comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 27 minutes ago
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/04/18/us/minnesota-national-guard-police-shooting/index.html

A Minnesota National Guard and police team were shot at in a drive-by shooting, official says


How confrontational
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did she suggest folk do drive-by shootings? If so, I agree she should be condemned.

Or, as I think is more accurate, she didn’t suggest folk do drive-by shootings.

Oh and I did see the other selective quotes you posted, without context or reference. Thank you for sharing them.

Let me ask; what do you think she meant by saying be confrontational? Do you think her intent was drive-by shootings?

Oh and on civil disobedience; do you have examples of when it is used as a tactic at a time when things are all calm and there isn’t trouble coming?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
She suggested that people get MORE confrontational, perhaps for those people it meant doing a drive by. She didn’t say go and do a drive by, no. But her vague and deliberately provocative statements have consequences. People have been hearing this stuff for years.

Do you want the context? Do you really think it will make any difference? Go into restaurants gas stations? Harass them? Even CNN criticised her for it yet you want to just say that I’ve given selective quotes without context?

I think she meant to wind people up in case they don’t get exactly what they want in terms of the result of the case. Oddly enough, I think she said that as far as she’s concerned it’s first degree murder. So I don’t think she’ll be happy either way.


Here’s another selective quote from the woman that you are defending here

“He absolutely should be charged with premeditated murder because of the lives that were lost for this invasion with his insurrection,” (Talking about Trump and Jan 6) premeditated murder, invasion, insurrection, harass them.

Yeah she’s very reasonable, definitely doesn’t whip up emotion with ridiculous statements which results in violence. She doesn’t care, her cause is worth it as far as she’s concerned. Well good for her but she’s a politician and should act more responsibly.


Honestly, I’m really struggling to understand how anyone can defend her making these comments at this time.

Imperfections of socialism or communism are far far worse than the imperfections of capitalism. That’s the whole point. Neither is perfect but when the others get it wrong, it’s horrendously wrong
-----
I would argue that the boom and bust cycle is socialism or communism is shorter and does less damage.

Capitalism's boom and bust cycle is much longer, even centuries, but when it goes bust it will probably be the end of days. You see the sheet prophesied in Revelations? That's what will happen when capitalism has it's bust.

He absolutely should be charged with premeditated murder because of the lives that were lost for this invasion with his insurrection,” (Talking about Trump and Jan 6) premeditated murder, invasion, insurrection, harass them.
------
This is not too ridiculous. When we brought up Taylor Greene you said it was only because you brought up AOC. I don't remember you saying a bad word about her, but here you are going mental over this?

Come on.

All I said was her suggesting civil disobedience, as that is how I interpreted her comments, was “ok”. Many a man of straw is being built today

comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 3 minutes ago
All I said was her suggesting civil disobedience, as that is how I interpreted her comments, was “ok”. Many a man of straw is being built today
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Saying her comments are ok is defending her and just don’t get how you can but each to their own.

Oh and just so we’re being transparent, the first reference to trump wrt this Waters women was;

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 10 hours, 59 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 11 hours, 13 minutes ago
Maxine Walters calling for people to get more confrontational 🙄
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This woman should lose her position in congress.

People accused Trump of inciting violence yet say nothing about this woman?

Unbelievable

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/britain-government-boris-johnson-tony-sewell-african-b930425.html

Good link by CEG.

Numpties can convince themselves but the world sees nothing but racism trying to cover its own arris, which is something I've mentioned here before. I work an international job and only within the UK can you find fools believing this report. The rest of the world sees it for what it is and the direction that England is heading is quite clear.

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 16 seconds ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 3 minutes ago
All I said was her suggesting civil disobedience, as that is how I interpreted her comments, was “ok”. Many a man of straw is being built today
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Saying her comments are ok is defending her and just don’t get how you can but each to their own.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Saying that comment, as interpreting it as civil disobedience but not violence, is IMO ok is all I am doing. If you have a vendetta against her then that’s for you and her to sort out, I was purely talking about the comment. I am not defending or attacking anything else she has said on anything else. Unless you can point out me doing so?

Oh and I stand by and would be keen for you to address my query around when does one see civil disobedience other than when tensions are high or however you phrased it above.

It's the Ben Shapiro tactic of debate, shift the goalposts with partial statements, deliberate misinterpretation and then crying when the opponent can't keep up with the plethora of gibberish.

