WaterMan Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 Just think if Mort reported that Vick was named. The now so called tool would be named as the always right reporter for ESPN once again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 The now so called tool would be named as the always right reporter for ESPN once again. Do you have that list of names yet? I've asked several times now and if you think ignoring my request will make me go away while you keep responding to other posts with your inane comments, you are sadly mistaken. So, one more time, please provide the list of names of the people indicted by the Feds in this dog fighting investigation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazysight Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 I liked this guy's take on Portis' comments: "Is it not sufficient for man to absorb the useful labors and lives of the inferior creation, without superadding excessive anguish, want and misery? — Julius Ames, The Spirit of Humanity If somebody is too stupid to understand the fundamental immorality of dog fighting, you're never going to be able to explain it to him. So don't waste your breath on Clinton Portis. You could show him scripture, wherein man's dominion over animals comes with an insistence on "holiness and justice." You could photocopy Gandhi's essay on animal rights for him. Heck, you could even give him a copy of Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man in the hopes that he might see a parallel in the inhumanity between Ellison's battle royal — a brutal free-for-all fought by black men for the entertainment of whites — and a bunch of men standing around and cheering as two dogs tear each other apart." http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/6836960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 Images are not allowed in these forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 Comparing dog fighting to child molesters? Give me a break. And btw half of the NFL is "thugs" so maybe you should find another sport. Wow, I can't believe you are still doing this...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 Well, I read through this whole thread and three facts came through too me, regardless of whether Vick is convicted or not. 1. Vick has lost all credibility amongst the general population. He is a despicable thug, and it doesn't matter if he walks or not. 2. Broncos has lost all credibility with most of the general population at this site, regardless of the outcome of Vick's trial. Enough is enough dude. You are teaming up with Waterman for God's sake, how much lower can you go. 3. Waterman's credibility remains the same on this site as it has always been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 (edited) I'm not trying to justify dog fighting. But pitbulls are not weener dogs. They're born killers. No, they're RAISED to kill by scumbags like Ron Mexico and his crew. When not tortured and trained to kill, pit bulls are often kept as pets, like most other dogs. Try doing a little research next time. If somebody is too stupid to understand the fundamental immorality of dog fighting, you're never going to be able to explain it to him.So don't waste your breath on Clinton Portis. Perhaps broncos is Portis in disguise. Edited July 9, 2007 by Bill Swerski Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 Do you have that list of names yet? I've asked several times now and if you think ignoring my request will make me go away while you keep responding to other posts with your inane comments, you are sadly mistaken. So, one more time, please provide the list of names of the people indicted by the Feds in this dog fighting investigation. The Feds have said not Mike Vick. It can't be anymore clear than that. Do you really care that much about some ghetto Atlanta/Virginia dog fighters to know their names? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 3. Waterman's credibility remains the same on this site as it has always been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoog Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 The Feds have said not Mike Vick. It can't be anymore clear than that. Do you really care that much about some ghetto Atlanta/Virginia dog fighters to know their names? They have also not said "not Vick". See my earlier post re: sealed endictments. Oh.. and get off the rape stand, I don't think Vick will be visiting you any time soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 Man I'm never going to win in any of these threads. Let's let things happen. Because you are an idiot!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 The Feds have said not Mike Vick. It can't be anymore clear than that. Do you really care that much about some ghetto Atlanta/Virginia dog fighters to know their names? Nice dodge - something right off the 1st grade playground. So in other words, the Feds have released NO names yet, have they? And you have no idea if Vick is going to be one of the people indicted, do you? In short, you have no idea what you are talking about. Just wanted to make that clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 Nice dodge - something right off the 1st grade playground. So in other words, the Feds have released NO names yet, have they? And you have no idea if Vick is going to be one of the people indicted, do you? In short, you have no idea what you are talking about. Just wanted to make that clear. That has been clear for quite some time now....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 Do you really care that much about some ghetto Atlanta/Virginia dog fighters to know their names? Sure sounds like you're talking about Michael "Badnewz" Vick there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 2. Broncos has lost all credibility with most of the general population at this site, regardless of the outcome of Vick's trial. Enough is enough dude. You are teaming up with Waterman for God's sake, how much lower can you go. A lot of you guys want to crucify anyone who has a opinion that differs from the general population. If anything Bronco's gains a little credibility for having an opinion that differs from everyone elses. It doesnt make him right or wrong, and it doesnt make him any less intelligent. Let the guy have his own opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 (edited) A lot of you guys want to crucify anyone who has a opinion that differs from the general population. If anything Bronco's gains a little credibility for having an opinion that differs from everyone elses. It doesnt make him right or wrong, and it doesnt make him any less intelligent. Let the guy have his own opinion. I've got no problem with someone standing there ground, despite other's opinions, I do it often. However, Michael Vick has proven himself several times to be a despicable thug. Seeing someone who I generally like (Broncos), defend him to no end, and turn a blind eye to his continuing acts of debauchery is disappointing. This isn't like arguing over how good of a football player he is, this is defending a guy who is obviously a despicable human being. I don't dislike Broncos, I'm just annoyed and disappointed that he is blindly defending this horror of a human being. I'm not comparing the crimes, but, I'm sure O.J. Simpson had a lot of fans, but, do you think they continued to support him, blind to all evidence ? I'm sure a few did, but, most realized he was scum, and he wasn't convicted. Edited July 9, 2007 by Menudo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 I've got no problem with someone standing there ground, despite other's opinions, I do it often. However, Michael Vick has proven himself several times to be a despicable thug. Seeing someone who I generally like (Broncos), defend him to no end, and turn a blind eye to his continuing acts of debauchery is disappointing. This isn't like arguing over how good of a football player he is, this is defending a guy who is obviously a despicable human being. I don't dislike Broncos, I'm just annoyed and disappointed that he is blindly defending this horror of a human being. I think he wants to wait and see what comes of this. We still have zero proof, outside of a shady figure on ESPN that Vick has any knowledge of the dog fighting incident. Outside of the dog incident, what has Vick done to show he's a thug? The Ron Mexico fiasco, and the water bottle are just evidence of the guy being a jackass... Not so much a thug though. If he's involved in the dog fighting ring, the feds will get him. If they have nothing on him, I think a lot of people will have to do a lot of retracting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 I think he wants to wait and see what comes of this. We still have zero proof, outside of a shady figure on ESPN that Vick has any knowledge of the dog fighting incident. Outside of the dog incident, what has Vick done to show he's a thug? The Ron Mexico fiasco, and the water bottle are just evidence of the guy being a jackass... Not so much a thug though. If he's involved in the dog fighting ring, the feds will get him. If they have nothing on him, I think a lot of people will have to do a lot of retracting. Well, jackass or thug, people can call it what they want, but, combine the incidents you mentioned, with his flipping off his home fans, and the fact that at minimum, these fights are occurring on his property, and this is not someone that I think anyone should be defending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncosn05 Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 (edited) Well, I read through this whole thread and three facts came through too me, regardless of whether Vick is convicted or not. 1. Vick has lost all credibility amongst the general population. He is a despicable thug, and it doesn't matter if he walks or not. 2. Broncos has lost all credibility with most of the general population at this site, regardless of the outcome of Vick's trial. Enough is enough dude. You are teaming up with Waterman for God's sake, how much lower can you go. Yeah this has turned into a lose lose for me. All I've done is say that I'm not going to put any judgement on Vick for this until he is found guilty or at least indited. How have I lost all credibility? I said Vick would not be suspended or jailed for this. I said that it will stand that Vick had nothing to do with it. So it would seem right now that I'm correct to a degree. I don't know the names of the people named in the documents. But it was "reported" that Vick wasn't so why can't you guys just chill for awhile. Now the entire Mort story is under fire by you guys. Enough is enough? Now in your case Menudo once you heard that Vick's property had dogfighting your opinion was set in stone that Vick was a terrible person without a soul. So your credibility is perfect when you jump to conclusions with no evidence, but mine is skewed for waiting for the conclusion of the federal investigation? Because you are an idiot!! Probably. But I'm just waiting until the case is made. Something people who are calling Vick a thug and a terrible person aren't. Replies like this is why I can't leave these threads. Edited July 9, 2007 by broncosn05 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncosn05 Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 (edited) Well, jackass or thug, people can call it what they want, but, combine the incidents you mentioned, with his flipping off his home fans, and the fact that at minimum, these fights are occurring on his property, and this is not someone that I think anyone should be defending. So far Vick has not been proved doing anything more than Plummer did. Well except one more finger. And I'm not "defending" him. I'm saying to give the guy the chance to go through due process. Edited July 9, 2007 by broncosn05 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 Well, jackass or thug, people can call it what they want, but, combine the incidents you mentioned, with his flipping off his home fans, and the fact that at minimum, these fights are occurring on his property, and this is not someone that I think anyone should be defending. +1 If he's involved in the dog fighting ring, the feds will get him. If they have nothing on him, I think a lot of people will have to do a lot of retracting. See, that's the problem. Celebrities/superstar athletes/people with tons of money aren't necessarily going to go down if guilty. If the prosecution couldn't take O.J. down with freaking DNA evidence, there's absolutely no guarantee that justice will prevail here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerwin8 Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 I don't know the names of the people named in the documents. But it was "reported" that Vick wasn't so why can't you guys just chill for awhile. I don't know if anybody read this little blurb in the article, but nobody's really talked about it yet, so here: The law enforcement authorities have privately told league and team officials that at least three people are expected to be indicted but the identities of those individuals were unknown. So it looks like nobody knows the names yet other than the feds. This is a paragraph after it is stated that Vick would not be charged. While it still seems pretty friggin' doubtful that Vick knew nothing about what was going on at his property, it's starting to look like he won't be charged with anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 I don't know if anybody read this little blurb in the article, but nobody's really talked about it yet, so here:So it looks like nobody knows the names yet other than the feds. This is a paragraph after it is stated that Vick would not be charged. While it still seems pretty friggin' doubtful that Vick knew nothing about what was going on at his property, it's starting to look like he won't be charged with anything. You are a Falcon fan, but, your statement that I have bolded above shows that you aren't one with blinders on. Yes, I'm sure Vick was shocked, shocked I tell you, that these types of acts were going on at his property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 So far Vick has not been proved doing anything more than Plummer did. Well except one more finger. And I'm not "defending" him. I'm saying to give the guy the chance to go through due process. I refuse to believe, based on Michael Vick's past, and the things I have read about this story, that he had absolutely no idea what was going on at his property. I could care less if he is charged or not, I already know how I feel about him. If that is wrong of me, then, so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted July 9, 2007 Share Posted July 9, 2007 I refuse to believe, based on Michael Vick's past, and the things I have read about this story, that he had absolutely no idea what was going on at his property. I could care less if he is charged or not, I already know how I feel about him. If that is wrong of me, then, so be it. Dude, even if he didn't know, it's his property and his responsibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts