Also in the news

[Alf Bentley]

13 minutes ago, Dr The Singh said:

How, that graph has purposely been created to make a point, particular to the current situation, this is what's called propaganda, I could do exactly the same and creat the same graph and do it for Punjabi Sikhs instead of Black Americans

 

You seemed to have a problem with the stats they'd quoted for different races in the USA vis-à-vis the overall US rate - the overall figure being lower than the figure for blacks. I was just explaining why I found that perfectly clear.

 

Yes, the graph has been created to make a point. There's nothing wrong with that, is there, provided that the figures used are accurate?

I take your point that the figure for India looks surprisingly low, but most of the other figures look pretty accurate (US much higher than Europe, even higher figures for parts of Latin America, Caribbean and Africa).

They've quoted credible sources for anyone to check.

 

Yes, you could make a graph showing Punjabi Sikhs instead - perhaps with Hindus, Muslims & others in India or with other nations. I wouldn't see anything wrong with that, so long as you were using accurate data. 

[Dr The Singh]

9 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

You seemed to have a problem with the stats they'd quoted for different races in the USA vis-à-vis the overall US rate - the overall figure being lower than the figure for blacks. I was just explaining why I found that perfectly clear.

 

Yes, the graph has been created to make a point. There's nothing wrong with that, is there, provided that the figures used are accurate?

I take your point that the figure for India looks surprisingly low, but most of the other figures look pretty accurate (US much higher than Europe, even higher figures for parts of Latin America, Caribbean and Africa).

They've quoted credible sources for anyone to check.

 

Yes, you could make a graph showing Punjabi Sikhs instead - perhaps with Hindus, Muslims & others in India or with other nations. I wouldn't see anything wrong with that, so long as you were using accurate data. 

I don't have a problem, just cus you find it's ok to manipulate data on a graph for propaganda, it doesn't mean I should.  This is my opinion, just cus you disagree, you think I have a problem.

 

It's just wrong to take something that is done on a country basis and then just on top add some stat that is totally different? Someone thought we do country stats, so, USA stat, India stat, Germany Stat....urm let's add Black Americans,   I didn't realise Black American was a country?????

 

No one is denying the fact of black oppression, but please let's not lose credibility, we don't need to do this shit. It just cheapens the whole thing for me.

 

The problem I have is falsehood of use info.  All across the globe in all spectrums people, politicians, governments, activist use data for there own means, and use data to validate there arguement.  Just look at the covid situation and how data is being used, and the amount of shit that's being constructed.

 

 

[the fox]

.

Edited 4 June 2020 by the fox

[urban.spaceman]

 

[Alf Bentley]

58 minutes ago, Dr The Singh said:

I don't have a problem, just cus you find it's ok to manipulate data on a graph for propaganda, it doesn't mean I should.  This is my opinion, just cus you disagree, you think I have a problem.

 

It's just wrong to take something that is done on a country basis and then just on top add some stat that is totally different? Someone thought we do country stats, so, USA stat, India stat, Germany Stat....urm let's add Black Americans,   I didn't realise Black American was a country?????

 

No one is denying the fact of black oppression, but please let's not lose credibility, we don't need to do this shit. It just cheapens the whole thing for me.

 

The problem I have is falsehood of use info.  All across the globe in all spectrums people, politicians, governments, activist use data for there own means, and use data to validate there arguement.  Just look at the covid situation and how data is being used, and the amount of shit that's being constructed.

 

 

Your comment below suggested you had "a problem with the stats they'd quoted for different races in the USA vis-à-vis the overall US rate", which is what I said.....meaning you didn't like what they'd done with the stats. 

I didn't just say you "have a problem", which would have been rude. I think it's dishonest of you to use a partial quote to imply that I was being offensive when I wasn't.

 

The fact that you asked "how in hell is US overall lower than Black Americans?" also suggests you initially didn't understand the graph.

US overall is lower because it's a rate per 10 million despite there obviously being more millions in the US overall than there are Black Americans.

 

5 hours ago, Dr The Singh said:

I think you really need to look at that graph, how in the hell is US overall lower then Black Americans?  What sort of rubbish is that 

 

 

We'll have to agree to disagree. You're entitled to your opinion, but I don't see it as manipulation or losing credibility to compare data for 3 different races with the same data for the US overall and for other countries.

 

Likewise, I'd see nothing wrong with taking data for Covid19 infection rates in different countries and comparing the rates in London and the NE - or taking strike rates for PL clubs and comparing Vardy's strike rate.

Whoever produced the graph was clear about the points they were making and used data to support their arguments. So long as the data was accurate and comparable, that's just presenting evidence.

 

I do agree that there's a massive problem with data being abused by politicians and activists of every stripe - and that annoys me, too. But this was a fair use of data to show that (a) US police killings are very high overall compared to most developed nations; (b) US police killings in ratio to population size are very different for different races; (c) Killings of black Americans are at a rate similar to much less developed, more chaotic countries like Iraq, Burkina Faso and Honduras.

 

 

[Carl the Llama]

5 hours ago, Dr The Singh said:

I think you really need to look at that graph, how in the hell is US overall lower then Black Americans?  What sort of rubbish is that 

Because that's how per capita stats work.  If there are 75 white people and 25 black people in a room and the police walk in and kill 6 white people and 5 black people, 11 people total.  That's 11 people of either race killed for every 100 people in the room, 8 white people killed for every 100 white people in the room, and 20 black people killed for every 100 black people in the room.

[urban.spaceman]

 

[RonnieTodger]

Mark Lawrenson is bald and it’s freaked me out big time. Looks like One Foot in the Grave out of I don’t believe it 

[LCFCbwoi]

7 hours ago, TamworthFoxes said:

I would personally think a large scale gathering of people to protest (justified or not), should be a significant worry at this time!

Imagine the anger and outcry if 5,000 Liverpool supporters gather at Anfield when they win the league. Football fans like ourselves will be vilified and ridiculed for exactly what the black lives matter protesters did. I have seen nothing in the way of condemnation for this protest gathering from any media outlet? Why?

Kyle Walker (whatever you think of him) was hammered in the press for lock down breaches, Harry Styles is some kind of hero for standing with thousands in London on the recent protest. 

I’m honestly not saying I disagree you with on the potential harm these protests could have on the spread of covid-19, they do potentially have major risks however, the easing of lockdown with the ‘taboo’ of socialising going down since the restrictions have began to be lifted haven’t helped in people taking the risks that we’re seeing now. I think people not sticking too restrictions over the past 3 weeks has been a bit of a joke tbh

[Danno]

1 hour ago, RonnieTodger said:

Mark Lawrenson is bald and it’s freaked me out big time. Looks like One Foot in the Grave out of I don’t believe it 

He’s just recovered from cancer mate.

 

actually that doesn’t seem the reason why he looks bald, but yeah he’s barely recognisable

Edited 4 June 2020 by DanNDH88

[leicsmac]

7 hours ago, Gordon the Great said:

The atomic bombing of Japan was a crime?..........after 6 years of war when the Japanese had murdered, starved raped  and tortured thousands of people of various nationalities all over Asia!.My Dad was on his way to take part in the Invasion of Japan when the bombs were dropped, He was 18 years old and the estimated casualties for a physical Invasion was over 4 million......so my Dad was fairly happy, to put it mildly when the Japanese surrendered.

He spent the next 2 years helping to try to keep allied prisoners from the Burma railway alive so they were able to go home looking something like Human beings.

He was the gentlest  bloke you could ever meet but he would not have anything Japanese in the house, television, radio, car etc.

When you have spent time watching people die and having to bury them after months of trying to keep them alive and forming the inevitable emotional attachment with them you may find your comment on this particular aspect of your post somewhat offensive........sorry for the rant but it needed to be said.

This is probably the wrong place for this, but...

 

...the way the Imperial Japanese forces behaved during WWII was barbarous, no two ways about it. They did practically everything you said and more besides.

 

That being said, it is also true that a great many of the ones who committed these atrocities then got away scot-free with it because the Allies decided it would either be politically expedient or that they needed the scientific information that they had, and Allied bombers had subjected a lot of Japanese civilians to the most grotesque of deaths through concentrated firebombing (like with Operation Meetinghouse). Even Curtis LeMay, the architect thereof, said that is the US had lost the war he fully expected to be tried as a war criminal - but winners never are.

 

And we'll never really know if it would have been possible to starve the Japanese Home Islands into submission rather than invading or subjecting them to nuclear hellfire (both of which would be bloodbaths) and if it would have cost less Allied lives to do so, but I guess my point is that two wrongs don't necessarily make a right and the cruelty and lack of thought for human life and suffering wasn't altogether uni-directional.

Edited 5 June 2020 by leicsmac

[foxile5]

2 hours ago, RonnieTodger said:

Mark Lawrenson is bald and it’s freaked me out big time. Looks like One Foot in the Grave out of I don’t believe it 

Lawro becoming the dinosaur he's always harboured inside. 

 

Deffo wouldn't his daughter, just for the record. 

[foxile5]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

This is probably the wrong place for this, but...

 

...the way the Imperial Japanese forces behaved during WWII was barbarous, no two ways about it. They did practically everything you said and more besides.

 

That being said, it is also true that a great many of the ones who committed these atrocities then got away scot-free with it because the Allies decided it would either be politically expedient or that they needed the scientific information that they had, and Allied bombers had subjected a lot of Japanese civilians to the most grotesque of deaths through concentrated firebombing (like with Operation Meetinghouse). Even Curtis LeMay, the architect thereof, said that is the US had lost the war he fully expected to be tried as a war criminal - but winners never are.

 

And we'll never really know if it would have been possible to starve the Japanese Home Islands into submission rather than invading or subjecting them to nuclear hellfire (both of which would be bloodbaths) and if it would have cost less Allied lives to do so, but I guess my point is that two wrongs don't necessarily make a right and the cruelty wasn't altogether uni-directional.

The way the Japanese treated the Koreans over several conflicts was terrible. The use of the 'comfort women' was barbaric. 

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, foxile5 said:

The way the Japanese treated the Koreans over several conflicts was terrible. The use of the 'comfort women' was barbaric. 

It was. Right from 1910 when the Japanese dropped any pretense of letting Koreans have control of their own country after one of their politicians was assassinated by a Korean nationalist, they pretty much seeked to eradicate Korean culture and replace it with their own. Totally Orwellian.

 

I do not intend to defend their regime because it is quite simply indefensible, but I was making the point that subjecting them to the horror of nuclear firestorm, while good for the purposes of vengeance, wasn't exactly morally square either.

[foxile5]

4 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

It was. Right from 1910 when the Japanese dropped any pretense of letting Koreans have control of their own country after one of their politicians was assassinated by a Korean nationalist, they pretty much seeked to eradicate Korean culture and replace it with their own. Totally Orwellian.

 

I do not intend to defend their regime because it is quite simply indefensible, but I was making the point that subjecting them to the horror of nuclear firestorm, while good for the purposes of vengeance, wasn't exactly morally square either.

It's telling there's so many cultural gaps in Korean society that they're filling with American traits. 

 

Bondaeggi is one of the sorta sad results of the conflict enforced famine that they cling to isn't it? Something unique they cling to that really isn't that brilliant. 

[leicsmac]

7 minutes ago, foxile5 said:

It's telling there's so many cultural gaps in Korean society that they're filling with American traits. 

 

Bondaeggi is one of the sorta sad results of the conflict enforced famine that they cling to isn't it? Something unique they cling to that really isn't that brilliant. 

Hmmm...one might say that, but then I would say a lot of it might also be down to the American cultural influence that is felt everywhere, rather than just affecting Korea specifically. They are fiercely protective of what of the cultural legacy remains, after all ("Hallyu Wave" and all that).

 

Beondegi is one of those famine legacy foods, yeah - there are others too. However, right now I think there's something of a cultural paradigm shift in Korean society going on - the generation between the ages of 20 and 30 have grown up in a society where democracy has always been a thing (mostly) and famine has never been an issue, and now they're looking at these cultural stereotypes like the famine-enforced food and thinking "why do we keep this around?" Of course, they will very much look to hold onto many parts of their cultural legacy ("of course you can eat it if you want to, it's just not going to be 'officially' culturally important"), but as this generation gets a bit older and gets to assume proper power over here there will be some big changes in what is "done" and "acceptable" in Korean society and what isn't, I reckon.

 

Honestly, there are some faults there, but I largely admire the Korean people - for all people think that they are follow-the-leader stick-in-the-muds (and they can be at times), they also have the capacity to go against the grain and change things rapidly and successfully if the will is there.

[foxile5]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Hmmm...one might say that, but then I would say a lot of it might also be down to the American cultural influence that is felt everywhere, rather than just affecting Korea specifically. They are fiercely protective of what of the cultural legacy remains, after all ("Hallyu Wave" and all that).

 

Beondegi is one of those famine legacy foods, yeah - there are others too. However, right now I think there's something of a cultural paradigm shift in Korean society going on - the generation between the ages of 20 and 30 have grown up in a society where democracy has always been a thing (mostly) and famine has never been an issue, and now they're looking at these cultural stereotypes like the famine-enforced food and thinking "why do we keep this around?" Of course, they will very much look to hold onto many parts of their cultural legacy ("of course you can eat it if you want to, it's just not going to be 'officially' culturally important"), but as this generation gets a bit older and gets to assume proper power over here there will be some big changes in what is "done" and "acceptable" in Korean society and what isn't, I reckon.

 

Honestly, there are some faults there, but I largely admire the Korean people - for all people think that they are follow-the-leader stick-in-the-muds (and they can be at times), they also have the capacity to go against the grain and change things rapidly and successfully if the will is there.

Spot on. 

 

I just hope cultural progress doesn't become overly reliant on us influence. 

 

They need to address the genuflection towards age and status. These things are a little redundant nowadays. 

[leicsmac]

 

Bloody hell.

 

A brief warning: this is a little disturbing to watch so be advised.

[Gordon the Great]

7 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

 

Hope that`s on a regular bus route.

[Nuneatonfox in Manchester]

2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

 

Bloody hell.

 

A brief warning: this is a little disturbing to watch so be advised.

Funny that you’re sharing this and not the viral video of 4 BLM guys beating an elderly woman with a huge plank of wood.

 

Or the shop owner in Dallas who was left twitching on the floor after a 20 guy beat down.

To those defending them, at what point do the riots become unacceptable?

 

[Innovindil]

45 minutes ago, Nuneatonfox in Manchester said:

Funny that you’re sharing this and not the viral video of 4 BLM guys beating an elderly woman with a huge plank of wood.

 

Or the shop owner in Dallas who was left twitching on the floor after a 20 guy beat down.

To those defending them, at what point do the riots become unacceptable?

 

The riots have always been unacceptable. There's plenty of videos of peaceful protestors stopping idiots around. 

 

Right now there's people that think all police are bad and people that think all protestors are violent. Neither is true and I'm genuinely not sure what making it into a competition even accomplishes. 

[StanSP]

4 hours ago, leicsmac said:

 

Bloody hell.

 

A brief warning: this is a little disturbing to watch so be advised.

It's very disturbing and saddening to see them just walk past him. It displays the mindset they have. Not a care in the world of any of these cops to 'protect and serve'. Okay you pushed him cos he was in your way (inexcusable as well given he's clearly harmless). But he's fallen, bleeding out of his ear, and you walk past him. How cold do you have to be?!

