Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday October 29 2016, @02:53PM   Printer-friendly
from the whatever-happened-to-DEsegregation? dept.

The Washington Times reports a story about protesters on the UC Berkeley campus physically blocking white students from accessing a bridge while police stand by and watch:

Students at the University of California, Berkeley held a day of protest on Friday to demand the creation of additional “safe spaces” for transgender and nonwhite students, during which a human chain was formed on a main campus artery to prevent white students from getting to class.

The demonstrators were caught on video blocking Berkeley’s Sather Gate, holding large banners advocating the creation of physical spaces segregated by race and gender identity, including one that read “Fight 4 Spaces of Color.”

Protesters can be heard shouting “Go around!” to white students who attempt to go through the blockade, while students of color are greeted with calls of “Let him through!”

Students turned away by the mob are later shown filing through trees and ducking under branches in order to cross Strawberry Creek, which runs underneath the bridge.

The protests were a response to a Safe Space being moved from the fifth floor of a building down to the basement.


[Original version of this story had "UCLA"; corrected to: "UC Berkeley" -Ed.]

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by cubancigar11 on Saturday October 29 2016, @08:34PM

    by cubancigar11 (330) on Saturday October 29 2016, @08:34PM (#420240) Homepage Journal

    That's not informative that's mis informative. People are going around because they don't want to be hassled into the staged "protest". Just because non-white people are going around a blockade doesn't mean blockade is not racist in nature, the same way a black or white person sitting in his home doesn't mean the riots on the street are not racially motivated.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=2, Interesting=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 29 2016, @09:04PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 29 2016, @09:04PM (#420256)

    Wow, you sure are an apologist.

    If the protestors were actually letting non-whites through you'd think the video would show it and then show them continuing on their way. Yet oddly all the video clips of people crossing the line mysteriously end the very second they enter the line. Not a single one of them is shown continuing on past the line. I wonder, why would the video editor deliberately leave out the most damning evidence?

    Oh yeah, because there was no evidence.

    All they've got are a couple of shots of people joining the protest, and if you look closely you can even see the new people chanting. Specifically the girl in the black shirt and black backpack at 1:36.

    • (Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Saturday October 29 2016, @10:35PM

      by cubancigar11 (330) on Saturday October 29 2016, @10:35PM (#420298) Homepage Journal

      I am sorry but you are holding me to a standard of evidence which is higher than than what you have for the protestors. May be you need damning evidence to agree to the anti-white sentiment among sjws but this is not court and I am aware of the long history of anti-cis-white-male-'check your privilege' ideology behind these protests for demanding 'safe-spaces'. Time to take your head out of the sand.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @12:21AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 30 2016, @12:21AM (#420374)

        > I am sorry but you are holding me to a standard of evidence which is higher than than what you have for the protestors.

        The standard is for the person making claims about the protestors. He shot the video, he edited the video. He deliberately chose to leave out what should have been the best evidence. I'm not defending the protestors. They may be racist. But the evidence presented is weak as shit. On one hand you have a university official saying the opposite on the record. If he's lying that's his job at risk. On the other hand you've got a nobody with a clear agenda doing a piss poor job of documenting his claims.

        You believe the later because you want to believe it. Not because the evidence is good.

        Give it a week and there will be cell phone footage from other people showing us what this guy left out of his video. 10 to 1 it completely demolishes it. But it won't matter because, "A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on."