Ahmaud Arbery; racist killing and attempted cover up.

[JimL]

I've seen this claim bantied about a few times, but I haven't seen any evidence of it. Do you have any?

Fake news. It's been looked into and reported, and there were no reported burglaries in that neighborhood recent to the murder.

[oxmixmudd]

Fake news. It's been looked into and reported, and there were no reported burglaries in that neighborhood recent to the murder.

This all plays into the racist stereotypes I've referred to a few times. He's black, he's in the neighborhood, he may have checked out the house under construction, so he MUST have been up to no good. That is in the background, so if someone even mentions there might have been burglaries (turns out the only thing that happened was someone stole a gun belonging to one of the two men that shot Arbery previous to the incident) it gets blown up and the white audience (maybe even some in the black audience) automatically are more prone to believe he was up to no good than that he was just there to jog. Far more so than if he were white. So from the very start, it's far more easy to get people believing some of this was 'his fault' - because he is black. We can't help it. But it's still racism pushing the story along and taking away this man's right - his right to innocent until proven guilty. Think about it, even though he's the fellow that was shot without cause by these other two men we are still willing to assume HE is guilty of something! It doesn't have to be proven, just hinted at and most people posting on this site are willing to believe THAT is the REAL story.

Up front on this site - in this thread - the FOCUS is not on why these two white men were chasing down a black man armed with two guns - but what did this black guy do that made these two white men grab their guns, chase him down, and accidentally shoot him? (and of course, the assumption is this as an 'accident' - because after all, these are two white guys)

The reality is that historically, white people have unfairly attacked and killed black people in this country way more than the other way around. Yet the assumptions are all reversed.

And that is why I warned about playing into stereotypes. Cause so far this thread is one great big stereotype for white racism and black oppression.

[Bill the Cat]

Rednecks and Trump voters do more bad things, again. Ambushing and killing an unarmed jogging black man.

Redneck is a racist and derogatory term. How very progressive of you...

[MaxVel]

This all plays into the racist stereotypes I've referred to a few times. He's black, he's in the neighborhood, he may have checked out the house under construction, so he MUST have been up to no good. That is in the background, so if someone even mentions there might have been burglaries (turns out the only thing that happened was someone stole a gun belonging to one of the two men that shot Arbery previous to the incident) it gets blown up and the white audience (maybe even some in the black audience) automatically are more prone to believe he was up to no good than that he was just there to jog. Far more so than if he were white. So from the very start, it's far more easy to get people believing some of this was 'his fault' - because he is black. We can't help it. But it's still racism pushing the story along and taking away this man's right - his right to innocent until proven guilty. Think about it, even though he's the fellow that was shot without cause by these other two men we are still willing to assume HE is guilty of something!

Have you even watched the video?


Arbery was jogging 10 miles away from his house. That's a marathon jog. He didn't appear to have running clothes on, or a water bottle with him. Odd, if you're going for a long run on a sunny day.

He illegally entered a house, and was in there for around 4 minutes. Why? Why go into someone else's property when you're 10 miles away from home on a jog?

His behaviour certainly is odd and raises questions about what he was doing on that day. If we could understand that it might help unpack just what happened.


When he came out, someone was on the phone to someone else, watching him - he ran off.

Then we have the truck stopped around a corner in the road. Two men, one in the back tray, one standing by the truck, on the passenger side.


I can possibly buy an argument that they were in the wrong to stop in the road there, etc, but he ran some considerable distance up to where they were stopped - no driver in the vehicle, dodged around the truck, and then attacked the man standing there. A man (rightly or wrongly) standing there with a gun in plain sight. Whatever else the circumstances, attacking someone else gives them cause to at the least defend themselves. If they are armed, the stakes for both parties are that much higher. Say he punches the man to the ground, takes the shotgun... ..what then? Maybe he shoots, maybe he doesn't... but if you're the armed man, are you going to give an attacker the opportunity to choose whether you live or die?

Arbery attacked an armed man, running up to him from at least 20 meters away to do so. He initiated the violence. Why?

From the video (the vehicle coming up behind) he had time and distance to make some choices. It doesn't seem that he was under any immediate threat when that video starts.

Why didn't he duck off into a property instead of keeping down the road? Why didn't he reverse course? Why didn't he approach someone and ask for help? Why did he choose to run up - 20 some metres - and attack the man with the gun?


Mistakes were made - but they weren't all on one side.

It doesn't have to be proven, just hinted at and most people posting on this site are willing to believe THAT is the REAL story.

Up front on this site - in this thread - the FOCUS is not on why these two white men were chasing down a black man armed with two guns - but what did this black guy do that made these two white men grab their guns, chase him down, and accidentally shoot him? (and of course, the assumption is this as an 'accident' - because after all, these are two white guys)

The reality is that historically, white people have unfairly attacked and killed black people in this country way more than the other way around. Yet the assumptions are all reversed.

