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 10th July 2010, 02:57 PM   #201
Cicero
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 7,861
Originally Posted by joobz View Post
that link doesn't contradict Unabogie's statement.
But let's examine another post of Unabogie's hard on for the TPP.

Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
I told you. If you think a bunch of overweight, disability check receiving, uninformed racists hanging around with Orange Pekoe on their hats calling me a "socialist" deserve my respect and civility, you're frankly mistaken. They deserve harsh mockery and they're getting it.
Did TPP people become "wealthier" from disability checks? I didn't see that in the NYT poll. Of course, all of Unabogie's petty pusillanimous pot shots were missing from the NYT poll.

Last edited by Cicero; 10th July 2010 at 02:58 PM.
Cicero 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 10th July 2010, 03:08 PM   #202
Cicero
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 7,861
Originally Posted by joobz View Post
I agree. Publicity is what they wanted it and conservative news outlets are giving it to them.
You mean the liberal lame stream media wouldn't want to portray Black Panthers in a bad light, or they wouldn't want word to get around about voter intimidation at a polling center? You are correct. Those are not of interest to them, unless of course the two guys happened to be Caucasian.

Quote:
But they will ask my neighbor to leave the property as a measure to keep the peace.
But the cops didn't ask the two guys to leave because they were on private property. They were asked to leave because the cops believed their presence did intimidate perspective voters.
Cicero 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 10th July 2010, 03:16 PM   #203
joobz
Tergiversator
 
joobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
Originally Posted by Cicero View Post
You mean the liberal lame stream media wouldn't want to portray Black Panthers in a bad light, or they wouldn't want word to get around about voter intimidation at a polling center? You are correct. Those are not of interest to them, unless of course the two guys happened to be Caucasian.
Oh, i'm sorry. I thought you wanted honest discussion.
Oh well.


Originally Posted by Cicero View Post
But the cops didn't ask the two guys to leave because they were on private property. They were asked to leave because the cops believed their presence did intimidate perspective voters.
you are a mind reader now. interesting.
__________________
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 10th July 2010, 03:27 PM   #204
Cicero
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 7,861
Originally Posted by joobz View Post
Oh, i'm sorry. I thought you wanted honest discussion.
Oh well.
Honest discussion to you is saying, "Publicity is what they wanted it and conservative news outlets are giving it to them." Really? What is your explanation for why you believe the lame stream media was not covering it at the time?


Quote:
you are a mind reader now. interesting.
Not even a lip reader as the cop plainly said at .27 in the YouTube video, "Sir, you can't stop people from voting."
Cicero 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 10th July 2010, 03:44 PM   #205
joobz
Tergiversator
 
joobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
Originally Posted by Cicero View Post
Honest discussion to you is saying, "Publicity is what they wanted it and conservative news outlets are giving it to them." Really? What is your explanation for why you believe the lame stream media was not covering it at the time?
Because as the facts have panned out that it is a non-issue.
If you think this raises concerns about there being too high an evidentiary bar, that's one thing. But the question is why this case and not past cases?






Originally Posted by Cicero View Post
Not even a lip reader as the cop plainly said at .27 in the YouTube video, "Sir, you can't stop people from voting."
You are right, good point.
The odd part is that we see in the videos people entering and leaving the voting area. You are using a police opinion that contradicts the video evidence.
__________________
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 10th July 2010, 03:49 PM   #206
YoPopa
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,484
Originally Posted by joobz View Post
The odd part is that we see in the videos people entering and leaving the voting area. You are using a police opinion that contradicts the video evidence.
Are you saying that because they did not intimidate everyone that is evidence that they did not intimidate anyone out of voting while they were there? That would be a very lame argument.
YoPopa 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 10th July 2010, 03:59 PM   #207
joobz
Tergiversator
 
joobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
Originally Posted by YoPopa View Post
Are you saying that because they did not intimidate everyone that is evidence that they did not intimidate anyone out of voting while they were there? That would be a very lame argument.
You are right, that would be a lame argument. good thing I didn't say that.


What I'm saying is that we don't have sufficient evidence of the intimidation. We have implication that that is what there were doing, but clearly as has been stated by the DoJ, not evidence of the level required to prove it.

We do have evidence of carrying a weapon at the site, hence the reason for the indictment.

Like I said, If the argument is that the standard of evidence is too high, I agree. IF the argument is that the DoJ, on racist grounds, failed to file criminal charges, I fully disagree.
__________________
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 10th July 2010, 05:43 PM   #208
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
 
leftysergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,863
Originally Posted by Cicero View Post
Well, the cops have side arms; he only had a nightstick. Not to mention both of them knew they were being recorded on video. But why would they resist? They already got the exposure they wanted.
Excuse me. Have you some video showing them actually causing people not to enter the polling place? Something smells wrong about this. There were, apparently, people in place with video-recording capability who were interested in showing us video of the cops making them leave. They were, however, not apparently interested in showing us the behavior that caused the cops to be there. Smells really fishy to me.
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 10th July 2010, 05:49 PM   #209
joobz
Tergiversator
 
joobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post
Excuse me. Have you some video showing them actually causing people not to enter the polling place? Something smells wrong about this. There were, apparently, people in place with video-recording capability who were interested in showing us video of the cops making them leave. They were, however, not apparently interested in showing us the behavior that caused the cops to be there. Smells really fishy to me.
The reality is that they probably were causing some problems, but were smart enough not to do anything overtly stupid with a camera on. The police came and made them leave. This was the proper course of action.
__________________
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 12th July 2010, 02:11 PM   #210
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by joobz View Post
Publicity is what they wanted it and conservative news outlets are giving it to them.
You think this is the sort of publicity they wanted?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8uMM58a6SE "New Black Panther Party Leader Malik Shabazz Heaping Praise on Osama Bin Laden" just 6 months after 9/11

Why is the Obama administration going out of it's way to protect this organization and it's members? This is a anti-American hate group.

Why hasn't the Obama adminstration had anything to say about this other than "no comment"?

Why hasn't the Obama administration done anything other than stonewall? In fact, when Adam's resigned over this matter (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-94202249.html ) he stated in his letter of resignation that:

Quote:
the events surrounding the dismissal of United States v. New Black Panther Party, et al., after the trial team sought and obtained an entry of default, has subjected me, Mr. Christopher Coates, and potentially at some point, all members of the team, to a subpoena from the United States Commission on Civil Rights.

… snip …

we have been ordered not to comply with the subpoena
That's stonewalling. To protect what? Shabazz? The NBP? Reverse racism? Or something even more serious? Take a look at this video clip folks:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ccbd4...layer_embedded "Evidence - Obama Stole Election Against Hillary Voter Intimidation And Fraud"

And who exactly gave the order to not cooperate with a subpoena in the Black Panther case? More than a few people need to be put under oath so we can get to the bottom of this, folks. Rather than let the Obama administration and the mainstream media sweep another one under the rug simply because they now control the DOJ. Didn't we learn anything from the 8 years of Bill Clinton?
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 12th July 2010, 03:01 PM   #211
joobz
Tergiversator
 
joobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
You think this is the sort of publicity they wanted?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8uMM58a6SE "New Black Panther Party Leader Malik Shabazz Heaping Praise on Osama Bin Laden" just 6 months after 9/11
Yup.


Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
Why is the Obama administration going out of it's way to protect this organization and it's members? This is a anti-American hate group.
Don't you mean Bush's DoJ?
__________________
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 12th July 2010, 03:41 PM   #212
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by joobz View Post
Don't you mean Bush's DoJ?
Like I pointed out to ANTPogo, had the Bush administration filed criminal charges, your side of the political aisle would likely have jumped up and down calling Bush a racist. And as I pointed out, the Bush administration might have had logically valid reasons for deciding to make it a civil rather then criminal case. Perhaps they decided they could get an effective penalty against these men without making it a criminal case. Perhaps they reasoned that in these times of extreme political division (as evident even in a forum like JREF), they stood less of a chance of getting a jury conviction in a criminal case than in a civil case, where the requirements for jury agreement aren't has high.

The issue here (as indicated in the OP) is why the Obama administration decided to effectively put aside a judgment by a court against the men in the civil case that was filed. I really doubt that the Bush adminstration would have done that. Do you?

So charges of racism, especially when one of the attorneys on the case says that senior officials in the Obama administration indicated there would be no Voting-Rights complaints filed where the victims were white, seem appropriate. And your unwillingness to honestly address that, or face the fact that the Obama administrations seems to be protecting an racially motivated hate group, is noted.
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 12th July 2010, 03:48 PM   #213
joobz
Tergiversator
 
joobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
Like I pointed out to ANTPogo, had the Bush administration filed criminal charges, your side of the political aisle would likely have jumped up and down calling Bush a racist.
So it's the left's fault that Bush's DoJ didn't prosecute?
What happened to personal responsibility that I thought conservatives advocate?

Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
And as I pointed out, the Bush administration might have had logically valid reasons for deciding to make it a civil rather then criminal case. Perhaps they decided they could get an effective penalty against these men without making it a criminal case. Perhaps they reasoned that in these times of extreme political division (as evident even in a forum like JREF), they stood less of a chance of getting a jury conviction in a criminal case than in a civil case, where the requirements for jury agreement aren't has high.
interesting that you find so many reasonable arguments to defend Bush's administrative handling of this situation.

One must wonder why you don't use the same reasoning for Obama's.....
__________________
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 12th July 2010, 03:59 PM   #214
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by joobz View Post
So it's the left's fault that Bush's DoJ didn't prosecute?
What happened to personal responsibility that I thought conservatives advocate?
Bush's personal responsibility is not the topic of this OP. It wasn't Bush that promised hope and change. Please desist from trying to drag the thread off-topic, joobz.
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 12th July 2010, 04:13 PM   #215
joobz
Tergiversator
 
joobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
Bush's personal responsibility is not the topic of this OP. It wasn't Bush that promised hope and change. Please desist from trying to drag the thread off-topic, joobz.
I am merely exposing your rather imbalanced approach to this issue.
you've already admitted that you aren't interested in voter rights in general. You are merely using this issue to characterize Obama as a racist.

Funny how you didn't call Bush a racist for not prosecuting the minutemen or Shabazz.
__________________
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 12th July 2010, 04:28 PM   #216
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by joobz View Post
I am merely exposing your rather imbalanced approach to this issue.
You can *try* to do that in a separate thread. What Bush did or didn't do is not the topic of this thread. So please desist from trying to make it the topic.
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 12th July 2010, 04:37 PM   #217
joobz
Tergiversator
 
joobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
You can *try* to do that in a separate thread. What Bush did or didn't do is not the topic of this thread. So please desist from trying to make it the topic.
Your unwillingness to address this issue settles the matter.

The Obama DoJ has done nothing "racist" here.


In truth, I do hope this issue raises the curtain on voter practices and strengthens the application of laws to protect voters. One must wonder why the case precedence has allowed this tradition of "difficult to prosecute" to develop. Unfortunately, your narrow view of what is on topic will not allow such a discussion to take place.


As such, we are merely limited to demonstrating why one cannot call Obama racist for doing exactly what Bush did.
__________________
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 13th July 2010, 04:50 AM   #218
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
 
Dancing David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,700
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
You can *try* to do that in a separate thread. What Bush did or didn't do is not the topic of this thread. So please desist from trying to make it the topic.
Yup, but when you ask why certain things were not persecuted , it does matter that it was the Bush DoJ. They were the ones in charge at the time. Obama's admin dismissed two of the chargees and continued with the third. But if you are asking why criminal procedings did not occur, that is a question for the Bush admin.

So if the question is "Why were charges dismissed?:, Obama/Holder
So if the question is "Why were criminal charges not persued?":, Bush/Mukasey
__________________
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 13th July 2010, 06:50 AM   #219
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by joobz View Post
Your unwillingness to address this issue settles the matter.

The Obama DoJ has done nothing "racist" here.
So just because this thread is not about Bush, Obama's DOJ can not possibly have done anything "racist" here.

Originally Posted by joobz View Post
As such, we are merely limited to demonstrating why one cannot call Obama racist for doing exactly what Bush did.
Except that's not true. You of course are perfectly entitled to prove that ... on another thread.
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 13th July 2010, 06:53 AM   #220
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by Dancing David View Post
But if you are asking why criminal procedings did not occur, that is a question for the Bush admin.
Except I didn't ask that in this thread. It's not a question in the OP, nor was it even mentioned until post #45 when someone from your side of this debate raised it.

I really wish you would stay on topic, David.
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 13th July 2010, 07:25 AM   #221
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 15,455
BAC, perhaps you could just PM everyone in advance exactly what you would like them to post? It will save you the trouble of having to deal with all these pesky counterarguments.
johnny karate 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 13th July 2010, 07:26 AM   #222
joobz
Tergiversator
 
joobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
So just because this thread is not about Bush, Obama's DOJ can not possibly have done anything "racist" here.
Your misscharacterization of my argument is equal to admitting your OP was false. If you actually had evidence that this is proof that the Obama DoJ was racist, you would be able to explain what Bush's DoJ actions (which parallel the current administrations actions) were fundamentally different.

You haven't done that.
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
Except that's not true. You of course are perfectly entitled to prove that ... on another thread.
Deny all you want:
The facts of the matter are:

1.) Past voter intimidation cases were difficult to convict.
2.) Bush DoJ did not pursue criminal charges on Minutemen Case involving carrying a weapon and videographing people entering to vote.
3.) Bush DoJ did not indict minutemen case.
4.) Bush DoJ did not pursue criminal charges on Black Panther case.
5.) Obama DoJ dropped indictment on 3 individuals except 1, the one holding a weapon.

It is clear that the Obama DoJ is acting in line with past administrations. If this makes Obama's Admin racist, then it also makes the Bush admin racist.
__________________
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 13th July 2010, 09:13 AM   #223
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
BAC, perhaps you could just PM everyone in advance exactly what you would like them to post?
Read the OP. It clearly defines the topic. Since I have been severely reprimanded multiple times for discussing equivalent Clinton activities on threads with some point to make about Bush, I think it only fair that those who support Obama not be allowed to divert threads on his administration into discussions of Bush and company.
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 13th July 2010, 10:31 AM   #224
joobz
Tergiversator
 
joobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
Read the OP. It clearly defines the topic.
Yup, it does define the topic all right.
To summarize the argument which you avoided:
The Obama DoJ handling of the case is consistent with past precedence. The lack of change regarding handling of the case is clearly consistent with a "non-racist" DoJ policy.
__________________
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 13th July 2010, 10:48 AM   #225
Just thinking
Philosopher
 
Just thinking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 5,169
This link is old news, right?
__________________
Our greatest challenge is not just to ask the important questions, but to recognize the meaningless ones.
Just thinking 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 13th July 2010, 10:58 AM   #226
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by Just thinking View Post
This link is old news, right?
No, that's definitely relevant and timely.
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 13th July 2010, 10:59 AM   #227
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
And so is this:

http://www.nationalcenter.org/P21PR-...er_071310.html

Quote:
The National Center For Public Policy Research

July 13, 2010

Black Leader Again Requests Obama Call for Black Panther Special Prosecutor

Washington, D.C. -- After seven months of silence, and with controversy growing by the day, the chairman of the Project 21 black leadership network sent President Barack Obama a second certified letter asking for the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate the Justice Department’s questionable handling of its voter intimidation case against members of the New Black Panther Party.

Project 21 Chairman Mychal Massie wrote a letter to President Obama on December 4, 2009 asking for a special prosecutor that continues to remain unanswered. In his second certified letter to President Obama, dated July 8, 2010, Massie wrote: "During the time that I have not been dignified with a reply, the problem has festered to a point where perceptions of racial bias within your Justice Department cannot be ignored."
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 13th July 2010, 12:30 PM   #228
GrouchoMarxist
Cowardly insulter of Buddhism
 
GrouchoMarxist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,146
Originally Posted by Just thinking View Post
This link is old news, right?
ha ha those NBP punks look about as tough as the dudes on What's Happening!!

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
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 13th July 2010, 01:38 PM   #229
Juniversal
CIA + FBI + NWO Employee
 
Juniversal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,145
Oddly enough this case was completed well over a year ago to little fanfare. Now Adams resigns and acts as if this case was the catalyst. It took him a year to become indignant enough to resign or even voice concerns over the supposed mishandling of this case? Something smells fishy.

Personally I feel the case shouldn't have been dismissed and the sentencing should have been at least something as innocuous as instructing the Panther members to refrain from standing in front of polling places for long periods of time. If anything Loretta King and Steve Rosenbaum (whom Adams claims ordered the dismissal) naturally, should retain much of the accountability for the dismissal. The charge handed down to Shabazz,

Quote:
"enjoining Minister King Samir Shabazz from
displaying a weapon within 100 feet of any open polling location
on any election day in the City of Philadelphia, or from
otherwise violating 42 U.S.C. § 1973i(b)".
42 U.S.C. § 1973i(b) being,

Quote:
(b) Intimidation, threats, or coercion
No person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, shall intimidate, threaten, or coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person for voting or attempting to vote, or intimidate, threaten, or coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person for urging or aiding any person to vote or attempt to vote, or intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person for exercising any powers or duties under section 1973a (a), 1973d,[1] 1973f, 1973g,[1] 1973h, or 1973j (e) of this title.
Not much of a sentence but a clear instruction to keep Shabazz from violating the law many feel he already violated. A slap on the wrist but not totally turning a blind eye.
__________________
"God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance." - Neil deGrasse Tyson
Juniversal 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 13th July 2010, 02:03 PM   #230
joobz
Tergiversator
 
joobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,998
Originally Posted by Just thinking View Post
This link is old news, right?
Favorite line from that video:
"We knew they didn't want a black man in office and there was some strong intelligence indicators that there was going to be some trouble at the polls."
__________________
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 13th July 2010, 02:16 PM   #231
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by Juniversal View Post
Oddly enough this case was completed well over a year ago to little fanfare.
False. Sure, the mainstream media might not have cared one iota but there was plenty of criticism of this decision. Here:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...968458430.html

Quote:
AUGUST 20, 2009

Holder's Black Panther Stonewall

Why did the Justice Department dismiss such a clear case of voter intimidation?
Next ...

Originally Posted by Juniversal View Post
It took him a year to become indignant enough to resign or even voice concerns over the supposed mishandling of this case?
There have been many complaints from the attorneys in the Voting Rights Section about the bias at DOJ that Adams has come forward about. According to Representative Frank Wolf (http://wolf.house.gov/index.cfm?sect...34&itemid=1575 ), when Voting Section chief, Chris Coates, complained he was transferred to South Carolina and at his going away luncheon, he complained vigorously about the New Black Panther Party case. Adams resigned when it became apparent that working internally within the DOJ wasn't going to fix this travesty of justice … when it became evident that the DOJ isn't listening but just doing more stonewalling. He resigned when he and others (as he noted in his letter of resignation) were finally "ordered not to comply" with a subpoena from the US Commission on Civil Rights. In disgust. The only fishy smell is that coming from the Obama administration and Holder's DOJ.
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 13th July 2010, 02:35 PM   #232
The Painter
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,654
Quote:
Are Holder and Obama racists?
Yes.
The Painter 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 13th July 2010, 02:40 PM   #233
Juniversal
CIA + FBI + NWO Employee
 
Juniversal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,145
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
False. Sure, the mainstream media might not have cared one iota but there was plenty of criticism of this decision. Here:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...968458430.html
Little fanfare =/= no fanfare.


Quote:
There have been many complaints from the attorneys in the Voting Rights Section about the bias at DOJ that Adams has come forward about. According to Representative Frank Wolf (http://wolf.house.gov/index.cfm?sect...34&itemid=1575 ), when Voting Section chief, Chris Coates, complained he was transferred to South Carolina and at his going away luncheon, he complained vigorously about the New Black Panther Party case. Adams resigned when it became apparent that working internally within the DOJ wasn't going to fix this travesty of justice … when it became evident that the DOJ isn't listening but just doing more stonewalling. He resigned when he and others (as he noted in his letter of resignation) were finally "ordered not to comply" with a subpoena from the US Commission on Civil Rights. In disgust. The only fishy smell is that coming from the Obama administration and Holder's DOJ.
[BeAChooser mode]Please stay on topic. My question had nothing to do with the other members of the doj. Only Adams[/BeAChooser mode]
__________________
"God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance." - Neil deGrasse Tyson
Juniversal 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 13th July 2010, 03:05 PM   #234
Juniversal
CIA + FBI + NWO Employee
 
Juniversal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,145
Originally Posted by BeAChooser View Post
The only fishy smell is that coming from the Obama administration and Holder's DOJ.
I meant Fishy in the sense that it's odd that he's acting as if this case was the catalyst for his departure a year after it's conclusion as opposed to biased DOJ policy in general. I smell a red herring. Not to say the supposed bias shouldn't be investigated.

Maybe i'm misunderstanding Adams. Is he claiming that they were instructed to ignore only "voting rights" cases where the victim is white but not all "civil rights" cases where the victim is white?
__________________
"God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance." - Neil deGrasse Tyson
Juniversal 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 13th July 2010, 03:11 PM   #235
332nd
Penultimate Amazing
 
332nd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,278
Originally Posted by The Painter View Post
Yes.
Awesome! He'll have the Tea Party vote locked up then!
__________________
The poster formerly known as Redtail
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 13th July 2010, 03:22 PM   #236
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by Juniversal View Post
[BeAChooser mode]Please stay on topic. My question had nothing to do with the other members of the doj. Only Adams[/BeAChooser mode]
No, you made the blanket assertion that "Oddly enough this case was completed well over a year ago to little fanfare."

As for something being fishy because Adams didn't resign until now:

http://www.mainjustice.com/2009/12/0...lack-panthers/

Quote:
DOJ Attorney Fights to Testify About Black Panthers

December 2, 2009

The career Civil Rights Division attorney who helped bring a controversial voter intimidation case against members of the New Black Panther Party is in conflict with Justice Department lawyers, who’ve ordered him to hold off cooperating with an outside investigation of the matter.

Voting Section lawyer J. Christian Adams, who assembled the now-dismissed government lawsuit against members of the black separatist group, is arguing through his attorney that he has a legal obligation to comply with a subpoena from the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, according to correspondence reviewed by Main Justice.
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 13th July 2010, 03:24 PM   #237
BeAChooser
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 11,716
Originally Posted by Juniversal View Post
Is he claiming that they were instructed to ignore only "voting rights" cases where the victim is white but not all "civil rights" cases where the victim is white?
That's what the OP article alleges.
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 13th July 2010, 03:31 PM   #238
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 I didn't ask that in this thread. It's not a question in the OP, nor was it even mentioned until post #45 when someone from your side of this debate raised it.

I really wish you would stay on topic, David.
I won't!
:P
__________________
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 13th July 2010, 04:19 PM   #239
Juniversal
CIA + FBI + NWO Employee
 
Juniversal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,145
Originally Posted by The Painter View Post
Yes.
I predict next Obama will shoe in New Black Panthers as members of his cabient and systematically remove white members of the administration in favor of fellow black militants and make the white man his slave as the socialist, facist, communist utopia becomes reality!! Muhwhahaha!!!!
__________________
"God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance." - Neil deGrasse Tyson
Juniversal 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 13th July 2010, 05:06 PM   #240
GrouchoMarxist
Cowardly insulter of Buddhism
 
GrouchoMarxist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,146
Originally Posted by Juniversal View Post
I predict next Obama will shoe in New Black Panthers as members of his cabient and systematically remove white members of the administration in favor of fellow black militants and make the white man his slave as the socialist, facist, communist utopia becomes reality!! Muhwhahaha!!!!
Those twerps couldn't fill even one of secretary Clinton's shoes.
__________________
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
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 10:12 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.