Post: #1

https://blog.google/topics/causes-commun...arcerated/
"First Time" is misleading because no one actually gets sent to prison straight away without being on Probation first- most commonly they'll have a 6 month window and only be sent to prison if they rack up several consecutive failed tests, or get arrested again during that period . (Non-Violent Crime = drug case) Or they didn't show up to court more than 3x in a row. It is actually very difficult to get sent to prison.

Quote:Before I came to Google, I spent long hours in women’s prisons as a human rights lawyer. Most women behind bars are mothers to minors, serving sentences for first time non-violent crimes. Mothers shared with me, in hushed voices, their suffering.
I tried to document the abuses committed against them, shackling them during childbirth to sexual abuse by prison guards. I’m still haunted by memories of very small children not being allowed to touch or kiss or hug their mothers during visits; by the little girl who told me she never knew the warmth of waking up to her mother next to her.

That’s why the chance to set up the Love Letters project at Google is so special to me. Two years ago, I reached out to the community organizations I knew working with children of incarcerated parents. We partnered together to create Love Letters: digital love letters from children to their incarcerated parents for Mother’s Day and Father’s Day, a project we’re continuing this year.
Our commitment to justice reform has expanded in the past two years. In addition to our philanthropy, just this past week we banned bail bond ads from Search because of their predatory effect on vulnerable communities. Love Letters is yet another way we’re using our different platforms to disrupt the human costs of mass incarceration.

This Mother’s Day, let’s remember those mothers behind bars and the children left behind, and bear witness to the suffering that happens when we overcriminalize communities. These love letters are a testament to the unbroken bonds that endure between mothers and their children. While incarceration deeply traumatizes families, love still scales the prison walls

Post: #2

I'm not insensitive to how hard this is for the parents or the kids, or to overcriminalization.

However, it's interesting that they don't disclose what these people were convicted of.

Post: #3

I hate to keep making the same complaint over and over, but can you people PLEASE include bylines when you post articles? The writer's identity is important. That's especially the case here.

This was written by Malika Saada Saar -- "Public Policy and Government Relations Senior Counsel, Civil and Human Rights." Here she is:



Saar is a big celebrity to the radical left. The Washington Post wrote a ridiculous gushing article about her ten years ago, where they called her "the one with all the street cred, all the degrees, all the passion."

They also praised "her recent kaboom" into fame and salivated over her "Cleopatra eyes." Leaving that creepy last phrase aside, yes, they used the word "kaboom" as a verb. That's actually worse than leaving a byline off an article on the forum.

So, now we know what this writer is about. The question is: Why would Google use Mother's Day to advance this woman's agenda? Off the top of my head, I could think of about 100 other things to focus on for this holiday: The mothers raising disabled kids, war widows, mothers unexpectedly diagnosed with an illness, women who stepped up when their man became disabled, etc.

Google is supposed to be a politically "non-denominational" entity, with search results that are untainted by political bias. This Mother's Day message (along with dozens of other things) makes me not trust that their search results aren't tainted by their political leanings.

Post: #4

(05-13-2018 01:57 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  The question is: Why would Google use Mother's Day to advance this woman's agenda? Off the top of my head, I could think of about 100 other things to focus on for this holiday: The mothers raising disabled kids, war widows, mothers unexpectedly diagnosed with an illness, women who stepped up when their man became disabled, etc.

Because on a normal day, someone might question their agenda.

On Mother's Day, if you question their agenda, it means you are against mothers.

It's the holiday version of a false flag.

Post: #5

(05-13-2018 01:57 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  makes me not trust that their search results aren't tainted by their political leanings.

Too late, already tainted. Just search for "white family" on images.

Or the autocomplete during the election for "Hillary clinton is"

Post: #6

(05-13-2018 02:22 PM)DJ-Matt Wrote:  

(05-13-2018 01:57 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  makes me not trust that their search results aren't tainted by their political leanings.

Too late, already tainted. Just search for "white family" on images.

Or the autocomplete during the election for "Hillary clinton is"

LOL!

The first result is the HuffPost story that's headlined "White Families Are Engines Of Inequality."

I'm less concerned with the subject than the annoying word choices. In the same way the writer of the Post article I quoted used "kaboom" as a verb, this writer, Jessie Daniels, used "engines" as an awful metaphor.

Her article -- which is too unfocused to summarize cogently -- seems to say that because Donald Trump keeps his family close by, all white people are guilty of hoarding wealth and resources.

First off, this is total bullshit. White people are statistically the most charitable (Google that!).

But those damned word choices. Why are white folks "engines" of inequality? Why not "vehicles" or "masters?" Why not "examples" of inequality? What a stupid word to use.

I actually hate the way the left uses words more than I hate their politics. I can understand being a bleeding heart or trying to fix inequality. But "engines of inequality" and "kaboom" as a verb are linguistic annoyances that make me want to vote hardcore right-wingers into office just to spite them.

Post: #7

(05-13-2018 01:57 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  The question is: Why would Google use Mother's Day to advance this woman's agenda?

There's a growing movement on the part of the radical left and feminists to abolish female prisons and custodial sentences for women. They've actually made substantial progress in the UK and Australia---you can find them and their propaganda (usually referred to by Orwellian terms such as "advocacy research") routinely published in mainstream new sources. Here's an example:

Why we should close women's prisons

It was only a matter to time before American progressives jumped on that bandwagon.

Post: #8

The next step is to pressure well paid incels to wife them up.

Post: #9

As a woman you have to fuck up really hard and repeatedly to exhaust your pussy pass and actually end up getting punished for a crime.

These chicks must be evil.

Post: #10

Still waiting for Google to do an awareness campaign for men incarcerated for missing alamony or child support payments.

Post: #11

(05-13-2018 06:22 PM)John Michael Kane Wrote:  Still waiting for Google to do an awareness campaign for men incarcerated for missing alamony or child support payments.

Having money automatically withdrawn from your bank account gets all the attention needed for that issue.

Post: #12

(05-13-2018 05:19 PM)RatInTheWoods Wrote:  As a woman you have to fuck up really hard and repeatedly to exhaust your pussy pass and actually end up getting punished for a crime.

These chicks must be evil.

Or retarded and/or ugly. Know a fat, ugly chick who has been pulled over 8 times for speeding and finally, on the 8th time, was given a speeding ticket.

Post: #13

So some drug dealing pimp beats a man to mush and then shoots him ten times. He gives the gun to his bottom bitch along with whatever drugs he's holding because the police are closing in. She goes and hides it all somewhere. Let's say the police are lucky and catch the pass on camera. They know she has the drugs and the murder weapon stashed but she refuses to co-operate. Well when she goes to jail, despite having screamed and laughed at the victim as he was being brutally murdered her lawyers will go to great lengths to explain that she never committed a violent crime.

Well of course she didn't. Women are the accessories to murderous thugs, not the murderous thugs themselves.

There are laws that prosecute entire groups which participate in a crime to the full extent the worst member participated. That is to say, if five guys beat up a dude but the sixth guy takes it a little far and finished the victim off with a gunshot then all 6 members are culpable for murder. You could be prosecuted for murder even if you stood at the sidelines and just cheered. These laws were in part a response to the way gangs would drop everything on one guy who would do the time with a smile on his face while the others walked free, or in other instances where everyone blamed everyone else and nobody could really prove beyond reasonable doubt who had thrown punches, kicks and possibly the final bullet.

Female accomplices to male thugs need to be prosecuted under similar laws, particularly where children are suffering from molestation or being pimped out "by the father". The idea that they're not guilty of "violent crimes" is a sick joke. I would be like saying the getaway driver is not also guilty of robbing the bank, just speeding and a parking violation.

Post: #14

Haven't those shitheads advocated for elimination of female prisons altogether?

If that happens then I predict most cartel members/killers to be women in the future.