College president sorry for saying 'All lives matter'

a reply to: Jamie1

It's not a terrible analogy at all. People are always finding specific causes to focus on. Women's rights - aren't men's rights important too? Sure, but what's wrong with a group focusing on women's rights? Save the whales - what about the other sea creatures? They matter too, but what's wrong with focusing on whales? There are and have been specific movements throughout history - nothing wrong with that. Nothing wrong with focusing on a specific issue, like children, or Native Americans, or handicapped people, or gays. None of those specific movements mean that all people on the planet don't have value or don't matter, it just means there is a specific issue that a group wants to focus on. THIS specific issue is regarding blacks being killed unnecessarily and unfairly by law enforcement, hence the slogan "black lives matter".

The elephant in the room here is that there are people who don't like blacks very much - they think they are a bunch of lazy thugs who are quick to blame everyone else for their situation. So when someone starts a movement called "black lives matter", it gets on the nerves of these people, so they try to sabotage the movement -- water it down, make it not about blacks anymore. Hence, "all lives matter".

What does this movement want? I believe they want law enforcement to be held accountable when they show prejudice against blacks. I believe they want things like stricter background checks on police applicants, better training for police recruits, and harsher consequences when officers have shown prejudice towards blacks.

The real racial bias: Cops more willing to shoot whites than blacks, study finds

‘Counter-bias’ rooted in concerns over social and legal consequences

Read more: www.washingtontimes.com...
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

“Across these 300 interviews, I have multiple officers telling me that they didn’t shoot only because the suspect was black or the suspect was a woman, or something that would not be consistent with this narrative of cops out there running and gunning,” said Mr. Klinger, a former cop and author of “Into the Kill Zone: A Cop’s Eye View of Deadly Force” (2006). “When it comes to the issue of race, I’ve never had a single officer tell me, ‘I didn’t shoot a guy because he was white.’ I’ve had multiple officers tell me, ‘I didn’t shoot a guy because he was black,’ ” Mr. Klinger said. “And this is 10, even 20 years ago. Officers are alert to the fact that if they shoot a black individual, the odds of social outcry are far greater than if they shoot a white individual.” ]

a reply to: Stormdancer777

Simulations for a study? Don't you think those cops knew that their reactions were going to be analyzed and reported on? Of course, they are going to be much more careful during a monitored simulation. That doesn't mean they won't react totally differently out in the real world, when someone isn't watching them.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Jamie1

It's not a terrible analogy at all. People are always finding specific causes to focus on. Women's rights - aren't men's rights important too? Sure, but what's wrong with a group focusing on women's rights? Save the whales - what about the other sea creatures? They matter too, but what's wrong with focusing on whales? There are and have been specific movements throughout history - nothing wrong with that. Nothing wrong with focusing on a specific issue, like children, or Native Americans, or handicapped people, or gays. None of those specific movements mean that all people on the planet don't have value or don't matter, it just means there is a specific issue that a group wants to focus on. THIS specific issue is regarding blacks being killed unnecessarily and unfairly by law enforcement, hence the slogan "black lives matter".

The elephant in the room here is that there are people who don't like blacks very much - they think they are a bunch of lazy thugs who are quick to blame everyone else for their situation. So when someone starts a movement called "black lives matter", it gets on the nerves of these people, so they try to sabotage the movement -- water it down, make it not about blacks anymore. Hence, "all lives matter".

What does this movement want? I believe they want law enforcement to be held accountable when they show prejudice against blacks. I believe they want things like stricter background checks on police applicants, better training for police recruits, and harsher consequences when officers have shown prejudice towards blacks.

Another FAIL in your analogy.

Yes, a group starts a campaign called "Save the Whales." Another group starts a campaign that's called "Save the Oceans" and the first group gets pissed off.

They act like insolent spoiled children when some of their own say, "Yeah, let's save the oceans too."

And if one of their own dares to say "Save the oceans" they're reprimanded and forced to apologize.

It's idiotic, especially in light of the fact that what they want is nothing tangible or measurably "doable" by anybody.

