Jump to content
Could you provide a reference for your claim about how many nuclear bombs Israel has?
And surely even you recognize that nuclear weapons are not a defensive measure but only either an offensive one or a retaliatory one?
Hamas is responsible for the slaughter in the Gaza Strip.
Is that my opinion? Well, yes, but it's also the opinion of Turki al Faisal, the former head of Saudi Arabia's intelligence services, writing in Asharq Al-Awsat. He said Hamas's firing of rockets at Israel "contribute nothing to the Palestinian interest."
Even most Middle Eastern governments, historically no friends of Israel, are refusing to publicly back Hamas in its nihilism.
And then again, maybe it's not really a "slaughter." A former AP reporter was quoted in the Wall Street Journal today as saying:
"During the 2008-2009 Gaza fighting," Friedman reports, "I personally erased a key detail--that Hamas fighters were dressed as civilians and being counted as civilians in the death toll--because of a threat to our reporter in Gaza." The AP's policy is "not to inform readers that the story is censored unless the censorship is Israeli." This month a story on Hamas intimidation "was shunted into deep freeze" by top AP editors.
It's impossible to get accurate information about the situation in Gaza. Whether because of sympathy or intimidation (and well they should be intimidated, since "collaborators" are likely to be summarily executed in the street, as happened to about 20 Palestinians in the last couple of days), reporters will not or cannot report accurately what is going on.
So if you keep taking pot-shots at me with a .22 pistol, and the weapon I have at my command is a scoped rifle, I'm supposed to just let you keep shooting, rather than shoot back with more accurate, more effective firepower? No, I think not. Would it really be better if Israel lobbed thousands of rockets randomly at Gaza, as opposed to its efforts to target Hamas's military leaders?
Oh, well, of course anecdotal data is the best kind of all.
You don't think it's "torturing data" to evaluate nation-wide statistics about interactions based on data out of one city about one particular type of interaction?
As Philip of Macedon said to the Spartans, "If." You have presented no data that police interact with whites significantly less than they do with blacks.
However, IF your speculations were correct, then the same analysis would suggest that black protestors, the AG, and others (including the editorial writer) are vastly overplaying the statistical risk to blacks in facing the police. Those statistics would necessarily flip as well. Remember that this thread started with the claim by the editorial writer that the rate of shootings of blacks by white police went "beyond chance."
NewInWW, your hatred of anyone who disagrees with you seems to render you incapable of understanding anything we say. How else could you so wildly fail to grasp the difference between a possible explanation for something and a justification of it? The fact, and it is a fact, that police face a statistically greater risk from blacks than from whites can't justify the shooting of any particular individual, because it says nothing about the risk from that individual.
But there I go again, engaging with someone whose hatred always shortcircuits hks brain.
"there is a pattern of white police officers shooting and killing black men that goes beyond chance. "
Indeed, there is. It might possibly have to do with another statistic:
During the decade from 2003-2012, 535 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed on duty. About 46% of their killers were black even though blacks are only about 12.5% of the population. Conversely, whites are 72% of the population but comprised only 52% of the cop-killers. ("Whites" in both sets of statistics included Hispanics.)
What this works out to, if I've done the math correctly, is that there is a nearly six times higher chance of death for a police officer who faces off against a black person than against a white person. (Average age by race, rates of urbanization by race, and maybe other factors might change that a little, but probably not much.)
While we can argue, and it is true, that the chance of death in EITHER case is extremely low, given that "facing off" is something police officers do every day, many times a day, it is unrealistic to expect that police officers have not internalized this excess risk in some way that may affect their performance of their duties.
In that sense, they are doing no different than blacks do when they perceive a greater risk to themselves in dealing with police officers than whites have to face. In fact, it appears that blacks do indeed face three times the risk of death that whites do in face-offs with cops, based on arrest-related homicide death statistics.
If blacks face three times the risk but cops face six times the risk in their mutual face-offs, that suggests to me that cops are actually bending over backwards (and perhaps sometimes into their graves) to be restrained in dealing with blacks.
Predators who enjoy the power and degradation that rape provides DO need to be babysat 24 hours a day, unless they're locked up alone.
NewInWW, For once, I agree with you 100%. The punishment of criminals should be decided by law; rape and other forms of torture have no place in it. It is irrelevant whether the criminal "deserves" it; our society does not, and I wouldn't trust a correctional officer who would knowingly countenance, much less enable, the rape of a prisoner to be at large in my community any more than I would trust the prisoner himself.
Last login: Friday, August 29, 2014
2014 Best Of The Best Winners
The latest wine and dine news.
The Valley's people, wine & food.
Find your way around the Valley.
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2014 Union-Bulletin, 112 S. First Ave., Walla Walla, WA 99362/509-525-3300. All rights reserved.