Al Sharpton arrested....

Status
Not open for further replies.
jillio said:
This isn't about Al Sharpton. It is about the shooting of unarmed men. Why is it that you cotinue to focus on that which has no bearing on the case?
Click to expand...
This thread is about Al Sharpton being arrested, so yes it holds bear to this thread.

And, still, you have not explained how it is that Al Shaprton is playing the race card
Click to expand...
I already did, you just think my answer is not good enough for you.
 
Cheri said:
This thread is about Al Sharpton being arrested, so yes it holds bear to this thread.


I already did, you just think my answer is not good enough for you.
Click to expand...

No, I haven't seen an answer that addresses the specific question of "how?"

And, you seem to be forgetting the reason Al Sharpton was arrested.
 
jillio said:
...And, you seem to be forgetting the reason Al Sharpton was arrested.
Click to expand...
According to the linked story:

"The Rev. Al Sharpton was arrested at the Brooklyn Bridge on Wednesday as he and hundreds of demonstrators blocked traffic to protest the acquittal of three detectives in the 50-bullet shooting of an unarmed black man on his wedding day.
Sharpton, two survivors of the shooting and the slain man's fiancee were among about a dozen people arrested on disorderly conduct charges near the base of the bridge."

That means, he was arrested on disorderly conduct charges for blocking traffic.

He was NOT arrested for protesting the acquittal. He had the right to protest the acquittal; he did NOT have the right to block traffic.
 
Reba said:
According to the linked story:

"The Rev. Al Sharpton was arrested at the Brooklyn Bridge on Wednesday as he and hundreds of demonstrators blocked traffic to protest the acquittal of three detectives in the 50-bullet shooting of an unarmed black man on his wedding day.
Sharpton, two survivors of the shooting and the slain man's fiancee were among about a dozen people arrested on disorderly conduct charges near the base of the bridge."

That means, he was arrested on disorderly conduct charges for blocking traffic.

He was NOT arrested for protesting the acquittal. He had the right to protest the acquittal; he did NOT have the right to block traffic.
Click to expand...

But would he have been blocking traffic if the acquittal had not happened?
 
jillio said:
But would he have been blocking traffic if the acquittal had not happened?
Click to expand...
Who knows? He can always come up with something to grand stand.

He knew that he could protest without getting arrested but he preferred to do it his way. That's his prerogative. Which is fine, as long as people don't think that he's being arrested for the act of protesting or for the reason of his protest.

People can hold any protest they want any time without Al.

He's actually hurt the cause by getting his name in the headlines instead of the cause itself being the headline--exactly the thing that you bemoan happening in this thread.

How come the headline wasn't "Slain man's fiancee arrested during Sean Bell shooting protest"?

:hmm:
 
Reba said:
Who knows? He can always come up with something to grand stand.

He knew that he could protest without getting arrested but he preferred to do it his way. That's his prerogative. Which is fine, as long as people don't think that he's being arrested for the act of protesting or for the reason of his protest.

People can hold any protest they want any time without Al.

He's actually hurt the cause by getting his name in the headlines instead of the cause itself being the headline--exactly the thing that you bemoan happening in this thread.

How come the headline wasn't "Slain man's fiancee arrested during Sean Bell shooting protest"?

:hmm:
Click to expand...

Would the protest have gotten as much media attention for the case if he hadn't been arrested? The whole point of the protest was to bring attention to the case. His arrest helped to accomplish that. That's not "playing the race card." Its using notoriety to an advantage.
 
jillio said:
Would the protest have gotten as much media attention for the case if he hadn't been arrested? The whole point of the protest was to bring attention to the case. His arrest helped to accomplish that. That's not "playing the race card." Its using notoriety to an advantage.
Click to expand...
I never said that he played the race card (although I understand why people believe that; that's his modus operandi).

My objection is to people promoting Sharpton as someone worthy of respect and adoration.
 
Reba said:
I never said that he played the race card (although I understand why people believe that; that's his modus operandi).

My objection is to people promoting Sharpton as someone worthy of respect and adoration.
Click to expand...

Okay. But he did accomplish his goal in this case.
 
jillio said:
Perhpas Blacks will be protesting in all states to keep Hillary Clinton from winning because they believe that her winning the election will not serve their best interests. Why does it have to be because she is a white woman?
Click to expand...
Have you ever followed the candidates speech? After Obama told a crowd in South Carolina about Martin Luther King how he was the Leader of Civil Rights, and Hillary jumped in and point out that President Johnson was the one that got the Civil Rights Act to passed. Al Sharpton did not like what she said in front of the crowd in South Carolina. If Obama says something about his own color it's ok in Al Sharpton's eyes, but when Hillary mention a President of her own color, it's wrong in Al Sharpton's eyes.
 
jillio said:
Okay. But he did accomplish his goal in this case.
Click to expand...

really? all he does is incite racial riot/hatred/etc. :dunno2:

I asked my friend who is a political activist (got arrested at RNC couple years ago) and a college reporter if Al Sharpton is playing a race card in Sean Bell case. including Sean Bell. His reply was - "isn't that his whole schtick?"
 
Cheri said:
Have you ever followed the candidates speech? After Obama told a crowd in South Carolina about Martin Luther King how he was the Leader of Civil Rights, and Hillary jumped in and point out that President Johnson was the one that got the Civil Rights Act to passed. Al Sharpton did not like what she said in front of the crowd in South Carolina. If Obama says something about his own color it's ok in Al Sharpton's eyes, but when Hillary mention a President of her own color, it's wrong in Al Sharpton's eyes.
Click to expand...

ZING!! +5
 
jiro123 said:
really? all he does is incite racial riot/hatred/etc. :dunno2:

I asked my friend who is a political activist (got arrested at RNC couple years ago) and a college reporter if Al Sharpton is playing a race card in Sean Bell case. including Sean Bell. His reply was - "isn't that his whole schtick?"
Click to expand...

And your friend's opinion is any more valid in what way?

And once again, "Isn't that his whole schtick?" is an avoidance of an answer, not an answer.
 
jiro123 said:
ZING!! +5
Click to expand...

Oh, Please!!!! Johnson was a politician, and in the position to have laws passed. King was an activist, and in a position to influence public opinion, which in turn influences political decisions. Do you really think that Johnson would have passed the laws without the outcry from the public based on the activists? Get real.

And Hillary's statement had nothing to do with color, nor did Sharpton's. And Obama was correct. Martin Luter King was a civil rights leader.

Can't you see past the color of anyone's skin?
 
Cheri said:
Show me where anyone say that they do not like people not in their own kind.
Click to expand...

It's not about not liking people of your own kind...it is about holding stereotypical views and judgemental ideas against people who are not like you. It's all over this thread. Some of the more racially offensive posts have already been removed. Any reference to color, when color should not be an issue, is inherently biased against.
 
jillio said:
Its in the news and people are talking about it.
Click to expand...
Only because of Rev. Al? Or did Sharpton get on board because it was newsworthy? :hmm:
 
jillio said:
It's not about not liking people of your own kind...it is about holding stereotypical views and judgemental ideas against people who are not like you. It's all over this thread. Some of the more racially offensive posts have already been removed. Any reference to color, when color should not be an issue, is inherently biased against.
Click to expand...
Most of us were pointing out the facts of Al Sharpton's actions and how he played the race card. You asked us a question, and we delivered the answer, and then we get judged for not liking anybody with dark skin. :confused: Then I will not answer any of your questions again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top