And that is why I warned about playing into stereotypes. Cause so far this thread is one great big stereotype for white racism and black oppression.

It's a tragedy. Someone died.

You're muddying the waters instead of looking at the data, though. That's also part of the tragedy of race in America - so many people cannot be impartial about any incident where there are people of different races involved.

[oxmixmudd]

Have you even watched the video?


Arbery was jogging 10 miles away from his house. That's a marathon jog. He didn't appear to have running clothes on, or a water bottle with him. Odd, if you're going for a long run on a sunny day.

He illegally entered a house, and was in there for around 4 minutes. Why? Why go into someone else's property when you're 10 miles away from home on a jog?

His behaviour certainly is odd and raises questions about what he was doing on that day. If we could understand that it might help unpack just what happened.


When he came out, someone was on the phone to someone else, watching him - he ran off.

Then we have the truck stopped around a corner in the road. Two men, one in the back tray, one standing by the truck, on the passenger side.


I can possibly buy an argument that they were in the wrong to stop in the road there, etc, but he ran some considerable distance up to where they were stopped - no driver in the vehicle, dodged around the truck, and then attacked the man standing there. A man (rightly or wrongly) standing there with a gun in plain sight. Whatever else the circumstances, attacking someone else gives them cause to at the least defend themselves. If they are armed, the stakes for both parties are that much higher. Say he punches the man to the ground, takes the shotgun... ..what then? Maybe he shoots, maybe he doesn't... but if you're the armed man, are you going to give an attacker the opportunity to choose whether you live or die?

Arbery attacked an armed man, running up to him from at least 20 meters away to do so. He initiated the violence. Why?

From the video (the vehicle coming up behind) he had time and distance to make some choices. It doesn't seem that he was under any immediate threat when that video starts.

Why didn't he duck off into a property instead of keeping down the road? Why didn't he reverse course? Why didn't he approach someone and ask for help? Why did he choose to run up - 20 some metres - and attack the man with the gun?


Mistakes were made - but they weren't all on one side.








It's a tragedy. Someone died.

You're muddying the waters instead of looking at the data, though. That's also part of the tragedy of race in America - so many people cannot be impartial about any incident where there are people of different races involved.

So - I tend to avoid watching videos of events like this - they are are hard thing to stomach. But I did go watch it so I could speak to it in reply to you.

Yikes! What you see in that video is a fellow jogging along with a truck stopped in front of him.That is not any sort of panic or aggressive run! He is not 'running' full out like a person trying to attack. He's at a sustainable pace JOGGING*.

He is already jogging along when we first see him, and he is WAY to far away to think he was actually 'going after' them. They are there stopped. He is jogging, He then slows a bit and tries to go around - they are in the middle of the road. THEY pull the gun, he tries to stop them from gunning him down. He is pushing the gun away, not attacking the man. THEY fire.

That is what that video shows. There is nothing in that video that even hints Arbery is doing anything wrong. From what I can tell, you've been sucked into the racist rhetoric trying to justify this.

Having watched it I am now absolutely convinced this is a racially motivated shooting with no justification of any sort. And these men need to spend the rest of their lives in jail.

*He is on the LEFT side of the road, as you are supposed to be when JOGGING - facing traffic. If he were cycling, he would have been on the right side. Everything in his body position while running is that of a person jogging. Nothing aggressive at all. The hesitation seen as he comes up on the truck is just standard for any runner coming up on a stopped vehicle. "Which way do I go to get a round". Then they are yelling. He panics. They have guns. If he runs, they shoot him in the back. What can he do.

I'm a cyclist, I've been in situations with angered drivers stopped in the road. What do I do - what is he going to do. I see that same thing in Arbery as he reacts to them confronting him as he approaches. IF you guys have seen this video and are still carrying on like you are ... God help us all.

[Cow Poke]

"Trump voters"???

first floor has the gift of miscernment.

[Cow Poke]

Have you even watched the video?


Arbery was jogging 10 miles away from his house. That's a marathon jog. He didn't appear to have running clothes on, or a water bottle with him. Odd, if you're going for a long run on a sunny day.

He illegally entered a house, and was in there for around 4 minutes. Why? Why go into someone else's property when you're 10 miles away from home on a jog?

His behaviour certainly is odd and raises questions about what he was doing on that day. If we could understand that it might help unpack just what happened.


When he came out, someone was on the phone to someone else, watching him - he ran off.

Then we have the truck stopped around a corner in the road. Two men, one in the back tray, one standing by the truck, on the passenger side.


