Jean,
I was shaking my head in agreement with this guy:
George Floyd riots below:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_racial_unrest
2020 United States racial unrest | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Clockwise from top:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
++++++++++++++++++++++++
But then, the guy that wrote the article that you sent stated this with his conclusion:
https://hotair.com/david-strom/2023/07/21/nyc-to-pay-2020-rioters-about-10000-each-n566105
"Derek Chauvin, the police officer who restrained Floyd, clearly went too far in restraining Floyd. But the autopsy clearly shows he didn’t kill him–Floyd died of an overdose from meth and fentanyl"
+++++++++++++++
I really don't know much about this particular person at the moment, maybe somebody else mislead him to believe that blatant lie. However, he clearly likes that lie and is going around repeating it (instead of the truth) because he likes it so much because an easy fact check would prove it to be a blatant lie.
Everybody that reads it is misled by that lie and he does more damage with his article than good.
+++++++++++++++
Keep in mind that I am NOT a fan of using George Floyd as somebody that inspires people or that did any good for society that deserves to get a special place being honored. We have tens of thousands of soldiers and cops that gave up their lives to help people or for our country. I get the symbolism but please don't use a self centered career criminal that died because of blatantly violating laws and refusing to cooperate with the arresting officers as a hero.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/85870/#85871
For those that want to be entertained by a discussion less than a year ago with somebody that constantly repeated the DISinformation/lie about George Floyd dying from a fentanyl overdose:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/88909/#88938
By TimNew - Sept. 19, 2022, 6:50 a.m.
Great stuff MM. Thanks. Let's continue this teaching opportunity.
What objective criteria did you use to draw the scientific conclusion that autopsies are flimsy evidence in your final conclusion that George Floyd was brutally murdered in a racist attack by a racist cop?
++++++++++++++
You can just read the entire thread from that point down to get the jest of it without going to all the links.
WHAT????!!!!! HOW IN GODS' NAME DID THIS GET TURNED INTO A GEORGIE RANT?!
I'LL TELL YA WHO KILLED GEORGIE ~ HIS MOTHER!! SHE COULD'VE ABORTED HIM, YEARS EARLIER, BUT..... NOOO ~ SHE ALLOWED HIM TO "GROW UP" A DRUG USER THAT HATED HIS OWN LIFE.
DUH!
AND, NO... I DIDN'T READ BUT A FEW LINES.
I'M TAKIN' A BREAK FROM HERE ~ I LIKE MY LIFE PEACEFUL & QUIET.
WHAT????!!!!! HOW IN GODS' NAME DID THIS GET TURNED INTO A GEORGIE RANT?!
++++++++++++++++++++
Do you not even read your own sources, Jean???
I was commenting on YOUR source.
++++++++++++++++++
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/97501/#97502
metmike: But then, the guy that wrote the article that you sent stated this with his conclusion:
https://hotair.com/david-strom/2023/07/21/nyc-to-pay-2020-rioters-about-10000-each-n566105
"Derek Chauvin, the police officer who restrained Floyd, clearly went too far in restraining Floyd. But the autopsy clearly shows he didn’t kill him–Floyd died of an overdose from meth and fentanyl"
Jean,
I use a great deal of time and effort to read and listen to all your stuff, then do extra work much of the time to gain insight in those topics in order to have an informed conversation with you about your topics.
They are often wonderful topics that make great points that are much appreciated and teach me things, especially from my following up to get additional information.
It always includes trying to see your points.
The least that you can do is to read what you send me yourself to at least know what you're sending,
then you wouldn’t be baffled when I respond to the concluding statement from your source…….and I even quoted them for you with my initial response, so you had a 2nd chance to read your own source.
I repeated that quote again in this post to give you a 3rd chance to read your own source.
Does this seem reasonable to you?