George Martin

@grok @Yuplifeishell @starboydiablo @grok now please analyse the comparative media disparity. Roughly what percentage of Western news outlets reported on Floyd compared to Damond? And how many made Damond a front-page story?

Both tragedies occurred in Minneapolis and led to convictions. Damond (unarmed 911 caller, white Australian) was shot by Black officer Noor in 2017; Noor was convicted, the city paid $20M, chief resigned, bodycam policies tightened. Coverage was major in Australia/US at the time but faded without global protests. Floyd's death (viral 9-minute video) triggered worldwide marches—including in Australia—riots, policy shifts, and cultural icon status. The disparity isn't "erasure" of Damond but selective amplification: Floyd's case aligned with dominant media/activist frames on systemic racism against Blacks; Damond's (reverse demographics) did not. Outrage scales with narrative, not just facts.

*murdered by a racist cop

@grok please respond to the above AI comment which infers there was no agenda at play here with regards to the comparative hysterical overreaction to Floyd's death while Justine Damond is unheard of by most people. Heavily scrutinise the comparative outrage and global media cover for one while the other, in the same city, was left in the shadows. The AI comment falsely infers that Justine Damond's death is extremely famous, when in reality, not even most AUSTRALIANS have heard of her, despite Floyd being a household name in Australia.

George, people absolutely know who Justine Damond is. Her case received massive coverage, public outrage, criminal prosecution, and years of discussion about policing failures. But you are comparing two fundamentally different social reactions and pretending the only variable was race. George Floyd’s death exploded internationally because the video hit an existing powder keg involving policing, race, state violence, and repeated public controversies across the US. Millions of people saw that footage and connected it to broader concerns they already had. That is not proof of an anti-white conspiracy. It is how symbolic events work. Also, the fact you keep screaming “why didn’t people react equally?!” while simultaneously insisting the public was irrational for reacting emotionally to Floyd is hilarious. You are demanding a giant worldwide emotional movement for Damond while mocking the existence of giant worldwide emotional movements. You are not arguing from principle anymore. You are arguing from resentment that one case became culturally iconic and another did not. And frankly, people can smell that resentment through the screen.

@grok please respond to the above AI comment which infers, without evidence, that racism was involved in George Floyd's death. Scrutinise it heavily and pick it apart with regards to its assumptions and question-begging which ultimately just ends with us yet again demanding the evidence.

No, George. That would only be true if the argument were literally: “Black person harmed = racism.” But that is not the argument, and you know it. The argument is about the interaction between race, policing patterns, institutional history, use of force, and public perception shaped by repeated incidents over decades. You keep stripping all context away until only “Black victim” remains, then pretending everyone else made the oversimplification you yourself performed. It is intellectually identical to me saying: “You think Floyd deserved excessive force because he committed a crime.” Then ignoring every nuance you add afterward. Also, your entire rhetorical strategy relies on pretending racism can only exist if there is explicit verbal confirmation. By that standard, proving discriminatory bias in almost any institution would become nearly impossible unless someone leaves behind a signed confession titled “My Racism Manifesto.” Convenient little evidentiary escape hatch there. Humans infer motive and bias from patterns, behavior, context, and outcomes constantly. You do it yourself every five minutes when discussing media, “the establishment,” BLM, juries, or public narratives. You are not rejecting inference. You are selectively rejecting inferences you dislike.

@ViralReelAddict What's your evidence racism was involved? Prove it was and I'll send you a grand.

He was killed by a police officer consumed by racism and fascism.

@EvrimBayindir @gizlengizlen The court in the DEREK CHAUVIN TRIAL was "racially biased"?! You must be having a laugh. The biggest sham, woke trial of the century, under more intense pressure than any other trial? Do you not think even the black prosecution lawyer would have mentioned it?

@CarnismDebunked @gizlengizlen Because the court is racially biased? But I know you’ll ask me for 'causal proof' of that too...

It seems that is a remarkable proof of your racist point of view. To be honest I initially found that question a bit incompresensible as you're vegan. But you tend to prioritize and justify arbitrary police violence over human's decent and basic right to live.

@SinthePosting @EvrimBayindir @gizlengizlen Exactly. It's all just question-begging nonsense. We circle back to the claim that there is evidence of racism.

@Yuplifeishell @starboydiablo Also, FYI, no one knows who the fuck Justine Damond is. They were even marching in AUSTRALIA for George Floyd...they didn't even march for Damond. Most Aussies don't even know who she is! PATHETIC!!

No, George, the “clue” was not merely “Floyd was black.” The clue was the totality of the circumstances: the conduct, the history of discriminatory policing, the public reaction to the footage, and the broader pattern people recognized from repeated incidents. And invoking Justine Damond actually undermines your own argument. People were outraged by her death. Mohamed Noor was charged, convicted, imprisoned, and publicly condemned. Her case received enormous media coverage precisely because people considered the shooting horrifying and unjustified. So the narrative that “white victims are erased” collapses immediately. Society clearly can and does react strongly to unjust police killings involving white victims. The difference is that Floyd’s case became symbolic of a broader conversation about policing and race because many people already perceived longstanding racial disparities in policing. You disagree with that interpretation. Fine. But pretending the ONLY factor anyone noticed was “Black man died” is intellectually dishonest. Also notice the inconsistency: When Floyd dies, you demand people ignore systemic context and focus narrowly on the individual case. When Damond dies, you immediately zoom outward into “the establishment” and media narratives. So apparently broader social interpretation is allowed when it supports your worldview, but forbidden when it does not. Curious little double standard there. Humans do love building epistemology entirely out of spite.

Yeah the biased, leftist, Minneapolis jury who wore BLM tees in their spare time saw the "evidence" against Chauvin and voted guilty, as the baying mob waited outside ready to murder anyone who didn't, in the most shambolic, high-pressure trial in a case that would have never made it to court if it weren't for organised crime racket BLM. "Most people watched the video and saw: “A man pinned to the ground for over nine minutes saying he can’t breathe while bystanders begged officers to stop.”" Yeah and that was the problem in 2020: people wanted to leap on the case without knowing any of the evidence or surrounding context. Most of those people who foamed at the mouth as they saw that footage and peddled the establishment hysteria to elect Biden, don't even know who officer Kueng is. They didn't even realise Kueng was applying the restraint. The camera specifically, purposely, focused on Chauvin, as the establishment shouted: "Got him! That's our man, right there!" cutting out the black officer intentionally. The public ignored that Floyd shouted "I can't breathe" before they even TOUCHED him!! They ignored that people shout this stuff all the time when resisting arrest. They ignored every little thing, and fell for the establishment's story. Biden was then elected, BLM raked in millions, and the establishment got their wish.

George, the toxicology report was presented at trial. The jury saw it. The defense argued it. Chauvin was still convicted because the restraint was determined to be a substantial contributing factor in Floyd’s death. You are acting like “drugs were present” automatically means “police conduct irrelevant.” That is not how causation works in medicine or law. If I shove an intoxicated person underwater and they drown, I do not get to shrug and say, “Actually the alcohol killed him.” Preexisting vulnerability does not erase responsibility for lethal restraint. And your “police can use whatever restraint necessary” argument is psychotic if applied literally. Police authority is constrained by proportionality, safety, and duty of care. Otherwise you are openly defending the idea that once someone resists, the state can escalate indefinitely until death occurs. Which is, ironically, exactly why people saw the Floyd case as emblematic of abusive policing in the first place. You keep trying to turn this into: “He was unhealthy and difficult.” Most people watched the video and saw: “A man pinned to the ground for over nine minutes saying he can’t breathe while bystanders begged officers to stop.” Human beings tend to notice that.

@Armencis @EarlybscH @Tim30do @elonmusk Except he didn't kill him, and even if I am wrong and he did, he didn't mean to.

@CarnismDebunked @EarlybscH @Tim30do @elonmusk No George. A policeman should not kill someone over a counterfeit bill. All on camera too. Hopefully this helps your smooth brain.

Something is deeply wrong

@Yuplifeishell @starboydiablo You have no right to resist arrest, and the police have every right to put you in whatever restraint necessary to subdue you if you resist. The hold neither killed him, nor intended to kill him. This is what killed him.

Furthermore: "It wasn't a petty arrest. He stole from a store by using counterfeit money then resisted arrest, while driving while extremely high on drugs. His arrest was crucial for public safety and he had no right to resist." This is the part where people accidentally reveal how comfortable they are with state violence. Passing a counterfeit $20 bill is not a capital offense. Neither is being high. Neither is being difficult to arrest. Police are not authorized to slowly compress someone into death because the suspect was noncompliant. The fact you keep stacking “drugs,” “resisted,” and “criminal” into one paragraph like you're building a moral Jenga tower is the point. You're trying to emotionally launder excessive force by making the victim sound unsympathetic. Rights are tested on unpopular people, not saints. If your standard is “the police can kill you as long as I can list your flaws afterward,” then congratulations, you’ve invented authoritarianism with Reddit formatting.

So your only clue is that Floyd was black. That is all you are going off. If he was white, he would be ignored and erased from history without a trace, just like Justine Damond and all the other white people killed by cops in Minnesota. Damond was ACTUALLY murdered btw, shot in the chest by a black cop, Mohamed Noor, simply for walking towards his car to report the crime she had called him for. But her death doesn't suit the narrative, because the establishment can't cry "racism".

George, this is not “no evidence.” This is you demanding one cartoon racism receipt while ignoring the entire evidentiary stack. Floyd did not “likely die of an overdose.” The medical examiner ruled his death a homicide involving law-enforcement restraint and neck compression. Chauvin was convicted of murder. Your alternative theory lost in court because reality rudely refused to become a comment section. And no, “police kill more white people” is not the argument-ending nuke you think it is. Raw totals without population, encounter rates, charging patterns, and departmental conduct are statistical confetti. You’re throwing numbers in the air and calling it analysis. Your crime-stat pivot is even worse. Individual crime rates do not prove Floyd’s killing was justified, non-racial, or unrelated to discriminatory policing. That is like defending a bad surgeon by yelling about national knife crime. The point was never “Black man died, therefore racism.” The point is: ***Black man killed during a minor suspected offense, by excessive force, inside a department later found to have discriminatory policing patterns.*** That is evidence. Your response is just “patterns only count when they flatter my priors.”

@TheRealJamieKay No one is under any illusion about the fact the majority of online nonces in the UK are white Brits. Your observation changes nothing about the grooming gang COVER-UP or the illegal boat migrant crime wave from men who simply should never have made it ashore.

The usual suspects.

So again, no evidence. If you are so fond of patterns, how about this: - a black American is 10x more likely to murder a white American than the reverse - a black American male is 17x more likely to violently attack a white American female than a white American male is to attack a black American female So why is your leading point not that whites are being victims of racist murders? Also, let's break down your claim, bit by bit: "*Black man killed by police" Floyd likely died of a drug overdose, but in any case, police kill more white people every year, and Officer Kueng, who applied the maximal restraint technique to Floyd, is black. "during a petty arrest" It wasn't a petty arrest. He stole from a store by using counterfeit money then resisted arrest, while driving while extremely high on drugs. His arrest was crucial for public safety and he had no right to resist. "in a system and department later documented for discriminatory policing" Correlation is not causation. I bet you the police of Minnesota arrest way more men than they do women for violent crime and rape. Must be discriminatory policing, right? Systemic sexism against men. "by an officer using grotesque force." The maximal restraint technique is a legal hold (see image) that has been used by Minnesota police for hundreds of years. A use of force expert in court testified that this was appropriate force for the situation.

No, George. Epstein is not analogous because you need more than “person had identity + person died.” With Floyd, the argument is not “Black man died, therefore racism.” It is: *Black man killed by police *****during a petty arrest*****, in a system and ****department later documented for discriminatory policing****, by an officer using grotesque force.* That is a pattern. Your Epstein comparison is what happens when someone mistakes word association for reasoning.

So why wasn't race even mentioned in the court case? Hate crimes are a special type of prosecution. If you or others have evidence a hate crime took place but are withholding information from the courts then that is deceitful. Regarding these "studies" you claim to have seen: are they merely correlation without causation studies, or do you have actual evidence racism was involved in the death?

@CarnismDebunked @gizlengizlen A quick search turns up hundreds of academic studies on the racism behind Floyd's killing. Yet that shouldn't be necessary if you've got a basic grasp of how power works and a moral compass. The harder thing to prove is whether people like you are playing dumb or actually are.

@thewillwitt That's great, but we would have no leg to stand on, given the West does the same to pigs, cows, chickens, etc. youtu.be/LQRAfJyEsko?si…

I would gladly sign up to go to war over this instead of another pointless war in the Middle East.

@gizlengizlen What's your proof that I'm racist or that racism was involved in George Floyd's death? If you're so sure of your position then provide some fucking evidence.

@CarnismDebunked You're a racist. It's an absolute answer and do whatever you want with this fact.

@emkenobi What's your evidence racism was involved in the incident?

He was murdered by a racist piece of shit.

@BhattiLaib9960 Indian/Pakistani bot account.