Muhammad Rasheed's Blog, page 231

The Perks of Privilege

Crystal Hubbard – [shared link] This story brightly illustrates the stubborn divide in St. Louis. One group blithely believes Brown deserved the death he got and the other group is wounded and angry that killing was the option Wilson chose. Making light of a death in this way is cowardly, backward, insensitive, and hateful. These haters behave as if they have a personal beef with Brown, as if he strong - armed THEM, or left a red mark on THEIR faces. Brown is dead. Why torment those still here? Why disregard very real feelings of distrust, anger, and pain? Are these feelings invalid simply because you don't understand or share them...?

Chris Andoe - Anyone who shared the obviously altered image should feel ashamed and embarrassed.
Crystal Hubbard - They don't. It'll be shared even more now. People at this level of ignorant hatred don't understand shame or embarrassment...

Mark Mercier - Very well said Crystal.

John Oliver - well that was well said.....and mark beat me to it while i was typing

Alex Marshall - @Crystal Hubbard... You nailed it. There's so many layers to this onion that I couldn't possibly touch on them all in just one comment. There is a lowest common denominator tbat a lot of people hover around when they are part of a group and feel safe behind a (relative) veil on social media. When I confront people that share posts like this I often get the response that they were "joking". My personal favorite is when they get defensive and deny that any action they take is "racist" because THEY don't acknowledge it as so ... which is, in itself, hella racist.

Richard Howes - Making light of anyone death is bad. Racism is horrific. But Michael brown is a poor role model for justice or miscarriage of justice. I teach my kids to always do what a policeman says. If the cop is wrong we will handle that later. I taught the. To not start fights and that punching someone can kill them. I've taught them how to shoot a gun and if they are attacked and they feel their life is in danger then to shoot to stop the violent action. Michael brown was not shot in the back. Half the witnesses said he had his hands down and the other half said he had his hands up but some said his hands were clenched in fists. He did rib a store and string arm the owner, indicting e was not a peaceable man. He was a man. Not a boy. Death may not be justifiable fr robbery and mugging. But that was not the cops decision. The decision was made by the criminal when he chose to commit crimes. The police protect society, try to stop comes in progress, and enforce the law. Without laws, without government and without police we have chaos and violence Commitee by people who feel they can take what they want from those who are physically weaker then them. This is why so many people don't want people having guns. It puts 5 foot tall Asian show owners at a disadvantage to 6 foot tall criminals. Guns make 80 year old ladies equal to 20 year old football players. Guns make 10 and 12 year old boys equal to 30 year old mixed martial arts fighters. Some people hate the fact that criminals might die. I lee well the father of a criminal and he hated the fact that his son might die in a house robbery. I understand he doesn't want his kid to die. I don't want me kids to de in a house robbery either. That's why my kids know how to shoot a gun. If someone is going to get hurt. If a fight is going to break out during the commission of a crime then my family comes first. THe father of the criminal feels the same way. I get it. I understand. My family won't start the crime but we won't allow ourselves to be victims of a crime. This isn't a white versus black thing. It's self preservation against criminals.

Richard Howes - And before the flames start, I lost a few so-called friends because they were using racial slurs in regard to ferguson protests. One of them is a democrat, a racist and retired cop.

Muhammad Rasheed - 1.) Mike Brown didn't have a criminal record.

2.) The store owner and staff said it wasn't Mike Brown in the security video, even though the cops, in their effort to manufacture evidence to save their murderous colleague from prison, insisted it was. The store was a neighborhood store that Brown had been patronizing for his entire 18 years. Why wouldn't the store owner know his customer better than the cops?

3.) Now that his deed was very public, Darren Wilson would do anything... say anything... to stay out of prison. But his entire defense was built on the integrity of his word as a cop, and appeals to the jury's believe in the "big scary black man" stereotype.

4.) After having never committed a crime before, why would Mike Brown start THAT day when he just happened to be accosted by a white cop with KKK affiliations and an itchy trigger finger?

Richard Howes - Item 1: I didn't know that. Item 2: The only source I can find for the store owner saying that is a counter-culture website, not multiple major news outlets. I don't find that reliable. Item 3: that's subjecture and not admissible in court. Item 4: I think you mean he never committed a crime he was arrested/tried for. If he did mug the store owner - that's a crime. Smoking pot is a crime. No major news outlet reports that Darren Wilson was a KKK member. They report that it was investigated by an anonymous police source. No news outlet what-so-ever has evidence that Darren Wilson's trigger finger was itchy. None of your comments directly or indirectly relate to my statements above.

Muhammad Rasheed - Item #2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wtrl6_qeyW0

Muhammad Rasheed - Item #3 IS "court," and why lawyers and attorneys have the reputation they have. Finding the truth is not their goal; their goal is to win the case.

John Oliver - "oh crap, i over reacted and killed someone by mistake" said no cop ever. LOL.

Muhammad Rasheed - Richard Howes wrote: "Smoking pot is a crime."

Should every citizen in America be shot and killed by Darren Wilson for smoking pot?

Richard Howes - Item #2: I watched that video twice, very closely, There is no mention of the store owners saying what you claim. It is about the tapes and the 991 call. There's nothing about who is on the tapes.

Richard Howes - Absurdity is not a valid debate technique.

Muhammad Rasheed - Continuously claiming this kid is a criminal when he has no criminal record is an absurdity, Richard.

Richard Howes - He had pot in his system. That is illegal.

Richard Howes - failure to obey a police officer is illegal.

Muhammad Rasheed - Did he deserve to be shot and killed for it?

Richard Howes - walking down the middle of the street is illegal.

Richard Howes - No sir. Firing a weapon in self defense may result in death. It's called justifiable homicide.

Muhammad Rasheed - It is an absurdity to suggest this 18 year old with no criminal record deserved to be shot and killed for any of these items.

Crystal Hubbard - No one chose Mike Brown to be a martyr. His community reacted to his death in a way that other communities didn't, hence the media fertilizing it to grow it into what it has now become. So let's hope the next black person killed by a trigger-quick cop is a Harvard history major with a spotless record, one who volunteers with orphans and sings in the choir on Sundays. Let's pick someone to die who the majority deems worthy of bearing the weight of martyr so that no other black youth is shot to death in the street, or at the side of his car, or at his own front door! Black people didn't choose Brown.

Darren Wilson did...

Muhammad Rasheed - Richard Howes wrote: "No sir. Firing a weapon in self defense may result in death. It's called justifiable homicide."

Killing a black teenager because you wanted to for the thrill of it, and then lying and saying it is self-defense relying on ingrained prejudices to get you off, is evil.

Richard Howes - I agree that he didn't deserve to die. Failing to obey a policeman, and attacking the policeman may result in the policeman defending himself. Anyone with firearms training knows that you don't shoot to kill. You shoot to stop a violent crime. If you catch a rapist in the act you can shoot him. If he stops raping, you cannot legally shoot him. Same for muggings, etc. but if you shoot, the perpetrator may die.

Richard Howes - Muhammad, Do you have direct evidence of that and why did you not present it to the investigation? Or are you engaging in more subjecture?

Muhammad Rasheed - Richard Howes wrote: "Failing to obey a policeman, and attacking the policeman may result in the policeman defending himself."

Crossing the path of a psychopath with legal authority may result in death, as is the case here.

Muhammad Rasheed - Darren's whole defense was subjective, Richard. It was based 50% on his word, and 50% banking on racial prejudice.

Richard Howes - More subjecture? Do you know darren wilson personally? Please cite your sources... or continue ranting...

Richard Howes - Were you on the grand jury?

Muhammad Rasheed - Why are my posts "rants" but yours weren't? 

Muhammad Rasheed - Were you on the grand jury, Richard?

Muhammad Rasheed - You believe Darren's story, and I don't.

Muhammad Rasheed - You give him the benefit of the doubt that his integrity as a cop was strong, and I don't.

Richard Howes - No sir. I read reputable news sources. and the grand jury disagrees with you.

Muhammad Rasheed - Yes, sir. The grand jury let him go free because they believed him, and felt Mike was a criminal because he was black. Just like you did, Mr. "I didn't know he didn't have a criminal record."

Richard Howes - Are you calling me a racist?

Muhammad Rasheed - You are a racist.

Richard Howes - You know me as well as you know darren wilson or michael brown.

Muhammad Rasheed - Why did you assume Mike Brown had a criminal record?

Muhammad Rasheed - Tell me.

Richard Howes - resorting to insults is not a valid debate technique. That's two rule violations for you.

Muhammad Rasheed - Why did you assume Mike Brown had a criminal record?

Muhammad Rasheed - Tell me.

Richard Howes - I never said he had a criminal record. I said he was never arrested/convicted. He had pot in his system. That is a criminal act.

Richard Howes - among other criminal acts.

Richard Howes - I'm going to give you the last word here. I'm out. You have lost the debate by violating the rules. We will let the jury of public decision chose if you won any points with your opinions.

Jennifer Gosnell - And back on topic, I plan to use this example with my students to help underline for them how quickly they lose control of images once they are online.

Richard Howes - images?

Jennifer Gosnell - Photographs. Once they are out there, anyone can grab them and edit them or reuse them to create a new narrative...

Crystal Hubbard - Jesus Harold Christ, Richard Howes and Muhammad Rasheed, please send each other friend requests! I know the both of you well enough to honestly say that you're too much alike! Richard is a writer, Muhammad is an artist. YOU'RE BOTH RACISTS. Now quit being mad at each other, friend each other, and find out how very alike you both really are! I promise, you'll both find common ground. Do it, or I swear, I'll find both of you in the real world and make you extremely sorry you forced me into taking two trips...!

Richard Howes - Where did I call him a racist? I never said such a thing. It is insulting for you to say so...

Muhammad Rasheed - I am attempting to understand him. I felt he was a racist because of the stance he took and how he was defending it. He protested the accusation, so I asked him specific questions to probe and see if he was.

Muhammad Rasheed - That was an honest attempt.

Crystal Hubbard - My apologies, Richard Howes, you're right. You ASKED if Muhammad Rasheed was calling you a racist...

Muhammad Rasheed – ^I remember that part!

Richard Howes wrote: "1. The decision was made by the criminal when he chose to commit crimes.
2. It puts 5 foot tall Asian show owners at a disadvantage to 6 foot tall criminals.
3. Some people hate the fact that criminals might die.
4. It's self preservation against criminals."

Me: "Mike Brown didn't have a criminal record.

Richard Howes wrote: "I didn't know that."

Richard Howes wrote: "I never said he had a criminal record."

To me this feels like dishonesty. But since I don't know you well enough to officially go there, please explain how you actually meant this so I don't jump to more conclusions and get banned by Crystal by flipping out on her Timeline.

Crystal Hubbard - Richard Howes, I find you insensitive on this matter, not racist...

Muhammad Rasheed - [raises hand] I find you racist, but am willing to alter that opinion as the facts come in suggesting otherwise

Richard Howes - I've already pointed out that pot use, disobeying police, and attacking someone is illegal. Illegal = Criminal. I'm using the term illegal to mean a criminal, same as "illegal immigrant" means "criminal immigrant". Let's turn to merriam websters: Crime or criminal act:
crime
noun \ˈkrīm\
: an illegal act for which someone can be punished by the government
: activity that is against the law : illegal acts in general
: an act that is foolish or wrong
1il•le•gal
adjective \(ˌ)i(l)-ˈlē-gəl\
: not allowed by the law : not legal
: not allowed by the rules in a game
Full Definition of ILLEGAL
: not according to or authorized by law : unlawful, illicit;also : not sanctioned by official rules (as of a game)— il•le•gal•i•ty noun— il•le•gal•ly adverb See illegal defined for English-language learners »See illegal defined for kids »
Examples of ILLEGAL
In this state, it is illegal for anyone under the age of 21 to drink alcohol.
The team was penalized for an illegal play.

Crystal Hubbard - There's too much for you and I to learn from one another, Richard Howes. You're going to have to do a lot worse than challenge my thinking and that of my friends to get me to block or unfriend you. Sorry, but you're stuck with me...

Richard Howes - Then you are stuck with all my insensitivities!

Muhammad Rasheed - @ Richard - So you would consider all of these college kids experimenting with pot to be criminals?

Muhammad Rasheed - Honestly?

Crystal Hubbard - You fellas can stay and debate as long as you want, but I want no more name calling. And use your indoor voices...

Muhammad Rasheed - Yes, ma'am.

Muhammad Rasheed - (i don't think jesus' middle name was really "harold")

Richard Howes - I'm not very sensitive when it comes to criminals. I lived in the highest crime neighborhood of Boston for five years. My car was repeatedly broken into. I've been attacked and beat up. I was robbed, stolen from, tires slashed more than once, I've had a trailer and four wheelers stolen out of my driveway at other locations, I've had my horses shot with paintball guns. I am very much anti criminal. I have no sympathy for criminals, convicted or otherwise. And violent criminals who die as a result of their own actions, unfortunately for them and their families, suffer their fate.

Richard Howes - Yes. smoking pot where it is illegal is a crime.

Muhammad Rasheed - But would you consider those college kids to BE "criminals?"

Richard Howes - Yes.

Muhammad Rasheed - Even at a predominantly white school?

Muhammad Rasheed - Like VERY "predominantly." lol

Muhammad Rasheed - VERRRRY.

Crystal Hubbard - Asked and answered, Muhammad Rasheed, move along in your line of questioning...

Muhammad Rasheed - Okay, I'm done. Crystal defused my anger and I want to go do something else now.

Richard Howes - Race has nothing to do with it. But I see you are continuing the absurd. You win. I'm a racist. Whatever. Your opinion means nothing. I'm outta here.

Muhammad Rasheed - Don't worry about it, I was mostly just goofing at the end there.

Richard Howes - No sir. I won't say what you are doing. And I'm not so dumb to not know what you are doing.

Crystal Hubbard - If you two think I'm going to let you part ways hating each other, you both have two big new thinks coming. This is NOT how grown-ass, smart men behave! Muhammad Rasheed, you can't judge Richard Howes as a person through a Facebook thread. Apologize for calling him a racist. Richard, don't presume to know what Muhammad is trying to do. That's unfair as well...

Muhammad Rasheed - I was just goofing, but I DO still think you are a racist (no offense) even if you delude yourself into thinking otherwise. Or you possibly are just wearing a public mask. I have no way of knowing which.

Muhammad Rasheed - I apologize for proclaiming that you are a racist, Richard, and hurting your little feelings.  awww…  You must feel 10x worse than getting shot by a KKK-affiliated white cop, don’t you?  I know. 

Crystal Hubbard - DAMMIT, Muhammad Rasheed! Richard Howes is not a racist, no more than you are! Chew on that for a minute...!

Muhammad Rasheed - I am a racist. Whatdoyoumean?

Muhammad Rasheed - I don't really have any power to exert any FORCE to my extra weak sauce racism, but I feel it. More and more every time a new kid gets shot.

Muhammad Rasheed - I apologize to you, too, for messing up your thread with my mess.

Crystal Hubbard - For the love of @#$%! You aren't messing up my thread! No one is! You were arguing, which is fine! I encourage it! I like it when Scylla and Charybdis confront each other. How else do people learn about each other and other viewpoints...?!

Muhammad Rasheed - ...and everytime somebody defends that racist viewpoint -- from whatever angle they justify it from --- on facebook. It drives me batshit.

Muhammad Rasheed - There's nothing I can do about it except argue at them. Type at them.

Muhammad Rasheed - lol

Muhammad Rasheed - Richard's whole "criminal" explanation/justification is coming across so SLIMY to me! hahahaha I'm sorry, Richard. I want to go the fuck OFF on you.  (I just don’t want to disrespect Crystal’s Timeline, and her adorable efforts to make us friends.) 

Muhammad Rasheed - I'm sorry, it's just the impression it's leaving on me. It FEELS like raw intellectual dishonesty. Just emotionally. In my GUTS.

Of course that means absolutely nothing. Right? It's not facts.

Muhammad Rasheed - There's a wall between us made up of pure "I Don't Know You," and I'm projecting my own racism at you.

Muhammad Rasheed - Filtering everything you typed through it, and it makes me hate you.
And I really don't believe a single thing you said.

Crystal Hubbard - You think I like it? I don't. I'm one of the quiet middle who's speaking up, finally and at last. I've spent my life in environments where I was the sole or one of a very few people of color. I see every viewpoint, and naturally, mine is the only one that's right -- and my viewpoint is that everyone has the capability for racism within them. It's how you behave when confronted by issues of race that determine whether you are or not. For all you and Richard Howes have said on this thread, I think you both might have different views had you been in that grand jury room. You weren't. You're here. And you're both clinging to your view and being insensitive to the other's. You'll walk away annoyed and angry, not having moved any closer to benefitting humanity...

Richard Howes - I've been jerked around by jerks way too many times in my life. It's a failing I have to live with, but I cut those people out of my life at every opportunity. He admitted he was testing me to see if I was a racist. Who is he to test anyone? He's no better or different from anyone else on the planet and him thinking he is, and him thinking he can judge other people is arrogant and basically shitty. He's not the biggest jerk I've ever met. I had a two bosses in my life that were far worse. But I wont tolerate it from him or anyone else. Looking at his facebook page I see how he and I are a lot alike and actually believe in some of the same things, but jerking me around was his critical mistake. I don;t fuck with people and I don't tolerate being fucked with. Fuck him.

Crystal Hubbard - I know. I'M your middle ground! Instead of snapping at each other, band together against me. I called you both racists. Now let me have it! Join forces to take me down...!

Muhammad Rasheed - (join forces with that [...] guy?)

Muhammad Rasheed - the hell...?

Muhammad Rasheed - Against Crystal???

Muhammad Rasheed - No. Crazy talk.

Muhammad Rasheed - I honestly don't think richard's viewpoint is worthy of being sensitive towards. I think it's an evil viewpoint, and part of why my people are stepped on and slaughtered routinely, and casually.

Muhammad Rasheed - Richard Howes wrote: "He admitted he was testing me to see if I was a racist."

No, I thought you were a racist from that 800 word rant up yonder. After your protest I tested you to see if I was wrong.

Muhammad Rasheed - That's totally different.

Muhammad Rasheed - Alex Marshall wrote: "My personal favorite is when they get defensive and deny that any action they take is 'racist' because THEY don't acknowledge it as so ... which is, in itself, hella racist."

Me too. I find it's often followed by some kind of faux-victim role, where they oddly want people to feel sorry for them for being confronted. And then right on cue they call me the racist for getting angry at their behavior. I think that's precisely the formula that Darren Wilson used to great effect to get that grand jury to side with him.

"Evidence" my ass...

They looked into his big blue puppy dog eyes and were all like, "Awww..! How dare that black savage attack you, Darren-poo!"

Richard Howes - I tried to hate you but actually I just don't care and that is far worse than hate…
I hated how you defend Michael Brown, like he's an innocent child.
I hated how you bait and lead, asking stupid questions, like, "Does smoking pot make someone a criminal?"
If it is illegal, is there any other answer? Or, "Does someone who smokes pot deserve to die?" No sir. No one deserves to die, but if you attack a police officer, you might suffer that fate.
I spoke of protecting my family, as you might protect yours.
I spoke of knowing how to use a gun, teaching my children to protect themselves, and when it is acceptable to stop violent crimes in progress. Does that make me a racist? How? I didn't mention any skin color or ethnicity, not even alluded to that, but you can judge me?
You judge me for defending law and order, like an anonymous anarchist... How you might be ready to burn down people's businesses and houses while claiming to want justice.
"The store owner says it wasn't Michael Brown." I'm sorry, the youtube video you posted talks about the 911 call and the surveillance tapes. There's no mention of the store owner saying who the perpetrator was.
"Darren Wilson was a KKK member." No sir. He was investigated for KKK ties, but nothing was discovered.
"He had an itchy finger and wanted to kill someone." Did you present your evidence to the investigation or do you offer conjecture?
You call me a racist. Did I once mention any race or skin color? Insulting your opponent violates the rules of debate. You've earned a debate team penalty.
I've traveled all over the world and I've seen and experienced many cultures. The USA has a large population of racists, this is true.
Then you admitted that you were testing me, trying to see if I was a racist.
It is interesting how you label everyone who disagrees with you as a racist. I don't think you know the meaning of the term, but I've heard it said before, "Only white people can be racist." Yes. That's exactly what someone told me. How enlightened.
You judge no one. Oh, you were just goofing? You were just joking when you called me a racist. How dumb of me to think you were intelligent enough to recite facts of the case and not post links to extremist pseudo-news websites.
So you believe inflammatory statements drive home your point? Burn this bitch down... said no orator in the world.
Yes. I dislike jerks. I won't tolerate racists. I blocked several people last week for using racial slurs, and I won't tolerate jerks playing some stupid game, trying to race-bait people to prove they are racists... And when you lost the debate you call me a racist.
I don't give a rat's behind what your skin color is. You are a jerk.
And now I will forget you.
You are only as powerful as the amount of people who "pay" attention to you. For now on, I will ignore you. I will block you on Facebook, and pretend you don't exist. I know someone else said that ignoring you let's the darkness win. I disagree. Like her, I spend my efforts on charities, and community service projects, and helping people who need help.
Spending any time or effort on you wastes my limited resources. That power is better spent elsewhere. I've already forgotten your name. I'll look, for an instant, and then I'll press the "block" button, and have you erased from existence. Never was. Never will be. Forever forgotten.

I used to hate you. Now I don't care and not caring is far worse... for you.

Muhammad Rasheed - Richard Howes wrote: "Spending any time or effort on you wastes my limited resources."

That explains this 625 word essay, I guess. hahahaha

You know you can't quit me. We have a 'thing' now, don't you see?  You are now my archrival. This love note you sent me cinches it.  You may as well accept my Friend Request and stop playing around.

Muhammad Rasheed - Thanks for proving to me that you really are a racist by the way.

Richard Howes - There's no wonder in the world why your shit comic books don't sell.

Muhammad Rasheed - That's your comeback?  lol

Hold on, I'm addressing your essay now. Patience.

I'll give you some real ammo.  :)

Muhammad Rasheed - Richard Howes wrote: “I tried to hate you but actually I just don't care and that is far worse than hate...”

Is it?  When your people are apathetic, you simply ignore us and pretend you are the only people in the universe.  When you express hatred, my people tend to hang from trees like peculiar fruit, and find ourselves shot dead in the streets over imagined crimes.  We’re safer when you don’t care.

 Richard Howes wrote: “I hated how you defend Michael Brown, like he's an innocent child.”

I hate how you treat him like a monster and just assume that the KKK affiliated Wilson was telling the truth about events because he catered to your own preprogrammed prejudices against brown’s demographic.

 Richard Howes wrote: “I hated how you bait and lead, asking stupid questions, like, ‘Does smoking pot make someone a criminal?’ If it is illegal, is there any other answer? Or, ‘Does someone who smokes pot deserve to die?’ No sir. No one deserves to die, but if you attack a police officer, you might suffer that fate.”

No white college student casually smoking pot to unwind would be considered a criminal by you.  You ONLY paint Brown with that brush because he is black, and “urban” or whatever else you people judge these kids with.  And the more I think about it, the more your filthy hypocrisy disgusts me.

Richard Howes wrote: “I spoke of protecting my family, as you might protect yours.”

This was a misdirection.

Richard Howes wrote: “I spoke of knowing how to use a gun, teaching my children to protect themselves, and when it is acceptable to stop violent crimes in progress.”

And MORE misdirection.

Richard Howes wrote: “Does that make me a racist? How? I didn't mention any skin color or ethnicity, not even alluded to that, but you can judge me?”

The topic is an 18 year old with no criminal record who was killed by a savage cop who killed him and made up a nonsense excuse so he could stay out of jail.  You are racist because you sided with him with NO question, and bought his manipulative story the way he knew you would.

Richard Howes wrote: “You judge me for defending law and order, like an anonymous anarchist...”

You didn’t defend law and order, you defended the law twisted and manipulated to support a racist, and the racist cops that conspired to keep their comrade out of prison.  That’s the White Supremacist system you threw your support behind.  You wouldn’t know law and order if you saw it.  All you know is supporting the white point of view no matter what.

I do support Law & Order, which is the source of my fury. There is no law and order for the disenfranchised class.

Richard Howes wrote: “How you might be ready to burn down people's businesses and houses while claiming to want justice.”

Perhaps I would desperately prefer anarchy, and indiscriminate destruction, if I lived in a filthy ghetto, with no skills, no income, and no hope.  It’s easy to rile the members of THAT class up to revolt – it’s easy to revolt against a worst case scenario after-all.  lol  I don’t live that way however, and prefer to think that the savagely murderous privileged class can somehow be convinced to leave other people alone and police their own neighborhoods so that we will all know peace.

Richard Howes wrote: “’The store owner says it wasn't Michael Brown.’ I'm sorry, the youtube video you posted talks about the 911 call and the surveillance tapes. There's no mention of the store owner saying who the perpetrator was.”

In addition to revealing that neither the owner nor the staff called the police on Mike Brown, and how the police confiscated the security video because they alone INSISTED it justified Wilson’s savage act of violence, it also explained that the store owner’s attorney said that the owner never said the security video was Brown. 

Richard Howes wrote: “"Darren Wilson was a KKK member." No sir. He was investigated for KKK ties, but nothing was discovered.

Was that supposed to be a quote from me?  More of your slimy dishonesty, eh?  I said he was affiliated with the Klan, not a member.  Did you learn to write at the Strawman Academy?

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/anonymous-claims-evidence-connecting-darren-wilson-ferguson-pd-kkk/

Richard Howes wrote: “’He had an itchy finger and wanted to kill someone.’ Did you present your evidence to the investigation or do you offer conjecture?”

He killed a teenager for walking up the middle of the street.   To ME that’s kind of over-the-top, and reveals someone with an itchy trigger finger, but of course I don’t feel the same way about black teenagers as you and Wilson do.

Richard Howes wrote: “You call me a racist. Did I once mention any race or skin color?”

Did you have to?  Assuming someone is a criminal deserving of cold-blooded murder when you would be horrified if the same scenario was acted out upon a white teen is a racist trait.

Richard Howes wrote: “Insulting your opponent violates the rules of debate. You've earned a debate team penalty.”

I’ll take it.  Thanks. 

Tell you what… stop being a racist and I’ll stop calling you one.  Deal?

Richard Howes wrote: “I've traveled all over the world and I've seen and experienced many cultures.”

lol @ you “experiencing” cultures.  Sure you did.

Richard Howes wrote: “The USA has a large population of racists, this is true.”

Western society invented the concept of “racism.”  It was a byproduct of the new concept of a civilization-wide chattel slavery built around physical racial traits.  No one had ever done that before in recorded history, and a brand new psychosis was born from it.
Richard Howes wrote: “Then you admitted that you were testing me, trying to see if I was a racist.”

To be clear, I knew you were a racist from your very first posts.  It was your protest against the charge that made me probe into exactly what your thoughts were on certain items to give you the opportunity to explain yourself.  You decided to duck the questions, of course, solidifying my original assessment.

Richard Howes wrote: “It is interesting how you label everyone who disagrees with you as a racist.”

lol Not everyone, Richard.   Only those who demonstrate racist traits.

 Richard Howes wrote: “I don't think you know the meaning of the term, but I've heard it said before, ‘Only white people can be racist.’ Yes. That's exactly what someone told me. How enlightened.”

[From the Oxford Dictionary] “Racism consists of both prejudice and discrimination based in social perceptions of biological differences between peoples. It often takes the form of social actions, practices or beliefs, or political systems that consider different races to be ranked as inherently superior or inferior to each other, based on presumed shared inheritable traits, abilities, or qualities. It may also hold that members of different races should be treated differently.”

The disenfranchised underclass lacks the ability to enforce both of the prejudice and discriminatory aspects of the concept which involves institutional permeated practices such as those that enable a cop to get away with murder.     A “Blacks Only” sign would never be taken seriously in any era in American history.  

Richard Howes wrote: “You judge no one. Oh, you were just goofing? You were just joking when you called me a racist.”

No, that part was absolutely serious.  I was just goofing with the “Like VERY ‘predominantly’” part.  I already knew the answer to that and was just messing with you.  I knew you weren’t going to admit it in public.

Richard Howes wrote: “How dumb of me to think you were intelligent enough to recite facts of the case and not post links to extremist pseudo-news websites.”

That’s one way to think of it.  Another more accurate way would be to notice that I posted a youtube clip from an actual local news broadcast… the kind you said you only pay attention to. 
With real life reporters and everything.  

Richard Howes wrote: “So you believe inflammatory statements drive home your point? Burn this bitch down... said no orator in the world.”*shrug*  Inflammatory statements are used to stress the opponent and get him to blurt out his true feelings in a moment of weakness. 

Richard Howes wrote: “Yes. I dislike jerks. I won't tolerate racists. I blocked several people last week for using racial slurs, and I won't tolerate jerks playing some stupid game, trying to race-bait people to prove they are racists... And when you lost the debate you call me a racist.”

???  I lost the debate?  How so?

Richard Howes wrote: “I don't give a rat's behind what your skin color is. You are a jerk.”

I know.  And you really, REALLY wouldn’t give a rat’s ass if I was even darker, right?  ;)

Richard Howes wrote: “And now I will forget you.”I doubt it.

Richard Howes wrote: “You are only as powerful as the amount of people who ‘pay’ attention to you. For now on, I will ignore you. I will block you on Facebook, and pretend you don't exist. I know someone else said that ignoring you let's the darkness win. I disagree.”

Go for it.  I don’t mind.

 Richard Howes wrote: “Like her, I spend my efforts on charities, and community service projects, and helping people who need help.”

I doubt it.  God’s people do that work in secret without bragging. 

Richard Howes wrote: “I've already forgotten your name. I'll look, for an instant, and then I'll press the ‘block’ button, and have you erased from existence. Never was. Never will be. Forever forgotten.”

Trying to take the cop-out insanity defense, eh?  smh

Richard Howes wrote: “I used to hate you.”

I never hated you because I don’t know enough about you to have that kind of emotional commitment.  I hate a racist system, racist actions, and the support of those actions.  Personally I would consider that to be a far more rational approach than the classic “hate” you admitted you are capable of for someone you know absolutely nothing about except they self identify with the Black American ethnic/racial group.  Interesting, don’t you think?

