Funtitled

[sawbuckplus]

[gopfails]

Source

[generallemarc]

Me when I blindly assume everyone killed in police shootouts did nothing wrong to tell the people who survived actual fascism that they don't know what fascism is.

[gopfails]

They shot him infront of his child and dragged his corpse out into the street

They literally got away with executing a man in broad daylight and murdered a woman cause she was rude to them.

You're a vile person

[generallemarc]

Yes, how awful I am for not blindly taking your screenshots and very unbiased description as accurate, which you're providing in the context of saying that actual survivors of fascism are wrong about what fascism is and you, the privileged one who lives in a liberal democracy and is free to call the state whatever they want, know better. Y'all spend your time shrieking about ZioNazis while telling survivors of actual fascism to shut up when they disagree with you.

[gopfails]

Oh cool so now you're LYING about dead people. Very religious of you so tolerate and kind.

You're going to hell

[generallemarc]

Yes indeed, I'm going to hell for lying, which I did when I said absolutely nothing about any specific person beyond "you're just assuming all of these people were innocent of anything and not dangerous". Show me where I lied about a dead person. Please.

[nonenosome2]

"She was rude to them"

Damn. That is a weird way of saying she hit a cop with her car.

I'm sure the others are equally unbiased descriptions.

[gopfails]

Even the pedophile you worship disagrees with you.

Victim blaming a dead woman who cant fight back or defend herself is absolutely pathetic and you should be embarrassed to post your shit takes online.

[nonenosome2]

Pedophile you worship.

Wow. 2 incorrect statements in one. You really can't help yourself can you?

And personally, I can watch the video of her hitting the gas while a cop is in front of her and hitting the cop with her car. I don't need him to tell me what I need to believe. I have eyes and video.

Victim blaming

Is it victim blaming now to watch a video and describe what happened? Words just dont mean anything anymore.

[salt-n-tigers]

Retards like that will never be in short supply, Brother. Fascism is responsible for millions, tens of millions of deaths but that idiot thinks “83 people” is a gotcha explanation for how we are living under a fascist tyrant. Those 83 people have only themselves to blame anyway

[bigredm38-6]

...*probably* have only themselves to blame...

Also, I'd like to see how many people were killed per year under bribin' biden.

And if the death from TDS psychos shooting up ICE facilities, and perps OD'ing in LE custody are counted under "ICE kills".

[the-davest-of-uncles]

OP, just be honest and say you love illegals, you hate American citizens, and you hate the rule of law.

[icantthinkofausername]

anyway, pro tip, don’t try to hit people with your car, especially if they have a gun, they will shoot you and that’d be your own fault.

[the-davest-of-uncles]

OP believes leftists are above the law.

I wonder which laws he's broken...?

[winterphile]

So are leftists now arguing that once Federal agents have caused the death of a certain number of people those laws can no longer be enforced? Does that apply to the IRS and ATF, or is this just laws you don't want enforced anyway?

[syabm]

GOP fails is a distraction troll.

Basically all that account (and his prior socks) does is try to distract from criticisms of the left, and never admit anyone on the left has ever been wrong.

[sawbuckplus]

[gopfails]

Source

[generallemarc]

Me when I blindly assume everyone killed in police shootouts did nothing wrong to tell the people who survived actual fascism that they don't know what fascism is.

[gopfails]

They shot him infront of his child and dragged his corpse out into the street

They literally got away with executing a man in broad daylight and murdered a woman cause she was rude to them.

You're a vile person

[generallemarc]

Yes, how awful I am for not blindly taking your screenshots and very unbiased description as accurate, which you're providing in the context of saying that actual survivors of fascism are wrong about what fascism is and you, the privileged one who lives in a liberal democracy and is free to call the state whatever they want, know better. Y'all spend your time shrieking about ZioNazis while telling survivors of actual fascism to shut up when they disagree with you.

[gopfails]

Oh cool so now you're LYING about dead people. Very religious of you so tolerate and kind.

You're going to hell

[generallemarc]

Yes indeed, I'm going to hell for lying, which I did when I said absolutely nothing about any specific person beyond "you're just assuming all of these people were innocent of anything and not dangerous". Show me where I lied about a dead person. Please.

[nonenosome2]

"She was rude to them"

Damn. That is a weird way of saying she hit a cop with her car.

I'm sure the others are equally unbiased descriptions.

[syabm]

If this is the same troll I've seen before, this isn't even remotely the first time I've seen them lie about the Good incident.

Like the time they claimed the ICE agents weren't clearly cops by saying the ID patches were unreadable smudges.

...Based exclusively on one blurry, low-res video.

Of course, given how dedicated they are, I assume they're either a paid troll or just plain mental, so

are on the table.

Trying to drive your car with a cop reaching in the window automatically puts that cop in danger, and I don't think I've seen seen any of them acknowledge that.

So even if we ignore the cop who was already in front of her telling her to stop when she started moving forward, what she did still could've killed a cop.

I think she panicked and lost her head, but that's still on her.

[mitchfynde]

Is self-defense the reason given for the shooting? Yes.

Did the agent survive? Yes.

Did the driver survive? No.

What was the physical danger the driver faced? A firearm.

What was the physical danger the agent faced? A 2-ton SUV.

Was the agent within at least a few feet of the vehicle before it started moving? Yes.

Did shooting the driver immediately halt the momentum of the 2-ton vehicle? No.

Would there be a reasonable expectation that shooting the driver would immediately halt the momentum of a 2-ton vehicle? No.

Is getting out of the way of a moving vehicle the best way to not be hit by that moving vehicle? Yes.

Does getting out of the way of a moving vehicle require shooting a gun? No.

Is it possible that aiming and shooting a gun will actually delay getting out of the way of a moving vehicle? Yes.

Was the agent holding a gun in his right hand and a phone in his left hand? Yes.

Did he drop either his phone or his gun throughout the entire altercation? No.

Did he shoot her at least two more times through the driver's side window while he was next to the vehicle? Yes.

Were there other people near the agent when he fired his gun? Yes.

Was the vehicles accelerator pegged after he shot her? Yes.

Did that cause the vehicle to speed down a neighborhood street until it collided with other cars where its engine continued to redline even after it was stopped? Yes.

Was that a potential danger to the general public? Yes.

Taken from DarkMatter2525's analysis of the situation. These are the facts of the matter. Shooting her did not stop her vehicle and yet he still survived. Shooting her directly endangered surrounding officers and any civilians in the area.

I can see from a police standard, arguing this was a fair shoot based on self-defense due to the complicated nature of self-defense and policing in general. But the facts of the matter do not speak kindly towards Jonathan Ross's actions as an intelligent human being.

As far as her actions being on her, maybe, but she had pretty strong justifications for everything she did here as well when you consider the actual facts. ICE certainly is something worth opposing. Opposing it puts you in danger. ICE under Trump is not necessarily beholden to law and can basically do what they want to you, as far as we can tell. Would you want to be captured by what you viewed as the gestapo of a fascist government as a visible minority?

