Happy
-
Posts
6,290 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Happy
-
-
21 minutes ago, Cripple Creek said:
I know it's lost on you, but, when someone points you to a source and tells you what to look for you really don't need more than that. Spoon feeding should end at infancy. For your own sake, educate yourself
Coming from you, I'll take this treasured 'advice' with a grain of salt.
-
The Patriots cast offs can hop aboard the Bucs bandwagon and root for Mongo and Tawhmie.
-
I hope the Pats do sign Kap and he starts, though I realistically doubt either happens
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, HappyDays said:
Which means we can both agree there is some level of undue force to use in that situation. What makes you think shoving the elderly man backwards on the pavement is legitimate force to use in that situation?
Because he didn't listen to the initial order to back away and held his ground. The mayor justified the police response.
Here is a source of reference: https://www.tmz.com/2020/06/06/buffalo-mayor-knocked-down-elderly-man-agitator-martin-gugino-cops/
-
47 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:
They are cops. Why didn't they just arrest this dangerous and infamous agitator on the spot?
That's what the prosecutor is going to ask them on the witness stand.
Are you a law man? I would bet that if the cops could have arrested him, they would have. How would you know what the prosecutor will ask them?
47 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:Why make this man an "antifa" martyr? Wouldn't capturing this scourge be a huge prize for law and order?
He's not a martyr...he didn't die. His intent was to 'skim' the cops radio communication signal as well as set the cops up to give an appearance of brutality.
-
2 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:
So what?
Every protester is asked to leave at some point--especially at curfew. Nothing you just said makes any difference. He was no threat to these cops waving his phone with that dangerous "Scanner app". If one old man and his buddy can provoke an entire "Elite" (lol, come on...) unit into looking foolish and undisciplined by waving a cell phine, than these cops did one right thing after "resigning" from this group.
I can't imagine what an Insane-O-Tron PPP is right now, given the stuff coming out here on TSW.
you really don't understand the issue with the old man Martin Gugino
41 minutes ago, Cripple Creek said:My goodness dude. You are very angry and lazy.
Thanks, that wasn't so hard. When you have a point to make, it's typically expected that you provide something to communicate your point, rather than asking others to do it for you.
Anyway, I did read the article and not every member or the ERT quit in solidarity with the two officers, though some did as specified in the article. Not all 57 people in a group are going to have the same motives for taking a certain action. Point taken that it was union related.
-
10 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:
Confronted an old man in their way, pushed home over, he fell like a tree, cracked his skull, started bleeding from his ear, they stepped over him.
What are we and "the msm" missing? Educate us.
He was inciting the crowd all day long, was provoking the cops, then attempted to skim their police radio signals with an app on his cell phone (when approached by police) while his antifa buddy filmed the entire incident. The old man was known by the Buffalo Mayor and asked to leave, which he did not. What the public saw regarding the old agitator being pushed to the ground and bleeding from his ear is exactly what he and antifa wanted you to see.
-
8 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:
Allen's tweets were hip-hop lyrics and Modern Family. In a savvy move right after they came out, Allen reached out to Stephen Smith who confirmed that he had himself verified that, on-air, along with saying Allen did not excuse them for that, he took responsibility and said it was wrong.
See explanation why Fromm's apparently nothing-burger remarks look like dumb jokes to me (and to you) but might come across differently to black men in my prev. post especially in view of current events
Ah, got it...thanks. I can see how black men would take offense to Fromm's joke.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Cripple Creek said:
Two of them (as of last night) have indicated that they stepped down because their union withdrew legal support for members of SWAT and HRT. They were abandoned. Go to WKBW and you'll find excerpts from the letter the PBA sent to members and you'll also get quotes from the two officers I mentioned.
Educate yourself.
So you're not going to supply a link to support your point? Lazy.
Yeah, but I'm sure I'm the one who needs education...
-
1 hour ago, thebandit27 said:
Anyone that hasn’t looked into the Allen tweets at this point is speaking from a position of ignorance.
He was a kid quoting hip hop lyrics and Modern Family. Ill-advised given the subject matter? Sure. Racist at all? Nope.
You mean Fromm tweets? This is interesting re: hip hop lyrics and Modern Family. I just figured it was a dumb joke, but did not think it was racist.
-
35 minutes ago, GG said:
Essentially admitted that he was learning on the job, and that's why ST cost this team a few Ws.
That was obvious this past season, where NE blocked a punt after noticing a weakness in blocking assignments just a few weeks after Philly initially beat a broken assignment and blocked a punt. The issue wasn't fixed after the Philly game and of course Belichick took advantage of it. To Farwell's credit, after those incidents, SpT wasn't really a problem, at least that I can recall.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/07/websites-post-fake-satirical-stories/ describes it as follows:Theconservativetreehouse.com posts conservative-leaning stories that sometimes include misinformation. It has a lengthy description on its “About Us” page, including:
“Fear is at the core of liberalism, and love/trust is at the core of conservatism. Liberalism is about control. Conservatism is about self-empowerment.”
