[American Thinker] The release of the official copy of the Hennepin County, Minnesota Medical Examiner’s autopsy of George Floyd on Wednesday inspired conservative black commentator Candace Owens to live stream an18-minute video commentary that has created a firestorm of blowback — with MSM coverage from as far away as New Zealand and Australia. Pro and con discussions of Owens on social media including Twitter reached a peak on Thursday, as the first of several memorial services for Floyd, with Al Sharpton delivering the eulogy, was broadcast live from Minneapolis on all four broadcast television networks, PBS, and the three major cable news channels.
Owens’s criticism of what she termed the "martyr" status accorded to Floyd is the first high profile commentary of its kind to hit the mainstream since the death of the 46-year-old African-American man on May 25 while he has being subdued by Minneapolis police after his arrest for an alleged non-violent crime. Her video is titled "Confession: #GeorgeFloyd is neither a martyr or a hero. But I hope his family gets justice." In the video itself (most easily accessible on YouTube), apparently shot on a cell phone, Owens made it clear that "What I am saying is not any defense for [Floyd’s accused murderer] Derek Chauvin. The family of George Floyd deserves justice for the way that he died." She added, however, that "I also am not going to accept the narrative that this is the best the black community has to offer."
#1
Floyd is being apotheosized to the level of a saint by the left. Couldn't they have picked someone who was a better poster child? Jeebus, I saw where the guy had a long rap sheet; not a nice guy.
#7
That cop deserves 15-20. Even if he was knowingly passing a fake bill, it doesn't deserve an asshat sitting on your neck for 8-10 minutes till you're dead. But the victim trailer is overflowing with self interest on this one.
[21st Century Wire] As the threat of COVID-19 quickly fades from foreground and the damage from governments’ experimental panic-driven ’lockdown’ measures, some experts are now asking an important question: why do different countries achieved such vastly different results in terms of fatalities due to Coronavirus?
The answers to this question will undoubtedly destroy official claims that the COVID lockdown was somehow science-based, let alone justified.
As it turns out, a large percentage of the population were never susceptible to this virus.
In other words, something unknown that was discovered as a result of the research done because nobody outside China knew anything about the new virus that was suddenly killing large numbers of people in China...and China was lying about what they did know.
In other words: the threat was completely overblown, and lockdown and social distancing policies have never been based in reality.
#1
"Genetics suspected." Could anyone possibly identify the targeted population group(s).
I recommend equal burden sharing and sacrifice, it's the only 'fair' thing to do. Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota and privileged, wellness plagued hamlets everywhere, please 'take a knee' and get on board.
#2
It isn’t fair to use the latest learnings to castigate decisions made before anything was known. The news coming out of China and then Italy at the beginning made it look like we had another Black Plague or Spanish Flu on our hands. Only a concentrated research and testing effort around the world revealed that the situation was actually as good as our best hopes, not as bad as our worst fears. But until the research started coming in we could not know.
Just as with the Ebola epidemic, we are learning all sorts of things about this specific disease and disease processes in general that contradict common medical wisdom accepted for a century or more. Not to mention that we were able to move quickly to try treatments like hydroxychloroquine because of research done during the SARS and MERS scares, and current research results will be applicable to many more diseases that cause similar inflammatory responses. How many lives will be saved in the future just by turning deep-lung pneumonia patients onto their stomachs, for instance, instead of leaving them on their backs?
#3
Not so, tw: in early March we already had the Diamond Princess data which both the WHO and CDC reviewed (and tested) and which told us the Case Fatality Rate was never going to be higher than 0.3%.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
06/05/2020 9:48 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Isn't the virus said to effect blacks at 4 times the rate of whites? Somebody thinking of real-estate in the Congo...
Posted by: Charles ||
06/05/2020 9:52 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Lex, even at .3% you could still be looking at 990K dead if the whole country was infected. In a normal 90 day period the US should see 716K deaths. This is based on the estimated population of 330 as per the US Census Bureau and the mortality rate of 8.8 per 1000 per year.
330M/365 x (8.8/1000) x 90. We should see 7,916 deaths nation wide from all causes any an average day. What I want to know have the C-19 attributed deaths been in addition to this amount, supplemental or part of the noral amount. And that I have not found a good answer for. Also given the way C-19 kills its host via blood clots it's still not something to take lightly. As to masks. A mask is not going to do a complete job of protecting you. But if you are infected even if you are asymptomatic it should reduce your chance of infecting others. Not 100% but if it helps reduce the chance of infecting others. Personally I think ig an individual knows they are infected and goes out in public unasked knowing they will infect others that at a minimum is reckless endangerment. If you do it knowing it will cause deaths from I faction then its Manslaughter or worse. Our rights, my rights, everybody's rights extend as far as our noses. Our rights to life, liberty, speech, religious freedom, self protection etc also come with unstated but implied responsibilities
#8
First of all, we don't know if the finding is true, or another a$$hole jumping the gun. Given the worldwide statistics of infection & mortality, I bet on an a$$hole.
#9
Cheaderhead - only 16% of the Diamond Princess passengers & crew were infected. Absent gross incompetence - such as we saw in NYC - and with sensible precautions but not a complete lockdown, there was no way that this was ever going to infect and kill more than a typical nasty flu strain would.
[Mises.org] There were many reasons to oppose the COVID-19 lockdowns.
They cost human lives in terms of deferred medical treatment. They cost human lives in terms of greater suicide and drug overdoses. Domestic abuse and child abuse have increased. Not according to San Diego County Law enforcement, which is based on , you know, FACTS and data.
There is also good reason to believe that lockdowns don't actually work. The lockdown activists capitalized on media-stoked fear to push their authoritarian agenda based not on science, but on the whims of a handful of experts who insisted that they need not present any actual evidence that their bizarre, draconian, and extreme scheme was worth the danger posed to human rights, health, and the economic well-being of billions of human beings.
Skipping down to the new stuff, though it is really an argument about execution, not locking down per se:
THE LOCKDOWNS EMPOWERED THE POLICE STATE
The lockdowns have created a situation in which millions of law-abiding citizens have been deemed criminals merely for seeking to make a living, leave their homes, or engage in peaceful trade.
In many areas, violations of the lockdown orders have been‐or even still are, in many places‐treated as criminal acts by police. This has greatly increased negative interactions between police and citizens who by no moral definition are criminals of any sort.
Many have already seen the stories: police arresting mothers for using playground equipment, police arresting business owners for using their own property, police beating people for the "crime" of standing on a sidewalk.
Complicating the issue is the apparent fact that police have not enforced social distancing edicts "uniformly." Some have alleged, for example, that the NYPD has lopsidedly targeted nonwhites in enforcement:
of the 40 people arrested [for social distancing violations in Brooklyn between March 17 and May 4], 35 were African American, 4 were Hispanic and 1 was white. The arrests were made in neighborhoods‐Brownsville, Bedford-Stuyvesant, Cypress Hills and East New York‐which have large concentrations of blacks and Latinos.
This may or may not reflect the reality of the general situation, but the fact is that the lockdowns created the perception among many that this is just yet another case of law enforcement targeting certain populations over small-time violations.
Moreover, it is quite plausible that lower-income populations have more often been on the receiving end of state harassment in the name of social distancing. After all, compliance with lockdowns is something of a luxury reserved for higher-income, white-collar residents who can work from home and remain comfortable for long periods in their roomy houses. Working-class people and those with fewer resources are far more likely to need to find income and venture outside during lockdowns. This attracts the attention of police.
Lockdown advocates, apparently in their usual state of extreme naïvete, perhaps believed that further empowering police to violently enforce government decrees against petty infractions would not lead to any unfortunate side effects down the road. Yet criminalizing millions of Americans and subjecting them to heightened police harassment is not a recipe for social tranquility.
Worsening a Volatile Situation
Of course, my comments here should not be interpreted as making excuses for rioters. Smashing up the property of innocent small business owners‐or worse, physically harming innocent people‐is reprehensible in all circumstances. But this isn't about making excuses. We're talking about avoiding extreme and immoral government policies (i.e., police-enforced lockdowns) that remove those institutions and conditions which are important in helping minimize conflict.
Some may insist that the riots would have occurred no matter what, but it's easy to see how the lockdowns made a bad situation worse. Yes, some of the rioters are lifelong thugs who are always on the lookout for new opportunities to steal and maim. But experience suggests that the pool of people willing to engage in riots is often larger during periods of mass unemployment than during other periods. In addition, those people who exist on the margins of criminality‐the sorts of people for whom third places serve an important role in moderating their more antisocial tendencies‐are more likely to be swept up in these events when third places are abolished. And, as we have seen, lockdowns also create more opportunities for police abuse that ignite riots of the sort we've seen in recent days.
It's true the responsibility for the riots lies primarily with the rioters. But we cannot deny that policymakers fuel the flames of conflict when they outlaw jobs and destroy people's social support systems by cutting them off from their communities. It's also wise to not provoke people by pushing for widespread human rights violations and additional police harassment. But this is what lockdown advocates have done, and their imprudence should not be forgotten.
#1
Almost seems planned. What's next. Foreign money and its influence. No invasion of a nation. No blood loss. Give money to influence and subvert. This has always been done since the continental congress days.
#2
I don't think the police on the whole want to be pursuing citizens for "lockdown violations" but they are being forced by state politicians with an agenda to keep people controlled and uncomfortable hoping it will negatively affect Trump's reelection.
#8
Raj wins 'deader of the day'! 26 hours? That sucks.
Posted by: Whiskey Mike ||
06/05/2020 15:21 Comments ||
Top||
#9
I full well anticipated a certain amount of unrest this Summer. The unfortunate event in Minneapolis just provided the spark. I actually expected the spark to happen in Milwaukee during the convention. Certain groups on the extreme left would have been on the lookout for something to react to.
#7
The lockdown does work at reducing the number of infections NOW, but it really only defers them until it is lifted or the germ gets through the cracks - unless safe and effective vaccines or treatments are developed and deployed before the lockdown is lifted. Or at least that’s how it looks to me - what do I have wrong?
#13
Whether or not we should have locked down in the first place is not an interesting question. Whether or not there is any justification to continue a lock down is very interesting indeed.
#16
Tijuana and Mexicali were overwhelmed. They already had sub-par med services and the numbers arriving last month were huge. There hasn't been much news in San Diego media lately, so it may have abated - but to what extent, I don't know
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/05/2020 16:21 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[American Thinker] The release of the official copy of the Hennepin County, Minnesota Medical Examiner’s autopsy of George Floyd on Wednesday inspired conservative black commentator Candace Owens to live stream an18-minute video commentary that has created a firestorm of blowback — with MSM coverage from as far away as New Zealand and Australia. Pro and con discussions of Owens on social media including Twitter reached a peak on Thursday, as the first of several memorial services for Floyd, with Al Sharpton delivering the eulogy, was broadcast live from Minneapolis on all four broadcast television networks, PBS, and the three major cable news channels.
[21st Century Wire] As the threat of COVID-19 quickly fades from foreground and the damage from governments’ experimental panic-driven ’lockdown’ measures, some experts are now asking an important question: why do different countries achieved such vastly different results in terms of fatalities due to Coronavirus?