She did her best to avoid harming anyone to the point that her vehicle didn't end up harming anyone even without her controlling it anymore. Renee Good did put herself in danger though. Of course she did. By protesting a fascist government's state police. That's hardly something that I think anyone should be killed for. She's a hero.

PS: Don't reblog my Israel posts again or you'll get more of these. Don't mistake me for one of you just because I'm not a leftist.

[siryouarebeingmocked]

>Was the agent within at least a few feet of the vehicle before it started moving? Yes.

In other words, he was close enough to make it extremely difficult to move out of the way in time.

The possibility people defending Good have consistently ignored.

Just like ignoring how she chose to drive forward with a cop directly in front of her. She backed up, and shifted into drive, and then hit the gas.

Y'all love to look for any excuse to hate on the cop, while ignoring the multiple extremely stupid decisions Good made which would not have ended well even if the cop did an acrobatic pirouette out of danger.

>Would there be a reasonable expectation that shooting the driver would immediately halt the momentum of a 2-ton vehicle? No.

I don't know about you, but if a car is coming directly at me and I don't think I have time to dodge, I rate my chances much higher if the driver's foot is off the gas pedal.

>Was that a potential danger to the general public? Yes.

So you'll get mad at the cops for shooting her and leaving the vehicle uncontrolled and therefore a danger to others, but not her for trying to drive away with multiple cops closely surrounding her, including one reaching into the car.

And, like I said, towards one right in front of her.

Interesting priorities.

>PS: Don't reblog my Israel posts again or you'll get more of these. Don't mistake me for one of you just because I'm not a leftist.

So you decided to come after a completely unreleated post just so you could own me, because I silently agreed with you?

I reblog posts from people I strongly disagree with on other various issues all the time. Left, right, center, authoritarian, libertarian, anarchist.

If you feel so strongly about this, I could just block you now so I never reblog any of your posts, even by accident, ever again.

Would you like that?

[mitchfynde]

Do you really expect me to take you seriously when your framing is that he had to do an "acrobatic pirouette" to get out of danger?

We've all seen the footage. He had to take like 1-2 steps back. It was not at all difficult for him to get out of the way. In fact, that was already in my fucking post. He spent more time drawing his weapon than attempting to get out of the way.

I'm not ignoring the choices she made. It seems far more likely to me that she genuinely feared for her life than he did. She acted accordingly. Her merely trying to escape arrest doesn't justify her being executed and I know that's true because you guys rarely claim it does. Instead you twist the facts of what happened even though we've all seen the damn video from like 5 angles.

The car was not coming directly at him. He had time to dodge. You're just lying and it's fucking insane to me.

Yes, I came at you for silently agreeing with me. Fuck you. No, I'm not going to block you. I want at least some of you to be exposed to outside ideas. Emphasis on OUTSIDE ideas, not my one single conservative-coded issue that we just happen to agree on.

[siryouarebeingmocked]

So, I skipped to the end.

That's okay. I'll just block you anyway. It's the only way to guarauntee I don't forget your not-so-polite request not to reblog from you.

As I said, I get plenty of exposure to ideas I disagree with, all the time. I created this blog in the first place partially to keep those arguments off my main.

And I'm not a conservative, as much as bigots (Dawkins) would like to pigeonhole me.

Also, may I point out the rather blatant hypocrisy of saying that I shouldn't silently reblog you just to agree with you because of your own partisan Guilt-by-Association thinking, but implying I'm still obliged to listen to you when you disagree with me?

[ultramaga]

Mitchfynde and other Leftists keep claiming that he can run over cops with impunity in other countries, but if he does it in America, they shoot him, which is proof that they are fascist.

But he never names the country where he can drive over a cop without consequences, and as I've said since the incident, all he has to do to prove us wrong is go to a police station in the non American country of his choice, and Livestream himself telling them he intends to jump in a car and drive at cops ...

and they better get out of the way and not fight back because otherwise they are Nazis who deserve to die.

I would laugh so hard at mitchfynde telling literal communists that they have to accept their place as broken bodies beneath his wheels.

To quote Pink Floyd, they would send him back to mother in a cardboard box.

[syabm]

I've never seen him say that, but given some of his other lunacy, I wouldn't exactly be shocked.

[gayhoediaz]

“it sounds like you’re justifying their actions-“ i am. they’re a fictional character. i’m okay with anything they do all the time. hope this helps.

[some-stars]

this shit from the comments is unironically so fucking sad to me. this is where we’re at now? “aren’t books supposed to have morals?” genuinely let’s all just pack it in and go home, we tried the whole “experiencing life and art at a greater complexity level than an eight year old can handle” thing and it didn’t work out, somebody break the news to oscar wilde, we’re done here. “books are meant to teach you something.” christ.

[napalm-waistcoat]

[bioloyg]

@astromachinations I actually need this on the post

[cookingwithroxy]

Hays Code - Wikipedia

Seduction of the InnocentIn 1948, Dr. Fredric Wertham, a respected New York psychiatrist, began a campaign against comic books. Wertham, the

These people are so bullshit they want to bring back shit like this.

[siryouarebeingmocked]

Except they don't want it to be explicit written standards, they want it to be vibes from angry mobs that often haven't even seen what they're mad about.

[tlaquetzqui]

I’m rapidly approaching a free speech absolutist but the moral context of the things that happen in a story is a fundamental part of the story.

“Light was right (except he didn’t kill billionaires)” okay you didn’t understand Death Note. “The Jedi were actually the bad guys and the Empire is good” that’s cool maybe you should rewatch Star Wars, a bit more carefully. “The UNSC aren’t authoritarian like 343 retconned them to be” Susan the list of things “the UNSC considers contraband” that Jun and the militia on Reach discuss includes rations. As in food.

Lots of my favorite characters are villains. I don’t pretend otherwise. One of them is literally the Antichrist and acts like it!

[mysharona1987]

[lizluvscupcakes]

To anyone confused- he said he’d give money to anyone who could give him a concrete action plan, then the UK called his bluff and showed him one and now he’s leaving them on read.

[daysleftofsecondterm]

Good LORD, the notes on this post are SICKENING. Your mothers raised you better than the way you’re behaving.

[amir-of-choccymilk-elias]

6 billion helps

if you have 6 billion dollars lying around it should go to feeding people

i don’t care if they gave him a fake empty useless plan

i don’t care if 6 billion dollars doesn’t fix everything

my fucking god he’s a trillionare he won’t miss it he doesn’t need it

dying starving children need it

6 billion is a lot of money and IT. FUCKING. HELPS.

the comments on this post disgust me

[siryouarebeingmocked]

>if you have 6 billion dollars lying around it should go to feeding people

Most of Elon's net worth is stock options. It's in companies. With employees.

It is literally already feeding people.

In fact, lots of working-class Tesla employees recently became millionaires because of their stock options.

>i don’t care if they gave him a fake empty useless plan

People on your team are the ones who are mad at him for not throwing his money at the plan, which they blindly assume would've worked.

He said he wanted the plan to be publicly disclosed and the books to be public, and the guy he was talking about refused.

At this point, (collective) you're essentially reduced to throwing a tantrum and ignoring any counterarguments.

>my fucking god he’s a trillionare he won’t miss it he doesn’t need it

Except OP - and that nontroversy - was long before he was a trillionaire.

>6 billion is a lot of money and IT. FUCKING. HELPS.

Why exactly should anyone trust you, when you admitted you don't actually care what happens to the money as long as it's supposedly helping and it's coming from someone you hate?

In reality, a lot of financial aid to help developing countries is embezzled. Which can cause lots of damage, especially when it's uncovered.

Such as freezing aid.

So blindly throwing other people's money at the problem demonstrably makes things worse.

And the US already spends a lot more than 6 billion every year. So does the UK. And France. And Germany. Sweden, Italy, and Holland all donate close to that much individually.

If gigantic countries donating much more aren't getting it done, why do you think another measley 6 bill will magically tip the scale?

[the-davest-of-uncles]

They don't care about feeding the hungry. They just want to hurt people they hate.

[kintallo]

I wonder how many people in the comments whining about Elon Musk and how he should be using his money to help the poor have actually done anything to help the poor themselves, even if it's something as small as donating a can of food to a food drive?

[the-davest-of-uncles]

Few, if any, I expect. They'd rather RAISE AWARENESS (i.e., bitch impotently on the internet). Anything else requires unassing the couch, and that's not going to happen.

[sawbuckplus]

[shoujoboy-restart]

So is Israel more or less antisemitic for killing jews than Hamas?

[siryouarebeingmocked]

[shoujoboy-restart]

why are yall zio water carriers genuinely incapable of criticizing a country killing their own fucking citizens while accusing their opposition of doing that lmao

[generallemarc]

Why are you using the slur invented by David Duke to lie about the Hamas massacre on October 7th so that you can protect your favorite jihadis?

[shoujoboy-restart]

The USA really be making the most innocuous shit have a racist origin, well thats fucked sorry about that.

anyways

i love this reasonings defenders of israel have now of "Israeli deaths caused by the war are horrible and sad! Except when caused by Israel as strategy, then they are okay and very reasonable and just the consequences of war acshually"

[generallemarc]

The USA really be making the most innocuous shit have a racist origin, well thats fucked sorry about that.

Yeah, very innocuous

The meme that disproves Hamas being terrorists

Hey, here's an idea, why don't you provide a source for your conspiracy theory that's not just "hey retard, stop believing the jihadis killed people in their massacre, that offends me!

i love this reasonings defenders of israel have now of "Israeli deaths caused by the war are horrible and sad! Except when caused by Israel as strategy, then they are okay and very reasonable and just the consequences of war acshually"

Of course you love it: you made it up. Because you want so badly for the aggressors in this war to be the victims, for the jihadi terrorists to be the heroes, that you rewrite reality to where Israel attacked itself and then blamed the poor innocent terrorists who only wanted to take babies as hostages for pure and innocent anti-colonial reasons.

[robin-hood-for-freedom]

What idiot communists think 'from each according to his ability, from each according to their need means: I get to do whatever I want and be given infinite luxury goods whenever I want.

What it actually means in practice: Comrade, you are able to work 16 hours a day at the radioactive asbestos factory. And you only need flavorless gruel and a cot to sleep on. Actually scratch that, having a cot is bourgeois decadence.

[unionizeurmom]

Quick tell the socialist and former socialist states that their higher homeownership rates than any capitalist nation is bourgeoise decadence.

Lol you must be talking to babies. Which tracks if you're a libertarian or rightoid.

[generallemarc]

My guy the former socialist states are poor because of the 50 years they spent under socialism. Or are Romania and Albania akshually models of prosperity thanks to their oh-so-democratically elected socialist rulers?

[otakuvampyre]

I love how they think higher home ownership means Communism was more prosperous or something. 🤣

[cookingwithroxy]

... Does anyone want to point out that during the Communist regime there was absolutely 0 home ownership. The state owned all the housing. The reason people in these states have them NOW is because as the governments transitioned to private ownership, they essentially just gave people the houses and apartments they were already living in.

Like, it was literally 'sorting this out is too much trouble, it's your problem now.'

[leviathan-supersystem]

oh hey I missed this when I was trying to have a discussion on this post a couple days ago, but yeah, this one is a massive whopper, easily proven false.

a source explaining how home ownership worked in cuba after the revolution:

https://reimaginerpe.org/19-1/hamberg

For 50 years the great majority of Cuban households have legally owned their homes as a form of “personal property,” but with some limitations.

.

After the Cuban revolution in 1959, evictions were halted, most rents were reduced and urban land speculation was largely controlled. Through the 1960 Urban Reform Law, tenants became homeowners by amortizing the purchase price of their units through rents. Landlords and other property holders were allowed to keep their own home as well as a second vacation home. State-built housing was offered as long-term “leaseholding,” with rents set at 10 percent of family income. Private renting was prohibited. In addition, vacant units confiscated from emigrants were distributed to people in need, and the Cuban lottery was transformed into a short-lived vehicle for financing new housing. Residents of poor urban housing remained as long-term leaseholders, but by the mid-1960s, no longer paid rent.

.

The 1984 (and 1988) General Housing Laws converted most leaseholders into homeowners, legalized most illegal and ambiguous tenure situations of tens of thousands of self-builders and others, permitted free-market private rentals and sales of roof-rights, and fostered self-building by both individuals and newly permitted housing cooperatives (which never got off the ground). The only groups not converted into homeowners were residents of tenements and shantytowns, who remained rent-free leaseholders, and occupants of units directly “linked” to workplaces.

.

By the early 1990s, more than 85 percent of Cuban households were homeowners, paying little or nothing for their units except for maintenance, repair and utilities. There were no mortgages or land and property taxes. Financing for purchases of units or repair was considered a loan, not a mortgage, and therefore dwellings were not used as collateral.

article 22 of the 1976 Cuban constitution is also relevant:

these people don't bother to read or learn anything about the system they condemn, they just have an absurd caricature of that system in their head ("under communism joseph stalin owns your toothbrush and he sneaks into your house to use it every night!!!!") and then when they encounter any evidence this caricature is inaccurate they cover their ears and eyes so the devil won't use objective material facts to tempt them from the holy path of capitalism.

[generallemarc]

Wow, you're right, the one-party dictatorship really did make things better after it put one guy in charge for half a century! Also communism isn't about eradicating private property anymore, and it never was and that's an absurd caricature.

[tsuquilisda]

rebecca black was right. It’s Friday

[whencartoonsruletheworld]

ohhh my god I just fact-checked, Nolan actually DID cut the "Nobody" scene from his Odyssey movie. Mfer that is like cutting the Father reveal from Star Wars. Let me speak in a language you understand this is like not dressing Batman up in his suit. "It was not possible to work it in" the TikTok musical with a budget of $4 and a scratched Hamilton CD managed to work it in in SONG form, step up your FUCKING GAME

[maxiemumdamage]

As someone who has written academic papers about the role of disguise and deceit in the Odyssey — Nobody is so damn important.

Prior to this point, when Odysseus tries to exercise Xenia (ancient Greek guest rites/hospitality code), he did what he was supposed to do. (Well, we think so anyway — notably, the most famous books of the Odyssey are told by Odysseus, who isn’t exactly a reliable narrator.)

But when Polyphemus kills and eats some of the men, the game changes. The Cyclops makes it clear he has no intention of abiding by Zeus’s laws, and will cannibalize the lot of the men. So, Odysseus responds in kind — he breaks Xenia and lies. He introduces himself under a false name as part of a trick. Polyphemus then breaks Xenia again — he tells Nobody he’ll be eaten last, and that is the Cyclops’ guest gift to him.

Odysseus’ transgression is clearly the lesser one. The Nobody trick works. It gets Odysseus and most of his crew out of the cave alive.

But, crucially, before leaving Odysseus sheds his disguise. He admits his true identity, in detail, so he can boast of his achievements and add vanquishing a Cyclops to the list. And it bites him in the ass spectacularly.

The only reason why Polyphemus can curse Odysseus, can bid his father Poseidon to curse the man who blinded him, is because he now knows who did it. If Odysseus had kept his mouth shut, he might have safely made it home from there. But while a big part of why the Nobody disguise vs. real name reveal is showing Odysseus’s hubris, it’s not just about that. It’s also about the start of a pattern that hurts him more than it helps him.

From this point in the Odyssey on, Odysseus lies about his identity constantly. And sometimes it protects him, but more often it’s a detriment or at least unnecessary. He’s lying about his identity primarily to people who are on his side — a kindly loyal swineherd, his son, his faithful wife, his ailing father.

The last one is especially damning, because happens when Odysseus has already killed the suitors and returned home and reunited with the rest of his family sans disguises. He knows from everyone else that Laertes never betrayed him or his legacy, but was mourning his son and heartbroken for almost a decade. Odysseus has publicly declared his return to everyone else — his father doesn’t know because he’s living in squalor remotely. But Odysseus doesn’t tell his father who he is. He makes up a fake identity and tells a story implying Laertes’ son is dead. And when Laertes bursts out crying, then Odysseus drops the charade and finally admits who he really was.

There was no utility to that lie. No loyalty to test. No hidden threats to worry about. But Odysseus still instinctively lies to his beloved father about who he is, only dropping the charade when he sees the damage it’s doing to his relationships.

Because at this point, lying is pathological for Odysseus. He can’t seem to stop doing it. Because with Polyphemus, a lie protected him and the truth hurt him. That is the point of the “ Nobody” disguise.

And they fucking cut it???

[emmaubler]

Tell me you didn't understand the work you were adapting without telling me you didn't understand it.

[phaeton-flier]

Large number of complaints about the modern world resolve down to "I want everything in one bag and I don't want the bag to be heavy"

[phaeton-flier]

I want the newest, coolest, shiniest phone they advertise on Instagram and it should cost $30 and be tiny and also huge and have every feature I could possibly want without thinking about it

[phaeton-flier]

I want my websites to allow me unlimited uploading of all data in high definition with zero lag or buffering, have every single person on earth available, with an easy way to see only the stuff I like and not anything I don't, for free with zero ads, with clear, straightforward moderation that gets rid of every Nazi and has zero false positives that also lets me tell random strangers and the people running the site to kill themselves, and I should be able to find it without doing any independent searching on my own because I'm too lazy to look for it

[phaeton-flier]

I want my girlfriend to have huge tits and a small waist and a fat ass and thin thighs and have clear skin and be a virgin and great at sex, likes all the stuff I like but not in the annoying way other people do, looks like she spends 3 hours a day on makeup and hair but takes up zero time in my bathroom, goes down on me but doesn't ask me to eat her out, has zero kinks except for mine, doesn't demand anything of me and is attracted to me for me, modestly hides her body from the public but also makes other people jealous when I'm with her, isn't crazy jealous but doesn't have any other guy friends, wants three ways only with other girls, and also she approaches me in public so I don't have to do anything to meet or woo her.

[phaeton-flier]

I'd do one about video games or food but the last few years have shown that people will talk endlessly about wanting shorter games with worse graphics made by people who work less hours for more pay, or wanting to pay $1 more for a hamburger if the worker gets paid more, and then immediately revolt when the cost of their bleeding edge console or burrito taxi goes up with inflation.

[no-sharks-on-the-sun]

if i could give one piece of advice to newly transitioning trans men, it's that it's 100% possible to find a community of people (including women!) who don't treat you as a threat, and the people trying to convince you otherwise are not your friends

[sawthatmountainburn]

famously, being treated like this has always worked out for trans girls perfectly and they've always come out of it better people :)

I Am A Transwoman. I Am In The Closet. I Am Not Coming Out.

NOTE: Wow, I wrote this piece anonymously and privately and did not intend for anyone else to actually read it. It was a way for me to vent…

[self-winding]

You wouldn't think "don't treat people like shit because of their gender/sex, don't lump people into a hivemind because of their gender/sex and make generalizations about them" would be such hard pills to swallow in trans communities.

[txttletale]

efforts towards a "positive vision of masculinity" or whatever are so funny because what these guys are trying to figure out is literally "what's a way of being a good person that's Not For Girls™"

[azucenanalga]

I think there are people who are excluded from girlhood who deserve to feel like they can be positive moral agents

[quasi-normalcy]

No one said that they can't? Like, no, what virtues are there that are gender specific? Just try to be a good person, it's all anyone can do.

[morlock-holmes]

There's a thing where people hold different expectations about you because of your gender, and then you notice, and it makes you self-conscious.

For example... The fact that you talk about positive masculinity as being about guys wanting a version of being a good person that's not for girls.

I see this all the time, and... As much as people are against femininity I don't think I've ever seen someone talk about how funny it is that women want a version of good behavior that excludes those icky boys.

[self-winding]

Obviously it is fine for boys to have women as role models and for girls to have men as role models. Like, yes, sure, in an ideal world gender wouldn't be a factor in this and people would just emulate those they admire.

But the nature of society complicates this because men and women are in fact treated differently. A girl who models her behavior after men she admires will run into problems because she is not viewed or treated the same as a man. A boy who models his behavior after women will run into similar issues. Hence the desire for gender-specific models of virtue.

[fuckass-politics-sideblog]

How Wikipedia defines Zionism has significantly changed over the years. This has contributed to the misunderstanding of what Zionism actually is.

Just look at how it's described in 2026 (now), in 2016, in 2006 and in 2004 (below the cut).

2026/Now: "Zionism is an ethnocultural nationalist movement that emerged in late 19th-century Europe to establish and support a Jewish homeland through colonization in the region of Palestine, which roughly corresponds to the Land of Israel in Judaism—itself central to Jewish history. Zionists wanted to create a Jewish state in Palestine with as much land, as many Jews, and as few Palestinian Arabs as possible."

2016: "Zionism (Hebrew: צִיּוֹנוּת, IPA: [t͡sijo̞ˈnut], translit. Tziyonut, after Zion) is a nationalist and political movement of Jews and Jewish culture that supports the re-establishment of a Jewish homeland in the territory defined as the historic Land of Israel (roughly corresponding to Palestine, Canaan or the Holy Land). Zionism emerged in the late 19th century in central and eastern Europe as a national revival movement, called Hovevei Tziyon. Soon after this most leaders of the movement associated the main goal with creating the desired state in Palestine, then an area controlled by the Ottoman Empire."

2006: "Zionism is a political movement and an ideology that supports a Jewish homeland in the Land of Israel, where the Jewish nation originated and where Jewish kingdoms and self-governing states existed at various times in history. While Zionism is based heavily upon religious tradition linking the Jewish people to the Land of Israel, the modern movement was originally secular, beginning largely as a response to rampant antisemitism in late 19th century Europe."

2004: "Zionism is a political movement among Jews holding that the Jewish people constitute a nation and are entitled to a national homeland. Formally founded in 1897, Zionism embraced a variety of opinions in its early years on where that homeland might be established. From 1917 it focussed on the establishment of a Jewish homeland or state in Palestine, the location of the ancient Kingdom of Israel. Since 1948, Zionism has been a movement to support the development and defence of the State of Israel, and to encourage Jews to settle there."

[notaplaceofhonour]

the “sources” for some of the most extreme & totalizing claims on the page are literally just a small handful of people claiming this or that is what Zionists wanted, repeating a buzzphrase with almost the exact same wording, and not citing evidence from the mouths of Zionists themselves that they wanted that.

one of said sources, Rashid Khalidi, is a former PLO spokesperson. like, actively produced propaganda in an official capacity for the PLO.

another of the sources claims that “as many Jews, and as few Palestinian Arabs as possible” was a position that “enjoyed the unanimous support of Zionists of all inclinations” (emphasis my own), which is just… an utterly batshit and easily-disproven statement for anyone who has ever met a Zionist (or for that matter, a Jew) or read the writings of the early Zionists.

at best the most extreme claims get a [ disputed - discuss ] slapped on as a band-aid, but I have seen much better-sourced edits to significantly less impactful pages removed far faster for far less. there is no reason claims that easily debunked or from a PLO propagandist should even be considered.

[fellahimedia]

"Not citing evidence from the mouths of zionists themselves" alright I got you from several Zionist voices on the concept that Zionism/a Jewish state cannot be achieved without the "transfer" of the local population.

Nahman Syrkin, socialist zionist, said that Palestine was “thinly populated, in which the Jews constitute today 10 percent of the population, must be evacuated for the Jews." B. Katznelson and Y. Kaufman, eds., Ketvei Nahman Syrkin [Writings of Nahman Syrkin].

Israel Zangwill, British zionist author and confidante of Herzl, in 1905 stated "[We] must be prepared either to drive out by the sword the [Arab] tribes in possession as our forefathers did or to grapple with the problem of a large alien population, mostly Mohammedan and accustomed for centuries to despise us." Speech delivered in April 1905, in Israel Zangwill, Speeches, Articles and Letters (London: The Soncino Press, 1937), p. 210

Zangwill wrote in the League of Nations Journal in 1919 that Palestinians “should be gradually transplanted” in Arab countries. In his book, The Voice of Jerusalem, in 1920. There, he advocated an “Arab exodus” that would be based on “race redistribution” or a “trek like that of the Boers from Cape Colony,” which he advocated as “literally the only ‘way out’ of the difficulty of creating a Jewish State in Palestine.” Masalha, Nur. 1992. Expulsion of the Palestinians: The Concept of "Transfer" in Zionist Political Thought, 1882–1948

He also stated quite racistly, that "many [Palestinians] are semi-nomad, they have given nothing to Palestine and are not entitled to the rules of democracy."

Ze'ev Jabotinsky wrote in 1925: “If you wish to colonize a land in which people are already living, you must provide a garrison for the land, or find a benefactor who will maintain the garrison on your behalf . . . Zionism is a colonizing adventure and, therefore, it stands or falls on the question of armed forces." Jabotinsky constantly disparaged anyone seeking a "peaceful" route to a jewish state by calling them "peace mongers."

Ben Gurion, first PM of Israel, in a meeting with the Jewish Agency Executive in 1936 said "If it was permissible to move an Arab from the Galilee to Judea, why it is impossible to move an Arab from Hebron to Transjordan, which is much closer? There are vast expanses of land there and we are over crowded….Even the High Commission agrees to a transfer to Transjordan if we equip the peasants with land and money. If the Peel Commission and the London Government accept, we’ll remove the land problem from the agenda. Flapan, Zionism and the Palestinians , p. 260, citing Protocols of the Executive meeting.

Also in 1936, Schmuel Shmuel Zuchovitzky (later Zakif), a leading figure in the agricultural sector and a member of the General Zionist Party Executive stated in a committee "I am convinced that it would be impossible to carry out transfer without compulsion. I do not see in this any immoral measure. I want to help the Jews to come to the Jewish state and to help the Arabs to cross to the Arab state. I know that these things are not so easy and involve a lot of difficulties …. And also [land] expropriation must be carried out." Compulsory transfer meant through the use of force. Protocol of the Jewish Agency Executive meeting of 12 June 1938.

Yosef Weitz, former director of the Jewish National Fund's Land Department, wrote in 1941 seeing “large [Arab] villages crowded in population and surrounded by cultivated land growing olives, grapes, figs, sesame, and maize fields . . . and once again I hear that voice inside me called: Evacuate this country” Another diary entry that same year: “They [the Arabs] are too many and too much rooted [in the country]… the only way is to cut and eradicate them from the roots.”

Weitz also wrote, "Amongst ourselves it must be clear that there is no room for both peoples in this country. No 'development' will bring us closer to our aim to be an independent people in this small country. After the Arabs are transferred, the country will be wide open for us; with the Arabs staying the country will remain narrow and restricted . . . The only way is to transfer the Arabs from here to neighbouring countries, all of them, except perhaps Bethlehem, Nazareth, and Old Jerusalem. Not a single village or a single tribe must be left. And the transfer must be done through their absorption in Iraq and Syria and even in Transjordan. For that goal, money will be found—even a lot of money. And only then will the country be able to absorb millions of Jews and a solution will be found to the Jewish question. There is no other solution."

Memorandum from the 1948 "transfer committee": The exodus of the Arabs beyond the boundaries of the state of Israel was not from the start an impossible occurrence and its occurence is not among the surprises that have never been predicted….On the contrary, much had been said about such a possibility, which has come out of planned considerations, in recent years, as a solution to the problem of the whole Land of Israel

[notaplaceofhonour]

Congrats on shifting the goalposts!

Even if you trusted & took the translation, sourcing, & framing of all the above quotes at face value (which you should not), they still don’t refute or even address anything that anyone here was talking about at all.

You could’ve saved yourself a lot of effort assembling that whole gishgallop if you had actually addressed the specific claim (that “‘as many Jews as possible, with as few Arab Palestinians as possible’ was a position that ‘enjoyed unanimous support of Zionists of all inclinations’”) instead of falling back on the entirely-irrelevant-but-much-easier-to-defend position that “there existed any Zionists who either saw the conflict as zero sum and/or advocated for evacuation at some point.”

Because no duh. There were people like that on both sides of the conflict. That was never a question.

But even just the Ze’ev Jabotinsky one alone makes it so clear how deceptive these quotes are being presented, because he literally said, consistently and on multiple occasions, that the removal of Arabs would not only be impossible but immoral and that he rejected the idea. He went as far as to draft a proposed constitution that would ensure equal rights & participation in the Israeli government for Arabs. These are not the words or actions of a person who was trying to ethnically-cleanse Arabs.

Lie better next time. Or at the very least actually address the argument.

[fellahimedia]

"Even if you trusted" these quotes at face value? I gave you citations to look from. The ones I didnt you can google and find them in jewish based websites

These voices are not just from the extreme like jabotinsky but members from the "socialist" perspective? Again I highlighted their roles before quoting them. The JNF was a major organization in the development of zionism and israel and its members believed in the transfer of palestinians

These were all major leaders in the establishment of israel.

And yes all these quotes go to show that this position from left to right on early zionist committees faced unanimous support. The constant debate from the 1890s to the 1940s was how to transfer palestinians not if they should..

Just because you dont believe that these people had a bearing on the development of zionism does not mean none of these quotes mattered.

I could bring on more figures but truly you dont seem to want to even read a pov that refutes your pov

[generallemarc]

#and the material reality is that it is a settler colonial ideology

So the Israelis born in Israel who simply want their country to keep existing within its internationally-recognized borders and not expand beyond them are "settler colonialists"? Do we need to throw them out of their country because of what their great-grandparents maybe did?

[siryouarebeingmocked]

There's also the famous "well, there were a small number of Black Vikings, therefore it makes perfect sense for Vikings Valhalla turn an actual historical white male chieftan into a black woman."

The second part is implied, because not a single person in that article defending the racebending actually addressed that complaint. I had to go to Screenrant for the canon explanation of "the real guy got killed, and his wife took over".

And they immediately admitted there was no evidence of any female Viking ruler, ever, but, but, there COULD have been!

This incident was held up by some people as an example of progressives living down to memes about racebending.

Bridgerton had to invent an entire alternate history to explain black British nobility.

Of course, since musicians apparently play orchestral covers of Taylor Swift and Billy Eilish, I gotta wonder why they even bothered.

Funny thing is, when I Googled for controversy, I kept finding criticism from the left, not the right.

I also remember the times MedievalPOC said it made perfect sense to for a random African trader to head hundreds of miles out of his way, over a mountain range, to a random corner of medival Europe (that is still extremely white today) to appear in Kingdom Come:Deliverance.

Just to be clear; anti-woke people have been wrong about diversity. Both in fiction and IRL. Up to the point of riots and terrorism.

I have argued with them.

But I think it sure is curious that neither OOP nor any of the people in the reblogs had a single actual example. Heck, none of them even named a specific work.

And of course they never admitted their enemies could be right about anything, ever.

[hst3000]

Natural fiber costumes: yes

No corset slander: yes

Colorful clothes, historical hairstyles, hats and headcovers: YES

No potatoes or pumpkins: this one doesn't bug me as much unless it's plot relevant but sure

Actors with aging and minimal makeup: other than you don't understand what stage and screen makeup is, yes.

Hema consultants: I would KILL for this.

Diagetic soundtrack music: Some of the best soundtracks use period instruments.

Don't fucking threaten me with a good time.

[yourtoradorasextendedwarranty]

I would like context for this. Because the most recent incident I could imagine would be the Irish and considering their history I'm far from shocked that they have had enough.

[syabm]

I was referring to both the 2024 English and 2026 Belfast riots.

One brown immigrant did something, which was apparently justification to assume it was a cultural thing based on no evidence, and then to riot and terrorize other brown immigrants.

I've been against that sort of racebaiting, from the left or right, even when it didn't put me, personally, in danger.

Heck, even when it would benefit me.

Other examples include saying media where a regular straight white guy is mocked and put upon by women and minorities is a general prescriptive statement on how white men should be treated.

Or the zillion arguments I used to have defending the Star Wars sequels, which someone is about to compulsively yell at me over.

[sawbuckplus]

[gopfails]

Source

[generallemarc]

Me when I blindly assume everyone killed in police shootouts did nothing wrong to tell the people who survived actual fascism that they don't know what fascism is.

[gopfails]

They shot him infront of his child and dragged his corpse out into the street

They literally got away with executing a man in broad daylight and murdered a woman cause she was rude to them.

You're a vile person

[generallemarc]

Yes, how awful I am for not blindly taking your screenshots and very unbiased description as accurate, which you're providing in the context of saying that actual survivors of fascism are wrong about what fascism is and you, the privileged one who lives in a liberal democracy and is free to call the state whatever they want, know better. Y'all spend your time shrieking about ZioNazis while telling survivors of actual fascism to shut up when they disagree with you.

[gopfails]

Oh cool so now you're LYING about dead people. Very religious of you so tolerate and kind.

You're going to hell

[generallemarc]

Yes indeed, I'm going to hell for lying, which I did when I said absolutely nothing about any specific person beyond "you're just assuming all of these people were innocent of anything and not dangerous". Show me where I lied about a dead person. Please.

[nonenosome2]

"She was rude to them"

Damn. That is a weird way of saying she hit a cop with her car.

I'm sure the others are equally unbiased descriptions.

[syabm]

If this is the same troll I've seen before, this isn't even remotely the first time I've seen them lie about the Good incident.

Like the time they claimed the ICE agents weren't clearly cops by saying the ID patches were unreadable smudges.

...Based exclusively on one blurry, low-res video.

Of course, given how dedicated they are, I assume they're either a paid troll or just plain mental, so

are on the table.

Trying to drive your car with a cop reaching in the window automatically puts that cop in danger, and I don't think I've seen seen any of them acknowledge that.

So even if we ignore the cop who was already in front of her telling her to stop when she started moving forward, what she did still could've killed a cop.

I think she panicked and lost her head, but that's still on her.

[gopfails]

Even the pedophile you worship thinks it was a bad shooting

-> she lost her head

Her last words were "im not mad at you"

Lying about and victim blaming a dead woman is probably the most low disgusting shit you can do. You're disgusting

[syabm]

Wkh hqwluh vbcbgb ri wkh gdun qljkw zdv FORvlqj lq, dqg jrpidlov udq ghvshudwh ilqjruv dorqj wkh frog lurq jurpphw ri wkh zlqgrz idwwlfh. Rxwvlgh, wkh krzolqj prqvrrq vzhiw dfurvv wkh edruhq khdwk, gulylqj d vkdus sowkrud ri lfb vqrz vwudljkw djdlqvw wkh dqflhqw vwrqh fruedov ri wkh urri.

Vxkghqob, d whuulibluo rvprvlv ri vrxqg iloohg wkh wlqb dofryh. Wkurxjk wkh udwwolqj jidvv, d sdoh, wlqb surervflv dsshduhg wr uhdfk iruzdug, lwv wklq skdodqjhv wdssluo zlwk jkrvwob whqgflwb djdlqvw wkh sdqh.

"ohw ph lq!" fulhg d vruurzixo yrlfh, lwv wrqh d fkloolqj fdfrskrqb wkdw hfkrhg ghhs lqvogh khu gldskudjp. "l kdyh orvw pb zdba dfurvv wkh juhdw dvwuroduh ri wkh prru! l kdyh ehhq d zhdub pdulqhu lq wkh gdun iru wzlqwb orqj vrovwlfhv!"

jrpidlov ihow d ylrohqw dsrsohba ri devroxwh kruuru julso khu wkurdw. Vkh wulhg wr sxoo wkh zrrghq wudqvro vkxw, exw wkh pbvwhulrxv jdujrboh rxwvlgh khog idvw, lwv skdqwrp vwuhqjwk ghibluo doo kxpdq zloo. lq wkh glp oxplqhvfhafh ri wkh gblqj fdqgoh, wkh hqwluh ehgurro wudqviruphg lqwr d fkdrwlf fkubvdolv ri vkliwlqj vkdgrzv, wkuhdwhqlqj wr sxoo khu plqg lqwr d shupdqhqw pdhovwurpo ri ghvsdlu.

[granmabarb]

He was just a young man. His life mattered.

*nitter link below for those who can’t access the twatter. simply copy and paste to your preferred browser to watch the video and read the comments

https://nitter.net/Banksycat/status/2057500117905682762

[siryouarebeingmocked]

Henry Nowak death: Murder trial racism claim 'wicked lie', court told

Henry Nowak's alleged killer has claimed during his trial that he was acting in self-defence.

Here's the context missing;

>Vickrum Digwa, 23, claims he acted in self-defence after [Nowak] used a racist insult, punched him and knocked his turban off, Southampton Crown Court heard.

And;

>Police initially handcuffed the victim before discovering his fatal injury a short time later.

So, officially, the cops didn't even notice he was stabbed when they cuffed him.

Even being very charitable, that sounds a lot like incompetence. Were they in a very dark alley or something?

Still, the trial of his killer has been covered multiple times by the Beeb and other outlets.

Why did police handcuff Henry Nowak?

A Sikh man, Vickrum Digwa, is standing trial for the murder of a Polish student, Henry Nowak, in Southampton, Hampshire

>It is admitted that Nowak, already weak from knife wounds, was trying to reach help when the police arrived. The evidence is that, having arrived, the police interviewed both parties; told that Nowak had started a drunken fight and racially abused Digwa, they immediately handcuffed him. Afterwards, they realised his condition. When he collapsed, they removed the cuffs and administered first aid. But it was too late. He died in their hands.

The popular narrative is that the police automatically arrested the white guy who allegedly made a slur. I think the punching complicated things, but I still wanna know why they didn't notice the stabbing.

[turtleduck-inc]

this is missing some of the big sticking points of this story. like that digwa's family was extremely complicit. his parents and his brother helped him lie to police on the spot. iirc, his mother even held henry down as he was bleeding out in the street. none of his family members were charged for any of this, last i heard.

but that's just a family of criminals. what's maybe more egregious is that henry told police multiple times that he'd been stabbed and one of the officers turned around and told him, word for word, "i don't think you have, mate".

they didn't just arrest him because they were told he attacked someone. they arrived at the scene and immediately started treating him with open contempt.

[siryouarebeingmocked]

That seems pretty polite to me, not "open contempt".

Especially when suspect lie about being hurt all the time.

Also, the original complaints were about Nowak, Digwa, and the cops' treatment of both. Not the family of either of any of those.

I have seen no evidence of any racial motive by the cops. Just assumptions.

[switch-up-snowfox]

The racial motive of the cops is attributed largely to

1, the family and suspect claimed racism in the first place to justify claiming victim status.

2, the murder weapon was a religious dagger that they were allowed to carry around as an exception to britains stringent knife laws.

3, someone's apparently put out the handbooks and such that the police are trained by and IIRC, it basically codifies "don't arrest the non-whites, arresting non-whites means contributing to racism" behavior, which people are also claiming is part of why they didn't bother checking Nowak for injuries at all until he collapsed and stopped responding.

also, as far as i know the only info we have of concretely what happened before the cops showed up with bodycams is the fact that nowak was stabbed and Digwa had the murder weapon. Dunno if there's medical reports on Digwa having any injury.

[siryouarebeingmocked]

1 and 2 aren't good evidence.

3. Were those handbooks for these specific cops?

What was the exact language used?

What are the rules and policies for this sort of situation if they were not acting on racial motives, and were they following those rules?

This BBC article says Digwa's brother called 999 and claimed Nowak was the attacker. Even if he was stabbed, it could've been in self-defense if they thought the call was true.

The operator also said they sent an ambulance.

And the cops called a bus and started CPR one minute after they arrested him. Which was one minute after they arrived.

So, two minutes total. That doesn't sound like they could've done a lot to help him even if they hadn't cuffed him.

The judge said Nowak's injuries were so severe he would not have survived, however quickly he received first aid, CPR or expert medical treatment.

Also, Digwa was convicted three days after OP's post. 21 year minimum sentence.

[yourtoradorasextendedwarranty]

The fact the mother and brother were not arrested as accessories to this, especially considering his mother hid the weapon is disgusting. I'll leave it at that because TurtleDuck covered a bit of what I would have said. I do believe yes there's some devil's advocate here that's valid, but given the video of the guy in the street that got punched in the back of the head by migrants then pinned to the wall by a cop after he tried to get back up and fight back, and they arrested him?

Forgive me if I CAN'T in any way give benefit of the doubt to UK cops at all. If a guy is on the ground struggling to stay up in any way, he's not a threat. Then after you tried to sit him up, he falls over again? That's not incompetence. That's full lack of care. Add to that putting him in cuffs and then never ONCE cuffing Digwa? That sounds like racist policy to me. They treated the killer with more dignity and respect than the Nowak's got. So a guy is on the ground and you put him in cuffs because, "this guy was racist" sounds like a policy issue not a, "Oh we are just kinda stupid" issue. Though I also tend to fall under:

[syabm]

>If a guy is on the ground struggling to stay up in any way, he's not a threat. Then after you tried to sit him up, he falls over again?

He could just be drunk.

There are also loads of examples of concussed and stunned people who were unable to stand up straight, but they were also violently combative.

>Add to that putting him in cuffs and then never ONCE cuffing Digwa?

Two minutes. They were on the scene for two minutes before calling a bus. They had Nowak arrested for one minute.

That's not some great length of time.

Also, like I said, his brother called the cops, so Digwa would seem to be the defender, not the suspect.

>That sounds like racist policy to me.

[granmabarb]

He was just a young man. His life mattered.

*nitter link below for those who can’t access the twatter. simply copy and paste to your preferred browser to watch the video and read the comments

https://nitter.net/Banksycat/status/2057500117905682762

[siryouarebeingmocked]

Henry Nowak death: Murder trial racism claim 'wicked lie', court told

Henry Nowak's alleged killer has claimed during his trial that he was acting in self-defence.

