yes of course, no racism, lol [This video is actually flagged and cannot even be embedded, lol] https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=191&v=SUnobHHAKxo and this
LOL, this reads like some kind of a parody out of mad magazine. A.) First off, are you really trying to accuse american football of being "weak kneed" when soccer has created more pussies than ballet? Most american sports will penalize players for acting like a soccer homo and pretending to be hurt. You guys seem to celebrate that kind of obnoxious behaviour. The princesses in Your version of football go down like a bag of wet shit if the opposing team looks at them funny. There is no sport in the world where men are more feminine than European Football. The only one I could think of is maybe womens syncronised swimming. B.) Never ending bitching about 9/11? Are you kidding me? The only reason you fruit cakes in germany dont cry about all the battles you lost is because the history books have already chalked you turds up as the losers of every single modern war. These days the term "Blitzkrieg" sounds more like something that some old lady will do in her diapers than a sign of german military power, and the only difference between your dear leader angela merkel and Chaz Bono is that chaz will atleast admit to having a penis at one point. C.) You want to talk about us supposedly not claiming responsibility for our wrongs? If anything Americans self flagellate, we love nailing ourselves to the cross to pay for our sins, more than any other nation, there is entire industries within america, that are based on hating america, when was the last time one of you queers apologized for hitler? I bet most of you German homos fantasize about him giving you a mustache ride in the back seat of a VW van.
A) I am sorry to break it to you pal but many hundred millions disagree with you. And your football pussies would not stand a chance against any of the teams in the SEVENS, not that you padded fatties would even qualify. But seriously buddy, American Football is really quite ridiculous and so thinks the rest of the world. Every 7.3 seconds on average the game is interrupted and players need a break. I think only cricket with its tea time break is more pathetic. But I am not surprised...people so overweight run out of air and need a break every few steps. Maybe after you discard your 1000 page rule book and play like real men without bandages , padding and helmet we can come back and talk. Before that American football players could as well pass as go cart drivers. B) you are changing the topic. The point was that you little sentimental cry babies gotta get your act together, suit up, and live your life. A few thousand people died Sep 11. Big deal. Your kind slaughtered and raped tens of thousand of the innocent in the many places around the world your ass does not belong in the first place. At least Germany lived up to its past. On the other hand every dumb kid in the US learns their country is the GRRRREEEAAAATTTEST place in the world and he/she is the best and mommy and daddy are proud. Total overconfidence and almost always underdeliver. Yeah buddy that's what your culture is all about. Oh hold on by the way how many wars did your country exactly win In the past 40 Years? I think you did not win a single on out of more than a dozen. You killed one dictator or terrorist and another 50 replace the 1 hating your country more than anybody before. you HONESTLY THINK this is the way to go? Lol. C) I think you must be in dreamland pal. Germany has apologized and paid all it's reparations In full. There are only greedy American Jews left that simple cannot accept that. On the other hand every American mom and dad tells their kids that they are the best in the world and how they will beat everyone. No matter how stupid and undereducated their kid may be. In reality you have a nation of slick Jews and throw in couple more of each race and the 98% rest is dumb like shit and cannot even tell an Indian apart from an East Asian. Please don't ridicule yourself even more with your distorted view of the facts. I am out of this thread. I saw enough. Carry on you conservative crowd. You will see that changing a president makes zero difference in a country of wild west gun slingers and overconfident but undereducated masses. A lot more is needed to turn this baby around. This is surely not the way to go to go heads to heads against China. The Chinese are soon enough gonna buy up your golf courses and buildings in the same way the Japanese owned you in the late 80s. Just this time around the money invasion won't last just a few years or decade.
It's all politics... Baltimore prosecutor's swift action, link to victim's lawyer raise questions http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...link-to-victim-lawyer-elected-official-raise/ The Maryland prosecutor who brought charges Friday against six Baltimore police officers within hours of receiving a medical examiner's report on the death of Freddie Gray is facing accusations that her swift action was over zealous and perhaps politically motivated. The Baltimore police union leader, Gene Ryan, made the most clear-cut accusations, after he raised concerns about Marilyn Mosby being married to City Councilman Nick Mosby. "It is clear that your husband's political future will be impacted, for better or worse, by the outcome of your investigation," Ryan, president of Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 3, wrote Mosby after her Friday announcement. He also argued Mosby has a conflict of interest because she received campaign contributions from Gray's family attorney William Murphy. Ryan asked that she appoint a special prosecutor to avoid the appearance of impropriety or of violating the rules of professional responsibility. (More at above url)
Funny how they blame capitalism when the most liberal cities in america implode. NY Times Blamed Reagan/Bush for LA Riots, But No Blame in Baltimore By Jeffrey Lord | May 2, 2015 | 8:51 PM EDT Is President Obama responsible for the Baltimore riots? If you take a look at how The New York Times portrayed the reaction to the Los Angeles riots of 1992, apparently so. For those who came in late, in 1992 one Rodney King was arrested by Los Angeles police after a high speed chase. King was later found to be legally intoxicated under California law as well as having traces of marijuana in his blood. The arrest was captured on videotape. The police were seen beating King -- and, as with Baltimore and today’s case of Freddie Gray, all hell soon broke loose when the officers were acquitted. Unlike Freddie Gray, Rodney King did not die, and in the day eventually emerged amid the riots to plead for calm. Today, as the events in Baltimore unfold - now with formal charges including murder brought against six Baltimore cops - there is one striking aspect that is not present as it was in Los Angeles. That would be blaming the President of the United States. Yes, that’s right. As Los Angeles burned, the media was quick to finger the real culprit as then-incumbent Republican President George H.W.Bush. Not to mention his predecessor, Ronald Reagan - then four years gone from the White House. Headlined the New York Times on May 6, 1992: CLINTON, IN ATTACK ON PRESIDENT, TIES RIOTS TO ‘NEGLECT' The story said, in part: “….Gov. Bill Clinton said yesterday that the riots in Los Angeles resulted in part from ’12 years of denial and neglect’ of festering social problems under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush. ….Mr. Clinton said the real cause of the riots included ’12 years of denial and neglect’ of social problems under the Reagan and Bush Administrations.” Got that? Clinton’s charge was front-paged. The Times made a point of putting the-then Democratic presidential candidate’s accusation about the Los Angeles riots and what he said was the real reason behind them on the front page as if The Gospel itself. Which, in the way of liberal media, it was. Now? After Baltimore erupts over the death of Freddie Gray? With Obama, not Reagan or Bush, in the White House? With progressive Democrats in charge of Baltimore for almost five decades straight? And the last four of five liberal Baltimore mayors being black - two women and two men? And one of those liberal mayors -- the white Martin O’Malley -- now out there running for president as the new JFK? Now there’s nothing but silence from the Times about just who is responsible for what surely must be the “denial and neglect” in Baltimore that has occurred in the Obama era and after the eight years of the Bill Clinton presidency. In fact, to do the math, fifteen of the last twenty-two years have seen the White House occupied by either Clinton or Obama. So what’s up with this? The answer isn’t hard to understand. What’s at stake in Baltimore - and in various cities around the country that have, like Baltimore, been run by liberals for decades - is liberalism itself. When all those protestors stand in front of cameras and complain about the system or no jobs or lack of opportunity or good schools or crime and gangs? They are citing the end result of decades of liberal policies that have had an iron grip on these cities. There is no way in the world that the liberal media - the Times in this case - will contribute to the bonfire by blaming Obama or Clinton much less the liberalism that has run Baltimore lo these several decades. Case in point in this Times editorial on the Baltimore situation. One will read in vain to find any condemnation of liberalism or Presidents Obama and Clinton or the black mayors who have been running the city. Instead the paper says: “The Baltimore Police Department has a particularly egregious history” of a “well-documented history of extreme brutality and misconduct.” Yet mysteriously, this “egregious history” has somehow just, well, happened. President Obama has nothing to do with this, nor President Clinton. No “denial and neglect” from them. And that long string of liberal mayors? Beginning with today’s Stephanie Rawlings-Blake and including presidential candidate Martin O’Malley? Somehow all that “egregious history” and “well-documented history of extreme brutality and misconduct” just kind of, um, happened. All these liberal mayors who have been running this Baltimore Police Department for decades? How could they possibly have anything to do with this? After all, they were only in charge. Even more mysteriously still is that back there in May of 1992 as Los Angeles erupted as a result of what the Times headlined as the result of those Reagan-Bush years of “denial and neglect” - New York City was just fine. Calm. Cool. Not a riot in sight. And who did the New York Times credit with this? Not Reagan or Bush, to be sure. No, the Times credited the black, liberal mayor of New York - David Dinkins. In a May 6, 1992 editorial - the very day it was front-paging Clinton’s charge of Reagan and Bush “denial and neglect” - the Times ran an editorial titled "New York Holds Together" in which the Times rhapsodized about “Mayor David Dinkins’s sensitive leadership” which “certainly contributed to a sense of calm and control.” Thus the game. When Baltimore explodes, for the Times and liberals in general it isn’t Obama’s fault or Clinton’s fault. It certainly isn’t the fault of all those liberal Baltimore mayors - four of whom were black and one of whom is out there running for the Democratic presidential nomination - who have been in charge of both the cops and the city for decades. But when the riot is in Los Angeles in 1992? It’s those damnable culprits of denial and neglect, Reagan and Bush. And if the sainted black liberal Mayor Dinkins is in charge of a non-rioting New York? Why, its because he’s a good liberal and all those good liberal policies work! The other day The Wall Street Journal ran an editorial on Baltimore titled "The Blue-City Model: Baltimore shows how progressivism has failed urban America." The piece began by saying: You’re not supposed to say this in polite company, but what went up in flames in Baltimore Monday night was not merely a senior center, small businesses and police cars. Burning down was also the blue-city model of urban governance. …But as order starts to return to the streets, and the usual political suspects lament the lack of economic prospects for the young men who rioted, let’s not forget who has run Baltimore and Maryland for nearly all of the last 40 years. The men and women in charge have been Democrats, and their governing ideas are "progressive." Exactly. And note that first line? The one that reads “You’re not supposed to say this in polite company…” That is precisely what is at work right now in the pages of the New York Times and what was at work all the way back there in 1992. If a riot happens on the watch of a conservative president - its not only his fault but also that of his conservative predecessor long gone from office. But a riot over police conduct in a liberal president’s era? In a city that has been run from top to bottom by liberals - black mayors, city council members and at this very moment a black police commissioner? Nothing to see here, folks. Move along. Typical. Utterly. Worse still it is a silent OK for Baltimore’s liberals to just keep doing what they’re doing. The anguished pleas of their black citizens in fact, for all the noise, just one big no big deal. The degree of outright cynicism of liberal media outlets never ceases to astound. - See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jeffre...riots-no-blame-baltimore#sthash.XzUCUMvI.dpuf
Blame corporal punishment (?), such as the "hero" black mom. Do you see white, hispanic, indian, or asian parents beating their kids like this? If another race did this, it would have constituted child abuse. Yet, if a black mom does it, she's disciplining him. Violence begets violence.