Stackhouse Responds To Article About Raptors Locking Arms During The Anthem

[refshateRaps]

It's an extremely complicated issue and I'm disappointed that it's been boiled down to cops vs African-Americans. What's happening in the States between the police and minorities are simply a symptom of a larger problem that includes class divide, gang violence, drugs, lack of infrastructure, a lack of schools, teachers and jobs, etc.

It's hard to picture but, if you're from Toronto, Jane/Finch, Regent Park, etc are Disneyland compared to parts of Chicago, Detroit, LA.

It's such a systemic, deep rooted problem in American society, I don't think there is a solution.

This man gets it. Although I believe there is a solution.

The people need to take back the Governments from the Corporate corruption that exploded and give the power back to the people. For better and some worse decision atleast it wont be absolute greed running the Countries any further

[Double Helix]

It's an extremely complicated issue and I'm disappointed that it's been boiled down to cops vs African-Americans. What's happening in the States between the police and minorities are simply a symptom of a larger problem that includes class divide, gang violence, drugs, lack of infrastructure, a lack of schools, teachers and jobs, etc.

It's hard to picture but, if you're from Toronto, Jane/Finch, Regent Park, etc are Disneyland compared to parts of Chicago, Detroit, LA.

It's such a systemic, deep rooted problem in American society, I don't think there is a solution.

This man gets it. Although I believe there is a solution.

The people need to take back the Governments from the Corporate corruption that exploded and give the power back to the people. For better and some worse decision atleast it wont be absolute greed running the Countries any further

I agree that as much money and lobbying and super pacs which can be removed from influence will benefit the electoral process here and south of the border. Especially south of the border. Elections should be decided more around ideas on offer and the ability of each candidate to execute those ideas realistically and less about advertising or attacks. Having said that, I think it's dangerous when people assume that because a founder of Facebook, or the owner of the Mavs, or Leonardo DeCaprio all put money behind a candidate to oppose another... that it's because all these rich people believe they're going to get some kind of kick back later. It really is always a battle between left and right decided by centrists and there's plenty of money on both sides who really don't like what the other side stands for and are willing to put their time or money into ensuring the other side loses.

It's so hilarious to me that Trump has somehow cast himself as an underdog Everyman for the working class and that people are buying it up down there. His team sought out the financial support of prominent Republican backers just the same as the rest. It's just that those Wall Street and corporate backers didn't want to be associated with his brand on this new shift to the white supremacist anti-feminist wing of the Republican Party and decided to focus on other campaigns instead. He still has the NRA on his side. So, after failing to secure the truly big money he somehow pitched himself as the outsider and not just any outsider... he pitched himself as a Bernie Sanders-like man of the people outsider. The irony of course is that Trump is no outsider to politics at all. He's contemplated runs for decades. He's been on both sides of the fence, trying to find his opening and wedge issue to get him there. He found his with anti free trade resentment, white male resentment and envy over the sexism and racism that many white dudes have over what their great grandfathers got away with. Throw in a huge dose of anti-immigrant fear and he had 3 wedge issues to run on.

So, now here's this guy passing himself off as a man of the working class who literally outsourced jobs, bought foreign goods for his buildings, stiffed small businesses and laborers with massive bills who couldn't afford to sue him, who didn't pay tax while the workers voting for him did, who took advantage of every corporate loophole he could... who has concerning foreign ties to Russia and the mafia... who literally sleeps with gold around him at night AND THIS GUY HAS SOLD HIMSELF AS AN EVERYMAN by putting on a red trucker cap. I know they're gullible but he truly is a masterful sales man/confidence man because it's mind-blowing how he's been able to pitch himself not only to the working class people as one of them but also to devout (no divorce) Christians for the same reason. I saw a great tweet the other day that asked what Republicans would have said if Obama had walked out on stage for his convention with 5 kids from 3 different, increasingly younger wives from different countries. I think we all know how that would have been packaged to America's religious right.

I understand populism. I saw the rise of Rob Ford first hand. I understand why some seem to desperately crave the idea of an everyday average less-polished person in charge but at the same time I have to ask why. What is it about that which seems so appealing? What kind of ego does one have to think that they can tackle all of these important issues without listening to experts? This whole notion of trying to cast intellectuals in a negative light or "elitists" is absurd when one really stops to think about it. I want the person that's in charge of Finance to be somebody who is an expert in that area. Not my buddy. I want the person that's in charge of defense to be somebody who is an expert on the military. Not somebody who watches cable news and thinks that's all they need to know. Life is short and when people have devoted their lives to certain areas of study or research and are citing peer-reviewed research for why our governments should be trying certain approaches I think they're worth listening to MORE than I do my uncle who has read a couple articles. Populist everyperson politicians tend to trade research, facts and pro-active thinking for conspiracies, emotion and knee-jerk, reactive quick fixes. They rally against the only groups fact-checking and the media and create echo chambers where anyone who questions anything is the enemy. They throw the baby (what is working) out with the dirty bathwater (what needs work). Brexit is a prime example of this right now and the British Pound hitting a 30 year low this week is in some ways the first solid example of it.

