tal: ...labelled a 'thug' because of geography
A person gets labelled a "thug" by their actions, not their geography.
You are taking the coward's approach and creating excuses for bad behavior....
after a thorough investigation and weighing of the evidence the grand jury has decided not to indict the officer.. the reaction so far seems as predicted - people refuse to accept that the result represents justice despite claims that is what they wanted.. there is now violence and vandalism, including gunshots.
let's hope the police contain the troublemakers.. .
tal: ...labelled a 'thug' because of geography
A person gets labelled a "thug" by their actions, not their geography.
You are taking the coward's approach and creating excuses for bad behavior....
after a thorough investigation and weighing of the evidence the grand jury has decided not to indict the officer.. the reaction so far seems as predicted - people refuse to accept that the result represents justice despite claims that is what they wanted.. there is now violence and vandalism, including gunshots.
let's hope the police contain the troublemakers.. .
tal: And since I don't "LIVE" in America. I am ignorant.
followed by:
tal: But the black kid, who is born in East LA and will forever be labelled because he received a poor education, and was labelled a 'thug' because of geography, may beg to differ.
How is it that you seemingly know what it's like, considering you are "ignorant" of America, are not black, have never lived in L.A., are Canadian and a female?
Your fantastical musings do provide a good belly laugh, however.
Maybe if black people, and the whitey's who prop them up, would stop using the word "can't", all these alleged barriers would suddenly evaporate by nothing more than a little more thinking "can do". Amazing how that works.
after a thorough investigation and weighing of the evidence the grand jury has decided not to indict the officer.. the reaction so far seems as predicted - people refuse to accept that the result represents justice despite claims that is what they wanted.. there is now violence and vandalism, including gunshots.
let's hope the police contain the troublemakers.. .
There's no doubt racism still exists in the USA. News flash: racism exists everywhere in some form or another regardless of how enlightened a person or society thinks they are. And, IMO, as I have already said, this nonsense in Ferguson has less to do with purported racial issues than it does with Neanderthals capitalizing on a situation to act out on their dysfunctional, go-nohwere, destructive lives, nothing more.
What irks me more than anything is when black people lament their lot in life in 2014- the age of Tiger Woods, Colin Powell, Denzel Washington, and for god's sake, Obama- and act as if they are still living in 18th/19th century America- still slaves, still without hope, forever trodden down by "the man". If that was true, then we wouldn't have Tiger Woods, Colin Powell, Denzel Washington, and for god's sake, Obama.
Perhaps the biggest problem with some people is not what has actually happened in the past but the fact they simply can't let it go. I challenge anyone to find any race, nationality or color of people that has not somehow gotten a bad deal somewhere in history. I'm sure I could find many events in history highlighting how Scandanavians have been abused or been victims of racism, then use it as an excuse to loot my neighbor's business and burn down my neighborhood.
The difference with the vast majority of people on this planet and the troglodytes in Ferguson is: everyone else has moved on.
after a thorough investigation and weighing of the evidence the grand jury has decided not to indict the officer.. the reaction so far seems as predicted - people refuse to accept that the result represents justice despite claims that is what they wanted.. there is now violence and vandalism, including gunshots.
let's hope the police contain the troublemakers.. .
Let's not pretend, okay? I hate that - there's something about pretension that gets on my nerves.
Denying factual history and arguing just to argue gets on my nerves. So my personal view (based in history) is "group think" ? Whatever, Tal.
[edit]:
(t) gets it
LOL.
i wasn't looking where i put my feet, and i almost took the cart out!
anyway, i stopped and chatted with the people for a bit.
three women and a man -- an elder and his wife.
I made a joke that I had wished that I had a cart like that when I was a child going from door to door with my family.
When you were a kid, diana, literature carts were wrong. Now they are right because the GB says so.
You handled the situation nicely. It's good to remember that JWs are just slaves to a system but are, for the most part, genuine people. Just uninformed and hoodwinked.
many jws enjoy turkey on thanksgiving day and are often discreet about their indulgences.
why be two faced?
why try to excuse it?.
