*Americas Ticking Time Bomb: Blacks*

[CockySOB]

He does it quite often. Anytime he is called on something he can't defend, he goes back and edits his post.

This time it wasn't the case though. He simply added a couple more items to his list.

[82Marine89]

Sorry bout that,

1. But I was thinking about the total hypocrisy of Black People in America.
2. Not total being *All* black peoples, but how totally a huge percentage are total hypocrites in being honest about their condition of even being a black person in the first place.
3. I watched them mostly say, OJ was innocent.
4. They wanted a murderer released to them, over justice for the innocent blood of his ex-wife, and Ronald Goldman, a innocent bystander.
5. Unless some one can argue this and make me understand their side, I am 100% correct!

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

It's called reasonable doubt. Regardless of whether he was guilty, those gloves did not fit his hands. Working in the construction industry, I regularly wear leather gloves. Not over sized gloves, but snug fitting leather gloves. These gloves are constantly getting wet and when they dry I am still able to put my hands in them without a problem. Even if the gloves that OJ was asked to put on were completely saturated with blood, he should still have had no problem putting them on his hands. That alone, even if I thought he was guilty, placed reasonable doubt in my mind.

[OCA]

It's called reasonable doubt. Regardless of whether he was guilty, those gloves did not fit his hands. Working in the construction industry, I regularly wear leather gloves. Not over sized gloves, but snug fitting leather gloves. These gloves are constantly getting wet and when they dry I am still able to put my hands in them without a problem. Even if the gloves that OJ was asked to put on were completely saturated with blood, he should still have had no problem putting them on his hands. That alone, even if I thought he was guilty, placed reasonable doubt in my mind.

But 82 you forget, you are dealing with the all knowing CWN, how dare you argue against him?

I believe that O.J.is guilty as hell but hey lets face it, the prosecution shit the bed in that case and allowed reasonable doubt to be placed inthe mind of the jurors.

But that don't matter to CWN, they're all just a bunch of dirty niggers!

[Kathianne]

I like Roomy.

Sir James, until I scrolled up to Roomy's reply to OCA, I thought he was addressing you, it fits. 'Unless you can prove me wrong, I'm 100% correct.'

[OCA]

I like Roomy.

Sir James, until I scrolled up to Roomy's reply to OCA, I thought he was addressing you, it fits. 'Unless you can prove me wrong, I'm 100% correct.'

Please explain this post Kath, kind of jumbled.

[OCA]

It was cut and dried during the choosing of the jury
fucking retards every last fucking one of themYou might have made a good jury foreman

Oh so you have a report on each of the jurors intelligence level, wow you are special!

[Kathianne]

Please explain this post Kath, kind of jumbled.

Sorry about that! LOL! I saw post #47 and thought it was aimed at Sir James. Then I saw Roomy had responded to you, as I went back.

[PostmodernProphet]

this thread demonstrates that employing certain trigger words is 100% effective in destroying all possibilities of constructive dialogue.....that in itself is an excellent reason for not using them......

[Roomy]

this thread demonstrates that employing certain trigger words is 100% effective in destroying all possibilities of constructive dialogue.....that in itself is an excellent reason for not using them......

Exactly.

[Pale Rider]

You've NEVER qualified your statements about blacks to include only a portion (significant or otherwise) of the black community. Moreover, CWN took the time to clarify his position when I asked, yet as I recall you didn't think you had too. And of course, CWN was much more cordial in discussing the issue that you were.

Perhaps if you had bothered to come down from your high horse and simply answer my questions in the other thread, we might have avoided any misunderstanding.

Maybe if you would take the time to go back and clarify your statements in the other thread, I'd reconsider my opinion of you as being a racist piece of shit. Pale, why do you imagine that I asked you those questions in the other thread? It's because I had never envisioned you to be a racist in the past - a loud, vulgar, obnoxious asshole? Yes, but aren't we all on some level? But I had not imagined that you were a racist until that thread, hence the repeated requests for clarification.

BTW, thanks for more neg-reps! I'm not sure how my exchange in this thread with Acts is neg-rep worthy, but hey! Whatever floats your dinghy.

Yes, I did answer your question and "clarify" myself, more than once. You didn't like the answer, so you got sassy and started calling me names along with your brother PmP.

You asked...

Pale, I'm trying to understand this. Are you saying that because there are opportunistic racist demagogues like Sharpton and Jackson, that it is OK for whites to take up parallel positions and actions? That's what it sounds like to me, which is why I wanted to give you a chance to clarify in case I misunderstood you.

To which I politely answered, because there was already two full pages of me "clarifying" my position, which it appeared you didn't bother to read...

I think if you read back through what I've already said, you wouldn't have any questions about my position. I've been quite concise.

So then you asked this...

So you do think that two wrongs make a right? That's why I asked, because that is certainly how I read your posts.

So I gave you another polite, very concise answer "clarifying" myself, speaking directly to the whole, SOLE POINT of the thread...

I haven't said anything is right or wrong in this thread. I've stated, backed up by the facts, that there is a huge disproportionate amount of violence perpetrated by blacks against whites, yet blacks are marching in the streets as if they are the victims, when nothing could be further from the truth. If anybody should be marching in the streets because they're being victimized, it should be white people.

So far NO ONE in this thread has been able to dispute that. The only one here flapping his lips in earnest has concentrated his efforts on attacking me personally in an attempt to derail the thread away from the facts, which is a TYPICAL LIBERAL TACTIC. "Attack the messenger, ignore the facts."

So you decide to ratchet the conversation up a notch. You claim the article to which I linked to for factual backup was "rhetoric," and that the FACTS were "tenous at best." You don't try to DISPROVE anything, you just attack the facts as BULL SHIT...

I think AmRen (American Renaissance) qualifies. Granted the report you linked to on their site uses a variety of sources, most even legit, but the rhetoric which ties together the facts is at best tenuous. Frankly, citing from that site is akin to someone citing a report from the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition - there may be facts scattered throughout the reports, but the source tends to show bias in the conclusions drawn.

You also go to on to ratchet up your speech to me, and lay the ground to start your personal attack on me, simply because of my use of "bold lettering"...

You trying to say that you are NOT using the same rhetoric and hyperbole that demagogues like Sharpton and Jackson use? That's certainly how I read your opening post with all of the words regarding race bolded as they were. Hence the reason I asked my previous question to you.

So I tried, once again, to show you by posting the initial article, AGAIN, to try and understand where you were extrapolating your attitude...

"Rhetoric... tenuous"... these are words you use to describe "facts?"

This is the exact page I linked to. It's a daily news story that is posted on my home page of my ISP, Charter.com. If the story has a racist bias, it would be slanted against whites more than anything.

I use bold for emphasis. Are you trying to tell me that using bold to emphasize "facts" is racist? Further, you're implying, it's not what I say, it's racist because I used bold letters?

So it seems here that at this point, you DO understand my point, you just don't like the way I construct a post...

Depending on how you emphasize the facts, yes. I'm sure you're familiar with that saying "statistics, statistics, and damned lies," correct? Facts can be used selectively to support anyones agenda and propaganda. You know this - we see the librull media doing it every day! I am of the mind though, that we conservatives should NOT stoop to their level.

So here I AGAIN state my point, even though it appears you understand what I'm saying, you just don't like the WAY I've constructed my post, so you can NOT say I didn't "clarify" myself. This is the SECOND time I did so...

I do believe here that you are trying to extrapolate something from my initial post that isn't there.

I hate to have say the same thing over and over in the same thread because people either didn't read it, or they chose to ignore it for the sake of prevarication to perpetuate an argument.

With that, I think if you read this whole thread you'd see that my whole point from start to finish, is that IN MY OPINION, which is backed up by fact, that black people have NOTHING to be bitching about or marching in protest for when it comes to violent crime. They are by far the most violent race, again, backed up by facts, that there is, and for them to march in the streets PROTESTING increased violence against them, again, IN MY OPINION, is a huge damn joke. I would tell that to my black friend AJ who comes over to his face, and I would expect he'd agree.

At this point you DO understand my position, I have "clarified" myself to you, but it appears you'd like to make a debate out of it, which is fine. That's what I'm here for...

I don't see violence as a racial issue, but a cultural issue. That is perhaps where I see your statements as being racist. Actually, there's no "perhaps" about it, I guess. The human race as a whole has a vast capacity for violence as has been seen time and again throughout history. It's not the "race" which is the problem, but rather the cultures which glorify violence and demean life. And we see those characteristics in the ghetto and gangsta lifestyles popularized in today's media.

I take it then, that you are a proponent of "nature" in the "nature versus nurture" debates, Pale?

So I do my best to answer your two question...

Well here then is where you start arguing apples and oranges. If I bought a Chevy Malibu, and it had major problems, I'd be correct in saying Chevy had a problem with one of it's cars. I'd also be correct in saying the Malibu had a problem, although saying Malibu would be more precise. It may be a cultural problem, but it is a cultural problem indicative to black people. Just saying cultural could mean it to be any race, when the facts clearly distinguish one in particular.

That question is a little to broad for a yes or no answer.

