Originally posted by Bashar Tegwe can wait all day because you never did that.
still waiting on that quote where I asserted that McMichaels is factually guilty of racial bias. but then again maybe if you repeat your same false accusation (with no proof and much maturity), that offending quote of mine will be magically birthed into existence. let's find out...
here's an example of asserting opinion as fact (completely false assertion as a bonus):
Originally posted by Silent Master
Once again you're wrong, homicide is the unlawful killing of someone and as of yet the state has not proven that the killing was unlawful. Therefore, you are wrong to call him a homicide victim.IOW, I was right
and it turned out he was wrong about what homicide means, and avoided the fact when he was corrected, with much maturity
Originally posted by Silent Master
Oh, I must have missed it, what was the evidence of McMichaels bias that you used to form your opinion?
Bingo, there is no evidence for them to base their opinion of the McMichaels on.
Nitpicking on whether or not there was truly a "rash" of break-ins is a dead give away. At first the claim was "there were no reports of any theft in the weeks leading up to the shooting". That got debunked, so then they turned to "well there weren't as many break-ins as they claimed". We know the McMichaels were robbed, we know the neighbor claims to have had $2500 worth of fishing equipment stolen(but also claims to have never officially reported it).
Had the neighbor also told the McMichaels about the theft of the fishing equipment? After all the cops *did* give him their number. And if they were all friends I'm not sure why they didn't already have the McMichaels number. In fact English tried to contradict them in a story to The Daily Beast.
And even if they were mistaken about the total number of break-ins I am not sure how this makes them racist.
Originally posted by Surturwhy would they lie about this rash of burglaries? Please explain.
Bingo, there is no evidence for them to base their opinion of the McMichaels on.Nitpicking on whether or not there was truly a "rash" of break-ins is a dead give away. At first the claim was "there were no reports of any theft in the weeks leading up to the shooting". That got debunked, so then they turned to "well there weren't as many break-ins as they claimed". We know the McMichaels were robbed, we know the neighbor claims to have had $2500 worth of fishing equipment stolen(but also claims to have never officially reported it).
Had the neighbor also told the McMichaels about the theft of the fishing equipment? After all the cops *did* give him their number. And if they were all friends I'm not sure why they didn't already have the McMichaels number. In fact English tried to contradict them in a story to The Daily Beast.
And even if they were mistaken about the total number of break-ins I am not sure how this makes them racist.
Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
why would they lie about this rash of burglaries? Please explain.
I'm not convinced they lied. The neighbor says he was robbed, but never officially reported it. We also know the cops gave the neighbor the number of the McMichaels to call if he had problems.
It is my opinion that the neighbor had informed them about the theft. Now we can debate if two thefts means it was a "rash" of break-ins, but I see no malicious intent behind this. I'm sure you do.
Originally posted by Surturso let me get this straight you have a gut opinion "where you are not convinced". OK, I have a gut opinion that they were probably racist.
I'm not convinced they lied. The neighbor says he was robbed, but never officially reported it. We also know the cops gave the neighbor the number of the McMichaels to call if he had problems.It is my opinion that the neighbor had informed them about the theft. Now we can debate if two thefts means it was a "rash" of break-ins, but I see no malicious intent behind this. I'm sure you do.