Why be two faced? Why try to excuse it?
The JW religion/culture is based squarely on duplicity; it's not what you are really doing that counts, only how it appears. End of story.
I've received many a birthday card from a JW on my birthday, only with the word "birthday" on the card crossed out. "Happy Birthday" !
See, if they cross it out, it's no longer a birthday card and Jehovah will not smite them for giving a non-birthday card to a JW on their birthday wishing them a happy birthday. Forget to cross the word "birthday" out and Jehovahâ„¢, the god of minutiae and rice paper-thin skin, will be miffed.
so i'm listening to the regional manager give his mid week talk and he's going over acts 15 where they're dealing with the issues that arrose from the jewish christians wanting the gentile christians to adhear too the mosaic law, so some of the apostles gathered to hash it out.
it struck me, though, that he kept using the phrase "the governing body at that time" to describe the apostles and older men who decided on the matter.
once he even slipped up and said apostles, then corrected it to the gb.. i'm thinking that they've actually gone so far as to put it in his outline to make sure its beaten into the r/f that the gb's power is somehow based in scripture.
Well, WT did insert in the rNWT (aka, "The Silver Sword") that there was a governing body in Jerusalem. So, it must be true.
You see, the best way to advance a doctrine that isn't in the Bible is to revise your old Bible and actually put the errant doctrine in the new Bible. Problem solved.
As at least one scholar said of the NWT (aka, "The Old Busted Sword"), WT formulates doctrine first, then creates their own Bible to support that doctrine.
As OT and Terry pointed out, Paul wasn't consulting any alleged "governing body" for his assignments. He worked all on his own. If WT wants to use that info. as precedent, then JWs shouldn't have to consult the present GB about anything. ANYTHING !!
Finally, the Acts account clearly says that women were present at the "governing body" meeting in Jerusalem and instrumental in the decision-making process. If that account is precedent, why are their no women members on the GB today?
after a thorough investigation and weighing of the evidence the grand jury has decided not to indict the officer.. the reaction so far seems as predicted - people refuse to accept that the result represents justice despite claims that is what they wanted.. there is now violence and vandalism, including gunshots.
let's hope the police contain the troublemakers.. .
The Americas were built on Cultural Genocide and Physical Genocide.
You just described human history, not just American history. Empires are not built on "playing nice".
And your assertion has nothing to do with what happened in Ferguson.
after a thorough investigation and weighing of the evidence the grand jury has decided not to indict the officer.. the reaction so far seems as predicted - people refuse to accept that the result represents justice despite claims that is what they wanted.. there is now violence and vandalism, including gunshots.
let's hope the police contain the troublemakers.. .
Too funny, moomanchu.
I think 99% of the MB-types fail on the first two rules:
1. Don't break the law
2. Use common sense
after a thorough investigation and weighing of the evidence the grand jury has decided not to indict the officer.. the reaction so far seems as predicted - people refuse to accept that the result represents justice despite claims that is what they wanted.. there is now violence and vandalism, including gunshots.
let's hope the police contain the troublemakers.. .
Its been realized in some of these situations similar to the one I mentioned, that people have gone on to a psychotic episode. ???
If I'm being attacked and my life is in imminent danger, I'm not going to ask my attacker for his meds list or the name of his psychiatrist before I defend myself.
If I have one or two seconds to decide my fate, I err on the side of saving my own life rather than a thug's.
Whether you're killed by a nutjob or a sane person, you are still dead.
[edit]:
finklestein, I see your view and appreciate it. If there is a non-violent, non-lethal option in a self-defense situation, then a person should take that avenue first. However, it's very easy to be an "armchair quarterback" and assert what you would, or wouldn't do, if your life is threatened. Fear, adrenaline, etc. all change the game, and what we think we'd do and what we actually do are often worlds apart.
Self-preservation wins everytime.