I don't need to relate to the person in charge. I don't need to like them. I just want them to have ideas that make sense to me, that I know have been peer-reviewed by other experts, that they've debated other alternatives honestly, that they've thought out long-term ramifications, that their plans have been costed by economic experts, and that the President or Prime Minister has the political conviction to push forth most of ideas that intrigued me about them in the first place.





Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[DonMega]

Seriously?
You think racism and tensions between police and (black) citizens is strictly a US problem, so only sporting events that happen in the US should be subject to protests or demonstrations? You think there have been no shootings or racially-inclined misconduct between police officers and black citizens in Toronto?

Seriously?

Nevemind that the athletes themselves are largely American, and that we are talking about an American sports league...

This is ignorance.

You seem biased, you know more white people get killed by cops every year than black people right? Some how no one gives a **** about that. Just 3 months ago a teen got gunned down by a police officer and no one is talking about it, why? because he's white.
http://nypost.com/2016/07/14/body-cam-video-shows-cop-fatally-shooting-unarmed-teen/
He was unarmed. The black fatalities are usually justified, they have a gun, they fight with cops or are criminals. Then you have blm who come in and use the opportunity to start looting / burning towns down. 90% of Police black shootings are justified because they are usually a threat.
The worst was when BLM murdered those 5 white cops and then they were giving excuses that he had military mental issues etc. But what they didn't mention was that he was kicked out of the military for raping a girl.
Seriously dude you sound racist.

If your immediate position is that black people deserve to be killed, and that they are inherently criminals, you need to stop arguing because your confirmation bias has clouded your perception of reality.

Where did I say that you idiot, I said these protests are one sided. No one is talking about all the white people that constantly get killed by cops. Mostly all white and black cop killings are deserving but it seems pretty racist that nothing gets mentioned when an innocent white teen gets gunned down and there is a body cam video of it.
Nearly 400 white people got shot by cops so far and 170 blacks. Can you name 1 white person?

[DonMega]

You seem biased, you know more white people get killed by cops every year than black people right? Some how no one gives a **** about that. Just 3 months ago a teen got gunned down by a police officer and no one is talking about it, why? because he's white.
http://nypost.com/2016/07/14/body-cam-video-shows-cop-fatally-shooting-unarmed-teen/
He was unarmed. The black fatalities are usually justified, they have a gun, they fight with cops or are criminals. Then you have blm who come in and use the opportunity to start looting / burning towns down. 90% of Police black shootings are justified because they are usually a threat.
The worst was when BLM murdered those 5 white cops and then they were giving excuses that he had military mental issues etc. But what they didn't mention was that he was kicked out of the military for raping a girl.
Seriously dude you sound racist.

If your immediate position is that black people deserve to be killed, and that they are inherently criminals, you need to stop arguing because your confirmation bias has clouded your perception of reality.

Where did I say that you idiot, I said these protests are one sided. No one is talking about all the white people that constantly get killed by cops. Mostly all white and black cop killings are justified but it seems pretty racist that nothing gets mentioned when an innocent white teen gets gunned down and there is a body cam video of it.
Nearly 400 white people got shot by cops so far and 170 blacks. Can you name 1 white person?

[LLJ]

Warmington is an idiot and should not be given the time of day. I mean he can't get simple things right:

It's nice to see Joe at least supports the gay community.

[Harold_and_Kumar]

I find there's an interesting discussion to be had about Canada's view of these problems. I find that Canadians essentially try to be colourblind - meaning they don't want to decipher between ethnicities and prefer to treat everyone equally. Which I may add, is actually quite awesome considering how damaging race relations are around the world.The only problem to colourblindness is it hides some of the inequities that are historic and implicit and causes people to believe that "equal under the law" and equal are the same thing, when they aren't. Maybe that's our next step in Canada.

I think this is an important thing to consider. We can all recognize that the issue is largely an American one, and an issue that we woudl prefer not ti import here in the form of creating issues with the way people interact with police. The question of whether we are importing a US problem into Canada through these demonstrations of support shouldn't be immediately viewed as racist or embarassing. It would be a bigger statement, IMO, if the Raptors only did this in the US and deliberately did not do it in Canada.

While I respect your opinion, that's not at all what I was meaning or getting at.