They are protesting into thin air. They are not asking for any specific laws to be changed, or policies to be changed. In other words, there is NOTHING anybody could do right now that would cause the protesters to wake up and say, "Ok, I'm happy now. Thank you for changing that."

All lives matter. All lives matter. All lives matter. Save the oceans. Save the whales.

Another example of living in the Orwellian land of doublespeak and thought police.

Not your post, the reality.

Let's accuse white cops of being racists and shooting blacks because of their skin tone, when the reality is the opposite. They are aware that shooting a black person is going to result in 1000x more scrutiny and outcry.

The method of brainwashing is to use a small sampling of anecdotal examples as evidence to support their twisted and incorrect statistical analysis so that they can gain power and influence. Study history. Late 1920's and early 1930's. See if you can find any parallels.

a reply to: Jamie1

Please show me where anyone "forced" the college president to do anything. Can you show me a picture or video of someone putting a gun to her head? Can you show me anything in writing where they threatened to burn her house down and kill her loved ones?

All they did was to explain to her why the slogan is what it is, and why the other slogan aims to undermine the specific focus of this movement, which the college president has stated she overwhelmingly supports. As soon as she realized her error, she was happy to correct it. Doesn't sound like anything was forced to me.

Google is your friend:

blacklivesmatter.com...

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Jamie1

Please show me where anyone "forced" the college president to do anything. Can you show me a picture or video of someone putting a gun to her head? Can you show me anything in writing where they threatened to burn her house down and kill her loved ones?

All they did was to explain to her why the slogan is what it is, and why the other slogan aims to undermine the specific focus of this movement, which the college president has stated she overwhelmingly supports. As soon as she realized her error, she was happy to correct it. Doesn't sound like anything was forced to me.

Google is your friend:

blacklivesmatter.com...

Yes, you're right. McCartney voluntarily apologized and wasn't forced to do anything.

Students were upset and complained, and she apologized for not having taken on the students beliefs that saying "all lives matter" was undermining their cause.

The irony is that taking the position that the it's a pissing contest between the hashtags, #alllivesmatter and #blacklivesmatter hurts their cause more than if they wouldn't have got their panties twisted over the original email.

They've lose credibility in the eyes of many people because they're unhappy about people saying "All lives matter."

They're too immature and self-involved to think through the PR consequences of anything they do.

originally posted by: Jamie1


The irony is that taking the position that the it's a pissing contest between the hashtags, #alllivesmatter and #blacklivesmatter hurts their cause more than if they wouldn't have got their panties twisted over the original email.

They've lose credibility in the eyes of many people because they're unhappy about people saying "All lives matter."

They're too immature and self-involved to think through the PR consequences of anything they do.

Excuse me, but that's a load of horse poop. The people who disagree with the movement continue to disagree, and the people who agree with the movement continue to agree, regardless of some random email sent out to a random college student/faculty by the college president. The only people making a big deal about this email are the ones who disagree with the movement in general, so they are attempting to yet again, undermine it. Keep tryin'.

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: Jamie1


The irony is that taking the position that the it's a pissing contest between the hashtags, #alllivesmatter and #blacklivesmatter hurts their cause more than if they wouldn't have got their panties twisted over the original email.

They've lose credibility in the eyes of many people because they're unhappy about people saying "All lives matter."

They're too immature and self-involved to think through the PR consequences of anything they do.

Excuse me, but that's a load of horse poop. The people who disagree with the movement continue to disagree, and the people who agree with the movement continue to agree, regardless of some random email sent out to a random college student/faculty by the college president. The only people making a big deal about this email are the ones who disagree with the movement in general, so they are attempting to yet again, undermine it. Keep tryin'.

My posting a thread on ATS isn't going to affect their "movement." Get to reality.

Burning businesses down on national television in front of millions of people will.

Walking into restaurants and harassing people, and having Yahoo make it a front page story will.

Do you think the above examples demonstrate that this "movement" really believes that "all lives matter?"

originally posted by: Jamie1


My posting a thread on ATS isn't going to affect their "movement." Get to reality.