 

'we have EMT on the scene' oh that's alright then! We'll just walk past him and not give him care until arrive! 

 

[StanSP]

1 hour ago, Nuneatonfox in Manchester said:

Funny that you’re sharing this and not the viral video of 4 BLM guys beating an elderly woman with a huge plank of wood.

 

Or the shop owner in Dallas who was left twitching on the floor after a 20 guy beat down.

To those defending them, at what point do the riots become unacceptable?

 

There's a difference between rioting and protesting. Majority have done it right. Peacefully, marching across streets in their thousands without causing damage. Yet they've still been met with rubber bullets and tear gas and pepper spray. Guess that's fine in your eyes by the sounds of it. 

 

Surprised you've not shared the video of a lady getting pushed down by police causing her to have seizures. Surprised you've not shared the video of police in their SUVs driving round nearly running protestors over. Surprised you've not shared the video of police kneeling on a guys neck and hammering him in the ribs with a knee while cuffed and on the floor. Surprised you've not shared the video of a black person, with hands in the air, protesting with words (not abusively) and getting arrested just for speaking out. 

 

While you defend them, at what point does the police brutality on innocent people become unacceptable? 

[leicsmac]

2 hours ago, Nuneatonfox in Manchester said:

Funny that you’re sharing this and not the viral video of 4 BLM guys beating an elderly woman with a huge plank of wood.

 

Or the shop owner in Dallas who was left twitching on the floor after a 20 guy beat down.

To those defending them, at what point do the riots become unacceptable?

 

A fair point, and the answer is simple in my eyes.

 

This and the incidents you mention, while both noteworthy, are different because it is much, much more likely that the protesters will face accountability for their actions of unjustified violence than the police. And that, fundamentally, is the entire reason why these protests began in the first place and that is what desperately needs to be addressed. And, lest we forget, raising the issue peacefully resulted in only silence, inaction and sometimes outright mockery.

 

And to answer the last question...the mathematical answer would be when the cost in suffering and death surpasses that of the cost of doing nothing at all and allowing systemic and institutionalised police malpractice to continue. IMO, there's a way to go on that particular ledger yet.

Edited 5 June 2020 by leicsmac

[davieG]

Vaccine summit exceeds target to raise almost £7bn

GES

Almost £7bn has been raised to immunise 300 million children at a virtual global vaccine summit hosted by the UK.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson said up to eight million lives would be saved as a result of the funds pledged at the Gavi vaccine summit on Thursday.

The money will help immunise children against diseases like polio, diphtheria and measles over five years.

Mr Johnson said the triumph of humanity over disease was the "greatest shared endeavour of our lifetimes".

The summit raised funds for Gavi, a global alliance of public and private sector organisations promoting vaccination among the world's poorest communities.

Pledges by more than 50 countries and individuals like billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates saw the total surpass an initial target of $7.4bn (almost £6bn).

Mr Gates donated $1.6bn (£1.3bn) from his foundation and Mr Johnson pledged £1.65bn over the next five years, making the UK the organisation's biggest donor.

• Stalled vaccine schemes 'put young lives at risk'

The summit comes as the world continues to struggle to get to grips with the coronavirus pandemic.

Mr Johnson also used the conference to urge world leaders to renew their "collective resolve" to find a Covid-19 vaccine.

"Just as we have great military alliances like Nato... where countries collaborate on building their collective military defence, so we now need that same spirit of collaboration and collective defence against the common enemy of disease," he said.

"It will require a new international effort to co-operate on the surveillance and the sharing of information - data is king - that can underpin a global alert system, so we can rapidly identify any future outbreak. And it will mean a radical scaling-up of our global capacity to respond."

International Development Secretary Anne-Marie Trevelyan later said she believed the UK was capable of delivering a coronavirus vaccine to those who need it "at speed" when one becomes available.