Trying this in a different thread cuz Breaking Cane wanted to derail this one.
- Thread starter ellu
- Start date
@ellu when will you return to your I’ll conceived comments about Sicknick and own this prejudgement before the facts? As a black man, you should know this all too well and how unfair this is and how many black men in our history have been wrongly convicted based on assumptions before facts.
I thought you had integrity and would return to state how wrong you were? @CashvilleCane1 ? @canam1965 ?
I thought you had integrity and would return to state how wrong you were? @CashvilleCane1 ? @canam1965 ?
So, you come to a thread without politics to post about a thread with politics that I said at the time I'd never revisit.
Hard to read ignored comments. How about you tag me over there and if I care I'll post.
I’ve been tagging you. Didn’t realize you turned snowflake and ignore threads that put you on the spot.
Last edited:
Breaking Cane has a valid point here...........and I actually enjoy Ellu's posts at times.........Ellu seems to only reply when it fits his agenda and narrative ( not that theres anything wrong with that, is it his God given right), however, I do find it interesting that he does this.............I could care less either way, but again, it is interesting....
Very. This is why his new name is Low Integrity @ellu .
I won’t result to name calling nor is it my place to judge another ...
It’s less a name and more a depiction of the behavior and morals.
That I understand completely and am in congruence with
Not true ....I’ve been here over 15 years and I have read many,many open minded and fair posts .....no narrative involved...now is that the norm, NO....but it does happen on occasion
Yep @ellu is agenda driven and can't admit when he fell for a conspiracy theory.
Hi and thanks. no, I don't only apply when it fits an agenda or narrative, what I do say, and have said, is that when a level of conversation devolves into ad hominem, or when both sides are no longer discussing an issue but it becomes name calling; or when I'm asked to defend the "me" of me, and questioned as to the actual beliefs I hold, irrespective of my clearly stating what they are; or when logic gives way to whataboutism, I close threads and don't return. I call it my superpower, the ability to literally not care what anyone says after these comments reach a certain point; I lose interest. It's boring.
I challenge folks to look at things in a totality objectively. I typically cite sources or provide exhaustive explanations of my beliefs. I don't care much for "hot takes" and I don't see the world in monochrome, the hues of ambiguity are the shades I believe exist, and they are richer than degrees of grey.
I've no problem admitting when I'm wrong and I frequently apologize when confronted with a wrong. What I do not do is revisit threads that have devolved. I've also developed quite the extensive list of muted folks; the entire experience of the Lounge is enhanced by it. I suggest that those who find my posts unpalatable exercise that right; as I fully intend to do so with a greater frequency.
You'll most frequently find me on topics that I have knowledge about, it's not advancing a narrative, it's imparting information that I'm familiar with. Where I'm unfamiliar or where information changes; where I'm wrong, I acknowledge it. I don't think there is anything particularly disturbing about saying "I don't know" or "I got that wrong". I think real men admit when they are not correct. That being said, when threads devolve, I also don't find the need to revisit them, whether the same day or three months later.
If nothing else I've been consistent about it.
You type all of this and still have not admitted to being wrong about Sicknick.
“Or when I’m asked to defend me”
This sounds like a copout to me. You presumed guilt and never came back to own it in at lest two threads, believing a media driven conspiracy theory after people asked where the evidence was for Sicknick’s cause of death. You even said such evidence didn’t matter and didn’t need to be provided. Still have not returned to own it, well before any such ad hominem happened, as you claim.
“I have no problem admitting when I am wrong.... I don’t revisit threads that have devolved”
This a diametrically opposing statement, seeing that now you use the term “devolved” when you are wrong and losing a debate and will now never return to such threads to admit being wrong. In fact, you typically leave threads when losing the argument, ending with, “don’t bother responding, l am done here.”
Sorry, but I have no time for folks with no integrity who claim to be centered and can’t own up to anything. You’ve been exposed as a fraud now, a political hack. Time to man up and show some integrity. Might as well change your name to CDWrong2
Last edited:
Haha @ellu you just proved you know nothing.
The first quote you provided was based on article Gary posted saying the US would be at 400k covid deaths by the end of 2020. My posts were 100% correct and that prediction was a farce. The final tally for the year was ~325k if I recall and the prediction Gary quoted was off by something like 50%. The article and prediction he posted was so bad it got scrubbed from the internet. I called BS from the beginning and was ultimately right in my predictions but I guess math doesn’t matter to conspiracy theorists like you.
The second quote I assume was in regards to vaccines. Plenty of reports in regards to blood clots, shingles activations, and other significant issues being developed by individuals to the point where multiple vaccines have now been stopped.
Better luck next time.
The first quote you provided was based on article Gary posted saying the US would be at 400k covid deaths by the end of 2020. My posts were 100% correct and that prediction was a farce. The final tally for the year was ~325k if I recall and the prediction Gary quoted was off by something like 50%. The article and prediction he posted was so bad it got scrubbed from the internet. I called BS from the beginning and was ultimately right in my predictions but I guess math doesn’t matter to conspiracy theorists like you.
The second quote I assume was in regards to vaccines. Plenty of reports in regards to blood clots, shingles activations, and other significant issues being developed by individuals to the point where multiple vaccines have now been stopped.
Better luck next time.
Last edited:
Proof conspiracy theorists like @ellu once again have no clue what they’re talking about.
Original prediction (scrubbed), final numbers. Hate to be the bearer of bad news but you swung and missed again.
Better luck next time.
I don’t know if your being intellectually dishonest or just bad at reasoning. You are either lying about the article or lying about the numbers.
it’s ironic that you call me a conspiracy theorist while invoking ridiculous conspiracies.
are you intentionally misstating what the article stated?
what’s more conspiracy theory than thinking “the Internet scrubbed” something. Literally that was your default position. What in the world of conspiracist??? My goodness.
The government is using folks as An expierment? Is that not a conspiracy? I don’t think much of Donald Trump as a leader but I do think his attempt at warp speed (for all its flaws) was not some massive plan to hurt Americans. You have to be a special kind of weird to not think that’s conspiracy theory.
super strange dude.
you call me a conspiracy theorist because I commented on a mainstream view while
1. misstating the contents of an article
2. Claiming that because it supported you it was scrubbed from the internet
3. Donald Trump signed off on Americans being targeted; especially poor Americans in the way that “had been done before” for medical experiments.
but I’m the conspiracy theorist.
explain why you lied about the article or concede you have poor ability to read and your math skills are subpar (50% is half sir).
I appreciate the response , truly do. I also hear alot of what you are saying and agree with certain points within your post. I agree it takes a real man to own up to being wrong as well as you being consistent. However, I don't agree with you statement alluding to you challenging people to be objective. I feel ( after reading many of your posts) that you do indeed have an agenda and usually sugarcoat to interject your agenda. The other day , there was a post where you stated you would love to see BLM stickers on the back of helmets. I , in turn, posed the question to you , " Would you also be willing to see WLM (white lives), ALM ( Asian Lives), HLM ( hispanics ), JLM (Jewish), ILM ( Italians), and ILM ( Irish) place on helmets". You did not respond at all ( not the 1st time you have avoided a non confrontational question by me or others on this site). My question is why the radio silence? You obviously have an opine on the matter, seeing as though you initiated the topic. This post is in no way meant to be demeaning or confrontational, but rather , to gather information. I hope you take the time to answer the question I have asked of you in this post. If not, no big deal. That's the beauty of America, we have freedom of choice, amongst the many other liberties we are blessed to have.
Liars going to lie. Can you access the article from the link? Nope because it was a stupid projection based on a horribly inaccurate model.
Did the hyperlink say 410k total deaths in the next 4 months? Yes
Were there only 335k total deaths after the allotted 4 months? Yes, which was 50% over the projection. There were already 240k deaths when the article was posted.
Keep lying to yourself.
Has he owned up to being wrong about that Sicknick murderer? He says he mans up when wrong, and those two threads are obvious man up moments. The funny part he is now acting like CD, the victim, claiming being called out for being wrong is an ad hominem.
It's a clown show. All b.s. phoney intellect common with the causes he aligns himself with. BLM is a good example. Again, a clown show!
and yet you continue to do so.
Can you access the article from the link? Nope because it was a stupid projection based on a horribly inaccurate model.
This is a conspiracy theory. The same damn thing you accuse me of you are actually guilty of. Literally. The link is no longer an actual link. If you simply right-click on and copy hyperlink from the menu you get http://the%20us%20coronavirus%20death%20toll%20is%20projected%20to%20reach%20410%2C000%20in%20the%20next%20four%20months/ we all know that %20 equals space in hyperlink language, if you don't know then that's easily searchable. Remove the spaces and search for the phrase and you get (its a google link click away) the+us+coronavirus+death+toll+is+projected+to+reach+410000+in+the+next+four+months. The article that you claim was scrubbed by is sitting right there.
Did the hyperlink say 410k total deaths in the next 4 months? Yes Well now that you can read the article, its proof that you were either incapable of understanding the words, misrecalling the argument or just a flat out liar, personally given your inability to discern how to find a link and your immediate jump to some fever pitch conspiracy theory of internet "scrubbing" I'll assume its the latter, but I digress.
The article, in its title says if. Are you familiar with the word conditional? do you know it can be applied linguistically? IF Mask use wanes. The article was published in September. the next four months would include (and stop me if I'm going to fast for you) October, November December and January. For sake of argument lets assume he is counting the month in which he starts so lets use September through December as 4 months. According to the model if mask use waned then deaths could total somewhere in the range of 410k. Deaths on December 31, which was less than 4 months after the article was posted, were 350,616. (as an aside the curve from December 2- February 15 is heartbreaking, so much death. use the drop down menu to view cumulative deaths).
Were there only 335k total deaths after the allotted 4 months? Yes, wrong. Again probably a function of your inability to find sourced material more than you being a liar.
which was 50% over the projection. Are you now posing that his prediction was less than the actual number of deaths? or you bad at words and math alike?
There were already 240k deaths when the article was posted. not sure this helps you, math (its wrong), words (its wrong), argument conspiracy (its nuts), none of it but hey, have at it.
You read an article that said if folks stopped doing X the result would be Y. You then claimed the article only said there will be Y number of deaths, intentionally (or ignorantly) omitting the conditional as to how that Y might come about. You then argued that this somehow was dispositive of number going so far as to say "It was an idiotic prediction then and it was even more idiotic to believe that could possibly happen." And yet, as holiday gatherings expanded...the projected upswing happened and sadly Americans died at an astonishing rate. Your conspiracy theory was defeated.
The most interesting part is when this was pointed to you as an example of conspiracy theory you immediately launched into yet another conspiracy theory about the web being scrubbed of articles ostensibly due to being off on prediction. Let that one sink in, you literally believed that an article was "scrubbed". Not that a server went down, a link broke, a company folded an archive failed, your first thought was the web was scrubbed. Sir, don't accuse anyone of conspiracy theory when this is your ability to apply..., well inability to apply, Occam's Razor.
Care to explain to the MAGA board members why you think Donald Trump intentionally was performing experiments on the poor with Operation Warp speed? I see you dodged that one. Get it Dodged...
Last edited:
I'll be 100% honest. I don't believe I saw your post, have no recollection of it. I tend to post my thoughts and move on. I engage when there is a factual issue to resolve, once research and facts have been presented, I usually am over it and on to the next thing. By the time I"m throwing around an opinion I'm usually about bored with a thread and I rarely come back to them. so I'll answer you now.
I would love to see BLM stickers on the back of helmets of each player that wants to wear them. That would be my full answer. My wish is that all of the players would actually want that. I'm thrilled that our QB is a true leader who does wear one. Why? It gives visibility to a cause that they experience in very varied (had to do that) real ways daily. It gives them voice and allows them to be seen as more than a commodity wrapped in a 5 year maximum commitment.
WLM reminds me of when I was a the President of the student bar at Miami Law and a fellow Second Amendment club member posed starting a white student bar association. He asked why there was a black student bar association (tired of hitting the caps key sorry. We had a long discussion, I gave him some historical reasoning and current analysis. He better understood my position. While that doesn't translate in conversation directly to your question the take away is similar. For the reasons stated above re: current players, WLM doesn't address an institutional concern nor does it address a historical grievance. Its a co-opting of a phrase if anything, that would have the effect of muting or at least drowning out the civil rights cry that is BLM.
The Asian community was intentional about changing the early slogan of Asian Lives Matter to Stop Asian Hate, why? because it as important to not silence a movement as it is to have one, there is space for other phrases to capture the needed redress without muting, via noise, one that is already occurring. the alliance between Stop Asian Hate and BLM is a thing of beauty. Black and Brown communities share a natural intersectionality in many cases, its an allyship that reflects that LatinX often encompasses blackness.
I hope this gives you some insight, for the record as President I approved the Italian Law Student Association at Miami (didn't hurt that David J was a good friend), was a member of the Cardoza Law Society and was quite active as a member in 2A law club, I let Patrick know that the Federalist Law Society could use a lil diversity tho.
Anyway, as I've offered others, a phone call is a much better way to dialogue and I welcome you to the same, DM me for contact information and we can chop it up. sorry I missed your post before and have a great day.
Similar threads
