Leftests have no problem ignoring decades of proof if one ounce of conspiracy supports their narrative.

The Christian faith I follow supports repentance, forgiveness, renewal and rebirth.

The Leftest religion I see has no margin for error, condems any person who hasn't always held the view that is the current fad of the day and aparently has no idea how we got here. I can't wait for these children to grow up and be judged by the ignorant children that benefit from their sacrifices.

I've never met Jerry and couldn't care less what he thought when he was 14, even if that was him. I guarantee he has worked with people of all faiths and backgrounds and has made more black millionaires than any one judging him.

ShaggySLC said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

ShaggySLC said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

Belton Ag said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

Where did i state he had anything to apologize for? I'm not assuming anything, he has previously confirmed that was him in the picture.


Not sure if you understand how apologizing works. You can't apologize on someone's else's behalf based on your perception or opinions of them. You're saying the point of your whataboutism is to bring attention to the picture being not taken today? I don't have a side, that's a weird sentence to just randomly sprout out in response to a question. I don't have a party and again are you saying there can only literally be one thing or action that should be focused on at any given time? Humans aren't allowed to focus or acknowledge multiple things at once? Most objective people who are aware of why anyone would be at school integrations in the south during the 50's know exactly why he and anyone would be there. For all I know he and a handful of students before school started showed up to oppose and harass kids with hate for being black and going to school. This would be based on what we factually know about people who showed up at school integrations south during the 50's. Many factual actions that are downright disgusting. Adults spitting on children because of the color of there skin. These are documented undeniable things that occurred over the south. Why would he need the benefit of doubt if he wasn't truly racist? In fact where did I use the term "muh racism"?

---

he has nothing to apologize for.

you are automatically assigning guilt to him.

---

---

i did not say anything about whether it was him in the picture or not.

as you said, he already admitted that is him in the picture.

he still has nothing to apologize about.

---

You stated I'm automatically assigning guilt. I'm letting you know he had factually admitted to being there as 1 of the few students we can clearly see. This was not during school or in between classes. This was before school began and he was there to oppose and harass kids for being black and going to school with hate. This is very clearly documented and acknowledged across the south when schools integrated during the 50s. Those facts are undeniable. When did I state has had anything to apologize for, ill ask again? Of course he doesn't have to apologize, being morally racist on its own isn't illegal.

---

He says he wasn't there to harass or oppose them, he says he was curious about the events. Is every white person in that picture a racist? What about the guy holding the news camera, was he there to harass and oppose the black students?

---

You're certainly free to believe whatever nonsensical lie you'd like to believe. I can safely say no objective person with base level intellect and factual understanding of those who opposed integration in the south during the 50s would even attempt to tell that lie after being caught red handed. So his defense is he was curious about a handful of his classmates showing up to oppose and harass kids for being black and going to school with hate? Based on facts we know about that time period and actions from that time period in that state regarding the integration of black kids it's completely plausible and highly probable every white person in that picture in 1950 Arkansas opposing kids going to school simply for being black is racist. The guy with the camera was there to record all the white people opposing and harassing kids with hate for being black and going to school.

---

You care a lot about this

---

Factually I care very little. But whatever you need to get you through your day is fine with me

---

Obviously from the novel you've written in this thread. So what should Jerry do now in your mind? Give away his money, his team, clean their feet like you see other shamed filled whites doing? Factually you care a lot lol

---

Are you aware of what a novel actual is? And even then that's has no correlation on caring. Jerry should do whatever he feels best, i can't speak for another human who I'm not. If you want him to give away his money and team that's certainly within your right to. I've never seen others clean their feet, I'm not sure what you're referring to.

Jerry lets black strippers play with his blonde leg hair. Leave him alone!

What is the big deal now? He is an early innovator then based on current trends! Are not schools desegregating NOW !

All this BS stuff! Doesn't A&M actually have separate graduations based on …….. race !
Did they not create a separate place for black student athletes to go on campus ….,.,

Do some colleges now have separate dorms for certain races!

Ag with kids said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

Where did i state he had anything to apologize for? I'm not assuming anything, he has previously confirmed that was him in the picture.


Not sure if you understand how apologizing works. You can't apologize on someone's else's behalf based on your perception or opinions of them. You're saying the point of your whataboutism is to bring attention to the picture being not taken today? I don't have a side, that's a weird sentence to just randomly sprout out in response to a question. I don't have a party and again are you saying there can only literally be one thing or action that should be focused on at any given time? Humans aren't allowed to focus or acknowledge multiple things at once? Most objective people who are aware of why anyone would be at school integrations in the south during the 50's know exactly why he and anyone would be there. For all I know he and a handful of students before school started showed up to oppose and harass kids with hate for being black and going to school. This would be based on what we factually know about people who showed up at school integrations south during the 50's. Many factual actions that are downright disgusting. Adults spitting on children because of the color of there skin. These are documented undeniable things that occurred over the south. Why would he need the benefit of doubt if he wasn't truly racist? In fact where did I use the term "muh racism"?

---

he has nothing to apologize for.

you are automatically assigning guilt to him.

---

---

i did not say anything about whether it was him in the picture or not.

as you said, he already admitted that is him in the picture.

he still has nothing to apologize about.

---

You stated I'm automatically assigning guilt. I'm letting you know he had factually admitted to being there as 1 of the few students we can clearly see. This was not during school or in between classes. This was before school began and he was there to oppose and harass kids for being black and going to school with hate. This is very clearly documented and acknowledged across the south when schools integrated during the 50s. Those facts are undeniable. When did I state has had anything to apologize for, ill ask again? Of course he doesn't have to apologize, being morally racist on its own isn't illegal.

---

I wonder where he got the idea you are assigning guilt...

---

If it isn't illegal how could I assign guilt?

---

Guilt doesn't have involve the law.

Cheating on your wife isn't illegal. However, if you do it, you're still guilty of cheating...

hth

---

But we weren't taking about cheating. In the context of Jerry Jones showing up to oppose and harass kids for being black while going to school, there is no guilt to be assigned. It wasn't illegal so where would the guilt assigning come in. Cheating on your wife is technically still illegal and a criminal charge in some states in the US. And civilly illegal in all states.

If the Left, Democratic Party, Academia, and Media insist on returning to those days and dwelling in them, they can also return to the level of pay then and the assets, and how swiftly and in what manner crime was punished.

Fast forward 65 years... how many young black men has Jerry Jones turned into millionaires?

Yah, he hates black people.

Let's just all pick up stones and throw them.

Quote:

---

You're certainly free to believe whatever nonsensical lie you'd like to believe. I can safely say no objective person with base level intellect and factual understanding of those who opposed integration in the south during the 50s would even attempt to tell that lie after being caught red handed. So his defense is he was curious about a handful of his classmates showing up to oppose and harass kids for being black and going to school with hate? Based on facts we know about that time period and actions from that time period in that state regarding the integration of black kids it's completely plausible and highly probable every white person in that picture in 1950 Arkansas opposing kids going to school simply for being black is racist. The guy with the camera was there to record all the white people opposing and harassing kids with hate for being black and going to school.

---

Jones says he goes there because of the publicity and because he was told by his football coaches to stay away from it all. He's 14 and he wants to see what all the commotion is about. It's the same reason news cameras are there and the photographer is there. Because people all over want to see it and witness it happening; they just can't be there. Jones could be there so he went.

No amount of you crowing about your towering intellect and how stupid we all are can change the fact that all you are doing in this thread is making ignorant assumptions about him rooted in your own biases.

I don't recall anyone on the Left being cancelled for being racist. Can someone help me out?

Coog97 said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

Belton Ag said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

Where did i state he had anything to apologize for? I'm not assuming anything, he has previously confirmed that was him in the picture.


Not sure if you understand how apologizing works. You can't apologize on someone's else's behalf based on your perception or opinions of them. You're saying the point of your whataboutism is to bring attention to the picture being not taken today? I don't have a side, that's a weird sentence to just randomly sprout out in response to a question. I don't have a party and again are you saying there can only literally be one thing or action that should be focused on at any given time? Humans aren't allowed to focus or acknowledge multiple things at once? Most objective people who are aware of why anyone would be at school integrations in the south during the 50's know exactly why he and anyone would be there. For all I know he and a handful of students before school started showed up to oppose and harass kids with hate for being black and going to school. This would be based on what we factually know about people who showed up at school integrations south during the 50's. Many factual actions that are downright disgusting. Adults spitting on children because of the color of there skin. These are documented undeniable things that occurred over the south. Why would he need the benefit of doubt if he wasn't truly racist? In fact where did I use the term "muh racism"?

