• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Responsible Reporting: Associated Press apologizes for out-of-context reporting on Trump calling MS-13 "animals"

"Why did Trump comment on people coming into the country in context to MS-13?"

Maybe because MS-13 is a growing problem in this country because they are coming into the country from Mexico?

Not hard to figure out.

Sure, but his response does sound like he was talking about all immigrants. I'm inclined to be charitable and at least agree on this instance that he wasn't trying to racist.

watch every latin drug cartel execution video you can find in an hour and then get back to me on walking their moccasins

Did you mean walking in their moccasins?

I'm not sure what it would prove. Humans aren't animals, they can act like them, but they aren't. Claiming they are is only done when you want to distance yourself from them, which to me, doesn't help.
 

NickFire

Member
Sure, but his response does sound like he was talking about all immigrants. I'm inclined to be charitable and at least agree on this instance that he wasn't trying to racist.
That's not being charitable. It's accepting reality. He only sounded that way because by design proper context was not laid out by the reporting agency. It would not be much different than hypothetically reporting that a person killed someone for entering their property, without including that the deceased was holding a gun and made prior threats. Ie, misleading by omission.
 

Gun Animal

Member
Sure. I don't believe in Free Will. I think presented a similar situation, humans are largely predictable. Being Poor is just one factor into why some people choose to become members of MS-13. I think if you want to reduce these gangs or violent crimes, you need to understand the reasoning behind it and address it.
The Genetics of Violent Behavior

15 posts until this thread gets locked

I'm not sure what it would prove. Humans aren't animals, they can act like them, but they aren't. Claiming they are is only done when you want to distance yourself from them, which to me, doesn't help.

It would help because you're missing the chemical fear/digust response that is absolutely necessary when making decisions about an out-group
 
Last edited:
That's not being charitable. It's accepting reality. He only sounded that way because by design proper context was not laid out by the reporting agency. It would not be much different than hypothetically reporting that a person killed someone for entering their property, without including that the deceased was holding a gun and made prior threats. Ie, misleading by omission.

I don't think you analogy works in this context, but I think I get your point that he was taken out of context. I'm not taking him out of context.

The Genetics of Violent Behavior

15 posts until this thread gets locked


What do you think that source proves? You've also not told me what you think race is.
 

Gun Animal

Member
What do you think that source proves? You've also not told me what you think race is.

Nobody uses the term "Race" anymore besides Modern Leftists while engaging in Libel/Slander/Propaganda and a few cuckoos. Not because it doesn't exist, but because the old racial hypothesis was highly flawed and the phenomenon Race describes is better described by various other terms with more specific use.

Not answering your first question.

If we executed every gang member the world would be a better place.

Do you honestly feel the same way about, say, Yakuza for example?
 
Last edited:

Airola

Member
Sure, but his response does sound like he was talking about all immigrants.

We know what a nature of discussion is. Things that are mentioned in the very beginning of a discussion can be the context of something that is mentioned late in the discussion.
That was nearly an hour long discussion. Trump was in the beginning already talking about criminals and the horrible crimes they make. Even without the MS-13 comment in the middle, what Trump said would've been about criminals. Now with the comment about MS-13 right before his comment makes it even more clear what he was talking about.

The fact that these news outlets are quick to pick up a line from an hour long conversation and paint it as something unbelievable rough in current social climate when in reality it was about something completely else shows they don't even care about the real context as long as they can get free quick punches on their disliked politician.

I'd think you would feel angry about those news outlets that have made these assumptions and have deceived you to hear a context that isn't there. I'm absolutely positive if you had listened to the full discussion you wouldn't think his response sounds like that. The reason you now think it sounds like that is because of these awful journalists who have made this small snippet of a bigger discussion into a headline.
 

KINGMOKU

Member
Trump shouldn't be calling anyone animals though. MS-13 = animals is so generalized if you are familiar with gangs and how they influence impoverished communities.

But I guess he othered them to rile the base.
I can't even believe what I'm reading. This gang is on the verge of being classified as a terrorist organization. Yes, they are indeed animals and this is not some appeal to the base horsecrap.

Do yourself a favor and see the manner of their crimes before posting. Good to know you came to the defense of the absolute lowest of the low when it comes to violent crime. Murder, mutilation, killing of children, you name it.

These "people" are trash.
 

Cleared_Hot

Member


PTe1UH4.png


Good for them. This is the sort of responsible reporting the country needs. There is plenty to report on Trump about, good and bad, without resorting to low standards.

All those people retweeting and liking that "gang members are not animals either" crap...

The left says things like this and wonder why trump won. You are literally defending MS-13 and victimizing them because trump called them animals. WHAT IS HAPPENING
 
All those people retweeting and liking that "gang members are not animals either" crap...

The left says things like this and wonder why trump won. You are literally defending MS-13 and victimizing them because trump called them animals. WHAT IS HAPPENING

Dehumanizing people is never the right approach.

Villains are human. It's important to keep that into perspective and understand that literally anyone is capable of atrocity, because at the end of the day, we're all just people.
 
I can't even believe what I'm reading. This gang is on the verge of being classified as a terrorist organization. Yes, they are indeed animals and this is not some appeal to the base horsecrap.

Do yourself a favor and see the manner of their crimes before posting. Good to know you came to the defense of the absolute lowest of the low when it comes to violent crime. Murder, mutilation, killing of children, you name it.

These "people" are trash.

Trump is trying to rile you up, and lead you blind. MS13 is a violent street gang, not a cartel, and we would target them with anti-gang mechanisms. They're homegrown. Obama attempted to label them higher, but they're not organized.
 

LegendOfKage

Gold Member
There's a difference between that and calling people less the human. I wouldn't be comfortable with my country's leader dehumanizing any group of people. It doesn't help anything and is just dismissive.

Also to those that agree with the more charitable interpretation, why do you think gang member are animals?

Trump shouldn't be calling anyone animals though. MS-13 = animals is so generalized if you are familiar with gangs and how they influence impoverished communities.

But I guess he othered them to rile the base.

When and how and why we dehumanize people is an interesting topic. It's completely subjective, but it's especially interesting to consider people who were born into violence and hate, and ask ourselves if we would have been any different. For example, if we were Germans during WWII, it would have been almost statically impossible that we would have been people who agreed to hide and protect Jews. It's a terrible thought.

So where do we draw the line from having sympathy for a Nazi, or a clan member, or a gang member, or Harvey Weinstein (to name someone specific) for the hate or mistrust or violence or repulsive behavior that they were brought to, as opposed to having sympathy for the harm done as a result of that hate, mistrust, violence, or repulsive behavior?

To be clear, I'm more than somewhat doubtful that if your sister or girlfriend became a sex trafficking victim, you would feel any sympathy for the people who ruined her life.

Also, exactly what is dehumanizing? If some racist asshole refers to black people as monkeys, I would agree that is dehumanizing. If someone refers to people as animals, I'd agree that is dehumanizing. But what about thug, or bitch, or shithead, or asshole, or even jerk? Do these suggest the removal of your humanity, or are they just insults? I think these are all interesting aspects of this situation to consider and discuss.

But my main question to you three (and the one I'm most interested in reading your replies to) is the following: If you're so opposed to people being referred to as animals, and if you find that to be dehumanizing and harmful even when applied to gang members, and if you feel the need to speak out and not let that dehumanization go unchallenged, do you react and speak out the same way when you hear someone refer to cops as pigs? Specifically, why or why not?
 

Airola

Member
We are all animals.
What separates us from other animals is the human quality in us.
When someone does things that go against that human quality and does savage things, they can be called animals because they lack some of the most important part of us that makes us civilized humans. It's not that they are "animals" for good. It's not that they can't get their "human status" back. And it's not that they aren't really humans. It's just that calling them animals is a good way to explain what their behaviour is like.

Dehumanizing people is never the right approach.

Villains are human. It's important to keep that into perspective and understand that literally anyone is capable of atrocity, because at the end of the day, we're all just people.

I've seen you several times claim you have used an intentional hyperbole to bring out a point and called out others for not understanding that. It's ironic how you can't see the hyperbole in this certain situation.
 
So people in here are actually upset Trump called Gangbangers animals.

So what’s the cut off word...trash?...,Lowlifes?

