Posted on 06/02/2020 7:18:05 AM PDT by AnthonySoprano
That was a not so clever comeback. The phony "dear friend" doesn't begin to make up for the snottiness.
My policy has always been "A bon chat bon rat." Neither comment was "clever", it's just the usual run of the mill exchange when people decide to resort to insults instead of dealing with the point in contention.
He worked for the defense in that case. So did Dershowitz. They were wrong. If he was a nut, so is Dershowitz and so are most lawyers and expert witnesses.
There is some evidence that Dershowitz is indeed a "nut", but the point here is that a man willing to misdirect in order to get off a guilty client is also willing to misdirect when he gets paid to find what the family wants found.
I don't think there ever has been a case with more evidence demonstrating wrongdoing on the part of the accused, and yet the accused was declared "not guilty."
The OJ trial was a travesty, and it had more to do with OJ's color and celebrity than any interest in justice or truth.
Perhaps you should offer your expert advice to the family? It seems your extensive knowledge is being wasted just being in the internet.
Signing off. Have a great life.
> You will have to show where he actually said that, and said it as something more than one of many possibilities.
I notice that you always skip the stuff that you don't have an answer for.
In many exchanges you can't seem to help yourself from turning the discussion into derogatory commentary about someone with whom you disagree.
Guy, I tried having intelligent discussions with you, but you just went on repeating the same nonsense and showing the same dumb picture that just proves the opposite of what you claim. I also notice the way you have of hijacking discussions to bring them around to your own obsessions, so I figured you were fair game as well. Like you would say, your good rat deserves a good cat.
Were it not for a dirt-bag cop, he would be alive.
One swift blow to that part of the neck will put a large man on his knees; much less a knee with the full weight of a man’s body pressed into it for several minutes.
Right back atcha. Saw that information on a thread from a day or so ago, and i'm not going to go look for it. It simply isn't worth that much trouble to prove you wrong.
Guy, I tried having intelligent discussions with you, but you just went on repeating the same nonsense and showing the same dumb picture that just proves the opposite of what you claim.
All this tells me is that you refuse to comprehend what it shows. You want to believe what you want to believe, and you will do so even when the facts contradict your version of reality.
That map shows exactly what I want it to show. It simply looks like the opposite if you don't understand what's going on, which you apparently don't.
I also notice the way you have of hijacking discussions to bring them around to your own obsessions, so I figured you were fair game as well.
Which one of your obsessions were you bringing the discussion around to by deciding to remark on which one of us was being clever or not? I seem to be the focus of your commentary, but I hope I'm not the focus of your obsession.
I think the blow will hurt worse than the weight. I assume you mean a "Karate chop" type blow, because I recall the side of the neck was one of the preferred targets for that style of fighting.
I think having a knee on the neck for 9 minutes is survivable by most normal people. I may even test this theory on myself if I continue to have interest in this topic.
I assure you that if i'm correct about this, we will get a demonstration of this fact from the Defense for that Cop.
I would think that since this technique is actually *IN* the Minneapolis police training manual, someone should already know the answer to whether or not this type of restraint is fatal or not.
I'm thinking it is not, but I could be wrong.
Apparently it also wasn't worth your trouble to verify if it was true or not. Hint: your time and trouble may not be worth as much as you think they are -- certainly compared with spreading information that may be false.
That map shows exactly what I want it to show. It simply looks like the opposite if you don't understand what's going on, which you apparently don't.
No, you come at that with preconceived notions that other people don't share. That's been pointed out to you time and time again, but it doesn't register with you.
I seem to be the focus of your commentary, but I hope I'm not the focus of your obsession.
By no means, but when I find you being too offensively you, I can't help commenting.
You didn't deny his culpability in getting OJ off the hook. Isn't one disqualification enough for you, or are you more concerned that I might be wrong about something, and you don't really give a d@mn about the larger point here?
No, you come at that with preconceived notions that other people don't share.
You are incorrect. I originally had your very same preconceived notion; That the map shows the war couldn't have been about tariffs because the South wasn't paying any of the tariffs. The map shows that the vast majority of tariffs are paid by New York City, and therefore the tariff issue is just so much smoke.
That is the lesson you wish everyone to understand from that map isn't it? Well that's what I believed when I first saw it. And then I learned the truth, which you have still yet to learn, or more accurately, have yet to acknowledge.
So you and I were in agreement about the map back when I was more ignorant of the economic conditions of that era.
By no means, but when I find you being too offensively you, I can't help commenting.
Them urges get to you. :)
Rumors that people don't check out grow and spread until we drown in them.
So you and I were in agreement about the map back when I was more ignorant of the economic conditions of that era.
But you really don't know economics, do you? I'm no expert in economics or in history by any means, but like I keep telling you, you need to talk to real economists and real historians and test your assumptions and conclusions against the views of people who have actually studied these things.
I know it well enough to understand that one side of a trade exchange is going to expect payment from the other side, and therefore trade must balance over time.
As the only thing the Europeans wanted to buy in large quantities were Southern products, the South was creating 3/4ths of all trade with Europe.
you need to talk to real economists and real historians and test your assumptions and conclusions against the views of people who have actually studied these things.
Over the years I have come to have great disdain for "experts." I've discovered that they will lie and make sh*t up to advance what they see as their political goals.
I think for the last 150 years there has been an industry justifying what Lincoln did because most of those people in that industry were the beneficiaries of what he did. Now these claims have been repeated so often people merely accept them as true, and will regard with an angry eye anyone pointing out contradictions in them.
The economics of the 1860s was this; The South produced the vast majority of the economic trade with Europe, but the New York Washington DC cartel had rigged the laws to funnel nearly all that money through New York and Washington DC pockets.
Not only would Southern independence interdict that money stream to the well connected, the capitalization from redirecting that money would have built up the Southern industrial base at the expense of the North Eastern industrial base. It would have devastated their manufacturing and their shipping industries, and it would have moved the center of economic power towards the direction of the Southern states and away from the New York Washington DC axis.
And that is why the South could not be allowed to secede.
That is all such a load of horse sh#t. But we’ve argued that extensively over the years and the arguments haven’t gotten through to you. That is why I suggest you have a discussion with actual experts. See you on the other thread.
Your mind recoils from a truth you don't want to believe. Your arguments don't get through because they are bogus. They do not accurately explain events. Mine do.
The answer has already been given by the Coroner as well as other experts in the field of knowledge.
The answer has already been given by the Coroner as well as other experts in the field of knowledge.
On a highly charged political case, I have reason to doubt everything any "experts" claim. The Minneapolis police training materials say this technique was allowed. If it were fatal to use this technique, I think it would have been known before George Floyd came along, and then it wouldn't be in the training materials.
Earlier today I read of a Freeper who had a friend do this to him to see if he could breath. He said he could breath with no problems at all. He also didn't pass out.
George Floyd had a heart condition, and it's looking like he died of a heart attack while being held down.
The knee on his neck was incidental to the cause of his death, but because prosecutors were breathing down his neck, the coroner put it in there anyway.
The family hired mercenary was going to say whatever the family paid him to say.
The blood flow and oxygen would have been cut of to his brain by applying pressure to that area of the neck.
You are correct sir!
This I have been told, but i'm not sure it's accurate. If it were accurate, why did they utilize this method in the Minneapolis Police training materials?
You have two arteries feeding the brain. One on each side of the neck. I'm not sure if compressing one of them will kill you. Maybe it will, but I don't have enough knowledge on this subject to say for sure.
I will also point out that one Freeper commented this week that he had a friend kneel on his neck in the same manner, just to see how it felt. He said he had no problem breathing and that he did not pass out.
So maybe a knee on your neck will kill you, and maybe it won't. I don't' know.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.