Civil disobedience, protest and confrontational demonstration are legitimate forms of public direct action to injustice and discrimination.

comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 51 seconds ago

It's the Ben Shapiro tactic of debate, shift the goalposts with partial statements, deliberate misinterpretation and then crying when the opponent can't keep up with the plethora of gibberish.
------
Exactly. You could debate 100 right wingers and it'd be like you debated the same guy 100 times.

comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 17 minutes ago
Oh and just so we’re being transparent, the first reference to trump wrt this Waters women was;

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 10 hours, 59 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 11 hours, 13 minutes ago
Maxine Walters calling for people to get more confrontational 🙄
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This woman should lose her position in congress.

People accused Trump of inciting violence yet say nothing about this woman?

Unbelievable
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough, thank you

comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 16 seconds ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 3 minutes ago
All I said was her suggesting civil disobedience, as that is how I interpreted her comments, was “ok”. Many a man of straw is being built today
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Saying her comments are ok is defending her and just don’t get how you can but each to their own.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Saying that comment, as interpreting it as civil disobedience but not violence, is IMO ok is all I am doing. If you have a vendetta against her then that’s for you and her to sort out, I was purely talking about the comment. I am not defending or attacking anything else she has said on anything else. Unless you can point out me doing so?

Oh and I stand by and would be keen for you to address my query around when does one see civil disobedience other than when tensions are high or however you phrased it above.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And no mention of the timing.

When do we see civil disobedience in calm situations? All the time. Don’t get what your point is here.

Do you think her comments are going to wind people up or will they just respond with civil disobedience?

Come on man.

comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 10 minutes ago
It's the Ben Shapiro tactic of debate, shift the goalposts with partial statements, deliberate misinterpretation and then crying when the opponent can't keep up with the plethora of gibberish.

Civil disobedience, protest and confrontational demonstration are legitimate forms of public direct action to injustice and discrimination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Right before the trial ends? Yeah that’s great.

Even CNN criticised her for her previous statements.

How has

adjective
tending to deal with situations in an aggressive way; hostile or argumentative

Come to mean civil disobedience? Some great linguistics gymnastics going on here.

542 protests were not peaceful last year alone so we should get more confrontational.

Ok guys.

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 16 seconds ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 3 minutes ago
All I said was her suggesting civil disobedience, as that is how I interpreted her comments, was “ok”. Many a man of straw is being built today
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Saying her comments are ok is defending her and just don’t get how you can but each to their own.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Saying that comment, as interpreting it as civil disobedience but not violence, is IMO ok is all I am doing. If you have a vendetta against her then that’s for you and her to sort out, I was purely talking about the comment. I am not defending or attacking anything else she has said on anything else. Unless you can point out me doing so?

Oh and I stand by and would be keen for you to address my query around when does one see civil disobedience other than when tensions are high or however you phrased it above.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And no mention of the timing.

When do we see civil disobedience in calm situations? All the time. Don’t get what your point is here.

Do you think her comments are going to wind people up or will they just respond with civil disobedience?

Come on man.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do we see civil disobedience in calm times? I mean if I think of some of the examples I’m thinking South Africa and apartheid with Mandela, civil rights movement in the US with the likes of MLK, the Indian fight for independence from the British Raj with Gandhi, the fight for women’s suffrage, the closure of the coal pits and steelworks in the UK, The whole point of civil disobedience is that it is against a tangible and prominent issue of the time. That in and of itself means it is at a time of tension to me.

What is the difference between “winding people up” and encouraging them to engage in civil disobedience?

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 3 minutes ago
How has

adjective
tending to deal with situations in an aggressive way; hostile or argumentative

Come to mean civil disobedience? Some great linguistics gymnastics going on here.

542 protests were not peaceful last year alone so we should get more confrontational.

Ok guys.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Way back I thought we agreed that interpreting her comments of confrontation were akin to suggesting civil disobedience?

It’s obv an issue you have a bee in your bonnet about and that’s cool; you do you and all that and I respect you feel that way.

I found the suggestion for more confrontation fairly reasonable and as above took it to mean civil disobedience which as we’ve discussed is a pivot image form of protest.

And let’s not forget her position is she doesn’t want police to use deadly force, when deadly force is not necessary, and be acquitted on all charges of doing so 🤷‍♂️

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by Just Shoot, now a Marxist (U10408)
posted 3 minutes ago
Maxine

If you see anybody from that (Trump) Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd and you push back on them, and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere.

Waters.

Nice lady...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 32 minutes ago
It's the Ben Shapiro tactic of debate, shift the goalposts with partial statements, deliberate misinterpretation and then crying when the opponent can't keep up with the plethora of gibberish.

Civil disobedience, protest and confrontational demonstration are legitimate forms of public direct action to injustice and discrimination.

🤷‍♂️

comment by Just Shoot, now a Marxist (U10408)
posted 15 seconds ago
As a side note, wouldn't her comments risk a mis-trial? It's putting pressure on the jury.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A much more interesting point to consider.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by Just Shoot, now a Marxist (U10408)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Just Shoot, now a Marxist (U10408)
posted 3 minutes ago
Maxine

If you see anybody from that (Trump) Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd and you push back on them, and you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere.

Waters.

Nice lady...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 32 minutes ago
It's the Ben Shapiro tactic of debate, shift the goalposts with partial statements, deliberate misinterpretation and then crying when the opponent can't keep up with the plethora of gibberish.

Civil disobedience, protest and confrontational demonstration are legitimate forms of public direct action to injustice and discrimination.

🤷‍♂️
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's my first comment on her. 😂 I haven't shifted anything.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
😂😂 fair enough!

comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 3 minutes ago
How has

adjective
tending to deal with situations in an aggressive way; hostile or argumentative

Come to mean civil disobedience? Some great linguistics gymnastics going on here.

542 protests were not peaceful last year alone so we should get more confrontational.

Ok guys.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Way back I thought we agreed that interpreting her comments of confrontation were akin to suggesting civil disobedience?

It’s obv an issue you have a bee in your bonnet about and that’s cool; you do you and all that and I respect you feel that way.

I found the suggestion for more confrontation fairly reasonable and as above took it to mean civil disobedience which as we’ve discussed is a pivot image form of protest.

And let’s not forget her position is she doesn’t want police to use deadly force, when deadly force is not necessary, and be acquitted on all charges of doing so 🤷‍♂️
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mate I see it as simply as this.

There’s been 542 non peaceful protests (if we take the 93% survey as gospel), on this issue, last year alone. Billions in damage, lives lost, jobs lost, people injured, one poor guy burned alive in his business, children killed.

And the legal justice system is progressing, completely filmed and public for all to see, complete transparency. By an independent judge and a jury.

And on the cusp of the trial coming to a conclusion. She said that protestors (which includes what I have listed above) need to get MORE confrontational.

You are isolating that statement and ignoring all of the context and history of violence and death that has taken place.

Given what has happened to-date, I don’t think that telling protestors to get more confrontational is anything other that causing more trouble. Civil disobedience? Nah mate, she knows what she’s doing. I’ve shown you her past quotes. Ignore this all if you want that’s up to you but I’ll never understand how you can do that.

comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Just Shoot, now a Marxist (U10408)
posted 15 seconds ago
As a side note, wouldn't her comments risk a mis-trial? It's putting pressure on the jury.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A much more interesting point to consider.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If anything the city giving the family $27m before the trial would have caused an issue. If that happened then I don’t see her comments doing that. Plus wouldn’t the jurors be cut off from the media during a trial? I think they would.

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 3 minutes ago
How has

adjective
tending to deal with situations in an aggressive way; hostile or argumentative

Come to mean civil disobedience? Some great linguistics gymnastics going on here.

542 protests were not peaceful last year alone so we should get more confrontational.

Ok guys.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Way back I thought we agreed that interpreting her comments of confrontation were akin to suggesting civil disobedience?

It’s obv an issue you have a bee in your bonnet about and that’s cool; you do you and all that and I respect you feel that way.

I found the suggestion for more confrontation fairly reasonable and as above took it to mean civil disobedience which as we’ve discussed is a pivot image form of protest.

And let’s not forget her position is she doesn’t want police to use deadly force, when deadly force is not necessary, and be acquitted on all charges of doing so 🤷‍♂️
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mate I see it as simply as this.

There’s been 542 non peaceful protests (if we take the 93% survey as gospel), on this issue, last year alone. Billions in damage, lives lost, jobs lost, people injured, one poor guy burned alive in his business, children killed.

And the legal justice system is progressing, completely filmed and public for all to see, complete transparency. By an independent judge and a jury.

And on the cusp of the trial coming to a conclusion. She said that protestors (which includes what I have listed above) need to get MORE confrontational.

You are isolating that statement and ignoring all of the context and history of violence and death that has taken place.

Given what has happened to-date, I don’t think that telling protestors to get more confrontational is anything other that causing more trouble. Civil disobedience? Nah mate, she knows what she’s doing. I’ve shown you her past quotes. Ignore this all if you want that’s up to you but I’ll never understand how you can do that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh I forgot about CHOP

Capitol Hill Occupied Protest which went on for weeks. And protestors need to get MORE confrontational?


Yeah I’m not down with those kind of statements at this time.