Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 33

Thread: Terrorist Only Gets 15 Months

  1. #1

    Default Terrorist Only Gets 15 Months

    https://www.foxnews.com/us/disbarred...e-floyd-unrest

    U.S. District Judge Brian Cogan praised the Ivy League-trained attorney for choosing a career in public interest law to fight against social injustices.

    "You’re a remarkable person who did a terrible thing on one night," Cogan said before admonishing her behavior, the news outlet reported. "It displays an amazing amount of arrogance. … It’s just a very arrogant way to think."

    Rahman and Colinford Mattis, a corporate lawyer and Brooklyn community board member, were arrested after allegedly passing out incendiary devices to demonstrators in a crowd in Brooklyn during clashes with the NYPD, days after Floyd died in Minneapolis during an arrest.

    Floyd's death set off a nationwide wave of protests and clashes between demonstrators and police.

    Both attorneys were arrested after Mattis, who was in the driver’s seat of a van, pulled over near the 88th police precinct, and Rahman got out and tossed a lit Molotov cocktail into a police cruiser.

    Nobody was injured in the attack but security cameras recorded Rahman hurling the cocktail into the police vehicle, which was severely damaged.

    Officers said they found a lighter, a Bud Light beer bottle filled with toilet paper, and a gasoline tank in the back of the minivan driven by Mattis.

    Rahman and Mattis have both been disbarred. Mattis is expected to be sentenced in December.

    ***

    Not only did she fire bomb a police cruiser she also *passed out incendiary devices* to demonstrators. Like holy shit. This as a lawyer so she fully knew how illegal her actions were. But of course since she's a lefty darling they gave her a sweetheart deal for her terrorism when they could have easily put her away for 10 years.

  2. #2
    The US doesn't have statutes to prosecute Domestic Terrorists (we've only focused on the foreign types, afaik).

    But of course you like to use the word TERRORIST because it's inflammatory and riles up the Fox News base. And you'd love to paint this as Left vs Right but that's just wrong. There were plenty of 'terrorists' and lawyers behind the violent 1/6 coup attempt, but Fox News has lied about it and Trump's base fell for it. Just like you.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by GGT View Post
    The US doesn't have statutes to prosecute Domestic Terrorists (we've only focused on the foreign types, afaik).

    But of course you like to use the word TERRORIST because it's inflammatory and riles up the Fox News base. And you'd love to paint this as Left vs Right but that's just wrong. There were plenty of 'terrorists' and lawyers behind the violent 1/6 coup attempt, but Fox News has lied about it and Trump's base fell for it. Just like you.
    GGT are you familiar with the term "whataboutism"

  4. #4

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    GGT are you familiar with the term "whataboutism"
    Maybe if you posted against your own side with even half the fervor and time you devote to the left, that might have some value. As it is, whataboutism is a completely valid response to any of your asinine threads. And it's not even whataboutism here. Whataboutism deflects some issue with an unrelated issue. This isn't unrelated. You originally defended and have since just minimalized and ignored extensive destruction of property, vandalism, injurious violence and cop-killing done by your lunatics. But you expect us to care about a "cop car" being damaged and no one getting hurt. This isn't whataboutism, Lewk. It's pointing out that your rampant hypocrisy means this is just manufactured outrage. It's not real and hence isn't worthy of a reaction by any of us.


    You haven't made a post exulting in self-defense in response to the Colorado Springs mass-shooting. Local clubgoers subdued their attacker before the police responded. One would think you'd be all over that but you're silent. Why? Is it because they were a bunch of gays? Or is it because they actually did it without having the shoot the attacker to death themselves? Kinda proves you don't care about self-defense at all. It's just a smoke-screen to give you an opportunity for you to jack-off to murder-porn.

    You want us to not engage in what you term "whataboutism"? Grow a spine, a conscious, and a pair of balls first.
    Last edited by LittleFuzzy; 11-21-2022 at 06:35 PM.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    Maybe if you posted against your own side with even half the fervor and time you devote to the left, that might have some value. As it is, whataboutism is a completely valid response to any of your asinine threads. And it's not even whataboutism here. Whataboutism deflects some issue with an unrelated issue. This isn't unrelated. You originally defended and have since just minimalized and ignored extensive destruction of property, vandalism, injurious violence and cop-killing done by your lunatics. But you expect us to care about a "cop car" being damaged and no one getting hurt. This isn't whataboutism, Lewk. It's pointing out that your rampant hypocrisy means this is just manufactured outrage. It's not real and hence isn't worthy of a reaction by any of us.


    You haven't made a post exulting in self-defense in response to the Colorado Springs mass-shooting. Local clubgoers subdued their attacker before the police responded. One would think you'd be all over that but you're silent. Why? Is it because they were a bunch of gays? Or is it because they actually did it without having the shoot the attacker to death themselves? Kinda proves you don't care about self-defense at all. It's just a smoke-screen to give you an opportunity for you to jack-off to murder-porn.

    You want us to not engage in what you term "whataboutism"? Grow a spine, a conscious, and a pair of balls first.
    Lmao check the dates this was posted before the shooting. Also I'd be more inclined to have posted it if it was a good guy with a gun killing the mother fucker.

    This may come as a shock to you but I typically post stories that are political wins from my perspective. I'm not Fox News - I'm under no obligation to post a balanced set of news articles and play it down the middle.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    Lmao check the dates this was posted before the shooting.
    My reply wasn't, and you had not started any new thread exulting in an act of self-defense like you would have if you'd seen a news report about an assailant being shot to death. Well, a black assailant. We all know the fact that this perp was a white guy connected to a MAGA politician is another reason for your silence.


    Also I'd be more inclined to have posted it if it was a good guy with a gun killing the mother fucker.
    If you'd actually read my post, you'd see I pointed this out. You don't give a rat's ass about self-defense. It's just an excuse you tell yourself so you don't have to feel bad about fapping to what really gets you off, black murder-porn.

    This may come as a shock to you but I typically post stories that are political wins from my perspective. I'm not Fox News - I'm under no obligation to post a balanced set of news articles and play it down the middle.
    Which means our behavior which you choose to label "whataboutism" is in fact a totally justified response. We're under no obligation whatsoever to feel any sort of concern about someone getting only 15 months for a crime that didn't so much as put a papercut on a single person.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post

    If you'd actually read my post, you'd see I pointed this out. You don't give a rat's ass about self-defense. It's just an excuse you tell yourself so you don't have to feel bad about fapping to what really gets you off, black murder-porn.

    No the point would be if they had used a gun it would have been a feather in the cap of 2A people. But are you suggesting its better that the murderous piece of shit didn't die? Would not the world be better off with the guy dead?

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    No the point would be if they had used a gun it would have been a feather in the cap of 2A people.
    That's a lie. We all know it's a lie because you already told us it was a lie because it doesn't count to you if they use a gun to subdue their attacker either but only to kill them. Goes to show that the 2nd amendment is also just a smoke-screen for your real interest. You only care about it because you read it as a license to kill people. To fulfill your fantasy of shooting someone (probably a black someone) to death.

    But are you suggesting its better that the murderous piece of shit didn't die?
    Yes? No shit, Sherlock, of course it is. Would the world have been better off if he'd died of a stroke a few days ago, before he could shoot up a nightclub? Probably. But his death after killing people does absolutely nothing to improve the world, and it's quite likely it wouldn't have any more effect on his harming others in the future than his inevitable incarceration. And you sure as hell don't care about any of the people he could harm in his inevitable incarceration since they're also criminals.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  10. #10
    Its pretty expensive to house someone for the rest of their life. Not to mention the cost of the trial and appeals. It would have been better if 'they' had died. Not only for the cost reasons but it also provides closure to the victim's families.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    Its pretty expensive to house someone for the rest of their life.
    Yes, you think life has no value while all value lies in property and money. You're alone in that. Both the liberals and those of us who are Christian place a high value on human life. No expense is worth taking it. IMO the only possible justification for taking a life is if it's the only way to save other lives.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    Yes, you think life has no value while all value lies in property and money. You're alone in that. Both the liberals and those of us who are Christian place a high value on human life. No expense is worth taking it. IMO the only possible justification for taking a life is if it's the only way to save other lives.
    The lack of empathy you have for the victim's families is concerning.

  13. #13
    A lack of blood lust is not the same as a lack of empathy, Leek.
    There's a man goin' 'round, takin' names
    And he decides who to free and who to blame

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    The lack of empathy you have for the victim's families is concerning.
    Killing someone doesn't do squat to prevent, remove, or heal injuries they've already inflicted on someone else. What it does do is injure the perpetrator (good in your opinion), the perpetrator's own family and loved ones, and also to an extent those inflicting or trying to derive some kind of satisfaction from it.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    Killing someone doesn't do squat to prevent, remove, or heal injuries they've already inflicted on someone else. What it does do is injure the perpetrator (good in your opinion), the perpetrator's own family and loved ones, and also to an extent those inflicting or trying to derive some kind of satisfaction from it.
    Literally the family of victims the world over have said publicly that the carrying out of a death sentence has provided them closure.

  16. #16
    And literally the family of victims the world over have publicly said it didn't help as well. People who were certain it would provide at least a measure of peace afterward have been disappointed. And there are those who were certain it would not help who did find a measure of surcease from it. The possible good gained must be weighed against the definite harm inflicted, not just on the person you want punished, but on others.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    And literally the family of victims the world over have publicly said it didn't help as well. People who were certain it would provide at least a measure of peace afterward have been disappointed. And there are those who were certain it would not help who did find a measure of surcease from it. The possible good gained must be weighed against the definite harm inflicted, not just on the person you want punished, but on others.
    There is no defined harm inflicted against anyone that matters. In cost benefit analysis there is no amount of 'harm' this murderous fatty can suffer that moves any unit of measurement up on the cost scale. There are rational arguments to be made on why the death penalty shouldn't be used, and those revolve around not executing an innocent person. 'They' aren't innocent, guilt is perfectly clear. Mercy for the guilty is cruelty to the innocent.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    There is no defined harm inflicted against anyone that matters.
    Would you look at the massive load of qualifiers in that statement? And every bit of it completely nonsensical because at a bare minimum, every death sentence imposed on someone for murder inflicts the exact same harm on everyone connected to the perpetrator as the harm you're claiming has been suffered by everyone connected to the victims. Something being "lawful" or not has absolutely no bearing on what harm it inflicts on others. The only thing it affects is the ability to seek redress for that harm.

    In cost benefit analysis there is no amount of 'harm' this murderous fatty can suffer that moves any unit of measurement up on the cost scale.
    Says the least Christian and most incorrect person on this board. Wrong. Also very clearly deliberately misunderstanding my position because nowhere did I limit things to just the harm suffered by the perpetrator being executed. Quite clearly the opposite

    Mercy for the guilty is cruelty to the innocent.
    Another lie. Classic you though,. Jean val Jean spending a second out of prison is an act of cruelty against each individual in all of France. Indeed, in all the world. Truly mercy is a contemptible concept (fie on the Christians for the notion), any act of it victimizes every person alive or yet to be born in existence.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  19. #19
    I can barely get through your gibberish Fuzzy. Your logic is so bad, implying that a mass murderer's family suffers because the mass murderer faces justice? LOL they would probably be happier if 'they' died too. (Not the family the 'they' that did the robbery. Such a weird nomenclature we have these days)

  20. #20
    UnChristian narcissistic sociopath that we knew you are, that's the response I expected from you. Of course you only care about your wife, parents, siblings, and children so long as they reflect well on you. If they don't, your "affection" and "love" turns off like a switch and they should be so lucky as to have the state kill them before you can do it yourself as a vigilante, just like any good patriarch engaged in honor-killing.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  21. #21
    The desire for justice should not matter if you have a subjective view of a person. If someone is guilty of murder you should be happy they are punished for said murder even if you have a blood relation to them. If your sibling or parent were a child rapist would you want them brought to justice or not?

  22. #22
    Your hang up lewk is that you think murder is justice. Every debate you have on the subject is and will continue to be in bad faith until you get over that handicap.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  23. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Your hang up lewk is that you think murder is justice. Every debate you have on the subject is and will continue to be in bad faith until you get over that handicap.
    Murder is unlawful killing. The legally applied death penalty or a self defense shooting by definition cannot be murder.

  24. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    The desire for justice should not matter if you have a subjective view of a person.
    There's no such thing as an objective view of a person, just aggregated subjective views. The best any system of justice can do is to be human and strive for impartiality (which is nothing like robotic). And you just explicitly rejected any kind of impartiality.

    If someone is guilty of murder you should be happy they are punished for said murder even if you have a blood relation to them.
    The work-around you've been using for every conservative (while simultaneously expressing disbelief and contempt when others use it on non-conservatives, even if they're actually the victims, like Ahmaud Arbury) is to just choose to disbelieve guilt based solely on on your shared tribal identification. That exact behavior you've already openly admitted governs all your posting around this general topic.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  25. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    Murder is unlawful killing. The legally applied death penalty or a self defense shooting by definition cannot be murder.
    Nonsense, because you love yourself some vigilantism (when it's done by or for conservatives rather than against them) which is definitely unlawful. You only think something is murder if you like/approve of the victim. Anyone you think is guilty of some wrongdoing in the past you approve of their death and think there should be no prosecution.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  26. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    Nonsense, because you love yourself some vigilantism (when it's done by or for conservatives rather than against them) which is definitely unlawful. You only think something is murder if you like/approve of the victim. Anyone you think is guilty of some wrongdoing in the past you approve of their death and think there should be no prosecution.
    Now seems like a good time to remind everyone of Lewk's bonkers attempts to defend those who murdered Ahmaud Arbery.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  27. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    Nonsense, because you love yourself some vigilantism (when it's done by or for conservatives rather than against them) which is definitely unlawful. You only think something is murder if you like/approve of the victim. Anyone you think is guilty of some wrongdoing in the past you approve of their death and think there should be no prosecution.
    Nah it is absolutely is still murder but sometimes murder is ok in my book. Its still illegal which makes it murder but it ended up making the world much better.

    Examples: Marianne Bachmeier and Gary Plauché are heroic.

  28. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Now seems like a good time to remind everyone of Lewk's bonkers attempts to defend those who murdered Ahmaud Arbery.
    Based on the initial story, yes. After more information came out, I changed my perspective. This happens. For example I also thought the Pulse shooting was a targeted anti-gay attack when it turns out that wasn't the case. I imagine you thought so as well, we are randos commenting on news stories not media professionals or political figures - our hot takes have no impact on anything.

  29. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    Based on the initial story, yes. After more information came out, I changed my perspective. This happens. For example I also thought the Pulse shooting was a targeted anti-gay attack when it turns out that wasn't the case. I imagine you thought so as well, we are randos commenting on news stories not media professionals or political figures - our hot takes have no impact on anything.

    Based on the narrative you elected to consume as someone so "media savvy" (another laughable handicap you need to address ). Only abandoned when you felt the position was unsustainable, which admittedly for you is a rare flip on these boards, but common enough among closet racists like yourself. Everyone else was pretty quick to jump into the whole hunting black folk for sport is bad camp.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  30. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    Based on the initial story, yes. After more information came out, I changed my perspective.
    That's another lie. Your perspective "changed" in that you stopped insisting it was a lawful citizen's arrest and started insisting it was self-defense because Arbury, in a last ditch attempt to save himself by getting the gun away from them, made their shooting of him self-defense since his trying to get ahold of the gun was a threat to THEM. The very furthest you've ever been willing to concede there is "well, none of us were there so we can't really be certain what happened. Reasonable doubt." Oddly enough, that never seems to apply in the case of a black offender, you're always quite certain then despite not having been there.

    There's a reason I keep hammering on this line, Lewk, and it's not just because I think you're a miserable excuse for a Christian and that I take issue with your asinine and hypocritical behavior. It's because you keep trying to insist on the blindness of justice when criminal justice in the US uses a jury system and you not only are the furthest thing from impartial and blind, you've started to openly admit to it and say you don't have to be. And you're not alone in that, there are a terrifying number of others who share your vile attitudes. How is justice supposed to be blind if you refuse to do your part?
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •