It Seems We've Reached A Point Where Law Cannot Be Imposed Upon Black Individuals -

[AzogtheDefiler]

The bottom line is to stop being a racist.

Racism is indemic with humans. Next idea.

Nope. Its on endemic with the pale primate known as the european.

Sorry, but you are not a virgin.

All opinions on this issue are suspect. What of the Arabs toward Israel?

All political marketing.

What of it? Didnt europe plop white people down in Israel and support them with their take over of the area?

There it is. The antisemitism showing through. Most were from the Middle East but why bother with facts when you can just scream “racism” and “white privilege” like a zombie.

" Most were from the Middle East "

Bullshit. There are no white people from that region of the world.

Most people who settled in Israel initially were dark and from the Middle East. Your ignorance is noted. You lost another debate. Your hatred of Jews is funny given that you cry racism like a bitch nonstop here. Hypocrisy 101.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

- without screams of racism.

So. What is the bottom line?

"It Seems We've Reached A Point Where Law Cannot Be Imposed Upon Black Individuals -"
How do you figure? In Atlanta, they shot a drunk black guy after they rousted him out of his car, asleep in the drive thu lane at Wendy's, gave him a field sobiety test (failed it) tried to cuff him, he took a taser from one of them and tried to run away on foot with nothing but the cop's non lethal tazer in his hands, stopped and started to point their tazer at them then turned and tried to run away again, I guess to drunk to know he couldn't outrun the bullets about to hit him in the back and they shot him down with real bullets, just last night, and all caught on video again. Is that what you call imposing real law upon black individuals? He's not going to be screaming about racism. He's dead and I guess Wendy's went back to serving doubles and triples at the drive through. Of course the cop has been fired. The Police chief has resigned and tonight they burned down the Wendy's. What are you whining about? You and I are not black.

He shot it straight at the cop, drunk or not; the cop had to dodge it. The cop was doing his job arresting the guy for DUI. Brooks fought them. He certainly wasn't just running away. He shot at the cop with the weapon he had available; he wasn't going to let them get near. And then he ran again, but there is no reason to think he wouldn't fire it again in ten seconds. Until I saw the parking lot video, I thought the same thing--the guy was running and why not just catch up with him later? But he was doing more than that. Maybe a tazer won't kill you (usually anyway) but it will incapacitate you and Brooks would not have shrunk from that, clearly.
It would be great if cops never pointed a gun at an "unarmed" man, but Brooks was armed and ready to use it. Not so lethal, but close enough.
I think this was a righteous shoot. A very suck rotten bitch of an outcome all around, but not a bad shoot.

I've read similar thoughts on the taser as yours.
Here's the thing. A taser is only good for one shot,it then has to be reloaded with another cartridge before you can fire it again.
Although it still has touch capability.

Okay. Now THAT makes sense. All the hunting around I've done, I couldn't find anything on that "one shot" thing. It doesn't really make sense to have a tazer that will only fire one time before you have to run to find an electrical outlet. The situations where you need one usually are pretty hairy.

I had a client who got tazed 14 times in a confrontation with police. He was high on PCP and the tazer wires were getting all tangled up they shot him with so many. Now, I know where this happened and there aren't even 14 cops on the force, so I know there weren't 14 "one shot" stun guns in use that night. But having to put in a new cartridge? And since Brooks got the gun but not more cartridges, his tazer was a one shot deal, then, right? Is that what you're saying? That makes sense. However, I've read on Google hits that there are two shot models. They probably hold two cartridges.

But this is all a side issue, sorta. The more critical question is why Rourke switched from the tazer to the gun. Maybe because HE ran out of cartridges--the reports are that they had tazed--or attempted to taze--Brooks multiple times already.

I know police are trained that self protection is paramount. If they're dead or injured they can't help anyone. So Rourke's self preservation instinct kicked in when Brooks fired at him. If it's true the tazer only holds one cartridge, Rourke would have known there could be no more shots fired from the tazer. But we don't know, for sure, any of this. We don't know what type of tazers these policemen were using, how many shots they'd already fired (witnesses say at least three) or any other specifics about cartridges, battery charge, etc.

He was pissed off that his taser got taken from him and he was too weak to stop it. Like one of the police chiefs said on the news. If a suspect is fleeing you have the option to either get some exercise or call for back up. Shooting him in the back is going to result in SOB being charged probably around Wed.

He shot him when brooks shot at him ,, the strong race won

The weak race had a gun. Thats the only way they can win.

Smart and powerful

The cops were weak and needy.

Keep telling yourself that.

I'm telling you and every other inbred.

Project much? Jews don’t kill other Jews at record rates so there is that. Worry about yourself.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Too Indignant To Anticipate The Future "

* Continuing To Promote Stupidity *

If nothing else the last 2 months is proof that the wrong side won the Civil War

The only proof of anything evident is that those who brought them here in the first place and those who wished to maintain them were mentally fucking retarded .

 

[Redcurtain]

- without screams of racism.

So. What is the bottom line?

"It Seems We've Reached A Point Where Law Cannot Be Imposed Upon Black Individuals -"
How do you figure? In Atlanta, they shot a drunk black guy after they rousted him out of his car, asleep in the drive thu lane at Wendy's, gave him a field sobiety test (failed it) tried to cuff him, he took a taser from one of them and tried to run away on foot with nothing but the cop's non lethal tazer in his hands, stopped and started to point their tazer at them then turned and tried to run away again, I guess to drunk to know he couldn't outrun the bullets about to hit him in the back and they shot him down with real bullets, just last night, and all caught on video again. Is that what you call imposing real law upon black individuals? He's not going to be screaming about racism. He's dead and I guess Wendy's went back to serving doubles and triples at the drive through. Of course the cop has been fired. The Police chief has resigned and tonight they burned down the Wendy's. What are you whining about? You and I are not black.

He shot it straight at the cop, drunk or not; the cop had to dodge it. The cop was doing his job arresting the guy for DUI. Brooks fought them. He certainly wasn't just running away. He shot at the cop with the weapon he had available; he wasn't going to let them get near. And then he ran again, but there is no reason to think he wouldn't fire it again in ten seconds. Until I saw the parking lot video, I thought the same thing--the guy was running and why not just catch up with him later? But he was doing more than that. Maybe a tazer won't kill you (usually anyway) but it will incapacitate you and Brooks would not have shrunk from that, clearly.
It would be great if cops never pointed a gun at an "unarmed" man, but Brooks was armed and ready to use it. Not so lethal, but close enough.
I think this was a righteous shoot. A very suck rotten bitch of an outcome all around, but not a bad shoot.

I've read similar thoughts on the taser as yours.
Here's the thing. A taser is only good for one shot,it then has to be reloaded with another cartridge before you can fire it again.
Although it still has touch capability.

Okay. Now THAT makes sense. All the hunting around I've done, I couldn't find anything on that "one shot" thing. It doesn't really make sense to have a tazer that will only fire one time before you have to run to find an electrical outlet. The situations where you need one usually are pretty hairy.

I had a client who got tazed 14 times in a confrontation with police. He was high on PCP and the tazer wires were getting all tangled up they shot him with so many. Now, I know where this happened and there aren't even 14 cops on the force, so I know there weren't 14 "one shot" stun guns in use that night. But having to put in a new cartridge? And since Brooks got the gun but not more cartridges, his tazer was a one shot deal, then, right? Is that what you're saying? That makes sense. However, I've read on Google hits that there are two shot models. They probably hold two cartridges.

But this is all a side issue, sorta. The more critical question is why Rourke switched from the tazer to the gun. Maybe because HE ran out of cartridges--the reports are that they had tazed--or attempted to taze--Brooks multiple times already.

I know police are trained that self protection is paramount. If they're dead or injured they can't help anyone. So Rourke's self preservation instinct kicked in when Brooks fired at him. If it's true the tazer only holds one cartridge, Rourke would have known there could be no more shots fired from the tazer. But we don't know, for sure, any of this. We don't know what type of tazers these policemen were using, how many shots they'd already fired (witnesses say at least three) or any other specifics about cartridges, battery charge, etc.

He was pissed off that his taser got taken from him and he was too weak to stop it. Like one of the police chiefs said on the news. If a suspect is fleeing you have the option to either get some exercise or call for back up. Shooting him in the back is going to result in SOB being charged probably around Wed.

He shot him when brooks shot at him ,, the strong race won

The weak race had a gun. Thats the only way they can win.

Smart and powerful

The cops were weak and needy.

You saw them avoid the choke hold twice, could have been choked out easy

 

[Asclepias]

- without screams of racism.

So. What is the bottom line?

"It Seems We've Reached A Point Where Law Cannot Be Imposed Upon Black Individuals -"
How do you figure? In Atlanta, they shot a drunk black guy after they rousted him out of his car, asleep in the drive thu lane at Wendy's, gave him a field sobiety test (failed it) tried to cuff him, he took a taser from one of them and tried to run away on foot with nothing but the cop's non lethal tazer in his hands, stopped and started to point their tazer at them then turned and tried to run away again, I guess to drunk to know he couldn't outrun the bullets about to hit him in the back and they shot him down with real bullets, just last night, and all caught on video again. Is that what you call imposing real law upon black individuals? He's not going to be screaming about racism. He's dead and I guess Wendy's went back to serving doubles and triples at the drive through. Of course the cop has been fired. The Police chief has resigned and tonight they burned down the Wendy's. What are you whining about? You and I are not black.

He shot it straight at the cop, drunk or not; the cop had to dodge it. The cop was doing his job arresting the guy for DUI. Brooks fought them. He certainly wasn't just running away. He shot at the cop with the weapon he had available; he wasn't going to let them get near. And then he ran again, but there is no reason to think he wouldn't fire it again in ten seconds. Until I saw the parking lot video, I thought the same thing--the guy was running and why not just catch up with him later? But he was doing more than that. Maybe a tazer won't kill you (usually anyway) but it will incapacitate you and Brooks would not have shrunk from that, clearly.
It would be great if cops never pointed a gun at an "unarmed" man, but Brooks was armed and ready to use it. Not so lethal, but close enough.
I think this was a righteous shoot. A very suck rotten bitch of an outcome all around, but not a bad shoot.

I've read similar thoughts on the taser as yours.
Here's the thing. A taser is only good for one shot,it then has to be reloaded with another cartridge before you can fire it again.
Although it still has touch capability.

Okay. Now THAT makes sense. All the hunting around I've done, I couldn't find anything on that "one shot" thing. It doesn't really make sense to have a tazer that will only fire one time before you have to run to find an electrical outlet. The situations where you need one usually are pretty hairy.

I had a client who got tazed 14 times in a confrontation with police. He was high on PCP and the tazer wires were getting all tangled up they shot him with so many. Now, I know where this happened and there aren't even 14 cops on the force, so I know there weren't 14 "one shot" stun guns in use that night. But having to put in a new cartridge? And since Brooks got the gun but not more cartridges, his tazer was a one shot deal, then, right? Is that what you're saying? That makes sense. However, I've read on Google hits that there are two shot models. They probably hold two cartridges.

But this is all a side issue, sorta. The more critical question is why Rourke switched from the tazer to the gun. Maybe because HE ran out of cartridges--the reports are that they had tazed--or attempted to taze--Brooks multiple times already.

I know police are trained that self protection is paramount. If they're dead or injured they can't help anyone. So Rourke's self preservation instinct kicked in when Brooks fired at him. If it's true the tazer only holds one cartridge, Rourke would have known there could be no more shots fired from the tazer. But we don't know, for sure, any of this. We don't know what type of tazers these policemen were using, how many shots they'd already fired (witnesses say at least three) or any other specifics about cartridges, battery charge, etc.

He was pissed off that his taser got taken from him and he was too weak to stop it. Like one of the police chiefs said on the news. If a suspect is fleeing you have the option to either get some exercise or call for back up. Shooting him in the back is going to result in SOB being charged probably around Wed.

He shot him when brooks shot at him ,, the strong race won

The weak race had a gun. Thats the only way they can win.

Smart and powerful

The cops were weak and needy.

You saw avid the choke hold twice, could have been choked out easy

Two cops against 1 guy?. They were weak.

 

[OldLady]

He was pissed off that his taser got taken from him

He was pissed off that his taser got taken from him

Brooks took the other cop's tazer. Rolfe was chasing him, firing the tazer, at first.

 

[Redcurtain]

- without screams of racism.

So. What is the bottom line?

"It Seems We've Reached A Point Where Law Cannot Be Imposed Upon Black Individuals -"
How do you figure? In Atlanta, they shot a drunk black guy after they rousted him out of his car, asleep in the drive thu lane at Wendy's, gave him a field sobiety test (failed it) tried to cuff him, he took a taser from one of them and tried to run away on foot with nothing but the cop's non lethal tazer in his hands, stopped and started to point their tazer at them then turned and tried to run away again, I guess to drunk to know he couldn't outrun the bullets about to hit him in the back and they shot him down with real bullets, just last night, and all caught on video again. Is that what you call imposing real law upon black individuals? He's not going to be screaming about racism. He's dead and I guess Wendy's went back to serving doubles and triples at the drive through. Of course the cop has been fired. The Police chief has resigned and tonight they burned down the Wendy's. What are you whining about? You and I are not black.

He shot it straight at the cop, drunk or not; the cop had to dodge it. The cop was doing his job arresting the guy for DUI. Brooks fought them. He certainly wasn't just running away. He shot at the cop with the weapon he had available; he wasn't going to let them get near. And then he ran again, but there is no reason to think he wouldn't fire it again in ten seconds. Until I saw the parking lot video, I thought the same thing--the guy was running and why not just catch up with him later? But he was doing more than that. Maybe a tazer won't kill you (usually anyway) but it will incapacitate you and Brooks would not have shrunk from that, clearly.
It would be great if cops never pointed a gun at an "unarmed" man, but Brooks was armed and ready to use it. Not so lethal, but close enough.
I think this was a righteous shoot. A very suck rotten bitch of an outcome all around, but not a bad shoot.

I've read similar thoughts on the taser as yours.
Here's the thing. A taser is only good for one shot,it then has to be reloaded with another cartridge before you can fire it again.
Although it still has touch capability.

Okay. Now THAT makes sense. All the hunting around I've done, I couldn't find anything on that "one shot" thing. It doesn't really make sense to have a tazer that will only fire one time before you have to run to find an electrical outlet. The situations where you need one usually are pretty hairy.

I had a client who got tazed 14 times in a confrontation with police. He was high on PCP and the tazer wires were getting all tangled up they shot him with so many. Now, I know where this happened and there aren't even 14 cops on the force, so I know there weren't 14 "one shot" stun guns in use that night. But having to put in a new cartridge? And since Brooks got the gun but not more cartridges, his tazer was a one shot deal, then, right? Is that what you're saying? That makes sense. However, I've read on Google hits that there are two shot models. They probably hold two cartridges.

But this is all a side issue, sorta. The more critical question is why Rourke switched from the tazer to the gun. Maybe because HE ran out of cartridges--the reports are that they had tazed--or attempted to taze--Brooks multiple times already.

I know police are trained that self protection is paramount. If they're dead or injured they can't help anyone. So Rourke's self preservation instinct kicked in when Brooks fired at him. If it's true the tazer only holds one cartridge, Rourke would have known there could be no more shots fired from the tazer. But we don't know, for sure, any of this. We don't know what type of tazers these policemen were using, how many shots they'd already fired (witnesses say at least three) or any other specifics about cartridges, battery charge, etc.

He was pissed off that his taser got taken from him and he was too weak to stop it. Like one of the police chiefs said on the news. If a suspect is fleeing you have the option to either get some exercise or call for back up. Shooting him in the back is going to result in SOB being charged probably around Wed.

He shot him when brooks shot at him ,, the strong race won

The weak race had a gun. Thats the only way they can win.

Smart and powerful

The cops were weak and needy.

You saw avid the choke hold twice, could have been choked out easy

Two cops against 1 guy?. They were weak.

Who’s sitting back having a margarita tonight?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

- without screams of racism.

So. What is the bottom line?

"It Seems We've Reached A Point Where Law Cannot Be Imposed Upon Black Individuals -"
How do you figure? In Atlanta, they shot a drunk black guy after they rousted him out of his car, asleep in the drive thu lane at Wendy's, gave him a field sobiety test (failed it) tried to cuff him, he took a taser from one of them and tried to run away on foot with nothing but the cop's non lethal tazer in his hands, stopped and started to point their tazer at them then turned and tried to run away again, I guess to drunk to know he couldn't outrun the bullets about to hit him in the back and they shot him down with real bullets, just last night, and all caught on video again. Is that what you call imposing real law upon black individuals? He's not going to be screaming about racism. He's dead and I guess Wendy's went back to serving doubles and triples at the drive through. Of course the cop has been fired. The Police chief has resigned and tonight they burned down the Wendy's. What are you whining about? You and I are not black.

He shot it straight at the cop, drunk or not; the cop had to dodge it. The cop was doing his job arresting the guy for DUI. Brooks fought them. He certainly wasn't just running away. He shot at the cop with the weapon he had available; he wasn't going to let them get near. And then he ran again, but there is no reason to think he wouldn't fire it again in ten seconds. Until I saw the parking lot video, I thought the same thing--the guy was running and why not just catch up with him later? But he was doing more than that. Maybe a tazer won't kill you (usually anyway) but it will incapacitate you and Brooks would not have shrunk from that, clearly.
It would be great if cops never pointed a gun at an "unarmed" man, but Brooks was armed and ready to use it. Not so lethal, but close enough.
I think this was a righteous shoot. A very suck rotten bitch of an outcome all around, but not a bad shoot.

I've read similar thoughts on the taser as yours.
Here's the thing. A taser is only good for one shot,it then has to be reloaded with another cartridge before you can fire it again.
Although it still has touch capability.

Okay. Now THAT makes sense. All the hunting around I've done, I couldn't find anything on that "one shot" thing. It doesn't really make sense to have a tazer that will only fire one time before you have to run to find an electrical outlet. The situations where you need one usually are pretty hairy.

I had a client who got tazed 14 times in a confrontation with police. He was high on PCP and the tazer wires were getting all tangled up they shot him with so many. Now, I know where this happened and there aren't even 14 cops on the force, so I know there weren't 14 "one shot" stun guns in use that night. But having to put in a new cartridge? And since Brooks got the gun but not more cartridges, his tazer was a one shot deal, then, right? Is that what you're saying? That makes sense. However, I've read on Google hits that there are two shot models. They probably hold two cartridges.

But this is all a side issue, sorta. The more critical question is why Rourke switched from the tazer to the gun. Maybe because HE ran out of cartridges--the reports are that they had tazed--or attempted to taze--Brooks multiple times already.

I know police are trained that self protection is paramount. If they're dead or injured they can't help anyone. So Rourke's self preservation instinct kicked in when Brooks fired at him. If it's true the tazer only holds one cartridge, Rourke would have known there could be no more shots fired from the tazer. But we don't know, for sure, any of this. We don't know what type of tazers these policemen were using, how many shots they'd already fired (witnesses say at least three) or any other specifics about cartridges, battery charge, etc.

He was pissed off that his taser got taken from him and he was too weak to stop it. Like one of the police chiefs said on the news. If a suspect is fleeing you have the option to either get some exercise or call for back up. Shooting him in the back is going to result in SOB being charged probably around Wed.

