Muhammad Rasheed's Blog, page 174

Vote Suppression by Gaslight

Muhammad Rasheed - [FB NOTE] #AskGregAQuestion: Elections 2018 | Voting Rights Under Attack

Mike Beckom - @MR... you can't possibly buy into this load of crappola, can you? Voter registration is bad? Proof of citizenship too? How so? And voter spoilage? Seriously? How exactly does the voting machine figure out your race or ethnicity? Dude, I understand that you're not enamored with the present administration. I get that you feel like minorities are getting the short greasy end of the stick. We ALL get that. It's in everything you post be it articles or toons. How do you function? If I carried around all that hate, all that anger and angst, I'm not sure I could get outta bed in the mornings. You are much too intelligent to ascribe to some of this blatant stupidity.

Muhammad Rasheed - There's a lot of research that went into this body of information, Mike, and I've been following it for a while now. Many of the techniques involved were resurrected from the 1870s era when the aristocracy were actively stripping away the gains of Reconstruction, working to disenfranchise the Black community from the political process. So now they're back, with a few extra toys added from the digital age, but the purpose is the same as it's always been. So yes, I do tend to buy into facts.

I'm more inclined to look with suspicion upon someone who demonstrates they haven't researched the material (your questions are answered in the vid clip below btw), but seem over-eager for me to look away from it, especially when it involves the topic of my life's work.

[VIDEO] Greg Palast: Cross Check- Motherlode of Vote Purge Scams

Muhammad Rasheed - Mike wrote: "If I carried around all that hate..."

Several months ago, I came across some quotes from a white conservative radio personality who said that racism is the fault of Black people themselves. He said that if they would just learn to let go of their resentments, and turn the other cheek and forgive whenever a Dylann Roof situation happened, then racism would go away. Is this the spirit you are coming from when you talk about "all that hate?" I hate the white supremacist system that plunders my people to feed/maintain the racist aristocracy, increasing the wealth gap. Any moral, righteous and freedom-loving people should.

Mike wrote: "...to some of this blatant stupidity."

I'm not sure what part you are calling 'stupid.' Is it the FAQ from Greg Palast, the voter suppression apparatus, or the effort to expose it as the evil scam it is?

Mike Beckom - the blatantly stupid part is questioning voter registration. Or voter suppression. Yeah, I've seen the redistricting plans of big govt. They work the voting districts around to benefit whomever they wish, whenever they wish. I've also been privy to the blatant stupidity of others. I lived in a part of SC where the population was 80/20 - black to white. I went to vote one fine sunny afternoon and found (at the prescribed distance away from the voting center) a couple of young black gents who were passing out....get this....sample ballots. They were imploring other people of color to 'vote the way this is marked'. I asked for one and was rebuffed. When I inquired why I couldn't have one, I was told I didn't need one. I then went on the offensive and asked....is it because I'm white? Perhaps it's because I'm capable of making up my own mind - which seems to be in contrast to what you're implying by passing out these 'examples'. I told them that they should go home and do something constructive with their lives instead of insulting others with their propaganda. How is it wrong to ask someone to prove their citizenship before casting a ballot? Businesses ask for proof of id for entry, to buy things, etc. Seems like with this being one of our most basic fundamental rights as CITIZENS....no real citizen would have a problem providing it. As for voting - I firmly believe everyone should make up and vote their own conscience. Otherwise, they are merely doing the bidding of others.

Muhammad Rasheed - I understand the official political justification stated for why voter registration laws were put in place, and from within the shallow confines of the surface film it seems to make sense. However, the practice and procedures of how these laws are consistently implemented reveals them as only a classic tool of voter suppression to disenfranchise a targeted group.

This article linked below reveals how slimy the practice is when GOP officials in NC were busted a couple years ago, before they learned to hide their slime better:

[ARTICLE] The ‘smoking gun’ proving North Carolina Republicans tried to disenfranchise black voters

Caping for Hillary...?

Jason Farmer - [FB THREAD] M. Rasheed defends Hillary over Bernie supporters

Muhammad Rasheed - Your post link implies another false equivalency fallacy. I voted for Hillary because she was going to further Obama's agenda for building up the middle class and the Black communities with long-ranging tech initiatives, not because I'm uncritically pro-Hillary.

You disagree?

Jason Farmer - I agree that you were caping for the Becky who spoke of your people like animals in a successful push to bring mass incarceration to our communities. You disagree?

Muhammad Rasheed - I do disagree. Because of the Obama endorsement, I decided to accept her apology since she was actively partnering with the Obama administration to help reform the criminal justice system her family helped break. The acknowledgment of her wrong, with the actions that went with a true repentance and the partnering with the Obama vision I believed in, is why I felt she deserved my vote.

Jason Farmer -

If 'Conspiracy Theory' was Fiction

The Exploiter's Oncode Victim-Blaming

Richard Sherman - The face of victimhood.

Muhammad Rasheed - I don't know what that means, Rich. The "victimhood" talking point is a Republican line. I never received their glossary of terms.

Richard Sherman - Received, probably not. Lived? Very much so.

Muhammad Rasheed - Care to decode for folks not in your club?

Richard Sherman - Not really, Muh. You'll end up butt-hurt and ranting.

Muhammad Rasheed - So leaving cryptic messages under my cartoon was intended to do what then?

Richard Sherman - [ARTICLE] Almost half of US families can't afford basics like rent and food

Muhammad Rasheed - Does this count as "victimhood?"

Lila W Grant - Good question. Depends on whether or not they're living beyond their means. I don't expect much insight from CNN, just hype.

Muhammad Rasheed - So the charge of "victimhood" is the perception that someone's plight is actually self-inflicted?

Lila W Grant - As someone who raised three kids on my own with little money, I never once thought of myself as a victim. That background, combined with your quotes around "victimhood," and CNN as the source, influenced me to read it as self-pity.

I can't say I agree with "self-inflicted."

Muhammad Rasheed - It seems like the kind of person who would level the term "victimhood" upon you, would say something along the lines of: "Well, she shouldn't have had all those kids! Then she wouldn't have had it so hard! It's all her fault, so why should taxes come out of MY hard-earned money to blah-blah-blah?!?"

Lila W Grant - My response would be that I may have as many kids as I want to. Every child is a gift from God and I don't allow man to tell me how many kids I'm entitled to. Not only that, but it's God who controls the womb, not birth control pills, no matter how much man wants to be in control. I received welfare only one time, when I moved to a town where employers do not hire single women with children, in spite of excellent references. I went thru all my savings and finally had no choice but to receive welfare. I hope I was receiving the tax money of all the jackasses who refused to hire me.

That's one side. The other side is that there are some women who have kids as a business venture, but the govt created that mess, so let the govt deal with it.

Muhammad Rasheed - I'm pretty sure your hypothetical "victimhood" critic would get triggered over that one time you were on welfare and skipped the rest. lol

Lila W Grant - Undoubtedly.

Hate Club's First Rule

Kwesi Ako Kennedy - Oh, so we kicking out productive members because they can stand up to the mediocre mod?

Muhammad Rasheed - smh Yup. I'm kicked out of Cartoonist Cafe again.  #snowflakes

Muhammad Rasheed - Ironically, this is the same demographic that's always going on and on about how much they hate political correct speech and want to say whatever they want. When I encourage that in their own racist-ass safe space I get banned.  lol Do racists ever try to make sense?

***FLASH BACK***

Alan Groening - Rash stop illustrating these essays of yours. It's inapropriate and NOT your job.

Muhammad Rasheed - My degree is in illustration. I'm trained specifically to illustrate prose. Your advice is inappropriate.

Alan Groening - Fuck you then

Muhammad Rasheed - I majored in Illustration. I was trained to illustrate prose material. I'm literally doing what I trained in.

Alan Groening - great. no one disputes the fact that you're a damn good illustrator, and you are.

Muhammad Rasheed - So your comments are weird.

Especially the "Fuck you then" part.

Alan Groening - you disregard any advice you're given, positive or negative.

Muhammad Rasheed - Your advice is inappropriate.

Alan Groening - its totally appropriate, let your cartoons speak for themselves.

Muhammad Rasheed - I draw some cartoons like that, but that doesn't represent the body of my work. I illustrate my prose/essays.

Alan Groening - dude. I love your cartoons, its the rant that follows that I can do without... you are NOT classically trained on creative writing, you dont have a degree in creative writing do you?

Muhammad Rasheed - Yes. I learned creative writiing at a correspondance school I attended.

Why are you so determined to control me? lol

Alan Groening - control you?

where the hell did that come from?

Muhammad Rasheed - Mostly from your efforts in this discussion to control me.

Alan Groening - giving my advice isnt trying to control you.

Muhammad Rasheed - I already explained that I'm doing literally what I went to college to master, and I'm expressing myself honestly in my art. Why do you

think it's okay for you to push your unwanted advice on a 50 yr old man?

I don't want advice from you, Mr. "Fuck you then."

Alan Groening - that is obvious

Muhammad Rasheed - Is it? Okay, then stop.

Alan Groening - you stop.

Muhammad Rasheed - You know you're attacking my Free Speech rights, yes?  I thought you were a patriot?

No?

Alan Groening - you told me to stop first, you;re attacking my free speech rights too...

Muhammad Rasheed - I told you to stop trying to control me. Slavery is over, you know?

I have the right to not be harassed with unwanted advice and "Fuck you then's".

Alan Groening - isnt that the entire point of Weapon of the People, that slavery really still continues?

Muhammad Rasheed - Well, if the whole point of your attempts to control me is that you don't believe in my message, then why are you so determined to prove

my strip true?

Does THAT make sense?

Alan Groening - no.

Muhammad Rasheed - Then why are you trying to push me around like you own me, Alan?

Knock it off.  I'm free. And I'm a free artist.

(not that my art work doesn't cost anything. You know what i mean.)

(people still have to pay for it and stuff)

Alan Groening - in your mind only i am trying to control you. which I have stated repeated that I'm not.

Muhammad Rasheed - Your actions show that you are.

Alan Groening - my actions are that Im sick as a dog on the couch under two warm blankets dude.

Muhammad Rasheed - I HEARD/READ your advice, and politely declined it.

The. End.

Muhammad Rasheed - You're sick because you're harassing me. lol Probably.

That's what you get.

Alan Groening - Im sick because my nephews got me sick on Christmas day.

Muhammad Rasheed - Noooo...

You're sick because you've been reading my stuff and getting all white conservative red-faced. Let it go. Get over it.

Then you'll feel better.

Alan Groening - damn. I am honestly stunned.

Muhammad Rasheed - Then why are you attacking my right of Free Speech when this is stuff I do know about? This is MY history.

Muhammad Rasheed - Your ignorance doesn't negate my Freedom to Express my OWN history in my art. Sir.

Alan Groening - wow, I was born in 1969 California and it wasnt covered in schools out here, so you can call me ignorant. Fine.

Muhammad Rasheed - Stop attacking my right of free speech because you don't like looking at the subject material. Thanks.

Alan Groening - and just to set the record straight, I'm not "attacking" you're right to free speech.

Muhammad Rasheed - Sure you are. Where'd my cartoon go then?

Alan Groening - I dunno... I didnt remove it.

Muhammad Rasheed - How is honestly telling my ethnic group's own history considered "hate speech" towards someone else exactly?

Can you explain that oddity using normal plain speak?

Alan Groening - hate speech? WTF are you going off on this time Rash?

Muhammad Rasheed - That's the message I got from FB when it was flagged. FB said "Hate Speech" was checked.

Muhammad Rasheed - Since YOU are the one that wrote "OKAY WE GET IT!!!!" obviously that was YOU.

Alan Groening - dunno... wasnt me that reported it.

Muhammad Rasheed - hahahahaahaha

Alan Groening - not me dude.

Muhammad Rasheed - hahahahaahaha

Muhammad Rasheed - Please explain how is honestly telling my ethnic group's own history considered "hate speech" towards someone else. Because I don't understand that point of view.

Muhammad Rasheed - Is this part of the "Get over it!!!" thing regarding your feelings about anti-Black racism?

Alan Groening - no. (its not part of the "GET OVER IT" thing.)

Muhammad Rasheed - "No" what?

Alan Groening - honestly dude, I did not report your cartoons to facebook, didnt push for them to be removed, didnt ban anything... I was at work all day

Alan Groening - when i got home from work, it was gone... but I had nothing to do with it.

Muhammad Rasheed - I'm tired of people pretending to be "patriots" when all they what is special rules for their group alone. The MOST un-American of all US citizens are the ones who do the MOST parading around with the ole Red, White & Blue.

It's offensive.

Freedom of Speech is for all Americans, not just you. You are not the only American citizen, even if you wish it to be.

Muhammad Rasheed - Hypocrisy is evil. Please improve.

Alan Groening - I really hope these comments aren't aimed at me personally because I had noting to do with your cartoon getting reported and removed or whatever else happened. and by the way I dont know what "smdh" means, remember, I'm ignorant?
so what you're saying is that the vast majority of the flag waving Red, White and Blue patriotic US citizens out there are un-American (in your eyes) ? Isn't that just a wee tad judgmental, Rash?

That's just harsh, you cant say they're un-american just because they wave a flag...

Muhammad Rasheed - 1.) It's directed to whomsoever it applies to.

2.) What I'm saying is that I'm tired of people pretending to be "patriots" when all they really want are special rules for their group alone, while wishing they could still legally throw balls at the heads of other groups' babies and are actually resentful of the fact they can't ("Make America Great Again!").

Muhammad Rasheed - Remember during Charlie Hebdo Gate, when this entire group filled up with offensive caricatures of the founder of Al-Islam, supposedly in solidarity for the right of free speech? Not once did I ask anyone to take them down, but I did ask how were those cartoons supposed to be helping anything. Just trying to engage in dialogue to understand the mindset involved got me banned from the group. I didn't flag anybody's drawings -- because I actually believe in Free Speech -- but I wanted to know what the message these guys were expressing actually was. I created cartoons that represented my interpretation of what they were actually telling me and I was banned for it.

While the actually offensive cartoons remained.

So with this blatant hypocrisy from this group in the record, don't preach at me about "wee tad judgmental," because the very group you are defending looks BAD. REAL BAD.


See Also :

It's one thing to know that's how they really think by
tracing the thread of truth through history,
and it's another thing to actually see them admit
how they feel from their heart in a raw state.

Caping for Becky

Muhammad Rasheed - [ARTICLE] Cosby accuser's family 'despises black people' & used Cosby for revenge on 'all black people'

"Bruce Castor opened an investigation on Bill Cosby for reports of a powerful black man sexually assaulting a white woman. After a lengthy investigation, he found Constand wasn’t credible given her extreme contradictions on what happened, when it happened and why it happened."

Jeremy Love - C'mon man, why post this nonsense?

Muhammad Rasheed - Why do you think it's "nonsense?" I thought it was very interesting.

Muhammad Rasheed - It's very insightful in how the legal system works.

Jeremy Love - It's a very dubious news source.

Muhammad Rasheed - lol All news sources are 'dubious.' What matters is the strength of the materials they report. Do they hold up or not?

Jeremy Love - On the night in question:
Q: Can you tell me ... what you recall of the night in which you gave the pills to Andrea?
A: Andrea came to the house. I called her. ... We talked about Temple University. We talked about her position. And then I went upstairs and I got three pills. I brought them down. They are the equivalent of one and a half. The reason why I gave them and offered them to Andrea, which she took after examining them, was because she was talking about stress.
___

Cosby describes a several-minute sexual encounter that followed.
Q: So, you're not telling us that you verbally asked her for permission?
A: I didn't say it verbally, I said. The action is my hand on her midriff, which is skin. I'm not lifting any clothing up. This is, I don't remember fully what it is, but it's there and I can feel. I got her skin and it's just above the hand and it's just above where you can go under the pants.

Q: Then what happens?
A: I don't hear her say anything. And I don't feel her say anything. And so I continue and I go into the area that is somewhere between permission and rejection. I am not stopped.

Muhammad Rasheed - Jeremy quoted: "The reason why I gave them and offered them to Andrea, which she took after examining them, was because she was talking about stress."

Nothing here suggests even remotely that she was drugged without her knowledge in a date rape scenario. He went to get some meds for his extra-marital affair 'friend' when she came over complaining about how stressed she was. You know what else is good for medicating stress? Sex. Since they were actively having an affair, the leap towards "Cosby is confessing his rape!" is ridiculous to the point of offense.

Jason Farmer - "Nothing here suggests even remotely that she was drugged without her knowledge in a date rape scenario."

How about the fact that s̶o̶m̶e̶ ̶m̶e̶d̶s̶ Quaaludes have been as illegal as heroin since 1984? She says she thought she was taking an herbal remedy, but for the sake of argument, let's say that's a lie; she knew he was giving her something illegal. Andrea Constand is 44. Do you think she was on the disco party scene at 10 or younger getting high off Quaaludes? Quaaludes were two decades removed from being a party drug in 2004. Qualudes in 2004 are a date rape drug.

Cosby testified to being prescribed the drugs in the 70s.

Q: When you got the quaaludes, was it in your mind that you were going to use these quaaludes for young women that you wanted to have sex with?

A: Yes.

He obtained the drugs back in the 70s for the purposes of sex and kept them 20 years after being classified a Schedule 1 drug. He kept a Schedule 1 illegal SEDATIVE known to be especially potent when mixed with alcohol for decades with the intent to give it to women he wanted to have sex with. He then gave that SEDATIVE with alcohol to a woman he wanted to sleep with from the first time he saw her, and then engaged in sexual activity with her, during which, he admits, she did not consent.

Q: So, you're not telling us that you verbally asked her for permission?

A: I didn't say it verbally, I said. The action is my hand on her midriff, which is skin. I'm not lifting any clothing up. This is, I don't remember fully what it is, but it's there and I can feel. I got her skin and it's just above the hand and it's just above where you can go under the pants.

Q: Then what happens?

A: I don't hear her say anything. And I don't feel her say anything. And so I continue and I go into the area that is somewhere between permission and rejection. I am not stopped.

His interpretation of consent is that she never said anything in her drug induced state, after taking a sedative he failed to identify, made especially potent by the alcohol he served with it.

And by his own admission, it's not the only time.

Q: Did you give her quaaludes?

A: Yes.

Q: What effect did the quaaludes have on her?

A: She became in those days what was called high.

Q: She said that she believes she was not in the position to consent to intercourse after you gave her the drug. Do you believe that is correct?

A: I DON'T KNOW (emphasis mine)... How many years ago are we talking about? 197[6]? ... I meet Ms. Picking in Las Vegas. She meets me backstage. I give her quaaludes. We then have sex.

How is this hard? You're caping for a rapist who rationalized racism because Black people have non-conforming names, Black women are unwed, and Black women (married and single) have multiple kids; a man who rationalized Black people being murdered for something as petty as stealing pound cake; a man whose very actions (the rapes and the "Pound Cake Speech" that resulted in a judge releasing the damning deposition I quoted) earned him his conviction.

Jason Farmer - Oh, and by the by. It's also rape if you decide to stick it in someone who is too drunk to give consent. Just so we're clear.

Muhammad Rasheed - @Jason... Please post the link you used for the pulled deposition quotes.

Jason Farmer - You don't have access to the deposition?

Jason Farmer - I'm not trying to be difficult for the sake of being difficult. I'm just trying to get to the point. You either do have access to the deposition, in which case you wish to challenge the context or veracity of those quotes, or you are lacking very pertinent information on this topic.

Jason Farmer - If it's the former, just go ahead and express your grievance.

Muhammad Rasheed - I'm looking for a copy that will enable me to rapidly search for the quotes you pulled for convenience, and so far the ones I find are scanned page images that won't let me do that. Since I feel it is highly unlikely that you took the time to type out those lengthy quotes you posted from scanned page image reference, I just wanted to use the same high-speed link you used. If you do not care to give it then I'll find it the long way later on when I have more time.

Jason Farmer - For expediency:

Read excerpts from Cosby's 2005-2006 quaalude deposition
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la...

Jason Farmer - For a little more depth:

Cosby Deposition | DOCUMENTCLOUD.ORG
https://www.documentcloud.org/documen...

Jason Farmer - I would encourage reading that second link.

Muhammad Rasheed - Yes, I was deliberately avoiding using other people's cherry-picked quote editorials about it.

Muhammad Rasheed - The second link document appears to have been written/packaged by the extremely biased Troiani herself.

This isn't THE Cosby Deposition, is it?

Muhammad Rasheed - It's peppered with her complaints and driving narrative of events.

Jason Farmer - It does provide insight into the coaching Cosby was receiving when answering. It could have been worse for him if not for that. But ignore it if you choose. Do you dispute that is the deposition?

Jason Farmer - @Muhammad... So, what's up? What are you disputing? Or are you scouring a 66 page document on a quest to find supporting evidence for a conclusion you've already arrived at?

Muhammad Rasheed - So far I've noticed an objective analysis of the case reveals something different than what Troiani and Co. want us to believe. This whole "He did it and that's that! Why dig deeper?!" doesn't seem right to me.

Jason Farmer - What part of what I posted are you objecting to?

Muhammad Rasheed - It's the revelation that it was Troiani's team that put together the deposition and released it to the public, and how it deliberately leads the reader in the direction she needs the narrative to flow in so the prosecution can influence the public... prior to jury selection.

The effort is very obvious and ham-fisted.

Jason Farmer - Are you stating what I posted was not Cosby's testimony?

Jason Farmer - She didn't release that to the public btw. It was sealed. I trust you know how it became unsealed? I alluded to it earlier.

Muhammad Rasheed - My question is: Where are the full source documents absent the heavily-biased Troiani's narration? Did the defense put together their own package of the deposition, too? Where is that?

Jason Farmer - Go look for it. Aren't you smart enough to parse out his testimony from her argument? I know you are. These are the deflections I was trying to avoid when I questioned your wanting me to post the source.

Muhammad Rasheed - Jason wrote: "Aren't you smart enough to parse out his testimony from her argument?"

But I'm not the one that has uncritically accepted what that woman has spoon fed the public as THE definitive version of events.

Jason Farmer - Again, you are choosing to deflect with questions about her complaints to the court concerning counsel's conduct. This is a document submitted to the court containing Bill Cosby's deposition. You wanted the source I quoted from. I gave you the source for expediency, and I also provided you this. Apparently, you have not done this much research on your own, which is surprising, for someone who has spoken so often and so matter-of-factly on this case.

Getting back on track. Are you claiming that the quotes I posted are not Bill Cosby's testimony? Deal with that.

Muhammad Rasheed - I'm saying that the document the public references as "The Cosby Disposition" was prepared by the heavily-biased, and very crooked, prosecution team and even goes so far as to contain the prosecution's heavy-handed narrative of how they want the reader to think of events -- basically grabbing the reader by the scruff of the neck and forcing him/her to follow the thread they want followed.

Since the doc was sealed, it was obviously done this way to influence the jury they would hand-pick. That they were able to release it to the public, who were happily led around by the bull's nose ring as the prosecution had hoped, it only worked in their favor.

Jeremy Love - He doesn't want to admit that those were Cosby's words. Cosby's legal team has not disputed the validity of the deposition. He made a absolutely ridiculous argument that a woman saying she was stressed out was a green light for sex, now he's dismissing the deposition as fake news. That deposition is game, set, match and he knows it. It is a clear admission to a crime.

Muhammad Rasheed - As I pointed out a few times now, it's the prosecution leading the reader with the narration that taints the document for public consumption. I never said those weren't Cosby's words. That's a strawman effigy.

Jason Farmer - @Jeremy... Thank you. @Muhammad... That's a rather evasive and hypocritical stance for you to take, considering your earlier defense of this article. You also don't seem too informed on about this deposition, why it was sealed, and how it was released. This had nothing to do with the prosecution. In fact, it was created before there even was a prosecution.

Jason Farmer - "I never said those weren't Cosby's words. That's a strawman effigy."

I believe what was stated is that you do not want to admit that those were Cosby's words, not that you deny it. You're deliberately being evasive. So again, do you deny that was his testimony?

Muhammad Rasheed - I haven't denied the testimony, but now that you mention it, I wouldn't doubt that Troiani would leave out parts, or nudge a word or to in a direction she felt could be more 'clear' if she were so inclined.

