Now Kondor wheres the other possible argument? No time to explain it from another way right?
Like I said the FB post was from someone who wasn't even involved. A random FB post that isn't even at the links provided.
I don't understand, CC... there are a myriad of possible explanations, many of which have been given good service here already... I was under the impression that I was merely serving-up another couple of such... but my own meager contribution was by no means intended to be all-inclusive and exclusionary of others, if that's where you were heading with that...
No what you did was go with a rumor then seek to explain (legitimize) the rumor to move from being hear say to a genuine topic.
For example: I say you **** goats. Someone else says if he ***** goats he must like a hairy ass. Someone else says if he likes hairy ass he must like guys!
See how that happens? No, I bet you don't just because you did it
Hmmmmm...
I did not see myself as "
going with a rumor" (as in locking that down as the real cause)...
It was a Devils Advocate -caliber speculative exercise, with the Deaf-White/Injured-Black scenario as its underlying basis.
I saw myself exploring that much discussed possibility, from the perspective of honest mistakes possibly triggering more visceral or biased reactions on both sides.
After emphasizing the world
"IF" twice in letters the size of the Empire State Building, I don't know what more I could have done to clearly label the post as speculative, contingent upon the veracity of that alternative explanation.
I also went so far as to say, if there was a disturbance underway, then, regardless of the cause, I could see how a restaurant manager could eject a bunch of folks whose number included the person(s) who were loudly venting their spleens and disturbing customers.
But I did not take the Alternative Story as Gospel Truth; nor was the piece meant to be some kind of lame and oblique way to reinforce the idea that it was credible.
Rather, it had simply been bandied-about so much, I was drawn to contributing a little myself, with the very clear caveat that its veracity was still very much in question.
That is my right as a contributor here, and it is a legitimate and permissible gambit, in exploring all of the possible explanations.
I also called for more information from stakeholders on all sides, before we rushed to judgment.
I have my own biases, like all of us, with respect to race and race-relations, but I also possess sufficient objectivity and goodwill and ethical and moral fiber, to shun the harmful effects of racial bias to the best of my own poor ability.
That includes race-baiting and hate-mongering coming from the
Black side of the so-called racial divide, as
well as the
White side.
That includes rejecting one-sided explanations of racial incidents until all of the data is in.
And, until that 'rumor' has been quelled, and while that 'rumor' is being actively discussed, it was (and is) entirely permissible and ethical to explore its ramifications.
Such exploration does not legitimize nor reinforce the rumor; it merely sets the stage for a 'what-if' scenario.
And, of course, until we
KNOW, with some reliable degree of certainty, what
DID happen, then... the whole damned thing is up-for-grabs, and 'what-if' scenarios are part-and-parcel of that mix...
Sorry you don't feel that way about it, but, them's the breaks, sometimes...