Triumph is going to destroy the 'BUSA :(

[Kults]

9 minutes ago, Hua Guofang said:

Yeah, the kid has been ufairly pilloried for this. The whole thing is emblematic of the us and themism we're going through these days. People want to hate their social opposites and treat them like they are the enemy. The chaperones and the teachers responsible for those school kids should be fucking sacked, though. How on earth could they have let the situation escalate like that?

 

I dig on those black Israelites though. They were hanging around Times Square a few years back when  I was killing a few days there. They really kept me entertained.

 Over here in Canada we awarded a former ISIS terrorist a 10MIL payday for being sent to Guantanamo after his IED killed a US soldier and not protecting his rights as a Canadian. He was a minor when it all went down. The left was all up in arms about 'muh kids cant be held accountable for their actions..THEYRE JUST KIDS!'

 

48 hours ago that same group was calling for a kids DEATH for standing there smiling. Funny that.

Edited January 22, 2019 by Kults

[where]

2 hours ago, Hua Guofang said:

I dig on those black Israelites though. 

MISGUIDED FOLKS 

[One Man Banned]

If you break that situation down to what it was, if you're a young scrawny white kid and a bunch of angry black guys start berating you, then a Native American dude walks up and starts playing a drum in your face, how you gonna react?  You're probably gonna stand there with a similar dumbass expression on your face I'm guessing.  Shit, if I was out in public and someone started mouthing off to me, and in the middle of it an Indian walks up to me drumming and chanting, I'm probably gonna be like WTF?!?!  

Also fuck those Hare Krishna airport/bus station/concert chanting kids.

[Hua Guofang]

5 hours ago, Kults said:

 Over here in Canada we awarded a former ISIS terrorist a 10MIL payday for being sent to Guantanamo after his IED killed a US soldier and not protecting his rights as a Canadian. He was a minor when it all went down. The left was all up in arms about 'muh kids cant be held accountable for their actions..THEYRE JUST KIDS!'

 

48 hours ago that same group was calling for a kids DEATH for standing there smiling. Funny that.

I find this kind of stuff a bit troubling: "It's the same people...."

 

I read this kind of stuff all of the time: The right want the wall built on the border to stop immigrants yet the same group want Christianity taught in schools, the religion that tells you to help the needy.

 

I mean, what is the 'right' and 'left' anyway? How do you register for these groups and when you get your membership card does it mean that any of the other millions of people in the group can speak for you and what any one group member says perfectly reflects the sentiments of every single person in that 'group'? Same shit goes for 'feminists', 'white males', 'black people', 'cyclists', 'libertarians', etc.

 

We like to see ourselves as unique with our own views that aren't always the same as everyone else, and this is usually true even for people with the same world views - we don't agree with what everyone does and says, even if we have the same identity. However, we look at those we don't like or don't agree with and we act like they are all the same, agree with everything everyone of them says and we put them into arbitrary groups, like 'middle aged white guys', the right and left, CEOs or black people. It really doesn't make sense and is a false construct, in my opinon.

[where]

There is a photo from 2012 of one of that high schools basketball game, and the crowd is all in blackface, which just blew up on fb and now I cant post it here. 

 

[Kults]

25 minutes ago, Hua Guofang said:

I find this kind of stuff a bit troubling: "It's the same people...."

 

I read this kind of stuff all of the time: The right want the wall built on the border to stop immigrants yet the same group want Christianity taught in schools, the religion that tells you to help the needy.

 

I mean, what is the 'right' and 'left' anyway? How do you register for these groups and when you get your membership card does it mean that any of the other millions of people in the group can speak for you and what any one group member says perfectly reflects the sentiments of every single person in that 'group'? Same shit goes for 'feminists', 'white males', 'black people', 'cyclists', 'libertarians', etc.

 

We like to see ourselves as unique with our own views that aren't always the same as everyone else, and this is usually true even for people with the same world views - we don't agree with what everyone does and says, even if we have the same identity. However, we look at those we don't like or don't agree with and we act like they are all the same, agree with everything everyone of them says and we put them into arbitrary groups, like 'middle aged white guys', the right and left, CEOs or black people. It really doesn't make sense and is a false construct, in my opinon.

