Other Forums Containment Thread

[benjipwns]

Let’s face it, nothing that people on resetera.com or blue check Twitter will make a single ounce of difference in our legal system because they have no power to effect change.  If it’s cathartic to let out steam that way I don’t see the harm because it’ll never amount to any actual change in the system

I don't think they're harmless. I mean, yes, they specifically are pretty harmless nobodies and the ResetERA.com members harm only themselves. But these arguments don't come from nowhere, and those people are influential (that their arguments have been taken up so forcefully is proof of that I think) and when groups support their efforts it becomes dangerous. Even if the only prominent effect is to do things like, say, harm the Democratic Party and empower Republicans. (Or worse, as I mentioned, to undermine anti-discrimination lawsuits.)

I also think that regardless of anyone's actual power it remains fair to criticize them.

[Taco Bell Tower]

I think that's benji's first top NSFW image.

[Nintex]

Rittenhouse is the victim of a campaign aimed at fanning the flames.
One side tried to keep up the charade that rioting and looting was actually good and the police shouldn't intervene but instead be defunded.
It didn't matter if cars, shops or anything else went up in flames. The message was more important than the property of hard working citizens.
The other side kept beating that law and order drum, just shoot them if you have to.

Rittenhouse wanted to do something to protect others and that went terribly wrong.
So if Rittenhouse is convicted it would solidify the idea that rioting and looting is good and stopping it is bad.

If he's acquitted it would solidify the idea that you can be your own judge, jury and executioner.
Especially if you shoot someone 'in self defense' who already commited a crime in the past.

This judge at least seems to want the kid to have a fair trial and to uphold traditions (veterans day).
That alone already makes him an enemy of the other side no matter the verdict.

In conclusion, you shouldn't try and save the world but just stay home and play video games instead.

[Lonewulfeus]

Would the cops have even arrested him or just shot him right then and there?

I know era routinely and uncritically parrot that the only reason the police in America exists is to protect rich peoples stuff and shoot black people, but the idea that police will always kill a suspect rather than arrest them is wholly at odds with the idea that black people are disproportionately jailed in the US.

They're literally mutually exclusive hypotheses.

That’s plausible for nonviolent crimes, which black people are jailed for at a massively disproportionate rate but a violent crime with a gun?

Again, era regularly and uncritically parrot the idea most black people in prison are just unlucky victims who were smoking a lil weed and the system decided to fuck them, but the majority of all offenders currently in prison - of all demographics - are there for violent crimes.

I think there is something deeply fucked going on in the American prison system, because, well, compare it to any other first world countries percentages of incarcerated portion of the population, but the majority of inmates are violent offenders.

It doesn't track with eras narrative.

FACT CHECK: This is false!

https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_offenses.jsp

Drug Offenses   67,235   46.0%
Immigration   6,624   4.5%
Burglary, Larceny, Property Offenses   7,331   5.0%

You could probably argue that most of the extortion, bribery, and fraud crimes are nonviolent as well and probably some of the weapons charges but I don’t have the info nor do I care enough to get that deep into it.  You could equally argue that some of the drug offenses could be violent, so for back of a napkin math well call it even.

Factor that with the race demographics of the BOP system, 38% of BOP inmates are black despite the percentage of Americans who are black sitting at 13-14%.  Blacks are statistically over represented in the BOP while white people are under represented.  The “resetera” narrative is probably closer to reality than assuming everyone in prison is guilty and experienced an equal and entirely unbiased application of the law.

[benjipwns]

I don't think this is the ResetERA.com or social justice narrative actually. It may be the progressive narrative, it may be a liberal narrative, etc.

Even if their problem actually is unequal application their solution is the elimination of law, police, prisons, etc.

[Lonewulfeus]

I don't think this is the ResetERA.com or social justice narrative actually. It may be the progressive narrative, it may be a liberal narrative, etc.

Even if their problem actually is unequal application their solution is the elimination of law, police, prisons, etc.

Defund the police is snappier even if it’s not totally accurate in what it originally (as far as I understood) meant.  Leave law enforcement to police and reallocate some of their funding to social services designed to help underserved communities just doesn’t roll off the tongue as well.

[BikeJesus]

If the gunman and the victims were all black, era would just say he was policing his own.

[HaughtyFrank]

Amir0x associate Dennis8K got got for appreciating the female form:

User Banned (1 month): Boys club rhetoric; Numerous prior bans including ban for similar behaviour

They better not slim down Rogue's thickness.



Apocalypse is speechless: "I am the rocks of the etern....eh...I....what was I saying...?"



(Image removed from quote.)

A worthy cause

 

[benjipwns]

Defund the police is snappier even if it’s not totally accurate in what it originally (as far as I understood) meant.  Leave law enforcement to police and reallocate some of their funding to social services designed to help underserved communities just doesn’t roll off the tongue as well.

This is actually skimming towards my point here though, Defund was the original walk back concession from Abolish by the mildly more politically savvy. And then later it became how you're defining Defund now. (Which is still a fringe position.)

And Abolish wasn't treated like the fringe extremist position it is; it was one that if you opposed you were a white supremacist; it was one granted things like NYT op-ed space: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html (I hope you're content with the idea that I can find you far more examples in elite media without me having to actually do so for you)

This kind of rhetoric continues to dominate the social justice space (the predominant leftie space in high class media/corporate circles), just look at the LOCKED DUE TO NO PRODUCTIVE DISCUSSION thread for how it warps ResetERA.com's type of discourse. Now Nepenthe wasn't dragged because she's an admin, but she should have been severely for being the very personification of what incelsiorlef and the rest were so angry about (not actually) the poll telling them. She literally stated she refuses to compromise with anyone who doesn't support the immediate abolition of capitalism and colonialism because those people are racists. Nobody (and especially the poll) was saying to ignore social issues completely for the materialist, but merely to alter emphasis and short-term political goals. This got pages of anger and temper tantrums and proclamations like Nepenthe's. This is not typical just for ResetERA.com where they mostly LARP what they see elsewhere, but elite leftie discourse in general. (Something I admit, due to hiding in plain sight, I'm more subject to than average.)

[Lonewulfeus]

Defund the police is snappier even if it’s not totally accurate in what it originally (as far as I understood) meant.  Leave law enforcement to police and reallocate some of their funding to social services designed to help underserved communities just doesn’t roll off the tongue as well.

This is actually skimming towards my point here though, Defund was the original walk back concession from Abolish by the mildly more politically savvy. And then later it became how you're defining Defund now. (Which is still a fringe position.)

And Abolish wasn't treated like the fringe extremist position it is; it was one that if you opposed you were a white supremacist; it was one granted things like NYT op-ed space: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html (I hope you're content with the idea that I can find you far more examples in elite media without me having to actually do so for you)

This kind of rhetoric continues to dominate the social justice space (the predominant leftie space in high class media/corporate circles), just look at the LOCKED DUE TO NO PRODUCTIVE DISCUSSION thread for how it warps ResetERA.com's type of discourse. Now Nepenthe wasn't dragged because she's an admin, but she should have been severely for being the very personification of what incelsiorlef and the rest were so angry about (not actually) the poll telling them. She literally stated she refuses to compromise with anyone who doesn't support the immediate abolition of capitalism and colonialism because those people are racists. Nobody (and especially the poll) was saying to ignore social issues completely for the materialist, but merely to alter emphasis and short-term political goals. This got pages of anger and temper tantrums and proclamations like Nepenthe's. This is not typical just for ResetERA.com where they mostly LARP what they see elsewhere, but elite leftie discourse in general. (Something I admit, due to hiding in plain sight, I'm more subject to than average.)

It’s funny, that opinion piece specifically mentions abolition of the police, but also talks about reducing the number of police as an acceptable outcome as well.  The rhetoric definitely reads abolish but overall reads like the current definition of defund would be acceptable if not ideal.  The conclusion of a society that works together as opposed to self preservation seems absolutely pie in the sky overly optimistic though.  Removing a major tool for white supremacy (not that all police actions are in service of advancing or continuing white supremacy but certainly some actions or levels of enforcement do just that for an extremely obvious example look at marijuana arrests) in the police isn’t going to make those sentiments go away.

[PogiJones]

Inequality is often a telling sign that something is wrong; it is not in and of itself the wrong thing, any more than a cough is the sickness. Unequal application of defendant protections is telling of the actual problem: minorities not receiving the protections they deserve. Tearing down defendant protections for white people for the sake of equality doesn't solve the problem, it just makes even more people have the problem.

The argument could be made that the actual goal of such people is to raise awareness of the problems with a lack of protection--to scare white people into caring, if you will. I haven't seen that in the narrative myself, though. I've just seen people seeking a pound of flesh, as far as I can tell.

[Snoopycat_]

Bring back Cream

[benjipwns]

Reducing the power, funding and number of police (and laws they enforce) is a good in and of itself. The desire to dress up the police purely as a force of white supremacist ends as if this is the only proper critique (and worse to lie about their origins in service of this) only seemingly helps to further entrench their power. Maybe next year will be different, but so far the record on two years of extensive Abolish/Defund/etc. rhetoric against the police for their white supremacist sins into the mainstream has mostly been the election of Republicans and pro-police Democrats (Biden, Eric Adams, etc.) and a subsequent massive boost in their funding rather than anything resembling any kind of effort against unequal treatment. (Other than that naturally associated with the switch in DOJ control.)

I actually have no idea who is convinced by saying "the police are inherently racist" over and over. Whites aren't, it supposedly makes all of them support the police even more. Blacks certainly aren't. Latinx certainly aren't. Are Asians? (I legitimately don't know.)

And the police being racist is probably the least objectionable of the social justice positions on the issue.

[Tuckers Law]

Wtf with all these careposts in the shit thread.  You should sue, Pogi.

[PogiJones]

That comma
 

[Lonewulfeus]

Reducing the power, funding and number of police (and laws they enforce) is a good in and of itself. The desire to dress up the police purely as a force of white supremacist ends as if this is the only proper critique (and worse to lie about their origins in service of this) only seemingly helps to further entrench their power. Maybe next year will be different, but so far the record on two years of extensive Abolish/Defund/etc. rhetoric against the police for their white supremacist sins into the mainstream has mostly been the election of Republicans and pro-police Democrats (Biden, Eric Adams, etc.) and a subsequent massive boost in their funding rather than anything resembling any kind of effort against unequal treatment. (Other than that naturally associated with the switch in DOJ control.)

I actually have no idea who is convinced by saying "the police are inherently racist" over and over. Whites aren't, it supposedly makes all of them support the police even more. Blacks certainly aren't. Latinx certainly aren't. Are Asians? (I legitimately don't know.)

And the police being racist is probably the least objectionable of the social justice positions on the issue.

I see it like this, Fox News isn’t racist, but is the favorite news channel of racists.  The police are the same, maybe not racist at its core but by god every thin blue line asshole is exactly the same, older white dudes.  Gotta ask myself why that is, can’t be one big coincidence.

Back to the rittenhouse thing though.  I can’t say I’ve followed the case extensively at all, but the one thing that stood out to me was the judges decision to bar the prosecutors other acts evidence video of rittenhouse wanting to shoot people he suspected were criminals at a cvs 2 weeks before he did in fact shoot people he suspected of being criminals.  Somehow those things aren’t remotely related to the judge which tells me he already thinks what rittenhouse did was self defense.  Should have let the jury decide if that was pertinent rather than just bar it outright.  I did agree with the video of him hitting the sisters friend or whatever though, that might not have had anything to do with his state of mind and would just make him look like a piece of shit, which he is of course but whatever.

[Lonewulfeus]

Wtf with all these careposts in the shit thread.  You should sue, Pogi.

There was too much pro rittenhouse crap the last few pages I felt the need to add some fair and balanced shit posting in the form of rambling care posts 

[benjipwns]

Back to the rittenhouse thing though.  I can’t say I’ve followed the case extensively at all, but the one thing that stood out to me was the judges decision to bar the prosecutors other acts evidence video of rittenhouse wanting to shoot people he suspected were criminals at a cvs 2 weeks before he did in fact shoot people he suspected of being criminals.  Somehow those things aren’t remotely related to the judge which tells me he already thinks what rittenhouse did was self defense.  Should have let the jury decide if that was pertinent rather than just bar it outright.

I'm glad you admit you haven't followed the case if you still think events were that he was "shoot[ing] people he suspected of being criminals."

The only reason the prosecution wanted the two week old video they claim is of Rittenhouse included is because of their original absurd overcharge that this is first-degree murder, it's nonsense when we have video evidence of the actual events. On the same day the judge made this decision that you see as so biased as to apparently maliciously influence the case, he also properly threw out attempts by the defense to enter the criminal history of Rosenbaum.

