Not directed at anyone here of course, lol

So, I am not sure what to say to this one. My mom prefaces with "Please read the following, I trust the sender more than the CDC." Which doesn't bode well for the rest of it. Which is very, very long. What it boils down to: -"this is not pneumonia but that the lungs are dry with no blood in them" "Italy has allegedly discovered covid is not a virus, but a bacterium. It clots the blood and reduces oxygen saturation from dispersing throughout the body." Then some stuff about the WHO and CDC are in cahoots of conspiracies. "Easily treated with aspirin and coagulant, Spread the word! Make this global! ... Before we lose all of our constitutional freedoms." "Patients with rheumatoid arthirits have never needed to be admitted to the ICU because they are on corticosteroid therapy, which is a great anti-inflammatory." There are actually 3 "articles" put into one long email but the authors seem to be either unknown or fake names (no Google results that would match a reporter). I don't want to copy+paste the entire thing here because I don't want to give it credence and myself spread it. Hope these snippets are enough. ----- So, how do you respond to these types of things? My parents are becoming more militant and insistent on a lot of their "scientific information" about all of this. I've done a Google search for this conspiracy in particular and found this debunk, but any other information you guys would include (the more scientific, the more backed up, small text, cited, etc, the better!) I'd appreciate any help. General advice also welcome. I'm kind of tired of doing this but feel an obligation to try and correct what I can.

Califa Oat Milk barista blend. Other brands work too but I do have a slight preference to the Califa one. I am the type of person that LOVES just a dash of coffee with my whole milk, lol. But my friend convinced me to go buy the stuff above and try it. IDK even why I did it, more to humor them. I am shocked how much I like it in my coffee. To the point where I have 4 in my pantry because the one time I ran out I was actually sad. Also have tried whatever the local Safeway carries, it's ok, but did stock up the next time I was at a store that carries Califa. So, while I am "allowed" to use whole milk in my coffee and have no reason not to, I am actively choosing the oat milk! Craziness!

Okay, so I can understand wanting to bat for a lower standard to make sure you get the home run. And, yes, the max sentence of Murder 3 in MN is 25 years. So technically I can see this as the "smart move." And reading MN's particular Murder 2 statute, I guess since the murder didn't happen while in the middle of another law-breaking activity or while one had an order of protection, maybe that is the sticking point. I had assumed all Murder 2 was where death was known as a distinct possibility from their actions but not necessarily pre-meditated. I have overreached all of my legal knowledge and am now happy to let more knowledgable heads weigh in. But my initial response will remain.

Minneapolis Mayor Frey, Wednesday: "George Floyd deserves justice, his family deserves justice, the black community deserves justice, and our city deserves justice....We watched for five whole excruciating minutes as a white officer firmly pressed his knee into the neck of an unarmed, handcuffed black man ... I saw no threat, I saw nothing that would signal that this kind of force was necessary." Hennepin County Attorney's Office, Wednesday: "This office is aware of Mayor Frey’s comments. We are working with the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension and the Hennepin County Medical Examiner to expeditiously gather and review all of the evidence in the tragic death of Mr. George Floyd. The videotaped death of Mr. Floyd, which has outraged us and people across the country, deserves the best we can give and that is what this office will do." 3rd degree murder charge in Minnesota, via Wikipedia: "Minnesota law originally defined third-degree murder solely as depraved-heart murder ("without intent to effect the death of any person, caus[ing] the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life").[7][8] In 1987, an additional drug-related provision ("without intent to cause death, proximately caus[ing] the death of a human being by, directly or indirectly, unlawfully selling, giving away, bartering, delivering, exchanging, distributing, or administering a controlled substance classified in Schedule I or II") was added to the definition of third-degree murder. Translation: Well...he uh.... didn't mean to kill him ALL the way. He just wanted him MOSTLY dead. And you know, that's not as bad as it could be right? Certainly not pre-meditated Murder 1. certainly not Murder 2, where he could have realized that kneeling on a man's neck while he says he can't breathe, loses consciousness, and control of his bodily functions, that death was really a distinct possibility. Really, he was just a little overzealous. Pinky swear. Yes, Hennepin County Attorney, this is certainly "the best you can give." eta: to add emphasis, all emphasis my own.

