|
Post by doctork on Sept 24, 2021 22:02:21 GMT -5
I watched the Springsteen video (beautiful, moving, reassuring to hose of us who also believe that death is not the end) and the Gordon Felt clip. The listening today struck me differently than the earlier discussion points. To me, Mr. Felt is reflecting on his personal loss of a brother, the loss of 39 others who also had family members who felt the loss, and the fact that once the United 93 passengers realized what was going on (an impending attack on the Capitol) they joined together to prevent it. Booky, I am of the same school as Francis Collins, head of NIH and Tony Fauci's boss: How can anyone who seeks to understand the miracles of science NOT believe in God? The NYPD firefighters on 9/11 had the opportunity to save lives - rescuing those trapped in the rubble or evacuating those people still in the tower - and they took it because that is what they do. Police officers, armed services members, ICU and ER staff all do that every day too, and it's no different today than it was 20 years ago. Selection for entry into the armed forces, military academies, nursing & medical schools, police & firefighting academies is very competitive. I saw Mr. Felt's question as a query of "Where is our unity?" that was so evident in the sacrifices of 9/11/2001. As a nation we felt our vulnerability and met the challenge. Are we doing so now? Or have we lost sight of the value and strength of our experiment with government "of the people, by the people and for the people." Mr. Felt didn't feel like a moral lecturer to me, just a guy who mourns his brother and shares his grief, while he wears a tie and his Panama hat.
I hadn't heard of JEDI as a significant acronym. I thought the Jedi's were the good guys in a sci-fi movie we watched decades ago when we were twenty-somethings, not anything worthy of an opinion piece (at least it was clearly labeled "opinion") in Scientific American. Does American Conservative have some bone to pick with University of Michigan (home of 4 of the 5 opinion authors) that caught Scientific American in the middle?
|
|
|
Post by BoatBabe on Sept 25, 2021 0:32:20 GMT -5
This is rich. www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/sjw-scientists-cancel-jedi-order/... the Jedi are inappropriate symbols for justice work. They are a religious order of intergalactic police-monks, prone to (white) saviorism and toxically masculine approaches to conflict resolution (violent duels with phallic lightsabers, gaslighting by means of “Jedi mind tricks,” etc.). The Jedi are also an exclusionary cult, membership to which is partly predicated on the possession of heightened psychic and physical abilities (or “Force-sensitivity”). Strikingly, Force-wielding talents are narratively explained in Star Wars not merely in spiritual terms but also in ableist and eugenic ones: These supernatural powers are naturalized as biological, hereditary attributes. So it is that Force potential is framed as a dynastic property of noble bloodlines (for example, the Skywalker dynasty), and Force disparities are rendered innate physical properties, measurable via “midi-chlorian” counts (not unlike a “Force genetics” test) and augmentable via human(oid) engineering. The heroic Jedi are thus emblems for a host of dangerously reactionary values and assumptions. Sending the message that justice work is akin to cosplay is bad enough; dressing up our initiatives in the symbolic garb of the Jedi is worse.Here's the original Scientific American ( Scientific American!!!) article: www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-the-term-jedi-is-problematic-for-describing-programs-that-promote-justice-equity-diversity-and-inclusion/I love this particular comment that follows the blog entry: RomanCandle • 19 hours ago And what's so bad about an object being "phallic" anyway? It's a very simple, efficient shape: that's why light sabres are shaped that way. That's why phalluses are shaped that way, for that matter.
Obviously I'm trolling a bit, but we don't talk enough about just how weird wokeism can be.This kind of descent into lunacy is what came to my mind when I heard Gordon Felt speak at the Flight 93 memorial. Rich, indeed.
|
|
|
Post by booklady on Sept 25, 2021 8:44:54 GMT -5
Does American Conservative have some bone to pick with University of Michigan (home of 4 of the 5 opinion authors) that caught Scientific American in the middle? [/div] [/quote] I don't know, Doc. I think Rod Dreyer's bone to pick is with wokeism taken to wacky extremes.
|
|
|
Post by booklady on Sept 25, 2021 8:59:14 GMT -5
Also, I loved Francis Collins' The Language of God
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Sept 25, 2021 15:13:31 GMT -5
I haven't read his book (I'll add it to my list) but I have heard Dr. Collins speak at medical meetings. No "scientific physician" I've been around or heard of has disparaged Dr. Collins' religious and philosophical beliefs.
Clearly Rod Dreyer's argument is against the rapidly spreading malignancy of excessive wokeism. I suppose that the Scientific American piece demonstrates the politicization of science.
|
|
|
Post by booklady on Sept 25, 2021 16:38:31 GMT -5
My priest has degrees in both mathematics and economics. I once asked him if he thought mathematics is the language of God. He said no, music is the language of God. Collins believes it to be DNA, I think. His book, telling the story of him leading the human genome project, I found quite meaningful and eye-opening.
|
|
|
Post by Jane on Nov 19, 2021 20:08:30 GMT -5
I am deeply disturbed by the verdict in the trial in Wisconsin (I cannot bring myself to speak his name). It was so obviously murder, and now it has been sanctioned.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Nov 20, 2021 2:00:11 GMT -5
Sadly, I think our president is correct when he said (I'll paraphrase a bit) "The judicial system works. The jury has made the right decision so we must abide by it." In a democracy, when the jury or the electorate makes a legally correct decision, we accept it.
What happened was wrong - people died unnecessarily - but per WI law, it was not murder. When the evidence and testimony were carefully reviewed by the jury, the defendant was not proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
The defense team did an excellent job. The prosecution did not. The judge seemed temperamental and biased to me, but IANAL and it appears that his "style" was legally permissible.
Jane, please keep up your valuable work with Moms Demand Action. You are right - the verdict is disturbing and the laws and the gun lobby have all gone crazy crazy. It's obvious this situation can't be right, but we don't have what is needed to make this slaughter stop.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Nov 20, 2021 16:41:42 GMT -5
I believe there will be civil suits - different law and different judge. I'm not sure at all that the first 2 victims posed a threat . One threw a bag at KR which contained toothpaste and suppies after being let out of prison. He maybe wasn't a stellar guy, but throwing a bag of harmless and lightweight objects isn't a mortal attack. I don't even remember the 2nd victim and don't want to live through it all again in order to search it out. But surely their horrified families will find some support and $ to make that kid's life very uncomfortable. He says he wants to be a nurse - fat chance!
Doesn't it seem that the first prosecutorial error was to try all 3 cases together? If one guy had a gun, the three cannot be lumped into one trial. But most important, as K suggests, the sight of a kid strolling through a demonstration with an AR-15 is what started it. Perhaps if some congress members get shot by people exercising their right to carry a gun, we might see a fast revisiting of our watered down gun laws.
The boycott of WI is informal, but I'll bet it gains strength. I will start writing to companies I purchase from just as soon as I can think of any. Kleenex! Any cheese I can trace to WI. Beer? I once stayed a couple nights in order to visit the Milwaukee Z00, but I haven't been a big spender. Madison is fun to visit, but i don't think it's ever been a hot convention town.
|
|
|
Post by joew on Nov 20, 2021 18:41:23 GMT -5
If any case was winnable — meaning proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt — the prosecution didn't do their job. For one thing, they didn't bring any lesser charges. Why not give the jury a chance to convict on manslaughter or reckless endangerment or something? For another, even their own witness, the third guy shot, testified that the shooter only shot when the witness displayed his own gun — which would lead any reasonable person who had been chased and beaten to believe he was in danger.
gail, the second victim was the one who was beating the defendant with a skateboard, which can certainly give rise to a right of self-defense.
Another point for all to bear in mind is that the defendant's claim of self defense depends very heavily on his state of mind. It isn't was he in mortal danger, but could he have believed that he was in mortal danger.
Seeing someone walking around carrying a weapon doesn't give demonstrators a right to attack him, and IMO doesn't mean he started it.
In short, I think the case against him was weak, and his defense was strong enough to justify any jury anywhere in saying, "We do not find him guilty of the crime that was charged beyond a reasonable doubt, which means we have to find him not guilty."
In other words, it seems to me that the verdicts were legally correct. For that reason, I don't think any retaliation is justified.
One more thing, I've seen some quotes suggesting that a black defendant would not have been acquitted, and that therefore the sysyem is broken. I'd suggest that the problem isn't that a white man who puts on a good defense gets acquitted. What needs to be done is to prevent wrongful convictions, not to prevent acquittals.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Nov 20, 2021 19:48:36 GMT -5
Oh, Joe, we see this so differently. Doesn't his carrying a long gun cause people to think they were in danger? If the argument is based on what Kyle thought, then everyone who encountered him - without a uniform - equally thought he was a threat. With a lethal weapon, not a skateboard. Kyle had no significant cuts, bruises or or bumps from being beaten. But I haven't the stomach to argue with you. I'm just very saddened .
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Nov 20, 2021 21:40:06 GMT -5
It's a sad day, but open carry is not illegal in Wisconsin and people are free to do so, including the defendant. In WI carrying a long gun is not grounds to feel endangered, while being hit with a skateboard is. One may disagree with the defendant's actions - we certainly do - but since there were no laws broken, and no evidence meeting the standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt" was provided, I agree the verdict was correct. Too many people (disproportionately people of color) have been imprisoned and sometimes put to death because of suspicion, hearsay, prejudice, or false witness. Innocent people need to be protected from this, and conviction should require evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. The prosecution did not do a good job, leaving plenty of room for reasonable doubt.
We have "double jeopardy" laws for a reason - states should not bring the same criminal case back repeatedly until they get the verdict they "like." Trump could be President again, given a chance to try his case again - presto, a sympathetic judge finds those 11,780 votes!
It's possible that a civil suit would be successful, as the grounds for conviction are much less stringent, "more probable than not" (i.e., 51% likelihood). But civil suits are about money and that kid has no assets, even with a different court and a different judge.
Worse yet, don't bet that kid can't become a nurse, though he may not have the necessary intellectual capacity. Since the "crime" occurred when he was a minor (depending on WI laws regarding juveniles), his juvenile records may be sealed. Some laws also provide protection against using past criminal records against a candidate for a job or for college admission. When we lived in Denver, a teenaged boy murdered both his parents. He was remanded to juvie until his release at age 18 or 21 (per CO law), then he completed 4 years of college, graduated with honors and applied to the University of Colorado medical school. He was accepted, became an MD, and completed a residency. People who had been in Colorado for a few years remembered the murder incident very well, but it was illegal to use his sealed juvenile record of murder against him at any point in his career.
We need better gun laws, ones that would not allow this defendant (and others) to be judged "not guilty."
|
|
|
Post by booklady on Nov 20, 2021 22:42:37 GMT -5
Some Congress people have been shot by people exercising their right to carry a gun. (Edited to correct) A Republican Congressman, Steve Scalise, and three other Republicans (not Congressmen but part of the group with Scalise, were shot while they were about to play baseball, if I remember correctly. Rep. Gabby Giffords, a Democrat, was shot in the head while with a group of people at a shopping center.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Nov 20, 2021 23:56:37 GMT -5
All too true Bookie. I was living in Arizona when Rep. Giffords was shot and I remember the episode with Rep. Scalise. The person who shot Gabby was crazy, but I don't recall the specifics about the other perp. We've had multiple presidents shot, 4 killed, as well as (at least) one POTUS candidate, RFK.
So I guess the "shoot a member of Congress" won't work. And if killing a couple dozen kindergardeners and their teachers, and subsequent weekly mass slaughters unabated doesn't work, I do not know what will.
Sad and discouraging.
|
|
|
Post by booklady on Nov 21, 2021 8:25:12 GMT -5
Killing the kindergarteners (and their faculty) was the absolute worst.
And we don't have to think of it in terms of every week, either. Every hour and day people are shooting each other down in the streets (and the drive-through lines at McDonald's and other "innocent" places), often in broad daylight, of our cities.
|
|
|
Post by Jane on Nov 21, 2021 11:23:57 GMT -5
Somewhat of a tangent, but I've met the woman who took down Gifford's shooter in the parking lot. She was in her 60's at the time; she is now a very active member of Moms Demand Action.
December is Sandy Hook rememberance month for Moms. In the past, we have had some very lovely services. Two years ago we held it at a local church--St. Mark's Episcopal. Kids read all the names of the Sandy Hook children and staff as well as other names like Trayvon etc. We included names of people who knew who had died by gun violence. My granddaughter Anna sang. Several people spoke, including a member of our group who was at Virginia Tech when all those people were killed, including some she knew, and then her husband was at the Air Force (?) base when that man killed all those people. When we left the church to walk downtown with our candles, the priest there rang the bell 26 times.
I went to a protest last night downtown. There were people there with guns. It was "organized" by Justice for Black Lives, but it was not well done. Are there standards for protests? I could have planned a better event. I also got ambushed by the local news, probably because I was wearing my red shirt that said "Moms Demand Action". Bill watched it last night and said I did fine, but I can't bring myself to look at it.
|
|
|
Post by booklady on Nov 21, 2021 13:26:38 GMT -5
Does Justice for Black Lives include a concern for Black lives lost to gang gun violence? It never seems to, in the media coverage of gun violence. Hundreds -- thousands? -- of lives lost without any demonstrations, prayer vigils, calls for confiscating weapons and outlawing possession, or gaseous windbags Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton holding press conferences. Lives lost to out-of-control guns and ammo on our streets are ALL lives lost, and worthy of outrage, including kids sitting on their stoops, Republicans playing baseball, and people driving on or off a highway ramp. If K.R. had been shot by the guy with the Glock who pointed it at him, would that guy have been equally painted as a murderer by CNN? The media (ALL sides) hypocrisy and rush to judgment and unwillingness or inability to presents facts, not Twitter comments, in our time is just scandalous, or more dangerous than ANYBODY with a gun. Tell the truth, not the thing that gets you clicks and viewers. Be responsible.
|
|
|
Post by Jane on Nov 21, 2021 14:53:57 GMT -5
Of course it does. Over 100 lives are ended by gun violence in this country every day, many in the Black community. I've been to many vigils and rallies for the victims; the majority of people who attend are Black. Urban violence is an every day occurance. Gun violence is now the second leading cause of death for children. Children! Every life lost matters to someone. GR has just implemented a new program which sends POC into neighborhoods of color. These "violence interupters" are people who know what happens in these communities--some of the workers have been in trouble themselves. We have to stem the tide of gun violence, but little or no help is received from the "powers that be".
And I don't think Jesse Jackson is a gaseous windbag.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Nov 21, 2021 14:59:43 GMT -5
I do see plenty of coverage regarding gun violence in general, and sometimes reporters remark on the preponderance of "black on black" violence, though incidents involving blacks killing whites may receive more coverage, and blacks are clearly more likely to be punished for killing whites than the reverse. I think that is why the case in Brunswick, GA is being so widely covered - two (or three) white men hunting down and killing a black jogger - as it differs from the historically more common narrative of "whites in danger." Last summer in Chicago there were so many lives lost to gun violence that the (black female) mayor was covered every Monday when she announced how many had been killed over the weekend; it was almost always black lives lost.