Now here is where you completely lose it, as if someone flipped a switch. I've been polite to you and answered every one of your questions up to this point, but you go off and start in with some real prime SHIT, accusing me "cherry picking" facts, WHERE YOU NEVER WERE ABLE TO PROVE, although my "thought process was the same as those ILL INFORMED ANTI IRISH BIGOTS of the 1800's"... YOU CALL ME AN ILL INFORMED BIGOT... FOR WHAT EVER REASON IS STILL UNKOWN!!! YOU NEVER WERE ABLE TO EXPLAIN WHY... YOU JUST WANTED TO START CALLING ME NAMES AND RIP INTO ME PERSONALLY...

Well, the part of the facts that you choose to cherry-pick, that is. And so that does make you every bit as racist as Sharpton or Jackson in my book. You're using the same type of ill-formed thought process which anti-Irish bigots of the late 1800's and early 1900's used.

In some arguments, perhaps, but not in this one. You are obviously concluding that statistics prove some kind of genetic predisposition to violence (specifically inter-racial violence) as having a genetic basis. That's not what the statistics show. The statistics show a higher proportion of black-on-white violent crime to white-on-black violent crime. But no data was collected in the study related to the mental health of the subjects, nor of any genetic histories of the subjects. The fact that you choose to focus on race as "THE" deciding factor is a leap not supported by anything other than perhaps your own prejudices. Now if you have scientific evidence to support your theory that blacks have some genetic predisposition to inter-racial violence, I'd be interested to see it.

Your doing nothing but ASSUMING my CONCLUSIONS prove something I HAVE NEVER SAID. You make accusations of statements or thoughts that are NONE EXISTANT IN ANYTHING I'VE SAID! Where it all came from, I don't know. Evidently you did NOT like the fact that I tried to be polite to you and sincerely answer all your questions. You chose instead to start in with your character assassination of me, and try to discredit the facts and spin off on a whole new tirade of name calling and bigotry on your own part.

So for you to come in this thread and claim that "it's all good," and that it's much better when everybody stays calm and takes nicey, nicey is about as fucking hypocritical as I've ever seen. It's a stinking crock of shit.

Now YOUR DIRTY LAUNDRY is on the board, and you've got some of your OWN shit on YOUR face just like PmP got on his. You fuck with me and treat me the way you did, and then pull a jacked off stunt like this, I will NOT let you get away with it... EVER... and don't forget it. I'll be all over you like OCA on crystal meth, until you either admit how wrong you were, or you leave.

[Hugh Lincoln]

Blacks are hypersensitive to the "n-word," The Bell Curve, Dr. James Watson and the rest of it BECAUSE THEY KNOW they don't measure up. Nobody freaks out about stuff like that unless there's some truth to it!

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. But look around folks, think about the, *AMERICAN RIOTS*, and who was behind them and why.
2. Very telling on this thread.
3. Reality boils over, and when it does, who's railing on whitey?
4. I remember that truck driver who got caught in South L. A., who was pulled from his rig and assaulted with bricks to the side of the head, log hair dude being whacked with bricks while young black men danced for joy, while doing it.
5. He was a victim of the blacks hypocrisy, and not one black person of renown was in amazement when he was attacked.
6. And the usual suspects Al, Jessie, Farrakhan, didn't come out and defend this white man.
7. And when you look around now here in America, just recently, we see those same suspects defending the, Jena 6, and not the victim.
8. If you are black or white, yellow, or brown, and you can't see the blatant hypocrisy, then you can't see anything at all.
9. That about covers it.
10. Thanks whoever it was who cleaned out this thread from the local rant machine, OCA.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[OCA]

I see they cleared out your stupid fucking post about dope.

Believe me, it will be the last post of mine that is deleted.

You can rant about Blacks as much as you want, they are smarter than you for the most part.

[82Marine89]

Hey Cheese Whiz, how about a response to post #32?

[OCA]

Sorry bout that,

1. But look around folks, think about the, *AMERICAN RIOTS*, and who was behind them and why.
2. Very telling on this thread.
3. Reality boils over, and when it does, who's railing on whitey?
4. I remember that truck driver who got caught in South L. A., who was pulled from his rig and assaulted with bricks to the side of the head, log hair dude being whacked with bricks while young black men danced for joy, while doing it.
5. He was a victim of the blacks hypocrisy, and not one black person of renown was in amazement when he was attacked.
6. And the usual suspects Al, Jessie, Farrakhan, didn't come out and defend this white man.
7. And when you look around now here in America, just recently, we see those same suspects defending the, Jena 6, and not the victim.
8. If you are black or white, yellow, or brown, and you can't see the blatant hypocrisy, then you can't see anything at all.
9. That about covers it.
10. Thanks whoever it was who cleaned out this thread from the local rant machine, OCA.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Jasper, TX

So Chester what is it that you hope to achieve with your racist rhetoric? You want all niggers expelled out of the country?

I believe that you are trolling for attention pure and simple.

You are a fucking jackoff.