Samson slew the Philistines with the jawbone of an ass.
Roger is going to slab himself with the same weapin.
9 Likes
Considering this is the gang that couldnât shoot straight it is definitely crosshairs.
2 Likes
I was not being entirely practical or serious. It was a comment to sum up some feelings about how these fucks keep fucking with our lives not just by their odious bigotry being made visible, tangible and substantial in our societies, but by their everyday acts of appropriating otherwise innocent trivial things to have some perverted meaning. They taint everything they touch and it is permanently tainted.
2 Likes
It was just the symbol for s Phillips head screw.
Roger is going to get a lot of time to indulge his hardware fetish in prison shop class.
9 Likes
Stone is going to rot in prison. The judge is going to ride him straight down. Repeat after me, judge or your honor.
There are definitely groups that work to deradicalize extremists and help them adjust to post-hate-group society. But itâs an arduous, personal process that has to help an individual. Basically itâs about helping people who want help. I donât know what you do when itâs 20% of your country.
8 Likes
Are we doing this every day now?
One of two of the most popular shoe coloured shoes has eyes, nose and a mouth - looks a bit like blackface!
Incidental cross/circle logo-Looks a bit like cross-hairs of a telescopic site!
It also looks like a Hot Cross Bun is he INVITING THE JUDGE TO SPEND EASTER WITH HIM!!!
Wasnât the graphic lifted from some white supremacist site?
Roger Stone isnât even defending this graphic.
7 Likes
You may have a general point but in this case âincidentalâ doesnât really work.
Someone created the image. Itâs not like the judge just happened to stand in front of a background including that circle thing.
So someone decided to whack her image in front of that segment of whatever the background is.
Thatâs a choice. Not incidental.
11 Likes
It would be fantastic if this gang of miscreants and morons would take a couple of days off instead of continuing to do incredibly awful things again and again and again, but that does not appear to be in the cards.
Or were you insinuating that noticing the things these people are doing is the real problem?
7 Likes
Iâm saying that making the pop-Rorschach links between what something can be said to resemble and then extrapolating that to what it is and accepting that as a truth is the problem.
To take the two examples:
The Katy Perry shoes came in black and pink because these are popular shoe colours. The features were not characatured stereotypes unless Al Jolson painted a gold diamond on his nose in The Jazz singer and the shoes did not behave as blackface where the perpetrator knows that they are taking on a characature of a black person but are too ignorant to care, posssibly having affection for their creation and forgetting what a gross and insulting exageration it is. Someone put a face on some shoes.
We go from that to blog entries that forget to include the pink shoe for context to this is DEFINITELY blackface to where is Katy Perryâs apology because we left any question of whether it is blackface or not behid two shaky âI reckonsâ ago?
This is more complicated in that the composite image that the clowns on that blog created slaps a cut-out photo onto their stock background which has a logo on that may or may not be a cross hair (we have corruption in our sites? who knows)/race hate symbol/both.
Roger Stone then shows his lack of self-preservation by slapping the whole image on twitter then takes it down when people imagine a cross-hair that is missing the judge when he should be taking it down because heâs in BIG MASSIVE TROUBLE and she is the last person he should irritate.
And why does it matter? Surely anything bad that befalls him is good? No?
Except we call them out every time they treat reality as only a suggestion so we canât base our objections to them on internet tealeaf readings while getting precious about the truth. Someoone has to ground themselves in some semblance of common sense, otherwise itâs going to get exhausting aping conservatives who are happy to pretend to agree with the most horrific distortions of the truth in order to move their broader agenda on.
So you donât even disagree with the actual supposition taking place.
4 Likes
If these kinds of discussions are so unimportant then why do people keep showing up to tone troll them? It doesnât silence them, only makes sure the same whinge gets represented over and over and over. Also, the comparison between the shoes and this is pretty flimsy.
10 Likes
I wish youâd helped Roger Stone draft his apology.
1 Like
| It seemed wrong | It didnât seem wrong | |
|---|---|---|
| It was wrong | Correct | False negative |
| It was not wrong | False position | Correct |
The debate about whether weâve all hit a false positive or whether youâve hit a false negative here hinges on whether what Stone did was wrong in reality. Stone was forced by their lawyers to apologize to the court. Iâm pretty sure youâve picked a bad example to complain about peopleâs miscalibrated wrongness sensors.
My problem here is that by comparing this to the Katy Perry shoes you are showing that you are the one not checking in with reality. If you feel Katy Perry has been wronged regarding shoes, that doesnât mean Roger Stone is being wronged here. The two cases are linked only by a reality-agnostic philosophical principle.
11 Likes
Oopsie!
7 Likes
Take a bonus upvote, you wonderful person!
Yes I do.
The supposition is that Roger stone deliberately posted a picture of the judge and that he chose a picture with cross-hairs very close to her head in a threatening gesture to the judge.
I would suggest and this is bourne out by the wording of Stoneâs apology (I know, I know, but itâs a logical fallacy to assume that a liar always lies) that he posted some crappy image from some shitty website and didnât even notice that the logo looked a bit like cross hairs/Trivial Persuit Cheese/a hot cross bun etc.
He should face consequences for posting the picture as an act of gross stupidity and legal baiting but I canât pretend that the choice of image or the interpretation of the logo as cross-hairs was implicit in his act of stupidity which is the supposition of this blog post.
Youâre honestly arguing that he got the picture from a white supremacist site that had a crosshairs logo but that logo could actually have been about the Naziâs love of hot cross buns?
This is a joke, right?
7 Likes
Yeah, I really donât see any reason to give Stone the benefit of a doubt here.
