El Paso Shooting
- Thread starter Scat
- Start date
It wasn't Trump's idiocy. He wanted to score political points by banning some Muslims even though he knew he knew it would be ineffective. It's all about scoring points with his mindless minions. The wall is in the same category. He'll throw up a few miles of fence that have negligible impact and then take a photo shoot and the bigots will cream their pants.
Red
Well-Known Member
There is no bigger megaphone then the one wielded by a president. And, in Trump's case, that megaphone has been in the form of tweets, more then any president before him. I remember suggesting, that if he were elected, he would govern mostly via Twitter and rallies. Hasn't quite turned out that way, executive orders have been prevalent, but Twitter and rallies have seen to it that the focus of the media has been on Trump, and to a saturated degree. But that suits him fine. (I'd love to see a week go by where the media ignores every tweet, and refuses to cover his rallies. Too bad, he snares them every time).
But do his hateful tweets and divisive rally speeches equate to an increase in hate crimes? I believe a president's words matter. If a president is scapegoating minorities with his words, then the very reach of his words, via social media, via live rallies attended by thousands, and sound bites of those rallies and tweets provided by the media, is huge. Far greater then any private citizen. Filling those tweets and rallies with hate, scapegoating, and "otherizing" Hispanics, at the very least, renders approval to those who feel the same way. It's wrong. Stop it. Don't need a direct link between Trump and El Paso. Just stop it.
But, FWIW, and both these studies must have flaws.
Do Trump tweets spur hate crimes?:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-trump-tweets-spur-hate-crimes1/
The actual study, PDF file at link:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3149103
And this study has come up on cable networks in recent days: hate crimes up 226% in counties that held Trump rallies during 2016 campaign:
https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brie...s-rose-by-226-percent-in-counties-where-trump
Last edited:
Red
Well-Known Member
FBI investigating "violent ideologies" of the Dayton shooter:
https://news.google.com/articles/CA...vIaCCzDnxf4CMN2F8gU?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US:en
"Dayton Police Chief Richard Biehl said his investigators have found that Betts had a "history of obsession” with violence and "had expressed a desire to commit a mass shooting."
And the FBI has now opened a domestic terrorism investigation into the Gilroy festival shooter:
https://www.npr.org/2019/08/06/7487...m-investigation-into-gilroy-festival-shooting
"Legan appeared interested in multiple violent ideologies, Bennett said. Investigators are trying to determine "what if any ideology he had actually settled on" and "who, if anyone, he may have been in contact with regarding these ideologies," Bennett said....
....A list of organizations found on the shooter's digital media, which Bennett says may have been potential targets, includes "religious institutions, federal buildings, courthouses, political organizations from both major political parties, and the Gilroy Garlic Festival."
https://news.google.com/articles/CA...vIaCCzDnxf4CMN2F8gU?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US:en
"Dayton Police Chief Richard Biehl said his investigators have found that Betts had a "history of obsession” with violence and "had expressed a desire to commit a mass shooting."
And the FBI has now opened a domestic terrorism investigation into the Gilroy festival shooter:
https://www.npr.org/2019/08/06/7487...m-investigation-into-gilroy-festival-shooting
"Legan appeared interested in multiple violent ideologies, Bennett said. Investigators are trying to determine "what if any ideology he had actually settled on" and "who, if anyone, he may have been in contact with regarding these ideologies," Bennett said....
....A list of organizations found on the shooter's digital media, which Bennett says may have been potential targets, includes "religious institutions, federal buildings, courthouses, political organizations from both major political parties, and the Gilroy Garlic Festival."
https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/08/07/us...ampede-trnd/index.html?r=https://www.cnn.com/
False alarms in New York, Utah and California. Some thing else happened, like a motorcycle backfiring or a sign falling and people panicking and running, hiding and fighting. This hurts my heart.
False alarms in New York, Utah and California. Some thing else happened, like a motorcycle backfiring or a sign falling and people panicking and running, hiding and fighting. This hurts my heart.
He's a history of islamaphobia. Links provided. You're gonna have a helluva time demonstrating that it wasn't driven from hate of muslims.
Red
Well-Known Member
Defending the indefensible. It's cowardly, and it's wrong:
https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/4...on-trump-administration-to-stop-using-fear-to
A former white supremacist turned anti-hate activist is calling on the Trump administration to stop using fear to motivate people following a pair of mass shootings that shocked the nation over the weekend, saying the rhetoric is similar to that used among white nationalists.
"What's really important for the government to do, first of all, is to stop espousing rhetoric that strikes chords with people who are afraid of immigrants," Arno Michaelis said in an appearance on Hill.TV on Tuesday.
"It's a really bad policy to use fear to motivate people, to try to get policy passed," Michaelis continued. "I don't think we want to be a society that's driven by fear and when there's constant talk of our country being 'invaded' - and even the word 'infested' has been used - those are word-for-word what [was] in the manifesto of this El Paso shooter."
"There has to be some responsibility in that regard," he added.
I’m not trying to demonstrate that. I Don’t find this argument to be compelling for this discussion. I’m sure he does think disparagingly of muslims. But He didn’t ban all Muslims, he banned specific targeted countries. You won’t agree and that’s fine but it wasn’t a Muslim ban. And I don’t find arguments saying it was to be compelling.
I don’t really feel the need to rehash this yet again with someone else lol.
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
I don't think he is saying it was a Muslim ban. I think he is speculating that Trump hates Muslims based off his words and actions. Pretty decent assumption.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
And that’s something I never contested or argued.
Others do. People change, and that's accepted. He wanted a full ban in 2015, and he still does.
How do you get to your goal? Usually doesn't happen all at once. Baby steps, slowly but surely. He's on his way to it by any way possible.
He can’t get to that goal if that’s his goal. The system safeguards against it.
It’s not a totalitarian regime. And no it’s not in danger of happening.
Red
Well-Known Member
I had originally felt Trump wanted a broader ban on Muslims, but, since that was a few years ago(and time flies when I'm having a good time, lol), I considered that I might have been mistaken. But I thought @silesian offered the evidence to demonstrate my memory was actually accurate since Trump stated, speaking of himself in the third person, as he was reading from a statement his administration was releasing:
"Donald Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States, until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on. We have no choice."
I believe that supports how I thought I remembered Trump's desire. The ban turned out to be limited to specific countries. But, it's hard to interpret "total and complete shutdown of Muslims enterng the United States" in any way other then just what it says. A ban on Muslims. And it's possible he was being influenced at the time by Steve Bannon, who had delivered a talk at the Vatican predicting that there would be a great war of Christian civilization vs. Islam. And that there must be such a war. I'm speculating, but Trump often fondly referred to "my two Steve's" at that time, referring to Bannon, and Steve Miller. Miller, of course, is the driving ideological force behind the administration's response to the situation on our southern border.
I know I was arguing what Trump wanted, not what Trump had to settle for....
Hahaha