Burning businesses down on national television in front of millions of people will.

Walking into restaurants and harassing people, and having Yahoo make it a front page story will.

Burning down businesses was not part of the black lives matter movement, just to be clear.

"Harassing" is the word used by the right wingers who are against the whole movement. The truth is, they said a few words, sang a song and read off some names of blacks killed by cops - took about 5 minutes - hardly what I would call "harassing". Then they asked the diners to stand and raise their fists in solidarity - which I heard several people did do.

As you seem to be so fond of saying, any "harassment" would be in the diner's minds only - they either choose to consider themselves harassed, or they choose to be enlightened by the rally -- completely their choice, right?

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: Jamie1


My posting a thread on ATS isn't going to affect their "movement." Get to reality.

Burning businesses down on national television in front of millions of people will.

Walking into restaurants and harassing people, and having Yahoo make it a front page story will.

Burning down businesses was not part of the black lives matter movement, just to be clear.

"Harassing" is the word used by the right wingers who are against the whole movement. The truth is, they said a few words, sang a song and read off some names of blacks killed by cops - took about 5 minutes - hardly what I would call "harassing". Then they asked the diners to stand and raise their fists in solidarity - which I heard several people did do.

As you seem to be so fond of saying, any "harassment" would be in the diner's minds only - they either choose to consider themselves harassed, or they choose to be enlightened by the rally -- completely their choice, right?

Yes, you're right. Being harassed is a perception.

The photos of the young woman crying because the "Black Brunch" crowd wouldn't respect her personal space may mean that women felt harassed.

Anybody can label it with whatever word they want. The fact is the protester were asserting their will onto people against their will.



And this black dude, Derryck Green, wrote this:



I’ve asked this on several occasions, but I’ll ask it again. How do these self-righteous, self-centered idiots think they’re doing anything beneficial for their “cause” by annoying and inconveniencing audiences wherever they go? Stopping street and freeway traffic, destroying private property, or yelling their false grievances in white faces as they attempt to enjoy a meal angers people, ensuring a full reservoir of resentment.

When will people say enough already?!

Look at these fools. Only in a postmodern, non-judgmental culture are these dummies not thrown out or arrested simply because they’re brown and black. And look at some of the faces of the patrons, my God. Actively averting their eyes, meekly sitting there and patiently enduring the condescending lecture and rubbish of the racial blame-game, passively encouraging these intruders- these so-called “activists”- to continue their bullying and intimidating of whites who won’t fight back.

As I’ve recently told a couple of friends, the ONLY reason crap like this continues to happen is because bullies specifically pick targets that won’t fight back and defend themselves. The very minute people of good will, regardless of color- but ESPECIALLY white people- stand up and start vociferously pushing back, this stuff ceases almost immediately



I think Mr. Green has some very valuable perceptions.

a reply to: Jamie1

Uh huh, more right wing propaganda.

Here are some facts:

Some peaceful protesters came in to some restaurants, said some words, then left. There were no riots, no one was hurt or shot, no one went to jail. Some protesters were asked to leave a couple of the restaurants, but other restaurants did nothing. When asked to stand and raise their fists in solidarity, many diners did so. Facts vs stories, right?

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Jamie1

Uh huh, more right wing propaganda.

Here are some facts:

Some peaceful protesters came in to some restaurants, said some words, then left. There were no riots, no one was hurt or shot, no one went to jail. Some protesters were asked to leave a couple of the restaurants, but other restaurants did nothing. When asked to stand and raise their fists in solidarity, many diners did so. Facts vs stories, right?

For sure. Facts vs. stories. The diners didn't have to get upset. I agree 100%!!

It's also a "story" that another person's perspective is "right wing propaganda." It's a different perspective from yours, that you could choose to learn from, just like the diners could choose to learn from the protesters.

We also have intelligence, and we know that unsuspecting diner's are probably going to react, not respond from a place of contemplative awareness. Their reaction is going to be very predictable. This is called anticipation.

So now 24 hours later, what measurable benefit do you think the "black brunch" provided to anybody?