---

he has nothing to apologize for.

you are automatically assigning guilt to him.

---

---

i did not say anything about whether it was him in the picture or not.

as you said, he already admitted that is him in the picture.

he still has nothing to apologize about.

---

You stated I'm automatically assigning guilt. I'm letting you know he had factually admitted to being there as 1 of the few students we can clearly see. This was not during school or in between classes. This was before school began and he was there to oppose and harass kids for being black and going to school with hate. This is very clearly documented and acknowledged across the south when schools integrated during the 50s. Those facts are undeniable. When did I state has had anything to apologize for, ill ask again? Of course he doesn't have to apologize, being morally racist on its own isn't illegal.

---

He says he wasn't there to harass or oppose them, he says he was curious about the events. Is every white person in that picture a racist? What about the guy holding the news camera, was he there to harass and oppose the black students?

---

You're certainly free to believe whatever nonsensical lie you'd like to believe. I can safely say no objective person with base level intellect and factual understanding of those who opposed integration in the south during the 50s would even attempt to tell that lie after being caught red handed. So his defense is he was curious about a handful of his classmates showing up to oppose and harass kids for being black and going to school with hate? Based on facts we know about that time period and actions from that time period in that state regarding the integration of black kids it's completely plausible and highly probable every white person in that picture in 1950 Arkansas opposing kids going to school simply for being black is racist. The guy with the camera was there to record all the white people opposing and harassing kids with hate for being black and going to school.

---

Your ridiculous, unnecessary and, quite frankly, really poorly executed loquacity is comical to me… even more so than your absurd and ignorant assertions.

---

I appreciate your word salad that address nothing being said in my post as a last ditch effort to save face. I understand how some truths are uncomfortable to deal with and the need to deflect away as quickly as possible.

AGHouston11 said:

---

What is the big deal now? He is an early innovator then based on current trends! Are not schools desegregating NOW !

All this BS stuff! Doesn't A&M actually have separate graduations based on …….. race !
Did they not create a separate place for black student athletes to go on campus ….,.,

Do some colleges now have separate dorms for certain races!

---

He was simply concerned that black students would feel uncomfortable being forced by police to join the white students. They were being forced to leave their safe space!

Ol Rock said:

---

Leftests have no problem ignoring decades of proof if one ounce of conspiracy supports their narrative.

The Christian faith I follow supports repentance, forgiveness, renewal and rebirth.

The Leftest religion I see has no margin for error, condems any person who hasn't always held the view that is the current fad of the day and aparently has no idea how we got here. I can't wait for these children to grow up and be judged by the ignorant children that benefit from their sacrifices.

I've never met Jerry and couldn't care less what he thought when he was 14, even if that was him. I guarantee he has worked with people of all faiths and backgrounds and has made more black millionaires than any one judging him.

---

THIS, SO MUCH THIS.

Another thing, the activists and Leftists are useless. They don't care about minorities--they are eager to make sure they accept Venezuelan levels of living more placidly by inventing scapegoats for them while the narrative setters and policy makers live in stratospheric wealth and ease and well maintained enclaves. Living the life of "rules for thee, not for me" incarnate. The reason the Left talks in plantation terms and dwell on the Jim Crow past so much is they are eager to recreate it in a different form globally.

They don't seek to teach them things that are useful for grasping opportunity. Greivance is a dead-end--it ends up making you a pawn of demagogues. Even teaching stoicism would be more useful than greivance and agitprop -- it got the 40's generation through the Great Depression and WW II.

There is no one more contemptible than today's activist narrative setters and agit-prop panderers.

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

ShaggySLC said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

ShaggySLC said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

Belton Ag said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

Where did i state he had anything to apologize for? I'm not assuming anything, he has previously confirmed that was him in the picture.


