Would You Have Supported Rosa Park's Silent Protest?

[IM2]

Private property was and still should be sacrosanct.
My property my rules.

Both you and your property are subject to the laws in the constitution.

The Constitution allows me to associate with whomever I want and to not associate.
So I don't have to speak with anyone I don't want to speak with, listen to anyone I don't want to listen to, do business with anyone I don't want to do business with, or allow anyone I don't want to enter my property.

Like I will keep telling you , both you and your property are subject to the constitution.

 

[IM2]

Nope, the NFL didn't lay down a rule but Jerry Jones did......being that the Cowboys are a subsidiary of NFL.INC and he had the right to cut any player that defied his rules.

One out of how many?

One out of how many? Teams or players? The NFL took a big hit on this issue...attendance and tv ratings down. Like I said, I don't give a shit about the anthem until we stop being surety against the debt of USA.INC and our rights are restored instead of being granted privileges granted to us by a benevolent corporate entity. If blacks AND whites want to stay out of the crosshairs of this gestapo entity that are referred to as the police? They should stop doing things that bring attention to themselves and learn admiralty law.This man is a perfect example and I am working on being as knowledgeable as he is.

The NFL ratings were not lower because of the protests. And the super bowl was one of the most watched in history.

 

[IM2]

Honestly? I would have empathized with Ms. Parks, and felt moved. But in reality, I wouldn't have done anything and let it slide because of the tenor of those current political tides. Cowardice, perhaps. Just like the current liberals bashing whites jump on the band wagon, it's the tenor of the times, the zeitgeist NOW. That group mentality stuff is scary then as it is NOW.

There is no one bashing whites. That group mentality is the White American mentality.

 

[PredFan]

Based on your current views on SJWs, protesting, the 1st Amendment right and law enforcement, what side would you have fell on during Rosa Park's era, when she decided that enough was enough and she was not going to be subjugated to go to the back of the bus for another human being no better or worse than she is simply because of her color?

What say you, and why?

The same side I fell on when it happened, her side.

 

[IM2]

Actually, it is a perceived wrong, he chose to protest, not a fight for law to be changed. And, as stated, in a private venue. If he had chosen to approach the councils of cities in which he perceived wrongs were happening, with irrefutable facts of that which he claims, then more power to him. He chose the easy way out. Taking a knee just created anger on all sides. It did nothing to help solve his perceptions of wrong.

The thing is what kapernick and others are protesting is not perceived.

For it to be perceived means its not happening. But police brutality is occurring at a higher rate for non whites than whites. Racial injustice still goes on and the criminal justice system by all studied results is racially based. Taking that knee only created anger among white racists. Because it did not create anger on all sides,The constitution doesn't say we cannot protest in private venues. Private entities are mot immune from the constitution. He did not have to go to specific places to protest a national problem. Your post is stupid mainly due to the fact that you have no idea of what he has done besides taking a knee.

When caught by the police, put your hands behind your head, interlock your fingers, kneel on the ground, and keep your mouth shut.
No brutality.

Wrong. We don't live in a police state and Dredd is not a real cop. So we don't have street judges and we do have rights upon being stopped by police.

You blacks just can't get rid of those chips on your shoulders.
Police have the right to arrest you and you have the right to plead your case in court.

Your post is just another example of the psychosis that exists in a certain portion of the white community.

 

[IM2]

Rosa Parks yes.
Colin Kapernick no.

This isn't about Colin Kapernick.

However, what makes you think you'd be on Rosa Park's side considering your current views on the above?

You do realize that the arguments made against Rosa Park et al are the exact same arguments made against Colin Kapernick et al. What changed?

Rosa Parks didn't disgrace the flag. Kapenick should have protested at a city hall or a police station if his bitch is with the police.

Kap did not disgrace the flag. He decided to protest where he wanted. We are free to do that.

 

[Dale Smith]

Private property was and still should be sacrosanct.
My property my rules.

Both you and your property are subject to the laws in the constitution.

The Constitution allows me to associate with whomever I want and to not associate.
So I don't have to speak with anyone I don't want to speak with, listen to anyone I don't want to listen to, do business with anyone I don't want to do business with, or allow anyone I don't want to enter my property.

Like I will keep telling you , both you and your property are subject to the constitution.

We don't have allodial rights to property. HJR 192, Senate Document #43 Senate Resolution No.62 Page Nine, Paragraph 2 April 17th, 1933....."The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State; individual so-called "ownership"is only by virtue of Government, i.e., law, amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State."

 

[Dale Smith]

Nope, the NFL didn't lay down a rule but Jerry Jones did......being that the Cowboys are a subsidiary of NFL.INC and he had the right to cut any player that defied his rules.

One out of how many?

One out of how many? Teams or players? The NFL took a big hit on this issue...attendance and tv ratings down. Like I said, I don't give a shit about the anthem until we stop being surety against the debt of USA.INC and our rights are restored instead of being granted privileges granted to us by a benevolent corporate entity. If blacks AND whites want to stay out of the crosshairs of this gestapo entity that are referred to as the police? They should stop doing things that bring attention to themselves and learn admiralty law.This man is a perfect example and I am working on being as knowledgeable as he is.

The NFL ratings were not lower because of the protests. And the super bowl was one of the most watched in history.

I beg to differ.

Eagles’ 1st Super Bowl Win Draws 103.4M Viewers, Smallest Audience In Nine Years – Update

 

[IM2]

Private property was and still should be sacrosanct.
My property my rules.

Both you and your property are subject to the laws in the constitution.

The Constitution allows me to associate with whomever I want and to not associate.
So I don't have to speak with anyone I don't want to speak with, listen to anyone I don't want to listen to, do business with anyone I don't want to do business with, or allow anyone I don't want to enter my property.

Like I will keep telling you , both you and your property are subject to the constitution.

We don't have allodial rights to property. HJR 192, Senate Document #43 Senate Resolution No.62 Page Nine, Paragraph 2 April 17th, 1933....."The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State; individual so-called "ownership"is only by virtue of Government, i.e., law, amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State."

We are bound by the laws of the constitution. Period. OK?

 

[Hossfly]

Rosa Parks yes.
Colin Kapernick no.

This isn't about Colin Kapernick.

However, what makes you think you'd be on Rosa Park's side considering your current views on the above?

You do realize that the arguments made against Rosa Park et al are the exact same arguments made against Colin Kapernick et al. What changed?

Rosa Parks didn't disgrace the flag. Kapenick should have protested at a city hall or a police station if his bitch is with the police.

Kap did not disgrace the flag. He decided to protest where he wanted. We are free to do that.

Tell it to the Marines. Or to veterans, especially combat veterans. The SOB disrespected us all.

 

[IM2]

Nope, the NFL didn't lay down a rule but Jerry Jones did......being that the Cowboys are a subsidiary of NFL.INC and he had the right to cut any player that defied his rules.

One out of how many?

One out of how many? Teams or players? The NFL took a big hit on this issue...attendance and tv ratings down. Like I said, I don't give a shit about the anthem until we stop being surety against the debt of USA.INC and our rights are restored instead of being granted privileges granted to us by a benevolent corporate entity. If blacks AND whites want to stay out of the crosshairs of this gestapo entity that are referred to as the police? They should stop doing things that bring attention to themselves and learn admiralty law.This man is a perfect example and I am working on being as knowledgeable as he is.

The NFL ratings were not lower because of the protests. And the super bowl was one of the most watched in history.

I beg to differ.

Eagles’ 1st Super Bowl Win Draws 103.4M Viewers, Smallest Audience In Nine Years – Update

Differ all you want but:

With the final numbers in, the game averaged 103.4 million viewers. That is a drop off of approximately 7% from the 2017 Super Bowl, which ended up drawing 111.3 million viewers. Super Bowl LII is therefore the least-watched Super Bowl since 2009, with that year’s game drawing 98.7 million viewers. However, it still ranks as one of the 10 most-watched American television programs of all time, coming in at number 10 behind every Super Bowl from 2010 to 2017 and the series finale of “MASH.”

TV Ratings: Super Bowl LII Slips 7% From 2017 to 103.4 Million Viewers

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Based on your current views on SJWs, protesting, the 1st Amendment right and law enforcement, what side would you have fell on during Rosa Park's era, when she decided that enough was enough and she was not going to be subjugated to go to the back of the bus for another human being no better or worse than she is simply because of her color?

What say you, and why?

I like to think I would have supported her.

Interesting fact- she was not the first black woman arrested for refusing to give up her seat to a white. That distinction belongs to Claudette Colvin.

Claudette Colvin - Wikipedia
The driver looked at them in his mirror. "He asked us both to get up. [Mrs. Hamilton] said she was not going to get up and that she had paid her fare and that she didn't feel like standing," recalls Colvin. "So I told him I was not going to get up either. So he said, 'If you are not going to get up, I will get a policeman.'" The police arrived and convinced a black man sitting behind the two women to move so that Mrs. Hamilton could move back, but Colvin still refused. She was forcibly removed from the bus and arrested by the two policemen, Thomas J. Ward and Paul Headley.[10][11][12] This event took place nine months before the NAACP secretary Rosa Parks was famously arrested for the same offense.[3] Claudette Colvin: "My mother told me to be quiet about what I did. She told me to let Rosa be the one: white people aren't going to bother Rosa, they like her".[4]

 

[IM2]

Rosa Parks yes.
Colin Kapernick no.

This isn't about Colin Kapernick.

However, what makes you think you'd be on Rosa Park's side considering your current views on the above?

You do realize that the arguments made against Rosa Park et al are the exact same arguments made against Colin Kapernick et al. What changed?

Rosa Parks didn't disgrace the flag. Kapenick should have protested at a city hall or a police station if his bitch is with the police.

Kap did not disgrace the flag. He decided to protest where he wanted. We are free to do that.

Tell it to the Marines. Or to veterans, especially combat veterans. The SOB disrespected us all.

Yeah that's why marines, and vets, including combat vets supported Kapernick. Because the protest was never about them or the flag.

 

[IM2]

Based on your current views on SJWs, protesting, the 1st Amendment right and law enforcement, what side would you have fell on during Rosa Park's era, when she decided that enough was enough and she was not going to be subjugated to go to the back of the bus for another human being no better or worse than she is simply because of her color?

What say you, and why?

I like to think I would have supported her.

Interesting fact- she was not the first black woman arrested for refusing to give up her seat to a white. That distinction belongs to Claudette Colvin.

Claudette Colvin - Wikipedia
The driver looked at them in his mirror. "He asked us both to get up. [Mrs. Hamilton] said she was not going to get up and that she had paid her fare and that she didn't feel like standing," recalls Colvin. "So I told him I was not going to get up either. So he said, 'If you are not going to get up, I will get a policeman.'" The police arrived and convinced a black man sitting behind the two women to move so that Mrs. Hamilton could move back, but Colvin still refused. She was forcibly removed from the bus and arrested by the two policemen, Thomas J. Ward and Paul Headley.[10][11][12] This event took place nine months before the NAACP secretary Rosa Parks was famously arrested for the same offense.[3] Claudette Colvin: "My mother told me to be quiet about what I did. She told me to let Rosa be the one: white people aren't going to bother Rosa, they like her".[4]

I'm sure Marc knows that but the question is about Parks.

 

[Jackson]

Rosa Parks yes.
Colin Kapernick no.

This isn't about Colin Kapernick.

However, what makes you think you'd be on Rosa Park's side considering your current views on the above?

You do realize that the arguments made against Rosa Park et al are the exact same arguments made against Colin Kapernick et al. What changed?

Bull shit! Colin Powell is putting his big butt before the nation. Rosa Parks was older, tired, and certainly needed a seat before those who were younger and just needed a ride. And she was black. So what?

 

[Dale Smith]

Rosa Parks yes.
Colin Kapernick no.

This isn't about Colin Kapernick.

However, what makes you think you'd be on Rosa Park's side considering your current views on the above?

You do realize that the arguments made against Rosa Park et al are the exact same arguments made against Colin Kapernick et al. What changed?

Rosa Parks didn't disgrace the flag. Kapenick should have protested at a city hall or a police station if his bitch is with the police.

Kap did not disgrace the flag. He decided to protest where he wanted. We are free to do that.

I agree and besides, the U.S flag is just a corporate banner and when you go into court, that corporate banner has gold fringe on it because it represents admiralty law i.e "statutory law". I feel ya, my brother....honestly I do. I have spent SOOOO much time researching the things I have learned. The fact of the matter is that those type of blatant "fuck you" kneel downs alienates people/sheeple that are so brainwashed from seeing the righteousness of the cause. The powers that be know this and use those like Colin Kapernick like a pawn. We are all in this together and I will totally validate your claim that blacks are unfairly targeted. People like me are unfairly targeted and pulled over because cops are fishing. I wear a bandana a good deal of the time. Cops see it, pull up my license plate number and see that in 2007 I was found in possession of a joint (that I had procured for my ex wife) and they FIND a reason to pull me over. That is why I am learning Black's Law dictionary. I have used my knowledge to get out of bullshit tickets because of "fishing expeditions". I am "me" and I am not going to stop being "me" just because I might get harassed. Fuck that shit.....knowledge is power.

 

[Dale Smith]

Private property was and still should be sacrosanct.
My property my rules.

Both you and your property are subject to the laws in the constitution.

The Constitution allows me to associate with whomever I want and to not associate.
So I don't have to speak with anyone I don't want to speak with, listen to anyone I don't want to listen to, do business with anyone I don't want to do business with, or allow anyone I don't want to enter my property.

Like I will keep telling you , both you and your property are subject to the constitution.

We don't have allodial rights to property. HJR 192, Senate Document #43 Senate Resolution No.62 Page Nine, Paragraph 2 April 17th, 1933....."The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State; individual so-called "ownership"is only by virtue of Government, i.e., law, amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State."

We are bound by the laws of the constitution. Period. OK?

Not in an admiralty court.....go into an admiralty court and claim constitutional rights and they will more than likely fine you for contempt of court if you persist. What do you do on a "court"? Like volleyball, basketball and tennis? You are playing a game. You throw, hit or dribble over the mid-line and the opponent returns the volley. It's a chess game......it's only until you get to the Supreme Court do you have a chance for the Constitution to come into play. You are a de-facto employee of USA.INC when you signed up for Social Security benefits and this corporate entity became the trustee of your bond which is the birth certificate that was printed on bond paper. It was monetized and given a value based on actuary tables because under the UCC, any thing can be bonded, monetized and used as a negotiable instrument. We are human chattel and this goes back to the Chapter 11 Bankruptcy of March 1933.

 

[Dale Smith]

Nope, the NFL didn't lay down a rule but Jerry Jones did......being that the Cowboys are a subsidiary of NFL.INC and he had the right to cut any player that defied his rules.

One out of how many?

One out of how many? Teams or players? The NFL took a big hit on this issue...attendance and tv ratings down. Like I said, I don't give a shit about the anthem until we stop being surety against the debt of USA.INC and our rights are restored instead of being granted privileges granted to us by a benevolent corporate entity. If blacks AND whites want to stay out of the crosshairs of this gestapo entity that are referred to as the police? They should stop doing things that bring attention to themselves and learn admiralty law.This man is a perfect example and I am working on being as knowledgeable as he is.

The NFL ratings were not lower because of the protests. And the super bowl was one of the most watched in history.

I beg to differ.

Eagles’ 1st Super Bowl Win Draws 103.4M Viewers, Smallest Audience In Nine Years – Update

Differ all you want but:

With the final numbers in, the game averaged 103.4 million viewers. That is a drop off of approximately 7% from the 2017 Super Bowl, which ended up drawing 111.3 million viewers. Super Bowl LII is therefore the least-watched Super Bowl since 2009, with that year’s game drawing 98.7 million viewers. However, it still ranks as one of the 10 most-watched American television programs of all time, coming in at number 10 behind every Super Bowl from 2010 to 2017 and the series finale of “MASH.”

TV Ratings: Super Bowl LII Slips 7% From 2017 to 103.4 Million Viewers

The point I am making is that there was a major drop off and there is a reason behind it....be it right or wrong for it.


Super Bowl Ratings Chart, All-Time - Sports Media Watch

 

[MarcATL]

I didn't realize that you folks had separate drinking fountains, had to sit on the back of the bus and couldn't sit at certain lunch counters. Who would have known!

Is that what you folks think? I didn't know anyone made such a claim.

 

[Kat]

Absolutely I would support her.