Oh, The Hypocrisy

Discussion in 'Politics' started by ReturnFire333, Aug 10, 2014.

  1. #1 ReturnFire333, Aug 10, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 10, 2014
    http://rt.com/usa/179276-missouri-teen-police-kill/
     
    Meanwhile, RIP Iraq, Afghanistan, etc... are people batting an eye? Maybe they are and it's just covered up. Condolences to the kid & family, but our country and allies slaughter families on the regular... but it doesn't seem to spark as much rage as someone in our country dying. When military slaughters overseas, it's "patriotism" and "serving the country" but when police kill a single kid it's an outrage front page news. Christ.

     
  2. Yes, because its over there and not here, thats why people generally dont know anything about it.
     
    Speaking about patriotism, I have noticed an increase in the amount of ads on TV with that whole propaganda twist to them, from Guinness commercials, to AARP and other insurance commercials, with the whole "thank you for your service", "protecting the country" rhetoric. Invading forces dont deserve any of those honors.
     
  3. as the general populace becomes more informed, I feel that such petty tactics will have a noticeably lesser effect as before, if you examine the core of these issues, all of this was established on ignorance.
     
  4. paid leave and a 'lengthy investigation' from those same dilligent officers, sounds about right.
     
  5. #5 nativetongues, Aug 10, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 10, 2014
    Why don't they release the footage from the officers dashboard cam. Aren't police officers required to film all the time, or am I full of shit? If such a video does exist than it should easily verify that the kid pushed the cop back into the car and made him feel threatened enough to shoot the kid. Either way this story is fucking weird. Very vague details in pretty much every article I can find. It seems like the cops are trying to keep a tight lid on this which makes no sense. If this cop really did nothing wrong then why aren't they being more open with the details and investigation. It's so moronic how anytime there is one of these shootings, they don't try to show all the evidence. If the evidence really does point to the fact that the officer did nothing wrong in his use of lethal force then they should have no issue releasing all the evidence to the public. How am I just supposed to take the word of one police officer over several citizens?. It just doesn't make any sense to me. Seems like there is more to this story than what is being written about it.

    Addressing the op's point about not caring about foreign civilian casualties, I couldn't agree more. It's the same reason why so many Israelis are able to justify protective edge. The fact that 1000 Palestinian people have died is justified because a couple Israeli civilians died, three I think to be exact. either way it's this moronic way of thinking that leads to conflict. People are able to justify the death of foreign individuals by reminding themselves of deaths of domestic individuals. In reality we should all say how about we don't kill civilians in foreign countries because their life is worth just as much as someone from our country. It's almost like dehumanizing the foreign citizens which happens a lot in foreign conflicts.
     
  6. black people chanting kill the police? they always do that. south central born and raised!
     
  7. #7 Cactus Ed, Aug 10, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 10, 2014
    This incident is one example in a long line of brutal police actions and has nothing in common with foreign policy or actions.

    edited and paragraph moved
     
  8. #8 nativetongues, Aug 10, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 10, 2014
    Yeah I guess I was talking more about the op'a point about not feeling sympathy for thousands of people being killed in foreign conflicts, yet freaking out when an innocent civilian is killed because it's someone right here. I know there is the other factor that it's a police officer who may be abusing his power is also a major contributor to the public concern. I just think that it's a little ridiculous that one death is an attrocity but 1000's of deaths seem to just become statistics to most people. My point was that there are so many people in America and Israel who don't shed an eye when it's discovered that Israel blew up a bunch of Palestinian children but freak out when one Israeli person dies at the hands of a Hamas. Once again I understand part of the difference in the reaction is attributable to the fact that Israel is generally trying to target military personnel whereas Hamas has been know to often go after citizens, but that justification can only go so far. I think some of this results from this disconnect so many people have where they validate military operations which often result in civilian deaths in other countries because there were civilian deaths in their own country. To be honest I shouldn't have brought it up and I definitely misread the op. I just wanted to clarify cause I don't think I said it properly the first time. Either way I really was just curious about the camera thing and shouldn't have written the second paragraph.
     
  9. #9 nativetongues, Aug 11, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 11, 2014
    Stumbled upon this article from like a year back. They put body cameras on every officer and force as well as public complaints went down across the board as a result. I think all police departments should consider a similar tactic. It would make it a lot more evident in these cases whether or not deadly force is necessary. Police officers swear to uphold the law so they should have no issue with having their actions filmed. If anything they should be glad because if something like this happens and they are being wrongly accused of misusing deadly force than they can use the footage to show their innocence. I think this is one of the best ideas to decrease police corruption and increase accountability but I doubt it is feasible to mandate on a national or even state level.

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/04/california-police-body-cameras-cuts-violence-complaints-rialto
     
  10.  
    Just as religion is being diminished by reason and compassion, so too will war-mongering and nationalism.
     
    Let's fucking hope...
     
    [​IMG]
     
  11. #11 Rotties4Ever, Aug 11, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 11, 2014
    You shouldnt have said the "R" word around me, especially in that context. Can you clearly articulate and tell me precisely how you blame religion? and What do you classify as 'religion' - that its being diminished by reason and compassion? Because I can prove to you that its not the fault of 'religion'.
    If you can make a case and give examples as to why you feel 'religion' is that bad, that would really help.  For instance my argument in this case is that youre scapegoating religion and blaming it for something that religion is not capable of doing.
     
    edit- I do agree 100 percent on that war is a racket part.
     
  12. #12 *ColtClassic*, Aug 11, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 11, 2014
     
    I'm not blaming religion, for anything. If you read my post, it simply states that religion is diminishing due to an increase in reasoned thinking and compassion in society. When reason is applied to religion, most religious claims begin to fall apart and are exposed as propaganda or baseless claims. Similairily, the logic behind funding and participating in warfare is disarmed by reasoned thinking. I don't make any claims about religion apart from the fact that in an age of increasing communication and public presence in media people are less keen to fall victim to nationalism or religious indoctrination.
     
    I could go into what religion has and hasn't achieved for society, but that would be a different post. I hope that makes sense.
     
    Sources:
     
    Religion -
     
    http://tobingrant.religionnews.com/2014/08/05/the-great-decline-61-years-of-religion-religiosity-in-one-graph-2013-hits-a-new-low/
     
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2597891/Losing-religion-New-research-shows-religion-declined-Internet-use-increased.html
     
    http://www.pewresearch.org/files/2013/10/FT_5-facts-atheists.png
     
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/14/atheism-rise-religiosity-decline-in-america_n_1777031.html
     
    War-
     
    http://www.economist.com/node/16930683
     
    http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brunitedstatescanadara/716.php?nid=&id=&pnt=716
     
    http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brunitedstatescanadara/677.php?nid=&id=&pnt=677
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_opinion_in_the_United_States_on_the_invasion_of_Iraq#The_change
     
    http://www.pewresearch.org/2008/03/19/public-attitudes-toward-the-war-in-iraq-20032008/
     
    http://www.people-press.org/2013/09/03/public-opinion-runs-against-syrian-airstrikes/
     
  13. #13 Rotties4Ever, Aug 11, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 11, 2014
    I think my definition of what constitutes as 'religion', is different then most people. I see a lot of generalizations in the articles. Its true that most religious claims fall apart when reason and applied sciences come into play. But its also true, that there are 1000's of different religions that widely differ in views, and it is my belief that one cant generalize all of religion under the blanket, because of the three main ones, and what people did in their names. And there are some aspects of some religions that actually embrace knowledge and science. I dont think it has to be either 'youre religious and you dont like science' or 'youre an atheist'
    To me science and religion are not necessarily mutually exclusive.  I think its possible to be a scientist who has faith.
    I feel that the same kind of flawed generalizations can be made about some aspects of science, like weapons research for instance.
    And thats my problem with these articles, is that they make these sweeping generalizations about religion- and they didnt give a precise definition of what they feel constitutes as 'religion', for instance if I dont subscribe to the three main religions but I have faith in
    that there is a God, does that make me religious? What if I study religion because it interests me, does that make me religious?
    I think we need to make clear definitions of what constitutes as religion.  '
     
    Just to give you some perspective, Einstein also believed in a "God", and he was not religious by all definitions of the word, but today we call that concept "Intelligent Design".  Only reason I mentioned this is because he had a great mind, and yet he thought like that, so just because someone has faith doesnt mean that person will ostracize any who dont validate what that individual believes. 
    Like I said, yes people did bad shit in the name of their faith, but people do bad shit all the time with no faith, so that statement is irrelevant.  
     
    I think what we need is some 'scientific religion' or 'religious science'  to offset the current paradigm.  :)
     
    edit- my reading comprehension is terrible, i read that posting as if you were blaming it, you werent I take that back.
     
     
    I see what youre saying but I feel like you have a misconception, and you attribute human characteristics to something thats not inherently alive with a mind of its own.
    In other words, religion, in and of its self, has not achieved anything for society (whether negative or positive) people who were religious did.
    Just like science is not a dude sitting dishing out knowledge and understanding of how things work, individual scientists did that.  I cant go to a court for a murder trial and say 'religion' did it.  A lot of religion is just collection of beliefs and views of humans, just like (*drum roll*) science, yes science is factual based and religion is faith based. Im not trying to argue that.  Im just trying to argue our perception of one or the other, and the illusion that the terms are mutually exclusive when in fact they are not.
     
  14. Were so caught up on nationalism that we dehumanize entire populations and cultures, because what? their skin is different? their mannerisms? or they dont wear the same kind of hat as you do? their customs are different? they eat different food differently?
    I would say it was so stupid if it wasnt so pitiful.
    World is going to get a lot more interesting in the next two, three decades, as that sort of thinking starts to get looked down at more and more, I cant wait to see all these cops who enforce morally unjust laws simply because a bunch of corporations decided what is legal, they are going to be laughed at, just like the idiots who enforced stupid shit 50 years ago are laughed at now. 
     
  15.  
    All I've literally said is that religious participation is on the decline. Yes, this is because people are questioning religion more and applying reason in their lives (at least to some degree).
     
    Everything else in your response is your own added interpretation.
     
    In response to the bolded - my original claim, "...religion is being diminished by reason and compassion...", does not actually attribute any characteristics to religion. One could infer from my statement that religion lacks reason and compassion, but this is not explicitly stated, nor was it the focus of my statement.
     
    Religion and science are very distinguishable disciplines. I would admit that individuals can claim to be both a scientist and a religious follower/believer, but I do not see any practical overlap between the two fields.
     
  16. such optimism.

    I am not so optimistic

    If people were capable of being people they would be people already.

    I think we will always have a few enlightened individuals and all the rest animals, as has always been the casr

    Sent from my LG-E739 using Grasscity Forum mobile app
     
  17. #17 Rotties4Ever, Aug 11, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 11, 2014
    except we didnt 'always' have access to so much information so easily and readily available to us, if you dont think that might play a crucial role in the coming times, then yes sure Im optimistic, which is pretty funny, friends who know me personally would argue the opposite, :laughing:
     
    edit- ps you sig is flawed, since youve established your own rules.
     
  18. What's my sign? I haven't changed it forever and it doesn't show up on the phone app.


    I don't think having access to information changes anything. Most people want to be spoonfed. If anything, Facebook and other internet things are reinforcing the propoganda.

    Sent from my LG-E739 using Grasscity Forum mobile app
     
  19. #19 Rotties4Ever, Aug 11, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 11, 2014
    Yes for the most part, sadly, a lot of people want to be spoon fed, but can we speak of intelligence in respect to all the world's populations? My personal belief out there is there are a lot of smart people, many of whom have not found the means to express their intellect, what I mean by that is, historically a lot of people who have had a positive impact on the lives of humans, and on knowledge and science for instance, didnt fully tap into their potential until later on in life, and a lot of influential people today also started out as being 'spoon fed', and now with the access to so much information so easily, every single little detail of our lives have changed.
    How many people still go to libraries for studying and research these days as oppose to say 10-15 years ago? There is noticeable difference, and thats just one generic example.
    Yes certain means of media communications do provide a fine vehicle of propaganda but it works both ways :)
    And I guess we will have to disagree on the concept of information and how it pertains to our intellect and our capacity to grow and understand our selves.
    Time will be the final teacher of us all.
     
  20. The hypocrisy when debating on the U.S. Invading Iraq. I ask the purpose of the war and someone says,"it's to defend our country". I get a laugh out of that every time.


    "I'm to drunk, to taste this chicken" -Talladega nights
     

Share This Page