NASCAR bans confederate flag from all events.

[Whateverman]

Maybe they can tell that to God when they stand before him.

If your beliefs are correct, they probably will.

[seanD]

Another hate crime hoax

https://www.theblaze.com/news/racist...headed-to-jail

Well, when all you have is the delusion of social media telling you there's a rightwing racism epidemic in the US, you occasionally have to at least stage a few to give it some authenticity. The laugher prior to this was the "noose" the NASCAR driver said he found in his garage. That was another hoot.

[oxmixmudd]

Well, when all you have is the delusion of social media telling you there's a rightwing racism epidemic in the US, you occasionally have to at least stage a few to give it some authenticity. The laugher prior to this was the "noose" the NASCAR driver said he found in his garage. That was another hoot.

The noose was real. It was the only pull down chord found in all the garages that took the form of a noose. The only question is was it targetting the driver specifically.

This is the noose that was found in Bubba Wallace's garage stall at the speedway

[seanD]

The noose was real. It was the only pull down chord found in all the garages that took the form of a noose. The only question is was it targetting the driver specifically.

This is the noose that was found in Bubba Wallace's garage stall at the speedway

CNN of all sources. The network that got caught reporting a false racism narrative about Covington school children and got sued for it. It was a rope used to pull down the garage door that was there prior to Bubba using the garage. And I honestly can't tell if there were other such ropes used in other garages because the quotes in that article are extremely awkward, in fact, I suspect CNN took many of those quotes out of context which would explain why they're so confusingly structured.

[seer]

The noose was real. It was the only pull down chord found in all the garages that took the form of a noose. The only question is was it targetting the driver specifically.

This is the noose that was found in Bubba Wallace's garage stall at the speedway

The "form" of a noose made long before Wallace's team was assigned that garage.

"The investigation also revealed evidence, including authentic video confirmed by NASCAR, that the noose found in garage number 4 was in that garage as early as October 2019," the FBI said in a statement. "Although the noose is now known to have been in garage number 4 in 2019, nobody could have known Mr. Wallace would be assigned to garage number 4 last week."

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/25/us/na...rnd/index.html

[oxmixmudd]

CNN of all sources. The network that got caught reporting a false racism narrative about Covington school children and got sued for it. It was a rope used to pull down the garage door that was there prior to Bubba using the garage. And I honestly can't tell if there were other such ropes used in other garages because the quotes in that article are extremely awkward, in fact, I suspect CNN took many of those quotes out of context which would explain why they're so confusingly structured.

The facts are the facts. CNN is a legit media source, like abc, even fox. All you are doing by ignoring them is allowing trump to deny you the right to know the truth about the world, and especially about things like the pandemic, which has now reached its worst level of growth since it began in the US.

The fact simply is that the pull rope in that garage is in fact a noose. A noose is a specific type of slip knot used to hang oeople. A slip knot is not particularly useful as a pull chord, it will tighten around your hand when you pull on it, which could be dangerous if you pull too hard. The only garage using a noose for the garage door pull chord is this one.

So the idea it was a hoax is false. It was a noose. What is unknown is why a noose. It may have been there a while, it may not have been aimed specifically at this driver. But its symbolism remains, whoever set it up would be aware of the symbolism, and it's not the sort of common knot that can be tied accidentally. And the driver could not have been expected to be anything but offended/intimidated by it.

[rogue06]

The facts are the facts. CNN is a legit media source...

Sorry. I couldn't make it past that part. CNN barely even pretends to be legit anymore. You have Chris Cillizza acknowledging that Trump's comment about reducing Chicom coronavirus testing was likely a joke but frankly admitting that it doesn't matter, they're still going to attack him.

[oxmixmudd]

Sorry. I couldn't make it past that part. CNN barely even pretends to be legit anymore. You have Chris Cillizza acknowledging that Trump's comment about reducing [bigoted slur removed] coronavirus testing was likely a joke but frankly admitting that it doesn't matter, they're still going to attack him.

The facts are the facts. The knot used on that garage and that garage only at Talladaga was a noose. That does not mean it targetted this driver specifically, but it does mean the claim there was a noose in that garage is not a hoax. Given the symbolism of the noose, however, it is likely whoever put it there did intend to send a message - though that would be hard to proove.

[seer]

The facts are the facts. The knot used on that garage and that garage only at Talladaga was a noose. That does not mean it targetted this driver specifically, but it does mean the claim there was a noose in that garage is not a hoax. Given the symbolism of the noose, however, it is likely whoever put it there did intend to send a message - though that would be hard to proove.

The FACT is Jim Wallace was not a target. And the FACT is he is a bad driver, always has been - perhaps he could make his millions like Kaepernick as a race hustler.

