Brand J Posted February 17 Posted February 17 3 minutes ago, Patrick Fitzryan said: Of course, that article conveniently left out this fact, which is even cited on left-leaning Wikipedia: "At the end of the exchange of gunfire, 12 people were dead, 10 white and 2 black.[12]" So your take on why the riots started is simply because “black men shot and killed 10 white men.” That’s laughable. I don’t know you personally, but your bias is obviously skewed. Let’s forget that those white men (as usual during those times) were the aggressors towards the blacks. The crux of the matter is that whites weren’t happy with black prosperity during that time and were looking for a reason to take down that little section of Tulsa. When the Black boy was accused - with little to no evidence - of raping a white girl in an elevator I believe it was, the white mob got what they were looking for - a reason to annihilate that town. That’s why some here are calling you racist because you’re spewing bias as facts. 1
FireChans Posted February 17 Posted February 17 1 hour ago, TrentEdwardsCheckDownOn4th said: Just to a look at the top donors of the gofundme for the lady that was shot and killed. Taylor swift donated $100,000 and then after that I don't notice a single name. None of these multi millionaire football players could muster up a few measley thousand dollars? Mahomes is worth like 100 million. Him donating $10,000 is the equivalent of an average American who is worth $100,000 donating $10. I cant imagine the outreach and support if this happened to fellow bills mafia. According to @Bob Jones, she sucks and shouldn’t have wasted her time. She should’ve just complained on a message board. 2 1
Coach Tuesday Posted February 17 Posted February 17 1 minute ago, Patrick Fitzryan said: Yeah, I think they were more concerned about another black-on-white violent crime -- something that happens way more often than the opposite despite there being 5X as many whites -- than trying to annihilate one tiny block that had a confectionery, donut shop, beauty salon, and cigar store. As for your "little to no evidence" claim, that is complete conjecture based in bias. The facts on these stories always get twisted to fit agendas. JUST SAY IT, DUDE
Coach Tuesday Posted February 17 Posted February 17 29 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said: Does anyone else think that this thread has gone far enough? I do. It should’ve been shut down when Cotton showed up and started telling us that Black people are just inherently violent, hey, he’s just quoting facts here that the leftist media doesn’t want to admit. 2 1
Fleezoid Posted February 17 Posted February 17 32 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said: Does anyone else think that this thread has gone far enough? 2
Coach Tuesday Posted February 17 Posted February 17 2 minutes ago, Patrick Fitzryan said: Say what? That in a world where white men are blamed for everything under the sun, it's ridiculous that certain groups are completely immune to any criticism? Getting closer… at least we’ve surfaced the “persecuted white man”… 1 1 1 2
FireChans Posted February 17 Posted February 17 Is this really @Cotton Fitzsimmons??? Never meet your heroes…. 1
Andrew Son Posted February 17 Posted February 17 Just now, Coach Tuesday said: Getting closer… at least we’ve surfaced the “persecuted white man”… The white man can't get a fair shake in this country! 2
Brand J Posted February 17 Posted February 17 1 minute ago, Coach Tuesday said: JUST SAY IT, DUDE Yeah he’s racist. I didn’t want to believe it before, just thought he was ignorant, but the way he’s twisting everything to paint Black folks as the villains, it’s undeniable. I mean, we’re talking about Tulsa in the 1920s and he’s claiming how Whites were afraid of their lives because of violent Blacks 😂 He also continues to claim “only 5 stores were destroyed,” omitting the fact that Black folks were dragged out of their homes and their houses set on fire. Their ENTIRE section of that city was destroyed! Airplanes dropped bombs on Greenwood for crying out loud. I’m sure he believes Emmitt Till deserved what he got for whistling at a white woman. 2
Coach Tuesday Posted February 17 Posted February 17 1 minute ago, Brand J said: Yeah he’s racist. I didn’t want to believe it before, just thought he was ignorant, but the way he’s twisting everything to paint Black folks as the villains, it’s undeniable. I mean, we’re talking about Tulsa in the 1920s and he’s claiming how Whites were afraid of their lives because of violent Blacks 😂 He also continues to claim “only 5 stores were destroyed,” omitting the fact that Black folks were dragged out of their homes and their houses set on fire. Their ENTIRE section of that city was destroyed! Airplanes dropped bombs on Greenwood for crying out loud. I’m sure he believes Emmitt Till deserved what he got for whistling at a white woman. He’s “just quoting facts and statistics.”
HappyDays Posted February 17 Posted February 17 15 minutes ago, Patrick Fitzryan said: Yeah, I think they were more concerned about another black-on-white violent crime -- something that happens way more often than the opposite despite there being 5X as many whites -- than trying to annihilate one tiny block that had a confectionery, donut shop, beauty salon, and cigar store. So you have completely misinterpreted what happened. I'm going to assume you're making a good-faith effort to do so and respond accordingly. It doesn't matter that 10 white people were killed at the offset. Some white men of the city were attempting to hunt down and lynch a black man off of nothing more than an accusation. Some black men armed themselves and defended the man that was accused, and yes they used guns to do so. That's the point of the 2nd amendment. They used their rights to protect themselves from unjust violence. If you remove race from the scenario you'd probably wholeheartedly agree with their actions, yes? A man is accused of a crime but not put on trial or any investigation whatsoever. An angry mob gathers together to kill that man. Another group gathers together and uses their 2nd amendment rights to defend that man from the angry mob. At what point in this scenario are you finding fault with the actions of the defenders? Because I suspect you will have to abandon some other aspect of your political leanings to find any fault there. Anyways it doesn't matter how it started. What matters is that a violent rampage ensued which led to the death of many innocent people, mostly black residents, and the destruction of many homes and businesses. Your statement is akin to saying "9/11 happened because of American military actions in the Middle East" which may be true but also removes exactly zero fault from the perpetrators. You should also know that your comments about the Tulsa massacre are throwing into question everything you're saying about modern problems and solutions. But like I said I am going to assume you're making a good-faith effort to understand these issues so I wanted to start by addressing misconceptions you have about century-old history first. 3
Brand J Posted February 17 Posted February 17 1 minute ago, Patrick Fitzryan said: It's pretty important to mention that for all the talk of me being a racist, no one has actually called me wrong or disputed any of those statisitcs. I’ve called you wrong multiple times. I realize you’re a waste of time though and won’t try to educate you any further. 1
Coach Tuesday Posted February 17 Posted February 17 3 minutes ago, Patrick Fitzryan said: It's pretty important to mention that for all the talk of me being a racist, no one has actually called me wrong or disputed any of those statisitcs. 2 minutes ago, HappyDays said: So you have completely misinterpreted what happened. I'm going to assume you're making a good-faith effort to do so and respond accordingly. It doesn't matter that 10 white people were killed at the offset. Some white men of the city were attempting to hunt down and lynch a black man off of nothing more than an accusation. Some black men armed themselves and defended the man that was accused, and yes they used guns to do so. That's the point of the 2nd amendment. They used their rights to protect themselves from unjust violence. If you remove race from the scenario you'd probably wholeheartedly agree with their actions, yes? A man is accused of a crime but not put on trial or any investigation whatsoever. An angry mob gathers together to kill that man. Another group gathers together and uses their 2nd amendment rights to defend that man from the angry mob. At what point in this scenario are you finding fault with the actions of the defenders? Because I suspect you will have to abandon some other aspect of your political leanings to find any fault there. Anyways it doesn't matter how it started. What matters is that a violent rampage ensued which led to the death of many innocent people, mostly black residents, and the destruction of many homes and businesses. Your statement is akin to saying "9/11 happened because of American military actions in the Middle East" which may be true but also removes exactly zero fault from the perpetrators. You should also know that your comments about the Tulsa massacre are throwing into question everything you're saying about modern problems and solutions. But like I said I am going to assume you're making a good-faith effort to understand these issues so I wanted to start by addressing misconceptions you have about century-old history first. Just now, Brand J said: I’ve called you wrong multiple times. I realize you’re a waste of time though and won’t try to educate you any further.
Breakout Squad Posted February 17 Posted February 17 43 minutes ago, Patrick Fitzryan said: I know exactly what your views are. Calling people "racist" for citing factual evidence, complaining about "fascist Christian fundamentalism"...you're on the far left, and the main tenet of your religion is repudiating reality so that you don't have to deal with uncomfortable truths, all while being consistently hypocritical and sanctimonious. Some people choose to not live their entire life lying to themselves. Deal with it. You sound quite sanctimonious.
Breakout Squad Posted February 17 Posted February 17 10 minutes ago, Patrick Fitzryan said: It's pretty important to mention that for all the talk of me being a racist, no one has actually called me wrong or disputed any of those statisitcs. Yes. Yes they have hahaha. 1 1
Coach Tuesday Posted February 17 Posted February 17 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Patrick Fitzryan said: What statistics were wrong? Amazing how the "true" story of Tulsa didn't come out until two years ago, but we're supposed to believe the new version without questioning why we never heard it. Lies are being told about cases that happened in modern day ("Breonna Taylor was shot in bed!"), but somehow revisionist history from an event 100 years ago is gospel? Okay. I guess in addition to being inherently more violent, Black people are also inherently better at P.R.? Edited February 17 by Coach Tuesday 1 1
Jauronimo Posted February 17 Posted February 17 19 minutes ago, Patrick Fitzryan said: Who said anything about them being inherently violent? There is clearly a cultural problem, though, and it's obvious to anyone who doesn't have their head buried deep in the sand. When you brought in wealth and argued the same trends are visible in the UK and Canada it ceased to be a "cultural" argument limited to American inner cities. Unless of course, you don't know what culture is, which is highly possible. 3
Terry Tate Posted February 17 Posted February 17 This thread has actually been very informative. Perhaps not the way intended. 1 1
Simon Posted February 17 Posted February 17 15 minutes ago, Terry Tate said: This thread has actually been very informative. Perhaps not the way intended. Sometimes allowing people the opportunity to show us who they really are is worth some temporary aggravation. 7 1 1 1 3
Recommended Posts