Police Brutality at LA

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Chris 62
Hardly.

Ah, the rapier wit of Chris62.

Chris62: I was planning on ignoring you, but you kept on going. So...

Do you not realize that everytime you try to argue with me, your arguments get cut to shreds? You end up resorting to insults, and usually quite quickly. Do you not realize how you look to everyone else?

Perhaps you're a glutton for punishment.

But the thing is, you're boring. I can't remember the last time you provide some facts to support your ramblings. In fact, you rarely add anything constructive to any discussion.

There are a lot of people who I routinely argue with, and I respect many of them even though I often disagree with them. The reason I respect their viewpoints is that they provide facts to back up their arguments, or they provide worthwhile opinion. Unfortunately, I can't say the same for you.

So go ahead and have the last word because it is not worth my time to respond to you.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Caligastia


Why is it that whenever a black man is assaulted by a white cop, people immediately start screaming "THIS IS RACISM!!!"

Because sometimes it is true, and sometimes it is a fool trying to blame other people for their own actions.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Tingkai


Because sometimes it is true, and sometimes it is a fool trying to blame other people for their own actions.

Yep, unfortunately both sides jump to conclusions before anyone knows the facts.

[Chris 62]

Originally posted by Tingkai
Ah, the rapier wit of Chris62.

I bet that's a phrase never used your way.

Chris62: I was planning on ignoring you, but you kept on going. So...

What are you talking about?
Off the medication again?

Do you not realize that everytime you try to argue with me, your arguments get cut to shreds? You end up resorting to insults, and usually quite quickly. Do you not realize how you look to everyone else?

Visiting fantasy land again?
You have NEVER won an argument with ANYBODY at poly, in fact, your consistantly one of the more ignorent posters here, if you really want brass tax evaluation.

Perhaps you're a glutton for punishment.

What are you talking about?
Looks like your off the deep end son.

But the thing is, you're boring. I can't remember the last time you provide some facts to support your ramblings. In fact, you rarely add anything constructive to any discussion.

A more psychocic rambling I couldn't imagine.

There are a lot of people who I routinely argue with, and I respect many of them even though I often disagree with them. The reason I respect their viewpoints is that they provide facts to back up their arguments, or they provide worthwhile opinion. Unfortunately, I can't say the same for you.

Ah Tinky, NOBODY respects you.
Go read couterglow to see what a number of apolyton posters think of you.
And bare in mind I never made any of those posts, you will find over a dozen posters refer to you as "jackass", and that is the least of them, and no, they are not made by friends of mine, people really do have a low opinion of you.
I never mention it because, frankly, your not worth the time.
I have no idea why you wanted to be again humiliated by me, you would think you would have learned you lesson by now, but intelligence isn't your bright spot, is it?

So go ahead and have the last word because it is not worth my time to respond to you.

I have no idea what you on about, nor do I care.

[Carver]

Chris62 the problem here is that no one in this thread resorted to personal attacks and juvenile insults until you began calling people "boy" and "son" amd "little twit". If you want to prove that Mugabe's government is wrong, then prove it. But you only weaken your position by dodging the facts and argueing personalities.

[Carver]

Originally posted by Chris 62

Chris62, is there any substance in your head or just insults?

You really are a petulent little twit, aern't you?

Well thanks for answering my question.

[Chris 62]

Originally posted by Carver
Chris62 the problem here is that no one in this thread resorted to personal attacks and juvenile insults until you began calling people "boy" and "son" amd "little twit". If you want to prove that Mugabe's government is wrong, then prove it. But you only weaken your position by dodging the facts and argueing personalities.

Your an idiot.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Chris 62
Ah Tinky, NOBODY respects you.
Go read couterglow to see what a number of apolyton posters think of you.
And bare in mind I never made any of those posts,

Oh man, I said I was going to give Chrissy the last word, but when I saw this, I had to explore it. (okay, it sparked the egotism within me. People are taking potshots behind my back. Of course I'm interested). So I go to Counterglow and I do a search of my name and what do I find: one thread with only two references to me.

One of those reference was from a guy named Chris, who just by chance has the same birthday as Chris62, but of course, I would never want to suggest that Chris62 lied when he wrote "And bare in mind I never made any of those posts."

[Carver]

Originally posted by Chris 62
Your an idiot.

I don't even have a comment, I just wanted to preserve this statement.

[drake]

I just had a discussion about this very issue with my bud at work at lunchtime. He started the discussion off by saying something along the lines of "here we go again", saying it in the tone that someone rolling their eyes would. The rest of the conversation consisted of basically coming to the conclusion that this is only news because 1) it is on videotape and 2)because its a white man beating a black man. Had the video not been rolling or had the victim been white, it wouldnt have even been a blip on the national radar screen.

And that this whole controversy and hype surrounding it is just another excuse for someone like the NAACP to get leverage for their politics. Another bruised poster boy.

While this is nothing more than another opinion and you're probably thinking "so", I only add this because the guy who said these things was a brutha, and I thought that a black opinion might be refreshing to hear around here. It certainly was refreshing to me.

Anyways, back to the insult slinging.

