Jump to content

Ahmad Arbery Trial.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 618
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

They are so fucked. Couldn't happen to a nicer group of people. What an absolutely idiotic argument. There's been some burglaries committed. You see someone you don't know jogging by. Said person

I look forward to the trial of the DA who swept it under the rug. 

Posted Images

1 hour ago, Fakenews said:
1 hour ago, jzk said:

Now it is true that there are some despicable people here that wish death and misery on people they don't even know.  Like Sloop. 

Speaking of fucked up.  

Thanks Faker - couldn't have said it better myself. :lol:

Bit early for JerKZ to be PUI isn't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Thanks Faker - couldn't have said it better myself. :lol:

Bit early for JerKZ to be PUI isn't it?

Yeah, Sloop certainly is pretty fucked up, wishing harm on innocent people and all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jzk said:

Yeah, Sloop certainly is pretty fucked up, wishing harm on innocent people and all.

Are you under the impression that there is such a thing as "innocent people"? That's a fairly mild delusion compared to some of your others, though.

And if there were such thing as an "innocent person," you would not be one

- DSK

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Are you under the impression that there is such a thing as "innocent people"? That's a fairly mild delusion compared to some of your others, though.

And if there were such thing as an "innocent person," you would not be one

- DSK

 

Yes, I think people wanting to use ivermectin are innocent and do not deserve to have what they consume tampered with by assholes wanting to cause harm upon them.

Previously I thought you were just really stupid and boring.  But maybe you are a piece of shit as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jzk said:

Yes, I think people wanting to use ivermectin are innocent and do not deserve to have what they consume tampered with by assholes wanting to cause harm upon them.

Those are not the words of an educated person so give up that facade.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jzk said:

Yes, I think people wanting to use ivermectin are innocent and do not deserve to have what they consume tampered with by assholes wanting to cause harm upon them.

Previously I thought you were just really stupid and boring.  But maybe you are a piece of shit as well.

So, you think everything should be made safe for idiots, even drugs?

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jzk said:

Yes, I think people wanting to use ivermectin are innocent and do not deserve to have what they consume tampered with by assholes wanting to cause harm upon them.

Previously I thought you were just really stupid and boring.  But maybe you are a piece of shit as well.

People using ivermectin are actively participating in mass murder, so innocent is not how I'd describe them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jzk said:

Yes, I think people wanting to use ivermectin are innocent and do not deserve to have what they consume tampered with by assholes wanting to cause harm upon them.

Previously I thought you were just really stupid and boring.  But maybe you are a piece of shit as well.

Wait, so people are tampering with drugs for horses to hurt people creepily trying to take these horse drugs for Covid?  How often has that happened?  Is there a scourge of horse drug tamperers we should be outraged about?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, The Joker said:

The facts of what had already happened to  the town of Kenosha during a protest proves you wrong.  

You lied about the scene outside the courthouse - don't move the goalposts. 

And you wrote that "No justice, no peace" is equivalent to 

"threats from the mob that they will burn the town down"  

Next you will be informing us that "Jews Will Not Replace Us !!" is the same as 

"Would you like to join us for tea at our garden party?"  

lying pos 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, The Joker said:

I’m confident the people that live there would not take that threat lightly.

Our far right peeps here have deflected from one of the central issues here . . . 

and that is police violence against lawful protesters - around 1,000 instances of it in the last two years. 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/29/us-police-brutality-protest

But the R-e-e-i-i-c-h totally fixates on disturbances BLM events . .  

Why might that be ???  (It's racism, not the other R-word) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

I thought you would play it honestly and tell us what you really thought. 
 

I admit my error on that point. 

WTF ever gave you that idea???  Certainly not past history.  Jayzus, are you new here?  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Cal20sailor said:

Those are not the words of an educated person so give up that facade.

Calling it a facade is being extraordinarily complimentary.

I only see his drivel when some heartless person quotes him but that is enough to know that most of what he posts is just made up on the spot to suit whatever rant he is on.

Currently I get the impression he has his panties in a bunch because I have him on ignore so it seems he has made up some lie about me wanting to see that horse syrup made more toxic to kill stupid people.

Or something equally bizarre, not to mention stupid.

:blink::lol:

 

JerKZ posting

Stupid 9.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Cal20sailor said:

Without the camera in GA?  They don't get charged.  That should scare all of us.

You'd think.

14 hours ago, Sean said:

stop referring to the victim as “criminal” for being curious about an inactive construction site.

Not sure about the rules in GA or up in NY, but curiously wandering around construction sites is a felony here.

Quote

One acre or less in area and is identified as such with a sign that appears prominently, in letters of not less than 2 inches in height, and reads in substantially the following manner: “THIS AREA IS A DESIGNATED CONSTRUCTION SITE, AND ANYONE WHO TRESPASSES ON THIS PROPERTY COMMITS A FELONY.”

