unarmed sitting protestor shot 14 times

[Walker]

and there is another take on this;
that conservatives actually cheer this as the cops
are engaged in "self defense" that is there usual cop out,
and the bible, on which the conservatives base their
their beliefs on, actually says this:

"thou shall not kill"

this is their defense of ending abortions
but self-defense is their go-to in cops killing civilians...
but if you are consistent, you must also condemn this action
as violating the lord message/law/command...it doesn't say,

thou shall not kill, UNLESS it is in self-defense.. and that is ok...

nope, thou shall not kill... nope, that is the entire commandment....
and any other defense is in violation of god's law/commandment...
this hypocrisy of the right is, in part, why I am at war with the right...
abortion bad, cop killing people good because it was in self-defense....
all based on the exact same law/commandment in the bible....
which is why we need to end morals/ethics based on religious
considerations.... and make it secular at all times....

so what does morality/ethics look like without a religious
context.... and this is Nietzsche entire output... what does
ethics/morals look like in a no-god universe?

Kropotkin

RIght wingers when asked to wear a mask: MY BODY MY CHOICE, when asked about abortion: NOT FOR WOMEN.
Abortion: Sanctity of life; Capital punishment: Roast those Muthas!
When I want to figure our people like prometheus I just look at some Trump supporters who think "Nazi Pelosi" instigated Jan 6th.

IT all makes sense...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzDhm808oU4

Pure gibberish and nonsense.

Philosophers have a responsibility to appropriately direct their brain power. Negligence of what’s appropriate disrupts the balance of the universe.

The Climate Crisis is the most immediate and urgent threat to All Life. Every person, industry, and country must put their full attention towards ending the Climate Crisis by making the climate priority numero uno.

These distractions concerning Leftist incompetence that corrupts society and its institutions only serve to shift the blame of Leftist idiocy, and delays the solving of the Crisis.

Climate Change and nothing else is the burning house.

We expect more of you.

[Belinda]

the hardest thing about killing a cop is knowing the poor bastard cannot comprehend the gravity of what he is doing and what he stands for. he's just an ordinary working guy with a family like everybody else and has never given a second thought to his role and what he's chosen to be. unfortunately for him the 'ignorance of the law is no excuse' nonsense works both ways. when u become a cop, a law enforcement agent in this society (I'm referring to america), prepared and obligated to arrest someone for breaking the law irrespective of their circumstances, u could very well in the most objective sense possible become a force that should be stopped. a literal enemy of the people. for example, some guy gets laid off, loses his house, becomes homeless and is then arrested for loitering. that arrest right there is reason enough to kill em. the good news is in that moment, that cop becomes more important than he ever could be otherwise becuz the lesson to be learned, the point to be made, is extraordinary.

now what is so unfortunate is that one couldn't ever give a formal warning to some aspiring agent of the law becuz they wouldn't take it seriously. one couldn't tell them in advance 'hey knucklehead, do u even know what's going on here? do u have any idea what you're about to do when u take that badge and become licensed to physically attack a citizen? u better be daaaamn sure that's what u wanna do becuz u are about to get in waaaaay over your head.'

suppose some joker level type genius broadcasted a nation wide message to all police, informing each one that he has two options; resign and never return to law enforcement, or risk being shot.

they would laugh at that.

If cops as an institution had the same social status as medicine or law then all cop personel would be educated in professional ethics to such a standard that no proper cop would harm an unarmed civilian. Putin has made his cops into his own militia , that's to say Russian cops support Putin's interests against his own people if that is what he wants to happen.
The question is: 'do our cops serve the people or the establishment?'

[Walker]

"What the actual fuck are you talking about?"

this study material is for anarchists and illegalists only. I'm gonna have to aks u to leave, sir.

Everyone that is intelligent enough to know that guns in society is a fucking stupid idea should...leave?

It would be great if all that remain believing in their guns could be placed into some massive arena to argue with each other (*of course with their loaded guns - )

"Whose bread I eat, his* song I sing."


* Australia ... gun confiscation.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Thanks for posting this.

It is a joke in bad taste but “they” were shot 14 times because there were too many of “them”. The police were outmanned.

In all seriousness, Goodman’s presentation and the ‘independent autopsy’ are rather weak. For all I know he might have been assassinated by the police but that is entirely speculative.

But it is more likely that that was not the case.

