Teacher fired for breaking up fight.

[ginwilly]

i just want to see you continue to be unable to cite the claims you have made today and in the past, leave your dumb ass swaying in the breeze.

I'm not wading through 50k posts of yours to show you what you have repeated. I noticed when given the opportunity to deny that you said that, you turned it back on me instead. Were you afraid I care enough to go through you posts to prove you a liar? I'll not do that, so you can answer anyway you like and I won't go back to double check your words. This is your chance to deny it without rebuttal from me. Now I can't stop the others here who have seen you repeatedly say ... because of institutional racism from correcting you, but I've giving you the opportunity to answer without ramifications from me.

 

[UncleBuck]

BTW, you do understand I'm FOR civil rights don't you?

lol, i have you on record being firmly opposed to civil rights.

 

[UncleBuck]

So wait, now you are denying that you defended the law because of institutional racism?

hey dipshit. you made some very specific claims about what i have said.

i am just asking you to show me where i said them. the search function is in the upper right corner, shit for brains.

 

[UncleBuck]

Why do you think London should do more time than you for the same crime based on the color of the victim's skin?

hate crimes are based on the motive and intent of the offender, not just the skin color of the victim you unrelenting moron.

 

[UncleBuck]

How can you say that if he supports hate crime legislation. By it's very definition, you will do more time than him if the victim is white. He will do more time for the same crime if the victim is black.

no, either one of us will do more time if we commit a crime BECAUSE OF the other person's skin color. not every interracial asault or crime is treated as a hate crime.

you have demonstrated how idiotic and out of touch with reality you are.

you rail against a law that you don't even fucking understand. just give up.

 

[UncleBuck]

Why should London do more time than you for the same crime dependent on the victim's color? You keep avoiding that question. Why is this such a difficult question?

i have to reject the question because that's not how hate crimes work, idiot.

 

[UncleBuck]

It's not that I don't understand the law.

yes, it is. you are an idiot.

 

[UncleBuck]

I'm not wading through 50k posts of yours to show you what you have repeated.

there's a search function for you to use. should be very easy since you made some very specific claims about what i have said.

the fact is that i have never said what you repeatedly claim i said and the search function will show this.

you are just a dumb racist liar.

go to hell.

 

[UncleBuck]

apologies for redding it up.

 

[ginwilly]

lol, i have you on record being firmly opposed to civil rights.

no you don't or you would have brought it out when you accepted the challenge to leave for a month. The challenged you failed miserably with but are still here you dishonest puke.

You have me on record asking why YOU think title II is needed today. You broke out the 1940 green book.

You have me on record several times saying I support civil rights and in 65 I would have voted for title II because it was necessary. Necessary because of the efforts of LBJ and daddy Gore to block civil rights in the 50's.

 

[ginwilly]

there's a search function for you to use. should be very easy since you made some very specific claims about what i have said.

the fact is that i have never said what you repeatedly claim i said and the search function will show this.

you are just a dumb racist liar.

go to hell.

So you are claiming I'm doing to you what you constantly do to others bigottybuck? That's gotta suck for you.

 

[UncleBuck]

I would have voted for title II because it was necessary.

but what about the racist food spitters?

you said it was a bad idea because of racist food spitters.

 

[UncleBuck]

So you are claiming I'm doing to you what you constantly do to others bigottybuck? That's gotta suck for you.

no, i can cite my claims with evidence. you can't, because you are a lying racist shit.

 

[Mindmelted]

 

[ginwilly]

but what about the racist food spitters?

you said it was a bad idea because of racist food spitters.

Try to keep up and stop doing what you claim I'm doing.

I think in this century, a bigoted store owner would be punished by society. I went on to say that we would be better off knowing these bigots instead of allowing them to hide behind title II. I would personally rather know I'm not welcome somewhere instead of patronizing a racist who hates me and spits in my food because of his resentment of being forced to serve me. All while I give him money. Seems stupid. Let me avoid that place and help put him out of business. Your system hides and protects the racist instead of exposing him. Nice lesson kiddos.

You said nut uh, there would be white only establishments flourishing even today. Then Donald Sterling happened and you were proven wrong yet again.

 

[abandonconflict]

no you don't or you would have brought it out when you accepted the challenge to leave for a month. The challenged you failed miserably with but are still here you dishonest puke.

You have me on record asking why YOU think title II is needed today. You broke out the 1940 green book.

You have me on record several times saying I support civil rights and in 65 I would have voted for title II because it was necessary. Necessary because of the efforts of LBJ and daddy Gore to block civil rights in the 50's.

I recall you saying something completely different.

 

[ginwilly]

I recall you saying something completely different.

what was it you recall? I've said lots of things on that subject but that's definitely something I've repeated here.

I've also repeatedly stated I believe in civil rights and under my system it would never have been an issue. This in spite of Bucks insistence that I said I was against civil rights that he has yet to bring forth. He has my posts saved so you know he would have by now, the dude is obsessed with me.

 

[abandonconflict]

what was it you recall?

Your opposition to the civil rights act per your view that people ought to have the right to discriminate against others based on bigotry in public.

 

[ginwilly]

Your opposition to the civil rights act per your view that people ought to have the right to discriminate against others based on bigotry in public.

Wow, what a tool. Most likely you are remembering bucktards interpretation of what I said.

My opposition to civil rights...... I'll give you the same option I gave Buck. If you can show a post of mine saying I'm against civil rights bring it out and I'll leave for a month, can't find it and you leave for a month. Care to take the challenge? buck took and is still here, so you can be a dishonest welch like buck if you want, it helps to know who we are talking to.

Take the challenge?

 

[abandonconflict]

It is possible to delete posts and it would be difficult to find such a post so your little challenge is pointless. I remember having this discussion with you, this is not the first time that you have changed your stance while swearing you never thought differently. You liked kynes post where he described welfare programs as essential during austerity after stating clearly your opposition to them.

The challenge is pointless and your credibility is gone.