Saddam Hussein is responsible for current state of Iraq.

[Black Diamond]

If he had cooperated with UN, he would still have a country, no Iraq war, no Isis.

[revelarts]

If he had cooperated with UN, he would still have a country, no Iraq war, no Isis.

"It's her Fault, If she would have just SHUT the F*** UP she wouldn't have been hit."



BTW
IF The CIA hadn't helped him into power and propped him up (and sold him chemical weapons) he wouldn't have been the leader of Iraq at all.

Revealed: how the West set Saddam on the bloody road to power
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/revealed-how-the-west-set-saddam-on-the-bloody-road-to-power-1258618.html

INVESTIGATION Exclusive: CIA Files Prove America Helped Saddam as He Gassed Iran
The U.S. knew Hussein was launching some of the worst chemical attacks in history -- and still gave him a hand.
http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/08/26/exclusive-cia-files-prove-america-helped-saddam-as-he-gassed-iran/


<center>
US Intelligence Helps Saddam's Party Seize Power in 1963
</center>Saddam Key in Early CIA Plot (April 10, 2003) (https://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/history/2003/0410saddam.htm)
According to former US intelligence officials and diplomats, the CIA's relationship with Saddam Hussein dates back to 1959, when he was part of a CIA-authorized six-man squad that attempted to assassinate Iraqi Prime Minister Abd al-Karim Qasim. (United Press International)

A Tyrant Forty Years in the Making (March 14, 2003) (https://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/history/2003/0314history.htm)[/h]Roger Morris writes of the "regime change" carried out by the CIA in Iraq forty years ago. Among the CIA's actions were attempted political assassinations and the handing over of a list of suspected communists and leftists that led to the deaths of thousands of Iraqis at the hands of Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath Party. (New York Times)

CIA Lists Provide Basis for Iraqi Bloodbath (https://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/history/1963cialist.htm)[/h]In this excerpt from his classic study of Iraqi politics, Hanna Batatu discusses how the Ba`ath Party seized power for the first time in a military coup in February 1963. He speaks of lists, provided by US intelligence, that enabled the party to hunt down its enemies, particularly the Communists, in a terrible bloodletting.

US and British Support for Saddam in the 1970s and 1980s

Officers Say US Aided Iraq in War Despite Use of Gas (August 18, 2002) (https://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/history/2002/0818officers.htm)[/h]According to senior military officials, a covert program carried out during the Reagan Administration provided Iraq with critical battle planning assistance at a time when US intelligence agencies knew that Iraqi commanders would employ chemical weapons against Iran. (New York Times)

The Riegle Report (1994) (http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/medsearch/FocusAreas/riegle_report/riegle_report_main.html)
This report by the Senate Banking Committee analyzes the US's exports of warfare-related goods to Iraq and their possible impact on the health consequences of the Gulf War. The report concludes that [B]the US provided Iraq "with 'dual-use' licensed materials which assisted in the development of Iraqi chemical, biological and missile-system programs." (Gulflink)

[Black Diamond]

Poor innocent Saddam was punched by wicked W and his father.

[aboutime]

Poor innocent Saddam was punched by wicked W and his father.


http://www.africamasterweb.com/SaddamPhotos/SaddamHanging.jpg

In the background....Barbra Streisand singing...."MEMORIES!"

[Gunny]

Poor innocent Saddam was punched by wicked W and his father.I can't read through that diatribe. Is there a point in there you could find? Sh*t. A Novel with every comment.

[revelarts]

Poor innocent Saddam was punched by wicked W and his father.

He never attacked the U.S. or Israel that's for sure.
the only countries that he attacked was Iran and we supported him in that.
And O yeah Kuwiat. which we defeated him over and he surrendered within weeks and retreated and the u.S. army went in and destroyed most... if not all... of the viable Chem weapons we sold him.


big threat? not even close.
Are Iraq and the region better off now that we went in a overthrew him, killed and displaced over a million Iraqis and filled the country with DU because we had to teach Saddam a lesson?

nope.

[aboutime]

He never attacked the U.S. or Israel that's for sure.
the only countries that he attacked was Iran and we supported him in that.
And O yeah Kuwiat. which we defeated him over and he surrendered within weeks and retreated and the u.S. army went in and destroyed most... if not all... of the viable Chem weapons we sold him.


big threat? not even close.
Are Iraq and the region better off now that we went in a overthrew him, killed and displaced over a million Iraqis and filled the country with DU because we had to teach Saddam a lesson?

nope.



Rev. How sad you are. How very, very sad it is to read that crap again. Poor you.
Go contact your buddy Obama, and see if he has a spot for you with his ACORN propaganda, and Treasonous liars club.

[revelarts]

Rev. How sad you are. How very, very sad it is to read that crap again. Poor you.
Go contact your buddy Obama, and see if he has a spot for you with his ACORN propaganda, and Treasonous liars club.


AT would you mind refuting with some facts one "lie" in any part of my comment that you quoted?
I'll edit my comment accordingly if you'll provide me with some reliable information.

[revelarts]

If he had cooperated with UN, he would still have a country, no Iraq war, no Isis."It's her Fault, If she would have just SHUT the F*** UP she wouldn't have been hit."
BTW
IF The CIA hadn't helped him (Saddam)into power and propped him up (and sold him chemical weapons) he wouldn't have been the leader of Iraq at all.
...

there's the edited version for you Gunny


I can't read through that diatribe. Is there a point in there you could find? Sh*t. A Novel with every comment.

[aboutime]

AT would you mind refuting with some facts one "lie" in any part of my comment that you quoted?
I'll edit my comment accordingly if you'll provide me with some reliable information.


Sure thing rev. Prove W killed (displaced) a million Iraqis', and left the DU there as you stated.
Otherwise. You are just repeating the typical, expected, constantly repeated DNC talking points that began right after Bush the Elder chased Saddam from Kuwait. And, you forgot to mention how Saddam actually threatened to Assassinate Bush the Elder.
Funny how the whiners always leave out the other important details, just to prove their points are false. And...let's not forget...People like you STILL insist there were no WMD's in Iraq....yet...you stated otherwise.

[revelarts]

Sure thing rev. Prove W killed (displaced) a million Iraqis', and left the DU there as you stated.
Otherwise. You are just repeating the typical, expected, constantly repeated DNC talking points that began right after Bush the Elder chased Saddam from Kuwait. And, you forgot to mention how Saddam actually threatened to Assassinate Bush the Elder.
Funny how the whiners always leave out the other important details, just to prove their points are false. And...let's not forget...People like you STILL insist there were no WMD's in Iraq....yet...you stated otherwise.

you called me a Liar.
you should have to prove that AT.

but here
no matter how you count it.


BBC 2010 numbers

"According to IBC there have been between 97,461 and 106,348 civilian deaths up to July 2010."
...
The International Organization for Migration, IOM, which monitors numbers of displaced families, estimates that in the four years 2006-2010, as many as 1.6 million Iraqis (http://www.iomiraq.net/library/IOM_displacement_monitoring_reports/yearly_and_mid_year_reviews/2010/IOM_Displacement_Reports_Four_Years_of_Post-Samarra_Displacement.pdf) [pdf] were internally displaced, representing 5.5% of the population....

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-11107739


Business Insider reports in 2013
...134,000: Civilians killed directly.655,000: Persons (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/10/AR2006101001442.html) who have died in Iraq since the invasion that would not have died if the invasion had not occurred.
150: Reporters killed.
2.8 million: Persons who remain either internally displaced or have fled the country....
http://www.businessinsider.com/iraq-war-facts-numbers-stats-total-2013-3



https://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/numbers/2014/
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/numbers/2014/images/2014graph.png





..http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/10/131015-iraq-war-deaths-survey-2013/
Half-Million Iraqis Died in the War, New Study Says
Household survey records deaths from all war-related causes, 2003 to 2011.
By Dan Vergano, National Geographic
PUBLISHED OCTOBER 16, 2013

..."This is a really serious and credible piece of work," says epidemiologist Leslie Roberts of Columbia University in New York, who has led wartime mortality surveys in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Zimbabwe, and Iraq.....
...Roberts agreed with Hagopian that the household survey estimate is likely conservative, because it relied on the imperfect recollections of household members and largely missed the 1.1 million Iraqis living in displaced-person camps or in other countries.




MIT Iraq: human cost

...Displacement: Refugees and internally displaced
The number of displaced persons, both internal (within Iraq) and external (refugees, mainly in Jordan and Syria) ranged from estimates of 3.5 million to 5 million or more, which were directly attributable to the war. Virtually all first-hand accounts blamed violence as the cause of moving, or threats of ethnic or sectarian cleansing of neighborhoods.

[Black Diamond]

you called me a Liar.
you should have to prove that AT.

but here
no matter how you count it.


https://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/numbers/2014/
You can't lie if you're lied to

[aboutime]

you called me a Liar.
you should have to prove that AT.

but here
no matter how you count it.


I have no need to prove it rev. Your statements, based on the loosely assembled, partisan, wannabe facts say it all for me.
I deal with truth, and honesty. FACTS that are proven to be TRUE. Not conjecture, not opinions, not fabrications. As Jack Webb used to say "JUST THE FACTS!"
I will not apologize for something I am sure I am right about. That would make me a hypocrite, and I am not a Democrat, Obama, Clinton fan.

[revelarts]

Depleted Uranium

Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/mar/06/iraq-depleted-uranium-clean-up-contamination-spreads

Wednesday 6 March 2013 06.44 EST First published on Wednesday 6 March 2013 06.44 EST

Cleaning up more than 300 sites in Iraq still contaminated by depleted uranium (DU) weapons will cost at least $30m, according to a report by a Dutch peace group to be published on Thursday.

The report, which was funded by the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, warns that the contamination is being spread by poorly regulated scrap metal dealers, including children. It also documents evidence that DU munitions were fired at light vehicles, buildings and other civilian infrastructure including the Iraqi Ministry of Planning in Baghdad – casting doubt on official assurances that only armoured vehicles were targeted. "The use of DU in populated areas is alarming," it says, adding that many more contaminated sites are likely to be discovered.


Christian Science moniter
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0515/p01s02-woiq.html

ARCHIVE 2003 0515
Remains of toxic bullets litter Iraq
The Monitor finds high levels of radiation left by US armor-piercing shells.


It's use continued through out the war Even though many groups including some U.S. Army Dr's requested that the use of the munitions should be stopped.
http://www.cadu.org.uk


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/craig-considine/us-depleted-uranium-as-ma_b_3812888.html


...The following passage from Koehler’s blog “The Suffering of Fallujah” gives us an idea of the immense impact that depleted uranium has had on Iraqi civilians:

“Thus last November, a group of British and Iraqi doctors petitioned the U.N. to investigate the alarming rise in birth defects at Fallujah’s hospitals. ‘Young women in Fallujah,’ they wrote ... are terrified of having children because of the increasing number of babies born grotesquely deformed, with no heads, two heads, a single eye in their foreheads, scaly bodies or missing limbs. In addition, young children in Fallujah are now experiencing hideous cancers and leukemias.’”
Koehler continues:

“The International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health has just published an epidemiological study, “Cancer, Infant Mortality and Birth Sex-Ratio in Fallujah, Iraq 2005-2009,” which has found, among much else, that Fallujah is experiencing higher rates of cancer, leukemia and infant mortality than Hiroshima and Nagasaki did in 1945.”...


U.S. Sends Planes Armed With Depleted Uranium to Middle East
Posted on October 28, 2014 by DavidSwanson

Public affairs superintendent Master Sgt. Darin L. Hubble of the 122nd Fighter Wing told me that the A-10s now in the Middle East along with “300 of our finest airmen” have been sent there on a deployment planned for the past two years and have not been assigned to take part in the current fighting in Iraq or Syria, but “that could change at any moment.”

The crews will load PGU-14 depleted uranium rounds into their 30mm Gatling cannons and use them as needed, said Hubble. “If the need is to explode something — for example a tank — they will be used.”

Pentagon spokesman Mark Wright told me, “There is no prohibition against the use of Depleted Uranium rounds, and the [U.S. military] does make use of them. The use of DU in armor-piercing munitions allows enemy tanks to be more easily destroyed.”



And we find some U.S. Forces are using it in Syria as well.
2017
UPI
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2017/02/15/CENTCOM-confirms-use-of-depleted-uranium-munitions-against-Islamic-State/1261487168724/
Veterans today
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/02/15/war-crime-us-confirms-use-of-depleted-uranium-in-syria/
Foreign Policy Mag
http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/02/14/the-united-states-used-depleted-uranium-in-syria/

INVESTIGATION
The United States Used Depleted Uranium in Syria
The airstrikes on oil trucks in Islamic State-controlled areas employed the toxic material, which has been accused of causing cancer and birth defects....

...Officials have confirmed that the U.S. military, despite vowing not to use depleted uranium weapons on the battlefield in Iraq and Syria, fired thousands of rounds of the munitions during two high-profile raids on oil trucks in Islamic State-controlled Syria in late 2015. The air assaults mark the first confirmed use of this armament since the 2003 Iraq invasion, when it was used hundreds of thousands of times, setting off outrage among local communities, which alleged that its toxic material caused cancer and birth defects.

U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) spokesman Maj. Josh Jacques told Airwars and Foreign Policy that 5,265 armor-piercing 30 mm rounds containing depleted uranium (DU) were shot from Air Force A-10 fixed-wing aircraft on Nov. 16 and Nov. 22, 2015, destroying about 350 vehicles* in the country’s eastern desert....






The National Center for Biotechnology Information
medical paper
Med Confl Surviv. 2013 Jan-Mar;29(1):7-25.
Environmental pollution by depleted uranium in Iraq with special reference to Mosul and possible effects on cancer and birth defect rates.

Fathi RA1, Matti LY, Al-Salih HS, Godbold D.
Author information
Abstract
Iraq is suffering from depleted uranium (DU) pollution in many regions and the effects of this may harm public health through poisoning and increased incidence of various cancers and birth defects. DU is a known carcinogenic agent. About 1200 tonnes of ammunition were dropped on Iraq during the Gulf Wars of 1991 and 2003. As a result, contamination occurred in more than 350 sites in Iraq. Currently, Iraqis are facing about 140,000 cases of cancer, with 7000 to 8000 new ones registered each year. In Baghdad cancer incidences per 100,000 population have increased, just as they have also increased in Basra. The overall incidence of breast and lung cancer, Leukaemia and Lymphoma, has doubled even tripled. The situation in Mosul city is similar to other regions. Before the Gulf Wars Mosul had a higher rate of cancer, but the rate of cancer has further increased since the Gulf Wars.

Harvard Study
Depleted Uranium Radioactive Contamination In Iraq: An Overview
Dr. Souad N. Al-Azzawi
Assoc. Prof. / Mamoun Univ. for Science & Technology
http://users.physics.harvard.edu/~wilson/soundscience/Al-Azzawi.pdf

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-responsibility-of-the-us-in-contaminating-iraq-with-depleted-uranium/15966
The Responsibility of the US in Contaminating Iraq with Depleted Uranium




.....

https://whowhatwhy.org/2015/11/21/toxic-dust-the-invisible-legacy-the-us-left-in-iraq/
TOXIC DUST: THE INVISIBLE LEGACY THE US LEFT IN IRAQ
The Story of Depleted Uranium

https://www.irinnews.org/investigations/2016/10/06/exclusive-iraq-war-records-reignite-debate-over-us-use-depleted-uranium


SO yeah, I'm not making anything up.
you should know that by now.

[revelarts]

You can't lie if you're lied to
Sheesh.
You can't lie if you cherry pick form a list of sources to find on you don't like either i guess.

[revelarts]

I have no need to prove it rev. Your statements, based on the loosely assembled, partisan, wannabe facts say it all for me.
I deal with truth, and honesty. FACTS that are proven to be TRUE. Not conjecture, not opinions, not fabrications. As Jack Webb used to say "JUST THE FACTS!"
I will not apologize for something I am sure I am right about. That would make me a hypocrite, and I am not a Democrat, Obama, Clinton fan.

SO yes again you've got nothing but your own personal opinion of reality with ZERO to back it up.
all your doing to throwing rocks over the fence because you can't or won't deal with the facts of what our gov't is doing.

SO AT, i leave you to your fantasies.

[aboutime]

SO yes again you've got nothing but your own personal opinion of reality with ZERO to back it up.
all your doing to throwing rocks over the fence because you can't or won't deal with the facts of what our gov't is doing.

SO AT, i leave you to your fantasies.


Sure thing rev. Thank you for proving my point. You want to call it fantasy? How much of your fantasy went away when Obama moved out of the W/H.
He's not there to back you, and your tired, repeated Liberal falsehoods anymore.

[Black Diamond]

Sheesh.
You can't lie if you cherry pick form a list of sources to find on you don't like either i guess.
not sure what you mean.

[revelarts]

not sure what you mean.

the point is this.
Even if that ONE source is off a bit, i posted several other sources BD.
But you seem to assume I inadvertently "lied" because I have one source that you don't like.

and not only that, you haven't shown that even that source is wrong in what i quoted.
you just SAY they are wrong and somehow we're supposed to take your word for it.

looks like a piss poor dodging of the facts.

there are Multiple sources that confirm what i wrote.
that there are millions of Iraqis dead or displaced by the Iraq war.
that's A FACT.
the smallest numbers I found for the combined # is around 1 and half million, other estimates go up to 5 and half plus.

Sadly It is what it is.

[revelarts]

Sure thing rev. Thank you for proving my point. You want to call it fantasy? How much of your fantasy went away when Obama moved out of the W/H.
He's not there to back you, and your tired, repeated Liberal falsehoods anymore.
You can't even remember that I never supported Obama AT.
You should probably just go to bed..

[Black Diamond]

the point is this.
Even if that ONE source is off a bit, i posted several other sources BD.
But you seem to assume I inadvertently "lied" because I have one source that you don't like.

and not only that, you haven't shown that even that source is wrong in what i quoted.
you just SAY they are wrong and somehow we're supposed to take your word for it.

looks like a piss poor dodging of the facts.

there are Multiple sources that confirm what i wrote.
that there are millions of Iraqis dead or displaced by the Iraq war.
that's A FACT.
the smallest numbers I found for the combined # is around 1 and half million, other estimates go up to 5 and half plus.

It is what it is.
You can't inadvertently lie.


I can list multiple sources saying the holocaust was faked, Obama was born in Kenya, and Cheney steered drones draped in American Airlines colors into the World Trade Center via remote control. Then I could just tell everyone who disagrees: you just don't like my sources.

[Black Diamond]

You can't even remember that I never supported Obama AT.
You should probably just go to bed..
I don't think you voted for him either time, but you cut him too much slack. Not because of the color of his skin. But because you agree with him re cops vs blacks imo.

[revelarts]

You can't inadvertently lie.


I can list multiple sources saying the holocaust was faked, Obama was born in Kenya, and Cheney steered drones draped in American Airlines colors into the World Trade Center via remote control. Then I could just tell everyone who disagrees: you just don't like my sources.

OK BD
You present me with reports from ...
the National Center for Biotechnology Information
United Press International
the Chritian Science monitor
a Harvard Medical Study
The International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs
US Central Command (CENTCOM) spokesmen
U.S. Army Public affairs superintendent Master Sgts
Pentagon spokesmen
International Organization for Migration
the BBC
the Guardian
The Brookings Institute
Brown University WATSON INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS
washington post
epidemiologists at Johns Hopkins University's Bloomberg School of Public Health
British medical journal the Lancet
supported by Columbia University drs who worked at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Human Rights Watch and Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Center for International Studies
etc...
Where they all come to together and agree that there was no holocaust or that Obama was born in Kenya and I'll consider it may be true!

Unless you can do that then your argument about getting sources to prove anything is just trying to blow smoke man.
I'm not sure if you think i'm suppose to buy it though and frankly I really don't think you buy it yourself.

[revelarts]

I don't think you voted for him either time, but you cut him too much slack. Not because of the color of his skin. But because you agree with him re cops vs blacks imo.

cops vs blacks?
I thought 'all lives mattered' even black, why are cops against Blacks?
is there ever a time where it's "cops vs whites"?

I didn't cut him or any president any slack. If I agree I say so If I don't i say so.
goes for Trump, Obama, Bush etc.
I don't change my political views based on party or color

[Black Diamond]

cops vs blacks?
I thought 'all lives mattered' even black why are cops against Blacks?

is there ever a time where it's "cops vs whites"?
All lives matter no matter what color they are. That's what I believe. But it's a racist view for some, so I give them what they "want".

To answer part of your question: yes There is a cops vs blacks narrative out there that Obama poured gasoline on.

[Kathianne]

cops vs blacks?
I thought 'all lives mattered' even black, why are cops against Blacks?
is there ever a time where it's "cops vs whites"?

I didn't cut him or any president any slack. If I agree I say so If I don't i say so.
goes for Trump, Obama, Bush etc.
I don't change my political views based on party or color

I agree with the bolded, 100%. As for the first paragraph, there shouldn't be any 'cop v anyone but the bad guys.' Unfortunately, that is more what trials are about. The police arrest and the judicial system has to figure out guilt or innocence.

That race has once again become a prime topic in the conversation, saddens me. I don't expect that will change regardless of whatever the police do. Politics more than anything else prevents any meaningful discussion.

[revelarts]

All lives matter no matter what color they are. That's what I believe. But it's a racist view for some, so I give them what they "want".

To answer part of your question: yes There is a cops vs blacks narrative out there that Obama poured gasoline on.

seems to me that since we agree that there was a real problem "Cops vs Blacks" , that maybe you could have cut Obama some slack for fumbling the ball in an attempt to bring attention to the issue.

seems to me that to many people decided that it was something to TAKE SIDEs on rather than something to address. Obama didn't MAKE anyone else fumble around with the problem. everyone choose to do that.
If he'd have been a better leader it could have gone better, there's no doubt that's true. but i think many people would rather DENY that there is a "cops vs Blacks" problem or a larger "cops vs people with no power" problem and a "Cops vs the constitution problem".

(I'm not saying all cops are bad, (for the thousands time) just that there IS in fact a problem, Some cities have gone a long way to address it other would rather pretend that cops basically do no wrong. )

[Black Diamond]

seems to me that since we agree that there was a real problem "Cops vs Blacks" , that maybe you could have cut Obama some slack for fumbling the ball in an attempt to bring attention to the issue.

seems to many people decided that it it' was something to TKE SIDEs on rather than something to address. Obama didn't MAKE anyone else fumble around with the problem. everyone choose to do that.
If he'd have been a better leader it could have gone better true. but i think many people would rather DENY that there is a "cops vs Blacks" problem or a large "cops vs people with no power" problem and a Cops vs the constitution problem".

(I'm not saying all cops are bad, (for the thousands time) just that there IS in fact a problem, Some cities have gone a long way to address it other would rather pretend that cops basically do no wrong. )
Obama is a race baiter. His rhetoric got cops killed. I don't give him a pass on anything. Only things I defend him on are his citizenship, his religion (he's not a Muslim) , and I don't think he or Hillary sent libyan sarin to the Rebels in order to make an excuse to take Assad out (which was a new theory you indirectly introduced me to).

[revelarts]

Obama is a race baiter. His rhetoric got cops killed.

I think he did a mild bit of race baiting.
about as much as Trump, but generally with a far more positive spin.
But his rhetoric was mild.
Please quote any seriously hostile things that Obama said.
I've asked this question before and i got the answer "I can tell what he REALLY MEANS" type of replies.
Trumps words about Blacks, Jews, Mexicans etc and violence are FAR MORE RAW but somehow his supporters insist that he's NOT racist in any way. look at Sessions record. Was anyone with a race record like that on Obama cabinet?
seems a double standard to me.


But the number of cops killed is still at a low point of several decades. Thankfully.
but the animosity in mainly low income white and minority communities over policing has been there for a LONG time. Before it became a Black thing many libertarians that i follow were writing about the over militarization of cops and Us vs Them mentality that seemed to be becoming more normalized among many depts. But I think the many TV and YouTube viewings of cops caught candidly on video killing and beating people ...apparently for little or no reason... and then not being punished for it has cause 1000 times more problems for police than anything Obama has ever said or every will.

[Black Diamond]

I think he did a mild bit of race baiting.
about as much as Trump, but generally with a far more positive spin.
But his rhetoric was mild.
Please quote any seriously hostile things that Obama said.
I've asked this question before and i got the answer "I can tell what he REALLY MEANS" type of replies.
Trumps words about Blacks, Jews, Mexicans etc and violence are FAR MORE RAW but somehow his supporters insist that he's NOT racist in any way. look at Sessions record. Was anyone with a race record like that on Obama cabinet?
seems a double standard to me.


But the number of cops killed is still at a low point of several decades. Thankfully.
but the animosity in mainly low income white and minority communities over policing has been there for a LONG time. Before it became a Black thing many libertarians that i follow were writing about the over militarization of cops and Us vs Them mentality that seemed to be becoming more normalized among many depts. But I think the many TV and YouTube viewings of cops caught candidly on video killing and beating people ...apparently for little or no reason... and then not being punished for it has cause 1000 times more problems for police than anything Obama has ever said or every will.
lol. Yeah my African American is racist. Having his black employees where they can't be seen is racist. Saying bad hombres is racist. Building a wall is racist. ROFLMAO. I don't think it's anti Semitic to say I want Jews counting my money. Paul McCartney said the Beatles chose their manager on that basis. What a nazi he is.

