Total posts: 1,048
Posted in:
-->
@Bones
This isn’t the lengthy documentary. It’s a 55 min breakdown by a black pastor giving an unbiased perspective on the case.
At about 16-18 min in is the actual expert that covers the fentanyl facts along with the point that the media inculcated everyone to buy their narrative, same for the jury pool that was so obviously tainted.
There was more than one angle of video and photos of Chauvin and the infamous knee. The one kept out of the public’s eye is the most important angle of them all: the one where his knee wasn’t on his neck but on his shoulder.
The medical examiner’s report proves beyond all reasonable doubt that Floyd’s killed himself. Enlarged heart. Lethal dose of fentanyl mixed with meth. No trauma to any muscular, tendons, skin, nothing around the neck physiology.
And I find it rather sick you’d find this case hilarious knowing it was a sham. People died. Peoples lives were ruined. Businesses destroyed. Police assassinated. So much loss and destruction over a lie (that’s more akin to the “hands up don’t shoot” lies than the conspiracies over the moon landing) to further racial division and discord directed at the criminal justice system and its employees.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
That’s not how the Bureau of Prisons works????
Come again!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
Those so-called (faux) experts lied.
The family being given free money was a PC PR stunt.
You clearly haven’t watched Candace’s movie where she interviewed an unbiased ACTUAL expert who proved the trial was a sham and the media steered it all in that direction.
I will debate this case until the cows come home and pigs fly, because next to BLM being the biggest lie ever sold, this case was the second biggest lie driving BLM all the way to the bank and million dollar mansions.
Created:
Posted in:
If you believe Chauvin killed Floyd as the left claims, then you need to prove that the level of Fentanyl in his system, mixed with Meth and other co trolled substances, had absolutely nothing to do with Floyd’s respiratory distress, enlarged heart, and erratic behavior during his lawful arrest. .
Created:
Posted in:
Candace Owens new documentary PROVES Floyd died of an OD on Fentanyl. and the left needs to spin a different take on order to financially benefit the biggest lie ever sold to America: #BLM
Created:
-->
@Bones
The truth will set your mind free of the lies perpetuated by the left, democrats but also the biggest lie ever sold: BLM.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
ROTFLMAO!!!
You people throwing “that’s your opinion” around don’t even know/understand the meaning of the term.
You’ve lost the so-called debate, not I.
Move on and play with the other children and let the adults hold/have the real debate/discussion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->@TWS1405Bullshit. Trump’s 4 years in office was an abortion.A few? Millions voted for Trump and he is right in the middle of this abortion hypocrisy.
Non- Sequitur. Red Herring.
Miller was a senior advisor to Trump. Trump supporters are also hypocrites for not objecting to his prominent position in the Administration.Walker will still get the votes of thousands of Georgia Republicans. That shows they are hypocrites.MAGA means Make Americans Get Abortions, when it involves a Republican politician.
Nope. Nope. and Nope.
Wouldn't expect anything less from the likes of you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@K_Michael
>@TWS1405acceptance for transgenders, drag, pedophilia and polygamy would follow suit.To date all have been accepted.Pedophilia and polygamy are both still illegal and deeply taboo in American culture. The other three were legalized because they're fine and have no more negative social consequences than trad marriage and cis relationships.
Really?
Need I go on?
Created:
Posted in:
-->@TWS1405Let us exclude pedophilia from my question:What is wrong with accepting the groups you mention?
Turn on a reputable news source or view some you tube videos if you don't want to subscribe to any one or more of them.
Matt Walsh destroys the entire gender ideology position (trans, drag), among others. The havoc upon women's rights alone demonstrates just how wrong accepting this mental illness is. Might as well accept schizophrenics as equal as anyone else as well and let them run amuck side by side with the other criminals given carte blanche by democrats.
Gay Marriage is no more in the Constitution than Abortion is, so it should have been left up to the states. That case was legislating from the bench and has now caused irreparable societal harm via legal recourse.
And drag? Please. You know full well what the problem with this group is. It's where pedophiles hide, among other deviants. And now they are being thrusted upon children with open arms by leftist progressives and democrats to destroy our youth.
The fact that you even had to ask what is wrong with these groups is dumbfounding in the wake of the obvious.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
-->@TWS1405Nope, just proving that there are two sides to every argument, neither of which is necessarily right nor wrong.
-->@TWS1405Perhaps it's just your conditioned sensibilities that are no longer pertinent.Maybe it would be better not to obsess about the personal necessities of others.I would suggest that those who obsess the most about the sexuality of others, are perhaps the most perverse of thought.
THAT is NOT proving anything other than you being a troll trying to gaslight me.
Though some people intolerantly assume self-righteousness and invent problems.Stop obsessing about other people's life choices and concentrate on your own.
The fact that you're making comments like this just demonstrates how ignorant you are of these issue and the problems they have caused for humanity.
Created:
Created:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Wow.
Thanks for proving you’re a part of the problem and not the solution.
Created:
As Candace Owens demonstrates in her new documentary, Chauvin should have been acquitted.
Created:
Posted in:
Ever since SCOTUS found some BS excuse to legislate from the bench to allow same sex marriage, I knew, everyone with intelligence knew, that acceptance for transgenders, drag, pedophilia and polygamy would follow suit.
To date all have been accepted. Either by forced social inclusion (e.g., threats of violence, public humiliation, doxing, etc.) or by law (BS cases of legislating from the bench).
Add to that, so-called institutions of higher learning or not teaching anything higher than self-entitlement to be spoiled brats with carte blanche to be anything but law abiding in order to force their ideological agenda. That is, the agenda most popular at the moment.
The world is going to shit in a hand basket, and the so-called progressive left is adding all the fuel to the flame of destruction as they possibly can without even knowing it. They are like the frog put in cold water and boiled to death. They do not know that they are but beggars of their own demise, and the cause of others demise as well.
Humanity is lost.
Created:
Posted in:
The actions, statements and/or behaviors of a few are not representative of an entire group or party. *facepalm* *rolling eyes*
Created:
-->
@Bones
You need to watch this fact-based documentary:
If you're too lazy to watch the entirety of it, here is a 55 min breakdown:
Here is another:
"Media make the innocent guilty; the guilty innocent"
Chauvin was innocent. Had he never arrived on scene to assist and restrain Floyd, Floyd would have died regardless.
He consumed a FATAL DOSE of fentanyl and meth. Period. Fact. Period.
Your reliance on false testimony by faux professionals paid for by the left is a fallacious appeal to authority.
Created:
-->
@Athias
@Shila
->@Shila @TWS1405Your image looks feminineWhich image is that? The obviously male character which serves as my avatar, the origin for which I've explained before?
Your Avatar. No male has eyebrows like that. No male has hair like that. It's typically feminine.
and you come off as remind.Don't know what this means.
*rolling eyes* You know damn well that's an autocorrect, but since you lack reading comprehension skills, it doesn't surprise me you do not know what I was attempting to say here.
If you cannot handle strong criticism of your piss poor positions, you should consider excusing yourself from any debate/discussion then.I have no qualms handling criticism of my "piss-poor" positions. However, what I will not tolerate is a lack of decorum and respect. The irony of this statement is that I did in fact excuse myself in the advent of regressive back-and-forth, for which you'd subsequently call me "an intellectual coward."
Respect is earned, not given.
I have clearly and correctly defined terms and debating terms that allow for that which I have done in identifying you as an idiot via your idiotic argument (i.e., not you the "person").
I did not call you an intellectual coward, what I said in context is that your behavior, attitude and denialism is what is being an intellectual coward (intellectual cowardice). If you knew what it meant you would have understood this; but you do not, which is no surprise.
I’m insulting the lack of intelligence and ignorance (stupidity) of the positions argued, not him “personally”Define "idiot," "coward," and "ignoramus," because I believe you do not know what they mean.
I already defined idiot and ignoramus. *facepalm* lack of attention to detail on your part. I never asserted the term 'coward' towards your arguments. Again, lack of attention to detail.
You're no debater. You're just a whiner.
seeing as I don’t know him “personally”Which is the reason you can only "try" to insult me, not actually insult me.Anyway, as I've stated, I have no intention of resuming my engagement in discussing this subject with you. So, carry on mouthing-off.
I don't need to insult you. You insult yourself by being offended by innocuous terminology within the apropos context in which they are given.
Again, quitting for ANY reason is a concession you are wrong and I right. Also, your persistence denialism and lack of intelligent rebuttals is indicative of the Dunning Kruger Effect and intellectual cowardice.
Created:
-->
@Shila
I’m insulting the lack of intelligence and ignorance (stupidity) of the positions argued, not him “personally” seeing as I don’t know him “personally” to do so. It’s all about the lies poor argument of his, not him.
Created:
-->
@Athias
Your image looks feminine, and you come off as remind. So you were considered a she.
So pardon me, he.
You’re still behaving like an intellectual coward. If you cannot handle strong criticism of your piss poor positions, you should consider excusing yourself from any debate/discussion then. Because you, anyone for that matter, will be called out for their idiocy when positing wholeheartedly stupid positions as you have here within.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
if you honestly believe your opinions are "objective"i do so wish you the best of luck
Doesn’t matter what I believe think or feel. The only thing my that matters is what I can prove. And I’ve proven you both factually inaccurate in your unsubstantiated subjective assertions. You know it. I know it. Everyone knows it. That being said, it’s precisely why you won’t put your money where your mouth is and prove what you’re claiming. You can’t. And you won’t. Again? Further displays of intellectual cowardice on your part.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Awesome sophomoric “I know you are, but what am I” retort there, sport.
You assert you’re such a great “debater,” then put the proverbial money where your mouth is and take up Athias’ exact arguments put forth and defend them; otherwise prove what I said in rebuttal clearly disproving her asinine assertions wrong.
Failure to do either simply proves my observations about you both 100% factually accurate.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
None of what I said is personal opinion.
Everything I posted is objective opinion - in other words, based on fact based truths. Claiming otherwise without proving it ain’t an argument.
sprinkled with uncreative insults
“if personal attacks are employed to devalue a speaker's argument by attacking the speaker; personal insults in the middle of an otherwise sound argument are not fallacious ad hominem attacks.”
none of which add up to a "sound-argument"
Now THAT = [a] personal opinion.
Your continued denialism and inability to admit you’re wrong = intellectual cowardice.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Uh, no I am NOT!!!
Your denialism is not an argument.
I followed up my post as I said I would the following morning with that very sound argument, one you’re purposely overlooking.
I proved how and why she is and has been an idiot where this topic is concerned. You’re just being stubborn and a hypocrite (you said nothing regarding the iwantrosevelt character and his actual name calling, ignoring that point of fact as well).
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
And where were you in defense of myself when iwantrosevelt…whatever that clowns handle is, has done nothing but name call me in every post he replies to me in? Eh!
If you and Athias were true “debaters,” you’d know I am right.
“if personal attacks are employed to devalue a speaker's argument by attacking the speaker; personal insults in the middle of an otherwise sound argument are not fallacious ad hominem attacks.”
Created:
-->
@Bones
They all lied. All of them. And they did so for the exact same reason the jury acquitted OJ Simpson. In addition to being participants in furthering the democrats and BLMs divisive agenda.
Created:
What a crock of 💩!!
Floyd did die of a fentanyl overdose. The democrats and the lies of SHAM BLM made it about faux police brutality.
Truth is an affirmative defense. He cannot be sued for telling the truth. No one can. No matter how much the truth hurts you.
Greedy family.
Greedy lawyers.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
Is a known actor really a stranger though? Sure, as in person to person they are as neither “knows” the other, personally. But she/they know of him being the known actor he is.
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
@Athias
You two need a vocabulary lesson:
idiot
ĭd′ē-ət
noun
- A person who is considered foolish or stupid.
stupid
stoo͞′pĭd, styoo͞′-
adjective
- Slow to learn or understand; obtuse.
- Tending to make poor decisions or careless mistakes.
- Marked by a lack of intelligence or care; foolish or careless.
stupid person
noun
- a person who is not very bright
Through several retorts of Athias', it is patently apparent (i.e., obvious) that she has made several statements with zero evidence - which are purely subjective uneducated opinions - that qualifies as foolish, stupid and demonstrates a lack of intelligence or care on the subject at hand.
Therefore, my calling Athias an IDIOT is neither an ad hominem NOR factually inaccurate (i.e., it is NOT an opinion). It is a fact-based objective observation premised on her own choice of words in explaining her position on the various parts of the subject under discussion.
Created:
-->
@Athias
Quitting for any reason = concession. Period.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Wrong. I clearly demonstrated she’s an idiot on the things she said In juxtaposition to the subject of the thread. That’s not opinion, that’s fact.
Created:
-->
@Athias
->@TWS1405Non SequiturDefine non sequitur. Because, I believe you don't know what it means.
I know what non-sequitur means, clearly you do not. I do not care what you believe, feel or think. The ONLY thing that matters is what you can prove. And I explained quite clearly how/why it was a NS. You just ignored that fact in order to turn things around on me, fallaciously.
This thread is about criminals on the street and how cops are treated by not only them, but the general public as well. It has NOTHING to do with politics and who is or is not running the so-called "government."This thread may be about what you described, BUT THE POINT I ADDRESSED is about the latitude afforded to criminals in a "stateless society."
There is no such thing as a "stateless society" in the United States of America. And it was Avery who was addressing the latitude afforded criminal while castigating civil servants.
Both she and the officer lived in the same apartment complex. They were in the parking lot. It was NOT "her own property."I stand corrected.
At least you can admit it, unlike so many others at this forum.
Knowing she lived in the same building, the officer attempted to serve said warrant. During which Turner became hostile, belligerent, combative and resisted lawful arrest.Which was instigated when the officer attempted to "lawfully" arrest her.
When someone is "caught," being caught does NOT give one carte blanche to resist a lawful arrest through violence, putting the cop's life at risk.
she has no right to act in such a manner, especially towards a peace officer.Except in defense of her own person when a "peace" officer is attempting to detain her.
No, she does not. No one is entitled to any measure of "defense" when being lawfully arrested. It's called "resisting arrest," "obstructing governmental operations," "assaulting an officer," and any other applicable criminal charge for doing so.
She was the threat, not the officer.Unless the terms in which she was renting her apartment were nullified, and the landlord wanted to evict her, the officer was still the threat.
This is why your response is so goddamn stupid. The terms of her lease have absolutely nothing to do with the warrant issued for her arrest for assaulting the property manager. She was the threat, not the officer and he never will be in any universe you can make stupid pathetic excuses for.
You clearly know nothing about the law, constitutional law, and the laws governing the authority law enforcement officers possess when enforcing said laws.There's a difference between knowing about the law, and arguing in defense of them. I AM NOT arguing in defense of them.
You clearly cannot argue against them if you do not understand them. That's the point of my observation, which stands factually accurate in the wake of your stupid responses.
A lawful arrest is NOT "a violation of one's person and sovereignty."Yes it is.
No, it is not. See, yet another stupid response.
Period. Fact. Period. So, NO!Ordnung Mein Fuhrer!
Sophomorically banal intellectual coward retort.
No one has the right or prerogative "to seek the end of all acts of aggression" in such a case as this.Because?
*yawn* Another ignorant STUPID response demonstrating the Dunning Kruger Effect on your part where this subject matter is concerned.