I think the issue of inequality is real and tangible, and Canada has its own racial history that while absolutely milder in reference to our black population is not necessarily milder for our Indigenous population. Insert "First Nations" into any of the issues we see in the US and I'd suggest the issues are synonymous. Furthermore, I'd argue the African American population in the US is much further along and organized than our Indigenous population when it comes to confronting inequality and that may be why people don't feel our own issues aren't as large (though I feel this is slowly changing). Nonetheless, both have a history of inequality and it's incorrect to believe Canada doesn't have a problem. And this isn't to take away from the plight of black Canadians, as they are still more likely to experience inequality, just not at the severity of the African-American experience or of the Indigenous experience in Canada.

My point wasn't that Canada doesn't have a problem, I think we just have less ignorant people than they have in the US. As a result, there are a lot of good-natured people who see the world as colourblind. While colourblindness is better in some ways in that it results in less overt acts of inequality or racism (and people will speak out against things they see as overtly racist), it has its own problems associated with it (like assuming everything is all good), which I was trying to highlight. To make progress, I think we need to see that racism isn't just overt, it is also institutionalized in the way we set up society and that it has been inherently set up to advantage certain groups. And I'm saying this as a white dude.

[jamesd]

I understand that black people tend to be more picked on by the police officers that's no secret to anyone but if the stats show that more whites and Hispanics are shot by officers, why is there no video evidence of that on cnn? Every story seems to be a black man shot by a white police officer? How is that helping racial tensions? hmm I'm no conspiracy theorist but can someone explain to me whats going on here...

If you have stats to back up your big what if-maybe please share them. These protests have as much to do with the divisions in a society along racial lines and the resulting violence. Stop watching CNN and start reading about the history of America. It will help.

History of America? You mean like civil war? That's what this is all about? That happened a long time ago dude I cant remember that far

You're so dumb that you think 'history' means 'like civil war?" Honestly, when someone is this obtuse, this misinformed and this proud of it they are no longer entitled to an opinion.

[jamesd]

Joe Warmington is an idiot. Be very clear about that first. He's a moron. He thinks that wearing a fedora makes him a reporter. He is literally a hack. He makes Sue-Anne Levy look like Helen Thomas, Robert Novak and Judith Miller rolled all into one. And that's no easy feat.

He 'writes' his single sentence paragraphs with the full intention of appealing to, affirming the bias of and inflaming the ignorance of the dumbest readers of The Sun which is literally a tabloid.


That moron aside yes, everyone with a conscience and a public stage should be protesting. At this point it is so bad I wouldn't blame players for making a jerk-off motion during the anthem.

[blitz41]

I always cringe at the whole "the military protects us and our freedoms!" narrative. It's utter nonsense lol.

Do you want the King of England coming into your living room and pushing your around? huh? do ya?

Considering your an old man it's pretty pathetic that you just gloss over WW2. I'm sure if Hitler had just been shown that we understand his concerns and see where his anger is coming from, he would've stopped attacking and conquering every country around him. If only 21st century "conflict resolution" was around back then the whole world war thing could've been stopped, lol, but stupid ass America had to go in with their military...

Military responsibility in any conflict comes down entirely to their effectiveness and tactics on the ground

The motivation behind using the military and getting the population behind war efforts is entirely a political issue

Whether a soldier fights in a just and righteous war or not has nothing to do with them. There were dirtbag soldiers on the allies side because of how they conducted themselves, just as there were men of honor in the invasion of Iraq because of how they conducted themselves. For anyone to blame the military for a countries motivations behind a war is the definition of unaware. I understand kids not grasping this but it shouldn't need to be explained to grown men.

Just fyi but the west as a whole (USA, Britain, Canada, France, ect.) didnt defeat hitler, not even close. 80% of all german military deaths came on the eastern front. Much as I hate them for occupying my ancestral home multiple times and all the innocents they killed, the soviets beat hitler, not the west, and certainly not America.

[jamesd]

You seem biased, you know more white people get killed by cops every year than black people right? Some how no one gives a **** about that. Just 3 months ago a teen got gunned down by a police officer and no one is talking about it, why? because he's white.
http://nypost.com/2016/07/14/body-cam-video-shows-cop-fatally-shooting-unarmed-teen/
He was unarmed. The black fatalities are usually justified, they have a gun, they fight with cops or are criminals. Then you have blm who come in and use the opportunity to start looting / burning towns down. 90% of Police black shootings are justified because they are usually a threat.
The worst was when BLM murdered those 5 white cops and then they were giving excuses that he had military mental issues etc. But what they didn't mention was that he was kicked out of the military for raping a girl.
Seriously dude you sound racist.

If your immediate position is that black people deserve to be killed, and that they are inherently criminals, you need to stop arguing because your confirmation bias has clouded your perception of reality.

Where did I say that you idiot, I said these protests are one sided. No one is talking about all the white people that constantly get killed by cops. Mostly all white and black cop killings are deserving but it seems pretty racist that nothing gets mentioned when an innocent white teen gets gunned down and there is a body cam video of it.
Nearly 400 white people got shot by cops so far and 170 blacks. Can you name 1 white person?

Oh boy you're not terribly bright.

