IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Black Panthers , Bradley Schlozman , department of justice , Eric Holder , J. Christian Adams , Malik Zulu Shabazz , minutemen , racism charges , voter intimidation

Reply
Old 7th July 2010, 05:23 AM   #41
Lurker
Illuminator
 
Lurker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,189
Wasn't there a similar case that happened under Bush where some Minutemen were accused of votr intimidation by bringing a gun and hanging outside a polling station? If I recall, those charges were dropped by the Bush administration. Could it be racism? Did bush protect his own race there?
Lurker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 05:26 AM   #42
Ocelot
Illuminator
 
Ocelot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 3,475
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
UNBELIEVEABLE.
I quite agree.
__________________
EDL = English Disco Lovers
Ocelot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 06:17 AM   #43
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
 
leftysergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,863
If Adams was hired by Schlozman, we can assume that he is a corrupt partisan hack, since that is exactly the type of person Schlozman was looking for, being, himself, a corrupt partisan hack.
leftysergeant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 06:23 AM   #44
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 32,923
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
I've posted nothing to suggest I'm a Birther. Yet another dishonest tactic to avoid addressing the real issue raised by Adam's testimony. This is saying as much about you, Upchurch, as it potential says about Holder. Why are you apparently so afraid of find out the truth in this matter? Let's just put everyone involved under oath and get them on the record, and clear this up.
What does it say about me when I point out that I never suggested you were a Birther, only that you deny evidence in a Birther style, which is much the same as a Truther style or any other conspiracy nut.

Other than the partisan hack making the claim, is there any substantial evidence that wrong-doing has occurred? Or should is it upon the accused to disprove every wild claim made of them? Who has the burden of proof?
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 06:27 AM   #45
A'isha
Miss Schoolteacher
 
A'isha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 15,221
Originally Posted by Lurker View Post
Wasn't there a similar case that happened under Bush where some Minutemen were accused of votr intimidation by bringing a gun and hanging outside a polling station?
Why yes, there was. Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez said in testimony before the Civil Rights Commission:

"In another case, in Arizona, the complaint was received by a national civil rights organization regarding events in Pima, Arizona in the 2006 election when three well-known anti-immigrant advocates affiliated with the Minutemen, one of whom was carrying a gun, allegedly intimidated Latino voters at a polling place by approaching several persons, filming them, and advocating and printing voting materials in Spanish.

In that instance, the Department declined to bring any action for alleged voter intimidation, notwithstanding the requests of the complaining parties."

He also mentioned another instance, in 2005, where the Bush DOJ didn't pursue voter intimidation charges against "armed Mississippi State investigators" who were accused of intimidating elderly minority voters by visiting them in their homes and asking them who they voted for, "in spite of state law protections that explicitly forbid such inquiries."

Perez also stated that the standards of proof for voter intimidation were incredibly high, and that in only three cases were criminal charges ever filed under Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act (the voter intimidation clause) since the law was passed in 1965. Three, in almost fifty years.

But I'm sure there's a really good reason that Adams (and BeAChooser) are all bent out of shape about this one particular instance, and yet were as quiet as church mice regarding every single other instance (save for thrice in forty-five years) where the DOJ declined to pursue voter intimidation charges against someone so accused.

Right?

Last edited by A'isha; 7th July 2010 at 06:29 AM.
A'isha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 10:47 AM   #46
joobz
Tergiversator
 
joobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
Originally Posted by Dancing David View Post
So what was the basis of the dropping of charges or dismissal?

ETA: It would appear that the person who was threatening voters King Samir Shabazz was the one who did not have charges dropped against him. What evidence is there that Jerry Jackson was intemidating voters?
Can you show where you got this?
It seems that charges were dropped against him.
__________________
What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC.
"Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser
joobz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 11:12 AM   #47
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
 
Dancing David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,700
Um, I got it from Ap through Yahoo, the Frederal charges were dropped but there was a Philadelphia law that stayed.

here was the AP story
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100701/...ack_panthers_2
Quote:
Before any penalties could be handed down — and after Obama appointed Eric Holder to run the Justice Department — charges were dropped against everyone but Samir Shabazz. The court prohibited him from displaying a weapon within 100 feet of any Philadelphia polling place through 2012
ETA:
Here is a news story from the time period of May 2009, hard to find other ones:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ng-case/print/
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn
And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch
You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager
Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar

Last edited by Dancing David; 7th July 2010 at 11:31 AM.
Dancing David is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 11:19 AM   #48
joobz
Tergiversator
 
joobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
Originally Posted by Dancing David View Post
Um, I got it from Ap through Yahoo, the Frederal charges were dropped but there was a Philadelphia law that stayed.

here was the AP story
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100701/...ack_panthers_2
Thank you.

Quote:
The Justice Department has explained this decision by saying that Jackson was a certified poll watcher who did not carry any weapons, that the New Black Panther website denounced the actions in Philadelphia and that the group had no national plan to intimidate voters.
Seems straight forward.

So, charges weren't dropped against King. BAC, how do you respond to this? What do you say about your information sources which claimed otherwise?
__________________
What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC.
"Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser
joobz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 11:24 AM   #49
GrouchoMarxist
Cowardly insulter of Buddhism
 
GrouchoMarxist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,146
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100701/...ack_panthers_2[/quote]

"you're about to be ruled by the black man, base for delicious cheese and pickles."
__________________
I can't believe that having said what I said was interpreted as having been what I said when I said it, because I said it where I said it, when I said it, and who I said it to. Only in America!
GrouchoMarxist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 11:29 AM   #50
SOdhner
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,744
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
Would you folks agree that this is a very serious charge and should be investigated ... by putting people under oath if necessary?
Let me try this as an example:

BeAChooser is a serial killer. This is a very serious charge, right? So clearly it should be investigated, right? Sure, that investigation will itself be harmful to BaC as he is smeared all over the news, and sure I'm not a reliable source at all, but why would that change anything?

You want a big show, when in cases like this all that is needed is a quick internal review to see if the accusation has any merit. I'm sure they did that, and it probably took all of five minutes. Done. Dragging it into some huge proceeding needlessly gives people the appearance of guilt without any basis and in the end you would still never concede the point because even if zero evidence is uncovered to a true believer like yourself it would still be one guy's word against another.

Should it be investigated? Yeah, but not in the way you think. It should be investigated about as seriously as someone who doesn't know you in real life and has no evidence calling you a serial killer.
SOdhner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 12:14 PM   #51
Newtons Bit
Penultimate Amazing
 
Newtons Bit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 10,023
The Ad Hominem arguments against Adams have convinced me that he cannot possibly be telling the truth. The first hand accounts of what he said occurred can't possibly be considered correct because he appears to be a conservative.
__________________
"Structural Engineering is the art of molding materials we do not wholly understand into shapes we cannot precisely analyze so as to understand forces we cannot really assess in such a way that the community at large has no reason to suspect the extent of our own ignorance." James E Amrhein
Newtons Bit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 12:21 PM   #52
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 32,923
Originally Posted by Newtons Bit View Post
The Ad Hominem arguments against Adams have convinced me that he cannot possibly be telling the truth. The first hand accounts of what he said occurred can't possibly be considered correct because he appears to be a conservative.
Close. First hand account of what he said occurred can't be trusted because it is anecdotal.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 12:41 PM   #53
Newtons Bit
Penultimate Amazing
 
Newtons Bit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 10,023
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
Close. First hand account of what he said occurred can't be trusted because it is anecdotal.
Got it. People can't be witnesses to something happening because it's only anecdotal. That makes more sense than the Ad Hominems.
__________________
"Structural Engineering is the art of molding materials we do not wholly understand into shapes we cannot precisely analyze so as to understand forces we cannot really assess in such a way that the community at large has no reason to suspect the extent of our own ignorance." James E Amrhein
Newtons Bit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 12:51 PM   #54
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by Spindrift View Post
Since when does being proved a liar get anyone drummed out of the Republican Party?
It happens a lot more often in the Republican Party than in the democratic party. You folks still idolize the biggest liar of all ... well before Obama came along.
BeAChooser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 12:54 PM   #55
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 32,923
Originally Posted by Newtons Bit View Post
Got it. People can't be witnesses to something happening because it's only anecdotal.
Well, yeah. Otherwise, we have to accept people's witnessing events of UFOs, angels, ghosts, Big Foot, and the Lock Ness Monster as evidence of those things.

Anecdotal evidence, by itself, is useless. People's biases and perspective color their perceptions, which make eye-witness reports, by themselves, useless. IF, however, they are corroborated with physical evidence, then you've got something.

It is not, as BAC suggests, the accused who bears the responsibility of providing that evidence. The burden lies on the person making the claim. In this case, the person making the claim is Adams. His claim is not enough by itself.

Last edited by Upchurch; 7th July 2010 at 01:35 PM.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 01:17 PM   #56
joobz
Tergiversator
 
joobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
Originally Posted by Newtons Bit View Post
Got it. People can't be witnesses to something happening because it's only anecdotal. That makes more sense than the Ad Hominems.
I would like corroborating evidence of Adams claim. As it seems charges weren't actually dropped on all involved. The only complaint Adams may have is that is seems the "punishment" King received was too light.
__________________
What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC.
"Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser
joobz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 01:22 PM   #57
joobz
Tergiversator
 
joobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
It happens a lot more often in the Republican Party than in the democratic party.
How cute. A tu quoque argument. I dislike lies from both parties and would like them to stop. Unfortunately, the US/THEM mentality allows for nonsense to continue.

If Adams is telling the truth, than it is a real problem. However, the evidence does not seem to support his statements.
__________________
What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC.
"Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser
joobz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 01:30 PM   #58
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
 
Dancing David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,700
Originally Posted by Newtons Bit View Post
Got it. People can't be witnesses to something happening because it's only anecdotal. That makes more sense than the Ad Hominems.
And the supporting evidence is....
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn
And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch
You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager
Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar
Dancing David is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 01:59 PM   #59
Newtons Bit
Penultimate Amazing
 
Newtons Bit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 10,023
Originally Posted by Dancing David View Post
And the supporting evidence is....
I'm not comments on this case, only on the silliness of the people trying to discount it based on the guy who was running the case being a conservative.
__________________
"Structural Engineering is the art of molding materials we do not wholly understand into shapes we cannot precisely analyze so as to understand forces we cannot really assess in such a way that the community at large has no reason to suspect the extent of our own ignorance." James E Amrhein
Newtons Bit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 02:08 PM   #60
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 32,923
Originally Posted by Newtons Bit View Post
I'm not comments on this case, only on the silliness of the people trying to discount it based on the guy who was running the case being a conservative.
Who?

eta: Ah, Unabogie.

Last edited by Upchurch; 7th July 2010 at 02:43 PM.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 02:19 PM   #61
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by joobz View Post
Quote:
The Justice Department has explained this decision by saying that Jackson was a certified poll watcher who did not carry any weapons, that the New Black Panther website denounced the actions in Philadelphia and that the group had no national plan to intimidate voters.

Seems straight forward.
Except that voter intimidation laws don't require weapons be visible for intimidation to occur. And the video clearly shows that even the unarmed Black Panthers were acting in a hostile, intimidating and threatening manner directly outside a polling place.

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 states in Section 11(b) that "no person … snip … shall intimidate, threaten, or coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person for voting or attempting to vote." What we see on that video is a clear case of intimidation. And multiple people complained about it … including some black voters.

The Voting Rights Act was written because black voters were often kept from casting ballots by threats of physical violence. Are modern day democrats now going to blithely defend blacks who do the same thing? Sad.

Especially when ProjectVote, which Obama and democrats are intimately associated with, complains (http://www.projectvote.org/voter-intimidation.html ) because supporters of Obama at a voting center were "heckled" by a group of protestors as they went into vote. And then complain that the penalties for doing that (up to a year in prison are too lenient. Compare a year in jail to be scolded "well just don't display a weapon within 100 feet of a Philadelphia polling place through 2012." And I guess it would be ok to do it elsewhere or after 2012 as far as the Holder DOJ is concerned. Seems there is a double standard taking place here, joobz, even if you refuse to see it.

Here's a little more information:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ng-case/print/

Quote:
Justice Department political appointees overruled career lawyers and ended a civil complaint accusing three members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense of wielding a nightstick and intimidating voters at a Philadelphia polling place last Election Day, according to documents and interviews.

… snip …

Career lawyers pursued the case for months, including obtaining an affidavit from a prominent 1960s civil rights activist who witnessed the confrontation and described it as "the most blatant form of voter intimidation" that he had seen, even during the voting rights crisis in Mississippi a half-century ago.

The lawyers also had ascertained that one of the three men had gained access to the polling place by securing a credential as a Democratic poll watcher, according to interviews and documents reviewed by The Washington Times.
Apparently, Adams is not the only one at the DOJ making this charge.

Originally Posted by joobz View Post
So, charges weren't dropped against King. BAC, how do you respond to this?
That the punishment wasn't commensurate with the seriousness of the crime.

And since you folks have decided to try Adams rather than the case based on his past history, let's look at Malik Zulu Shabazz and his past.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/A...and4facts.html

Quote:
Shabazz is the leader of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense (NBPP), a radical black separatist group that calls for a militant response to racism. … snip … the NBPP uses violent rhetoric, takes a paramilitary posture and often threatens violence.

… snip … the NBPP has embraced racist views and has made vilifying another minority, Jews, the center of its ideology. Although Shabazz denies that he or the NBPP are anti-Semitic, the group focuses on the Jews as the source of black oppression, of the “black Holocaust,” and of most of the world’s problems, and Shabazz led the way in accusing Jews of masterminding 9/11.

Mod WarningEdited for compliance with Rule 4. Do not copy lengthy tracts of text from elsewhere. Instead use a short quote and a link to the original source.
Responding to this mod box in thread will be off topic Posted By:LashL

THIS is the man and organization your side of this debate is defending.

Last edited by LashL; 7th July 2010 at 05:30 PM.
BeAChooser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 02:32 PM   #62
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by SOdhner View Post
Let me try this as an example:

BeAChooser is a serial killer. This is a very serious charge, right?
Except your example isn't at all similar (just desperate). You have presented no evidence that I'm a serial killer. On the other hand, we have clear evidence that the *new* Black Panthers violated the voter intimidation laws (with, apparently, the help of democrat officials since they were given democrat poll watcher status). Nor have you presented any evidence that I was taken to court for being a serial killer, as these Black Panthers were taken to court (they just decided not to show up). Nor have you presented any evidence that one or more government lawyers have stated the new district attorney ordered them to drop my case after telling them "we just aren't going to prosecute serial killers whose screen names begin with the letter B" (the equivalent of what Adams stated they were told). It's rather sad that your defense of the indefensible has come done to nonsense like the above.

Why are you so afraid to put these people under oath and get them on the record? Why?
BeAChooser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 02:45 PM   #63
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
It is not, as BAC suggests, the accused who bears the responsibility of providing that evidence.
The responsibility of the DOJ is to investigate serious claims of misconduct. Here we have a relatively high former government official making extremely serious charges in public which you don't want the DOJ to even investigate. Charges which seem to fit the observable facts. And given the history of the Reno DOJ (in which Holder was a top official) vis-a-vis refusing to properly investigate serious allegations of criminal activities during the Clinton years, folks should be more than a little concerned that the same thing is happening now ... with Holder in command of the DOJ. How ironic given that Obama tried to attack Hillary during the Presidential Primary campaign over the corruption in her husband's administration. And we thought we'd see *change*.
BeAChooser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 02:46 PM   #64
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by joobz View Post
I dislike lies from both parties
Yeah, sure you do.
BeAChooser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 02:48 PM   #65
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 32,923
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
Except your example isn't at all similar (just desperate). You have presented no evidence that I'm a serial killer. On the other hand, we have clear evidence that the *new* Black Panthers violated the voter intimidation laws
What is that clear evidence?
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 02:55 PM   #66
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
What is that clear evidence?
Wow. You've not looked at the videos? You've not listened to the witnesses? Justice sure would be blind in your case.
BeAChooser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 02:57 PM   #67
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
Who?

eta: Ah, Unabogie.
It's not that he's a conservative. It's that he's a vocal, partisan conservative who keeps making outrageous charges. I posted the link to his earlier "op-ed" where he opined that Obama was appeasing the Muslim hordes. Now he comes out with another completely unbelievable charge (that's it OFFICIAL DOJ POLICY to ignore black criminals) and his credibility is indeed relevant. Forgive me if I require slightly more evidence than this guy's word.
Unabogie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 02:57 PM   #68
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/breakin...inglepage=true

Quote:
BREAKING: A Third Former DOJ Official Steps Forward to Support J. Christian Adams

… snip …

July 6, 2010

Several former DOJ employees have been in contact with Pajamas Media, interested in publicly supporting J. Christian Adams as he comes forward about the DOJ’s failure to enforce the country’s laws from a race-neutral perspective.

These former DOJ employees have expressed a willingness to go on record regarding Adams’ professionalism, excellent performance, and outstanding record of enforcing the law without racial bias.

Additionally, they would like to corroborate Adams’ statements about the DOJ.

And perhaps — pay attention, DOJ press liaisons — offer their own accounts regarding the DOJ’s hostility to race-neutral law enforcement.
Mod WarningEdited for compliance with Rule 4. Do not cut and paste long tracts of text available elsewhere. Instead use a short quote and a link to the original source only.
Responding to this mod box in thread will be off topic Posted By:LashL

Last edited by LashL; 7th July 2010 at 05:31 PM.
BeAChooser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 02:58 PM   #69
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
I posted the link to his earlier "op-ed" where he opined that Obama was appeasing the Muslim hordes.
And you think he isn't?
BeAChooser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 02:59 PM   #70
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 32,923
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
Wow. You've not looked at the videos?
I did look at the video you gave. It showed two guys standing there holding sticks at the polling place. I did not see them threatening or otherwise intimidating anyone.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 03:08 PM   #71
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
 
Dancing David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,700
Originally Posted by Newtons Bit View Post
I'm not comments on this case, only on the silliness of the people trying to discount it based on the guy who was running the case being a conservative.
Fair 'nuff
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn
And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch
You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager
Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar
Dancing David is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 03:11 PM   #72
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
I did look at the video you gave. It showed two guys standing there holding sticks at the polling place. I did not see them threatening or otherwise intimidating anyone.
Nothing at all threatening or intimidating?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFOKn...eature=related
BeAChooser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 03:12 PM   #73
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
 
Dancing David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,700
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
Except that voter intimidation laws don't require weapons be visible for intimidation to occur. And the video clearly shows that even the unarmed Black Panthers were acting in a hostile, intimidating and threatening manner directly outside a polling place.
Seems the DoJ felt it was one NBP member.

I am shocked at the level of under reporting on this one as well. (Seriously I am suprized that only one newspaper ran the story.)

So either someone felt that this was no big deal, including Fox news...
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn
And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch
You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager
Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar
Dancing David is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 03:17 PM   #74
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
 
Dancing David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,700
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
I did look at the video you gave. It showed two guys standing there holding sticks at the polling place. I did not see them threatening or otherwise intimidating anyone.
Yeah I have to say that is a low bar for intimidation. Now the reports of the shouting are much more exciting.
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn
And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch
You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager
Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar
Dancing David is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 03:19 PM   #75
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
 
Dancing David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,700
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
Nothing at all threatening or intimidating?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFOKn...eature=related
There is a stick, where is the threatening?

the weapon is a violation.
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn
And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch
You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager
Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar
Dancing David is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 03:28 PM   #76
joobz
Tergiversator
 
joobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
Except that voter intimidation laws don't require weapons be visible for intimidation to occur. And the video clearly shows that even the unarmed Black Panthers were acting in a hostile, intimidating and threatening manner directly outside a polling place.
I agree.

However, the video shows only King as holding a stick and had no business being there. The other person was actually a certified poll watcher.

Quote:
The Justice Department has explained this decision by saying that Jackson was a certified poll watcher who did not carry any weapons, that the New Black Panther website denounced the actions in Philadelphia and that the group had no national plan to intimidate voters.
The stick went too far and was why charges weren't dropped.

Do you believe the other person was being intimidating?



Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
That the punishment wasn't commensurate with the seriousness of the crime.
For King, who held a weapon, this is a legitimate complaint and one I would like to know more about.


Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
And since you folks have decided to try Adams rather than the case based on his past history, let's look at Malik Zulu Shabazz and his past.
As I haven't attacked Adams, this point is erroneous.



Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
THIS is the man and organization your side of this debate is defending.
I am not defending him. I do not think he is a good person.

Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
Yeah, sure you do.
I do. I just happen to only hate real lies and not the imagined manufactured nonsense of political hacks.
__________________
What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC.
"Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser
joobz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 03:32 PM   #77
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 32,923
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
Nothing at all threatening or intimidating?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFOKn...eature=related
The same two guys standing there and leaving when the police asked them to? What is it you find obviously intimidating?

Based on these two short clips, this doesn't appear to be as clear cut as you would like to believe.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 03:49 PM   #78
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by Dancing David View Post
Seems the DoJ felt it was one NBP member.
Actually, there were 3 NBP members there and even if there was only one, does that mean it's no longer a serious crime. If only one person is at a polling station we are now going to simply ignore it? Especially if they aren't brandishing any obvious weapons. The taunts, menacing appearance and such are perfectly ok? At least as long as you're democrat?
BeAChooser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 03:52 PM   #79
332nd
Penultimate Amazing
 
332nd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,278
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
More from the comments section



Yep, totally dispassionate reporting you've linked to. Nothing racist about these folks. I suggest a special prosecutor.
Wait, what!?!? You mean I paid $7,000 in property taxes this year and they were going to give it to me anyway!?!? Oooo... Wait til this year's "Screw With the White Man BBQ & Fish Fry!" They're gonna hear about this!

Come to think of it, I only got my wife so far & I was promised two white women! Grrr...
__________________
The poster formerly known as Redtail

Last edited by 332nd; 7th July 2010 at 03:53 PM.
332nd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 03:54 PM   #80
joobz
Tergiversator
 
joobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
Actually, there were 3 NBP members there and even if there was only one, does that mean it's no longer a serious crime. If only one person is at a polling station we are now going to simply ignore it? Especially if they aren't brandishing any obvious weapons. The taunts, menacing appearance and such are perfectly ok? At least as long as you're democrat?
There were claims of racists statements being lobbed at voters. This is a real concern.

however, there was nothing in the video that appeared intimidating. Unless, of course, one considers a black man in a black coat intimidating.
__________________
What's the best argument for UHC? This argument against UHC.
"Perhaps one reason per capita GDP is lower in UHC countries is because they've tried to prevent this important function [bankrupting the sick] and thus carry forward considerable economic dead wood?"-BeAChooser
joobz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:07 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.