Here's the context missing;

>Vickrum Digwa, 23, claims he acted in self-defence after [Nowak] used a racist insult, punched him and knocked his turban off, Southampton Crown Court heard.

And;

>Police initially handcuffed the victim before discovering his fatal injury a short time later.

So, officially, the cops didn't even notice he was stabbed when they cuffed him.

Even being very charitable, that sounds a lot like incompetence. Were they in a very dark alley or something?

Still, the trial of his killer has been covered multiple times by the Beeb and other outlets.

Why did police handcuff Henry Nowak?

A Sikh man, Vickrum Digwa, is standing trial for the murder of a Polish student, Henry Nowak, in Southampton, Hampshire

>It is admitted that Nowak, already weak from knife wounds, was trying to reach help when the police arrived. The evidence is that, having arrived, the police interviewed both parties; told that Nowak had started a drunken fight and racially abused Digwa, they immediately handcuffed him. Afterwards, they realised his condition. When he collapsed, they removed the cuffs and administered first aid. But it was too late. He died in their hands.

The popular narrative is that the police automatically arrested the white guy who allegedly made a slur. I think the punching complicated things, but I still wanna know why they didn't notice the stabbing.

[turtleduck-inc]

this is missing some of the big sticking points of this story. like that digwa's family was extremely complicit. his parents and his brother helped him lie to police on the spot. iirc, his mother even held henry down as he was bleeding out in the street. none of his family members were charged for any of this, last i heard.

but that's just a family of criminals. what's maybe more egregious is that henry told police multiple times that he'd been stabbed and one of the officers turned around and told him, word for word, "i don't think you have, mate".

they didn't just arrest him because they were told he attacked someone. they arrived at the scene and immediately started treating him with open contempt.

[siryouarebeingmocked]

That seems pretty polite to me, not "open contempt".

Especially when suspect lie about being hurt all the time.

Also, the original complaints were about Nowak, Digwa, and the cops' treatment of both. Not the family of either of any of those.

I have seen no evidence of any racial motive by the cops. Just assumptions.

[switch-up-snowfox]

The racial motive of the cops is attributed largely to

1, the family and suspect claimed racism in the first place to justify claiming victim status.

2, the murder weapon was a religious dagger that they were allowed to carry around as an exception to britains stringent knife laws.

3, someone's apparently put out the handbooks and such that the police are trained by and IIRC, it basically codifies "don't arrest the non-whites, arresting non-whites means contributing to racism" behavior, which people are also claiming is part of why they didn't bother checking Nowak for injuries at all until he collapsed and stopped responding.

also, as far as i know the only info we have of concretely what happened before the cops showed up with bodycams is the fact that nowak was stabbed and Digwa had the murder weapon. Dunno if there's medical reports on Digwa having any injury.

[siryouarebeingmocked]

1 and 2 aren't good evidence.

3. Were those handbooks for these specific cops?

What was the exact language used?

What are the rules and policies for this sort of situation if they were not acting on racial motives, and were they following those rules?

This BBC article says Digwa's brother called 999 and claimed Nowak was the attacker. Even if he was stabbed, it could've been in self-defense if they thought the call was true.

The operator also said they sent an ambulance.

And the cops called a bus and started CPR one minute after they arrested him. Which was one minute after they arrived.

So, two minutes total. That doesn't sound like they could've done a lot to help him even if they hadn't cuffed him.

The judge said Nowak's injuries were so severe he would not have survived, however quickly he received first aid, CPR or expert medical treatment.

Also, Digwa was convicted three days after OP's post. 21 year minimum sentence.

[judarud]

Notable medical specialist criminal judge said he would have died anyways. Case closed.

[syabm]

And you think the judge wasn't summarizing testimony from the actual medical folks who treated Nowak or looked at the evidence...why?

[sawbuckplus]

[siryouarebeingmocked]

I like how his le epic own quote isn't an actual counterpoint.

And most of the rest of the video is people clapping like trained seals. Presumably so other left-wing people will feel smug.

[gopfails]

Siryouarebeingmocked is unemployed and directly benefits from the kind of socialist policies mamdani is pushing for.

He just thinks YOU don't deserve to benefit from them

[syabm]

Va n zvyyvfrpbaq, tbcsnvyf jnf fgnegyrq ol gur fbhaq bs gur qbbe-oryy, naq gura urneq n fgrc jnyxvbt hc gur fgnvepnfr; fur xarj vg jnf gur cebhq znfgre bs Crzoreyrl, uvf fhqqra nccrnenapr svyyvat ure jvgu n fririr nccbcyrkl bs fhecevfr. Ur ehfurq vagb gur nypbir jvgubhg n fvatyr jbeq bs terrgvat, uvf qnex pbhagranapr orgenlvat gur nofbyhgr ibegrk bs uvf vaare zvaq. Ur ortna gb cnpr gur sybbe jvgu encvq trfgvphyngvbaf, uvf rlrf svkrq hcba her fznyy culfvbtabzl jvgu na vagrafr granpvgl gung znqr her oybbq eha pbyq.

"Va inva unir V fgehttyrq, tbcsnvyf!" ur rkpynvzrq, uvf ibvpr n ybj, gerzoyvat pnplcubal bs enj rzbgvba. "Zl jvyy unf orra hggreyl pbadhrerq ol lbhe ornhgl! Vg jvyy abg qb. Zl srryvatf pnaabg or ercerffrq ol beqvanel qrpbehg. Lbh zhfg nyybj zr gb gryy lbh ubj neqragyl V nqzver naq ybir lbhe ragver cebobfpvf."

tbcsnvyf fgnarq ng uvz va nofbyhgr fghcrsnpgvba. Ure urneg orng ntnvafg her qvncuentz yvxr n genccrq oveq vafvqr n jvpxre puelrnyvf. Fhe ybbxrq qbja ng gur qryvpngr fvyire pungrynvar unatvat sebz her fvyx ghavp, gelvat gb tngure rabhtu pbtvgngvba gb fcrnx. Fhe xarj uvf neebtnag yvarni-r ybbxrq qbja hcba her bja uhzoyr cunynak bs n snzvyl, naq gur furre nhqnpvgl bs uvf cebcbzny ghearq ure fubpx vagb n obvyvat cyrguben bs qrrc erfragzrag.

"Vs V pbhyq srry nal tengvghqr sbe lbhe bssre," tbcsnvyf ercyvrq, her fznyy cunynatrf pyrapuvat gur rqtr bs gurznubtnalk gnoyr, "V jbhya abj gunax lbh sbe guvf qenzngvp qrpynentvba. Ohg V pnaabg. Lbh unir qrfgeblrq gur unccvarff bs zl qrnerfg fvfgre, naq ab nzbhag bs ryrtnag gbbgucnfgr pna uvqr gur snpg gung lbh ner gur zbfg frysjfu tnetblyr V unir rire unq gur zvfsbeghar gb zrrg."