Way to miss the point dude. “They” as In the same networks, blue ticks and mainstream media sources. I dont pretend to know what any one individual thinks.

[where]

1 hour ago, where said:

There is a photo from 2012 of one of that high schools basketball game, and the crowd is all in blackface, which just blew up on fb and now I cant post it here. 

 

 

[Hua Guofang]

1 hour ago, Kults said:

Way to miss the point dude. “They” as In the same networks, blue ticks and mainstream media sources. I dont pretend to know what any one individual thinks.

I definitely got your point, I think you may have ignored mine. 

 

Blue ticks are tens of thousands of individual people.  The mainstream media (a nebulous concept itself) is something is made up of numerous organizations with thousands of individual employees. 

 

But youve just ascribed two precise opinions to all of them, like they’ve all signed off on it, whilst admitting to not knowing what they actually think. 

 

Its a typical out-group bias that allows you to denigrate those you disagree with/don’t identify with. Example: driver sees cyclist break road rules: “fucking bike riders. They  tell us to follow the rules and make way for them but then they do whatever they want anyway”.  Driver sees other driver run red light, wow, that guy is a shit driver. 

 

We we all do it, ascribe individual variance to our group but see the other group collectively, which is what you just did when you said “the left”, like their all in coordination and agreement with each other. 

 

[Kults]

58 minutes ago, Hua Guofang said:

I definitely got your point, I think you may have ignored mine. 

 

Blue ticks are tens of thousands of individual people.  The mainstream media (a nebulous concept itself) is something is made up of numerous organizations with thousands of individual employees. 

 

But youve just ascribed two precise opinions to all of them, like they’ve all signed off on it, whilst admitting to not knowing what they actually think. 

 

Its a typical out-group bias that allows you to denigrate those you disagree with/don’t identify with. Example: driver sees cyclist break road rules: “fucking bike riders. They  tell us to follow the rules and make way for them but then they do whatever they want anyway”.  Driver sees other driver run red light, wow, that guy is a shit driver. 

 

We we all do it, ascribe individual variance to our group but see the other group collectively, which is what you just did when you said “the left”, like their all in coordination and agreement with each other. 

 

There is definitely a common narrative there.

 

I was pointing out how hypocritical their reaction to this weeks events was given their previous take on another situation that happened locally.

 

You skipped over all that and went into some debate over what constitutes the two main political idiologies in the west and how we qualify their bases ? You seem to make a lot of apologies for recent liberal  behaviour and defend it with these vague statements like they’re not all the same. Ya I get that, many of them subscribe to the progressive narratives though and it’s transparent.

[Hua Guofang]

YEah, I fully get what you're saying in terms of hypocrisy. I'm trying to say that you are far too lose with your argument and that it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. "They is no "they", there is no defined group like you're trying to make out and you can't call people out for hypocrisy because they subscribe to some undefined narrative. You're ascribing precise, concrete behaviours to some amorphous identity (because you don't like that identity and you like it when they look stupid), you're saying people are hypocrites because they subscribe to a narrative, not because they actually hold contradicting views? You can't see how that's about as solid as custard? 

 

And to my biases, that you imply when saying that I apologise for liberals. YEp, been stepping in those shoes lately but may be it's because this forum has largely shifted to a conservative (I use the term very loosely) or anti-liberal bent. Also, if you look at what I've been saying, it's not that I support any of these people or their ideologies. I'm calling out what I see as inaccurate (and correcting myself when I am wrong...) and discussing the issue, not the ideology. Given that this place now has an anti-liberal bent, I'm only reacting to stuff said about liberals. On a sports forum where I have similar conversations, I am seen as a conservative war monger because that place has a fully liberal bent and I challenge their biases when I think I see them. On neither forum have I actually advocated for a particular position, because I don't have one. I fucking hate any ideology and any person that argues for one. It's like saying "I have the answer regardless of the question". 

 

And it goes both ways. You might say I don't have an agenda but the left are all fucktards and will destroy the world, it's like saying "I know their answer is wrong regardless of the question". And that is similarly useless. 

 

 

[Hua Guofang]

3 hours ago, where said:

 

 

Hang on, isn't it only two people out of a couple of hundred that have blackface? 