[Chris 62]

Just because I'm bored, I decided to put the "wit" and wisdom of Carver together

This is another example of how some police officers view their position not as a job, but as a party. They feel once they put on their uniforms they are free to do whatever they want. No one on their beat matters except for them. This is the attitude LA's police chief was attacking, and that's the reason many of the white officers out there hate him.

First post, no facts in, you have passed judgement.

Amen Albert. Although I'm not too enthusiastic about riots. Targeted killings make more sense. The Israelis say they target terrorists because the Pal Authority doesn't act. Well if the CA authorities don't act the people will have to execute justice themselves and target the CA terrorists

Second post by you, you compound your stupidity by calling a police force terrorists and calling for murder!

All police are not terrorists, of course. But the officers who beat up this kid are terrorists, the officers that assaulted Abner Luima are terrorists, the officers that killed Amadou Diallo are terrorists, the officers that killed Patrick Dorismond are terrorists, the officers that killed Johnny Gamich are terrorists and the hundreds of other officers that we don't hear about that are needlessly abusive every day are terrorists.

Post three.
Police who have broken the law are terrorists according to you.

Many african-americans take action against criminal activity every day. Nevertheless, it is more outrageous for a police officer to murder than a private citizen . Crime happens, but when the crimes are being committed by those who have sworn to "serve and protect" this is a different problem requiring special attention.

Post four, you change a beating into murder.

If you call being forced to give up property you stole harassment then I guess the whites of Zimbabwe are being harassed.

Post five, your first of the 'sins of the father are yours" reference, as, from what your saying, whites can't possibly own land in Africa.

Zimbabwe's independence came in 1980, less than one generation ago. All land aquired prior to 1980 was stolen by a white minority government. Any white person sitting on a farm in 1979 stole that farm from Africans. In some cases the land may have been stolen originally in 1930 but guess what - buying property known to be stolen (or receiving such property) is a crime in every nation I can think of. So yes, the vast majority of white farmers in Zim are thieves

Post six, you continue your rather unique (and dead wrong) interpretation of law.
It's all quite insane, but let's continue.

In other words you didn't like what I wrote but you know its true.

Number seven, someone took umbridge at your rather, "unique" view, so like all of the terminally delusional, you take this as aformation.

I'm really not sure what you're talking about here, but most welfare recipients in the US are white.

Number eight, the facts from thin air post, always a favorite.

Zim has no policy to kill whites. In the recent political/land reform tension more blacks have died than whites. Why don't you mention the blacks? You must be racist if you ignore dead blacks but want to raise hell over a handful (less than 20 I believe) dead whites.
As for the European taxpayers, spending money voluntarily is not theft.

Number nine, an apologist post for a vicious and vile thug.

That might be part of it, but the land still needs to be reclaimed. The status quo is unacceptable.

Number ten, your continued evaluation of the law, no matter that it flies in the face of the agreements made, but then, treaties are but pieces of paper, no?

Michael Radu's "essay" is a collection of unsubstantiated claims and mind-reading.
The qoute is taken completely out of context. The race-baiting author seemingly wants us to think Mugabe views all whites as evil. Well the Ian Smith regime was evil. Apartheid South Africa was evil.
This statement means a majority of black farm workers have died. That is a bold faced lie.
quote:
Mugabe is right and, of course, very few of the whites in the west would care about the Zim election if it weren't for the fewer than 100,000 whites there.
The author is probably upset that Belguim and France have been cut out of the looting they enjoyed under the US and French supported Mobutu.

A rather poor troll by M Radu.

Number 11, you take on the spector of being a propaganda minister for a monster.

Agreed. Mugabe has not handled the land reforn program properly. The farms should have been marked for repossesion, the farmers given notice and then sent packing. But the process in Zim has been less orderly than would be ideal.

Number 12, more apologies for the lawless monster.

I believe I did. The rediculous assertions by Radu and some posters here that Mugabe is a racist are completely unsubstantiated. I am quite sure that many of the whites who call Mugabe a racist would not think of doing so if he were white and the evicted farmers black. Then he would just be "rectifying an historical injustice".
I seem to be one of the very few posters in this thread who knows anything of the facts. Its amazing (well not really) that so many people who never called apartheid South Africa "evil" call Mugabe evil at the drop of the hat. A few dead, precious white bodies and Mugabe is evil. While apartheid can kill hundreds of thousands (including the Pretoria organized civil wars in Mozambique and Angola) and the white government is just our "partner against communism" and we have to use "constructive engagement". Ronald Reagan called apartheid "our friend". That is a blatant double standard, it is disparate treatment of whites and blacks, it is another example of white racism.

Thank You.

Number 13 almost borders on the surealistic.
If you believe even half on this, your quite mad.

No. Killing is wrong period. Mugabe should not be out to kill whites, and I have seen no evidence that he is. People here have seen reports of a few whites dying during a turbulent and tense political situation and are assuming that the deaths are organized genocide. No whites were lined up and shot by Mugabe's men. They died during chaotic situations during which many more blacks died . As I've said Mugabe has been wrong to let the land reform program become so chaotic. But loosing control of a situation is not synonomous with racial hatred

Number 14 is an outright denial of reality, with yet another apology.

I never put one word into anyone's mouth. I don't know how you or many others here feel about apartheid. I said many people who attack Mugabe never scolded apartheid with the same energy.
Reagan (and Big Bush) were vehemently opposed to economic sanctions on South Africa, they didn't even enforce the military sanctions wholeheartedly. Reagan vetoed the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986. Congress overrode his veto in what was on of the few veto overrides related to foreign policy in the 20th century (if not the only one).

Number 15 sees you claim that the reason Mugabe is suported is becasue...others didn't opose aparthied???

"every non-white" - that is total racist crapola from you. All on-whites don't act alike. Not all blacks act alike. Any sentence you make with "every non-white" is racist so don't do it if you profess to be a non-racist.

A change of pace, now I'm a racist according to you.

Chris62, just how stupid are you?

Making statments like "all non-whites..." or "all blacks..." is plainly racist and to do so is stupid, so look at your own stupidity. Or you can continue to wallow in ignorance and prejudice along with Spencer and his recount of The History of Southern Africa According To A Buch of Racist Boer Bastards .

Here we see you frustrated, as I laughed off your nonsense about me being racist, so like a good little woodpecker you keep trying.

There is little point in continuing further, at least four people pointed out how rediculous your posts were, and you went merrily along.

I only have so much patience with jack-asses, you reacxhed my limit.
And calling you "son" isn't an insult, but now I wish it had been, as you are rather insulting if you believe your own drival.

[Chris 62]

Originally posted by Tingkai


Oh man, I said I was going to give Chrissy the last word, but when I saw this, I had to explore it. (okay, it sparked the egotism within me. People are taking potshots behind my back. Of course I'm interested). So I go to Counterglow and I do a search of my name and what do I find: one thread with only two references to me.

One of those reference was from a guy named Chris, who just by chance has the same birthday as Chris62, but of course, I would never want to suggest that Chris62 lied when he wrote "And bare in mind I never made any of those posts."

You are so delusional it's pathetic Tinky.

The thread was deleated long ago, you think they would leave it?

Your even dumber then I thought.

Oh, a little edit, I went back to see what they left, I found this nice quote from Serious Black:
"Tingkai, I agree 100%. Just a total tool."

It's a shame the other thread is gone, but this enough to prove even in your little "rebuttal" you lied.

Loser.

[Zoid]

Originally posted by Chris 62
I believe the truth is they aern't treated as equals, but as children.
Blacks are told they need help to suceed (be it welfare or affirmative action) instead of being told they are the equal of everyone else.

There is also the growing nonsense of "reperations", another way of saying the black man is a perpetual victim who must always be helped with some handout.

Blacks are treated differently then whites, there is no denying it, but that doesn't mean all cases of abuse are racially motivated.
Many police officers are simply power mad brutes, I have seen this type side by side with normal people.

It seems you are correct. Although I don´t know what´s worse; a racist cop or a power mad one...

I would tend to agree with your interpretation.
There has been great strides in the US to change this, but it will persist as long as they are viewed as black people and not just people.

True, unfortunately you can´t get rid of peoples xenophobia and latent racism with affirmitive action and similar measures.

[Carver]

Originally posted by drake
I just had a discussion about this very issue with my bud at work at lunchtime. He started the discussion off by saying something along the lines of "here we go again", saying it in the tone that someone rolling their eyes would. The rest of the conversation consisted of basically coming to the conclusion that this is only news because 1) it is on videotape and 2)because its a white man beating a black man. Had the video not been rolling or had the victim been white, it wouldnt have even been a blip on the national radar screen.

To go on-topic for a minute:
Yes, its only news because its on tape. And yes, the radar blip might be smaller if the victim were white. We don't know if the attack was racially motivated or not, but it doesn't matter. Just as whatever happened prior to the filmed event doesn't matter. That officer's assault was unjustified.

Contrary to what some posters here have alleged I'm not jumping to any conclusions about race or police brutality in general, I am just saying what was on that tape was wrong and nothing justifies it.

Anyways, back to the insult slinging.

Hopefully not, these kinds of insults are rather pointless and just detract from the conversation.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
SpenceH, if Mugabe's forces didn't fight actual troops, how is it that Rhodesia ceased to exist? I was around then too, and what you're writing sounds a lot more like the stuff that Ian Smith was saying than what everyone else was saying.

Rhodesia ceased to exist (in no small part) because of the English and worldwide pressure to end apartheid there. There were several differences between Rhodesia and SA that caused Rhodesia to shift to majority rule much earlier though. 1) Britain had a lot more influence in Rhodesian politics than they did in SA. 2) Whites in Rhodesia were a much smaller minority as a percentage of the population than in SA. 3) Unlike SA, Rhodesia didnt have any militarily significant metals so the embargos had much greater effect. Eventually, large chunks of the white population began leaving (in addition to the blacks) and minority rule was doomed.

I'm didnt say that Mugabe's and Nkomo's bandits didnt engage Rhodesian troops. I'm saying that they didnt do so willingly. Terrorists never do. The change to "majority rule" in Zimbabwe was not caused by any ZANU or ZAPU military successes.