Iconochasm
All post-temple whore technology is gay.
No bio...
User ID: 314
I spent a few minutes thinking about that post, knowing there was a joke there, and then the second I walked away from my computer, unable to return for hours, I was struck with a severe esprit d'escalier. The proper Platner in the Senate joke:
Graham, you just raped John Fettterman!
Yeah, he was going to vote no. Don't worry, it wasn't in a gay way.
Gonna be really exciting to see that mentality play out in the Senate.
My teen son uses "got raped" to refer to taking a heavy hit in sports all the time.
Graham definitely meant cock in ass, though.
You get mad at some vaguely proximate white guy.
"Incompetence" is underselling it. This looks like "failed state African shithole" levels of incompetence. Calling it fraud is the charitable option.
Raman likely doesn't rock the boat on NGO grifting, etc. Same machine, different figurehead.
Supposedly, Republicans are heavily insinuating/claiming that they have much worse stuff to drop in the general. This is just primary funtime.
He might be the first politican I'd like to actually have a beer with.
"So run it by me again, Graham, how exactly is raping a dude not gay?"
"It's not a sex thing! It's about power. Dominance."
"But you got hard."
"Hard for power!"
"Power over a dude!"
Oooh, I have thoughts about this.
So, I'm roughly the same age as this guy. My grandfather was pushing me to join the military out of high school, and one of the reasons I never even considered it was because I'd absorbed nice, modern, genteel, Atlantic Democrat memes like "People who join the army are the bottom 10% of their class who just want to murder sandni**gers".
Sorry, vets.
I say this because Graham Platner struck me as actually fitting that description. Well-off prep school kid from New England joins the Marines in 2004? That's weird. Copilot data about military members from each state doesn't even bother to list Maine. Other estimates put the total Marines from the state in the low hundreds. "Well-off prep school kid from New England joins the Marines" is possibly literal one-in-a-million rarity. Maybe if the kid was a die-hard patriot, but even at 18 he was already a leftist anti-war protestor.
So it struck me that Platner might actually be the kind of guy who signed up just to kill people.
And then it turns out that he posted on /marines that he joined up because he wanted to kill people and had a hell of an excellent experience.
So now I'm thinking he's an old school style of communist. Less "soy vegan latte" and more "Soviet leader who won an internal power struggle by just killing the opposition".
I don't think the American system will give him much of an opportunity to indulge, but it's funny that he's probably a better mark for the "worried about fascism" people than anyone they've ever called a fascist.
Yup. In regards to the Toxoplasma thesis, the Summer of Love kicked off in full spite of basically the entire right openly agreeing that the situation (as presented in the initial video) looked heinous.
But if, in a situation of Bayesian uncertainty, you choose to prioritize neutralizing the potential threat posed by an individual over that individual's own health, and it turns out he was in fact dying, then you're responsible for his death.
It's also worth noting that the police were surrounded by hostile people yelling at them. That's going to split attention and make it difficult to stop and check the guy and do first aid. And they had an ambulance on the way. (Iirc, it actually took a wrong turn and was delayed for several minutes.)
And the concern isn't just that Floyd might have hurt others. He could very easily have tried to get up and fallen and hurt himself. Like I said, I've personally seen someone in a comparable state literally crack their own skull open by falling over and hitting the corner of the curb. And in such a case, the PD is still getting sued or worse because "He was obviously in distress, why didn't you keep better control of him!"
He was initially not arrested
Yes, it looked at first like a fairly reasonable self-defense. A man attacked him and got shot for it. McGlockton was guilty of a serious offense against a person as well. He was just too dead to convict over it.
That's also what is to be expected with anyone approaching in even slightly good faith, that any random conviction was done to a truly guilty person since the US legal system is generally reliable.
I eagerly await you full-throatedly repeating this argument to the African American community.
I'm not really sure what you're saying here, the language seems a bit confused. It sounds like you think I was excusing Digwa, and speculating that Henry deserved it. Maybe I was unclear, but I was making the exact opposite point. I very much doubt that Henry did anything that could have passed any remotely sane muster for being a proper "provocation". I was allowing the possibility that some normal, mundane, innocuous thing was interpreted as provocation by a man who was already a violent asshole.
Digwa deserves to die, his family deserves to be severely punished and deported, and any of his community that has a problem with that should also be deported citizen or not.
But that consideration of moral and legal blame is separate from trying to unravel why the violent asshole picked this particular target to murder. As rafa said, he doesn't seem to match the kind of schizophrenic who is truly random in their attacks.
"first they came for the people who lynched Negroes in the streets, but I did not speak out, because I was against lynching Negroes in the streets"
That does seem pretty analogous to the communists. "First they came for the omnicidal would-be-tyrants".
but I would be very surprised if it looks like pinning him down in a chokehold,
Why? Every policy is written in blood. How many people going on deranged crashouts would hurt themselves or someone else if they weren't forcibly restrained?
I once called the cops to assist some delirious homeless guy who fell over and cracked his head open on the sidewalk. Do you think the cops should have let Floyd drive away while ODing on fent, which is what he would have done otherwise?
I'll go on the record and say that if I'm ever in a similar state, I would be thankful to be restrained, because I have a bare minimal "deserves to live in a decent society" level of concern for the likelihood that I might accidentally hurt someone else while out of my mind.
If you disagree then you disagree
I don't think you even read my post.
Fine.
Do you think there is a difference between "found guilty in court" and "I personally looked at the facts and concluded he was guilty"?
We actually discussed that case pretty thoroughly here back in the day. My understanding of the legal argument was that while McGlockton absolutely escalated to violence and plausibly threatened Drejka's life, Drejka's actions initiated the altercation, thereby limiting or losing his presumptive right to self-defense. There is a reason CCers are advised to act like the most peaceful man alive. I don't particularly disagree with the conviction, though 20 years for manslaughter seems a bit excessive. Much less understandable shootings in my state tend to go around 15.
Worth noting that McGlockton's family asked for the max of 30, and neither of his parents offered grace or mercy or forgiveness. I guess those government agencies that threaten families into "lowering tension and division" only apply to white people.
And I know all that because I followed the case and came to my own decision instead of just posting the first authoritative-looking thing I found on google to score a deflection point in an argument.
My assumption would be that he took way more than 11 ng/ml, and that was just how much had metabolized by the time bio-activity stopped. Plus he had multiple other heart/lung health issues and was obviously having the kind of crashout that can make a fat middle-aged man die.
And I'm not a doctor either, but my understanding was that fent was something like 50 times stronger than oxy, processed faster, and there was only a partial carryover for tolerance, which is exactly why "Expected oxy, got fent, ODed and died" is a cliche that happens tens of thousands of times per year.
It's honestly impressive how far you're willing to go on occasion to avoid having a thought.
excited delerium
I think it's a term coined to describe a regularly observable phenomenon, rather than something with a specific, well-understood underlying medical theory. "Sometimes people go pants-shitting crazy when getting arrested, usually involving a novel cocktail of unknown drugs. How the fuck am I supposed to describe this in the reports?"
No, two autopsies found different results. The original one "revealed no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation."
The second autopsy, the "independent" one, was hired by the family, represented by race-baiting huckster Benjamin Crump.
The tox report found Fentanyl 11 ng/ml. 2-3 ng/ml is lethal for someone without a high tolerance
That's not utterly conclusive, but I think any reasonable person would consider it a reasonable doubt, especially given the unprecedented pressure campaign going on. If you were a medical examiner during the Summer of Love, would you have been willing to send all the people burning cities into a berserk rage by declaring it an OD? At what confidence level?
it seems plausible
The standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt", actually.
but his blood fent level, especially for a long time addict,
One of the key points is that we do not know if he was a long time fent addict. We know he was an opioid user, but if he thought he was getting regular stuff and it was cut with fent and that difference killed him, well, that happens tens of thousands of times per year.
There's a lot of room between "completely random" and "accidentally provoked because the attacker required neglible provocation". Maybe Digwa was already in a seething rage for unrelated reasons, and some mild comment after bumping into a stranger (or just the bumping) set him off. My point is that the plausible, likely area of their potential interactions includes quite a bit of "Henry did literally nothing wrong".

AIUI, this latest round was from the NYT, and they have been accused of actively trying to sabotage the scandal-mongering, e.g. misleading the women in the story about what would be included and leaving out a bunch of details and evidence.
Which isn't a bad play, tactically.
More options
Context Copy link