The site is registered through Domains By Proxy, a company that hides the identity and location of the owner of the website.
Nor do I find blanket discrediting of all mainstream media to make sense.
Sources like AP are required to verify everything with two independent sources. Mainstream media has credibility on the line. The owners are public record. The reporters are public record. The sources must be identified in some way and vetted by the editors.
You got you a site there with no sources, a hidden owner and location, and a track record of having included misinformation in the past, and you find that more credible than a well-identified wire source or media outlet with a well-known, accountable owner and location that verifies sources? I"m sorry, that strikes me as gullible, I can't find a better word. Wooo woo, the owner isn't identified, the location isn't identified, the motives are unknown, and the sources aren't given so Whoop whoop yep that sure makes it more credible than the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Buffalo Snoose, AP, Guardian, BBC, etc etc.
I mentioned it was a conservative site because none of the vaunted, msm outlets either bother to disclose information that is contrary to their agenda, or are too lazy to dig deeper. CTH has been around for years and runs articles based on current events, including those that more traditional outlets cover.
If that strikes you as gullible, well I guess that is your problem. Again, they have been covering events for years and digging deeper into events than WP, WSJ, NYT, etc, etc. and are typically not inaccurate. The story broke today, so more should come to light in the next few days.
The site is privately owned, why do they need to disclose ownership? All they have to do is report accurately, which they do.
Interesting that your factcheck.org link only seems to list more conservative leaning sites as containing 'misinformation.' No left leaning sites that I can see....hmmm. You mentioned gullible and bias?
Getting back to the original issue, why did 57 Buffalo cops resign from the Emergency Response Team, and risk their careers, if these two cops did indeed harm an 'innocent' 75 year old protestor? Could it be that they know something that isn't being reported by msm outlets?
-
22 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:
Actually I know of no evidence that Martin Gugino is an "Antifa member" (whatever does that mean anyway?) nor "professional agitator".
He's retired (no surprise age 75) and self describes as a "peace activist".
there's a TBN article but every time I try to get the link it asks me to log in again ?♂️
Anyway I find no evidence that he's an "antifa member", which seems to have become a convenient bucket to use to discredit anyone at a protest.
I suppose you could call him a "professional agitator" but what makes a protestor, someone who is passionate about causes and likes to exercise his constitutionally guaranteed free speech rights, distinct from a "professional agitator" - professional usually means paid, what is the evidence of that.
This is a conservative media link, because the mainstream media won't cover it honestly; they do not want it disclosed that these protests are ripe for far left organizations to infiltrate and use for a completely different purpose than what was intended. Look at his twitter profile, which is linked in the article and pretty telling.
-
27 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:
Isn't it hard to argue that it's just 'a few bad cops' ruining the rest's reputation when 57 of them from one unit resign in solidarity with the two who shoved the guy to the ground?
You know the guy the Buffalo cops shoved to the ground was an Antifa member and professional agitator...right? Details are often left out of agendas.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Limeaid said:
Except in this case (the part you ignore) the offense is listening to the OC with most of the OL and WRs new.
The OL is the same as it was last year; who is new in the starting lineup?. We picked up Diggs and drafted a couple of rookie WRs, but otherwise we retained our WR corps. Who wanted Foster, McKenzie, John Brown, and Beasley? All of them are on the smaller side. Remember jokes about the smurfs last year? Did Beane go rogue, or did Daboll have a considerable say in who he wanted? I would have to believe McD deferred the personnel decisions and requests to Daboll since he is the OC and McD doesn't seem like a micromanager; he gave Dennison enough rope to hang himself. I believe Daboll made the offense too complex for the personnel he had. His play calling is questionable, to say the least.
It's amazing that these ex-Pats position coaches who get a shot at OC make the offense complex and try to emulate what NE did with a veteran QB, who took years to learn the E-P offense. When Brady became the QB in 2001 and went to the SB that year, as well as well as 2003 and 2004 seasons, Brady wasn't the Brady of later in his career, he was developing into the QB he is (or was, at least). NE relied on their defense to win. That all seems to escape Daboll and his supporters/sympathizers. Daboll needs 11 vets, and the more all pros the better, for his offense to be effective.
-
1 minute ago, Limeaid said:
Well that was partly because offense was not listening to OC because it was far too complex in first year and was listening to QB.
Correct. My thought was that even though the offense was too complex, they still had a better passing offense than we did...with Fitzpatrick. Daboll's offense was too complex for Josh and a bunch of young, second year WRs, as well as rookie TE's. We struggled to score points, yet Daboll is retained.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:
Miami put together a better passing Offense on team that was "tanking".
Plus they ended up firing their OC.
-
1
-
-
43 minutes ago, SDS said:
Comfort is what got us here today. If you are uncomfortable, then maybe ask yourself why.Pro sports events are not the place to get uncomfortable. If the experience gets unpleasant, people will stop attending games like they did a few years ago when Kaepernick started the kneeling trend. The owners felt the pinch and the kneeling went away, for the most part. Nothing good will come of Sunday afternoon protests.
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, Logic said:
Thats literally my point.
People who find Kaep’s protest disrespectful seem to feel that his using captive NFL viewership as an audience to his social justice message is wrong. “Stick to sports!”, they say.
Meanwhile, Anheuser-Busch uses captive NFL viewership as a way to sell a product that is linked to 88,000 deaths a year in our country, and the same people don’t find THAT disrespectful.
Kneeling to bring attention to a cause that wants to SAVE lives is enough to get people to want to turn off their TVs and swear off the NFL. Meanwhile, the constant barrage of ads during an NFL broadcast for a product linked to 88,000 deaths a year doesn’t make them bat an eye. Where’s the “stick to sports!” Cry then?
I don't believe most people view kneeling as an act that wants to save lives, as a matter of fact, few probably do. Most people don't view beer ads as something that is trying to kill us, most view enjoying a beer as complimentary to watching a football game. Not once have I turned on a game and said "I can't wait to see who is protesting the NA, should be fun!" I do, however, enjoy a beer during a game. You make some really good posts, but your point here is missing the mark.
-
9 minutes ago, SDS said:
They are both messages. What is for the social good the other is to get you drunk. Why is one offensive and one not noticed?Most people do not view a beer ad as offensive, there has been ads for as long as games have been on TV. There are people who do view kneeling during the NA as offensive and disrespectful to the flag/country/vets, etc. Why is it so that beer ads are not noticed and kneelers offensive? Most people don't want to deal with social issues and protests on Sunday afternoons and just want to watch the game.
-
2 minutes ago, Logic said:
I find it weird how people that are offended by Kaep’s protest AREN’T offended by the constant onslaught of ads during NFL games trying to sell them alcohol.
I’d rather see one 2-minute silent protest before a game than 37 beer ads during it. Raising attention for a worthy and vital social cause is far more noble than taking advantage of captive viewership to try to sell them a product linked to addiction, disease and death.
Put another way: if you find a quick, silent, peaceful protest profane and distasteful, but you don’t find the constant barrage of advertising profane, I question where your heart lies. And if you say “well, the NFL needs the ad money!”, guess what? They also need the black players.
I'm lost on equating beer ads with Kaepernick's protests. I have no idea how you came up with that apples to oranges comparison. Whether you agree with it or not, people view Kaepernick's stance disrespectful; no one thinks twice about a beer ad.
-
11 minutes ago, Billl said:
People on your side have always been of the opinion that enough has been done for equality, and they always will.
on my side? Am I a Confederate Army General, or something?
-
1
-
-
40 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:
I understood what you wrote, but you’re missing my point. What you don’t like about it is exactly the point of it being done that way.I see. It's ok then for people to pay $100+ for a ticket to get into a game, in addition to paying an exorbitant amount for food and drinks all for the privilege of being educated, made to feel uncomfortable, etc by people who take it upon themselves to voice (including their actions) the misdeeds of a small amount of American police forces? Imagine if any other business got into customer's faces about <name the issue> and expected the customer to come back; won't happen. Same with the NFL, and no, it is not too big to fail. Careful about what you're proposing.
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:
It wasn't until politicans, including the President, tweeted and made public comments that frothed people up and it became a big "my country right or wrong" test of patriotism.
I agree that politics should ideally be kept out of the games, but the players are human and have human opinions on current events that hit very close to home for many of them.What I'd really like to see is a national consensus on clear measures to at least TRY to address the problem of police accountability for civilian injuries or deaths. Because then the point would become moot.
I mentioned that it would be good if politicians stopped making public statements (incl tweets) about the NFL. But like players, politicians are human too, though it is actually their job to comment on social issues. Again, I would like to see them not comment on pro sports like I would like to see players not display their social issue opinions on game day.
A national consensus and police accountability would be good. Not all police are good guys; I went to college in a small mid Atlantic, mid southern town. The local police force was highly regarded and never questioned. That leads to abuses.
Goodell Admits NFL Was Wrong Not to Listen
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
This is probably the best solution, bolded.
I remember saying the pledge with hand over heart in elementary school. Not sure if they do that now, or if kids even know what the Pledge of Allegiance is.