It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Clippers Owner Banned for Life

page: 7
4
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:03 PM
link   
why is this still an issue and an argument.

He's racist and a scumbag. He's in a special contract with the NBA due to his ownership. They have a thorough and well written constitution and bylaws that state that owners can be banned and ownership forced to sell due to certain situations like this. They are in their rights to ban him for life. It's also the right decision. What's the argument again and why is this thread still going strong? lol




posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:03 PM
link   
a reply to: FlyersFan

Actually, hedo makes much more than that. Just not paid by the clipps.

"Personally, I would like to have a white Southern coach coaching poor black players.

Read more: www.businessinsider.com...
". Those are HIS words.

But no, he doesnt want to keep black people down at all. I mean geez, look, the league made rules so he couldnt keep them down....that proves hes not racist, right?



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: captaintyinknots

It is not a crime to be racist. I never said anything about him committing a crime.

To me this is an attack on free speech and the race angle is nothing but a rabble rouser.

FREE SPEECH IS A LEGAL THING. no one is attacking his free speech. Just as he has free speech, the NBA has freedom of expression to remove him.

Please, read your constitution.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:04 PM
link   
a reply to: captaintyinknots
Careful with the 'T' word ... glass houses. You are still bringing up alleged past behaviors and it has nothing to do with what the NBA did in 'banning for life' the owner. If you want to just discuss what the NBA did and exclude the NAACP information, then you'll have to stop bringing in alleged past behavior.



originally posted by: ArtemisE
a reply to: FlyersFan
Appearently all the nba "insiders" say he was a known racist that paid off the NAACP to attempt to improve his image

That is an alleged conspiracy worthy of it's own thread.
And that could explain a lot of things going on with this story.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: captaintyinknots
a reply to: Deny Arrogance

bhcourier.com...


He admitted it to the NBA.


Nowhere in that article did he admit that he gave consent to the recording, only that it was his voice.

Now who is letting facts get in the way?



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: FlyersFan

Im not worried about calling trolling trolling when I see it. If i get in trouble Ill live with it.

so tell me, why do you resist opening a thread where discussing the NAACP would be on topic, but instead insist on continuing to push it here as hard as you can, even though, once again, you havent shown a single way that it has anything to do with this?



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:08 PM
link   
Okay .. now I"m confused.


originally posted by: captaintyinknots
...he'd get to go on making millions off of people he was trying to keep down...


originally posted by: captaintyinknots
But no, he doesnt want to keep black people down at all.


Why would he want to keep the players down when in fact they are making him a fortune?
The better they do ... the better he does financially.
And their salaries are through the roof. Clippers Salaries



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:08 PM
link   
a reply to: captaintyinknots

Please support the Constitution! I have the Preamble memorized.....

When someone is fired and fined over something they say that is NOT free speech.

I am amazed there is more controversy to this than the NBA refs who were caught rigging games.

Some ornery old man saying something stupid is not a big deal. Making a big deal about it only fuels racism.
edit on 29-4-2014 by jrod because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:09 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod
The day that the object of a racist's rants don't bother that group and they are expected to just shrug their shoulders my friend, there was a point of time in American history that behavior was the exact reaction expected.

Your comments to me somewhat shock me that you think that it is no big deal, he continues to perpetuate stereotypes and kids see this stuff, do you think it is a big deal to the developing mind of children who love the NBA? and come from those very ethnic groups ?

I remain true to this phrase "Silence is acceptance" I have to differ with your logic because what you are attempting to present, is the illogical, being bothered by this and vocal about it or making a big deal is the exact thing to stop racial bias, not shrug your shoulders and sing cum bah yah to it.

Try going to the players and tell them this is no big deal, that's all I would ask of you as a test of your logic.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:12 PM
link   
yeah, it's a big deal. When someone says something this offensive, it's not wrong to stand up and say something about it.