Jeremy Travis - @Muhammad... Can you prove that she so tainted Cosby's deposition, or do you just BELIEVE that she did?

Further, IF she tainted it, what would his deposition look like if she hadn't tainted it?

Muhammad Rasheed - Jason wrote: "Jeremy Love Thank you."

Are you thanking him for his strawman? *thoughtful*

Jason wrote: "Muhammad Rasheed, that's a rather evasive and hypocritical stance for you to take, considering your earlier defense of this article."

The article authors don't have Troiani's slimeball reputation though, so I don't understand this comparison.

Jason Farmer - Again, not what I asked. I obliged your request. I ask you to return the favor. Are you denying (not have you) that is Cosby's testimony. Here are your choices:

A) Yes.
B) No.
C) I don't know.

If "A," show us some evidence to back it up. If "B" or "C," why were you speaking so matter-of-factly on the case?

Muhammad Rasheed - Jeremy wrote: "Muhammad, can you prove that she so tainted Cosby's deposition...?"

Throughout the deposition, the preparer's narrative of how she wants the reader to understand the material breaks in every 10 lines or so. Since the deposition package was actually prepared by the prosecution team itself -- and the reading media and public happens to believe EXACTLY what that narration wants them to believe -- it is obvious to me that unsealing and releasing these documents into the public tainted the entire eligible pool of potential jurors.

Jeremy Travis - Then how come Cosby's attorneys haven't set straight the record of the deposition?

Jason Farmer - @Muhammad... You've completely exposed yourself here. The deposition was not prepared by the prosecution. You are completely winging it. I'll be back. I hope you'll stop with these deflections and answer the question I posed in my last reply, or at least confess you don't possess the knowledge to have made some of the comments you did.

Muhammad Rasheed - Jason wrote: "The deposition was not prepared by the prosecution."

First page of desposition from your link:



Muhammad Rasheed - Second page of desposition from your link:



Jeremy Love - I don't see the relevance.

Muhammad Rasheed - It has Troiani's sig as the submitter.

Jeremy Love - Cosby said: 1) he gave her drugs 2) she was not fully conscious 3) he made sexual contact 4) she did not consent. No amount of "leading questions" can break that chain of events. That is a crime. If that deposition was doctored why would Cosby's legal team remain silent?

Jason Farmer - FYI (maybe TMI): I just hopped out of the shower, half dressed, and getting myself together. That should give you enough time to realize your error.

Jeremy Love - You don't understand, the deposition was for a CIVIL CASE. There is no prosecution in a civil case.

Jason Farmer - Damn it, Jeremy.

The Outstanding Accomplishments of the Overclass

Hired Thugs of White Supremacy

What happens if you leave Islam?

Muhammad Rasheed - The Qur'an says that "there is no compulsion in religion," so anyone claiming that Allah orders other Muslims to kill the leaver is out of line. We are not allowed to punish people who decide that Islam isn't for them, and Muslim theocratic governments who make laws that have such punishments within them are not doing so from an Islamic position at all.


What Allah DOES say however is that HIS punishment for such a decision will be hellfire. In the Qur'an, the One God of Abraham says that He will not accept any other religion from one who once accepted the truth of Al-Islam, and then rejected it. Such a deed makes one a "transgressor of faith," and Allah uses language that makes it clear He considers the transgressor to be the most vile of all the hellbound. Yet Allah gives even these foolish people respite, and says several times that if they repent and turn back to Al-Islam, He will indeed forgive them. So how could that situation happen, and the unwise have the opportunity to save themselves per Allah's merciful policy, if the very wrong and misguided Muslims attack and kill the person because they decided to convert to something else? It is obvious that this is why Allah said "there is no compulsion in religion," because it is He who knows and you who know not.

O ye who believe! Stay your hand, and sheathe your swords! Attack not the transgressor of faith lest he should attack you. It may be that it is Allah's will that the transgressor will soften his heart and turn back to the Truth. The future lies in the unseen, and Allah has not shared the secrets of the unseen with you! Will you not then be wise? Peace.

A Willing Commitment to Toxicity