ParisInAKilt Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 1 minute ago, thplinth said: His company would not have sacked him if the banner had said Black Lives Matter so why sack him for saying White Lives Matter. There is only one word that is different. Black versus White. Do explain how one gets you fired and the other does not. That’s your white privilege on display, please attend re-education camp tomorrow at 0800hrs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 2 minutes ago, ParisInAKilt said: I’m not that invested in the poor lad but I’m sure some lawyer would take the case if he was getting paid. Pretty self-evidently they would. Maybe his mate Tommy Robinson Stephen Yaxley-Lennon can sort it out for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 40 minutes ago, ThistleWhistle said: Not missing the point at all - you specifically chose that passage to cut and paste in so was the key information you wanted to disseminate. If the speculation around whether he was an Islamic terrorist or a Christian (terrorist) had been as important to you it would have been copied in or you'd have written about it so don't think it is me who missed the point. But for some reason, attacks perpetrated by suspected Islamic terrorists always require “more information.” Their ideology can’t have been the main motivating factor, it’s claimed. No, that would have to be “Western foreign policy” or “institutional racism” or “lack of opportunity.” His idealogy as an islamic terrorist is explcitly said to be the main motivating character so if he is in infact Christian then it is relevant. It's his cousin who said he converted, his sister has also said it and talked about a video he sent. she is quoted along with her brother in an interview Eiman said: 'That's what caused tension between him and his family in Libya – they didn't approve of him converting to Christianity to marry a British girl, so there were problems.' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 How do we know more tractions is being given to one than the other. Is there objective metrics so we can remove everyones biases? I don't have a TV don't read the MSM beyong the occasional link from boards like this. I found out about both thse stories on here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 While we're on banners - surely the CCTV around Bute House must be pretty good. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-53179239?at_medium=custom7&at_custom4=2533E7CE-B6F3-11EA-83A2-9DA796E8478F&at_custom1=[post+type]&at_custom2=twitter&at_campaign=64&at_custom3=%40BBCScotlandNews Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThistleWhistle Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 7 minutes ago, phart said: But for some reason, attacks perpetrated by suspected Islamic terrorists always require “more information.” Their ideology can’t have been the main motivating factor, it’s claimed. No, that would have to be “Western foreign policy” or “institutional racism” or “lack of opportunity.” His idealogy as an islamic terrorist is explcitly said to be the main motivating character so if he is in infact Christian then it is relevant. It's his cousin who said he converted, his sister has also said it and talked about a video he sent. she is quoted along with her brother in an interview Eiman said: 'That's what caused tension between him and his family in Libya – they didn't approve of him converting to Christianity to marry a British girl, so there were problems.' And then the next bit was just flannel about how he's probably still a bit Muslimy really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 1 minute ago, phart said: How do we know more tractions is being given to one than the other. Is there objective metrics so we can remove everyones biases? I don't have a TV don't read the MSM beyong the occasional link from boards like this. I found out about both thse stories on here. All my own perceptions, not based on any firm metrics. The murder got pretty widespread coverage from Saturday night through to Sunday, with it being the main story on pretty much every news bulletin. With the suspect in custody and not much new details coming out, the new-cycle has moved on. There's also a sense of "another one". Will undoubtedly pick up again when and if any new information comes out and when it goes to court. The banner wasn't front page news, it was featured during the live coverage on Monday, there was some coverage on Sunday, but not as lead item, then a bit of a follow up when the culprit became known, then a bit more today when it came out he'd been sacked. None of these were lead stories, not comment or analysis, 15-20 second segments at best. I suspect we won't hear much more of this after today. Both stories have provoked gigabytes of commentary and whataboutery on social media, largely from people indulging in whataboutery or seeking to advance their own agendas - from all sides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 Rebecca Long-Bailey sacked extremely tenuously... https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jun/25/keir-starmer-sacks-rebecca-long-bailey-from-shadow-cabinet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Toepoke said: Rebecca Long-Bailey sacked extremely tenuously... https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jun/25/keir-starmer-sacks-rebecca-long-bailey-from-shadow-cabinet "in which the actor said the practice of kneeling on a person’s neck – which led to the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis – was “learnt from seminars with Israeli secret services”. Israel denies this." Seems to be the problem. Various orginisations have made similiar claims https://www.amnestyusa.org/with-whom-are-many-u-s-police-departments-training-with-a-chronic-human-rights-violator-israel/ American counciles have made the same claims https://forward.com/fast-forward/398942/north-carolina-city-votes-to-bar-international-police-exchanges/ It's nothing to do with religion or being anti-anything, Israel is an occupying force policing a non-compliant population , the US is meant to be policing it's own citizens it's this gap in operational context that causes the problem. etc etc Edited June 25, 2020 by phart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 56 minutes ago, phart said: "in which the actor said the practice of kneeling on a person’s neck – which led to the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis – was “learnt from seminars with Israeli secret services”. Israel denies this." Seems to be the problem. Various orginisations have made similiar claims https://www.amnestyusa.org/with-whom-are-many-u-s-police-departments-training-with-a-chronic-human-rights-violator-israel/ American counciles have made the same claims https://forward.com/fast-forward/398942/north-carolina-city-votes-to-bar-international-police-exchanges/ It's nothing to do with religion or being anti-anything, Israel is an occupying force policing a non-compliant population , the US is meant to be policing it's own citizens it's this gap in operational context that causes the problem. I'd be interested in your view on this, I'm having an argument elsewhere on the Internet about it. This article seems to the be source that's been quoted as being evidence for Maxine Peake's comments being anti-semitic, which is what's gotten Rebecca Long-Bailey into trouble. Lesson 2: Making connections between the U.S. and Israel without context can do harm Highlighting these police exchange programs without enough context or depth can end up harming our movements for justice. Suggesting that Israel is the start or source of American police violence or racism shifts the blame from the United States to Israel. This obscures the fundamental responsibility and nature of the U.S., and harms Black people and Black-led struggle. It also furthers an antisemitic ideology. White supremacists look for any opportunity to glorify and advance American anti-Black racism, and any chance to frame Jews as secretly controlling and manipulating the world. Taking police exchanges out of context provides fodder for those racist and antisemitic tropes. https://jewishvoiceforpeace.org/update-on-deadly-exchange-campaign/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 3 hours ago, ParisInAKilt said: That’s your white privilege on display, please attend re-education camp tomorrow at 0800hrs Is that where I learn about metrics while using terms like muslimy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 2 minutes ago, aaid said: I'd be interested in your view on this, I'm having an argument elsewhere on the Internet about it. This article seems to the be source that's been quoted as being evidence for Maxine Peake's comments being anti-semitic, which is what's gotten Rebecca Long-Bailey into trouble. Lesson 2: Making connections between the U.S. and Israel without context can do harm Highlighting these police exchange programs without enough context or depth can end up harming our movements for justice. Suggesting that Israel is the start or source of American police violence or racism shifts the blame from the United States to Israel. This obscures the fundamental responsibility and nature of the U.S., and harms Black people and Black-led struggle. It also furthers an antisemitic ideology. White supremacists look for any opportunity to glorify and advance American anti-Black racism, and any chance to frame Jews as secretly controlling and manipulating the world. Taking police exchanges out of context provides fodder for those racist and antisemitic tropes. https://jewishvoiceforpeace.org/update-on-deadly-exchange-campaign/ The assertion "Israel is the start or source of American police violence or racism" hasn't been made as far as i'm aware it's the origin of one restraint technique. I've not read that much on what RLB said beyond that thing i posted. I've read numerous reports over the years about techniques used by Israeli security sources. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 The JVFP even link this at the top One of the most dangerous places where the regimes of Trump and Netanyahu converge is in exchange programs that bring together police, ICE, border patrol, and FBI from the US with soldiers, police, border agents, etc. from Israel. In these programs, “worst practices” are shared to promote and extend discriminatory and repressive policing in both countries. These include racial profiling, massive spying and surveillance, deportation and detention, and attacks on human rights defenders. https://deadlyexchange.org/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 1 minute ago, phart said: The assertion "Israel is the start or source of American police violence or racism" hasn't been made as far as i'm aware it's the origin of one restraint technique. I've not read that much on what RLB said beyond that thing i posted. I've read numerous reports over the years about techniques used by Israeli security sources. RLB, didn't say anything, she retweeted an interview in the Independent today with the actor Maxine Peake which contained the following section which has caused all the trouble and which Labour have said contains an "anti-semitic conspiracy theory". Quote “Systemic racism is a global issue,” she adds. “The tactics used by the police in America, kneeling on George Floyd’s neck, that was learnt from seminars with Israeli secret services.” (A spokesperson for the Israeli police has denied this, stating that “there is no tactic or protocol that calls to put pressure on the neck or airway”.) I'm personally struggling to see the anti-semitism there but the justification it seems to come from the article and piece I quoted up the page, I can understand that argument but I think that's being misrepresented in suggesting that claiming that suggesting the above is itself anti-semitic. My reading the JVP piece can be summarised as follows: It's not a good idea to link use of force by US police forces to Israel and it lets the US off the hook and it also gives ammunition to those promoting an anti-semitic agenda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 3 minutes ago, phart said: The JVFP even link this at the top One of the most dangerous places where the regimes of Trump and Netanyahu converge is in exchange programs that bring together police, ICE, border patrol, and FBI from the US with soldiers, police, border agents, etc. from Israel. In these programs, “worst practices” are shared to promote and extend discriminatory and repressive policing in both countries. These include racial profiling, massive spying and surveillance, deportation and detention, and attacks on human rights defenders. https://deadlyexchange.org/ That's interesting. For context, the other place in the internet I'm having this argument is full of a combination of unreconstructed Tories and New Labour types who all hate Corbyn and his cronies. So they don't care about Israel and the US but its all about things to bash the Labour left with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 2 minutes ago, aaid said: RLB, didn't say anything, she retweeted an interview in the Independent today with the actor Maxine Peake which contained the following section which has caused all the trouble and which Labour have said contains an "anti-semitic conspiracy theory". I'm personally struggling to see the anti-semitism there but the justification it seems to come from the article and piece I quoted up the page, I can understand that argument but I think that's being misrepresented in suggesting that claiming that suggesting the above is itself anti-semitic. My reading the JVP piece can be summarised as follows: It's not a good idea to link use of force by US police forces to Israel and it lets the US off the hook and it also gives ammunition to those promoting an anti-semitic agenda. I can see their argument if folk were blaming Israel for Police violence in the US when that predates Israel anyway, However pointing out the technique is learned from elsewhere isn't. If folk struggle with nuance I can see why their broadstroke understanding could cause problems. JVP support the deadly exchange movement which calls for the end of the police callaboration cause of an exhange of "worst practices" . Clarification is always good though. I suspect Keir is using this as a means to get rid of a political "enemy" while simultaneously helping the anti-semitism stain of Labour to be cleaned a little. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 1 minute ago, phart said: I suspect Keir is using this as a means to get rid of a political "enemy" while simultaneously helping the anti-semitism stain of Labour to be cleaned a little. I'm pretty certain that's why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exile Posted June 25, 2020 Author Share Posted June 25, 2020 (edited) On 6/23/2020 at 11:32 PM, phart said: There shouldn't be any police action for the banner. I was about to make a point last night about this being an interesting moral philosophy question for students of logic/ethics. why is it OK to say "All X matter" and not "All Y matter". But I didn't finish posting it. I think it may have become overtaken by events. Strictly speaking the two statements (black and white) are or should be interchangeable but it's all about context. As I understand it, people saying "Black Lives Matter" are trying to draw attention to inequality and injustice. For some reason, some other people are annoyed by this. Those who say "All Lives Matter" appear (to those supporting BLM) to be deliberately diminishing the significance of the statement BLM, as if meaning to say that 'race' is not an issue, and that inequality and injustice are OK or irrelevant, or not an issue. Even if I agree that "White Lives Matter", if I'm a non white person in Burnley I would not be comfortable to think my townsfolk would go out of their way to fly that banner over my town. (Or, if you're a Scotsman in London and you see people around you with "English Lives Matter" banners you might feel uncomfortable about your own position) Edited June 25, 2020 by exile Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 21 minutes ago, phart said: I suspect Keir is using this as a means to get rid of a political "enemy" while simultaneously helping the anti-semitism stain of Labour to be cleaned a little. I'd imagine that absolutely the case. If I were a Labour front-bencher or someone with ambitions to become one, I'd make sure I was a million miles away from the merest reference to Israel. That's not the most healthiest of positions, particularly for an opposition but unfortunately that's how it is going to be for the foreseeable future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exile Posted June 25, 2020 Author Share Posted June 25, 2020 6 hours ago, thplinth said: The simple answer as to why this happens has to be that it doesn’t fit in with the prevailing narrative. We’ve had weeks of Black Lives Matter protests in this country, following the death of a man 4,000 miles away. Yet three gay men are slaughtered in our own backyard and there’s not a hint of a protest – in fact, their deaths were lower on yesterday’s news agenda than the trailing of a potentially racist airplane banner. The simplest answer is that "Attacker kills some people" is not news in the way that "Police kill someone" is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 17 minutes ago, exile said: I was about to make a point last night about this being an interesting moral philosophy question for students of logic/ethics. why is it OK to say "All X matter" and not "All Y matter". But I didn't finish posting it. I think it may have become overtaken by events. Strictly speaking the two statements (black and white) are or should be interchangeable but it's all about context. As I understand it, people saying "Black Lives Matter" are trying to draw attention to inequality and injustice. For some reason, some other people are annoyed by this. Those who say "All Lives Matter" appear (to those supporting BLM) to be deliberately diminishing the significance of the statement BLM, as if meaning to say that 'race' is not an issue, and that inequality and injustice are OK or irrelevant, or not an issue. Even if I agree that "White Lives Matter", if I'm a non white person in Burnley I would not be comfortable to think my townsfolk would go out of their way to fly that banner over my town. (Or, if you're a Scotsman in London and you see people around you with "English Lives Matter" banners you might feel uncomfortable about your own position) I think this is as about a well laid out explanation as it gets. Tony Livesey, is a 5-Live presenter, on the Drive show and is a Burnley fan himself. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/football/53163342 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tartan_Don Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 So, if you say "Black lives matter" you are supporting an injustice in society? And if you say "White lives matter" you are racist and oppressive? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 7 minutes ago, Tartan_Don said: So, if you say "Black lives matter" you are supporting an injustice in society? And if you say "White lives matter" you are racist and oppressive? That's a fair summary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave78 Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 34 minutes ago, Tartan_Don said: So, if you say "Black lives matter" you are supporting an injustice in society? And if you say "White lives matter" you are racist and oppressive? On your 2nd point, i wouldn't go as far as assuming whoever said that is racist. But it's certainly a huge red flag, to my mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tartan_Don Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 Why the red flag ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.5eeaf0fbe501ba3c868c32fd77caef1f.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.