[Hua Guofang]

1 hour ago, Hua Guofang said:

YEah, I fully get what you're saying in terms of hypocrisy. I'm trying to say that you are far too lose with your argument and that it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. "They is no "they", there is no defined group like you're trying to make out and you can't call people out for hypocrisy because they subscribe to some undefined narrative. You're ascribing precise, concrete behaviours to some amorphous identity (because you don't like that identity and you like it when they look stupid), you're saying people are hypocrites because they subscribe to a narrative, not because they actually hold contradicting views? You can't see how that's about as solid as custard? 

 

And to my biases, that you imply when saying that I apologise for liberals. YEp, been stepping in those shoes lately but may be it's because this forum has largely shifted to a conservative (I use the term very loosely) or anti-liberal bent. Also, if you look at what I've been saying, it's not that I support any of these people or their ideologies. I'm calling out what I see as inaccurate (and correcting myself when I am wrong...) and discussing the issue, not the ideology. Given that this place now has an anti-liberal bent, I'm only reacting to stuff said about liberals. On a sports forum where I have similar conversations, I am seen as a conservative war monger because that place has a fully liberal bent and I challenge their biases when I think I see them. On neither forum have I actually advocated for a particular position, because I don't have one. I fucking hate any ideology and any person that argues for one. It's like saying "I have the answer regardless of the question". 

 

And it goes both ways. You might say I don't have an agenda but the left are all fucktards and will destroy the world, it's like saying "I know their answer is wrong regardless of the question". And that is similarly useless. 

 

 

So that was a bit of a ramble and I reckon I can say it more succinctly. 

 

Your claim: Two arguments are made (gitmo and smirko) that contradict each other. Both arguments have a progressive narrative. Therefore, people with a progressive ideology are hypocrites. 

 

Doesn't matter which way you say it either: Two arguments are made (the wall, christian values) that contradict each other. Both arguments have a conservative narrative. Therefore, people with a conservative ideology are hypocrites. 

 

The argument is weak and that's what I'm calling out. I see that "the same people who said this now say that" on twitter every day, same shit, both sides and it only ever holds credible when it can be pinned to an actual person. Otherwise you're just attacking people because you don't like them. And that's why I called bullshit on your claim of hypocrisy. It may actually be accurate, but you've said nothing convincing so far. 

[Hua Guofang]

So now anyone connected to Covington Cath is a bad person by association: 

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/who-knew-trumps-top-white-house-attorney-is-covington-catholic-high-school-graduate/ar-BBSBSgS?ocid=st

 

Who knew? Trump's top White House attorney is Covington Catholic High School graduate

 

And of course, once your bias has baited you to click the link, you get this, in the body: 

 

What does Cipollone's White House role have to do with last week's incident in Washington, D.C., involving current CovCath students? Absolutely nothing, but it wasn't been widely known that Trump had a top adviser directly connected to CovCath

 

Quality journalism.....

[Kults]

I’m not sure where to start, you’re all over the place tbh. There is most definitely a left and a right and a crowd that follows both. Not even sure what you’re trying to say.

[Kults]

1 hour ago, Hua Guofang said:

 

 

The argument is weak and that's what I'm calling out. I see that "the same people who said this now say that" on twitter every day, same shit, both sides and it only ever holds credible when it can be pinned to an actual person. Otherwise you're just attacking people because you don't like them. And that's why I called bullshit on your claim of hypocrisy. It may actually be accurate, but you've said nothing convincing so far. 

 Guess you want me to link each and every blue tick or news source  to what they said about this weeks events vs what they said to something months ago?

 

Sorry, I’m not that invested in this discussion to do all that legwork. 

[Hua Guofang]

No, not really and I'm sure some of them do exist. 

 

My aim was to point out that you can't ascribe their behaviour to millions of people because they follow some vague narrative. It's the same logic as racism and its a fallacy. Each side does it to each other, it's pointless and destructive.

 

Ok, climbing down off my high horse now.

Edited January 23, 2019 by Hua Guofang

[Kults]

Just now, Hua Guofang said:

No, not really and I'm sure some of them do exist. 

 

My aim was to point out that you can't ascribe their behaviour to millions of people that follow some vague narrative. It's the same logic as racism and its a fallacy. Each side does it to each other, it's pointless and destructive.

 

Ok, climbing down off my high horse now.

Your entire statement is contradictory. You say there is no group or hive mind then immediately say ‘each side’. Which is it ?

[Hua Guofang]

There are left and right ideologies but they aren't monolithic and homogeneous and thus you can't ascribe blame to the whole 'group' based on the actions of a few, like you have in your original post.

[Kults]

1 minute ago, Hua Guofang said:

There are left and right ideologies but they aren't monolithic and homogeneous and thus you can't ascribe blame to the whole 'group' based on the actions of a few, like you have in your original post.

Ya, I already stated that it’s not each and every single person that calls themseves either left or right leaning that follow the script. I never claimed otherwise. You’re  claiming it isn’t a wide swath of people subscribing to their team sports narrative is naive at best and disengenuous at worst.

[Hua Guofang]

Ann Coulter‏Verified account @AnnCoulter

FollowFollow @AnnCoulter

 

Journalists (August 2018): Alex Jones caused the families of Sandy Hook victims to be harassed. He must be BANNED from all social media!

 

Journalists (January 2019): Please kill these children and their families.

[One Man Banned]

Man when this story 1st broke I waited to comment as I thought there was more to it.  Then there was.  Then there was again.  If I'm following all the twists and turns correctly in the end the drummer is the only one who comes out not being a douchebag.  And these kids seemingly became more douchier, especially w/ the blackface history and the school or families hiring a PR firm to coach them in the narrative.

[Kults]

5 hours ago, One Man Banned said:

Man when this story 1st broke I waited to comment as I thought there was more to it.  Then there was.  Then there was again.  If I'm following all the twists and turns correctly in the end the drummer is the only one who comes out not being a douchebag.  And these kids seemingly became more douchier, especially w/ the blackface history and the school or families hiring a PR firm to coach them in the narrative.

Lets be real, what would you and a large group of your mates done at 16 years old if some dude started blasting a drum a foot from your face..? I wouldn't have stood there smiling, Ill leave it at that. They're teens man. Dudes lucky they didn't mob him.

 

They're little fucks ill give you that much, but weren't most of us at that age as well?

Edited January 24, 2019 by Kults

[One Man Banned]

That's pretty much what I said, at first.  However, for what you want to believe from the 'news' these kids had a history of racism and they were there for a March for Life rally.    Kind of amusing to me since the scrawny shit kid doesn't look old enough to produce life yet and unfortunate that this is the incident he wants to let his balls drop over.  I thought before that maybe they were just getting hassled for a MAGA hat and they were kind of innocents, but not quite so.  

 

Not sure I can be mad at the Black Israelites either.  They're like a religious Player Haters club, I don't think there's anyone black or white who passes them that they don't berate, so kind of hard to take serious/personal.

 

Gets into other issues.  Like when you're a kid you somewhat believe/trust adults, but as you get older you have to question shit and develop your own beliefs and moral compass.  Also getting tired of seeing kids in the political spotlight.  Difficult, as Americans they have a say and are entitled to be represented.  But, they can't vote.  They also can't fully grasp and understand all the issues at play, leaving them easy targets for manipulation by the media, politicians, teachers, parents and anyone else who wants to mold their agenda to them.

[Kults]

I hear ya. Bad form all around. Frankly amazed its even considered newsworthy and that we're still talking about it

[Hua Guofang]

Yeah, its symptomatic of the malaise we're in at the moment.

 

Some of the people on Twitter saying shit like: "That boy is irredeemable, no one who does that will ever be a good person", etc. etc., all based off a still pic. Even when the multitude of vids are watched, they still say "Nah, I don't buy it, he's a racist maniac and he should be.....". It's like the facts are irrelevant and the only thing that matters is their anger at people that don't agree with their views.

 

I, unfortunately, control the twitter account for the organisation where I work, which means both tweeting and monitoring. I have to watch the crazy that is political discussion today (FB as well...) and neither side has a monopoly on fuckwittery and there is way more than one 'side' of the coin...., so much fuckwittery. And the majority of people mouthing off have zero credibility on what they discuss. This current shitfight is a peeeerrrrfect example of that.

