- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
New Orleans law student posts GOAT rant. "The Whitest Privilege in Oregon"
Posted on 1/4/16 at 8:23 am
Posted on 1/4/16 at 8:23 am
Not taking sides in the argument, but I laughed hard.
a literal gold mine of MAD. Bravo Sir!
LINK
Edited for spelling error in title.
quote:
I sorely wish I did not have to edit away this man's face and name, but even bloggers and law-student's must bend to ethics every now and again.
This is emblematic of a lot of what I'm seeing from the angry white man clique on social media.
I'll be unequivocal -- when protesters in Ferguson challenged government authority and abuse, you labeled them thugs. Guess what, it's 2016, you bunch of goddamn yokels -- you don't get to smash government property and point guns at law enforcement just because you're white.
a literal gold mine of MAD. Bravo Sir!
LINK
Edited for spelling error in title.
This post was edited on 1/4/16 at 9:06 am
8
Posted on 1/4/16 at 8:25 am to LSU1NSEC
quote:
when protesters in Ferguson challenged government authority and abuse, you labeled them thugs.
i love this meme
"thug" didn't even really start to pick up steam as a meme until Baltimore, and that was AFTER the black mayor and Obama used it to describe looters
Posted on 1/4/16 at 8:26 am to LSU1NSEC
Comparing what's going on in Oregon with lies of Ferguson is absurd!
Posted on 1/4/16 at 8:26 am to LSU1NSEC
quote:You like the D?
New Orleans law student posts GOAT rant. "The Whitest Priviledge in Oregon"
"Privilege" doesn't have one. It's like a female word.
Posted on 1/4/16 at 8:29 am to Wtodd
You're right, in one case a person was killed by the government without trial. In the other, two people were convicted of arson and don't want to do their tiime.
In one case, "protestors" are armed with high powered weaponry, the other unarmed.
In one case, "protestors" have taken over government property, the other couldn't even stand on the street without having "non-lethal" weaponry used against them.
You're right, comparing the two is completely absurd. One is clearly completely out of line.
In one case, "protestors" are armed with high powered weaponry, the other unarmed.
In one case, "protestors" have taken over government property, the other couldn't even stand on the street without having "non-lethal" weaponry used against them.
You're right, comparing the two is completely absurd. One is clearly completely out of line.
Posted on 1/4/16 at 8:30 am to recruitnik
quote:
In one case, "protestors" have taken over government property,
in BFE not really affecting anything
quote:
the other couldn't even stand on the street without having "non-lethal" weaponry used against them.
this is a straight up lie. they were given time/places to protest and violated that and were controlled accordingly
this is before the riots started, also
Posted on 1/4/16 at 8:34 am to recruitnik
quote:
You're right, in one case a person was killed by the government without trial. In the other, two people were convicted of arson and don't want to do their tiime.
Check your facts there chief. They did their time on trumped up bullshite charges.
Posted on 1/4/16 at 8:36 am to recruitnik
quote:
You're right, in one case a person was killed by the government without trial.
The moment he tried to get the cops gun, the trial was over......and 4 different investigations said the cop acted appropriately.
Posted on 1/4/16 at 8:38 am to LSU1NSEC
quote:
and law-student's must bend to ethics
But not to grammar rules, apparently. Law student?
Posted on 1/4/16 at 8:40 am to LSU1NSEC
quote:
protesters in Ferguson challenged government authority and abuse
I have checked and I don't see
quote:
challenge government authority and abuse
in any of the definitions of "looting" or "rioting" I can find.
Posted on 1/4/16 at 8:40 am to recruitnik
quote:
You're right, in one case a person was killed by the government without trial. In the other, two people were convicted of arson and don't want to do their tiime.
Too much stupid here to even bother trying to address.
Posted on 1/4/16 at 8:41 am to recruitnik
quote:
in one case a thug who was attacking/trying to kill a cop was killed by the government without trial.
quote:Those thugs were not unarmed. They had lethal weapons. There we arsonists in those thug crowds. How many were charged or prosecuted
"protestors" fighting an unconstitutional government agency are armed with high powered weaponry, the other unarmed.
quote:
"protestors" have taken over government property,(US government is "of the people, by the people" so they are taking over what is actually ours and what was taken illegally)
quote:The "other" were burning and destroying private property you nitwit.
the other couldn't even stand on the street without having "non-lethal" weaponry used against them.
quote:I agree
recruitnik is completely absurd
Posted on 1/4/16 at 8:43 am to LSU1NSEC
I lol'd
Posted on 1/4/16 at 8:49 am to LSU1NSEC
Oh boy, look at that grammar. 
Posted on 1/4/16 at 8:54 am to recruitnik
quote:
In one case, "protestors" have taken over government property, the other couldn't even stand on the street without having "non-lethal" weaponry used against them.
You have an awfully inaccurate definition of standing.
Posted on 1/4/16 at 8:56 am to recruitnik
quote:
In the other, two people were convicted of arson and don't want to do their tiime.
They did time already, the judge had a fit that it was too short and is now making them do more. The two people in question aren't associating themselves with this bunch of loons anyway and are reporting back to jail. Of course they don't want to do more time, one guy is in his 70s. 4 years is a lot of the time he has left. Honestly they should just have to pay a large fine in this case. These guys were trying to protect their land because the government wasn't maintaining our land that borders their land.
This post was edited on 1/4/16 at 8:57 am
Posted on 1/4/16 at 8:58 am to recruitnik
quote:
ou're right, in one case a person was killed by the government without trial. In the other, two people were convicted of arson and don't want to do their tiime.
In one case, "protestors" are armed with high powered weaponry, the other unarmed.
In one case, "protestors" have taken over government property, the other couldn't even stand on the street without having "non-lethal" weaponry used against them.
You're right, comparing the two is completely absurd. One is clearly completely out of line
You sound upset. I hope so. You don't know what you are talking about
Posted on 1/4/16 at 8:58 am to Dam Guide
quote:
They did time already, the judge had a fit that it was too short and is now making them do more. The two people in question aren't associating themselves with this bunch of loons anyway and are reporting back to jail. Of course they don't want to do more time, one guy is in his 70s. 4 years is a lot of the time he has left. Honestly they should just have to pay a fine in this case. These guys were trying to protect their land because the government wasn't maintaining our land that borders their land.
This to me isn't even about them anymore, this is about a band of stupid arse hillbilly's occupying federal property under the veil of "peaceful" however they are armed to the teeth.
Posted on 1/4/16 at 9:00 am to recruitnik
quote:
recruitnik
ignorance is bliss I guess It's nice how you failed to mention that the "protestors" in Oregon haven't fired a shot while the "protestors" in Baltimore and Ferguson almost burned both cities to the ground.
You also failed to mention that while very little damage has been done in the entirety of the Oregon situation, millions of dollars in damage to those cities and multiple lives were lost in the riots.
Now, tell me which scenario was more disruptive again?
Posted on 1/4/16 at 9:00 am to fisherbm1112
Also the Ferguson to Oregon comparisons have gotten way out of hand. One occurred in a highly populated area where a lot of unbiased people were affected. This is occurring in the middle of nowhere outside of a small town. I feel like this is going to result in a shootout where the "occupiers" are not going to have a favorable outcome.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News