Trump is my favourite comedian of the year already (27 Viewers)

CCFCSteve

Well-Known Member
That video is good in explaining things. That sort of points to him not being racist in any way there, but then when he talks about "prowling blacks", that is a very racist thing to say. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Would need to see if there is any context there

Yeah, you cant say stuff like that. I tried to find the episode but can’t. Stand alone it sounds horrible and a dangerous generalisation
 

SBT

Well-Known Member
I guess neither was him saying of course anyone of any skin colour would be qualified and to think otherwise is bigoted ?
I’d find it much easier to believe he held mainstream, conciliatory views if he didn’t spend so much time winking at far more extreme and provocative beliefs in the same breath, often blaming other people for the need to entertain them.
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
Yeah, you cant say stuff like that. I tried to find the episode but can’t. Stand alone it sounds horrible and a dangerous generalisation

It's here:


"Now, were they trying to hijack her, were these Blacks trying to go rob her? Happening all the time in urban America, prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people, that’s a fact. It’s happening more and more."
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
It's here:


"Now, were they trying to hijack her, were these Blacks trying to go rob her? Happening all the time in urban America, prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people, that’s a fact. It’s happening more and more."
He's had an absolute shocker there.

And I also picked up on him saying "600 white women are killed by black men in a year "

🤔

How many white women are killed by white men?

Knowing the death and murder rates in America, you know it is going to completely dwarf that figure.

In 2022 the figure for women killed was 2,400. Guessing that's around the yearly average

So if he's saying 600 killed by black people, then that's 1,800 that are not killed by black people.

I also noticed him talking of one black guy that argued with her, but then said maybe it was a group. So that's just conjecture.
 

CCFCSteve

Well-Known Member
It's here:


"Now, were they trying to hijack her, were these Blacks trying to go rob her? Happening all the time in urban America, prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people, that’s a fact. It’s happening more and more."

Yeah, you can’t be saying that unless youve got facts and numbers to back it up. Sweeping generalisation and doesn’t do anything to remove tension from the whole race debate

Interesting story though which if true again highlights context issues with people on X etc
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
Yeah, you can’t be saying that unless youve got facts and numbers to back it up. Sweeping generalisation and doesn’t do anything to remove tension from the whole race debate

Interesting story though which if true again highlights context issues with people on X etc

Too much instant reaction/outrage (we saw that with the Southport killing, when it was said the killer had just come over here on a boat) these days

And then people don't look for context.

Have to confess, I have done so myself.

I have always been proud of myself in always taking time to check the facts, but it's very high tension times now and we are bombarded with information and I think the whole ethos behind it all is to get an instant reaction and people all riled up.

I have fallen for that myself
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
Too much instant reaction/outrage (we saw that with the Southport killing, when it was said the killer had just come over here on a boat) these days

And then people don't look for context.

Have to confess, I have done so myself.

I have always been proud of myself in always taking time to check the facts, but it's very high tension times now and we are bombarded with information and I think the whole ethos behind it all is to get an instant reaction and people all riled up.

I have fallen for that myself
You’re human, we all are
 

Earlsdon_Skyblue1

Well-Known Member
View attachment 46178

I totally agree. The answer to hate is not hate.

View attachment 46180

Just that there are some pretty hateful things said in there.

Sorry Otis, you are showing quite a bit of ignorance on this.

Stephen King was practically hounded off twitter in the last couple of weeks for point one alone, which was completely incorrect. You could pick apart a lot of the rest as well and it largely comes down to someone who has a grudge on him trying to slander what he has said as if that somehow means his shooting was for a credible reason. I don't know how anyone can make well-rounded views based off such misleading information.


It's here:


"Now, were they trying to hijack her, were these Blacks trying to go rob her? Happening all the time in urban America, prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people, that’s a fact. It’s happening more and more."

Again, you are far too naïve to be posting on these issues as well. You also clearly haven't even watched the video or know what the story is about. It was another racism hoax story trying to whip people up. Black on white crime (as well as black on black crime, but separate point) is a significantly higher issue in the USA than anything else when it comes to interracial crime. There was a huge story literally in the last week or two, which I assume you also missed. As I posted previously: A good report on these crimes can be found through The Bureau of Justice Statistics. Remember to take the population percentages into account as well. It makes for some pretty damning reading.

Table 14 here is useful: https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv18.pdf
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
Again, you are far too naïve to be posting on these issues as well. You also clearly haven't even watched the video or know what the story is about. It was another racism hoax story trying to whip people up.

I have watched it. The hoax part is a separate issue, his 'prowling blacks' comment is there for all to hear.
 

SBT

Well-Known Member
Black on white crime (as well as black on black crime, but separate point) is a significantly higher issue in the USA than anything else when it comes to interracial crime. There was a huge story literally in the last week or two, which I assume you also missed. As I posted previously: A good report on these crimes can be found through The Bureau of Justice Statistics. Remember to take the population percentages into account as well. It makes for some pretty damning reading.
What’s the virtue, in your opinion, of framing crime stats through the lens of race-on-race? And if the conclusions from a report like that are damning, then what’s your policy prescription?
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
Sorry Otis, you are showing quite a bit of ignorance on this.

Stephen King was practically hounded off twitter in the last couple of weeks for point one alone, which was completely incorrect. You could pick apart a lot of the rest as well and it largely comes down to someone who has a grudge on him trying to slander what he has said as if that somehow means his shooting was for a credible reason. I don't know how anyone can make well-rounded views based off such misleading information.




Again, you are far too naïve to be posting on these issues as well. You also clearly haven't even watched the video or know what the story is about. It was another racism hoax story trying to whip people up. Black on white crime (as well as black on black crime, but separate point) is a significantly higher issue in the USA than anything else when it comes to interracial crime. There was a huge story literally in the last week or two, which I assume you also missed. As I posted previously: A good report on these crimes can be found through The Bureau of Justice Statistics. Remember to take the population percentages into account as well. It makes for some pretty damning reading.

Table 14 here is useful: https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv18.pdf
I am talking about his language.
 

Earlsdon_Skyblue1

Well-Known Member
I am talking about his language.

I noticed you've since been honest enough to say you've been taken in by things in the past. Fair enough.

What's gone with this is very deliberate though, and it's an attempt to slowly but surely dehumanise him in order to offer a bit of leniency towards the concept of his assanation, unfortunately.
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
I noticed you've since been honest enough to say you've been taken in by things in the past. Fair enough.

What's gone with this is very deliberate though, and it's an attempt to slowly but surely dehumanise him in order to offer a bit of leniency towards the concept of his assanation, unfortunately.
Yeah. I get that. I am appalled by his language though in that clip

I will always put my hand up if I think I have misjudged the situation
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
What's gone with this is very deliberate though, and it's an attempt to slowly but surely dehumanise him in order to offer a bit of leniency towards the concept of his assanation, unfortunately.
This is bollocks. Not making him out to be some sort of saint is in no way giving even the slightest hint that killing him was acceptable.

The simple fact is there's around 45K gun deaths a year in the US, people don't respond like this to kids being gunned down in schools, young people being murdered indiscriminately in night clubs, people being shot in church etc etc. The response is weird enough in the US but from some here it is just hard to comprehend.

When the best defence of the guy is that one or two of the quotes floating around aren't quite as racist as you might first think its probably not a sign he's the guy we should be holding up as the standard.
 

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
Sorry Otis, you are showing quite a bit of ignorance on this.

Stephen King was practically hounded off twitter in the last couple of weeks for point one alone, which was completely incorrect. You could pick apart a lot of the rest as well and it largely comes down to someone who has a grudge on him trying to slander what he has said as if that somehow means his shooting was for a credible reason. I don't know how anyone can make well-rounded views based off such misleading information.




Again, you are far too naïve to be posting on these issues as well. You also clearly haven't even watched the video or know what the story is about. It was another racism hoax story trying to whip people up. Black on white crime (as well as black on black crime, but separate point) is a significantly higher issue in the USA than anything else when it comes to interracial crime. There was a huge story literally in the last week or two, which I assume you also missed. As I posted previously: A good report on these crimes can be found through The Bureau of Justice Statistics. Remember to take the population percentages into account as well. It makes for some pretty damning reading.

Table 14 here is useful: https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv18.pdf
Speaking of a racism hoax, wasn’t it you who said ‘it doesn’t matter if it really happened or not’ when Trump and Vance repeated the racist lies about Haitian immigrants eating people’s pets? That literally was a racist hoax and you didn’t care much about the truth, because you just wanted it to be true. It was spread to whip people up, and it succeeded.
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
This idiocy is going to lead to more unnecessary harm.


"I'm not so careful with what I say". Fucking hell, he literally says this stuff out loud and people still cheer him on. Stuff like this will directly lead to harm & suffering.
The Trump administration is terminating the federal government’s annual report on food insecurity in America, saying it had become “redundant, costly and politicized” and noting that “extraneous studies do nothing more than fear monger.”
The move comes after President Donald Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress passed a sweeping domestic agenda package this year that will enact massive cuts to the food stamp program.
Can't imagine why they don't want the report being published anymore.
 

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
"I'm not so careful with what I say". Fucking hell, he literally says this stuff out loud and people still cheer him on. Stuff like this will directly lead to harm & suffering.


Can't imagine why they don't want the report being published anymore.
I watched on as RFK Junior explained how they’re going to prove a link between vaccines and autism, still flogging the dead and fraudulent horse published by Andrew Wakefield all those years ago.

I met Joe Biden’s chief science adviser about 10 years ago. A Nobel laureate, incredibly well qualified to provide scientific advice to the president. Now these sorts of positions are being filled with conspiracy lunatics.
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
Have no fear, Jimmy Kimmel is back.

All is well with bad comedy again.
Yeah, it doesn't matter though does it. There's an on off button and no-one is forced to watch.

I don't watch his show, past seeing the odd clip that pops up on here, but I am so glad he is back, as he should be free to air his opinions.

Be interesting to see what Trump does and how he reacts following this.
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
I watched on as RFK Junior explained how they’re going to prove a link between vaccines and autism, still flogging the dead and fraudulent horse published by Andrew Wakefield all those years ago.

I met Joe Biden’s chief science adviser about 10 years ago. A Nobel laureate, incredibly well qualified to provide scientific advice to the president. Now these sorts of positions are being filled with conspiracy lunatics.
It's mad isn't it.

Knew this sort of thing was going to happen when you appoint the likes of RFK to a position like this.

Findings are apparently inconclusive and inconsistent on this, but it of course won't let them stop claiming it.

I guessed part of the answer to this increase in figures, just by using one tiny little brain cell of mine.

Looked it up, and yup, it's bloody obvious.


"We are significantly better at identifying autism now than 20 years ago due to greater awareness, broader diagnostic criteria, improved screening methods, and a deeper understanding of autism's presentation in diverse populations, particularly in women and girls. While the number of diagnoses has increased, the rise in diagnosed cases is attributed more to these improvements in identification rather than a fundamental increase in the number of autistic individuals. "
 

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
It's mad isn't it.

Knew this sort of thing was going to happen when you appoint the likes of RFK to a position like this.

Findings are apparently inconclusive and inconsistent on this, but it of course won't let them stop claiming it.

I guessed part of the answer to this increase in figures, just by using one tiny little brain cell of mine.

Looked it up, and yup, it's bloody obvious.


"We are significantly better at identifying autism now than 20 years ago due to greater awareness, broader diagnostic criteria, improved screening methods, and a deeper understanding of autism's presentation in diverse populations, particularly in women and girls. While the number of diagnoses has increased, the rise in diagnosed cases is attributed more to these improvements in identification rather than a fundamental increase in the number of autistic individuals. "
Give him enough time and there will be mass outbreaks of entirely preventable diseases, all because of an idiot who thinks he knows better than decades of peer reviewed clinical evidence and research.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top