Shocking moment conservative activist is punched in the face on UC-Berkeley campus over sign reading 'hate crime hoaxes hurt real victims'

submitted by SundogsPlace from dailymail.co.uk

all 14 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]SundogsPlace[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I was listening to the news the last few days, they've rebranded Jussie Smollet(or near), as a victim by way of 'Trump Derangement Syndrome"; forget the fact that back in the day we would of recognized him as an opportunist weasel.

Likewise, Christine Ford claim's, which again turned out to be crap, and yet nothing.

Too compliment that, all I've heard on the radio the last 2 days, is "White supremist, or separatist(depending station), was 'plotting' to kill EVERYONE!!!!!! Be afraid, because this guy had thoughts similar to what many celebs, or British Royalty have said themselves, but did this new villian who they're using to drown out the Jussie stuff, did he have real access?????

I say no, and as it turns out, he happens to be a Coast Guard Lt. I'm sure he had access to light arms, and munitions, but not the crap stored at the CDC. It's just noise to cover over the blatant hypocrisy of the opportunist; they'll all come out of the woodwork now...... Especially with attacks as outlined in the article.

I do think every time these people commit hoaxs, real victims are diminished.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 5 fun -  (1 child)

?
Peace activists know how to throw down!
?

[–]SundogsPlace[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

He was quite burly, hahaha; thanks for the comment Tom

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

This is true, but people'll use it to argue that real victims are "hurting real victims". I understand why he was punched in the face – I don't agree with physical violence against peaceful protestors, but I understand.

[–]SundogsPlace[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

was it wrong to point out these hoaxes hurt real victims, and that makes it 'understandable' to be punched in the face?

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

It's a little like having a sign saying that "black people commit more crimes". Yes, you could say "black people commit more crimes, so we should establish support structures in poor and black communities to help to eliminate the causes of this phenomenon". But it's more likely that people will say "black people commit more crimes, so we should put them in prison more".

It's the same thing here. It might be meant well, but it'll probably be used primarily as a way of arguing those assaulted by rich people are "faking it".

[–]SundogsPlace[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

LMAO wizzwizz, in your mind it's like, "It's a little like having a sign saying that "black people commit more crimes". Yes, you could say "black people commit more crimes, so we should establish support structures in poor and black communities to help to eliminate the causes of this phenomenon". But it's more likely that people will say "black people commit more crimes, so we should put them in prison more".

No offense, but to myself, you just proved you're perhaps one of those SJW's on the side of the road telling real rape victims to shut the F*** up when a gang of newly arrived Rapefugees gang rapes them; while at the same time, screaming 'metoo'.

The femenazi's have actually stated that marital sex, between two people who love each other, is worse than violent rape, which they should enjoy.

There's a real derangement syndrome it appears; sad days when real victims have to take a back seat to the made for tv drama crap.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I'm very proud that my first reaction to that wasn't defensive. Progress!

Now, please explain that better.

The femenazi's have actually stated that marital sex, between two people who love each other, is worse than violent rape, which they should enjoy.

Considering that this is against what feminism argues for, I doubt very much that this was something that most feminists would support. I certainly wouldn't.

But for you to allude to that when describing my comment suggests that what I'm saying – or what I'm appearing to say – is at great odds with what I believe.

There's a real derangement syndrome it appears; sad days when real victims have to take a back seat to the made for tv drama crap.

I agree with this. However, "this hoax hurts real victims" can be used as a weapon against people who are real victims. It's fine to say in a case in which there's a real hoax, and not fine to say in a genuine case, but if you're respectable then saying it makes people think that the former situation (the one in which the person is justified in what they're saying, which is in line with their respectability) is more true than the latter situation (the one in which the person is unjustified in what they're saying, which is at odds with their respectability) regardless of whether it's actually real or a hoax. Therefore, I think it shouldn't be used around the time when there's a high-profile case going 'round. The times when it's genuinely acceptable to say it add legitimacy to people using it as a manipulative tool.

I don't agree with the punching, but I understand it. I think explaining this to the activist might make them re-time their activism.

[–]SundogsPlace[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I don't have the article in front of me, but I do buried on facebook, or here, but yes, there was some what was noted as a 'prominent feminist activist', I guess well known, that made a statement of rape was better than long term, monogamous sex with your partner.

There are also many accounts of feminists in Europe/Sweden, Germany, and elsewhere telling women the right thing is to keep their mouths shut about migrant sexual attacks. I personally will avoid aligning myself with such a broad definition of what they 'support'.

In regards to "this hoax hurts real victims", well hell yes it does. So how do you stop opportunists, that take advantage of the system to game it????

Jussie Smollet is definitely playing a victim, even though he's an opportunist; now 'he's had an uncontrollable drug problem'... 'FEEL SORRY FOR ME', should be what he's advocating.

Either he's just damn an evil-self-centered-SOB, that needs a lot of years in jail, or perhaps had someone explained to him beforehand how what he was doing would hurt real victims, would he still have done it?

How do you fix it Wizzwizz?

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

If I call myself a Christian, and call for the stoning of adulterers, does that mean that Christians support stoning adulterers? Even if I'm a 'prominent Christian activist'? Well then.

There are also many accounts of feminists in Europe/Sweden, Germany and elsewhere telling women the right thing is to keep their mouths shut about migrant sexual attacks.

Well, they're pretty shit feminists. I don't want to invoke the No True Scotsman fallacy, so I'll just pop this here and see if you concur.

In regards to "this hoax hurts real victims", well hell yes it does. So how do you stop opportunists, that take advantage of the system to game it????

This is tricky, and something to which I have no answer. But you should discuss this issue when there aren't high-profile cases around to avoid perverting the course of justice.

Jussie Smollet is definitely playing a victim, even though he's an opportunist; now 'he's had an uncontrollable drug problem'... 'FEEL SORRY FOR ME', should be what he's advocating.

No comment on this particular case.

How do you fix it Wizzwizz?

I don't know.

I don't know.

I would really like to have the answers, but I don't.

[–]SundogsPlace[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

In regards to any religion, they bread zealots; I'm more into spirituality myself... I think all anyone needs is already within them; they just need to tune out the 'outside whispers', and get to know themselves. It's harder than you'd think, and I'm no enlightened master, so I try to constantly ask myself why I do what I do, and/or is it from external media influences; there's a lot of directed 'pograms' out there.

Yet the bible passage you refer to is one of my favorites; to myself, it applies on an individual to individual; not so much to an oligarchy group push narrative.

In regards to the the article from 'everdayfeminism.com', I found it interesting. I'm male, and the article discussed man on man rape in parts. Let me comment, I've not been raped, but I'd hope that whoever was would report it so that it doesn't happen to the next guy, or gal.
In reading the narrative of the article, I must comment that police, and prosecutors, are making money for the system; it's not just rape, but a myriad of crimes they won't do much about; it's about money, and people need to comprehend that. It'll never be fair to many victims of numerous violent crimes.
Is it fair? Hell no. Does it necessitate change? I think so, but in what way?
I don't see more government control making much of an impact, but I do see self preparedness, self awareness, and knowing this world is about a fight, and if you're gonna live in this world, you'd better be ready to fight.
The world we live in is alive, and wild; comfort is in your den like any animal, outside of that, is survival.
Yes, being awake, and aware can ruin some parties, but at the same time, you'll go home more likely in one piece, and 'spiritually whole', if that makes sense.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I must comment that police, and prosecutors, are making money for the system;

Not everyone lives in America. Some people have uncorrupt police – or at the very least less corrupt police.

What you're saying is pretty deep, and I'm going to need some time to process it. But it's a tangent nonetheless.

I don't want to invoke the No True Scotsman fallacy, so I'll just pop this here and see if you concur.

Do you concur?

This is tricky, and something to which I have no answer. But you should discuss this issue when there aren't high-profile cases around to avoid perverting the course of justice.

Do you agree? Why, or why not?

[–]SundogsPlace[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Corruption doesn't have much to do with it. Police go off of what they hear, and are told; most cannot clearly Annunciate, or convey what happened to them, why, and what they want done; mix that in with average police IQ, and presto; recipe for disaster even without corruption mixed in.

In regards to No True Scotsman(I like that, not too familiar with it, but cool), I wasn't familiar with the term, but the concept I'm very familiar with. For myself, I want to be fully informed, aware, and have an internal knowing, a 'standing'.
To further a lie, out of convenience, or to further a larger narrative, because you think it's the 'best', is nothing more than lying to yourself, and basically amounting to 'kicking your own feet out from under you'.

As to the last point, and discussing serious topics while they're ongoing.... The very most important thing I've learned in my life is that it's impossible to stop people; especially in mass from doing what they'll do.

In water, and in electrical circuitry, there are 'eddie currents'. These always go against the flow, they're ever present, and in some way shape, or regard will be there. We have these same sorts of things occur in society. Why?

If that analogy isn't good enough, lets go with the proverbial impenetrable wall, and the unstoppable force; who wins, who should win, and why? There's no correct answer; except simple acceptance...........'the reeds that sway with the wind stay, while the tree that won't, falls'.

So many parables.

Perhaps no matter what pogram, or societal interference, something else drives synthesis; whether consciously, or not, we're all always trying to find our level, like water.....(consciously, or not)

My point in the above ramble? WTF is society doing? We're allowing directed pograms to point out everyone's difference, pitting groups against one another, simply by giving artificial heightened status. Maybe we need to fall back to everyone learning RESPECT, concentrating on self improvement, and realizing, or perhaps letting go to, the idea that 'everything comes out in the wash'.

.............God, I sound like Yoda.