5 ms·

I think I understand what you mean by “accusations of being traitors from the right”. However, I was unaware of “BLM hostility on the left”. Could you share so

by elygre 5y ago

I think I understand what you mean by “accusations of being traitors from the right”. However, I was unaware of “BLM hostility on the left”. Could you share some more information about this?

exporectomy 5y ago
Police in general were the main target of hate in BLM. Some were murdered in the name of BLM because all of them were seen as complicit in the black killing issues.
cat_plus_plus 5y ago
Just one of many lies Capitol Police specifically faced: https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/us-elections-government/ny-trump-church-photo-black-lives-matter-protest-inspector-general-report-20210609-537e7ztrljb5bbn5mjecrto6qi-story.html https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/us-elections-gover...
- rob74 5y ago
  totally off topic, but as a European reader I'm getting the following message on that website: > Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in your country. We are engaged on the issue and committed to looking at options that support our full range of digital offerings to your market. We continue to identify technical compliance solutions that will provide all readers with our award-winning journalism. Come on guys, 3 years after GDPR you could at least change your text from "we are engaged and committed to looking at options" to "we don't really give a s***"!
  - Cockbrand 5y ago
    I agree! Here's a snapshot of the article: https://archive.is/xWaut https://archive.is/xWaut
  - Tenoke 5y ago
    I am from the EU and more like GDPR (assuming it's even that and not e.g. licensing like BBC Global) than not but I think it's totally fair in general for companies to not provide their services to places where the local laws don't suit them.
    - CRConrad 5y ago
      Sure. But then they can frigging say so, can't they? "Sorry, we ain't gonna" is one thing, whereas "Just a sec, your custom is important to us!", three years afterwards is just utter fucking bullshit. Companies are free to ignore my custom, but not to serve me bullshit.
  - mjevans 5y ago
    They really don't, and FFS, I refuse to ever agree to a cookie question on a site I do NOT create a sign-in for. I block those elements and disable javascript, etc. I'm saddened that 3 years later they still haven't given up trying to demand things I'm never giving them. Too many have given in to the Windows UAC / Popup 'just click yes' illness of security fatigue.
    - mike_d 5y ago
      Just use Firefox with Total Cookie Protection (each domain you visit gets an isolated cookie jar) and set the "Delete cookies and site data when Firefox is closed" option. You are now free to carelessly click on and accept any random cookie that comes your way. Just restart once a week or so for Firefox updates and you are a completely new person.
      - shakna 5y ago
        Your fingerprint islikely to persist between that. Just your graphics driver and fonts is enough that deleting those cookies did exactly nothing - and that's not any of the advanced tracking techniques.
        egberts 5y ago
        ^THIS^
    - bakuninsbart 5y ago
      There's so many sneaky ways these sites try to get you to accept cookies, and the european legislation will probably need a couple more iterations until it is in a state where most annoying loopholes are closed. It is gone so far that sometimes out of happiness over a "reject all"-button, I will disable adbloc to give the sites some revenue.
  - jyriand 5y ago
    Strange, I'm also from an European country, but can see the site fine
    - rob74 5y ago
      Sorry for generalizing, I guess you are from a non-EU European country? Or their filtering is buggy...
- mike_d 5y ago
  Your link is actually a great example of the confusion that has led to harassment and hatred of Capitol Police officers. The Capitol Police (Controlled by Congress), DC Metro Police (Mayor of DC) and DC Protective Services (Mayor of DC) were the good guys in almost all of this. The Park Police (subject of your link), Secret Service, Federal Protective Service, US Marshal Service, and DC National Guard were all under the authority of the Executive branch and the ones who forcefully cleared the park and harassed BLM protestors. (ACPD and MPD also assisted Park Police under a mutual aid request) The Bureau of Prisons was never requested but showed up to the party anyway, likely at the direction of the head of DHS, who was not interviewed for the OIG report.
  - mschuster91 5y ago
    From the perspective of someone beaten up by a police officer, there is no way to distinguish from which part of the police he just got beat up.
neartheplain 5y ago
The Democratic Party and BLM movement entertained calls for police abolition and defunding all summer. Three times as many officers were hospitalized defending the Portland federal courthouse compared to those defending the Capitol. BLM grafitti in Portland called for officers there to be defunded, abolished, and killed. The Democratic Party mayor of Portland banned city officers from helping defend the federal courthouse, and personally appeared at the siege to show solidarity with the rioters. I could list a hundred more examples.
