In an interview, the creator of the TV show COPS, John Langley, admits that he
goes out of his way to show more white suspects on the show, even though black
people commit most of the crimes:
LANGLEY: "Here's the reality of street crime. Approximately 60% to 70% is committed by people of color. Only 30-35% of the suspects are white people. In
prisons, the numbers are pretty much the same. Around 35% of the inmates are white and the rest are black, hispanic, etc. Now on COPS, we reverse that. We show 60% to 70% white suspects and only 30%, sometimes maybe as high as 40% of
people of color. Why do we do that? Because I don't want to contribute to negative stereotyping. Everyone knows that street crime takes place in the ghettos. We all know that, or should know that. All of the white criminals are
in corporate boardrooms and places like that because they're not disenfranchised, so they do different kinds of crime."
Well, there you have it. White people are committing all kinds of crime all the time. You just can't see it. It's invisible crime. White people are constantly committing Madoff-level accounting frauds. Happens every day. Millions of white people are out there committing their invisible crimes with the same frequency as blacks and hispanics, you just can't see it.
Leftist Hollywood TV producers are sure of it. Just ask them. They'll happily tell you. In fact, they're so sure of it, they're willing to put fake racial propaganda on the air for decades, all to counteract this grave injustice they've made up in their own heads.
This is an incredible quote and it sums up leftism nicely. They actually think
they're justified when they lie to you in support of a fake narrative that they've invented because it suits their ideology. When reality stubbornly refuses to comply with the fantasy in their heads, they just lie about reality.
COPS also downplays the type of crimes the "marginalized communities" commit. When they do show bipocs getting arrested for things, it's almost always for things like low-level property crimes or drug possession. If a black guy murders someone or a hispanic guy holds up a liquor store and beats the proprietor, they don't show that. Those crimes only make it on the show if the
criminal is white.
This is why the new phenomenon on YouTube is the police body cam channels. They have no political agenda. They just show what happens with no attempt to conform to a narrative. And it's why the usual grievance groups are now pressuring YouTube to "do something" about these channels because they're constantly showing the larger public exactly what cops have to endure from all
the diversity out there, and how culturally enriched America is because of it.
They're also pressuring the cities themselves, who are required by law to release the footage to those who request it, but who are nevertheless buckling
to the pressure and starting to require disclosure from requestors as to why the footage is being requested and if it's not for what they deem to be a "legitimate purpose"-- i.e., for court or a lawsuit, etc.-- imposing onerous fees in order to obtain it.
California leads the way on this (as it does with most bad ideas). State law prohibits public release of body cam footage from law enforcement unless it's part of a legal proceeding pursuant to a judicial order. This is why almost all the YouTube police channels heavily feature footage from Florida, Wisconsin, Illinois, New Jersey, and Texas. Conspicuously missing are any episodes showing what happens on the streets of America's most populous state.
Illinois is desperately afraid of losing the race to the bottom, so in the last year, several bills have been introduced in the state legislature with regard to body cams. HB 1583 and HB 3524 would have limited access by changing
which officers are required to wear body cams in the first place and changed the requirements of when the cameras are required to be operating. HB 3515, HB
3380 and SB 1796 were broader. They targeted the person who requested the footage, either limiting the circumstances under which the footage can be requested, who is permitted to access it, or both.
So to sum up, politicians and grievance groups are going out of their way to suppress public records precisely because the truth is their mortal enemy and they understand that it is devastating to the fake narratives they want to push on the public. These body cams are a window in the reality of life in America that the Left desperately wants to keep hidden, which is why, after vociferously demanding body cams be implemented during the 2020 Summer of Love, they've now done a complete 180 and are doing everything they can to suppress them.
Regardless of what you think about mass surveillance, there's no question that
these cameras are in the public interest. They not only reveal police misconduct when it occurs but also protect society against the false claims of
racism and police brutality that have become ubiquitous over the last 20 years. We *should* be able to surveil what our public servants are doing on the street, as well as what (and whom) they're having to deal with on those streets. And you should be highly suspicious of any politician, group, or tech
platform that wants to hide it from you.
Americans have a right to see what these people have done to our country.
