Salinas California Police Department caught beating a man

[ZombiLoin]

Do agree, caribou is tribal.

[Ad Bot]

[Cantaloupe]

You remind me of these kinds of people:



Are the big bad liberals here dismissing your fact-based arguments as racism?

Speaking of facts:
Man, its Fox News. And that still doesn't justify using such a wild accusation.

Do you completely ignore what I am saying and move on to your own little agenda? I find it really frustrating how my responses are constantly ignored, and all I hear is "we can tell that you are a tribal beneath all of those words". I cant even tell you how stupid that sounds. It's almost like the McCarthy years when everyone was classified as a Communist if they had some socialist views.

The reason we think you're tribal has nothing to do with your use of the word 'thug'. If this is literally the only ignorance you wish to apologize for, then don't even bother.
Why don't you start by reviewing the same thread where everyone else simultaneously came to the conclusion that you're a tribal?

http://forum.blockland.us/index.php?topic=266645.0

I said this: "Looks more to me like 100+ blacks attacking random whites, I didn't see one white face running in the video. All 100 of these kids should be charged with assault, and aggravated assault. This is a hate crime committed." That was not tribal, in the video I saw black individuals attacking other white people, which led me to believe that it was a hate crime. If a mob of one hundred whites started attacking black people, that would also be classified as a hate crime.

And if you're going to come back claiming you never, "explicitly said that they are discriminated against because of their own doing", then go ahead and give the thread another read over.
You seem to be under the impression that I'm grasping at straws for any chance to prove you a tribal. The fact of the matter is that literally everyone on the forums sees what I see. If we surveyed everyone in this thread about whether Caribou is a tribal, everyone would say yes.

I am not upset about what you or others may think because it is simply not true.

Let me put it in other words: you're on the defensive here. I have literally nothing to prove to anyone anymore. I've so clearly delineated all the tribal stuff you've said that no one here would possibly disagree with me except for you. It's your job to prove you aren't a tribal, and I seriously doubt you're going to be able to do that at this point in time.

The problem that I have here is that you've given some quotes which either don't mention a thing about race, or they mention the word "black people" or "minorities", and the only thing that seems to be said by you people is that statement was tribal.

[ZombiLoin]

what are "implications" for $300 alex

what is "rhetorical meaning" for $500 alex

[Nickpb 2.0]

 Why do you reply in the quote? Also im pretty sure you realize how stupid you sound by now

[Narkro555]

http://forum.blockland.us/index.php?topic=266645.0

How is that not tribal? Before you changed the title it was "Mob of 100+ blacks attacking random white people." This was a clear push of the idea that African-Americans are violent thugs that randomly attack innocent white people. Your title claim was completely untrue and was just trying to justify a belief that black people are predisposed to violence again white people (attacking "random" whites) and that they are an actual threat (+100 "mob").

[SeventhSandwich]

I said this: "Looks more to me like 100+ blacks attacking random whites, I didn't see one white face running in the video. All 100 of these kids should be charged with assault, and aggravated assault. This is a hate crime committed." That was not tribal, in the video I saw black individuals attacking other white people, which led me to believe that it was a hate crime. If a mob of one hundred whites started attacking black people, that would also be classified as a hate crime.

Lol, that thread contains a conversation that carries on for dozens of pages. There's waaaay more to it than just your first innocuous-looking post. Please try again.

I am not upset about what you or others may think because it is simply not true.

On what basis? Because you say it's not true? Because you promise it's not true? What value does your word have to anyone?

The problem that I have here is that you've given some quotes which either don't mention a thing about race, or they mention the word "black people" or "minorities", and the only thing that seems to be said by you people is that statement was tribal.

So you're saying that in a thread about minorities, you decided to go off on some random tangent about regular old poor people without any implication that they are also minorities? Not buying it.

Regardless, your statements about poor people are equally offensive and incorrect. At best you're just trying to prove that you hate one disenfranchised group instead of another. That's not impressive to anyone.

[Cantaloupe]

How is that not tribal? Before you changed the title it was "Mob of 100+ blacks attacking random white people." This was a clear push of the idea that African-Americans are violent thugs that randomly attack innocent white people. Your title claim was completely untrue and was just trying to justify a belief that black people are predisposed to violence again white people (attacking "random" whites) and that they are an actual threat (+100 "mob").

I did not create the thread, DrenDran did.

Lol, that thread contains a conversation that carries on for dozens of pages. There's waaaay more to it than just your first innocuous-looking post. Please try again.
On what basis? Because you say it's not true? Because you promise it's not true? What value does your word have to anyone?
So you're saying that in a thread about minorities, you decided to go off on some random tangent about regular old poor people without any implication that they are also minorities? Not buying it.

Regardless, your statements about poor people are equally offensive and incorrect. At best you're just trying to prove that you hate one disenfranchised group instead of another. That's not impressive to anyone.

Unfortunately, I am not trying to impress you or anyone else online. Literally every single thing I've said has been left unanswered and ignored, this is really pathetic. Are you saying that all poor people are minorities? You aren't making sense, and you are making me believe that you are the tribal now. I've said that some poor people are where they are today because of the choices they've made or the choices their parents made (some poor people, not all, keep that in mind), and I've never mentioned these poor people being black. Statistically in inner cities, blacks tend to be poorer than whites, but at a national level the whites are the poorest.

[ZombiLoin]

CITATIONS NEEDED

[Aces]

The level hostility you hold is unreal. I did not realize that the article I was reading did not contain accurate facts, I realize that this is something scandalous.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Michael_Brown

Somehow the autopsy and crime evidence doesn't mention him with multiple cigarillos at his death? Was there something I missed between the two events? Whatever the case the camera video would probably detail it all.

[Narkro555]

I did not create the thread, DrenDran did.

My mistake, sorry. Although I do see the post claiming black people have made no progress and that white settlers had the same level of opportunities as slaves.

[SeventhSandwich]

Unfortunately, I am not trying to impress you or anyone else online. Literally every single thing I've said has been left unanswered and ignored, this is really pathetic.

No, I've answered everything you've said. Link me to one of your posts that I haven't responded to, and I'll get to it pronto.

Are you saying that all poor people are minorities? You aren't making sense, and you are making me believe that you are the tribal now.

Lol, okay. Anyone else think that's what I said?

I've said that some poor people are where they are today because of the choices they've made or the choices their parents made (some poor people, not all, keep that in mind), and I've never mentioned these poor people being black.

That's not what you've said before. You've generalized minorities and poor people in other threads without any form of modifier of 'some' or 'many'. And regardless, what do you expect us to gather from that information? That it's okay to stuff on entire groups of people because of the actions of a few?

I'm sorry, but people do not provide random snippets of sociological data without implication. If I said, "some people with tourette's deserve to be euthanized", people would gather that I am a sick national socialist forget. The fact that I can backtrack and say, "Oh, I didn't say all people with tourette's" doesn't really change it, right?

Statistically in inner cities, blacks tend to be poorer than whites, but at a national level the whites are the poorest.

Bullstuff. Stratified samples of median household income show that blacks are overall the poorest race.
http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_10_SF4_B19013&prodType=table

Case in loving point. You shamelessly make claims that are just wrong. They aren't just dumb opinions or tribal generalizations, but literally just incorrect.

You'd think that after the last debacle you'd start fact-checking the stuff you say.

[Cantaloupe]

No, I've answered everything you've said. Link me to one of your posts that I haven't responded to, and I'll get to it pronto.
Lol, okay. Anyone else think that's what I said?

I am not Speedy Gonzales, if I were him, then I'd be getting the quotes you did not reply to within a jiffy.
That's not what you've said before. You've generalized minorities and poor people in other threads without any form of modifier of 'some' or 'many'. And regardless, what do you expect us to gather from that information? That it's okay to stuff on entire groups of people because of the actions of a few?

I've generalized lower income people, but I've never said anything negative about all poor people, just some who don't try hard enough.

I'm sorry, but people do not provide random snippets of sociological data without implication. If I said, "some people with tourette's deserve to be euthanized", people would gather that I am a sick national socialist forget. The fact that I can backtrack and say, "Oh, I didn't say all people with tourette's" doesn't really change it, right?
Bullstuff. Stratified samples of median household income show that blacks are overall the poorest race.
http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_10_SF4_B19013&prodType=table

I did not want to be called a tribal. Also if that's how you feel, then be it. If you know that you carry a gene that could cause your offspring to suffer, then you are most likely right in not having any kids at all. It's not worth making a child suffer from a terminal illness. Tourette's on the other hand is not a terminal illness.

You'd think that after the last debacle you'd start fact-checking the stuff you say.

[SeventhSandwich]

I am not Speedy Gonzales, if I were him, then I'd be getting the quotes you did not reply to within a jiffy.

No you wouldn't, because there are none. I don't ignore posts that I am unable to respond to. That's your thing.

I've generalized lower income people, but I've never said anything negative about all poor people, just some who don't try hard enough.

Either I'm reading this wrong, or you don't recognize the fact that 'lower income people' and 'poor people' are the same thing.

Regardless, generalizing people is inherently negative. People do not like it when you assume bad things about them because of stereotypes and generalizations. When you do this with ethnicity, it is known as racism.

I'm sorry, but people do not provide random snippets of sociological data without implication. If I said, "some people with tourette's deserve to be euthanized", people would gather that I am a sick national socialist forget. The fact that I can backtrack and say, "Oh, I didn't say all people with tourette's" doesn't really change it, right?

I did not want to be called a tribal.

Ah, okay. You like to generalize and unfairly apply labels to marginalized groups, but you make sure to put modifiers on it so that you don't get a label yourself. Do you recognize just how awful that is?

If you know that you carry a gene that could cause your offspring to suffer, then you are most likely right in not having any kids at all. It's not worth making a child suffer from a terminal illness. Tourette's on the other hand is not a terminal illness.

Not the point. By putting modifiers and weasel words on your writing, people aren't prevented from understanding your implication.

[Cantaloupe]

No you wouldn't, because there are none. I don't ignore posts that I am unable to respond to. That's your thing.
Either I'm reading this wrong, or you don't recognize the fact that 'lower income people' and 'poor people' are the same thing.

Regardless, generalizing people is inherently negative. People do not like it when you assume bad things about them because of stereotypes and generalizations. When you do this with ethnicity, it is known as racism.
I did not want to be called a tribal.

Ah, okay. You like to generalize and unfairly apply labels to marginalized groups, but you make sure to put modifiers on it so that you don't get a label yourself. Do you recognize just how awful that is?

Not the point. By putting modifiers and weasel words on your writing, people aren't prevented from understanding your implication.

Why would it be tribal if I were to say something negative about some impoverished people? I fail to understand that.

[ZombiLoin]

Statistically in inner cities, blacks tend to be poorer than whites, but at a national level the whites are the poorest.

Bullstuff. Stratified samples of median household income show that blacks are overall the poorest race.
http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_10_SF4_B19013&prodType=table

so we've established that caribou deliberately falsifies facts to fit his agenda. awesome.

i personally think this destroys any remaining credibility he has and nobody should ever take him seriously any more so help you god.