I can possibly buy an argument that they were in the wrong to stop in the road there, etc, but he ran some considerable distance up to where they were stopped - no driver in the vehicle, dodged around the truck, and then attacked the man standing there. A man (rightly or wrongly) standing there with a gun in plain sight. Whatever else the circumstances, attacking someone else gives them cause to at the least defend themselves. If they are armed, the stakes for both parties are that much higher. Say he punches the man to the ground, takes the shotgun... ..what then? Maybe he shoots, maybe he doesn't... but if you're the armed man, are you going to give an attacker the opportunity to choose whether you live or die?

Arbery attacked an armed man, running up to him from at least 20 meters away to do so. He initiated the violence. Why?

From the video (the vehicle coming up behind) he had time and distance to make some choices. It doesn't seem that he was under any immediate threat when that video starts.

Why didn't he duck off into a property instead of keeping down the road? Why didn't he reverse course? Why didn't he approach someone and ask for help? Why did he choose to run up - 20 some metres - and attack the man with the gun?


Mistakes were made - but they weren't all on one side.








It's a tragedy. Someone died.

You're muddying the waters instead of looking at the data, though. That's also part of the tragedy of race in America - so many people cannot be impartial about any incident where there are people of different races involved.

But the guy was black and the 'bad guys' were white, so --- it is the sworn duty of the liberals to ignore the facts and pronounce judgment. It makes them feel good.

[seanD]

But the guy was black and the 'bad guys' were white, so --- it is the sworn duty of the liberals to ignore the facts and pronounce judgment. It makes them feel good.

This is yet another reason why I doubt Ox is a Christian. How can an individual supposedly filled with the spirit of truth, be so fervent in their embrace of lies and falsehoods?

[JimL]

Have you even watched the video?


Arbery was jogging 10 miles away from his house. That's a marathon jog. He didn't appear to have running clothes on, or a water bottle with him. Odd, if you're going for a long run on a sunny day.

He illegally entered a house, and was in there for around 4 minutes. Why? Why go into someone else's property when you're 10 miles away from home on a jog?

His behaviour certainly is odd and raises questions about what he was doing on that day. If we could understand that it might help unpack just what happened.


When he came out, someone was on the phone to someone else, watching him - he ran off.

Then we have the truck stopped around a corner in the road. Two men, one in the back tray, one standing by the truck, on the passenger side.


I can possibly buy an argument that they were in the wrong to stop in the road there, etc, but he ran some considerable distance up to where they were stopped - no driver in the vehicle, dodged around the truck, and then attacked the man standing there. A man (rightly or wrongly) standing there with a gun in plain sight. Whatever else the circumstances, attacking someone else gives them cause to at the least defend themselves. If they are armed, the stakes for both parties are that much higher. Say he punches the man to the ground, takes the shotgun... ..what then? Maybe he shoots, maybe he doesn't... but if you're the armed man, are you going to give an attacker the opportunity to choose whether you live or die?

Arbery attacked an armed man, running up to him from at least 20 meters away to do so. He initiated the violence. Why?

From the video (the vehicle coming up behind) he had time and distance to make some choices. It doesn't seem that he was under any immediate threat when that video starts.

Why didn't he duck off into a property instead of keeping down the road? Why didn't he reverse course? Why didn't he approach someone and ask for help? Why did he choose to run up - 20 some metres - and attack the man with the gun?


Mistakes were made - but they weren't all on one side.








It's a tragedy. Someone died.

You're muddying the waters instead of looking at the data, though. That's also part of the tragedy of race in America - so many people cannot be impartial about any incident where there are people of different races involved.

Yeah right, he jogged 10 miles, if that's even true, I don't know, but he jogged 10 miles away form home in order to burglarise a home construction site with no tools and no vehicle. He simply walked in there and looked at the construction, which btw way is something I've done myself many times, and then walked out in a matter of minutes. Again, if that was a white kid having been hunted down and shot by 2 black men under the same circumstances, you wouldn't be making up all these excuses for them. Ya'll did the same in the Treyvon Martin case, if he's black he must of been up to something and deserved what he got.

[Cow Poke]

This is yet another reason why I doubt Ox is a Christian. How can an individual supposedly filled with the spirit of truth, be so fervent in their embrace of lies and falsehoods?

I don't doubt for a second that Ox is a Christian.

[Cow Poke]

Yeah right, he jogged 10 miles, if that's even true, I don't know, but he jogged 10 miles away form home in order to burglarise a home construction site with no tools and no vehicle. He simply walked in there and looked at the construction, which btw way is something I've done myself many times, and the walked out in a matter of minutes.

How many times have you gone 10 miles away from your own house on multiple occasions in the middle of the night to wander through the interior of a home under construction? MULTIPLE times AT NIGHT. Do you DO that, Jim? WHO DOES?

Again, if that was a white kid having been hunted down and shot by 2 black men under the same circumstances, you wouldn't be making up all these excuses for them. Ya'll did the same in the Treyvon Martin case, if he's black he must of been up to something and deserved what he got.

When you come to a set of facts with a particular narrative, you're gonna see what you want to see. When you come to the facts with an open mind, it's quite a different outcome. To link this to the Martin case without knowing all the facts reveals your extreme bias.

[oxmixmudd]

This is yet another reason why I doubt Ox is a Christian. How can an individual supposedly filled with the spirit of truth, be so fervent in their embrace of lies and falsehoods?

Be careful - you may find yourself on the side of the lies and falsehoods - especially in this case. Should we then doubt if you are a 'true Christian'?

As I said above - watching that video there is little doubt in my mind Arbery was jogging. Not running away from or towards the men who shot him, just jogging. From what I understand, he jogged every day, sometimes twice a day. There appears to be no aggression in his run, and the stutter as he tries to decide the best way around the truck looks normal. When the car video starts, he is already jogging.

from USA today:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...al/3105123001/

Source: above

Surveillance video recorded minutes before the slaying of a jogger that has sent ripples of shock across the nation proves the Georgia man was not involved in a crime, attorneys for Ahmaud Arbery's family said.

An individual believed to be Arbery was seen at a property under construction for less than three minutes before being ambushed a short while later, lawyers said in a statement Saturday night.

The surveillance video is "consistent with the evidence already known to us" that Arbery made a brief stop at the site while out for a run and "engaged in no illegal activity," they said.

"Ahmaud did not take anything from the construction site. He did not cause any damage to the property," the attorneys said. "He remained for a brief period of time and was not instructed by anyone to leave but rather left on his own accord to continue his jog. Ahmaud’s actions at this empty home under construction were in no way a felony under Georgia law."

© Copyright Original Source

[seanD]

I don't doubt for a second that Ox is a Christian.

There are a lot of Christians I disagree with and I'm sure you disagree with, but I've never had the urge to spew the amount of vitriol that he spews to other protestant Christians. And it's not like he's directing that hatred to an organization like the RCC that actually has a history of corruption and pedophile rings, but at Christians who simply choose to put their faith in the bible like creationists. He treats them like they're the scourge of the earth. Then he continuously accuses all of us not only of being beneath him when it comes to both his religious and political views, but now accuses us all in here of being racists. Sorry, but I don't see Christian in that at all. Maybe I just need to get out and meet more Christians.

[Cow Poke]

There are a lot of Christians I disagree with and I'm sure you disagree with, but I've never had the urge to spew the amount of vitriol that he spews to other protestant Christians. And it's not like he's directing that hatred to an organization like the RCC that actually has a history of corruption and pedophile rings, but at Christians who simply choose to put their faith in the bible like creationists. He treats them like they're the scourge of the earth. Then he continuously accuses all of us not only of being beneath him when it comes to both his religious and political views, but now accuses us all in here of being racists. Sorry, but I don't see Christian in that at all. Maybe I just need to get out and meet more Christians.

Ox and I are in an agreed-upon truce. I said what I wanted to say.

[oxmixmudd]

There are a lot of Christians I disagree with and I'm sure you disagree with, but I've never had the urge to spew the amount of vitriol that he spews to other protestant Christians. And it's not like he's directing that hatred to an organization like the RCC that actually has a history of corruption and pedophile rings, but at Christians who simply choose to put their faith in the bible like creationists. He treats them like they're the scourge of the earth. Then he continuously accuses all of us not only of being beneath him when it comes to both his religious and political views, but now accuses us all in here of being racists. Sorry, but I don't see Christian in that at all. Maybe I just need to get out and meet more Christians.

Sorry to say, there is plenty of corruption and pedophilia happening in Protestant churches and by Protestant leaders. Is that ok then because they are 'real' Christians?

And the 'Scientific' Creationism I speak out against is itself 100% reliant upon lies and deception to make its case. But I guess that is ok - also because they are 'real' Christians?

And what you see as vitriol is a missed perception on your part. Perhaps colored by the general tone of those here that regularly regale what I have to say, most of the time peppered with some rather nasty insults of their own - from my perspective far more cutting and below the belt than anything I respond to them with. But I guess they also get a pass - once again - because they are 'real' Christians?

And I did not accuse you all of 'being' racist, but of being sucked into or accidentally participating in racial stereotypical bahavior.

Is the truth not to be spoken to 'real' Christians seanD if the implication of that truth is those 'real' Christians are doing something that might be wrong? Is right and wrong defined as what 'real' Christians do, or can 'real' Christians sometimes do wrong? And if those 'real' Christians are doing something wrong and don't realize it, are other 'real' Christians supposed to look the other way and say nothing? And if some person points out something a 'real' Christian is doing is wrong, does that then make them NOT 'real' Christians?