So we all need to get together and figure out what our social norms are going to be when it comes to political discourse and then strictly enforce them.

Can we have a rule that the leader of the party can’t be the one encouraging the violence and destruction? I’m not comprehending why those on the right can’t just admit that this is all bat shit crazy. It is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bawlmer
I think his point with the downplaying is that you cannot say on one hand that group A's violence is speech while on the other declaring that Group B's speech is violence. Comparatively, the optics of that may have been bad but given this summer, what happened was mostly peaceful and was not much different then what the left did during the Kavanaugh hearings and the riots that surrounded Trump's inauguration. You can argue severity semantics and have points in favor of each side, but at the end of the day there are many similarities.

There was an article I read earlier this week that said that the tolerance for political violence has to be 0.0 for everyone. I made allusions to that this summer as well. You cannot have one set of rules for this type of political violence and another set for that. And saying, "Of course I don't support rioting and looting" while contributing to funds to bail out rioters and looters is not truly zero tolerance.

I saw people on here that were arguing that protests that resulted in billions of dollars of damage were mostly peaceful this summer, then saying that they wanted the people on the 6th to get machine gunned. If allowing for even the slightest bit of political violence on one side enters the equation, then the other side WILL respond in kind eventually. It is an inevitability.

So after the last 4 years we can try and understand each other, each side having folks who have behaved badly, or we can keep turning up the political heat. For what it is worth, deplatforming a bunch of sites for "inciting violence" because they happen to be conservative is not a good start when you did not do the same for those who were inciting riots this summer. I am not exactly with the people who stormed the Capitol, I understand their frustration but that was a bad idea, BUT...what is happening in the aftermath is not going to make me likely to try and be a voice of reason should these things continue.

Full stop, I will not accept a country where it is one rule for these people and another for these. So we all need to get together and figure out what our social norms are going to be when it comes to political discourse and then strictly enforce them.
Good read. While not from a blue collar family, I grew up in a blue collar town (Terre Haute). One generation removed from deep poverty. He hits on a lot of good points.

Maybe Manchin and Murkowkski can work together to pull our government back to the middle. If we don't start working for common good, this country is screwed. I really think most of us our moderate in our views, but we are drowned out.
 
Last edited:
What frightening moments for a black cop....


btw if you listen to the threats and name-calling, I suspect you will be able to hear a few N-words hurled at him as he retreats.
 

Black people are no more monolithic than white. And diversity is not just a color thing. Your friends may have a diversity of color but based on what you say about them, they are one of the least diverse groups based on thoughts and opinions (the real diversity that matters).
Whitlock oversimplifies issues but more important, he overlooks a basic disconnect. Whatever he means by Trumpism and the Trump Phenomenon, Trump is a false idol to represent it. Trump is a demagogue, a con artist, and a criminal.

Whitlock is right all people have a right to their views and a basic level of decency. That doesn’t mean they haven’t fallen for the Trump Charade.
 
I read that article the other day. I read the study they referenced and wasn’t impressed. Nevertheless it concedes that BLM protests have turned violent against police and the cosplay larpers never did before.
Every protest will have opportunist groups using it to their advantage. This has been true forever.

The vast majority of the people protesting during the summer BLM protests were non violent. Any statement other wise is complete BS.

And pointing out that there was violence does not refute that statement. I did not see any politician of significance do anything other than condemn the violence.

The people that use racism at every turn are a problem, but the people that downplay it at every turn are just as bad (and I would argue worse). If anyone hasn't seen the big issue racism is over the last 4 years than their bias has completely blinded them.
 
Can we have a rule that the leader of the party can’t be the one encouraging the violence and destruction? I’m not comprehending why those on the right can’t just admit that this is all bat shit crazy. It is.

Until the right acknowledges the role of their leadership in this insurrection, there won't be any useful discussion.

ap21007067368664.jpg
 
Every protest will have opportunist groups using it to their advantage. This has been true forever.

The vast majority of the people protesting during the summer BLM protests were non violent. Any statement other wise is complete BS.

And pointing out that there was violence does not refute that statement. I did not see any politician of significance do anything other than condemn the violence.

The people that use racism at every turn are a problem, but the people that downplay it at every turn are just as bad (and I would argue worse). If anyone hasn't seen the big issue racism is over the last 4 years than their bias has completely blinded them.
Agreed the vast majority were nonviolent - but many (hundreds) were violent and that violent was aimed at police and property.

Race is a major problem in our country based on a dark history. Significant monumental progress has been rightfully made, but I feel we’re regressing because of the endless narratives being pushed by the media and “woke” race baiters. I don’t know if you see all that from abroad but it’s endless here. And it severely hinders progress.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT