search results matching tag: Associated

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (669)     Sift Talk (58)     Blogs (19)     Comments (1000)   

How US schools punish Black kids | 2020 Election

newtboy says...

That crime bill Trump said was too lenient? Didn't target blacks enough, and didn't put them in prison long enough?
You forget what Trump's position on race was/is....round up the blacks and imprison them all, they're all muggers and rapists. He put out ads saying so.

You can't bring up a thing about Biden where Trump wasn't exponentially worse. Biden isn't perfect, Trump is inhumanly and inhumanely horrible. That's why knowledge is important, it helps you not make ridiculous accusations against your opponent that only apply to your guy. Try it.

How many times has Biden pleaded guilty to defrauding the poor, or veterans, or business associates? Can Biden still be involved with a charity, or is he banned for outright stealing donations?

This insanity of trying to label Biden a racist (with 90% of African American support) and trump a friend of the African American community (with 8% of their vote) is just too funny. You don't even realize you're insulting them with that claim, clearly implying they're too dumb to know who supports them and who won't say the words "black lives matter" without following it with "are all terrorist thugs coming for you next".

🤦‍♂️

bobknight33 said:

The Biden crime bill has jailed more poor and blacks than justified.

Yet Biden still stands on what he did as a positive thing. No regrets.

RoboWaiter -- coming to a restaurant near you!

ant says...

*dead -- "Video unavailable
This video is no longer available because the YouTube account associated with this video has been terminated."

Can you drive someone's car if you dress as the Stig?

ant says...

*dead -- "Video unavailable
This video is no longer available because the YouTube account associated with this video has been terminated."

Ku Klux Klan Member interview-Chris

newtboy says...

You stupid stupid dishonest stupid man. He renounced them for decades before the photo with Biden ('08?), starting in the 40's when he left the KKK after a few years in. Trump is currently being supported by the active KKK membership and leaders as well as multiple racist hate groups. He has not renounced them or said he doesn't want their votes, instead he claims he doesn't know who David Duke is despite having discussed him at length in prior interviews and calls them good people, his tough guys. Democrats have renounced the KKK and racists publicly for decades. Derp.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/kkk-trump-david-duke-tucker-carlson-election-2020-a9609491.html

https://www.factcheck.org/2016/03/trumps-david-duke-amnesia/

If Biden is the racist, why do open racists all support Trump?

🤦‍♂️

Robert Byrd served as U.S. Representative for the state of West Virginia from 1953 to 1959, and as a U.S. Senator from 1959, until his death in 2010 ( here ).

Byrd was not a Grand Wizard or leader of the Klan. He was, however, a former organizer and member of the KKK. A Washington Post article reviewing Byrd’s memoir explains these years in more detail. Byrd later renounced his membership to the organization, although his early record in Congress on race and civil rights was mixed. For example, Byrd partook in a lengthy filibuster effort against the 1964 Civil Rights Act, but supported the 1968 civil rights act . A Democrat but conservative in values, Byrd decades later also criticized President Bill Clinton’s decision to push for the legalization of gay marriage.

In a 2006 CNN interview, Byrd expressed regret for the filibuster and called his time in the Klan the greatest mistake of his life.
In 2005, Byrd commented on his past membership of the Klan in his memoir and in an interview with the Washington Post said, "I know now I was wrong. Intolerance had no place in America. I apologized a thousand times … and I don't mind apologizing over and over again. I can't erase what happened."

During the 2008 presidential race, Byrd endorsed Barack Obama.

At the time of his death, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), a leading civil rights organization formed in 1909 for the advancement of racial equality and elimination of racial discrimination, issued a statement mourning his passing. The NAACP’s President and CEO remarked: "Senator Byrd reflects the transformative power of this nation. Senator Byrd went from being an active member of the KKK to a being a stalwart supporter of the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act and many other pieces of seminal legislation that advanced the civil rights and liberties of our country”. ( bit.ly/33hn5V3 ) Then-President Obama eulogized Byrd.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-biden-clan/false-claim-joe-biden-pictured-with-grand-wizard-of-ku-klux-klan-idUSKBN2103C3

McConnell, the Republican Senate leader, also spoke at Byrd’s memorial service — and other Republicans issued statements remembering Byrd. Texas Sen. John Cornyn said that Byrd was “a tireless public servant” and that the “Senate has lost a great champion, he will be missed greatly.”

Now go scourge yourself until I tell you to stop, you liar and fool. Trump made you look stupid again with another misrepresentation you regurgitated.

bobknight33 said:

And JOE BIDEN PRAISES FORMER KKK LEADER ROBERT BYRD AS A ‘MENTOR’
..

Kids Try to Make TF2 Movie While Effective Troll Ruins It

ant says...

*dead -- "Video unavailable
This video is no longer available because the YouTube account associated with this video has been terminated."

Goodyear

newtboy says...

Agreed, even if the claims were true, Trump abused his power by calling for a boycott of an American company for personal reasons.
BUT....
It's a fake, not a Goodyear official policy or slide. Jesus is a liar. (See above)

"Trump’s tweet followed a report from WIBW-TV in Topeka, Kansas, based on an anonymous Goodyear employee’s screenshot that listed Black Lives Matter and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Pride messages as acceptable while politically affiliated slogans and material, including “MAGA Attire” and “Blue Lives Matter,” in support of police, were listed as unacceptable. The screenshot was described in the report as part of the company’s diversity training.
Kramer wrote that the visual was created by an employee at the company’s Topeka factory and “was not approved or distributed by Goodyear corporate or anyone outside of that facility.
Kramer reiterated Thursday that Goodyear has “a longstanding corporate policy that asks associates to refrain from workplace expressions in support of any candidate or political party.”
https://www.snopes.com/ap/2020/08/20/goodyear-attire-supporting-police-ok-but-no-political-wear/

There's no room for debate.
The article linked showed that Goodyear clarified that Blue Lives Matter clothing was specifically allowed so there would be no confusion, they didn't change their policy, yet here we are with people claiming they were not allowed beforehand, but there's zero evidence any Blue Lives Matter clothing was ever considered a violation besides the fake screenshot/policy.

messenger said:

I think there's room for debate about whether the policy was unevenly applied, but either way, it's an abuse of power. Goodyear should even be able to openly advocate for Biden without fearing the President would start a boycott.

The room for debate part:
Obviously MAGA hats are campaigning, and so is By/Bye Don 2020 clothing, and both should be disallowed according to the Goodyear policy.

The Black Lives Matter organization has policies for the defunding of police and other things that aren't directly opposing racism. So, however political Blue Lives Matter is, it's as political as Black Lives Matter in that regard, and either both should be allowed or both disallowed. Yet the image that jesus linked to above shows Blue Lives Matter as "Unacceptable".

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

You mean an editorial opinion piece? Call me when you have something, not when you find a Trumpster who agrees with Trump. I don't have Wall Street Journal account, so I can only read paragraph one.

There's no question in anybody's mind why Trump's unqualified appointee chose now to dismantle the post offices ability to deliver mail, when it's needed most. Any problems the post office has had existed when Trump came into office, some have worsened since (edit:holy shit! They've doubled annual losses under Trump's perfect business acumen, now nearly $9 billion a year loss and skyrocketing!), but they did nothing about it until months before an election ( that is depending on the post office) to make changes, changes that make them less efficient, cost money, and make them incapable of on time delivery (so incapable of handling the election). Not one bit of that is by accident.

The post office cannot raise postage rates without congressional approval, and have other congressionally mandated costs costing them billions ( https://news.nd.edu/news/postal-service-losing-money-because-of-congressional-mandate-not-low-prices-expert-says/) so the letter side of the business is losing money, the package delivery side Trump complains about has mostly paid the bills for a while now, but they still lose millions/billions as a unit, that's why they asked for I think $23 billion to upgrade to be able to meet historic minimum standards and $3 billion to cover extra costs associated with the election, money Trump says are no go because they'll allow fraudulent voting (the first sitting president ever to go to great lengths to ensure the smallest vote count, btw)...but recently said he would sign a bill including that funding for the post office if Democrats agree to billions more in more tax cuts that mostly benefit people like....wait for it....himself (as if the deficit isn't growing fast enough). If he really thought mail in voting was fraudulent, why would he agree to do it for anything? Isn't that selling out democracy?! Aren't you enraged?!?

US History: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)

newtboy says...

Oh Jesus, bobski, now you just deny it happened based on one prageru video that conveniently omits what happened 68-72...the time period in question?!? And you complain about CNN?!?

Your proof it didn't happen, Republicans didn't completely control the south until 94?! What nonsense. That's not proof of anything of the sort, implied correlation isn't causation. Republicans were about to disappear in the south in 68-69, that changed by 72.

Perhaps you've forgotten that, in 2005, Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman formally apologized to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), a national civil rights organization, for decades of exploiting racial polarization to win elections and ignoring the black vote.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

Learn some truth, not some far right propaganda that intentionally omits the time period being discussed in it's best arguments, offering red herring suppositions at best. Duh.

bobknight33 said:

"the Southern Strategy" Yet another false narrative that radical liberal school system pushed.
You sure are gullible. Someday hopefully you will actually learn some truth.

Woman kicked off plane for singing Whitney Houston song.

ant says...

*dead -- "Video unavailable
This video is no longer available because the YouTube account associated with this video has been terminated." *wings

the real matrix-follow the rabbit-find how far the hole goes

ant says...

*dead -- "Video unavailable
This video is no longer available because the YouTube account associated with this video has been terminated."

Free Speech Considered Support for Nazism

newtboy says...

Don't pretend to be so oblivious.
The gallery is one person making decisions on who to allow to hold private rallies in secret at her establishment, and she chooses Nazis and white power personalities. I thought you support taking individual responsibility.
The Nation of Islam, and I'm no fan at all, is a huge, multinational organization of millions I assume lead by some form of committee and encompassing a wide range of views and opposing extremes....They did not all choose to be associated with that one extremists nor did they all agree with him by far, then or now, only some did. That's similar to the same question but changing "nation of Islam" to "America". Obviously that's comparing apples to the president's drag queen makeup.

I won't comment much on Canada blm because I don't know them and don't choose to take the time needed to sleuth out some truths about them, but assuming what you say is correct it sounds like they have some racism in their midst that they should weed out before they become the monster they wish to destroy.

Brett Stevens, did you read any of the links? Or my quotes from them? Did you visit America.com, his website, or his blog amerika? (i won't) Do you have a clue who he is and the racist mass murderer he celebrates?

They have a right to speak, the crowd has a right to protest and take any civil legal action they choose to remove the soapbox from their neighborhood. I never said different. You must have confused me with the protesters.
They don't have a right to shout or hold their signs emblazoned with their stupid wrong things intended to provoke at a protest and attempt to spark violence, even if they cleverly camouflage it so on the surface their message seems agreeable, which is what I think was his intent. If successful, he would gain more fuel for the argument that the racists and Nazis planning a violent race war aren't the problem, it's the fascist liberal grandma shovers and sign thieves we should really be worried about....just like the boogaloos in America that caused many if not most of the riots, shot cops, and planned multiple mass murders and bombings all of which they intended to pin on blm.

They don't actually need any place to speak today, there's a soapbox in every cellphone.

But

This facility was holding their alt-right events in secret, hiding their speech itself. They wanted it hidden. You can't bemoan their voices being silenced while also defending their secret rallies which no one who might confront or correct them was told happened, can you?

And side note
The government isn't stopping them, so it's not censorship before that idea crops up.

Again, your bar for crying violence in this instance is subterranean. No one would ever be prosecuted for the level of violence without injury that he suffered, nor compensated for his miniscule loss of cardboard. Do you see him hit, kicked, punched, shoved hard, anything? Time stamp please. I'll change my tune if he was actually injured, I didn't see it anywhere, just his sign yanked after being slowly shoved away from one specific spot.

Could you honestly say ANY right wing event, especially any alt-right event infiltrated by a fairly quiet blm activist with a sign bemoaning police corruption would be as gentle and non violent? Edit: I doubt it.

The point of this video as presented is to pretend that's the case, that the shove from grandma is societies downfall, a direct attack on freedom not a rejection of a defender and facilitator of racists and Nazis (if he's not one himself). The Nazis and racists resurfacing and arming themselves (happening here in America) are nothing to be upset about or oppose....they're good people, not like disgusting anti free speech granny and those other freedom haters.
I'm astonished I'm apparently the only one willing to object to that long ago debbunked distortion of reality.

Free Speech Considered Support for Nazism

bcglorf says...

@newtboy,
Nazis and white power groups are bad enough that standing with them makes one my foe....like NAMBLA.

Do you apply that with equal opportunity?

The guilt of association for the gallery with Stevens and whatever his name was from Amerika.org, should be similar to association with say the Nation of Islam and Farakhan?

What about Canada’s branch of BLM in Toronto who blocked the Toronto Pride parade and one of whose founders(Yusra Khogali) have said things like “white people are recessive genetic defects, this is factual”

https://archive.is/7R2LV/c2fbdb212391ecd395c3c89372819e2bd8d772bc.png

And

“ Plz Allah give me strength to not cuss/kill these men and white folks out here today. Plz plz plz”

Thats as much ‘evidence’ as you’ve given for convicting Brett Stevens of white supremacy, and then to convict anyone associated with him there after.

I say we dont get so extreme as you and deny all those people and anyone associated a right to speak their piece on that basis alone. I say the stupid and wrong things being said need to be allowed to be spoken, and confront them with corrections and revelation rather than force and violence to quiet them.

Free Speech Considered Support for Nazism

bcglorf says...

I did read about 'doxxing' those artists but the owner of the Gallery is also quoted as saying she did NOT send it to Amerika, but published the list for everyone, and sounded like it was what she always did.

I am a skeptic, and I've too often seen people just lumping others into camps of either friend/foe, and then accelerating the process by identifying anyone that associates with a foe is obviously now a foe too.

I'm sorry, but evidence against the gallery and the guy in the video here looks pretty limited. Might be right, but also might be wrong and I've seen too much witch hunting in Canada where anyone not on board is automatically alt-right, and alt-right is really just code for nazi, and if you've called them alt-right long enough then you can just start calling them a nazi.

It's dishonest, divisive and dangerous.

newtboy said:

Reading comprehension, not a strong suit?

They didn't just reference Amerika, and didn't just host it's editor/creator, they actively supplied it with the personal information of artists that had discovered the secret agenda and publicized it.
BIG DIFFERENCE.

I'm not interested enough in the Canada thing to investigate, I've spent hours on this extensive discussion, I have no need to spark another discussion on another politicized topic today just to fight over every statement and act, but I'm fairly convinced the video clip she showed included the actual promotion of violence and hatred, not just a person who is well known in certain circles for promoting them. If that's against the rules, it's against the rules. Even in the unlikely event it did just include her innocuously, if she is a well known alt-right extremist provocateur and it's against the rules to discuss extremists and their views, then it's against the rules. I find that silly and unproductive, but institutions have a right to be silly.

Free Speech Considered Support for Nazism

bcglorf says...

I did read that one, admittedly with reluctance because I've found the independent can be a lot more opinion than fact(ala msnbc/fox). The article mostly states Mr. Osborne accuses the gallery of many things, by far the worst is association with the website "Amerika" which I'm not familiar with, but unless it is so vile that even referencing it when discussing ideologies is 'bad' it didn't seem enough to make the gallery into witches, errr nazis.

For the Canadian incident, the full debate she showed a clip from is here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kasiov0ytEc

I'm afraid it's an hour long, but I don't know which 'clip' she would have been playing, although it was debate between Mattes and Peterson.

Lindsay Shepherd was the TA involved, this is the full audio recording of the meeting she was pulled into with 3 full staff and faculty to 'discuss' how her action of playing the video was wrong:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Nd32_uIcnI

newtboy said:

Try the first one....lazybones. ;-) It lays out both the stated intent and the actions that belie that statement.

It seems far easier to read the links than try to research it yourself, so I don't understand why you decided to ignore the research offered in favor of your own unproductive but far more labor intensive research. Seems a bit like putting fingers in your ears and saying you hear no evidence during a discussion.

Free Speech Considered Support for Nazism

newtboy says...

Some was addressed.
Read the first link... https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/ld50-gallery-protest-lucia-diego-donald-trump-alt-right-hackney-dalston-a7596346.html
Stevens wasn't the only one.

If they claim they have them speak there to " provide a vehicle for the free exploration of ideas, even and perhaps especially where these are challenging, controversial or indeed distasteful for some individuals to contemplate." but hold the events in secret, only open to far right wingers and Nazis, that's pretty blatantly a lie. Don't you agree?

When they gave private information about the artists who outed their secret agenda to Amerika they became unambiguously guilty by their own actions, not just association....and guilt by association is still guilt. If I stand with, support, defend, and host NAMBLA, I fully expect to be lumped with them. They NEVER denounced the hate, racism, or fascism they supported, and they participated with them in attacks against those who oppose Nazis. Ergo-Nazi.

bcglorf said:

@newtboy,

EDIT: drafted this and sent while you were writing previous reply, so maybe some of this is addressed?

Alright, I've gone one step further and read through the shutdownld50 tumblr 'evidence' seeing as they of all places probably gather the most condemning evidence they could.

The evidence amounts to putting on 1 event/exhibit that included far right folks, and included "Brett Stevens", whom I'm not familiar with but the quote from him on Breivik certainly sounds bad. In addition to putting on this exhibit, the even worse accusation is that they didn't really advertise it much publicly. Now, call me skeptical, but I have to believe that if they HAD advertised it heavily that ALSO would have compounded their guilt.

To me it still looks like guilt be association. The gallery had the audacity to host speakers that people disliked, so ergo-nazi!

Please though, if there is more or better evidence then please do let me know, or point me to what I'm missing. Is the Stevens guy so vehemently pro-nazi and and pro-violence that the association really should be enough? I'm inclined to believe no else they'd have better and more extensive quotes to use against him.

Again, I'm coming from a place of not knowing any of these people's backgrounds or history, but if we are supposed to believe them to be villians of such a high degree, I want a stronger case than those people say so and if you spent a few weeks of research on it you'd agree, trust us.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon