Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 305: Where's the beef? With the police.

(+) Yeah! (+)

MrGreenonion posted...

https://twitter.com/NYPDDetectives/status/1272801631961260032

Life comes at you etc etc

All you had to do to not show yourself to be a credulous bootlicker was withhold an opinion for 5 hours and 17 minutes in the middle of the night

uhhhh suddenly you trust the cops??? when they tell you they were poisoned theyre liars but when they tell you they werent poisoned you believe them??? Very convenient!!!
---

Corrik7 posted...

I mean, I am not wrong. Kaepernick led a dreadful, terrible SF team before getting benched for Blaine Gabbert. Then wanted top dollar as a starter or nothing. When he finally came around to accepting a possible backup spot, he burned bridges with owners considering signing him like in Baltimore where his girlfriend on social media called the Baltimore owner a racist or something.

as someone condemned to the dumpster fire of the afc east let me tell you that kaep would have easily been the 2nd best qb in that cursed division a number of years

Though again, this year I think the rebuilds have all kicked in and with Darnold, Allen, and Tua they're all set on where they want to go for now. But before that? lmao.

---

wow what a plot twist that definitely no one could have seen coming

---

...by debunked you mean still confirmed they got poisoned due to Shake Shack right.

https://nypost.com/2020/06/16/nypd-finds-no-criminality-by-shake-shack-workers-in-case-of-sickened-cops/

After a thorough investigation by the NYPDs Manhattan South investigators, it has been determined that there was no criminality by shake shacks employees, Chief of Detectives Rodney Harrison said in a tweet early Tuesday.

Police sources said the case has been deemed unintentional after it appeared that whatever cleaning solution was used on the shake machine wasnt rinsed off enough.

gotta keep in mind the wording used. it wasn't denying the facts, it was saying there's no criminality, which doesn't mean that what happened didn't happen, just that it's not intentional. like you do realize the biggest difference between something like, say, writing pig on a cup and people literally go to the hospital is that the latter's a much more serious accusation which would need an actual record to it, right? that you can't just randomly say that one and have a he-says/she-says moment? it's effectively being accused of attempted murder, they'd straight up be opening themselves to an easy libel suit if the basic facts were made up.

MrGreenonion posted...

All you had to do to not show yourself to be a credulous bootlicker was withhold an opinion for 5 hours and 17 minutes in the middle of the night

1) since when is 11 the middle of the night
2) life comes at you fast etc, ya could've waited another 2-3 hours to have it clear that it's not a hoax or fake that they got poisoned. the main thing that's been rebutted is the claim of intent.

if the story does escalate further in either direction it'll be known pretty quick.

---

Wang showing up with the far right twitter defense I see.

Wang, the immediate response from the police (and yourself) was: "The police are under attack because we're being vilified by liberals and their pandering politicians and even Shake Shack's antifa staff are trying to murder us!"

When the far simpler (and apparently accurate) explanation was "human error".

---

That's totally not what was said, no.

---

"We are at the point where people working at Shake Shack are literally poisoning cops."

Which, alright, your wording isn't expressly saying anything there, and it also covers the fact that said poisoning may have been accidental. But why then, Wang, would you need to add the clause "we are at the point". What point is that, if the poisoning was accidental? Don't pull this Corrik semantics shit. You know exactly what you posted, and the implied meaning behind the words used.

---

Also, the statement from the Detectives' Endowment Association, which put out the tweet you posted, used the phrase "intentionally poisoned", followed by the paragraph: "Police in New York City and across the country are under attack by vicious criminals who dislike us simply because of the uniform we wear. Emboldened by pandering elected officials, these cowards will go to great lengths to harm any member of law enforcement."

You know EXACTLY what was being said, when you posted these statements, Wang.

---

At the time it was believed intentional, yes.
My objection is to the (and yourself) part as that's certainly not what I said.

---

Kinglicious posted...

At the time it was believed intentional, yes.
My objection is to the (and yourself) part as that's certainly not what I said.

You shared the post. You made it clear what the implication was behind sharing that post and the wording you used to share it. Don't be a coward if you're not going to stand behind the words you used.

---

Kinglicious posted...

At the time it was believed intentional, yes.
My objection is to the (and yourself) part as that's certainly not what I said.

Simple question:
Did you take the statement you shared at its word when you shared it
---

Jakyl25 posted...

How ironic that they have to live in paranoid fear now because of the actions of one bad apple

Hahahah. Well played

Also, teargassing 3 year olds, whst the ever loving ****

---

All this trouble just because Americans didn't want a woman as President.

---

Inviso posted...

You shared the post. You made it clear what the implication was behind sharing that post and the wording you used to share it. Don't be a coward if you're not going to stand behind the words you used.

i'm sticking behind the words i used.
i'm not sticking behind the words you made up.

Jakyl25 posted...

Simple question:
Did you take the statement you shared at its word when you shared it

depends on which part.
that they were poisoned, sure. i'll take that at its word because it's a severe enough claim that can be easily verified by media/investigators that it'd be a massive error. if that part were to be faked that'd be a major story in and of itself.

the intent, not so much. it's either really inconvenient timing or on purpose, one of those two. either way, intent ain't gonna be known immediately but of course the union's gonna go that way. and it of course will become national news and way more important than, say, a cup. your options are either attempted murder or massive negligence to the point of a crime, either way someone fucked up pretty badly at that shake shack.

the rest of the flavor text, nah. that's just rhetoric.

---

https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1272865606459633664?s=20

Keep in mind this a pretty highly rated polling group, too.

---

also, while completely unrelated to this subject uh...

the rest of the world is still moving and a lot of media isn't focusing on stories that are way, way, way more important than our domestic issues.

we currently have a major world war 3 situation happening.
China and India have been fighting over the border for the past few weeks now. not sure that's been mentioned in this topic, it just so happened to occur shortly after everyone got obsessed on the Floyd murder. yesterday this escalated to violent conflict that killed at least 3 Indians and 5 Chinese. meaning, they're getting really close to war.

that's separate from North Korea's antics with the demilitarized zone and seeming to want to start a fight again. while not that unusual out of NK, the timing is a major issue due to China/India as that means we've got two major events happening at the same time with potential for war, in a similar region, at a time when the western world is busy with its internal affairs.

and that all happened on the halfway point of 2020.

---

who cares?

none of that is any of our business

our only response should be the immediate withdrawal of all troops anywhere near those conflicts, so we don't get caught up in any crossfire

---

uhh....
India and China are nuclear powers with over a billion people and make up a massive amount of the world's manufacturing of literally everything.

it's the entire world's business if the two go to war and they're already at the stage where they're having armed conflicts resulting in deaths. it then becomes a WW3 problem since India's allies will include various European countries, Japan, and the US. technically Russia too but they play to both.

---

Reminder: Police 'poisoned' makes national news, but a toddler was teargassed by police -- twice -- and you hear next to nothing about it from the media. Same with the story about the officer in oregon who warned proud boys about going inside 'discreetly' and saying they didn't want to appear to be taking sides.

---

Wanglicious posted...

uhh....
India and China are nuclear powers with over a billion people and make up a massive amount of the world's manufacturing of literally everything.

it's the entire world's business if the two go to war and they're already at the stage where they're having armed conflicts resulting in deaths. it then becomes a WW3 problem since India's allies will include various European countries, Japan, and the US. technically Russia too but they play to both.

Any links to the news for this? Much as you've implied, I've not heard anything about this.

---

Wanglicious posted...

i'm sticking behind the words i used.
i'm not sticking behind the words you made up.

The tweet you shared said intentionally poisoned, and your commentary was shake shack employees are literally poisoning cops, which very much implies you instantly, 100% bought the intentionally part. And yes, the fact that the intentionally part ended up not being the case is a pretty damn big deal.

And thats why people are getting on your case. You are always getting on others to wait for the facts, research things further, etc. But you didnt do that yourself when you saw something that you could use to further push the narrative you want pushed.

---

Wanglicious posted...

we are at the point where people working at shake shack are literally poisoning cops.

We are at the point unambiguously implies that you are presenting this as a deliberate escalation of the tensions between the public and the police
---

Wanglicious posted...

we currently have a major world war 3 situation happening.
China and India have been fighting over the border for the past few weeks now. not sure that's been mentioned in this topic

I think the only mention might have been me sharing this tweet

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1265604027678670848?s=21

And wondering how this qualifies as America First
---

lmao that backtrack that Wang didn't mean that there was any intent is just a blatantly ridiculous lie, there's nothing else to say about it

I didn't believe even he could possibly try and rationalize himself out of that one but here we are at that point

---

Seanchan posted...

Any links to the news for this? Much as you've implied, I've not heard anything about this.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-india-china/india-says-officer-two-soldiers-killed-in-violent-faceoff-on-border-with-china-idUKKBN23N0ZD

the 5 chinese dead is a bit harder to find, probably because it's china. but there's some reporting on it, like here:
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/videos/news/five-chinese-soldiers-killed-in-lac-faceoff-reports/videoshow/76404289.cms

HashtagSEP posted...

which very much implies you instantly, 100% bought the intentionally part.

except you aren't going to know intent right off the bat.
like you're saying that i'm the guy always saying wait for the facts while at the same time saying that i'm gonna forget about that on the biggest unclear issue at the start of a crime, intent. meaning i either messed up (fair assumption) or that you're reading me wrong (actual case).

Jakyl25 posted...

We are at the point unambiguously implies that you are presenting this as a deliberate escalation of the tensions between the public and the police

well yeah, as that's how it's presented by them. claim is believable and made its rounds quite a bit. now we're in the part where you've got the basic facts as true but also the intent as false, making nobody look good. shake shack is going with incompetence, i'm sure various NYPD members going with malice due to the timing, even if the official take by them is also incompetence. not fake news or a hoax but also not accurate.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

I think the only mention might have been me sharing this tweet

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1265604027678670848?s=21

And wondering how this qualifies as America First

I linked to the article about the conflict a week ago or so. You guys ignored it to probably argue with me about something stupid. I'm sure


---

Wanglicious posted...

like you're saying that i'm the guy always saying wait for the facts while at the same time saying that i'm gonna forget about that on the biggest unclear issue at the start of a crime, intent. meaning i either messed up (fair assumption) or that you're reading me wrong (actual case).

lmfao this is hilarious

---

Gotta remember they are jumping on you for jumping to a conclusion when they are jumping to conclusions about the hangings that have happened also.

Hypocrites.

---

hangings are weird.
entirely possible it's lynching but a lynching in manhattan seems a bit off to put it mildly, especially when we're in the middle of a pandemic and depression, meaning suicide rates should be significantly up. at the same time, why that method of all of them? get it wrong and you're alive after a lot of pain or are dying a really slow, painful death. and there's no way you don't know what the implication is in the overall environment. potentially is a figurative statement, that they weren't actually lynched but felt like they were.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Gotta remember they are jumping on you for jumping to a conclusion when they are jumping to conclusions about the hangings that have happened also.

Hypocrites.

tell me corrik do you genuinely believe there is any chance in hell that black people are committing suicide by hanging themselves in trees to replicate lynchings.


---

Wang in 2020 - it's impossible for NYC to have racists

---

changmas posted...

lmfao this is hilarious

It's called gaslighting.

---

i see your reading comprehension is as shit as ever.

---

Obviously you didn't say impossible, but casting doubt upon it and refuting it simply because of where it happened is equally as stupid as I was pretending to be. And that was my point! Glad you caught on.

---

One instance of it happening is suspicious, but no reason to jump to conclusions without a deeper investigation

Five instances of it happening is beyond suspicion and into clear malice
---

changmas posted...

tell me corrik do you genuinely believe there is any chance in hell that black people are committing suicide by hanging themselves in trees to replicate lynchings.

Let me ask you this.

If a person commits suicide by hanging from a tree. You are suicidal and thinking about commiting suicide and see that in the news directly prior. COULD that influence your decision on how you commit suicide?

I am not saying it is not a lynching or whatever. I said we should wait for details to come out, like autopsies. You are jumping to a very racially charged view right off the bat, that may be ultimately correct or not. While Wang thought he was getting accurate news possibly, (which it was just not intent-wise), some of you are jumping to the opposite of initial reports off the bat because it is oddly... The news you want it to be.

Just wait and see. That's a very large assumption to make.

---

I assume the damage intended was done. Run the irresponsible claim of saying it was "intentional poisoning" up front without any investigation, get it to circulate among "all live matters" types and the alt-right, then come out later with the investigation results "actually it wasn't intentional at all"

Let the lie circulate and go viral and try to set a favorable narrative before the truth can come out so it's smothered by the time it does


---

xp1337 posted...

I assume the damage intended was done. Run the irresponsible claim of saying it was "intentional poisoning" up front without any investigation, get it to circulate among "all live matters" types and the alt-right, then come out later with the investigation results "actually it wasn't intentional at all"

Let the lie circulate and go viral and try to set a favorable narrative before the truth can come out so it's smothered by the time it does

Honestly, even if reported appropriately, right wing propagandists still would have reported it as such because "what's the chances this only happens when the 3 cops come in for a shake". Doesn't matter really. Propagandists will propaganda regardless of details.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Let me ask you this.

If a person commits suicide by hanging from a tree. You are suicidal and thinking about commiting suicide and see that in the news directly prior. COULD that influence your decision on how you commit suicide?

I am not saying it is not a lynching or whatever. I said we should wait for details to come out, like autopsies. You are jumping to a very racially charged view right off the bat, that may be ultimately correct or not. While Wang thought he was getting accurate news possibly, (which it was just not intent-wise), some of you are jumping to the opposite of initial reports off the bat because it is oddly... The news you want it to be.