One therefore believes what suits one. And Goodman’s presentation feeds as it were those who wish to decide the case as ‘evil police’ against ‘peaceful protestor’. I watch her show regularly but it is not hard to see that her presentations are skewed (often enough).

[Walker]

The question is: 'do our cops serve the people or the establishment?'

The motto, "Protect and Serve," is rather open-ended.

They serve who signs the paycheck. Whose bread I eat ...

[Sculptor]

and there is another take on this;
that conservatives actually cheer this as the cops
are engaged in "self defense" that is there usual cop out,
and the bible, on which the conservatives base their
their beliefs on, actually says this:

"thou shall not kill"

this is their defense of ending abortions
but self-defense is their go-to in cops killing civilians...
but if you are consistent, you must also condemn this action
as violating the lord message/law/command...it doesn't say,

thou shall not kill, UNLESS it is in self-defense.. and that is ok...

nope, thou shall not kill... nope, that is the entire commandment....
and any other defense is in violation of god's law/commandment...
this hypocrisy of the right is, in part, why I am at war with the right...
abortion bad, cop killing people good because it was in self-defense....
all based on the exact same law/commandment in the bible....
which is why we need to end morals/ethics based on religious
considerations.... and make it secular at all times....

so what does morality/ethics look like without a religious
context.... and this is Nietzsche entire output... what does
ethics/morals look like in a no-god universe?

Kropotkin

RIght wingers when asked to wear a mask: MY BODY MY CHOICE, when asked about abortion: NOT FOR WOMEN.
Abortion: Sanctity of life; Capital punishment: Roast those Muthas!
When I want to figure our people like prometheus I just look at some Trump supporters who think "Nazi Pelosi" instigated Jan 6th.

IT all makes sense...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzDhm808oU4

Pure gibberish and nonsense.

Open your eyes.
Your wank fantasy Trump is a crook.
And idiots like you are throwing cash at him to buy crooked lawyers.
All around him dozens of his acolytes have already been found guilty of a range of crimes, some have done time.
The rope is finally surrounding Trump. And just like his alter-ego Al Capone Trump is gonna do gaol time.

[Belinda]

Thanks for posting this.

It is a joke in bad taste but “they” were shot 14 times because there were too many of “them”. The police were outmanned.

In all seriousness, Goodman’s presentation and the ‘independent autopsy’ are rather weak. For all I know he might have been assassinated by the police but that is entirely speculative.

But it is more likely that that was not the case.

One therefore believes what suits one. And Goodman’s presentation feeds as it were those who wish to decide the case as ‘evil police’ against ‘peaceful protestor’. I watch her show regularly but it is not hard to see that her presentations are skewed (often enough).

I take that as a warning and as generally good advice. The media are hard to evaluate and I'm driven as often as not to look to who benefits from whichever stance. Sculptor's online persona is unfailingly sceptical, and so I trust Sculptor's judgement as to which reportage is honest.

[Alexis Jacobi]

I take that as a warning and as generally good advice. The media are hard to evaluate and I'm driven as often as not to look to who benefits from whichever stance. Sculptor's online persona is unfailingly sceptical, and so I trust Sculptor's judgement as to which reportage is honest.

Curious it is then that I see his stance as 'hysterical' 'over-blown' 'shrill' 'emotional' and for these exact reasons unreliable. Just as I could never rely on him to be given an accurate assessment of the *facts*, nor an accurate picture of *the world* and what goes on in the world, similarly I am also deeply suspicious of those on the other side of the spectrum who seem enmeshed in the same 'hysterical' 'over-blown' 'shrill' 'emotional' mode of presenting information.

But to make this topical: there is, there must be, an accurate and fair description of what exactly happened at the protest which resulted in 'them' getting shot and killed. But who is telling the story? What purpose will the telling of the story have? To whom will that story, however it is bent, be purveyed? And then: what does the audience desire to hear and how will Story be moulded for them?

A picture-perfect example:

Open your eyes.
Your wank fantasy Trump is a crook.
And idiots like you are throwing cash at him to buy crooked lawyers.
All around him dozens of his acolytes have already been found guilty of a range of crimes, some have done time.
The rope is finally surrounding Trump. And just like his alter-ego Al Capone Trump is gonna do gaol time.

[promethean75]

"If cops as an institution had the same social status as medicine or law then all cop personel would be educated in professional ethics to such a standard that no proper cop would harm an unarmed civilian"

yes that would be neat, but what i meant wuz police are illegitimate in a capitalist society. and that it is unfortunate cops aren't getting this memo.

[Iwannaplato]

Only someone not really paying attention to things could have managed not to notice that a large portion of the right is very skeptical about police power, violence, ignorance of the law, systematic perjury and more.

Coherent observation on your part.

I’d modify “police power” and extend it to national state power (the term they use is Deep State), the intelligence agency complex, both military and domestic, and the FBI (Federal police: Federal political police).

The Right became ‘skeptical’ when these powers began to be used against them by what they describe as a deep state régime. As a reference point for this perspective I’d refer to the ideas of Steve Bannon.

It is hard to clearly see and accurately describe the massive power struggles playing out today, both nationally and internationally, and easy to employ (paranoiacally) inaccurate descriptions and convenient generalizations. You have to cobble together a tentative perspective by intuitively blending perspectives offered by people with real experience in divergent areas.

Any additional thoughts on these matters?

I agree generally with the above. I have lots of thoughts, though I actually tend to avoid putting them online.
One thing I will say is that one of the most clever things done recently was to get the Left to think that broad criticisms of the media and broad criticisms of government was a Right wing attitude. To make this taboo on the Left. It wasn't before, not when I was younger. So, now a lot of broad changes could be made which at one time the Left would have at least questioned openly. Leaving this to the Right, with both sides demonizing each other so much that no discussion is really possible.

And this is of great benefit to a rather small group of people now trying to change everything and not caring at all about right, left.

[Belinda]

I take that as a warning and as generally good advice. The media are hard to evaluate and I'm driven as often as not to look to who benefits from whichever stance. Sculptor's online persona is unfailingly sceptical, and so I trust Sculptor's judgement as to which reportage is honest.

Curious it is then that I see his stance as 'hysterical' 'over-blown' 'shrill' 'emotional' and for these exact reasons unreliable. Just as I could never rely on him to be given an accurate assessment of the *facts*, nor an accurate picture of *the world* and what goes on in the world, similarly I am also deeply suspicious of those on the other side of the spectrum who seem enmeshed in the same 'hysterical' 'over-blown' 'shrill' 'emotional' mode of presenting information.

But to make this topical: there is, there must be, an accurate and fair description of what exactly happened at the protest which resulted in 'them' getting shot and killed. But who is telling the story? What purpose will the telling of the story have? To whom will that story, however it is bent, be purveyed? And then: what does the audience desire to hear and how will Story be moulded for them?

A picture-perfect example:

Open your eyes.
Your wank fantasy Trump is a crook.
And idiots like you are throwing cash at him to buy crooked lawyers.
All around him dozens of his acolytes have already been found guilty of a range of crimes, some have done time.
The rope is finally surrounding Trump. And just like his alter-ego Al Capone Trump is gonna do gaol time.

Do you believe emotional flatness to be a prerequisite of sceptical capabiity?

[Alexis Jacobi]

Do you believe emotional flatness to be a prerequisite of sceptical capabiity?

To be somewhat or largely free of emotionalized ideas is, yes, a big part of what I do recommend. But as you have gathered I see emotionalism in the realm of ideas as often negative. However, I am definitely not opposed to feelings and sentiments.

[Belinda]

"If cops as an institution had the same social status as medicine or law then all cop personel would be educated in professional ethics to such a standard that no proper cop would harm an unarmed civilian"

yes that would be neat, but what i meant wuz police are illegitimate in a capitalist society. and that it is unfortunate cops aren't getting this memo.

I don't understand . Do you think the British police force is an illegal institution? Or else, what do you mean by "illegitimate"? Morally illegitimate?

[Belinda]

Do you believe emotional flatness to be a prerequisite of sceptical capabiity?

To be somewhat or largely free of emotionalized ideas is, yes, a big part of what I do recommend. But as you have gathered I see emotionalism in the realm of ideas as often negative. However, I am definitely not opposed to feelings and sentiments.

"

'hysterical' 'over-blown' 'shrill' 'emotional'

Your words. Shrill and emotional are compatible with sceptical reasoning. Hysterical and over-blown are your own evaluations.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Your words. Shrill and emotional are compatible with sceptical reasoning. Hysterical and over-blown are your own evaluations.

Me disagree. Fundamental level. What now?