Potential Mayweather-McGregor numbers.

[blackbelt2003]

Snoop...I agree with your points, bro...except for the fact that nearly every stereotype joke we can possibly make has its roots in some dark, evil moment in history. Again, the Irish jokes about them being drunks and stupid carry the exact same historical weight as the aforementioned Black 'jokes'. Yet we see these plastered all over the media and referred to by EVERYONE, including the same Blacks who would get offended if someone made a corresponding comment to them.

Same with the Jews.

The answer? 1. Either make blanket rules about not offending anyone, anywhere regardless of creed, colour or race is 2. make blanket rules that you can't regulate against offence so just let people say whatever the fuck they want...or 3. use COMMON SENSE! This instance wasn't a white southern, union flag carrying American making an intentionally racist comment with inflammatory language against a Black American. Shit, it wasn't even an American! It was an Irishman, the most picked on, discriminated against, hard times race on the whole planet. And the person taking umbrage to the comment is the same one who has made the same kind of comments about Mexicans and Pinoys without noticing any irony or hypocrisy. If there was EVER a time that common sense would dictate that this should not even have been FLAGGED UP as a racist statement, let alone debated on, then I don't know what is.



Black

[Snoop]

Back to the pressers, McGregor fucking owned the third presser. Floyd just repeated what he said before and ended up just cursing at him. Conor cracked me up by absolutely shitting on everyone his team, calling his bodyguards "juicehead monkeys" (they were white, so it's okay ( )

I wonder though, if all this great shit-talking is going to work for or against Conor when he gets absolutely pulverized in the ring.

[blackbelt2003]

Yeah, back to the topic at hand

Anyone seen the Facebook rumours about Macgregor being knocked out in sparring by Brandon Rios?



Black

[the ollie reed fan club]

(07-16-2017 12:45 PM)blackbelt2003 Wrote:  Snoop...I agree with your points, bro...except for the fact that nearly every stereotype joke we can possibly make has its roots in some dark, evil moment in history. Again, the Irish jokes about them being drunks and stupid carry the exact same historical weight as the aforementioned Black 'jokes'. Yet we see these plastered all over the media and referred to by EVERYONE, including the same Blacks who would get offended if someone made a corresponding comment to them.

Same with the Jews.

The answer? 1. Either make blanket rules about not offending anyone, anywhere regardless of creed, colour or race is 2. make blanket rules that you can't regulate against offence so just let people say whatever the fuck they want...or 3. use COMMON SENSE! This instance wasn't a white southern, union flag carrying American making an intentionally racist comment with inflammatory language against a Black American. Shit, it wasn't even an American! It was an Irishman, the most picked on, discriminated against, hard times race on the whole planet. And the person taking umbrage to the comment is the same one who has made the same kind of comments about Mexicans and Pinoys without noticing any irony or hypocrisy. If there was EVER a time that common sense would dictate that this should not even have been FLAGGED UP as a racist statement, let alone debated on, then I don't know what is.



Black

Agreed, a racist joke is a racist joke, just because you have supposedly 'history' on your side (although we've just ween Warlord dismantle much of that) makes it no less racist. The history of the treatment of the Irish is no less appalling than that of Black America yet it is still OK to make jokes at their expense. Same with the Jews.

I'm sick and tired of hearing how 'context' allegedly gives one side a pass when making racist comments yet the other can't go there. Here is another one that gives me the shits, the use of the word nigga. As we all know that is a no-go zone for white people. We can only refer to it as 'the N word.' yet black people are able to throw it around with impunity. How does that work? I mean how much black blood do you need in order to able to use that word? Do you need at least 50%? Will someone who only has say only one black grandparent, do they have enough black heritage to be able to use it? If it is OK for black people to use that word then surely there is some rule as to how much black heritage you should have in order to be bale to say it right?

As usual one of my favourite Conservatives, (who just happens to be black) Larry Elder knocks it out of the park.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TfsEQMU...nesChannel

---

(07-16-2017 03:04 PM)blackbelt2003 Wrote:  Yeah, back to the topic at hand

Anyone seen the Facebook rumours about Macgregor being knocked out in sparring by Brandon Rios?



Black

Brandon Rios would be the absolute worst guy to bring in for sparring, if only because he would give zero fucks about Connor's confidence and would be trying to take his head off with every punch

[Warlord]

(07-16-2017 12:02 PM)Snoop Wrote:  1) Interesting fact about Anthony Johnson. I had no idea that blacks owned slaves in the US. That being said, I would say a) I think the scale of their existence was far lesser than white slave owners

Almost 30% of free blacks were slave owners. 1.4% of whites were slave owners at the height of slavery.

Quote:b) I think the definition of being the first "legal" slave owner holds little importance to the argument. He wasn't the first actual slave owner in the US since he himself was a slave upon arriving...

Two-thirds of ALL whites came to the colonies in some form of bondage. There was nothing unique about how Mr. Johnson arrived.

Quote:3) I think overall you bring really good insight to the debate and I will fully admit that I learned something new here today. I think both you and Black make a good point that enslaving human beings is just an unfortunate habit of the human condition and I'll agree that racial activists will conveniently ignore the fact that there were in fact white slaves, and that Africa had a huge part in enslavement within their own continent, of people of their own color. You make a good point about the existence of white slaves in America, but again, [b]did black slaveowners own white slaves in the US?

Yes. As I mentioned earlier, Anthony Johnson owned 5 slaves, 4 of whom were white.

Quote:I think that's a important point to highlight because it shows both the comparative status of blacks to whites and to the fact why a black American comedian like Chris Rock making white jokes isn't held in the same light as McGregor making black jokes to Mayweather. The door didn't swing both ways here.

As I mentioned earlier, the Irish were treated far worse than blacks. Half of them died before their seven years of bondage were up. That's a far higher mortality rate than was found among black slaves.

The reason no one talks (or even knows) about white slaves in America is because it doesn't fit the narrative. The media and education system are dominated by left-wingers whose primary goal has always been divide and conquer. Surely you have realized how divisive the left is in America? You can't truly say you think they are about unity, can you?

Quote:4) Finally, despite all the facts that you presented here, there is also the reality to consider of what people in popular society know. I think all the points you brought up are valid, but the fact of the matter is that people don't know these things. Why? Because they weren't popularized through media and I think there is a reason for that. Black enslavement, on the other hand, was very much so, and by parties invested in maintaining that system of slavery. Things like Blackface, Minstrel Shows, and racist charcuteries in movies were made to perpetuate the belief that blacks were baffoonish and subhuman, therefore justifying the behavior in treating them as such.

I explained why this happens earlier. Furthermore, the racism against the Irish, both in America and in Europe, was far worse than anything ever done to blacks.

Blackface may be politically incorrect, but it's not like we call prison vans "Nigger wagons." They're called "Paddy Wagons." Did you ever wonder why? The open discrimination practiced against the Irish was practiced on a scale much wider than most people know today.

I highly recommend Herbert Asbury's 'the Gangs of New York' for many reasons, one of them being his coverage of the draft riots.

When Lincoln declared war on the south, he had to eventually initiate a draft to raise the amount of soldiers the Union armies would need to continue to wage that war effectively.

Blacks were legally excluded from the draft, and wealthier white families could pay for "substitutes" to take their place: the Irish. That tells you all you need to know about where the Irish ranked in the eyes of the western world at that time -- below even blacks.

Quote:Again, I'm not saying I agree fully with the media reporters pulling the race card, but I understand the logic. At the same time, hearing everyone's opinion and reasoning here, I also understand the frustration with liberal media.

There is no logic to what they do -- only a narrative that must be fed.

Slavery is a stain on human history, not just American history. All races have been enslaved and have themselves enslaved others. I just can't stand the fact that white America is somehow the only race that gets this sin hung over their heads on a daily basis, and willingly allow it to be done.

Hell, even American Indians owned slaves, both black and white, as well as other Indians who were defeated in battle. I bet you never heard that in school, did you?

[Spyder]

I love Larry Elder. I listen to him almost daily. Dude went to Crenshaw High, and somehow came out with common sense values. His book "Dear Father, Dear Son; Two Lives...Eight Hours" is an incredible read, and a great insight into how he got the values that he has.

[Imperius3]

Warlord, if 1.4 percent of white Americans owned black slaves, then who was the other 98.6 percent?


Anyway, I watched the London presser. Dear lord, that was embarrassing. Floyd kept yelling out, "YYYYeeeeeeeeaaaaaahhhhhhhh!" He sounded stupid as fuck, especially when he threw in "bitch" and "faggot" for good measure. Very transparent hype, and I felt embarrassed just watching it.

[ViperSniper]

This is already a black eye for boxing and shows why it has lost legitimacy as a sport over the years. For our best boxer in the world to be fighting a UFC fighter with minimal to no boxing experience with no professional fights. This should not be sanctioned boxing bout.
You wouldn't see a football player get an opportunity to compete for a golfers green jacket, a swimmer compete in the F1 Grand Prix, a NBA player to play Federer in a grandslam final.
It makes a mockery of the sport after it's finally grown some talent & exposure on tv.

The best case scenario for boxing is if Mayweather were to either put on a complete master piece display of boxing while completely humiliating McGregor in the process, makes Connor dance aka Judah styles or scores a spectacular KO. Even then..it won't mean shit or say anything about which combat is better or do anything for Floyd's career, legacy or reputation for the sport. Only thing Floyd wins is money, but Connor has already won just by getting the career high pay & exposure.

What if we end up seeing McGregor face the winner of Canelo-GGG next for the middleweight title, Jon Jones fight Joshua? Or we get Mayweather fight Nate Diaz for his 51st fight or Fury going to the UFC lol.
It's not what the sport needs now it's starting to build momentum & has already killed the buzz of Canelo-GGG which is what boxing fans have been wanting for years now.

Unfortunately seen all 4 press conferences and was disappointed. It all just felt like a Wild n' Out episode! This was the only reason I had any interest in this being signed. .now that it's over..meh!






McGregor showed he is a much better talker and used the pressers to show how over the moon he is about the mammoth pay rise he has just been guaranteed. Connor is acting like a total douchbag & has managed to make Floyd look okay. Both seemed uncomfortable throughout but feel Mayweather got to McGregor by doing less & without any interruptions either. Connor has gone all WWE while Floyd did the same like always but added a Tyson/Briggs approach to his talk and persona. These dudes are lame as!

[Warlord]

@Imperius

The other 98.6% of the white population were people who didn't own slaves.

[Snoop]

(07-16-2017 10:35 PM)Warlord Wrote:  Almost 30% of free blacks were slave owners. 1.4% of whites were slave owners at the height of slavery.

Where are you getting your stats from?

Quote:Two-thirds of ALL whites came to the colonies in some form of bondage. There was nothing unique about how Mr. Johnson arrived.

My mention of Johnson being a former slave was not to indicate he came under unique circumstances, rather just to highlight the fact that he was not the first actual slave-owner. Again, his status of being the first legal slaveowner is an interesting tidbit, but not directly relevant to the discussion.

Quote:Yes. As I mentioned earlier, Anthony Johnson owned 5 slaves, 4 of whom were white.

So I'll admit that this is completely new to me. I had no idea it was even possible for black Americans to own white slaves. That certainly changed a lot of things for me. At the same time, I am also interested in seeing how common this sort of situation occurred. Was it pretty common for blacks to own white slaves, or was Johnson sort of an anomaly? Just because you find one case that doesn't fit the norm, doesn't suddenly invalidate a claim that applies to a majority. At the same time, I am giving you full credit here for the new info. This certainly applies to the debate at hand in your favor.

Quote:As I mentioned earlier, the Irish were treated far worse than blacks. Half of them died before their seven years of bondage were up. That's a far higher mortality rate than was found among black slaves.

The reason no one talks (or even knows) about white slaves in America is because it doesn't fit the narrative. The media and education system are dominated by left-wingers whose primary goal has always been divide and conquer. Surely you have realized how divisive the left is in America? You can't truly say you think they are about unity, can you?

Over the years I've certainly realized that leftist ideology is not as genuine or noble as it's propagated to be and have moved considerably right as I've grown older. But I can't say the right is really about unity either.

Quote:I explained why this happens earlier. Furthermore, the racism against the Irish, both in America and in Europe, was far worse than anything ever done to blacks.

Blackface may be politically incorrect, but it's not like we call prison vans "Nigger wagons." They're called "Paddy Wagons." Did you ever wonder why? The open discrimination practiced against the Irish was practiced on a scale much wider than most people know today.

This is a fair point. I think it's worth considering, however, that the racism and oppression against Irish were committed by other white Europeans and not American blacks. Or at least, American blacks did not have the sort of power to create a media system that was able to influence the country the way it was done against them.

I'm also curious to know if there was anything akin to the lynching era that was done upon European immigrants.

Quote:I highly recommend Herbert Asbury's 'the Gangs of New York' for many reasons, one of them being his coverage of the draft riots.

I'll check it out. Was the Scorsese flick based on this book?

Quote:When Lincoln declared war on the south, he had to eventually initiate a draft to raise the amount of soldiers the Union armies would need to continue to wage that war effectively.

Blacks were legally excluded from the draft, and wealthier white families could pay for "substitutes" to take their place: the Irish. That tells you all you need to know about where the Irish ranked in the eyes of the western world at that time -- below even blacks.

Curious to know what you think of the movie "Glory" and its historical accuracy.

Quote:There is no logic to what they do -- only a narrative that must be fed.

Slavery is a stain on human history, not just American history. All races have been enslaved and have themselves enslaved others. I just can't stand the fact that white America is somehow the only race that gets this sin hung over their heads on a daily basis, and willingly allow it to be done.

Hell, even American Indians owned slaves, both black and white, as well as other Indians who were defeated in battle. I bet you never heard that in school, did you?

I certainly knew American Indians enslaved those they defeated in battle and I get that enslaving people isn't specifically a "white" thing. On that note, I understand why it's extremely frustrating that liberal media frames slavery as if it's only a trait within white people. My thing is when response goes too far in the other direction and there are active deniers of slavery, or those who try to minimize the after-effects of human atrocity. Overall though, I appreciate the info being discussed in this thread.

I think one thing to be clarified is that this whole debate started because of Black's comment and I may have jumped the gun assuming he was talking about white Americans, when he could have been just talking about McGregor. In light of this discussion, I'll say that people calling McGregor "racist" in his antics should probably educate themselves more American/European history. They'd probably change their tune.

---

This is gold: