Sean Hannity denounces Bundy's remarks as "despicable, ignorant"

Your behavior is that you pegged him as racist upon first sight only. That makes you a racial profiler AND a racist. Denying this doesn't NOT make you a racist. Your words are there for everyone to see and you have proudly repeated them. Why keep up the denials other than you were busted not keeping to your own standards?

Deflective questions aren't responses. See above. You have been proven a racist by your comments. Furthermore, your dislike of whites using profiling was never drawn after these white profilers were found guilty "in a court of law," so why move the goalposts here other than your personal protection from your own standards? This is tedious.

You don't even know the difference between the words conscious and conscience. You have no idea what you're doing other than racially profiling as a side career and trashing whites when they do it, while you proudly and repeatedly proclaim you had someone pegged as a racist by "first sight," which means your sole criteria were his race, age, and gender.

So again, this means you support cops profiling young black males, or do you not think the shoe fits on the other foot? After all, the conscious/conscience of the po-po tell them that these young black males are far more likely than not to be criminals, and indeed so, look at the statistics.

You used no such "movement" and you invoked that as a justification after the fact only after you were confronted. You SAW him and drew the conclusion. There isn't even a shred of evidence he's involved in such a movement, but that hasn't stopped you from making the fallacious claim.

This is hilarious. All because you are engaging in flagrant racism of the type that if white cops did to blacks, you'd explode over.

Just stop. Everyone sees you for who you are. Using your words to show you're a racist isn't "lying." It makes you a racist in denial.

 

Now this is hilarious.

"The feds want to avoid another Ruby Ridge or Waco." They can easily do that by not behaving stupidly and shooting unarmed people who are not presenting a threat to the feds. You obviously have no clue about either incident, but are rather drawing from vague Clinton-era media and political narratives which invoke "angry white militia male" caricatures and nothing more.

Are you aware a man at the compound at Ruby Ridge shot and killed a federal officer in self-defense and the courts agreed it was a self-defense case? Are you aware the courts ALSO rewarded him and Randy Weaver damages? Are you aware that Randy Weaver was found innocent of the charges the feds tried to bring against him?

I didn't think so. From the Wikipedia summary on the Ruby Ridge case:

The Denver FBI SWAT team assigned to Ruby Ridge thought the ROE were "crazy" and agreed among themselves to follow the FBI deadly force policy. However, most of the FBI HRT sniper/observers accepted the ROE as modifying the deadly force policy. Examples: HRT sniper Dale Monroe saw the ROE as a "green light" to shoot armed adult males on sight and HRT sniper Edward Wenger believed that if he observed armed adults, he could use deadly force, but he was to follow standard deadly force policy for all other individuals. Fred Lanceley, the FBI Hostage Negotiator at Ruby Ridge, was "surprised and shocked" at the ROE, the most severe rules he had ever heard in his over 300 hostage situations and characterized the ROE as inconsistent with standard policy.[48] A later Senate report criticized the ROE as "virtual shoot-on-sight orders."[10]

Before the negotiators arrived at the cabin, FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi, from a position over 200 yards north and above the Weaver cabin,[49] shot and wounded Randy Weaver in the back with the bullet exiting his right armpit, while he was lifting the latch on the shed to visit the body of his dead son.[50] (The sniper testified at the later trial that he had put his crosshairs on Weaver's spine, but Weaver moved at the last second.) Then, as Weaver, his 16-year-old daughter Sara,[51] and Harris ran back toward the house, Horiuchi fired a second bullet, killing Vicki Weaver,[52] and wounded Harris in the chest. Vicki Weaver was standing behind the door through which Harris was entering the house, holding their 10-month-old baby Elisheba[51] in her arms.[53] The Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) Ruby Ridge Task Force Report (June 10, 1994) stated in section I. Executive Summary subhead B. Significant Findings that the second shot did not satisfy constitutional standards for legal use of deadly force. The OPR review also found the lack of a request to surrender was "inexcusable", since Harris and the two Weavers were running for cover without returning fire and were not an imminent threat. The task force also specifically blamed Horiuchi for firing through the door, not knowing whether someone was on the other side of it. While controversy exists as to who is responsible for approving the ROE that were being followed by the sniper, the task force also condemned the so-called "rules of engagement" allowing shots to be fired with no request for surrender.[50]

Both FBI HQ and the Site Commanders in Idaho re-evaluated the situation based on information they were receiving from US Marshals Hunt, Cooper and Roderick about what had happened on August 21. On about August 24, 1992, the fourth day of the siege on the Weaver family, FBI Deputy Assistant Director Danny Coulson wrote a memo:


OPR 004477
Something to Consider
1. Charge against Weaver is Bull (*)(*)(*)(*).
2. No one saw Weaver do any shooting.
3. Vicki has no charges against her.
4. Weaver's defense. He ran down the hill to see what dog was barking at. Some guys in camys shot his dog. Started shooting at him. Killed his son. Harris did the shooting [of Degan]. He [Weaver] is in pretty strong legal position."[10][55]

At the trial that followed, Weaver was ultimately acquitted of all charges except missing his original court date and violating his bail conditions, for which he was sentenced to 18 months and fined $10,000. Credited with time served, Weaver spent an additional 4 months in prison. Weaver's defense attorney, Gerry Spence, rested his case without offering a defense. Instead he convinced the jury to find as they did merely through his cross-examination and discrediting of the government witnesses and evidence.

Kevin Harris was defended by attorney David Niven and acquitted of all charges[/I].

The surviving members of the Weaver family filed a wrongful death suit for $200 million. In an out-of-court settlement in August 1995, the federal government awarded Randy Weaver $100,000 and his three daughters $1 million each. The government did not admit any wrongdoing in the deaths of Sammy and Vicki.[63][64] On the condition of anonymity, a DOJ official told the Washington Post that he believed the Weavers probably would have won the full amount if the case had gone to trial.[65]

FBI director Louis Freeh disciplined or proposed discipline for twelve FBI employees over their handling of the incident and the later prosecution of Randy Weaver and Harris. He described the incident before the U.S. Senate hearing investigation as "synonymous with the exaggerated application of federal law enforcement" and stated "law enforcement overreacted at Ruby Ridge."[66]

- - - Updated - - -

The only hilarious thing here is the typical liberal gambit to only claim racism from someone from the political right of center, and that their core followers fall for it every single time, like so many hungry pigeons.

 

Nothing in your description of a racist adds up to the definition of a racist. One's claim of another being a racist, does not make the person making that observation a racist. This definition of Racism proves my point, and destroys yours; http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/racism

 

LMAO....

Ok, then, so you are saying when the LAPD pulls over a car load of young black guys for the specific reason of being young black guys, it's not racist.

I feel you.

 

That is not the same thing. That is physically exercising racism because they are black, "IF" that is why they are pulling them over. They are physically committing a racist act by pulling them over for that purpose alone. Declaring someone a racist based on one's good judgment of that person being a racist is an entirely different matter. You're trying to lump the two together. You are trying to make this way more complicated than it is, because you are trying to fit your own convenient narrative. Believe me, I get it.

Saying I know the person is a racist, I believe the person is a racist, my sixth sense tells me he or she is a racist, does not automatically mean the person doing the accusing is a racist them self. I understand that is your stance, but unfortunately that isn't an applicable reason to label the accuser a racist. In order to do that, you would need to prove that the accuser is actively involved in racism through verbal or physical interaction. By my own words of " I new he was a racist the time I laid eyes on him", could never be applicable in a court of law. You couldn't prove my racism by me being the accuser of someone else being racist on that alone.

So, you can go on and accuse all you want. You've proved nothing. And unfortunately, neither have I. I cannot prove I am not racist, other than I have not committed any racist crimes that I could be convicted for. So, enjoy your fantasy.

 

LMFAO.... But it's just the cops using their "conscious" and concluding as you did that the person is so-and-so by merely looking at them.

Shocker you are angry that someone practices what you do.

You're both coming to conclusions against someone based on their appearance and here you are trying to excuse yourself doing it by redrawing the boundaries to "they have to physically pull them over."

Cute, please. Keep going. Tell me how your "sixth sense" tells you things when the truth is your EYES did it based on your looking at him and drawing an instantaneous, hostile conclusion. The way you keep dodging around and now trying to move the goal posts is utterly adorable. Now it's "pulling people over" plus "court of law" to prove racism.

I'm sorry, racial profiling doesn't have a definition of your choosing based on what day it is and whether or not someone slaps you in a chat room.