He shot him when brooks shot at him ,, the strong race won

The weak race had a gun. Thats the only way they can win.

Smart and powerful

The cops were weak and needy.

You saw avid the choke hold twice, could have been choked out easy

Two cops against 1 guy?. They were weak.

By that operational definition George Floyd was weak too. Thanks.

 

[Asclepias]

The bottom line is to stop being a racist.

Racism is indemic with humans. Next idea.

Nope. Its on endemic with the pale primate known as the european.

Sorry, but you are not a virgin.

All opinions on this issue are suspect. What of the Arabs toward Israel?

All political marketing.

What of it? Didnt europe plop white people down in Israel and support them with their take over of the area?

There it is. The antisemitism showing through. Most were from the Middle East but why bother with facts when you can just scream “racism” and “white privilege” like a zombie.

" Most were from the Middle East "

Bullshit. There are no white people from that region of the world.

Most people who settled in Israel initially were dark and from the Middle East. Your ignorance is noted. You lost another debate. Your hatred of Jews is funny given that you cry racism like a bitch nonstop here. Hypocrisy 101.

Bullshit. The only dark people that are actually from that area arent white.

 

[Asclepias]

- without screams of racism.

So. What is the bottom line?

"It Seems We've Reached A Point Where Law Cannot Be Imposed Upon Black Individuals -"
How do you figure? In Atlanta, they shot a drunk black guy after they rousted him out of his car, asleep in the drive thu lane at Wendy's, gave him a field sobiety test (failed it) tried to cuff him, he took a taser from one of them and tried to run away on foot with nothing but the cop's non lethal tazer in his hands, stopped and started to point their tazer at them then turned and tried to run away again, I guess to drunk to know he couldn't outrun the bullets about to hit him in the back and they shot him down with real bullets, just last night, and all caught on video again. Is that what you call imposing real law upon black individuals? He's not going to be screaming about racism. He's dead and I guess Wendy's went back to serving doubles and triples at the drive through. Of course the cop has been fired. The Police chief has resigned and tonight they burned down the Wendy's. What are you whining about? You and I are not black.

He shot it straight at the cop, drunk or not; the cop had to dodge it. The cop was doing his job arresting the guy for DUI. Brooks fought them. He certainly wasn't just running away. He shot at the cop with the weapon he had available; he wasn't going to let them get near. And then he ran again, but there is no reason to think he wouldn't fire it again in ten seconds. Until I saw the parking lot video, I thought the same thing--the guy was running and why not just catch up with him later? But he was doing more than that. Maybe a tazer won't kill you (usually anyway) but it will incapacitate you and Brooks would not have shrunk from that, clearly.
It would be great if cops never pointed a gun at an "unarmed" man, but Brooks was armed and ready to use it. Not so lethal, but close enough.
I think this was a righteous shoot. A very suck rotten bitch of an outcome all around, but not a bad shoot.

I've read similar thoughts on the taser as yours.
Here's the thing. A taser is only good for one shot,it then has to be reloaded with another cartridge before you can fire it again.
Although it still has touch capability.

Okay. Now THAT makes sense. All the hunting around I've done, I couldn't find anything on that "one shot" thing. It doesn't really make sense to have a tazer that will only fire one time before you have to run to find an electrical outlet. The situations where you need one usually are pretty hairy.

I had a client who got tazed 14 times in a confrontation with police. He was high on PCP and the tazer wires were getting all tangled up they shot him with so many. Now, I know where this happened and there aren't even 14 cops on the force, so I know there weren't 14 "one shot" stun guns in use that night. But having to put in a new cartridge? And since Brooks got the gun but not more cartridges, his tazer was a one shot deal, then, right? Is that what you're saying? That makes sense. However, I've read on Google hits that there are two shot models. They probably hold two cartridges.

But this is all a side issue, sorta. The more critical question is why Rourke switched from the tazer to the gun. Maybe because HE ran out of cartridges--the reports are that they had tazed--or attempted to taze--Brooks multiple times already.

I know police are trained that self protection is paramount. If they're dead or injured they can't help anyone. So Rourke's self preservation instinct kicked in when Brooks fired at him. If it's true the tazer only holds one cartridge, Rourke would have known there could be no more shots fired from the tazer. But we don't know, for sure, any of this. We don't know what type of tazers these policemen were using, how many shots they'd already fired (witnesses say at least three) or any other specifics about cartridges, battery charge, etc.

He was pissed off that his taser got taken from him and he was too weak to stop it. Like one of the police chiefs said on the news. If a suspect is fleeing you have the option to either get some exercise or call for back up. Shooting him in the back is going to result in SOB being charged probably around Wed.

He shot him when brooks shot at him ,, the strong race won

The weak race had a gun. Thats the only way they can win.

Smart and powerful

The cops were weak and needy.

You saw avid the choke hold twice, could have been choked out easy

Two cops against 1 guy?. They were weak.

Who’s sitting back having a margarita tonight?

Not the cop that got fired. Why do you ask?

 

[Asclepias]

- without screams of racism.

So. What is the bottom line?

"It Seems We've Reached A Point Where Law Cannot Be Imposed Upon Black Individuals -"
How do you figure? In Atlanta, they shot a drunk black guy after they rousted him out of his car, asleep in the drive thu lane at Wendy's, gave him a field sobiety test (failed it) tried to cuff him, he took a taser from one of them and tried to run away on foot with nothing but the cop's non lethal tazer in his hands, stopped and started to point their tazer at them then turned and tried to run away again, I guess to drunk to know he couldn't outrun the bullets about to hit him in the back and they shot him down with real bullets, just last night, and all caught on video again. Is that what you call imposing real law upon black individuals? He's not going to be screaming about racism. He's dead and I guess Wendy's went back to serving doubles and triples at the drive through. Of course the cop has been fired. The Police chief has resigned and tonight they burned down the Wendy's. What are you whining about? You and I are not black.

He shot it straight at the cop, drunk or not; the cop had to dodge it. The cop was doing his job arresting the guy for DUI. Brooks fought them. He certainly wasn't just running away. He shot at the cop with the weapon he had available; he wasn't going to let them get near. And then he ran again, but there is no reason to think he wouldn't fire it again in ten seconds. Until I saw the parking lot video, I thought the same thing--the guy was running and why not just catch up with him later? But he was doing more than that. Maybe a tazer won't kill you (usually anyway) but it will incapacitate you and Brooks would not have shrunk from that, clearly.
It would be great if cops never pointed a gun at an "unarmed" man, but Brooks was armed and ready to use it. Not so lethal, but close enough.
I think this was a righteous shoot. A very suck rotten bitch of an outcome all around, but not a bad shoot.

I've read similar thoughts on the taser as yours.
Here's the thing. A taser is only good for one shot,it then has to be reloaded with another cartridge before you can fire it again.
Although it still has touch capability.

Okay. Now THAT makes sense. All the hunting around I've done, I couldn't find anything on that "one shot" thing. It doesn't really make sense to have a tazer that will only fire one time before you have to run to find an electrical outlet. The situations where you need one usually are pretty hairy.

I had a client who got tazed 14 times in a confrontation with police. He was high on PCP and the tazer wires were getting all tangled up they shot him with so many. Now, I know where this happened and there aren't even 14 cops on the force, so I know there weren't 14 "one shot" stun guns in use that night. But having to put in a new cartridge? And since Brooks got the gun but not more cartridges, his tazer was a one shot deal, then, right? Is that what you're saying? That makes sense. However, I've read on Google hits that there are two shot models. They probably hold two cartridges.

But this is all a side issue, sorta. The more critical question is why Rourke switched from the tazer to the gun. Maybe because HE ran out of cartridges--the reports are that they had tazed--or attempted to taze--Brooks multiple times already.

I know police are trained that self protection is paramount. If they're dead or injured they can't help anyone. So Rourke's self preservation instinct kicked in when Brooks fired at him. If it's true the tazer only holds one cartridge, Rourke would have known there could be no more shots fired from the tazer. But we don't know, for sure, any of this. We don't know what type of tazers these policemen were using, how many shots they'd already fired (witnesses say at least three) or any other specifics about cartridges, battery charge, etc.

He was pissed off that his taser got taken from him and he was too weak to stop it. Like one of the police chiefs said on the news. If a suspect is fleeing you have the option to either get some exercise or call for back up. Shooting him in the back is going to result in SOB being charged probably around Wed.

He shot him when brooks shot at him ,, the strong race won

The weak race had a gun. Thats the only way they can win.

Smart and powerful

The cops were weak and needy.

You saw avid the choke hold twice, could have been choked out easy

Two cops against 1 guy?. They were weak.

By that operational definition George Floyd was weak too. Thanks.

They had 4 cops on him so no.

 

[Redcurtain]

- without screams of racism.

So. What is the bottom line?

"It Seems We've Reached A Point Where Law Cannot Be Imposed Upon Black Individuals -"
How do you figure? In Atlanta, they shot a drunk black guy after they rousted him out of his car, asleep in the drive thu lane at Wendy's, gave him a field sobiety test (failed it) tried to cuff him, he took a taser from one of them and tried to run away on foot with nothing but the cop's non lethal tazer in his hands, stopped and started to point their tazer at them then turned and tried to run away again, I guess to drunk to know he couldn't outrun the bullets about to hit him in the back and they shot him down with real bullets, just last night, and all caught on video again. Is that what you call imposing real law upon black individuals? He's not going to be screaming about racism. He's dead and I guess Wendy's went back to serving doubles and triples at the drive through. Of course the cop has been fired. The Police chief has resigned and tonight they burned down the Wendy's. What are you whining about? You and I are not black.

He shot it straight at the cop, drunk or not; the cop had to dodge it. The cop was doing his job arresting the guy for DUI. Brooks fought them. He certainly wasn't just running away. He shot at the cop with the weapon he had available; he wasn't going to let them get near. And then he ran again, but there is no reason to think he wouldn't fire it again in ten seconds. Until I saw the parking lot video, I thought the same thing--the guy was running and why not just catch up with him later? But he was doing more than that. Maybe a tazer won't kill you (usually anyway) but it will incapacitate you and Brooks would not have shrunk from that, clearly.
It would be great if cops never pointed a gun at an "unarmed" man, but Brooks was armed and ready to use it. Not so lethal, but close enough.
I think this was a righteous shoot. A very suck rotten bitch of an outcome all around, but not a bad shoot.

I've read similar thoughts on the taser as yours.
Here's the thing. A taser is only good for one shot,it then has to be reloaded with another cartridge before you can fire it again.
Although it still has touch capability.

Okay. Now THAT makes sense. All the hunting around I've done, I couldn't find anything on that "one shot" thing. It doesn't really make sense to have a tazer that will only fire one time before you have to run to find an electrical outlet. The situations where you need one usually are pretty hairy.

I had a client who got tazed 14 times in a confrontation with police. He was high on PCP and the tazer wires were getting all tangled up they shot him with so many. Now, I know where this happened and there aren't even 14 cops on the force, so I know there weren't 14 "one shot" stun guns in use that night. But having to put in a new cartridge? And since Brooks got the gun but not more cartridges, his tazer was a one shot deal, then, right? Is that what you're saying? That makes sense. However, I've read on Google hits that there are two shot models. They probably hold two cartridges.

But this is all a side issue, sorta. The more critical question is why Rourke switched from the tazer to the gun. Maybe because HE ran out of cartridges--the reports are that they had tazed--or attempted to taze--Brooks multiple times already.

I know police are trained that self protection is paramount. If they're dead or injured they can't help anyone. So Rourke's self preservation instinct kicked in when Brooks fired at him. If it's true the tazer only holds one cartridge, Rourke would have known there could be no more shots fired from the tazer. But we don't know, for sure, any of this. We don't know what type of tazers these policemen were using, how many shots they'd already fired (witnesses say at least three) or any other specifics about cartridges, battery charge, etc.

He was pissed off that his taser got taken from him and he was too weak to stop it. Like one of the police chiefs said on the news. If a suspect is fleeing you have the option to either get some exercise or call for back up. Shooting him in the back is going to result in SOB being charged probably around Wed.

He shot him when brooks shot at him ,, the strong race won

The weak race had a gun. Thats the only way they can win.

Smart and powerful

The cops were weak and needy.

You saw avid the choke hold twice, could have been choked out easy

Two cops against 1 guy?. They were weak.

Who’s sitting back having a margarita tonight?

Not the cop that got fired. Why do you ask?

He probably has a million dollar pension lol

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

The bottom line is to stop being a racist.

Racism is indemic with humans. Next idea.

Nope. Its on endemic with the pale primate known as the european.

Sorry, but you are not a virgin.

All opinions on this issue are suspect. What of the Arabs toward Israel?

All political marketing.

What of it? Didnt europe plop white people down in Israel and support them with their take over of the area?

There it is. The antisemitism showing through. Most were from the Middle East but why bother with facts when you can just scream “racism” and “white privilege” like a zombie.

" Most were from the Middle East "

Bullshit. There are no white people from that region of the world.

Most people who settled in Israel initially were dark and from the Middle East. Your ignorance is noted. You lost another debate. Your hatred of Jews is funny given that you cry racism like a bitch nonstop here. Hypocrisy 101.

Bullshit. The only dark people that are actually from that area arent white.

Facts don’t care about your feelings. You lost another debate. Ask any learned person. Most Jews in Israel in 1947 were from surrounding Middle East countries. Exodus pushed Europeans there as well. UK owned land given back to them. Jews banded together vs killing one another at record rates. No Bloods and Crips in the Jewish community.

 

[Asclepias]

- without screams of racism.

So. What is the bottom line?

"It Seems We've Reached A Point Where Law Cannot Be Imposed Upon Black Individuals -"
How do you figure? In Atlanta, they shot a drunk black guy after they rousted him out of his car, asleep in the drive thu lane at Wendy's, gave him a field sobiety test (failed it) tried to cuff him, he took a taser from one of them and tried to run away on foot with nothing but the cop's non lethal tazer in his hands, stopped and started to point their tazer at them then turned and tried to run away again, I guess to drunk to know he couldn't outrun the bullets about to hit him in the back and they shot him down with real bullets, just last night, and all caught on video again. Is that what you call imposing real law upon black individuals? He's not going to be screaming about racism. He's dead and I guess Wendy's went back to serving doubles and triples at the drive through. Of course the cop has been fired. The Police chief has resigned and tonight they burned down the Wendy's. What are you whining about? You and I are not black.

He shot it straight at the cop, drunk or not; the cop had to dodge it. The cop was doing his job arresting the guy for DUI. Brooks fought them. He certainly wasn't just running away. He shot at the cop with the weapon he had available; he wasn't going to let them get near. And then he ran again, but there is no reason to think he wouldn't fire it again in ten seconds. Until I saw the parking lot video, I thought the same thing--the guy was running and why not just catch up with him later? But he was doing more than that. Maybe a tazer won't kill you (usually anyway) but it will incapacitate you and Brooks would not have shrunk from that, clearly.
It would be great if cops never pointed a gun at an "unarmed" man, but Brooks was armed and ready to use it. Not so lethal, but close enough.
I think this was a righteous shoot. A very suck rotten bitch of an outcome all around, but not a bad shoot.

I've read similar thoughts on the taser as yours.
Here's the thing. A taser is only good for one shot,it then has to be reloaded with another cartridge before you can fire it again.
Although it still has touch capability.

Okay. Now THAT makes sense. All the hunting around I've done, I couldn't find anything on that "one shot" thing. It doesn't really make sense to have a tazer that will only fire one time before you have to run to find an electrical outlet. The situations where you need one usually are pretty hairy.

I had a client who got tazed 14 times in a confrontation with police. He was high on PCP and the tazer wires were getting all tangled up they shot him with so many. Now, I know where this happened and there aren't even 14 cops on the force, so I know there weren't 14 "one shot" stun guns in use that night. But having to put in a new cartridge? And since Brooks got the gun but not more cartridges, his tazer was a one shot deal, then, right? Is that what you're saying? That makes sense. However, I've read on Google hits that there are two shot models. They probably hold two cartridges.

But this is all a side issue, sorta. The more critical question is why Rourke switched from the tazer to the gun. Maybe because HE ran out of cartridges--the reports are that they had tazed--or attempted to taze--Brooks multiple times already.

I know police are trained that self protection is paramount. If they're dead or injured they can't help anyone. So Rourke's self preservation instinct kicked in when Brooks fired at him. If it's true the tazer only holds one cartridge, Rourke would have known there could be no more shots fired from the tazer. But we don't know, for sure, any of this. We don't know what type of tazers these policemen were using, how many shots they'd already fired (witnesses say at least three) or any other specifics about cartridges, battery charge, etc.

He was pissed off that his taser got taken from him and he was too weak to stop it. Like one of the police chiefs said on the news. If a suspect is fleeing you have the option to either get some exercise or call for back up. Shooting him in the back is going to result in SOB being charged probably around Wed.

He shot him when brooks shot at him ,, the strong race won

The weak race had a gun. Thats the only way they can win.

Smart and powerful

The cops were weak and needy.

You saw avid the choke hold twice, could have been choked out easy

Two cops against 1 guy?. They were weak.

Who’s sitting back having a margarita tonight?

Not the cop that got fired. Why do you ask?

He probably has a million dollar pension lol

That will go to the guys family after its all said and done. That will change the families trajectory. Tell him thanks for the donation.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

- without screams of racism.

So. What is the bottom line?

"It Seems We've Reached A Point Where Law Cannot Be Imposed Upon Black Individuals -"
How do you figure? In Atlanta, they shot a drunk black guy after they rousted him out of his car, asleep in the drive thu lane at Wendy's, gave him a field sobiety test (failed it) tried to cuff him, he took a taser from one of them and tried to run away on foot with nothing but the cop's non lethal tazer in his hands, stopped and started to point their tazer at them then turned and tried to run away again, I guess to drunk to know he couldn't outrun the bullets about to hit him in the back and they shot him down with real bullets, just last night, and all caught on video again. Is that what you call imposing real law upon black individuals? He's not going to be screaming about racism. He's dead and I guess Wendy's went back to serving doubles and triples at the drive through. Of course the cop has been fired. The Police chief has resigned and tonight they burned down the Wendy's. What are you whining about? You and I are not black.

He shot it straight at the cop, drunk or not; the cop had to dodge it. The cop was doing his job arresting the guy for DUI. Brooks fought them. He certainly wasn't just running away. He shot at the cop with the weapon he had available; he wasn't going to let them get near. And then he ran again, but there is no reason to think he wouldn't fire it again in ten seconds. Until I saw the parking lot video, I thought the same thing--the guy was running and why not just catch up with him later? But he was doing more than that. Maybe a tazer won't kill you (usually anyway) but it will incapacitate you and Brooks would not have shrunk from that, clearly.
It would be great if cops never pointed a gun at an "unarmed" man, but Brooks was armed and ready to use it. Not so lethal, but close enough.
I think this was a righteous shoot. A very suck rotten bitch of an outcome all around, but not a bad shoot.

I've read similar thoughts on the taser as yours.
Here's the thing. A taser is only good for one shot,it then has to be reloaded with another cartridge before you can fire it again.
Although it still has touch capability.

