Anti-PC people making a mistake on the Duck Dynasty story

[thanatos144]

this summed it all up for me

Mellisa Harris Perry's Panel Shows Bigotry, Not the Robertsons - YouTube

Wow, I bet the libs are wanting badly to tar and feather this cat, and send him away quickly to Siberia or something, but if they even try it I would stand up for this cat just like I would for Phil or anyone else that recognizes what has been going on forever and a day now in a lot of these things.

However, there is still racism to found in all places within our society, and it can be found in every walk of life upon this earth, so everyone just needs to know it when they see it, and it's best to not think for one second that it resides in a person's skin color, but rather it resides only in a persons actions, and in their speak when found being directly involved in it . It's an old game to keep stereo typing people by their color, but now that is vanishing faster than a speeding bullet hopefully, and this cat is proof that the stereo typical skin color racist thing, is fast becoming more and more of a thing that is only to be found way off in a distant past, otherwise within the context of the nations history only, and not as a continued reality. It is getting way on better these days I hope, because people are way on smarter than they were before on these sorts of things, and they aren't being fooled as often as they were in the past. Good video I thought.

You have never heard of Alfonzo Rachel ? You should check him out.

 

[thanatos144]

Libel is a civil wrong and not against the criminal law.
Try again.

So...you think civil law is not law?
As long as we're on the subject of your lack of comprehension you might also try to note that I have not, and do not, make any claim that A&E or GQ (whatever that is) have done anything illegal or reprehensible. Phil Robertson was in fact libeled by people falsely claiming that he is a homophobe or racist. That clear things up any?

Nah, I do not "comprehend" the difference between civil and criminal law.
I have only investigated over 5000 cases of the both of them.
Robertson is a public figure. He was not libeled in any way under the civil laws of libel in this country.
Get back to us after you have assisted in a case of libel. Ever heard of Richard Jewel? That name ring a bell? Go look into that case and see what experience one would gain working on that case.

What you are saying is you tried a case of libel for Richard Jewel? Who was that against?

 

[Gadawg73]

So...you think civil law is not law?
As long as we're on the subject of your lack of comprehension you might also try to note that I have not, and do not, make any claim that A&E or GQ (whatever that is) have done anything illegal or reprehensible. Phil Robertson was in fact libeled by people falsely claiming that he is a homophobe or racist. That clear things up any?

Nah, I do not "comprehend" the difference between civil and criminal law.
I have only investigated over 5000 cases of the both of them.
Robertson is a public figure. He was not libeled in any way under the civil laws of libel in this country.
Get back to us after you have assisted in a case of libel. Ever heard of Richard Jewel? That name ring a bell? Go look into that case and see what experience one would gain working on that case.

What you are saying is you tried a case of libel for Richard Jewel? Who was that against?

I did not try it, I am not a lawyer.
Case was against the Atlanta Journal Constitution.

 

[thanatos144]

Nah, I do not "comprehend" the difference between civil and criminal law.
I have only investigated over 5000 cases of the both of them.
Robertson is a public figure. He was not libeled in any way under the civil laws of libel in this country.
Get back to us after you have assisted in a case of libel. Ever heard of Richard Jewel? That name ring a bell? Go look into that case and see what experience one would gain working on that case.

What you are saying is you tried a case of libel for Richard Jewel? Who was that against?

I did not try it, I am not a lawyer.
Case was against the Atlanta Journal Constitution.

Why would he do that when his case was against the federal bureau of investigation for leaking the story?

 

[Gadawg73]

What you are saying is you tried a case of libel for Richard Jewel? Who was that against?

I did not try it, I am not a lawyer.
Case was against the Atlanta Journal Constitution.

Why would he do that when his case was against the federal bureau of investigation for leaking the story?

1 can not sue the FBI for libel.
You sue the deepest pockets and would be the billion dollar entity Cox Enterprises.
Go look into the case(s) as NBC and CNN were also sued.
Go look into it.

 

[koshergrl]

So...you think civil law is not law?
As long as we're on the subject of your lack of comprehension you might also try to note that I have not, and do not, make any claim that A&E or GQ (whatever that is) have done anything illegal or reprehensible. Phil Robertson was in fact libeled by people falsely claiming that he is a homophobe or racist. That clear things up any?

Nah, I do not "comprehend" the difference between civil and criminal law.
I have only investigated over 5000 cases of the both of them.
Robertson is a public figure. He was not libeled in any way under the civil laws of libel in this country.
Get back to us after you have assisted in a case of libel. Ever heard of Richard Jewel? That name ring a bell? Go look into that case and see what experience one would gain working on that case.

What you are saying is you tried a case of libel for Richard Jewel? Who was that against?

