You're focussing on the wrong thing. Minorities are not the only victimized people and events are happening that will eventually touch even you in just as serious a way if you haven't experienced it already. Fergusen is just the beginning of the New World Order and you shouldn't ignore it just because you happen to dislike the people it is happening to because the final outcome would have our founding fathers rolling in their graves.
what has blacks stealing and breaking things because they're upset about the cops shooting a cigar thief got to do with a new world order 
Topic: It's funny to see these thugs in Ferguson bitching about how they have nothing - page 3. (Read 9950 times)
January 09, 2015, 10:40:01 AM
January 09, 2015, 08:37:25 AM
The Black communities are receiving a lot of money from the tax payer and suffer because of it. They would benefit more of a free state and free markets because they would be willing to work harder and cheaper than richer people.
January 09, 2015, 08:03:41 AM
Quote from: saddampbuh
not really, most minority groups in america have been victimised at one point or another and still managed to get ahead, is it possible blacks will ever stop blaming their laziness and criminality on other people being mean to them?
You're focussing on the wrong thing. Minorities are not the only victimized people and events are happening that will eventually touch even you in just as serious a way if you haven't experienced it already. Fergusen is just the beginning of the New World Order and you shouldn't ignore it just because you happen to dislike the people it is happening to because the final outcome would have our founding fathers rolling in their graves. January 08, 2015, 12:49:17 PM
Is it possible one might not be able to improve because one really is being victimized?
not really, most minority groups in america have been victimised at one point or another and still managed to get ahead, is it possible blacks will ever stop blaming their laziness and criminality on other people being mean to them? January 08, 2015, 12:21:32 PM
Is it possible one might not be able to improve because one really is being victimized?
December 02, 2014, 02:51:24 PM
Not all protestors robbed stores but they have all been lied on TV when they heard it's a racist crime when the policeman was clearly in self defense.
The black community is suffering from its leaders telling them they are victims. You can't improve if you think you are a victim.
The black community is suffering from its leaders telling them they are victims. You can't improve if you think you are a victim.
December 02, 2014, 02:17:21 PM
Ironic, but in the grand scheme of things, Chicago.gov administers a civil rights-free zone, so she wouldn't even be allowed to defend herself without an order from SCOTUS.
December 02, 2014, 02:16:36 PM
The Blaze. 
Journalistic integrity at its finest.
Journalistic integrity at its finest.The blaze tried to mike brown you too?
Haha!
No, I'm just not high on blogspam (on either side) that takes a story and repackages it into inflammatory material to feed a particular base's rigid mindset. The Blaze is certainly one of those. The left has their share of them too. They're just obnoxious articles that add very little, if any, value to what are important conversations.I agree. Media is a business, and the purpose of owning a business is to make money. Any cable media is no longer in the business of reporting news, but spinning news to press their viewers' preconceived rage points. Then there is another step to the extreme in websites like The Blaze that really whore themselves out to get you to click that link. You can tell how much integrity one of these 'news' sites has by how often they use subjective adjectives in their headlines. For example, "Absolutely Disgusting" might be something that appears in a headline about the behavior of a black shopper to get conservative minded folks to click through and see for themselves just how disgusting some people are. (See the previous Blaze link if you want to see for yourself!)
The problem is these headlines work. They make a ton of money. That's why there's so many of them.
And that is why we have a brain and sort out or believe what we want and reject what we do not want. I would copy paste a few lines and and always give credit by adding a link to the original source where I saw that information. In this case you could bypass the blaze and just watch the video while getting some context. Then not trusting the blaze you could google/duck duck go/ bling that youtube video and read the behind the scene of that video. Maybe there was an personal history between the cop and the dude on the video being "mike browned", before.
Obviously most people do not care and are too lazy to do too much research and prefer to trust the main stream media, the one that makes the most money with the most advertising. That is their choice and is perfectly acceptable too
If people were interested in unbiased information, something like The Blaze wouldn't exist. People don't want that though. They want pieces that make them feel superior to groups they view as inferior, so they can post them wherever and rant about how terrible some groups are for doing or thinking [insert racial or political stereotype here]. The Blaze is worst than most because it foments division and hatred by playing on racial undertones, otherwise there'd by no reason to point out the race of people they're writing about in the headlines. 'Check out the disgusting way this black shopper acted around this cop' or whatever the headline was. The point isn't that some guy was disrespectful to a cop, it's that he's black and he's acting in a way you should hate. The headline tells you that much.
My question is, if you know a site is a disgraceful click monger and their presentation of information is so biased and serves no legitimate news function, why do you post them? Even if, as you say, people have brains and can decide for themselves if a source is worthy? If you're posting it and saying 'Decide for yourself if this is relevant information,' then it just looks like you're posting things you agree approve of. And in the case of this specific Blaze story, the story trying to appeal to people on the basis of 'look at this ridiculous black guy' is what's disgusting.
If people were interested in unbiased information, something like CNN wouldn't exist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZFZmQCA1KE
Nor Fox News, yada yada.
Yawn.
December 02, 2014, 01:37:40 PM
Sheriff Clarke ~ Irresponsible Groups Descended on Ferguson MO Like Vultures on a Roadside Carcass
December 02, 2014, 12:34:51 PM
The Blaze. Journalistic integrity at its finest.
Journalistic integrity at its finest.The blaze tried to mike brown you too?
Haha!
No, I'm just not high on blogspam (on either side) that takes a story and repackages it into inflammatory material to feed a particular base's rigid mindset. The Blaze is certainly one of those. The left has their share of them too. They're just obnoxious articles that add very little, if any, value to what are important conversations.I agree. Media is a business, and the purpose of owning a business is to make money. Any cable media is no longer in the business of reporting news, but spinning news to press their viewers' preconceived rage points. Then there is another step to the extreme in websites like The Blaze that really whore themselves out to get you to click that link. You can tell how much integrity one of these 'news' sites has by how often they use subjective adjectives in their headlines. For example, "Absolutely Disgusting" might be something that appears in a headline about the behavior of a black shopper to get conservative minded folks to click through and see for themselves just how disgusting some people are. (See the previous Blaze link if you want to see for yourself!)
The problem is these headlines work. They make a ton of money. That's why there's so many of them.
And that is why we have a brain and sort out or believe what we want and reject what we do not want. I would copy paste a few lines and and always give credit by adding a link to the original source where I saw that information. In this case you could bypass the blaze and just watch the video while getting some context. Then not trusting the blaze you could google/duck duck go/ bling that youtube video and read the behind the scene of that video. Maybe there was an personal history between the cop and the dude on the video being "mike browned", before.
Obviously most people do not care and are too lazy to do too much research and prefer to trust the main stream media, the one that makes the most money with the most advertising. That is their choice and is perfectly acceptable too
If people were interested in unbiased information, something like The Blaze wouldn't exist. People don't want that though. They want pieces that make them feel superior to groups they view as inferior, so they can post them wherever and rant about how terrible some groups are for doing or thinking [insert racial or political stereotype here]. The Blaze is worst than most because it foments division and hatred by playing on racial undertones, otherwise there'd by no reason to point out the race of people they're writing about in the headlines. 'Check out the disgusting way this black shopper acted around this cop' or whatever the headline was. The point isn't that some guy was disrespectful to a cop, it's that he's black and he's acting in a way you should hate. The headline tells you that much.
My question is, if you know a site is a disgraceful click monger and their presentation of information is so biased and serves no legitimate news function, why do you post them? Even if, as you say, people have brains and can decide for themselves if a source is worthy? If you're posting it and saying 'Decide for yourself if this is relevant information,' then it just looks like you're posting things you agree approve of. And in the case of this specific Blaze story, the story trying to appeal to people on the basis of 'look at this ridiculous black guy' is what's disgusting.
If people were interested in unbiased information, something like CNN wouldn't exist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZFZmQCA1KE
December 02, 2014, 11:08:39 AM
...when they have thousands of dollars of ink tatted all over their bodies and up their arms.
This is what people mean by the "entitled" culture. People think a paycheck is meant to blow on fun stuff while the government picks up the tab for your basic necessities like food, housing, healthcare or child care.
This is what people mean by the "entitled" culture. People think a paycheck is meant to blow on fun stuff while the government picks up the tab for your basic necessities like food, housing, healthcare or child care.
It always amuses me when poor white trash bitches about a black guy getting a 200 dollar welfare check to help make ends meet. Meanwhile, the tax payers of St. Louis have cut a 528 MILLION dollar welfare check to the owner of the Rams, a man worth 6 BILLION dollars, and not even bat an eye. Talk about needing tax payers to pay for your toys!
December 02, 2014, 11:00:23 AM
...when they have thousands of dollars of ink tatted all over their bodies and up their arms.
This is what people mean by the "entitled" culture. People think a paycheck is meant to blow on fun stuff while the government picks up the tab for your basic necessities like food, housing, healthcare or child care.
This is what people mean by the "entitled" culture. People think a paycheck is meant to blow on fun stuff while the government picks up the tab for your basic necessities like food, housing, healthcare or child care.
Really? I thought they were "bitching" about being brutalized and murdered by armed white racist thugs.
December 02, 2014, 10:09:24 AM
http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2014/12/chicago-based-reporter-who-published-darren-wilsons-address-wanted-a-list-police-protection.html
-----------------------------------------------------------
Note to julie: make sure you have friends among the people whose colleague you've made a target of, next time...
December 01, 2014, 05:45:43 PM
The Blaze. Journalistic integrity at its finest.
Journalistic integrity at its finest.The blaze tried to mike brown you too?
Haha!
No, I'm just not high on blogspam (on either side) that takes a story and repackages it into inflammatory material to feed a particular base's rigid mindset. The Blaze is certainly one of those. The left has their share of them too. They're just obnoxious articles that add very little, if any, value to what are important conversations.I agree. Media is a business, and the purpose of owning a business is to make money. Any cable media is no longer in the business of reporting news, but spinning news to press their viewers' preconceived rage points. Then there is another step to the extreme in websites like The Blaze that really whore themselves out to get you to click that link. You can tell how much integrity one of these 'news' sites has by how often they use subjective adjectives in their headlines. For example, "Absolutely Disgusting" might be something that appears in a headline about the behavior of a black shopper to get conservative minded folks to click through and see for themselves just how disgusting some people are. (See the previous Blaze link if you want to see for yourself!)
The problem is these headlines work. They make a ton of money. That's why there's so many of them.
And that is why we have a brain and sort out or believe what we want and reject what we do not want. I would copy paste a few lines and and always give credit by adding a link to the original source where I saw that information. In this case you could bypass the blaze and just watch the video while getting some context. Then not trusting the blaze you could google/duck duck go/ bling that youtube video and read the behind the scene of that video. Maybe there was an personal history between the cop and the dude on the video being "mike browned", before.
Obviously most people do not care and are too lazy to do too much research and prefer to trust the main stream media, the one that makes the most money with the most advertising. That is their choice and is perfectly acceptable too
If people were interested in unbiased information, something like The Blaze wouldn't exist. People don't want that though. They want pieces that make them feel superior to groups they view as inferior, so they can post them wherever and rant about how terrible some groups are for doing or thinking [insert racial or political stereotype here]. The Blaze is worst than most because it foments division and hatred by playing on racial undertones, otherwise there'd by no reason to point out the race of people they're writing about in the headlines. 'Check out the disgusting way this black shopper acted around this cop' or whatever the headline was. The point isn't that some guy was disrespectful to a cop, it's that he's black and he's acting in a way you should hate. The headline tells you that much.
My question is, if you know a site is a disgraceful click monger and their presentation of information is so biased and serves no legitimate news function, why do you post them? Even if, as you say, people have brains and can decide for themselves if a source is worthy? If you're posting it and saying 'Decide for yourself if this is relevant information,' then it just looks like you're posting things you agree approve of. And in the case of this specific Blaze story, the story trying to appeal to people on the basis of 'look at this ridiculous black guy' is what's disgusting.
December 01, 2014, 02:21:14 PM
Peaceful protesters very upset that they can't be martyred by police when the "militia" has the PP's back? /facepalm
December 01, 2014, 01:07:35 PM
The Blaze. Journalistic integrity at its finest.
Journalistic integrity at its finest.The blaze tried to mike brown you too?
Haha!
No, I'm just not high on blogspam (on either side) that takes a story and repackages it into inflammatory material to feed a particular base's rigid mindset. The Blaze is certainly one of those. The left has their share of them too. They're just obnoxious articles that add very little, if any, value to what are important conversations.I agree. Media is a business, and the purpose of owning a business is to make money. Any cable media is no longer in the business of reporting news, but spinning news to press their viewers' preconceived rage points. Then there is another step to the extreme in websites like The Blaze that really whore themselves out to get you to click that link. You can tell how much integrity one of these 'news' sites has by how often they use subjective adjectives in their headlines. For example, "Absolutely Disgusting" might be something that appears in a headline about the behavior of a black shopper to get conservative minded folks to click through and see for themselves just how disgusting some people are. (See the previous Blaze link if you want to see for yourself!)