Total national gun-related lives lost are announced annually, then categorized by state, and broken down by "gun violence," suicide, accidents and "other," but not necessarily by race. The total is usually (for past 10 - 15 years) around 40,000 with slightly more than half due to suicide, just under half due to violence, and a very small proportion due to accidents or other. The incidence of suicide by firearms correlates closely with prevalence of gun ownership in a given state. Quite a bit of the data that I read about guns is in health care literature and the MMWR (Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, published weekly by the CDC), so maybe I see a lot more coverage than the general public rather than just those in health care.
15 years ago when I was a student in the MPH (Masters in Public Health) program at UW, class members laughed at me when I said I thought gun deaths were a public health epidemic and should be treated as such. Now I think the public health problem is self-evident, and surveys routinely show a majority in favor of more gun control. However, when inquiring about guns in the home became a standard part of the pediatric well child exam, there was an uproar in many states, some of whom then passed laws making it illegal for a doctor to discuss the issue with families.
Yesterday during the APHC show (from 1985 in Honolulu) a high school chorus sang "America the Beautiful." I reviewed the words to the song/poem written by Katherine Bates. If only we could follow and achieve her lofty goals: America the Beautiful O beautiful for spacious skies, For amber waves of grain, For purple mountain majesties Above the fruited plain! America! America! God shed His grace on thee, And crown thy good with brotherhood From sea to shining sea! O beautiful for pilgrim feet Whose stern impassioned stress, A thoroughfare for freedom beat Across the wilderness! America! America! God mend thine every flaw, Confirm thy soul in self-control, Thy liberty in law! O beautiful for heroes proved In liberating strife, Who more than self their country love And mercy more than life! America! America! May God thy gold refine Till all success be nobleness, And every gain divine! O beautiful for patriot dream That sees beyond the years, Thine alabaster cities gleam Undimmed by human tears! America! America! God shed His grace on thee, And crown thy good with brotherhood From sea to shining sea!
Oh beautiful for halcyon skies For amber waves of grain For purple mountain majesties Above the enameled plain! America! America! God shed His grace on thee, Till souls wax fair as earth and air And music-hearted sea! O beautiful for pilgrim feet Whose stern impassioned stress, A thoroughfare for freedom beat Across the wilderness! America! America! God shed His grace on thee, Till paths be wrought through wilds of thought By pilgrims foot and knee! Oh beautiful for glory-tale Of liberating strife, When once and twice for man’s avail Men lavished precious life! America! America! God shed His grace on thee, Till selfish gain no longer strain The banner of the free! O beautiful for patriot dream That sees beyond the years, Thine alabaster cities gleam Undimmed by human tears! America! America! God shed His grace on thee, Till nobler men keep once again Thy whiter jubilee! by Katherine Lee Bates; (1859-1929) Inspired by a trip to Pikes Peak in 1893, Katherine Lee Bates wrote the poem America the Beautiful. Her poem first appeared in print on July 4, 1895 in The Congregationalist, a weekly journal. Ms. Bates revised the lyrics in 1904 and again in 1913.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Nov 21, 2021 15:03:53 GMT -5
Of course it does. Over 100 lives are ended by gun violence in this country every day, many in the Black community. I've been to many vigils and rallies for the victims; the majority of people who attend are Black. Urban violence is an every day occurance. Gun violence is now the second leading cause of death for children. Children! Every life lost matters to someone. GR has just implemented a new program which sends POC into neighborhoods of color. These "violence interupters" are people who know what happens in these communities--some of the workers have been in trouble themselves. We have to stem the tide of gun violence, but little or no help is received from the "powers that be". And I don't think Jesse Jackson is a gaseous windbag. Good for Grand Rapids! One reason that deaths due to gun violence rose 2020 - 2021 is that due to the pandemic, violence interrupters were limited in their efforts. Violence interruption is an important public health component of fighting gun violence, which IMHO IS a public health problem.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Nov 21, 2021 18:18:30 GMT -5
I do know about those who have been shot. I have prayed for them. I recall the entire Congress rising to applaud Gabby Giffords when she first went back, not to work but to greet and reassure her colleagues. I truly thought there would be major gun legislation after that. But even that didn't move those who depended on NRA funding, and the Scalise shooting didn't either. So maybe it will take a number of them getting hurt together (as might have happened Jan. 6, although there were no guns) to break the gun lobby's hold on people more interested in reelection than in serving the American people.
