Nobody said anything about protection under the law . It said the illegal beating you would get for wearing a police uniform would be well deserved and so would you desreve an illegal beating for pretending to be one of us as there is no purpose for you doing either that doesnt deserve a shit kicking.Compromised said:
Blogger leaked order to raid Hells Angels
- Thread starter Galahad
- Start date
Read what you just wrote.ImanHa said:
You state that an ILLEGAL BEATING would be perfectly justified. In the "real" world, an illegal beating is not justified, either by the police or by the HA.
Stating that because the police get to beat people up, the HA should also be allowed to beat people up shows a complete lack of respect for human rights, legal rights and the legal system. It also shows that you have a "fcuk the law" mentality, which only bolsters the arguement that HA is s criminal organization.
Esco! said:Can somebody please help me............please.........
Lexmark X5470......wont scan for some reason......I dont know why!!
Did you give it a beer???
Apparently they don't work after a beer.
ImanHa said:
May we then surmise that you are one of those big rough tough macho cycle riding gentlemen.
This is rich.
Compromised: Bingo. If you read carefully both Sheik and Imanha have admitted that they think violence and threats of violence are an acceptable way to resolve disputes. Imanha just gave a case where he thinks someone getting illegallly beaten up is justified; Sheik previously posted about how he'd been charged with assault and uttering threats but got off because it was too trivial and/or the conditions made it not worth prosecuting. In any case, both admitted to thinking there are cases where it's acceptable for people to threaten violence or use violence to settle civil disputes.
Since they think that's acceptable they just don't get why the rest of us would have a problem with it or the HA.
Since they think that's acceptable they just don't get why the rest of us would have a problem with it or the HA.
I admit it without question
I suppose you think a justifiable beating is never warranted.
I guess the guy who just kidnapped a 9 year old boy and doused him with gasoline to burn him alive before he was snatched by a teacher from the kidnapper should deserve a kiss from you.
The girl who went sausa dancing and left her 2 year old to die a horroble death crying till her little throat went dry from dehydration, left alone for 33 hours in 33 degree heat. I guess she deserves your coddling.
There are thousands of examples where a beating is more than justified. It doesnt make those who say it criminals, it makes them human.
You are either a hypocritical liar or a coward that would sing koom-by-ya at the rape trial of your wife's attacker.
Fugi - bingo my ass. It's easy to see here who's being honest and who's full of it. Go hug a tree somewhere.
I suppose you think a justifiable beating is never warranted.
I guess the guy who just kidnapped a 9 year old boy and doused him with gasoline to burn him alive before he was snatched by a teacher from the kidnapper should deserve a kiss from you.
The girl who went sausa dancing and left her 2 year old to die a horroble death crying till her little throat went dry from dehydration, left alone for 33 hours in 33 degree heat. I guess she deserves your coddling.
There are thousands of examples where a beating is more than justified. It doesnt make those who say it criminals, it makes them human.
You are either a hypocritical liar or a coward that would sing koom-by-ya at the rape trial of your wife's attacker.
Fugi - bingo my ass. It's easy to see here who's being honest and who's full of it. Go hug a tree somewhere.
You are correct: I am against vigilante justice. Those cases deserve swift and severe punishment by the state. You've picked out cases that are extreme and highly unpleasant just to ratchet up the rhetoric. Those cases are significantly more extreme than the cases where you and Sheik admitted you would choose to use violence or threats of violence.
Your example was someone wearing the wrong clothes, Sheik's example was someone not paying a bill owing.
The two of you need counselling around violence and the threat of violence to keep you out of jail. Meanwhile you've both shot all your credibility with the civilized folks among us, from whom you distance yourselves when you resort to violence to settle a civil dispute.
Your example was someone wearing the wrong clothes, Sheik's example was someone not paying a bill owing.
The two of you need counselling around violence and the threat of violence to keep you out of jail. Meanwhile you've both shot all your credibility with the civilized folks among us, from whom you distance yourselves when you resort to violence to settle a civil dispute.
Don't quite understand the concept of rights and law, do you?ImanHa said:
As a society, and as a collection of societies, most rational humans have decided that extrajudicial punishment is wrong and illegal. And as a society, we have decided that torture is illegal.
Your continued insistance that violence is a justified course shows not only your lack of empathay, but your one dimentional approach to problem solving and obvious lack of intellectual ability.
Rather that attempt to refute the arguements made, you have decided to once again rely upon logical fallacy, this time the ad hominim attack coupled with what is known as the straw man.
No one is suggesting that a unfit parent go without punishment, nor is anyone suggesting that the unfit parent be "coddled". But to suggest that the HA would wipe out crime by laying a beating on anyone and everyone that HA feels is deserving, does not bolster your arguement that the HA is not a criminal organization and that HA is nothing more than a social group that also happens to run around protecting the underdog. The very notion that the HA is justified in providing extrajudicial punishment shows a fundamental contempt for the rule of law, and a pathologically inflated sense of ego.
As for your suggestion that I am a tree hugger, I'm very happy to be a socially and environmentally responsible person. You, on the other hand, seem to think that social and environmental responsibility is for the weak and the prey. Think again.
Uhhhh, I am supposed to name them? What planet are you from?ImanHa said:
All these arguments are pointless (though Fuji does an excellent job arguing on point). Just "man up" and admit to what your organisation does. I am pretty sure $2M in drugs is not for personal use. However, the more you talk, the more you show your true colors... so.. keep talking.
Ahhhhhhhhhhh Suck my ass. LOL
You guys are a joke. You call somebody a rapist then a criminal if they want to beat you for it. Stay here typing. Dont go out into the real world. Love to see you hit the street flapping your koom by ya gums.
I was quite willing to defend any point rationally but when ya get f heads saying "well, the girls i know that have been raped by you guys" ya fucken suck my ass. I been around a long time and i dont know any girls that have been raped by us. But this shit head knows several.
2 million dollars worth of drugs? Where? What cause the cops bring pictures of drugs to a well rehearsed press conference? Saw a drug raid on the news right after that, ohhh they had real drugs there. hmmm
Ive been listening to this bullshit and when i hear we were responsible for 1000 murders and rAPES but all the bodies are hidden and the victims wont talk and blah blah blah.
Gets a little frustrating being blamed for your horseshit wet dreams.
Fuck yas all, and i hope you have the balls to go right up to one of us and spout your rape bullshit stories in person. Hope its me you talk to.
I guess defending your honour with your fists makes you a criminal and letting people walk all over you makes you a hero according to some people here. Go french neck with dalton mcguinty and let him check your onion rings for transfat somewhere. Fuck yas all.
You guys are a joke. You call somebody a rapist then a criminal if they want to beat you for it. Stay here typing. Dont go out into the real world. Love to see you hit the street flapping your koom by ya gums.
I was quite willing to defend any point rationally but when ya get f heads saying "well, the girls i know that have been raped by you guys" ya fucken suck my ass. I been around a long time and i dont know any girls that have been raped by us. But this shit head knows several.
2 million dollars worth of drugs? Where? What cause the cops bring pictures of drugs to a well rehearsed press conference? Saw a drug raid on the news right after that, ohhh they had real drugs there. hmmm
Ive been listening to this bullshit and when i hear we were responsible for 1000 murders and rAPES but all the bodies are hidden and the victims wont talk and blah blah blah.
Gets a little frustrating being blamed for your horseshit wet dreams.
Fuck yas all, and i hope you have the balls to go right up to one of us and spout your rape bullshit stories in person. Hope its me you talk to.
I guess defending your honour with your fists makes you a criminal and letting people walk all over you makes you a hero according to some people here. Go french neck with dalton mcguinty and let him check your onion rings for transfat somewhere. Fuck yas all.
Well, Fuji, Compromised, lookingforitallthetime, I will be quite impressed if you can offer a credible retort to this brilliant exposition.ImanHa said:
I had been finding ImamHa's responses interesting, because it is a perspective that I do not usually get to hear, and he expressed it well, though I see some of these things differently than he does. But I have a sense that this interesting interaction will not continue.
In a way, I am now more convinced of his sincerity, since he got frustrated, because it seems clear that he is a regular person, not a polished HA PR flack, if there is such a thing. I would be interested to learn more of the reality of the Hells Angels, without anyone spinning it, if that were possible, but I do not see how it would be.
In a way, I am now more convinced of his sincerity, since he got frustrated, because it seems clear that he is a regular person, not a polished HA PR flack, if there is such a thing. I would be interested to learn more of the reality of the Hells Angels, without anyone spinning it, if that were possible, but I do not see how it would be.
Defending one's honour is a reasonable and noble thing. Threatening violence or actually carrying it out over a "business" transaction is not. That's what the courts are for.ImanHa said:
Would you agree that those that carried out the bombing outside a rival club in Quebec where a young boy was killed deserved a "beating"? Did you lead the charge to do the "honourable" thing or was the 11 year old just collateral damage?ImanHa said:
So, again, you admit to using violence and threats of it to resolve disputes. This time, if someone insults you.ImanHa said:
There's no proof about the rape stuff, it's true. We've got his word to go on. It's as good as your word, but it's not the sort of proof that would stand up in a court. Fortunately, we do have lots of court records to go on that prove a convincing enough case. Moreover, we have your own words, above, confirming your violent attitude.
What the documented evidence shows is that the HA organization as a whole thinks just like you do: that violence is an appropriate way of settling disputes. That got it declared a criminal organization by an Ontario court judge. That's not the only example of documented evidence, but it'll do. Along with your own words it makes a fairly convincing case.
Your big frustrated rant was about as close to a "you're right" as you're likely to post. You ran out of ways to reply, so you ranted. Good enough.