Stirring shit up saying if I had a son, assuming the guilt of cops and letting everyone know it when there was no case. That's mild. Baltimore, Ferguson, tray tray, supporting black lives matter.... All mild. I suppose it's mild compared to Julius Streicher.

Please point out where trump sat under David duke for 20 years and called him his mentor. Please point out the times trump has invited the klan to the White House or to trump tower. I'm sorry but black lives matter is the klan with a tan. They shout "pigs in a blanket, fry em like bacon". And Obama never told them to stop. In fact he gives them credence. And Obama never told blacks to stop burning down cities. He simply blamed republicans for not allowing any more spending after he doubled the national debt (after the Baltimore riots) How dare they say no more spending. He maybe could have said "hey. Stop. But nope. It's never Obama's fault. It's all because of bush, republicans, Jim Crow and slavery (in other words white peoples fault).

We are more racially divided than we have been in 50 years thanks to Obama. When trump said of course the judge ruled against me, he's Mexican. That's racist I'll give you that one.

[revelarts]

lol. Yeah my African American is racist.
maybe, but it's racially oafish?
If Obama said "there's my White Guy."...?


Having his black employees where they can't be seen is racist.
yes, yes it is.
WTH?


Saying bad hombres is racist.
Again it shows he's an racially numb OAF. like Archie Bunker, 'Look Edith Ramone's here one my Putro Rican friend der Edith,... spray for roaches when he leaves will ya.'


Building a wall is racist.
IMO It's stupid, and when he say's that all Mexicans coming over are generally killers etc YES that's sorta racist.
Are all whites generally killers rapist thieves etc but i guess there are few good ones?

I don't think it's anti Semitic to say I want Jews counting my money.
how many stray stereotyping racial remarks about various races does it take before a white person shows he's generally got issue with races, AT LEAST in the sense that he seems to have various fixed negative/positive race based prejudgements that he ACTS ON in his personal life and business?
10 20 200 1000? infinite?


Paul McCartney said the Beatles chose their manager on that basis.
Seems an odd standard.
SO if someone picks their president because he was black would that be racist?
I've been told it was.
But Paul and Trump picking a Jew BECAUSE they are Jews.. HOW COULD ANYONE THINK THAT'S RACIST??!? ROMAOLOL HardyHar. NAZI! it's NOT the SAME AT ALL!

gotta say IMO it's double standards here BD.
Seems part of the problem is people are ether blind to it or want to give one side a pass.. many passes.



Stirring shit up saying if I had a son, Ok, umm,
I have to say I still don't see what's so horrible wrong with that. Seemed an attempt to humanize a kid that was being demonized by some to me. Heck with Obama's background His Kids could have come out WHITE and he could have said the same. My take away was it could have been ANY of OUR kids... even the president of the U.S.. IMO again people had to decided to TAKE SIDES "Local white-ish nut vs Black kids" "Since I'm not black, and therefore Obama takes the side of a dead black kid. HEY!!! I'm not included here, as a matter of fact, Obama is DEFINITELY against me, Joe White person and HATES all WHITE PEOPLE!!" the horrorrrrr. really? WTH? uh no. I'm sorry I don't see the terrible offense of humanizing a kid who'd been killed that by ANY objective reckoning should not have been. a kid who hadn't gone to trial either BTW.


Assuming the guilt of cops and letting everyone know it when there was no case. That's mild.
Frankly i don't think he should have said Jack about any specific ongoing cases.
I think it was stupid. I agree with you there.
But he's not the 1st to do it, i believe Gulliani has done it too. Heck Trump took out newspaper ads on black kids that were found INNOCENT and he still wanted them to go to jail for it. but that's not wrong or racist at all and should never be brought up as a problem or reflex on his character.


Baltimore, Ferguson, tray tray, supporting black lives matter.... All mild.

Uh, yes, mild. Again what EXACTLY did he say? Did he Tell anyone to riot or kill cops?
Or do you know what he REALLY meant when he called for calm on several occasions?
Should he have jump the gun and pre-judged nope. But is it possible to say anything along the line of... 'There have been issues with some police in general and i think this needs to be investigated to see if there's any wrong doing on this occasion .'.... that WOULD NOT be interrupted by Police and police supporters as OUTRIGHT betrayal of the police? I don't think so.


...Obama condemned the more extreme voices, while defending the movement as a whole."In a movement like Black Lives Matter there are always going to be folks who say things that are stupid or imprudent or over generalized or harsh," Obama said after meeting with acting Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy.

"Whenever those of us who are concerned about fairness in the criminal justice system attack police officers, you are doing a disservice to the cause," Obama said, calling violence against police a "reprehensible" crime that needs to be prosecuted. "But even rhetorically, if we paint police in broad brush without recognizing that the vast majority of police officers are doing a really good job and are trying to protect people … if the rhetoric does not recognize that, then we're going to lose allies in the reform cause."
Even before a sniper killed five police officers during a Black Lives Matter protest in Dallas, Obama has gone out of his way to acknowledge both the evidence of bias in policing and the difficult and dangerous job that police officers have.
"There are legitimate issues that have been raised," he said. "And there is data and evidence to back up the concerns that are being expressed."...


Saying that is TOO MUCH for some. It Show just how he REALLY wants cops DEAD i guess, and that he really HATES white people. umm hmm.




I'm sorry but black lives matter is the klan with a tan.
How many lychings has BLM done so far, how many white people have they dragged behind their cars, how many people have actually been blocked from voting, who many churches have they burned down so far, how many churches have they gone into recently and shot white people based on the BLM rhetoric (Dylan Root)? how many jobs have they denied people for being white?
sorry not even close BD.
yes some of them say some stupid, criminal crap and they are FAR left. but i'm old enough to remember the 60s hearing white kids and college students "shouting kill the pigs" and the like. But seemed the hippy kids were always the ones getting their heads busted in by the cop or being shot and sometimes killed.


And Obama never told them to stop. In fact he gives them credence. And Obama never told blacks to stop burning down cities. He simply blamed republicans for not allowing any more spending after he doubled the national debt (after the Baltimore riots) How dare they say no more spending. He maybe could have said "hey. Stop. But nope. It's never Obama's fault. It's all because of bush, republicans, Jim Crow and slavery (in other words white peoples fault).
see above, he did tell people to stop. but those are not the quotes that were played on fox news or briet bart. Look If you want to IGNORE all the times he did and pretend that he NEVER said anything about "bootstraps" and people taking care of their own neighborhood's then we can't even have a real conversation. But I'd agree that Baltimore's problem is not just gov't money. But he's a DEMOCRAT what do EXPECT him to say BLACK or WHITE? But also we have to be real here as well. History DOEs impact people lives today. ignoring that doesn't help either. native americans are living where they are living because of what people in the past did. Yes "white people". YOU didn't do it BD. but lets be real it was in fact WHITE PEOPLE. That's just history. doesn't mean that everything that happens to today is "white people's" fault but the history is real. it's not a KNOCK on your person to admit the reality of the past and what effect i has TODAY. And honestly ask if some issues are ongoing or if issues can be mitigated in VARIOUS ways by ALL Americans TODAY.
Is that racist to say? Can whites on right admit that much without assuming people are trying to condemn them all NOW? be nice if we could.


We are more racially divided than we have been in 50 years thanks to Obama.
well maybe, but it take 2 to tango.
But If Obama was SO horrifying it would have been nice to see some WHITE MLKs that approached the horrible racist Obama that was taking all the white's rights to vote and work and to go to school and rights cheer the police when they kill. If more on the right could have mustered some christian love, peaceful reasoned resistants and reconciliation rather than unfocused racial animosity I think we'd be further along.

If racial reconciliation is a real goal is Trump the BEST advocate for that? Is Sessions?



When trump said of course the judge ruled against me, he's Mexican. That's racist I'll give you that one.
we AGREE!

[revelarts]

Just for context

here are some of the Speeches.
Obama DOES say people need to be calm
and He DOES Honors police living and fallen. Calls them heroes.

if you're trying to say he didn't say it the WAY you wanted him to,
Or that he questioned them TO often ... ooh... hey sorry, but he does give due respect and praise as well.
But If cops are to saintly to be questioned, well no ones become that big IMO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-9g5luRjFM

[Black Diamond]

Just for context

here are some of the Speeches.
Obama DOES say people need to be calm
and He DOES Honors police living and fallen. Calls them heroes.

if you're trying to say he didn't say it the WAY you wanted him to,
Or that he questioned them TO often ... ooh... hey sorry, but he does give due respect and praise as well.
But If cops are to saintly to be questioned, well no ones become that big IMO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-9g5luRjFM
Yeah he's the great Uniter he said he would be in the US of KKKA. Questioning =/= assuming they are guilty because a black was killed.

[Black Diamond]

I Don't think it's a great thing to say I want Jews to count my money because they are good with it. I just don't think it's anti Semitic to say it. I think it used to be more acceptable to say it. Like 35 years ago when trump and Paul said it. As far as trayvon goes, Obama should have kept his mouth shut. How do you get a fair trial when it's obvious whose side the potus is on. If Obama said there's my white I wouldn't care. i don't think trump is Archie bunker. He wouldn't have been friends with rosa parks and I believe even al sharpton. And how many years Does Obama have to sit under a bigot before you wonder if he is one?

[Gunny]

:popcorn:

[Abbey Marie]

Just for context

here are some of the Speeches.
Obama DOES say people need to be calm
and He DOES Honors police living and fallen. Calls them heroes.

if you're trying to say he didn't say it the WAY you wanted him to,
Or that he questioned them TO often ... ooh... hey sorry, but he does give due respect and praise as well.
But If cops are to saintly to be questioned, well no ones become that big IMO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-9g5luRjFM


Talk is cheap, Rev. Whom did he invite/not invite to the WH?

[Kathianne]

Talk is cheap, Rev. who did he invite/not invite to the WH?

I agree with the tone he set from the beginning with the whole professor incident. Immediately he came down playing the race card, though he did walk it back a bit. But that did set the tone for what followed, his knee jerk reaction was to assume the police were at fault and it carried over to his supporters, which is not unusual in politics. While not unusual, in this case it caused more of a focus for many on racial issues, but NOT in a good way. The differences overtook the commonalities, which had taken literally over a century to create with much soul searching on everyone's part.

When BLM developed, it could have a positive, but when it was taken as a talking point of the left-not just blacks, but anarchists and others-the divide was cemented.

I'm not sure how I'd feel if I was in Rev's shoes, I don't think he sees it the same as we do. Then again, different life experiences.

I just know the whole thing saddens me.

[revelarts]

Talk is cheap, Rev. Whom did he invite/not invite to the WH?

Ruters
"President Barack Obama will host a meeting with law enforcement officials, activists and civil rights leaders on Wednesday to discuss ways to repair "the bonds of trust" between communities and police, the White House said on Monday..."

Washington times
"President Obama hosted a marathon meeting at the White House on Wednesday with Black Lives Matter activists, civil rights leaders, police and elected officials..."

Who do we focus on that he invited to White House?
And if Talk is Cheap why so much emphasis on what he supposedly didn't say say to SOME BLM and others?

Again here's where i have question how much we're looking for offense, or protecting our turf rather than meeting people ...including Obama... where they are, and trying to work for the best FROM there.

look Abbey, there are People here that have said some pretty ... hmm questionable... things race wise on this board. Should I ONLY have that in mind when thinking of them as a person? Saying, 'but but the people here aren't the president' doesn't cut it. It's people, Americans. It's part of tapestry of race relations that were told was so much better in America BEFORE Obama.

I'll remake this obvious point again, Blacks (latinios etc) are still the minority. And we interact with ALL kinds of whites everyday. And on occasion have PUT UP WITH and try an turn positive working with colleagues, bosses customers, officials, and neighbors that have various levels of real animosity towards us because of race. Now If we decided to take every slight and offense as signal on how to response to every overture towards a peaceful relationship there would be NO progress, or working and living together.

Do you think MLK thought that LBJ wasn't a race baiting opportunist? MLK knew it, but LBJ reached out in with some VERY real overtures at addressing some real race problems. And MLK and others graciously and kindly worked with him IN Spite of LBJ's very real personal short comings. If any one of us was looking for Obama to be perfect and never lean one way or another in various people's eye's on race then i think we're being unrealistic. There are many blacks that think he did NOTHING but as you say ...give lip service... to race and definitely nothing as far as helping poor black communities.
The only positive concrete thing IMO is that he had a couple of investigations that brought some broad local police issues to light. But many are still denial that police can do any wrong soooo where does that leave us? But what President has ever investigated any police wrong doing since JFK sent the FBI to the south in the 60s. Have all the police Depts been unquestionable race wise since 1964? Trump says he's going to Support the police (no matter what?). Sessions has a history of racism. So where do any legit complaints about police go now to be objectively reviewed?

But look my MAIN point is that Obama did not want DEAD cops. Or people rioting or committing criminal acts.
what ever someone might think of his "mentor" or his questioning police 1st. It seems clear to me that DEAD cops and roits were NOT not his map as legit activities.
just as saying "hire only JEWS to count the money" does not mean someone is a NAZI.
I think we all can agree that there are LEVELS of racial sensitivity. And we all somewhere on a spectrum.
But I got the impression that, like most people reaching for fairnest, he really just wanted EQUAL protection under the law.
And IMO at times he assumed that some people weren't getting that and spoke when he should have kept his mouth shut.
BUT here's the thing, that response doesn't come out of nowhere, or out of "racism" or "hating cops", it comes from a long and often denied or minimized history of police abuses.
So yes, here's a shocker, if a group has seen it over and over again and watched it be ignored and denied over and over, when someone from that group gets to power they may be touchy and OVER react verbally.
But it doesn't mean they want Officals DEAD. Is it POSSIBLE that he might just want them living up to the BEST of the profession? Is that possible?

A bit of gaining other's perspective and NOT assuming the worse motives of others would go a long way to some peace. IF people can allow themselves to be open to it,
and not be so quick to take offense themselves and allow people to not be perfect on all sides.

But hey it is what it is.

At this point i feel like Rodney King
"Can't we all just get along"

[aboutime]

Rev. I guess you either didn't remember, or want to admit....Others whom Obama Didn't need to invite....but he chose to have there too???
Such as: http://icansayit.com/images/Musbrohoodmem.jpg

[jimnyc]

IMO It's stupid, and when he say's that all Mexicans coming over are generally killers etc YES that's sorta racist.
Are all whites generally killers rapist thieves etc but i guess there are few good ones?

I've had an issue from the beginning with the media always stating "immigration", when Trump's stance, as well as so many of us others, is with "ILLEGAL immigration".

Also, he never said ALL Mexicans. In fact, he often spoke highly of Mexicans. He did say illegal immigration, and he did say that Mexico was sending us the worst they have, when he would be speaking about the rapes and murders from illegal aliens. And while he believes that some murderers and "bad people" are coming over illegally, as do I - I don't believe he ever stated ALL of them were killers. I could be wrong on this one, it's still early for me! LOL

[aboutime]

A Reminder to rev, and all members who use the racist card to make your point.

The LAWS of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA are...No Person is permitted to enter the USA ILLEGALLY. Doing so is BREAKING THE LAWS of the USA.
PEOPLE, of all races, creeds, colors, backgrounds, body temperature who enter ILLEGALLY are BREAKING THE LAW.

PERIOD.

[BoogyMan]

He never attacked the U.S. or Israel that's for sure.
the only countries that he attacked was Iran and we supported him in that.
And O yeah Kuwiat. which we defeated him over and he surrendered within weeks and retreated and the u.S. army went in and destroyed most... if not all... of the viable Chem weapons we sold him.


big threat? not even close.
Are Iraq and the region better off now that we went in a overthrew him, killed and displaced over a million Iraqis and filled the country with DU because we had to teach Saddam a lesson?

nope. Point of clarification.

Saddam certainly did attack Israel. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/january/18/newsid_4588000/4588486.stm)

[aboutime]

Point of clarification.

Saddam certainly did attack Israel. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/january/18/newsid_4588000/4588486.stm)


BoogyMan. I second that with Another point of clarification, if you don't mind.

Saddam attacked Saudi Arabia as well, while also attacking Israel.
I know, because I was in a hospital bed, at Fleet Hospital Five, (A HUGE TENT CITY)in the Desert, when we heard those terrible air-raid sirens, and had to put our Gas mask's on..just in case.
I know the sound of a SADDAM "SCUD" screaming overhead, then the boom from the Patriot Missile that took it down.
Anybody who insists Saddam was innocent, and didn't deserve his fate...probably misses OBAMA, and HILLARY too!

[Kathianne]

Ruters
"President Barack Obama will host a meeting with law enforcement officials, activists and civil rights leaders on Wednesday to discuss ways to repair "the bonds of trust" between communities and police, the White House said on Monday..."

Washington times
"President Obama hosted a marathon meeting at the White House on Wednesday with Black Lives Matter activists, civil rights leaders, police and elected officials..."

Who do we focus on that he invited to White House?
And if Talk is Cheap why so much emphasis on what he supposedly didn't say say to SOME BLM and others?

Again here's where i have question how much we're looking for offense, or protecting our turf rather than meeting people ...including Obama... where they are, and trying to work for the best FROM there.

look Abbey, there are People here that have said some pretty ... hmm questionable... things race wise on this board. Should I ONLY have that in mind when thinking of them as a person? Saying, 'but but the people here aren't the president' doesn't cut it. It's people, Americans. It's part of tapestry of race relations that were told was so much better in America BEFORE Obama.

I'll remake this obvious point again, Blacks (latinios etc) are still the minority. And we interact with ALL kinds of whites everyday. And on occasion have PUT UP WITH and try an turn positive working with colleagues, bosses customers, officials, and neighbors that have various levels of real animosity towards us because of race. Now If we decided to take every slight and offense as signal on how to response to every overture towards a peaceful relationship there would be NO progress, or working and living together.

Do you think MLK thought that LBJ wasn't a race baiting opportunist? MLK knew it, but LBJ reached out in with some VERY real overtures at addressing some real race problems. And MLK and others graciously and kindly worked with him IN Spite of LBJ's very real personal short comings. If any one of us was looking for Obama to be perfect and never lean one way or another in various people's eye's on race then i think we're being unrealistic. There are many blacks that think he did NOTHING but as you say ...give lip service... to race and definitely nothing as far as helping poor black communities.
The only positive concrete thing IMO is that he had a couple of investigations that brought some broad local police issues to light. But many are still denial that police can do any wrong soooo where does that leave us? But what President has ever investigated any police wrong doing since JFK sent the FBI to the south in the 60s. Have all the police Depts been unquestionable race wise since 1964? Trump says he's going to Support the police (no matter what?). Sessions has a history of racism. So where do any legit complaints about police go now to be objectively reviewed?

But look my MAIN point is that Obama did not want DEAD cops. Or people rioting or committing criminal acts.
what ever someone might think of his "mentor" or his questioning police 1st. It seems clear to me that DEAD cops and roits were NOT not his map as legit activities.
just as saying "hire only JEWS to count the money" does not mean someone is a NAZI.
I think we all can agree that there are LEVELS of racial sensitivity. And we all somewhere on a spectrum.
But I got the impression that, like most people reaching for fairnest, he really just wanted EQUAL protection under the law.
And IMO at times he assumed that some people weren't getting that and spoke when he should have kept his mouth shut.
BUT here's the thing, that response doesn't come out of nowhere, or out of "racism" or "hating cops", it comes from a long and often denied or minimized history of police abuses.
So yes, here's a shocker, if a group has seen it over and over again and watched it be ignored and denied over and over, when someone from that group gets to power they may be touchy and OVER react verbally.
But it doesn't mean they want Officals DEAD. Is it POSSIBLE that he might just want them living up to the BEST of the profession? Is that possible?

A bit of gaining other's perspective and NOT assuming the worse motives of others would go a long way to some peace. IF people can allow themselves to be open to it,
and not be so quick to take offense themselves and allow people to not be perfect on all sides.

But hey it is what it is.

At this point i feel like Rodney King
"Can't we all just get along"

I don't see all these things in the same way you do, but I do understand much of what you are saying.

Indeed there are folks that say the right things all the time, but in their heads or perhaps when in the company of those they know and trust, they aren't the same as they purport. Others are far more upfront about their feelings that 'most' of whatever act/believe such and such, but one on one may be much more fair and honest in dealing with those 'most.' Johnson for example.

Here's my take on pre and post Obama, for many. There was no belief that racism was dead or 'nearly gone in actions,' however there was a civility in our day to day dealings. There were some sensibilities that not only made things more civil, it opened doors when enough contact was made-be it at home in the neighborhood, at work, shopping, etc. Please, thank you, holding doors, etc., were extended to all without much thought. I've said many times that I believe that most of the issues of racism are really issues of socioeconomic matters. It's a matter of shared mores and values.

What Obama did in a sense was once again bring the 'me' vs 'them' to the forefront, the police were just the most visible of that. I see his time in office almost analogous to what we've seen happening in the 'women's movement,' what were fair and needed changes at a point in time, have morphed into a true reversal where men are put as second class. They are underemployed, undereducated, open to stereotyping without apology. They are dying earlier and turning to crime more. In a real sense he validated those that see everything through race, whatever their skin hue. He validated those that feel they are 'victims' including those that really just need to get off their butts. He validated those that feel that minorities not only have made their lives 'harder' regarding jobs, success, etc... In both cases many of those that use their victimology to validated their own failures.

There's no doubt that we'll never get all people to treat others fairly, regardless of their race. I don't have answers, but I do think that levels of civility that were found, at least in my life experiences, were better than we now find ourselves in. It seems it's open season on those most uncivil to feel free to speak 'power to the man,' the 'man' being anyone different than themselves.

[revelarts]

I don't see all these things in the same way you do, but I do understand much of what you are saying.

Indeed there are folks that say the right things all the time, but in their heads or perhaps when in the company of those they know and trust, they aren't the same as they purport. Others are far more upfront about their feelings that 'most' of whatever act/believe such and such, but one on one may be much more fair and honest in dealing with those 'most.' Johnson for example.

Here's my take on pre and post Obama, for many. There was no belief that racism was dead or 'nearly gone in actions,' however there was a civility in our day to day dealings. There were some sensibilities that not only made things more civil, it opened doors when enough contact was made-be it at home in the neighborhood, at work, shopping, etc. Please, thank you, holding doors, etc., were extended to all without much thought. I've said many times that I believe that most of the issues of racism are really issues of socioeconomic matters. It's a matter of shared mores and values.

What Obama did in a sense was once again bring the 'me' vs 'them' to the forefront, the police were just the most visible of that. I see his time in office almost analogous to what we've seen happening in the 'women's movement,' what were fair and needed changes at a point in time, have morphed into a true reversal where men are put as second class. They are underemployed, undereducated, open to stereotyping without apology. They are dying earlier and turning to crime more. In a real sense he validated those that see everything through race, whatever their skin hue. He validated those that feel they are 'victims' including those that really just need to get off their butts. He validated those that feel that minorities not only have made their lives 'harder' regarding jobs, success, etc... In both cases many of those that use their victimology to validated their own failures.

There's no doubt that we'll never get all people to treat others fairly, regardless of their race. I don't have answers, but I do think that levels of civility that were found, at least in my life experiences, were better than we now find ourselves in. It seems it's open season on those most uncivil to feel free to speak 'power to the man,' the 'man' being anyone different than themselves.

I appreciate what your saying Kath, and the tone of your reply.
And there's no doubt that many felt that Obama's actions/words/missteps with the addition of BLM-ish activity were an excuse to justify their own bad views and actions about race.
But is that a real good excuse for their bad reactions?

Does the fact that the feminist movement has gone over the edge mean that now i, as a man, can feel justified in treating women less politely or even unfairly. And having a 'they get what the deserve' attitude when i see real and or systematic abuses.
True, it may not make me MORE sympathetic overall but real issues that i may have ignored previously still should be an object of concern. Even if couched in a way that i don't like. If i'm really trying to be decent person myself.

And I guess overall ..in my thinking at least... I have in mind a picture of a black guy being killed over a pack of imaginary cigarettes and the police going back to the job without consequence. And a white guy whose feelings are hurt because the president made him feel excluded/blamed because the president and some loud mouth activist jumped to mistaken conclusions in black white cases a few times. So now that makes him feel justified in ignoring or making excuses for all the abused and dead black guys at the hands of cops all the other times. And minimize the seriousness of other issues like one you posted of instances in LA where , i believe, the police and prosecutors sent many to jail without good cause and used lying informants. And ignore or chalk up to "bad apples" or over statements made in many police officers testimonies of systematic unfair and abusive treatment towards minorities that they've witnessed over the course of years or decades.

While i can in fact understand the hurt feelings or outrage caused by having an issue brought up that's uncomfortable and at times overstated or miss stated. And how the REPEATED complaint can seem unfocused or personal. And how mistaken accusations can make one sincerely believe that NOTHING really is a problem. And the whole package might for some make the general air of politeness that may have been in part of most behavior less at the forefront. I have to wonder, was that air of politeness partly due to a benign ignorance of an ongoing problem?

So generally, from my POV at least, those uncomfortable feelings really don't compare to the feelings of concern low income and minorities have of the real past and potentially unfair treatment, unfair abuse and unjustified deaths of themselves or family members at the hands of the police and courts that are supposedly there to protect us all. Again it's NOT an indictment of ALL police, ALL of the Justice system or ALL whites. Many whites... maybe numerically MORE... are in fact victims of the same. But it's demonstrably MORE focused in lower income and minority communities.
And that's not to ignore all of the other issues that minorities and lower income people have to deal with internally. However, IMO, it's no excuse for the wider population to dismiss it all because of bad feelings. Or to revive or nurse new racial animosity.

But it is what it is.

[Kathianne]

I appreciate what your saying Kath, and the tone of your reply.
And there's no doubt that many felt that Obama's actions/words/missteps with the addition of BLM-ish activity were an excuse to justify their own bad views and actions about race.
But is that a real good excuse for their bad reactions?

Does the fact that the feminist movement has gone over the edge mean that now i, as a man, can feel justified in treating women less politely or even unfairly. And having a 'they get what the deserve' attitude when i see real and or systematic abuses.
True, it may not make me MORE sympathetic overall but real issues that i may have ignored previously still should be an object of concern. Even if couched in a way that i don't like. If i'm really trying to be decent person myself.

And I guess overall ..in my thinking at least... I have in mind a picture of a black guy being killed over a pack of imaginary cigarettes and the police going back to the job without consequence. And a white guy whose feelings are hurt because the president made him feel excluded/blamed because the president and some loud mouth activist jumped to mistaken conclusions in black white cases a few times. So now that makes him feel justified in ignoring or making excuses for all the abused and dead black guys at the hands of cops all the other times. And minimize the seriousness of other issues like one you posted of instances in LA where , i believe, the police and prosecutors sent many to jail without good cause and used lying informants. And ignore or chalk up to "bad apples" or over statements made in many police officers testimonies of systematic unfair and abusive treatment towards minorities that they've witnessed over the course of years or decades.

While i can in fact understand the hurt feelings or outrage caused by having an issue brought up that's uncomfortable and at times overstated or miss stated. And how the REPEATED complaint can seem unfocused or personal. And how mistaken accusations can make one sincerely believe that NOTHING really is a problem. And the whole package might for some make the general air of politeness that may have been in part of most behavior less at the forefront. I have to wonder, was that air of politeness partly due to a benign ignorance of an ongoing problem?

So generally, from my POV at least, those uncomfortable feelings really don't compare to the feelings of concern low income and minorities have of the real past and potentially unfair treatment, unfair abuse and unjustified deaths of themselves or family members at the hands of the police and courts that are supposedly there to protect us all. Again it's NOT an indictment of ALL police, ALL of the Justice system or ALL whites. Many whites... maybe numerically MORE... are in fact victims of the same. But it's demonstrably MORE focused in lower income and minority communities.
And that's not to ignore all of the other issues that minorities and lower income people have to deal with internally. However, IMO, it's no excuse for the wider population to dismiss it all because of bad feelings. Or to revive or nurse new racial animosity.

But it is what it is.

Since you were responding to me, you were a bit all over the place, my fault. I bolded a couple lines I want to make some observations about:

Decent people are not the ones causing the problems, they are trying to do the right thing. In fact, regarding the feminist discussion I brought up, you applied the word 'civil.' Yeah, my guess if we met, without knowing what each other look like, we'd be civil. Many others, well they wouldn't.

When it comes to 'words' being misstated or overstated, folks should 'understand.' Yet, when it comes to the instances where bad police, which for the record I've said many times, exist in small percentages; you continue to argue that it's more common than not, at least with minorities. I'm not trying to be glib or any other type of dismissal. I do believe that while you deplore those bad cops and you're not alone by any means, you do overstate the instances at the minimum. You never seem to acknowledge that there are criminal problems in poor areas in greater percentage than wealthier areas. Yes, without a doubt, the minorities comprise a higher percentage of the poor as a ratio is a fact. Indeed, that is but one issue that leads to higher arrests. Yes, because many or most of those arrested also are forced to have public defenders, they are more likely to be arrested, incarcerated, and in the worst cases, end up on death row. Those last, important points, are not just for minorities, but for young, male, and poor in general.

Now the stickiest wicket regarding this whole issue, why the poorest of minorities are over represented by percentage regarding crime. There are numerically many more poor whites, than minorities by number. I believe that prejudice may play a role, in many locations, a large role. However that still doesn't address the problem as a whole. It's not one you nor I can answer definitely. Some has to do with the breakdown of families, which I believe has hit minority groups in general, blacks in particular, in devastating ways since 'The War on Poverty.' That doesn't mean by any means that it addressed many issues that needed attention. It was in the unintended consequences that followed by law and implementation how some of those issues were addressed. Long before 'all men' were looked at by some as superfluous, black men were first in these ways.

[revelarts]

Since you were responding to me, you were a bit all over the place, my fault. I bolded a couple lines I want to make some observations about:

Decent people are not the ones causing the problems, they are trying to do the right thing. In fact, regarding the feminist discussion I brought up, you applied the word 'civil.' Yeah, my guess if we met, without knowing what each other look like, we'd be civil. Many others, well they wouldn't.

When it comes to 'words' being misstated or overstated, folks should 'understand.' Yet, when it comes to the instances where bad police, which for the record I've said many times, exist in small percentages; you continue to argue that it's more common than not, at least with minorities. I'm not trying to be glib or any other type of dismissal. I do believe that while you deplore those bad cops and you're not alone by any means, you do overstate the instances at the minimum. You never seem to acknowledge that there are criminal problems in poor areas in greater percentage than wealthier areas.
...Again it's NOT an indictment of ALL police, ALL of the Justice system or ALL whites. Many whites... maybe numerically MORE... are in fact victims of the same. But it's demonstrably MORE focused in lower income and minority communities.
And that's not to ignore all of the other issues that minorities and lower income people have to deal with internally. ........


Kath, I've acknowledged those and others several times and commented on the issues you bought up.
Especially since when people do reply to the police and race issue from the right those issues ALWAYS come up.
I've acknowledge them and posted links and stories... on more than one occasion... of various and ongoing efforts by Black churches, educators, activist and bushiness people to address those issues.

having said that ...again... and expecting that me saying it here will be FORGOTTEN or ignored again in a few days and people will assume that i never said it... because my comments on a police situation is so pointed.

But K, it still seems that you put sub par and abusive policing of some locals into the "bad apple" category.
And don't really see any police issues generally nor any having any real racial input.
And i'm drawn to concluded, if my reading is right, that you'd be one that would think that THERE IS NO serious problem to be addressed on policing justice system side of the discussion.
But that IF black neighborhoods would just straiten up, that the police would not harass, arrest, beat or kill innocent blacks so much.
Others have said as much.
If i've miss stated your position my apologies.
but I'm not sure that you've stated clearly any real police short comings.

Do you think there are any broad problems with equal and constitutional policing that needs to addressed OTHER than a random 'bad apple' issues? you've mentioned family that don't like policing as much anymore. but I don't see that you think that any police Depts have any real need to change.
Seems you do think that many blacks have problems that they need to change (some of which we agree on and i acknowledge) that are exacerbated by poverty (agreed). But there are no aspects of poor policing really on the table as a serious issue for improvement or debate. You're willing to patiently to hear complaints but you think they are exaggerated.
So i guess we just disagree here.

[Kathianne]

Kath, I've acknowledged those and others several times and commented on the issues you bought up.
Especially since when people do reply to the police and race issue from the right those issues ALWAYS come up.
I've acknowledge them and posted links and stories... on more than one occasion... of various and ongoing efforts by Black churches, educators, activist and bushiness people to address those issues.

having said that ...again... and expecting that me saying it here will be FORGOTTEN or ignored again in a few days and people will assume that i never said it... because my comments on a police situation is so pointed.

But K, it still seems that you put sub par and abusive policing of some locals into the "bad apple" category.
And don't really see any police issues generally nor any having any real racial input.
And i'm drawn to concluded, if my reading is right, that you'd be one that would think that THERE IS NO serious problem to be addressed on policing justice system side of the discussion.
But that IF black neighborhoods would just straiten up, that the police would not harass, arrest, beat or kill innocent blacks so much.
Others have said as much.
If i've miss stated your position my apologies.
but I'm not sure that you've stated clearly any real police short comings.