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Calling it a facade is being extraordinarily complimentary.

I only see his drivel when some heartless person quotes him but that is enough to know that most of what he posts is just made up on the spot to suit whatever rant he is on.

Currently I get the impression he has his panties in a bunch because I have him on ignore so it seems he has made up some lie about me wanting to see that horse syrup made more toxic to kill stupid people.

Or something equally bizarre, not to mention stupid.

:blink::lol:

 

JerKZ posting

Stupid 9.jpg

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

Does he have to?

image.jpg?width=2048&enable=upscale

 

Makes me think that all those kids who had to wear that pointy hat in the corner throughout much of school seemed to adopt it later in life.  

image.thumb.png.92bea952286147e12fdce7c72691c506.png

Yup, still dunces.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Cal20sailor said:
16 hours ago, jzk said:

No one ever claimed sloop to be educated that I know of.

Wow, great deflection!  Sloop can defend himself, look at those in your corner.

If I cared to it'd mean taking him off ignore.

So it ain't gonna happen - I see too much of his lies and drivel just from people quoting him.

The bullshit posted by a fanatic who creates junk mail for a living is not going to keep me awake at night.

I believe these are his.

How to Overcome Criticism of Your Passion

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, jzk said:

I guess he really was "just out for a jog" after all.  But even if he was a "criminal," they still don't have the right to murder him.  

It has been well established that Andy Ngo dude is a lying pos, 

much like you 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

If I cared to it'd mean taking him off ignore.

So it ain't gonna happen - I see too much of his lies and drivel just from people quoting him.

The bullshit posted by a fanatic who creates junk mail for a living is not going to keep me awake at night.

I believe these are his.

How to Overcome Criticism of Your Passion

That word "ignore" that you keep using.  I don't think it means what you think it means.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jzk said:

Do you have anything to offer besides the ad hominem?  What is Andy lying about here?

An unwise man once said “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice? You can’t get fooled again”

so, he butchered it. But was right. Why would anyone bother watching a pre-cut Ngo hit piece? You know it’s bullshit by knowing it’s source.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

An unwise man once said “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice? You can’t get fooled again”

so, he butchered it. But was right. Why would anyone bother watching a pre-cut Ngo hit piece? You know it’s bullshit by knowing it’s source.

Apparently, calling a known liar a “liar” is now an ad hominem attack. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Apparently, calling a known liar a “liar” is now an ad hominem attack. 

Like @Dogin his final days, you knew the odds were what was posted was a lie. Jizzie is just about there.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Raz'r said:

An unwise man once said “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice? You can’t get fooled again”

so, he butchered it. But was right. Why would anyone bother watching a pre-cut Ngo hit piece? You know it’s bullshit by knowing it’s source.

So what is the issue with the information he cited?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

Apparently, calling a known liar a “liar” is now an ad hominem attack. 

Do you know what an ad hominem attack is?

It is dismissing the argument based on the author.  Can anyone challenge the actual evidence presented?

What did he lie about?  Everyone has lied about something.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, jzk said:

Do you have anything to offer besides the ad hominem? 

My comment was not ad hominem in the slightest . . 

Ngo has a well earned and widespread reputation for lying. 

Amazing that your thinking must go something like, "Well yeah, he has lied to me repeatedly in the past, but I'm pretty sure he is being truthful now."  

Dude, that is the first rule of critical thinking - don't believe anything that a proven liar says. 

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/andy-ngo-right-wing-troll-antifa-877914/

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AJ Oliver said:

My comment was not ad hominem in the slightest . . 

Ngo has a well earned and widespread reputation for lying. 

Amazing that your thinking must go something like, "Well yeah, he has lied to me repeatedly in the past, but I'm pretty sure he is being truthful now."  

Dude, that is the first rule of critical thinking - don't believe anything that a proven liar says. 

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/andy-ngo-right-wing-troll-antifa-877914/

It is classic ad hominem, even if he lies 50% of the time - especially if.  You are not attacking the truth of what he is saying, but rather he himself.  

I wonder why you can't actually dispute the assertions being made.   Well not really.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jzk said:

Do you know what an ad hominem attack is?

It is dismissing the argument based on the author.  Can anyone challenge the actual evidence presented?

What did he lie about?  Everyone has lied about something.

I do.

Just wondering if every time someone labels someone else a liar, you'll chime in with calling it an ad hominem attack?

Will YOU ever label someone a liar?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jzk said:

It is classic ad hominem, even if he lies 50% of the time - especially if.  You are not attacking the truth of what he is saying, but rather he himself.  

I wonder why you can't actually dispute the assertions being made.   Well not really.

I don’t listen to liars, then try to figure out their latest lies. Quicker to ignore them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

I do.

Just wondering if every time someone labels someone else a liar, you'll chime in with calling it an ad hominem attack?

Will YOU ever label someone a liar?

No one has refuted the allegations.  No one.

Here is a lesson in ad hominems for you.

Not ad hominem:

You are wrong, dipshit.

Ad hominem:

You are wrong because you are a dipshit.

See the difference?

Link to post
Share on other sites

An ad hominem is an attack literally to the person.

After Sally presents an eloquent and compelling case for a more equitable taxation system, Sam asks the audience whether we should believe anything from a woman who isn't married, was once arrested, and smells a bit weird.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem

When Bus Driver and others attack Andy Ngo as a liar, which he is, that is not an attack on the person of Andy Ngo but rather an attack on his veracity, the credibility of a witness in your average Law And Order script. Now if they were to attack him as, you know, just another fuckin' Asian, yeah, that would be an ad hominem. But classifying Ngo as a liar based on his previous lies is not an ad hominem.

Note that Bus doesn't have to take Ngo's argument seriously. Once Ngo lost his credibility, which he has, well he lost it and then he's in Never Cry Wolf territory.

We regret the confusion.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

An ad hominem is an attack literally to the person.

After Sally presents an eloquent and compelling case for a more equitable taxation system, Sam asks the audience whether we should believe anything from a woman who isn't married, was once arrested, and smells a bit weird.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem

When Bus Driver and others attack Andy Ngo as a liar, which he is, that is not an attack on the person of Andy Ngo but rather an attack on his veracity, the credibility of a witness in your average Law And Order script. If they were to attack him as, you know, just another fuckin' Asian, yeah, that would be an ad hominem. But classifying Ngo as a liar based on his previous lies is not an ad hominem.

We regret the confusion.

Yes, they attacked his character rather than disputing the actual allegations.

That is the definition of ad hominem.

Keep trying.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

An ad hominem is an attack literally to the person.

After Sally presents an eloquent and compelling case for a more equitable taxation system, Sam asks the audience whether we should believe anything from a woman who isn't married, was once arrested, and smells a bit weird.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem

When Bus Driver and others attack Andy Ngo as a liar, which he is, that is not an attack on the person of Andy Ngo but rather an attack on his veracity, the credibility of a witness in your average Law And Order script. Now if they were to attack him as, you know, just another fuckin' Asian, yeah, that would be an ad hominem. But classifying Ngo as a liar based on his previous lies is not an ad hominem.

Note that Bus doesn't have to take Ngo's argument seriously. Once Ngo lost his credibility, which he has, well he lost it and then he's in Never Cry Wolf territory.

We regret the confusion.

But you HAVE to take liars seriously, and give them a chance, or the RWNJs will think you're not being open-minded and fair.

I'm willing to give people a chance and all but at some point, in the stream of never-ending lies and bullshit, I tune them out. Like Rush.

- DSK

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Steam Flyer said:

But you HAVE to take liars seriously, and give them a chance, or the RWNJs will think you're not being open-minded and fair.

I'm willing to give people a chance and all but at some point, in the stream of never-ending lies and bullshit, I tune them out. Like Rush.

- DSK

There is the dipshit.  Steam is not wrong because he is a dipshit, but rather he is just a dipshit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, jzk said:

Yes, they attacked his character rather than disputing the actual allegations.

That is the definition of ad hominem.

Keep trying.

Carts go behind horses. They concluded that he was a liar based on his lies.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Olsonist said:

Carts go behind horses. They concluded that he was a liar based on his lies.

Which is attacking the person rather than the argument.

Still no one here has or can attack the argument.

Btw, what did he lie about?  Can you name his top 5 lies?

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jzk said:

Which is attacking the person rather than the argument.

Still no one here has or can attack the argument.

Btw, what did he lie about?  Can you name his top 5 lies?

You are absolutely RIGHT! They are ignoring your liar's argument! (But they're not attacking his person.) Now pay attention here because it's going to get simple. They're ignoring your liar's argument because he's a liar. He wandered into Never Cry Wolf territory.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Olsonist said:

You are absolutely RIGHT! They are ignoring your liar's argument! Now pay attention here because it's going to get simple. They're ignoring your liar's argument because he's a liar. He's wandered into Never Cry Wolf territory.

Not only can't you refute the argument (actual pleadings filed in the case), but you can't even cite the lies he told.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, jzk said:

No one has refuted the allegations.  No one.

Here is a lesson in ad hominems for you.

Not ad hominem:

You are wrong, dipshit.

Ad hominem:

You are wrong because you are a dipshit.

See the difference?

I didn’t say he was right or wrong. I don’t care, as he’s a known liar, so I will ignore him. I guess you’re working for the same treatment.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, jzk said:

No one has refuted the allegations.  No one.

Here is a lesson in ad hominems for you.

Not ad hominem:

You are wrong, dipshit.

Ad hominem:

You are wrong because you are a dipshit.

See the difference?

If someone is known to have lied, they are a liar.  I do my best to remember who has lied to me.

Calling them a liar, and choosing not to believe what they say because they are a liar, is not an ad hominem attack.

No matter how badly you want it to be.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bus Driver said:

If someone is known to have lied, they are a liar.  I do my best to remember who has lied to me.

Calling them a liar, and choosing not to believe what they say because they are a liar, is not an ad hominem attack.

No matter how badly you want it to be.

What lies did he tell?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bus Driver said:

If someone is known to have lied, they are a liar.  I do my best to remember who has lied to me.

Calling them a liar, and choosing not to believe what they say because they are a liar, is not an ad hominem attack.

No matter how badly you want it to be.

Yes, that is an ad hominem.  You didn't show that he is wrong or lying.  You didn't address the issue at all.  I suspect because you already know he is correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Raz'r said:

I didn’t say he was right or wrong. I don’t care, as he’s a known liar, so I will ignore him. I guess you’re working for the same treatment.

He passed that barrier years ago for me. 100% bullshit, all the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

I'm willing to give people a chance and all but at some point, in the stream of never-ending lies and bullshit, I tune them out. Like Rush.

- DSK

Dude, seriously the irony of your post is incredible.  And that you don't even get it is what makes this post so deliciously ironic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Burning Man said:

Dude, seriously the irony of your post is incredible.  And that you don't even get it is what makes this post so deliciously ironic.

I have concluded he is  one of those people that lies so often and simply doesn’t even understand that he is lying.  
It is just part of his belief system. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Burning Man said:

Dude, seriously the irony of your post is incredible.  And that you don't even get it is what makes this post so deliciously ironic.

How so? He seems like a reasonable poster with no Trumpaloon tendencies so his dislike of liars rings true.  My big problem with him is his hatred for the friendly neighborhood outdoor cat.  He’d murder them just like you do with coyotes.  That’s kind of sociopathic.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Joker said:

I have concluded he is  one of those people that lies so often and simply doesn’t even understand that he is lying.  
It is just part of his belief system. 

So, he's clearly a republican then!

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Fakenews said:

He seems like a reasonable poster with no Trumpaloon tendencies

Actually, Dougies propensity for constantly lying without even probably realizing it because it's so ingrained in his being is EXACTLY a trumpaloon tendency.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Burning Man said:

Actually, Dougies propensity for constantly lying without even probably realizing it because it's so ingrained in his being is EXACTLY a trumpaloon tendency.  

:lol:

Wow, you really got your panties in knot this time.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:

If that lying weasel Ngo wrote that it was sunny outside ..  

you best stick you head out there and check. 

What are the top 5 lies that he has told?

In this case, he posted pages right out of the court filings.  But the clowns can't address those facts because well, that is why they resort to the ad hominem in the first place.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
7 minutes ago, Mike G said:
With credit for time served it's only like Life+19 years now.
 

 

 

Sad story. Just a bunch of good ol boys IMO, who didn't think through what might happen if the guy they decided to arrest didn't properly surrender to their display of 2nd Amendment. They didn't go out there to kill someone, they wanted to detain someone they thought was a sneak-thief.  As much as they deserve to be punished it seems wrong to get the same sentence someone who did premeditated murder. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mark K said:

Sad story. Just a bunch of good ol boys IMO, who didn't think through what might happen if the guy they decided to arrest didn't properly surrender to their display of 2nd Amendment. They didn't go out there to kill someone, they wanted to detain someone they thought was a sneak-thief.  As much as they deserve to be punished it seems wrong to get the same sentence someone who did premeditated murder. 

 

 

Imagine how many people would still be alive, if the USA actually brought up to present time, the 2nd amendment....

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mark K said:

Sad story. Just a bunch of good ol boys IMO, who didn't think through what might happen if the guy they decided to arrest didn't properly surrender to their display of 2nd Amendment. They didn't go out there to kill someone, they wanted to detain someone they thought was a sneak-thief.  As much as they deserve to be punished it seems wrong to get the same sentence someone who did premeditated murder. 

 

 

I hate conscience wrestling with this. These guys made legendary bad decisions, and deserved jail time, but like you, I have a problem with the sentence length. 25 years and parole would have been sufficient punishment. But it is what it is, I expect appeals appeals, appeals, regardless.

Link to post
Share on other sites