Why?!?
I think you're missing the point really, as far as my attitude goes. Why they do what they do doesn't mean shit to me, and it really shouldn't to anyone else either. Regardless of what you think about their position, kneeling during a song means next to nothing to me, tbh.
It became kneeling later. The initial controversy came when Kaepernick sat on the bench during the anthem instead of standing. I guess he either offered the motivation after the game or was asked why he did it since there is footage of him doing it. It became kneeling due to the reaction to it IMO. I guess kneeling isn't seen as "disrespectful" compared to ignoring the anthem entirely, but doing something other than standing and removing your hat still signifies protest.
Nationalism and patriotism.
How am I missing the point, then?
It doesn't mean you're protesting police brutality, it depends on why you're kneeling. In this case, Kaepernick and other players have said they kneel/knelt for black lives and for equality.
Because you're still making it about why he's doing it. My point is that his reasons for doing it are irrelevant, and he shouldn't even have the opportunity to do so because the National Anthem being played before domestic sporting events serves no real purpose. I mean, this is even more evident in the MLB, when something like half the players aren't even from the USA. I'd much rather have home teams play their state anthem or team song or something.
No, the actual act of kneeling only began after he got attention/scrutiny for sitting on the bench.
And my point is that his reasons for doing it is relevant in terms of people's reactions. They keep somehow thinking it's an attack on the armed forces and the flag when it's not.
Isn't that just confirmation bias? I don't think everyone who has a negative reaction to him sees what he does as an "attack" on the armed forces or the flag. The fact that he kneels now is evidence that that isn't his point. However, that doesn't mean he's on the "right" side of the argument either (if there even is one, but what use is nuance in a debate in this political environment?
--- Double Post Merged, , Original Post Date: ---
Two dead, and twenty-four injured.
I have to ask...someone walks into a hotel and no one thought it was suspicious he was carrying large cases capable of holding multiple rifles? I mean, what does security exist for if it doesn't search or look out for such things?
His name is Stephen Paddock and he was a white male, 63, with no criminal history beyond a citation or any (so far) derogatory information associated to his name/character. He was a trained pilot and hunter, but his brother said he had no marksman or military training. The female person of interest, Marilou Danley (woman in the photo, room mate, currently in the Philippines), is no longer being sought after due to the belief she was not involved. It is being reported the man used her identification to rent the rooms.
The police believe he committed suicide prior to the SWAT team breaching his room with charges.
May I ask where you got the info that he had a machine gun from? According to police reports, he had hand guns and about seven rifles and despite common belief, they are not one and the same thing. Assault rifles are semi and fully automatic weaponry, one or the other or both, with smaller magazine capabilities (20-50 rounds). Machine guns are guns holding large box magazines (50+ rounds) or firing belt ammunition or other mechanisms that allows numerous rounds to be fired without reloading, aka, they are guns that are always fully automatic.
ISIS is claiming? First I heard of that. As far as I have read there are no reports as to his motives quite yet.And ISIS is already taking credit for the attack by saying he was radicalized several months prior. Unsurprising, really.
At this point, I think we should just conclude that ISIS will take credit for basically any large scale violent event no matter where it was, who was involved etc. They are feeling irrelevant every day that passes and feeding them attention by showcasing their pride of the attack and acceptance of it when we have no evidence to conclude it was connected is not good for anyone.
As for the nutbag that did this, this is what I've seen reported as of now:
I have to ask...someone walks into a hotel and no one thought it was suspicious he was carrying large cases capable of holding multiple rifles? I mean, what does security exist for if it doesn't search or look out for such things?
May I ask where you got the info that he had a machine gun from? According to police reports, he had hand guns and about seven rifles and despite common belief, they are not one and the same thing. Assault rifles are semi and fully automatic weaponry, one or the other or both, with smaller magazine capabilities (20-50 rounds). Machine guns are guns holding large box magazines (50+ rounds) or firing belt ammunition or other mechanisms that allows numerous rounds to be fired without reloading, aka, they are guns that are always fully automatic.
And no one blames things on "Mexicans and Muslims" unless there is plausible cause pointing to Islamic terrorism (say an ISIS flag or a FB post talking about it) or the violence was committed by an illegal immigrant with a long criminal history that has crossed over our border more than five times. No one did it [assume] here. Most people, the intelligent ones, waited for information instead of jumping to conclusions (thankfully we didn't have some ignorant Republican on the news pointing to a Muslim though).
Also, what do you mean this kind of thing doesn't happen in Afghanistan? It happens a lot, just with different weapons. Why, just today people were killed in the Helmand province due to erroneous air raids while they were trying to push back against the Taliban in their territory. Violence is so common in Afghanistan that they have to tighten security regularly in cities like Kabul ahead of holy holidays (like the tenth day of Muharram) because of radical Jihadists don't like that some Muslims believe in different versions of their religion peacefully. On August 2nd, nearly thirty people were killed at Jawadya Mosque (located in western Herat) by not only a suicide bomber, but a gunman as well. They wounded nearly seventy people.
Senseless, horrific violence is a common occurrence in Afghanistan and I find it strange that you would even make this claim, but perhaps I am misunderstanding your meaning here...?
They announced it on their propaganda outlet, Amaq. They do this all the time though, so I really doubt there was any connection. And you are right, the police, FBI etc have no motives for this. It is just ISIS trying to get out there because they're being stomped to death by Syria, Philippines etc efforts.
At worst the guy was sort of indoctrinated, same as any other guy that has carried out terrorist attacks in ISIS' name without ever actually being in touch with them.
If he was indoctrinated, I'd be curious to know if he flew to the Philippines. I've heard it is prime recruitment ground there for ISIS right now, due to Marawi etc.
That could easily be half the tourists in vegas... He was literally a tourists in a hotel. It's not reasonable to be suspicious of something as common as luggage there. What you are suggesting is the equivalent to being worried that your cards when playing blackjack are coated with anthrax.
I wouldn't go that far with that comparison. I wouldn't say it isn't unreasonable, in this day and age, to be suspicious of large luggage after so many shootings or bombings. Might be I'm just naturally suspicious due to where I live though..
The unreasonable part would be that security measures in question simply don't work. Just look at airports... They have expensive scanners and security measures and yet they somehow remain laughably ineffective at it. Expecting hotels to have anything like this and be anywhere within the realm of effective at it is nothing short of insane. Of course, part of the issue here is how useless the TSA is however that still wouldn't justify hotels doing this. It would be more of the same idiotic illusion of security without there being any actual increase in security.