The problem is these headlines work. They make a ton of money. That's why there's so many of them.
And that is why we have a brain and sort out or believe what we want and reject what we do not want. I would copy paste a few lines and and always give credit by adding a link to the original source where I saw that information. In this case you could bypass the blaze and just watch the video while getting some context. Then not trusting the blaze you could google/duck duck go/ bling that youtube video and read the behind the scene of that video. Maybe there was an personal history between the cop and the dude on the video being "mike browned", before.
Obviously most people do not care and are too lazy to do too much research and prefer to trust the main stream media, the one that makes the most money with the most advertising. That is their choice and is perfectly acceptable too
December 01, 2014, 12:12:24 PM
The Blaze. Journalistic integrity at its finest.
Journalistic integrity at its finest.The blaze tried to mike brown you too?
Haha!
No, I'm just not high on blogspam (on either side) that takes a story and repackages it into inflammatory material to feed a particular base's rigid mindset. The Blaze is certainly one of those. The left has their share of them too. They're just obnoxious articles that add very little, if any, value to what are important conversations.I agree. Media is a business, and the purpose of owning a business is to make money. Any cable media is no longer in the business of reporting news, but spinning news to press their viewers' preconceived rage points. Then there is another step to the extreme in websites like The Blaze that really whore themselves out to get you to click that link. You can tell how much integrity one of these 'news' sites has by how often they use subjective adjectives in their headlines. For example, "Absolutely Disgusting" might be something that appears in a headline about the behavior of a black shopper to get conservative minded folks to click through and see for themselves just how disgusting some people are. (See the previous Blaze link if you want to see for yourself!)
The problem is these headlines work. They make a ton of money. That's why there's so many of them.
December 01, 2014, 11:17:23 AM
The Blaze. Journalistic integrity at its finest.
Journalistic integrity at its finest.The blaze tried to mike brown you too?
Haha!
No, I'm just not high on blogspam (on either side) that takes a story and repackages it into inflammatory material to feed a particular base's rigid mindset. The Blaze is certainly one of those. The left has their share of them too. They're just obnoxious articles that add very little, if any, value to what are important conversations. December 01, 2014, 11:02:35 AM
The Blaze. Journalistic integrity at its finest.
Journalistic integrity at its finest.The blaze tried to mike brown you too?
Haha!
No, I'm just not high on blogspam (on either side) that takes a story and repackages it into inflammatory material to feed a particular base's rigid mindset. The Blaze is certainly one of those. The left has their share of them too. They're just obnoxious articles that add very little, if any, value to what are important conversations. November 30, 2014, 04:09:11 PM
VIDEO>>> SNIPERS TAKE POSITION Atop #Ferguson Rooftops – Protesters VERY UPSET (Video)
Ferguson businesses – the ones that are still standing – brought in local militias this week to protect their property from violent protesters, looters and arsonists.
The militia volunteers were members of the Oathkeepers, an organization founded in 2009 to protect the Constitution and individual rights.
One woman was very upset that the members were guarding a Ferguson business. The woman actually says it’s wrong for the militia to protect other people’s property.
“It’s not a joke, I’m sorry. It’s not about intentionality(?) This is somebody else’s property, not even yours. And, you’re volunteering too. You’re not even being paid… It’s unacceptable. It’s diabolical. It’s sinful.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jWEEB61xQ8
Ferguson police forced the Oathkeepers off of the rooftops on Saturday after complaints by protesters.
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported:
They are volunteers affiliated with a 35,000-member national organization called Oath Keepers. Yale Law School graduate and libertarian Stewart Rhodes said by telephone from Montana that he founded the group in 2009 to protect constitutional rights, including those of protesters confronted by what he described as overly militarized police.
Police questioned group members early in the week and allowed them to stay. But Saturday, after media inquiries, St. Louis County police officers ordered the Oath Keepers to leave the rooftops.
Threatened with arrest for operating without a license, the volunteers argued but eventually left their positions early Saturday, Rhodes said.
“We are going to go back as protesters,” Rhodes said Saturday afternoon.
Rhodes, who said he is Mexican-American, stressed that Oath Keepers is not anti-government. He said the volunteers handling rooftop security in Ferguson were current or former government employees and first responders, many who have intense military, police and EMS training.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/11/video-snipers-take-position-atop-ferguson-rooftops-protesters-very-upset-video/
Jump to: