quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

To me you [BamaD] seem to be reading some meaning into the Guardian's text that isn't there. Here is the quote in full with the relevant part bolded:
"[i]Still, looking at our data for the US against admittedly less reliable information on police killings elsewhere paints a dramatic portrait, and one that resonates with protests that have gone global since a killing last year in Ferguson, Missouri"
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/09/the-counted-police-killings-us-vs-other-countries

quote:

HunterCA
Everything you [tweakabelle] bolded was not news, it was opinion.

Really? It now seems that Hunter is unable to distinguish between fact and opinion.

This is the section of the text I bolded: "one that resonates with protests that have gone global since a killing last year in Ferguson, Missouri".
It reports 4 facts:
1. The picture of police killings "resonates" ("chiefly US (Of an idea or action) meet with agreement:" http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/resonate ) with the data on police killings in the US versus police killings overseas and connects the data and the protests described in the remainder of the sentence. The resonance is a fact not an opinion as any review of the data and history itself will demonstrate;
2, "protests"; There have been numerous protests against police brutality across the US. That there have been protests is a fact; and;
3. global[ly] The protests have been international subsequent to fact#4 (below). Also a fact.
4. The protests have gained momentum since the Ferguson killing. Also a fact (It could be argued that the very existence of this thread in part confirms this fact). The growing protests also confirm the resonance referred to in 1.
The relevant part-sentence was an accurate and non-sensational reporting of a series of facts. Not a single opinion there. That these facts are "news" is self evident.

Therefore either Hunter doesn't know the difference between a fact and an opinion, or facts have somehow ceased to be facts and Hunter is correct, or there is no difference between a fact and an opinion, in which case Hunter is also correct. That's a pretty easy decision to make. Ditto for "news" and "opinion".

So, judging by his own words, we can add news, facts and opinions to the already long list of subjects that Hunter pontificates loudly about but appears to be quite ignorant.

What is your fascination with me? You should really stop your emotive, almost historical drama. I posted facts. When ever I do you disappear with no more discussion until you can come back another day with your morbid interest in me. Tweaka, you really should seek help with that. I'm sure it's affecting other parts of your life as well.

Your facts are most people's understanding of fantasy. And your an insulting, immature, child about it.

This coming from you is fucking priceless.

Facts, are stuff people can agree on.

No they aren't but it does explain why you are always claiming to be putting out facts. Apparently you don't know what the word even means.


People that live in reality can agree when a chef's dish is really good by sampling it. So therefore a discussion can be brought together on how it could be improved upon if any. You would not know what to do, even while giving heaps of 'ideas' for improvements, after telling us your a very good cook. An no one takes stock in your words, because its to do stuff to the dish that would be either unhealthy or just a gross taste. An you think your funny while doing it.

Wrong again. Taste is subjective and everyone is going to have a different opinion on what tastes good and what doesn't.

Tweak is very stable, intelligent and mature of a poster on here. Her arguments and sources are usually very solid and often argues on point/topic.

Sure if you consider "jews are evil, repubs are evil" to be a solid argument. But since you seem to play the same tune, at least as far as the right is concerned, I can understand why you would think that way.


These are not qualities you often exhibit here. Or is your reply to her debating the information being presented directly? Because the reality and fact present is that your just attacking her and don't have anything relevant to discuss.



You basically concede defeat, but can not do it like a gentleman but instead as a little child.

Reality and fact verse fantasy. Learn it!

I would suggest you take your own advice but I won't hold my breath.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Oh my goodness....

"Officials said Sweat was shot twice in the torso. Sweat was not armed, New York State Police Superintendent Joseph D'Amico said."

I wonder if white lives matter... here this poor murderer was unarmed... refused to stop when ordered and was shot in the back twice while running away... clearly NOT A THREAT to the arresting officer.

The shame!!!

Butch