Bagism: Web Board
[Show Followups] [Post New Message]
 [Search Web Boards] [Web Boards Menu] [Letter Box Web Board]

Re: Violence over George Zimmerman

Posted by **The Duke** on Jul 15, 2013 at 6:00:09 AM:
In Reply to: Re: Violence over George Zimmerman posted by **BlackMonk** on Jul 14, 2013 at 8:35:53 PM:

***********
***********
***********Dylan Chambers, son of music icon Lester Chambers, has just posted (6 pm PST on Facebook, Saturday, July 13, 2013:
***********“Dylan Here.... Lester was just assaulted on stage at The Russell City Hayward Blues Festival by a crazed woman after dad dedicated ‘People Get Ready’ to Trayvon Martin. He is on the way to the hospital now.”
***********
***********My prediction about the responses to this: Someone is going to talk about how the attacker isn't representative of all of Zimmerman's supporters or all white people or something like that, even though people here have been acting as though riots over the verdict (which haven't actually happened)are representative of people who thought Zimmerman was guilty or all black people or something like that.
**********
********** My prediction is that you are about to justify and rationalize violence and murder ...
**********
*********
*********No, that's for the Zimmerman defenders to do.
*********
******** You are asserting here and now, you do not support violent response over the verdict? Even those outraged over the lack of justice for Trayvon Martin?
********
*******I take it you didn't read the article linked to.
*******
*******
****** No, I did not. I am conversing with my peers, not their sources. Lord Knows, Monk, if I viewed every link, I'd have no time to interact! Therefore I go by the comments each of you contribute, rather than the links that are supplied. This is why I rarely open HJ's contributions, they are articles, for the most part, written by someone else, and not open for discussion.
****** As for you-rs, we can witness the same information, and arrive at opposing viewpoints.so I rarely open your links as well.
****** Once again, I reiterate, my attraction to this board is interacting with you all as human beings.
******
******
*****
*****The problem there is that you're responding to me without knowing what I'm actually saying, since the comments I made in my post were made in the context of the article I linked to. Since you don't have that context, you might be making an incorrect assumption about what I'm saying.
*****
****Yk
****
**** This from a fellow who chastised another for not being descriptive.enough in his choice of wording?
**** How you say.... double standard?
****
****
***
***Not at all. I was perfectly clear. You just ignored the context. That was your fault, not mine. When you were in school, did you tell you teachers that your poor grades were their fault because you thought you should be able to pass tests without doing the required reading?
**
** Yet it is your responsibility to communicate with me in a clear, concise manner.
** I have never demanded you complete a reading assignment in order to understand what the hell I'm talking about ...
** If you cannot express someone else's opinion in your own words, that is your failure.
**
*
*First of all, I don't think you know what "concise" means. Go google it. Second, I was talking about a news story. Since you haven't read the story, you're not capable of responding to my post intelligently.
*
Wrong on both accounts! Perhaps you believe a bit of programming equates to intelligence. I disagree.
It doesn't take information to be knowledgeable, nor does it take knowledge to be wise.

Followup Messages:

top of page

 

Home Web Chat Web Boards Discography Library Quiz Art & Poetry Links Store

Image Map -- text links below

Home | Web Chat | Web Boards | Discography | Library | Quiz | Art & Poetry | Links | Store

Produced by Sam Choukri
Frequently Asked Questions
Last updated on Jul 16, 2013