Trump clashes with sports world over player protests, invitation

[Publicus]

On 10/2/2017 at 2:59 PM, amvet said:

I don't disagree with anything you said.  Civil disobedience is a form of protest as is disrespect for the National Anthem.  I respect both.  I would point out that sitting, kneeling or raising a fist in protest during the National Anthem is just that protest and protected speech. 

 

You are fixated on the word and notion of 'disrespect'. This is erroneous.

 

You are also in a dance marathon with the notion the protestors are engaged in or suggest civil disobedience. The participating NFL personnel are not engaged in civil disobedience. They challenge no law; they break no law. There is no legal consequence to their actions under the Constitution. The certain NFL members are protesting the national police homicide crime wave that broke out against numerous unarmed black Americans. 

[amvet]

1 hour ago, Publicus said:

 

You are fixated on the word and notion of 'disrespect'. This is erroneous.

 

You are also in a dance marathon with the notion the protestors are engaged in or suggest civil disobedience. The participating NFL personnel are not engaged in civil disobedience. They challenge no law; they break no law. There is no legal consequence to their actions under the Constitution. The certain NFL members are protesting the national police homicide crime wave that broke out against numerous unarmed black Americans. 

I agree with you 100% and have said so many times. 

 

Does kneeling or sitting or the black power salute during the National Anthem get many Americans very angry including Ruth the Supreme Court Justice and the President of the United States? Yes it does. 

 

Is getting people angry a good way to bring about compromise and change? No it's not. 

 

Maybe you all should read how to win friends and influence people or something like that. 

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, amvet said:

I agree with you 100% and have said so many times. 

 

Does kneeling or sitting or the black power salute during the National Anthem get many Americans very angry including Ruth the Supreme Court Justice and the President of the United States? Yes it does. 

 

Is getting people angry a good way to bring about compromise and change? No it's not. 

 

Maybe you all should read how to win friends and influence people or something like that. 

Total B.S.

Look up the history of ACT UP.

They saved countless lives. 

Pissing people off that deserved to be pissed off in the process.

There are many other examples in history.

I get it. You don't get it. It's just not in your personal experience.

 

 

Next ... 

[Publicus]

1 hour ago, amvet said:

I agree with you 100% and have said so many times. 

 

Does kneeling or sitting or the black power salute during the National Anthem get many Americans very angry including Ruth the Supreme Court Justice and the President of the United States? Yes it does. 

 

Is getting people angry a good way to bring about compromise and change? No it's not. 

 

Maybe you all should read how to win friends and influence people or something like that. 

 

Although your post is to another poster it does reinforce the obvious, i.e., Trump is not the only guy with a bag of tricks bigger than an elephant. It is indeed quite a sack you have there.

 

No pun on politics intended of course. But Obercommando Mike Ditka whom you laud stands by Trump while the Trump athletic supporter Tom Brady read Trump the riot act on this one. So perhaps Brady's balls are not inflated after all.

 

The thread has gone from being the long train of horrors to the long and slow motion great train wreck of 2017.

 

So now you wanna make the coin toss best two of three or what.

 

[Publicus]

12 hours ago, amvet said:

I think you gotta ask yourself how smart this whole kneeling, sitting and fisting protest is.  One, what is the protest about?  It's about cops harassing young black men.  So what is the best way to fix that?  Confrontational conflict protests is the answer of the young black men of the NFL.  Now, how smart is that?  

 

A bunch of young black men sitting around and talking about ending police harassment and one says, "I know how, lets get the cops enraged, red faced popping angry enough to shoot us that should stop the harassment eh?"  How do we do that?  "Well, lets attack one of their sacred symbols, a cop totem like the National Anthem.  That'll will anger them  em off enough to  pee their pants."

 

How to stop a fight?  Make the aggressive party with all the guns more angry than he already is.  Ya, that works.    

 

As you drive on and also increase your thread postodmeter the self-revealing thriller above makes it all worthwhile thx.

