₦airaland Forum

You’re steupid if your argument is that a professional in the line of duty is excused to use unnecessary violence because someone hurt his or her feeling with their words. This is the so called logic you guys claim to have?

basilico:
So because you are black and pregnant you should go insulting cops then blame race instead of hormones.
The cop would probably have slapped a white woman who insulted her, stop dragging in race. It's the cops anger management problem , most likely aggravated by the black woman.
It's difficult to reason with someone whoae mind is made up that every white person is evil .

basilico:
So because you are black and pregnant you should go insulting cops then blame race instead of hormones.
The cop would probably have slapped a white woman who insulted her, stop dragging in race. It's the cops anger management problem , most likely aggravated by the black woman.
It's difficult to reason with someone whoae mind is made up that every white person is evil .

You are a vile person for this comment. Blaming a pregnant victim for her own assault by an officer.

cococandy:
You’re steupid if your argument is that a professional in the line of duty is excuse to use unnecessary violence because someone hurt his or her feeling with their words. This is the so called logic you guys claim to have?

Have I not said the police officer has anger management issues. It behoves her to make the arrest if need be as painless as possible as per police training.
The culprit is also obligated to obey law enforcement. Facial without verbal communication can be construed as rudeness too.
I posted the conversation when she was stopped, clearly she wasn't cooperative..Whether it's her hormones or racial biases when facing an officer, the culprit should have just done as she was told.
I don't see how they got to the police station and she got punched without provocation just like that. I'd love to be the fly on the wall when she got punched . My take. She wasn't punched for no reason.


It's never occured to you that I'm the biggest proponent of do the right thing always on this nairaland.
Do the right thing I repeat, it costs you absolutely nothing to be nice. Zero. It saves you a ton of problems

What if that girl got into premature labour due to HBP and she is forced to undergo an emergency Caesarian section . Who loses? The cops goes to jail yes , but what about her and the risks.

Please stop talking.

I really do not enjoy being disrespectful but I can’t help calling out the steupid stuff you say here daily. Then of course I feel bad afterwards because I didn’t enjoy the interaction. But there’s no way in the name of all that’s holy you don’t see how silly you sound with this lame argument.

basilico:
Have I not said the police officer has anger management issues. It behoves her to make the arrest if need be as painless as possible as per police training.
The culprit is also obligated to obey law enforcement. Facial without verbal communication can be construed as rudeness too.
I posted the conversation when she was stopped, clearly she wasn't cooperative..Whether it's her hormones or racial biases when facing an policer , the culprit should have just done as she was told.
I don't see how they got to the police station and she got punched without provocation just like that. I'd love to be the fly on the wall when she gut punched . My take. She wasn't punched for no reason.


It's never occured to you that I'm the biggest proponent of do the right thing always on this nairaland.
Do the right thing I repeat, it costs you absolutely nothing to be nice. Zero. It saves you a ton of problems

What if that girl got into premature labour due to HBP and she is forced to undergo an emergency Caesarian section . Who loses? The cops goes to jail yes , but what about her and the risks.

cococandy:
Please stop talking.

I really do not enjoy being disrespectful but I can’t help calling out the steupid stuff you say here daily. Then of course I feel bad afterwards because I didn’t enjoy the interaction. But there’s no way in the name of all that’s holy you don’t see how silly you sound with this lame argument.

Wonder why you can't get what I'm driving at.
She should not have been punched. I don't think she was just punched out of the blue.
That simple.

I'm blaming the officer. That's her job ,her daily beat and she needs to pay whether the black woman was in the wrong.
Since we don't know what transpired ,I won't call it a racist thing until there's more info.

Unlike you I just don't buy everything I hear. Like this Palestinian blue eyed little girl incident where media excoriated the IDF for arresting a child.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPhEjECGjAs?si=jJVR4aWKPovEqAcs

What you don't see is that the press was right behind filming the provocation to sell to leftist rag outlets.

GracieX3:
You are a vile person for this comment. Blaming a pregnant victim for her own assault by an officer.

benalvino3:
Walsh’s man argument is not:
Emmett Till deserved to be murdered because he behaved improperly.

His argument is closer to:
Important details of the popular account are uncertain, disputed or inaccurately repeated; therefore, the case has been simplified into a politically useful morality story, and we should question other racial narratives presented the same way.

But the guy subscribed to strawman; he said something like this - Whatever Till did, it could not justify kidnapping, torture and murder.

That statement is obviously correct but it does not refute Walsh’s principal historical claim.

Walsh never needs Till’s alleged conduct to justify his murder.

He only needs to establish that the familiar account Till innocently whistled, Carolyn Bryant completely fabricated everything and later admitted lying contains claims that are less certain than commonly presented.

My biggest issue is that he constantly tries to make it seem like Walsh justified the killing, even though Walsh said none of the events justified the brutal killing of Till.

I was going to say "read between the lines" or something like that but it is not even necessary to do so to figure out where Walsh was heading. In framing the matter as a sexual assault on the white woman and even drawing Emmet's father into the matter and saying that his father's conduct in terms of sexual assault was telling as well, Walsh set out to criminalize a fourteen year old child and it is not surprising that you fail to see that given your antecedents.

In screaming red bold.

John Yoo is a conservative legal scholar and law professor who has confirmed he is joining a Department of Justice investigation team led by longtime attorney Joe diGenova.🔍

Details of His New RoleThe Mission: He will serve as a periodic consultant and Special Government Employee advising diGenova and Victoria Toensing on constitutional matters.

The Probe: The Miami-based investigation is looking into whether past law enforcement and intelligence officials engaged in a "grand conspiracy" against Donald Trump.

The Scope: The probe covers a wide window, investigating actions spanning from the 2016 Russia election-interference investigation to the 2022 FBI search of Mar-a-Lago.

Deepsight..This Florida investigation has racked up hundreds of subpoenas on those deep state thugs like Brennan, Comey, Strzok, Lisa Page etc.
RICO charges don't have a time limit.
IOW the e Jean Carroll case is not over, her case is part of the extra judicial lawfare launched by Obama and continued by XiBiden. SCOTUS refusal to take it up don't mean the allegations pass the litmus test.
Under Merrick Garland lawfare DOJ the accusations were one way intended to jail and put out Trump once and for all.

Now since I like diverging, if Merrick Garland had a single photo of Trump abusing girls with Epstein he never needed to wage all those cases , namely

1.
Jack Smith, Federal Election Interference Case (U.S. v. Donald J. Trump, Washington D.C.)
2.
Jack Smith , Federal Classified Documents Case (U.S. v. Donald J. Trump, Florida)
3.
New York Falsifying Business Records / Hush Money Case (People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump)
4.
Georgia Election Interference Case (State of Georgia v. Donald J. Trump, et al.)Civil Lawsuits & Judgments
5.
New York Civil Business Fraud Case (People of the State of New York by Letitia James v. Donald J. Trump, et al.)
6.
E. Jean Carroll Sexual Abuse & Defamation Suit I
7.
E. Jean Carroll Defamation Suit II
8.
January 6th Civil Liability Lawsuits (Blassingame v. Trump, Thompson v. Trump, and consolidated cases filed by lawmakers and Capitol Police officers)
9.
14th Amendment Constitutional Ballot Access Disqualification Challenges (Trump v. Anderson, et al.)
10.
Mary Trump Fraud and Fraudulent Inducement Lawsuit

Since you are a lawyer I think you know you don't need a sledgehammer to kill a single flea.

basilico:
In screaming red bold.

John Yoo is a conservative legal scholar and law professor who has confirmed he is joining a Department of Justice investigation team led by longtime attorney Joe diGenova.🔍

Details of His New RoleThe Mission: He will serve as a periodic consultant and Special Government Employee advising diGenova and Victoria Toensing on constitutional matters.

The Probe: The Miami-based investigation is looking into whether past law enforcement and intelligence officials engaged in a "grand conspiracy" against Donald Trump.

The Scope: The probe covers a wide window, investigating actions spanning from the 2016 Russia election-interference investigation to the 2022 FBI search of Mar-a-Lago.

Deepsight..This Florida investigation has racked up hundreds of subpoenas on those deep state thugs like Brennan, Comey, Strzok, Lisa Page etc.
RICO charges don't have a time limit.
IOW the e Jean Carroll case is not over, her case is part of the extra judicial lawfare launched by Obama and continued by XiBiden. SCOTUS refusal to take it up don't mean the allegations pass the litmus test.
Under Merrick Garland lawfare DOJ the accusations were one way intended to jail and put out Trump once and for all.

Now since I like diverging, if Merrick Garland had a single photo of Trump abusing girls with Epstein he never needed to wage all those cases , namely

1.
Jack Smith, Federal Election Interference Case (U.S. v. Donald J. Trump, Washington D.C.)
2.
Jack Smith , Federal Classified Documents Case (U.S. v. Donald J. Trump, Florida)
3.
New York Falsifying Business Records / Hush Money Case (People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump)
4.
Georgia Election Interference Case (State of Georgia v. Donald J. Trump, et al.)Civil Lawsuits & Judgments
5.
New York Civil Business Fraud Case (People of the State of New York by Letitia James v. Donald J. Trump, et al.)
6.
E. Jean Carroll Sexual Abuse & Defamation Suit I
7.
E. Jean Carroll Defamation Suit II
8.
January 6th Civil Liability Lawsuits (Blassingame v. Trump, Thompson v. Trump, and consolidated cases filed by lawmakers and Capitol Police officers)
9.
14th Amendment Constitutional Ballot Access Disqualification Challenges (Trump v. Anderson, et al.)
10.
Mary Trump Fraud and Fraudulent Inducement Lawsuit

Since you are a lawyer I think you know you don't need a sledgehammer to kill a single flea.

I think it would be best if both parties would stop the tit-for-tat retribution campaign and instead focus on the problems faced by ordinary Americans. In the case of this investigation, it is likely to just make lawyers in Miami richer by giving them more billing hours. Instead, the DoJ should focus on criminals who actually harm the country.

Historical injustices should be settled once and for all.
Merrick Garland went after Trump with the full backup of the DOJ surveillance state. The laws were broken.There should be retribution, the prime movers should go to jail. I have pinned down over 20 names, FBI Director Kash Patel had over 60.

For Joe Biden years it was one sided. Criminals who broke the law blatantly trying to jail the only person who would have upended the wheel.
Never responded to you here if my memory serves me right by the way. Are you new here?

CaptainIgbo:
I think it would be best if both parties would stop the tit-for-tat retribution campaign and instead focus on the problems faced by ordinary Americans. In the case of this investigation, it is likely to just make lawyers in Miami richer by giving them more billing hours. Instead, the DoJ should focus on criminals who actually harm the country.

GracieX3:
Why are you defending racist nonsense.

The white woman in question is not reliable all other testimonies about what happened in the store contradicted hers. Emmet had cousins at the store too.

But your racist ass would believe the white woman

Exactly the point Matt Walsh is making.

How is it okay for you to make the point but when another person make it you scream racism.

It is also mentioned that she didn't tell her husband when he returned, it was people who were in the store that told him first.

DeepSight:
I was going to say "read between the lines" or something like that but it is not even necessary to do so to figure out where Walsh was heading. In framing the matter as a sexual assault on the white woman and even drawing Emmet's father into the matter and saying that his father's conduct in terms of sexual assault was telling as well, Walsh set out to criminalize a fourteen year old child and it is not surprising that you fail to see that given your antecedents.

Yes, he was trying to bring the like father like son situation. Maybe that is relevant to Till's behaviour, maybe not. He himself said it.

There is also an account of Till's friends bewildered and scared to death for what Till was doing.

At the end of the day, he said the murder was brutal and wrong.

But that still does not address his main argument: how the story is taught and whether disputed claims are presented to students as settled historical fact.

benalvino3:
Yes, he was trying to bring the like father like son situation. Maybe that is relevant to Till's behaviour, maybe not. He himself said it.

There is also an account of Till's friends bewildered and scared to death for what Till was doing.

At the end of the day, he said the murder was brutal and wrong.

But that still does not address his main argument: how the story is taught and whether disputed claims are presented to students as settled historical fact.

You mean you don't know why Till's friends would be scared to death? Are you that ignorant of the history of race relations in the US particularly with white women and black men?

DeepSight:
You mean you don't know why Till's friends would be scared to death? Are you that ignorant of the history of race relations in the US particularly with white women and black men?

I understand why his friends would have been terrified. In that period, even an accusation involving a Black boy and a white woman could have deadly consequences.

But their fear does not establish exactly what happened inside the store. It shows that they understood the danger of the situation, not that every detail of Carolyn Bryant’s later account was true.

That is the point under dispute: there were conflicting accounts, and the precise encounter remains uncertain.

Acknowledging the racial climate explains their reaction; it does not magically resolve a disputed historical question.

And Till likely understood that danger too, which may explain why his friends were so alarmed by whatever they believed he was doing.

None of that justifies his murder, but “they were afraid because of racism” is not evidence that one specific version of the encounter is necessarily correct.

Matt Problem is how the situation is disputed yet what is being taught in school is definitive.

benalvino3:
Exactly the point Matt Walsh is making.

How is it okay for you to make the point but when another person make it you scream racism.

It is also mentioned that she didn't tell her husband when he returned, it was people who were in the store that told him first.

You and Matt Walsh are racists against Blacks. I say this because, even the white woman's initial testimony differed from her final testimony. In one, Emmett grabbed her waist but in another, he only held her hand.

All other testimonies stated that Emmett Till only communicated verbally with her, either by words or whistling, then left the store.

You have no point. A false allegation on a black person by a white person in Segregation era in the USA that results in death is a racial problem. One which you love to cover up.

You see, you have no point. You even brought up Emmetts father. You are sick. How is it relevant? You are a sicko.

benalvino3:
I understand why his friends would have been terrified. In that period, even an accusation involving a Black boy and a white woman could have deadly consequences.

But their fear does not establish exactly what happened inside the store. It shows that they understood the danger of the situation, not that every detail of Carolyn Bryant’s later account was true.

That is the point under dispute: there were conflicting accounts, and the precise encounter remains uncertain.

Acknowledging the racial climate explains their reaction; it does not magically resolve a disputed historical question.

And Till likely understood that danger too, which may explain why his friends were so alarmed by whatever they believed he was doing.

None of that justifies his murder, but “they were afraid because of racism” is not evidence that one specific version of the encounter is necessarily correct.

Matt Problem is how the situation is disputed yet what is being taught in school is definitive.

Can you please draw my attention to where in the video Matt condemned the killing, because the reviewer says he didn't.

basilico:
Y

I cannot correct what the Supreme Court decides.
Notice conservatives reluctantly accept court decisions.
If it was democrats who were aggrieved they'd be calling for expansion of the court

Or rioting and threatening the justices

New York senator Kristen Gillbrand is happy the Communists are taking over the Democrat Party

Democrat Senator Kristen Gillibrand says that communists taking over the Democrat party is “a very good trend for nationwide elections.” pic.twitter.com/FzfUe1ptEt

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) June 30, 2026

What could go wrong. In 1917 Lenin and Trotsky used the same tactics to overcome the feudal Czars and establish the Communist state.

Democrat PA senator Fetterman can see the writing on the wall.

🚨 NEW: John Fetterman BLASTS “dirtbag left” wing of Democrats amid a series of shocking wins in Maine, New York and says they should “start their own party” pic.twitter.com/PSx3RcX27M

— TV News Now (@TVNewsNow) June 30, 2026

I'll paraphrase the Muslim Brotherhood( Ikhwan in Arabic) mission in America. A 1991 leaked internal document.

"The Ikhwan must understand that all their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all religions.".

The left joined the islamists to first overcome the Christians then usher in Communism
Christianity is the big threat to communists, it must first be defeated. The islamists have other ideas , subjugate christians and they go tango with the far left. That's why you see Ilhan Omar, Mamdani, Tlaib, London Sadiq Khan , Keith Ellison etc joining forces with the liberal left to take power. The left gets communists,then the islamists overthrow them and install Sharia.
Allahu Akbar.
Inshallah.

Deepsight , I have a wealth of knowledge and resources farther than you can fathom . I ain't bragging

Supreme Court affirms birthright citizenship.

PDPGuy:
Supreme Court affirms birthright citizenship.

yep..

PDPGuy:
Supreme Court affirms birthright citizenship.

So it took some ragtag mullahs giving trump a black eye to get the SC to find the semblance of a spine?

A scholarly article captures everything going wrong in America.

https://amgreatness.com/2026/06/30/the-new-socialists-elite-ungrateful-and-toxic-as-ever/

Growing Radicalism: The author states that new, elite socialist figures are pushing traditional Democrats aside and advancing an aggressive agenda that lacks majority public support.

Proposed Agendas: The article outlines several core goals of this movement, including open borders, systemic political restructuring (such as packing the court and ending the Electoral College), government takeovers of housing, heavy taxes on wealth, and race-based reparations.Hypocrisy and Resentment: The author accuses these socialist leaders of being ungrateful elites who benefit from American capitalism and luxury while simultaneously trying to destroy the system that enabled their success.

Trump as a Counterrevolutionary: The piece concludes that the radical left's intense hostility toward Donald Trump exists because his administration actively dismantles the progressive system by cutting off their funding, enforcing deportations, and banning diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives

GloriousGbola:
So it took some ragtag mullahs giving trump a black eye to get the SC to find the semblance of a spine?

Lol
I don’t know whether Iran would want to take partial credit for this ruling 😂

But it’s absolutely ridiculous that it had to take 9 lawyers (in robes) to say that the plain language of the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause is what it is

Another blockbuster ruling from SCOTUS

PDPGuy:
Lol
I don’t know whether Iran would want to take partial credit for this ruling 😂

But it’s absolutely ridiculous that it had to take 9 lawyers (in robes) to say that the plain language of the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause is what it is

Unfortunately, it was 6. Tells you everything one needs to know about the "strict constructionists" on the court.
This Supreme Court has proven itself to be nothing more than an unelectected political body aggregating power to themselves.
100% in support of a new Dem congress changing the structure of the court.

Also, this outcome was expected.
I'm sure Roberts took it to give the Court a way to say "look, we are not beholden to Trump", while mostly beholden to Trump and the Republican party.

This is what my screen looks like, just by blocking Basilico and Bemeruca. I'm 100% it's them posting nonsense and people trying to explain to them why it's nonsense.

DeepSight:
Can you please draw my attention to where in the video Matt condemned the killing, because the reviewer says he didn't.

Even the reviewers own videos shows where Matt did it. Are you serious? Did you even watch what you asked me to watch?

24 minutes into your video, he said the brutal killing was not justified. It was wrong.

benalvino3:
Even the reviewers own videos shows where Matt did it. Are you serious? Did you even watch what you asked me to watch?

24 minutes into your video, he said the brutal killing was not justified. It was wrong.

Okay. I have heard it, my bad. He really said it just in passing and I missed it earlier. He dwelt rather on how Emmet was wrong for supposedly sexually assaulting the woman and even called the whole thing a myth. So its entire direction is still obvious, and it remains sickening to approach the matter the way he did considering the age of the boy and what happened to him.

Aside from this, the man is a known and unapologetic racist.