 

That you sit and pretend that profiling is limited to physical interaction is hilarious, but then you need to redraw boundaries to wriggle out of your own standard.

I'm the one obsessed with racism when you're the one pegging people based on how they look. This is rich. Please, continue.

Is profiling racist, yes or no?


1

: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race


2

: racial prejudice or discrimination

Pegging someone guilty by merely glancing at them is both racial prejudice AND discrimination.

What you're trying to do is copy my words and twist them and try to throw them back at me. I'm amused you're on this thread so long trying to escape being trapped in your own standards, when everyone can see you for what you are. This has nothing to do with mythical courtrooms you wish to invoke, as indeed when your ideological kind throw the same accusations as whites, you never say, "This will qualify in court due to..."

So please, no moving the goal posts.

Profiling is wrong or not. Pegging someone as evil by merely looking at them is wrong or not. Yes or no? No "sixth sense" tap dancing; you admittedly based it on FIRST LOOK.

Deny until you turn purple. Keep posting responses repeating your hollow denials. Nobody is impressed.

ra·cial pro·fil·ing


noun
US

noun: racial profiling; plural noun: racial profilings

the use of race or ethnicity as grounds for suspecting someone of having committed an offense.


Seriously just get over it. You were outed, now kindly stop crapping up the thread with your angry outbursts.

 

I already proved he fits the definition of racism and racial profiling. He needs to stop trashing up the thread with these rants. He's derailing the thread and this thread may end up locked because of it.

 

This entire thread is nothing but left wing trash beginning with the OP. Best thing that happened was our little racist slipped his tounge. I enjoy watching lefties tell us they're not racist because their senses are so much more perceptive than everyone else. They're not profiling because they KNOW they're right. Maroons.

 

I don't see why it should. This thread and your arguments about racism match perfectly with the same trap Shawn Hannity fell into. He new in his mind this man Bundy was a hero. Then, when Bundy went to running his mouth, Hannity realized he had made a fatal mistake about Bundy because of his racist comments. You are doing the same thing. You jumped in here with your "FACTS" about me being racist, when you have none. You only have opinions, when your knowledge and thought about human nature are limited in scope. You've made your stand against me as a racist, but you can only conclude opinions. Not having a clear understanding of human nature keeps, you in this box you put yourself in.

 

You're not convincing anyone with your denials. The media made a big stink out of Bundy by taking him out of context and posting mined quotes. You profiled Bundy based on his appearance and openly admit to doing so. Racial profiling, by definition. Case closed.

I'm not interested in your psychology internet articles. I've taken psych classes in college. Don't trash others for doing what you do, which is racial profiling.

That simple.

Are you religious?

Romans 2:1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.

2 But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.

3 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?

 

No your a racist. A dishonest racist to boot. A dishonest delusional racist. You can sit up to your chest in delusion and tell the world your not racist for judging people by their race but your still a disgusting racist. Don't feel too bad, your a leftist in good company of other leftist racists. You purchased it you own it.

 

Definition of profiling; the act or process of extrapolating information about a person based on known traits or tendencies. I new of no known traits or tendencies of Bundy. Therefore those factors were never used in my decision making. Profiling is also the act of suspecting or targeting a person on the basis of observed characteristics or behavior. Since I have never observed Bundy's characteristics or behavior in my decision making, profiling does not apply. That's the real case closed.

I

 

Yes - suspecting or targeting on the basis on observed characteristics. Thanks for admitting that.

 

You just admitted you have no reason to call Bundy a racist yet you called him a racist upon first sight of him.
That dear boy is why you are the racist. I'm willing to bet your still not brilliant enough to grasp reality.

 

And I'll bet you are not brilliant enough to understand that when one does not observe the characteristics of the person it is not profiling. That is why I posted the definition. Do you know what characteristics are? Is he fat, skinny, old, young, blue eyes, brown eyes, etc. I did not "observe" those things about Bundy when drawing my conclusions, I can assure you. I also did not judge Bundy on his behavior because I have no idea how he behaves. You can label anyone on here a racist all you like, including me. The bottom line, I know a racist when I see one. And Bundy is a racist just by looking at him. And it turned out I was right. And that is reality.

 

Turns out your both wrong and a racist badweek not to mention a luminary of the refrigerator bulb type.