It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Petulent Left Rejoices in Waco Biker Shootout

page: 1
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 18 2015 @ 06:25 PM
link   
White on White Crime Strikes Again in Waco


Why Are WHite People Destorying Their Own Community

Both these articles are currently on the front page of the Huffington Post. I read both completely and most of the comments on both articles. Nine people dead in a shooting, and not one but two front page articles stirring the racial tensions endemic in the nation right now. I can kind of understand one article showing the disparity between how media reports crimes committed by gangs of different racial makeup, but two? They missed a great opportunity to expound on and discuss how The War on (some) Drugs empowers criminal enterprises of all racial and ethnic makeups, totally missed the fact that no one in the white community unattached to those who lost their lives cares that bikers killed each other and were killed by cops, and no one is justifying the actions of those involved in the violence other than police that were involved in the firefight.
If you really think you are going to make the current majority in this country give a damn about the plight of minorities and police brutality with reporting and opinion like this, just keep it up. I personally care less about what Urban minorities go through daily than I did before reading that drivel.




posted on May, 18 2015 @ 06:38 PM
link   
a reply to: jefwane

I believe you may have missed the point of the first article. It seems to me that they were trying point out the hypocrisy of inevitable statements we hear and read after white on black violence occurs.


In recent years, a national pattern has begun to emerge in the wake of shootings in which a black man is killed by a white man. Of course the death is a tragedy, goes the narrative, but the dead man probably provoked the killing somehow -- and more importantly, if you truly care about young black men, why aren't you more concerned about black-on-black violence?



Around 83 percent of white victims in 2011 were murdered by other whites, based on the most recent FBI homicide data.


If we were really concerned about violence and death, why aren't we more concerned about white on white crime? See what they did there?

The second article touches on the white "gangs" and the effect they can have on the communities when they act out violently. The article exposes the hypocrisy that we are quick to talk about black gangs, violence and what they do to their communities, but there is no national discussion when it's white "gangs".

Both are pretty clever in my opinion and should open our discussions up to a wider point of view.



posted on May, 18 2015 @ 07:21 PM
link   
" Petulent Left Rejoices in Waco Biker Shootout "

The best the Left can do in the wake of massive rioting and fires in the big cities?



+1 more 
posted on May, 18 2015 @ 07:35 PM
link   
It's not rejoicing but pointing out hypocrisy.



posted on May, 18 2015 @ 07:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: jefwane

I believe you may have missed the point of the first article. It seems to me that they were trying point out the hypocrisy of inevitable statements we hear and read after white on black violence occurs.


In recent years, a national pattern has begun to emerge in the wake of shootings in which a black man is killed by a white man. Of course the death is a tragedy, goes the narrative, but the dead man probably provoked the killing somehow -- and more importantly, if you truly care about young black men, why aren't you more concerned about black-on-black violence?



Around 83 percent of white victims in 2011 were murdered by other whites, based on the most recent FBI homicide data.


If we were really concerned about violence and death, why aren't we more concerned about white on white crime? See what they did there?

The second article touches on the white "gangs" and the effect they can have on the communities when they act out violently. The article exposes the hypocrisy that we are quick to talk about black gangs, violence and what they do to their communities, but there is no national discussion when it's white "gangs".

Both are pretty clever in my opinion and should open our discussions up to a wider point of view.


I can go with that, The Huff post/AOL is probably like most of us, asking why this type of thing continues and in sometimes wild west fashion where anyone can get hurt. They also probably know the histories of these gangs and all the rest and see the need to talk about it, and it has to be talked about. These gangs are effectual worldwide with their own bloody histories, as well as the imitators who think to do the same things.
More to the point, is why the vast majority of people who don't subscribe to gangs, or violence in general, and who may or not be affluent need this. Life's a bitch for most people in the most mundane ways in any case.
In some ways, this is where the freedom of passage falls down. In my home, I would not allow anyone with a gun, let alone an AK, whatever into my home. Am I wrong or am I right?

edit on 18-5-2015 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on May, 18 2015 @ 08:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
It's not rejoicing but pointing out hypocrisy.


I don't see any hypocrisy at all. This has nothing to do with race. They're just wrongfully using this as an opportunity to make it about race. Cheap.



posted on May, 18 2015 @ 08:13 PM
link   
a reply to: jefwane

It seems that in the mids of making your partisan rant you missed the entire point.
Well done, that's a significant achievement given that millions of Americans actually do get it.



posted on May, 18 2015 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Did you see the part where the bikers raided CVS...

Oh wait.



posted on May, 18 2015 @ 08:50 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

A valid and coherent opinion.

I conceded that I understand the point of opining on the disparity of type of coverage. But, the titles of the articles I posted both alude to race. At the time that I posted this thread both were right next to each other on the Huffpost homepage. I didn't create the titles Huffpost did. Why title both articles with the word white in them other than to inflame the tensions currently at play in our civil discourse?

From a dispassionate observer, why imediately bring race into a discussion of an interesting event, unless you have an agenda? Is not a deadly event between organisations known to operate on the fringes of society notable enough to cover?
Could anyone honestly say that an event of similar magnitude between, lets say Bloods and Vice Lords, would be covered by other News Sources that diferently?

Such sentiment in my opinion detracts from the legitimacy of the conversation over events in Baltimore, South Carolina, and Ferguson. All of those incidents concern individuals versus the power of the statenot groups that volununtarily associate with one another like street and biker gangs. They really aren't comparable.

All of the discord that has erupted over the past year does not involve organisations believed to be in operation of criminal enterprises except in the worst parts of Ferguson when the out-of-towners arrives. The genesis of Ferguson and Baltimore were percieved injustices perpetrated by the State on individuals. This is just a gang fight.



posted on May, 18 2015 @ 08:54 PM
link   
I bet you they're all in the Tea Party. The real story here is how America, and specifically white America, has become so accepting of gun violence over the last few decades.



posted on May, 18 2015 @ 08:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Lysergic

You bring up a very important point.

In the case of the recent riots, black kids burnt down business' after they became outraged at an incident in which they believed a social injustice had occurred.

In the case of the bikers, a community had to have "large-scale lockdown", closed business' and even caused the restaurant to have it's franchise contract pulled because not only had these groups had a history of issues in the past and the establishment did not take proper action, but a bunch of grown men decided to engage in a fight in which many rounds of ammunition were spent, even exchanging gunfire with law enforcement, nine lives were taken and almost two hundred people were arrested.

Was this caused by a perceived social injustice? We don't know. What we do know is that this entire ordeal began in the bathroom of a restaurant that can be compared to Hooters and it's more likely that no social injustice occurred at all. This was a case of ego and machismo that was born from their "gang mentality".

How we, and the media, approach this important. Do we brush this off, or do we address the issue of gang mentality and violence with a group of white people the same way we do as a group of black people?



posted on May, 18 2015 @ 09:00 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Ok your response is fair enough but whites are not going to go out and burn down their hood over some biker thugs.



posted on May, 18 2015 @ 09:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: CB328
I bet you they're all in the Tea Party. The real story here is how America, and specifically white America, has become so accepting of gun violence over the last few decades.


Yea that it.....the Tea Party or White Panthers or something.


Seriously though who is accepting this sort of behavior? These are not average anybody. There is no acceptance anywhere in the white community on par with the way black tolerate or must tolerate the level of violence it gets from gang related activity there.

Sorry but whites just are not going to burn the bitch down cause the cops have to shoot a few during a biker shootout.



posted on May, 18 2015 @ 09:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Logarock

Agreed. But whites are also not going to believe that a police officer, whom represents the government, shooting a white man is some sort of social injustice against their race.

Rightfully so, black people can perceive as much.

The two situations are not necessarily comparable, except in the way we approach gang violence and the coverage/rhetoric behind it.

I believe that was the point of the articles.



posted on May, 18 2015 @ 09:12 PM
link   
The thread title should read "Uncomprehending Right cognitively unable to process nuanced snark"

K~
edit on 18-5-2015 by aethertek because: dgfhgj



posted on May, 18 2015 @ 09:22 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert


If what you say is true it really demonstrates a very interesting and deep difference. To think or respond more like a black I would take it on the chin if a kid got killed in biker gang crossfire but go on the riot if the cops killed an unarmed biker.



posted on May, 18 2015 @ 09:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: aethertek
The thread title should read "Uncomprehending Right cognitively unable to process nuanced snark"

K~


No.

The title is accurate and correct.






posted on May, 18 2015 @ 09:41 PM
link   
Logarock, and Introvert,

Based on our last couple of posts, we are probably not all that far apart of our views on this event.

I'll admit I'm more likely to post a hyperbolic thread title attacking the left than I am the right, but I despise most Democrats and Republicans alike.

I strongly feel that the Huffpost reporting on this, based on the two articles I linked and particularly their chosen titles, do nothing to advance discourse about issues facing our nation. Comparing this in any way to the events that have lit multiple cities on fire over the past year, is a disservice to all of us. It promotes division, confuses issues, and the statistics in the first article are misleading having not taken into account population percentages.



posted on May, 18 2015 @ 10:15 PM
link   
a reply to: jefwane

God help us man, who gives a crap?

Its Waco, pronounced by knuckle dragging Texas Neanderthals as "Wacko". And it was thug, v. thug, v. thug. Three different "Biker Gangs" of aged old and fat white farts.

And of course, the spectacle of whites dying thrills the Leftists. They hate white people so more dead the better.

Honestly, this isn't really a story so much as it is a saga of stupid meets dumb. High order of Idiocracy in my opinion.



posted on May, 19 2015 @ 02:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: smurfy
They also probably know the histories of these gangs and all the rest and see the need to talk about it, and it has to be talked about. These gangs are effectual worldwide with their own bloody histories, as well as the imitators who think to do the same things.


Here we have bikers in Devon and Cornwall with far too many guns for their own defensive use. I'm wondering if they're being used as makeshift armouries for arming groups to be used in creating social instability followed by a control grid style crackdown. The possibility is bikers are being used by undercover forces as useful idiots. It's certainly something that needs talking about. Why do Devon and Cornwall bikers have too many guns?

The obvious difference between the biker shootout and a stone-throwing, looting riot is the bikers sat down like good little boys. A friend who got involved in a biker shootout was embarrassed when they had to go straight from the shootout to the nearest bike shop to buy helmets so they wouldn't attract attention from the police. They'd left their helmets where they'd been sheltering from the bullets before they ran for the bike.

How outlaw are todays outlaw bikers? They seem more like fluffy, image conscious businessmen with big fat egos.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join