Then you wonder why people are getting to the point that they don’t give 2 shits what MSM says.
 

TheMikado

Banned

Just going to quote the article for it's absurdity...
What really happens in firearm-permissive environments?
Although mass killings get the most press, by far, the main cause of firearm deaths in the USA is suicide, and not due to combat fatalities or homicides. According to statistics from the CDC and The Epidemiology of Firearm Violence in the Twenty-First Century United States (2015), from 2002-2013 suicide in the U.S. was far more common than the combination of homicides, combat-related casualties and accidents.

The media’s bias toward covering homicides far more than suicides is due in part to the sensational nature of murders including mass shootings. According to data provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and a 2015 review by gun violence expert Dr. Garen Wintemute, the epidemiology of firearm violence has had a mortality rate that remained unchanged for more than a decade, making this issue a huge and costly public health problem in the United States.

The media covers homicides rather than suicides because homicides are ILLEGAL and murder... Is this even a serious academic article.

Re-reads and follows links
Interestingly, this line of thinking is supported by a study published this summer in Molecular Psychiatry: Genetic Background of Extreme Violent Behavior. The analysis of almost 900 Finnish criminals found that at least 5-10% of them -who had committed at least 10 homicides or repeatedly attempted homicides, or batteries- in fact carried a MAOA low-activity genotype.

Violent genes
In developed countries, the majority of all violent crime is committed by a small group of antisocial repeat offenders. But until recently, no genes had been shown to contribute to severe or recidivistic violent behaviors such as homicide. According to a meta-analysis on data from 24 genetically informative studies, up to 50% of the total variance in aggressive behavior is explained by genetic influences.

So, if I'm reading this right... even the genetic prevalence is only confirmed to be present in a small number of their sample size, further it is for individuals with are severely violent committing 10 or more homocides/attempting homocides/ or batteries. (ignoring the fact that I'm not sure how you even get that many repeat offenders...) So again, it sounds like the genetic basis for it is small, but individuals can have a stronger propensity. I wonder if the article says why...?

In the early 1990s, researchers linked low levels of MAO-A with increased frequencies of antisocial behavior, specifically when individuals had a history of being mistreated during childhood. Later studies by Guo and colleagues (2008) investigated MAOA variants in 2500 American boys in grades 7 to 12, and demonstrated a genetic basis for severe aggressive behavior seen at school. A specific variant of the MAOA gene (VNTR 2R MAOA) was a risk factor of violent delinquency, but only when the boys suffered some other stress, such as family issues, low popularity and failing school.

So environment plays a role... looks like the genetic variance in violent behavior is removed when the environment has less external stressors.

Anyway, this wasn't even any external links, just using the one you actual gave yourself.
 

Dontero

Banned
It wouldn't be animal. I think that sort of language only serves to reduce empathy and understanding behind a person motive/actions. To create distance. It's easier for us to call them animals, because then we don't have to acknowledge that we could have made the same choices they did to get to perform that action.

Bruh, there is no gang that has humans in them. Whole point of gang is to be animal. Your sweet-talk only works when you are someone who never dealt with gangs. As long as you would personally experience joys of being under gang thumbs you would be screaming on top of your lungs to hang all gangmembers regardless of age, gender, race, whatever as long as they declared themselves as gang members.
 
Nobody uses the term "Race" anymore besides Modern Leftists while engaging in Libel/Slander/Propaganda and a few cuckoos. Not because it doesn't exist, but because the old racial hypothesis was highly flawed and the phenomenon Race describes is better described by various other terms with more specific use.

If your only idea of what race is, is based off a Youtube video that claims Leftist Psychology, a term I've never heard before, was responsible for the Unabomber...I think it's fair for me to guess you know bugger all about it. Don't get me wrong. I totally agree with the conclusion you have, I just think you don't actually know much about this beyond perhaps a series of talking points.

What is Race? Why is the term still used?

Not answering your first question.

Haven you? My first question was "What do you think race is?". My second is "what did you mean by the article?" so which one?


We know what a nature of discussion is. Things that are mentioned in the very beginning of a discussion can be the context of something that is mentioned late in the discussion.
That was nearly an hour long discussion. Trump was in the beginning already talking about criminals and the horrible crimes they make. Even without the MS-13 comment in the middle, what Trump said would've been about criminals. Now with the comment about MS-13 right before his comment makes it even more clear what he was talking about.

The fact that these news outlets are quick to pick up a line from an hour long conversation and paint it as something unbelievable rough in current social climate when in reality it was about something completely else shows they don't even care about the real context as long as they can get free quick punches on their disliked politician.

I'd think you would feel angry about those news outlets that have made these assumptions and have deceived you to hear a context that isn't there. I'm absolutely positive if you had listened to the full discussion you wouldn't think his response sounds like that. The reason you now think it sounds like that is because of these awful journalists who have made this small snippet of a bigger discussion into a headline.

While I understand it, Trump hasn't done much to help prove he isn't racist. His comments previously combined with this, makes it an easy leap. That said I've agreed that this does look worse because of the lack of the context and with it, it does make more sense.

When and how and why we dehumanize people is an interesting topic. It's completely subjective, but it's especially interesting to consider people who were born into violence and hate, and ask ourselves if we would have been any different. For example, if we were Germans during WWII, it would have been almost statically impossible that we would have been people who agreed to hide and protect Jews. It's a terrible thought.

So where do we draw the line from having sympathy for a Nazi, or a clan member, or a gang member, or Harvey Weinstein (to name someone specific) for the hate or mistrust or violence or repulsive behavior that they were brought to, as opposed to having sympathy for the harm done as a result of that hate, mistrust, violence, or repulsive behavior?

To be clear, I'm more than somewhat doubtful that if your sister or girlfriend became a sex trafficking victim, you would feel any sympathy for the people who ruined her life.

Also, exactly what is dehumanizing? If some racist asshole refers to black people as monkeys, I would agree that is dehumanizing. If someone refers to people as animals, I'd agree that is dehumanizing. But what about thug, or bitch, or shithead, or asshole, or even jerk? Do these suggest the removal of your humanity, or are they just insults? I think these are all interesting aspects of this situation to consider and discuss.

But my main question to you three (and the one I'm most interested in reading your replies to) is the following: If you're so opposed to people being referred to as animals, and if you find that to be dehumanizing and harmful even when applied to gang members, and if you feel the need to speak out and not let that dehumanization go unchallenged, do you react and speak out the same way when you hear someone refer to cops as pigs? Specifically, why or why not?

I'm not hear to police language in general, my reaction to Trumps use of words is in-proportion to the position of power he holds. If billy-no-mates where to say this, I'd ignore him. In most cases I disagree with derogatory terms being used on people. I say most cases, because everything is subjective and I could imagine some instances in which the term could fit. I didn't use to speak out, but I do when it comes to friends and family.

Bruh, there is no gang that has humans in them. Whole point of gang is to be animal. Your sweet-talk only works when you are someone who never dealt with gangs. As long as you would personally experience joys of being under gang thumbs you would be screaming on top of your lungs to hang all gangmembers regardless of age, gender, race, whatever as long as they declared themselves as gang members.

Do you have a source for the definition your pulling?
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
That's exactly what it means tho. That's why we lock these animals in cages while they rape eachother and continue to act like animals daily. Soulless garbage...

You're garbage if you really feel that way. I hope you are trolling. The worse thing we as humans can do is act like to be human means we don't do anything bad/illegal. Killing people has always been one of the most human things we do as a species. The split-second America starts a war we love it when people die. But if it's a gang member fighting for different reasons, they are animals and not even human.

We lock humans up when they are a danger to society. Not because they are animals. And people that AREN'T locked up also rape people. It's not just prisoners that rape people.
 

BANGS

Banned
You're garbage if you really feel that way. I hope you are trolling... ...Killing people has always been one of the most human things we do as a species.
Yeah ok I'm not taking that bait lmfao. Take your goofy gang sympathizing gimmick to another forum that might fall for that shit...
 

Manus

Member
Yeah they are animals. I agree with our president. I mean they have that they love to rape people in their gang motto. Can't believe some people in here are defending them. They all should be shot. I don't want my tax dollars going towards taking care of them in prison.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Yeah ok I'm not taking that bait lmfao. Take your goofy gang sympathizing gimmick to another forum that might fall for that shit...
Yeah they are animals. I agree with our president. I mean they have that they love to rape people in their gang motto. Can't believe some people in here are defending them. They all should be shot. I don't want my tax dollars going towards taking care of them in prison.

You two sound like gang members without the colors. It's funny......saying that humans that murder and rape people are "terrible humans" is now considered "defending" people. Now if we don't call them animals, we are in the wrong. I see why we elected Trump now. This country is getting dumber by the day.
 
Last edited:

Weilthain

Banned
It’s really crazy how brain washed people are. So many celebs retweeting this rubbish. So many people will just believe it. Everyone keeps hating each other. All for ratings.
 

Manus

Member
You two sound like gang members without the colors. It's funny......saying that humans that murder and rape people are "terrible humans" is now considered "defending" people. Now if we don't call them animals, we are in the wrong. I see why we elected Trump now. This country is getting dumber by the day.

And with your idea no wonder we have Trump as president. You're to blind to actually see that. With thoughts like that and defending these rapid animals were gonna continue to have a president like Trump.
 
I've seen you several times claim you have used an intentional hyperbole to bring out a point and called out others for not understanding that. It's ironic how you can't see the hyperbole in this certain situation.

I am not the president of the United States. My words don't matter. Seriously, the standard you hold the president to is "some fucker on NeoGAF"?
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
And with your idea no wonder we have Trump as president. You're to blind to actually see that. With thoughts like that and defending these rapid animals were gonna continue to have a president like Trump.

You said I'm defending them because I'm only calling them "terrible human beings that murder and rape". Think about that for a second dude. Pathetic. We as a nation deserve worse. How we are holding things together baffles me.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
No just you lmfao

nah...nah...nah....all of us. It's not enough to lock gang members up for 50 years. We need to also dismember them, cut their tongues out, and display this on national tv. And then call them animals to justify it all.
 
And with your idea no wonder we have Trump as president. You're to blind to actually see that. With thoughts like that and defending these rapid animals were gonna continue to have a president like Trump.
Why are you worried that we might get presidents like Trump? So far nothing he seems to be doing warrants that.
 
Last edited:

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
This assumes that Trump uses words in any kind of precise way. (He doesn't.)

It also sounds like another one of those claims that something is a dog whistle for one group even though only people opposing that group ever hear the super-secret message embedded in it.

That person on Twitter does make a great point though. Don't treat Trump like he's some dumb, bumbling fool.
 
Bodies hanging from over passes, cutting peoples heads off with chainsaws, dissolving people in drums, dissolving people in drums, shoving hot metal rods into persons dick before killing them.

They are animals.. Are the PC now protecting the most vicious gang ever?
 

Airola

Member
I shouldn't google this thing more, it makes my head and heart and soul ache:
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...ald-trump-animals_us_5afd2234e4b0779345d5dc5f
That little article is stupid on its own by keeping on pushing that false narrative, but the Instagram post that article is based on is on a whole another level of stupid.

Let's imagine some terrorist group or a gang would shoot a brutal and painful execution on video and somehow that was seen by the general public. Let's imagine people calling them animals. Let's imagine Trump being among those who call them animals. Anyone countering that by posting a picture of zebras and saying "no, these are animals" would be nothing short of an idiot and an asshole. This situation is no different from that except that the general public hasn't seen the actual acts of violence even though these acts are known to them.

I am not the president of the United States. My words don't matter. Seriously, the standard you hold the president to is "some fucker on NeoGAF"?

No, you both have the same standards on arguments. You don't get to decide that you are the only one who can hyperbole the hell out of the argument.

Any sane person understood Trump was calling violent criminals animals there. Any sane person understood Trump doesn't think they really are not humans. Any sane person understood he called them animals in the sense that their behaviour is inhumane.

And any sane person knows all of this spin about "but no-one should call anyone an animal" is only because the original "Trump called immigrants animals" wasn't correct and those who already hate Trump feel bad if they have to take back their words.

Just think about it, the thing that now seems to be wrong in this whole situation is that Trump has "devalued" a group of criminals who rape, torture and murder. Even if Trump was wrong with what he said, that is what he did wrong. He devalued a group of criminals who rape, torture and murder. That's it. What a horrible president he is. He dares to call inhumane criminals names.

The bubble you live in must have come from some unbelievably flowery and fruity smelling soap based on how desperately you want to stay inside of it.
 

Airola

Member
Bodies hanging from over passes, cutting peoples heads off with chainsaws, dissolving people in drums, dissolving people in drums, shoving hot metal rods into persons dick before killing them.

They are animals.. Are the PC now protecting the most vicious gang ever?

They hate one person that much that they are willing to go that route.
 

bigedole

Member
It's disgusting what lengths people will go to to attack Trump. Members of that gang are vile pieces of human trash that I would put below animals, at least animals have a reason when they torture/kill. Anyone who is saying "Yeah but no human is an animal" really needs to go and read about what this specific group has done. Think long and hard about who you're willing to defend just to be "on the right side".
 
Last edited:
It's disgusting what lengths people will go to to attack Trump. Members of that gang are vile pieces of human trash that I would put below animals, at least animals have a reason when they torture/kill. Anyone who is saying "Yeah but no human is an animal" really needs to go and read about what this specific group has done. Think long and hard about who you're willing to defend just to be "on the right side".

I think one of the worst arguments they have is that they have some amount of sympathy for the gang because of their living conditions i.e. (presumably) poverty.
 
No, you both have the same standards on arguments. You don't get to decide that you are the only one who can hyperbole the hell out of the argument.

I've never made that claim here on GAF, and I challenge you to find a post of mine wherein I do. If I'm arguing with you on GAF, you're more than welcome to hyperbole your arguments, precisely because I do it all the time.

I have a problem with the way our president speaks, because he is the president. And for no other reason. Once he gets out of office and is back to being a private citizen, I don't care how he speaks, because he's no longer in a position of extreme power. But for right now, he's still the president, and his words matter.

Any sane person understood Trump was calling violent criminals animals there. Any sane person understood Trump doesn't think they really are not humans. Any sane person understood he called them animals in the sense that their behaviour is inhumane.

And any sane person knows all of this spin about "but no-one should call anyone an animal" is only because the original "Trump called immigrants animals" wasn't correct and those who already hate Trump feel bad if they have to take back their words.

It isn't spin; people do actually feel that way. I had people crying at me to not celebrate Osama bin Laden's death, because something something no one should ever celebrate the end of a human life something something. But I still ran out into the middle of my college campus and drank and partied with everyone else.

Look, it's more complicated than you're making it out to be. It's okay to recognize that these people are villains, and it would even be okay to celebrate their demise. The problem is the dehumanization of them. Seeing them as something sub-human does us all a disservice, because we need to be honest with ourselves about the nature of humanity and the things that all of us are capable of doing under the right circumstances. It's not monsters, it's not aliens from another planet committing atrocities. It's human beings. It's us. We have to recognize this.

The issue I have is with his vagaries on the matter, because even though the person Trump was speaking to brought up the gang, Trump took it in a slightly different direction. The majority of the people that we're rounding up and throwing out are not in that gang, but Trump decided to lump them all together into the same group. I mean, hell, MS-13 started in Los Angeles. They're homegrown. So why are they being lumped in with immigrants coming into the country in the first place?
 
Last edited:

Gun Animal

Member
If your only idea of what race is, is based off a Youtube video that claims Leftist Psychology, a term I've never heard before, was responsible for the Unabomber...I think it's fair for me to guess you know bugger all about it. Don't get me wrong. I totally agree with the conclusion you have, I just think you don't actually know much about this beyond perhaps a series of talking points.

lol your comprehension is sub-optimal. that video was a narrated exerpt from the Unabomber Manifesto (Industrial Society and it's Future), the greatest written work of the 20th century. You're so low info that it's very difficult to talk to you.
 

Hissing Sid

Member
Always fun watching people throw themselves around a mental assault course when it comes to anything Trump says or does.

But then I guess when the Devil speaks, anything he says must be evil cos he’s the Devil right?

Stands to reason dunnit?

So saying the opposite to anything the Devil says must count as good and is therefore a pure and holy deed, Indeed.

And then you find yourself sweating and out of breath on the other side of the scramble net, having defended the indefensible, wondering why everyone else is throwing you funny looks and pointing.