Richard Howes wrote: “Now I don't care and not caring is far worse... for you.”

So basically you’re saying this is some kind of upgrade from the inferior race-based hate you had for me before, and now it’s a horrifyingly worse race-based apathy?  Naturally I’m going to assume this is still a part of your insanity defense.

Richard Howes - People don't hate you because you are black. They hate you because you are an asshole.

Muhammad Rasheed - Probably that too.  I’ve heard that before and usually from folk who are equally assholes.  The fundamental problem in context of this topic is that a certain demographic hated me before I revealed I was an asshole.

Wait...

...I thought you were supposed to be ignoring me? I think "ignore” means something different over there in racist land from what it means here in disenfranchised land. Is it one of you all’s bullshit pet terms like "race bait?"

Richard Howes - The debate is over. You lost.

Muhammad Rasheed - I suppose that is one of the perks of 'white privilege' where you have the magic power to proclaim who wins or loses something willy-nilly, and genuinely expect people to take you seriously. lol

Tell me, Richard: Have I given the impression that I respect what you think to that degree? Did you expect me to cry because you said I lost and feel bad? hahahaha

Muhammad Rasheed - What's WRONG with you people???

Don't answer; it's rhetorical.

Muhammad Rasheed - I think that's really my favorite part of privilege, and the one I'm most envious of... how y'all can just go around proclaiming shit. lol Do you watch The Office?

"BANKRUPTCY!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Hahahahahaha

Muhammad Rasheed - For example, that Jennifer Gosnell's "back on topic" comment. What the pluck did her class using Internet pics have to do with the damn topic?! lol Because she said so??

Y'all are a TRIP!!

Has the Pac-Man Lost His Bite?

Albert Mvl Rodriguez – [shared link] Damn...Canelo did better in his first PPV LOL



Roy TgaHawk - hmmm...why do you always compare Pacquiao with your boy Canelo?

Albert Mvl Rodriguez - Because him being a up and coming ppv star you would expect the top P4P guys would have top ppvs.
I just got a lot of respect for the young 23yr old.

Jamie Mather - Pacman aint top draw anymore.

James Hutton - Even if there is a PPV star competing, it does matter which opponent he chooses.

Kevin M. Cook - That fight was horrible. 300k buys is a miracle

Tom Lux - 100K of those buys are from people that only knew he was fighting by dropping Floyd Mayweather's name and dropping his banker "Floyd fight is next"
Arum, Pac and Roach peddled this tactic hard a month before the fight Embarrassing.
40 million doesn't seem too bad now let alone 40mi + 30%PPV eh manny?!?!?!

Jordan Stoddart - Great numbers imo

Ya-Sin Abdul-Matin - Dynamite numbers considering it's free a week later and Chris was nothing to really write home about going against him amongst real fans.

Joseph Lopez - Canelo didn't fight Algieri, and the fact that he has been fighting in Macau as opposed to the U.S. I think that's starting to hurt his PPV numbers. Most people had never heard of Algieri, Lara wasn't exactly a household name compared to Algieri, but many hardcore boxing fans knew that Lara was a hell of a fighter, and that Canelo-Lara was realistically a "50-50" fight.

Tom Lux - 80/20 split to make the Mayweather fight. Mayweather should at least get 70/30. At least!

Muhammad Rasheed - Mayweather felt that way about it from the beginning.

Tom Lux - 2009 I would of agreed with 50/50 tbh and I hate manny and I admire floyd. Each year that goes by that shit flips over to floyd by 10% cus manny getting put to sleep etc lol

Adrian James Davis - You admire floyd the woman beater,, get a fucken life creep

Tom Lux - That's all he is? A women beater? Wrong.

Muhammad Rasheed - @Adrian - I think it's pretty obvious he's admired for his boxing skill -- the very reason he's on the world stage -- and not for his personal life.
The same reason people praise Woody Allen; no one is admiring his pedo appetite.

Royce Tee Taylor - Y'all are trippin. Name another ppv that did not happen in America where it was a foreign star vs an absolute nobody and the ppv buys exceeded 300k?if it were PAC vs canelo in Vegas and they did 300k, I would say his star is dead. But he's getting 300k american buys while fighting in China vs a guy with only one credible win over another not so well known guy. Puuuulllleasssse. Y'all know no chill.

Roy TgaHawk - The most logical comment on this thread I think. You know your boxing.

Adrian James Davis - Without manny .. avoid mayweather will never have the biggest fight of the decade/century, no one only pacman can give him that..it should be a 50/50 ..either guy will sell out wembley london 80,000 seats with an A mere con fight ,,

Christopher Rada - People tripping over the fact that he couldn't hit 1m views with a fight that even wasn't in America with an unknown opponent who was at the front of the promotion the whole time. It should've been expected for that ppv to tank with the amount of shit pacquiao's team got for picking a C class opponent like Algeri

Muhammad Rasheed - If both Pacquiao and Mayweather were "managed talent" under the old system, where the suits behind the scenes get the lion's share of the profits generated, I would be willing to agree to a 50/50 split.

But Mayweather is the one wearing the suit AND in the ring, and the 50/50 doesn't make any sense in this new scenario. Mayweather is the power-player negotiating the deal from both sides of the table.

Roy TgaHawk - False. You really believe he's his own boss? I beg to differ. Haymon just tells him that...& Floyd believes it!

Muhammad Rasheed - *shrug*

Believe what you wish.

Tom Lux - Sort it out!!! Mayweather is his own boss. Fact. Al haymon
Mayweather ego too big to be under Al lmao. Sort it out!

Albert Mvl Rodriguez - GOLDENBOY CUTS FLOYDS CHECKS

Roy TgaHawk - Muhammad Rasheed is right. Believe what you wish. Floyd believes what Al tells him....now you belive what Floyd tells you. :D

Adrian James Davis - Mayweather can hardly read..hes a boxer not a businessman and will do anything not to lose the 0,, i

Muhammad Rasheed - "Mayweather fully reaps the benefits of being boxing’s biggest attraction through a business model where he controls all of the revenue streams of his fights as promoter via Mayweather Promotions (Golden Boy Promotions handles most of the logistics of Mayweather’s bouts as co-promoter)." Kurt Badenhausen, Forbes Magazine

http://www.forbes.com/.../floyd-mayweather-by-the-numbers/

Stephen Gambrell – Lmaoooooo

Muhammad Rasheed - http://bleacherreport.com/.../2192887-making-money-how...

Muhammad Rasheed - "Manny Pacquiao may be more popular, but no boxer makes more on fight night than the self promoted and self promoting Floyd Mayweather, who controls 100 per cent of the purse and pays out the guy he was just punching when it's over."

http://www.thestar.com/.../floyd_money_mayweathers_unique...

Muhammad Rasheed - There's no way Pacquiao should get 50% when he's basically just a contractor that Floyd is hiring for Floyd's event.

Muhammad Rasheed - Seriously.

Muhammad Rasheed - The old model doesn't apply in this case; you shouldn't keep saying "50/50" as if it does.

Emmanuel Zamora - Great number.. he was fucking fighting algeieri

Roy TgaHawk - Why do you wanna keep bringing up that 50-50 split excuse/demand by Floyd? There's no argument there. Didn't Pac agree to get the lesser purse in order to ensure a fight?

Muhammad Rasheed - I only mentioned it in response to a comment above, Roy. Calm down.

Roy TgaHawk - ...but this thread was abt Lara & Pac's PPV. Somebody just had to mention Floyd in this thread where Floyd has nothing to do with in the 1st place.

Muhammad Rasheed - Again, I was just responding to something someone else said. Relax. What are you? A cop? jesus...

Muhammad Rasheed - Don't shoot.

Roy TgaHawk - who isn't relaxed?

Muhammad Rasheed - You. You're freaking out.

Muhammad Rasheed - Take a pill and lie down.

Roy TgaHawk - Ok. The person that need to relax, I think, is the guy who had to google all that stuf abt Floyd...but I could be wrong.

Muhammad Rasheed - lol Trust me, I had it on speed dial.

A Storm from the South

Muhammad Rasheed – "Jeb Bush cut a total of $5.8 million in grants to public libraries, pilot projects for library homework help and web-based high-school texts, and funding for a joint-use library in Tampa." ~"American Libraries - Gov. Jeb Bush Vetoes Florida Library Appropriations". ALA. 2006-05-26. Retrieved 2009-04-03.

Bakkah Rasheed-Shabazz - Stay out of the Bushes!

Muhammad Rasheed - Jeb is getting ready to run for president in '16. I notice that all of the negative items still mentioned on his Wiki page lead to broken links.

Also notable is that he had an unusual number of African American votes during his last couple of runs, and this despite getting rid of Affirmative Action in the Florida universities. The blacks there are either extra, extra retarded, or extra, extra well-informed.

Muhammad Rasheed - I predict he's going to win the presidency.

Bakkah Rasheed-Shabazz - And I will fly to Kuwait, kick your arse, and take the next plane home. "What you talking 'bout, Willis?"

Muhammad Rasheed - I'm not voting for no damn Bushes! Why do I have to get beat up?

Muhammad Rasheed - Jeb helped his brother cheat in 2000, remember? Do you think he's going to play squeaky clean when he decides to run? They already brought back the racist ass voter ID thing. Do you really think it'll stop there?

2016 is going to be disgusting. Watch. And Bush will be in the White House again.

Bakkah Rasheed-Shabazz - You put that BS prediction out there! Are you some kind of spy for the GOP? Do you want your mother to go back to jail for human rights activism?

Muhammad Rasheed - Only big Democratic voting numbers will prevent it, and I don't trust that to happen.

Muhammad Rasheed - Demos are lazy when it comes to flexing their voting muscle. They need a 20 year nap after they all came out in Nov 2012...

Bakkah Rasheed-Shabazz - They can choose any of their other GOP cronies besides the Bushes.

Muhammad Rasheed - lol

Muhammad Rasheed - None of them are as clever and sneaky as a Bush.

Muhammad Rasheed - He'll win it. He's already started preparing...

...and a Storm is coming...


Bakkah Rasheed-Shabazz - Seven years of plenty followed by seven years of famine. Your racist FB friends need to feel what the GOP have planned for their dumb arses. I'm under the protection of Yusuf pbuh stage of consciousness that's developed to the completion in the Seal of the Prophets pbuh. Tell them Chiefs of Pharaoh to throw their rods. They plan, and Allah swt plans; but He is the Best of planners.

Muhammad Rasheed - [whisper]the wolf in the bush is going to want his revenge for you daring to put a black man in the White House[/whisper]
Bakkah Rasheed-Shabazz - Bring it, racist arse, fools! My Rabb causes the sun to rise in the East; can they cause the sun to rise in the West?

The Bad Kind of Mind Control

Zodicus Zu’ul – [shared link] If you're against this film using white folks in place of actual Egyptians, but fully support Idris Elba as a Norse god (or even Michael B Jordan as Johnny Storm)... you are a fucking hypocrite. Congratulations.

Jonathan Blevins - I was against Idris Elba as Heimdall not because of his ethnicity but because I wanted him to play Luke Cage.

Daryle Lamont Jenkins - Yeah, but Elba and Jordan are playing comic book characters! Gotta give some leeway for that!

Zodicus Zu'ul - Honestly, I can handle Jordan as Storm without problem. I mean, I've read enough What If...? to where that isn't an issue. But Heimdall is an actual mythic figure (which, to me, so is Moses). I mean, at least Hogun is an actual character in the comics (i wouldn't be surprised if the Vikings had met the Mongolians). To me, personally, it would be about like Woody Allen playing Othello.

Muhammad Rasheed - Ancient Egyptians = real people

hemdal/human torch = fictional

Zod = stupid

Zodicus Zu'ul - i love it when people flat refuse to see the irony in their own statements.

Muhammad Rasheed - I love it when people are stupid.

Zodicus Zu'ul - see, i know you can argue/debate better than that. im of the opinion, that if i have reduced your entire argument to personal insults, i must be on the right track.

Muhammad Rasheed - Zod you don't have an argument. The Ancient Egyptians are real people that real academics have whitewashed and Hollywood has Amen'd, and you are equaling that seriousness with a triviality.

Muhammad Rasheed - Comic book characters are trivial. Real human history is serious.

Muhammad Rasheed – Zod’s article wrote: “"Following months of backlash, Ridley Scott has finally addressed the casting controversies surrounding 'Exodus.'"

I don't give a flying fuck what he has to say about it. Keep your shit movie.

Clifton Hatchett - I thought it was a comedy spoof or something. You're looking at it wrong. I'm sure it's an action comedy. It has to be.

Muhammad Rasheed - Oh, I'm not looking at it wrong; I'm not looking at it at all. Fuck that movie.

Clifton Hatchett - Agreed, not at all surprised though.

David Stanley - Who really gives a flying shit? It's a movie. ALSO fictional. There's real problems in the world without getting riled up over this dumb shit. Ridley Scott never gets anything accurate or claims to. Fuck, look at Gladiator. Not a single fat gladiator (which they were because it kept them from getting killed from being cut and stabbed so much). C'mon, this is retarded. Everybody on earth should be aware that ancient Egyptians existed... cause... there's Egypt. Getting bent out of shape about a movie, which is a pure work of fiction, about magical events that may or may not have been true is just petty.

Muhammad Rasheed - David Stanley wrote: "Who really gives a flying shit?"

I do.

David Stanley wrote: "It's a movie. ALSO fictional."

Fictional twisting of real events of the past, based on bullshit ideology, are why modern people are so stupid.

David Stanley wrote: "There's real problems in the world without getting riled up over this dumb shit."

Real problems in the world are directly linked to manipulative assholes twisting the facts of history so that the modern "educated" think a certain way, causing them to inflict real problems on people.

David Stanley wrote: "Everybody on earth should be aware that ancient Egyptians existed... cause... there's Egypt."

This movie doesn't enable them to know they existed. It makes it look like they are a fictional European country.

David Stanley wrote: "Getting bent out of shape about a movie, which is a pure work of fiction, about magical events that may or may not have been true is just petty."

Getting bent out of shape about my getting bent out of shape is petty. So why are you here?

Chup A. Cabra - Noah was Australian. And friends with magic rock monsters.

David Stanley - Muhammad Rasheed, apparently the same reason you are. To argue about something retarded. " This movie doesn't enable them to know they existed. It makes it look like they are a fictional European country.

David Stanley - THAT. That is just stupid. Where ever did I say this movie was educational? Never. Did I say the movie let people know Ancient Egyptians existed? No where in my statement. I don't know about you, but I get my education from factual sources and don't rely on movies to do anything but ONE thing. Entertain. Because, that's the point of a movie. The only way this movie makes Egypt seem like a fictional country is if you've recently crawled out from under a rock or happen to have never went to school and were raised under said rock. Based on what you said, you think people are being educated by a MOVIE? You think MOVIES are a direct link to world problems? Because they're really not. Everything you said there makes no sense what so ever and now everyone who's read this knows that.