[Sparko]

A noose isn't automatically a racist symbol. Someone could have just thought it was funny or cool to tie a rope handle into a noose, completely innocently. It was a rope, they needed a handle, and did it as a joke. Then years later a black driver comes to the garage, someone points out the noose and takes it as a message to him personally. FBI investigates, finds out it was there long before Wallace was assigned the garage randomly.

That should be the end of it.

[MaxVel]

see the bolded above

No go see if you can find anything so viscous in my replies to you?

No, it's not you never accused everyone else here of being 'racist', or of 'mouthing the words of demons', or of supporting racism. You are just being a cry-bully, again. You insult, smear and accuse others, and then pretend innocence whne people call you out for what you are.

I think 'class pariah' pretty much sums it up. Thanks for making my point.


Now - go back and read again. I said the rhetoric here on these topics (floyd, floyd protests, arbery killing) would be indistinguishable for that of a member of the KKK or neo-nazi's. The rhetoric here. The same sorts of 'softening the guilt' (justification) of the white killers and condemnations of the black men and women killed. The same focus on the unruly aspects of the protests instead of the subject of them (all to common systematic abuse of black people by policing organizations).

Like it or not, you guys are just not far at all from what they put out for public consumption, the ideas they float as part of their recruitment efforts and talking points.

See - that's just a fact Max. It has bad implications - yes. But the implication exists because of the FACT, not because I pointed it out.

You're pathetic. At least have the guts to own what you say, instead of trying to slide out of it with a feeble attempt at pretending 'it wasn't really what I meant, but you are one anyway'

Your conduct has been offensive. You've offended me and many others here with your false accusations. Own that.

[oxmixmudd]

No, it's not you never accused everyone else here of being 'racist', or of 'mouthing the words of demons', or of supporting racism. You are just being a cry-bully, again. You insult, smear and accuse others, and then pretend innocence whne people call you out for what you are.

Yes - those are comments about what certain STATEMENTS are. It is not a direct attack on the person. I make that distinction both in terms of what I say, and in terms of what I call ad hominem towards me. Most of those that go off the rails like you are here mostly can't seem to discern or understand the difference. Here is an example:

ME: Constantly focusing on the character of a victim when the victim is innocent and has been subject to an injustice and is black IS stereotypically racist.

RESPONDER: how dare you call ME racist, you hypocritical, self righteous twit.

This summarizes most of what happens here. I point out something is evidence of a problem , and if that problem is a moral one (or not), the person I point it out to takes it as if it was a direct insult on their entire character, and then takes that interpretation as license to ACTUALLY hurl whatever pejoratives are legal on this web site my direction.

There are two issues here.

1) People say things that have implications they may not realize. This is ESPECIALLY true when it comes to racism and racial stereotypes. Pointing that out potentially helps that person recognize what they are doing and avoid that pitfall. It is not a direct attack on the character of the person. I am guilty though in that sometimes after a few rounds of personal attacks I respond in kind. Not great, and fodder for further accusations, but it is not what I aim for.

2) There is a great hypocrisy in responding that way. Because one of the most common rationalizations by Christians WRT the gay community is to say they are NOT condemning the person when they point out that acting on gay attraction is sin. "Love the sinner, hate the sin" is the common catch phrase capturing the sentiment. And the very same people that go off the rails when I point out what they are doing is actually racist or immoral and call me every derogatory term they can think of mock or criticise without mercy gay people that claim the Christian community spews hate and judgement their direction when they call their sexual attraction sin and when they try to exclude them in various ways because of it. It is rank hypocrisy to do that.

If you (any one of you) can tell a gay person what they are doing is sin and still 'love' them and expect them to recognize that fact, the you need to be able to accept MY rebukes in the same spirit and with the same restraint you want to impost on the gay community.

You're pathetic. At least have the guts to own what you say, instead of trying to slide out of it with a feeble attempt at pretending 'it wasn't really what I meant, but you are one anyway'

There is no pretense to my words. I own what I say, but I will also correct misunderstandings or distortions of what I say. If you misunderstand me, then unless my explanation is simply preposterous, you need to accept it. I don't make up things and I don't lie. Ever. So If I say, "you misunderstood me, this is what I meant ..." then that is the absolute truth about it.

Your conduct has been offensive. You've offended me and many others here with your false accusations. Own that.

I own that my words offended you. But I also am pointing out you cant distinguish between me correcting an action or a phrase from a personal attack on your character. I can't remember ever calling you a hypocrite, or telling you that you were pathetic or anything even resembling that. I have pointed out flaws in your logic, or where your statements compromise some moral principle. have done it in the last two posts you sent my direction.