- okamiueru 5y ago
  From the list of examples, only the Portland grafitti suggesting cops be killed seems valid to me. Defunding police is something I'd assume cops could be very much for, assuming they understand the intention behind. It's isn't a "let's get rid of police" as much as it is "let's reduce the scope of police responsibility". This way, people who might have a mental or drug problem are met by health care professionals, rather than people with guns. If I were a cop, I'd be all for it.
  - legostormtroopr 5y ago
    A motto you have to explain is a bad motto. To a police officer "Defund the police" sounds a lot like "unemployment".
    - okamiueru 5y ago
      I think it is mostly hindered by an unwillingness to listen and/or understand, and not that it requires explanation (which, in of itself isn't necessarily a bad thing... explaining things to people seems par for the course when misinformation is high). If I'm well aware what it means by just following international news, while also not having the affected profession, and living on the other side of the world... you would think the onus should fall sliiiightly on the people directly involved for not understanding the motto, rather than it being a bad or convoluted one. The inspection required to understand it also doesn't do a whole lot of leaps either. "Defund the police!". "What, like completely?", "Nah, that would be insane. Just the part where they need to deal with shit they shouldn't be dealing with". "Ah, ok.". That said, I'm sure there are some who mean "fully". Probably a smaller percentage of people meaning it than people assuming others mean it.
GaryTang 5y ago
A multitude more deaths caused by BLM protests. It wasn’t the rosy portrayal the TV showed you. And many people are still living in fear, not knowing when a BLM protest might come burn down their home.
- altacc 5y ago
  As with many things, the perception of BLM, and associated fear, is based on how the media portrays it and what they give attention to. People living in fear of BLM mostly have that false fear instilled in them by the media, especially the right wing media. The overwhelming majority of BLM protests in the US are completely peaceful. Where protests have turned violent it is often initiated by police action and is typically both small scale and very localized. The definition of "violent" demonstration includes blocking roads, which many people wouldn't consider actually violent or destructive. However some people think BLM is an immediate threat to themselves & their property. To be clear, BLM is certainly not the only example of an incorrectly perceived event/movement/whatever. This happens every day and across the spectrum of politics, geography, etc... Human nature is not perfect and neither is the environment we're living in, so perfect understanding of complex & large scale systems is impossible. https://acleddata.com/2021/05/25/a-year-of-racial-justice-protests-key-trends-in-demonstrations-supporting-the-blm-movement/ https://acleddata.com/2021/05/25/a-year-of-racial-justice-pr...
- the_why_of_y 5y ago
  Here is what we have found based on the 7,305 events we’ve collected. The overall levels of violence and property destruction were low, and most of the violence that did take place was, in fact, directed against the BLM protesters. First, police made arrests in 5% of the protest events, with over 8,500 reported arrests (or possibly more). Police used tear gas or related chemical substances in 2.5% of these events. Protesters or bystanders were reported injured in 1.6 percent of the protests. In total, at least three Black Lives Matter protesters and one other person were killed while protesting in Omaha, Austin and Kenosha, Wis. One anti-fascist protester killed a far-right group member during a confrontation in Portland, Ore.; law enforcement killed the alleged assailant several days later. Police were reported injured in 1% of the protests. A law enforcement officer killed in California was allegedly shot by supporters of the far-right “boogaloo” movement, not anti-racism protesters. The killings in the line of duty of other law enforcement officers during this period were not related to the protests. Only 3.7% of the protests involved property damage or vandalism. Some portion of these involved neither police nor protesters, but people engaging in vandalism or looting alongside the protests. In short, our data suggest that 96.3% of events involved no property damage or police injuries, and in 97.7% of events, no injuries were reported among participants, bystanders or police. These figures should correct the narrative that the protests were overtaken by rioting and vandalism or violence. Such claims are false. Incidents in which there was protester violence or property destruction should be regarded as exceptional – and not representative of the uprising as a whole. In many instances, police reportedly began or escalated the violence, but some observers nevertheless blame the protesters. https://www.radcliffe.harvard.edu/news-and-ideas/black-lives-matter-protesters-were-overwhelmingly-peaceful-our-research-finds https://www.radcliffe.harvard.edu/news-and-ideas/black-lives...