[Snoopycat_]

Jesus Christ, the ackshullying is out of control. It’s ackshully gone mad

[Lonewulfeus]

Back to the rittenhouse thing though.  I can’t say I’ve followed the case extensively at all, but the one thing that stood out to me was the judges decision to bar the prosecutors other acts evidence video of rittenhouse wanting to shoot people he suspected were criminals at a cvs 2 weeks before he did in fact shoot people he suspected of being criminals.  Somehow those things aren’t remotely related to the judge which tells me he already thinks what rittenhouse did was self defense.  Should have let the jury decide if that was pertinent rather than just bar it outright.

I'm glad you admit you haven't followed the case if you still think events were that he was "shoot[ing] people he suspected of being criminals."

The only reason the prosecution wanted the two week old video they claim is of Rittenhouse included is because of their original absurd overcharge that this is first-degree murder, it's nonsense when we have video evidence of the actual events. On the same day the judge made this decision that you see as so biased as to apparently maliciously influence the case, he also properly threw out attempts by the defense to enter the criminal history of Rosenbaum.

Why was he there in the first place?  I didn’t realize it was a 17 year olds job to police a protest with a semi automatic rifle

It’s not a massive logical leap to vigilantism.

[benjipwns]

You've jumped the shark into irrelevant nonsense again.

[clothedmacuser]

His mind went from food > Asian food > boats > "fresh off the boat" like Asians > boats stuck in Long Beach thousands of miles way because that's the only way to make the joke work > take that California/Biden ha ha.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/rittenhouse-judge-makes-a-racist-joke-regarding-supply-chain-issues-during-break-i-hope-the-asian-food-isn%E2%80%99t-coming.513540/post-76974717

so he wasn't racist just anti-biden?

[killamajig]

Would the cops have even arrested him or just shot him right then and there?

I know era routinely and uncritically parrot that the only reason the police in America exists is to protect rich peoples stuff and shoot black people, but the idea that police will always kill a suspect rather than arrest them is wholly at odds with the idea that black people are disproportionately jailed in the US.

They're literally mutually exclusive hypotheses.

That’s plausible for nonviolent crimes, which black people are jailed for at a massively disproportionate rate but a violent crime with a gun?

Again, era regularly and uncritically parrot the idea most black people in prison are just unlucky victims who were smoking a lil weed and the system decided to fuck them, but the majority of all offenders currently in prison - of all demographics - are there for violent crimes.

I think there is something deeply fucked going on in the American prison system, because, well, compare it to any other first world countries percentages of incarcerated portion of the population, but the majority of inmates are violent offenders.

It doesn't track with eras narrative.

FACT CHECK: This is false!

https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_offenses.jsp

Drug Offenses   67,235   46.0%
Immigration   6,624   4.5%
Burglary, Larceny, Property Offenses   7,331   5.0%

You could probably argue that most of the extortion, bribery, and fraud crimes are nonviolent as well and probably some of the weapons charges but I don’t have the info nor do I care enough to get that deep into it.  You could equally argue that some of the drug offenses could be violent, so for back of a napkin math well call it even.

Factor that with the race demographics of the BOP system, 38% of BOP inmates are black despite the percentage of Americans who are black sitting at 13-14%.  Blacks are statistically over represented in the BOP while white people are under represented.  The “resetera” narrative is probably closer to reality than assuming everyone in prison is guilty and experienced an equal and entirely unbiased application of the law.

FACT CHECK

You're posting a statistic from the Federal prison system. Go look at State inmates and post those statistics. You'll find there's a difference.

Edit

With a quick Google I came up with this

An estimated 1,296,700 sentenced prisoners were under state jurisdiction at yearend 2005. About 53% (687,700) were held for violent offenses, 20% (253,300) for drug offenses, and 19% (248,900) for property offenses.

Do you want to talk about prisons you can talk with me I worked in one. Most of the people in there didn't get busted smoking weed. A lot of drug charges are also tied with violence. You murdered somebody and had a bag of weed in the trunk you can't just label it as a drug crime

[HaughtyFrank]

His mind went from food > Asian food > boats > "fresh off the boat" like Asians > boats stuck in Long Beach thousands of miles way because that's the only way to make the joke work > take that California/Biden ha ha.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/rittenhouse-judge-makes-a-racist-joke-regarding-supply-chain-issues-during-break-i-hope-the-asian-food-isn%E2%80%99t-coming.513540/post-76974717

so he wasn't racist just anti-biden?

