sharkyvilla Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 He did go down like Paul Alcock but you'd at least hope they checked if he had swallowed his tongue or put him in the recovery position. I hope he is alright. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 I mean, you can hear the crack of his head and the blood pouring out so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted June 5, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted June 5, 2020 If he was black they'd have knelt on his neck, just to make sure he and everyone else got the message. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 3 minutes ago, sharkyvilla said: He did go down like Paul Alcock The bloke is 75. It typically doesn't take much of a shove to knock pensioners off their feet. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 Quote The Buffalo video shows a 75-year-old man approach police officers enforcing a curfew. They then move forward, pushing him back and causing him to fall over and hit his head. As he lies on the ground, blood is seen pouring from his ear. The man was taken away in an ambulance and was later found to have suffered a severe head injury. An initial statement from Buffalo Police Department said the man had "tripped" and fallen during a "skirmish involving protesters", compounding outrage at the incident on social media. Police spokesman Jeff Rinaldo later attributed the statement to officers not directly involved in the incident, adding that when the video had emerged the two policemen who pushed the demonstrator had been suspended without pay. On the same evening, a delivery driver in New York City was arrested 27 minutes after the city's curfew had started, despite being a key worker exempt from the curfew. Police tried to lie their way out of this one too and have since been suspended without pay. Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 Suspended, haha. And people wonder why the protests are happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 3 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: Suspended, haha. And people wonder why the protests are happening. Yep, the lies should double whatever punishment they get. Do they not know the world is watching and there are 100x camera filming everything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 1 minute ago, Genie said: Yep, the lies should double whatever punishment they get. Do they not know the world is watching and there are 100x camera filming everything? We're well within a total post-truth world now. Things happen on camera in broad daylight and they still lie about it/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Straggler Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 6 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: We're well within a total post-truth world now. Things happen on camera in broad daylight and they still lie about it/ It's not even just that. There were what 40 cops there? Did a single one of them report the 2 guys who did the push? This lie like so many others is supported by a culture of silence. Every single one of the cops there should be up in front of a disciplinary committee to explain why having witnessed the assault by two of their colleagues not a single one of them did anything about it or report it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 36 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: Suspended, haha. And people wonder why the protests are happening. To be fair, immediate suspension is what should happen. You don't just immediately sack someone based on a video, with no investigation and disciplinary process, that's how you lose an unfair dismissal lawsuit. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 2 minutes ago, Davkaus said: To be fair, immediate suspension is what should happen. You don't just immediately sack someone based on a video, with no investigation and disciplinary process, that's how you lose an unfair dismissal lawsuit. Sacked? How about arrested on suspicion of GBH/assault? It isn't an employment issue. If roles were reversed, the old guy would be in a cell right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 49 minutes ago, Davkaus said: It typically doesn't take much of a shove to knock pensioners off their feet. The voice of experience? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 2 hours ago, HanoiVillan said: To be clear, it is highly highly unlikely that somebody like The Rock would ever win a Democratic presidential primary. Centrists can and do win (like Biden!), but they win because primary voters (especially African-American voters, but not only) want a candidate they perceive as 'electable', and so they prefer centrists with long resumes. While I don't disagree with the thrust of your point, things are only the status quo until they stop being so. In early 2015 there would have been a significant amount of precedent to show exactly why the Republican party wouldn't pick "somebody like" Trump as it had never happened before. Likewise in 2007 there would have been a long list of reasons that the Democrats would never pick "somebody like" Obama. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 Does The Rock, or Dwayne have any qualifications what so ever apart from being famous and rich to make him suitable for a role in politics? Any at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 21 minutes ago, ml1dch said: While I don't disagree with the thrust of your point, things are only the status quo until they stop being so. In early 2015 there would have been a significant amount of precedent to show exactly why the Republican party wouldn't pick "somebody like" Trump as it had never happened before. Likewise in 2007 there would have been a long list of reasons that the Democrats would never pick "somebody like" Obama. This is true, and perhaps I'm overstating it, but there are big assymetries (sp?) between the two parties that make a policy-light, personality-heavy candidate like Trump more plausible in the Republican party. Democrats are usually (both by temperament and media expectation) forced into being policy heavy. It's not just that The Rock doesn't have an electoral record or policy prescriptions, he doesn't even seem to have a signature issue. However, you are right to remind me to be a bit humbler, since I called Trump wrong in 2015. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted June 5, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted June 5, 2020 7 minutes ago, sne said: Does The Rock, or Dwayne have any qualifications what so ever apart from being famous and rich to make him suitable for a role in politics? Any at all? Didn't stop Trump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 4 minutes ago, Chindie said: Didn't stop Trump. Yes, but as I say, there are real differences between the parties, that I think impact this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 8 minutes ago, Chindie said: Didn't stop Trump. No exactly, kinda hope they try and appoint someone capable instead of someone famous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 4 hours ago, Chindie said: Less than a month ago a bunch of heavily armed men 'protested' inside government buildings because of the lockdown. They were left alone. Now we've seen entirely unthreatening purple getting beaten, arrested, fired on. A bloke on his knees begging for dialogue picked up and arrested. Elderly people pushed to the ground. Journalists fired on. People taking tear gas cannisters to the face from point blank range. ...I wonder what the difference is? Factually. The first group queued up and followed instructions to gain entry. They followed the law of the land. It is legal in the USA to buy a tiki-torch, light it, sling an assault rifle over your shoulder and march down a street waving a swastika. This group did not follow police instruction in many cases. They were not necessarily following the law of the land. You need permission to protest in the US these days. I guess this has followed from the WTO riots in 1999 and the patriot act, but I'm unsure. Ethically/morally and sensibility wise, your comparison has a lot of validity. Reality is a different place unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted June 5, 2020 Share Posted June 5, 2020 38 minutes ago, ml1dch said: While I don't disagree with the thrust of your point, things are only the status quo until they stop being so. In early 2015 there would have been a significant amount of precedent to show exactly why the Republican party wouldn't pick "somebody like" Trump as it had never happened before. Likewise in 2007 there would have been a long list of reasons that the Democrats would never pick "somebody like" Obama. Pedant alert! The Republican party did not pick Trump. Trump forced the republican party to pick him via winning their primary process, democratically, to the horror of the republican party old-guard/elite. Pretty much ditto with Obama, where the establishment had very clearly anointed Clinton, though with less horror. The one true constant has been the neo-liberal economic doctrine, but it's rude to talk about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts