There you go. Commie cigar thinks he's the judge and jury.Originally Posted by cubanstogie
There you go. Commie cigar thinks he's the judge and jury.
It doesn't matter if he was a "good" person in your opinion, my opinion, or the Minneapolis PD's opinion.
George Floyd should still be alive today. Full stop. No equivocating. No "yeah...but...". No "but he was a thug". Just stop the nonsense.
George Floyd is a human being who was murdered by a police officer for reasons that no one has been able to clearly explain. Unless new evidence or information emerges, those are the facts. That is why he is a martyr. Not all martyrs are saints.
Yeah but Biden called Trump a clown.
Yeah but Floyd was a black drug user.
Do you have another adjective I should use for a guy holding gun to pregant womans belly. A pro choice liberal maybe?
Sounds like something you'd do.
I really cant say it any clearer, Floyd didn’t deserve to die. Ive said it multiple times. You can keep trying to convince me though.
Well, since that never happened according to the police report of the incident and the trial documents; we are spared watching you grope for an appropriate word. While Floyd was tried and convicted of being involved in the robbery of two women and he did hold a gun on one of the women, no one was pregnant at the time.
So again, get your news from actual sources of information and not social media content creators and influencers.
- - - Updated - - -
Then why make sure you continue to point out that he is a "Thug" or "scumbag" as well? Just as we are all supposed to understand what the wink emoji means; how am I supposed to take these efforts on your part aside from what I am currently assuming but hoping I am not correct about...
You might as well go back to monkey pics chim chim, pathetic response. Embarrassing actually unless you’re 8 or 9 years old
Again, sounds like something you'd do. How long is your criminal record?
Speeding ticket, actually no Cop let me off as professional courtesy to firemen. I got nothing then.
I say you stuck the barrel of a .357 in a pregnant women's stomach while high on fentanyl just like you say Floyd did.
Isn't that exactly what happened, though? The coroner ruling his death a massive drug overdose, from the drugs he was seen on video trying to swallow before the cops searched his car, on bodycam footage that wasn't released for some reason until after the riots? Isn't that what new evidence is?
While I am no expert on police holds to know how true it is or not, supposedly part of the defense's case will be that the type of neck hold used, while it looks brutal, cannot actually make someone pass out or die. Again, I have no idea whether that's real or a line of BS from his lawyers, but if a jury buys it - watch out for riots Round 2.
See you Space Cowboy ...
He did not die from a drug overdose. He died from the application of force by the police officer.
The answers to all of your questions are readily available on the internet. For instance, here again, is a seemingly unbiased breakdown by someone more than qualified to go through both the ME/Coroner's report and the independent autopsy: https://www.medpagetoday.com/blogs/working-stiff/86913
The information about basic facts and laboratory tests are super easy to find on the internet. Just look for information sources and not the "just asking questions" or "what about" nonsense filtered through social media content creators and influencers.
It took me one click to get the information on whether or not Floyd's victim was pregnant, and one click to get the findings on two Floyd autopsies.
Two clicks, maybe 45 seconds, to get the right information.
Last edited by tom444; 10-06-2020 at 04:19 PM. Reason: Two clicks, maybe 45 seconds.
There, I fixed it for you.
Yup.
See you Space Cowboy ...
Then why make sure you continue to point out that he is a "Thug" or "scumbag" as well? Just as we are all supposed to understand what the wink emoji means; how am I supposed to take these efforts on your part aside from what I am currently assuming but hoping I am not correct about...[/QUOTE]
assume what you want. I left nothing open for interpretation. Floyd didn’t deserve to die, floyd was a thug from everything Ive read. Except reading opinions of 2 guys on this forum
Sure, that's a version if it makes you feel better. However, none of it is true. There is not a single medical document that backs up your version of the facts. Whatever drugs were in his system did not cause his death.
I have not been able to find a single credible doctor that has listed his death as anything other than a homicide. That includes the Hennepin County Medical Examiner's office. So unless your new argument is that the ME's office is a rats nest of socialist liberal deep state plants...no idea what else can be said on the matter.
Array title="Mach1 has a reputation beyond repute">
Seattle Teacher Berates 10-Year-Old for Admiring Donald Trump, and the Kid's Mother Caught it On Video
The left gets triggered whenever you say anything nice about Donald Trump. Some don't have the testicular fortitude to say anything to you, so they take it out on your kids.
I'd like to think we could expect more from teachers. Sadly, that's not the world we live in. Especially in Seattle, where we should never expect more from anyone.
A kid said he admired Donald Trump. His teacher stopped the class for it. The kid's mother recorded both the incident AND the phone call where the teacher lied to the mother. Allegedly, of course.
https://mynorthwest.com/2203336/rant...student-trump/
And you wonder why so many of the teachers' unions want parents to pledge they aren't going to listen in to students taking a Zoom class IN THEIR OWN HOMES. The kid didn't say he liked President Trump because of how Trump trolls the haters and losers. He liked him for the same reason all ten-year-olds like who the president is when they are ten-years-old. Teachers need to keep their opinions to themselves. Or save it for the bar or Facebook where they can rant about how much they hate children like a normal teacher.
https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/seattle-teacher-trump
Give a lib a fish--he eats for a day
Teach a lib to fish--he is back the next day asking for more free fish.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
another example of lefts love of free speech. That is of course if they agree with it. The teacher must not be a doer , wink wink
Oh well. Guess what, though? In the big picture, it doesn't even matter at all whether it was murder or not. You know why? Because it was one guy and one cop and it shows nothing at all about racism, let alone "systemic racism." It's always too bad that someone died, but if you want to place any importance on it beyond that - the entire broader cause that this guy is a martyr for is based on a foundation that is questionable at best, and the facts are not on your side. That is the hard truth of the matter. But wait, no, what's right out in front of everyone's noses must be completely wrong - it's only a click away!
See you Space Cowboy ...
Typical. Move the goalposts. Create arguments no one is having but you. Bring zero facts to the table. All to avoid admitting you don’t know what you’re talking about. But if you frame it aggressively enough you get to feel right. And that’s really what matters.
I mean, it could be worse. I could spend inordinate amounts of my time researching things and "educating myself on the issues," and still wind up holding exclusively the most retarded political positions. Or I could go to great lengths trying to assert my intellectual superiority, and exhaustively documenting my way of thinking, yet still manage to get nearly everything wrong - while the people I am constantly deriding for their shallow and lazy approach could easily just obliterate anything I said, because at the heart of it, nothing could change the fact that everything I believed in was just elaborately constructed bullshit.
Now that would REALLY suck.
See you Space Cowboy ...
Look, you either want the truth or you don't.
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com...ng-of-america/
Scientific American
George Floyd’s Autopsy and the Structural Gaslighting of America
The weaponization of medical language emboldened white supremacy with the authority of the white coat. How will we stop it from happening again?
Ann Crawford-Roberts, Sonya Shadravan, Jennifer Tsai, Nicolás E. Barceló, Allie Gips, Michael Mensah, Nichole Roxas, Alina Kung, Anna Darby, Naya Misa, Isabella Morton, Alice ShenJune 6, 2020
The world was gaslit by misreporting about George Floyd’s initial autopsyreport.
As concerned physicians, we write to deconstruct the misinformation and condemn the ways this weaponization of medical language reinforced white supremacy at the torment of Black Americans.
Gaslighting is a method of psychological manipulation employed to make a victim question their own sanity, particularly in scenarios where they are mistreated. The term comes from a 1938 play and, later, a popular film, wherein a predatory husband abuses his wife in a plot to have her committed to a mental institution. He dims the gas lights in their home; then, when she comments on the darkness, knowingly rejects her observation and uses it as evidence that she’s gone insane. It’s a torturous tactic employed to destroy a person’s trust in their own perception of reality. It’s a devastating distraction from oppression. It’s insidious. And it happened recently when millions of people who had seen nine agonizing minutes of murder were told by an autopsy report that they hadn’t.
In America, widespread anti-Black violence is often paired with structural gaslighting. Racism, after all, thrives when blame for its outcomes are misattributed. When Black families are refused loans in criminally discriminatory housing schemes, their credit is blamed. When youth of color are disproportionately stopped and frisked, they are told the process is random, and for their safety.
And when Black people are killed by police, their character and even their anatomy is turned into justification for their killer’s exoneration. It’s a well-honed tactic. One analysis of the national database of state-level death certificate data found that fewer than half of law enforcement–related deaths were reported. In addition to this undercounting, police actions were further minimized by the use of diagnostic codes that incorrectly labeled the cause of death as “accidental” or “undetermined” rather than police-related. For centuries, our systems have relied on this psychological torture—a host of mental gymnastics—to deny the truth of what Black people have always known. The cause of death is racism.
On May 29, the country was told that the autopsy of George Floyd “revealed no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxiation,” and that “potential intoxicants” and preexisting cardiovascular disease “likely contributed to his death.” This requires clarification. Importantly, these commonly quoted phrases did not come from a physician, but were taken from a charging document that utilized politicized interpretations of medical information. As doctors, we wish to highlight for the public that this framing of the circumstances surrounding Floyd’s death was at best, a misinterpretation, and at worst, a deliberate obfuscation.
A timeline of events illustrates how a series of omissions and commissions regarding Mr. Floyd’s initial autopsy results deceptively fractured the truth. On May 28, a statement released by the Hennepin County Medical Examiner’s office reported ongoing investigations and acknowledgement from the forensic pathologist that an “autopsy … must be interpreted in the context of the pertinent investigative information.” As per standardized medical examination, Floyd’s underlying health conditions and toxicology screen were documented. These are ordinary findings that do not suggest causation of death, yet headlines and the May 29 charging document falsely overstated the role of Floyd’s coronary artery disease and hypertension, which increase the risk of stroke and heart attack over years, not minutes. Asphyxia—suffocation—does not always demonstrate physical signs, as other physician groups have noted.
Without this important medical context, however, the public was left to reconcile manipulated medical language with the evidence they had personally witnessed. Ultimately, the initial report overstated and misrepresented the role of chronic medical conditions, inappropriately alluded to intoxicants, and failed to acknowledge the stark reality that but for the defendant’s knee on George Floyd’s neck, he would not be dead today.
By Monday, June 1, in the context of widespread political pressure, the public received two reports: the preliminary autopsy report commissioned by Floyd’s family by private doctors, and—shortly thereafter—a summary of the preliminary autopsy from the Hennepin County Medical Examiner’s Office. Both reports stated that the cause of Floyd’s death was homicide: death at the hands of another.
By inaccurately portraying the medical findings from the autopsy of George Floyd, the legal system and media emboldened white supremacy, all under the cloak of authoritative scientific rhetoric. They took standard components of a preliminary autopsy report to cast doubt, to sow uncertainty; to gaslight America into thinking we didn’t see what we know we saw. In doing so, they perpetuated stereotypes about disease, risky behavior and intoxication in Black bodies to discredit a victim of murder. This state of affairs is not an outlier—it is part of a patterned and tactical distortion of facts wherein autopsy reports are manipulated to bury police violence and uphold white supremacy. As Ida B. Wells said, “Those who commit the murders write the reports.” A similar conflict of interest between police departments and medical examiners offices continues today.
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing
... and they all stood up and clapped.
See you Space Cowboy ...
I'm all in favor of the democratic principle that one idiot is as good as one genius, but I draw the line when someone takes the next step and concludes that two idiots are better than one genius. - Leo Szilard.
reeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
See you Space Cowboy ...
Array title="vader29 has a reputation beyond repute">
That's the cleaning crew from Dumbshit Medical on Trump Ave in Redstate Alabama.
Array title="Craic has a reputation beyond repute">
Okay, it's one thing to present truth. It's another to present an opinion piece from a blog that has a spurious association with its sources, and then claim it is truth.
- Refused loans . . . This is a horrendous piece of misinformation. The article puts this statement in present tense. The problem? The link is to an article discussing redlining, which was outlawed in 1968. Redlining ended over half a century ago.
- "Stopped and Frisked." The blog misrepresents the article. At the very beginning of the article, they state plainly that the reason most cited is "furtive moments." Do I agree with that? No. But it isn't like they're walking up to a black person that was just walking down the street listening to headphones and throw that person up against a wall.
- "Anatomy." Oh, come on. At this point, anyone who really cares about "truth" should stop reading the blog. The linked article is about a police chief explaining that they've recently learned there's differences in how arteries work and blood flows, and the recovery after a chokehold. The chief made an unfortunate statement of "normal" for those who recover faster (more likely white people). This isn't justification for killing a black person. It's an explanation of what they are learning. Moreover, the article itself is about the "moral outrage" of the use of "normal."
- "One analysis of the national database..." This is an awful, fallacious piece of logic here. He cites an article, then pairs it with a statement on Black America to push the idea that death of blacks are vastly underreported. That's the exact opposite of the conclusion. I'll quote from the conclusion. "There was no evidence suggesting that underreporting varied by death investigator type (medical examiner versus coroner) or race/ethnicity."
- "Charging document." Well, the link is broken and the blog gives no indication of who reported about the document. That means this is an unsourced assertion at this point.
- "Falsely overstated." What? Um, no. Here's what it said. "The autopsy revealed no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation. Mr. Floyd had underlying health conditions including coronary artery disease and hypertensive heart disease. The combined effects of Mr. Floyd being restrained by the police, his underlying health conditions and any potential intoxicants in his system likely contributed to his death.
In other words, there are three things that look to have had a hand in his death. That's not an overstatement. It's a well-measured statement on possibility. Moreover, if someone was play rhetorical games, they'd write it as, "The combined effects of the underlying conditions, and potential intoxicants likely contributed to his death along with the actions of the officer." But, note the police actions were first.
The author then goes on with this great piece of horrid logic that "artery disease and hypertension . . . increase the risk of stroke and heart attack over years, not minutes." Um, yeah, and then that risk remains elevated so that when a person's heart rate spikes, they're more likely to have a heart attack. It's the past damage that is currently present that causes the risk.
- "Other physician groups." This is a reference to the "Collective Black Physicians Statement." Repeat after me, everyone, "Confirmation Bias." I don't doubt what the physicians are saying is true. I point this out to show how the author of this article has no clue how to properly uses sources. Find an unbiased study that says the same thing. Call up a few physicians and interview them.
- "Autopsy reports are manipulated to bury police violence." Um, this is a link to an opinion piece. Oh, and one that's also behind a paywall. It is not a legitimate source.
- "And uphold white supremacy." Again, a link to an opinion piece. And, ironically, vastly overstated. The article title? "Autopsies can uphold white supremacy." Now, the author is a scholar, but opinion pieces are not peer-reviewed pieces. They do not serve as a good source.
There were others, but I decided to stop here.
_____________________________________________
This "writer" would fail any freshman 100 level course I teach. You simply cannot use sources in a spurious way and attempt to be taken seriously. Especially when some of your sources say nothing of what you're trying to say, and at least one says the exact opposite. Moreover, it's this kind of crap that makes people doubt anything they read on the topic (which is, itself, a cognitive distortion of all-or-nothing thinking).
Look, is there racism in this country? Yes. But it's become the go-to card anytime there's a confrontation between a white person and someone of a different race. And, one of the very sources used in the article above specifically says that underreporting does not differ between races.
What you and many others are missing here is that there's two questions. 1. Was the police officer's actions driven by race. 2. Was the following investigation driven by race. I can't answer the first one. As for the second one, if you want to prove it was driven by race, then compare the way this report was handled with the way reports from other black people and the deaths of white people in police custody are handled. Until that is done, there's as much if not more possibility that the underlying point of view was, "Oh crap, we better make ourselves look less guilty" and not "Oh well, he's a black person so it's okay."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote