This is the second time I’ve seen this claim, in the face of mountains of evidence (see the cites above) – you and Laura Ingraham. Where is this coming from? What is your news source that has been propagating this false claim?
This is a sincere question, and I look forward to your answer. I know it’s difficult to cite something not happening, but if you could provide a cite that tear gas wasn’t used, I would appreciate that as well.
Hope springs eternal!
“Protesters Dispersed With Tear Gas So Trump Could Pose at Church”
Have you not seen the video? Maybe, technically it wasn’t ‘tear’ gas, don’t know. That would be a distinction without a difference.
Here’s a citethat says no tear gas was used, “just” smoke bombs and pepper balls – I’m not sure I understand the difference in effect between pepper balls and tear gas.
Is this distinction like someone saying, I can’t believe they dynamited that building! And, the reply being, they didn’t dynamite that building, when the reality is that they used C4 or something?
That same spokesperson also says the protesters:
This is apparently a lie – if you watch video taken by news people on location, they claim that it was entirely peaceful, with not even water bottles being thrown. So, I find it hard to trust that spokesperson.
OK, I’m seeing more cites that it was “pepper balls”. I imagine that’s the nit that D’Anconia is picking. It’s too bad the priests didn’t have a chance to do a chemical analysis on the gas irritant while they were crying and coughing.
D’Anconia, tear gas is a generic term for most people for any airborne irritant that is deployed for crowd control or other policing measures. I think it’s misleading in the extreme to just type, “they didn’t use tear gas”, without the follow-up that they did use pepper balls, which have very similar effects to tear gas. Your post makes it seem like no such crowd control measures were used when, in fact, they were.
I’m hearing that pepper balls are worse than tear gas. Being shot with a pepper ball hurts like hell, or so I’ve been told (and can easily imagine).
You can always come up with some rationalization but the actual ‘simple fact’ is that it shows how partisan/ideological people tend to have huge blind spots about what might be of overriding importance to them v to other people, and viewing their opinions and instincts as ‘simple facts’. 
Last week, and maybe still now, other people’s feeling that for example it’s really important to attend worship services, or go to work, has to be subsumed to COVID safety, no way should ‘we’ allow worship services or particular types of work even with precautions. This week something really important comes up, and it’s fine for masses of people to congregate with basically no precautions (again mask alone might not make much difference in such packed crowds, though I hope the recent mass crowds don’t cause a huge number of new infections).
It’s the lack of self awareness about how one’s own value judgments might not be shared by other reasonable people that’s the most obvious part, to me.
It’s the same right-wing pedantry and linguistic nit-picking that gets used time and again as a method to deflect from actual issues and “win” debates. Because the point is to show superiority; to make the looser kids give up the ball in frustration and go home.
“It’s not technically an assault rifle, so ur dum.”
“So you think white lives don’t matter? Why do you think whites should die?”
“No one used tear gas (it was just tear-inducing chemicals delivered by pellet), so you can’t be trusted to know anything about anything!”
“The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” - George Orwell, 1984
isn’t it funny how the party that screams and cries about how Democrats are “dictators” is just fine with their side acting like authoritarians?
No, it’s isn’t. The first rule of propaganda is to accuse your opponent of doing what you yourself are doing. Goebbels couldn’t have done this any better.
Cool story, bro.
This part is especially ironic.
The peaceful protesters were tear gassed. People who say otherwise are either ignorant or lying. Which are you?
Right back at ya, ‘bro’.
The idea of avoiding mass gatherings and other high risk activities is mainly to protect high risk people you might infect. The great majority of people in the mass gatherings are not high risk. They are mainly risking the health of high risk people they might later come in contact with.
As everyone seemed to understand when the gatherings were eg. weddings, church services, house parties, etc where people were in some cases cited or even arrested.
There’s no way to get around the fact that this is a big course change for a lot of left leaning people v what they were saying very recently. For a really good reason, they might argue, but denying that it is just makes people look foolish. And chalking it up to ‘courage’, in general, sanctimonious.
Here’s the thing, though – you can ‘go’ to church remotely, and many, many churches have set it up so you can do just that. House parties are pretty unessential and can be put on hold for now. You can wait to get married, or get married in a small ceremony and have the big party later. You can wait to get your hair cut, your nails done, or whatever.
If people waited 6 months to march for George Floyd, there would be little turnout. Do you understand the difference?
I mean, some people actually go to war for what they believe in – that’s pretty fucking dangerous, too.
I’m not condoning the large gatherings, but I understand why people may decide to do that, given the horrific treatment of many black men, and African Americans in general.
I’m a lib’s lib, but I don’t think the “courage” argument is very compelling. Any fool can have courage.
I don’t think the protestors are more courageous than the protestors from four weeks ago. They just have a more noble cause on their side. Regardless, the pandemic doesn’t care. I am glad that many of the protestors are trying to protect themselves, but a great deal of them are still going to bring home the virus despite their efforts. So there will be bodies that result from all of this. It just won’t be the bodies of the protestors necessarily.
So it’s complicated and sad.
Are you going to return and either clarify your statement or admit error? Did you see Tired and Cranky’s post with the definition from M-W? Did you have a specific compound in mind?
T&C, I guess I was wrong about the pepper bombs not being tear gas. Looks like it would easily fall under that definition.
Wearing masks when in a group of people, indoors or out, is highly likely not an excess, and it is certainly not a joke for people to continue to insist on it.
And I have seen plenty of protestors wearing masks and/or distancing; and plenty of people posting worries about those who are not.
But in any case equating protesting for the right to breathe in other’s faces unhindered by a mask, and protesting for the right to be allowed to keep breathing unhindered by somebody else’s knee on one’s neck, are not remotely equivalent issues.
Anyone who insists on “it wasn’t tear gas” should just stand downwind of a BBQ grill and not move and if they complain just point out it’s not tear gas.
As for the main thing about this thread, people went outside even during lockdown for things that were considered essential. I went to the grocery store once a week, once or twice a week I ordered delivery from local eateries, I hit the hardware store a couple times for a project around the house. Being shut in unless you were completely at risk was not the norm. But I didn’t expect to be able to go bowling or play poker or sit in a small bar and watch some punk band.
The whiners were complaining they wanted hair cuts. Some at a local protest were complaining they missed shooting pool. Women were upset they couldn’t get their nails done. These were not essential by any means and reeked of privilege.
Whereas black people who were protesting and their allies literally felt the death of Floyd was a culmination of a system that literally put their lives at risk whenever they dealt with law enforcement. For sure some of the angst was brought about by cabin fever - even people who were smart enough to realize the dangers of reopening too soon didn’t like being cooped up all the time. They just didn’t deal with it by being selfish, petulent babies.
All that said, I am very fearful for a coronavirus spike in many communities as a result of the protests. I hope for the risks they took that some good finally comes from it for a change.
The purpose of the proposed military deployment is not to prevent people from protesting and demanding the arrest of people who have already been arrested, but to prevent widespread violence and looting. There has never been a right to riot or loot. Pretending that opposing violent looting is the same as opposing demonstrations is disingenuous.
Bull fucking shit. The protest in Lafayette Park was peaceful up to the point that President Tinpot wanted a photo-op. Then federal officers violently drove out the protestors.
I was watching it live on CNN when it went down. The protestors were doing nothing and there was no warning from the thugs in uniform.