God! You sound like one of those nut job sovereign citizen clowns."Sounds like" is not an argument.
Sounds like, come off as, appear to be...what difference does it make when you clearly put forth statements indicative of the attitude a sovereign citizen spouts off. Also, it's not meant to be an argument but rather an observation. Big difference.
Another non-sequitur.Define non sequitur. Because I don't believe you know what it means.
See initial response to this stupid shifting of the argument back to me when it is to YOU who does not know what it means.
Everyone knows that 99.90% of the time anyone with a badge IS a law enforcement officer. Imposters are far, few and between.So you don't ask police officers for their badge numbers and confirm that they are who they say they are?
Nope. Running into a fake officer is about as rare as winning the lottery.
FFS! Another non-sequitur.Define non sequitur. Because I don't believe you know what it means.
See initial response to this stupid shifting of the argument back to me when it is to YOU who does not know what it means.
She is asking about existing as a human being, being physically present.I suppose your guess is as good as mine was.
It wasn't a guess. Reading comprehension matters.
Police officers may be employees of the state, but they are not "enforcers" (i.e., mercenaries) of the state.Non sequitur. No one said anything about "mercenaries." Do you see how the term non sequitur is properly used?
Proof positive you do not know what non-sequitur means. Not to mention a clear lack of reading comprehension skills.
They are CIVIL SERVANTS!!They most certainly are not. They are obligated and loyal to the State.
Yes, they are!!! Ignoramus!!!
"Civil servants are professionals who work for the government and whose salaries are paid by taxpayers. Civil service can be conducted at the national, state and local level."
And there are millions upon millions of victims of crime, especially violent crime, that would wholeheartedly disagree with your last, albeit asinine, assessment.I neither entertain nor indulge ad populum arguments.
Their lay statements are evidence against your position. It's not a popularity contest to see who agrees more than others.
You begin with a stupid statement and end with a stupid statement with a lot of stupid in-between.
...you'll receive no response from me. Have a nice day, sir.
That's EXACTLY what an intellectual coward with no integrity would say.
I will take that as your concession that you know you are wrong and have resigned from the debate/discussion.
PS.
I guess we can use the word, "debater" resorts to ad hominem statements to convey discontent with an opponent's contention. What a concept..
When the observation is true, it is not a fallacious ad hominem.
Created:
-->
@Athias
I’m going to sleep right now, got past a few lines of your reply and all I can say at this point is…
You are an IDIOT!!!
I’ll shred your ignorant retort in the morning over coffee.
Created:
No surprise you chicken little arse posted this stupid thread.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
->@TWS1405Wow. Talk about putting a new image next to the term "TDS troll" in the dictionary.Talking about poor police training.It appears the capitol police failed to secure the Congress building.There was a failure of intelligence.The FBI could not be trusted.The Secret services deleted all records related to the Jan 6 riots.You need to put a new image on law enforcement in America.
In specific regards to 1/6, THIS is YOUR image!!!!!
Created:
Posted in:
Wow. Talk about putting a new image next to the term "TDS troll" in the dictionary.
Created:
-->
@Athias
@Avery
Criminals get to do whatever they want!I'd rather have criminals "run free" than run government.
Non Sequitur. This thread is about criminals on the street and how cops are treated by not only them, but the general public as well. It has NOTHING to do with politics and who is or is not running the so-called "government."
Oh you're right.When people are on edge, that gives them the right to grab people's weapons.My bad.When being threatened on their own property, they most certainly have the prerogative to effectively end said threat.
It's clear you know nothing about this case involving this officer and Pam Turner.
Both she and the officer lived in the same apartment complex. They were in the parking lot. It was NOT "her own property."
She assaulted the manager of the property, hence the warrant for her arrest. There is no specific date, time or place said warrant needs to be served. Knowing she lived in the same building, the officer attempted to serve said warrant. During which Turner became hostile, belligerent, combative and resisted lawful arrest. She has no right to act in such a manner, especially towards a peace officer. She was the threat, not the officer.