By the way, if by defending your honour with fists you mean beating people up just because they insulted you, then yeah, that does make you a criminal. It does make you someone who is in need of psychological counselling.
Note that at this point you have verged on threatening members of this board. You've repeatedly challenged people to meet with you in person and just now implied that if they did, and said what they've said here, you would attack them. Your own behavior here confirms what everyone is saying.
In countries like Somalia and parts of Mexico organized gangs have taken the law into their own hands and become the ultimate arbiters of "justice" (very much needs quotes). If you think that's the way things should be, if you think the strongest/toughest should mete out whatever violent punishment they happen to think is fair, then I suggest you move to one of those places.
We don't really want your kind in Canada.
If you don't want to leave get some counselling, deal with your unacceptably violent attitude, and find some way to be a civilized member of this society.
I apoligize for nothing. You people can watch cops get charged with umpteen rapes, murders and extortions in Ontario alone, and rightly ignore it because guilty by association is wrong.
You point to a few incidents that cover the globe and a half century of selective history and flatly claim that guilty by association is correct.
There are two sides to every story.
www.realdealnews.com Consider both sides.
You point to a few incidents that cover the globe and a half century of selective history and flatly claim that guilty by association is correct.
There are two sides to every story.
www.realdealnews.com Consider both sides.
Says you. The cops say the HA planted it. In either case Ontario court judges are able to think their way through these things and I trust the judge's assessment of the facts more than I trust yours.Sheik said:
There are a few bad cops out there. Bad judges are damn few and damn far between.
You plainly just don't like our system of government here in Canada, and I think if you dislike it that much, you should reconsider whether this is the right country for you. Try Somalia, where things work a little more the way you prefer.
I'm not going to get into a bunch of what-if speculation about hearsay nonsense when we've got cold hard facts to go on. Cold hard facts including YOUR views and Imanha's views posted right here in this channel corroborating what everyone is saying.
It happens ALL the time. Why would an expert witness be expected to know bottom feeders like these guys?
This one wasn't. Dude, they got their fair day in court, and despite potentially using bombs to scare the judge and who knows what other dirty tricks THEY LOST. Get over it.
You and Imanha right here on this channel have already admitted to everything the HA was accused of anyway: a willingness to use violence to settle civil disputes. That's what got them declared a criminal organization and that's EXACTLY what you two have admitted to anyway.
Fugi, some don't take kindly to scuriless insults and react poorly. Fact of life.
The report on police corruption that was promised to be made public then shelved when they read it was just leaked to the Globe and Nail.
"A total of 218 criminal charges against 12 officers were referred to the Crown Law Office, the report says. Prosecutors suggested charging six officers with 22 counts in connection with an alleged conspiracy while naming four others "as unindicted co-conspirators."
Prosecutors also advised that as a "rule of thumb" no more than seven accused should be charged with conspiracy for fear of overwhelming the court process.Although the task force left on the table 196 potential charges, sources familiar with the Neily report say it suggests that the charges actually laid would be sufficient to send a message to the whole force. "I see no value added to anyone to do any further investigation, except those issues . . . that may arise in support of the prosecution now initiated," a portion of the report says.
"From the position of a police officer, just how many times do you have to charge another police officer with attempt to obstruct justice, perjury, or deceit, in order to get your point across?"
There's your justice system. Addressing crimes commited means nothing when it's an embarrassment, but when it means taking a bow, embellishing crime means everything.
You guys go on drinking the bath water. Go on sleep walking into a police state and you do wake up and say maybe those Hells Angels were entitled to fair justice it is going to be too late for anybody.
The trial by inuendo and distortion by selection here in this forum, is a pretty good mirror of the media, so i can't really blame the puppets for the puppet master.
The report on police corruption that was promised to be made public then shelved when they read it was just leaked to the Globe and Nail.
"A total of 218 criminal charges against 12 officers were referred to the Crown Law Office, the report says. Prosecutors suggested charging six officers with 22 counts in connection with an alleged conspiracy while naming four others "as unindicted co-conspirators."
Prosecutors also advised that as a "rule of thumb" no more than seven accused should be charged with conspiracy for fear of overwhelming the court process.Although the task force left on the table 196 potential charges, sources familiar with the Neily report say it suggests that the charges actually laid would be sufficient to send a message to the whole force. "I see no value added to anyone to do any further investigation, except those issues . . . that may arise in support of the prosecution now initiated," a portion of the report says.
"From the position of a police officer, just how many times do you have to charge another police officer with attempt to obstruct justice, perjury, or deceit, in order to get your point across?"
There's your justice system. Addressing crimes commited means nothing when it's an embarrassment, but when it means taking a bow, embellishing crime means everything.
You guys go on drinking the bath water. Go on sleep walking into a police state and you do wake up and say maybe those Hells Angels were entitled to fair justice it is going to be too late for anybody.
The trial by inuendo and distortion by selection here in this forum, is a pretty good mirror of the media, so i can't really blame the puppets for the puppet master.
