Roland Martin vs. Dr. Umar Johnson
Options
Comments
-
5th Letter wrote: »NoCompetition wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
Ultimately though this guy has to stand on his own. Not deflecting to Hillary or Bill Maher as you did earlier. They have nothing to do with this. Why even go in that direction? Thats literally not connected. Maybe this is a glimpse into the mentality of those who are subsceptible to this type of thing. Change the subject and go in tangeants and just go, dont worry about connecting dots and making sense. Play the game And most of all...get their money. Emotional manipulations work good for that not reality. And Malcolm's credentials are not Umar Johnson's. People have pointed out various real inaccuracies, vagueness, flaws, and nonsensical positions he has taken. Its not about making up points its just seeing whats there. There is a lot of foolery.
The same reason why those people on the panel defelected into his lineage and his degrees and money for his school, they had a issue with him and used those things to deflect and discredit and y'all are in here doing the same. Y'all are hypocrites ? on Umar but give passes to others that y'all like. Either be consistent or shut the ? up.
Speaking specifically of Umars situation, this lack of paperwork will always leave a question mark over his head. Theres no running from that. If Umar was a white supremacist, he'd still need to have that ? .
Had dude not came on the scene with that, itd be different. But since he did, he needs to be consistent as well. If for nothing but to keep his enemy from having it as a weapon to use against him.
His so called lack of paperwork does not or should it take away from his message and the work he has put in. -
5th Letter wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »NoCompetition wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
Ultimately though this guy has to stand on his own. Not deflecting to Hillary or Bill Maher as you did earlier. They have nothing to do with this. Why even go in that direction? Thats literally not connected. Maybe this is a glimpse into the mentality of those who are subsceptible to this type of thing. Change the subject and go in tangeants and just go, dont worry about connecting dots and making sense. Play the game And most of all...get their money. Emotional manipulations work good for that not reality. And Malcolm's credentials are not Umar Johnson's. People have pointed out various real inaccuracies, vagueness, flaws, and nonsensical positions he has taken. Its not about making up points its just seeing whats there. There is a lot of foolery.
The same reason why those people on the panel defelected into his lineage and his degrees and money for his school, they had a issue with him and used those things to deflect and discredit and y'all are in here doing the same. Y'all are hypocrites ? on Umar but give passes to others that y'all like. Either be consistent or shut the ? up.
Speaking specifically of Umars situation, this lack of paperwork will always leave a question mark over his head. Theres no running from that. If Umar was a white supremacist, he'd still need to have that ? .
Had dude not came on the scene with that, itd be different. But since he did, he needs to be consistent as well. If for nothing but to keep his enemy from having it as a weapon to use against him.
His so called lack of paperwork does not or should it take away from his message and the work he has put in.
No one gets a pass for false flagging a PhD.....
His main point in the interview was that blacks cannot marry white and truly be down for the cause....
Which has been proven as ? far before umar was born...
No hate and nothing wrong with being a lecturer.....
But...
What work has he put in....????
-
He was looking into buying ST Paul. Man that ? is in the middle of ? no where.
-
5th Letter wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
True, but Malcolm himself also revised his stance and message in time. So you can't say people were wrong to criticize him, when in the end he had some of the same criticisms for himself.
Most of y'all arguments are about his degrees and about money for his school. How does any of that make his points invalid? Just like bringing up Malcolm's past, it's a deflection tactic and a way to discredit. That's my point.
That's still a bad comparison. Malcom X actually used his past as a way talking point to tell people what to avoid and how it had his mind ? up. He used his past as a way to give a foundation to what he would speak on. Same as Umar uses his claims of having a degree to speak on certain things involving the education system. Ya'll have yet to give a good reason to ignore why someone who wants to start a school should be allowed to just bypass any question about their own academic history. -
5th Letter wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
True, but Malcolm himself also revised his stance and message in time. So you can't say people were wrong to criticize him, when in the end he had some of the same criticisms for himself.
Most of y'all arguments are about his degrees and about money for his school. How does any of that make his points invalid? Just like bringing up Malcolm's past, it's a deflection tactic and a way to discredit. That's my point.
I don't know who ya'll is, but I've never made an argument about his degrees or his money. I've always addressed the points he's made. So the first thing you cats need to do is stop treating everyone who is critical of Umar as if they are the same.
The second thing ya'll need to stop doing is acting like a person's credibility doesn't matter. Again, I believe people should move on from the degree argument, but it's silly to act like a man lying about his credentials isn't pertinent when he's using those credentials as proof that his ideas are valid. When the ? says he has the expertise to create and run a school, he always leans on his credentials. If those credentials are a lie, then that should throw his expertise into question. So stop throwing that argument out as if it's just fluff. It's not. If you believe them questioning his credentials is unfounded, fine, but honestly Umar himself should have been able to shut it down a long time ago. I got degrees. If people questioned my degrees, it would be as easy as getting my phone and taking pictures of those degrees. He seems to get ? that people keep harping on this, but doesn't seem to take even the easiest steps towards proving the naysayers wrong.
Bringing up Malcolm's past also wasn't a deflection. You can't say "Forget the white man. Let's build our own" if you are out there chasing white women. That's a legitimate criticism. The difference is Malcom addressed it and denounced his old life. Umar addresses the criticisms but he seems to get defensive and hostile about it, which is understandable when people are coming at you a certain way, but it doesn't make the criticisms unfounded. -
He didnt bypass the question though. He explained in length his credentials and challenged people to call the institutions and inquire.
Do you have a problem with his stance/message because you are mixed?
-
Most other times ? will be quick to say don't listen to somebody whose experience in an area is lacking or showing to be faulty...hell ? hate listening to ? sports casters who didn't play or were mediocre players but see nothing wrong with a man who wants to build a school not clearly answering up about his own educational credentials.
-
He didnt bypass the question though. He explained in length his credentials and challenged people to call the institutions and inquire.
Do you have a problem with his stance/message because you are mixed?
That is bypassing though. If you make a claim, the burden of proof is on you. Now, truthfully, most people don't call a person's degrees into question. I'm not sure why they are doing that with him, but people have questioned it. So if he wants to put those questions to rest, all he has to do is provide the proof. Telling people "call the institutions and ask yourself" is a bit of a dodge. It would be like a journalist making claims in an article and when confronted about the legitimacy of those claims saying "Go ask my sources yourself." No one would accept that as a valid response.
As for his stance, I don't really have a problem with it. I don't agree with a lot that he's said, and I've addressed those things specifically and why I believe he's wrong. For instance, in this interview when he makes the statement that "No white person has ever fought against systematic white privilege." That is factually incorrect. Whites fought against slavery. They fought for Civil Rights. And some now are fighting against unfair treatment by the justice system. Unless you think slavery, race based discrimination, and racially unfair treatment by America's institutions aren't examples of systematic white privilege, I don't really see how you can claim that statement to be true. I also don't agree with his views on miscegenation, but I understand why he has them. I think the generalizations he makes to support those views are dangerous and divisive, but I believe there is merit in promoting that black people marry other black people. -
5th Letter wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »NoCompetition wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
Ultimately though this guy has to stand on his own. Not deflecting to Hillary or Bill Maher as you did earlier. They have nothing to do with this. Why even go in that direction? Thats literally not connected. Maybe this is a glimpse into the mentality of those who are subsceptible to this type of thing. Change the subject and go in tangeants and just go, dont worry about connecting dots and making sense. Play the game And most of all...get their money. Emotional manipulations work good for that not reality. And Malcolm's credentials are not Umar Johnson's. People have pointed out various real inaccuracies, vagueness, flaws, and nonsensical positions he has taken. Its not about making up points its just seeing whats there. There is a lot of foolery.
