The reality of black and white disparities in the US

[oxmixmudd]

Right, something I have repeatedly and emphatically stated throughout the other thread, and yet you continue to falsely accuse me of trying to justify his death.

I did not accuse you of trying to justify his death.

I NOTED that your posts emphasize the facts the denigrate Arbery and partially justify the killers.

Can you tell the difference?

[Mountain Man]

I NOTED that your posts emphasize the facts the denigrate Arbery and partially justify the killers.

If you think that's a necessary conclusion based on the facts, then that's on you, not me. I personally have not reached that conclusion.

[oxmixmudd]

If you think that's a necessary conclusion based on the facts, then that's on you, not me. I personally have not reached that conclusion.

The content of your posts is not 'a conclusion', it's simply a fact. You emphasize the facts that potentially implicate Arbery and justify in part the killers. (1)"Arbery trespassed" is a fact that implicates Arbery and gives partial justification to his killers. It is irrelevant in that (2) his trespass was extremely minor and nothing was taken, and in that what he was observed doing can not justify armed pursuit - making the pursuit criminal.

That is the reality, the facts.

You emphasized (1) and played down (2) And that has implications. You did this repeatedly and similarly with other facts related to the case. That has implications as well.

But is was not just you. It was the pattern of the entire thread, of all those posting from the conservative perspective. And that has very negative implications wrt racism. Implications I pointed out.

[MaxVel]

So the armed chase was justified but the death was not? They aren’t racist for calling him the n-word?

You’re making tons of sense.

Wha...?

Your response has MM saying the opposite of what he said.

Ox: ...nothing Arbery did justified the chase.

MM: Right, something I have repeatedly and emphatically stated throughout the other thread,

the bolded indicates MM agreeing with Ox that 'nothing Arbery did justified the chase'

You respond with 'So the armed chase was justified..'

[Charles]

I did not accuse you of trying to justify his death.

I NOTED that your posts emphasize the facts the denigrate Arbery and partially justify the killers.

Can you tell the difference?

Correct. MM seems to believe he can continue his one-sided focus only on "facts" to denigrate the victim and not be called out on it if only he once in a while makes the claim that he is not trying to justify the killers. It is painfully obvious that his racist bias serves the goal of at least partly justifying the killers. He can call it whatever he likes to call it, try to fool himself or others but it is and remains racist bias.

[Mountain Man]

You emphasize the facts that potentially implicate Arbery and justify in part the killers.

No, I'm simply stating the facts as I know them. YOU are the one who is insisting those facts lead to the conclusion that Arbery is necessarily implicated and the McMichaels necessarily justified, which is a conclusion that I have clearly, repeatedly, and emphatically, rejected throughout the other thread despite you and others insisting that one could reach no other conclusion based on the facts. As I keep saying, that's on you, not me.

[Charles]

No, I'm simply stating the facts as I know them. YOU are the one who is insisting those facts lead to the conclusion that Arbery is necessarily implicated and the McMichaels necessarily justified, which is a conclusion that I have clearly, repeatedly, and emphatically, rejected throughout the other thread despite you and others insisting that one could reach no other conclusion based on the facts. As I keep saying, that's on you, not me.

Simply not true. You have repeteadly tried to implicate him and I don't think anyone is really fooled by your obviously false statement that a post like the one below is not in anyway at all meant to justify what happened:

First of all, entering a property under construction is trespassing.

Secondly, this guy wasn't out jogging, and he didn't just happen to wander by and poke his head in out of curiosity. The neighborhood in question was ten-miles from his home, and he had cased the place at night on multiple occasions. Furthermore, let's not pretend that construction sites aren't a popular target for thieves.

Third, he was shot as a direct result of his own aggressive actions. If he had quietly waited for the police to arrive then he would still be alive.

I'm not saying he deserved to be shot, or that the guys were necessarily right to approach him while armed, or any nonsense like, but this lie that he was just some innocent black man out for a jog needs to be rejected. Come on, ox, I thought you were a defender of the truth.

You are speaking with two tounges. You throw dirt on the victim and yet try to convince us that you are not trying to justify anything. Your agenda is way too obvious.

[Mountain Man]

Simply not true. You have repeteadly tried to implicate him and I don't think anyone is really fooled by your obviously false statement that a post like the one below is not in anyway at all meant to justify what happened...

You are being dishonest by quoting a post from several weeks ago while there were still relatively few concrete facts about the case and ignoring everything I've said since then. At the time I posted the above, it was being reported that the neighborhood was 10-miles from where Arbery lived. It has since been clarified that at the time of the incident, he was either living with or visiting his mother who lives closer, which I have conceded does change the dynamics of the situation somewhat, because while Arbery was still trespassing on private property, it is more plausible that he did so while out for a jog.

But you can see even at the time of the post you quote, while facts were still uncertain, I explicitly said that "I'm not saying he deserved to be shot, or that the guys were necessarily right to approach him while armed, or any nonsense like [that]," and this is a position I have consistently held throughout the entire discussion despite attempts by you and others to dishonestly claim I've said or implied the opposite.

[Charles]

You are being dishonest by quoting a post from several weeks ago while there were still relatively few concrete facts about the case and ignoring everything I've said since then. At the time I posted the above, it was being reported that the neighborhood was 10-miles from where Arbery lived. It has since been clarified that at the time of the incident, he was either living with or visiting his mother who lives closer, which I have conceded does change the dynamics of the situation somewhat, because while Arbery was still trespassing on private property, it is more plausible that he did so while out for a jog.

Here is what you said: "No, I'm simply stating the facts as I know them. YOU are the one who is insisting those facts lead to the conclusion that Arbery is necessarily implicated and the McMichaels necessarily justified, which is a conclusion that I have clearly, repeatedly, and emphatically, rejected throughout the other thread despite you and others insisting that one could reach no other conclusion based on the facts. As I keep saying, that's on you, not me."

The post is from that very thread in which you claimed you had not implicated him when you obviously had. You did not mention the post from weeks ago based on "few concrete facts".

And now you use the excuse of it being weeks ago and refer to their being "few concrete facts". So lets see what you wrote when there were few concrete facts:

First of all, entering a property under construction is trespassing.

Secondly, this guy wasn't out jogging, and he didn't just happen to wander by and poke his head in out of curiosity. The neighborhood in question was ten-miles from his home, and he had cased the place at night on multiple occasions. Furthermore, let's not pretend that construction sites aren't a popular target for thieves.

Third, he was shot as a direct result of his own aggressive actions. If he had quietly waited for the police to arrive then he would still be alive.

I'm not saying he deserved to be shot, or that the guys were necessarily right to approach him while armed, or any nonsense like, but this lie that he was just some innocent black man out for a jog needs to be rejected. Come on, ox, I thought you were a defender of the truth.

Again, based on what you yourself call few concrete facts you come to the conclusion that "Third, he was shot as a direct result of his own aggressive actions." I didn't take many "facts" for you to get there. Your bias is all over, and what you have written about not wanting to justify anything gets more and more desperate as all your desperate attempts to avoid the obvious are pointed out.

But you can see even at the time of the post you quote, while facts were still uncertain, I explicitly said that "I'm not saying he deserved to be shot, or that the guys were necessarily right to approach him while armed, or any nonsense like [that]," and this is a position I have consistently held throughout the entire discussion despite attempts by you and others to dishonestly claim I've said or implied the opposite.

As pointed out in that very post you are contradicting yourself speaking in two tounges so your "position" rather seems a strategy to "sugar coat" the attempts to throw dirt at the victim. And while quoting yourself you conveniently left out this part: "but this lie that he was just some innocent black man out for a jog needs to be rejected." We now have your own words for saying this was based on "few concrete facts". If you think you can excuse your dirty biased attempts to throw mud at the victim by claiming "I'm not saying he deserved to be shot" while still claiming "Third, he was shot as a direct result of his own aggressive actions" and having to mention anything bad you can possibly find about him you are rather naive. There is an obvious racist bias in what you write and it is even way too obvious.

[Mountain Man]

The post is from that very thread in which you claimed you had not implicated him when you obviously had.

If you think the facts implicate Arbery and justify his death then that's your conclusion, not mine.

[oxmixmudd]

If you think the facts implicate Arbery and justify his death then that's your conclusion, not mine.

Can't even own your own posts and clearly written evalautions, eh MM?


Dishonesty noted.

[Charles]

If you think the facts implicate Arbery and justify his death then that's your conclusion, not mine.

Nope. Here is what you wrote:

First of all, entering a property under construction is trespassing.

Secondly, this guy wasn't out jogging, and he didn't just happen to wander by and poke his head in out of curiosity. The neighborhood in question was ten-miles from his home, and he had cased the place at night on multiple occasions. Furthermore, let's not pretend that construction sites aren't a popular target for thieves.

Third, he was shot as a direct result of his own aggressive actions. If he had quietly waited for the police to arrive then he would still be alive.

I'm not saying he deserved to be shot, or that the guys were necessarily right to approach him while armed, or any nonsense like, but this lie that he was just some innocent black man out for a jog needs to be rejected. Come on, ox, I thought you were a defender of the truth.

Own the dirt.

[Mountain Man]

"I'm not saying he deserved to be shot, or that the guys were necessarily right to approach him while armed, or any nonsense like [that]..."

[Charles]

"I'm not saying he deserved to be shot, or that the guys were necessarily right to approach him while armed, or any nonsense like [that]..."

I note that you cannot even quote yourself in full and need to take out half sentences when you like to pretend your so innocent. It is not the first time I have seen you cutting this part out: "but this lie that he was just some innocent black man out for a jog needs to be rejected."

Of course if you quote yourself in full you would expose yourself.

Here is what you said:

First of all, entering a property under construction is trespassing.

Secondly, this guy wasn't out jogging, and he didn't just happen to wander by and poke his head in out of curiosity. The neighborhood in question was ten-miles from his home, and he had cased the place at night on multiple occasions. Furthermore, let's not pretend that construction sites aren't a popular target for thieves.

Third, he was shot as a direct result of his own aggressive actions. If he had quietly waited for the police to arrive then he would still be alive.

I'm not saying he deserved to be shot, or that the guys were necessarily right to approach him while armed, or any nonsense like, but this lie that he was just some innocent black man out for a jog needs to be rejected. Come on, ox, I thought you were a defender of the truth.

So, you are doing quite a lot to throw as much dirt on him as possible and still try to make it look decent. If you think your half hearted attempt at a disclaimer that you like to present only the first half of justifies it, you are naive. But, however, I can't help but see it as a rather dirty strategy in which you cannot even quote yourself in full length and own what you have actually said when you are pretending to be soo innocent.

[Mountain Man]

Here is what you said...

I know what I said, and you can keep quoting that post from weeks ago all you want, but the fact is at no point did I say or imply that the actions taken against Arbery were justified, and in fact, I have repeatedly and explicitly said otherwise. Just because the narrative that he was just some innocent black kid out for a jog is false doesn't necessarily lead to the conclusion that he deserved to die. I don't believe the facts as I stated them support that, and I'm not entirely sure why you and others insist they do.