Originally Posted by Cool Hand Clyde
I was actually about to post the same link, but from a FOX site, just to mess with these guys again.
BTW, that story/link is not on CNN or MSNBC.
|
|
|
|
|
BTW, that story/link is not on CNN or MSNBC.
You need to watch this short clip Tylertechsas by a black man about his situation. You might learn something!!!!!
http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-303586
Umm, no I don't. Let me also add that neither you Guiss or anyone else speaks for me on this forum. I don't think every white person is a racist. I'm white and I'm not a racist and there are many more people who don't see color in a way that is evil and destructive. However, to ignore the fact that there are people like that just because it is 2009 is downright stupid. I mean person of blue color is basically an admitted racist, yet I see none of you call him out on it. That is and always have been the problem with us whites. When we see injustice and intolerance amongst our own race we refuse to meet it head on which is condoning it. Instead, what too many of us do is point the finger in the other direction and say "See they do it too". Many of you on here just don't get it. It is not about color, it is about right and wrong. In this Gates situation, the police were wrong no matter how you look at it or else why would the charges have been dropped? Obama was not wrong for condemning the "action" of the police, he should have just worded it differently. My god the hypocrisy of condemning this President over a situation that was worded poorly after what we have had the last 8 years.
Re: Gates, Crowley, racism, and Obama
Sounds like he's not sorry to me.
The President would've been wise to avoid commenting all together, particularly since he admitted that he "may be a little biased" because Gates is a friend, plus admitting he didn't have all the facts at the time. But he didn't avoid commenting.
As more details come out, it's obvious Gates was being belligerent and basically daring the officer to act. The President should admit he was mistaken in describing the officer's action as "stupid," if not apologize. Instead he only says he "unfortunately gave an impression that I was maligning the Cambridge Police Department or Sgt. Crowley specifically." Ridiculous. He thinks people are idiots or he simply doesn't care (both?). Either way, he's completely botching the situation.
It's disheartening to think he's expected to handle infinitely more complex issues than this...
If President Obama had not answered that question at the press conference, Tylertechsas and many others on this forum would have been asking the question "What is Obama trying to hide?" in every kind of way.
Nope, all he had to say, which he did say, was that I don't know all of the facts and I will not comment on this. Problem was he said I don't know all of the facts.. but...
He has said that in the past in press conferences when asked to comment on something. No big deal it was a non event.
Irony:
Boorack Obamalama jet setting around the world apologizing for America but not being man enough to apologize to a respected WHITE policeman.
If you have a copy of the constitution, go to the Bill of Rights and read Amendment #1. The people back in 1789 solved this type of situation literally with the stroke of a pen.
If you think the First Amendment protects you from being arrested for ANYTHING you say, you are wrong.
Anyway, Obama showed his true colors on this issue and the majority of Americans disagree with what he said. He will now pay the price for being an idiot.
Jordan Mills on choosing Tech:
“It’s a great experience seeing them play. It was a good atmosphere. The fans stood up the whole game and never sat down. They have a great fan base.”
The first amendment does protect you from ANYTHING you say as long as it is not threatening to another person. Nowhere in the police report did it say the police felt threatened. That means that Gates was arrested for hurting Crowley's feelings and I'm sorry you can't do that in this country. So go ahead and create your CSA so you can arrest people for hurting the police's feelings. Go ahead and create your CSA so you can enjoy your perfect Presidents and your perfect laws, and your perfect "ECONOMIES" with your perfect little theories.
Wrong. I can cite you a long list of court decisions that say otherwise.
You are the one that keeps showing your ignorance.Nowhere in the police report did it say the police felt threatened. That means that Gates was arrested for hurting Crowley's feelings and I'm sorry you can't do that in this country. So go ahead and create your CSA so you can arrest people for hurting the police's feelings. Go ahead and create your CSA so you can enjoy your perfect Presidents and your perfect laws, and your perfect "ECONOMIES" with your perfect little theories.
Jordan Mills on choosing Tech:
“It’s a great experience seeing them play. It was a good atmosphere. The fans stood up the whole game and never sat down. They have a great fan base.”
That's not true. You cannot go into the AMC theater in Frisco and yell "fire" in a crowded theater. Yelling "fire" when there is none, is not threatening anyone in particular or directly. Yet if you do this, you WILL go to jail.The first amendment does protect you from ANYTHING you say as long as it is not threatening to another person. Nowhere in the police report did it say the police felt threatened. That means that Gates was arrested for hurting Crowley's feelings and I'm sorry you can't do that in this country. So go ahead and create your CSA so you can arrest people for hurting the police's feelings. Go ahead and create your CSA so you can enjoy your perfect Presidents and your perfect laws, and your perfect "ECONOMIES" with your perfect little theories.
Yelling "fire" in a movie theater when there is none can get someon injured. That is considered a "threat" to someone's well being. You are correct but so am I. I'll say it since it pains you to.:icon_wink:
There are also laws regarding obscenity, lying in certain contexts (libel, obstruction of justice, false testimony in other circumstance, etc.), treason and espionage, disturbing the peace, passing on insider/trade secret information, infringement of copyrights, "uttering", propositioning...
But most significantly, check out Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, for the U.S. Supreme Court upholding the conviction of a dude for offensive and derisive language towards a police officer.
Now, what was the expression about being better to be thought a fool?
Jordan Mills on choosing Tech:
“It’s a great experience seeing them play. It was a good atmosphere. The fans stood up the whole game and never sat down. They have a great fan base.”
Carefully point out to me which of those are not "threats". Maybe our definitions are wrong because to me threats does not always mean physical harm.
Massachusetts law forbids arresting a citizen because of offensive language to a police officer unles the officer is threatened physically.
Now what was the quote about expressions and fools?:icon_wink:
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