Don't tell anyone that Colbert is also cracking supply chain jokes

[benjipwns]

so he wasn't racist just anti-biden?

There's nothing Democratic judges love more than sneaking dogwhistles to attack Joe Biden (and California) into their comments about lunch.

[Lonewulfeus]

Why is his motive irrelevant?

[Uncle]

Why is his motive irrelevant?

because that's the realm of determining whether he's innocent or guilty, not the realm of defending protections and rule of law for anyone in front of a judge, regardless of why they're there

[benjipwns]

Why is his motive irrelevant?

It doesn't speak to motive. I don't know the prosecutions argument as to why it matters, if you link to the transcript I'd be happy to read it though, but you can't introduce everything ever said by someone as evidence as to motive for a specific act. This recording alleged to be of Rittenhouse is from two weeks prior not the same day or the day before even. Even if Rittenhouse had gone there deliberately for the sole purpose of shooting people (of which this recording is apparently the only evidence) he still can act entirely and solely in self defense when it comes time to shoot someone. The prosecution is failing completely on the latter point so I don't see how this would bail them out in making the case for murder, especially first degree. Hence why I don't see it as rising to the level of the judge maliciously trying to throw the case to protect white supremacy.

Look, the prosecution is trying to manufacture motive for an underlying charge, murder, they have no evidence for. I'm not sure what it would add for the jury.

[Boredfrom]

Why is his motive irrelevant?

Motive doesnt matter for some reason. Thats why you can pull a Robert Durst and dismember somebody but that doesnt mean he did kill him in the eyes of the law.

It doesn't speak to motive. I don't know the prosecutions argument as to why it matters, if you link to the transcript I'd be happy to read it though, but you can't introduce everything ever said by someone as evidence as to motive for a specific act. This recording alleged to be of Rittenhouse is from two weeks prior not the same day or the day before even. Even if Rittenhouse had gone there deliberately for the sole purpose of shooting people (of which this recording is apparently the only evidence) he still can act entirely and solely in self defense when it comes time to shoot someone.

[benjipwns]

Motive doesnt matter for some reason. Thats why you can pull a Robert Durst and dismember somebody but that doesnt mean he did kill him in the eyes of the law.

Your Durst example is poor, they didn't charge him with anything lesser than premeditated first degree murder. The prosecutors never disputed Durst's claim of a fight which explicitly rules out a first degree murder charge.

Prosecutors are not allowed to put people in prison for any reason they want.

[Boredfrom]

Motive doesnt matter for some reason. Thats why you can pull a Robert Durst and dismember somebody but that doesnt mean he did kill him in the eyes of the law.

Your Durst example is poor,

Why? I didnt say the presecutor didnt fuck it out also there. But the guy so obviously did it that is hurts (again, not saying that Kyle Ratface or whatever is guilty,  but is irritating that you are acting like twitter is raping the US law system because stuff like this)

 

didn't charge him with anything lesser than premeditated first degree murder. The prosecutors never disputed Durst's claim of a fight which explicitly rules out a first degree murder charge.

And he got free and innocent (sorry, got charged for tampering with evidence)

The law is perfect,i guess.

Prosecutors are not allowed to put people in prison for any reason they want.

I agree but why pretend there is no grey areas or that everything is fault ofthe shitty presecutor.

[benjipwns]

Durst (or Rittenhouse) going free because the prosecution fucked up and failed to prove their charges is not a problem with the legal system. It's utterly correct.

I agree but why pretend there is no grey areas or that everything is fault ofthe shitty presecutor.

Who has argued this? Quote it.

but is irritating that you are acting like twitter is raping the US law system because stuff like this

Demanding that innocent people be thrown in prison for life is "raping" the US legal system, sorry.

[Boredfrom]

Durst going free because the prosecution fucked up and failed to prove their charges is not a problem with the legal system. It's utterly correct.

 

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/family-of-robert-dursts-first-wife-to-speak-after-murder-indictment/3388775/

PERFECTION

Who has argued this? Quote it.

Is just the impression you are giving as how hard you are care posting about this trial:

I never said you did, we don't disagree. I'm saying there are tons of people who are champing at the bit to tear down the law in this case because it supports their bias and their ideology and they want blood.

This has been the story of world politics for 10 years, and no exclusive of progressist/neoliberals. It sucks, but I also think people are allowed to vent or shit on this stuff.

[benjipwns]

I also think people are allowed to vent or shit on this stuff.

When I have said people cannot do that?

They can do that and then I'm allowed to "vent or shit" about them calling for the elimination of the rule of law.

[Boredfrom]

I have no idea what you're trying to even say.

That I dont want to talk about this case in the shit thread because is depressing than funny.

They can do that and then I'm allowed to "vent or shit" about them calling for the elimination of the rule of law.

SEE!!!

[clothedmacuser]

Why is his motive irrelevant?

Because we need to know if the judge is racist or just anti-biden.  Both are equally bad but for different reasons.

[benjipwns]

That I dont want to talk about this case in the shit thread because is depressing than funny.

Have you tried not talking about it?

[Boredfrom]

That I dont want to talk about this case in the shit thread because is depressing than funny.

Have you tried not talking about it?

Have you tried the politics thread? How many pages and ignored Nintex posts almost dedicated to this trial?

[benjipwns]

Be the change you seek.

[Boredfrom]

Be the change you seek.

We can do it together.

[benjipwns]

I already am, I don't share your goals however.

[Boredfrom]

I already am, I don't share your goals however.

My only goal is being free.

[benjipwns]

Ethos and Praxis in the Meta: ResetERA.com staff actioning racist student group at Emerson College: https://www.thefire.org/emerson-college-investigates-suspends-conservative-student-group-for-stickers-criticizing-chinas-government/

Update:

The Conduct Board found, in particular, that:

By disseminating the Stickers[, TPUSA] engaged in discriminatory conduct on the basis of national origin, that had the effect of "unreasonably interfering with" the Complainant's enrollment and/or had the effect of creating a hostile, intimidating or offensive working, living or learning environment. Although the Board found that the members of the Emerson chapter did not intend to target anyone other than China's government, handing out the sticker nonetheless had a discriminatory effect given the pervasive environment of anti- Asian discrimination that has developed over the past several years particularly in the wake of the COVID pandemic.

[clothedmacuser]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/kotaku-call-of-duty-vanguards-campaign-is-an-insult-to-world-war-ii.513924/

[Boredfrom]

don't get this article at all. Yes COD's campaign is full of unrealistic stuff and people doing crazy shit that didn't happen in reality, but that is how they all are. I for one was happy to have a big budget AAA cod campaign based around more underrepresented demographics that actually fought in the war and never get highlighted at all. This article is just going to be used to fuel the alt-right assholes that already complain about this game starring a black man and russian woman. Every COD ever has had individuals doing insane shit, and video games in general, and it's never questioned when it's a white guy because it looks 'natural', but add an underrepresented minority and suddenly the pitchforks come and people start caring about realism and historical accuracy.

Like we get one game in a AAA franchise actually highlighting characters like these after dozens and dozens of the opposite, and it's supposed to be a problem.

The article just told you that reality was way more complicated than a Captain Planet episode and that ignoring this is a disservice. There werent just nazis acting like racist scumbags.

Rather than attempt to actually confront any of the relevant issues that would have been faced by anyone at the time, the game instead takes the most pusillanimous route possible. You’ll never believe this, but, right, the Nazis were pretty racist. I know! The game’s cartoon villains snarl their bigotry, while our heroes are all dreadfully offended on behalf of each other. We know the Germans are the baddies, because they’re the naughty racist ones. The very notion would never cross the indefectible minds of any of the Allied characters.

Things venture more daringly when it comes to sexism, because of course they do. The female character, a Russian sniper, gets to say, “Because I’m a WOMAN?!” most of the times she gets a line, and here the game is so brave as to put some of the misogyny into the mouths of her teammates. Sorry, not mouths, mouth. The Australian one. Because we all know they’re a bit like that, eh? Them and their Sheilas. Bunch of drongos.

[benjipwns]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/kotaku-call-of-duty-vanguards-campaign-is-an-insult-to-world-war-ii.513924/

It always bothered me how in every media depiction of WW2 they act like only the nazis were racist. Don't get me wrong they were fucking demons but I would argue that France, Britain and especially the US were as if not more racist towards POC as the nazis .

 

[Taco Bell Tower]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/recent-character-redesigns-in-media-that-add-white-to-their-updated-outfits.513840/#post-76965486
They can't read at all 

[Nintex]

So after years of 'why aren't there any women or black soldiers in WW2?' complaints they finally get what they want and what the fuck do they do... complain.
Y'all really surprised the people that make yearly shoot bang could not pull off your woke power fantasy of the stoic non-binary yet totally accepted Russian trans activist spreading pamflets in the Stalingrad ruins.

In other news, Icecream

https://twitter.com/benandjerrys/status/1458964448924819460

[Boredfrom]

So after years of 'why aren't there any women or black soldiers in WW2?' complaints they finally get what they want and what the fuck do they do... complain.
Y'all really surprised the people that make yearly shoot bang could not pull off your woke power fantasy of the stoic non-binary yet totally accepted Russian trans activist spreading pamflets in the Stalingrad ruins.

That is a pretty spectacular misread of that thread and article

[HaughtyFrank]

Sometimes it's hard to tell what kind of equality people want in the justice system. Should Rittenhouse be treated like a black person would be, or should every black person be treated like he is. The latter seems preferable but it also means that Rittenhouse should walk

[benjipwns]

Sometimes it's hard to tell what kind of equality people want in the justice system. Should Rittenhouse be treated like a black person would be, or should every black person be treated like he is. The latter seems preferable but it also means that Rittenhouse should walk

The latter to me not only seems preferable but essentially optimal. The more time I spend in the social justice mines the more they seem fundamentally opposed to and contemptuous of this as a concept.

Maybe they don't matter and "nobody really believes" it but it doesn't seem very realistic to have to silo oneself away from large swaths of the media culture simply to pretend this increasingly extreme and utterly dangerous view isn't becoming a dominant cause among certain elite institutions.

[Boredfrom]

Sometimes it's hard to tell what kind of equality people want in the justice system. Should Rittenhouse be treated like a black person would be, or should every black person be treated like he is. The latter seems preferable but it also means that Rittenhouse should walk

The latter to me not only seems preferable but essentially optimal. The more time I spend in the social justice mines the more they seem fundamentally opposed to and contemptuous of this as a concept.

Maybe they don't matter and "nobody really believes" it but it doesn't seem very realistic to have to silo oneself away from large swaths of the media culture simply to pretend this increasingly extreme and utterly dangerous view isn't becoming a dominant cause among certain elite institutions.

Sometimes it's hard to tell what kind of equality people want in the justice system. Should Rittenhouse be treated like a black person would be, or should every black person be treated like he is. The latter seems preferable but it also means that Rittenhouse should walk

[benjipwns]

It sucks, but I also think people are allowed to vent or shit on this stuff.

[benjipwns]

Silence non-lunatics!

User Banned (Permanent): Egregious downplaying of systemic bigotry in the judicial system

If anyone is interested in understanding the actual issue at hand, here is what is going on:

1. The prosecution can introduce evidence -- but that evidence has to be authenticated/introduced by someone familiar with its history. I.E, 'Yes, I took this photo marked state's evidence 727'.
2. If that evidence (such as a photograph) is modified in some way (and yes, zooming/cropping counts) -- the 'expert' that did the modification has to introduce that as a new piece of evidence. ('Yes, I cropped the photo previously introduced as state's evidence 727. My cropped version is marked state's evidence 838.').
3. All of the state's prior modified imagery was previously introduced by a Dr. James Armstrong, a forensic image specialist that did the modification. You can watch his original testimony here.
4. The prosecutor wanted to show a zoomed-in view of a previously admitted photograph -- just by zooming it himself on an iPAD (IIRC). That is not allowed.
5. If the prosecutor wants to show a zoomed-in view of a previosly admitted photograph -- he can have a forensic image specialist do so, such as Dr. Armstrong, and he can have Dr. Armstrong introduce the new/modified evidence.

There's nothing wild going on here, except people taking Twitter clips out-of-context without understanding the process. The judge is not a forensic image specialist. It's not his job to know whether or not pinch-to-zoom affects the content of the image (and, btw, it does.). That what experts are for.

If the prosecutor wants a modified form of the image -- he can just ask an expert to produce and then introduce it. It's not a big deal.

nuh uh, systemic racism, boomer judge, whataboutism!

User Banned (1 Month): Dismissing Concerns Around Racism

Seems like it's just a regular joke regarding supply chain issues and everything being late? There's no connection between supply chain logistics and asian sentiment, the only iffy thing is calling it 'Asian' food instead of something more specific.

User Banned (Permanent): Dismissive commentary around racism concerns over multiple posts; account in junior phase

This is how the left gets manipulated by the right; exploiting the outage culture when there's plenty to be justifiably outraged by this "judge" who probably shouldn't be presiding over even a small claims court.

I am fully aware of the kind of soft racism that exists today, which in some ways can be more nefarious due to its subtle nature. I've been aware and dealing with it my whole adult life.

Was this a harmless dad joke about supply chain? Or was it a xenophobic/racist sentiment expressed as soft racism from a white male boomer who assuredly lives in an overwhelmingly white/wealthy town in Wisconsin? The truth is, no one knows for sure of his intent and I wouldn't be surprised if the judge himself does not know. Therefore, I believe this is not worthwhile for ridicule and fear that doing so will cause more harm than good.

As Chairman Yang wrote, getting outraged over this will only help him garner more sympathy, thereby playing right into the hands of the conservative political machine.

This isn’t about placating the conservatives. That’s not how you win elections.

Do you see all the other threads about the stupid things this judge did? Go pour your outrage in those. I’m not sure why you took what I wrote as limiting outrage in general, especially since everything you’re clearly outraged by is fully justified.

Do you really not see how an outrage towards something that can be easily dismissed via plausible deniability can be counter productive? And not falling for traps set by the right is gas lighting by fake sympathizers now?

If you’re on the scorched earth policy, sorry guy, I ain’t there yet.

As you’re the OP, I should say I meant no disrespect with my posts.

I honestly believe the judge is a racist boomer who did his best to acquit a young white supremacist; we agree on that. What I am not sure about is that the Asian food joke was done with a racist intent. Many posts
in this very thread show I’m not alone.

Even if it was, he could easily dismiss it. And this is why things like this have to be signal boosted carefully. Given all the other things this judge did that stinks of racism, trying to crucify him over this will melt all the justifiable shit way with it.

And this can have a significant negative impact on the perception of well meaning suburbanites.

Nearly that whole entire thread is completely unhinged from anything resembling reality.

[Lonewulfeus]

Sometimes it's hard to tell what kind of equality people want in the justice system. Should Rittenhouse be treated like a black person would be, or should every black person be treated like he is. The latter seems preferable but it also means that Rittenhouse should walk

I think people want the latter but the former is a much more attainable goal.

[Boredfrom]

It sucks, but I also think people are allowed to vent or shit on this stuff.

I also think that regardless of anyone's actual power it remains fair to criticize them.

[Transhuman]

It would seem he is, but the prosecution has done a very, very poor job of arguing that it wasn't self defense or that Rittenhouse went to Kenosha with the intention of murdering people.

They tried to introduce the video where Rittenhouse told a friend he wished he had his gun so he could kill protesters. I don't know how that got canned. Normally on Law and Order, that'd be the part where Jack McCoy says "goes to state of mind, your Honour" and the judge says "I'll allow it". I've seen that work dozens of times.

[benjipwns]

It's possible that a judge appointed by a Democrat with a liberal jurisprudence record that he's abiding by in this very case is a "MAGA chud" out to serve white supremacy but I certainly wouldn't want to place money on the possibility.

They tried to introduce the video where Rittenhouse told a friend he wished he had his gun so he could kill protesters. I don't know how that got canned.

Because it doesn't exist?

[Boredfrom]

It's possible that a judge appointed by a Democrat with a liberal jurisprudence record that he's abiding by in this very case is a "MAGA chud" out to serve white supremacy but I certainly wouldn't want to place money on the possibility.

They tried to introduce the video where Rittenhouse told a friend he wished he had his gun so he could kill protesters. I don't know how that got canned.

Because it doesn't exist?

   .

https://www.kenoshanews.com/news/local/state-seeks-to-admit-video-of-rittenhouse-in-separate-incident-threatening-to-shoot-men-with/article_cddeb29f-5a86-5151-ab20-a3834456304e.html

(He didn’t say protesters but looters... still  )

[benjipwns]

Right. Correct. There is no video in which Rittenhouse says he wishes to kill protesters. It does not exist.

(He didn’t say protesters but looters... still  )

No, incorrect, he doesn't say looters either.

I don't know why you guys are so desperate to lie about this case.