On 2026-08-05 8:26 p.m., BTR1701 wrote:
In an interview, the creator of the TV show COPS, John Langley, admitsI agree completely. In fact, I'd go one step further and strongly
that he
goes out of his way to show more white suspects on the show, even
though black
people commit most of the crimes:
LANGLEY: "Here's the reality of street crime. Approximately 60% to 70% is
committed by people of color. Only 30-35% of the suspects are white
people. In
prisons, the numbers are pretty much the same. Around 35% of the
inmates are
white and the rest are black, hispanic, etc. Now on COPS, we reverse
that. We
show 60% to 70% white suspects and only 30%, sometimes maybe as high
as 40% of
people of color. Why do we do that? Because I don't want to contribute to
negative stereotyping. Everyone knows that street crime takes place in
the
ghettos. We all know that, or should know that. All of the white
criminals are
in corporate boardrooms and places like that because they're not
disenfranchised, so they do different kinds of crime."
Well, there you have it. White people are committing all kinds of
crime all
the time. You just can't see it. It's invisible crime. White people are
constantly committing Madoff-level accounting frauds. Happens every day.
Millions of white people are out there committing their invisible
crimes with
the same frequency as blacks and hispanics, you just can't see it.
Leftist Hollywood TV producers are sure of it. Just ask them. They'll
happily
tell you. In fact, they're so sure of it, they're willing to put fake
racial
propaganda on the air for decades, all to counteract this grave injustice
they've made up in their own heads.
This is an incredible quote and it sums up leftism nicely. They
actually think
they're justified when they lie to you in support of a fake narrative
that
they've invented because it suits their ideology. When reality stubbornly
refuses to comply with the fantasy in their heads, they just lie about
reality.
COPS also downplays the type of crimes the "marginalized communities"
commit.
When they do show bipocs getting arrested for things, it's almost
always for
things like low-level property crimes or drug possession. If a black guy
murders someone or a hispanic guy holds up a liquor store and beats the
proprietor, they don't show that. Those crimes only make it on the
show if the
criminal is white.
This is why the new phenomenon on YouTube is the police body cam
channels.
They have no political agenda. They just show what happens with no
attempt to
conform to a narrative. And it's why the usual grievance groups are now
pressuring YouTube to "do something" about these channels because they're
constantly showing the larger public exactly what cops have to endure
from all
the diversity out there, and how culturally enriched America is
because of
it.
They're also pressuring the cities themselves, who are required by law to
release the footage to those who request it, but who are nevertheless
buckling
to the pressure and starting to require disclosure from requestors as
to why
the footage is being requested and if it's not for what they deem to be a
"legitimate purpose"-- i.e., for court or a lawsuit, etc.-- imposing
onerous
fees in order to obtain it.
California leads the way on this (as it does with most bad ideas).
State law
prohibits public release of body cam footage from law enforcement
unless it's
part of a legal proceeding pursuant to a judicial order. This is why
almost
all the YouTube police channels heavily feature footage from Florida,
Wisconsin, Illinois, New Jersey, and Texas. Conspicuously missing are any
episodes showing what happens on the streets of America's most populous
state.
Illinois is desperately afraid of losing the race to the bottom, so in
the
last year, several bills have been introduced in the state legislature
with
regard to body cams. HB 1583 and HB 3524 would have limited access by
changing
which officers are required to wear body cams in the first place and
changed
the requirements of when the cameras are required to be operating. HB
3515, HB
3380 and SB 1796 were broader. They targeted the person who requested the
footage, either limiting the circumstances under which the footage can be
requested, who is permitted to access it, or both.
So to sum up, politicians and grievance groups are going out of their
way to
suppress public records precisely because the truth is their mortal
enemy and
they understand that it is devastating to the fake narratives they
want to
push on the public. These body cams are a window in the reality of
life in
America that the Left desperately wants to keep hidden, which is why,
after
vociferously demanding body cams be implemented during the 2020 Summer of
Love, they've now done a complete 180 and are doing everything they
can to
suppress them.
Regardless of what you think about mass surveillance, there's no
question that
these cameras are in the public interest. They not only reveal police
misconduct when it occurs but also protect society against the false
claims of
racism and police brutality that have become ubiquitous over the last 20
years. We *should* be able to surveil what our public servants are
doing on
the street, as well as what (and whom) they're having to deal with on
those
streets. And you should be highly suspicious of any politician, group,
or tech
platform that wants to hide it from you.