Do you think there are any broad problems with equal and constitutional policing that needs to addressed OTHER than a random 'bad apple' issues? you've mentioned family that don't like policing as much anymore. but I don't see that you think that any police Depts have any real need to change.
Seems you do think that many blacks have problems that they need to change (some of which we agree on and i acknowledge) that are exacerbated by poverty (agreed). But there are no aspects of poor policing really on the table as a serious issue for improvement or debate. You're willing to patiently to hear complaints but you think they are exaggerated.
So i guess we just disagree here.


I'm pressed for time, have to go to work in a few.

Yes, you have 'acknowledged' that all police aren't bad repeatedly, that there are good police. Yes, in our family there has been widespread bad feelings towards what has happened with that profession.

Those who've been at the job for many years, family wise through generations or just those that are called, do have a different perspective perhaps. Good people are getting screwed all the way around, bad triumphs. What is happening, and it is in the news just yesterday highlighting Baltimore is that the 'good cops' are leaving or at least choosing not to go to the places that need them the most. Why? They want to do 'good', they truly want to 'serve and protect' beyond the simple mantra.

There are departments, Chicago and Baltimore come to mind, where there are systemic problems in the system-though more police officers enter their positions wanting to change it, then not. They find themselves in the position of being attacked from all sides. The people hate and distrust all police, some are willing to kill them because of the uniform. The unions, the management, their political bosses are often corrupt, those that are not are gone too soon. Tough departments attract and lose the thinking cops in faster and faster fashion. It's not all the fault of the departments either.

The community leaders, the organizers if you will, many of which are no better than those corrupt leaders in the departments, though often at odds in the news, they work hand in glove together. Corruption isn't only being done on the streets. Look at what you read, who is most visible on the streets that are most needed in the communities you are concerned with? It's not the organizers or the politicians, they show up when the press does. Nope, it's the cops. Yes, the bad ones that may shake down the hustlers and the legit business owners. But also the good ones, that help out the elderly, try to keep the good kids out of trouble. Will go out of their way to help a parolee find a job-they know who will hire those with a record.

More later, I got to run.

[Gunny]

there's the edited version for you GunnySchool time. Rev. The military back in the 90s under Bush I predicted the EXACT power vacuum we have today if Saddam was taken out. It's why we didn't.

Point number 2: We were already in Afghanistan and Saddam was contained. You don't start a second front unless absolutely necessary. Iraq was not. Saddam was contained. Focus on your current fight.

Point #3: Saddam was a POS from the second his eyelids fluttered. And I've SEEN WITH MY EYES the human rights violations and I don't need a lecture from a desk jockey. If you ever wanted to see Marines with tears in their eyes. maybe you should have been in Kuwait instead of polishing that chair with your ass telling everyone else how all they're supposed to think and do things.

I play to win. Period. Game of checkers or Gulf War and everything in between. I support winning, not arm-chair quarterbacking by fools with no clue. You want to blame GWB? How about how Billybob Clinton abused us? I think he racked up to camels and a tent on his score list. Involved ys in a war in Europe that didn't have jackass sh*t to do with us.

Don't YOU come on here telling US WTF happened. We were there. Where were you?

[Black Diamond]

School time. Rev. The military back in the 90s under Bush I predicted the EXACT power vacuum we have today if Saddam was taken out. It's why we didn't.

Point number 2: We were already in Afghanistan and Saddam was contained. You don't start a second front unless absolutely necessary. Iraq was not. Saddam was contained. Focus on your current fight.

Point #3: Saddam was a POS from the second his eyelids fluttered. And I've SEEN WITH MY EYES the human rights violations and I don't need a lecture from a desk jockey. If you ever wanted to see Marines with tears in their eyes. maybe you should have been in Kuwait instead of polishing that chair with your ass telling everyone else how all they're supposed to think and do things.

I play to win. Period. Game of checkers or Gulf War and everything in between. I support winning, not arm-chair quarterbacking by fools with no clue. You want to blame GWB? How about how Billybob Clinton abused us? I think he racked up to camels and a tent on his score list. Involved ys in a war in Europe that didn't have jackass sh*t to do with us.

Don't YOU come on here telling US WTF happened. We were there. Where were you?
It's easy to play arm chair quarterback.

[aboutime]

Hey Gunny. Bout time for both pete and rev to give us all of their Military experience here? What do you think?
Of course, they know better than the President of the United States.

How many Elected positions have BOTH of them held in their lifetime?

[revelarts]

School time. Rev. The military back in the 90s under Bush I predicted the EXACT power vacuum we have today if Saddam was taken out. It's why we didn't.
exactly


Point number 2: We were already in Afghanistan and Saddam was contained.
YES, Exactly!



You don't start a second front unless absolutely necessary. Iraq was not. Saddam was contained. Focus on your current fight.

YES Agreed!



Point #3: Saddam was a POS from the second his eyelids fluttered. And I've SEEN WITH MY EYES the human rights violations
I can't disagree with that.



...and I don't need a lecture from a desk jockey. If you ever wanted to see Marines with tears in their eyes. maybe you should have been in Kuwait instead of polishing that chair with your ass telling everyone else how all they're supposed to think and do things.

...Don't YOU come on here telling US WTF happened. We were there. Where were you?
OK, I never said you needed a lecture. I'm just responding to people questioning the facts I've received from people JUST LIKE YOU. And people that worked in the field as Intel and WORKED from desk as intel people, And the politicians, leaders who made the calls as well.
seems to me that if we're honest we all get information from various sources.

you weren't there when Saddam eye's 1st fluttered open so you can't say if he was good kid or not. but you claim some authority to do so.

you weren't there during the civil war either but a while back you decided you had to tell me what REALLY happened.
not being there does not mean that you don't know anything, and being there doesn't mean you know EVERYTHING.
so please stop pretending that it does and stop trying to shut me or others down with the "you weren't there so STHU" line of BSery Gunny.
I've never claimed to be there or to experience what you've experienced But I do listen to you and people like you as PART of trying to get a complete picture. I think , on your best days, you do the same.




Tony Blair
“I apologise for the fact that the intelligence we received was wrong,” he told CNN.
“I also apologise for some of the mistakes in planning and, certainly, our mistake in our understanding of what would happen once you removed the regime.”
Asked by host Fareed Zakaria if the Iraq war was “the principal cause” of the RISE of Islamic State, he was reported by the Mail on Sunday to have conceded: “I think there are elements of truth in that.”
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2...n-rise-of-isis (http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/oct/25/tony-blair-sorry-iraq-war-mistakes-admits-conflict-role-in-rise-of-isis)

Not Just "elements"... it's the truth.

[Gunny]

exactly

YES, Exactly!


YES Agreed!



I can't disagree with that.


OK, I never said you needed a lecture. I'm just responding to people questioning the facts I've received from people JUST LIKE YOU. And people that worked in the field as Intel and WORKED from desk as intel people, And the politicians, leaders who made the calls as well.
seems to me that if we're honest we all get information from various sources.

you weren't there when Saddam eye's 1st fluttered open so you can't say if he was good kid or not. but you claim some authority to do so.

you weren't there during the civil war either but a while back you decided you had to tell me what REALLY happened.
not being there does not mean that you don't know anything, and being there doesn't mean you know EVERYTHING.
so please stop pretending that it does and stop trying to shut me or others down with the "you weren't there so STHU" line of BSery Gunny.
I've never claimed to be there or to experience what you've experienced But I do listen to you and people like you as PART of trying to get a complete picture. I think , on your best days, you do the same.




Tony Blair
“I apologise for the fact that the intelligence we received was wrong,” he told CNN.
“I also apologise for some of the mistakes in planning and, certainly, our mistake in our understanding of what would happen once you removed the regime.”
Asked by host Fareed Zakaria if the Iraq war was “the principal cause” of the RISE of Islamic State, he was reported by the Mail on Sunday to have conceded: “I think there are elements of truth in that.”
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2...n-rise-of-isis (http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/oct/25/tony-blair-sorry-iraq-war-mistakes-admits-conflict-role-in-rise-of-isis)

Not Just "elements"... it's the truth.

Crying over spilled milk solves nothing. The CURRENT situation in Iraq is the DIRECT result of Obama pulling us out. ISIS is a DIRECT result of pulling us out.