It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Jamie1
One target, white police, is an approved target. The other, a black QB accused of rape, is disapproved. If the intent of the action is to criticize white police, it's ok. If it's to criticize a black QB, it's not ok.
So wouldn't you have to have Oregon approving the protest on police, or I am sorry on white police, and then not allowing this to prove your point?
Where has Oregon, the school in question, approved one thing and not the other?
You are using actions of others to demonize what Oregon is doing.
Please call people out in the future about race baiting, seems you know all about it.
originally posted by: Jamie1
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: DenyObfuscation
The school has an entire clause of it's student athlete code of conduct dedicated to unsportsmanlike behavior. I would say taunting an opponent on national television after winning a bowl game falls under unsportsmanlike behavior.
Winston's "conduct" has included shooting up the school causing $4000 in damage, being accused of rape, stealing from restaurants, and of course jumping up on a table on campus and screaming "F** her right in the P***" even after being accused of rape.
And yet the Oregon players are going to be punished for chanting "No means no."
Return your gun to its holster please. You have no jurisdiction here. That quote wasn't 'cherry picking', BTW.
Cherry pick quotes all you want bub.
How was it violated by chanting "No means no"? Intent has to be interpreted.
The school has a code against unsportsmanlike conduct.
You made my point.
I would think it was fairly evident that the behavior exceeded the bounds of celebration and jubilation of winning the game.
So it must be true then? Have you thought about that? Can you think about that? Maybe you shouldn't.
Did the coach say anything about not liking their message? Or did he say he was aware of the BEHAVIOR?
I don't need to, given that you can't explain the evil inherent to the behavior and resort to 'Coach said this so it must be true'.
Can you find me anything from the coach saying he didn't like the thought process of the players?
originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Jamie1
So your issue is with florida state allowing him to do what ever he wants and letting him get away with it.
Well he was suspended for half a game.
Again, what does Oregon's actions have to do with any of that?
That's what the issue is - punishing players for making statements that are not politically correct, and allowing other players to go unpunished for making statements that are politically correct.
originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Jamie1
So then you have the coach not approving of the actions, so it was not approved as your said.
It was his decision to not take it any further.
And as you keep making this about how the white man is being targeted for being white, how is it not race baiting?
You have made this all about race since the OP.
It was all about how hard the white man has cause of the constant 'targeting' of white males.
The coach saw this as a taunt after winning the game, it was not a stand against the actions of the player.
All the stuff you talk about happened pre game, this happened post game during celebration, context is important.
originally posted by: Jamie1
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Jamie1
In you opening paragraph you state…
The chant was in reference to the rape allegations against Florida St. quarterback Jameis Winston.
I agree with you. But then you say…
Or maybe the players chanting "no means no" with the tomahawk chop were making a statement about STOPPING Jameis Winston from scoring on the field and winning the game.
Neither of these suggestions have anything to do with race.
The part that has to do with race is who the chants are directed towards.
Protesting against white cops - approved.
Direct ridicule to black QB - punished.
originally posted by: ImaFungi
Same exact situation, if the quarterback was white, the same thing would have occurred, I actually bet there would have been more outrage. If you do not agree with me on that, you really are not familiar with the sports world, and the world of college football in particular, and the media in general.
I would bet my life if they were chanting "I can't breathe" or "Hands up, don't shoot" and the white coach said he was going to punish them, the white coach would be fired before the next game
If the intent of the action is to criticize white police, it's ok. If it's to criticize a black QB, it's not ok.
I'm defending the black players who are going to be punished by their white coach.