I tell you what, I'll bold every epithet like the one above when I respond to anyone. And you can do the same (if I use one) when I respond to you or anyone else. And then we can count and see what reality is.

[Sparko]

Yes - those are comments about what certain STATEMENTS are. It is not a direct attack on the person. I make that distinction both in terms of what I say, and in terms of what I call ad hominem. Most of those that go off the rails like you are here mostly can't seem to discern or understand the difference. Here is an example:

ME: Constantly focusing on the character of a victim when the victim is innocent and has been subject to an injustice IS stereotypically racist.

RESPONDER: how dare you call ME racist, you hypocritical, self righteous twit.

This summarizes most of what happens here. I point out something is evidence of a problem , and if that problem is a moral one, the person I point it out to takes it as if it was a direct insult on their entire character, and take it as license to ACTUALLY hurl whatever pejorative are legal on this web site my direction.

There are two issues here.

1) People say things that have implications they may not realize. This is ESPECIALLY true when it comes to racism and racial stereotypes. Pointing that out potentially helps that person recognize what they are doing and avoid that pitfall. It is not a direct attack on the character of the person. I am guilty though in that sometimes after a few rounds of personal attacks I respond in kind. Not great, and fodder for further accusations, but it is not what I aim for.

2) There is a great hypocrisy in responding that way. Because one of the most common rationalizations by Christians WRT the gay community is to say they are NOT condemning the person when they point out that acting on gay attraction is sin. "Love the sinner, hate the sin" is the common catch phrase capturing the sentiment. And the very same people that go off the rails when I point out what they are doing is actually racist or immoral and call me every derogatory term they can think of mock without mercy gay people that claim the Christian community spews hate and judgement their direction when they call their sexual attraction sin and when they try to exclude them in various ways because of it. It is rank hypocrisy.

If you (any one of you) can tell a gay person what they are doing is sin and still 'love' them and expect them to recognize that fact, the you need to be able to accept MY rebukes in the same spirit and with the same restraint you want to impost on the gay community.






There is no pretense to my words. I own what I say, but I will also correct misunderstandings or distortions of what I say. If you misunderstand me, then unless my explanation is simply preposterous, you need to accept it. I don't make up things and I don't lie. Ever. So If I say, "you misunderstood me, this is what I meant ..." then that is the absolute truth about it.



I own that my words offended you. But I also am pointing out you cant distinguish between me correcting an action or a phrase from a personal attack on you.

I don't call you names Max. I haven't say things about you like what is bolded above and can be found in many if not most of the responses to me in this and other threads. Sometimes I can get pushed to the point I'll say something like that, but it is rare. Far rarer than is sent my way.

I tell you what, I'll bold every epithet like the one above when I respond to anyone. And you can do the same (if I use one) when I respond to you or anyone else. And then we can count and see what reality is.

Saying you didn't attack the person just what they said, is just being passive aggressive, Jim.

[oxmixmudd]

A noose isn't automatically a racist symbol. Someone could have just thought it was funny or cool to tie a rope handle into a noose, completely innocently. It was a rope, they needed a handle, and did it as a joke. Then years later a black driver comes to the garage, someone points out the noose and takes it as a message to him personally. FBI investigates, finds out it was there long before Wallace was assigned the garage randomly.

That should be the end of it.

It 'could' be yes in a very theoretical sense. But it is not likely to be. Either way, it is not unreasonable for Bubba Wallace to see it for what it means in the context of the history of racism in this country. You need to own the fact that a noose left in or around the property of a black man means "lynching" and racial hatred. And someone made that noose part of their expression of themselves in that garage, and it is very unlikely with the confederate flag flying constantly in and around that place they did not know exactly what that noose would mean to any black person that saw it.

That is what the legacy of slavery and racism in this country has made it mean. And regardless of how it got there, regardless of the actual intent of whoever tied it, that is what it would mean to any black man coming upon it. The personal nature of that, the random hatred black people still have to endure far too often for them NOT to see it that way is something you and every other person mocking his pain in this thread needs to accept and find some empathy for, like the rest of the Nascar drivers did. These are wounds still wide open Sparko, inflicted by white people, some of them our friends, relatives, or ancestors, especially with the senseless deaths of Arbery and Floyd still being protested.

[oxmixmudd]

Saying you didn't attack the person just what they said, is just being passive aggressive, Jim.

No it's not Sparko. It has implications to the character of the person only if they know what they are doing and are doing it anyway. But regardless, there is a huge difference between saying 'focussing on Arbery's trivial infraction in light of what the McMichaels did is racist' and saying "you are a pathetic racist hypocrite".

It is the difference between telling a person their behavior is wrong or offensive and spitting on a person whose behavior you don't like.