I've been annoyed by some of their words and actions over the years, but I'm offended by calling Jackson and Sharpton gaseous windbags
|
|
|
Post by joew on Nov 24, 2021 14:35:52 GMT -5
All three defendants in the Ahmaud Arbery murder have been found guilty. IMO this is another case in which the system worked. I'm especially pleased that it shows justice for a black man from a largely white jury in the deep South.
Also worth noting: differing verdicts on some counts show that the jury considered each count separately for each defendant, which is just what they were supposed to do.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Nov 24, 2021 17:02:56 GMT -5
"The bad guys lost!" That is always good news, especially when such a verdict was rendered by a mostly white jury against 3 white men who killed a black man, even the one who was just taking the video.
Brunswick, GA is not too far from the old family farm on my father's side. Though we never lived in that area, I've always thought they had to be good people, mostly.
|
|
|
Post by slb2 on Nov 25, 2021 2:05:19 GMT -5
I wonder what motivated the videographer to record it and then release it. If he hadn't, likely this would never have come to light.
|
|
|
Post by joew on Nov 25, 2021 10:47:45 GMT -5
I wonder what motivated the videographer to record it and then release it. If he hadn't, likely this would never have come to light. I've read it was actually the third defendant's lawyer who released it. Could he have thought it was exculpatory for his client? Or did he wants to see justice done to the other two? We'll probably never know what he was thinking.
|
|
|
Post by slb2 on Nov 26, 2021 1:53:05 GMT -5
I wonder what motivated the videographer to record it and then release it. If he hadn't, likely this would never have come to light. I've read it was actually the third defendant's lawyer who released it. Could he have thought it was exculpatory for his client? Or did he wants to see justice done to the other two? We'll probably never know what he was thinking. I'll say a word for his safety, then. I can see how he might feel vulnerable and fearful. :/
|
|
|
Post by BoatBabe on Nov 26, 2021 13:54:54 GMT -5
I believe that the third defendant, the videographer, even though he was a neighbor had never met the son and dad before that day. He also tried to remove himself from being the third defendant, which his lawyers refused to do. He wanted a separate trial, but requested it late in the process, as the atmosphere turned south after the son testified. Please correct me if my information is incorrect.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Nov 27, 2021 15:33:26 GMT -5
I don't know for sure, but I read that he wanted the tape released because it would show he wasn't part of the family posse. It does seem as if he wasn't as involved, but I guess he was convicted because he didn't interfere. I haven't read the jury report and don't intend to. If anyone gets the definitive scoop, I'm also willing to be corrected.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Nov 27, 2021 16:28:10 GMT -5
I don't want to waste my time on the details either, but I heard a commentary, probably on CNN, that under the specifics of Georgia law, since he was there and actively filming the event he was as guilty as the one who pulled the trigger. I was surprised at that.
In general, US laws don't require interference with a crime-in-progress or other emergency situation. I've followed this as a healthcare practitioner, as to whether I am required to help in a medical emergency. In the US, the law is generally "No" and in fact many doctors and nurses refuse to intervene because of the risk of malpractice liability. In other countries, it's different. And then there is one's personal moral or ethical obligation, which also may be different.
|
|
|
Post by joew on Nov 27, 2021 17:44:59 GMT -5
The concept, as I understand it, is that if you're part of a group engaged in felonious conduct a felony, you're also guilty even if you didn't commit the specific criminal act. Apparently, in Georgia, the law distinguishes between "malice murder," which the jury convicted the shooter of, and "felony murder," which all three were guilty of. If the videographer didn't want to be considered part of the criminal enterprise, he should have stayed home.
|
|