info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
THC (dope) in TM (Trayvon Martin)
3 views
Skip to first unread message
HeyBub
May 18, 2012, 7:01:39 PM5/18/12
to
"Toxicology tests found elements of the drug in the teenager's chest
blood -- 1.5 nanograms per milliliter of one type (THC), as well as 7.3
nanograms of another type (THC-COOH) -- according to the medical examiner's
report.
States have varying standards for dope intoxication.
" In Nevada, that equates to 2 ng/ml for THC and 5 ng/ml for THC-COOH, also
known as marijuana metabolite. The cutoff level in Ohio is 2 ng/ml for THC
and 50 ng/ml for THC-COOH."
I couldn't find the presumptive intoxication limit for THC in Florida, but
the military has a limit of 15 nanograms/ml in URINE (we have only BLOOD
levels for Martin).
http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/17/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
blood -- 1.5 nanograms per milliliter of one type (THC), as well as 7.3
nanograms of another type (THC-COOH) -- according to the medical examiner's
report.
States have varying standards for dope intoxication.
" In Nevada, that equates to 2 ng/ml for THC and 5 ng/ml for THC-COOH, also
known as marijuana metabolite. The cutoff level in Ohio is 2 ng/ml for THC
and 50 ng/ml for THC-COOH."
I couldn't find the presumptive intoxication limit for THC in Florida, but
the military has a limit of 15 nanograms/ml in URINE (we have only BLOOD
levels for Martin).
http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/17/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
Tegger
May 18, 2012, 7:59:40 PM5/18/12
to
"HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in
news:xJGdndRFZ6BGSSvS...@earthlink.com:
> "Toxicology tests found elements of the drug in the teenager's chest
> blood
He wasn't "high", or even "coming down", if that's what you're getting at.
He was stone-sober when he attacked Zimmerman.
Pot makes you mellow, not hostile. Had Martin actually been on pot,
Zimmerman would never have died. "Hey man, I'm just passin' through. I'm
cool, man. Just gonna walk through there and be on my way. Want some
Skittles?"
--
Tegger
news:xJGdndRFZ6BGSSvS...@earthlink.com:
> "Toxicology tests found elements of the drug in the teenager's chest
> blood
He was stone-sober when he attacked Zimmerman.
Pot makes you mellow, not hostile. Had Martin actually been on pot,
Zimmerman would never have died. "Hey man, I'm just passin' through. I'm
cool, man. Just gonna walk through there and be on my way. Want some
Skittles?"
--
Tegger
Unknown
May 18, 2012, 8:19:50 PM5/18/12
to
"Tegger" wrote in message news:XnsA057CB58...@208.90.168.18...
> Pot makes you mellow, not hostile. Had Martin actually been on pot,
It still wouldn' thave justified the shooting.
> Pot makes you mellow, not hostile. Had Martin actually been on pot,
Mike Smith
May 18, 2012, 8:56:11 PM5/18/12
to
Zimmermann stopped Trayvon from assaulting him.
Mike Smith
Unknown
May 18, 2012, 9:27:42 PM5/18/12
to
"Mike Smith" wrote in message
news:arrdr7hodbla0dso8...@4ax.com...
> Zimmermann stopped Trayvon from assaulting him.
And now he's reaping the rewards of that heroic act.
So - do you think he'll live to see 30?
news:arrdr7hodbla0dso8...@4ax.com...
> Zimmermann stopped Trayvon from assaulting him.
So - do you think he'll live to see 30?
NotMe
May 18, 2012, 9:27:24 PM5/18/12
to
"HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
news:xJGdndRFZ6BGSSvS...@earthlink.com...
has come and gone. Regardless it's not a matter that makes one bit of
difference in this trial.
Tegger
May 18, 2012, 9:41:53 PM5/18/12
to
Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote in news:arrdr7hodbla0dso851fvndrrp5io868vk@
4ax.com:
It's certainly looking that way, isn't it? What's nice is that it's
appearing as though Zimmerman is not going to get simply lynched. At least
not yet, anyway
My point is that doped-up men are highly unlikely to be attackers. If
Martin attacked Zimmerman, you can bet he was either stone-cold sober, or
was drunk on alcohol. And he wasn't drunk.
--
Tegger
4ax.com:
appearing as though Zimmerman is not going to get simply lynched. At least
not yet, anyway
My point is that doped-up men are highly unlikely to be attackers. If
Martin attacked Zimmerman, you can bet he was either stone-cold sober, or
was drunk on alcohol. And he wasn't drunk.
--
Tegger
Unknown
May 18, 2012, 10:16:58 PM5/18/12
to
"NotMe" wrote in message news:jp6t3m$hhp$1...@dont-email.me...
> Not that it matters but THC stays in the system a long time after the high
> has come and gone. Regardless it's not a matter that makes one bit of
> difference in this trial.
Yeah, it does make a bit of difference.
Zimmerman said that what made Martin seem "suspicious" to him was not that
he was black, but rather that he was "acting high".
The blood work proves that it was the other way around - that he was black,
but not high.
That's the difference it makes.
> Not that it matters but THC stays in the system a long time after the high
> has come and gone. Regardless it's not a matter that makes one bit of
> difference in this trial.
Zimmerman said that what made Martin seem "suspicious" to him was not that
he was black, but rather that he was "acting high".
The blood work proves that it was the other way around - that he was black,
but not high.
That's the difference it makes.
Message has been deleted
Mike Smith
May 19, 2012, 3:25:06 AM5/19/12
to
on our planet.
Mike Smith
HeyBub
May 19, 2012, 9:57:30 AM5/19/12
to
* Can someone be charged with aggravated (armed) robbery if all they had in
their possession was a water gun?
* How about if he just poked a finger in his jacket pocket?
* What if he used a real gun but it was unloaded?
We await your enlightened response(s) with a hushed silence. Go ahead, we're
waiting for you to demonstrate your idiocy once again.
HeyBub
May 19, 2012, 9:58:05 AM5/19/12
to
HeyBub
May 19, 2012, 9:58:38 AM5/19/12
to
HeyBub
May 19, 2012, 9:59:26 AM5/19/12
to
Tegger wrote:
> "HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in
> news:xJGdndRFZ6BGSSvS...@earthlink.com:
>
>> "Toxicology tests found elements of the drug in the teenager's chest
>> blood
>
>
> He wasn't "high", or even "coming down", if that's what you're
> getting at. He was stone-sober when he attacked Zimmerman.
>
I'm not "getting at" anything. I'm just your humble reporter.
> "HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in
> news:xJGdndRFZ6BGSSvS...@earthlink.com:
>
>> "Toxicology tests found elements of the drug in the teenager's chest
>> blood
>
>
> He wasn't "high", or even "coming down", if that's what you're
> getting at. He was stone-sober when he attacked Zimmerman.
>
Unknown
May 19, 2012, 5:34:56 PM5/19/12
to
"Mike Smith" wrote in message
news:skier7lg64eji7ogd...@4ax.com...
> Of course. He did nothing wrong, and we have one less gansta-wannabee
> on our planet.
Mike Smith
May 19, 2012, 7:35:35 PM5/19/12
to
Can you get any dumber? Unlikely.
Mike Smith
Unknown
May 19, 2012, 5:39:09 PM5/19/12
to
"G. Morgan" wrote in message
news:mk2er7d9306g0fipu...@Osama-Is-Dead.net...
> He probably would have
> passed a regular drug test with a few glasses of water before
> peeing.
Yeah, and if you ask a drug dealer if he's a cop, he has to tell you the
truth.
Sheesh!
news:mk2er7d9306g0fipu...@Osama-Is-Dead.net...
> He probably would have
> passed a regular drug test with a few glasses of water before
> peeing.
Yeah, and if you ask a drug dealer if he's a cop, he has to tell you the
truth.
Sheesh!
Billy
May 20, 2012, 1:11:47 AM5/20/12
to
In article <4pmdnW7ZS9fcOirS...@earthlink.com>,
You're a humble scum bag, Bub.
--
E Pluribus Unum
Know where your money is tonight?
It's making the lives of Wall Street Bankers more comfortable.
The GOP is chasing us towards a cliff called "Obama."
Vote 3rd Party
--
E Pluribus Unum
Know where your money is tonight?
It's making the lives of Wall Street Bankers more comfortable.
The GOP is chasing us towards a cliff called "Obama."
Vote 3rd Party
Billy
May 20, 2012, 1:14:11 AM5/20/12
to
In article <gNednbWoX8BtOyrS...@earthlink.com>,
Haven't you wasted enough band width on this? Sander is under no
obligation to answer your question. Fuck-off.
obligation to answer your question. Fuck-off.
Billy
May 20, 2012, 1:20:27 AM5/20/12
to
In article <arrdr7hodbla0dso8...@4ax.com>,
> Mikie Smith
George Zimmerman was somebody who was told to stay in his truck that day
by the cops who he called, and he chose to get out with a gun and track
down a young man on the street trying to get away from him because he
was afraid of him. And that young man is dead as a result.
When confronting Martin, Zimmerman didn't tell him that he represented a
watch program. He said, in a public area,"What are you doing here"?
Know what you are Mikie? Yeah, you know.
George Zimmerman was somebody who was told to stay in his truck that day
by the cops who he called, and he chose to get out with a gun and track
down a young man on the street trying to get away from him because he
was afraid of him. And that young man is dead as a result.
When confronting Martin, Zimmerman didn't tell him that he represented a
watch program. He said, in a public area,"What are you doing here"?
Know what you are Mikie? Yeah, you know.
bjacoby
May 20, 2012, 1:25:50 AM5/20/12
to
On 5/18/2012 10:16 PM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
> Yeah, it does make a bit of difference.
> Zimmerman said that what made Martin seem "suspicious" to him was not
> that he was black, but rather that he was "acting high".
> The blood work proves that it was the other way around - that he was
> black, but not high.
> That's the difference it makes.
Don't they teach "teachers" to read anymore? He was WAY over the legal
> Yeah, it does make a bit of difference.
> Zimmerman said that what made Martin seem "suspicious" to him was not
> that he was black, but rather that he was "acting high".
> The blood work proves that it was the other way around - that he was
> black, but not high.
> That's the difference it makes.
limit for "high" in MY state! And that makes him black and high! And why
aren't you asking what kind of job he had to keep paying for all those
drugs he was obviously using. How do you pay for YOUR stash? Go out
snatching jewelry in the nearby gated neighborhoods? Wouldn't surprise
me for a loser like you. Watch out for Hispanics you racist!
bjacoby
May 20, 2012, 1:32:14 AM5/20/12
to
As for some black dope using punk being "mellow", well, I guess you guys
live in some all white gated communities. He probably just decided he
was being "dissed" by some cracker.
The Daring Dufas
May 20, 2012, 2:06:00 AM5/20/12
to
That's a position once held by a student for no pay. ^_^
TDD
Unknown
May 20, 2012, 4:21:10 AM5/20/12
to
"Billy" wrote in message
news:wildbilly-53AA8...@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au...
He's an old right-wing nut-job.
This is how their last days tend to go.
Just leave him be - he'll be gone soon enough.
news:wildbilly-53AA8...@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au...
> "HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> We await your enlightened response(s) with a hushed silence. Go ahead,
>> we're
>> waiting for you to demonstrate your idiocy once again.
>Haven't you wasted enough band width on this? Sander is under no
>obligation to answer your question. Fuck-off.
It's not his fault.
>> We await your enlightened response(s) with a hushed silence. Go ahead,
>> we're
>> waiting for you to demonstrate your idiocy once again.
>Haven't you wasted enough band width on this? Sander is under no
>obligation to answer your question. Fuck-off.
He's an old right-wing nut-job.
This is how their last days tend to go.
Just leave him be - he'll be gone soon enough.
Unknown
May 20, 2012, 4:28:43 AM5/20/12
to
"bjacoby" wrote in message news:cf%tr.27883$8L6....@newsfe07.iad...
>Don't they teach "teachers" to read anymore? He was WAY over the legal
> limit for "high" in MY state!
So, racists have their own state now?
>Don't they teach "teachers" to read anymore? He was WAY over the legal
> limit for "high" in MY state!
