BF2S Forums DAST Chat

He mentioned rewriting history and history clicked into my mind. Eat a cock.

How bad the Iranian government cracked down on the protesters wasn't my point. I don't give a shit. O and again eat a cock.

13urnzz wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

I'm talking about how people find it 'ironic' that Iran is mouthing off during the U.K. riots but think it's SOP for their governments to sling shit during any other international event.

'oh how ironic, they are acting like us'

Last time I checked, the US didn't violently disperse protest crowds and then tell other countries not to do the same thing.

nah, never happened.

Guess that's his point. back then was a lot different than now I guess with proper riot equipment.

Uzique wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Sure, we'll see.

here you go dilbert. tip on the way out, please.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/0 … olice-ipcc

seems the person that doesn't judge someone because a) they're black b) they have tattoos and c) they deal drugs is the one that is right.

what a surprise!

the funny thing is that if this exact same story happened in america you would have a 5 page argument with a yankie about police brutality.

fuck you, dilbert.

Not really, he was a drug dealer carrying an illegal gun, he should have got twenty years just for those two.
I don't care too much if a criminal carrying a loaded gun in public got shot, he made the choice and paid the consequence.

Where I've commented on other Police brutality, eg Menendez or the guy whose dog was shot over a small bag of cannabis, its been pretty clear the Police were in the wrong.

I'm sure you're upset that your cocaine supply is going to be a little disrupted for the next few weeks. QQ.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-08-10 02:52:44)

Dilbert_X wrote:

I don't care too much if a criminal carrying a loaded gun in public got shot, he made the choice and paid the consequence.
.

from anti-american borefest dilbert to flag-waving Lowing in one post... oh how the contortionist squirms when the facts turn against him

yeah great lets cite the changing wikipedia as evidence that something is amiss... you do realise this country is full of angry white moronic racists right now, yeah? i'm sure sentiments at a time like this are really convincing. just stick to the ipcc report, please. they said nothing at all to incriminate mark duggan in a situation that warranted being shot and killed. his status as being 'armed' means nothing in the eyes of the law other than a possession of an illegal firearm charge. dealing cocaine is a drug charge. neither of these deserve the death penalty. there is no evidence whatsoever that a man with a fiancee and two kids would have committed a sure-fire suicide by pulling a gun on police. the fact is that for the last 3 pages you've assumed he got wrapped up in a gunfight because you posted pictures of a black man with tattoos and then judged from there. 'innocent until proven guilty'. you're suddenly forgetting all of your lovely anti-american skepticism...

Uzique wrote:

yeah great lets cite the changing wikipedia as evidence that something is amiss... you do realise this country is full of angry white moronic racists right now, yeah? i'm sure sentiments at a time like this are really convincing. just stick to the ipcc report, please. they said nothing at all to incriminate mark duggan in a situation that warranted being shot and killed. his status as being 'armed' means nothing in the eyes of the law other than a possession of an illegal firearm charge. dealing cocaine is a drug charge. neither of these deserve the death penalty. there is no evidence whatsoever that a man with a fiancee and two kids would have committed a sure-fire suicide by pulling a gun on police. the fact is that for the last 3 pages you've assumed he got wrapped up in a gunfight because you posted pictures of a black man with tattoos and then judged from there. 'innocent until proven guilty'. you're suddenly forgetting all of your lovely anti-american skepticism...

Sounds like you are angry enough to do something about it. I know, how about you take to the streets, run over some people, burn down some businesses, loot some of the more popular things you want and antagonize the police by throwing rocks and shit at them. All in the name of your views against violence.

Gotta love angry young protesters taking advantage of any situation they can in order to get that new Ipad and new clothes for free. Even pretending they give a fuck about some drug dealer shot by police.

My favorite part is Uzi, after all that is happening, is only outraged by the police action against a drug dealer pointing a gun at them. Everything else is perfectly understandable apparently.

Dilbert_X wrote:

It seems the country is pretty full of violent black criminals too.

Why was he carrying a loaded illegal gun if he was such a homebody?
He was well known for carrying a gun and dealing cocaine, thats pretty incriminating. Its an invitation to be shot, by other gangsters let alone the fuzz.

drug dealers carry weapons for defense, not offense. their business is making money, not getting life sentences.

carrying a gun does not mandate a death sentence, im sorry. there are laws for illegal possession of a firearm. the tariff does not extend to 'be killed unlawfully'. the ipcc report thus far seems pretty mute and damning of the police's actions... a definite tone of a fuck-up, here. if the investigators themselves are pretty quiet, why are you so loud?

Uzique wrote:

where am i defending the rioting anywhere? you fucking dolt.

if im all about upholding legal principles, why would i be condoning burning down businesses and vehicles?

read a book lowing

well, you could start by expressing more outrage over the violence ( protesting violence ) than you do over the cops having the nerve to actually defend themselves against a gun wielding known drug dealer. Maybe you could be outraged over the murder of 3 people who wasn't a drug dealer or carrying guns, in the name of peace. How about a little outrage over the burned out businesses and theft? Nehhhh, reserve your anger for the dead drug dealer. What was he, your uncle, brother, what? Or are you still trying to come to grips with the death of bin laden?

Last edited by lowing (2011-08-10 04:04:05)

Shocking wrote:

Fantastic DST chats page, 10/10.

great post, would read again

Sorry theres a few things here.

Police followed the family chap in question and decided they needed firearms officers to bring him in which isn't exactly a common occurrence in the UK.

He had in his position a loaded firearm which is illegal in the UK.

To have been killed illegaly there would have to be a convincing argument that the family man with the loaded gun did not prove a threat to life at the time of his arrest.

It doesn't matter whether he got a shot off 1st or not, if he was known to be armed and did not act absolutely perfectly to police requests then he deserved to be shot.

shes staring into your soul

Here's some real Hope... not dope

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ … story.html

It's nice to see how mainstream media outlets are finally giving Ron Paul more attention. Last election he was basically ignored, but it seems that people can no longer cover their ears to the sensible stances he has on issues. People might not agree with everything he says but I think almost anyone can find things they agree with him on. Conservatives ought to like his less-spending mantra and surely liberals should like his anti-drug war mantra.