Unarmed White Man and His Two Dogs Shot, Killed

[CrusaderFrank]

Unarmed White Man and His Two Dogs Shot, Killed
Man And His Two Dogs Shot Killed In St. Louis Watch the video - Yahoo News


Quote:

St. Louis police say a man and his two dogs were all shot and killed in the parking lot of a Subway restaurant. Police are looking for the suspect, described as a Black male.

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Obama has blood on his hands, holder has blood on his hands and sharpton has blood on his hands. They can all go to hell.

Things that do not belong in this story-

"white".
"black".
"Obama".
"Holder".
"Sharpton".

Stop lying. It does not further your whacked agenda.

If Obama had a son, he could have been the black murderer

 

[waltky]

I was attacked by two dogs a few years ago in my own yard...

... shot at one and missed...

... shot the other between the eyes...

... the first dog decided he didn't want to be a bad dog after all and moved off...

... good thing the owner wasn't with them, armed or not...

... the two dogs constituted a weapon...

... which is why the case was dismissed when she took me to court over it.

 

[Rotagilla]

Sure..whatever.

laws that mandate a minority...regardless of qualification...be hired in order to meet some artificial government "quota", displaces qualified white people.

White people pay more into the system than they get back from it. That is a fact.

I don't know what "patriotism" has to do with it..you often trying to slip biased words into your comments, I've noticed.

I got the word "patriot" based directly from your post, in which you wrote "It's ironic..we're funding the very people who despise our system and work to take it down."

and you notice nowhere is the word "patriot" or "patriotic"

To me, working to take down our system is unpatriotic.

"To me..." isn't a valid rebuttal of facts

So, do you believe that everyone on welfare is unpatriotic, or black and unpatriotic, or do you just believe they are the majority? And what would you do to change this?

I don't know..you made it all up..it's your fantasy world you can invent any conclusion you want...


It's (obviously) easier (for you) to create a distraction and try to change the subject than to address the issue head on.....

Well, what do you call someone who "despises and wants to take down the system"? Those are your words.

Depends on which side you're on.

More avoidance.

No. It is true. It depends on which side you're on.
Were the colonists in 1776 "patriots" or "traitors"?
Depends on which side you're on.

I am on the side of the system. Which side are you on?

I support the constitution over the "system".

I would have guessed

You do a lot of "guessing" and "to me..." and use a lot of qualifiers.
I'm pretty sure I don't care what you "guess".

you are the side of the system, because you typed that white people are tired of "funding the very people who despise our system and work to take it down."

Classic "if-then" fallacy.

But I may be wrong. Just spit it out. What word would you use to label the kind of person you described?

Which "kind of person" are you referring to?

 

[Rotagilla]

That's not my question.

You seemed to be under the impression that after the "collapse and partitioning" there will be "corrections" made.

What form will these "corrections" take? What will you have to do with them, if you are still alive at the time?

Who knows, chickie..Read some history is the best advice I can give you.

When governments/countries collapse, "corrections" are ALWAYS made.

Wow. You are so confident there will be a "collapse and partitioning", and "corrections", and you have no ideas how these things will occur????

History is littered with the wreckage of failed governments and nations. Read some.

OK, let's take a different approach; what are you hoping will happen?

I hope it won't take too long to sort out.

I can only conclude that you haven't really thought this through.

Good for you.
Watch me not care what you "conclude".

 

[ricechickie]

you are the side of the system, because you typed that white people are tired of "funding the very people who despise our system and work to take it down."

Classic "if-then" fallacy.

But I may be wrong. Just spit it out. What word would you use to label the kind of person you described?

Which "kind of person" are you referring to?

Holy Christ, can you read? I just wrote, "The kind of person you described." The kind who "despise our system and work to take it down."

You certainly are doing a lot of gymnastics to avoid answering simple questions.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

NBC editing of the first video release happen after? Come on you can't be that stupid.

You are not at all clear which video you are referring to, nor which incident, nor the editing that happened.

No I am quite clear, the NBC edited version of the Zimmerman 911 call That NBC edited version.

 

[Rotagilla]

you are the side of the system, because you typed that white people are tired of "funding the very people who despise our system and work to take it down."

Classic "if-then" fallacy.

But I may be wrong. Just spit it out. What word would you use to label the kind of person you described?

Which "kind of person" are you referring to?

Holy Christ, can you read? I just wrote, "The kind of person you described." The kind who "despise our system and work to take it down."

You certainly are doing a lot of gymnastics to avoid answering simple questions.

No dear..I've tried mature discussion with you before.I know your evasive and biased tactics.
Now you're just frustrated because you can't herd me in the direction you want.

"People who despise our system and want to take it down" can be called many things..It depends on which side you're on, as I pointed out so elegantly (and you ignored) earlier..I'm not going to endlessly circle back around and around points I already made as you look for leverage to play "gotcha" .

..You're the one that has to label people...You can make up any descriptive term you like. I couldn't care less.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Why are racists so bad at their native languages?


Could it be that stupid people gravitate towards racism?

You really need to step away from your racism it's not good to be there.

 

[ricechickie]

NBC editing of the first video release happen after? Come on you can't be that stupid.

You are not at all clear which video you are referring to, nor which incident, nor the editing that happened.

No I am quite clear, the NBC edited version of the Zimmerman 911 call That NBC edited version.

Actually, you weren't clear. You wanted to talk about two incidents (Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown), and then started on about some edited video by NBC.

What did the edited audio do to inject race into a story that wasn't about race in the first place?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The only group that really wants a race war would be the one that gains the most advantage from one. Now who would that be? Whites? according to some they already have the advantage. Blacks? We have laws that protects minorities
How about the government? It's a lot easier to control a divided people than it is to control a unified people.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

NBC editing of the first video release happen after? Come on you can't be that stupid.

You are not at all clear which video you are referring to, nor which incident, nor the editing that happened.

No I am quite clear, the NBC edited version of the Zimmerman 911 call That NBC edited version.

Actually, you weren't clear. You wanted to talk about two incidents (Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown), and then started on about some edited video by NBC.

What did the edited audio do to inject race into a story that wasn't about race in the first place?

The first version is what I said that was very clear. maybe you didn't comprehend it, that's not my fault.

 

[ricechickie]

you are the side of the system, because you typed that white people are tired of "funding the very people who despise our system and work to take it down."

Classic "if-then" fallacy.

But I may be wrong. Just spit it out. What word would you use to label the kind of person you described?

Which "kind of person" are you referring to?

Holy Christ, can you read? I just wrote, "The kind of person you described." The kind who "despise our system and work to take it down."

You certainly are doing a lot of gymnastics to avoid answering simple questions.

No dear..I've tried mature discussion with you before.I know your evasive and biased tactics.
Now you're just frustrated because you can't herd me in the direction you want.

"People who despise our system and want to take it down" can be called many things..It depends on which side you're on, as I pointed out so elegantly (and you ignored) earlier..I'm not going to endlessly circle back around and around points I already made as you look for leverage to play "gotcha" .

..You're the one that has to label people...You can make up any descriptive term you like. I couldn't care less.

I'm trying not to make up terms.

I'm using your words to attempt to understand your position, but any question to make things more clear gets the run-around from you.

 

[ricechickie]

The only group that really wants a race war would be the one that gains the most advantage from one. Now who would that be? Whites? according to some they already have the advantage. Blacks? We have laws that protects minorities
How about the government? It's a lot easier to control a divided people than it is to control a unified people.

Do you think, then, that white people vilifying blacks (and blacks vilifying whites) plays right into the hands of those who could gain from racial tension?

 

[Rotagilla]

you are the side of the system, because you typed that white people are tired of "funding the very people who despise our system and work to take it down."

Classic "if-then" fallacy.

But I may be wrong. Just spit it out. What word would you use to label the kind of person you described?

Which "kind of person" are you referring to?

Holy Christ, can you read? I just wrote, "The kind of person you described." The kind who "despise our system and work to take it down."

You certainly are doing a lot of gymnastics to avoid answering simple questions.

No dear..I've tried mature discussion with you before.I know your evasive and biased tactics.
Now you're just frustrated because you can't herd me in the direction you want.

"People who despise our system and want to take it down" can be called many things..It depends on which side you're on, as I pointed out so elegantly (and you ignored) earlier..I'm not going to endlessly circle back around and around points I already made as you look for leverage to play "gotcha" .

..You're the one that has to label people...You can make up any descriptive term you like. I couldn't care less.

I'm trying not to make up terms.

I'm using your words to attempt to understand your position, but any question to make things more clear gets the run-around from you.

I made my position more than clear in my many polite replies. You ignore them and look for absurd angles to use to play semantic games.

You're just agitating and looking for attention now.

 

[ricechickie]

NBC editing of the first video release happen after? Come on you can't be that stupid.

You are not at all clear which video you are referring to, nor which incident, nor the editing that happened.

No I am quite clear, the NBC edited version of the Zimmerman 911 call That NBC edited version.

Actually, you weren't clear. You wanted to talk about two incidents (Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown), and then started on about some edited video by NBC.

What did the edited audio do to inject race into a story that wasn't about race in the first place?

The first version is what I said that was very clear. maybe you didn't comprehend it, that's not my fault.

OK, you were clear. Fine.

Can you answer my question?

 

[ricechickie]

I made my position more than clear in my many polite replies. You ignore them and look for absurd angles to use to play semantic games.

You're just agitating and looking for attention now.

I can see the whine in your post.

If you don't like the way the discussion is going, you're free to end it anytime now.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The only group that really wants a race war would be the one that gains the most advantage from one. Now who would that be? Whites? according to some they already have the advantage. Blacks? We have laws that protects minorities
How about the government? It's a lot easier to control a divided people than it is to control a unified people.

Do you think, then, that white people vilifying blacks (and blacks vilifying whites) plays right into the hands of those who could gain from racial tension?

Well whose doing the vilifying?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

NBC editing of the first video release happen after? Come on you can't be that stupid.

You are not at all clear which video you are referring to, nor which incident, nor the editing that happened.

No I am quite clear, the NBC edited version of the Zimmerman 911 call That NBC edited version.

Actually, you weren't clear. You wanted to talk about two incidents (Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown), and then started on about some edited video by NBC.

What did the edited audio do to inject race into a story that wasn't about race in the first place?

The first version is what I said that was very clear. maybe you didn't comprehend it, that's not my fault.

OK, you were clear. Fine.

Can you answer my question?

What did the edited version do to inject race?
Don't tell me you haven't heard about it?
The edited version has Zimmerman blurting out race as if he was voluntary saying it.
The real call has the dispatcher asking him to identify the person.
NBC left out that part.

 

[Rotagilla]

I made my position more than clear in my many polite replies. You ignore them and look for absurd angles to use to play semantic games.

You're just agitating and looking for attention now.

I can see the whine in your post.

If you don't like the way the discussion is going, you're free to end it anytime now.

I'm very happy with the way this conversation is going.

Many are reading this and forming/reinforcing opinions on the topic of disproportionate negro crime ....and the type of people who constantly try to change the subject to avoid talking about the problem.

All is well.
Carry on.

 

[ricechickie]

You are not at all clear which video you are referring to, nor which incident, nor the editing that happened.

No I am quite clear, the NBC edited version of the Zimmerman 911 call That NBC edited version.

Actually, you weren't clear. You wanted to talk about two incidents (Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown), and then started on about some edited video by NBC.

What did the edited audio do to inject race into a story that wasn't about race in the first place?

The first version is what I said that was very clear. maybe you didn't comprehend it, that's not my fault.

OK, you were clear. Fine.

Can you answer my question?

What did the edited version do to inject race?
Don't tell me you haven't heard about it?
The edited version has Zimmerman blurting out race as if he was voluntary saying it.
The real call has the dispatcher asking him to identify the person.
NBC left out that part.

So, it is your contention that no one would have thought about the race of the shooter and the dead kid without the NBC tape?