HeyBub
May 20, 2012, 10:23:55 AM5/20/12
to
Here are some simple questions to test your understanding of the law.
* Can someone be charged with aggravated (armed) robbery if all they had in
their possession was a water gun?
* How about if he just poked a finger in his jacket pocket?
* What if he used a real gun but it was unloaded?
* Can someone be charged with aggravated (armed) robbery if all they had in
their possession was a water gun?
* How about if he just poked a finger in his jacket pocket?
* What if he used a real gun but it was unloaded?
HeyBub
May 20, 2012, 10:23:08 AM5/20/12
to
Billy wrote:
>>
>> Here are some simple questions to test your understanding of the law.
>>
>> * Can someone be charged with aggravated (armed) robbery if all they
>> had in their possession was a water gun?
>> * How about if he just poked a finger in his jacket pocket?
>> * What if he used a real gun but it was unloaded?
>>
>> We await your enlightened response(s) with a hushed silence. Go
>> ahead, we're waiting for you to demonstrate your idiocy once again.
>
> Haven't you wasted enough band width on this? Sander is under no
> obligation to answer your question. Fuck-off.
In future, when using the word "bandwidth," please abbreviate it as
>>
>> Here are some simple questions to test your understanding of the law.
>>
>> * Can someone be charged with aggravated (armed) robbery if all they
>> had in their possession was a water gun?
>> * How about if he just poked a finger in his jacket pocket?
>> * What if he used a real gun but it was unloaded?
>>
>> We await your enlightened response(s) with a hushed silence. Go
>> ahead, we're waiting for you to demonstrate your idiocy once again.
>
> Haven't you wasted enough band width on this? Sander is under no
> obligation to answer your question. Fuck-off.
"bndwth," thereby saving precious bndwth.
Thks.
HeyBub
May 20, 2012, 10:24:33 AM5/20/12
to
HeyBub
May 20, 2012, 10:25:45 AM5/20/12
to
HeyBub
May 20, 2012, 10:26:14 AM5/20/12
to
Mike Smith
May 20, 2012, 1:18:48 PM5/20/12
to
On Sat, 19 May 2012 22:20:27 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
wrote:
>In article <arrdr7hodbla0dso8...@4ax.com>,
> Mikie Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 18 May 2012 19:19:50 -0500, "Sanders Kaufman"
>> <[bu...@kaufman.net]> wrote:
>>
>> >"Tegger" wrote in message news:XnsA057CB58...@208.90.168.18...
>> >
>> >> Pot makes you mellow, not hostile. Had Martin actually been on pot,
>> >
>> >It still wouldn' thave justified the shooting.
>> >
>>
>> Bullshit. The shooting was a success.
>> Zimmermann stopped Trayvon from assaulting him.
>>
>> Mikie Smith
>
>George Zimmerman was somebody who was told to stay in his truck that day
>by the cops who he called, and he chose to get out with a gun and track
>down a young man on the street trying to get away from him because he
>was afraid of him.
Did you know not a single thing in the above paragraph is true?
The police NEVER told him to stay in his truck.
He did not get out of his truck with a gun and track down Trayvon.
Trayvon attacked him; Trayvon was NOT trying to get away, nor was
Trayvon afraid of Zimmerman.
Is there a reason why you MUST lie in a vain attempt to twist the
facts into your own little fantasy about what happened?
Mike Smith
wrote:
>In article <arrdr7hodbla0dso8...@4ax.com>,
> Mikie Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 18 May 2012 19:19:50 -0500, "Sanders Kaufman"
>> <[bu...@kaufman.net]> wrote:
>>
>> >"Tegger" wrote in message news:XnsA057CB58...@208.90.168.18...
>> >
>> >> Pot makes you mellow, not hostile. Had Martin actually been on pot,
>> >
>> >It still wouldn' thave justified the shooting.
>> >
>>
>> Bullshit. The shooting was a success.
>> Zimmermann stopped Trayvon from assaulting him.
>>
>> Mikie Smith
>
>George Zimmerman was somebody who was told to stay in his truck that day
>by the cops who he called, and he chose to get out with a gun and track
>down a young man on the street trying to get away from him because he
>was afraid of him.
The police NEVER told him to stay in his truck.
He did not get out of his truck with a gun and track down Trayvon.
Trayvon attacked him; Trayvon was NOT trying to get away, nor was
Trayvon afraid of Zimmerman.
Is there a reason why you MUST lie in a vain attempt to twist the
facts into your own little fantasy about what happened?
Mike Smith
Message has been deleted
DJ
May 20, 2012, 4:41:42 PM5/20/12
to
G. Morgan wrote:
> What does that have to do with the subject?
>
> I think that 'rule' is unconstitutional. The police can lie all
> they want during their investigation, but if you lie back - it's
> "obstruction of justice" - a charge in itself.
>
> Everyone should watch this video:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
>
> "Don't Talk to Police" - A law professor and a cop telling you
> exactly why.
>
Also, Never consent to any search without a warrant.
DJ
>
> I think that 'rule' is unconstitutional. The police can lie all
> they want during their investigation, but if you lie back - it's
> "obstruction of justice" - a charge in itself.
>
> Everyone should watch this video:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
>
> "Don't Talk to Police" - A law professor and a cop telling you
> exactly why.
>
Also, Never consent to any search without a warrant.
DJ
Unknown
May 20, 2012, 7:25:30 PM5/20/12
to
"Mike Smith" wrote in message
news:0k9ir7p76jc2kugmo...@4ax.com...
>Did you know not a single thing in the above paragraph is true?
What matters is that Zimmerman is already paying for his crime.
If you really want to defend him, give him a place to sleep and something to
eat while he's on the run.
Unknown
May 20, 2012, 8:00:16 PM5/20/12
to
"G. Morgan" wrote in message
news:31bir7thq9ddfto49...@Osama-Is-Dead.net...
> I think that 'rule' is unconstitutional. The police can lie all
> they want during their investigation, but if you lie back - it's
> "obstruction of justice" - a charge in itself.
"unconstitutional", eh?
That's funny stuff, right there.
And it's not obstruction of justice to lie to a cop.
If you lied and got charged with obstruction, you must have been doing
something else when you were lying - like trying to conceal a felony.
Unknown
May 20, 2012, 8:08:29 PM5/20/12
to
"DJ" wrote in message news:KvudnYX_7vtc1STS...@giganews.com...
> Also, Never consent to any search without a warrant.
Yeah, instead of going to work or visiting friends, you can sit on a kilo of
smack with gun to your head, waiting for the feds to bust in.
Then you can show the government, your teachers, your parents and your
ex-wife who's really in charge of your life.
That'll show 'em.
> Also, Never consent to any search without a warrant.
smack with gun to your head, waiting for the feds to bust in.
Then you can show the government, your teachers, your parents and your
ex-wife who's really in charge of your life.
That'll show 'em.
Mike Smith
May 20, 2012, 9:21:02 PM5/20/12
to
He's easy to find.
Mike Smith
HeyBub
May 21, 2012, 7:51:28 AM5/21/12
to
HeyBub
May 21, 2012, 7:52:00 AM5/21/12
to
HeyBub
May 21, 2012, 7:52:42 AM5/21/12
to
HeyBub
May 21, 2012, 6:30:01 PM5/21/12
to
Both Scooter Libby and Martha Stewart went to prison for this exact offense.
Kaufmann lies:
Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, False in one, False in all.
1. That Jared Loughner was a member or supporter of the Tea Party or the
Republican Party.
2. That Rick Perry refused federal help in fighting Texas wildfires.
3. That a professor of law, Lawrence Alexander, is a "whack job," even
though Alexander graduated Summa Cum Laude and has authored over 200 books
and peer-reviewed scholarly papers.
4. Michelle Bachman said that Guardasil, the cervical cancer vaccine, caused
autism.
5. That George Bush reported Iraq had nuclear-tipped rockets.
6. That your humble reporter (Heybub) once had a motorcycle/bicycle wreck
and is addicted to narcotics.
7. That the Fast & Furious resulted in the closing of several gun stores
8. That Eric Holder was NOT subpoenaed
9. That there was no such thing as the Greek godess Poena
10. There is no such thing as a recall election
11. Republicans are anti law and order
12. That the GOP is in league with the drug cartels to enable violence
13. Kaufmann asserts Perry holds that Obama is an African
14. George Bush killed people
15. Members of tx.guns claimed that Obama was too "African"
16. The Republicans cut the ATF budget (11/8/2011)
17. Obama inherited the F&F program from Bush (11/12/2011)
18. No one knows the contents of F&F sealed records (11/30/2011)
19. Tea-baggers have threatened to kill Obama and his family (12/30/2011)
20. That Rick Santorum sued or threatened to sue Google (1/4/2012)
21. That News Corp owns the History Channel (1/10/2012)
22. That it is more common for gun owners to kill members of their own
family than prevent assaults (1/13/2012)
23. That there exists a law limiting assault weapon purchases to 2 per week
(1/14/2012)
24. That a Heroin addict can get by on $2.50/day of the drug. The real numer
is on the order of $175/day (1/14/2012)
25. Gov. Perry ordered that all college fresmen be vaccinated for meningitis
(1/16/2012)
26. The Justice Department prosecuted President Nixon (2/7/2012)
27. An abortion doctor's killer was a Republican (2/12/2012)
28. Sarah Palin was connected to the shooting in Tucson (2/12/2012)
29. David Brock, head of Media Matters, is not anti-gun (2/17/2012)
30. US oil refineries are blowing up and catching fire (2/23/2012)
31. The US exports crude and imports refined products (2/23/2012)
32. The "courts" have said Texas voter-ID law is wrong (3/16/2012)
33. That Zimmerman had to put up "cash" not a bond (4/22/2012)
34. Zimmerman's lawyers considered having him declared "homeless"
(4/26/2012)
35. That he is a member of the Republican National Committee (5/11/2012)
36. Democrats haven't started any wars in a long time (except for Serbia,
Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia, Albania, Haiti, Somalia, and Sudan, all by
Clinton) 5/15/2012
37. It is not against the law to lie to local police or federal officers
(5/21/2012)
bjacoby
May 21, 2012, 10:16:26 PM5/21/12
to
On 5/21/2012 6:30 PM, HeyBub wrote:
> Kaufmann lies:
>
> Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, False in one, False in all.
>
> 1. That Jared Loughner was a member or supporter of the Tea Party or the
> Republican Party.
> 2. That Rick Perry refused federal help in fighting Texas wildfires.
> 3. That a professor of law, Lawrence Alexander, is a "whack job," even
> though Alexander graduated Summa Cum Laude and has authored over 200 books
> and peer-reviewed scholarly papers.
> 4. Michelle Bachman said that Guardasil, the cervical cancer vaccine, caused
> autism.
> 5. That George Bush reported Iraq had nuclear-tipped rockets.
> 6. That your humble reporter (Heybub) once had a motorcycle/bicycle wreck
> and is addicted to narcotics.
> 7. That the Fast& Furious resulted in the closing of several gun stores
> Kaufmann lies:
>
> Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, False in one, False in all.
>
> 1. That Jared Loughner was a member or supporter of the Tea Party or the
> Republican Party.
> 2. That Rick Perry refused federal help in fighting Texas wildfires.
> 3. That a professor of law, Lawrence Alexander, is a "whack job," even
> though Alexander graduated Summa Cum Laude and has authored over 200 books
> and peer-reviewed scholarly papers.
> 4. Michelle Bachman said that Guardasil, the cervical cancer vaccine, caused
> autism.
> 5. That George Bush reported Iraq had nuclear-tipped rockets.
> 6. That your humble reporter (Heybub) once had a motorcycle/bicycle wreck
> and is addicted to narcotics.
understand how a person as obviously mentally defective as this can
continue to find enough to eat or hold a job (other than in the Obama
administration). This is proof America is a great place!
Unknown
May 22, 2012, 9:49:52 AM5/22/12
to
"Mike Smith" wrote in message
news:m26jr7tk97ttms79o...@4ax.com...
> You poor stupid fool. Zimmerman is not "on the run".
Unknown
May 22, 2012, 10:41:17 AM5/22/12
to
"HeyBub" wrote in message
news:t6udnQnVYtVwXCfS...@earthlink.com...
> It is against federal law and most state laws to lie to the authorities.
Most state laws don't even address the issue of lying.
So that's not true.
But keep taking advice from jailhouse lawyers and posting it here.
It's a lot of fun to see why kind of stupid things you'll believe.
news:t6udnQnVYtVwXCfS...@earthlink.com...
> It is against federal law and most state laws to lie to the authorities.
So that's not true.
But keep taking advice from jailhouse lawyers and posting it here.
It's a lot of fun to see why kind of stupid things you'll believe.
bjacoby
May 22, 2012, 11:07:15 AM5/22/12
to
your stash.
HeyBub, here ya go!
Kaufmann Lie number 38.
38. Zimmerman is "on the run".
Message has been deleted
RM V2.0
May 22, 2012, 2:18:16 PM5/22/12
to
>
It is not obstruction to lie to the police. You dont even have to speak to
them. In Texas you are only required to give your name and address. Lie
about that and it can be an issue.
Message has been deleted
Unknown
May 22, 2012, 12:40:40 PM5/22/12
to
"G. Morgan" wrote in message
news:56fnr7tc87djck9bu...@Osama-Is-Dead.net...
> "Sanders Kaufman" <[bu...@kaufman.net]> wrote:
>>And it's not obstruction of justice to lie to a cop.
>>If you lied and got charged with obstruction, you must have been doing
>>something else when you were lying - like trying to conceal a felony.
>Wrong.
>>And it's not obstruction of justice to lie to a cop.
>>If you lied and got charged with obstruction, you must have been doing
>>something else when you were lying - like trying to conceal a felony.
It's okay that you don't know how the justice system works.
HeyBub
May 22, 2012, 7:25:27 PM5/22/12
to
HeyBub
May 22, 2012, 7:26:56 PM5/22/12
to
Kaufmann lies:
Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, False in one, False in all.
1. That Jared Loughner was a member or supporter of the Tea Party or the
Republican Party.
2. That Rick Perry refused federal help in fighting Texas wildfires.
3. That a professor of law, Lawrence Alexander, is a "whack job," even
though Alexander graduated Summa Cum Laude and has authored over 200 books
and peer-reviewed scholarly papers.
4. Michelle Bachman said that Guardasil, the cervical cancer vaccine, caused
autism.
5. That George Bush reported Iraq had nuclear-tipped rockets.
6. That your humble reporter (Heybub) once had a motorcycle/bicycle wreck
and is addicted to narcotics.
HeyBub
May 22, 2012, 7:39:11 PM5/22/12
to
box - I actually went to law school.
EVERY SINGLE JURISDICTION has laws against perjury, so your statement that
most state laws don't address the issue of lying is false on its face.
Knowingly filing a false police report is a criminal offense in all 50
states and the District of Columbia, states the National Center for Missing
and Exploited Children. Persons making false police reports may be
prosecuted if the police and local prosecutor choose to pursue the matter.
Filing a false police report is a misdemeanor in some jurisdictions and a
felony in others. The penalty for filing a false police report varies by
state.
What Happens When You File a False Police Report? | eHow.com
http://www.ehow.com/about_6366735_happens-file-false-police-report_.html#ixzz1ve1v73Tn
Specifically, in Texas:
TEXAS PENAL CODE
§ 37.08. FALSE REPORT TO PEACE OFFICER OR LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEE. (a) A
person commits an offense if, with intent to deceive, he knowingly makes a
false statement that is material to a criminal investigation and makes the
statement to:
(1) a peace officer conducting the investigation; or
(2) any employee of a law enforcement agency that is authorized by the
agency to conduct the investigation and that the actor knows is conducting
the investigation.
(b) In this section, "law enforcement agency" has the meaning assigned by
Article 59.01, Code of Criminal Procedure.
(c) An offense under this section is a Class B misdemeanor.
And as long as you are pontificating on the law, perhaps you can answer a
question or two:
HeyBub
May 22, 2012, 7:40:19 PM5/22/12
to
HeyBub
May 22, 2012, 7:42:10 PM5/22/12
to
(up to 6 months in jail and/or $2,000 fine)
Steve Rothstein
May 22, 2012, 9:19:03 PM5/22/12
to
statement to the initial report to the police, as the name implies. If
you make any false statement that is material at any time in the
investigation, whether or not you have been advised of your rights or
not or whether you are a suspect or not, you cannot lie to an officer
conducting an investigation.
Steve Rothstein
Steve Rothstein
May 22, 2012, 9:21:15 PM5/22/12
to
are arrested. You cannot lie about it if you are a suspect or a witness,
but you do not have to give it in those cases.
But, as HB posted in another post, lying during the investigation is a
crime in Texas. We do not call it obstruction of justice, which is not a
term in the Penal Code, but it is a crime.
Steve Rothstein
Unknown
May 22, 2012, 11:26:04 PM5/22/12
to
"G. Morgan" wrote in message
news:erpnr7t1df5v49ggs...@Osama-Is-Dead.net...
>It is if they are conducting an investigation and you give them
Yeah, that's what I said.
It's not the lie you're in trouble for; it's the obstruction.
It's just kinda pathetic that you had to take this whole journey to come to
that rather obvious conclusion.
But hey - kudos for you to ever figuring it out at all!
Billy
May 26, 2012, 6:08:48 PM5/26/12
to
In article <0k9ir7p76jc2kugmo...@4ax.com>,
Mikie Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 19 May 2012 22:20:27 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <arrdr7hodbla0dso8...@4ax.com>,
> > Mikie Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 18 May 2012 19:19:50 -0500, "Sanders Kaufman"
> >> <[bu...@kaufman.net]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >"Tegger" wrote in message news:XnsA057CB58...@208.90.168.18...
> >> >
> >> >> Pot makes you mellow, not hostile. Had Martin actually been on pot,
> >> >
> >> >It still wouldn' thave justified the shooting.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Bullshit. The shooting was a success.
> >> Zimmermann stopped Trayvon from assaulting him.
> >>
> >> Mikie Smith
> >
> >George Zimmerman was somebody who was told to stay in his truck that day
> >by the cops who he called, and he chose to get out with a gun and track
> >down a young man on the street trying to get away from him because he
> >was afraid of him.
You're not even on a nodding relationship with true, but prove it, if
you can. Looking around, I see 6 citations supporting the proposition
that Zimmerman as a self-appointed community watch captain broke all the
rules of the National Sheriff's Association for Neighborhood Watch
capitans (not to follow suspect, and not to carry a weapon). Zimmerman
killed Martin at a distance from Zimmerman's vehicle. And when Marin
asks what do you want, Zimmerman doesn't identify himself, but say's
"What are you doin' here?"
>
> The police NEVER told him to stay in his truck.
The dispatcher is heard trying to discourage Zimmerman, asking, "Are you
following him?.. Okay, we don't need you to do that."
<http://abcnews.go.com/US/neighborhood-watchman-allegedly-shot-trayvon-ma
rtin-wanted-cop/story?id=15949879#.T2i6TfWnOt9>
"The alleged action of a "self-appointed neighborhood watchman" last
month in Sanford, FL significantly contradicts the principles of the
Neighborhood Watch Program," stated NSA Executive Director Aaron D.
Kennard, Sheriff (ret.). "NSA has no information indicating the
community where the incident occurred has ever even registered with the
NSA Neighborhood Watch program."
<http://trayvonmartinmurdercase.blogspot.com/2012/03/national-sheriffs-as
sociation-statement.html>
> He did not get out of his truck with a gun and track down Trayvon.
<http://bcclist.com/2012/03/27/trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-map/>
At 2:07 minutes into his call to the police, Zimmerman says, "he's
running.". At 2:37 minutes, Zimmerman tells the dispatcher, "he ran."
The sound of an "open door" chime, a change in Zimmerman's voice and the
sound of wind indicate that Zimmerman has left his vehicle, prompting
the dispatcher to ask if Zimmerman is following Martin. When Zimmerman
confirms that he is, the dispatcher says, "We don't need you to do
that."[111] Zimmerman says "OK". Asked if he "want(s) to meet with the
officer," Zimmerman says "yeah" and gives directions to where his
vehicle is parked but is unable to provide an address. He also tells the
dispatcher the numbers of his street address, and then at 3:35 adds, "Oh
crap, I don't want to give it all out. I don't know where this kid is."
The dispatcher asks him if he wants to meet the police at the
mailboxes,[Note 3, 4th picture] and he at first agrees but then says,
"Actually, could you have him call me, and I'll tell him where I'm at?",
to which the dispatcher replies, "no problem".[112] Zimmerman appears to
hang up at the 4:05 mark. The recording ends at the 4:11 mark,
approximately 7:13:41 PM.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin>
> Trayvon attacked him; Trayvon was NOT trying to get away, nor was
> Trayvon afraid of Zimmerman.
ABC News was there exclusively as the 16-year-old girl told Attorney
Benjamin Crump about the last moments of the teenager's life. Martin had
been talking to his girlfriend all the way to the store where he bought
Skittles and a tea. The phone was in his pocket and the earphone in his
ear, Crump said.
"He said this man was watching him, so he put his hoodie on. He said he
lost the man," Martin's friend said. "I asked Trayvon to run, and he
said he was going to walk fast. I told him to run, but he said he was
not going to run."
Eventually, he would run, said the girl, thinking that he'd managed to
escape. But suddenly the strange man was back, cornering Martin.
"Trayvon said, 'What are you following me for,' and the man said, 'What
are you doing here.' Next thing I hear is somebody pushing, and somebody
pushed Trayvon because the head set just fell. I called him again, and
he didn't answer the phone."
<http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-arrest-now-abc-reveals-crucial-p
hone/story?id=15959017>
>
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/03/what-happened-trayvon-martin-
explained
>
> Is there a reason why you MUST lie in a vain attempt to twist the
> facts into your own little fantasy about what happened?
What's that smell? Burning martyr?
Show the lies. Point out the twisted facts. Be a man.
>
> Mikie Smith
And then to top it off, Zimmerman uses a photo of The Frank W. Hale Jr.
Black Cultural Center at Ohio State University, after it was defaced
with graffiti saying "Long Live Zimmerman.", while he, Zimmerman, is
asking for money.
<http://www.mediaite.com/online/george-zimmerman-website-praises-vandalis
m-of-black-cultural-center/>
George Zimmerman Launches Defense Website
George Zimmerman, the alleged killer of Trayvon Martin, has launched his
own website in an attempt to raise money for what he described as his
"living expenses and legal defense." The website contains photos of
pro-Zimmerman slogans, including a sign at a rally by Koran-burning
pastor Terry Jones and a photo of a vandalized black cultural center at
Ohio State University where someone spray-painted the words "Long Live
Zimmerman."
<http://www.democracynow.org/2012/4/10/headlines#4108>
<http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/40190_George_Zimmerman_Launches_
Site_With_Photo_of_Vandalized_Black_Cultural_Center>
<http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/09/11104813-george-zimmerman-t
akes-to-web-to-raise-money-for-legal-costs-lawyers-confirm>
--
E Pluribus Unum
Know where your money is tonight?
It's making the lives of Wall Street Bankers more comfortable.
The GOP is chasing us towards a cliff called "Obama."
Vote 3rd Party
Mikie Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 19 May 2012 22:20:27 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <arrdr7hodbla0dso8...@4ax.com>,
> > Mikie Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 18 May 2012 19:19:50 -0500, "Sanders Kaufman"
> >> <[bu...@kaufman.net]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >"Tegger" wrote in message news:XnsA057CB58...@208.90.168.18...
> >> >
> >> >> Pot makes you mellow, not hostile. Had Martin actually been on pot,
> >> >
> >> >It still wouldn' thave justified the shooting.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Bullshit. The shooting was a success.
> >> Zimmermann stopped Trayvon from assaulting him.
> >>
> >> Mikie Smith
> >
> >George Zimmerman was somebody who was told to stay in his truck that day
> >by the cops who he called, and he chose to get out with a gun and track
> >down a young man on the street trying to get away from him because he
> >was afraid of him.
>
> Did you know not a single thing in the above paragraph is true?
You can read English, right? Point out the lies, please.
> Did you know not a single thing in the above paragraph is true?
