Down with Black Lives Matter! ALL Lives Matter!

[JoeB131]

No, the problem is you WANT to see a difference and you'll continue to do so as long as you WANT to do so.

Um, no, there was a difference.

White guy commits a horrible crime, they take every effort to make sure they take him alive.

Black guy commits minor crime, and they use deadly force on him.

 

[Conservative65]

No, the problem is you WANT to see a difference and you'll continue to do so as long as you WANT to do so.

Um, no, there was a difference.

White guy commits a horrible crime, they take every effort to make sure they take him alive.

Black guy commits minor crime, and they use deadly force on him.

Um, yes, there is a difference. Not my problem you're too blind to see it.

 

[bgrouse]

That's what my mother told me.

Mine said the same thing to me. My dad had a different way of getting me out of the street.

You said they want to avoid what happened in the video.

I did not say that.

Yes you did you lying turd!

I asked:
Exactly what shit, that is supposedly visible in that video, does BLM supposedly want to stop?

You answered:
A car deliberately driving into a crowd of people, then police not going after the car.

I was just pointing out that the easiest way to do that was to follow mom's advice that most people follow anyway.

I'm not going to disagree with your mother.

You're full of shit! Here is how that discussion started (I searched for his name and that is the first instance in this thread):

I'm not talking about how the discussion got started, the guy was shot after the cops rammed his vehicle.

You did NOT say you were talking about the end of the video specifically when you lied about what happened.

Well, you weren't talking about the beginning of the video when you mentioned it, either. In fact, what you said...

"...the guy intentionally drove his car in a threatening manner, crashing it into the cop car, at which point the cops were justified in defending themselves by killing this turd..." ​

...indicates you were talking about the end of the video.

"...crashing it into the cop car, at which point..."​

Those words right there indicates one incident directly followed the other.

You're retarded! I specifically pointed out that this is when the justification to kill him occurred. I underlined it for you above.

And BTW, you still have not acknowledged the cops ran into him.

What does that change? I also didn't acknowledge they breathed air or walked on two legs.

And why is it not OK to use deadly force to protect yourself from someone who attacks you with a car?

At the time of the shooting, it was the cops who just attacked him with their car.

And your point is? It doesn't undo what happened just a bit earlier. I guess you think if a guy shoots at a cop, the cop can only shoot at the person's front?

You seem to have a lot of trouble with the guy who passed by protesters,

Now you're the one who's lying. The guy deliberately drove his car into a crowd of people.

So who was hit or hurt by him driving his car into the crowd?

but no trouble with someone who hit a cop car twice attempting to pin the cop against the car.

If someone walks up to you with a gun and says they're going to kill you, are you just going to sit there and let them shoot you to death?

Is that what happened to Smith?

I'm saying you're a damned liar. I'm also wondering whom he hit. Was someone injured or killed as a result of it? And if nobody was hit, why are you asking if it's OK?

How can I be a liar, when I was asking a question? Questions are not lies. They're questions.

Your question stated a premise, shit for brains!

And it doesn't matter to you that those people (in the video) were standing in a crosswalk?

So essentially you made a claim ("those people were standing in a crosswalk") and asked if it mattered to me. How ******* retarded are you?

I see one person on the edge of the crosswalk. He's also not in the path of the car.

That's because he had to jump out of the way.

So show me a picture just before the driver passed them where there were multiple people standing in the crosswalk in the place where the driver would later pass!

 

[Billo_Really]

Yes you did you lying turd!

I asked:
Exactly what shit, that is supposedly visible in that video, does BLM supposedly want to stop?

You answered:
A car deliberately driving into a crowd of people, then police not going after the car.

Where do you see the word "avoid" in my statement?

You're retarded! I specifically pointed out that this is when the justification to kill him occurred. I underlined it for you above.

How old are you? You talk like you're 15.

So who was hit or hurt by him driving his car into the crowd?

Well, you finally admit he drove into a crowd of people.

Is that what happened to Smith?

Smith didn't shoot at the cops.

Your question stated a premise, shit for brains!

And it doesn't matter to you that those people (in the video) were standing in a crosswalk?

So essentially you made a claim ("those people were standing in a crosswalk") and asked if it mattered to me. How ******* retarded are you?

Questions are not statements. And why is it retarded to ask you if it mattered. Everything you've said to date has been in favor of the car's right to drive into a crowd of people. I guess Black Lives Don't Matter in your world?

So show me a picture just before the driver passed them where there were multiple people standing in the crosswalk in the place where the driver would later pass!

I already did, you fuckin' racist. Go back and look at it yourself.

 

[bgrouse]

Yes you did you lying turd!

I asked:
Exactly what shit, that is supposedly visible in that video, does BLM supposedly want to stop?

You answered:
A car deliberately driving into a crowd of people, then police not going after the car.

Where do you see the word "avoid" in my statement?

You were answering my question where I asked you what they wanted to stop. Saying they want to avoid it is the same thing phrased differently. Are you really that thick?

You're retarded! I specifically pointed out that this is when the justification to kill him occurred. I underlined it for you above.

How old are you? You talk like you're 15.

You talk like you're a retard.

So who was hit or hurt by him driving his car into the crowd?

Well, you finally admit he drove into a crowd of people.

Why don't you answer the question? If he really drove into the crowd, he would have hit/hurt someone. I phrased the question like that to make a point and you fell for it. Your failure to show any evidence of anyone being hit proves he just drove past the protesters, not into them.

Is that what happened to Smith?

Smith didn't shoot at the cops.

No, he tried to kill them with his car, at which point the cops were justified in sending him to hell.

Your question stated a premise, shit for brains!

And it doesn't matter to you that those people (in the video) were standing in a crosswalk?

So essentially you made a claim ("those people were standing in a crosswalk") and asked if it mattered to me. How ******* retarded are you?

Questions are not statements.

No, but your question contained one, idiot!

And why is it retarded to ask you if it mattered.

Because they weren't standing in it.

Everything you've said to date has been in favor of the car's right to drive into a crowd of people. I guess Black Lives Don't Matter in your world?

OK, let me rephrase: it's OK to drive into an area containing people, thereby "into a crowd of people," as long as you don't attempt to hit or hit anyone (or someone's valuable property, like a car, you get the idea), OK?

So show me a picture just before the driver passed them where there were multiple people standing in the crosswalk in the place where the driver would later pass!

I already did, you fuckin' racist. Go back and look at it yourself.

I looked. They're not in the crosswalk. Not any people that are in the way of the car.

The bottom line is this: the driver you're whining about didn't hit any person or any vehicle. He saw a gap in the protesters and drove past peacefully. Your beloved negro, on the other hand, tried to pin a cop against the car and ended up hitting the cop car twice.

The rest of your bullshit is a matter of derailing the subject of our discussion by debating pointless semantics.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Getting so tired of this racism! Everyone matters! Race is irrelevant! Why can't we do what Rodney King said decades ago? Why can't we just get along?

Maybe if the cameras didn't follow the extremists, we'd find there isn't a major race problem...

King said that decades ago and police are still on their bullshit. Welp, it's only been decades, yanno?

 

[Billo_Really]

You were answering my question where I asked you what they wanted to stop. Saying they want to avoid it is the same thing phrased differently. Are you really that thick?

Typical internet troll.

They want to stop "you" and these bullshit little posts you keep uploading.

Why don't you answer the question? If he really drove into the crowd, he would have hit/hurt someone.

That's not true. People had to jump out of the way. That doesn't mean he didn't drive straight for the crowd. But just keep doing your little troll bullshit. We're way off topic and that's your fault.

I phrased the question like that to make a point and you fell for it. Your failure to show any evidence of anyone being hit proves he just drove past the protesters, not into them.

Yawn.

No, he tried to kill them with his car, at which point the cops were justified in sending him to hell.

At the time he was murdered, he was not threatening anyone with deadly force. You're really into revenge, aren't you?

No, but your question contained one, idiot!

A question, is not a statement, dumbass! Home school did you no favors.

Because they weren't standing in it.

That wasn't what I asked you.

OK, let me rephrase: it's OK to drive into an area containing people, thereby "into a crowd of people," as long as you don't attempt to hit or hit anyone (or someone's valuable property, like a car, you get the idea), OK?

Well, that's not what happened. He deliberately tried to hit them.

I looked. They're not in the crosswalk. Not any people that are in the way of the car.

You're a fuckin' liar.

The bottom line is this: the driver you're whining about didn't hit any person or any vehicle. He saw a gap in the protesters and drove past peacefully. Your beloved negro, on the other hand, tried to pin a cop against the car and ended up hitting the cop car twice.

There wasn't a gap there before he hit the gas.

The rest of your bullshit is a matter of derailing the subject of our discussion by debating pointless semantics.

That's called projection, on your part. Accusing me of what you happen to be doing at the time.

What is BLM protesting? People like you. Racists like you. Dumbass hayseed-inbred-rednecks like you. Punk ass little bitches like you, who treat brown people like they're sub-human.

Now troll on, troll boy.

 

[bgrouse]

You were answering my question where I asked you what they wanted to stop. Saying they want to avoid it is the same thing phrased differently. Are you really that thick?

Typical internet troll.

They want to stop "you" and these bullshit little posts you keep uploading.

Why don't you answer the question? If he really drove into the crowd, he would have hit/hurt someone.

That's not true. People had to jump out of the way. That doesn't mean he didn't drive straight for the crowd. But just keep doing your little troll bullshit. We're way off topic and that's your fault.

I phrased the question like that to make a point and you fell for it. Your failure to show any evidence of anyone being hit proves he just drove past the protesters, not into them.

Yawn.

No, he tried to kill them with his car, at which point the cops were justified in sending him to hell.

At the time he was murdered, he was not threatening anyone with deadly force. You're really into revenge, aren't you?

You don't need to be pointing a gun at someone at the time you are shot. You can be shot after the fact. For instance, if a criminal fires at police and then stops to reload or retreats to a better position. In that example, he's still a threat, just not a direct one in the sense that he's not pointing a gun at that very moment. Ever heard of the fleeing felon rule? Smith was still in control of the weapon he initially used to attack the cops.

No, but your question contained one, idiot!

A question, is not a statement, dumbass! Home school did you no favors.

It's called a loaded question (AKA complex question), you moron! Here, some non-home schooling for you:

The fallacy of complex question is usually (but not always) in the form or a question. The fallacy involves the asking of a question that tacitly assumes the truth of a statement (or occurrence of a state of affairs) not generally granted or not given into evidence.

Complex Question; Loaded Question; Leading Question

Because they weren't standing in it.

That wasn't what I asked you.

OK, let me rephrase: it's OK to drive into an area containing people, thereby "into a crowd of people," as long as you don't attempt to hit or hit anyone (or someone's valuable property, like a car, you get the idea), OK?

Well, that's not what happened. He deliberately tried to hit them.

I see no evidence of that given that he was driving at jogging speed (notice how the protesters were easily able to catch up with the car initially after it passed them) and the fact that he waited only to drive through an area devoid of protesters. Looks like you're making shit up.

I looked. They're not in the crosswalk. Not any people that are in the way of the car.

You're a fuckin' liar.

Even you admitted they weren't in the crosswalk in the picture you posted!

Interesting you won't comment on the picture I provided the moment the car entered the crosswalk that showed people in that crosswalk.

I see one person on the edge of the crosswalk. He's also not in the path of the car.

That's because he had to jump out of the way.

You're contradicting yourself.

The bottom line is this: the driver you're whining about didn't hit any person or any vehicle. He saw a gap in the protesters and drove past peacefully. Your beloved negro, on the other hand, tried to pin a cop against the car and ended up hitting the cop car twice.

There wasn't a gap there before he hit the gas.

The rest of your bullshit is a matter of derailing the subject of our discussion by debating pointless semantics.

That's called projection, on your part. Accusing me of what you happen to be doing at the time.

What is BLM protesting? People like you. Racists like you. Dumbass hayseed-inbred-rednecks like you. Punk ass little bitches like you, who treat brown people like they're sub-human.

Now troll on, troll boy.

 

[Billo_Really]

You don't need to be pointing a gun at someone at the time you are shot. You can be shot after the fact.

Yeah, it's called murder.

For instance, if a criminal fires at police and then stops to reload or retreats to a better position. In that example, he's still a threat, just not a direct one in the sense that he's not pointing a gun at that very moment. Ever heard of the fleeing felon rule? Smith was still in control of the weapon he initially used to attack the cops.

No he wasn't. After the cop rammed his car into the vehicle, it was incapacitated. So he was no longer in control.

It's called a loaded question (AKA complex question), you moron! Here, some non-home schooling for you:

The fallacy of complex question is usually (but not always) in the form or a question. The fallacy involves the asking of a question that tacitly assumes the truth of a statement (or occurrence of a state of affairs) not generally granted or not given into evidence.

Complex Question; Loaded Question; Leading Question

It's not a complex question, because I didn't assume any alleged truth about you. I asked you, "Why is it retarded to ask you if it matters to you?"

A complex question would be, "Why doesn't it matter to you?" Or, "Why is it retarded to ask you if it matters, when we both know you don't?"

I simply asked why is it retarded to ask that question, which is not a complex fallacy.

I see no evidence of that given that he was driving at jogging speed (notice how the protesters were easily able to catch up with the car initially after it passed them)

That's because he stopped, you stupid troll.

and the fact that he waited only to drive through an area devoid of protesters. Looks like you're making shit up.

Wrong, troll. He drove straight into a crowd, as the video shows.

Even you admitted they weren't in the crosswalk in the picture you posted!

No I didn't. I said they jumped out of the way, not out of the crosswalk, you piece of shit, troll.

You're contradicting yourself.

More troll speak, from troll boy. Deliberately derailing the thread to talk about his troll nonsense.

 

[JoeB131]

Um, yes, there is a difference. Not my problem you're too blind to see it.

White guy gets handled with kids gloves, black guy handled brutally.
Yes, there is a difference.
Not my problem you are too racist to see why it's wrong.

 

[bgrouse]

You don't need to be pointing a gun at someone at the time you are shot. You can be shot after the fact.

Yeah, it's called murder.

Nope, it's not. You're an idiot. Cops can shoot people who are still threatening.

For instance, if a criminal fires at police and then stops to reload or retreats to a better position. In that example, he's still a threat, just not a direct one in the sense that he's not pointing a gun at that very moment. Ever heard of the fleeing felon rule? Smith was still in control of the weapon he initially used to attack the cops.

No he wasn't. After the cop rammed his car into the vehicle, it was incapacitated. So he was no longer in control.

Prove it was "incapacitated."

It's called a loaded question (AKA complex question), you moron! Here, some non-home schooling for you:

The fallacy of complex question is usually (but not always) in the form or a question. The fallacy involves the asking of a question that tacitly assumes the truth of a statement (or occurrence of a state of affairs) not generally granted or not given into evidence.

Complex Question; Loaded Question; Leading Question

It's not a complex question, because I didn't assume any alleged truth about you. I asked you, "Why is it retarded to ask you if it matters to you?"

A complex question would be, "Why doesn't it matter to you?" Or, "Why is it retarded to ask you if it matters, when we both know you don't?"

I simply asked why is it retarded to ask that question, which is not a complex fallacy.

Here's what you asked:

And it doesn't matter to you that those people (in the video) were standing in a crosswalk?

Which is a question that assumes those people were standing in a crosswalk.

Which fits the definition of:

The fallacy of complex question is usually (but not always) in the form or a question. The fallacy involves the asking of a question that tacitly assumes the truth of a statement (or occurrence of a state of affairs) not generally granted or not given into evidence.

Get it now idiot?

I see no evidence of that given that he was driving at jogging speed (notice how the protesters were easily able to catch up with the car initially after it passed them)

That's because he stopped, you stupid troll.

I see at least one person keeping up in parallel. Stopping is what allowed him to close the distance perpendicularly.

and the fact that he waited only to drive through an area devoid of protesters. Looks like you're making shit up.

Wrong, troll. He drove straight into a crowd, as the video shows.

As usual you're arguing semantics and not proving anything. The bottom line is the driver didn't hit anyone while your negro hit a cop car twice.

Even you admitted they weren't in the crosswalk in the picture you posted!

No I didn't. I said they jumped out of the way, not out of the crosswalk, you piece of shit, troll.

So put your money where your mouth is and post a still of people standing squarely in the crosswalk AND in the path of where the car eventually passes. You can do it just like I did a while ago (I actually posted a video AND a still) when I outed you a piece of shit liar.

You're contradicting yourself.

More troll speak, from troll boy. Deliberately derailing the thread to talk about his troll nonsense.

 

[Conservative65]

Um, yes, there is a difference. Not my problem you're too blind to see it.

White guy gets handled with kids gloves, black guy handled brutally.
Yes, there is a difference.
Not my problem you are too racist to see why it's wrong.

Coward like you making claims he won't provide anything to prove. Man like me willing to provide whatever it takes to back up what he says.

Not my fault you can't see the difference. Maybe you do and simply like living as a coward.

As for your post, no difference. You focus solely on the action the person took ignoring how they reacted when the police encountered them.