Americans have a right to see what these people have done to our country.
recommend that every classroom in the land, from nursery schools to universities, have cameras and audio to record what goes on in the classrooms so that people can watch what their kids are being told. I
think people would be deeply disturbed if they saw and heard the things
that some teachers are telling their children. It's really hard to run
an indoctrination factory if the parents can literally see and hear what goes on and replay it at their leisure.
On 8/5/2026 10:47 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2026-08-05 8:26 p.m., BTR1701 wrote:
In an interview, the creator of the TV show COPS, John Langley, admits >>> that heI agree completely. In fact, I'd go one step further and strongly
goes out of his way to show more white suspects on the show, even
though black
people commit most of the crimes:
LANGLEY: "Here's the reality of street crime. Approximately 60% to 70% is >>> committed by people of color. Only 30-35% of the suspects are white
people. In
prisons, the numbers are pretty much the same. Around 35% of the
inmates are
white and the rest are black, hispanic, etc. Now on COPS, we reverse
that. We
show 60% to 70% white suspects and only 30%, sometimes maybe as high
as 40% of
people of color. Why do we do that? Because I don't want to contribute to >>> negative stereotyping. Everyone knows that street crime takes place in >>> the
ghettos. We all know that, or should know that. All of the white
criminals are
in corporate boardrooms and places like that because they're not
disenfranchised, so they do different kinds of crime."
Well, there you have it. White people are committing all kinds of
crime all
the time. You just can't see it. It's invisible crime. White people are >>> constantly committing Madoff-level accounting frauds. Happens every day. >>> Millions of white people are out there committing their invisible
crimes with
the same frequency as blacks and hispanics, you just can't see it.
Leftist Hollywood TV producers are sure of it. Just ask them. They'll
happily
tell you. In fact, they're so sure of it, they're willing to put fake
racial
propaganda on the air for decades, all to counteract this grave injustice >>> they've made up in their own heads.
This is an incredible quote and it sums up leftism nicely. They
actually think
they're justified when they lie to you in support of a fake narrative
that
they've invented because it suits their ideology. When reality stubbornly >>> refuses to comply with the fantasy in their heads, they just lie about
reality.
COPS also downplays the type of crimes the "marginalized communities"
commit.
When they do show bipocs getting arrested for things, it's almost
always for
things like low-level property crimes or drug possession. If a black guy >>> murders someone or a hispanic guy holds up a liquor store and beats the >>> proprietor, they don't show that. Those crimes only make it on the
show if the
criminal is white.
This is why the new phenomenon on YouTube is the police body cam
channels.
They have no political agenda. They just show what happens with no
attempt to
conform to a narrative. And it's why the usual grievance groups are now >>> pressuring YouTube to "do something" about these channels because they're >>> constantly showing the larger public exactly what cops have to endure
from all
the diversity out there, and how culturally enriched America is
because of
it.
They're also pressuring the cities themselves, who are required by law to >>> release the footage to those who request it, but who are nevertheless
buckling
to the pressure and starting to require disclosure from requestors as
to why
the footage is being requested and if it's not for what they deem to be a >>> "legitimate purpose"-- i.e., for court or a lawsuit, etc.-- imposing
onerous
fees in order to obtain it.
California leads the way on this (as it does with most bad ideas).
State law
prohibits public release of body cam footage from law enforcement
unless it's
part of a legal proceeding pursuant to a judicial order. This is why
almost
all the YouTube police channels heavily feature footage from Florida,
Wisconsin, Illinois, New Jersey, and Texas. Conspicuously missing are any >>> episodes showing what happens on the streets of America's most populous >>> state.
Illinois is desperately afraid of losing the race to the bottom, so in >>> the
last year, several bills have been introduced in the state legislature >>> with
regard to body cams. HB 1583 and HB 3524 would have limited access by
changing
which officers are required to wear body cams in the first place and
changed
the requirements of when the cameras are required to be operating. HB
3515, HB
3380 and SB 1796 were broader. They targeted the person who requested the >>> footage, either limiting the circumstances under which the footage can be >>> requested, who is permitted to access it, or both.
So to sum up, politicians and grievance groups are going out of their
way to
suppress public records precisely because the truth is their mortal
enemy and
they understand that it is devastating to the fake narratives they
want to
push on the public. These body cams are a window in the reality of
life in
America that the Left desperately wants to keep hidden, which is why,
after
vociferously demanding body cams be implemented during the 2020 Summer of >>> Love, they've now done a complete 180 and are doing everything they
can to
suppress them.
Regardless of what you think about mass surveillance, there's no
question that
these cameras are in the public interest. They not only reveal police
misconduct when it occurs but also protect society against the false
claims of
racism and police brutality that have become ubiquitous over the last 20 >>> years. We *should* be able to surveil what our public servants are
doing on
the street, as well as what (and whom) they're having to deal with on
those
streets. And you should be highly suspicious of any politician, group, >>> or tech
platform that wants to hide it from you.
Americans have a right to see what these people have done to our country. >>>
recommend that every classroom in the land, from nursery schools to
universities, have cameras and audio to record what goes on in the
classrooms so that people can watch what their kids are being told. I
think people would be deeply disturbed if they saw and heard the things
that some teachers are telling their children. It's really hard to run
an indoctrination factory if the parents can literally see and hear what >> goes on and replay it at their leisure.
You seem to want, rather than a teacher, an AI, inasmuch as no human
could function under such hypercritical scrutiny.
On 8/5/2026 10:47 PM, Rhino wrote:
classrooms so that people can watch what their kids are being told. I think people would be deeply disturbed if they saw and heard the things that some teachers are telling their children. It's really hard to run
an indoctrination factory if the parents can literally see and hear what goes on and replay it at their leisure.
You seem to want, rather than a teacher, an AI, inasmuch as no human
could function under such hypercritical scrutiny.
moviePig wrote in article <115286n$3u2sq$1@dont-email.me>:
On 8/5/2026 10:47 PM, Rhino wrote:
classrooms so that people can watch what their kids are being told. I
think people would be deeply disturbed if they saw and heard the things
that some teachers are telling their children. It's really hard to run
an indoctrination factory if the parents can literally see and hear what >>> goes on and replay it at their leisure.
You seem to want, rather than a teacher, an AI, inasmuch as no human
could function under such hypercritical scrutiny.
Everyone who works retail is in a similar position.
On Aug 6, 2026 at 8:11:18 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 8/5/2026 10:47 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2026-08-05 8:26 p.m., BTR1701 wrote:
In an interview, the creator of the TV show COPS, John Langley, admits >>>> that heI agree completely. In fact, I'd go one step further and strongly
goes out of his way to show more white suspects on the show, even
though black
people commit most of the crimes:
LANGLEY: "Here's the reality of street crime. Approximately 60% to 70% is
committed by people of color. Only 30-35% of the suspects are white
people. In
prisons, the numbers are pretty much the same. Around 35% of the
inmates are
white and the rest are black, hispanic, etc. Now on COPS, we reverse >>>> that. We
show 60% to 70% white suspects and only 30%, sometimes maybe as high >>>> as 40% of
people of color. Why do we do that? Because I don't want to contribute to
negative stereotyping. Everyone knows that street crime takes place in >>>> the
ghettos. We all know that, or should know that. All of the white
criminals are
in corporate boardrooms and places like that because they're not
disenfranchised, so they do different kinds of crime."
Well, there you have it. White people are committing all kinds of
crime all
the time. You just can't see it. It's invisible crime. White people are >>>> constantly committing Madoff-level accounting frauds. Happens every day. >>>> Millions of white people are out there committing their invisible
crimes with
the same frequency as blacks and hispanics, you just can't see it.
Leftist Hollywood TV producers are sure of it. Just ask them. They'll >>>> happily
tell you. In fact, they're so sure of it, they're willing to put fake >>>> racial
propaganda on the air for decades, all to counteract this grave injustice
they've made up in their own heads.
This is an incredible quote and it sums up leftism nicely. They
actually think
they're justified when they lie to you in support of a fake narrative >>>> that
they've invented because it suits their ideology. When reality stubbornly
refuses to comply with the fantasy in their heads, they just lie about >>>> reality.
COPS also downplays the type of crimes the "marginalized communities" >>>> commit.
When they do show bipocs getting arrested for things, it's almost
always for
things like low-level property crimes or drug possession. If a black guy >>>> murders someone or a hispanic guy holds up a liquor store and beats the >>>> proprietor, they don't show that. Those crimes only make it on the
show if the
criminal is white.