Yes, unfortunately happening. It seems there are 4 tiers (definitions mine): 1. [Peaceful] Protestors: people who are showing a demonstration against what has happened but haven't caused destruction. Vast majority of demonstrators are peaceful protestors. 2. Non-peaceful protestors, or, Rioters: people who are showing a demonstration against what has happened by destroying property. 3. Looters: people who are taking advantage of what's going on with the riots and using the cover of rioters to benefit themselves. 4. Saboteurs: people making either the protestors or rioters look bad through various means. Matryoshka's post shows one example. I've seen some photos of the protests that make it looks like no one is showing up to the peaceful demonstrations, juxtaposed with over-crowded riot photos, this is another type of sabotage. Basically, trying to de-legitimize people's rightful anger and reactions. As this goes on we'll probably see more of #4, whether or not we realize it 😞 eta: And, as time goes on, it will start just being referred to as one homogenous entity instead of 4 different groups with different motives. Since 2, 3, and 4 are usually louder and make better photos, the danger of the #1s getting dismissed is high.

Quoting you just because I agree and at any point if my argument doesn't make sense, just come back and read what Joy wrote. No one here has said that all police are out to kill black people. Strawman. Pointing out that people kill people does not negate that blacks are at more risk to be killed by police. You can qualify that with "in certain regions" if you like, but that is just being argumentative to seem open-minded and fair, if I'm going to give my opinion. It is systemic racism: "Systemic Racism includes the policies and practices entrenched in established institutions, which result in the exclusion or promotion of designated groups. " Source for more indepth definition if you are confused. This is not saying that ALL police departments suffer from systemic racism. I would argue that many departments do have this problem, yes. But there are definite practices if not in-ink policies that promote racial profiling and automatically escalating the situation when the suspect is black. "But, but that's just, like, your opinion, Moonhawk!" I'll save us a step in this chain and just reply to this now. This is not just "news cycle! Whipping up race issues once again! Cherry picked!" Blacks are at more risk. This website has great data broken down into nice pictures. I took 4 or 5 screenshots that would be super great but don't want to derail all of this too much. Here is where you go to learn more: https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/ edited for clarity. took out 3 words.

[I've deleted a quote and specific reply because it can be confusing and generally isn't necessary for my second part of post] Also, generally: We all want justice. Here is our common ground. And justice starts with looking at the available evidence and moving forward with the judicial process. Right now, the next step is the arrest of at least the officer who knelt on Mr. Floyd's neck. That has not happened. As of right now, then, it seems a miscarriage of justice is in process, or at least you can understand why others would feel this way. To be angry and to show anger at this current miscarriage of justice is not a rush to judgement. (And I understand you think he should be arrested. Again, common ground.) I think others displaying this anger at the situation -- both the original murder and now the lack of arrest -- see "don't rush to judgement" as passively agreeing with the current miscarriage of justice. Because the judgement they have made is: he should be arrested based on what we have seen.

It looks like the peaceful protesters were left alone. The protestors that attacked the police station did get rubber bullets and tear gas (from what I've read/seen). The protests were about a mile apart -- the peaceful at the place he was murdered, the violent protest at the closest police station. And the violent protests focused all destruction on the police station/cars, not just general destruction. It seems that the violent one partially "evolved" out of the peaceful protest, but also both were concurrent and far away from each other. If I'm wrong on this, please let me know. I'm basing this off of social media, including Reddit posts, that are going into more detail from on the ground. eta: Source comment on Reddit here. There are a lot of other comments on that thread, as well as other threads, that seem to agree with this assessment so far. eta: realizing this may be taken as "defending" the police. Not doing that at all, just trying to clarify and make sure everyone has accurate information. I know that I get much (most) of my news from this board so hoping the help the understanding as others have helped me in the past. eta: strikeout per below post by JadeOrchidSong

I remember when I was 18, the woman I was doing odd jobs for found out my sisters were 16 and 18 years older than me. She said immediately and without thought, "Oh, so you were just an accident." I, shocked, replied, "No, I was a miracle." She did apologize. I think if a family atmosphere fosters love and joking, being called a mistake can just be an inside joke of sorts, and not have negative effect on the child. In some ways acknowledging the gap can take the venom out of it later if people try to bring it up. But outside of the family sometimes people take those types of labels seriously and act differently because of it. And different children are, well, different. Regardless, every child should feel like a complete and wanted member of the family. I feel for you that your experience was less than what you deserved.

1 Fish, 2 Fish, Red Fish, Blue Fish ! (Or you could be boring like me and do DD11, DS9, DS6, DD3. But I want to inspire you to greatness!)

The tragedy is that the omen wasn't just for her, it was for all of us, lol...

This must be very stressful for your daughter, her husband, and you. It is frustrating when you do everything "right" and you find yourself as a football between various agencies. Going past JAWM: Please have her contact Medicaid and see what happens if she applies; babies change a lot of how its calculated and depending on the state she could be ok. If she gets Medicaid, then they would probably qualify for WIC or SNAP (idk what is available in her state) so that would help out as well if her husband has to take a cut in hours. Also, at least in AZ, the children can qualify for Medicaid even if parents do not, so that may help even if not fully cover everything. Back to JAWM: Many hugs {{{{}}}}