I can't find a complete video of what the Indian guy said. It was all over the news earlier, the most crazy piece of fiction possible but everybody believed it at first. I'll come back to look again later.
It looked like a smirk to me too. I believed the whole media lie at first. An old Indian claiming he felt threatened, hard to ignore. Turns out the whole story was wrong. The kids were doing nothing. The Indian said the kids surrounded him and he was frightened. Fact is he walked into their group right up to the kid that seems to be smirking, and continued drumming inches from the kid's face. Given the actual circumstances that came out later I take the boy's word for it that he meant to be smiling to try to defuse any antagonism. He didn't do anything but stand there and let the Indian drum in his face.
The Native American guy told the media that the boys had been yelling at the Black Israelites and that it was terrible how they talked to those old guys. They hadn't said one thing to the black guys. He also said they were chanting "Build the Wall." They weren't. He might have had that wrong because one of the black guys WAS yelling that, which is shown on the third video I posted in Message 545. It wasn't the boys though. He also said he felt threatened by the kids, that they surrounded him. Well, he himself had walked up to them and pushed through them so that some of them were sort of surrounding him, but it was because of his own movement, nothing they were doing. He tried to characterize the boys as aggressive pro-Trumpers. They were nothing of the sort.
I may yet find a video of what he initially said to the media but at least you can hear the reporter quote him from about 19:30 on that third video in Message 545. \
I don't know what they were doing there and I'm sure you don't either. Some of them thought the Indian guy had come over to give them support against the black Israelites who were calling them names so maybe all they thought they were doing was joining in with his drumming.
If nothing else the message here ought to be how easy it is to misconstrue people's behavior. Possibly the Indian wasn't lying but if not he got the totally wrong idea about what the kids were doing. The media didn't bother to check any of their own first impressions and contributed to a rush to judgment against the boys who were completely innocent of any of the provocations they were accused of. Even their own school administration believed the media accounts against them. And now they are the targets of all kinds of threats.
I was glad to hear on the news about an hour ago that one woman who had joined in the accusations of the boys now regrets what she'd said. I don't know if she's a reporter or what.
Good luck focusing on equal treatment of all classes of people, because the Marxists have been working hard to divide us into mutually antagonistic races and classes for decades now. And the Left has been following the Marxist line and the media are Leftist.
However, I now think everybody is probably misreading everybody else in this story. Except the black Israelites who were clearly in the wrong from any point of view. But when the Indian guy's first description of events was shown to be so extravagantly false as more of the video came out, that made him appear to be the lying instigator. But I think it's possible there was so much confusion he misunderstood what was going on and may not have been lying, just wrong about what the boys were doing.
Here's another video I just found of two news anchors actually sounding quite sane and reasonable:
They claim some of the boys were misbehaving but it isn't clear to me where they were getting that. They said some of them WERE taunting the Native American guy with the drum, they mention the "tomahawk chop" and assume that was meant as a taunt. I don't know but I doubt it. What I suggest above still seems more likely to me: that the kids at first thought the guy was supporting them against the black Israelites and their school chants then mingled with his drumming and they thought it was all just a fun thing they were doing together. I could be wrong but they just look like exuberant kids to me, not kids mocking this man. And that idea seems highly unlikely for a lot of reasons. But I think more discussion is needed.
I also now think the Native American may not have meant to face down the kid, but wanted him to move aside to let him pass. The kid on the other hand thought he was being singled out and confronted and felt it necessary to stand his ground and not seem intimidated or threatening.
If nothing else, however, it is clear that the media rushed to judgment against the boys and that twitter and other gossip sources have put them in harm's way and that needs to be corrected no matter what else.
I'm glad to see these two reporters seeming to care about objectivity in reporting for a change. That in itself is a hopeful sign.
Another part of the discussion is the MAGA hat, which the two anchors said represents racist and other provocations though they defend people's right to wear it. Well, to wearers of it all it means is "I support Trump's policies and I'm not a racist," and being intimidated into not wearing it just continues the false political divide. These two say wearers of it need to be aware of that. I think they should be telling those who get provoked by it to cool their jets, they are the ones in the wrong.
By the time you get home and write your ponderings I may be back in bed. In any case I wanted to comment on this:
Why is it that fringe minority groups are always favored as the good guys even when the videos clearly saw them instigate confrontation.
This is exactly what the Right understands that apparently most others don't. This is the product of decades of propaganda in the media and in the universities against the dominant western culture and even specifically against the white race. They are racists themselves of course but their disinformation makes it OK to be racist against whites because whites are the only racists they recognize. So at least you recognize the bias in the reporting. Now recognize that it's the product of Marxist propaganda as I keep trying to point out. Yes it is speficially Marxist. It comes out of the Cultural Marxism that was the dominant academic worldview of the sixties. The whole feminist attack on "patriarchy" is from the Marxist Feminist stuff. The attack on white people is part of the Marxist racist attempt to bring down western civilization. Political Correctness is the weapon used to force their anti-American analysis on the rest of us, labeling those who disagree racist, sexist, xenophobic etc, all slanderous lies used for intimidation. Multiculturalism is another tenet aimed directly against the American melting pot. I know all this partly because in the sixties I was where all this hate was brewing around me. I kept thinking, "they hate my working class white father who never hurt anyone in his life?"
Martin Luther King had the right idea, to bring all the races together in friendship so that we judge each other as individuals by our character and not our race, but that got buried in the Marxist rhetoric.
All this stuff about "white privilege" comes from Cultural Marxism. All this stuff about how it's the rich people who are causing poverty comes from Cultural Marxism. it's not true, it's the fact that liberty allows people with vision to make money that grows the economy and historically has provided for all sorts of material benefits we take for granted in America because of our capitalist system. All Marxism does is promote envy, and envy is enough to kill all the good American liberty can do, and kill liberty itself.
Granted Trump is a nationalist and in my opinion not too bright
Understanding "nationalist" as patriotic love of America makes him the good guy to Trump supporters, and I think we are actually growing in our love and admiration of the guy as he stands his ground against the Leftist attempts to bring him down. Think what you want, it's a free country (sort of still, maybe not for much longer though), but the more I hear Trump these days the more I like what he has to say and how he says it.
But I side with you in this one. Two wrongs dont make a right. Maybe my people have been knowing jerks and oppressors in past history but trying to make an issue that we are privileged or always wrong will only cause more conflicts.
There is nothing any more racist about whites than any other group on earth, that's all Marxist propaganda to divide the country, kill the melting pot and end all hope of unity as a nation of people from different backgrounds, magnify grievances, identify a scapegoat that then becomes the subject of violent threats and so on. It is they who are the racists these days. Marxism is sheer evil and it is the predominant cause of all the unrest happening today. And the aim is to kill American sovereignty and subordinate us to a global government.
We need to focus on equal treatment of all classes of people rather than vilify any one group....and i mean ANY.
That's exactly right, but you don't have much of a clue about the powerful philosophical and political forces working against just that attitude.
Thanks to the sloppy, one-sided reporting of the malicious, agenda-driven media, a group of Catholic high school teenagers and their families have become the subjects of threats and harassment from a hateful online outrage mob. Their only sins? Being white, Catholic, and supporters of the president.
The full story has emerged in the wake of the fake news blitzkrieg over the weekend, and the media outlets that spread defamatory smears against the kids are now being warned to correct and retract their stories or face a lawsuit. Contrary to the media's malicious narrative, the kids were not racist rednecks mobbing a Native American elder with hateful slurs. It was quite the opposite.
Los Angeles-based trial lawyer Robert Barnes offered to represent the Covington families for free should they decide to sue the New York Times.
“This is libel. Retract, or get sued,” Barnes tweeted, quoting a now-deleted tweet from the Minnesota Democrat in which she claimed the teens were at fault for the confrontation Saturday at the Indigenous People’s March in Washington, D.C., between the students from the Northern Kentucky school and Native American Nathan Phillips.
“The boys were protesting a woman’s right to choose & yelled ”it’s not rape if you enjoy it,’” Omar tweeted Tuesday night, before deleting the tweet Wednesday morning. She also erroneously wrote that the students “were taunting 5 Black men before they surrounded Phillips and led racist chants.”
Nick Sandmann, the Covington Catholic High School junior at the center of the videotaped encounter, told NBC's "Today" show that he did nothing to provoke anyone and sought to calm the situation. “As far as standing there, I had every right to do so," he said in the interview. "My position is that I was not disrespectful to [Native American protester] Mr. (Nathan) Phillips. I respect him. I’d like to talk to him. I mean, in hindsight, I wish we could’ve walked away and avoided the whole thing.”
Meanwhile, some parental chaperones who witnessed the encounter say the Covington students were targeted because they were Catholics at a March for Life rally who were wearing Trump "Make American Great Again" hats. “I think they were targeted for what they stood for... which is Christianity, the right for life," parental chaperone Jill Hamlin told Fox News. "And they were singled out, and I believe, partially because of the color of their skin they were targeted.”
Clearly shows the Left-Right divide that he attacks Trump with the usual Leftist lies rather than addressing the actual behavior of the boys at the event. I hope their lawyer might consider suing the bishops and other Catholic administrators who also rushed to judgment of these boys on political grounds alone.
™ Version 4.2
(1)