Yes, protests are generally one-sided because of how they are, you know, uh protests? You think if both sides agreed there would be a need for protest? Jesus.

And to your super-specious argument about ratio of killings? White people make up roughly 62 percent of the U.S. population. Blacks account for 24 percent of those fatally shot and killed by the police despite being just 13 percent of the U.S. population. That means black Americans are 2.5 times as likely as white Americans to be shot and killed by police officers.

90 percent of black shootings are justified? Citation please. Or is that just you deciding "They had it coming. "Now, how many of the white shootings by cops were justified? Because if they were justified why would there be protests? You're simply not making anything even remotely approaching a coherent argument. You're basically saying "black people should quit whining"


BLM isn't looting and burning towns down. You're just making things up. Parsing out the amount of bull in your response is nearly impossible.

And I'll add that I'm a white, straight male born into a wealthy family. I have been afforded every conceivable privilege on the planet by birth. I've never been ostracized, marginalized or discriminated against. Systemically or personally. So, it's not like I have a vested interest in this discussion beyond being a human being who is sick of the treatment of others and the defence of that treatment.

[Courtside]

I find there's an interesting discussion to be had about Canada's view of these problems. I find that Canadians essentially try to be colourblind - meaning they don't want to decipher between ethnicities and prefer to treat everyone equally. Which I may add, is actually quite awesome considering how damaging race relations are around the world.The only problem to colourblindness is it hides some of the inequities that are historic and implicit and causes people to believe that "equal under the law" and equal are the same thing, when they aren't. Maybe that's our next step in Canada.

I think this is an important thing to consider. We can all recognize that the issue is largely an American one, and an issue that we woudl prefer not ti import here in the form of creating issues with the way people interact with police. The question of whether we are importing a US problem into Canada through these demonstrations of support shouldn't be immediately viewed as racist or embarassing. It would be a bigger statement, IMO, if the Raptors only did this in the US and deliberately did not do it in Canada.

While I respect your opinion, that's not at all what I was meaning or getting at.

I think the issue of inequality is real and tangible, and Canada has its own racial history that while absolutely milder in reference to our black population is not necessarily milder for our Indigenous population. Insert "First Nations" into any of the issues we see in the US and I'd suggest the issues are synonymous. Furthermore, I'd argue the African American population in the US is much further along and organized than our Indigenous population when it comes to confronting inequality and that may be why people don't feel our own issues aren't as large (though I feel this is slowly changing). Nonetheless, both have a history of inequality and it's incorrect to believe Canada doesn't have a problem. And this isn't to take away from the plight of black Canadians, as they are still more likely to experience inequality, just not at the severity of the African-American experience or of the Indigenous experience in Canada.

My point wasn't that Canada doesn't have a problem, I think we just have less ignorant people than they have in the US. As a result, there are a lot of good-natured people who see the world as colourblind. While colourblindness is better in some ways in that it results in less overt acts of inequality or racism (and people will speak out against things they see as overtly racist), it has its own problems associated with it (like assuming everything is all good), which I was trying to highlight. To make progress, I think we need to see that racism isn't just overt, it is also institutionalized in the way we set up society and that it has been inherently set up to advantage certain groups. And I'm saying this as a white dude.

White dude here too, and I don't disagree with you about the causes and existence of issues, systemic and otherwise. Canada does have problems - similar but different. What I was trying to clarify, though, is that you bring up the issues with natives - which are real - but you know that's not the issue that the players are drawing attention to. They're specifically choosing to show solidarity with visible protests like those of Colin Kaerpernick or Black Lives Matter. I don't wish or mean to diminish those issues as they are abosoltely real, but they exist in a far different way here in Canada. We don't the the prevalence of guns and gun crime here, we don't have privatized prison systems and police forces that seem to think it's their job to keep those prisons full for their local ecomomies.

In Canada, you can absolutely be shot and killed by police who are over reacting to possible mental issues or using excessive force, but the widely known killings of Sammy Yatim (not black), Robert Dziekanski (not black) and others too numerous to mention, show that among those getting killed in police confrontations, there is not a disproportionate number of them that are black men. Yes, there have been black men killed here at he hands of police, and yes, certain neighborhoods face more police scrutiny than others and that is partialy race driven, as well as the whole driving while black thing that is of course real - but all these things are NOT what the team is protesting. They are protesting race relations with police IN THE USA, and my earlier point is that if they are going to take this stance, they may be promoting a more adversarial relationship with police in Canada than already exists. Canadian cops absolutely do need to work on their policies in dealing with the mentally ill, with profiling and such, but they are not anywhere near the same as police in the US. The players themselves will tell you they like it better in Canada because things are more chill here, they're treated more equally here, and that includes the police.

By not protesting games in Canada, it woudl be a gesture on their part to say "Hey, we have faith in you guys" (Canadian police) and sending the message to US cops "You should be more like the police in Canada", or Toronto specifically.

[jonny three time]

Do you want the King of England coming into your living room and pushing your around? huh? do ya?

Considering your an old man it's pretty pathetic that you just gloss over WW2. I'm sure if Hitler had just been shown that we understand his concerns and see where his anger is coming from, he would've stopped attacking and conquering every country around him. If only 21st century "conflict resolution" was around back then the whole world war thing could've been stopped, lol, but stupid ass America had to go in with their military...

Military responsibility in any conflict comes down entirely to their effectiveness and tactics on the ground

The motivation behind using the military and getting the population behind war efforts is entirely a political issue

Whether a soldier fights in a just and righteous war or not has nothing to do with them. There were dirtbag soldiers on the allies side because of how they conducted themselves, just as there were men of honor in the invasion of Iraq because of how they conducted themselves. For anyone to blame the military for a countries motivations behind a war is the definition of unaware. I understand kids not grasping this but it shouldn't need to be explained to grown men.

Just fyi but the west as a whole (USA, Britain, Canada, France, ect.) didnt defeat hitler, not even close. 80% of all german military deaths came on the eastern front. Much as I hate them for occupying my ancestral home multiple times and all the innocents they killed, the soviets beat hitler, not the west, and certainly not America.

I'm fully aware of Russia's role in ww2. I'd argue that Germany actually defeated themselves by going into Russia before they were ready to, but regardless. Russia's war on the Eastern front was integral to Germanys demise. The fact that the US was also fighting Japan on the Pacific can't be overlooked as allied forces beyond American involvement was minimal there. It's not easy being the lone country with massive amounts of troops on both the Pacific and Atlantic sides of the war.

Regardless, I think your missing the point. The existence of a strong military is the ultimate deterrent. Sometimes the military gets used in noble causes, sometimes in situations they should never be involved in. That comes down to politics though, not the military or the soldiers themselves.

[Scase]

I always cringe at the whole "the military protects us and our freedoms!" narrative. It's utter nonsense lol.

Do you want the King of England coming into your living room and pushing your around? huh? do ya?

Considering your an old man it's pretty pathetic that you just gloss over WW2. I'm sure if Hitler had just been shown that we understand his concerns and see where his anger is coming from, he would've stopped attacking and conquering every country around him. If only 21st century "conflict resolution" was around back then the whole world war thing could've been stopped, lol, but stupid ass America had to go in with their military...

Military responsibility in any conflict comes down entirely to their effectiveness and tactics on the ground

The motivation behind using the military and getting the population behind war efforts is entirely a political issue

Whether a soldier fights in a just and righteous war or not has nothing to do with them. There were dirtbag soldiers on the allies side because of how they conducted themselves, just as there were men of honor in the invasion of Iraq because of how they conducted themselves. For anyone to blame the military for a countries motivations behind a war is the definition of unaware. I understand kids not grasping this but it shouldn't need to be explained to grown men.

Me thinks you missed the obvious simpsons reference.

[OAKLEY_2]

Do you want the King of England coming into your living room and pushing your around? huh? do ya?

Considering your an old man it's pretty pathetic that you just gloss over WW2. I'm sure if Hitler had just been shown that we understand his concerns and see where his anger is coming from, he would've stopped attacking and conquering every country around him. If only 21st century "conflict resolution" was around back then the whole world war thing could've been stopped, lol, but stupid ass America had to go in with their military...

Military responsibility in any conflict comes down entirely to their effectiveness and tactics on the ground

The motivation behind using the military and getting the population behind war efforts is entirely a political issue

Whether a soldier fights in a just and righteous war or not has nothing to do with them. There were dirtbag soldiers on the allies side because of how they conducted themselves, just as there were men of honor in the invasion of Iraq because of how they conducted themselves. For anyone to blame the military for a countries motivations behind a war is the definition of unaware. I understand kids not grasping this but it shouldn't need to be explained to grown men.

Just fyi but the west as a whole (USA, Britain, Canada, France, ect.) didnt defeat hitler, not even close. 80% of all german military deaths came on the eastern front. Much as I hate them for occupying my ancestral home multiple times and all the innocents they killed, the soviets beat hitler, not the west, and certainly not America.

When hero worshiping people need to understand that Hitler and Mussolini were more than popular with international industry, banks, the Catholic church and many other persons of priviledge. Hitler as rogue madman is the worst bit of history distortion the "winners" ever wrote. The lovely allies, our heroes, also carpet bombed Hamburg and huge numbers of innocent civilians, men, women, children were scorched where they stood in the melting ashvault. This bombing carnage was practiced on the city of Lubeck to see how destructive it would be as an eventual war tactic. The bombing of Hamburg is widely considered to have been a war crime and was the brainchild of the British.

[jonny three time]

Considering your an old man it's pretty pathetic that you just gloss over WW2. I'm sure if Hitler had just been shown that we understand his concerns and see where his anger is coming from, he would've stopped attacking and conquering every country around him. If only 21st century "conflict resolution" was around back then the whole world war thing could've been stopped, lol, but stupid ass America had to go in with their military...

Military responsibility in any conflict comes down entirely to their effectiveness and tactics on the ground

The motivation behind using the military and getting the population behind war efforts is entirely a political issue

Whether a soldier fights in a just and righteous war or not has nothing to do with them. There were dirtbag soldiers on the allies side because of how they conducted themselves, just as there were men of honor in the invasion of Iraq because of how they conducted themselves. For anyone to blame the military for a countries motivations behind a war is the definition of unaware. I understand kids not grasping this but it shouldn't need to be explained to grown men.

Just fyi but the west as a whole (USA, Britain, Canada, France, ect.) didnt defeat hitler, not even close. 80% of all german military deaths came on the eastern front. Much as I hate them for occupying my ancestral home multiple times and all the innocents they killed, the soviets beat hitler, not the west, and certainly not America.

When hero worshiping people need to understand that Hitler and Mussolini were more than popular with international industry, banks, the Catholic church and many other persons of priviledge. Hitler as rogue madman is the worst bit of history distortion the "winners" ever wrote. The lovely allies, our heroes, also carpet bombed Hamburg and huge numbers of innocent civilians, men, women, children were scorched where they stood in the melting ashvault. This bombing carnage was practiced on the city of Lubeck to see how destructive it would be as an eventual war tactic. The bombing of Hamburg is widely considered to have been a war crime and was the brainchild of the British.

Are you a Nazi sympathizer or something? Two points to counter this ridiculous post.

1. Money makes the world go round. Even the worst dictators in the world will have banks, multi-national businesses and anyone else do business with them if the money is right. Remember hearing about all the celebrities and singers who performed for Gadhafi and various other Middle East dictators, back during the Arab spring? This is why sanctions are imposed for regimes that the rest of the world agrees needs to be stopped. It's just juvenile to expect banks, businesses and entire countries to say no to them out of some honor code. They know that somebody else, a competitor in their line of business, will say yes to the business they themselves are turning down.

2. Did you ever hear about the Battle of Britain? Or the Blitzkrieg? The Nazis bombed British civilian populations, intentionally I might add, years before the bombings of Hamburg and Dresden. So you can't ask for a "fair" one way war. The only reason the bombings of major German cities should be considered wrong is that they didn't have the desired effect of demoralizing German citizens by breaking their collective will. Britain and the US should have realized this given that the Battle of Britain also didn't break British resolve and actually helped galvanize the collective war efforts of its citizens. It gave them grit and they should have realized a similar reaction would happen if Germany went through a similar event.

[Mattd97]

Sun media has embarrassed us or directly impacted us negatively now how many times with their faux outrage and tabloid reporting? Too many to mention.

The beer thrower for the Jays is reportedly an employee.

Simmons tabloid reporting on Carroll and CoJo walking through a Casino he was in late.

Rob Ford enabling, defending and denying.

Pretty sure they helped promote that FHRITP hydro guy at the TTC game to get his job back after they canned him.

Their staff regularly fans the flames of anti-Muslim sentiment in the GTA under the guise that they seem to think nearly every single Muslim is pro-Sharia law. Or that Sun staffers think they should have the right to force a Muslim woman to wear less while presenting it as though all Muslim women only wear what they wear because men force them to. As opposed to faith. It's such hypocrisy.

Vince Carter and his mom bashing earlier in his career before he wanted out.

These dudes will probably drive Auston Matthews out of here after his first contract with photos of him in bars or stories of his flings. They're the worst. If there's a place to drive a wedge in with a bold, emotional headline they'll always force it in and wedge. If ever there's a media company here who'll make Derozan, Valanciunas or Lowry reconsider their time in the city I'd put money on it being this one.

As others said, locking arms is more a sign of solidarity than a sign of disrespect (especially against Canada). These Sun staffers seem to envy what their American Right Wing media friends get to write about and complain about and I'm sure Wormington has probably been dying to write such a piece ever since Colin Kaepernick first took a knee. As much as he's saying this gesture isn't warranted for up here I'd suggest his reaction to some players locking arms up here isn't warranted because it's not at all controversial beyond his attempts to make it so.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

yeah people have said the sun is conservative - but even as a liberal leaning person I have to say thats unfair to conservatism. theres a weird dichotomy to conservatism that Sam Bee did a good job of tracing the origins of. The sun is just the stupid side of it. same as trump and the tea party. its not fair to lug them in to the conservatism of, say, the globe and mail. I disagree with those people on many things, but they dont just stoke stupid illogical arguments and people like the sun and trump

[Harold_and_Kumar]

I think this is an important thing to consider. We can all recognize that the issue is largely an American one, and an issue that we woudl prefer not ti import here in the form of creating issues with the way people interact with police. The question of whether we are importing a US problem into Canada through these demonstrations of support shouldn't be immediately viewed as racist or embarassing. It would be a bigger statement, IMO, if the Raptors only did this in the US and deliberately did not do it in Canada.

While I respect your opinion, that's not at all what I was meaning or getting at.

I think the issue of inequality is real and tangible, and Canada has its own racial history that while absolutely milder in reference to our black population is not necessarily milder for our Indigenous population. Insert "First Nations" into any of the issues we see in the US and I'd suggest the issues are synonymous. Furthermore, I'd argue the African American population in the US is much further along and organized than our Indigenous population when it comes to confronting inequality and that may be why people don't feel our own issues aren't as large (though I feel this is slowly changing). Nonetheless, both have a history of inequality and it's incorrect to believe Canada doesn't have a problem. And this isn't to take away from the plight of black Canadians, as they are still more likely to experience inequality, just not at the severity of the African-American experience or of the Indigenous experience in Canada.

My point wasn't that Canada doesn't have a problem, I think we just have less ignorant people than they have in the US. As a result, there are a lot of good-natured people who see the world as colourblind. While colourblindness is better in some ways in that it results in less overt acts of inequality or racism (and people will speak out against things they see as overtly racist), it has its own problems associated with it (like assuming everything is all good), which I was trying to highlight. To make progress, I think we need to see that racism isn't just overt, it is also institutionalized in the way we set up society and that it has been inherently set up to advantage certain groups. And I'm saying this as a white dude.

White dude here too, and I don't disagree with you about the causes and existence of issues, systemic and otherwise. Canada does have problems - similar but different. What I was trying to clarify, though, is that you bring up the issues with natives - which are real - but you know that's not the issue that the players are drawing attention to. They're specifically choosing to show solidarity with visible protests like those of Colin Kaerpernick or Black Lives Matter. I don't wish or mean to diminish those issues as they are abosoltely real, but they exist in a far different way here in Canada. We don't the the prevalence of guns and gun crime here, we don't have privatized prison systems and police forces that seem to think it's their job to keep those prisons full for their local ecomomies.

In Canada, you can absolutely be shot and killed by police who are over reacting to possible mental issues or using excessive force, but the widely known killings of Sammy Yatim (not black), Robert Dziekanski (not black) and others too numerous to mention, show that among those getting killed in police confrontations, there is not a disproportionate number of them that are black men. Yes, there have been black men killed here at he hands of police, and yes, certain neighborhoods face more police scrutiny than others and that is partialy race driven, as well as the whole driving while black thing that is of course real - but all these things are NOT what the team is protesting. They are protesting race relations with police IN THE USA, and my earlier point is that if they are going to take this stance, they may be promoting a more adversarial relationship with police in Canada than already exists. Canadian cops absolutely do need to work on their policies in dealing with the mentally ill, with profiling and such, but they are not anywhere near the same as police in the US. The players themselves will tell you they like it better in Canada because things are more chill here, they're treated more equally here, and that includes the police.

By not protesting games in Canada, it woudl be a gesture on their part to say "Hey, we have faith in you guys" (Canadian police) and sending the message to US cops "You should be more like the police in Canada", or Toronto specifically.

I understand your point better now. I mostly agree with what you're saying, though I'm not sure I come to the same conclusion. Nonetheless, you raise interesting points to think about.

[OAKLEY_2]

Just fyi but the west as a whole (USA, Britain, Canada, France, ect.) didnt defeat hitler, not even close. 80% of all german military deaths came on the eastern front. Much as I hate them for occupying my ancestral home multiple times and all the innocents they killed, the soviets beat hitler, not the west, and certainly not America.

When hero worshiping people need to understand that Hitler and Mussolini were more than popular with international industry, banks, the Catholic church and many other persons of priviledge. Hitler as rogue madman is the worst bit of history distortion the "winners" ever wrote. The lovely allies, our heroes, also carpet bombed Hamburg and huge numbers of innocent civilians, men, women, children were scorched where they stood in the melting ashvault. This bombing carnage was practiced on the city of Lubeck to see how destructive it would be as an eventual war tactic. The bombing of Hamburg is widely considered to have been a war crime and was the brainchild of the British.

Are you a Nazi sympathizer or something? Two points to counter this ridiculous post.

1. Money makes the world go round. Even the worst dictators in the world will have banks, multi-national businesses and anyone else do business with them if the money is right. Remember hearing about all the celebrities and singers who performed for Gadhafi and various other Middle East dictators, back during the Arab spring? This is why sanctions are imposed for regimes that the rest of the world agrees needs to be stopped. It's just juvenile to expect banks, businesses and entire countries to say no to them out of some honor code. They know that somebody else, a competitor in their line of business, will say yes to the business they themselves are turning down.