by elygre 5y ago

I think I understand what you mean by “accusations of being traitors from the right”. However, I was unaware of “BLM hostility on the left”. Could you share some more information about this?

exporectomy 5y ago

Police in general were the main target of hate in BLM. Some were murdered in the name of BLM because all of them were seen as complicit in the black killing issues.

cat_plus_plus 5y ago

Just one of many lies Capitol Police specifically faced: https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/us-elections-government/ny-trump-church-photo-black-lives-matter-protest-inspector-general-report-20210609-537e7ztrljb5bbn5mjecrto6qi-story.html https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/us-elections-gover...

rob74 5y ago
totally off topic, but as a European reader I'm getting the following message on that website: > Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in your country. We are engaged on the issue and committed to looking at options that support our full range of digital offerings to your market. We continue to identify technical compliance solutions that will provide all readers with our award-winning journalism. Come on guys, 3 years after GDPR you could at least change your text from "we are engaged and committed to looking at options" to "we don't really give a s***"!
- Cockbrand 5y ago
  I agree! Here's a snapshot of the article: https://archive.is/xWaut https://archive.is/xWaut
- Tenoke 5y ago
  I am from the EU and more like GDPR (assuming it's even that and not e.g. licensing like BBC Global) than not but I think it's totally fair in general for companies to not provide their services to places where the local laws don't suit them.
  - CRConrad 5y ago
    Sure. But then they can frigging say so, can't they? "Sorry, we ain't gonna" is one thing, whereas "Just a sec, your custom is important to us!", three years afterwards is just utter fucking bullshit. Companies are free to ignore my custom, but not to serve me bullshit.
- mjevans 5y ago
  They really don't, and FFS, I refuse to ever agree to a cookie question on a site I do NOT create a sign-in for. I block those elements and disable javascript, etc. I'm saddened that 3 years later they still haven't given up trying to demand things I'm never giving them. Too many have given in to the Windows UAC / Popup 'just click yes' illness of security fatigue.
  - mike_d 5y ago
    Just use Firefox with Total Cookie Protection (each domain you visit gets an isolated cookie jar) and set the "Delete cookies and site data when Firefox is closed" option. You are now free to carelessly click on and accept any random cookie that comes your way. Just restart once a week or so for Firefox updates and you are a completely new person.
    - shakna 5y ago
      Your fingerprint islikely to persist between that. Just your graphics driver and fonts is enough that deleting those cookies did exactly nothing - and that's not any of the advanced tracking techniques.
      - egberts 5y ago
        ^THIS^
  - bakuninsbart 5y ago
    There's so many sneaky ways these sites try to get you to accept cookies, and the european legislation will probably need a couple more iterations until it is in a state where most annoying loopholes are closed. It is gone so far that sometimes out of happiness over a "reject all"-button, I will disable adbloc to give the sites some revenue.
- jyriand 5y ago
  Strange, I'm also from an European country, but can see the site fine
  - rob74 5y ago
    Sorry for generalizing, I guess you are from a non-EU European country? Or their filtering is buggy...
mike_d 5y ago
Your link is actually a great example of the confusion that has led to harassment and hatred of Capitol Police officers. The Capitol Police (Controlled by Congress), DC Metro Police (Mayor of DC) and DC Protective Services (Mayor of DC) were the good guys in almost all of this. The Park Police (subject of your link), Secret Service, Federal Protective Service, US Marshal Service, and DC National Guard were all under the authority of the Executive branch and the ones who forcefully cleared the park and harassed BLM protestors. (ACPD and MPD also assisted Park Police under a mutual aid request) The Bureau of Prisons was never requested but showed up to the party anyway, likely at the direction of the head of DHS, who was not interviewed for the OIG report.
- mschuster91 5y ago
  From the perspective of someone beaten up by a police officer, there is no way to distinguish from which part of the police he just got beat up.

neartheplain 5y ago

The Democratic Party and BLM movement entertained calls for police abolition and defunding all summer. Three times as many officers were hospitalized defending the Portland federal courthouse compared to those defending the Capitol. BLM grafitti in Portland called for officers there to be defunded, abolished, and killed. The Democratic Party mayor of Portland banned city officers from helping defend the federal courthouse, and personally appeared at the siege to show solidarity with the rioters. I could list a hundred more examples.

okamiueru 5y ago
From the list of examples, only the Portland grafitti suggesting cops be killed seems valid to me. Defunding police is something I'd assume cops could be very much for, assuming they understand the intention behind. It's isn't a "let's get rid of police" as much as it is "let's reduce the scope of police responsibility". This way, people who might have a mental or drug problem are met by health care professionals, rather than people with guns. If I were a cop, I'd be all for it.
- legostormtroopr 5y ago
  A motto you have to explain is a bad motto. To a police officer "Defund the police" sounds a lot like "unemployment".
  - okamiueru 5y ago
    I think it is mostly hindered by an unwillingness to listen and/or understand, and not that it requires explanation (which, in of itself isn't necessarily a bad thing... explaining things to people seems par for the course when misinformation is high). If I'm well aware what it means by just following international news, while also not having the affected profession, and living on the other side of the world... you would think the onus should fall sliiiightly on the people directly involved for not understanding the motto, rather than it being a bad or convoluted one. The inspection required to understand it also doesn't do a whole lot of leaps either. "Defund the police!". "What, like completely?", "Nah, that would be insane. Just the part where they need to deal with shit they shouldn't be dealing with". "Ah, ok.". That said, I'm sure there are some who mean "fully". Probably a smaller percentage of people meaning it than people assuming others mean it.

GaryTang 5y ago

A multitude more deaths caused by BLM protests. It wasn’t the rosy portrayal the TV showed you. And many people are still living in fear, not knowing when a BLM protest might come burn down their home.

altacc 5y ago
As with many things, the perception of BLM, and associated fear, is based on how the media portrays it and what they give attention to. People living in fear of BLM mostly have that false fear instilled in them by the media, especially the right wing media. The overwhelming majority of BLM protests in the US are completely peaceful. Where protests have turned violent it is often initiated by police action and is typically both small scale and very localized. The definition of "violent" demonstration includes blocking roads, which many people wouldn't consider actually violent or destructive. However some people think BLM is an immediate threat to themselves & their property. To be clear, BLM is certainly not the only example of an incorrectly perceived event/movement/whatever. This happens every day and across the spectrum of politics, geography, etc... Human nature is not perfect and neither is the environment we're living in, so perfect understanding of complex & large scale systems is impossible. https://acleddata.com/2021/05/25/a-year-of-racial-justice-protests-key-trends-in-demonstrations-supporting-the-blm-movement/ https://acleddata.com/2021/05/25/a-year-of-racial-justice-pr...
the_why_of_y 5y ago
Here is what we have found based on the 7,305 events we’ve collected. The overall levels of violence and property destruction were low, and most of the violence that did take place was, in fact, directed against the BLM protesters. First, police made arrests in 5% of the protest events, with over 8,500 reported arrests (or possibly more). Police used tear gas or related chemical substances in 2.5% of these events. Protesters or bystanders were reported injured in 1.6 percent of the protests. In total, at least three Black Lives Matter protesters and one other person were killed while protesting in Omaha, Austin and Kenosha, Wis. One anti-fascist protester killed a far-right group member during a confrontation in Portland, Ore.; law enforcement killed the alleged assailant several days later. Police were reported injured in 1% of the protests. A law enforcement officer killed in California was allegedly shot by supporters of the far-right “boogaloo” movement, not anti-racism protesters. The killings in the line of duty of other law enforcement officers during this period were not related to the protests. Only 3.7% of the protests involved property damage or vandalism. Some portion of these involved neither police nor protesters, but people engaging in vandalism or looting alongside the protests. In short, our data suggest that 96.3% of events involved no property damage or police injuries, and in 97.7% of events, no injuries were reported among participants, bystanders or police. These figures should correct the narrative that the protests were overtaken by rioting and vandalism or violence. Such claims are false. Incidents in which there was protester violence or property destruction should be regarded as exceptional – and not representative of the uprising as a whole. In many instances, police reportedly began or escalated the violence, but some observers nevertheless blame the protesters. https://www.radcliffe.harvard.edu/news-and-ideas/black-lives-matter-protesters-were-overwhelmingly-peaceful-our-research-finds https://www.radcliffe.harvard.edu/news-and-ideas/black-lives...