martin wrote:

arkrud wrote:

martin wrote:

arkrud wrote:

djsunyc wrote:

arkrud wrote:

djsunyc wrote:i called him a fat f ck.

grabbing pu$$y and being racist is ok now so i can call him a fat f ck.

If someone shoot 50 people is it OK to shoot somebody too?
If one being a jerk being OK for other to be same?... God help us all.

are you trying to equate the 2? get some grip on reality.

btw, radical white terrorist attack in vegas. worst mass shooting in history. i wonder if the word terrorist willbe used? especially if he is a christian. lets also make it eaaier for more folks to get guns while we are at it. as well as silencers.

Psycho killed many people.
Leave the dead alone - this is not political issue.
Nothing in what happened should be used to prove any political, racial, or religions points.
Unless someone is sick psycho himself.

akrud, I don't know if there is a language barrier or level of understanding to exactly what you are stating or what others are stating but I would ask that you read and more carefully construct your statements.

Calling someone fat or a fat ****, while certainly very colorful and perhaps - and I don't even have the right phrase for it - guttural language(?), you somehow equated that to killing. It's not the same level. Don't go there.

And by some weird association you also just labeled djsu a sick psycho in your next reply. Did you mean that? And why can't dj talk about how we have used the word "terrorist" in the media and the like? Why would he or anyone, and why particularly would you, call someone a sick psycho?

Whether intentional or not, you just dropped the conversation. Please refrain.

I stated that someone who will use this kind of event to prove any political, racial, or religions points is in my opinion sick psycho.
I never called anyone specifically. There is no need for this. It is self evident for any normal person not blinded with hate.

And yet that's how I read it, and I'm sure many others may have as well. It was not self evident in the context of what dj had written about using the phrase terrorism and the post your replied to in general.

Mostly speaking, I glaze over what you write because it's all over the place and half the things you say don't make sense and aren't even pertinent to what you reply to.

I am asking you to be more clear.

I was thinking about my posting and getting more inclined to stop participating in any non-Knicks related discussions.
Sometimes when one is communicating with people who are world apart it produced nothing but frustration.
This forum is serving the goal of entertaining people about the great game of basketball and should be the outlet to get away from disturbances and hardship of day-to-day life.
I think the "political" topics should also be comforting and my views regardless of being wrong or right are not in line with majority of posters and so are irritating to them.
I start feeling like man posting at woman site dedicated to motherhood. Out of place.
Fist preseason game is tomorrow and Rangers starting the season Saturday so time to get back to sports.

arkrud wrote:

martin wrote:

arkrud wrote:

martin wrote:

arkrud wrote:

djsunyc wrote:

arkrud wrote:

djsunyc wrote:i called him a fat f ck.

grabbing pu$$y and being racist is ok now so i can call him a fat f ck.

If someone shoot 50 people is it OK to shoot somebody too?
If one being a jerk being OK for other to be same?... God help us all.

are you trying to equate the 2? get some grip on reality.

btw, radical white terrorist attack in vegas. worst mass shooting in history. i wonder if the word terrorist willbe used? especially if he is a christian. lets also make it eaaier for more folks to get guns while we are at it. as well as silencers.

Psycho killed many people.
Leave the dead alone - this is not political issue.
Nothing in what happened should be used to prove any political, racial, or religions points.
Unless someone is sick psycho himself.

akrud, I don't know if there is a language barrier or level of understanding to exactly what you are stating or what others are stating but I would ask that you read and more carefully construct your statements.

Calling someone fat or a fat ****, while certainly very colorful and perhaps - and I don't even have the right phrase for it - guttural language(?), you somehow equated that to killing. It's not the same level. Don't go there.

And by some weird association you also just labeled djsu a sick psycho in your next reply. Did you mean that? And why can't dj talk about how we have used the word "terrorist" in the media and the like? Why would he or anyone, and why particularly would you, call someone a sick psycho?

Whether intentional or not, you just dropped the conversation. Please refrain.

I stated that someone who will use this kind of event to prove any political, racial, or religions points is in my opinion sick psycho.
I never called anyone specifically. There is no need for this. It is self evident for any normal person not blinded with hate.

And yet that's how I read it, and I'm sure many others may have as well. It was not self evident in the context of what dj had written about using the phrase terrorism and the post your replied to in general.

Mostly speaking, I glaze over what you write because it's all over the place and half the things you say don't make sense and aren't even pertinent to what you reply to.

I am asking you to be more clear.

I was thinking about my posting and getting more inclined to stop participating in any non-Knicks related discussions.
Sometimes when one is communicating with people who are world apart it produced nothing but frustration.
This forum is serving the goal of entertaining people about the great game of basketball and should be the outlet to get away from disturbances and hardship of day-to-day life.
I think the "political" topics should also be comforting and my views regardless of being wrong or right are not in line with majority of posters and so are irritating to them.
I start feeling like man posting at woman site dedicated to motherhood. Out of place.
Fist preseason game is tomorrow and Rangers starting the season Saturday so time to get back to sports.

sounds good

meloshouldgo wrote:

djsunyc wrote:how the US media + politicians handle terror attacks:

1. muslim = terrorist
2. blacks = thugs
3. whites = mentally ill

just a good guy that's going through some problems is probably the reasoning with this one.

I was gonna post pretty much the same thing, except blacks would be druggies looking for a free ride.

Read his speech, at least he had the decency of responding quickly. Which is better than what we have seen from him before.

I bet that if you were to diagnose just about everybody who ever involved themselves in intentional violence towards civilian populations you would find that they were in fact mentally ill - whatever race, religion, etc.

I would also posit that when one's reaction to a tragedy in which over 50 people die and over 400 are injured is "ah great, a white person did it!!! Let's see how the media will spin this in favor of whitey now so I can express indignation at the imbalance in national news coverage" - it is at best in poor taste.

nixluva wrote:

simrud wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

djsunyc wrote:how the US media + politicians handle terror attacks:

1. muslim = terrorist
2. blacks = thugs
3. whites = mentally ill

just a good guy that's going through some problems is probably the reasoning with this one.

I was gonna post pretty much the same thing, except blacks would be druggies looking for a free ride.

Read his speech, at least he had the decency of responding quickly. Which is better than what we have seen from him before.

I bet that if you were to diagnose just about everybody who ever involved themselves in intentional violence towards civilian populations you would find that they were in fact mentally ill - whatever race, religion, etc.

I would also posit that when one's reaction to a tragedy in which over 50 people die and over 400 are injured is "ah great, a white person did it!!! Let's see how the media will spin this in favor of whitey now so I can express indignation at the imbalance in national news coverage" - it is at best in poor taste.

A lot of this kind of reaction is a response to decades of imbalance. Doesn't make it right but it has an explanation. IMO the focus has to be on what needs to be done to address this problem since it's a largely American phenomenon. Next to NOTHING has been done to address this and that is a disgrace.

I agree with you, but this type of reaction is why Trump won the election. Nobody likes him outside of a relatively small minority but a lot of people voted for him largely in response to this type of rhetoric from the left.

simrud wrote:

nixluva wrote:

simrud wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

djsunyc wrote:how the US media + politicians handle terror attacks:

1. muslim = terrorist
2. blacks = thugs
3. whites = mentally ill

just a good guy that's going through some problems is probably the reasoning with this one.

I was gonna post pretty much the same thing, except blacks would be druggies looking for a free ride.

Read his speech, at least he had the decency of responding quickly. Which is better than what we have seen from him before.

I bet that if you were to diagnose just about everybody who ever involved themselves in intentional violence towards civilian populations you would find that they were in fact mentally ill - whatever race, religion, etc.

I would also posit that when one's reaction to a tragedy in which over 50 people die and over 400 are injured is "ah great, a white person did it!!! Let's see how the media will spin this in favor of whitey now so I can express indignation at the imbalance in national news coverage" - it is at best in poor taste.

A lot of this kind of reaction is a response to decades of imbalance. Doesn't make it right but it has an explanation. IMO the focus has to be on what needs to be done to address this problem since it's a largely American phenomenon. Next to NOTHING has been done to address this and that is a disgrace.

I agree with you, but this type of reaction is why Trump won the election. Nobody likes him outside of a relatively small minority but a lot of people voted for him largely in response to this type of rhetoric from the left.

People like you take what was said and use to construct what you want to hear do you can justify bull**** arguments like the one you posted. When and where did anyone say anything that resembled "ah great, a white person did it"?? It was a commentary on how politicians handle these events, never was anything said that lessened the crime or the grief it caused. But feel free to syntbesize a complete fabrication so you can grind your axe against it.

Save your self righteous horse**** for someone who cares.

arkrud wrote:

martin wrote:

arkrud wrote:

martin wrote:

arkrud wrote:

djsunyc wrote:

arkrud wrote:

djsunyc wrote:i called him a fat f ck.

grabbing pu$$y and being racist is ok now so i can call him a fat f ck.

If someone shoot 50 people is it OK to shoot somebody too?
If one being a jerk being OK for other to be same?... God help us all.

are you trying to equate the 2? get some grip on reality.

btw, radical white terrorist attack in vegas. worst mass shooting in history. i wonder if the word terrorist willbe used? especially if he is a christian. lets also make it eaaier for more folks to get guns while we are at it. as well as silencers.

Psycho killed many people.
Leave the dead alone - this is not political issue.
Nothing in what happened should be used to prove any political, racial, or religions points.
Unless someone is sick psycho himself.

akrud, I don't know if there is a language barrier or level of understanding to exactly what you are stating or what others are stating but I would ask that you read and more carefully construct your statements.

Calling someone fat or a fat ****, while certainly very colorful and perhaps - and I don't even have the right phrase for it - guttural language(?), you somehow equated that to killing. It's not the same level. Don't go there.

And by some weird association you also just labeled djsu a sick psycho in your next reply. Did you mean that? And why can't dj talk about how we have used the word "terrorist" in the media and the like? Why would he or anyone, and why particularly would you, call someone a sick psycho?

Whether intentional or not, you just dropped the conversation. Please refrain.

I stated that someone who will use this kind of event to prove any political, racial, or religions points is in my opinion sick psycho.
I never called anyone specifically. There is no need for this. It is self evident for any normal person not blinded with hate.

And yet that's how I read it, and I'm sure many others may have as well. It was not self evident in the context of what dj had written about using the phrase terrorism and the post your replied to in general.

Mostly speaking, I glaze over what you write because it's all over the place and half the things you say don't make sense and aren't even pertinent to what you reply to.

I am asking you to be more clear.

I was thinking about my posting and getting more inclined to stop participating in any non-Knicks related discussions.
Sometimes when one is communicating with people who are world apart it produced nothing but frustration.
This forum is serving the goal of entertaining people about the great game of basketball and should be the outlet to get away from disturbances and hardship of day-to-day life.
I think the "political" topics should also be comforting and my views regardless of being wrong or right are not in line with majority of posters and so are irritating to them.
I start feeling like man posting at woman site dedicated to motherhood. Out of place.
Fist preseason game is tomorrow and Rangers starting the season Saturday so time to get back to sports.

Akrud, I responded to several of your comments in what I felt was a direct and noncombative tone. You only seem to respond when you think you can down talk or dismiss the poster but if someone really challenges you intellectually to justify your position then like BRIGGs you ignore it. Just saying. Obviously you can respond to who you want but if your really believe in your views then convince us in plain language why that is the case.

TheGame wrote:Out of respect for the victims we should all refrain from tying politics to the event.

I disagree with the premise that it is somehow disrespectful to the victims. If you are referring to DJ's post, I think he said what he said because he felt the victims would be marginalized by the politicians seeking to downplay the true nature of this incident.

I will add that so far that does not seem to be the case. And maybe they'll find a way to rise above the concerns laid out by DJ and do the decent thing.

nixluva wrote:

simrud wrote:

nixluva wrote:

simrud wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

djsunyc wrote:how the US media + politicians handle terror attacks:

1. muslim = terrorist
2. blacks = thugs
3. whites = mentally ill

just a good guy that's going through some problems is probably the reasoning with this one.

I was gonna post pretty much the same thing, except blacks would be druggies looking for a free ride.

Read his speech, at least he had the decency of responding quickly. Which is better than what we have seen from him before.

I bet that if you were to diagnose just about everybody who ever involved themselves in intentional violence towards civilian populations you would find that they were in fact mentally ill - whatever race, religion, etc.

I would also posit that when one's reaction to a tragedy in which over 50 people die and over 400 are injured is "ah great, a white person did it!!! Let's see how the media will spin this in favor of whitey now so I can express indignation at the imbalance in national news coverage" - it is at best in poor taste.

A lot of this kind of reaction is a response to decades of imbalance. Doesn't make it right but it has an explanation. IMO the focus has to be on what needs to be done to address this problem since it's a largely American phenomenon. Next to NOTHING has been done to address this and that is a disgrace.

I agree with you, but this type of reaction is why Trump won the election. Nobody likes him outside of a relatively small minority but a lot of people voted for him largely in response to this type of rhetoric from the left.

I actually kind of disagree. Trump won Cuz at least 80,000 former Obama voters flipped and thought he'd bring better jobs and overall economic improvement in their states. Remember more people voted for other candidates by a large margin.

IMO the culture war is a Republican talking point. If not for the Electoral College he's not President.

The imbalance of representation in Congress has stopped us from getting major gun control reforms. Most Americans want something done! The will of the majority isn't being headed due to tricks of our political structure. Things like Gerrymandering and Voter Suppression are distorting our government as well. States with the fewest populations have an outsized representation. This thing is broken.

I don't think Trump would have won the Republican primary without all the backlash he got from the far left. Republicans would have nominated someone more sensible and qualified for the job imo. And that guy would have probably defeated Hillary also - she was one of the weakest Dem nominees in a long time.

simrud wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

simrud wrote:

nixluva wrote:

simrud wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

djsunyc wrote:how the US media + politicians handle terror attacks:

1. muslim = terrorist
2. blacks = thugs
3. whites = mentally ill

just a good guy that's going through some problems is probably the reasoning with this one.

I was gonna post pretty much the same thing, except blacks would be druggies looking for a free ride.

Read his speech, at least he had the decency of responding quickly. Which is better than what we have seen from him before.

I bet that if you were to diagnose just about everybody who ever involved themselves in intentional violence towards civilian populations you would find that they were in fact mentally ill - whatever race, religion, etc.

I would also posit that when one's reaction to a tragedy in which over 50 people die and over 400 are injured is "ah great, a white person did it!!! Let's see how the media will spin this in favor of whitey now so I can express indignation at the imbalance in national news coverage" - it is at best in poor taste.

A lot of this kind of reaction is a response to decades of imbalance. Doesn't make it right but it has an explanation. IMO the focus has to be on what needs to be done to address this problem since it's a largely American phenomenon. Next to NOTHING has been done to address this and that is a disgrace.

I agree with you, but this type of reaction is why Trump won the election. Nobody likes him outside of a relatively small minority but a lot of people voted for him largely in response to this type of rhetoric from the left.

People like you take what was said and use to construct what you want to hear do you can justify bull**** arguments like the one you posted. When and where did anyone say anything that resembled "ah great, a white person did it"?? It was a commentary on how politicians handle these events, never was anything said that lessened the crime or the grief it caused. But feel free to syntbesize a complete fabrication so you can grind your axe against it.

Save your self righteous horse**** for someone who cares.

When in response to a mass shooting you say let's see how the media handles the fact that the shooter was white as your reaction it does exactly that - it lessens the grief caused.

But sure let's go down the "people like you" route and "other" the polemical opponent - that is the extremist way, left or right. I can say a lot of things about "people like you" too. But I'm not going to take the bait.

Yeah keep misquoting and misrepresenting what I said, this is exactly why you have an axe to grind. This high sounding pompous bull**** isn't fooling anyone. I responded to someone who criticized the initial media reaction to this event you projecting how I feel about it from that is all you not me. Put words in my mouth that I didn't say and you'll get a response like that.

TheGame wrote:I will try to say this as respectfully as I can. The fact that shooter is white is irrelevant. This was a horrible act. However, I think people may have mentioned that he was white to illustrate how prejudices work in this country. If the shooter had been black, he would have instantly been tied to black lives matter or NFL protesters. If he had been Muslim, then he would have automatically been a member of ISIS. But since he is white, he is just some white guy who snapped. Only white people have the freedom to not have every negative thing committed by a member of their race be automatically transferred to the other members of their race as a stereotype. BRIGGS was a great sample of this as he would post YouTube videos of AAs committing a crime as some generalized support for his argument that ALL black people do those acts. Nixluva showed a graph a few days ago showing that the vast majority of this country has no real meaningful interaction with AAs, so all of their views of the AA community are shaped by FOX news. If the only images you are shown are AAs commiting crimes then you come to believe that is all AAs do.

Great post. Very well said.

knicks1248 wrote:

TheGame wrote:I will try to say this as respectfully as I can. The fact that shooter is white is irrelevant. This was a horrible act. However, I think people may have mentioned that he was white to illustrate how prejudices work in this country. If the shooter had been black, he would have instantly been tied to black lives matter or NFL protesters. If he had been Muslim, then he would have automatically been a member of ISIS. But since he is white, he is just some white guy who snapped. Only white people have the freedom to not have every negative thing committed by a member of their race be automatically transferred to the other members of their race as a stereotype. BRIGGS was a great sample of this as he would post YouTube videos of AAs committing a crime as some generalized support for his argument that ALL black people do those acts. Nixluva showed a graph a few days ago showing that the vast majority of this country has no real meaningful interaction with AAs, so all of their views of the AA community are shaped by FOX news. If the only images you are shown are AAs commiting crimes then you come to believe that is all AAs do.

America breeds more hypocrite's than any other nation in the world

Then why are you here?