RE: Content of Character: 0 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


mnottertail -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 8:35:27 AM)

You haven't actually written anything, you have slobbered, and spouted geysers of the most imbecilic doggerel here, but havent had a thought that would occupy the level of even a dung beetle.




Musicmystery -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 9:06:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

And he doesn't get that black people don't speak with one voice. After all, they're all black, right? So of course, they all think alike, just like all white people do.

Good thing he's so open-minded and aware.




I didn't write anything like that

Too bad you people are such morons, such stupid lowlife trolls that you are unable to debate what is actually written

Of course you did. King remarked on content of character once in a speech, and you label yourself a devote while questioning while anyone of color would see things differently than King did.

Too bad your black/white left/right you/trolls view of the world blinds you.




Sanity -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 9:19:20 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

And he doesn't get that black people don't speak with one voice. After all, they're all black, right? So of course, they all think alike, just like all white people do.

Good thing he's so open-minded and aware.




I didn't write anything like that

Too bad you people are such morons, such stupid lowlife trolls that you are unable to debate what is actually written

Of course you did. King remarked on content of character once in a speech, and you label yourself a devote while questioning while anyone of color would see things differently than King did.

Too bad your black/white left/right you/trolls view of the world blinds you.


No. The only one who wrote anything LIKE that is you

I wrote rioters around the St Lois area

Nothing like all blacks, that was your ugly inner racist trying to project your own slimy vileness onto me

I am sure there are as as many blacks as there are whites as a percentage who see a problem with rioters taking the side with someone due to color alone in a knee jerk fashion

I have no doubt about that

You are a coward when it comes to discussing race relations. Dare to bring up a legitimate issue and you go from zero to troll in the blink of an eye







mnottertail -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 9:31:23 AM)

So you are calling the white nutsucker rioters of StL out? Whadda fuckin Guy! Hah?




Musicmystery -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 10:39:20 AM)

At least he's consistently funny.

In a sad sort of way.




Sanity -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 10:56:25 AM)


Hilarious to the trolls, perhaps, that MLK's dream of having people judged by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin falls on deaf ears in St Lois today

Just because the young man who died after taking several shots at an off duty cop was black is reason to riot?

Really?

The facts make the racist trolls here uncomfortable so they do their best to derail

Much easier than thinking




Musicmystery -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 11:21:47 AM)

[:D]

And *you* think "that's not what anyone said."

Another frustrated fiction writer who can't sell his novel.




mnottertail -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 11:24:31 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Hilarious to the trolls, perhaps, that MLK's dream of having people judged by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin falls on deaf ears in St Lois today

Just because the young man who died after taking several shots at an off duty cop was black is reason to riot?

Really?

The facts make the racist trolls here uncomfortable so they do their best to derail

Much easier than thinking



Why do you say the guy was black, are you judging the content of his character or the color of his skin?




Gauge -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 11:38:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: Gauge

No, it is what is common practice for police officers.
It is what they refer to as an Extra Job.

Is that why they have to have special permission in writting to have this extra job?[8|]


It is completely allowed for them to participate in working for a private security company or local establishment as security. They are not officially working for their department but are still allowed to make arrests and yes, even enforce the law if need be.

Since cops are cops 24/7 they are wearing their cop uniform and using their cop authority and their cop gun and badge while working for a second paycheck. Not all jurrisdictions allow this.



Perfectly above board, legal, common knowledge amongst the civilians and not unethical.

In my country cops are civilians by law.

Before commenting on something, please try to understand what it is you are commenting on.

You clearly need to follow your own advice.




Look Sunshine, I will definitely keep quiet when I don't know something. Oddly enough, you didn't prove me wrong, you simply gave more details about what the practice is all about.

I know you like to believe you are right all the time, but this time you supported my point, not ripped it apart.




thompsonx -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 11:40:18 AM)


ORIGINAL: Sanity

No. The only one who wrote anything LIKE that is you

I wrote rioters around the St Lois area


If you had any evidence that the rioters were other than black you would be able to post it. Since you can't produce any such evidence to shield you from the obvious racism in your post it would follow that the poster approves of his post.


Nothing like all blacks, that was your ugly inner racist trying to project your own slimy vileness onto me

But you are the one who points out a supposed inconsistancy in the thought paterns of blacks.

I am sure there are as as many blacks as there are whites as a percentage who see a problem with rioters taking the side with someone due to color alone in a knee jerk fashion

If you are sure of that perhaps you might link us to the source of your certainty

I have no doubt about that

Then do it! instead of just running off at the mouth like some punk.

You are a coward when it comes to discussing race relations. Dare to bring up a legitimate issue and you go from zero to troll in the blink of an eye

tomcat says "Anytime baby".









thompsonx -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 11:50:17 AM)


ORIGINAL: Gauge


ORIGINAL: thompsonx




No, it is what is common practice for police officers.
It is what they refer to as an Extra Job.

Is that why they have to have special permission in writting to have this extra job?[8|]


It is completely allowed for them to participate in working for a private security company or local establishment as security. They are not officially working for their department but are still allowed to make arrests and yes, even enforce the law if need be.

Since cops are cops 24/7 they are wearing their cop uniform and using their cop authority and their cop gun and badge while working for a second paycheck. Not all jurrisdictions allow this.



Perfectly above board, legal, common knowledge amongst the civilians and not unethical.

In my country cops are civilians by law.

Before commenting on something, please try to understand what it is you are commenting on.

You clearly need to follow your own advice.




Look Sunshine, I will definitely keep quiet when I don't know something.

Now sweetie you know you have this genetic thingie that prevents you from doing that...but it is cute that you try[;)]


Oddly enough, you didn't prove me wrong, you simply gave more details about what the practice is all about.

I pointed out that you were wrong about cops not being civilians.

I know you like to believe you are right all the time,

Being right is not a matter of belief. Being right is knowing what you are talking about before you hit enter.



but this time you supported my point, not ripped it apart.

This time, as in everytime I have disagreed with you, I have shown the inaccuracies of your opinions. Ripping is reserved for scenes involving "ravishment"[;)]







thompsonx -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 12:01:37 PM)


ORIGINAL: mnottertail

You haven't actually written anything, you have slobbered, and spouted geysers of the most imbecilic doggerel here, but havent had a thought that would occupy the level of even a dung beetle.

I am not an etymyologist but I play one on t.v. and I wont have you denigrating one of our more usefull exoskeletal creatures.[sm=shame.gif]




thompsonx -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 12:03:49 PM)


ORIGINAL: Sanity


Hilarious to the trolls, perhaps, that MLK's dream of having people judged by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin falls on deaf ears in St Lois today

Just because the young man who died after taking several shots at an off duty cop was black is reason to riot?

Perhaps he was listening to another famous amerikan..."give me liberty or give me death"




thompsonx -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 12:05:45 PM)


ORIGINAL: Sanity


How about we get back on topic, professor

Why is it that the knee-jerk rioters in the St Lois area have never heard, or at least taken to heart, the dream spoken of by MLK

Are you speaking of the white rioters? Have you any proof of this scuroulous lie? Or is this some more of the shit that gushes from your mouth with every post?

While most of the rest of us have a very long time ago

Like the white cop that executed the kid in fergustan?




Gauge -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 12:49:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Now sweetie you know you have this genetic thingie that prevents you from doing that...but it is cute that you try



It is cute, isn't it? It is even more cute that I do shut my mouth when I don't know something... unlike you, where your need to insult people takes over your ability to think rationally. Kind of like your claim that the article said nothing about the cop being the only one with the gun. I proved you wrong, and you came back with asking if we expect you to believe there was a gun by the cops say so? Well, yes, that was what was in the article, and we were going off of the article, and there has been nothing to say that he did not have a gun.

quote:

I pointed out that you were wrong about cops not being civilians.


Where did I say that cops were not civilians? They are civilians that are empowered by their jurisdiction to enforce the law. This makes them a little different than average civilians.

quote:

Being right is not a matter of belief. Being right is knowing what you are talking about before you hit enter.


You have yet to prove me wrong. I don't really care if you think I am. The facts speak for themselves.

quote:

This time, as in everytime I have disagreed with you, I have shown the inaccuracies of your opinions. Ripping is reserved for scenes involving "ravishment"


Now I am going to have to show you the inaccuracies of your statement. An opinion cannot be wrong or right, it is an opinion. Facts however can be wrong or right depending on many factors. An opinion based on correct factual information is more difficult to prove inaccurate than an opinion based on false information. My experience with you is that you simply don't bother to interact and discuss, but you swoop in and try to prove how superior you are to everyone else. That is fine, but for myself, you are just like me, a person with an opinion. I really don't know why I bother with you, you are always the same every single time I have attempted to discuss something with you. I don't have a burning need to be right all the time, and I will be the first one to admit I was wrong about something, so, I will let you know when that happens on my own.

I anxiously await your reply that will insist that I am wrong... yet again.




thompsonx -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 1:01:30 PM)


ORIGINAL: Gauge


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Now sweetie you know you have this genetic thingie that prevents you from doing that...but it is cute that you try



It is cute, isn't it?

I said it was, didn't I?

I anxiously await your reply that will insist that I am wrong... yet again.

Wrong again I just said you were right.[;)]












thompsonx -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 1:23:26 PM)

ORIGINAL: Gauge

It is even more cute that I do shut my mouth when I don't know something...

ROFLMFAO cite please.[8|]


unlike you,

Where have I been wrong?



where your need to insult people takes over your ability to think rationally.

I have not been insulting to you have I?I have pointed out a few errors in logic and failure to be aware of certain facts.


Kind of like your claim that the article said nothing about the cop being the only one with the gun. I proved you wrong, and you came back with asking if we expect you to believe there was a gun by the cops say so?

As was shown in the other thread about cops executing people for being black in public. What ever the cops say is an allegation until proved otherwise.



Well, yes, that was what was in the article, and we were going off of the article, and there has been nothing to say that he did not have a gun.

Just as the cites reffed in the other thread said the dead man was shot while attacking the murderer.

I pointed out that you were wrong about cops not being civilians.

Where did I say that cops were not civilians? They are civilians that are empowered by their jurisdiction to enforce the law. This makes them a little different than average civilians.

Go read what you wrote and take your foot out of your mouth. You claimed that cops

"Perfectly above board, legal, common knowledge amongst the civilians and not unethical."

Stating that this knowledge (that all cops have) is common among those not cops as in civilians. Now if the grammar of that escapes you perhaps a phone call to your 7th grade english teacher could disabuse you of your ignorance?


Being right is not a matter of belief. Being right is knowing what you are talking about before you hit enter.

You have yet to prove me wrong. I don't really care if you think I am. The facts speak for themselves.

This time, as in everytime I have disagreed with you, I have shown the inaccuracies of your opinions. Ripping is reserved for scenes involving "ravishment"

Now I am going to have to show you the inaccuracies of your statement. An opinion cannot be wrong or right, it is an opinion.




Facts however can be wrong or right depending on many factors.

Wanna try that one again[8|]



An opinion based on correct factual information is more difficult to prove inaccurate than an opinion based on false information. My experience with you is that you simply don't bother to interact and discuss, but you swoop in and try to prove how superior you are to everyone else.

Not superior just better informed...facts trumph opinion everytime.




That is fine, but for myself, you are just like me, a person with an opinion.

When I state an opinion it is labled as such. When I state a fact I also label it as such.

I really don't know why I bother with you,

Because you think that knowledgable is hawt...why the phoque else would you put up with me?


you are always the same every single time I have attempted to discuss something with you.

That is what happens when you come to class without having done your homework.


I don't have a burning need to be right all the time,

If you don't then you must have a burning desire to be wrong all the time....tell me it ain't so [:(]


and I will be the first one to admit I was wrong about something, so, I will let you know when that happens on my own.

refer to the bolded parts in my previous post.[;)]





Gauge -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 2:10:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

blah, blah blah blah





Whatever dude. Rock on.




thompsonx -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 2:34:24 PM)


ORIGINAL: Gauge


ORIGINAL: thompsonx

blah, blah blah blah



Whatever dude. Rock on.

See how easy that was[8|]





DesideriScuri -> RE: Content of Character: 0 (10/10/2014 3:48:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83
The problem is not for him acting or having the power to when off duty, it is for him accepting two paychecks one to protect public interests the other one to pursuit a private interest while acting as public officer, that's borderline to birbery.


Private interests? It's usually some security related role they are being hired for. You know, pretty much exactly like what their day job is? It's not like they are a military wing of some private firm. Think of them like bouncers at a night club. They are there to keep the peace at the night club.

There was a bar in Toledo that had a rash of shootings. They hired some off-duty police to be the salve to the rash. Worked quite well, too.




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875