 

I agree a lot with what Kults has said, they're young kids goofing off. Kids are allowed to make mistakes and in this situation, I don't think they really did that much wrong. Yeah, they're wearing stupid hats and were there for a cause many won't agree with, but that's a separate argument/issue. The Indian dude walked into the middle of them, even as an adult I would have interpreted his actions as challenging to me/the group, regardless of what he actually intended. The kids danced around and goofed off and Smirko simply smiled at him. It is IMPOSSIBLE to accurately read the intention of his smile - he may have been disrespectfully smirking at him, he may have been showing a sign of friendliness and politeness - there is no convincing evidence either way what his intent was and to make an assessment of his intent based on that evidence is likely more an indicator of your own biases than his.

 

The Black Isrealites are carricatures, nobody takes them seriously. When they were in place yelling their inevitable abuses, the school chaperones and teachers should have moved the boys away and politely spoken to the Black dudes saying that they were just young boys, could they please all go their separate ways. They did not, they let the situation escalate and I believe that in the whole situation, they are the ones who deserve most blame for the outcomes.

 

Yay!

[Hua Guofang]

Best take I've seen yet. A clear eyed view of the battle lines we've drawn, the careers that are staked upon battle existing, the desperation of ego and what we are willing to sacrifice for self interest.

 

This is a great read and reflective of not just the mainstream media but all of us. 

 

With the internet, we are all now the media. 

 

 

 

 

Covington and the Pundit Apocalypse

Our hasty condemnation of these teenagers reveals the cold truth about hot takes.

By Frank Bruni

Opinion Columnist

Jan. 22, 2019

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/22/opinion/covington-teenagers-twitter.html

 

There’s no shame and much honor in the job of coming to judgments about news events.

 

But we don’t have to rush there.

 

That’s what too many of us pundits did upon first seeing video footage and hearing accounts of the encounter in Washington last Friday between teenagers from Covington Catholic High School and a Native American elder and veteran playing a drum. There were glimmers of something cruel and even dangerous happening to him. Glimmers were enough for us.

 

Now of course we’ve seen extra footage, heard additional accounts and moved to a place that should more frequently be our starting point: uncertainty. Tweets have been deleted. Outrage has been put on hold.

 

It won’t stay there for long. It’s too electric, too profitable, and there will be prompts and genuine cause for it. But will we pause next time to make sure that we understand what we’re reacting to and whom we’re condemning? Even if that means fewer retweets? Will we filter our responses through a mature acknowledgment of what, in real time, we can and cannot take for granted?

 

Only if we’re honest about what we’ve been doing and why we’ve been doing it.

 

With everything from Twitter followers to television bookings, we’re rewarded for fierce conviction, for utter certainty, for emphatically taking sides and staying unconditionally faithful to what we’ve pushed for and against in the past. We each have our brand, and the narrower and more unyielding it is, the more currency it has and the more loyal our consumers. Instead of bucking the political tribalism in America, we ride it.

 

We react to news by trying to fit it into the argument that we routinely make, the grievance that we usually raise, the fury or angst or sorrow that we typically peddle. We have our narrative, and we’re on the lookout for comments and developments that back it up. The response to the initial footage of the Covington boys — and, in particular, to the one who wore a red MAGA cap as he stood before and stared at the drumming veteran — adhered to this dynamic.

 

Was that a smirk on the teenager’s face? A sneer? His expression was just indefinite enough to become a symbol of entitlement for the pundits who favor that locution, of the white patriarchy for another group, of the wages of Trumpism, of the fraudulence of Catholicism.

 

And while many pundits’ outrage was correctly calibrated to what they assumed was going on, it was built on assumption. It was hasty. A crowd was forming and the clock was ticking and nobody wanted to be late to the inquisition. A “hot take” is prized — hence the well-known phrase for this instant analysis. Nobody talks about a “cold take,” though that’s the temperature of truth

 

To glance at Twitter as the video of the Covington teenagers went viral over the weekend was to see each pundit one-upping the disdain of the pundits who vented before him or her. It was also to wonder about the degree of preening and performance involved. They weren’t merely spreading the word of what had supposedly happened in Washington. They were seizing the opportunity for a fresh and full-throated reminder of their own morality and politics. They were burnishing their brands. And that self-interest was — and is — the enemy of caution.

 

I’m not going to single out any particular pundits and tweets, because there were many and because, under different circumstances, one of those tweets could easily have come from me. As it happens, I missed this pile-on. But I’m sure that if I scrubbed my Twitter history, I’d find that I’ve behaved in the fashion that I’m lamenting here.

 

My focus on pundits may seem narrow, but we’re stand-ins for a much larger group of Americans, including politicians, many of whom denounced the Covington kids as prematurely and confidently as pundits did. Also, we’re visible, and our trade is influence. We’re sometimes called “thought leaders,” for heaven’s sake. Do we mean to be leading people toward overconfidence in their ingrained perspectives and a disposition to see all of life through one narrow lens? Should we be modeling snap assessments and press-a-button derision? The teenagers have received death threats.

 

The rest of the media didn’t behave all that differently from how we did, and to some degree probably followed our example. Newspaper and television stories bought into preliminary versions of what happened in Washington, which encouraged readers and viewers to do the same. And we all abetted our detractors’ efforts to delegitimize us. Witness the way President Trump framed the initial condemnations of the Covington kids as “fake news.” We let him keep banging his drum.

 

Some of the condemners counter that their essential point remains, that entitlement, cruelty and racism persist and even thrive in today’s America. That’s for sure. But when the evidence cited for that turns out to be inconclusive or wrong, their position is weakened. Their goal isn’t served.

 

Some conservatives are gleeful about how this went down. But isn’t their vengeful joy its own rushed celebration, its own self-serving simplification of a complex sequence of events? We’ve realized the error of the first draft, but we’ll probably never produce a final, indisputable one. I wish more of us had the humility to concede that.

[Hua Guofang]

Interesting week.

 

Trump was tweeting up a storm last weekend, during the week he recognised the Golan Heights as part of ISrael and said a bunch of insulting shit about McCain. All of this is divisive, sensational and hits on sensitivities getting people outraged (and thankful to Trump). Those used to his strategy expected something was going to happen or that he was trying to distract from the NZ massacre because he was named as an inspiration in the manifesto.

 

Today, the Mueller report dropped. Trump had obviously gotten word that it was about to bounce and started running distraction. I've not been expecting too much from the report. If Mueller had found anything big, I'd expect that as soon as he was sure, he'd have moved on it, like he did with MAnafort, et al. At worst, Donny Jr is facing a stretch.

 

However, those that are confident of their own innocence don't run campaigns of distraction.

 

Interesting to see if DOJ allow it to go public. If we see key Reps starting to distance themselves from Trump, then I reckon his time is up, without any doubt. If they don't, then we're just in for more of the same political bullshit and division that could have ugly social consequences like people shooting up media outlets, violent protests by the anti-Trumpers, etc.

[Mercer]

Although I hate the full scale erosion of liberty Trump has brought to the right, I feel like if McCain was ever handed the executive  powers to wage warfare, we'd all be spitting on his grave now. McCain would have been another Teddy Roosevelt imperialist at the very least. At worst, a world war might have gone down when Crimea got annexed. No matter the situation, his stance was always either invade, bomb, or continue to occupy indefinitely.

 

Understandable now that he's dead, but it was strange watching sensible people on the left (and the right) pretend like he was some sort of hero. McCain represented war, which I automatically associate with the end results, death and dismemberment. There is no honor, or bravery in a career of consistently leaning towards invasive warfare. If we're being honest about McCain here, that was basically the entire theme of his political career. I hope he's not remembered as some sort of honorable good guy, just like Obama, Trump, and Bush he was a piece of shit.

[Kults]

Have a great day everyone! Lol

[Hua Guofang]

And there we go, no collusion!

 

I wonder why Trump was so nervous about it, why he fired Comey and why his guys were willing to break the law (and now get in deep shit) for it all when there was nothing to hide anyway.

 

Maybe they truly did believe that it was a politicised witch hunt. Will be interesting to see what the congressional committees do now.