Before Cleveland Game, Biggest Anthem Protest Yet

[Ana the Ist]

I'm not misrepresenting anything...I might be taking a slightly facetious approach, but none the less, you implied that him making the personal choice to take a knee instead of participating was "shoving politics in your face".

If there mere sight of someone else not doing something is somehow infringing on you, then your beef is with the cameraman, not him.

I'm all for anyone being able to protest whatever they want...no matter how dumb I think it is...but what exactly are they protesting against? The anthem itself? Police violence? Racism? The U.S. itself?

When it's this vague...it looks like people are just virtue signalling and looking for attention.

 

[TerranceL]

Sorry, not going to break it down into smaller words for you.

Forget smaller words can we start at making it coherent.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

this thread is clear proof that the idea of a post racist America is a joke.

the level of intellectual dishonesty by those complaining about this rather peaceful protest is staggering!

 

[Ana the Ist]

this thread is clear proof that the idea of a post racist America is a joke.

the level of intellectual dishonesty by those complaining about this rather peaceful protest is staggering!

I would argue that the idea of a "post racial" anywhere, anytime, is a joke.

Would you happen to know what they were protesting?

 

[Ana the Ist]

I mean, maybe they stated it clearly and it's just not mentioned in the article...but I didn't see any mention of what these men were protesting. Zero.

They miserably failed the one litmus test of any protest....a clear understanding of what is being protested.

Lacking that...this is virtue signalling. A "hey look at me! I'm protesting stuff!"...so that others can commend their "bravery".

 

[Tallguy88]

No, I was being facetious. I was pointing out they are already political since we play our national anthem before sporting events for some odd reason.

Playing the national anthem isn't political, it's patriotic. All major political parties play the anthem and probably 90% of Americans have no problem with it.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

Would you happen to know what they were protesting?

they're protesting standing for a national anthem for a country that would not seek but rather pervert justice for blacks being murdered by law enforcement.

I don't believe anyone here misunderstood what colin kaepernick was protesting for as he made it clear from the beginning(Yes we are talking about colin kaepernick as these protestors mimicking what he is doing for those purposes). the media isn't asking why they're doing because they already know they're following after kaepernick. it's also possible that they are protesting on bahalf of kaepernick being blackballed from the league over these protests as well.

can you tell me what the Charlottesville rioters were protesting?

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

Playing the national anthem isn't political, it's patriotic.

expressing loyalty to your country is just as much a political statement as expressing disdain for it.

how can anyone think otherwise?

 

[Ana the Ist]

they're protesting standing for a national anthem for a country that would not seek but rather pervert justice for blacks being murdered by law enforcement.

Am I just supposed to take your word for it...or do you have a link or something quoting the players on this?

All I got from the article posted was "there's more work to be done"...which is so vague that maybe they were protesting Ice Cube getting a star on the Hollywood walk of fame.

I don't believe anyone here misunderstood what colin kaepernick was protesting for as he made it clear from the beginning(Yes we are talking about colin kaepernick as these protestors mimicking what he is doing for those purposes).

Well I'll agree that we do know what Colin was protesting...but kneeling during the national anthem isn't exactly synonymous with being against police violence. If it's supposed to be, I don't see the connection.

the media isn't asking why they're doing because they already know they're following after kaepernick. it's also possible that they are protesting on bahalf of kaepernick being blackballed from the league over these protests as well.

Ok...so you don't actually know what they were protesting. I applaud you giving it a guess though.

can you tell me what the Charlottesville rioters were protesting?

Which ones? I believe the first group of idiots were racists using the removal of a Lee statue as an excuse to gather and chant racist things...the second group of idiots apparently thought it was a great idea to go and try to agitate the first group of idiots. The end result was a girl getting run over and killed, and many more injured...which when you think about it wasn't really worth removing a statue nor protesting.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

Ok...so you don't actually know what they were protesting.

I just told you.

they're siding with kaeperneck. for the fact that he has been blackballed from the league for his protests against injustice from law enforcement. there as is also those who agree with what he is protesting and ae standing with him(by kneeling) in similar protest.

please don't respond by telling me I don't know what they were protesting for because I gave you two reasons that are closely related to each other.

the first group of idiots were racists using the removal of a Lee statue as an excuse to gather and chant racist things

yeah, this group, who were the ones who ran over and killed a female protester, stated that the guy who did it was a hero, and expressed that they had no sympathy for the person who was killed. this group that showed up with assault rifles and full military gear with flags representing several neo-Nazi and confederate groups and for what?

tell me what they were there for? how were these people's rights being infringed upon to where they felt the need to show up and demonstrate in the manner they did?

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

A) They did not enslave an entire race. That makes it sound like they cleared out Africa.
B) I didn't realize they were slaves until 1917.
C) Lots of people have been oppressed and marginalized in this country. See Irish, Native American, Italian, Japanese, German, and so on. The only two groups I don't think we've oppressed at some point are the British and the French.
D) Were any of these people oppressed? No. In fact, many are probably richer than a lot of the people they claim are oppressing them.

this could possibly be the most ignorant and misinformed post on CF.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I just told you.

You sure did...doesn't mean you're correct though.

they're siding with kaeperneck. for the fact that he has been blackballed from the league for his protests against injustice from law enforcement. there as is also those who agree with what he is protesting and ae standing with him(by kneeling) in similar protest.

Well....
Seth DeValve says reaction to Browns protest has been mixed; plus Joe Schobert is lighter: Things we learned on Wednesday

According to at least one player...it doesn't even sound like a protest.

""We wanted to take the time to pray for our country. It wasn't something that was meant to be disrespectful to anything or anybody, it was something that was meant to take time out to pray for the status of our country."

So...I'm not entirely sure it was a protest at all. No mention of police violence...or Colin.

Good guesses though.

please don't respond by telling me I don't know what they were protesting for because I gave you two reasons that are closely related to each other.

You don't know though.

yeah, this group, who were the ones who ran over and killed a female protester, stated that the guy who did it was a hero, and expressed that they had no sympathy for the person who was killed. this group that showed up with assault rifles and full military gear with flags representing several neo-Nazi and confederate groups and for what?

I don't know why.you keep asking me...I don't know. I've made a guess off of a couple articles I've read. I wasn't there though...I don't know why they were.

tell me what they were there for? how were these people's rights being infringed upon to where they felt the need to show up and demonstrate in the manner they did?

Well, the right to free speech and assembly are right there in the constitution...and from what I read they were assaulted, pepper sprayed, and had urine thrown on them.

While I fully condemn them and everything they stand for...I fully support their right to assemble and speak without being assaulted.

Of course, that's assuming that they didn't start the fighting themselves...like I said, I have no idea, I wasn't there.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

Well....
Seth DeValve says reaction to Browns protest has been mixed; plus Joe Schobert is lighter: Things we learned on Wednesday

According to at least one player...it doesn't even sound like a protest.

""We wanted to take the time to pray for our country. It wasn't something that was meant to be disrespectful to anything or anybody, it was something that was meant to take time out to pray for the status of our country."

So...I'm not entirely sure it was a protest at all. No mention of police violence...or Colin.

Good guesses though.

actually the player doesn't deny it as being a protest.

Browns tight end Seth DeValve knew the feedback from the protest on Monday night involving more than a dozen Browns, most kneeling and praying during the national anthem, would be mixed. It is, as he pointed out, the same as it ever was.

"There's been lots of mixed opinions on this subject for hundreds of years," DeValve said on Wednesday, "so it's the same today."

they knew what they were doing and why they were doing it. if they really just wanted to pray for the good of the country they could've done that at any other time then when they did it. the thing that's been getting mixed opinions for hundreds of years certainly can't be kneeling during the national anthem or football players being blackballed from the league as that hasn't gone on for 100s of years. racism and injustice has.

what you read here is a player playing politics. the players don't want to lose their jobs so they'll come out and say "we're just praying for the country". basically, they're trying to walk it back. they agree with what kaeperneck is doing and attempted to join him in it, but they also don't want to lose their jobs and when questioned on it, they softened things.

the same political pressure that twisted the arm of Donald trump to finally, after 2 attempts, condemn the Nazi hate groups at Charlottesville by name(even going as far as calling them "thugs"!!!...whoa!).

political pressure leading to political capitulation. cowardice under fire.

I pray or this country too. among praying that this country would turn away from murdering unborn children and various forms of sexual deviancy, I also pray that it would turn from it's racist ways.

Well, the right to free speech and assembly are right there in the constitution...and from what I read they were assaulted, pepper sprayed, and had urine thrown on them.

While I fully condemn them and everything they stand for...I fully support their right to assemble and speak without being assaulted.

Of course, that's assuming that they didn't start the fighting themselves...like I said, I have no idea, I wasn't there.

I didn't ask whether or not they had the right to be there. I asked you why they felt the need to be there and demonstrate in the manner that they did? what rights of this group are being infringed upon to where they felt the need to have this protest?

do you believe any group of people who believe all blacks, Asians, and jewish people should be killed and wiped off the face of the planet have the right to demonstrate and express these views?

 

[Ana the Ist]

actually the player doesn't deny it as being a protest.

He doesn't deny they were trying to contact a UFO either, but that doesn't make it so.

they knew what they were doing and why they were doing it. if they really just wanted to pray for the good of the country they could've done that at any other time then when they did it.

True...or they could've done it during the anthem. Apparently that's a good way to draw attention to what you're doing.

the thing that's been getting mixed opinions for hundreds of years certainly can't be kneeling during the national anthem or football players being blackballed from the league as that hasn't gone on for 100s of years. racism and injustice has.

I'm sorry...I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. Are you now saying it wasn't about Colin and police violence?

what you read here is a player playing politics.

That's certainly possible...but I can only go by their words. I can't read minds.

the players don't want to lose their jobs so they'll come out and say "we're just praying for the country". basically, they're trying to walk it back. they agree with what kaeperneck is doing and attempted to join him in it, but they also don't want to lose their jobs and when questioned on it, they softened things.

How brave of them.

the same political pressure that twisted the arm of Donald trump to finally, after 2 attempts, condemn the Nazi hate groups at Charlottesville by name.

political pressure leading to political capitulation. cowardice under fire.

You'd rather Trump not condemn hate groups?

I didn't ask whether or not they had the right to be there. I asked you why they felt the need to be there and demonstrate in the manner that they did?

Well no offense...but that's a pretty stupid question. How can I possibly know what someone "felt"?

what rights of this group are being infringed upon to where they felt the need to have this protest?

I'm guessing it was about the removal of a statue...but I don't honestly know if that was their true intentions or just an excuse to gather. Again...I don't know. I don't pretend to know either. These are honest answers, and no matter how many times you ask...They're all I have.

do you believe any group of people who believe all blacks, Asians, and jewish people should be killed and wiped off the face of the planet have the right to demonstrate and express these views?

Yeah...absolutely...don't you?

Not only do I think they have the right, I think it's rather important that they have this right. Allow me to explain....

You see, it's important that we allow everyone to express themselves, no matter how unpopular....no matter how distasteful we might find it....and we should allow this freely. You see, a good many years ago a man named Frederick Douglass espoused some very unpopular views for his time...what would our nation be if we silenced him at every attempt? What would our nation be if every time MLK spoke, a group of people who disagreed showed up, beat him up, and threw urine on him?

Freedom of speech, freedom of assembly are quite possibly the two most important rights we have friend...I'd say even more so than freedom of press or religion or bearing arms. You need not look far to see nations that don't allow such freedoms.

So don't go trampling on them lightly...simply because you disagree with those speaking.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

He doesn't deny they were trying to contact a UFO either, but that doesn't make it so.

because UFOs are an issue we've had mixed opinions on for 100s of years and they specifically said they were praying for the country and not trying to contact aliens.

True...or they could've done it during the anthem. Apparently that's a good way to draw attention to what you're doing.

that's what protests are about, drawing attention to an issue.

I'm sorry...I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. Are you now saying it wasn't about Colin and police violence?

police violence against black people absolutely involves racism and injustice which have been issues in this country for 100s of years.

I can't read minds.

neither can I, but I can analyze actions and recognize patterns.

How brave of them.

cowardice under fire.

You'd rather Trump not condemn hate groups?

i'd rather he do it because he actually believes that what went on there was wrong and needed to be called for what it was rather than doing something because of political arm twisting which at best is disingenuous.

Well no offense...but that's a pretty stupid question. How can I possibly know what someone "felt"?

which is why didn't ask you that question and instead asked you what their motivation was for doing what they did.

You see, a good many years ago a man named Frederick Douglass espoused some very unpopular views for his time...what would our nation be if we silenced him at every attempt? What would our nation be if every time MLK spoke, a group of people who disagreed showed up, beat him up, and threw urine on him?

ok, I've been trolled, you got me.


feel free to have the last word. I'm outa here.

 

[Ana the Ist]

because UFOs are an issue we've had mixed opinions on for 100s of years and they specifically said they were praying for the country and not trying to contact aliens.

Oh...so you are taking them at their word?

that's what protests are about, drawing attention to an issue.

Exactly...they're pointless if you're not willing to state the issue...which apparently they didn't.

police violence against black people absolutely involves racism and injustice which have been issues in this country for 100s of years.

I suppose that's a legitimate point if police violence and injustice only happened to black people. As it stands...it happens to everyone.

neither can I, but I can analyze actions and recognize patterns.

You can also make guesses. Since the brain is prone to seeing patterns where they don't exist...I wouldn't put too much faith in patterns.

cowardice under fire.

Call it what you like.

i'd rather he do it because he actually believes that what went on there was wrong and needed to be called for what it was rather than doing something because of political arm twisting which at best is disingenuous.

If you spend the rest of your life hoping for a politician to tell you what he really believes...you'll always be disappointed.

which is why didn't ask you that question and instead asked you what their motivation was for doing what they did.

You can take either of my previous answers to this question and place them here...my answer hasn't changed.

What are you hoping I'll say?

ok, I've been trolled, you got me.


feel free to have the last word. I'm outa here.

I'm guessing you're new here, so I'm not going to report you for calling me a troll. Instead, I'll simply say that I genuinely believe everything I said...and I would stand for their right to speak or assemble not because I agree with them...just the opposite.

For years we watched the Westboro Baptist church spew nothing but hatred for homosexuality...and the result? They're now allowed to marry. I genuinely believe it's because more and more people were confronted with the ugliness of such hatred and the pain it must cause their fellow man.

Really, if you know any of our nation's history, you'd see that many times the popular opinion was stupid and wrong. Did you know that during the early years of WW2 the popular opinion was that it was Europe's problem and we shouldn't get involved in fighting nazis?

And so I would tell you, friend, if the popular opinion today is that we should assault, throw urine, or otherwise impede anyone's ability to speak freely or assemble peacefully...no matter how unpopular their views are....then that popular opinion is indeed wrong.

 

[Nithavela]

this thread is clear proof that the idea of a post racist America is a joke.

the level of intellectual dishonesty by those complaining about this rather peaceful protest is staggering!

 

[Nithavela]

Playing the national anthem isn't political, it's patriotic. All major political parties play the anthem and probably 90% of Americans have no problem with it.

Just because all major parties agree to something doesn't make it non-political. Neither does only a minority disagreeing with it.

 

[Nithavela]

I'm guessing you're new here, so I'm not going to report you for calling me a troll.

It's not against the rule to say that someone is trolling or has trolled. Only directly saying that someone is a troll is against the rules because that doesn't describe a single behaviour but a person as a whole.

 

[Ana the Ist]

It's not against the rule to say that someone is trolling or has trolled. Only directly saying that someone is a troll is against the rules because that doesn't describe a single behaviour but a person as a whole.

Oh did the rules change?