 

The posts in their aggregate make your statement. This one however is the duzy.

 

I'd reiterate that it goes unstated everyone is entitled to his opinion and that what is stated leaves you highly vulnerable. In your own words of course.

[Publicus]

13 hours ago, amvet said:

Angered by the protest, police and other emergency service workers have turned down an offer to participate in a ceremony ahead of a game on 10 September Dan Nemeth, president of the Cleveland Association of Rescue Employees Local 1975, told Fox8Cleveland: “This hit home with me. I am a veteran, an eight-year veteran with the US Marine Corps.

“So, to disrespect the flag by taking a knee is not something I was going to be a part of.

 

I could find another ten quotes but yes the National Anthem is a cop totem as is the flag.  Are American cops trigger happy?  Well, that is what the protest is all about eh?

 

I wouldn't stay seated during the Anthem as I'm not a subscriber to the Mike Tyson/Donald Trump school of diplomacy I'm a lot smarter than that.   

 

Here's more of whatall the trooper and USMC veteran Nemeth rattled off...

 

"When I was growing up, we were taught to stand every morning, put our hands over our hearts and say the pledge of allegiance," Nemeth said. For them to disrespect the flag by taking a knee did not sit well with me.

 

"Military and the safety forces live and die by the flag and what it stands for, and for them [Browns management] to say how much they support the military and the men and women that fight to defend our country and the freedoms that we have, it's hypocritical [allowing players to take a knee.]"

 

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2017/09/cleveland_rescue_union_joins_p.html

 

 

 

Here is some of what Chief of Police Calvin Williams said on the behalf of the CPD....

 

The Cleveland Browns Organization has been a longtime partner of the Cleveland Division of Police, donating and assisting (many times quietly) to our Police Athletic League and hosting events with kids in the city's Muny League Football. As law enforcement officers, we took an oath to serve and to protect. We protect the rights of all citizens to express their views as protected by the First Amendment of our constitution, no matter the issue.  

 

http://www.cleveland19.com/story/36281485/police-chief-responds-after-cleveland-unions-refuse-to-hold-flag-at-browns-opening-game

 

 

Nemeth the Marine veteran needs to recognize the oath he took to support and defend the Constitution.

 

Military veterans such as Nemuth who disrespect their oath to the Constitution are not reliable or of merit in their active duty service or as veterans, and ultimately as citizens of the republic. There is in fact a longstanding argument that is both Constitutional and statutory. It is that the person who assumes a sacred oath never is released from the oath. That moreover, once a citizen swears an oath to the Constitution the oath is valid for life. Without trying to argue the points here, the belief is that the only way one who assumes an oath to the Constitution can be free of the oath is to renounce it. I don't hear Nemuth renouncing his oath-taking explicitly, but then again it could be argued he never meant or understood each oath he has sworn so help him God.

[amvet]

7 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Total B.S.

Look up the history of ACT UP.

They saved countless lives. 

Pissing people off that deserved to be pissed off in the process.

There are many other examples in history.

I get it. You don't get it. It's just not in your personal experience.

 

 

Next ... 

Almost a perfect example of how not to resolve a conflict.
 

What is needed is conflict resolution not confrontation.  Any experienced arbitrator or negotiator would have an idea how to proceed.  

 

There are many ways to look at the thread.  1.  The underlying problem - race relations. or 2.  The problem created by the disruption of the National Anthem.  3.  Or the media's take that everything is Trump's fault. 

 

I find the thread a poster boy for the problem and the answer is hopeless.  Both sides can't even see what they are doing let alone see what the other side is doing. 

 

I'm a totally objective party.  I don't have a dog in the hunt.  I live in Asia and have no plans of ever going back to North America. 

 

To the one side --  Stop with the silly baiting stuff you are only angering the other side.

 

To the other side - Stop with the silly baiting stuff you are only angering the other side. 

 

You can figure out which side is which. 