I'm curious: do you think it would be okay to assault or even kill a police officer for attempting to arrest you?The attempt to arrest or detain is a violation of one's person and sovereignty. So yes, one has the prerogative to seek the end of all acts of aggression to which one is subject.
You clearly know nothing about the law, constitutional law, and the laws governing the authority law enforcement officers possess when enforcing said laws.
A lawful arrest is NOT "a violation of one's person and sovereignty." Period. Fact. Period. So, NO! No one has the right or prerogative "to seek the end of all acts of aggression" in such a case as this. God! You sound like one of those nut job sovereign citizen clowns.
What about asking for I.D?You don't ask police officers for their badge numbers and confirm that they are who they say they are?
Another non-sequitur. Everyone knows that 99.90% of the time anyone with a badge IS a law enforcement officer. Imposters are far, few and between.
What about existing?Police officers are enforcers for the State. The State is an institution defined by its capacity to coerce. So yes, their existing constitutes a threat.
FFS! Another non-sequitur. She is asking about existing as a human being, being physically present.
Police officers may be employees of the state, but they are not "enforcers" (i.e., mercenaries) of the state. They are CIVIL SERVANTS!! Big eff'ing difference!
The state is not defined by any such thing as you so ignorantly purport. And there are millions upon millions of victims of crime, especially violent crime, that would wholeheartedly disagree with your last, albeit asinine, assessment.
Created:
-->
@sadolite
Whatever, yours is superior. I will never question anything you say.
You need to work on your grammar.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
You're still proving how ignorant you are of world history.
Ancient and medieval colonialism was practiced by the Phoenicians, the Greeks, the Turks, and the Arabs.
Colonialism in the modern sense began with the "Age of Discovery", led by Portuguese, who became increasingly adventuresome following the conquest of Ceuta in 1415, aiming to control navigation through the Strait of Gibraltar, expand Christianity, obtain plunder, and suppress predation on Portuguese populations by Barbary pirates as part of a longstanding African slave trade; at that point a minor trade, one the Portuguese would soon reverse and surpass. Around 1450, based on North African fishing boats, a lighter ship was developed, the caravel, which could sail further and faster,[1] was highly maneuverable, and could sail "into the wind".
Created:
-->
@sadolite
Whatever is one word, not two. Genius.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
Not to forget whites came up with the idea of colonization and slavery.
You’re so ignorant of world history it’s pathetic.
Created:
-->
@sadolite
Yeah I do, smart ass. Because I watched and more importantly LISTENED to her. Such decisions are not made lightly, as was the case with hers.
Created:
-->
@sadolite
She can’t sabotage anything. She’s no longer in Congress and hasn’t been since 2021.
And it wasn’t an “all of a sudden” decision, either. What’s laughable is you actually believing it was.
Created:
The reason she went for the taser was because the officer already had his gun in his hand. She needed to defend herself. And seeing the taser not secured reached for it.Which is exactly what the officer did not do when he shot Pamela. She was not a criminal, she had some mental issues.
It’s stupid 💩 like this that gives credence to Shila being muted/blocked for being anything but an intelligent person.
It’s clear it never read up on the facts of this case as each of these statements are patently (in their face) factually inaccurate!!!
Created:
-->
@Avery
The crime is the real root cause, and the real solution is prosecuting criminals.
BINGO!!!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Shila
Whites set the standard for beauty. One would expect they would at least meet it. But ugly vs attractive is a white issue after they passed the albino standard for white.
When physically unattractive ppl procreate, their offspring are either equally or even more unattractive than their parents. Look at Chelsey Clinton for a prime example.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Public-Choice
--> @TWS1405I'm waiting to see how being black will somehow tie into this. After all, you blame them for everything else in life.
“Everything else in life”? Nope. Just half the violent crime in this country and the segment that’s overtly racist towards anyone not black (namely whites).
Created: