Ahmaud Arbery; racist killing and attempted cover up.

[JimL]

Except that I don't lie, or make a bunch of idiot false accusations. Been stewing on this, Jim?

If you want to get technical about it, the above is itself is a lie.

[Cow Poke]

If you want to get technical about it, the above is itself is a lie.

If you want to be honest about it, PROVE it.
I stand by my claim - I don't lie, and I don't make a bunch of idiot false accusations.

Sheeesh, Jim, you were acting out like an out of control three year old, and now, TWO DAYS LATER, you're suddenly thinking about what I said?
Maybe you a conscience after all.

But, know what I think?
I think Charles showed up, so you're hoping to drag him into this.

How bout taking this up with me in the looneybin instead of derailing this thread, eh?

Meanwhile, stop acting like the oddball kid who constantly has to say stupid stuff for attention.

[Cow Poke]

And that's where I stopped reading.

To describe what happened to Arbery as "hunting and killing" is so far from the truth that anything else this Gerson character has to say is suspect.

Yeah, when somebody starts with something like that, it pretty much negates anything they say subsequently that might actually be true or helpful.

[Charles]

Yeah, when somebody starts with something like that, it pretty much negates anything they say subsequently that might actually be true or helpful.

It seems to me neither you nor Mountain Man reason along those lines when it comes to the "I alone can fix it" president who is now hiding in the white house or elsewhere while cities are smashed and more than 100.000 people have died from something he claimed he had under control.

If you read what "might actually be true or helpful" you will see why Trump cannot unify your country. But I have a feeling neither you nor Mountain Man would actually like to know since you both bear some sort of responsibility for it. This is why the absurdities, the moral crisis of a large part of the evangelicals and republicans will continue. Hint: what was needed for unification was broken long ago. That is why, as bad as the situation already is, it seems Trump only manages to make it even worse.

[Roy]

Yep, actually MM has said it was not justified, but only after insinuating that he was up to no good. Asserting that he has been casing the joint at night on multiple occassions, an assertion that you suggested as well, and he also said that the idea that this was just some innocent "black guy" out for a jog needs to be rejected.

You'll have to take that up with MM.

Because you won't.

[Cow Poke]

Because you won't.

What's your deal, Roy? I've always treated you with courtesy and respect.

I have made it clear, over and over, that the killing was not justified in any way. JimL lies about my position, then throws MM into the mix.

But, hey, you got an amen from Charles.

[oxmixmudd]

What's your deal, Roy? I've always treated you with courtesy and respect.

I have made it clear, over and over, that the killing was not justified in any way. JimL lies about my position, then throws MM into the mix.

But, hey, you got an amen from Charles.

Unfortunately cp, whether you intend to or not, the content of your posts has tended to support rather than stand against the mostly racist rhetoric in this thread. I do not believe that is what you wanted it to do*, so I'm just letting you know that was its effect so perhaps you can correct for that in the future.

*that is, I do NOT believe you would ever intentionally support racist rhetoric

[Mountain Man]

...then throws MM into the mix.

Yeah, I'm not sure what else he's looking for at this point. Jimmy complains that I am "insinuating that [Arbery] was up to no good", but all I've done is state the facts. If the facts make it appear that Arbery was up to no good then it can't be helped.

I've not been active much in this thread lately because there's nothing else to say at this point until we get more information about the case, which likely won't happen until the trial.

[Mountain Man]

*that is, I do NOT believe you would ever intentionally support racist rhetoric

Only unintentionally, huh? Talk about a back-handed compliment.

"You would be quite attractive if you weren't short, fat, and ugly."

[Cow Poke]

Yeah, I'm not sure what else he's looking for at this point. Jimmy complains that I am "insinuating that [Arbery] was up to no good", but all I've done is state the facts. If the facts make it appear that Arbery was up to no good then it can't be helped.

I've not been active much in this thread lately because there's nothing else to say at this point until we get more information about the case, which likely won't happen until the trial.

I'm really coming to the conclusion that JimL is "that kid" back in elementary who would do anything, say anything, no matter how stupid or false it is, just to get attention.

And, as I was taught in youth ministry, "BAD attention is still attention".

[oxmixmudd]

Only unintentionally, huh? Talk about a back-handed compliment.

"You would be quite attractive if you weren't short, fat, and ugly."

Almost all the participants in this thread presenting views consistent with conservative media rhetoric have been tools of racist rhetiric. Many of us that are the privileged hold effectively racist views without really understanding that is what they are, and even though we do not accept any racist viewpoint that we recognize as such.

As a consequence, many of us are unintentionally racist in our posts here.

So while you'd prefer to fan hostility, I was simply trying to assure CP I recgnize that he would never intentionally support racist dialogue.

[Roy]

What's your deal, Roy? I've always treated you with courtesy and respect.

MM described Arbery as having "cased the place a number of times at night on multiple occasions", and you agreed that he was just laying out the facts.

But it is not a fact that Arbery 'cased' the building, unless you or MM can show that he was planning to rob it.

Your refusal to comment suggests that you have no problem either with MM's description or his subsequent pretence that he had never done anything other than lay out facts. It suggests that you won't ever call him to task on this unfounded accusation, either because he's a fellow conservative Christian and you don't want to be seen arguing n public, or, given your failure to ever say that Arbery might not have been 'casing' the place, because you agree with him.

Was Arbrey 'casing' the building?

P.S. You'll probably dismiss this as 'nit-picking', but it's not - it's an accusation of criminal intent.

[Cow Poke]

MM described Arbery as having "cased the place a number of times at night on multiple occasions", and you agreed that he was just laying out the facts.

Where?

But it is not a fact that Arbery 'cased' the building, unless you or MM can show that he was planning to rob it.

I don't believe I supported that claim - it's a FACT, according to his family's lawyer, that he was there before - but I never saw that as "casing" the place. On the other hand, I have no way of knowing it was NOT.

Your refusal to comment

This is a steaming load of horsie poo - DECLINING to comment on something is not the same as REFUSING to comment.

suggests that you have no problem either with MM's description or his subsequent pretence that he had never done anything other than lay out facts.

By telling JimL he'd have to take that up with MM should indicate to an honest broker that I don't share those same views.

It suggests that you won't ever call him to task on this unfounded accusation, either because he's a fellow conservative Christian and you don't want to be seen arguing n public, or, given your failure to ever say that Arbery might not have been 'casing' the place, because you agree with him.

I believe you have earned a Gold Medal in the Olympics of Conclusion Jumping.

Was Arbrey 'casing' the building?

I don't see it as that, no.

P.S. You'll probably dismiss this as 'nit-picking', but it's not - it's an accusation of criminal intent.

More conclusion jumping on your part, Roy. I honestly thought better of you.

[JimL]

I'm really coming to the conclusion that JimL is "that kid" back in elementary who would do anything, say anything, no matter how stupid or false it is, just to get attention.

And, as I was taught in youth ministry, "BAD attention is still attention".

Well, I could do as you do and call that an outright lie, but in reality you'd just be wrong in your conclusion once again. I'm just the opposite, I don't like attention, good or bad and never did.

But this response of yours to MM is what I mean by your insinuating that Arbery was in some way to blame. In the post to which you just responded, MM suggested that the facts point to Arbery's guilt, that he was up to no good. And do you correct him in that what he says is not true.Do you tell him that the facts do not make it clear that Arbery was up to no good? No you don't? Instead you basically agree with him by criticizing me to whom his post was directed. You've also suggested Arbery's guilt yourself by stating over and over again that Arbery lived 10 miles away and visited the site on multiple occassions at night, suggesting of course that by night you mean in the dark, when in fact he lived two miles away and you have no idea whether he visited the site on multiple occassions in the dark of night or not. Did you make any such insinuations about the McMichaels, did you look into their or their accomplices history? No. But you did attempt to defend their actions. You can call me a liar all you want, but none of that is a lie.

[Cow Poke]

Well, I could do as you do and call that an outright lie

I'm not worried - you'd have to substantiate it, and you can't.