Chief Moose Cost Lives

WorldNetDaily ^ | 11-08-02 | Paul Sperry

[Howlin]

Aren't you the optomist today? :-)

[Itzlzha]

In fact, police who checked cars on roads and freeways following each shooting were ordered to wave cars by if the drivers were minorities or females, according to one ATF agent. They were told to search only cars with white males behind the wheel.

Ah've done been Profiled!

Ah demands reparations!!!!

I'll take it in 50's please...shall I hold my breath for MY reparations?

( Insert cricket sounds )....

[Catspaw]

Of course you can't document anything about your allegation about Chief Moose making "anti-white" statements. But you can make the accusation, can't you? However, you're more than willing to make a smear.

[Catspaw]

I'm just a ray of sunshine today, aren't I?

[nanny]

[I'm not trying to make anybody feel bad. There were posts that I objected to and I see somebody else agreed, since they are gone. And yes, mocking a man because of the color of his skin is bigoted. Sorry]

Yes, I see they are gone and someone else agreed they were offensive and perhaps they were - I didn't see them.

I am not defending anyone mocking someone because of the color of their skin - although I, personally, believe there are many things worse. It is not the biggest evil of all times. It is immoral and wrong - but there are much worse things going on in this country.

I am not really sure what exactly constitutes bigotry or racism and have seen any small slight or the correct usage of a word called racism and have seen detrimental effects to this country because of it. It was a serious thing in the past - it is changing, thank goodness - but it should not be used in a cavalier way. Still calling someone a bigot and racist offends me mightily. It is not just a charge against that one person - but surely you realize the harm that has been done by people using that word to silence discourse. That is my point. It is dangerous as well as offensive. Each time it is thrown out there, it just gives a little credence to the people who use it to control thought and discussion in this country.

[nanny]

[Of course you can't document anything about your allegation about Chief Moose making "anti-white" statements. But you can make the accusation, can't you? However, you're more than willing to make a smear.]

I didn't smear - I repeated what other posters had said - in that I was wrong. Should have used the alleged so it would be palatable.

Let me retract everything and just say - PEOPLE WERE BEING MURDERED BY BLACK OR DARK SKINNED PEOPLE - and that police chief had (alledged, reportedly, etc.) information from witnesses that it was dark skinned or black people, but refused to 'paint a group of people'! He, however, had no trouble painting one group of people - white people. Now I don't know what his reasons were - but they were wrong and it is not all hindsight - I read the eyewitness accounts also. I cannot believe he, and others apparently, just discounted the information. And yes, it is human nature to question his reason for doing it.

Now based on the postings I have read, I question whether his actions were based on race.

If the skin color had been reversed and the white police chief had been reported to be, let's say, anti-black (however you want to put it), wouldn't you question the reason for the negligence to consider credible evidence. I would. So no, my remarks are not racist or bigotted or a smear. Just a natural progression based on all I have read and seen. IN the end that is all any of us can do.

[Catspaw]

So...you just made an assumption. You have no proof that Chief Moose is "anti-white." However, you aren't willing to retract your statement. It's too bad you can't admit you're wrong.

[nanny]

[So...you just made an assumption. You have no proof that Chief Moose is "anti-white." However, you aren't willing to retract your statement. It's too bad you can't admit you're wrong.]

I don't think you read my post - did you? I did say I repeated what I had read on FR in postings by people who allegedly live where this man formerly worked. I did take their postings as truth - in that I was wrong.

I still question the chief, and others, in not checking out dark skinned people, contrary to eye witness accounts. Now I did couple that with what I had read on FR and 'questioned' if race could have been his reasoning.

I should have used 'alledged' the statements read on FR. I admitted that - but I still question his actions - I would. question them even if I had read nothing about him on FR .

PEOPLE WERE BEING KILLED and this chief, and apparently others, were disregarding credible evidence. There has to be a reason - what was it? Incompetence? Could be. I will question that. If I had, you probably would have attacked me saying I only questioned his competence because he was black. It is a no win situation.

But no, I wasn't wrong in questioning his actions - and I was only wrong in taking posting on FR as truth. Only those people can answer if it was truthful.

[RedBloodedAmerican]

Remember this one?

[RedBloodedAmerican]

ROFLMBO!!! Oh, how did I miss that one? LOL!!!!