David Stanley - As a point, I won't watch this movie just like I didn't watch Noah (and the Fabulous Magical Rock Monsters). Because the fiction of it doesn't interest me and I've never once in my life sat to say "Hmm. This movie looks educational! I think I'll believe all the ignorant crap I see on screen! Durp durp durpa durp!" Because, you know, Star Wars is a documentary.

David Stanley - Hey guys! Did you know there's talking raccoons that run around with sentient trees? IN SPACE?! I never knew! Thank you Guardians of the Galaxy, for saving our universe from complete destruction! That. That right there.

David Stanley - I showed this to my Iranian friends and my buddy from Gambia. They laughed really, really hard. Just thought y'all would like to know.

Zodicus Zu'ul - To be fair, no one likes to have their hypocrisy pointed out to them.

Ashley Mosley - but but Zod, thats just who Dave is.. well how he is anyway.... fucking silent damn ninja. but i agree with both of you on both points. lol

Zodicus Zu'ul - Oh, I wasn't meaning Dave.

Muhammad Rasheed - David Stanley wrote: “THAT. That is just stupid.”

Everything you’ve said in this thread is stupid and lacks insight.

David Stanley wrote: “Where ever did I say this movie was educational? Never.”

You also managed to miss the point of the comment.

David Stanley wrote: “Did I say the movie let people know Ancient Egyptians existed? No where in my statement.”

You should work to make yourself clearer.

People DO know about Egypt. And product like this one brainwashes them into thinking Egypt was a certain way that it was not. That IS very important.

David Stanley wrote: “I don't know about you, but I get my education from factual sources and don't rely on movies to do anything but ONE thing. Entertain. Because, that's the point of a movie.”

That’s one of the points of a movie. Movies also legitimize certain ideological points of view by showing it over and over and over again.

David Stanley wrote: “The only way this movie makes Egypt seem like a fictional country is if you've recently crawled out from under a rock or happen to have never went to school and were raised under said rock. Based on what you said, you think people are being educated by a MOVIE? You think MOVIES are a direct link to world problems? Because they're really not. Everything you said there makes no sense what so ever and now everyone who's read this knows that.”

There’s plenty of people who are under the very wrong impression that the Ancient Egyptians were not Black Africans. Hollywood’s twisted/screwed-up casting choices are partly responsible for this, and this film is only feeding that ignorant flame.

David Stanley wrote: “As a point, I won't watch this movie just like I didn't watch Noah (and the Fabulous Magical Rock Monsters). Because the fiction of it doesn't interest me and I've never once in my life sat to say "Hmm. This movie looks educational! I think I'll believe all the ignorant crap I see on screen! Durp durp durpa durp!" Because, you know, Star Wars is a documentary.”

It doesn’t matter. What matters are all of the people who are indoctrinated into thinking that that depiction is true, and it in turn influences their own depictions in their own art, until it turns into the “normal.”

David Stanley - Okay. How about this, Rasheed. You show me the people indoctrinated by this magic brainwashing power movies have that apparently I'm immune to. Show me one person who thinks movies are real that isn't under the influence of acid or some crippling mental illness. Not one single person I know thinks Egypt was full of white folk. Not one single person, children included, that i know believes anything in a movie is real. Nothing you've said is true. Do I think it's stupid to not use proper casting? Sure, it's a little stupid. But, my point entirely which you fail to grasp (because I'm starting to think you've been brainwashed) is that MOVIES DON'T MATTER. They're for entertainment purposes ONLY. And apparently I do make sense since not a single person, besides you, has disagreed with me. I don't know where in the hell you got the idea that movies brainwash people but I want to meet whoever taught you this ignorant, moronic bit of false information so I can give them books to read. Really. Read what you're saying. Show it to strangers. This film DOES NOT MATTER. Never will. You want to know what you can do if you really don't like this movie? Same thing I'm going to do. Don't watch it, don't support it, and don't talk about it. Because, you do know that even negative comments are publicity for it, right? Take for instance this dumb thing with that Kardashian and her ass pic. Everybody got all up in arms about how awful it was she posted those pictures during a time when real, important things were happening. Like Ferguson, like the probe landing on that comet. And you know what? Negative comments about HER were EVERYWHERE. More so than anything important. So, in effect, she got EXACTLY what she wanted. Publicity. It's perpetuating a cycle. If you ignore the stupid shit, don't give it ANY credit (good or bad) it tends to just go away. That, my friend, is a bit of wisdom.

Muhammad Rasheed - David Stanley wrote: “Okay. How about this, Rasheed. You show me the people indoctrinated by this magic brainwashing power movies have that apparently I'm immune to.”

The people who put these films together and the numerous jackasses on the Internet arguing that the Ancient Egyptians were not Black African. Also every jackass that thinks all black people are lazy criminals, which is another Hollywood mainstay. These are two of the most obvious examples.

David Stanley wrote: “Show me one person who thinks movies are real that isn't under the influence of acid or some crippling mental illness.”

“Showing that movies are real” is not my argument. Using them as tools of indoctrination that are harmful when they twist the facts of history is my argument.

David Stanley wrote: “Not one single person I know thinks Egypt was full of white folk. Not one single person, children included, that i know believes anything in a movie is real. Nothing you've said is true.”

You are a liar. Congratulations on your lack of integrity.

David Stanley wrote: “Do I think it's stupid to not use proper casting? Sure, it's a little stupid. But, my point entirely which you fail to grasp (because I'm starting to think you've been brainwashed) is that MOVIES DON'T MATTER.”

The people who think that way are the ones who are easily brainwashed. They think it’s harmless and allow anything to download into them and their kids.

David Stanley wrote: “They're for entertainment purposes ONLY.”

You are naive. Here, watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqvJp...

This clip is showing the damage caused from exactly the type of thing I’m talking about.

Muhammad Rasheed - David Stanley wrote: “And apparently I do make sense since not a single person, besides you, has disagreed with me.”

lol Once upon a time there were a whole lot more people in Europe who thought the sun revolved around the earth than those who thought the opposite. Is that really a stance you want to take?

Muhammad Rasheed - David Stanley wrote: “You want to know what you can do if you really don't like this movie? Same thing I'm going to do. Don't watch it, don't support it, and don't talk about it. Because, you do know that even negative comments are publicity for it, right?”

There’s no way I would watch a Hollywood film with Egypt in it. The same reason I refuse to watch that Russell Crowe “Noah” flick, nor that “Son of God” tv series and film. But there’s a certain demographic that they are marketed to that eat that stuff up. I will never sway them away from those films.

Muhammad Rasheed - David Stanley wrote: “Take for instance this dumb thing with that Kardashian and her ass pic. Everybody got all up in arms about how awful it was she posted those pictures during a time when real, important things were happening.”

I didn’t. I have no interest in those “famous for being famous” folk.

Muhammad Rasheed - David Stanley wrote: “Like Ferguson, like the probe landing on that comet. And you know what? Negative comments about HER were EVERYWHERE. More so than anything important. So, in effect, she got EXACTLY what she wanted. Publicity. It's perpetuating a cycle. If you ignore the stupid shit, don't give it ANY credit (good or bad) it tends to just go away. That, my friend, is a bit of wisdom.”

You’re building a strawman that has nothing to do with my point, and are calling it “wisdom?” More penetrating insight from you, hm, David? Smh

David Stanley - I'm a liar? So, you know all the people I know then? Well, nice to meet you, God. i didn't know you were omnipotent. You can't call somebody a liar for something you have no idea about. Because you don't know every single person I know. chances are you don't even know 1% of the people I know. So, you have no basis to call me a liar and doing so makes no sense what so ever. So, let me get this straight. You just let kids do whatever they want without teaching them anything? Because, that's not how you raise a child. You don't just go "Here you go, son! Download everything in the world and figure everything in life out for yourself!" You TEACH them stuff. You MONITOR what the hell they do. That's how you keep false information nullified. And you're saying all sorts of nonsense that has nothing to do with my points. I think we're even there, Rasheed. So, you don't watch the news or see things come across you FB wall by accident? Because all that stuff you said "I have no interest in that" was everywhere and you're saying you weren't AWARE of it? Now who's lying. What does that video have to do with anything I've said? Nothing. Saw that before as well. Where are you seeing people arguing that Ancient Egyptians aren't black African? Because you show me where and I'll go there and call them morons. Show me the proof of what you're saying and I'll gladly concede. Show me these assholes arguing about something that's basic common sense and also show me people being indoctrinated by movies. Not a psychological study on racism. Also, that's not a strawman comment. That's me saying people need to either DO something about something or quit talking about it.

David Stanley - Download into them... are you a Scientologist?

Muhammad Rasheed - David Stanley wrote: “I'm a liar? So, you know all the people I know then? Well, nice to meet you, God. i didn't know you were omnipotent. You can't call somebody a liar for something you have no idea about. Because you don't know every single person I know. chances are you don't even know 1% of the people I know. So, you have no basis to call me a liar and doing so makes no sense what so ever.”

Keep demonstrating your lack of integrity. Nice. (btw omnipotent = all-powerful; you’re looking for “omniscient”)

David Stanley wrote: “So, let me get this straight. You just let kids do whatever they want without teaching them anything? Because, that's not how you raise a child. You don't just go ‘Here you go, son! Download everything in the world and figure everything in life out for yourself!’ You TEACH them stuff. You MONITOR what the hell they do. That's how you keep false information nullified.”

Another strawman? I’m talking specifically about bs mass media indoctrination messages beaming nonsense in the world, while you are trying to misdirect towards my parenting technique. smh

David Stanley wrote: “And you're saying all sorts of nonsense that has nothing to do with my points. I think we're even there, Rasheed.”

I already noticed that you lacked any kind of insight into this topic, David. It’s no surprise that the trait is also paired up with your penchant for verbosity.

David Stanley wrote: “So, you don't watch the news or see things come across you FB wall by accident? Because all that stuff you said ‘I have no interest in that’ was everywhere and you're saying you weren't AWARE of it? Now who's lying.”

I’m also not surprised at your confusion between “lack of interest” and “awareness.” Let me assure you that the concepts are not synonymous. You may consider this a teaching moment.

David Stanley wrote: “What does that video have to do with anything I've said? Nothing.”

lol I’m sure I STILL don’t know whatever it is you’re supposed to be saying (with great passion & over-wordiness), but what it has to do with what I’m saying is that Hollywood’s twisting of the facts of history regarding Ancient Egypt is part of the indoctrination that leads to the kind of psychological damage and identify crisis shown in the clip.

David Stanley wrote: “Saw that before as well. Where are you seeing people arguing that Ancient Egyptians aren't black African? Because you show me where and I'll go there and call them morons. Show me the proof of what you're saying and I'll gladly concede. Show me these assholes arguing about something that's basic common sense and also show me people being indoctrinated by movies.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/.../Ancient_E......

For the record, you give the impression that you are well read on nothing. Just thought you’d like to know the impression you’re leaving.

David Stanley wrote: “Not a psychological study on racism.”

They are one and the same.

David Stanley wrote: “Also, that's not a strawman comment.”

Well, considering my point is that the indoctrinating ideological message of mass entertainment is very dangerous to our psyche, and your manufactured point that you decided to argue against, was that we shouldn’t spread negative messages by commenting on them, sounds very much like a strawman fallacy that you substituted for my point.

David Stanley - That's not showing me where people are actively arguing about the topic. Like I said, show me specifically where people are actively debating this stupid illogical notion that Ancient Egyptians weren't black. Besides Wikipedia which is not a viable resource for accurate information as any user can alter the information or dispute it for any reason. I asked to be shown to where I can tell these people that they are wrong, which you have failed to produce and avoid by insulting me. Integrity, right there. Practice what you preach, as they say. On the subject of that ignorant Kardashian thing, I had previously asked if you were aware of it. Your response indicated you were not. And of course there's all sorts of nonsense "beamed" out into the world, Scotty. I'm not disputing the fact that misinformation exists. I'm saying that people need to stop perpetuating the bullshit. It's 3 am here, if i use the wrong word I apologize. Lack of sleep factors into that. Still, you didn't answer the question. How do you know every person I know and what they think enough to call me a liar when I say that the people that I personally know don't buy into bullshit? I'm not saying Hollywood isn't doing backwards crap. Not in the slightest. In fact, I agreed that they are. But, I don't think that it's indoctrination. My opinion. Because, as I've said, no one I know believes what they see in a movie as factual by any stretch. I don't know one single person personally that has been indoctrinated. I know of people who believe things that are completely retarded as I know of a few Republicans and Scientologists. And you're the one who brought up kids being indoctrinated. My counter was that you teach children different and that becomes nullified.

Muhammad Rasheed - David Stanley wrote: “That's not showing me where people are actively arguing about the topic. Like I said, show me specifically where people are actively debating this stupid illogical notion that Ancient Egyptians weren't black.”

“Moving the goalposts is an informal logically fallacious argument in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded.”

What do you walk around with a potato sack full of logical fallacies? Is that your thing? Don’t do that, dude.

David Stanley wrote: “Besides Wikipedia which is not a viable resource for accurate information as any user can alter the information or dispute it for any reason.”

Scroll down and find the sections called “Notes” and “References” and tell me what you see. I’ll wait.

David Stanley wrote: “I asked to be shown to where I can tell these people that they are wrong, which you have failed to produce and avoid by insulting me. Integrity, right there. Practice what you preach, as they say.”

You expressed incredulous disbelief that anyone was arguing over a common sense topic, and I posted a link demonstrated that academia and special interest groups have been arguing this very topic since American slavery. Now you are actually trying to say that I didn’t provide what you were asking for because I didn’t point you to a live argument going on in a message board forum somewhere. If I were you I would avoid even typing the word ‘integrity’ for fear I would burst into flames like it was holy water touching a vampire…

David Stanley wrote: “On the subject of that ignorant Kardashian thing, I had previously asked if you were aware of it. Your response indicated you were not.”

Meanwhile, in the real world, you went off topic to fly into a rant about something that I had no interest in, as well as having nothing to do with the point. When I pointed this out and belittled you over it you became butthurt. The End.

David Stanley wrote: “And of course there's all sorts of nonsense "beamed" out into the world, Scotty.”

Fascinating. Tell me more.

David Stanley wrote: “I'm not disputing the fact that misinformation exists. I'm saying that people need to stop perpetuating the bullshit.”

So in your mind, sitting silent and letting the bad guys bombard society with their Hollywood Death Ray of Doom at will, without raising even the slightest protest, is being a responsible citizen then? [reaches for another “no integrity” sticker to stick on your forehead]

David Stanley wrote: “It's 3 am here, if i use the wrong word I apologize. Lack of sleep factors into that.”

It doesn’t matter. I was just messing with you. You deserve it since you’re a friend of General Zod.

David Stanley wrote: “Still, you didn't answer the question. How do you know every person I know and what they think enough to call me a liar when I say that the people that I personally know don't buy into bullshit? I'm not saying Hollywood isn't doing backwards crap. Not in the slightest. In fact, I agreed that they are. But, I don't think that it's indoctrination. My opinion. Because, as I've said, no one I know believes what they see in a movie as factual by any stretch. I don't know one single person personally that has been indoctrinated.”

Everyone is indoctrinated with something, David. Good and bad. The way we learn as children absolutely involve indoctrination techniques.

David Stanley wrote: “I know of people who believe things that are completely retarded as I know of a few Republicans and Scientologists. And you're the one who brought up kids being indoctrinated. My counter was that you teach children different and that becomes nullified.”

The trick is to take ownership of your own indoctrination, so that other people won’t download their own ideological/doctrinal mess into you first. The same is true with your children.

David Stanley - So in your mind, sitting silent and letting the bad guys bombard society with their Hollywood Death Ray of Doom at will, without raising even the slightest protest, is being a responsible citizen then? And then this from you from from earlier: There’s no way I would watch a Hollywood film with Egypt in it. The same reason I refuse to watch that Russell Crowe “Noah” flick, nor that “Son of God” tv series and film. But there’s a certain demographic that they are marketed to that eat that stuff up. I will never sway them away from those films.

David Stanley - Aren't you in effect sitting silent by not practicing what you preach?

Muhammad Rasheed - David Stanley wrote: “And then this from you from from earlier: Aren't you in effect sitting silent by not practicing what you preach?”

1.) I came in here to ‘vocalize’ by disapproval of this film and Zod’s goofy message.

2.) You countered with your message that we shouldn’t talk about stuff we disagree with because it spreads the message.

3.) I mentioned that there’s a specific demographic that absolutely believe in that message and eat it up that I will never sway away from that message no matter how much I protest.

4.) You somehow think that by refusing to watch one of those films it means I’m “sitting silent” even though you met me while I was protesting… doing the opposite of “sitting silent.”

5.) Now you're saying we should complain about negative messages and spread them because if we don't we are "sitting silent" and that's bad.

Truly you have a dizzying intellect.

David Stanley - You've devolved into insults instead of actually providing anything useful to debate. I didn't say PROVE. I said SHOW me WHERE in plain english so that I could go do something about. Which is the exact opposite of sitting silent. I apologize profusely if that is not your native language in all seriousness, however, as offending isn't my intention. I didn't become butthurt. I was simply making the point using an off topic reference that to feed the bullshit machine is the wrong tactic to take in my personal opinion. An opinion. Not a fact, but an opinion based on my own observations. I, for one, am not and have never been indoctrinated into anything. I make up my own mind about everything and no one on Earth or otherwise can make me think anyway way different than how I choose to. So, you're opinion does not apply to me. It may apply to others who don't think for themselves, but it does not apply to me. It's also not a moving of goal posts if my originally request was not adhered to. It's avoidance to give credulity to your own opinion. As has been half of what's transpired.

David Stanley - No no. You said you wouldn't keep anyone from seeing these films that you are apparently whole heartedly against. Which is sitting silent.

David Stanley - Granted your choice of wording may have been misleading, so I'll give you the befit of the doubt that you were trying to say that you could not sway their beliefs.

David Stanley - Benefit of the doubt.

David Stanley - I don't support this film either. At least that we agree on.

Muhammad Rasheed - David Stanley wrote: “You've devolved into insults…”

Nah. I started off calling Zod ‘stupid,’ remember?

David Stanley wrote: “…instead of actually providing anything useful to debate.”

So your poor argument structure and defense is my fault, eh?

David Stanley wrote: “I didn't say PROVE. I said SHOW me WHERE in plain english so that I could go do something about.”

You love playing yourself, don’t you, David? Are you really going to proclaim yourself a master of “plain English” and yet not know that ‘show’ and ‘prove’ are synonyms? smh

David Stanley wrote: “Which is the exact opposite of sitting silent.”

Why don’t you write a definitive treatment on the topic and submit it for peer review in high academia where it is being debated? You are a master of plain English after-all. lol

David Stanley wrote: “I apologize profusely if that is not your native language in all seriousness, however, as offending isn't my intention.”

You are both adorable AND ironic.

David Stanley wrote: “I didn't become butthurt.”

Right. That’s what the butthurt always say when they are butthurt.

David Stanley wrote: “I was simply making the point using an off topic reference that to feed the bullshit machine is the wrong tactic to take in my personal opinion. An opinion. Not a fact, but an opinion based on my own observations.”

It wasn't a very good point.

David Stanley wrote: “I, for one, am not and have never been indoctrinated into anything.”

Sure you are. Everyone is. You only think you aren't based on poor understanding.

David Stanley wrote: “I make up my own mind about everything and no one on Earth or otherwise can make me think anyway way different than how I choose to. So, you're opinion does not apply to me. It may apply to others who don't think for themselves, but it does not apply to me.”

Your ability to read & write is indoctrination-based technique, for example.

David Stanley wrote: “It's also not a moving of goal posts if my originally request was not adhered to. It's avoidance to give credulity to your own opinion. As has been half of what's transpired.”

Your request was based on raw ignorance of a centuries old debate, David. Do you really want to belabor that?

David Stanley - And more insults. I'm not surprised. Insults are the last tactic of the defeated.

Muhammad Rasheed - I told you I started off with them so that concept is nullified.  ;)

Muhammad Rasheed - David Stanley wrote: “No no. You said you wouldn't keep anyone from seeing these films that you are apparently whole heartedly against. Which is sitting silent. Granted your choice of wording may have been misleading, so I'll give you the befit of the doubt that you were trying to say that you could not sway their beliefs.”

There are people who genuinely feel that the “Son of God” show is an accurate depiction in every way, and would literally attack me for suggesting otherwise. They may keep their show with my blessing. The willfully ignorant are unreachable, and forcing them to change their minds is not my fight.

You may take up that mantle if you wish. I don’t know where their message board forums would be though.

David Stanley - You insulted Zod. I haven't defended Zod and haven't done a thing to warrant insult. Simply debating opinion, which is a thing in and of itself futile. Saying they're unreachable is a very pessimistic outlook when I believe no one is a lost cause. Except for rapists, child molesters, and psychopaths. They're complete lost causes but that's an entirely different subject.

David Stanley - And never fear attack for voicing what you believe. Be it literal attacks or otherwise.

David Stanley-  I'd have not thought you'd say that as you've so vigorously defended your opinions on indoctrination.

David Stanley - And quelling ignorance and correcting it is the duty of anyone who is not. Be it you, me, or anyone else on earth.

David Stanley - Also, when I said show, I was using in a manner that means to lead to. As an example of how that's used in a sentence: "Please show me to the bathroom. i have to poop."

Muhammad Rasheed - David Stanley wrote: “You insulted Zod. I haven't defended Zod and haven't done a thing to warrant insult. Simply debating opinion, which is a thing in and of itself futile.”

You seem to have pulled back from your original very aggressive approach, in favor of what is now an attempt to appeal to my sensitive nature.  I should reveal at this point that I don’t have one.

David Stanley wrote: “Saying they're unreachable is a very pessimistic outlook when I believe no one is a lost cause.”

People who prefer to be ignorant are quite unreachable. They can only save themselves.

Muhammad Rasheed - David Stanley wrote: “And never fear attack for voicing what you believe. Be it literal attacks or otherwise.”

Is that the impression I give? That I’m afraid to voice my opinions? I guess I need to work on that…

Muhammad Rasheed - David Stanley wrote: “I'd have not thought you'd say that as you've so vigorously defended your opinions on indoctrination.”

That’s because there’s nothing wrong with using indoctrination techniques upon yourself as an effective long-term learning tool to absorb concepts you value. I’m against Big Business using Mass Media to indoctrinate me with concepts that some asshole Hollywood exec believes, that I 100% disagree with.

Muhammad Rasheed - David Stanley wrote: “And quelling ignorance and correcting it is the duty of anyone who is not. Be it you, me, or anyone else on earth.”

An adult who is determined to remain ignorant on a subject has the right to do so. I can tell him about a particular message, but I cannot make him take it.

Muhammad Rasheed - David Stanley wrote: “Also, when I said show, I was using in a manner that means to lead to. As an example of how that's used in a sentence: ‘Please show me to the bathroom. i have to poop.’"

I’m going to be generous and assume you’re from Kentucky or someplace, and leave it at that. lol

[a curious inquiry later revealed that David Stanley really is from KY]

Muhammad Rasheed –


Muhammad Rasheed - ^btw Rupert owns about 85% of the news media.

Sean Page - Muhammed have you actually been to Egypt? Just interested.

Muhammad Rasheed - Sean, I'm far more interested in what that has to do with a discussion about false depictions of the Ancient Egypt people.

Because it would seem that your bs misdirection/irrelevance technique is even stronger than David's.

Too Black to Live

Warren Murphy – [shared photo]  perp walk

James McGachey - I wish I had said that.

John Nielson - "two less animals to deal with"

Michael Mercer - LMAO

Neil Bagozzi - This an inaccurate cartoon....the pants are up way to high.

Clyde Levine - martin was just walking this other asshole was peice of shit and he met with a violent end. Let's get it rigth. Finish book 4 nice...

Isaiah Stewart - Very sad

Jerry Conrad - Gangstas r us charter members.

Michael Mercer - Yes you are Isaiah, yes you are.

Isaiah Stewart - I'm sad when this country throws away life … time and time again … and thinks its funny … or something to JOKE about :'-(

Jerry Conrad - Isaiah, I agree with you , the waste of life is a tragedy. From what I understand of the facts, both these shootings were justifiable. These two guys threw away their own lives, nobody took their lives from them.

Would it have been better if they had taken the lives of the people they were attacking instead?
I suppose you are right we shouldn't joke about such things, but we should never lose sight of the fact that these two men were the instigators of the violencen The tragedy is that nobody taught them better.

Muhammad Rasheed - smh

Muhammad Rasheed - "Both these shootings were justifiable" because they were black. Black people, of course, are not allowed to "just be kids" and make dumb mistakes the way white kids are, no. If black people do anything at all that whites disapprove of, it's okay to shoot them dead in the streets.

That's clearly the meaning of the "perp walk" message that you all approve of.

Very interesting.

Muhammad Rasheed - I like how white serial killers are always very carefully captured, gently tucked into bed and kissed "good nite," while blacks are shot casually over the tiniest imagined offense. If you find out they actually didn't do it, then well, look: "He sold half a joint to his best friend 7 years ago, so fuck 'em."

Jerry Conrad - Obviously you don't know under what circumstances deadly force is justified. Go take a class.

Muhammad Rasheed - It's justified when black people are involved.

Muhammad Rasheed - Clearly.

Muhammad Rasheed - The police officer uses his discretion to determine whether deadly force is needed or not. White cops kill blacks far more often than whites even over the exact same circumstances.

It would be better if they policed their own neighborhoods, and stayed the hell out of mine.

Muhammad Rasheed - Notice that armed white teens are less likely to be shot and killed by a white cop, than an unarmed black teen.

Muhammad Rasheed - Jerry Conrad wrote: "Go take a class."

lol I briefly wasted a few seconds trying to come up with something to tell you to go take, but I don't think there's anything that can fix you.

So, you may continue to hate my people, justify why it's okay to slaughter them, all while pretending that you all are the good guys. Have fun.

Jerry Conrad - You don't have to look in the mirror to see hate and racism ( although it's clearly there) because YOU see it everywhere.
If you think the WHOLE WORLD stinks you should check you own breath first.

Muhammad Rasheed - Yeah. The person who points at the injustice is the one in the wrong, right?

NOT the one with the guns, force, military, manipulative & biased jurors, history of lynch mobs, and well-documented record of an infamous multi-billion dollar international slave trade. Oh no.

The one who feels the sting of it against his people, and protests casual jokes about it, is somehow the one that's responsible for it in your mind, hm, Jerry?

Muhammad Rasheed - I caused it. I caused all the hate and racism because I got mad at it and dared to vocalize that anger. So it's magically my fault.

Muhammad Rasheed - Right?

Jerry Conrad - But people like you with your attitude yes.
I don't dislike you because of your skin color, you are one of the most hateful, racist, and bigoted people I have ever encountered on this forum.
I'm done.
I am violating one of my primary philosophies, which is to "Never try to teach a jackass to sing, it wastes my time and pisses off the jackass."

Muhammad Rasheed - Jerry Conrad wrote: "But people like you with your attitude yes."

My attitude. And what is my attitude that you protest so? That I dared to get upset at the wrongs done to my people, and point them out. That it dared to anger me when I see your hi-fiving over casual jokes about it.

Jerry wrote: "I don't dislike you because of your skin color, you are one of the most hateful, racist, and bigoted people I have ever encountered on this forum."

I know. Everyone else here enthusiastically Amens the casual destruction of black youth, and you came here as a refuge to surround yourself by those who would share that same opinion. I understand. That makes me an intruder by default. In a world in which white is always right, the one who dares say otherwise must be "hateful, racist, and bigoted."

Jerry wrote: "I am violating one of my primary philosophies, which is to 'Never try to teach a jackass to sing, it wastes my time and pisses off the jackass.'"

It's actually adorable that you think you have something to teach me on this topic. All you have to teach is that it's okay for white cops to shoot and kill black youth. I reject that "knowledge" as it can never serve me.  Isn't that the whole point of your protest about my "attitude" after-all?  "Come on, Muhammad!  Lighten up.  We're just making fun of those black kids.  Fuck 'em!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature......

Jerry Conrad - BTW: the animal usually referred to is a PIG, but because your name suggests you may be Muslim I changed it to something less offensive to you. (Hateful, insensitive prick that I am.)

Muhammad Rasheed - I don't care. I just can't eat the thing. Reading the word "pig" isn't non-kosher.

Muhammad Rasheed - Nice of you to look out for me though.

There may be hope for you yet, Jer, if we can just manage to tip it from the "religion" bucket into the "race" one...

The Spirit of Hypocrisy

Warren Murphy - so the stupid perverted criminal who is the attorney general of this country has now finally achieved his goal: a race war in the United States. one can hardly wait for him to go to jail where he belongs.

John Nielson - Holder is such a freakin scumbag

George Wanko - So, the New York Times publishes Officer Wilson's home address in yesterday's edition right before the Grand Jury findings are released.....real nice. I guess endangering Officer Wilson, his family and neighbors is of no concern to the 2 NYT reporters.........Shame on JULIE BOSMAN of 5620 N. Wayne Ave., Apt.2 in Chicago and CAMPBELL ROBERTSON of 1113 N. Dupre Street in New Orleans........

Clyde Levine - come on you know this is not going to happen. But maybe sometime down the road a thing may come about...

Isaiah Stewart - This is wrong ... sorta like when bloodthirsty Christian conservatives publish the addresses of physicians who provide legal abortion services.

Clyde Levine - and that did not mean a thing to the fair and balance media.

Isaiah Stewart - Warren doesn't think there is such a thing as a bad cop. Lots of LAPD cops do contract murder on the side. Lots of cops have been busted framing and killing innocents for sport. Such accounts have been reported for decades in most states.

George Wanko - Kiss my Big Big Black Ass Isaiah.

HG Ohlsson - Erin Burnett, Anderson Cooper and the rest of their ilk can join him.

Warren Murphy - i don't know how you figured that out, ike.

Isaiah Stewart - .. says Warren, who wrote Murders Shield, a Destroyer where Remo has to oppose and kill bad cops! F@ck crooked cops! They are the lowest of the low! And they are far too common today!

Isaiah Stewart - .. and DARREN WILSON IS A RACIST SOUTHERN CRACKER WHO COMMITTED FIRST DEGREE MURDER ... AND HIS RED NECK ASS CAN ROT IN HELL!!!!!!

