My quarrel is with neither Lemon nor Jackson, but rather with the author of this article. It took me quite some time to realize that she has no idea what Jackson and Lemon were talking about; in that she recognizes no distinction between “demonstration” and “riot;” she uses the two terms interchangeably.
As here: “[A] substantial number of Americans refuse to pay attention to the true message rioting is supposed to send due to the illegal activity that comes with such demonstrations.”
No “illegal activity” needs to “come with“ rioting; rioting is inherently illegal. And violent.
My diary for 2014-08-20 noted: “Interesting that the people and authorities in Ferguson have managed to well divide the peaceful protesters from the criminals.” It proved to be as simple as night and day: those intent on acting civilly demonstrated during the day; those intent on criminal violence only came out at night.
“The videos make for numbing viewing. In one, a store employee takes out the trash, only to be arrested for trespassing. Others appear to show searches without warrants and police stopping customers without any obvious reason.”
It is hard to see how the police chief’s sign and actions could be misconstrued. It would appear that many police union presidents, including this gentleman and NYC’s Mr. Lynch, have “issues.”
India’s current ruling party, the BJP, is a Hindu “fundamentalist,” nationalist movement with a long history of sometimes violent intolerance toward adherents of other faiths. Gandhian tolerance is not the order of the day.
These items appear in reverse chronological order.
India’s Narendra Modi apologizes for official’s remarks on non-Hindus
No member of an American cabinet would be allowed to stay in office after making such a statement.
See also: Demolition of the Babri Mosque