# Here we go. 3 year old accused being a racist



## PT111Pro (Nov 15, 2014)

After everyone have to be liberal correct or else, it is only logical to accuse babies for not beining in compliance with liberal/imperialistic correctness.

A judge accuses a white little girl being a racist.
This is the new USA that the liberal/Imperialist gain, where even babies need to be politically correct or else..
Outrage! Judge hammers white victims of armed home invasion for racism, lets criminal go free - BizPac Review
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/04/black_judge_heaps_scorn_on_threeyear_old_racist.html


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

PT111Pro said:


> After everyone have to be liberal correct or else, it is only logical to accuse babies for not beining in compliance with liberal/imperialistic correctness.
> 
> A judge accuses a white little girl being a racist.
> This is the new USA that the liberal/Imperialist gain, where even babies need to be politically correct or else..
> ...


PT111 - this has NOTHING to do with liberalism in any form - itis totally about the judge and his personal opinions.


----------



## PT111Pro (Nov 15, 2014)

Ahh that is what it is? 
Well - if U go to Europe it started out the same way and 10 years later a lawyer told my sister, "You are right, hitting you with a club in the face and robbing your purse is against the law, but you will not find a judge in the entire nation that is prepped to commit social suicide to bring a Muslim to court". 
Believe me Sail that is all about liberalism and the supreme race in the US. Believe me liberals don't want to unite, they want to divide because it is in liberalism all about divide at imperra. 

Just imagine what would happen 15 years ago when a judge would made a statement like this to any race in the nation. 
Or just imagine the liberal supremacist outcry when a white judge would say that to a black victim family today.That would create a new Ferguson with al the Al speeches, and the by liberals organized street gangs would have a blast for months, looting, robbing, raping and even killing for justice. 

Do you still want to tell me that has nothing to do with liberalism and the supreme imperialist? 
Oh yes I understand, U are a liberal, you support liberal supremacist agendas, vote whenever you are able to for those elitists and racists, but you are not that liberal like them. Right?

I like a saying here in Texas: " If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, has feathers like a duck, it walks and talks like a duck, it is probably a duck".


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

PT111Pro said:


> Ahh that is what it is?
> Well - if U go to Europe it started out the same way and 10 years later a lawyer told my sister, "You are right, hitting you with a club in the face and robbing your purse is against the law, but you will not find a judge in the entire nation that is prepped to commit social suicide to bring a Muslim to court".
> Believe me Sail that is all about liberalism and the supreme race in the US. Believe me liberals don't want to unite, they want to divide because it is in liberalism all about divide at imperra.
> 
> ...


Time for your tin-foil hat again, I'm afraid....


----------



## Goldwing (Nov 5, 2014)

I like the analogy of the pit bull to the black thug. They both are notorious for their actions. The standard defense is, "Oh they're very nice for the most part, it just depends on how they're raised."

I don't pet pit bulls.

GW


----------



## TurboHonda (Aug 4, 2012)

SailDesign said:


> PT111 - this has NOTHING to do with liberalism in any form - itis totally about the judge and his personal opinions.


Actually it does, to some extent. He didn't get to be a judge by independent thought and personal opinion.

I hear the same agrument from any group when one their own creates a problem. Muslims, blacks, republicans, democrats, etc. "He's not representative of our group."

They all want to distance themselves. When that doesn't work, they pull out the discussion enders: Racist, sexist, homophobe, hater, and tin foil hat.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

TurboHonda said:


> Actually it does, to some extent. He didn't get to be a judge by independent thought and personal opinion.
> 
> I hear the same agrument from any group when one their own creates a problem. Muslims, blacks, republicans, democrats, etc. "He's not representative of our group."
> 
> They all want to distance themselves. When that doesn't work, they pull out the discussion enders: Racist, sexist, homophobe, hater, and tin foil hat.


I didn't say he was not representative, I said it was his personal opinion that stated the kid was a racist. A liberal (or any other rational person) would have understood that the reason for her fear was being held at gun-point. Sadly, he took it as a personal affront.