Ever watch Live PD? When the white guys act up, they get treated like they deserve. When they don't, the same. When the black guys act up, they get treated like they deserve. Whey they don't, the same. You likely hate that show because it reveals what I've been saying as true.

 

[JoeB131]

Ever watch Live PD? When the white guys act up, they get treated like they deserve. When they don't, the same. When the black guys act up, they get treated like they deserve. Whey they don't, the same. You likely hate that show because it reveals what I've been saying as true

You do realize on a show like Live PD, the cops know they are being filmed and aren't going to do things that are going to get them in trouble, right?

 

[Conservative65]

Ever watch Live PD? When the white guys act up, they get treated like they deserve. When they don't, the same. When the black guys act up, they get treated like they deserve. Whey they don't, the same. You likely hate that show because it reveals what I've been saying as true

You do realize on a show like Live PD, the cops know they are being filmed and aren't going to do things that are going to get them in trouble, right?

You do realize that you continue to make excuses for your hatred of cops?

That's why blacks will always be behind whites. You make excuses for them enabling them to continue to do things that keep themselves down. And you wonder why they'll be behind.

 

[bgrouse]

Ever watch Live PD? When the white guys act up, they get treated like they deserve. When they don't, the same. When the black guys act up, they get treated like they deserve. Whey they don't, the same. You likely hate that show because it reveals what I've been saying as true

You do realize on a show like Live PD, the cops know they are being filmed and aren't going to do things that are going to get them in trouble, right?

Many cops, like some of the ones in the "controversial" encounters with blacks, ARE filmed, either by bystanders or their own cameras.

BLM exists because the savages try to justify savage acts by their fellow blacks.

Why don't the blacks march when a cop kills a white if COPS are what they are protesting?

when cops kill white people, they are investigated and usually fired if they were found in the wrong.

But here's the reality of how police handle different races.

The first picture is of a black man selling single cigarettes being choked to death by cops.

The second picture is a white man who killed 9 black people in a church and was treated with kid gloves. They even took him to Burger King becasue the poor thing looked peckish.

Both of the encounters were filmed. Roof gave up right away. The moron Garner was waving his hands like a retard and yelling and didn't give up easily. Roof's stop looked like it was initially a higher risk stop and that's visible in the cops' decision to stop him at gunpoint, but what they did afterwards is what affected the way they were eventually put into handcuffs and taken away.

Initial arrests generally don't have an existing conviction associated with them, just suspicion. The cop's job is not to punish the criminal, but to arrest him, which is why the entirety of the arrest process generally has little to do with the suspected crime and more to do with the behavior of the suspect.

It was Garner's fault that he decided to be morbidly obese and he had even more reason to comply since the more "hands on" the cops got thanks to his behavior the more likely he would have been hurt.

 

[JoeB131]

You do realize that you continue to make excuses for your hatred of cops?

Not at all. Good cops who do their jobs and are professional totally have my support. They are the ones who get picked for a show like "LivePD". Guys like Loehmann and Van Dyke, they don't get picked for shows like that. Even their police departments know they are loose cannons.

That's why blacks will always be behind whites. You make excuses for them enabling them to continue to do things that keep themselves down. And you wonder why they'll be behind.

Again, pretending racism isn't pervasive in this country doesnt' make it go away.

Both of the encounters were filmed. Roof gave up right away. The moron Garner was waving his hands like a retard and yelling and didn't give up easily. Roof's stop looked like it was initially a higher risk stop and that's visible in the cops' decision to stop him at gunpoint, but what they did afterwards is what affected the way they were eventually put into handcuffs and taken away.

Okay, buddy, you tell yourself that. A black guy who wasted 9 white people wouldn't have gotten the kids gloves Burger King treatment.

Initial arrests generally don't have an existing conviction associated with them, just suspicion. The cop's job is not to punish the criminal, but to arrest him, which is why the entirety of the arrest process generally has little to do with the suspected crime and more to do with the behavior of the suspect.

sorry, I don't think that selling loose cigarettes is worthy of lethal force. That's just crazy talk.

 

[Conservative65]

You do realize that you continue to make excuses for your hatred of cops?

Not at all. Good cops who do their jobs and are professional totally have my support. They are the ones who get picked for a show like "LivePD". Guys like Loehmann and Van Dyke, they don't get picked for shows like that. Even their police departments know they are loose cannons.

