General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSaveOurDemocracy
(4,400 posts)True Blue American
(17,988 posts)She was oblivious to that look.
CurtEastPoint
(18,663 posts)lapucelle
(18,319 posts)She has said that the Abu Ghraib prison scandal's fallout was overblown and that opponents of then-President Bush used it to construct an exaggerated "master narrative"; she said that Abu Ghraib was "torture lite" compared to more brutal atrocities, such as those of Pol Pot. She stated that the interrogation techniques promulgated in the war on terror were "light years" from real torture and "hedged around" with bureaucratic safeguards.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heather_Mac_Donald
wryter2000
(46,081 posts)Wow. Something to be really proud of.
deurbano
(2,895 posts)Takket
(21,625 posts)sharedvalues
(6,916 posts)Typical Republican liar, propped up by billionaire funding
True Blue American
(17,988 posts)yardwork
(61,703 posts)tblue37
(65,488 posts)where she isn't permitted to teach first-year students any more?
No, sorry--that isn't her. Who is it?
lapucelle
(18,319 posts)tblue37
(65,488 posts)CurtEastPoint
(18,663 posts)sharedvalues
(6,916 posts)True Dough
(17,321 posts)It never stops.
lapucelle
(18,319 posts)Collimator
(1,639 posts)But I do recognize the demeanor of a person who is attempting to be professional and respectful in a discussion around a subject that has clearly impacted his life experiences in a way in which the first speaker can never truly comprehend.
lapucelle
(18,319 posts)tblue37
(65,488 posts)lapucelle
(18,319 posts)relationship between race of the victim and police shootings.
He countered that the data in the study she cited were correlational rather than causal, by the admission of the study's authors. Thus her conclusion about cause and effect was flawed, agenda-driven junk science.
wryter2000
(46,081 posts)The sound cut in and out for me, even though I tried it twice. "Agenda-driven junk science." Them's fightin' words among scientists.
CurtEastPoint
(18,663 posts)white cops shooting black men more often than would be expected is false.
He then refuted her saying that the study she quoted has been essentially debunked.
chowder66
(9,080 posts)Miss McDonald: "We are also told we are Living through an epidemic of racially biased police shootings of black men, this too is false.
[Dr. Goff turns and looks at her astonishingly].
"A study published this August in the proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences is just the latest research undercutting the media narrative about race and police shootings, it is the rate of violent crime.......".
[Video Ends of Miss McDonald]
Second video showing Dr. Goff responding;
Dr Goff: "The study just cited by Miss McDonald the proceedings National Academy of Sciences does not show that the white officers are less or more likely to be involved in deadly shootings. It simply does not. It's correlational study and the authors themselves have admitted to others in the scientific community that the central causal claim that they make, which is that there is no bias in this, is unsupported by the data that has been made public and have been publicly analyzed by scholars like Jonathan Momo at Princeton Universtiy. I do not like to be a part of anything where that becomes a laundromat for junk science for I apologize for stepping out of my character to say so".
[Dr. Goff then breathes a heavy frustrated sigh].
[Video ends of Dr. Goff]
There is much more at the link below......
https://www.c-span.org/video/?464473-1/judiciary-committee-holds-oversight-hearing-policing-practices&start=3541
True Blue American
(17,988 posts)When he answered.
ismnotwasm
(42,008 posts)brush
(53,862 posts)She needs to be doxxed and ridiculed? I'm so glad the African American professor sitting right next to her refuted her lies.
And think of the nerve she had to think she could spew lies like that sitting right next to a black man. Apparently some people think AAs are just supposed to accept their bullshit.
It would have been nice if there was a video of her reaction to him exposing her lies.
lapucelle
(18,319 posts)rusty fender
(3,428 posts)wryter2000
(46,081 posts)Did not let her get away with it.
I am so effing sick of people sitting in front of congress and lying their asses off. It's about damned time people start going to jail for it.
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)and he is one of the leading experts on police bias. He is a very thoughtful scholar. I once sat through a workshop on implicit bias he was leading, and it was fantastic.
His parents, by the way, were featured in a documentary a year or two ago about the Loving decision and the first mixed race couples who were impacted by it (his dad is white and his mom is black). They're a great couple!
This woman is nothing but a rightwing idiot.
gordianot
(15,245 posts)Then have to answer her assertion.
Jim__
(14,083 posts)I think this is the full report.
An excerpt:
There is widespread concern about racial disparities in fatal officer-involved shootings and that these disparities reflect discrimination by White officers. Existing databases of fatal shootings lack information about officers, and past analytic approaches have made it difficult to assess the contributions of factors like crime. We create a comprehensive database of officers involved in fatal shootings during 2015 and predict victim race from civilian, officer, and county characteristics. We find no evidence of anti-Black or anti-Hispanic disparities across shootings, and White officers are not more likely to shoot minority civilians than non-White officers. Instead, race-specific crime strongly predicts civilian race. This suggests that increasing diversity among officers by itself is unlikely to reduce racial disparity in police shootings.
Abstract
Despite extensive attention to racial disparities in police shootings, two problems have hindered progress on this issue. First, databases of fatal officer-involved shootings (FOIS) lack details about officers, making it difficult to test whether racial disparities vary by officer characteristics. Second, there are conflicting views on which benchmark should be used to determine racial disparities when the outcome is the rate at which members from racial groups are fatally shot. We address these issues by creating a database of FOIS that includes detailed officer information. We test racial disparities using an approach that sidesteps the benchmark debate by directly predicting the race of civilians fatally shot rather than comparing the rate at which racial groups are shot to some benchmark. We report three main findings: 1) As the proportion of Black or Hispanic officers in a FOIS increases, a person shot is more likely to be Black or Hispanic than White, a disparity explained by county demographics; 2) race-specific county-level violent crime strongly predicts the race of the civilian shot; and 3) although we find no overall evidence of anti-Black or anti-Hispanic disparities in fatal shootings, when focusing on different subtypes of shootings (e.g., unarmed shootings or suicide by cop), data are too uncertain to draw firm conclusions. We highlight the need to enforce federal policies that record both officer and civilian information in FOIS.
underpants
(182,879 posts)Thank you.
Snackshack
(2,541 posts)Cognitive Dissonance is strong with her.
stopdiggin
(11,361 posts)thanks. still chuckling. that was worth the price of admission!
patphil
(6,207 posts)She wears her racist colors well.
Patrick Phillips
Iggo
(47,565 posts)We've been killing this many black men the whole time and you people are just catching on?