In fact, I'd say it's mandatory.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:12 PM
link   
a reply to: phinubian

It would not be a big deal had a black owner made the same comments about white people.

I support free speech. Racism is dying but will never die when stories like this are spun to trigger such an emotional response from the masses.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: captaintyinknots
why do you resist opening a thread where discussing the NAACP would be on topic, but instead insist on continuing to push it here

Why do you insist on discussing alleged past racist behaviors which have nothing to do with the NBA 'banning for life' topic of this thread? YOU stop bringing that up and I'll stop bringing up information that contradicts your off topic information.

you havent shown a single way that it has anything to do with this?

... says the fella who hasn't shown a single way that the alleged past behavior has anything to do with this topic.

Dude ... like I said ... careful with that 'T' word ... glass houses ...



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance

originally posted by: captaintyinknots
a reply to: Deny Arrogance

bhcourier.com...


He admitted it to the NBA.


Nowhere in that article did he admit that he gave consent to the recording, only that it was his voice.

Now who is letting facts get in the way?
Excuse me, I misunderstood which proof you were asking for.

He has an archivist (the mistress) on his staff specifically for the purpose of recording the conversations. Thats her job. I thought that was already known....give me a few to dig through and see if I can find something that will stnad as proof of it...



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:15 PM
link   
a reply to: FlyersFan

Dude, feel free to report me.

Why wont you answer the direct question?

The truth is, you are really, really clinging to anything you can here. You're not meaning too, but you are quite transparent at this point.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:16 PM
link   
Totally absurd and inappropriate!!

I'm a black woman who is outraged at this attack on this man for simply having a personal sentiment.

Welcome to THOUGHT-CONTROL



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: captaintyinknots

Please support the Constitution! I have the Preamble memorized.....

When someone is fired and fined over something they say that is NOT free speech.

I am amazed there is more controversy to this than the NBA refs who were caught rigging games.

Some ornery old man saying something stupid is not a big deal. Making a big deal about it only fuels racism.
It is not, at all, a free speech issue when someone violates the by laws of the private organization that they are a part of. At all.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: phinubian

It would not be a big deal had a black owner made the same comments about white people.

I support free speech. Racism is dying but will never die when stories like this are spun to trigger such an emotional response from the masses.



I disagree. Racism is still pretty rampant in the world. Take a look at Israel and how they denigrate and treat the Palestinian people. That's racism. Take a listen to the duck hunters and other prominent Christians continuously state how black people were better off as slaves. That's disgusting and ...that's racism. Racism never stops unless you stand up and make a big deal out of it. That's how you end it. Triggering emotional responses from the masses is critical to ending racism.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod

I will agree, you have a point, it is being spun for someone, but the greater element is the negative component, news and media will of course blow things out of proportion, we all know and realize this, but in this instance, it is a sad thing and to me the owner is the epitome of what they used to call the old boys club, now all this is showing is that is not the accepted way America as a whole should operate, the old boys club is a thing of the past.

But your theoretical is just that because at this time there has been no black owner that has felt uncomfortable or made it clear or been been captured on audio recording that they do not want to be closely associated with whites, or as an example does not want Larry Bird at their games, and I do believe if your theoretical had been reality , a big deal would be made of it.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:22 PM
link   
Yes racism still exists.

I do not support what he said, however I support free speech.

The NBA has a double standard. Had a black owner said the same thing about white people, that owner would not be fined nor barred and it would not be a sensational story.



posted on Apr, 29 2014 @ 03:22 PM
link   

California Wiretapping Law

California's wiretapping law is a "two-party consent" law. California makes it a crime to record or eavesdrop on any confidential communication, including a private conversation or telephone call, without the consent of all parties to the conversation.

See Cal. Penal Code § 632. The statute applies to "confidential communications" -- i.e., conversations in which one of the parties has an objectively reasonable expectation that no one is listening in or overhearing the conversation

Link


As long as he knew it was recorded.
edit on 4/29/2014 by roadgravel because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join