That's why blacks will always be behind whites. You make excuses for them enabling them to continue to do things that keep themselves down. And you wonder why they'll be behind.

Again, pretending racism isn't pervasive in this country doesnt' make it go away.

Both of the encounters were filmed. Roof gave up right away. The moron Garner was waving his hands like a retard and yelling and didn't give up easily. Roof's stop looked like it was initially a higher risk stop and that's visible in the cops' decision to stop him at gunpoint, but what they did afterwards is what affected the way they were eventually put into handcuffs and taken away.

Okay, buddy, you tell yourself that. A black guy who wasted 9 white people wouldn't have gotten the kids gloves Burger King treatment.

Initial arrests generally don't have an existing conviction associated with them, just suspicion. The cop's job is not to punish the criminal, but to arrest him, which is why the entirety of the arrest process generally has little to do with the suspected crime and more to do with the behavior of the suspect.

sorry, I don't think that selling loose cigarettes is worthy of lethal force. That's just crazy talk.

Nothing but excuses from you Joe. It's all you have which means you have nothing because you're miserable existence is worth nothing.

 

[JoeB131]

Nothing but excuses from you Joe. It's all you have which means you have nothing because you're miserable existence is worth nothing.

whatever, Possum Catcher..

Point is, eventually, there's going to be a day when White folks aren't running this country anymore... then what do you do?

 

[bgrouse]

You do realize that you continue to make excuses for your hatred of cops?

Not at all. Good cops who do their jobs and are professional totally have my support. They are the ones who get picked for a show like "LivePD". Guys like Loehmann and Van Dyke, they don't get picked for shows like that. Even their police departments know they are loose cannons.

That's why blacks will always be behind whites. You make excuses for them enabling them to continue to do things that keep themselves down. And you wonder why they'll be behind.

Again, pretending racism isn't pervasive in this country doesnt' make it go away.

Both of the encounters were filmed. Roof gave up right away. The moron Garner was waving his hands like a retard and yelling and didn't give up easily. Roof's stop looked like it was initially a higher risk stop and that's visible in the cops' decision to stop him at gunpoint, but what they did afterwards is what affected the way they were eventually put into handcuffs and taken away.

Okay, buddy, you tell yourself that. A black guy who wasted 9 white people wouldn't have gotten the kids gloves Burger King treatment.

You can speculate about what would have happened all you want. The bottom line is these two incidents involved significantly different responses to the cops' arrest attempts from the suspects and the cops' actions were accordingly different. If you wanted.

A better question is why you posted pictures of two incidents that worked against your position.

Initial arrests generally don't have an existing conviction associated with them, just suspicion. The cop's job is not to punish the criminal, but to arrest him, which is why the entirety of the arrest process generally has little to do with the suspected crime and more to do with the behavior of the suspect.

sorry, I don't think that selling loose cigarettes is worthy of lethal force. That's just crazy talk.

The cops didn't use force for selling loose cigarettes, idiot. They used it because he resisted, as I already told you. Why can't you understand that the arrest is not the punishment?

There was also no damage to Garner's windpipe or neck bones per the autopsy report article I read. Garner was held by the neck for less than 20 seconds. I'm not aware of anyone who can be choked to death in 20 seconds or less unless the choking action causes other damage to the throat, which apparently was not found in the autopsy. Watching the video, it looks like Garner was held in a "choke hold" for a few seconds at most and was then able to speak. The report even cited prone positioning during physical restraint as a cause of death, the others including the choke hold/medical conditions. So yes, while the choke hold may have prevented him from breathing initially, it was less than 20 seconds and obviously not enough to even cause unconsciousness. The rest of the time Garner spent without breath was apparently due to his own weight pressing on him. He literally chose to make himself so fat that he couldn't survive a prone arrest!

This guy was on the way to morgue for a long time. And it was his fault.

Meanwhile, De Blasio is still making cigarettes more expensive and fueling the illegal cigarette trade:
NYC Hikes Price Of Pack Of Cigarettes To $13, Highest In US

 

[bgrouse]

Nothing but excuses from you Joe. It's all you have which means you have nothing because you're miserable existence is worth nothing.

whatever, Possum Catcher..

Point is, eventually, there's going to be a day when White folks aren't running this country anymore... then what do you do?

Then it would turn into your average African shithole, which is generally what happens when negroes run a government. I guess we'll have to move or starve to death then.