----------



## PT111Pro (Nov 15, 2014)

Huummmm Sail,
You mean that a judge in a courtroom just does his deals based on opinions? That is very interesting.

Following your logic my friend than you can't blame the liberals leaders likeHitler or Stalin what happen to the Jews. Right? The liberal leaders like Hitler and Stalin and there where more did not do never ever something to or against Jews. They never harmed, penalized or discriminated or killed a single Jew in their entire lifetime. They only expressed their opinion. Well Stalin had to go to the exile to Swiss because of Jewish bankers like so many in Russia and Hitler lost his entire heritage based on Jewish banks also like so many in Europe. So we have to understand why they hated Jews? I doubt it! But they never harmed a Jew, this liberals Stalin Pol Pot, Mao, Hitler and all the others in the last century, also just only expressed their opinion. Is that it how I should look at them?

That is a very interesting thought of a liberal viewpoint. I have to think about that logic a little bit more! Well - but without a thin foil on my head.


> TurboHonda
> They all want to distance themselves. When that doesn't work, they pull out the discussion enders: Racist, sexist, homophobic, hater, and tin foil hat.


Yes your observation is right.
When they can't attack the facts, can't denial it ever happen, can't make it little and can't say it is more a very isolated incident, they attack the person that brings the message directly and very personal. 
There is absolutely nothing stupid in it to complain when liberals attacking toddlers because they don't fit in their hateful racist political agenda. There is nothing stupid when people disagree with liberals. They are not that smart that they want you make think they are. 
Only because I say how it is, complained about real racism, I get told I am a stupid thin foil man. Racism are only people that fit in the hat of liberal view and agendas. That is how they do it.

Where was the outcry of the liberals when the black racists in Ferguson beating and kicking white people to death? Only one made it into the news a little longer because it was a Russian immigrant and not a white US citizen. You didn't hear a lot about that at all, it didnt fit liberal hate agendas. It was barely a side-note from 10-15 seconds on ABC TV. You right, that is how they do it.

Sail you can take your thin-foil and make someone else happy with it. Thanx


----------



## Tip (Aug 22, 2012)

Seems we once again we have a case of the perpetrator becoming the victim.

But in this case we also now seem to have the child's fearful reaction being blamed on an inanimate object.

Hmmmmmm


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

This discussion begs these questions:
How did a person who allows his personal opinions and feelings deeply affect his legal decisions end up on the Bench? Who appointed him, and why? And if he stood for election to his judgeship, why was he elected?
Did nobody know that he could not maintain the impartiality required by his office?

Another question arises: His decision to set free someone who committed a series of felonies, ostensibly because he felt that one witness-and-victim was a racist, should trigger immediate judicial review. Why has this judge's superior (President of the Court? Chief Magistrate?) not called the decision into question, and dismissed him?

A personal note: I just love it when an obvious racist, speaking from an obviously racist point of view, publickly labels other people as racists.


----------



## Goldwing (Nov 5, 2014)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> This discussion begs these questions:
> How did a person who allows his personal opinions and feelings deeply affect his legal decisions end up on the Bench? Who appointed him, and why? And if he stood for election to his judgeship, why was he elected?
> Did nobody know that he could not maintain the impartiality required by his office?
> 
> ...


I like the idea of the LEOs wearing body cameras. I REALLY like the idea of cameras in the courtroom!

I wish someone would take the time to see how the scumbags probation works out. I don't know if you can use the term recidivism when probation is the punishment, but

I have a crisp twenty that I will wager that there will be recidivism, and a conviction, and a victim who asks "Why did they let this criminal go free?"

JMHO YMMV

GW


----------



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

There are only 2 judges in the world that a truly fair and impartial...........
One just retired and the other is dead......

*As for this judges babble and ruling.....​*


----------



## BackyardCowboy (Aug 27, 2014)

goldwing said:


> I have a crisp twenty that I will wager that there will be recidivism, and a conviction, and a victim who asks "Why did they let this criminal go free?"
> 
> JMHO YMMV <snip>
> 
> GW


I wonder................... if he commits another violent crime while on probation, can the victim sue the judge for 'aiding and abetting' or some other charge? (Legal minds want to know. a lot of potential money in this for attorneys suing judges)


----------



## PT111Pro (Nov 15, 2014)

> BackyardCowboy
> I wonder................... if he commits another violent crime while on probation, can the victim sue the judge for 'aiding and abetting' or some other charge?


That depents who you are.
If you are black and have in addition prove that you never worked a decent job in your life, and you have a clear record to be very violent - than a clear yes you can sue the judge but not if you are a lawbreaking citizen and black. To be only black doesn't really help much. They only need you to vote for the system than. Or you are a violent authentic Muslim (they call authentic Muslim extreme), than you can sue too.

Looking over the fence in England say in entire Europe little children and their parent staying on court and get convicted for racism, because a 3 year old in Kindergarden don't like Turkish spicy food and said it. The parents go to prison and the children in Forster Care to get raised in accordance with liberal views. That is not a joke that really happen in the so called the first real existing liberal social state of the United Europe. 
Woman get raped, others get killed by Muslims and no one goes to court, like my sister get told: "Yes it is against the law to rob and kill or rape, but you will not find a judge in the entire nation that is willing to commit social suicide." 


> Steve 1911A1
> Who appointed him, and why? And if he stood for election to his judgeship, why was he elected?


What a sinister question. Who voted for Obama, Hillary, Karry, Edwards only to name a view. The problem is that many liberals think they have to vote for the democrats because they are liberals. They don't comprehend that the democratic party is any- and everything but liberal. This kind of liberalism uses many names so people can identify them with this supremacists. They are fascists like Franco and Mussolini nothing else. They want a God like Imperior leadership like the Pharaohs in Egypt and they will tell and promise you whatever you want to hear to get elected until they got what they want.


> Steve1911A1
> Did nobody know that he could not maintain the impartiality required by his office?


What a question. He was placed there because they knew. Once one of them get in power they make sure they pull as much as they can from their own kind behind them. Not only in political parties. No! In TV stations, Kindergarden, Schools, Colleges, Police departments, Department of such and such, FEMA, Hospitals, everywhere and they do a good job. After that system is implemented many of the little helpers in police departments, Department of Such and Such, Schools, Colleges, Hospitals, Movie and Home Video companies, TV stations and wherever else they are have to learn very fast, that this supremacist don't like witnesses. The little helper than will be the first that they target to erase because they could tell how they did it. Just check history in the last 4000 years and what, and how they did once they are finished with implementing their power.

But the real big issue that I have is, that the USamericans can look over to Europe, can see what really happen in that new kind of real social liberal United Europe and still vote for the democrats and believe it will not happen in the US what happen in Europe. That is the real amazing part of it.


----------



## Goldwing (Nov 5, 2014)

SailDesign said:


> I didn't say he was not representative, I said it was his personal opinion that stated the kid was a racist. A liberal (or any other rational person) would have understood that the reason for her fear was being held at gun-point. Sadly, he took it as a personal affront.


Sail, to be clear Olu never stated that the 3 year old was racist. He intimated that he was deeply troubled by the writing of the mother, "But it won't affect what happens

here." Then in the same lying breath he grants probation to the poor misunderstood little criminal.

GW

P.S. I looked for an emoticon to represent BOVINE SCATULATION but sadly, I had to spell it out here.:mrgreen:


----------



## TurboHonda (Aug 4, 2012)

Scatulation. An interesting word. Had to look it up. The theory of scatulation, as used in evolution, deals with the packaging or boxing of all mankind. "Adams body contained the germs of anyone ever born." Or Eve. Take your pick. It is such an obscure and seldom used word that it was commandeered by the urban dictionary to mean something entirely different. I wonder what's next. Niggardly, perhaps?


----------



## Goldwing (Nov 5, 2014)

TurboHonda said:


> Scatulation. An interesting word. Had to look it up. The theory of scatulation, as used in evolution, deals with the packaging or boxing of all mankind. "Adams body contained the germs of anyone ever born." Or Eve. Take your pick. It is such an obscure and seldom used word that it was commandeered by the urban dictionary to mean something entirely different. I wonder what's next. Niggardly, perhaps?


I stole the term from a speech by General Norman Schwartzkopf. He used it instead of bulls#!+.

GW


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

goldwing said:


> Sail, to be clear Olu never stated that the 3 year old was racist. He intimated that he was deeply troubled by the writing of the mother, "But it won't affect what happens
> 
> here." Then in the same lying breath he grants probation to the poor misunderstood little criminal.
> 
> ...


I'm still trying to work out why PT111 thinks that makes him a liberal.... That is my issue here.

Both sides of the fence lie. Lots.


----------



## Goldwing (Nov 5, 2014)

SailDesign said:


> I'm still trying to work out why PT111 thinks that makes him a liberal.... That is my issue here.
> 
> Both sides of the fence lie. Lots.


I am not qualified to comment (still playing nice).:smt083 I think you might want to just let it go.

GW


----------



## PT111Pro (Nov 15, 2014)

Well - Sail,
do you really want to sell me that a conservative judge would make a statement like this or would act like this? We can talk a lot about differences and I agree, in the republican party are the same amount of conservatives than liberals in the democratic party.

Put this judge is a true liberal, as it is understood by the liberal/democratic party leadership. There is absolutely no doubt. If you indentify yourself as a liberal and think they are like a liberal it's not my problem. Make your homework even if it's incontinent to you.
May you don't understand the so called liberals in that party really and dream a daydream about what you dream up what they sand for. May you should check again what they mean by liberal and liberalism in their book. Its may differs a lot to them what you think liberalism supposedly should be. You may want to do your homework? 

Word's are fast used in liberalism and words can create assumptions. They use words to create assumptions in the listeners mind, but the words used by liberals have in all the cases a very different meaning than the general population would think. They are pro family and many out there think they understand what family in a political liberal mind is. Wrong, the word family in a liberal political correct sense means nothing like before. They mean with the word family a entire town, a group of people that share a political view but they don't need necessarily know each other. You may find this OK but I bet a lot of so called liberals have not really a glow what the word family really means in liberalism. The most of the so called liberals that vote time and time again again have no idea what the words that they get told really mean for a political correct liberal.

So Sail why do you think, that this judge is not a political correct liberal with political correct statements and actions? If it loks like a duck, if it has feathers like a duck, if it walks and talks like a duck, - it is totally right to think that is a duck. It didn't bark - right?


----------



## BackyardCowboy (Aug 27, 2014)

As far as the original post, a 3 year old child is afraid of the monster in the closet.
When the monster(s) come out of the closet, and even Mom and Dad are afraid, then the monsters become real.
Since, in this case, the monsters were black, the child may wonder if all monsters are black or all Blacks are monsters.
We know many Blacks are fine people/citizens, but a 3 year old can't distinguish at that age. After all, he just learned that monsters are real and mom and dad can't handle them or protect him/her (the child) either.

Wonder if the judge ever had any kids of his own or what would happen if the boogeyman came out of his closet while he was home.


----------



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

BackyardCowboy said:


> As far as the original post, a 3 year old child is afraid of the monster in the closet.
> When the monster(s) come out of the closet, and even Mom and Dad are afraid, then the monsters become real.
> Since, in this case, the monsters were black, the child may wonder if all monsters are black or all Blacks are monsters.
> We know many Blacks are fine people/citizens, but a 3 year old can't distinguish at that age. After all, he just learned that monsters are real and mom and dad can't handle them or protect him/her (the child) either.
> ...


And there you have it............


----------