You're not even on a nodding relationship with true, but prove it, if
you can. Looking around, I see 6 citations supporting the proposition
that Zimmerman as a self-appointed community watch captain broke all the
rules of the National Sheriff's Association for Neighborhood Watch
capitans (not to follow suspect, and not to carry a weapon). Zimmerman
killed Martin at a distance from Zimmerman's vehicle. And when Marin
asks what do you want, Zimmerman doesn't identify himself, but say's
"What are you doin' here?"
>
> The police NEVER told him to stay in his truck.
The dispatcher is heard trying to discourage Zimmerman, asking, "Are you
following him?.. Okay, we don't need you to do that."
<http://abcnews.go.com/US/neighborhood-watchman-allegedly-shot-trayvon-ma
rtin-wanted-cop/story?id=15949879#.T2i6TfWnOt9>
"The alleged action of a "self-appointed neighborhood watchman" last
month in Sanford, FL significantly contradicts the principles of the
Neighborhood Watch Program," stated NSA Executive Director Aaron D.
Kennard, Sheriff (ret.). "NSA has no information indicating the
community where the incident occurred has ever even registered with the
NSA Neighborhood Watch program."
<http://trayvonmartinmurdercase.blogspot.com/2012/03/national-sheriffs-as
sociation-statement.html>
> He did not get out of his truck with a gun and track down Trayvon.
<http://bcclist.com/2012/03/27/trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-map/>
At 2:07 minutes into his call to the police, Zimmerman says, "he's
running.". At 2:37 minutes, Zimmerman tells the dispatcher, "he ran."
The sound of an "open door" chime, a change in Zimmerman's voice and the
sound of wind indicate that Zimmerman has left his vehicle, prompting
the dispatcher to ask if Zimmerman is following Martin. When Zimmerman
confirms that he is, the dispatcher says, "We don't need you to do
that."[111] Zimmerman says "OK". Asked if he "want(s) to meet with the
officer," Zimmerman says "yeah" and gives directions to where his
vehicle is parked but is unable to provide an address. He also tells the
dispatcher the numbers of his street address, and then at 3:35 adds, "Oh
crap, I don't want to give it all out. I don't know where this kid is."
The dispatcher asks him if he wants to meet the police at the
mailboxes,[Note 3, 4th picture] and he at first agrees but then says,
"Actually, could you have him call me, and I'll tell him where I'm at?",
to which the dispatcher replies, "no problem".[112] Zimmerman appears to
hang up at the 4:05 mark. The recording ends at the 4:11 mark,
approximately 7:13:41 PM.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin>
> Trayvon attacked him; Trayvon was NOT trying to get away, nor was
> Trayvon afraid of Zimmerman.
ABC News was there exclusively as the 16-year-old girl told Attorney
Benjamin Crump about the last moments of the teenager's life. Martin had
been talking to his girlfriend all the way to the store where he bought
Skittles and a tea. The phone was in his pocket and the earphone in his
ear, Crump said.
"He said this man was watching him, so he put his hoodie on. He said he
lost the man," Martin's friend said. "I asked Trayvon to run, and he
said he was going to walk fast. I told him to run, but he said he was
not going to run."
Eventually, he would run, said the girl, thinking that he'd managed to
escape. But suddenly the strange man was back, cornering Martin.
"Trayvon said, 'What are you following me for,' and the man said, 'What
are you doing here.' Next thing I hear is somebody pushing, and somebody
pushed Trayvon because the head set just fell. I called him again, and
he didn't answer the phone."
<http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-arrest-now-abc-reveals-crucial-p
hone/story?id=15959017>
>
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/03/what-happened-trayvon-martin-
explained
>
> Is there a reason why you MUST lie in a vain attempt to twist the
> facts into your own little fantasy about what happened?
What's that smell? Burning martyr?
Show the lies. Point out the twisted facts. Be a man.
>
> Mikie Smith
And then to top it off, Zimmerman uses a photo of The Frank W. Hale Jr.
Black Cultural Center at Ohio State University, after it was defaced
with graffiti saying "Long Live Zimmerman.", while he, Zimmerman, is
asking for money.
<http://www.mediaite.com/online/george-zimmerman-website-praises-vandalis
m-of-black-cultural-center/>
George Zimmerman Launches Defense Website
George Zimmerman, the alleged killer of Trayvon Martin, has launched his
own website in an attempt to raise money for what he described as his
"living expenses and legal defense." The website contains photos of
pro-Zimmerman slogans, including a sign at a rally by Koran-burning
pastor Terry Jones and a photo of a vandalized black cultural center at
Ohio State University where someone spray-painted the words "Long Live
Zimmerman."
<http://www.democracynow.org/2012/4/10/headlines#4108>
<http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/40190_George_Zimmerman_Launches_
Site_With_Photo_of_Vandalized_Black_Cultural_Center>
<http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/09/11104813-george-zimmerman-t
akes-to-web-to-raise-money-for-legal-costs-lawyers-confirm>
--
E Pluribus Unum
Know where your money is tonight?
It's making the lives of Wall Street Bankers more comfortable.
The GOP is chasing us towards a cliff called "Obama."
Vote 3rd Party
Billy
May 26, 2012, 6:19:32 PM5/26/12
to
In article <fYNur.18905$x11....@newsfe21.iad>,
Run, shmun. Zimmerman will spend a lifetime looking over his shoulder,
and staying out of poorly lit alley ways. He may be acquitted, but I'm
guessing he isn't the only vigilante in the world. His life is
essentially over. He could go to work for a white power publication as a
symbol, BUT he isn't REALLY white, according to them.
and staying out of poorly lit alley ways. He may be acquitted, but I'm
guessing he isn't the only vigilante in the world. His life is
essentially over. He could go to work for a white power publication as a
symbol, BUT he isn't REALLY white, according to them.
Mike Smith
May 27, 2012, 10:09:35 AM5/27/12
to
On Sat, 26 May 2012 15:08:48 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
Did you read what sanders posted? Do you understand English?
>
>>
>> The police NEVER told him to stay in his truck.
>The dispatcher is heard trying to discourage Zimmerman, asking, "Are you
>following him?.. Okay, we don't need you to do that."
><http://abcnews.go.com/US/neighborhood-watchman-allegedly-shot-trayvon-ma
>rtin-wanted-cop/story?id=15949879#.T2i6TfWnOt9>
OK, you do not understand plain English. I already knew that.
>
>"The alleged action of a "self-appointed neighborhood watchman" last
>month in Sanford, FL significantly contradicts the principles of the
>Neighborhood Watch Program," stated NSA Executive Director Aaron D.
>Kennard, Sheriff (ret.). "NSA has no information indicating the
>community where the incident occurred has ever even registered with the
>NSA Neighborhood Watch program."
><http://trayvonmartinmurdercase.blogspot.com/2012/03/national-sheriffs-as
>sociation-statement.html>
So what...
told to "stay by his truck"?
>
>> Trayvon attacked him; Trayvon was NOT trying to get away, nor was
>> Trayvon afraid of Zimmerman.
>ABC News was there exclusively as the 16-year-old girl told Attorney
>Benjamin Crump about the last moments of the teenager's life. Martin had
>been talking to his girlfriend all the way to the store where he bought
>Skittles and a tea. The phone was in his pocket and the earphone in his
>ear, Crump said.
>
>"He said this man was watching him, so he put his hoodie on. He said he
>lost the man," Martin's friend said. "I asked Trayvon to run, and he
>said he was going to walk fast. I told him to run, but he said he was
>not going to run."
>
>Eventually, he would run, said the girl, thinking that he'd managed to
>escape. But suddenly the strange man was back, cornering Martin.
>
>"Trayvon said, 'What are you following me for,' and the man said, 'What
>are you doing here.' Next thing I hear is somebody pushing, and somebody
>pushed Trayvon because the head set just fell. I called him again, and
>he didn't answer the phone."
><http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-arrest-now-abc-reveals-crucial-p
>hone/story?id=15959017>
More proof that I was correct. Trayvon approached Zimmerman and
attacked him.
>
>>
>http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/03/what-happened-trayvon-martin-
>explained
>>
>> Is there a reason why you MUST lie in a vain attempt to twist the
>> facts into your own little fantasy about what happened?
>What's that smell? Burning martyr?
>Show the lies. Point out the twisted facts. Be a man.
Look up, fool.
Why should I post more than I already have? You simply do not possess
the intelligence to understand what happened, based on your mindless
post.
Mike Smith
>
>>
>> The police NEVER told him to stay in his truck.
>The dispatcher is heard trying to discourage Zimmerman, asking, "Are you
>following him?.. Okay, we don't need you to do that."
><http://abcnews.go.com/US/neighborhood-watchman-allegedly-shot-trayvon-ma
>rtin-wanted-cop/story?id=15949879#.T2i6TfWnOt9>
>
>"The alleged action of a "self-appointed neighborhood watchman" last
>month in Sanford, FL significantly contradicts the principles of the
>Neighborhood Watch Program," stated NSA Executive Director Aaron D.
>Kennard, Sheriff (ret.). "NSA has no information indicating the
>community where the incident occurred has ever even registered with the
>NSA Neighborhood Watch program."
><http://trayvonmartinmurdercase.blogspot.com/2012/03/national-sheriffs-as
>sociation-statement.html>
>
>> He did not get out of his truck with a gun and track down Trayvon.
><http://bcclist.com/2012/03/27/trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-map/>
>
>At 2:07 minutes into his call to the police, Zimmerman says, "he's
>running.". At 2:37 minutes, Zimmerman tells the dispatcher, "he ran."
>The sound of an "open door" chime, a change in Zimmerman's voice and the
>sound of wind indicate that Zimmerman has left his vehicle, prompting
>the dispatcher to ask if Zimmerman is following Martin. When Zimmerman
>confirms that he is, the dispatcher says, "We don't need you to do
>that."[111] Zimmerman says "OK". Asked if he "want(s) to meet with the
>officer," Zimmerman says "yeah" and gives directions to where his
>vehicle is parked but is unable to provide an address. He also tells the
>dispatcher the numbers of his street address, and then at 3:35 adds, "Oh
>crap, I don't want to give it all out. I don't know where this kid is."
>The dispatcher asks him if he wants to meet the police at the
>mailboxes,[Note 3, 4th picture] and he at first agrees but then says,
>"Actually, could you have him call me, and I'll tell him where I'm at?",
>to which the dispatcher replies, "no problem".[112] Zimmerman appears to
>hang up at the 4:05 mark. The recording ends at the 4:11 mark,
>approximately 7:13:41 PM.
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin>
This proves what I posted. Where is your proof that Ziimmerman was
>> He did not get out of his truck with a gun and track down Trayvon.
><http://bcclist.com/2012/03/27/trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-map/>
>
>At 2:07 minutes into his call to the police, Zimmerman says, "he's
>running.". At 2:37 minutes, Zimmerman tells the dispatcher, "he ran."
>The sound of an "open door" chime, a change in Zimmerman's voice and the
>sound of wind indicate that Zimmerman has left his vehicle, prompting
>the dispatcher to ask if Zimmerman is following Martin. When Zimmerman
>confirms that he is, the dispatcher says, "We don't need you to do
>that."[111] Zimmerman says "OK". Asked if he "want(s) to meet with the
>officer," Zimmerman says "yeah" and gives directions to where his
>vehicle is parked but is unable to provide an address. He also tells the
>dispatcher the numbers of his street address, and then at 3:35 adds, "Oh
>crap, I don't want to give it all out. I don't know where this kid is."
>The dispatcher asks him if he wants to meet the police at the
>mailboxes,[Note 3, 4th picture] and he at first agrees but then says,
>"Actually, could you have him call me, and I'll tell him where I'm at?",
>to which the dispatcher replies, "no problem".[112] Zimmerman appears to
>hang up at the 4:05 mark. The recording ends at the 4:11 mark,
>approximately 7:13:41 PM.
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin>
told to "stay by his truck"?
>
>> Trayvon attacked him; Trayvon was NOT trying to get away, nor was
>> Trayvon afraid of Zimmerman.
>ABC News was there exclusively as the 16-year-old girl told Attorney
>Benjamin Crump about the last moments of the teenager's life. Martin had
>been talking to his girlfriend all the way to the store where he bought
>Skittles and a tea. The phone was in his pocket and the earphone in his
>ear, Crump said.
>
>"He said this man was watching him, so he put his hoodie on. He said he
>lost the man," Martin's friend said. "I asked Trayvon to run, and he
>said he was going to walk fast. I told him to run, but he said he was
>not going to run."
>
>Eventually, he would run, said the girl, thinking that he'd managed to
>escape. But suddenly the strange man was back, cornering Martin.
>
>"Trayvon said, 'What are you following me for,' and the man said, 'What
>are you doing here.' Next thing I hear is somebody pushing, and somebody
>pushed Trayvon because the head set just fell. I called him again, and
>he didn't answer the phone."
><http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-arrest-now-abc-reveals-crucial-p
>hone/story?id=15959017>
attacked him.
>
>>
>http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/03/what-happened-trayvon-martin-
>explained
>>
>> Is there a reason why you MUST lie in a vain attempt to twist the
>> facts into your own little fantasy about what happened?
>What's that smell? Burning martyr?
>Show the lies. Point out the twisted facts. Be a man.
Why should I post more than I already have? You simply do not possess
the intelligence to understand what happened, based on your mindless
post.
Mike Smith
Billy
May 28, 2012, 1:34:41 AM5/28/12
to
In article <fuc4s7da944tosfd8...@4ax.com>,
You see the map. You see where Zimmerman's truck is. You see where
Martin was killed. You don't want to understand that the dispatcher told
Zimmerman not to follow a suspect, which is also against the National
Sheriff's Associations express directions, as well as carrying a weapon,
to Neighborhood Watch personnel (of which Zimmerman was not a member).
Zimmerman wantonly followed a person who was involved in no crime,
except walking while black, and killed him.
These things are certain.
Then there are eyewitnesses who report a fight, and a person on the
phone who says that Zimmerman never identified himself.
Anything else is just a figment of your twisted racist mind.
Again, you have no citations of support for you vision of the events
that lead to Martin's killing. I gave you at least 9 citations
supporting my understanding of what happened. You just shovel your
"facts" out of your backside. You wear your ignorance like a badge of
honor. God, you are stoopid.
> Mikie Stoopid
Martin was killed. You don't want to understand that the dispatcher told
Zimmerman not to follow a suspect, which is also against the National
Sheriff's Associations express directions, as well as carrying a weapon,
to Neighborhood Watch personnel (of which Zimmerman was not a member).
Zimmerman wantonly followed a person who was involved in no crime,
except walking while black, and killed him.
These things are certain.
Then there are eyewitnesses who report a fight, and a person on the
phone who says that Zimmerman never identified himself.
Anything else is just a figment of your twisted racist mind.
Again, you have no citations of support for you vision of the events
that lead to Martin's killing. I gave you at least 9 citations
supporting my understanding of what happened. You just shovel your
"facts" out of your backside. You wear your ignorance like a badge of
honor. God, you are stoopid.
Mike Smith
May 28, 2012, 6:39:55 AM5/28/12
to
On Sun, 27 May 2012 22:34:41 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
Only in your delusional fantasy. Dumbass stated Zimmerman was told to
stay in his truck. That is a lie. You have not refuted my statement
that was a lie.
Zimmerman did not "wantonly" follow someone who was "walking while
black". You are intentionally being deceptive. Why?
>
>Then there are eyewitnesses who report a fight, and a person on the
>phone who says that Zimmerman never identified himself.
So what.
>
>Anything else is just a figment of your twisted racist mind.
Again you jump in with your delusional fantasy about my mind.
>
>Again, you have no citations of support for you vision of the events
>that lead to Martin's killing. I gave you at least 9 citations
>supporting my understanding of what happened. You just shovel your
>"facts" out of your backside. You wear your ignorance like a badge of
>honor. God, you are stoopid.
Your cites backed up my perception of the facts as published by
various media outlets. Your cites do NOT back up your or sanders
ignorant fantasy about what happened.
You are just too stupid to comprehend the facts, so you rely on the
delusional fantasy you (and other libtards) have created to condemn
the righteous shoot by Zimmerman. Trayvon attacked Zimmerman, causing
numerous physical injuries. Zimmerman shot Trayvon to stop him from
further injuring Zimmerman. Zimmerman had a clear fear of his life
when the gansta-wannabee intentionally attacked Zimmerman and was
performing a gansta-wannabee beat-down on Zimmerman.
All your little fantasizing and whining will not change that scenario,
Billy-boi.
Mike Smith
stay in his truck. That is a lie. You have not refuted my statement
that was a lie.
Zimmerman did not "wantonly" follow someone who was "walking while
black". You are intentionally being deceptive. Why?
>
>Then there are eyewitnesses who report a fight, and a person on the
>phone who says that Zimmerman never identified himself.
>
>Anything else is just a figment of your twisted racist mind.
>
>Again, you have no citations of support for you vision of the events
>that lead to Martin's killing. I gave you at least 9 citations
>supporting my understanding of what happened. You just shovel your
>"facts" out of your backside. You wear your ignorance like a badge of
>honor. God, you are stoopid.
various media outlets. Your cites do NOT back up your or sanders
ignorant fantasy about what happened.
You are just too stupid to comprehend the facts, so you rely on the
delusional fantasy you (and other libtards) have created to condemn
the righteous shoot by Zimmerman. Trayvon attacked Zimmerman, causing
numerous physical injuries. Zimmerman shot Trayvon to stop him from
further injuring Zimmerman. Zimmerman had a clear fear of his life
when the gansta-wannabee intentionally attacked Zimmerman and was
performing a gansta-wannabee beat-down on Zimmerman.
All your little fantasizing and whining will not change that scenario,
Billy-boi.
Mike Smith
Billy
May 28, 2012, 1:42:17 PM5/28/12
to
In article <9lk6s7pv6pct69hso...@4ax.com>,
So when the dispatcher said,"Are you following him?.. Okay, we don't
need you to do that.", you read that as attack!?? You really are stupid,
Stoopid.
Why did an armed Zimmerman follow Martin, thus breaking 2 of the
Neighborhood Watch guidelines? You tell me.
If he broke 2 guidelines, how do you know he didn't break more?
>
> >
> >Anything else is just a figment of your twisted racist mind.
>
> Again you jump in with your delusional fantasy about my mind.
Twisted, racist mind to be exact.
>
> >
> >Again, you have no citations of support for you vision of the events
> >that lead to Martin's killing. I gave you at least 9 citations
> >supporting my understanding of what happened. You just shovel your
> >"facts" out of your backside. You wear your ignorance like a badge of
> >honor. God, you are stoopid.
>
> Your cites backed up my perception of the facts as published by
> various media outlets. Your cites do NOT back up your or sanders
> ignorant fantasy about what happened.
So you heard it somewhere? Where? Where do the cites that I posted
support your sick, twisted, racist fantasy?
provided, Stoopid. How do you know Martin attacked Zimmerman, hmmm?
Martin wasn't the one with the history of violence.
Martin didn't engage Zimmerman.
Martin wasn't armed.
Your butt must really hurt after shoveling all your "facts" out of it.
>
> All your little fantasizing and whining will not change that scenario,
> Billy-boi.
There you go, posturing and posing again. Why not use "real" facts, like
adults do, Stoopid?
>
> Mikie Stoopid
P.S. I'm glad you figured out how to spell Zimmerman, i.e. with 1 "i",
not 2.
need you to do that.", you read that as attack!?? You really are stupid,
Stoopid.
>
> Zimmerman did not "wantonly" follow someone who was "walking while
> black". You are intentionally being deceptive. Why?
I'm so glad it had nothing to do with Marin being an African American.
> Zimmerman did not "wantonly" follow someone who was "walking while
> black". You are intentionally being deceptive. Why?
Why did an armed Zimmerman follow Martin, thus breaking 2 of the
Neighborhood Watch guidelines? You tell me.
If he broke 2 guidelines, how do you know he didn't break more?
>
> >
> >Then there are eyewitnesses who report a fight, and a person on the
> >phone who says that Zimmerman never identified himself.
>
> So what.
Is that your response to all witnesses?
> >
> >Then there are eyewitnesses who report a fight, and a person on the
> >phone who says that Zimmerman never identified himself.
>
> So what.
>
> >
> >Anything else is just a figment of your twisted racist mind.
>
> Again you jump in with your delusional fantasy about my mind.
>
> >
> >Again, you have no citations of support for you vision of the events
> >that lead to Martin's killing. I gave you at least 9 citations
> >supporting my understanding of what happened. You just shovel your
> >"facts" out of your backside. You wear your ignorance like a badge of
> >honor. God, you are stoopid.
>
> Your cites backed up my perception of the facts as published by
> various media outlets. Your cites do NOT back up your or sanders
> ignorant fantasy about what happened.
support your sick, twisted, racist fantasy?
>
> You are just too stupid to comprehend the facts, so you rely on the
> delusional fantasy you (and other libtards) have created to condemn
> the righteous shoot by Zimmerman. Trayvon attacked Zimmerman, causing
> numerous physical injuries. Zimmerman shot Trayvon to stop him from
> further injuring Zimmerman. Zimmerman had a clear fear of his life
> when the gansta-wannabee intentionally attacked Zimmerman and was
> performing a gansta-wannabee beat-down on Zimmerman.
How do you weave this tangle of of opinions from the citations that I
> You are just too stupid to comprehend the facts, so you rely on the
> delusional fantasy you (and other libtards) have created to condemn
> the righteous shoot by Zimmerman. Trayvon attacked Zimmerman, causing
> numerous physical injuries. Zimmerman shot Trayvon to stop him from
> further injuring Zimmerman. Zimmerman had a clear fear of his life
> when the gansta-wannabee intentionally attacked Zimmerman and was
> performing a gansta-wannabee beat-down on Zimmerman.
provided, Stoopid. How do you know Martin attacked Zimmerman, hmmm?
Martin wasn't the one with the history of violence.
Martin didn't engage Zimmerman.
Martin wasn't armed.
Your butt must really hurt after shoveling all your "facts" out of it.
>
> All your little fantasizing and whining will not change that scenario,
> Billy-boi.
adults do, Stoopid?
>
> Mikie Stoopid
P.S. I'm glad you figured out how to spell Zimmerman, i.e. with 1 "i",
not 2.
Unknown
May 28, 2012, 2:30:13 AM5/28/12
to
"Mike Smith" wrote in message
news:fuc4s7da944tosfd8...@4ax.com...
> More proof that I was correct. Trayvon approached Zimmerman and
> attacked him.
maybe on foot.
All Martin did was stand his ground and be black.
The Daring Dufas
May 28, 2012, 4:24:43 PM5/28/12
to
and testify for the prosecution? You wouldn't want to commit perjury now
would you? ^_^
TDD
Mike Smith
May 28, 2012, 5:49:03 PM5/28/12
to
On Mon, 28 May 2012 10:42:17 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
wrote:
>There you go, posturing and posing again. Why not use "real" facts, like
>adults do, Stoopid?
I did. You did not understand them. It's not your fault; your parent's
defective DNA combined to make you as stupid as you are.
Mike Smith
wrote:
>There you go, posturing and posing again. Why not use "real" facts, like
>adults do, Stoopid?
defective DNA combined to make you as stupid as you are.
Mike Smith
Mike Smith
May 28, 2012, 5:52:48 PM5/28/12
to
Mike Smith
HeyBub
May 28, 2012, 7:10:25 PM5/28/12
to
> "http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/27/us-usa-gunman-indiana-idUSBRE84P02L20120527"
>
> The gun-nut left Texas with his pistol to go find a job.
> He couldn't find one - so he beat up an old lady and took a bunch of
> hostages.
>
> That's when he realized that the life of a Tea Party Republican
> gun-nut is a life, not worth living.
> So he shot himself twice.
> Yeah - that's right, it took two.
> The gun-nut couldn't even shoot himself right.
Unknown
May 28, 2012, 10:30:23 PM5/28/12
to
"Mike Smith" wrote in message
news:hss7s7p63q55aqm8o...@4ax.com...
> You libtards and your ignorant fantasies are hilariously stupid.
Unknown
May 28, 2012, 10:34:24 PM5/28/12
to
"Mike Smith" wrote in message
news:ujs7s799d4cgfjphl...@4ax.com...
> I did. You did not understand them. It's not your fault; your parent's
> defective DNA combined to make you as stupid as you are.
They'd be talking about Easter or some such, and then just start babbling -
like they'd had a stroke.
Same thing with this racist tantrum.
He's talking about a current event, and then BAM - starts babbling about
some other guy's DNA.
Clinton was right - you creeps are seriously "unhinged".
Billy
May 29, 2012, 2:26:11 AM5/29/12
to
In article <ujs7s799d4cgfjphl...@4ax.com>,
Not even responding to the questions, Stoopid?
I doubt that your dad even knew your mom's name, or wanted to.
I doubt that your dad even knew your mom's name, or wanted to.
Mike Smith
May 29, 2012, 5:49:39 AM5/29/12
to
Now that is hilariously funny! And typical of this imbecile's level of
understanding.
Mike Smith
Mike Smith
May 29, 2012, 5:54:28 AM5/29/12
to
On Mon, 28 May 2012 23:26:11 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
wrote:
>In article <ujs7s799d4cgfjphl...@4ax.com>,
> Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 28 May 2012 10:42:17 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >There you go, posturing and posing again. Why not use "real" facts, like
>> >adults do, Stoopid?
>>
>> I did. You did not understand them. It's not your fault; your parent's
>> defective DNA combined to make you as stupid as you are.
>>
>> Mike Smith
>
>Not even responding to the questions, Stoopid?
I did. You did not understand my answers.
>I doubt that your dad even knew your mom's name, or wanted to.
You libtards and your delusional fantasies are hilariously stupid.
Mike Smith
wrote:
>In article <ujs7s799d4cgfjphl...@4ax.com>,
> Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 28 May 2012 10:42:17 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >There you go, posturing and posing again. Why not use "real" facts, like
>> >adults do, Stoopid?
>>
>> I did. You did not understand them. It's not your fault; your parent's
>> defective DNA combined to make you as stupid as you are.
>>
>> Mike Smith
>
>Not even responding to the questions, Stoopid?
>I doubt that your dad even knew your mom's name, or wanted to.
Mike Smith
Mike Smith
May 29, 2012, 5:54:57 AM5/29/12
to
Mike Smith
HeyBub
May 29, 2012, 7:15:34 AM5/29/12
to
Here are some simple questions to test your understanding of the law.
Billy
May 29, 2012, 5:14:45 PM5/29/12
to
In article <sr69s7laca3seag2h...@4ax.com>,
>
> BWAHAHAHahAhAHhAHahhHAHAHAhahahahahAha
Hyenas laugh, too ;O))
> Mikie Stoopid
Mikie Stoopid <m...@wt.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 May 2012 21:34:24 -0500, "Sanders Kaufman"
> <[bu...@kaufman.net]> wrote:
>
> >"Mikie Stoopid" wrote in message
> On Mon, 28 May 2012 21:34:24 -0500, "Sanders Kaufman"
> <[bu...@kaufman.net]> wrote:
>
> >news:ujs7s799d4cgfjphl...@4ax.com...
> >
> >> I did. You did not understand them. It's not your fault; your parent's
> >> defective DNA combined to make you as stupid as you are.
> >
> >This reminds me of when those Republican preachers "talk in tongues".
> >They'd be talking about Easter or some such, and then just start babbling -
> >like they'd had a stroke.
> >Same thing with this racist tantrum.
> >He's talking about a current event, and then BAM - starts babbling about
> >some other guy's DNA.
> >
> >Clinton was right - you creeps are seriously "unhinged".
Yup, even Clinton was right a few times.
> >
> >> I did. You did not understand them. It's not your fault; your parent's
> >> defective DNA combined to make you as stupid as you are.
> >
> >This reminds me of when those Republican preachers "talk in tongues".
> >They'd be talking about Easter or some such, and then just start babbling -
> >like they'd had a stroke.
> >Same thing with this racist tantrum.
> >He's talking about a current event, and then BAM - starts babbling about
> >some other guy's DNA.
> >
> >Clinton was right - you creeps are seriously "unhinged".
>
> BWAHAHAHahAhAHhAHahhHAHAHAhahahahahAha
Hyenas laugh, too ;O))
> Mikie Stoopid
Billy
May 29, 2012, 5:17:55 PM5/29/12
to
In article <i479s7tkqh5ge6k5d...@4ax.com>,
> Mikie Stoopid
Mikie Stoopid <m...@wt.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 May 2012 23:26:11 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <ujs7s799d4cgfjphl...@4ax.com>,
> On Mon, 28 May 2012 23:26:11 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <ujs7s799d4cgfjphl...@4ax.com>,
> > Mikie Stoopid <m...@wt.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 28 May 2012 10:42:17 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >There you go, posturing and posing again. Why not use "real" facts, like
> >> >adults do, Stoopid?
> >>
> >> I did. You did not understand them. It's not your fault; your parent's
> >> defective DNA combined to make you as stupid as you are.
> >>
> >> Mikie Stoopid
> >
> >> On Mon, 28 May 2012 10:42:17 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >There you go, posturing and posing again. Why not use "real" facts, like
> >> >adults do, Stoopid?
> >>
> >> I did. You did not understand them. It's not your fault; your parent's
> >> defective DNA combined to make you as stupid as you are.
> >>
> >
> >Not even responding to the questions, Stoopid?
>
> I did. You did not understand my answers.
>
> >I doubt that your dad even knew your mom's name, or wanted to.
>
> You libtards and your delusional fantasies are hilariously stupid.
>
Have a citation for that, Stoopid?
> >Not even responding to the questions, Stoopid?
>
> I did. You did not understand my answers.
>
> >I doubt that your dad even knew your mom's name, or wanted to.
>
> You libtards and your delusional fantasies are hilariously stupid.
>
> Mikie Stoopid
Mike Smith
May 29, 2012, 6:24:08 PM5/29/12
to
On Tue, 29 May 2012 14:14:45 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
Folks, 20 years ago I used to feel sorry for these poor ignorant
fools, but as I matured, I realized their stupidity is self-inflicted.
They are intentionally stupid, and have no desire to educate
themselves. They like being ignorant, they like being fed bullshit by
their masters, they like going through life as clueless as possible.
So I'll just denigrate their ignorance, and ridicule their
cluelessness, and laugh at them.
Mike Smith
Folks, 20 years ago I used to feel sorry for these poor ignorant
fools, but as I matured, I realized their stupidity is self-inflicted.
They are intentionally stupid, and have no desire to educate
themselves. They like being ignorant, they like being fed bullshit by
their masters, they like going through life as clueless as possible.
So I'll just denigrate their ignorance, and ridicule their
cluelessness, and laugh at them.
Mike Smith
Billy
May 30, 2012, 1:11:41 AM5/30/12
to
In article <uqias758cgk7j2hhc...@4ax.com>,
any supporting documentation. Why do you embarrass yourself like this,
Stoopid?
The way it works, moron, is that you make a statement like,"Conservatism
Thrives on Low Intelligence and Poor Information", and then you add a
non-partisan source, so that folks won't think that you are just
shoveling facts out of your backside.
<http://www.alternet.org/story/154082/conservatism_thrives_on_low_intelli
gence_and_poor_information/>
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/06/right-stupidity-spre
ads-enabled-polite-left?INTCMP=SRCH>
>
> So I'll just denigrate their ignorance, and ridicule their
> cluelessness, and laugh at them.
>
> Mikie Stoopid
So you gonna denigrate their ignorance with facts, or invectives?
You gonna ridicule their cluelessness with facts, or invectives?
You gonna laugh at them because of facts, or because it is your
birthright as a hyena?
I probably shouldn't pick on someone who is so obviously helpless, but
what the hell. I'm only going to go around once.
So come-on Mikie, show us why everyone who isn't down in the same hole
as you are is stupid. Go for it.
Bwahahahahaha!
Mikie Stoopid <m...@wt.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 May 2012 14:14:45 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
> wrote:
>
>
> >> On Mon, 28 May 2012 21:34:24 -0500, "Sanders Kaufman"
> >> <[bu...@kaufman.net]> wrote:
> >>
>
> Folks, 20 years ago I used to feel sorry for these poor ignorant
> fools, but as I matured, I realized their stupidity is self-inflicted.
> They are intentionally stupid, and have no desire to educate
> themselves. They like being ignorant, they like being fed bullshit by
> their masters, they like going through life as clueless as possible.
Citation pleas, you hopeless moron. You have made allegations without
> On Tue, 29 May 2012 14:14:45 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
> wrote:
>
>
> >> On Mon, 28 May 2012 21:34:24 -0500, "Sanders Kaufman"
> >> <[bu...@kaufman.net]> wrote:
> >>
>
> Folks, 20 years ago I used to feel sorry for these poor ignorant
> fools, but as I matured, I realized their stupidity is self-inflicted.
> They are intentionally stupid, and have no desire to educate
> themselves. They like being ignorant, they like being fed bullshit by
> their masters, they like going through life as clueless as possible.
any supporting documentation. Why do you embarrass yourself like this,
Stoopid?
The way it works, moron, is that you make a statement like,"Conservatism
Thrives on Low Intelligence and Poor Information", and then you add a
non-partisan source, so that folks won't think that you are just
shoveling facts out of your backside.
<http://www.alternet.org/story/154082/conservatism_thrives_on_low_intelli
gence_and_poor_information/>
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/06/right-stupidity-spre
ads-enabled-polite-left?INTCMP=SRCH>
>
> So I'll just denigrate their ignorance, and ridicule their
> cluelessness, and laugh at them.
>
So you gonna denigrate their ignorance with facts, or invectives?
You gonna ridicule their cluelessness with facts, or invectives?
You gonna laugh at them because of facts, or because it is your
birthright as a hyena?
I probably shouldn't pick on someone who is so obviously helpless, but
what the hell. I'm only going to go around once.
So come-on Mikie, show us why everyone who isn't down in the same hole
as you are is stupid. Go for it.
Bwahahahahaha!
Mike Smith
May 30, 2012, 7:13:00 AM5/30/12
to
On Tue, 29 May 2012 22:11:41 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
wrote:
>In article <uqias758cgk7j2hhc...@4ax.com>,
> Mikie Stoopid <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 29 May 2012 14:14:45 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >> On Mon, 28 May 2012 21:34:24 -0500, "Sanders Kaufman"
>> >> <[bu...@kaufman.net]> wrote:
>> >>
>>
>> Folks, 20 years ago I used to feel sorry for these poor ignorant
>> fools, but as I matured, I realized their stupidity is self-inflicted.
>> They are intentionally stupid, and have no desire to educate
>> themselves. They like being ignorant, they like being fed bullshit by
>> their masters, they like going through life as clueless as possible.
>
>Citation pleas, you hopeless moron. You have made allegations without
>any supporting documentation. Why do you embarrass yourself like this,
I've been down this road before, moron. Just how many cites would
convince you that you are wrong, and too stupid to know you are wrong?
1? 5? 10? 10,000?
>Stoopid?
Yes, you are.
>
>The way it works, moron, is that you make a statement like,"Conservatism
>Thrives on Low Intelligence and Poor Information", and then you add a
>non-partisan source, so that folks won't think that you are just
>shoveling facts out of your backside.
><http://www.alternet.org/story/154082/conservatism_thrives_on_low_intelli
>gence_and_poor_information/>
><http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/06/right-stupidity-spre
>ads-enabled-polite-left?INTCMP=SRCH>
>
BWAHAHAahAHAhaHAHAHaHhahahahaAH
alt.net & guardian?
BWHahaahAHhAhahahaHahhahahaHHA
Does this mean you will accept any blog I want to cite?
And how many cites will make you happy?
Mike Smith
wrote:
>In article <uqias758cgk7j2hhc...@4ax.com>,
> Mikie Stoopid <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 29 May 2012 14:14:45 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >> On Mon, 28 May 2012 21:34:24 -0500, "Sanders Kaufman"
>> >> <[bu...@kaufman.net]> wrote:
>> >>
>>
>> Folks, 20 years ago I used to feel sorry for these poor ignorant
>> fools, but as I matured, I realized their stupidity is self-inflicted.
>> They are intentionally stupid, and have no desire to educate
>> themselves. They like being ignorant, they like being fed bullshit by
>> their masters, they like going through life as clueless as possible.
>
>Citation pleas, you hopeless moron. You have made allegations without
>any supporting documentation. Why do you embarrass yourself like this,
convince you that you are wrong, and too stupid to know you are wrong?
1? 5? 10? 10,000?
>Stoopid?
Yes, you are.
>
>The way it works, moron, is that you make a statement like,"Conservatism
>Thrives on Low Intelligence and Poor Information", and then you add a
>non-partisan source, so that folks won't think that you are just
>shoveling facts out of your backside.
><http://www.alternet.org/story/154082/conservatism_thrives_on_low_intelli
>gence_and_poor_information/>
><http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/06/right-stupidity-spre
>ads-enabled-polite-left?INTCMP=SRCH>
>
alt.net & guardian?
BWHahaahAHhAhahahaHahhahahaHHA
Does this mean you will accept any blog I want to cite?
And how many cites will make you happy?
Mike Smith
Billy
May 31, 2012, 12:54:52 AM5/31/12
to
In article <100cs7d1jbnjt1oa8...@4ax.com>,
again, and expecting a different result." Maybe this time will be
different.
Are you are saying that The Guardian, the origin of the article that
ads-enabled-polite-left?INTCMP=SRCH>
is partisan?
Got a cite for that?
AlterNet
<http://www.alternet.org/>
Obama Expands Secret Wars Across the Globe
What Can Labor Win if it Backs Obama's Re-Election?
Romney Attacks Student Loan Reform, Touts For-Profit Colleges
Outrage: Kansas Pastor Wants the Government to Kill Gays
Sounds like your kind of site, Stoopid.
> And how many cites will make you happy?
Since you never have any cites, go ahead and surprise me.
>
> Mikie Stoopid
Mikie Stoopid <m...@wt.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 May 2012 22:11:41 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <uqias758cgk7j2hhc...@4ax.com>,
> > Mikie Stoopid <m...@wt.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 29 May 2012 14:14:45 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >> On Mon, 28 May 2012 21:34:24 -0500, "Sanders Kaufman"
> >> >> <[bu...@kaufman.net]> wrote:
> >> >>
> >>
> >> Folks, 20 years ago I used to feel sorry for these poor ignorant
> >> fools, but as I matured, I realized their stupidity is self-inflicted.
> >> They are intentionally stupid, and have no desire to educate
> >> themselves. They like being ignorant, they like being fed bullshit by
> >> their masters, they like going through life as clueless as possible.
> >
> >Citation pleas, you hopeless moron. You have made allegations without
> >any supporting documentation. Why do you embarrass yourself like this,
>
> I've been down this road before, moron.
You know what they say, "Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over
> On Tue, 29 May 2012 22:11:41 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <uqias758cgk7j2hhc...@4ax.com>,
> > Mikie Stoopid <m...@wt.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 29 May 2012 14:14:45 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >> On Mon, 28 May 2012 21:34:24 -0500, "Sanders Kaufman"
> >> >> <[bu...@kaufman.net]> wrote:
> >> >>
> >>
> >> Folks, 20 years ago I used to feel sorry for these poor ignorant
> >> fools, but as I matured, I realized their stupidity is self-inflicted.
> >> They are intentionally stupid, and have no desire to educate
> >> themselves. They like being ignorant, they like being fed bullshit by
> >> their masters, they like going through life as clueless as possible.
> >
> >Citation pleas, you hopeless moron. You have made allegations without
> >any supporting documentation. Why do you embarrass yourself like this,
>
> I've been down this road before, moron.
again, and expecting a different result." Maybe this time will be
different.
> Just how many cites would
> convince you that you are wrong, and too stupid to know you are wrong?
> 1? 5? 10? 10,000?
>
>
> >Stoopid?
>
> Yes, you are.
>
> >
> >The way it works, moron, is that you make a statement like,"Conservatism
> >Thrives on Low Intelligence and Poor Information", and then you add a
> >non-partisan source, so that folks won't think that you are just
> >shoveling facts out of your backside.
> ><http://www.alternet.org/story/154082/conservatism_thrives_on_low_intelli
> >gence_and_poor_information/>
> ><http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/06/right-stupidity-spre
> >ads-enabled-polite-left?INTCMP=SRCH>
> >
> BWAHAHAahAHAhaHAHAHaHhahahahaAH
>
> alt.net & guardian?
>
> BWHahaahAHhAhahahaHahhahahaHHA
>
> Does this mean you will accept any blog I want to cite?
No.
> convince you that you are wrong, and too stupid to know you are wrong?
> 1? 5? 10? 10,000?
>
>
> >Stoopid?
>
> Yes, you are.
>
> >
> >The way it works, moron, is that you make a statement like,"Conservatism
> >Thrives on Low Intelligence and Poor Information", and then you add a
> >non-partisan source, so that folks won't think that you are just
> >shoveling facts out of your backside.
> ><http://www.alternet.org/story/154082/conservatism_thrives_on_low_intelli
> >gence_and_poor_information/>
> ><http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/06/right-stupidity-spre
> >ads-enabled-polite-left?INTCMP=SRCH>
> >
> BWAHAHAahAHAhaHAHAHaHhahahahaAH
>
> alt.net & guardian?
>
> BWHahaahAHhAhahahaHahhahahaHHA
>
> Does this mean you will accept any blog I want to cite?
Are you are saying that The Guardian, the origin of the article that
"Conservatism Thrives on Low Intelligence and Poor Information"
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/06/right-stupidity-spre
ads-enabled-polite-left?INTCMP=SRCH>
is partisan?
Got a cite for that?
AlterNet
<http://www.alternet.org/>
Obama Expands Secret Wars Across the Globe
What Can Labor Win if it Backs Obama's Re-Election?
Romney Attacks Student Loan Reform, Touts For-Profit Colleges
Outrage: Kansas Pastor Wants the Government to Kill Gays
Sounds like your kind of site, Stoopid.
> And how many cites will make you happy?
>
> Mikie Stoopid
Mike Smith
May 31, 2012, 6:53:29 AM5/31/12
to
On Wed, 30 May 2012 21:54:52 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
after time...
>> Just how many cites would
>> convince you that you are wrong, and too stupid to know you are wrong?
>> 1? 5? 10? 10,000?
>>
>>
>> >Stoopid?
>>
>> Yes, you are.
>>
>> >
>> >The way it works, moron, is that you make a statement like,"Conservatism
>> >Thrives on Low Intelligence and Poor Information", and then you add a
>> >non-partisan source, so that folks won't think that you are just
>> >shoveling facts out of your backside.
>> ><http://www.alternet.org/story/154082/conservatism_thrives_on_low_intelli
>> >gence_and_poor_information/>
>> ><http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/06/right-stupidity-spre
>> >ads-enabled-polite-left?INTCMP=SRCH>
>> >
>> BWAHAHAahAHAhaHAHAHaHhahahahaAH
>>
>> alt.net & guardian?
>>
>> BWHahaahAHhAhahahaHahhahahaHHA
>>
>> Does this mean you will accept any blog I want to cite?
>No.
Then why are you posting clueless leftard websites?
>Are you are saying that The Guardian, the origin of the article that
>"Conservatism Thrives on Low Intelligence and Poor Information"
><http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/06/right-stupidity-spre
>ads-enabled-polite-left?INTCMP=SRCH>
>is partisan?
>
>Got a cite for that?
How many cites will satisfy you, fool.
>
>AlterNet
><http://www.alternet.org/>
>Obama Expands Secret Wars Across the Globe
>What Can Labor Win if it Backs Obama's Re-Election?
>Romney Attacks Student Loan Reform, Touts For-Profit Colleges
>Outrage: Kansas Pastor Wants the Government to Kill Gays
>
>Sounds like your kind of site, Stoopid.
>
>> And how many cites will make you happy?
>Since you never have any cites, go ahead and surprise me.
What's the matter... Did my request for a number confuse you?
Pick a number, fool. How many cites will satisfy you?
Mike Smith
wrote:
>In article <100cs7d1jbnjt1oa8...@4ax.com>,
>Mikie Stoopid <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 29 May 2012 22:11:41 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <uqias758cgk7j2hhc...@4ax.com>,
>> > Mikie Stoopid <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Tue, 29 May 2012 14:14:45 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >> On Mon, 28 May 2012 21:34:24 -0500, "Sanders Kaufman"
>> >> >> <[bu...@kaufman.net]> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >> Folks, 20 years ago I used to feel sorry for these poor ignorant
>> >> fools, but as I matured, I realized their stupidity is self-inflicted.
>> >> They are intentionally stupid, and have no desire to educate
>> >> themselves. They like being ignorant, they like being fed bullshit by
>> >> their masters, they like going through life as clueless as possible.
>> >
>> >Citation pleas, you hopeless moron. You have made allegations without
>> >any supporting documentation. Why do you embarrass yourself like this,
>>
>> I've been down this road before, moron.
>You know what they say, "Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over
>again, and expecting a different result." Maybe this time will be
>different.
Not likely, you do keep going down the same road, time after time
>In article <100cs7d1jbnjt1oa8...@4ax.com>,
>Mikie Stoopid <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 29 May 2012 22:11:41 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <uqias758cgk7j2hhc...@4ax.com>,
>> > Mikie Stoopid <m...@wt.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Tue, 29 May 2012 14:14:45 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >> On Mon, 28 May 2012 21:34:24 -0500, "Sanders Kaufman"
>> >> >> <[bu...@kaufman.net]> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >> Folks, 20 years ago I used to feel sorry for these poor ignorant
>> >> fools, but as I matured, I realized their stupidity is self-inflicted.
>> >> They are intentionally stupid, and have no desire to educate
>> >> themselves. They like being ignorant, they like being fed bullshit by
>> >> their masters, they like going through life as clueless as possible.
>> >
>> >Citation pleas, you hopeless moron. You have made allegations without
>> >any supporting documentation. Why do you embarrass yourself like this,
>>
>> I've been down this road before, moron.
>You know what they say, "Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over
>again, and expecting a different result." Maybe this time will be
>different.
after time...
>> Just how many cites would
>> convince you that you are wrong, and too stupid to know you are wrong?
>> 1? 5? 10? 10,000?
>>
>>
>> >Stoopid?
>>
>> Yes, you are.
>>
>> >
>> >The way it works, moron, is that you make a statement like,"Conservatism
>> >Thrives on Low Intelligence and Poor Information", and then you add a
>> >non-partisan source, so that folks won't think that you are just
>> >shoveling facts out of your backside.
>> ><http://www.alternet.org/story/154082/conservatism_thrives_on_low_intelli
>> >gence_and_poor_information/>
>> ><http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/06/right-stupidity-spre
>> >ads-enabled-polite-left?INTCMP=SRCH>
>> >
>> BWAHAHAahAHAhaHAHAHaHhahahahaAH
>>
>> alt.net & guardian?
>>
>> BWHahaahAHhAhahahaHahhahahaHHA
>>
>> Does this mean you will accept any blog I want to cite?
>No.
>Are you are saying that The Guardian, the origin of the article that
>"Conservatism Thrives on Low Intelligence and Poor Information"
><http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/06/right-stupidity-spre
>ads-enabled-polite-left?INTCMP=SRCH>
>is partisan?
>
>Got a cite for that?
>
>AlterNet
><http://www.alternet.org/>
>Obama Expands Secret Wars Across the Globe
>What Can Labor Win if it Backs Obama's Re-Election?
>Romney Attacks Student Loan Reform, Touts For-Profit Colleges
>Outrage: Kansas Pastor Wants the Government to Kill Gays
>
>Sounds like your kind of site, Stoopid.
>
>> And how many cites will make you happy?
>Since you never have any cites, go ahead and surprise me.
Pick a number, fool. How many cites will satisfy you?
Mike Smith
Unknown
May 31, 2012, 7:12:52 PM5/31/12
to
"Mike Smith" wrote in message
news:sr69s7laca3seag2h...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 28 May 2012 21:34:24 -0500, "Sanders Kaufman"
>
>
>>Clinton was right - you creeps are seriously "unhinged".
>BWAHAHAHahAhAHhAHahhHAHAHAhahahahahAha
>Now that is hilariously funny! And typical of this imbecile's level of
>understanding.
Unhinged. It's the proper word.
>BWAHAHAHahAhAHhAHahhHAHAHAhahahahahAha
>Now that is hilariously funny! And typical of this imbecile's level of
>understanding.
Billy
Jun 1, 2012, 6:26:08 PM6/1/12
to
In article <g6jes79gjgvm3hsih...@4ax.com>,
Stoopid Mikie <m...@wt.net> wrote:
Given a choice of the number of citations, Stoopid Mikie again posts
without any supporting citations.
> On Wed, 30 May 2012 21:54:52 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <100cs7d1jbnjt1oa8...@4ax.com>,
Show me that AlterNet, and the Guardian are partisan, and Ill agree with
you.
Storm Front is out.
>
> Stoopid Mikie
See you in the funny papers.
Stoopid Mikie <m...@wt.net> wrote:
Given a choice of the number of citations, Stoopid Mikie again posts
without any supporting citations.
> On Wed, 30 May 2012 21:54:52 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <100cs7d1jbnjt1oa8...@4ax.com>,
> >Stoopid Mikie <m...@wt.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 29 May 2012 22:11:41 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <uqias758cgk7j2hhc...@4ax.com>,
> >
> >> On Tue, 29 May 2012 22:11:41 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <uqias758cgk7j2hhc...@4ax.com>,
you.
>
Are you are saying that The Guardian, the origin of the article that
"Conservatism Thrives on Low Intelligence and Poor Information"
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/06/right-stupidity-spre
ads-enabled-polite-left?INTCMP=SRCH>
is partisan?
> >
Got a cite for that?
>
> How many cites will satisfy you, fool.
Since you are timid, 5 cites would be sufficient, but non-partisan. So
Are you are saying that The Guardian, the origin of the article that
"Conservatism Thrives on Low Intelligence and Poor Information"
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/06/right-stupidity-spre
ads-enabled-polite-left?INTCMP=SRCH>
is partisan?
> >
Got a cite for that?
>
> How many cites will satisfy you, fool.
Storm Front is out.
>
> >
AlterNet
<http://www.alternet.org/>
Obama Expands Secret Wars Across the Globe
What Can Labor Win if it Backs Obama's Re-Election?
Romney Attacks Student Loan Reform, Touts For-Profit Colleges
Outrage: Kansas Pastor Wants the Government to Kill Gays
> >
Looks like your kind of site, Stoopid.
> >
AlterNet
<http://www.alternet.org/>
Obama Expands Secret Wars Across the Globe
What Can Labor Win if it Backs Obama's Re-Election?
Romney Attacks Student Loan Reform, Touts For-Profit Colleges
Outrage: Kansas Pastor Wants the Government to Kill Gays
> >
> >
> >> And how many cites will make you happy?
Five. Opps, sorry, 5.
> >> And how many cites will make you happy?
> >Since you never have any cites, go ahead and surprise me.
>
> What's the matter... Did my request for a number confuse you?
> Pick a number, fool. How many cites will satisfy you?
- 5 -
>
> What's the matter... Did my request for a number confuse you?
> Pick a number, fool. How many cites will satisfy you?
>
> Stoopid Mikie
See you in the funny papers.
Mike Smith
Jun 1, 2012, 9:27:29 PM6/1/12
to
On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 15:26:08 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
wrote:
>Show me that AlterNet, and the Guardian are partisan, and Ill agree with
>you.
>>
>Are you are saying that The Guardian, the origin of the article that
>"Conservatism Thrives on Low Intelligence and Poor Information"
><http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/06/right-stupidity-spre
>ads-enabled-polite-left?INTCMP=SRCH>
>is partisan?
>> >
>Got a cite for that?
>>
>> How many cites will satisfy you, fool.
>Since you are timid, 5 cites would be sufficient, but non-partisan. So
>Storm Front is out.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/localgovernment/2010/06/is-the-bbc-more-biased-than-the-guardian.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1349506/Left-wing-bias-Its-written-BBCs-DNA-says-Peter-Sissons.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060706021426AA1YdnN
http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/opinion/columnists/karl-du-fresne/4774149/Keeping-the-state-broadcaster-honest
http://stevenbirnspeaks.com/2011/02/16/left-wing-alternet-defends-racist-attack-on-black-conservative/
http://www.alternet.org/
http://blogs.alternet.org/about/
http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/92907/reporter-denied-by-aipac-writes-little-about-israel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlterNet
All of this is WAY over your level of intelligence, but you said 5
cites would be sufficient.
Mike Smith
wrote:
>Show me that AlterNet, and the Guardian are partisan, and Ill agree with
>you.
>>
>Are you are saying that The Guardian, the origin of the article that
>"Conservatism Thrives on Low Intelligence and Poor Information"
><http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/06/right-stupidity-spre
>ads-enabled-polite-left?INTCMP=SRCH>
>is partisan?
>> >
>Got a cite for that?
>>
>> How many cites will satisfy you, fool.
>Since you are timid, 5 cites would be sufficient, but non-partisan. So
>Storm Front is out.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1349506/Left-wing-bias-Its-written-BBCs-DNA-says-Peter-Sissons.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060706021426AA1YdnN
http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/opinion/columnists/karl-du-fresne/4774149/Keeping-the-state-broadcaster-honest
http://stevenbirnspeaks.com/2011/02/16/left-wing-alternet-defends-racist-attack-on-black-conservative/
http://www.alternet.org/
http://blogs.alternet.org/about/
http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/92907/reporter-denied-by-aipac-writes-little-about-israel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlterNet
All of this is WAY over your level of intelligence, but you said 5
cites would be sufficient.
Mike Smith
Billy
Jun 3, 2012, 2:46:55 AM6/3/12
to
In article <eupis7dgkv57lvrh2...@4ax.com>,
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1349506/Left-wing-bias-Its-written-BBC
> s-DNA-says-Peter-Sissons.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
Uh-huh <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/ushome/index.html>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian
Centre-left
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre-left>
Centre-left is a political term commonly used to describe adherence to
views whose views leaning to the left but close to the centre on the
left-right political spectrum. The centre-left promotes a degree of
social equality that it believes is achievable through promoting equal
opportunity.[1] The centre-left opposes a wide gap between the rich and
the poor and supports moderate measures to reduce the gap, such as a
progressive income tax, laws prohibiting child labour, minimum wage
laws, laws regulating working conditions, limits on working hours, laws
to ensure workers' right to organize.[2] The centre-left, unlike the
far-left, typically claims that equality of outcome is not possible, but
that equal opportunity improves social equality in society.[3]
Not very damning.
> http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060706021426AA1YdnN
Opinion? Lame. Partisan
>
> http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/opinion/columnists/karl-du-fresne/4774149/K
> eeping-the-state-broadcaster-honest
Opinion? Lame. Partisan
>
>
>
> http://stevenbirnspeaks.com/2011/02/16/left-wing-alternet-defends-racist-attac
> k-on-black-conservative/
Opinion? Lame. Partisan
>
> http://www.alternet.org/
What do you find offensive on this page?
>
> http://blogs.alternet.org/about/
What do you find offensive on this page?
>
> http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/92907/reporter-denied-by-aipac-writes-little-a
> bout-israel
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlterNet
AlterNet, a project of the non-profit Independent Media Institute, is a
progressive/liberal activist news service, but contains broad enough
information to be relevant to readers of many persuasions. Launched in
1998, AlterNet now claims a readership of over 3 million visitors per
month (the web ratings service Quantcast estimates that it receives 1.3
million).
AlterNet publishes original content as well as journalism from a wide
variety of other sources. AlterNet states that its mission is to
"inspire citizen action and advocacy on the environment, human rights
and civil liberties, social justice, media, and health care issues."
AlterNet's tagline is "The Mix is the Message."
What do you find wrong here? That it was characterized as "left liberal"
by NPR, which is constantly worrying about losing corporate sponsors?
you an "E" for effort.
>
> Stoopid Mikie
Odd isn't it, that the 2 best responses that you had came from Wikipedia?
Stoopid Mikie <m...@wt.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 15:26:08 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Show me that AlterNet, and the Guardian are partisan, and Ill agree with
> >you.
> >>
> >Are you are saying that The Guardian, the origin of the article that
> >"Conservatism Thrives on Low Intelligence and Poor Information"
> ><http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/06/right-stupidity-spre
> >ads-enabled-polite-left?INTCMP=SRCH>
> >is partisan?
> >> >
> >Got a cite for that?
> >>
> >> How many cites will satisfy you, fool.
> >Since you are timid, 5 cites would be sufficient, but non-partisan. So
> >Storm Front is out.
>
>
> http://conservativehome.blogs.com/localgovernment/2010/06/is-the-bbc-more-bias
> ed-than-the-guardian.html
You got to be kidding <http://conhomeusa.typepad.com/>
> On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 15:26:08 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Show me that AlterNet, and the Guardian are partisan, and Ill agree with
> >you.
> >>
> >Are you are saying that The Guardian, the origin of the article that
> >"Conservatism Thrives on Low Intelligence and Poor Information"
> ><http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/06/right-stupidity-spre
> >ads-enabled-polite-left?INTCMP=SRCH>
> >is partisan?
> >> >
> >Got a cite for that?
> >>
> >> How many cites will satisfy you, fool.
> >Since you are timid, 5 cites would be sufficient, but non-partisan. So
> >Storm Front is out.
>
>
> http://conservativehome.blogs.com/localgovernment/2010/06/is-the-bbc-more-bias
> ed-than-the-guardian.html
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1349506/Left-wing-bias-Its-written-BBC
> s-DNA-says-Peter-Sissons.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
Uh-huh <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/ushome/index.html>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian
Centre-left
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre-left>
Centre-left is a political term commonly used to describe adherence to
views whose views leaning to the left but close to the centre on the
left-right political spectrum. The centre-left promotes a degree of
social equality that it believes is achievable through promoting equal
opportunity.[1] The centre-left opposes a wide gap between the rich and
the poor and supports moderate measures to reduce the gap, such as a
progressive income tax, laws prohibiting child labour, minimum wage
laws, laws regulating working conditions, limits on working hours, laws
to ensure workers' right to organize.[2] The centre-left, unlike the
far-left, typically claims that equality of outcome is not possible, but
that equal opportunity improves social equality in society.[3]
Not very damning.
> http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060706021426AA1YdnN
Opinion? Lame. Partisan
>
> http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/opinion/columnists/karl-du-fresne/4774149/K
> eeping-the-state-broadcaster-honest
Opinion? Lame. Partisan
>
>
>
> http://stevenbirnspeaks.com/2011/02/16/left-wing-alternet-defends-racist-attac
> k-on-black-conservative/
Opinion? Lame. Partisan
>
> http://www.alternet.org/
What do you find offensive on this page?
>
> http://blogs.alternet.org/about/
What do you find offensive on this page?
>
> http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/92907/reporter-denied-by-aipac-writes-little-a
> bout-israel
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlterNet
AlterNet, a project of the non-profit Independent Media Institute, is a
progressive/liberal activist news service, but contains broad enough
information to be relevant to readers of many persuasions. Launched in
1998, AlterNet now claims a readership of over 3 million visitors per
month (the web ratings service Quantcast estimates that it receives 1.3
million).
AlterNet publishes original content as well as journalism from a wide
variety of other sources. AlterNet states that its mission is to
"inspire citizen action and advocacy on the environment, human rights
and civil liberties, social justice, media, and health care issues."
AlterNet's tagline is "The Mix is the Message."
What do you find wrong here? That it was characterized as "left liberal"
by NPR, which is constantly worrying about losing corporate sponsors?
>
>
> All of this is WAY over your level of intelligence, but you said 5
> cites would be sufficient.
Way under is more like it. But an excellent try for you Mikie. I'll give
>
> All of this is WAY over your level of intelligence, but you said 5
> cites would be sufficient.
you an "E" for effort.
>
> Stoopid Mikie
Odd isn't it, that the 2 best responses that you had came from Wikipedia?
0 new messages