Not sure if you understand how apologizing works. You can't apologize on someone's else's behalf based on your perception or opinions of them. You're saying the point of your whataboutism is to bring attention to the picture being not taken today? I don't have a side, that's a weird sentence to just randomly sprout out in response to a question. I don't have a party and again are you saying there can only literally be one thing or action that should be focused on at any given time? Humans aren't allowed to focus or acknowledge multiple things at once? Most objective people who are aware of why anyone would be at school integrations in the south during the 50's know exactly why he and anyone would be there. For all I know he and a handful of students before school started showed up to oppose and harass kids with hate for being black and going to school. This would be based on what we factually know about people who showed up at school integrations south during the 50's. Many factual actions that are downright disgusting. Adults spitting on children because of the color of there skin. These are documented undeniable things that occurred over the south. Why would he need the benefit of doubt if he wasn't truly racist? In fact where did I use the term "muh racism"?

---

he has nothing to apologize for.

you are automatically assigning guilt to him.

---

---

i did not say anything about whether it was him in the picture or not.

as you said, he already admitted that is him in the picture.

he still has nothing to apologize about.

---

You stated I'm automatically assigning guilt. I'm letting you know he had factually admitted to being there as 1 of the few students we can clearly see. This was not during school or in between classes. This was before school began and he was there to oppose and harass kids for being black and going to school with hate. This is very clearly documented and acknowledged across the south when schools integrated during the 50s. Those facts are undeniable. When did I state has had anything to apologize for, ill ask again? Of course he doesn't have to apologize, being morally racist on its own isn't illegal.

---

He says he wasn't there to harass or oppose them, he says he was curious about the events. Is every white person in that picture a racist? What about the guy holding the news camera, was he there to harass and oppose the black students?

---

You're certainly free to believe whatever nonsensical lie you'd like to believe. I can safely say no objective person with base level intellect and factual understanding of those who opposed integration in the south during the 50s would even attempt to tell that lie after being caught red handed. So his defense is he was curious about a handful of his classmates showing up to oppose and harass kids for being black and going to school with hate? Based on facts we know about that time period and actions from that time period in that state regarding the integration of black kids it's completely plausible and highly probable every white person in that picture in 1950 Arkansas opposing kids going to school simply for being black is racist. The guy with the camera was there to record all the white people opposing and harassing kids with hate for being black and going to school.

---

You care a lot about this

---

Factually I care very little. But whatever you need to get you through your day is fine with me

---

Obviously from the novel you've written in this thread. So what should Jerry do now in your mind? Give away his money, his team, clean their feet like you see other shamed filled whites doing? Factually you care a lot lol

---

Are you aware of what a novel actual is? And even then that's has no correlation on caring. Jerry should do whatever he feels best, i can't speak for another human who I'm not. If you want him to give away his money and team that's certainly within your right to. I've never seen others clean their feet, I'm not sure what you're referring to.

---

I do, that's the joke. You didn't answer any question. I asked what you think he should do. I hope he prints out this thread and whips his ass with it but that's me.

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

Coog97 said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

Belton Ag said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

Where did i state he had anything to apologize for? I'm not assuming anything, he has previously confirmed that was him in the picture.


Not sure if you understand how apologizing works. You can't apologize on someone's else's behalf based on your perception or opinions of them. You're saying the point of your whataboutism is to bring attention to the picture being not taken today? I don't have a side, that's a weird sentence to just randomly sprout out in response to a question. I don't have a party and again are you saying there can only literally be one thing or action that should be focused on at any given time? Humans aren't allowed to focus or acknowledge multiple things at once? Most objective people who are aware of why anyone would be at school integrations in the south during the 50's know exactly why he and anyone would be there. For all I know he and a handful of students before school started showed up to oppose and harass kids with hate for being black and going to school. This would be based on what we factually know about people who showed up at school integrations south during the 50's. Many factual actions that are downright disgusting. Adults spitting on children because of the color of there skin. These are documented undeniable things that occurred over the south. Why would he need the benefit of doubt if he wasn't truly racist? In fact where did I use the term "muh racism"?

---

he has nothing to apologize for.

you are automatically assigning guilt to him.

---

---

i did not say anything about whether it was him in the picture or not.

as you said, he already admitted that is him in the picture.

he still has nothing to apologize about.

