The Pelosi attack.

[dm123]

What do you want as a source since the passage from the Jewish website is being dismissed?

I would be very interested to see:

a predominately black forum where they also lived through the same events

Does the site you reference link or refer to any first hand accounts or other source material?

[Yehuda57]

Who brought the CH riots into this?

(a recent example is your claimed understanding of what was written regarding the CH riots)

[dm123]

Who brought the CH riots into this?

(a recent example is your claimed understanding of what was written regarding the CH riots)

As far as CH riots it would be hard to imagine to get a true picture of what actually happened on this forum.

While some people here may not be open to a "true picture", I think there are enough that would be open to hearing "the other side's perspective".

On that note, if you do have a link to

a predominately black forum where they also lived through the same events

or some other first hand source I for one am interested to see, PM's are open if you don't want to post publicly for whatever reason.

[rbs-g1.5]

While some people here may not be open to a "true picture", I think there are enough that would be open to hearing "the other side's perspective".

I think in this case its a well known fact and its an insult to the victims to want to hear the others side perspective. it sounds close minded but sometimes things are just plain black and white.

[dm123]

I think in this case its a well known fact and its an insult to the victims to want to hear the others side perspective. it sounds close minded but sometimes things are just plain black and white.

I agree with you that all the facts line up here, as yehuda57 mentioned:

Would the first-hand accounts match up? Yes they would.

CV made a claim:

As far as CH riots it would be hard to imagine to get a true picture of what actually happened on this forum.

and hypothesized that other groups may have a different set of facts than we're familiar with, to which yehuda57 and myself have been pushing back that we can give a true picture here and are both open to hearing if there are any conflicting narratives (which CV has seemingly failed to do sufficiently thus far). Ironically your post would prove CV's point. And IF there are victims on the other side wouldn't it be insulting to them to not want to hear them out?

[biobook]

I'm not that much of an idiot (though I am clearly an idiot)

Don't beat yourself up.  It was an understandable slip, happens to all of us writing on deadline with no time to research all the details. 

[rbs-g1.5]

Ironically your post would prove CV's point. And IF there are victims on the other side wouldn't it be insulting to them to not want to hear them out?

I  agree with you that its ok to be open minded and curious about what exactly happened that brought to the riots starting. We can even have hashkafa discussions about any possible hisgaarus baumos that was done in Galus But as to what actually happened on a very large scale was witnessed by all of us or our parents.  There is no excuse for a pogrom ( Yes cv ,in our culture that's what we call it) and i don't give a hoot as to which excuses they had for it. Neither do i want to hear the Polacks or Russians side of the story of pogroms in pre-war Europe and Russia. Whether or not  somebody on the other side was victimized as an isolated incident is irrelevant. The Jews were clearly the victims here and there is no legitimacy to any other side of the story.

[CountValentine]

I  agree with you that its ok to be open minded and curious about what exactly happened that brought to the riots starting. We can even have hashkafa discussions about any possible hisgaarus baumos that was done in Galus But as to what actually happened on a very large scale was witnessed by all of us or our parents.  There is no excuse for a pogrom ( Yes cv ,in our culture that's what we call it) and i don't give a hoot as to which excuses they had for it. Neither do i want to hear the Polacks or Russians side of the story of pogroms in pre-war Europe and Russia. Whether or not  somebody on the other side was victimized as an isolated incident is irrelevant. The Jews were clearly the victims here and there is no legitimacy to any other side of the story.

I fully understand your culture using the word pogrom to describe it. Would you understand why other cultures would not use it? Of the numerous articles I have read the word used overwhelmingly is "riots".

[imayid2]

I fully understand your culture using the word pogrom to describe it. Would you understand why other cultures would not use it? Of the numerous articles I have read the word used overwhelmingly is "riots".

Pogrom is an overkill. It not the way the word is generally used.
Riots is perfectly acceptable if it’s being made clear who the the rioters rioted against, and that they  specifically targeted Jews.

[Yehuda57]

Don't beat yourself up.  It was an understandable slip, happens to all of us writing on deadline with no time to research all the details. 

BTW, there was a reporter (I think the Atlantic, but I could be wrong) who posted a story about DeSantis meeting with Justice Thomas a day before the Dobbs decision. He made a mistake, it was a year before. Even before the outlet had removed the piece, which they did very quickly, he immediately started posting apologies and expressed his deep embarrassment. If the errors in the story were indeed due to being on deadline, we'd see corrections and edits. There were none. The reporter and the editors saw plenty of feedback. They stand by their shoddy reporting.

I fully understand your culture using the word pogrom to describe it. Would you understand why other cultures would not use it? Of the numerous articles I have read the word used overwhelmingly is "riots".

I personally don't care if someone doesn't use the word pogrom, but it wasn't just Orthodox Jews who used the term
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Heights_riot#Use_of_the_term_%22pogrom%22

The NYT asserted that Guiliani came up with the term to earn the Jewish vote. No doubt he (rightly) used the riots to campaign, but he didn't come up with it. And the Time's implication that it was fear-mongering hyperbole is a huge issue, especially seeing as the only reason not to call it a pogrom is a technicality - because it wasn't "state-sponsored". Although, the report reveals how the police allowed the riots to continue, and how many Jews were beaten in full view of police officers who just watched.

[CountValentine]

I personally don't care if someone doesn't use the word pogrom,

You should stop there. 

[rbs-g1.5]

I fully understand your culture using the word pogrom to describe it. Would you understand why other cultures would not use it? Of the numerous articles I have read the word used overwhelmingly is "riots".

i dont care which word you use , we also call it the crown heights riots the point is that it was one sided blatant evil. and there is no legitimacy to the perpetrators whining side of the story
its irrelevant which word you use to describe groups of people roaming the streets seeking out  members of a certain race and their property and attacking.(all while being egged on by a racism spewing priest) while the attacked community was hiding in their homes .we all grew up on stories such as these happening in europe and  all i said is thats what in jewish culture is called a pogrom. 

[rbs-g1.5]

Pogrom is an overkill. It not the way the word is generally used.
Riots is perfectly acceptable if it’s being made clear who the the rioters rioted against, and that they  specifically targeted Jews.

are you of the understanding that the pogroms in poland and russia always left multiple dead people?
I do agree that at least according to websters dictionary it means a massacre,but in our culture ,mobs roaming the streets looting and hunting jews is a pogrom and not overkill.

[rbs-g1.5]

I personally don't care if someone doesn't use the word pogrom, but it wasn't just Orthodox Jews who used the term

[/quote]

You should stop there. 

just ignore everything else he wrote and focus on a random sidepoint as if to prove your original point.which brings us back to how this conversation ended up on this thread in the first place.

[rbs-g1.5]

ORIGIN OF POGROM
1880–85; (<Yiddish ) <Russian pogróm literally, destruction, devastation (of a town, country, etc., as in war), noun derivative of pogromít’, equivalent to po- perfective prefix + gromít’ to destroy, devastate, derivative of grom thunder

[CountValentine]

  just ignore everything else he wrote and focus on a random sidepoint as if to prove your original point.which brings us back to how this conversation ended up on this thread in the first place.

I am not ignoring anything. Rudy used it to attack his opponent. It threw gas on the fire. It was the wrong word for him to use.

[imayid2]

ORIGIN OF POGROM
1880–85; (<Yiddish ) <Russian pogróm literally, destruction, devastation (of a town, country, etc., as in war), noun derivative of pogromít’, equivalent to po- perfective prefix + gromít’ to destroy, devastate, derivative of grom thunder

What matter is how it’s commonly used, and the images conjured by it’s usage. Being that programs in Europe commonly left multiple causalities, many associate the word with those images of the more famous ones.

[CountValentine]

Some of you are acting like I never heard of or seen race riots in the US. This country has a long history of race riots. 
ETA: Google Watts

[CountValentine]

What matter is how it’s commonly used, and the images conjured by it’s usage.

STOP THE PRESSES!!!

[Yehuda57]

What matter is how it’s commonly used, and the images conjured by it’s usage. Being that programs in Europe commonly left multiple causalities, .

... And commonly didn't