Its Juneteenth.

[AndyMarquisLIVE]

But he knows it's been altered, 'cuz people get in fights in LP city, too

But, the documentary I watched described La Plata as a peaceful, quiet farmland.

 

[AndyMarquisLIVE]

You were talking about Lexington Park.

I know I know, open mouth, insert foot.

 

[AndyMarquisLIVE]

"Racist" stopping in to say hi.

You notice who the violent offenders are in this NBC Raw Video?

 

[This_person]

You were talking about Lexington Park.

I know I know, open mouth, insert foot.

It just kills me when he answers like that. BS Gal asks him how he knows it was altered, and he goes off on his tangents having nothing to do with his accusation nor the question.

What color are stop signs? You know, I love ice cream, because Bush is a traitor.

HUH?

 

[AndyMarquisLIVE]

It just kills me when he answers like that. BS Gal asks him how he knows it was altered, and he goes off on his tangents having nothing to do with his accusation nor the question.

What color are stop signs? You know, I love ice cream, because Bush is a traitor.

HUH?

Yeah his posts are very hard to follow.

 

[JPC sr]

Subsidized Adultery is child support.

It just kills me when he answers like that. BS Gal asks him how he knows it was altered, and he goes off on his tangents having nothing to do with his accusation nor the question.

What color are stop signs? You know, I love ice cream, because Bush is a traitor.

HUH?

I told BS Gal correctly and straight up that the film was altered because it showed the one kick (and there was only one kick) but that film showed the same one kick over and over and that means the film was altered big time in order to make it look much worse then it really was.

The link is above the BSGal post.

I gave the correct answer in detail there - no editing - its still done.

 

[This_person]

I told BS Gal correctly and straight up that the film was altered because it showed the one kick (and there was only one kick) but that film showed the same one kick over and over and that means the film was altered big time in order to make it look much worse then it really was.

The link is above the BSGal post.

I gave the correct answer in detail there - no editing - its still done.

A. BS Gal asked in Post 52 where your proof was that the tape was "altered". Can you show me anywhere after Post 52 that you answered that question in the manner you describe above?

B. MMDad seems to be being proven right, you're either drunk, high, or mentally challenged. I'll admit I didn't watch the video, because I'm not too interested in watching people get beat up for no reason. But, because of the controversy you seem to have with it, I decided to click the link. They didn't alter any tape. THEY REPLAYED IT. It was so reprehensible, they felt the need to repeat it. It's not altered, it's repeated.

C. One kick, I agree. Reprehensible. Can you grasp reality in this and agree with that?

 

[JPC sr]

Subsidized Adultery is child support.

A. BS Gal asked in Post 52 where your proof was that the tape was "altered". Can you show me anywhere after Post 52 that you answered that question in the manner you describe above?

The answer was already in the post that she quoted so the proof that it was altered is in the fact that I said that he was only kicked one time and the film showed it repeated as if the guy was kicked several times or even 6 times in the film but only once in real life. This was said in her post # 52, click to see it HERE. The point bottom line is that I was correct in saying the film was - is altered by showing more then one kick.

I had already said how the film was altered and did not repeat it again.

It was so reprehensible, they felt the need to repeat it. It's not altered, it's repeated.

C. One kick, I agree. Reprehensible. Can you grasp reality in this and agree with that?

I agree that I do not kick anybody and it would be reprehensible for me to do such a thing, but in our system then we must assume a person is innocent until proven guilty and we do not know the reason the suspect kicked the other guy. It could have been a provoked assult or some other reason.

It is a mistake to judge and condemn people based on a film, like remember the Rodney King incident and that film and its after effects.

 

[hvp05]

The answer was already in the post that she quoted so the proof that it was altered is in the fact that I said that he was only kicked one time

I love it when he uses this form of response! His proof is because he said so. And then he'll say, "click link HERE" to supposedly back himself up with his "proof".

Well, guess what JPC... there are about a dozen people involved in this conversation, all who SAY the OPPOSITE of what you have said.

and the film showed it repeated as if the guy was kicked several times or even 6 times in the film but only once in real life.

The point bottom line is that I was correct in saying the film was - is altered by showing more then one kick.

I like how you tried to use TP's language - "repeated" - against him. Repeating a video clip does not equate to altering it, plain and simple. But I won't waste time chipping at that brick wall.

we must assume a person is innocent until proven guilty and we do not know the reason the suspect kicked the other guy. It could have been a provoked assult or some other reason.

Technically, the legal system must follow procedure even in a case with video. However, the inclusion of a video will often make a case essentially 'open and shut'.

You aim to amaze yet again by excusing an obvious criminal. "Provoked assault"? I have come to the realization - some time ago, actually - that NO amount of proof can convince you against what you believe is the reality. If the incident is on video then we are misinterpreting it, or not seeing the whole situation; if the offender admits to doing everything they have been coerced; if the court convicts the person it's another example of the unjust, brutal system. I can hardly believe you are this deranged at merely 54 years old; you should pray for an early death before your condition worsens much more.

It is a mistake to judge and condemn people based on a film, like remember the Rodney King incident and that film and its after effects.

So whose side are you on?

 

[Dork]

I love it when he uses this form of response! His proof is because he said so. And then he'll say, "click link HERE" to supposedly back himself up with his "proof".

Well, guess what JPC... there are about a dozen people involved in this conversation, all who SAY the OPPOSITE of what you have said.

I like how you tried to use TP's language - "repeated" - against him. Repeating a video clip does not equate to altering it, plain and simple. But I won't waste time chipping at that brick wall.

Technically, the legal system must follow procedure even in a case with video. However, the inclusion of a video will often make a case essentially 'open and shut'.

You aim to amaze yet again by excusing an obvious criminal. "Provoked assault"? I have come to the realization - some time ago, actually - that NO amount of proof can convince you against what you believe is the reality. If the incident is on video then we are misinterpreting it, or not seeing the whole situation; if the offender admits to doing everything they have been coerced; if the court convicts the person it's another example of the unjust, brutal system. I can hardly believe you are this deranged at merely 54 years old; you should pray for an early death before your condition worsens much more.

So whose side are you on?

I would say there are a lot more than a dozen people who will disagree with JPC. It amazes me that he still stands by his twisted views of reality even though everyone else tells him he is wrong. I just wonder if he just recently became so deranged or if he's been like this most of his life. AND to top it off, he actually wastes his time running for a seat in the house of reps or whatever he is running for I wouldn't even let him use the seat in my bathroom. I still stand by my theory that this person doesn't really exist and that it's just someone playing us.

 

[hvp05]

I would say there are a lot more than a dozen people who will disagree with JPC.

Of course, but I was referring to those that have actually commented on his posts recently.

 

[JPC sr]

Subsidized Adultery is child support.

I still stand by my theory that this person doesn't really exist and that it's just someone playing us.

OMG, what if that is correct?

 

[Dork]

OMG, what if that is correct?

Well, is it?

 

[Dork]

Of course, but I was referring to those that have actually commented on his posts recently.

Understood. Hey, here's a question. How many people have actually agreed with JPC over the past few years?

 

[Dork]

OMG, what if that is correct?

Who is this mysterious masked man who has taken on the role of a former political candidate? Could it be a person studying phychology and is using this forum to study the reactions of people when presented with views that are way off center of the norm? This person's statements are obviously way off the charts and always generate strong reactions. What a great idea for a term paper or thesis.

 

[itsbob]

Who is this mysterious masked man who has taken on the role of a former political candidate? Could it be a person studying phychology and is using this forum to study the reactions of people when presented with views that are way off center of the norm? This person's statements are obviously way off the charts and always generate strong reactions. What a great idea for a term paper or thesis.

SOme people in here know him, and have met him.. He's a mental case that's been let loose on society.

 

[JPC sr]

Subsidized Adultery is child support.

Of course, but I was referring to those that have actually commented on his posts recently.

Since the 4th of July is a white Independence Day and Juneteenth is an African American style independence day then we might need to make Juneteenth into a new national holiday to give equality.

 

[Dork]

SOme people in here know him, and have met him.. He's a mental case that's been let loose on society.

I don't doubt there is a real JPC Sr. I don't doubt he is a mental case and actually ran in an election. It just strikes me as odd that he went away right after the election last year and started over again in April 2007, fresh, with a brand new account and everything. He linked it to the old election page to make it look real and referred to a new election next year but I don't see any reference to time or year on his web site.

He also recently mentioned that he studies psychology.

Maybe VRAI can verify that the old JPC and this one are the same by looking at his IP addresses or by looking at E-mail addresses he's used, etc.

I did ask JPC in an indirect way if he was real. No response yet.

I may be wrong about all this but I am on a mission to find out.

Also look at his last post. "Since the 4th of July is a white Independence Day and Juneteenth is an African American style independence day then we might need to make Juneteenth into a new national holiday to give equality."Does that sound like a crazy person who actually believes what he is saying or someone trying to stir the pot. I think he is slipping a little.



So, JPC...........Are you the real JPC? Please prove it. Don't give us a lame reason why you shouldn't have to. That would only reveal the truth.

 

[JPC sr]

Subsidized Adultery is child support.

I don't doubt there is a real JPC Sr. I don't doubt he is a mental case and actually ran in an election. It just strikes me as odd that he went away right after the election last year and started over again in April 2007, fresh, with a brand new account and everything. He linked it to the old election page to make it look real and referred to a new election next year but I don't see any reference to time or year on his web site.

I had not noticed nor known that I had no date on my campaign website and I just finished putting the 2008 date onto every page in three places. Two of the "2008" on the top of each page and once at the bottom of each page.

See my new campaign website link at bottom of this post in my Signature or in my profile under my avatar.

Thank you "Dork" for pointing that out as I had not noticed the lacking.

My old website is still opperational and it has the 2006 date on it, link HERE.

So, JPC...........Are you the real JPC? Please prove it. Don't give us a lame reason why you shouldn't have to. That would only reveal the truth.

I have no idea of how to prove it is the same old me.

If you have any suggestions then I will try to comply.

 

[Lenny]

I had not noticed nor known that I had no date on my campaign website and I just finished putting the 2008 date onto every page in three places. Two of the "2008" on the top of each page and once at the bottom of each page.

See my new campaign website link at bottom of this post in my Signature or in my profile under my avatar.

Thank you "Dork" for pointing that out as I had not noticed the lacking.

My old website is still opperational and it has the 2006 date on it, link HERE.
I have no idea of how to prove it is the same old me.

If you have any suggestions then I will try to comply.

So, JPC...........Are you the real JPC? Please prove it. Don't give us a lame reason why you shouldn't have to. That would only reveal the truth.

Nope. You're right, we're all figments of JPC Sr's imagination (or in his case, hallucinations).