This is why the new phenomenon on YouTube is the police body cam
channels.
They have no political agenda. They just show what happens with no
attempt to
conform to a narrative. And it's why the usual grievance groups are now >>>> pressuring YouTube to "do something" about these channels because they're
constantly showing the larger public exactly what cops have to endure >>>> from all
the diversity out there, and how culturally enriched America is
because of
it.
They're also pressuring the cities themselves, who are required by law to
release the footage to those who request it, but who are nevertheless >>>> buckling
to the pressure and starting to require disclosure from requestors as >>>> to why
the footage is being requested and if it's not for what they deem to be a
"legitimate purpose"-- i.e., for court or a lawsuit, etc.-- imposing >>>> onerous
fees in order to obtain it.
California leads the way on this (as it does with most bad ideas).
State law
prohibits public release of body cam footage from law enforcement
unless it's
part of a legal proceeding pursuant to a judicial order. This is why >>>> almost
all the YouTube police channels heavily feature footage from Florida, >>>> Wisconsin, Illinois, New Jersey, and Texas. Conspicuously missing are any
episodes showing what happens on the streets of America's most populous >>>> state.
Illinois is desperately afraid of losing the race to the bottom, so in >>>> the
last year, several bills have been introduced in the state legislature >>>> with
regard to body cams. HB 1583 and HB 3524 would have limited access by >>>> changing
which officers are required to wear body cams in the first place and >>>> changed
the requirements of when the cameras are required to be operating. HB >>>> 3515, HB
3380 and SB 1796 were broader. They targeted the person who requested the
footage, either limiting the circumstances under which the footage can be
requested, who is permitted to access it, or both.
So to sum up, politicians and grievance groups are going out of their >>>> way to
suppress public records precisely because the truth is their mortal
enemy and
they understand that it is devastating to the fake narratives they
want to
push on the public. These body cams are a window in the reality of
life in
America that the Left desperately wants to keep hidden, which is why, >>>> after
vociferously demanding body cams be implemented during the 2020 Summer of
Love, they've now done a complete 180 and are doing everything they
can to
suppress them.
Regardless of what you think about mass surveillance, there's no
question that
these cameras are in the public interest. They not only reveal police >>>> misconduct when it occurs but also protect society against the false >>>> claims of
racism and police brutality that have become ubiquitous over the last 20 >>>> years. We *should* be able to surveil what our public servants are
doing on
the street, as well as what (and whom) they're having to deal with on >>>> those
streets. And you should be highly suspicious of any politician, group, >>>> or tech
platform that wants to hide it from you.
Americans have a right to see what these people have done to our country.
recommend that every classroom in the land, from nursery schools to
universities, have cameras and audio to record what goes on in the
classrooms so that people can watch what their kids are being told. I
think people would be deeply disturbed if they saw and heard the things >>> that some teachers are telling their children. It's really hard to run >>> an indoctrination factory if the parents can literally see and hear what >>> goes on and replay it at their leisure.
You seem to want, rather than a teacher, an AI, inasmuch as no human
could function under such hypercritical scrutiny.
As opposed to no scrutiny at all, which is currently the de facto norm. In many (mostly deep blue) jurisdictions, the school districts refuse to even release a copy of the curriculum to parents. "No, you have no right to see what we're going to be teaching your kid for six hours every day, now please just pay more taxes and shut up."
On Aug 6, 2026 at 8:11:18 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 8/5/2026 10:47 PM, Rhino wrote:
On 2026-08-05 8:26 p.m., BTR1701 wrote:
In an interview, the creator of the TV show COPS, John Langley, admits >>>> that heI agree completely. In fact, I'd go one step further and strongly
goes out of his way to show more white suspects on the show, even
though black
people commit most of the crimes:
LANGLEY: "Here's the reality of street crime. Approximately 60% to 70% is
committed by people of color. Only 30-35% of the suspects are white
people. In
prisons, the numbers are pretty much the same. Around 35% of the
inmates are
white and the rest are black, hispanic, etc. Now on COPS, we reverse >>>> that. We
show 60% to 70% white suspects and only 30%, sometimes maybe as high >>>> as 40% of
people of color. Why do we do that? Because I don't want to contribute to
negative stereotyping. Everyone knows that street crime takes place in >>>> the
ghettos. We all know that, or should know that. All of the white
criminals are
in corporate boardrooms and places like that because they're not
disenfranchised, so they do different kinds of crime."
Well, there you have it. White people are committing all kinds of
crime all
the time. You just can't see it. It's invisible crime. White people are >>>> constantly committing Madoff-level accounting frauds. Happens every day. >>>> Millions of white people are out there committing their invisible
crimes with
the same frequency as blacks and hispanics, you just can't see it.
Leftist Hollywood TV producers are sure of it. Just ask them. They'll >>>> happily
tell you. In fact, they're so sure of it, they're willing to put fake >>>> racial
propaganda on the air for decades, all to counteract this grave injustice
they've made up in their own heads.
This is an incredible quote and it sums up leftism nicely. They
actually think
they're justified when they lie to you in support of a fake narrative >>>> that
they've invented because it suits their ideology. When reality stubbornly
refuses to comply with the fantasy in their heads, they just lie about >>>> reality.
COPS also downplays the type of crimes the "marginalized communities" >>>> commit.
When they do show bipocs getting arrested for things, it's almost
always for
things like low-level property crimes or drug possession. If a black guy >>>> murders someone or a hispanic guy holds up a liquor store and beats the >>>> proprietor, they don't show that. Those crimes only make it on the
show if the
criminal is white.
This is why the new phenomenon on YouTube is the police body cam
channels.
They have no political agenda. They just show what happens with no
attempt to
conform to a narrative. And it's why the usual grievance groups are now >>>> pressuring YouTube to "do something" about these channels because they're
constantly showing the larger public exactly what cops have to endure >>>> from all
the diversity out there, and how culturally enriched America is
because of
it.
They're also pressuring the cities themselves, who are required by law to
release the footage to those who request it, but who are nevertheless >>>> buckling
to the pressure and starting to require disclosure from requestors as >>>> to why
the footage is being requested and if it's not for what they deem to be a
"legitimate purpose"-- i.e., for court or a lawsuit, etc.-- imposing >>>> onerous
fees in order to obtain it.
California leads the way on this (as it does with most bad ideas).
State law
prohibits public release of body cam footage from law enforcement
unless it's
part of a legal proceeding pursuant to a judicial order. This is why >>>> almost
all the YouTube police channels heavily feature footage from Florida, >>>> Wisconsin, Illinois, New Jersey, and Texas. Conspicuously missing are any
episodes showing what happens on the streets of America's most populous >>>> state.
Illinois is desperately afraid of losing the race to the bottom, so in >>>> the
last year, several bills have been introduced in the state legislature >>>> with
regard to body cams. HB 1583 and HB 3524 would have limited access by >>>> changing
which officers are required to wear body cams in the first place and >>>> changed
the requirements of when the cameras are required to be operating. HB >>>> 3515, HB
3380 and SB 1796 were broader. They targeted the person who requested the
footage, either limiting the circumstances under which the footage can be
requested, who is permitted to access it, or both.
So to sum up, politicians and grievance groups are going out of their >>>> way to
suppress public records precisely because the truth is their mortal
enemy and
they understand that it is devastating to the fake narratives they
want to
push on the public. These body cams are a window in the reality of
life in
America that the Left desperately wants to keep hidden, which is why, >>>> after
vociferously demanding body cams be implemented during the 2020 Summer of
Love, they've now done a complete 180 and are doing everything they
can to
suppress them.
Regardless of what you think about mass surveillance, there's no
question that
these cameras are in the public interest. They not only reveal police >>>> misconduct when it occurs but also protect society against the false >>>> claims of
racism and police brutality that have become ubiquitous over the last 20 >>>> years. We *should* be able to surveil what our public servants are
doing on
the street, as well as what (and whom) they're having to deal with on >>>> those
streets. And you should be highly suspicious of any politician, group, >>>> or tech
platform that wants to hide it from you.
Americans have a right to see what these people have done to our country.
recommend that every classroom in the land, from nursery schools to
universities, have cameras and audio to record what goes on in the
classrooms so that people can watch what their kids are being told. I
think people would be deeply disturbed if they saw and heard the things >>> that some teachers are telling their children. It's really hard to run >>> an indoctrination factory if the parents can literally see and hear what >>> goes on and replay it at their leisure.
You seem to want, rather than a teacher, an AI, inasmuch as no human
could function under such hypercritical scrutiny.
As opposed to no scrutiny at all, which is currently the de facto norm. In many (mostly deep blue) jurisdictions, the school districts refuse to even release a copy of the curriculum to parents. "No, you have no right to see what we're going to be teaching your kid for six hours every day, now please just pay more taxes and shut up."
moviePig wrote in article <115286n$3u2sq$1@dont-email.me>:
On 8/5/2026 10:47 PM, Rhino wrote:
classrooms so that people can watch what their kids are being told. I
think people would be deeply disturbed if they saw and heard the things
that some teachers are telling their children. It's really hard to run
an indoctrination factory if the parents can literally see and hear what >>> goes on and replay it at their leisure.
You seem to want, rather than a teacher, an AI, inasmuch as no human
could function under such hypercritical scrutiny.
Everyone who works retail is in a similar position.
moviePig wrote in article <115286n$3u2sq$1@dont-email.me>:
On 8/5/2026 10:47 PM, Rhino wrote:
classrooms so that people can watch what their kids are being told. I
think people would be deeply disturbed if they saw and heard the things >> > that some teachers are telling their children. It's really hard to run >> > an indoctrination factory if the parents can literally see and hear what >> > goes on and replay it at their leisure.
You seem to want, rather than a teacher, an AI, inasmuch as no human
could function under such hypercritical scrutiny.
Everyone who works retail is in a similar position.
On 8/6/2026 1:04 PM, The True Melissa wrote:
moviePig wrote in article <115286n$3u2sq$1@dont-email.me>:
On 8/5/2026 10:47 PM, Rhino wrote:
classrooms so that people can watch what their kids are being told. I >>>> think people would be deeply disturbed if they saw and heard the things >>>> that some teachers are telling their children. It's really hard to run >>>> an indoctrination factory if the parents can literally see and hear what >>>> goes on and replay it at their leisure.
You seem to want, rather than a teacher, an AI, inasmuch as no human
could function under such hypercritical scrutiny.
Everyone who works retail is in a similar position.
In quality, perhaps. Still, I find the mere prospect of being a room
with 20 kids whose parents are watching with thumbs poised terrifying.
On Aug 6, 2026 at 10:56:50 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 8/6/2026 1:04 PM, The True Melissa wrote:
moviePig wrote in article <115286n$3u2sq$1@dont-email.me>:
On 8/5/2026 10:47 PM, Rhino wrote:
classrooms so that people can watch what their kids are being told. I >>>>> think people would be deeply disturbed if they saw and heard the things >>>>> that some teachers are telling their children. It's really hard to run >>>>> an indoctrination factory if the parents can literally see and hear what
goes on and replay it at their leisure.
You seem to want, rather than a teacher, an AI, inasmuch as no human >>>> could function under such hypercritical scrutiny.
Everyone who works retail is in a similar position.
In quality, perhaps. Still, I find the mere prospect of being a room
with 20 kids whose parents are watching with thumbs poised terrifying.
Good. I'd rather our public servants feel terrified of those they serve rather
than the feeling of entitlement they currently display with appalling frequency.
. . .
As opposed to no scrutiny at all, which is currently the de facto norm.
In many (mostly deep blue) jurisdictions, the school districts refuse
to even release a copy of the curriculum to parents. "No, you have no
right to see what we're going to be teaching your kid for six hours
every day, now please just pay more taxes and shut up."
On Aug 6, 2026 at 10:56:50 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 8/6/2026 1:04 PM, The True Melissa wrote:
moviePig wrote in article <115286n$3u2sq$1@dont-email.me>:
On 8/5/2026 10:47 PM, Rhino wrote:
classrooms so that people can watch what their kids are being told. I >>>>> think people would be deeply disturbed if they saw and heard the things >>>>> that some teachers are telling their children. It's really hard to run >>>>> an indoctrination factory if the parents can literally see and hear what >>>>> goes on and replay it at their leisure.
You seem to want, rather than a teacher, an AI, inasmuch as no human
could function under such hypercritical scrutiny.
Everyone who works retail is in a similar position.
In quality, perhaps. Still, I find the mere prospect of being a room
with 20 kids whose parents are watching with thumbs poised terrifying.
Good. I'd rather our public servants feel terrified of those they serve rather >than the feeling of entitlement they currently display with appalling >frequency.
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
. . .
As opposed to no scrutiny at all, which is currently the de facto norm.
I am shocked SHOCKED by this inconsistency in moviePig's position on
whether things can function with scrutiny! This is so unexpected.
In many (mostly deep blue) jurisdictions, the school districts refuse
to even release a copy of the curriculum to parents. "No, you have no
right to see what we're going to be teaching your kid for six hours
every day, now please just pay more taxes and shut up."
There is no legal refusal. A parent must file a public records request.
If the local newspaper is interested, they have attorneys, or IJ or the
state ACLU or Common Cause may help.
My mother had a masters in education and was a substitute teacher once I
was older. She got curricullum. Are not parents substitute teachers any longer? There is no way to keep it secret.
On 2026-08-06 2:49 p.m., BTR1701 wrote:
On Aug 6, 2026 at 10:56:50 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:Spoken like a teacher who is currently indoctrinating his students into
On 8/6/2026 1:04 PM, The True Melissa wrote:
-a moviePig wrote in article <115286n$3u2sq$1@dont-email.me>:
-a On 8/5/2026 10:47 PM, Rhino wrote:-a Everyone who works retail is in a similar position.
-a classrooms so that people can watch what their kids are being
told. I
-a think people would be deeply disturbed if they saw and heard the >>>>>> things
-a that some teachers are telling their children. It's really hard >>>>>> to run
-a an indoctrination factory if the parents can literally see and >>>>>> hear what
-a goes on and replay it at their leisure.
-a You seem to want, rather than a teacher, an AI, inasmuch as no human >>>>> -a could function under such hypercritical scrutiny.
In quality, perhaps.-a Still, I find the mere prospect of being a room
with 20 kids whose parents are watching with thumbs poised terrifying.
the joys of Marxism....
Good. I'd rather our public servants feel terrified of those they
serve rather
than the feeling of entitlement they currently display with appalling
frequency.
On Aug 6, 2026 at 10:56:50 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 8/6/2026 1:04 PM, The True Melissa wrote:
moviePig wrote in article <115286n$3u2sq$1@dont-email.me>:
On 8/5/2026 10:47 PM, Rhino wrote:
classrooms so that people can watch what their kids are being told. I >>>>> think people would be deeply disturbed if they saw and heard the things >>>>> that some teachers are telling their children. It's really hard to run >>>>> an indoctrination factory if the parents can literally see and hear what
goes on and replay it at their leisure.
You seem to want, rather than a teacher, an AI, inasmuch as no human >>>> could function under such hypercritical scrutiny.
Everyone who works retail is in a similar position.
In quality, perhaps. Still, I find the mere prospect of being a room
with 20 kids whose parents are watching with thumbs poised terrifying.
Good. I'd rather our public servants feel terrified of those they serve rather
than the feeling of entitlement they currently display with appalling frequency.
On 8/6/2026 12:01 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
. . .
As opposed to no scrutiny at all, which is currently the de facto norm.
I am shocked SHOCKED by this inconsistency in moviePig's position on >>whether things can function with scrutiny! This is so unexpected.
In many (mostly deep blue) jurisdictions, the school districts refuse
to even release a copy of the curriculum to parents. "No, you have no >>>right to see what we're going to be teaching your kid for six hours
every day, now please just pay more taxes and shut up."
There is no legal refusal. A parent must file a public records request.
If the local newspaper is interested, they have attorneys, or IJ or the >>state ACLU or Common Cause may help.
My mother had a masters in education and was a substitute teacher once I >>was older. She got curricullum. Are not parents substitute teachers any >>longer? There is no way to keep it secret.
To be a substitute teacher now, you have to have college credits just as
you would for a regular teacher, and be certified. My exbf is ABD in >geology/paleontology and was well versed in biology. He couldn't get a
sub job until he took several education classes despite his extensive >science education. You can thank George Bush and his No Child Left
Behind proclamation.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 74 |
| Nodes: | 6 (1 / 5) |
| Uptime: | 51:13:56 |
| Calls: | 1,101 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 1,339 |
| Messages: | 276,016 |