Just wait and see. That's a very large assumption to make.

so let me get this straight. it's perfectly reasonable to assume that a random drunk man who stole a taser might be so violent as to hold up a car, steal it, and drive it into a family of four and kill them but believing that 5 black people found dead in a position that replicates lynching is likely to be actual lynching is jumping to conclusions.

It's weird how you're allowed to assume whatever you want about situations but no one who holds a different view than you is!


---

https://twitter.com/Alexrosstweets/status/1272755226546765825

also lol i can't believe they would actually retract the statement. apparently that kind of violence can be tolerated! (context being that the shooter was later revealed to be shooting in the defense of racist statues)

---

changmas posted...

so let me get this straight. it's perfectly reasonable to assume that a random drunk man who stole a taser might be so violent as to hold up a car, steal it, and drive it into a family of four and kill them but believing that 5 black people found dead in a position that replicates lynching is likely to be actual lynching is jumping to conclusions.

It's weird how you're allowed to assume whatever you want about situations but no one who holds a different view than you is!

It is perfectly reasonable to assume a violent offender of the flee from police COULD cause injury to the innocent public. Yes.

Here is the problem with many of you in this group.

1. You jump on someone for jumping to a conclusion based on what they read.
2. When someone says you are also jumping to a conclusion regarding something in the OPPOSITE of what has been said in another scenario. You...
3. Get defensive and try to change someone's words to defend your jumping to a conclusion, while you just jumped on someone for jumping to a conclusion.

Meaning...

4. You didn't refute jumping to a conclusion after jumping on someone else for having done so. You tried to justify why it is okay when you do it instead of the person you jumped on for it.

Like wtf?

---

https://twitter.com/NPR/status/1272639155399544833?s=19

---

Jakyl25 posted...

One instance of it happening is suspicious, but no reason to jump to conclusions without a deeper investigation

Five instances of it happening is beyond suspicion and into clear malice

five instances depends on how related they are. you won't find a connection between manhattan and the pair in southern california, those should be unrelated in all ways. maybe the City Hall one is more than the initial report, the circumstances there are definitely more political. the manhattan one not as much; dude was found dead in a park. gotta remember that before the pandemic started suicide was already the 2nd leading cause of death for men in most age groups and that spikes in times of unemployment (almost 16.8% for the black demo, highest since the 80s), and in health crisis (we already know black communities got hit really hard). even the method, hanging, is unusually popular - last year it was 26% of all suicides. ultimately each case has to be examined on its own. i don't know the status of all of them, just that those 3 are suicides officially right now, with feds getting involved for the SoCal ones.

---

Corrik7 posted...

It is perfectly reasonable to assume a violent offender of the flee from police COULD cause injury to the innocent public. Yes.

Here is the problem with many of you in this group.

1. You jump on someone for jumping to a conclusion based on what they read.
2. When someone says you are also jumping to a conclusion regarding something in the OPPOSITE of what has been said in another scenario. You...
3. Get defensive and try to change someone's words to defend your jumping to a conclusion, while you just jumped on someone for jumping to a conclusion.

Meaning...

4. You didn't refute jumping to a conclusion after jumping on someone else for having done so. You tried to justify why it is okay when you do it instead of the person you jumped on for it.

Like wtf?

He wasn't a violent offender until the police escalated the situation and turned him violent. A peaceful, forty-minute conversation with a clearly-inebriated man should not result in the situation turning on a dime, and a man being shot in the back as he's running from the cops. There's something wrong with that situation, and you know it.

---

lol Wang with the gaslighting, who saw that coming.

Why can't we get one decent right winger on this board?

---

Corrik7 posted...

4. You didn't refute jumping to a conclusion after jumping on someone else for having done so. You tried to justify why it is okay when you do it instead of the person you jumped on for it.

you mean literally what you're doing? do you have any sense of self-awareness at all?

---

UshiromiyaEva posted...

Why can't we get one decent right winger on this board?

1. decent
2. right-winger

pick one

---

changmas posted...

you mean literally what you're doing? do you have any sense of self-awareness at all?

Again. Your defense isn't that I am wrong. Your defense is that well uh I think you are one too! You aren't refuting being a hypocrite at all. Lol.

Like, hello?


---

changmas posted...

1. decent
2. right-winger

pick one

Chang is more accurate than he wants to be in this post. The reason you can't get a decent right-winger on this forum is because by disagreeing with your opinions and being right-wing, many of you cannot realize having different opinions than your own doesn't make someone not decent.

It's partly the fault of the thread being mostly an echo chamber, but anyone who disagrees with you ideologically is not a decent person in many of your minds.

So, Chang is right on his assessment in the minds of many here.

Anyone right of center is not a decent person in your mindset.

---