What an enormous loss to society of a major resource for medical, scientific, and educational gains and abilities.
Militias, especially in the southern states, were primarily organized to be ready to put down slave revolts or disturbances and this was their main aim up to the Civil War, and after there were plenty of unofficial militias in the Klan, lynchings, and organized armed groups after the Civil War. Blacks generally were not allowed weapons.
There were militias in the Northern states but most of them atrophied when slavery ended in them.
1 Like
Looters Lives Matter. Nearly all freed without jail term, most with charges dropped entirely. NYC and Chicago.
https://news.yahoo.com/downtown-chicago-emerges-pandemic-hobbled-011618733.html
Violent crime is up in the city in every category. Carjackings, about half committed by juveniles, are happening all over Chicago, while expressway shootings are at levels never seen before with 93 so far this year versus 39 at the same time last year, according to police.
In downtown, much of the lawlessness has been blamed on youths who have come to the area on weekends the last two months, causing havoc by tipping over planters, robbing pedestrians and committing assaults â incidents that business owners say are keeping customers away.
Itâs all covid and Trumpâs fault, clearly. Why wonât those white Supremacists in other states stop oppressing these peacefully protesting city residents into committing all this violent crime?
1 Like
Did you even read the article? About a man being denied admittance to their school, who instead went to another medical school?
Besides being a situation that shouldnt have happened, there was no âloss to societyâ whatsoever.
The news reporting will keep changingâŚ
I wonder what âminor crimeâ encompasses. Would carjacking be a minor crime? Or robbery?
2 Likes
They were hugging and kissing the police.
They werenât rioting.
They were patriots demonstrating for freedom.
It was GOP operatives in disguise.
There was no looting, they were returning defective purchases.
It was a typical tourist visit.
It was a conservative hoax.
It was people exercising their constitutional rights.
It never happened. The media made it up.
It was organized by the FBI.
Weird post!!
1 Like
'A theory embraced recently by conservative media personalities and politicians who support former President Donald Trump, which alleges that the violence that took place at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 was somehow orchestrated by the FBI, appears to have originated with an article on a right-wing website run by a fired Trump White House official.
On Tuesday night, Fox News host Tucker Carlson told his roughly three million viewers that it appeared âthe FBI was organizing the riots of Jan. 6.ââ
Wait! The FBI organized the riots of January 6? I thought there was no riot. And why are conservatives then defending the rioters?
https://www.yahoo.com/news/juneteenth-country-enslaved-labor-built-110048911.html
Context: In the 1800s, the U.S. became an economic power because of the use of enslaved labor in the growing cotton industry.
- Enslaved Black people built the Capitol building, the White House, roads and infrastructure, and various universities across the country with little to no compensation.
- The selling of enslaved people also financed universities like Georgetown.
- By 1860, the value of the enslaved people was âroughly three times greater than the total amount invested in banks,â and it was âequal to about seven times the total value of all currency in circulation in the country," Steven Deyle wrote in Carry Me Back: The Domestic Slave Trade in American Life.
Right before emancipation , Black Americans â free and enslaved â owned only one-half of 1% of the national wealth.
- In the decades after slavery, Black Americans were often banned from buying property, limited in pursuing legal claims, prevented from voting, and banished to segregated schools.
- Successful Black businesses thrived in enclaves like Tulsa, Okla., and East St. Louis, Ill., only to be destroyed by white mobs. Those business owners that had insured their enterprises were unable to collect on their premiums.
I saw that new policy and suspected immediately it would be selectively applied, in favor of âcriminals of colorâ and âmostly peaceful (leftist) protestorsâ. You can read the APâs new ânon-naming of criminalsâ policy directly here -
The policy will not apply to serious crimes, such as those involving violence or abuse of the public trust, or cases of a fugitive on the run.
Note also they are trying to use their clout as an advertising referral to local news to bully everyone else into adopting their new policy.
The AP said it will also not link to local newspaper or broadcast stories about such incidents where the arrested personâs name or mugshot might be used.
In any event, it didnât take long to confirm my suspicions that this new policy would not apply to any of those Evil Trump Supporting White Supremacists. Only 4 days after the new AP proclamation of letting non-violent bygones be bygones, theyâre naming a guy from the Jan 6th mostly peaceful Capitol protest who is charged with obstructing Congress, trespassing, witness tampering, and transporting firearms.
Court documents filed this week also show another man, Guy Reffitt of Texas, has been indicted on new charges that he brought a rifle and handgun to Washington and carried the handgun onto Capitol grounds. He was arrested in January and previously pleaded not guilty to charges including obstruction of an official proceeding.
