UJRefugees.net

dot wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 1:56 am

Flumper wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 1:06 am maybe you don't understand what I meant by "opened things up to being shot". What I mean, is that if all of those things have happened and you make some kind of threat and have a weapon, you will probably get shot. If you can't understand that, then I can't help you.

but, i will say again. i don't know the facts. the guy either made some kind of threat that put his kids or another officer in danger and the cop felt the need to kill him or the cop is a complete psychopath.

now, share your facts so I can know which of those two is true.

What I understand is from the start you’ve been looking for a way, an angle, to excuse the inexcusable. That’s your main goal because that’s your starting position. You’ve even invented what-if's to support it. Doesn’t matter what facts are presented, you'll move the goalposts or derp away and pretend it never happened and continue being a vile excuse of a person.

B-Tender wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:27 am So when the cop was following the dude around the car, why didn't he tackle him, clothesline, grab with both arm, etc? He was just following him with his gun aimed at him. There were three cops there, it's hard to believe they couldn't have physically restrained him.

Flumper wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:09 am and you are even dumber than i thought. how you came to that conclusion is ridiculous. but, apparently you are one of these stupid political fucktards that use terms like "derp" and "moving goal posts" because you have no original thoughts. You have no facts and you probably know less about the situation than anyone that has posted about it. your contribution to this topic has been no more than to shine the light of stupidity upon yourself. congratulations.

dot wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:35 am

Flumper wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:09 am and you are even dumber than i thought. how you came to that conclusion is ridiculous. but, apparently you are one of these stupid political fucktards that use terms like "derp" and "moving goal posts" because you have no original thoughts. You have no facts and you probably know less about the situation than anyone that has posted about it. your contribution to this topic has been no more than to shine the light of stupidity upon yourself. congratulations.

As I've told others here, I observe without posting a lot more than I used to in the prior site incarnations. And what I've observed is you're an ignorant Trumpie cultist not worth the time debating with facts, only worth derision because you've demonstrated that said facts do not matter to you. Why would I waste the time laying out facts you're going to ignore? All you've done is make up scenarios to justify the attempted murder, so keep your "original thoughts" to yourself as they have no value in actual worthwhile discourse. Tl;dr, go screw yourself.

Flumper wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:40 am look, stupid. i'm not making up scenarios to justify anything. i made up a scenario to demonstrate that you don't know the truth until you know the facts. just because a person was shot by a policeman doesn't mean there wasn't justification. I don't knowif there was or not. I have said that so many times now I would think you would understand it by now. I don't know the facts. You said you do. All I know is what I have read. I have no idea why the cop pulled the trigger when he did and for so many times as he did.

As I said, he either had a damn good reason or he is a certified nut. Now, let's hear your facts.

dot wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:35 am Tl;dr, go screw yourself.

dot wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:12 am

Flumper wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:40 am look, stupid. i'm not making up scenarios to justify anything. i made up a scenario to demonstrate that you don't know the truth until you know the facts. just because a person was shot by a policeman doesn't mean there wasn't justification. I don't knowif there was or not. I have said that so many times now I would think you would understand it by now. I don't know the facts. You said you do. All I know is what I have read. I have no idea why the cop pulled the trigger when he did and for so many times as he did.

As I said, he either had a damn good reason or he is a certified nut. Now, let's hear your facts.

The shooting is on video. You have inserted hypothetical events to try to excuse it because the video itself has already forced you to admit it's unwarranted. Everything else is just an attempt to excuse the inexcusable. And if you go back and read instead of inserting hypothetical events, I've said no such thing as professing to know "the facts," that's just another of your attempted goalpost moving distractions to move the subject away from the indefensible. What I have said is there should not have been an attempted summary execution by a police officer on someone who was unarmed, facing away, and at point blank range and you trying to change the subject to what else should have been done is an attempt to obfuscate that which should not have been done. Something you're actively trying to excuse. Ergo:

dot wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:35 am Tl;dr, go screw yourself.

dot wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:12 am

Flumper wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:40 am look, stupid. i'm not making up scenarios to justify anything. i made up a scenario to demonstrate that you don't know the truth until you know the facts. just because a person was shot by a policeman doesn't mean there wasn't justification. I don't knowif there was or not. I have said that so many times now I would think you would understand it by now. I don't know the facts. You said you do. All I know is what I have read. I have no idea why the cop pulled the trigger when he did and for so many times as he did.

As I said, he either had a damn good reason or he is a certified nut. Now, let's hear your facts.

The shooting is on video. You have inserted hypothetical events to try to excuse it because the video itself has already forced you to admit it's unwarranted. Everything else is just an attempt to excuse the inexcusable. And if you go back and read instead of inserting hypothetical events, I've said no such thing as professing to know "the facts," that's just another of your attempted goalpost moving distractions to move the subject away from the indefensible. What I have said is there should not have been an attempted summary execution by a police officer on someone who was unarmed, facing away, and at point blank range and you trying to change the subject to what else should have been done is an attempt to obfuscate that which should not have been done. Something you're actively trying to excuse. Ergo:

dot wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:35 am Tl;dr, go screw yourself.

Stapes wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:18 am
That is way over Flumpers reading ability. Hell, Cheezy is trying to look up obfuscate but can't remember how to spell it.

Flumper wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:23 am there is not one word of substance in anything that he said. he isn't even coming close to framing my position on this matter. I have no idea why he thinks twisting it into something it isn't does anyone any good. He brings nothing to the topic. He's just another one of these dummies that use words like "moving goal posts" and thinks they are having a debate. i think his decision to read more and post less is probably a tactic that more suits him.

dot wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:28 am

Flumper wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:23 am there is not one word of substance in anything that he said. he isn't even coming close to framing my position on this matter. I have no idea why he thinks twisting it into something it isn't does anyone any good. He brings nothing to the topic. He's just another one of these dummies that use words like "moving goal posts" and thinks they are having a debate. i think his decision to read more and post less is probably a tactic that more suits him.

If only you could learn such a thing. That would require genuine inner reflection though. I mostly lurk because I don't have free time like I did a decade ago. But when idiots like you say something monumentally stupid, that's when it's time to pop up back up again.

Flumper wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:30 am well, it was a deeply meaningful pop up that you did. we are all a little dumber for it. thanks.

Flumper wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:15 am

dot wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:12 am

Flumper wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:40 am look, stupid. i'm not making up scenarios to justify anything. i made up a scenario to demonstrate that you don't know the truth until you know the facts. just because a person was shot by a policeman doesn't mean there wasn't justification. I don't knowif there was or not. I have said that so many times now I would think you would understand it by now. I don't know the facts. You said you do. All I know is what I have read. I have no idea why the cop pulled the trigger when he did and for so many times as he did.

As I said, he either had a damn good reason or he is a certified nut. Now, let's hear your facts.

The shooting is on video. You have inserted hypothetical events to try to excuse it because the video itself has already forced you to admit it's unwarranted. Everything else is just an attempt to excuse the inexcusable. And if you go back and read instead of inserting hypothetical events, I've said no such thing as professing to know "the facts," that's just another of your attempted goalpost moving distractions to move the subject away from the indefensible. What I have said is there should not have been an attempted summary execution by a police officer on someone who was unarmed, facing away, and at point blank range and you trying to change the subject to what else should have been done is an attempt to obfuscate that which should not have been done. Something you're actively trying to excuse. Ergo:

dot wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 2:35 am Tl;dr, go screw yourself.

what a dumb ass.

dot wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:36 am

Flumper wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:30 am well, it was a deeply meaningful pop up that you did. we are all a little dumber for it. thanks.

You're projecting, but the first step in solving the problem is admitting you have one. Good for you.

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 4:56 pm

Biker wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 10:53 pm