---

You stated I'm automatically assigning guilt. I'm letting you know he had factually admitted to being there as 1 of the few students we can clearly see. This was not during school or in between classes. This was before school began and he was there to oppose and harass kids for being black and going to school with hate. This is very clearly documented and acknowledged across the south when schools integrated during the 50s. Those facts are undeniable. When did I state has had anything to apologize for, ill ask again? Of course he doesn't have to apologize, being morally racist on its own isn't illegal.

---

He says he wasn't there to harass or oppose them, he says he was curious about the events. Is every white person in that picture a racist? What about the guy holding the news camera, was he there to harass and oppose the black students?

---

You're certainly free to believe whatever nonsensical lie you'd like to believe. I can safely say no objective person with base level intellect and factual understanding of those who opposed integration in the south during the 50s would even attempt to tell that lie after being caught red handed. So his defense is he was curious about a handful of his classmates showing up to oppose and harass kids for being black and going to school with hate? Based on facts we know about that time period and actions from that time period in that state regarding the integration of black kids it's completely plausible and highly probable every white person in that picture in 1950 Arkansas opposing kids going to school simply for being black is racist. The guy with the camera was there to record all the white people opposing and harassing kids with hate for being black and going to school.

---

Your ridiculous, unnecessary and, quite frankly, really poorly executed loquacity is comical to me… even more so than your absurd and ignorant assertions.

---

I appreciate your word salad that address nothing being said in my post as a last ditch effort to save face. I understand how some truths are uncomfortable to deal with and the need to deflect away as quickly as possible.

---

Of course, you didn't get it. Happy Thanksgiving, little buddy!

ShaggySLC said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

ShaggySLC said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

ShaggySLC said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

Belton Ag said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

Where did i state he had anything to apologize for? I'm not assuming anything, he has previously confirmed that was him in the picture.


Not sure if you understand how apologizing works. You can't apologize on someone's else's behalf based on your perception or opinions of them. You're saying the point of your whataboutism is to bring attention to the picture being not taken today? I don't have a side, that's a weird sentence to just randomly sprout out in response to a question. I don't have a party and again are you saying there can only literally be one thing or action that should be focused on at any given time? Humans aren't allowed to focus or acknowledge multiple things at once? Most objective people who are aware of why anyone would be at school integrations in the south during the 50's know exactly why he and anyone would be there. For all I know he and a handful of students before school started showed up to oppose and harass kids with hate for being black and going to school. This would be based on what we factually know about people who showed up at school integrations south during the 50's. Many factual actions that are downright disgusting. Adults spitting on children because of the color of there skin. These are documented undeniable things that occurred over the south. Why would he need the benefit of doubt if he wasn't truly racist? In fact where did I use the term "muh racism"?

---

he has nothing to apologize for.

you are automatically assigning guilt to him.

---

---

i did not say anything about whether it was him in the picture or not.

as you said, he already admitted that is him in the picture.

he still has nothing to apologize about.

---

You stated I'm automatically assigning guilt. I'm letting you know he had factually admitted to being there as 1 of the few students we can clearly see. This was not during school or in between classes. This was before school began and he was there to oppose and harass kids for being black and going to school with hate. This is very clearly documented and acknowledged across the south when schools integrated during the 50s. Those facts are undeniable. When did I state has had anything to apologize for, ill ask again? Of course he doesn't have to apologize, being morally racist on its own isn't illegal.

---

He says he wasn't there to harass or oppose them, he says he was curious about the events. Is every white person in that picture a racist? What about the guy holding the news camera, was he there to harass and oppose the black students?

---

You're certainly free to believe whatever nonsensical lie you'd like to believe. I can safely say no objective person with base level intellect and factual understanding of those who opposed integration in the south during the 50s would even attempt to tell that lie after being caught red handed. So his defense is he was curious about a handful of his classmates showing up to oppose and harass kids for being black and going to school with hate? Based on facts we know about that time period and actions from that time period in that state regarding the integration of black kids it's completely plausible and highly probable every white person in that picture in 1950 Arkansas opposing kids going to school simply for being black is racist. The guy with the camera was there to record all the white people opposing and harassing kids with hate for being black and going to school.