 

One side is making provocative statements for the sake of making provocative statements (tweets)

 

The other side is making provocative gestures (kneeling, sitting and black power saluting) for the sake of making provocative gestures.

 

I tried for about 100 posts to get people to realize that kneeling and sitting and giving the black power salute was pissing people off.

 

Hooray.  JT finally confirmed that fact when he wrote, "Pissing people off that deserved to be pissed off in the process."

 

Clarify what the disagreement is. ...

Establish a common goal for both parties. ...

Discuss ways to meet the common goal. ...

Determine the barriers to the common goal. ...

Agree on the best way to resolve the conflict.

[Si Thea01]

2 minutes ago, amvet said:

Almost a perfect example of how not to resolve a conflict.
 

What is needed is conflict resolution not confrontation.  Any experienced arbitrator or negotiator would have an idea how to proceed.  

 

There are many ways to look at the thread.  1.  The underlying problem - race relations. or 2.  The problem created by the disruption of the National Anthem.  3.  Or the media's take that everything is Trump's fault. 

 

I find the thread a poster boy for the problem and the answer is hopeless.  Both sides can't even see what they are doing let alone see what the other side is doing. 

 

I'm a totally objective party.  I don't have a dog in the hunt.  I live in Asia and have no plans of ever going back to North America. 

 

To the one side --  Stop with the silly baiting stuff you are only angering the other side.

 

To the other side - Stop with the silly baiting stuff you are only angering the other side. 

 

You can figure out which side is which. 

 

One side is making provocative statements for the sake of making provocative statements (tweets)

 

The other side is making provocative gestures (kneeling, sitting and black power saluting) for the sake of making provocative gestures.

 

I tried for about 100 posts to get people to realize that kneeling and sitting and giving the black power salute was pissing people off.

 

Hooray.  JT finally confirmed that fact when he wrote, "Pissing people off that deserved to be pissed off in the process."

 

Clarify what the disagreement is. ...

Establish a common goal for both parties. ...

Discuss ways to meet the common goal. ...

Determine the barriers to the common goal. ...

Agree on the best way to resolve the conflict.

 

The best way for the conflict on here to e resolved, is for everyone to give it a miss, and just ignore those who use disparaging innuendos.  They think they are clever but they are easily seen through.  Others are like dogs chasing their tails, a whole 55 pages containing  both.  Given the repetitious nature of the responses then maybe someone should think about doing this.  but then the conflict and divide will only be transferred to some other thread.  Have a happy day  you all. 

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, amvet said:

Almost a perfect example of how not to resolve a conflict.
 

What is needed is conflict resolution not confrontation.  Any experienced arbitrator or negotiator would have an idea how to proceed.  

 

There are many ways to look at the thread.  1.  The underlying problem - race relations. or 2.  The problem created by the disruption of the National Anthem.  3.  Or the media's take that everything is Trump's fault. 

 

I find the thread a poster boy for the problem and the answer is hopeless.  Both sides can't even see what they are doing let alone see what the other side is doing. 

 

I'm a totally objective party.  I don't have a dog in the hunt.  I live in Asia and have no plans of ever going back to North America. 

 

To the one side --  Stop with the silly baiting stuff you are only angering the other side.

 

To the other side - Stop with the silly baiting stuff you are only angering the other side. 

 

You can figure out which side is which. 

 

One side is making provocative statements for the sake of making provocative statements (tweets)

 

The other side is making provocative gestures (kneeling, sitting and black power saluting) for the sake of making provocative gestures.

 

I tried for about 100 posts to get people to realize that kneeling and sitting and giving the black power salute was pissing people off.

 

Hooray.  JT finally confirmed that fact when he wrote, "Pissing people off that deserved to be pissed off in the process."

 

Clarify what the disagreement is. ...

Establish a common goal for both parties. ...

Discuss ways to meet the common goal. ...

Determine the barriers to the common goal. ...

Agree on the best way to resolve the conflict.

Your argument was that the behavior was disrespectful. Whatever the merits of that contention, it is not necessarily the same thing as "pissing people off."

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, amvet said:

Almost a perfect example of how not to resolve a conflict.
 

What is needed is conflict resolution not confrontation.  Any experienced arbitrator or negotiator would have an idea how to proceed.  

 

There are many ways to look at the thread.  1.  The underlying problem - race relations. or 2.  The problem created by the disruption of the National Anthem.  3.  Or the media's take that everything is Trump's fault. 

 

I find the thread a poster boy for the problem and the answer is hopeless.  Both sides can't even see what they are doing let alone see what the other side is doing. 

 

I'm a totally objective party.  I don't have a dog in the hunt.  I live in Asia and have no plans of ever going back to North America. 

 

To the one side --  Stop with the silly baiting stuff you are only angering the other side.

 

To the other side - Stop with the silly baiting stuff you are only angering the other side. 

 

You can figure out which side is which. 

 

One side is making provocative statements for the sake of making provocative statements (tweets)

 

The other side is making provocative gestures (kneeling, sitting and black power saluting) for the sake of making provocative gestures.

 

I tried for about 100 posts to get people to realize that kneeling and sitting and giving the black power salute was pissing people off.

 

Hooray.  JT finally confirmed that fact when he wrote, "Pissing people off that deserved to be pissed off in the process."

 

Clarify what the disagreement is. ...

Establish a common goal for both parties. ...

Discuss ways to meet the common goal. ...

Determine the barriers to the common goal. ...

Agree on the best way to resolve the conflict.

"I'm a totally objective party.  I don't have a dog in the hunt.  I live in Asia and have no plans of ever going back to North America. "

Actually there are many posters in this thread, I daresay, who also qualify as "objective" by the criteria you set forth. Yet some of them disagree with you.  Something doesn't compute.

[amvet]

19 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Your argument was that the behavior was disrespectful. Whatever the merits of that contention, it is not necessarily the same thing as "pissing people off."

Giving the black power salute during the American National Anthem would not piss off black people.  I get that.  Do the black people get that it pisses off people who are not black? 

[amvet]

15 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

"I'm a totally objective party.  I don't have a dog in the hunt.  I live in Asia and have no plans of ever going back to North America. "

Actually there are many posters in this thread, I daresay, who also qualify as "objective" by the criteria you set forth. Yet some of them disagree with you.  Something doesn't compute.

The crux of my post is - it would be a good idea to resolve the racial conflict in America by

Clarify what the disagreement is. ...

Establish a common goal for both parties. ...

Discuss ways to meet the common goal. ...

Determine the barriers to the common goal. ...

Agree on the best way to resolve the conflict.

 

What objective person on this thread disagrees with that?

[ilostmypassword]

14 minutes ago, amvet said:

Giving the black power salute during the American National Anthem would not piss off black people.  I get that.  Do the black people get that it pisses off people who are not black? 

You have not answered my point. Just because you piss people off does not necessarily mean you are being disrespectul to them. Remember your contention was in reply to Jingthing's post:

"Hooray.  JT finally confirmed that fact when he wrote, "Pissing people off that deserved to be pissed off in the process."

If I say unkind things about Donald Trump, am I being disrespectul to the people who support him?

[amvet]

4 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

You have not answered my point. Just because you piss people off does not necessarily mean you are being disrespectul to them. Remember your contention was in reply to Jingthing's post:

"Hooray.  JT finally confirmed that fact when he wrote, "Pissing people off that deserved to be pissed off in the process."

If I say unkind things about Donald Trump, am I being disrespectul to the people who support him?

One gets pissed off by being disrespected.  If the Anthem and patriotic stuff like that is important to you having someone disrespect it (like the black power salute to some people who are not black) would piss you off. Every culture has totems if they are not treated in the prescribed way persons in that culture will get pissed off.

[ilostmypassword]

3 minutes ago, amvet said:

One gets pissed off by being disrespected.  If the Anthem and patriotic stuff like that is important to you having someone disrespect it (like the black power salute to some people who are not black) would piss you off. Every culture has totems if they are not treated in the prescribed way persons in that culture will get pissed off.

Again, if i say unkind words about Donald Trump, some of his supporters will likely get pissed off. Am I being disrespectful to them?  The feelings of other people are not a definitive way of judging disrespect.

President Erdogan of Turkey has done some things that piss me off. Am I so benighted or self-centered to believe that he was disrespecting me?

[amvet]

3 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Again, if i say unkind words about Donald Trump, some of his supporters will likely get pissed off. Am I being disrespectful to them?  The feelings of other people are not a definitive way of judging disrespect.

President Erdogan of Turkey has done some things that piss me off. Am I so benighted or self-centered to believe that he was disrespecting me?

Donald Trump is not a totem of America.  He is only a President and as such is traditionally the butt of jokes and takes the blame for everything.  People did the same thing with Washington and Lincoln.  It is traditional to disrespect Presidents but not totems. 

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, amvet said:

Donald Trump is not a totem of America.  He is only a President and as such is traditionally the butt of jokes and takes the blame for everything.  People did the same thing with Washington and Lincoln.  It is traditional to disrespect Presidents but not totems. 

For the moment let's assume that the players are being disrespectful to a totem.  That doesn't mean that they are being disrespectful to the people who worship, adore, or other feel warmly towards that object.  Unless as in certain arithmetical functions, disrespect commands a certain transitive power.  

[amvet]

2 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

For the moment let's assume that the players are being disrespectful to a totem.  That doesn't mean that they are being disrespectful to the people who worship, adore, or other feel warmly towards that object.  Unless as in certain arithmetical functions, disrespect commands a certain transitive power.  

Sure it does.  Ever hear, love me love my dog.  Same thing.  When the French satirical magazine disrespected Muslim totems what happened?

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, amvet said:

Sure it does.  Ever hear, love me love my dog.  Same thing.  When the French satirical magazine disrespected Muslim totems what happened?

And when a woman in say, a Muslim neighborhood goes with her hair uncovered, is that disrespecting the locals? Not unless that was her intention. It's all about intention.

[amvet]

7 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

And when a woman in say, a Muslim neighborhood goes with her hair uncovered, is that disrespecting the locals? Not unless that was her intention. It's all about intention.

No it's not.  If I draw a cartoon of Mohammad to teach religion to a child in the Middle East I'm still going to get beheaded.  If I violate a religious totem I'll still get killed even though my intention might have been pure.  Ignorance of the law or culture is rarely a defense.  I'm an atheist so I think anything having to do with religion is silly but having said that I can understand it would be disrespectful to use holy books as toilet tissue or stand in a church when everyone else sat. 

[Opl]

5 minutes ago, amvet said:

No it's not.  If I draw a cartoon of Mohammad to teach religion to a child in the Middle East I'm still going to get beheaded.  If I violate a religious totem I'll still get killed even though my intention might have been pure.  Ignorance of the law or culture is rarely a defense. 

 

France is not in the M.E

 

[inThailand]

1 minute ago, Opl said:

 

France is not in the M.E

 

 

They should be!

[amvet]

5 minutes ago, Opl said:

 

France is not in the M.E

It gets the point across that totems are very important to a lot of people and some behave irrationally when those things like religious and national symbols are treated in any other way but the traditional prescribed way.  If I was trying to negotiate with a group of people for positive change I wouldn't try and offend them by violating their traditional handling of totemic things.   I wouldn't kneel or sit during a national anthem or call a ruler considered god "rocket man."  Both are absolutely nuts. 

[Opl]

3 minutes ago, amvet said:

It gets the point across that totems are very important to a lot of people and some behave irrationally when those things like religious and national symbols are treated in any other way but the traditional prescribed way.  If I was trying to negotiate with a group of people for positive change I wouldn't try and offend them by violating their traditional handling of totemic things.   I wouldn't kneel or sit during a national anthem or call a ruler considered god "rocket man."  Both are absolutely nuts. 

 

Free press as well as free speech are totems too. 

IMO, you are talking about taboos. 

 

[rockingrobin]

28 minutes ago, amvet said:

No it's not.  If I draw a cartoon of Mohammad to teach religion to a child in the Middle East I'm still going to get beheaded.  If I violate a religious totem I'll still get killed even though my intention might have been pure.  Ignorance of the law or culture is rarely a defense.  I'm an atheist so I think anything having to do with religion is silly but having said that I can understand it would be disrespectful to use holy books as toilet tissue or stand in a church when everyone else sat. 

This misses the point. The american values gives a right to protest , it is all about the message that determines whether it is disrespectful or not.

The US flag and anthem is a symbol of these values, and since there is no law prohibiting the use of the flag as a means of protest , then the act itself cannot be regarded as disrespectful.

 

If one takes the view that the flag is so sacred and beyond criticism, then that is not being patriotic but idolization

[LannaGuy]

1 minute ago, rockingrobin said:

This misses the point. The american values gives a right to protest , it is all about the message that determines whether it is disrespectful or not.

The US flag and anthem is a symbol of these values, and since there is no law prohibiting the use of the flag as a means of protest , then the act itself cannot be regarded as disrespectful.

 

If one takes the view that the flag is so sacred and beyond criticism, then that is not being patriotic but idolization

 

It's not about THAT.  It's not about 'nationalism' nor about 'sacred flags' it's about common decency and respect.

 

You take your shoes off in a Thai Wat or not?  you let someone out of a side street when driving or not?  you pick your nose in public or not?  you might, technically, have the freedom but...

 

America is obsessed with 'freedoms' and it gets people killed. There is NO reason any human, apart from a soldier, would need a battlefield weapon. It's INSANE to cry 'freedoms' when people die to make sure you have them.

 

No decent nor compassionate human being can condone buying tons weapons because it's a 'freedom'.  It's PC BS is what it is.

[amvet]

18 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

This misses the point. The american values gives a right to protest , it is all about the message that determines whether it is disrespectful or not.

The US flag and anthem is a symbol of these values, and since there is no law prohibiting the use of the flag as a means of protest , then the act itself cannot be regarded as disrespectful.

 

If one takes the view that the flag is so sacred and beyond criticism, then that is not being patriotic but idolization

You are saying an act cannot be legal and disrespectful and that is not correct.  Many things are disrespectful and also legal.  Do you want me to list a few hundred?  It was disrespectful for me to dress up like a clown for my fathers funeral but not illegal.  

[amvet]

5 minutes ago, LannaGuy said:

It's not about THAT.  It's not about 'nationalism' nor about 'sacred flags' it's about common decency and respect.

 

You take your shoes off in a Thai Wat or not?  you let someone out of a side street when driving or not?  you pick your nose in public or not?  you might, technically, have the freedom but...

 

America is obsessed with 'freedoms' and it gets people killed. There is NO reason any human, apart from a soldier, would need a battlefield weapon. It's INSANE to cry 'freedoms' when people die to make sure you have them.

 

No decent nor compassionate human being can condone buying tons weapons because it's a 'freedom'.  It's PC BS is what it is.

Is this thread about gun control?  How should we kneel down before a football game to protest gun control? 

[amvet]

27 minutes ago, Opl said:

 

Free press as well as free speech are totems too. 

IMO, you are talking about taboos.

Free speech and a free press are rights in the Constitution that guarantee our right to disrespect totems like National Anthems. American Flags and other totems. 

[ilostmypassword]

54 minutes ago, inThailand said:

 

They should be!

I know what you mean. Imagine doubting the Bush administration's overwhelming evidence about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Firance also happens to be the western nation with the second highest number of troops fighting Islamist extremism.

Shame on France!

And no shame at all on the ignoramuses who haven't a clue about what France is doing.