Timothy Janson - Isaiah Stewart...put down the crack pipe and back away slowly. First off you obviously haven't the slightest idea of what constitutes first degree murder. Secondly your little angel Micheal Brown had prior felony arrests. Third he was a known gang banger and pictures have shown his stupid ass holding a wad of cash on his mouth pointing a gun while he sits around with the rest of his "home boys".

Timothy Janson - Isaiah Stewart is obviously too stupid to realize the irony of his comment referring to Darren Wilson as a racist southern white cracker

Muhammad Rasheed - Timothy Janson wrote: "Secondly your little angel Micheal Brown had prior felony arrests."

ALLL 18 year old white men who have prior felony arrests should IMMEDIATELY be rounded up and shot dead by the police.

Timothy Janson - And another idiot heard from...

Muhammad Rasheed - Wasn't that the reason you mentioned Mike's prior felony's? Were you not implying that he deserved to be shot and killed because of them?

So logically all 18 year old white men with prior felonies should be killed, too, yes? If this isn't why you brought up Mike's record, then explain why you mentioned it. What was the point?

This is an Official Integrity Check.

Muhammad Rasheed - Should this man be shot and killed?

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=...

Muhammad Rasheed - Timothy Janson wrote: "Third he was a known gang banger..."

Known by whom, Timothy? You and your anal cavity?

Timothy Janson wrote: "...and pictures have shown his stupid ass holding a wad of cash on his mouth pointing a gun while he sits around with the rest of his 'home boys.'"

All white teens who are posing on camera holding guns and cash should IMMEDIATELY be rounded up and shot and killed by the police.

Timothy Janson - Muhammad Rasheed stay away from my anal cavity. Go toss someone else's salad

Isaiah Stewart - THANK YOU, Muhammad!!! You are obviously too wise and enlightened to be joining the usual brain-damaged morons on this thread.

Isaiah Stewart - Time for Ike to take off the kid gloves!

Isaiah Stewart - Exhibit One: Cops in Albuquerque murder in cold blood a homeless mentally ill man for doing nothing but camping illegally … all cops were suspended for what I see as First Degree Murder … Watch ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jwyto...

Muhammad Rasheed - Timothy Janson wrote: "Muhammad Rasheed stay away from my anal cavity. Go toss someone else's salad"

I see. So you sidestepped the Official Integrity Check altogether. Very interesting. That is an automatic failure.

Idiot.

Isaiah Stewart - Exhibit Two: A very heavy, burley cop beats the CRAP outta a tiny SHOELESS homeless WOMAN … a WOMAN (the jew in me is freaking out) … literally punching her in the face FIFTEEN TIMES … which easily could have KILLER HER … for no reason at all ..

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ke6z...

Isaiah Stewart - I am SICK to people thinking cops are perfect angles. Police officers are HUMAN BEINGS, folks … and HUMANS AIN'T PERFECT. They are just as imperfect as all of us. Warren knew this fact in 1972 when he felt the need to write Murders Shield and having Remo and Chiun killing cops by the car loads. He STILL knows it today! As we all do … HUMANS ARE NOT PERFECT (!!!)

[Timothy Janson deleted all of his comments]

Isaiah Stewart - Officer Darren Wilson's official statement was full of so many holes … it made cheesecloth look like concrete. I read it many times over and over. Could NOT believe it. What a crock of excrement.

If Officer Wilson had told me that "rain was wet" after that loony statement I wouldn't have believed it. Obviously an insecure cop with racial issues who got VERY offended that his authority was being questioned. His brain went into the red zone and he gunned an unarmed kid down in a flash of rage. Pure and simple.

Isaiah Stewart - When I was in Los Angeles I was having breakfast next to two WHITE police officers. This was near Inglewood, a black community bordering South Central L.A. One cop says to the other: "How does a black woman fight crime? …. She gets an abortion." The other cop laughed! Made me SICK TO MY STOMACH. So sick that I had to physically leave the restaurant. This is the racist crap that poor black people have to put up with. Disgusting!!!!!!

Muhammad Rasheed - Yes, and these are the very people in charge of "justice" in my communities. Of course their people see nothing wrong with it, because your own are inclined to cover over your own people's faults. That's natural. But in America's centuries old racially divided nation – as Timothy's hypocrisy has revealed in this very thread – they are NOT inclined to cover over our faults. They will instantly shoot us dead over even the smallest imagined slight, and then immediately justify why it was necessary.

Isaiah Stewart - So WHY is Ike so sensitive about cops being killers? Simple. I happen to be jewish. Worst yet, my mom's name is Schewel (a Germanic surname that means "house of worship" in Yiddish).

Hitler murdered many Schewels doing WWII, and the German Gestapo rounding them up and killing them WERE nothing more than domestic COPS.

Trust me, folks. COPS CAN KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE … COPS CAN BE CROOKED! You NEVER want to see America become a Police State where cops are not held accountable for their actions when they kill. Us citizens ALWAYS need to hold them accountable for each and every life they take. Killing should NEVER get a free ride.

Joseph Patrick - For 25 days the grand jury heard more than 70 hours of testimony from 60 witnesses, (including 3 medical examiners.) in its deliberation the grand jury considered 5 possible charges ranging from first degree murder to involuntary manslaughter.

Exactly how many hours and days did you pour over evidence and research the incident? I'd venture to say nowhere near that much. You watched tv. You read a few memes. And you saw your favorite celebrity bellowing that you should be outraged. So being a good liberal, you slathered at the teeth and obeyed when your masters told you to.

This cop apparently did his job. The "gentle giant" was anything but. That's the biz, sweetheart

Muhammad Rasheed - Joseph Patrick wrote: "For 25 days the grand jury half listened to more than 70 hours of testimony from 60 witnesses, (including 3 medical examiners.) in its deliberation the grand jury dismissed 5 possible charges ranging from first degree murder to involuntary manslaughter."

*fixed*
 
Joseph Patrick - And your evidence is? Oh, a burned down Little Caesars.

Muhammad Rasheed - Joseph Patrick wrote: "Exactly how many hours and days did you pour over evidence and research the incident?"

I don't know. Should I have logged that?

Joseph Patrick wrote: "I'd venture to say nowhere near that much."

"That much" of half ass listening like they did?

Joseph Patrick wrote: "You watched tv."

I don't watch tv.

Joseph Patrick wrote: "You read a few memes."

I create memes.

Joseph Patrick wrote: "And you saw your favorite celebrity bellowing that you should be outraged."

Nope. In fact, in this very thread I disagree with one of my favorite celebrities.

Joseph Patrick wrote: "So being a good liberal..."

I'm not a liberal. I lean libertarian. But I am anti-racist and tend to be immediately suspicious of any rhetoric that sounds like it. I don't give the benefit of the doubt on those kinds of opinions, no more than Wilson and other white cops give to their victims. Should I?

Joseph Patrick wrote: "...you slathered at the teeth and obeyed when your masters told you to."

Nah. My knowledge of history, suggests that white people hate black people (to put it mildly), and this tends to color how I see you all's comments.

How I interpret them... on pretty much any subject. I am free of masters, Joseph, save one.

Joseph Patrick wrote: "This cop apparently did his job."

For an organization that has proven time and time again that they hate black people, the nature of his "job" is obvious at this point.

Joseph Patrick wrote: "The 'gentle giant' was anything but."

How do you know?

Joseph Patrick wrote: "That's the biz, sweetheart"

Yeah. The biz is fundamentally unfair, and why people get fed up about it so often.

Muhammad Rasheed - Looks like it will never change.  I don't expect it to.

Muhammad Rasheed - Joseph Patrick wrote: "And your evidence is?"

My evidence that the grand jury half listened to the evidence and didn't take it as seriously as they took their pre-determined biases?

The verdict itself is my evidence.

Muhammad Rasheed - They found Wilson not guilty of killing that black kid, because they didn't believe black kids are worth leaving alive.
Further up in this thread I posted a clip of a white guy resisting arrest, fighting off two cops, and running. Stronger than either cop, I find it odd that they didn't shoot him, don't you, Joseph?

No, no, of course you don't think it odd. You probably agree that they shouldn't shoot him, right? Why that misunderstood "gentle giant" white man probably has a family to support! Let's not go off all half-cocked, shooting good white people willy-nilly! Why what kind of society would this be if cops went around treating white men the way they treat those scary black guys who were probably asking for it anyway, huh?

Warren Murphy - there's a lot of racist bullshit being posted here. for myself, i stand with jefferson and lincoln.

Muhammad Rasheed - You stand with jefferson and lincoln on racist bullshit?

Which parts?

Joseph Patrick - Flawed logic of one who generalizes: "Cops are racist. White people are racist. Everyone is racist...but me."

Generalizing: it's easier than actually thinking.  :D

Muhammad Rasheed - I am racist.

Did you think I can read through the events of world history and come away from it singing "Kumbaya?"

Muhammad Rasheed - White people have committed the worst events in history -- with the highest body counts -- but in my country, you've somehow convinced yourselves that it is black people who are the big, scary threat.

Muhammad Rasheed - How could I NOT be a racist after being confronted with that hypocrisy?  A symptom of your peculiar psychosis.

Muhammad Rasheed - Using Malcolm X's example, I judge people one-on-one, and give them the benefit of the doubt based on their actions within my life.

But as a group, it brings out my inner racist when I see folk like Darren Wilson receiving this support from you.

Muhammad Rasheed - I don't expect you to change.

Muhammad Rasheed - In fact, you seem to have actually gotten worse since Jan 2009.

Neil Bagozzi - Hey Muhammad why do you live in in the U.S.? There has to be many countries that are far greater and fairer. I recommend the Middle East or Africa.

Muhammad Rasheed - lol

Muhammad Rasheed - All country's have their pros and cons.

Muhammad Rasheed - This is the only nation I know. It is my home. All my roots are here. As you may remember, when my ancestors came here as slaves, we were stripped of knowledge of our home countries, to be broken for the chattel slave role, so now we know none other than this one. This one I helped build.  We've invested quite a few blood, sweat & tears in this land -- both willingly and unwillingly -- to leave now before finally getting to enjoy the full fruit of freedom that we have definitely earned by now.

Personally I like the opportunities here better than in other places.

Muhammad Rasheed - The society as a whole is very gradually getting better over time, and the pros outweigh the cons by far.

Unless you all decide to start lynching us all the time again. You act like you want to, based on the verdict from the other day.

A Cop's Word

Willy Trujillo - So everyone ignores the fact that Mike brown was a criminal who robbed a store attacked a police officer tried to take his gun than tried attacking him again. If Mike brown would not have been braking the law he would still be alive today but all you ignorant people think a cop has no right to defend himself by using deadly force when Mike brown was willing to and he proved that by trying to take his gun. Cops have a rigth to go home to there families too not just get killed by some punks who want to live the thug life

Muhammad Rasheed - 1. Michael Brown did NOT have any felonies. His juvenile records (if any) are confidential and are just speculation.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/...

2. That picture of Michael Brown holding the money in his mouth and pointing the gun...WASN'T Michael Brown.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/...

Willy Trujillo - Still dosent change the fact that he robed a store and attacked a cop and tried to take his gun does it

Muhammad Rasheed - The store owner and the other patrons said he didn't rob the store. The video shows a completely different person.

I don't believe for a second he tried to attack that cop.

Muhammad Rasheed - Since Brown didn't have a criminal record at all, why do you think the cops were telling the truth?

Muhammad Rasheed - They got Wilson off by playing up the "scary big black guy" stereotype, that apparently all white people believe, hence the nature of the controversy.

Muhammad Rasheed - You want to vilify Mike Brown because he was black, just like the Ferguson cops did. You want to exonerate Darren Wilson because he is white, just like the Ferguson cops.

I just showed you that Mike Brown wasn't a criminal, so why are you still determined to believe conflicting evidence? Because you want to believe that he was a criminal because that's how you are indoctrinated to think about black people.

Muhammad Rasheed - Willy Trujillo wrote: "So everyone ignores the fact that Mike brown was a criminal..."

So even though it WASN'T a fact, white people still go around saying it IS a "fact." With enthusiasm.

Muhammad Rasheed - You PRAY for it to be true. You NEEED it to be true.

Tell me why you are like this, Willy.

Willy Trujillo - So I guess the fact that his blood was on the gun and inside the police car proves nothing the cop must be a good shot to shoot him in the thumb

Muhammad Rasheed - Are you kidding? Brown's blood was on Wilson's gun because Darren Wilson is a murderer. THAT'S why.

Was that supposed to be a question?

Muhammad Rasheed - https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=...

Muhammad Rasheed - https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=...

Muhammad Rasheed - I have zero reason to trust a cop's word on anything.

Willy Trujillo - Look just keep ignoring the facts see where that gets you. I'm not racist it's just the witnesses all are not reliable and evidence proves other wise if evidence was in favor of Mike I would be supporting his cause as well

Muhammad Rasheed - Willy, you are the one who have been ignoring facts. The only thing that supports Wilson's version of events is his word based on his integrity as a cop. Cops have no integrity as the clips I just posted are representative of their behavior prove time and time again.

You are inclined to believe Wilson's side because of that faulty "cop integrity" piece, because he is white, and because you believe in the "savage black scary man" stereotype.

Muhammad Rasheed - These are the only facts. Darren Wilson is a liar and a murderer. Mike Brown did not have a criminal record. So why are you so quick to believe Wilson's story? Wilson hates black people, shot one in cold blood over a lie, and was forced to defend himself in court when he was surprised to find the spotlight shined on him for his deed. Don't you think he would cook up any cock-n-bull story to keep from going to prison? Wouldn't you? Cops don't have any integrity, so why wouldn't his defense be built upon a lie, especially since EVERYONE knows all blacks are criminals and probably deserved to get shot dead in the streets over SOMETHING, right? That's the only reason Wilson is free right now, Willy.

There is no evidence that supports his story. The jury believed him because white people think ALLL blacks are criminals inherently, and it was on the strength of pure racism that they believed his story and the "evidence" that supported it.

Pretending to be the Good Guys

Warren Murphy - isn't it wonderful that the criminal moron who is our u.s. atty. general is now hooked up with al the crook sharpton and pinocchius the first, pathological liar, to try to keep alive the race hatred they have been sponsoring for so long. the wonderful part is that it mighty mean that eric holder stays on the job until after the gop takes over the senate and then this perjuring thug may be called on to justify his lawlessness. one can only pray.

Michael Mercer - He'll make his escape before the republicans are sworn in.

Muhammad Rasheed - Warren Murphy wrote: "general is now hooked up with al the crook sharpton and pinocchius the first, pathological liar, to try to keep alive the race hatred they have been sponsoring for so long."

Since the cops and their friends are the ones doing all of the killing and antagonizing along racial lines, how is it that these three can be blamed for "keeping alive race hatred?" What are they doing exactly to fan the flames of race hatred that are more potent than killing unarmed teens based on stereotypes?

Joe Brumley - That is the Agenda they are seeking.

Muhammad Rasheed - What are the goals of the "Agenda?"

Bob Napier - The unarmed teen was a felon, thug, and gangsta who was attacking a cop. Good riddance.

Muhammad Rasheed - http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/...

Muhammad Rasheed - http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/...

Muhammad Rasheed - Bob Napier wrote: "The unarmed teen was a felon, thug, and gangsta who was attacking a cop. Good riddance."

So Mike Brown isn't a felon, thug, gangster. But white people keep repeating that lie that they literally just made up based on stereotype.

Doesn't that mean that you all are the ones keeping alive racial hatred the same way you have for centuries now?

Muhammad Rasheed - The exact same way.

Muhammad Rasheed - I have no illusions about changing anybody's mind or anything equally naive, I just want to understand better. Please tell me why you act this way.

Carl L. Heifetz - I think that it would be great to have a black president, especially one with the American experience who understands how this country has progressed, who knows that it was the Republicans responsible, and understands our system of government that respond to the voters.. There are several black conservatives in the wings. I really would like to give one of them a shot at it.
.
Muhammad Rasheed - Carl L. Heifetz wrote: “I think that it would be great to have a black president…”

You’re saying that we don’t have a black president? Is this a reference to Obama’s interracial thing? If so, then it is funny that traditionally someone with “even a single drop of black blood” was ostracized, yet here, now that a black person has made it to the highest office in the land, his other side is over-emphasized. Is this what you are doing here?

Carl L. Heifetz wrote: “…especially one with the American experience who understands how this country has progressed…”

President Obama acknowledges that very progress in almost every single speech. As you know, he is a very prolific speaker.  He also acknowledges -- realistically as this very thread can attest to -- that we have a lot of work to do yet.

Carl L. Heifetz wrote: “who knows that it was the Republicans responsible…”

What are you referencing here? That it was the Republicans responsible for putting him in office? Or for helping knit the racial divide and improving the lives of the black American citizens? Either way, there is a clear discrepancy based on recent history in the last 30+ years. Or are you reaching waaaayyyy back to the abolishment of slavery…?

Carl L. Heifetz wrote: “…and understands our system of government that respond to the voters..”

Is this a dig at the Executive Orders thing? Can you explain why you all ignore the fact that previous presidents used Executive Orders far more often than this president? Naturally I believe the apparent hypocrisy is racism-based, but if it genuinely is not, please explain the odd imbalance in critique.

Gojko Kasich - I don’t care what the dead perpetrator's record was prior to the day in question. The security video ALONE shows one B felony, an A misdemeanor, and a C misdemeanor. How?

I. Status of the perpetrator prior to the interaction with the officer
 
A. He was guilty of Robbery in the 2nd degree as a class B felony. Under Missouri law:
 
569.030. 1. A person commits the crime of robbery in the second degree when he forcibly steals property.
 
2. Robbery in the second degree is a class B felony.
 
“Forcibly steals” is defined in 569.010:
 
(1) "Forcibly steals", a person "forcibly steals", and thereby commits robbery, when, in the course of stealing, as defined in section 570.030 , he uses or threatens the immediate use of physical force upon another person for the purpose of:
 
(a) Preventing or overcoming resistance to the taking of the property or to the retention thereof immediately after the taking; or
 
B. He was guilty of stealing as an A misdemeanor
 
570.030. 1. A person commits the crime of stealing if he or she appropriates property or services of another with the purpose to deprive him or her thereof, either without his or her consent or by means of deceit or coercion.
 
9. Any violation of this section for which no other penalty is specified in this section is a class A misdemeanor.
 
C. He was guilty of 3rd degree assault, as a C misdemeanor:
 
565.070. 1. A person commits the crime of assault in the third degree if:
 
(3) The person purposely places another person in apprehension of immediate physical injury; or
 
(5) The person knowingly causes physical contact with another person knowing the other person will regard the contact as offensive or provocative; or
 
2. Except as provided in subsections 3 and 4 of this section, assault in the third degree is a class A misdemeanor.
 
3. A person who violates the provisions of subdivision (3) or (5) of subsection 1 of this section is guilty of a class C misdemeanor.
 
II. Status of the perpetrator when interacting with the officer: An A or B felony, a C felony, and a D felony.
 
The initial interaction was because the perpetrator was violating Ferguson city ordinance:
 
Sec. 44-344. - Manner of walking along roadway.
 
(a) Where sidewalks are provided, it shall be unlawful for any pedestrian to walk along and upon an adjacent roadway.
 
(b) Where sidewalks are not provided, any pedestrian walking along and upon a highway shall, when practicable, walk only on the left side of the roadway or its shoulder facing traffic which may approach from the opposite direction.
 
State law reference— Similar provisions, RSMo 300.405.
 
As mentioned, it was ALSO a violation of Missouri State Law:
 
300.405. 1. Where sidewalks are provided it shall be unlawful for any pedestrian to walk along and upon an adjacent roadway.
 
2. Where sidewalks are not provided any pedestrian walking along and upon a highway shall when practicable walk only on the left side of the roadway or its shoulder facing traffic which may approach from the opposite direction.
 
A. Assault on the cop, with an attempt to cause serious physical injury, is a Class A felony
 
565.081. 1. A person commits the crime of assault of a law enforcement officer, corrections officer, emergency personnel, highway worker in a construction zone or work zone, utility worker, cable worker, or probation and parole officer in the first degree if such person attempts to kill or knowingly causes or attempts to cause serious physical injury to a law enforcement officer, corrections officer, emergency personnel, highway worker in a construction zone or work zone, utility worker, cable worker, or probation and parole officer.
 
7. Assault of a law enforcement officer, corrections officer, emergency personnel, highway worker in a construction zone or work zone, utility worker, cable worker, or probation and parole officer in the first degree is a class A felony.
 
At the very least, it was a C felony:
 
565.082. 1. A person commits the crime of assault of a law enforcement officer, corrections officer, emergency personnel, highway worker in a construction zone or work zone, utility worker, cable worker, or probation and parole officer in the second degree if such person:
 
(2) Knowingly causes or attempts to cause physical injury to a law enforcement officer, corrections officer, emergency personnel, highway worker in a construction zone or work zone, utility worker, cable worker, or probation and parole officer by means other than a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument;
 
7. Assault of a law enforcement officer, corrections officer, emergency personnel, highway worker in a construction zone or work zone, utility worker, cable worker, or probation and parole officer in the second degree is a class B felony unless committed pursuant to subdivision (2), (5), (6), or (7) of subsection 1 of this section in which case it is a class C felony.
 
B. Trying to grab the gun
 
Attempting to disarm the officer was a Class C felony.
 
575.153. 1. A person commits the crime of disarming a peace officer, as defined in section 590.010 , or a correctional officer if such person intentionally:
 
(1) Removes a firearm, deadly weapon, or less-lethal weapon, to include and including any blunt impact, chemical or conducted energy devices, used in the performance of his or her official duties from the person of a peace officer or correctional officer while such officer is acting within the scope of his or her official duties; or
 
(2) Deprives a peace officer or correctional officer of such officer's use of a firearm, deadly weapon, or any other equipment described in subdivision (1) of this subsection while the officer is acting within the scope of his or her official duties.
 
2. The provisions of this section shall not apply when:
 
(1) The defendant does not know or could not reasonably have known that the person he or she disarmed was a peace officer or correctional officer; or
 
(2) The peace officer or correctional officer was engaged in an incident involving felonious conduct by the peace officer or correctional officer at the time the defendant disarmed such officer.
 
3. Disarming a peace officer or correctional officer is a class C felony.
 
C. Resisting arrest after committing the felony of disarming the officer was a D felony:
 
575.150. 1. A person commits the crime of resisting or interfering with arrest, detention, or stop if, knowing that a law enforcement officer is making an arrest, or attempting to lawfully detain or stop an individual or vehicle, or the person reasonably should know that a law enforcement officer is making an arrest or attempting to lawfully detain or lawfully stop an individual or vehicle, for the purpose of preventing the officer from effecting the arrest, stop or detention, the person:
 
(1) Resists the arrest, stop or detention of such person by using or threatening the use of violence or physical force or by fleeing from such officer; or
 
(2) Interferes with the arrest, stop or detention of another person by using or threatening the use of violence, physical force or physical interference.
 
2. This section applies to:
 
(2) Arrests, stops, or detentions, for any crime, infraction, or ordinance violation; and
 
4. It is no defense to a prosecution pursuant to subsection 1 of this section that the law enforcement officer was acting unlawfully in making the arrest. However, nothing in this section shall be construed to bar civil suits for unlawful arrest.
 
5. Resisting or interfering with an arrest is a class D felony for an arrest for a:
 
(1) Felony

Muhammad Rasheed - Gojko Kasich wrote: “I don’t care what the dead perpetrator's record was prior to the day in question.”

Convenient. That helps with the reinforcement of the stereotype in your mind, right? We all made up our minds that Mike Brown must’ve been a felon, thug and gangster… despite him not having any record of such… he just MUST’VE been because that’s what we are programmed to think about black people. We have blind faith that is how black people are. They have a monopoly on criminality based on their genetics and skin color and whatever. Eating habits maybe. So even though the figure in the security video was wearing a completely different outfit from what Mike Brown was wearing during the confrontation with Wilson, NOT ONCE do we question the cops’ word that it was him. And to be perfectly fair about it, even if it wasn’t him, he was still a black guy and we all agree that blacks are naturally savage criminals who deserve to be shot dead in the streets, whether they have an actual criminal history or not.

J.d. Charles - I think Mike Brown was a thug because he assaulted a man much smaller than him. I know he committed a misdemeanor because I saw the video of the petty theft at the store. Its got nothing to do with his skin color. Its got to do with his actions. None of the people rioting, looting or agitating since his death would have let him in their home when he was alive if they were familiar with his record. Reality Check- there are white thugs too. They get shot by the cops, their victims, other thugs, etc... Nobody ever turns that into a racial thing. I wonder why?

Muhammad Rasheed - J.d. Charles wrote: “I think Mike Brown was a thug because he assaulted a man much smaller than him.”

The owner of the store and the staff said it wasn’t him in the video. That’s not significant to you?

J.d. Charles wrote: “I know he committed a misdemeanor because I saw the video of the petty theft at the store.”

The owner said it wasn’t him on the video. He owns a neighborhood store that Mike Brown had been patronizing for his entire 18 years. You don’t think the store owner would recognize him better than the cops would? Why wouldn’t he? The ONLY thing the cops were concerned with was keeping their colleague out of trouble.

J.d. Charles wrote: “Its got nothing to do with his skin color.”

Sure it does. You WANT to believe this 18 year old with no criminal record is a thug by nature because that’s the stereotype you were programmed to believe.

J.d. Charles wrote: “Its got to do with his actions.”

The actions the cops were subscribing to him were those of another man according to the store owner and the staff.

J.d. Charles wrote: “None of the people rioting, looting or agitating since his death would have let him in their home when he was alive if they were familiar with his record.”

Why are you pretending you know what his record is when you very obviously do not? Why are you repeating a lie based on a stereotype you and your friends made up about Mike Brown, J.d.? Mike Brown didn’t have a criminal record at the time of his murder. Why are you saying that he did? The true answer is actually “racism.” Can you provide a different answer that will be more believable to the rational mind?

J.d. Charles wrote: “Reality Check- there are white thugs too.”

I know. One of them killed Mike Brown while other thugs helped lie about the murder so their friend could stay out of prison.

J.d. Charles wrote: “They get shot by the cops, their victims, other thugs, etc... Nobody ever turns that into a racial thing. I wonder why?”

Why doesn’t the public continuously bring up the high numbers of white-on-white crime the way they do the black-on-black crimes (and for the same reasons)? That’s actually an excellent question, J.d. All races do inflict violent crimes on themselves, and the white-on-white, and black-on-black numbers are roughly similar. Yet as you imply, the black-on-black crimes are continuously mentioned as if they are some special race-based issue different from white-on-white crime. Why is that? I suspect it’s because the popular media are catering to the stereotypes believed by white people, hence the reason why you keep bringing things like that up as “fact” even though it’s not true.

It is your demographic responsible for the discrepancy, because you represent the “mainstream” viewpoint in America that big business courts.

Missy Davis - JD Charles he also committed three attempts to attack and harm the officer so he was given 2 chances before he attacked the officer again and the officer had no choice. Has nothing to do with race, he was committing a crime against a office and had comitted a robbery

Missy Davis - well said J.D>

Muhammad Rasheed - Missy Davis wrote: "JD Charles he also committed three attempts to attack and harm the officer so he was given 2 chances before he attacked the officer again and the officer had no choice."

How do you know? Because the guy who was trying to stay out of prison by building a defense based on the jury's pre-programmed fear of the "big scary black guy" stereotype told you it was true? And you think it is actually reasonable to consider that realistic? This 18 year old kid who never committed a crime before suddenly began a crime spread for no other reason than because this KKK affiliated person who would say anything to stay out of prison said so? Is that right?

The Hypocrisy Files

WHITE FOLKS RIOT: Why? Because a sports team won or lost (it doesn't matter which). Result? Millions of dollars in property damage. Cop response? "Ah, those silly kids are just blowing off a little stea--! GO, BRONCOS!!! YEAH!!!!!"



BLACK FOLKS RIOT: Why? From released pressure built up from a fundamentally racist society. Result? Millions of dollars in property damage. Cop response? "Look at those stupid fucking animals run as I shoot into the crowd with military grade assault weapons. FUCK they're too stupid to live."

An Equal Belief in Religion, Science, & Personal Myth

Michael Balance Williams – [shared photo] My cousin on point like a decimal this AM! Thanks Del Bosby.
Michele Smith - Hmmm good one!

Miles Farris - Cause I just got up to go pee and my bed was dry when I returned.

Michael Balance Williams - Fluids are wet. That being said....all of the 22 fluids in your body make up what I call...a wet dream. When are you not having one lol

Miles Farris - Everyone knows you're never supposed to pee in a dream...it's a setup!

Laron Tanner - I'm feeling this Mike... Just like our conversation before... I believe we don't understand or know the concept of TIME... You have to go see Interstellar

Sharon Mcglothin Darkchocolate Thatz - toooooo deep for me! ;-)

Muhammad Rasheed - "It is believed" by who?

Michael Balance Williams - Whom ever lol

Muhammad Rasheed - That's not an answer!

Muhammad Rasheed - "It is believed" is a set up for a supposed 'truth.'

In order to proceed with the premise, I need to know whether the 'truth' is actually real, so I first need to know who actually believes this so I can determine why they believe it. If they believe because 'they on some bullshit,' then that is significant. lol It will instantly negate the point of the meme.

Iam Bennu - I read slow and would be dead before I could answer this.

Michael Balance Williams - To whom it may concern?

Michael Balance Williams - At least they gave a disclaimer...unlike religion. You don't have to believe in science for it to be true.

Michael Balance Williams - What's real is created by... you!

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: "At least they gave a disclaimer...unlike religion. You don't have to believe in science for it to be true."

You think so? Religion said that the universe had a beginning, and originally atheist scientist assumed that was false for no other reason (blind faith) than because religion said it. Today all the facts support what religion said first.

Currently atheist scientists believe [blind faith] in string theory and landscape theory and there isn't a single fact that supports it.

So you wanna try again?

Michael Balance Williams - Facts and truth will continue to change.