Donât get me wrong - he broke various laws and peacefully surrendered and is awaiting his trial, afforded apparently a stunning lack of âbail reformâ due to his skin color, political persuasion, or just being caught up in the leftist witch hunt in the wake of the capitol protests.
That article named a number of other people arrested for charges that do seem to fall under the violent crime reporting. But this was literally the first search and first article I found and they were already not following their own policy.
If the left didnât have double standards, they would have no standards at all.
1 Like
What media do you approve of? Fox News? Klan Times? Pravda? Pyongyang Picayune?
https://www.yahoo.com/news/earth-apos-atmosphere-trapping-apos-173243950.html
"âItâs likely a mix of anthropogenic forcing and internal variability,â he added. âAnd over this period theyâre both causing warming, which leads to a fairly large change in Earthâs energy imbalance. The magnitude of the increase is unprecedented.â
Ultimately, the study determined that unless the rate of heat intake abates, the Earth is in for greater changes in climate."
Kinda makes me wonder, had Trump won in 2020, would we have a significantly higher vaccination rate right now? Did democrat voters unknowingly not just defeat Trump, but as a side effect, push a bunch of Trump voters to choose not to get vaccinated (some of which will die). If you could somehow prove that were the case, what would the average democrat voter say if you told them, âIf you hadnât sent in your mail-in ballot last year, you would have helped save XYZ lives, the vast majority of which are Trump voters. If it meant Trump was still in the White House, would you have chosen to save those lives?â
To Glitchâs point, I suspect youâd have a shoe on the other foot situation, where you would instead have a bunch of leftists refusing vaccination because they couldnât trust a Trump FDA to properly scrutinize the new vaccines.
It is crazy to me how this issue become politicized; it is one thing if youâve looked at the data and believe the vaccine is unsafe, itâs quite another if you refuse it solely based on a perceived act of patriotism and show of loyalty towards a strongman. I donât recall vaccines ever being a political issue aside from some of the truly crazy anti-vaxxers or a small segment of devout religious.
The politicization of everything is going to kill this country.
1 Like
Trump openly discouraged people from believing there was covid, that there is any risk whatsoever, that any precautions were necessary, that the vaccine is necessary. âTry it, if youâd likeâ.
We would still have the same nutters refusing if Trump was in office. But weâd have far fewer vaccinations at this point because distribution was a complete mess through January.
1 Like
It crazy to me how it is always boiled down to these two options. The biggest factor is necessity - one side wants everyone vaccinated because of what might happen, the other side doesnât want to be vaccinated because of whatâs likely to happen. Whether itâs political, lack of trust, or whatever other excuse, the bottom line is that most holdouts would get vaccinated in a heartbeat if they actually faced an acute risk of severe illness/death.
The insistence that the vaccine is necessary for everyone, when all available data makes it clear that is not true for a majority of people, only breeds additional mistrust over why itâs being pushed.
Have you watched the full segment on Tucker? " The FBI was organizing the riots of Jan 6" doesnât have enough context surrounding it to understand what the claims are.
This misses a key point though - while those who are young may not necessarily get seriously ill, those who go unvaccinated give the virus a chance to mutate to something that may not be as effective against vaccines. This is the same reason that the third world needs to be vaccinated. Further, those who are immunocompromised, for which the vaccine is not as effective, are now at greater risk of infection because 30-35% of the adult population has chosen not to get the shot.
The whole reason we can open right now is because of the vaccine. This is just my opinion, but I find it incredibly selfish that those who choose not to receive it are reaping the benefits of the responsible choice made by the majority of Americans.
I dont mean to sound disrespectful (I was hoping certain others would make that comment, so I could be more condscending 
), but this is the âWhy wont you just do what I want!â tantrum.
Anyone who feels at risk has been vaccinated. Anyone who feels the risk is low and is willing to accept is, has accepted the risk of remaining unvaccinated whether you agree or not. And anyone who is compromised and unable to be vaccinated is already following protocols that preclude exposure to unnecessary people, whether those people are vaccinated or not. Remember, such people cant say âif you are vaccinated, then Iâm safe around youâ since 10-30% of vaccainted persons have no protection.
Not to mention that the CDC continues to say it is ârareâ (their word) for someone recovered from an infection to not have immunity. So when it comes to risk of exposure, Iâll take ârareâ over â10-30%â every time. Which regulates vaccination status to a secondary safety factor, not the primary line that continues to be drawn.