Floyd Died From An Overdose Of Fentanyl - Not From Being Choked Out By Minneapolis Police!

[PAMFAM10]

I guess were Even trying to change definitions.

 Appeasement: 

noun

1. the action or process of appeasing.

   "a policy of appeasement"

   to bring to a state of peace, quiet, ease, calm, or contentment; pacify; soothe: to appease an angry king. to satisfy, allay, or relieve; assuage: The fruit appeased his hunger.

[PAMFAM10]

Any time you need a history lesson or facts I’m here for you cardinalbacker.

[baddog]

7 minutes ago, PAMFAM10 said:

By that notion the tea party (a moment) is traitorous. You see how that sounds.

Exactly. To rebel against the status quo is to be treasonous. The Boston Tea Party was special and not really treason due to the fact they left their country and started anew. The British said no-no, you are still under King’s rule. More to it than that, I know. 
The last tea party, which is the one I think you are referring, was to keep the status quo intact. Correct me if I am wrong. Of course I’m wrong to a lefty. lol

[PAMFAM10]

3 minutes ago, baddog said:

Exactly. To rebel against the status quo is to be treasonous. The Boston Tea Party was special and not really treason due to the fact they left their country and started anew. The British said no-no, you are still under King’s rule. More to it than that, I know. 
The last tea party, which is the one I think you are referring, was to keep the status quo intact. Correct me if I am wrong. Of course I’m wrong to a lefty. lol

Just stop it . Just stop 🤯

[CardinalBacker]

2 hours ago, PAMFAM10 said:

By that notion the tea party (a moment) is traitorous. You see how that sounds.

I don't really see how a conservative movement to keep things the way that they are is traitorous.... but the name sure as heck suggested it, lol.  

[CardinalBacker]

2 hours ago, PAMFAM10 said:

I guess were Even trying to change definitions.

 Appeasement: 

noun

1. the action or process of appeasing.

   "a policy of appeasement"

   to bring to a state of peace, quiet, ease, calm, or contentment; pacify; soothe: to appease an angry king. to satisfy, allay, or relieve; assuage: The fruit appeased his hunger.

Appeasement in an international context is a diplomatic policy of making political or material concessions to an aggressive power in order to avoid conflict.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 The term is most often applied to the foreign policy of the UK Governments of Prime Ministers 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

, 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 and most notably 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 towards 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 and 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 between 1935–39.

 

Source:  

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

That's what I was trying to figure out-what you meant.  Are you suggesting that the victorious North had "appease" the South and to try not to upset feelings after winning the war, wrecking the great portions of the Southern states and devastating the Southern economy? 

Practically every city out there has a MLK Drive, Boulevard, and/or Street.  It doesn't matter if we're talking about Northern or Southern cities.  And it wasn't done exclusively by African Americans, either.  Across the board we like to recognize people who have made great accomplishments. 

How would you feel (and this isn't unthinkable) if it comes to pass that MLK is somehow considered to be anti-LGBTQ because of his stances on homosexuality?  If suddenly the left cries for renaming all MLK streets, dismantling the MLK Memorial in Washington, and moving all traces of him into museums because suddenly the Bible's teachings against homosexuality are now considered "hate speech?"  It's not that hard to imagine.  How would you feel then.... everything that MLK has done will be vilified because he, like most at the time, felt that homosexuality was sinful?  That's the danger in trying to examine and rewrite our history in today's context.

 

[PAMFAM10]

5 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

Appeasement in an international context is a diplomatic policy of making political or material concessions to an aggressive power in order to avoid conflict.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 The term is most often applied to the foreign policy of the UK Governments of Prime Ministers 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

, 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 and most notably 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 towards 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 and 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 between 1935–39.

 

Source:  

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

That's what I was trying to figure out-what you meant.  Are you suggesting that the victorious North had "appease" the South and to try not to upset feelings after winning the war, wrecking the great portions of the Southern states and devastating the Southern economy? 

Practically every city out there has a MLK Drive, Boulevard, and/or Street.  It doesn't matter if we're talking about Northern or Southern cities.  And it wasn't done exclusively by African Americans, either.  Across the board we like to recognize people who have made great accomplishments. 

How would you feel (and this isn't unthinkable) if it comes to pass that MLK is somehow considered to be anti-LGBTQ because of his stances on homosexuality?  If suddenly the left cries for renaming all MLK streets, dismantling the MLK Memorial in Washington, and moving all traces of him into museums because suddenly the Bible's teachings against homosexuality are now considered "hate speech?"  It's not that hard to imagine.  How would you feel then.... everything that MLK has done will be vilified because he, like most at the time, felt that homosexuality was sinful?  That's the danger in trying to examine and rewrite our history in today's context.

 

Your beyond help you’re grasping hard making silly comparisons. MLK did not take up arms and kill thousands of Americans. Your trying to compare lee to king. You have to be a silly individual to put those two in a single sentence. This is sadly expected. You’ll bend any corner trying to normalize the confederate actions. It’s not because of what lee thought of blacks it’s because he enslaved men and was willing to turn his back on country and kill thousands. I mean this seriously. And your the same one damming blacks for honoring Floyd. Make it make sense. If there ever was a gay community or gay school i would not oppose them choosing to not have a mlk street school nor statues. You see how that work. 
 

 

It’s no longer wish to keep having this debate take it however you want it. Absolutely no point.

[CardinalBacker]

2 hours ago, PAMFAM10 said:

Your beyond help you’re grasping hard making silly comparisons. MLK did not take up arms and kill thousands of Americans. Your trying to compare lee to king. You have to be a silly individual to put those two in a single sentence. This is sadly expected. You’ll bend any corner trying to normalize the confederate actions. It’s not because of what lee thought of blacks it’s because he enslaved men and was willing to turn his back on country and kill thousands. I mean this seriously. And your the same one damming blacks for honoring Floyd. Make it make sense. If there ever was a gay community or gay school i would not oppose them choosing to not have a mlk street school nor statues. You see how that work. 
 

 

It’s no longer wish to keep having this debate take it however you want it. Absolutely no point.

Nobody is comparing the two... I’m sorry that you’re having so much trouble understanding basic comparisons. 
 

REL died in 1870 and was widely hailed as a hero at the time of his passing by most people, believe it or not. At the turn of the century (1900-1920) they were throwing up monuments and naming schools after him. Move forward a hundred years (2020) and he is a traitor who is to be scorned and universally despised based on “new” ways of thinking.  
On the other hand, you have MLK who died in 1968 and was widely hailed as hero at the time of his passing. At the turn of the century (2000-2020) they were throwing up monuments and naming schools after him. Imagine that a hundred years from now  (2100-2120) and he is considered a traitor who is to be scorned and universally despised based on “new” ways of thinking? Because that’s what the left is doing today.... who says that it won’t happen again?   
 

That’s a pretty good comparison if you ask me. 

[Reagan]

23 hours ago, PAMFAM10 said:

Only the narrative to have in your head of what others think? Have you had a conversation with a blm member on this issue? Any black persons told you this. Or your conservative/conspiracies outlet thinking for you. You don’t understand how you make yourself look.

"Let's get down to the brass tacks:   I'm fairly sure the BLM types will want one to believe this scenario:   Floyd was an upstanding person in his community.  Had a good job.  Good family man.  Has never been in trouble with the law.   Now, on the other hand, the cop woke up that morning and said:  "I think I'm going to kill a black person today!"   And poor Floyd was just in the wrong place, minding his own business, at the wrong time.   Am I close that this is what a lot of people want everyone to believe?"

Well, I ask you:  Of the two scenarios above, which one is true?  Or, are they both wrong or both right?

[Setx fan]

8 minutes ago, Reagan said:

"Let's get down to the brass tacks:   I'm fairly sure the BLM types will want one to believe this scenario:   Floyd was an upstanding person in his community.  Had a good job.  Good family man.  Has never been in trouble with the law.   Now, on the other hand, the cop woke up that morning and said:  "I think I'm going to kill a black person today!"   And poor Floyd was just in the wrong place, minding his own business, at the wrong time.   Am I close that this is what a lot of people want everyone to believe?"

Well, I ask you:  Of the two scenarios above, which one is true?  Or, are they both wrong or both right?

I think you have a lot of time on your hands my guy. You’ve allready posted the same thing word for word. This is pointless. Go back to Fox News and find a fresh topic 

[NetCat]

4 minutes ago, Setx fan said:

I think you have a lot of time on your hands my guy. You’ve allready posted the same thing word for word. This is pointless. Go back to Fox News and find a fresh topic 

I've seen you say this a couple of times. Is this a new version of saying "dude", "bro", or "man"?

I'm old that's why 😂

[Reagan]

3 minutes ago, Setx fan said:

I think you have a lot of time on your hands my guy. You’ve allready posted the same thing word for word. This is pointless. Go back to Fox News and find a fresh topic 

Just wondering what his/her answer would be.  You can't answer it either, can you?!

[Setx fan]

2 minutes ago, NetCat said:

I've seen you say this a couple of times. Is this a new version of saying "dude", "bro", or "man"?

I'm old that's why 😂

Basically

[Setx fan]

1 minute ago, Reagan said:

Just wondering what his/her answer would be.  You can't answer it either, can you?!

It’s allready been discussed. They’re both wrong. Nobody ever said that’s what happened. Next topic. The Fox News website down or something? 

[NetCat]

10 minutes ago, Setx fan said:

Basically

Thanks

[LumRaiderFan]

5 minutes ago, Setx fan said:

It’s allready been discussed. They’re both wrong. Nobody ever said that’s what happened. Next topic. The Fox News website down or something? 

lol, the old Fox News card...can you tell me what is wrong with them?

They have more different viewpoints on their network than all the others.

Flip to any other networks and you will not see anything other than liberal viewpoints.   
 

 

[Setx fan]

12 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

lol, the old Fox News card...can you tell me what is wrong with them?

They have more different viewpoints on their network than all the others.

Flip to any other networks and you will not see anything other than liberal viewpoints.   
 

 

There are less biased news stations than Fox. Not that most news stations aren’t but I can tell when someone only pays attention to one sided news. It’s annoying 

[CardinalBacker]

2 minutes ago, Setx fan said:

There are less biased news stations than Fox. Not that most news stations aren’t but I can tell when someone only pays attention to one sided news. It’s annoying 

I used to wake up to them every morning. I quit that years ago. 

Just too much negativity.

 

[LumRaiderFan]

8 minutes ago, Setx fan said:

There are less biased news stations than Fox. Not that most news stations aren’t but I can tell when someone only pays attention to one sided news. It’s annoying 

The commentary is not the news...Fox has the most accurate hard news of all the networks.  Best method is on the website IMO.  The news just needs to be reported...the truth is always one sided.

 

[Realville]

Your Welcome 

[Reagan]

28 minutes ago, Setx fan said:

There are less biased news stations than Fox. Not that most news stations aren’t but I can tell when someone only pays attention to one sided news. It’s annoying 

Did you know that a convicted terrorist is in charge of the BLM's finances?  Probably did see that on CNN or MSLSD, did you?

[Setx fan]

32 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

The commentary is not the news...Fox has the most accurate hard news of all the networks.  Best method is on the website IMO.  The news just needs to be reported...the truth is always one sided.

 

If your biased also you will probably feel that way

[LumRaiderFan]

7 minutes ago, Setx fan said:

If your biased also you will probably feel that way

If biased means watching the news for years and figuring out which ones are decent and which are dishonest....guilty.

I get a kick out of how Fox gets under folk’s skin, many who have never even watched it.

[Setx fan]

21 minutes ago, Reagan said:

Did you know that a convicted terrorist is in charge of the BLM's finances?  Probably did see that on CNN or MSLSD, did you?

I know a lot of people mistake the BLM organization for the BLM movement. Then again maybe it’s not a mistake. I know the BLM movement started at least a year before the organization. I know there are several other idiots and organizations that have attached themselves. I know people were bashing the movement long before the organization came into play. I’m also aware of cointelpro. 

[Setx fan]

1 minute ago, LumRaiderFan said:

If biased means watching the news for years and figuring out which ones are decent and which are dishonest....guilty.

I get a kick out of how Fox gets under folk’s skin, many who have never even watched it.

Fox don’t bother me at all. I just look at things from all angles to get a complete understanding. I will never rely on one source unless that source is God. Men are faulty