Science also says that our universe came from another one. Facts without works is dead.

It's ok to question the validity in everything. Do you believe any and every thing you hear and read? Religion will use science to back up their claims. Science doesn't need religion. If you want to get super deep with it....religion is a sub category of science...but that's another lesson for.

Michael Balance Williams - When u separate things...they no longer look related...Just like church and state. When people.get sworn into office, isn't the bible used?

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: "Science also says that our universe came from another one."

There are zero facts to support this.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: "Do you believe any and every thing you hear and read?"

That's a suddenly odd position to take from someone who just declared that science is true whether you believe in it or not. Do you even know what your point is supposed to be?

Michael Balance Williams wrote: "Religion will use science to back up their claims."

That doesn't even make sense. The facts support the scientific theory, and they confirm what religion always said.

Michael Balance Williams wrote: "Science doesn't need religion."

It doesn't need religion to do what?

Michael Balance Williams wrote: "If you want to get super deep with it....religion is a sub category of science...but that's another lesson for."

lol Religion deals with those aspects of our existence that science is not equipped to deal with.

Michael Balance Williams - There are zero facts that God exist. We only believe what we hear.

In my experience, gravity exists whether or not I believe in it. I will drown in a pool of water whether or not I believe it to be true. These are facts.

Without your knowledge of something, it doesn't exist. Your subjective universe only exists because you create it.

They confirm what religion always said? Prove it?!?!

Michael Balance Williams - You need to check your equipment, it is not up to date Muhammad Rasheed
It is not up to date on science and religion.
Science doesn't need religion to back up scientific methods. Religion on the other hand, can't go a moment without using the methodologies of science to back up its claims.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: “There are zero facts that God exist. We only believe what we hear.”

God told you He exists in His Book. That would be a fact.

Michael Balance Williams wrote: “In my experience, gravity exists whether or not I believe in it. I will drown in a pool of water whether or not I believe it to be true. These are facts.”

Yes, they are facts. These are facts that support certain theories. In the case of the universe having a beginning, facts supported that statement from God’s Book, but it didn’t support the atheist scientists’ position, forcing them to form a new theory.

Michael Balance Williams wrote: “Without your knowledge of something, it doesn't exist. Your subjective universe only exists because you create it.”

You are talking about modern physicists and their theories of ‘strings’ and the ‘landscape.’ These are 100% subjective concepts composed of nothing except their wishing.

Michael Balance Williams wrote: “They confirm what religion always said? Prove it?!?!”

The facts of the expanding universe feature “the metric expansion of space – which is the increase of the distance between two distant parts of the universe with time. It is an intrinsic expansion whereby the scale of space itself changes. This is different from other examples of expansions and explosions in that, as far as observations can ascertain, it is a property of the entirety of the universe rather than a phenomenon that can be contained and observed from the outside. Metric expansion is a key feature of Big Bang cosmology, is modeled mathematically with the FLRW metric, and is a generic property of the universe we inhabit. Technically, the metric expansion of space is a feature of many solutions to the Einstein field equations of general relativity, and distance is measured using the Lorentz interval. This explains observations which indicate that galaxies that are more distant from us are receding faster than galaxies that are closer to us (Hubble's law).”

These facts support the theory that the universe had a beginning, sprang into existence at a point in the distant past. The world religions have always said that the universe was created at a point in the distant past. In fact, Nobel Prize winning physicist (and co-discoverer of the cosmic microwave background radiation) Arno Penzias once said that “The best data we have concerning the Big Bang, are exactly what I would have predicted if I had nothing to go on but the five books of Moses, the Psalms, and the bible as a whole.”

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: “You need to check your equipment, it is not up to date Muhammad Rasheed”

You think so?

Michael Balance Williams wrote: “It is not up to date on science and religion.”

Really? lol

Michael Balance Williams wrote: “Science doesn't need religion to back up scientific methods.”

If the physicists had listened to religion in the beginning, and assumed it did know what it was talking about (faith) just in a non-scientific language, they would’ve spared themselves much wasted time chasing after their nonsense “didn’t have a beginning universe” that was composed only of more wishing.

Michael Balance Williams wrote: “Religion on the other hand, can't go a moment without using the methodologies of science to back up its claims.”

Religion doesn’t need science to back its claims because it functions on faith. The science can’t help but discover religion’s claims are true because God’s Word is true.

Michael Balance Williams - I can t believe that a god exists just because its in a book.

When I say Religion, I'm mainly referring to the Catholic religions.. FYI.

There is no outside of the universe, Mr Separatist! Everything is within YOU! You are the universe experiencing itself. In essence, you can never really think outside...

Michael Balance Williams - The perception of an expanding universe could be observed in several different ways. It could be a cycle that we are observing from one angle. We change the universe when we change our thinking of it. Religion is the same way. All is mind and mind is mental.

Michael Balance Williams - Lol

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: “I can t believe that a god exists just because its in a book.”

This will be your undoing. By the time you change your mind, you will be dangling over the Pit.

Michael Balance Williams wrote: “When I say Religion, I'm mainly referring to the Catholic religions.. FYI.”

lol This is a personal beef, eh?

Michael Balance Williams wrote: “Here is no outside of the universe, Mr Separatist! Everything is within YOU! You are the universe experiencing itself. In essence, you can never really think outside...”

Hmmmm… So, on the one hand my omniscient Lord has told me something in His Book, and on the other hand Michael Balance Williams has told me something (who’s wrong pretty much every time he touches a keyboard).

Whooo am I goingggg to belieeeeeve? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm…

hahahahahaha

Muhammad Rasheed - Speak of more profound matters.

Throw down your rod. I can roll with the Catholics just this once. They believe in the beginning of the universe, too, you know?

Michael Balance Williams - Certain men, with certain thinking wants there to be a beginning to the universe because of their limited thinking.

Michael Balance Williams - How can gods word be true without the believer first knowing all there is about the history behind the blind faith. 50 million Native Americans and at least 100 million Africans in the Transatlantic Slave Trade died because of it this blind faith you speak of. Why would a god have Europeans kill millions of people during the dark ages that didnt want blind faith? Doesn't make sense. My knowledge of history says that the majority of indigenous people that already had a connection with god didn't accept blind faith in front of the barrel of a gun or weapon because they knew better.

Michael Balance Williams - Yeah...over the pit of bbq eating and not thinking about this convo lol

Michael Balance Williams - Never knew God touched a keyboard before. Got a pic of that Muhammad Rasheed?

Michael Balance Williams - I'd rather know than believe. Don't be lazy with your faith, I wasn't.

Michael Balance Williams - Yeah...I read that Catholics just accepted homosexual and evolution. They are scrambling for members because no one is going to mass or to church anymore. And because there are more Muslims now than Christians.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: "Certain men, with certain thinking wants there to be a beginning to the universe because of their limited thinking."

It seems like you have no idea what big bang theory actually is, what it means, what its relationship is to science, or even what I'm talking about.

What are you trying to say here, Michael? You don't recognize Big Bang Theory as a legitimate working model theory in modern science?

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: “How can gods word be true without the believer first knowing all there is about the history behind the blind faith.”

Because, by definition, that’s not how “faith” functions. Faith is believing in a concept without physical proof of the concept. I believe in the inevitability of the Day of Judgment, without any scientific/mathematical proof that it will happen. But it WILL happen. That is my faith in operation.
Michael Balance Williams wrote: “50 million Native Americans and at least 100 million Africans in the Transatlantic Slave Trade died because of it this blind faith you speak of.”

This doesn’t compute. Blind faith in what caused these events?

Michael Balance Williams wrote: “Why would a god have Europeans kill millions of people during the dark ages that didnt want blind faith?”

Who told you that God told the Europeans to do it? Where did you get that info?

Michael Balance Williams wrote: “Doesn't make sense.”

Certainly not based on what you are saying. What do those events have to do with God’s instructions to the believers? Are you arguing against concepts that you believe in blind faith about the Abrahamic Religions that doesn’t exist? Tell me why you believe these things, please.

Michael Balance Williams wrote: “My knowledge of history says that the majority of indigenous people that already had a connection with god didn't accept blind faith in front of the barrel of a gun or weapon because they knew better.”

Again your understanding of religion how and it fits into these events doesn’t compute. I’m not tracking your thoughts; you’re going to need to explain what this means so I can understand how to address this.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: “Yeah...over the pit of bbq eating and not thinking about this convo lol”

*shrug*

You’ll remember.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: "I'd rather know than believe."

You are not equipped to know the unseen.

Michael Balance Williams wrote: "Don't be lazy with your faith, I wasn't."

I need you to explain those items above further so I can have better insight into how you see religion and how it functions. Right now it seems like you just made up your own religion and wrote "Christianity" on it on a piece of duct tape. I've experienced that before when talking to folk like Tony Steed.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: “Yeah...I read that Catholics just accepted homosexual and evolution.”

I’m more interested in arguing the bible for them on certain matters, rather than certain church politics from theologian-priest decisions. God abolished the priesthood concept sometime around when the Book of Malachi was revealed, so I neither have interest in their grand pronouncements, nor do I respect the concept of “priest.” God abolished that foolishness for a reason after-all.

But as of this time, with all the relevant data known, they don’t have to “accept evolution.” The scientists themselves are actually only accepting it on blind faith; they lack everything they need to actually make it as real as they need it to be for they way they’ve been treating it. The church’s decision is little more than politics, and fearful that they will be embarrassed by finding themselves on the wrong side of history (like that sun around the earth thing), simply because the intellectual class has accepted evolution as ‘fact’ despite weak evidence.

Michael Balance Williams - I overstand your understanding of the big bang theory and what it is. I'm not limited by it. Its just a theory dude. I have my own about my god and the universe.

Your faith functions the way you set your box up. Don't limit yourself. Continue to push the envelope, I might get your message. I can't take you and your god seriously if you continue to antagonize and belittle my character.

I'm super cool about people and their system of faith. But when you have not took the time to research what's in the book you believe in...the way i have...there is a problem and the convo will not go any where if you're not willing to teach your self or take on new info. There are 100,000's and thousands of religions but the majority is set on the first one they get manipulated into without hearing about or searching other religions. SMH

Sorry it doesn't compute for you. Research it. You seem very educated.

Michael Balance Williams - I have to get ready for work. I'll respond shortly.

Michael Balance Williams - Oan: I clump american Muslims under the Catholic church. There were scrolls and knowledge about god before the old testament came out. Thousands of years before the old testament.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: “I overstand your understanding of the big bang theory and what it is. I'm not limited by it. Its just a theory dude. I have my own about my god and the universe.”

The factual data discovered by scientists support Big Bang theory. Big Bang also happens to correlate to what God said about His creation of the universe… that at one time it did not exist, and then later on, it DID. The theory, the facts, the mathematics support this.

Alternate theories that desperate atheist scientists are scrambling around trying to topple Big Bang are coming up short. That means Big Bang isn’t “just a theory.” It means it’s true. The believer already knew it was true because the universe’s Creator already told us that.

Tell me what factual data supports your own theory, and/or why you believe it.

Michael Balance Williams wrote: “Your faith functions the way you set your box up. Don't limit yourself. Continue to push the envelope,”

The Supreme Creator is omnipotent… and He is the opposite of limited. There isn’t anything a human can invent that can even touch Him, because they are limited to what humans can and can’t do and use that as their “Oooo! Ahhh!” standard.

Michael Balance Williams wrote: “I might get your message. I can't take you and your god…”
There is only One God.

Michael Balance Williams wrote: “…seriously if you continue to antagonize and belittle my character.”

I took a couple of comments you said earlier as an attempt to belittle me, and it set the snippy tone I’ve taken since. If you didn’t mean it that way, then I apologize for reading into your posts what you didn’t intend, and will dial it back.

Michael Balance Williams wrote: “I'm super cool about people and their system of faith. But when you have not took the time to research what's in the book you believe in...the way i have...there is a problem and the convo will not go any where if you're not willing to teach your self or take on new info.”

Since this is our first conversation about this, we don’t yet know what the other has researched or not; we’re still in the Opening stage. The early Middlegame will reveal what is what. In the meantime I need you to explain the comments you made before so I’ll know how to respond.

Michael Balance Williams wrote: “There are 100,000's and thousands of religions but the majority is set on the first one they get manipulated into without hearing about or searching other religions. SMH”

You are off topic, and that comment is irrelevant here. I am a student of comparative religion.
Michael Balance Williams wrote: “Sorry it doesn't compute for you. Research it. You seem very educated.”

I’m asking you to explain your own understanding of the correlation between religion and the above mentioned historical events. I already know the religion, and the events. I can’t research what’s only in your head without asking you yourself to rephrase it for better clarity. The burden of presenting your point so that you are clear to your opponent is on you, not me.

Michael Balance Williams wrote: "Oan: I clump american Muslims under the Catholic church. There were scrolls and knowledge about god before the old testament came out. Thousands of years before the old testament."

So? God said the scripture revealed to the Hebrews and to the Arab prophet were only the latest of many going all the way back to the first men. I thought you said you were a student of comparative religion?

Michael Balance Williams - You started the onslaught of belittling and I called you out on it.
I am a student of comparative religions as well. God is what you make it.
You are not my opponent. This is not a battle. These are our ideas about what we think. If you want to have a private detailed dialogue about science and religion, inbox me. We have both strayed from the original topic.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: "You started the onslaught of belittling and I called you out on it."

I will interpret that as confirmation that what I initially thought was belittling from you actually wasn't, and I apologize for the offense.

Michael Balance Williams wrote: "I am a student of comparative religions as well. God is what you make it."

God is what He said He is.

Michael Balance Williams wrote: "You are not my opponent. This is not battle."

It's a philosophical battle and debate.

Michael Balance Williams wrote: "These are our ideas about what we think."

Sure. Whose are the stronger? What differentiates a strong idea from a real one? Are all ideas equally strong or weak no matter whether they are supported or not, or are held together by poor logic structure? Why or why not?

Michael Balance Williams wrote: "We have both strayed from the original topic."

You set the topic with this line: "At least they gave a disclaimer... unlike religion. You don't have to believe in science for it to be true." This was the gauntlet thrown down that I'm challenging you on.

Tell me what is the correlation between religion and the two historical events you named based on how Michael Balance Williams sees it, please. I need to see how you are interpreting religion from your own insight so I can better understand your comments.

Michael Balance Williams - If I told you to believe that my god is stronger than your God, just because he said he is, would you? I'm gonna inbox you since you can't seem to respect my wishes.

Muhammad Rasheed - Michael Balance Williams wrote: "If I told you to believe that my god is stronger than your God, just because he said he is, would you?"

I would ask you to show me the revealed text that countered the revealed text that the One God gave to mankind.

Michael Balance Williams wrote: "I'm gonna inbox you since you can't seem to respect my wishes."

Okay, fine.

Michael Balance Williams - So you write your last comment after you responded to what inboxed you? I see that you like to get the last word. Disrespectful I tell you. I can care less about getting the last word. I'll still respect you until I'm disrespected.

Muhammad Rasheed - Since you actually asked the question here first, it didn't seem inappropriate to answer it here. Plus it gave me the chance to fix the typos in the PM, which doesn't allow for that.

Relax. I said, "Okay, fine."