---

You care a lot about this

---

Factually I care very little. But whatever you need to get you through your day is fine with me

---

Obviously from the novel you've written in this thread. So what should Jerry do now in your mind? Give away his money, his team, clean their feet like you see other shamed filled whites doing? Factually you care a lot lol

---

Are you aware of what a novel actual is? And even then that's has no correlation on caring. Jerry should do whatever he feels best, i can't speak for another human who I'm not. If you want him to give away his money and team that's certainly within your right to. I've never seen others clean their feet, I'm not sure what you're referring to.

---

I do, that's the joke. You didn't answer any question. I asked what you think he should do. I hope he prints out this thread and whips his ass with it but that's me.

---

I very clearly stated Jerry should do what he thinks is best. Are you lying about me not answering or did you just read the words wrong?

Coog97 said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

Coog97 said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

Belton Ag said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

Where did i state he had anything to apologize for? I'm not assuming anything, he has previously confirmed that was him in the picture.


Not sure if you understand how apologizing works. You can't apologize on someone's else's behalf based on your perception or opinions of them. You're saying the point of your whataboutism is to bring attention to the picture being not taken today? I don't have a side, that's a weird sentence to just randomly sprout out in response to a question. I don't have a party and again are you saying there can only literally be one thing or action that should be focused on at any given time? Humans aren't allowed to focus or acknowledge multiple things at once? Most objective people who are aware of why anyone would be at school integrations in the south during the 50's know exactly why he and anyone would be there. For all I know he and a handful of students before school started showed up to oppose and harass kids with hate for being black and going to school. This would be based on what we factually know about people who showed up at school integrations south during the 50's. Many factual actions that are downright disgusting. Adults spitting on children because of the color of there skin. These are documented undeniable things that occurred over the south. Why would he need the benefit of doubt if he wasn't truly racist? In fact where did I use the term "muh racism"?

---

he has nothing to apologize for.

you are automatically assigning guilt to him.

---

---

i did not say anything about whether it was him in the picture or not.

as you said, he already admitted that is him in the picture.

he still has nothing to apologize about.

---

You stated I'm automatically assigning guilt. I'm letting you know he had factually admitted to being there as 1 of the few students we can clearly see. This was not during school or in between classes. This was before school began and he was there to oppose and harass kids for being black and going to school with hate. This is very clearly documented and acknowledged across the south when schools integrated during the 50s. Those facts are undeniable. When did I state has had anything to apologize for, ill ask again? Of course he doesn't have to apologize, being morally racist on its own isn't illegal.

---

He says he wasn't there to harass or oppose them, he says he was curious about the events. Is every white person in that picture a racist? What about the guy holding the news camera, was he there to harass and oppose the black students?

---

You're certainly free to believe whatever nonsensical lie you'd like to believe. I can safely say no objective person with base level intellect and factual understanding of those who opposed integration in the south during the 50s would even attempt to tell that lie after being caught red handed. So his defense is he was curious about a handful of his classmates showing up to oppose and harass kids for being black and going to school with hate? Based on facts we know about that time period and actions from that time period in that state regarding the integration of black kids it's completely plausible and highly probable every white person in that picture in 1950 Arkansas opposing kids going to school simply for being black is racist. The guy with the camera was there to record all the white people opposing and harassing kids with hate for being black and going to school.

---

Your ridiculous, unnecessary and, quite frankly, really poorly executed loquacity is comical to me… even more so than your absurd and ignorant assertions.

---

I appreciate your word salad that address nothing being said in my post as a last ditch effort to save face. I understand how some truths are uncomfortable to deal with and the need to deflect away as quickly as possible.

---

Of course, you didn't get it. Happy Thanksgiving, little buddy!

---

Didn't mention not getting it though…. May I suggest catching up on some brief comprehension skills?

Truthlasthope is a leftist, liberal bent bigot. He's no different than the Democrat slave owners, he's no different than the democrats dressing in bedsheets and blackface, he's no different than the democrats that don't want racial jungles in there schools.

I mean truthslasthope HAS to agree and support all that racist trash, he's a liberal leftist after all, and it's documented that's what they used to support.

So, truthhope, I'm just applying your own logic to yourself. Or maybe I'm seeing you through a certain color lense and don't actually understand you, maybe, just maybe, people and ideas can change over time.

You're a disgusting racist, truthlasthope. You assume racism is at Jerry's heart even though he said he was a curious kid.

Jerry Jones is an octogenarian billionaire who has been photographed doing blow with strippers. I don't think an article from the 1950s will impact him much. Just saying.

I'm not sure if he's discussed this picture but he has discussed, in a 2010 interview, being there.

But you clearly believe he is a racist and racism is wrong, it should be punished. If you don't feel like he should be punished, you are then okay with racist acts.

What should happen to Jerry Jones? If he's guilty of racism, his punishment should not be up to him, right?

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

ShaggySLC said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

ShaggySLC said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

ShaggySLC said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

Belton Ag said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

C@LAg said:

---

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

Where did i state he had anything to apologize for? I'm not assuming anything, he has previously confirmed that was him in the picture.


Not sure if you understand how apologizing works. You can't apologize on someone's else's behalf based on your perception or opinions of them. You're saying the point of your whataboutism is to bring attention to the picture being not taken today? I don't have a side, that's a weird sentence to just randomly sprout out in response to a question. I don't have a party and again are you saying there can only literally be one thing or action that should be focused on at any given time? Humans aren't allowed to focus or acknowledge multiple things at once? Most objective people who are aware of why anyone would be at school integrations in the south during the 50's know exactly why he and anyone would be there. For all I know he and a handful of students before school started showed up to oppose and harass kids with hate for being black and going to school. This would be based on what we factually know about people who showed up at school integrations south during the 50's. Many factual actions that are downright disgusting. Adults spitting on children because of the color of there skin. These are documented undeniable things that occurred over the south. Why would he need the benefit of doubt if he wasn't truly racist? In fact where did I use the term "muh racism"?

---

he has nothing to apologize for.

you are automatically assigning guilt to him.

---

---

i did not say anything about whether it was him in the picture or not.

as you said, he already admitted that is him in the picture.

he still has nothing to apologize about.

---

You stated I'm automatically assigning guilt. I'm letting you know he had factually admitted to being there as 1 of the few students we can clearly see. This was not during school or in between classes. This was before school began and he was there to oppose and harass kids for being black and going to school with hate. This is very clearly documented and acknowledged across the south when schools integrated during the 50s. Those facts are undeniable. When did I state has had anything to apologize for, ill ask again? Of course he doesn't have to apologize, being morally racist on its own isn't illegal.

---

He says he wasn't there to harass or oppose them, he says he was curious about the events. Is every white person in that picture a racist? What about the guy holding the news camera, was he there to harass and oppose the black students?

---

You're certainly free to believe whatever nonsensical lie you'd like to believe. I can safely say no objective person with base level intellect and factual understanding of those who opposed integration in the south during the 50s would even attempt to tell that lie after being caught red handed. So his defense is he was curious about a handful of his classmates showing up to oppose and harass kids for being black and going to school with hate? Based on facts we know about that time period and actions from that time period in that state regarding the integration of black kids it's completely plausible and highly probable every white person in that picture in 1950 Arkansas opposing kids going to school simply for being black is racist. The guy with the camera was there to record all the white people opposing and harassing kids with hate for being black and going to school.

---

You care a lot about this

---

Factually I care very little. But whatever you need to get you through your day is fine with me

---

Obviously from the novel you've written in this thread. So what should Jerry do now in your mind? Give away his money, his team, clean their feet like you see other shamed filled whites doing? Factually you care a lot lol

---

Are you aware of what a novel actual is? And even then that's has no correlation on caring. Jerry should do whatever he feels best, i can't speak for another human who I'm not. If you want him to give away his money and team that's certainly within your right to. I've never seen others clean their feet, I'm not sure what you're referring to.

---

I do, that's the joke. You didn't answer any question. I asked what you think he should do. I hope he prints out this thread and whips his ass with it but that's me.

---

I very clearly stated Jerry should do what he thinks is best. Are you lying about me not answering or did you just read the words wrong?

---

No you don't, that's the lie ol boy. You don't write all the crap you have if you didn't. Keep doing you, its hilarious.

Misery loves company. If truthlasthope can convince himself that Jerry Jones is a racist, that will make him feel a little better about being a racist himself.

Put that feather in your hat and call it macaroni!

aggiephoenix02 said:

---

Truthlasthope is a leftist, liberal bent bigot. He's no different than the Democrat slave owners, he's no different than the democrats dressing in bedsheets and blackface, he's no different than the democrats that don't want racial jungles in there schools.

I mean truthslasthope HAS to agree and support all that racist trash, he's a liberal leftist after all, and it's documented that's what they used to support.

So, truthhope, I'm just applying your own logic to yourself. Or maybe I'm seeing you through a certain color lense and don't actually understand you, maybe, just maybe, people and ideas can change over time.

You're a disgusting racist, truthlasthope. You assume racism is at Jerry's heart even though he said he was a curious kid.

---

I belong to no political affiliation. Your first sign you've got nothing of substance to bring. Just ranting away with whataboutism on a thread not involving politics or politicians. Well I'm black and the slaves were black and the slave owners were white. So there is that glaring difference. Sign 2 you're just ranting. My face is already black so there would never no need to dress on black face. You surely are swinging and missing quite a bit. Well it's ironic that the subject matter of this OP is literally Jerry and a handful of classmates making it their business to let those black kids no they don't won't to go to school with them. No I actually don't have to agree and support any racist anything from either of the political parties. It's fairly easy for me to not to. I haven't spoken on any logic or applied any logic to anyone so I'm not sure what you're referring to when you say "my" logic. People and ideas can change over time. They also cannot, not sure why you're fixated on half of the possible outcomes. I don't assume racism at Jerry's heart, just acknowledging his actions.

Jerry Jones firing of Tom Landry is 10,000 times worse than whatever supposedly he did or did not do in this picture. At least to Cowboys fans who were around at the time and will never forgive that.

PanzerAggie06 said:

---

I'm not sure if he's discussed this picture but he has discussed, in a 2010 interview, being there.

---

Yes I've seen it reported he did admit and discuss somewhat in 2010 but that he also thought the picture would never actually get out in wide circulation.

Quote:

---

and the slave owners were white.

---

Factually wrong. You are delusional.

You belong to no political affiliation? You're just spouting liberal bile all over this thread, can't stop posting to the point you're sounding ridiculous, but you don't care, and don't support one party over the other? Right.

So why are you here? Like arguing? Trolling? Getting paid to post stupid takes?

TheTruthsLastHope said:

---

aggiephoenix02 said:

---

Truthlasthope is a leftist, liberal bent bigot. He's no different than the Democrat slave owners, he's no different than the democrats dressing in bedsheets and blackface, he's no different than the democrats that don't want racial jungles in there schools.

I mean truthslasthope HAS to agree and support all that racist trash, he's a liberal leftist after all, and it's documented that's what they used to support.

So, truthhope, I'm just applying your own logic to yourself. Or maybe I'm seeing you through a certain color lense and don't actually understand you, maybe, just maybe, people and ideas can change over time.

You're a disgusting racist, truthlasthope. You assume racism is at Jerry's heart even though he said he was a curious kid.

---

I belong to no political affiliation. Your first sign you've got nothing of substance to bring. Just ranting away with whataboutism on a thread not involving politics or politicians. Well I'm black and the slaves were black and the slave owners were white. So there is that glaring difference. Sign 2 you're just ranting. My face is already black so there would never no need to dress on black face. You surely are swinging and missing quite a bit. Well it's ironic that the subject matter of this OP is literally Jerry and a handful of classmates making it their business to let those black kids no they don't won't to go to school with them. No I actually don't have to agree and support any racist anything from either of the political parties. It's fairly easy for me to not to. I haven't spoken on any logic or applied any logic to anyone so I'm not sure what you're referring to when you say "my" logic. People and ideas can change over time. They also cannot, not sure why you're fixated on half of the possible outcomes. I don't assume racism at Jerry's heart, just acknowledging his actions.

---

If English isn't your first language, you're actually doing pretty well, dude!

The Libby's must be getting time and a half posting on a holiday