It's always just a matter of time before gadog starts bragging about his career in pseudo law enforcement, investigation, and did you know he wrote the book, literally, on How To Investigate that is required reading for all super secret agents?

 

[thanatos144]

I did not try it, I am not a lawyer.
Case was against the Atlanta Journal Constitution.

Why would he do that when his case was against the federal bureau of investigation for leaking the story?

1 can not sue the FBI for libel.
You sue the deepest pockets and would be the billion dollar entity Cox Enterprises.
Go look into the case(s) as NBC and CNN were also sued.
Go look into it.

actually you can sue the FBI.... They get sued all the fucking time.

 

[Pogo]

Why would he do that when his case was against the federal bureau of investigation for leaking the story?

1 can not sue the FBI for libel.
You sue the deepest pockets and would be the billion dollar entity Cox Enterprises.
Go look into the case(s) as NBC and CNN were also sued.
Go look into it.

actually you can sue the FBI.... They get sued all the fucking time.

You can't sue an entity for libel that doesn't put out opinions, Einstein. That's why it would be against the newspaper.

I'm flummoxed as to how a sparkling intellect such as yours even finds the power switch on your computer...

 

[koshergrl]

It doesn't have to be an opinion, it just has to be a false, published statement. So if the FBI makes a false statement to the courts, then that can be libel.

 

[Gadawg73]

Why would he do that when his case was against the federal bureau of investigation for leaking the story?

1 can not sue the FBI for libel.
You sue the deepest pockets and would be the billion dollar entity Cox Enterprises.
Go look into the case(s) as NBC and CNN were also sued.
Go look into it.

actually you can sue the FBI.... They get sued all the fucking time.

Wrong again. You are batting 100%.
In the United States of America the Federal government and ALL of it's entities, including the FBI, have SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY and MAY NOT BE SUED.

Stick to whatever you know best because this is not it. I mean no disrespect of you.
However, if you want to listen and learn I can show you the facts.
Because your claim that "they get sued all the fucking time" is false. If you sue them the Judge immediately DISMISSES THE CASE because of sovereign immunity unless the government entity AGREES TO BE SUED, which is maybe 1 in 10,000 times if that.
Sovereign immunity the Federal government has 100%.
Or you can keep listening to the ignorant like Allie Babble aka koshergirl aka ignorant.
The choice is yours but obvious. If you did not know what sovereign immunity is you need to start with the basics. I do not believe you to be stupid so if you are willing I can teach you.

 

[Gadawg73]

It doesn't have to be an opinion, it just has to be a false, published statement. So if the FBI makes a false statement to the courts, then that can be libel.

No dumbass, the FBI has SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY.
You are ignorant.

If the FBI or anyone makes a "false statement to the courts" that is not libel you stupid fuck!
That is A CRIMINAL offense.
You are dumb as a fucking rock.

 

[thanatos144]

1 can not sue the FBI for libel.
You sue the deepest pockets and would be the billion dollar entity Cox Enterprises.
Go look into the case(s) as NBC and CNN were also sued.
Go look into it.

actually you can sue the FBI.... They get sued all the fucking time.

Wrong again. You are batting 100%.
In the United States of America the Federal government and ALL of it's entities, including the FBI, have SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY and MAY NOT BE SUED.

Stick to whatever you know best because this is not it. I mean no disrespect of you.
However, if you want to listen and learn I can show you the facts.
Because your claim that "they get sued all the fucking time" is false. If you sue them the Judge immediately DISMISSES THE CASE because of sovereign immunity unless the government entity AGREES TO BE SUED, which is maybe 1 in 10,000 times if that.
Sovereign immunity the Federal government has 100%.
Or you can keep listening to the ignorant like Allie Babble aka koshergirl aka ignorant.
The choice is yours but obvious. If you did not know what sovereign immunity is you need to start with the basics. I do not believe you to be stupid so if you are willing I can teach you.

The FBI is not congress and can be and have been sued for civil rights violations and crimes perpetrated on the citizens....

 

[Foxfyre]

actually you can sue the FBI.... They get sued all the fucking time.

Wrong again. You are batting 100%.
In the United States of America the Federal government and ALL of it's entities, including the FBI, have SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY and MAY NOT BE SUED.

Stick to whatever you know best because this is not it. I mean no disrespect of you.
However, if you want to listen and learn I can show you the facts.
Because your claim that "they get sued all the fucking time" is false. If you sue them the Judge immediately DISMISSES THE CASE because of sovereign immunity unless the government entity AGREES TO BE SUED, which is maybe 1 in 10,000 times if that.
Sovereign immunity the Federal government has 100%.
Or you can keep listening to the ignorant like Allie Babble aka koshergirl aka ignorant.
The choice is yours but obvious. If you did not know what sovereign immunity is you need to start with the basics. I do not believe you to be stupid so if you are willing I can teach you.

The FBI is not congress and can be and have been sued for civil rights violations and crimes perpetrated on the citizens....

This is true and there are several cases pending of various suits filed against the FBI. The FBI does win most that make it to court and are successful in getting most dismissed, but it does happen. Anybody can sue anybody. They just aren't always successful in doing so.

Filing frivolous lawsuits can be very lucrative for some like the ACLU; can be excessively expensive for most.

But dragging the train back on the track here, trying to make the Phil Robertson thing into a legal issue or civil suit kind of matter or a Constitutional free speech issue is futile. None of the above apply and those of us who are trying to bring sanity to the discussion are indeed bowling on the wrong lane when we try to make it into one of those things.

The Phil Robertson should a matter of what will be our common cultural sense of ethics and decency and nothing more. We either as a culture see it as okay to hurt people because we don't like them or agree with them or we see that as wrong. I hope we will all come to see that as wrong.

 

[Gadawg73]

Wrong again. You are batting 100%.
In the United States of America the Federal government and ALL of it's entities, including the FBI, have SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY and MAY NOT BE SUED.

Stick to whatever you know best because this is not it. I mean no disrespect of you.
However, if you want to listen and learn I can show you the facts.
Because your claim that "they get sued all the fucking time" is false. If you sue them the Judge immediately DISMISSES THE CASE because of sovereign immunity unless the government entity AGREES TO BE SUED, which is maybe 1 in 10,000 times if that.
Sovereign immunity the Federal government has 100%.
Or you can keep listening to the ignorant like Allie Babble aka koshergirl aka ignorant.
The choice is yours but obvious. If you did not know what sovereign immunity is you need to start with the basics. I do not believe you to be stupid so if you are willing I can teach you.

The FBI is not congress and can be and have been sued for civil rights violations and crimes perpetrated on the citizens....

This is true and there are several cases pending of various suits filed against the FBI. The FBI does win most that make it to court and are successful in getting most dismissed, but it does happen. Anybody can sue anybody. They just aren't always successful in doing so.

Filing frivolous lawsuits can be very lucrative for some like the ACLU; can be excessively expensive for most.

But dragging the train back on the track here, trying to make the Phil Robertson thing into a legal issue or civil suit kind of matter or a Constitutional free speech issue is futile. None of the above apply and those of us who are trying to bring sanity to the discussion are indeed bowling on the wrong lane when we try to make it into one of those things.

The Phil Robertson should a matter of what will be our common cultural sense of ethics and decency and nothing more. We either as a culture see it as okay to hurt people because we don't like them or agree with them or we see that as wrong. I hope we will all come to see that as wrong.

FBI has sovereign immunity. FBI INVESTIGATES civil rights cases.
ACLU never files lawsuits for monetary damages for themselves.

 

[thanatos144]

The FBI is not congress and can be and have been sued for civil rights violations and crimes perpetrated on the citizens....

This is true and there are several cases pending of various suits filed against the FBI. The FBI does win most that make it to court and are successful in getting most dismissed, but it does happen. Anybody can sue anybody. They just aren't always successful in doing so.

Filing frivolous lawsuits can be very lucrative for some like the ACLU; can be excessively expensive for most.

But dragging the train back on the track here, trying to make the Phil Robertson thing into a legal issue or civil suit kind of matter or a Constitutional free speech issue is futile. None of the above apply and those of us who are trying to bring sanity to the discussion are indeed bowling on the wrong lane when we try to make it into one of those things.

The Phil Robertson should a matter of what will be our common cultural sense of ethics and decency and nothing more. We either as a culture see it as okay to hurt people because we don't like them or agree with them or we see that as wrong. I hope we will all come to see that as wrong.

FBI has sovereign immunity. FBI INVESTIGATES civil rights cases.
ACLU never files lawsuits for monetary damages for themselves.

I am done with you.... Your ignorance is palpable.

 

[Gadawg73]

This is true and there are several cases pending of various suits filed against the FBI. The FBI does win most that make it to court and are successful in getting most dismissed, but it does happen. Anybody can sue anybody. They just aren't always successful in doing so.

Filing frivolous lawsuits can be very lucrative for some like the ACLU; can be excessively expensive for most.

But dragging the train back on the track here, trying to make the Phil Robertson thing into a legal issue or civil suit kind of matter or a Constitutional free speech issue is futile. None of the above apply and those of us who are trying to bring sanity to the discussion are indeed bowling on the wrong lane when we try to make it into one of those things.

The Phil Robertson should a matter of what will be our common cultural sense of ethics and decency and nothing more. We either as a culture see it as okay to hurt people because we don't like them or agree with them or we see that as wrong. I hope we will all come to see that as wrong.

FBI has sovereign immunity. FBI INVESTIGATES civil rights cases.
ACLU never files lawsuits for monetary damages for themselves.

I am done with you.... Your ignorance is palpable.

ACLU never files lawsuits for monetary damages for themselves.
ACLU files constitutional challenges, many I disagree with, that have NOTHING whatsoever to do with money.
But you would not know any of that as you are a sheep led by rumor, innuendo and falsehoods.
You are the ignorant fool that claimed the FBI gets sued all the time and then I schooled you on sovereign immunity.
You are a partisan ideological hack that is as uninformed as a citizen can be.

 

[Foxfyre]

The FBI is not congress and can be and have been sued for civil rights violations and crimes perpetrated on the citizens....

This is true and there are several cases pending of various suits filed against the FBI. The FBI does win most that make it to court and are successful in getting most dismissed, but it does happen. Anybody can sue anybody. They just aren't always successful in doing so.

Filing frivolous lawsuits can be very lucrative for some like the ACLU; can be excessively expensive for most.

But dragging the train back on the track here, trying to make the Phil Robertson thing into a legal issue or civil suit kind of matter or a Constitutional free speech issue is futile. None of the above apply and those of us who are trying to bring sanity to the discussion are indeed bowling on the wrong lane when we try to make it into one of those things.

The Phil Robertson should a matter of what will be our common cultural sense of ethics and decency and nothing more. We either as a culture see it as okay to hurt people because we don't like them or agree with them or we see that as wrong. I hope we will all come to see that as wrong.

FBI has sovereign immunity. FBI INVESTIGATES civil rights cases.
ACLU never files lawsuits for monetary damages for themselves.

Well I'm sorry, but the evidence is pretty strong that you're wrong about the FBI's sovereign immunity as there are a number of active lawsuits pending as we speak here. And the ACLU has profited by many hundreds of thousands if not millions in legal fees collected from we the taxpayer which of course is their primary motive in filing many of the lawsuits they file against varius entities. You could find that out for yourself with even a cursory google effort, but oh well. . . .

And neither of those things has anything to do with how we, the people, should see the flap between Phil Robertson and GLAAD.

 

[Gadawg73]

Most ALL the $$$ the ACLU gets is from donations from foundations such as the Ford Foundation, George Soros, Carnegie Foundation, etc.
They make little to no money filing lawsuits. Filing lawsuits COSTS THEM money.
And I oppose a lot of them but who did Jerry Falwell call when he needed help? The ACLU.
And who defends street preachers for free everytime a city, a municipality or other government entity bans street preaching there? ACLU.
Just the facts. Facts sure a bitch aren't they?

 

[Gadawg73]

This is true and there are several cases pending of various suits filed against the FBI. The FBI does win most that make it to court and are successful in getting most dismissed, but it does happen. Anybody can sue anybody. They just aren't always successful in doing so.

Filing frivolous lawsuits can be very lucrative for some like the ACLU; can be excessively expensive for most.

But dragging the train back on the track here, trying to make the Phil Robertson thing into a legal issue or civil suit kind of matter or a Constitutional free speech issue is futile. None of the above apply and those of us who are trying to bring sanity to the discussion are indeed bowling on the wrong lane when we try to make it into one of those things.

The Phil Robertson should a matter of what will be our common cultural sense of ethics and decency and nothing more. We either as a culture see it as okay to hurt people because we don't like them or agree with them or we see that as wrong. I hope we will all come to see that as wrong.

FBI has sovereign immunity. FBI INVESTIGATES civil rights cases.
ACLU never files lawsuits for monetary damages for themselves.

Well I'm sorry, but the evidence is pretty strong that you're wrong about the FBI's sovereign immunity as there are a number of active lawsuits pending as we speak here. And the ACLU has profited by many hundreds of thousands if not millions in legal fees collected from we the taxpayer which of course is their primary motive in filing many of the lawsuits they file against varius entities. You could find that out for yourself with even a cursory google effort, but oh well. . . .

And neither of those things has anything to do with how we, the people, should see the flap between Phil Robertson and GLAAD.

What active lawsuits? Car wrecks that they accept liability? Other ENTITIES, not individuals?
Were the FBI agents ACTIVE IN crime? That is a CRIMINAL case, NOT a civil case.
FBI has sovereign immunity in ALL civil litigation unless they WAIVE that immunity.
NO crime has immunity. I am speaking of CIVIL cases as that is the discussion. LIBEL is a civil case.
As for the ACLU, they never sue for money for themselves.
Please, respectfully, how could they? That makes absolutely no sense at all. ACLU comes in as "friend of the court" status on constitutional issues.
There are no monetary damages to be argued over.
Respectfully, you are dead wrong with your claims that ACLU files law suits to make money.

 

[Gadawg73]

OK, I agree, back to Robertson.
He was harmed in no way in all of this.