Okay. Now THAT makes sense. All the hunting around I've done, I couldn't find anything on that "one shot" thing. It doesn't really make sense to have a tazer that will only fire one time before you have to run to find an electrical outlet. The situations where you need one usually are pretty hairy.

I had a client who got tazed 14 times in a confrontation with police. He was high on PCP and the tazer wires were getting all tangled up they shot him with so many. Now, I know where this happened and there aren't even 14 cops on the force, so I know there weren't 14 "one shot" stun guns in use that night. But having to put in a new cartridge? And since Brooks got the gun but not more cartridges, his tazer was a one shot deal, then, right? Is that what you're saying? That makes sense. However, I've read on Google hits that there are two shot models. They probably hold two cartridges.

But this is all a side issue, sorta. The more critical question is why Rourke switched from the tazer to the gun. Maybe because HE ran out of cartridges--the reports are that they had tazed--or attempted to taze--Brooks multiple times already.

I know police are trained that self protection is paramount. If they're dead or injured they can't help anyone. So Rourke's self preservation instinct kicked in when Brooks fired at him. If it's true the tazer only holds one cartridge, Rourke would have known there could be no more shots fired from the tazer. But we don't know, for sure, any of this. We don't know what type of tazers these policemen were using, how many shots they'd already fired (witnesses say at least three) or any other specifics about cartridges, battery charge, etc.

He was pissed off that his taser got taken from him and he was too weak to stop it. Like one of the police chiefs said on the news. If a suspect is fleeing you have the option to either get some exercise or call for back up. Shooting him in the back is going to result in SOB being charged probably around Wed.

He shot him when brooks shot at him ,, the strong race won

The weak race had a gun. Thats the only way they can win.

Smart and powerful

The cops were weak and needy.

You saw avid the choke hold twice, could have been choked out easy

Two cops against 1 guy?. They were weak.

By that operational definition George Floyd was weak too. Thanks.

They had 4 cops on him so no.

I mean when he pointed a gun at a pregnant woman’s stomach, had his crew rob her and then pistol whip her. Pretty cowardly by my definition but not by yours it seems.

 

[Asclepias]

The bottom line is to stop being a racist.

Racism is indemic with humans. Next idea.

Nope. Its on endemic with the pale primate known as the european.

Sorry, but you are not a virgin.

All opinions on this issue are suspect. What of the Arabs toward Israel?

All political marketing.

What of it? Didnt europe plop white people down in Israel and support them with their take over of the area?

There it is. The antisemitism showing through. Most were from the Middle East but why bother with facts when you can just scream “racism” and “white privilege” like a zombie.

" Most were from the Middle East "

Bullshit. There are no white people from that region of the world.

Most people who settled in Israel initially were dark and from the Middle East. Your ignorance is noted. You lost another debate. Your hatred of Jews is funny given that you cry racism like a bitch nonstop here. Hypocrisy 101.

Bullshit. The only dark people that are actually from that area arent white.

Facts don’t care about your feelings. You lost another debate. Ask any learned person. Most Jews in Israel in 1947 were from surrounding Middle East countries. Exodus pushed Europeans there as well. UK owned land given back to them. Jews banded together vs killing one another at record rates. No Bloods and Crips in the Jewish community.

You just admitted europeans were pushed there. You lost again. Arent you like 0-197 now? We'll just round it off and say 0-200.

 

[Redcurtain]

- without screams of racism.

So. What is the bottom line?

"It Seems We've Reached A Point Where Law Cannot Be Imposed Upon Black Individuals -"
How do you figure? In Atlanta, they shot a drunk black guy after they rousted him out of his car, asleep in the drive thu lane at Wendy's, gave him a field sobiety test (failed it) tried to cuff him, he took a taser from one of them and tried to run away on foot with nothing but the cop's non lethal tazer in his hands, stopped and started to point their tazer at them then turned and tried to run away again, I guess to drunk to know he couldn't outrun the bullets about to hit him in the back and they shot him down with real bullets, just last night, and all caught on video again. Is that what you call imposing real law upon black individuals? He's not going to be screaming about racism. He's dead and I guess Wendy's went back to serving doubles and triples at the drive through. Of course the cop has been fired. The Police chief has resigned and tonight they burned down the Wendy's. What are you whining about? You and I are not black.

He shot it straight at the cop, drunk or not; the cop had to dodge it. The cop was doing his job arresting the guy for DUI. Brooks fought them. He certainly wasn't just running away. He shot at the cop with the weapon he had available; he wasn't going to let them get near. And then he ran again, but there is no reason to think he wouldn't fire it again in ten seconds. Until I saw the parking lot video, I thought the same thing--the guy was running and why not just catch up with him later? But he was doing more than that. Maybe a tazer won't kill you (usually anyway) but it will incapacitate you and Brooks would not have shrunk from that, clearly.
It would be great if cops never pointed a gun at an "unarmed" man, but Brooks was armed and ready to use it. Not so lethal, but close enough.
I think this was a righteous shoot. A very suck rotten bitch of an outcome all around, but not a bad shoot.

I've read similar thoughts on the taser as yours.
Here's the thing. A taser is only good for one shot,it then has to be reloaded with another cartridge before you can fire it again.
Although it still has touch capability.

Okay. Now THAT makes sense. All the hunting around I've done, I couldn't find anything on that "one shot" thing. It doesn't really make sense to have a tazer that will only fire one time before you have to run to find an electrical outlet. The situations where you need one usually are pretty hairy.

I had a client who got tazed 14 times in a confrontation with police. He was high on PCP and the tazer wires were getting all tangled up they shot him with so many. Now, I know where this happened and there aren't even 14 cops on the force, so I know there weren't 14 "one shot" stun guns in use that night. But having to put in a new cartridge? And since Brooks got the gun but not more cartridges, his tazer was a one shot deal, then, right? Is that what you're saying? That makes sense. However, I've read on Google hits that there are two shot models. They probably hold two cartridges.

But this is all a side issue, sorta. The more critical question is why Rourke switched from the tazer to the gun. Maybe because HE ran out of cartridges--the reports are that they had tazed--or attempted to taze--Brooks multiple times already.

I know police are trained that self protection is paramount. If they're dead or injured they can't help anyone. So Rourke's self preservation instinct kicked in when Brooks fired at him. If it's true the tazer only holds one cartridge, Rourke would have known there could be no more shots fired from the tazer. But we don't know, for sure, any of this. We don't know what type of tazers these policemen were using, how many shots they'd already fired (witnesses say at least three) or any other specifics about cartridges, battery charge, etc.

He was pissed off that his taser got taken from him and he was too weak to stop it. Like one of the police chiefs said on the news. If a suspect is fleeing you have the option to either get some exercise or call for back up. Shooting him in the back is going to result in SOB being charged probably around Wed.

He shot him when brooks shot at him ,, the strong race won

The weak race had a gun. Thats the only way they can win.

Smart and powerful

The cops were weak and needy.

You saw avid the choke hold twice, could have been choked out easy

Two cops against 1 guy?. They were weak.

Who’s sitting back having a margarita tonight?

Not the cop that got fired. Why do you ask?

He probably has a million dollar pension lol

That will go to the guys family after its all said and done. That will change the families trajectory. Tell him thanks for the donation.

Only thing that family will win is a take down for a dead beat thug father lol

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

- without screams of racism.

So. What is the bottom line?

"It Seems We've Reached A Point Where Law Cannot Be Imposed Upon Black Individuals -"
How do you figure? In Atlanta, they shot a drunk black guy after they rousted him out of his car, asleep in the drive thu lane at Wendy's, gave him a field sobiety test (failed it) tried to cuff him, he took a taser from one of them and tried to run away on foot with nothing but the cop's non lethal tazer in his hands, stopped and started to point their tazer at them then turned and tried to run away again, I guess to drunk to know he couldn't outrun the bullets about to hit him in the back and they shot him down with real bullets, just last night, and all caught on video again. Is that what you call imposing real law upon black individuals? He's not going to be screaming about racism. He's dead and I guess Wendy's went back to serving doubles and triples at the drive through. Of course the cop has been fired. The Police chief has resigned and tonight they burned down the Wendy's. What are you whining about? You and I are not black.

He shot it straight at the cop, drunk or not; the cop had to dodge it. The cop was doing his job arresting the guy for DUI. Brooks fought them. He certainly wasn't just running away. He shot at the cop with the weapon he had available; he wasn't going to let them get near. And then he ran again, but there is no reason to think he wouldn't fire it again in ten seconds. Until I saw the parking lot video, I thought the same thing--the guy was running and why not just catch up with him later? But he was doing more than that. Maybe a tazer won't kill you (usually anyway) but it will incapacitate you and Brooks would not have shrunk from that, clearly.
It would be great if cops never pointed a gun at an "unarmed" man, but Brooks was armed and ready to use it. Not so lethal, but close enough.
I think this was a righteous shoot. A very suck rotten bitch of an outcome all around, but not a bad shoot.

I've read similar thoughts on the taser as yours.
Here's the thing. A taser is only good for one shot,it then has to be reloaded with another cartridge before you can fire it again.
Although it still has touch capability.

Okay. Now THAT makes sense. All the hunting around I've done, I couldn't find anything on that "one shot" thing. It doesn't really make sense to have a tazer that will only fire one time before you have to run to find an electrical outlet. The situations where you need one usually are pretty hairy.

I had a client who got tazed 14 times in a confrontation with police. He was high on PCP and the tazer wires were getting all tangled up they shot him with so many. Now, I know where this happened and there aren't even 14 cops on the force, so I know there weren't 14 "one shot" stun guns in use that night. But having to put in a new cartridge? And since Brooks got the gun but not more cartridges, his tazer was a one shot deal, then, right? Is that what you're saying? That makes sense. However, I've read on Google hits that there are two shot models. They probably hold two cartridges.

But this is all a side issue, sorta. The more critical question is why Rourke switched from the tazer to the gun. Maybe because HE ran out of cartridges--the reports are that they had tazed--or attempted to taze--Brooks multiple times already.

I know police are trained that self protection is paramount. If they're dead or injured they can't help anyone. So Rourke's self preservation instinct kicked in when Brooks fired at him. If it's true the tazer only holds one cartridge, Rourke would have known there could be no more shots fired from the tazer. But we don't know, for sure, any of this. We don't know what type of tazers these policemen were using, how many shots they'd already fired (witnesses say at least three) or any other specifics about cartridges, battery charge, etc.

He was pissed off that his taser got taken from him and he was too weak to stop it. Like one of the police chiefs said on the news. If a suspect is fleeing you have the option to either get some exercise or call for back up. Shooting him in the back is going to result in SOB being charged probably around Wed.

He shot him when brooks shot at him ,, the strong race won

The weak race had a gun. Thats the only way they can win.

Smart and powerful

The cops were weak and needy.

You saw avid the choke hold twice, could have been choked out easy

Two cops against 1 guy?. They were weak.

Who’s sitting back having a margarita tonight?

Not the cop that got fired. Why do you ask?

He probably has a million dollar pension lol

That will go to the guys family after its all said and done. That will change the families trajectory. Tell him thanks for the donation.

May change the trajectory not “will” you don’t know that. You don’t have ESP.

 

[OldLady]

Shooting him in the back is going to result in the SOB being charged probably around Wed.

Could be. Back to my client that got stunned 14 times, they never shot him. We've got a huge drug problem around here and nary a soul has been killed by a cop, even though they confront raging drunks and guys jacked on any number of drugs, some of them armed, all of them dangerous My client lived to lie in an ER bed for over a week waiting for an opening at the psych hospital. People may laugh at us rubes, but maybe our cops need to teach city cops how to handle folks who are out of line.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

The bottom line is to stop being a racist.

Racism is indemic with humans. Next idea.

Nope. Its on endemic with the pale primate known as the european.

Sorry, but you are not a virgin.

All opinions on this issue are suspect. What of the Arabs toward Israel?

All political marketing.

What of it? Didnt europe plop white people down in Israel and support them with their take over of the area?

There it is. The antisemitism showing through. Most were from the Middle East but why bother with facts when you can just scream “racism” and “white privilege” like a zombie.

" Most were from the Middle East "

Bullshit. There are no white people from that region of the world.

Most people who settled in Israel initially were dark and from the Middle East. Your ignorance is noted. You lost another debate. Your hatred of Jews is funny given that you cry racism like a bitch nonstop here. Hypocrisy 101.

Bullshit. The only dark people that are actually from that area arent white.

Facts don’t care about your feelings. You lost another debate. Ask any learned person. Most Jews in Israel in 1947 were from surrounding Middle East countries. Exodus pushed Europeans there as well. UK owned land given back to them. Jews banded together vs killing one another at record rates. No Bloods and Crips in the Jewish community.

You just admitted european were pushed there. You lost again. Arent you like 0-197 now? We'll just round it off and say 0-200.

As well not just. I am undefeated against you and everyone else here. But don’t deflect. Jews don’t kill one another at record rates. Maybe you should try doing that instead of crying racism like a bitch. 201-0. You lose again, loser.