2. Did you ever hear about the Battle of Britain? Or the Blitzkrieg? The Nazis bombed British civilian populations, intentionally I might add, years before the bombings of Hamburg and Dresden. So you can't ask for a "fair" one way war. The only reason the bombings of major German cities should be considered wrong is that they didn't have the desired effect of demoralizing German citizens by breaking their collective will. Britain and the US should have realized this given that the Battle of Britain also didn't break British resolve and actually helped galvanize the collective war efforts of its citizens. It gave them grit and they should have realized a similar reaction would happen if Germany went through a similar event.

Maybe you simply missed the nuance of my point. That history is written by the victors sometimes in spite of the facts and sometimes bad information is against the public good. I am asking the question if we should or should not think twice before boldly proclaiming support for the sanctity of troops and or police when we may be short on the facts of what these security operations are actually doing. This pause for critical analysis counters the idea from this Sun "writer" that protesters of police violence (primarily against one visible minority group) should be rebuked because who else might protect implied freedoms? Freedoms we might actually discover are either in short supply or unevenly distributed.

The flaming of protesters really means the Sun writer does not wish to any way take responsibility or acknowledge injustice and that citizens should love authority unconditionally no matter what is captured on a bystanders cell phone.

[SharoneWright]

1.I understand populism. I saw the rise of Rob Ford first hand. I understand why some seem to desperately crave the idea of an everyday average less-polished person in charge but at the same time I have to ask why. What is it about that which seems so appealing? What kind of ego does one have to think that they can tackle all of these important issues without listening to experts? This whole notion of trying to cast intellectuals in a negative light or "elitists" is absurd when one really stops to think about it. I want the person that's in charge of Finance to be somebody who is an expert in that area. Not my buddy.
.
.
2.Populist everyperson politicians tend to trade research, facts and pro-active thinking for conspiracies, emotion and knee-jerk, reactive quick fixes. They rally against the only groups fact-checking and the media and create echo chambers where anyone who questions anything is the enemy. They throw the baby (what is working) out with the dirty bathwater (what needs work).
.
.
3.I don't need to relate to the person in charge. I don't need to like them.

And yet I'm guessing you would have voted Obama over Romney.........

1.Obama had less experience and expertise..
2.Obama had more emotional populism.. yes we can hope and change
3.Obama had more likability - everyone's cool (1?) black friend

Romney had:

-A far better resume
-Less emotional voters
-Was less relatable

I'll leave it to others to decide the state of America 8 years later. Personally I think people vote based on personal ideology and seek to justify their vote based on selective reasoning. imho

personally, i think outcome is what matters. style is irrelevant. what trajectory do you wish for.

[jonny three time]

1.I understand populism. I saw the rise of Rob Ford first hand. I understand why some seem to desperately crave the idea of an everyday average less-polished person in charge but at the same time I have to ask why. What is it about that which seems so appealing? What kind of ego does one have to think that they can tackle all of these important issues without listening to experts? This whole notion of trying to cast intellectuals in a negative light or "elitists" is absurd when one really stops to think about it. I want the person that's in charge of Finance to be somebody who is an expert in that area. Not my buddy.
.
.
2.Populist everyperson politicians tend to trade research, facts and pro-active thinking for conspiracies, emotion and knee-jerk, reactive quick fixes. They rally against the only groups fact-checking and the media and create echo chambers where anyone who questions anything is the enemy. They throw the baby (what is working) out with the dirty bathwater (what needs work).
.
.
3.I don't need to relate to the person in charge. I don't need to like them.

And yet I'm guessing you would have voted Obama over Romney.........

1.Obama had less experience and expertise..
2.Obama had more emotional populism.. yes we can hope and change
3.Obama had more likability - everyone's cool (1?) black friend

Romney had:

-A far better resume
-Less emotional voters
-Was less relatable

I'll leave it to others to decide the state of America 8 years later. Personally I think people vote based on personal ideology and seek to justify their vote based on selective reasoning. imho

personally, i think outcome is what matters. style is irrelevant. what trajectory do you wish for.

Excellent post. In all fairness though it was McCain that Obama beat to become president. He beat Romney for his second term and given that every president up for reelection has more experience than someone who hasn't been president, that doesn't apply in that case. It completely applies to his first election vs. McCain though.

DH clearly doesn't see both political sides with clarity. They both almost completely appeal to the emotions of their base, with talking points serving as their form of "reason". Also, he fails to realize how corrupted fact-checking and research groups have become, depending on who gives them their funding. Just look at all "science" right-wing groups funded to show global warming either didn't exist, or wasn't a man-made problem. Politicians on both sides can find "facts" from some group or another to support their narrative. Take a look at this great segment by John Oliver to show what I'm talking about...

Watch on YouTube