Hah! What do they know?

They’re probably in league with Lucifer!
 

Airola

Member
I've never made that claim here on GAF, and I challenge you to find a post of mine wherein I do.

Read a couple of sentences further your own post.

If I'm arguing with you on GAF, you're more than welcome to hyperbole your arguments, precisely because I do it all the time.

So what would you say then if I were to call these criminals animals as a hyberbole? You would understand what I mean if it was me who said it but you wouldn't understand if it was the president who said that?

I have a problem with the way our president speaks, because he is the president. And for no other reason. Once he gets out of office and is back to being a private citizen, I don't care how he speaks, because he's no longer in a position of extreme power. But for right now, he's still the president, and his words matter.

From another point of view you could argue that because his words matter, it is perfectly ok for him to call those criminals animals because it sends the message that even the president despises their actions that much.


It isn't spin; people do actually feel that way. I had people crying at me to not celebrate Osama bin Laden's death, because something something no one should ever celebrate the end of a human life something something.

I did the same when bin Laden and Saddam Hussein died. I used to think that way too, so I kinda understand where you are coming from. With Hussein there was do doubt in me that we shouldn't celebrate his death and that any death, even his, is a tragedy. With bin Laden, I still argued for the same thing but I had begun to doubt if that view really made any sense.

Look, it's more complicated than you're making it out to be. It's okay to recognize that these people are villains, and it would even be okay to celebrate their demise. The problem is the dehumanization of them. Seeing them as something sub-human does us all a disservice, because we need to be honest with ourselves about the nature of humanity and the things that all of us are capable of doing under the right circumstances. It's not monsters, it's not aliens from another planet committing atrocities. It's human beings. It's us. We have to recognize this.

I get what you mean, but through the years I've started to understand that part of humanity is that there are these animal tendencies in us, and that the point isn't to dehumanize them but to address the issue in their inhumane behaviour when people say someone is "an animal" or "a monster" or "not people." People full well understand they are us. And because of they know they are us, calling them animals has a lot more meaning. They know we are all people but they also know that there are those among us who act in a completely opposite manner. To say they are animals has a lot more meaning than just saying they are horrible people or criminals or whatever else.

I was such a big anti-gun pacifist that when someone asked what I would do if a member of my family was raped and/or killed and I had a gun, I told I would not use the gun and would look for other means to intervene, and told they are not animals but human beings who have the right to live. You might not be that hardcore in this subject but I was and I'm pretty embarrassed of that now. That was in the early or mid 2000's. Not that I've changed into pro-gun or completely gotten rid of all "pacifist" views, but I've certainly lost quite a bit of the more naive ways to think about the subject.

The issue I have is with his vagaries on the matter, because even though the person Trump was speaking to brought up the gang, Trump took it in a slightly different direction. The majority of the people that we're rounding up and throwing out are not in that gang, but Trump decided to lump them all together into the same group. I mean, hell, MS-13 started in Los Angeles. They're homegrown. So why are they being lumped in with immigrants coming into the country in the first place?

Have you even listened to the whole discussion?
It's clear from the beginning that Trump is focusing on criminals connected to violence, drugs etc.
It doesn't matter where MS-13 started in. It matters where it gets their members. The context in that part of the discussion was that the lady there told how they can't report these MS-13 gang members because of sanctuary laws. So obviously she was saying there are people who come in this country that they know are MS-13 members, but what they can do to the local MS-13 members is something they can't do if they come from another country. That's a huge problem, I assume you would agree on that. And as a comment on that Trump replied they have been able to stop some of these criminals coming to the country.
 

Metaphoreus

This is semantics, and nothing more
That person on Twitter does make a great point though. Don't treat Trump like he's some dumb, bumbling fool.

... but isn't he?

Sure, we should hold the president to a higher standard. But we also shouldn't attribute to intelligent malice what is better explained by... well, Donald Trump being a dumb, bumbling fool.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
They hate one person that much that they are willing to go that route.

This has zero to do with Trump and everything to do with the way we view humans. I hate it when people say the KKK, slave owners, etc were animals. They weren't! They were humans that did terrible acts. The reason I personally don't call people "animals" is that it can change your view of how you'd like them to be treated next. The word "animal" allows a person's mind to accept inhumane behavior to being done to them.

I used to call terrible people animals years ago, but I've learned to not think that way.
 

Airola

Member
This has zero to do with Trump and everything to do with the way we view humans. I hate it when people say the KKK, slave owners, etc were animals. They weren't! They were humans that did terrible acts. The reason I personally don't call people "animals" is that it can change your view of how you'd like them to be treated next. The word "animal" allows a person's mind to accept inhumane behavior to being done to them.

I used to call terrible people animals years ago, but I've learned to not think that way.

I don't personally like to call people animals either. I don't like to call them monsters. One reason I love Twin Peaks is that they show how good people can do terrible things and people who do terrible things can still be loved. But I understand really well if someone wants to call, say, a person who tortures, rapes and kills someone an animal or a monster. I personally wouldn't necessarily say it, but I definitely understand people who do.

If you do inhumane things to others, you should be prepared the same happen to you. Not that I advocate physical retaliation for crimes or that I encourage people to take law on their own hands, but if someone goes and beats the hell out of someone who has raped and murdered their child, I wouldn't have any sympathy for the rapist murderer. I wouldn't go and say, or even think, that this rapist has been handled wrong when the father of the victim beat him up.

That said, I will wholeheartedly applaud people who can and will forgive even people like that, like the father of a victim of Gary Ridgway - he forgave Gary even though his daughter was raped and murdered by him - this video still brings me to tears - and in that video I can feel sympathy for that "animal" because of his reaction to that forgiveness. See, people with an "animal status" can be loved. They can change. They can show regret. But it doesn't change the fact that their behaviour has been horrible and disgusting to the point that it defies all what we think civilized humans ought to be.

I wouldn't understand someone calling someone who grab's someone's butt without a consent an animal. I wouldn't understand someone calling a thief an animal. I wouldn't understand someone who punched a person who then fell down, hit the head to the ground and died an animal. I wouldn't understand someone shooting a person during a robbery an animal. But people who torture, rape and murder, saw people to pieces, drag the corpses for people to see, burn people alive, that kind of inhumane acts are something that goes beyond "normal" crimes and bad behaviour. And I will not say one word of criticism towards people who see them as animals. You act like an "animal", you deserve to be called an animal. You don't have to be called an animal, but if someone does call that person an animal they've reaped what they've sown.

These people are already the lowest of low in people's eyes even if people wouldn't call them animals. As if that word would make them suddenly think they are lower than what they already think they are.

I wouldn't say there are people beyond redemption but some are very close to that. And I think it's pettiness in it's highest form to call out people who go and call those people animals. Calling someone an animal is really damn low in a list of unacceptable behaviour. They have murdered, they have raped, they have tortured and they don't regret it. They sure as hell deserve a punishment of some sort. They at least deserve to get their freedom taken away. Like, what, people call you less than a human? Too bad, maybe you shouldn't have participated in torture, rape and murder and maybe you at the very least should've shown regret about it.

And once more, no-one thinks they are not-humans. The "animal" and "not people" means they are humans and they are people but that their acts are as if they weren't.

Someone should make a comedy sketch where a person who has tortured, raped and murdered people gets sentenced for life and maybe even gets a death sentence on top of it, but when someone comes and calls him "an animal" there's one person who steps ahead and starts saying "no, don't say that, don't call him an animal, that's uncalled for!" As if calling the criminal an animal somehow makes the criminal's situation worse. As if calling someone an animal goes over the line after sentencing to jail for life.
 

KINGMOKU

Member
Trump is trying to rile you up, and lead you blind. MS13 is a violent street gang, not a cartel, and we would target them with anti-gang mechanisms. They're homegrown. Obama attempted to label them higher, but they're not organized.
Nobody riles me up as I am my own man, thus I do my own research so you can stop with the passive aggressive "your dumb" routine. Do better.

There is a point that a human being loses that label and have lost their right to be treated as such. Past the point of no return, and my heart only bleeds for those who deserve it.

Only animals butcher children, mutilate bodies, and do things I can't even describe.

I'm not blind. My eyes are wide open and compassion ends when it should.
 
Top Bottom