The same reason why those people on the panel defelected into his lineage and his degrees and money for his school, they had a issue with him and used those things to deflect and discredit and y'all are in here doing the same. Y'all are hypocrites ? on Umar but give passes to others that y'all like. Either be consistent or shut the ? up.
Speaking specifically of Umars situation, this lack of paperwork will always leave a question mark over his head. Theres no running from that. If Umar was a white supremacist, he'd still need to have that ? .
Had dude not came on the scene with that, itd be different. But since he did, he needs to be consistent as well. If for nothing but to keep his enemy from having it as a weapon to use against him.
His so called lack of paperwork does not or should it take away from his message and the work he has put in.
No one gets a pass for false flagging a PhD.....
His main point in the interview was that blacks cannot marry white and truly be down for the cause....
Which has been proven as ? far before umar was born...
No hate and nothing wrong with being a lecturer.....
But...
What work has he put in....????
He broke down where he got his degrees and even said to call these institutions to verify.
And his main point was not about interracial relationships. It became the focus because the woman and Roland kept harping on it.
Going around the country educating black people on various issues that affect black people. -
5th Letter wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »NoCompetition wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
Ultimately though this guy has to stand on his own. Not deflecting to Hillary or Bill Maher as you did earlier. They have nothing to do with this. Why even go in that direction? Thats literally not connected. Maybe this is a glimpse into the mentality of those who are subsceptible to this type of thing. Change the subject and go in tangeants and just go, dont worry about connecting dots and making sense. Play the game And most of all...get their money. Emotional manipulations work good for that not reality. And Malcolm's credentials are not Umar Johnson's. People have pointed out various real inaccuracies, vagueness, flaws, and nonsensical positions he has taken. Its not about making up points its just seeing whats there. There is a lot of foolery.
The same reason why those people on the panel defelected into his lineage and his degrees and money for his school, they had a issue with him and used those things to deflect and discredit and y'all are in here doing the same. Y'all are hypocrites ? on Umar but give passes to others that y'all like. Either be consistent or shut the ? up.
Speaking specifically of Umars situation, this lack of paperwork will always leave a question mark over his head. Theres no running from that. If Umar was a white supremacist, he'd still need to have that ? .
Had dude not came on the scene with that, itd be different. But since he did, he needs to be consistent as well. If for nothing but to keep his enemy from having it as a weapon to use against him.
His so called lack of paperwork does not or should it take away from his message and the work he has put in.
No one gets a pass for false flagging a PhD.....
His main point in the interview was that blacks cannot marry white and truly be down for the cause....
Which has been proven as ? far before umar was born...
No hate and nothing wrong with being a lecturer.....
But...
What work has he put in....????
You would be hard press to find majority of black people down to fight white supremacy that will agree with interracial relationship.
Can you imagine Harriet Tubman with a white man talking about let's get free??? -
5th Letter wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
True, but Malcolm himself also revised his stance and message in time. So you can't say people were wrong to criticize him, when in the end he had some of the same criticisms for himself.
Most of y'all arguments are about his degrees and about money for his school. How does any of that make his points invalid? Just like bringing up Malcolm's past, it's a deflection tactic and a way to discredit. That's my point.
That's still a bad comparison. Malcom X actually used his past as a way talking point to tell people what to avoid and how it had his mind ? up. He used his past as a way to give a foundation to what he would speak on. Same as Umar uses his claims of having a degree to speak on certain things involving the education system. Ya'll have yet to give a good reason to ignore why someone who wants to start a school should be allowed to just bypass any question about their own academic history.
There you go being naive again. Did you even watch this interview? Didn't he not answer the questions about his degrees and where he attained them? -
5th Letter wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »NoCompetition wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
Ultimately though this guy has to stand on his own. Not deflecting to Hillary or Bill Maher as you did earlier. They have nothing to do with this. Why even go in that direction? Thats literally not connected. Maybe this is a glimpse into the mentality of those who are subsceptible to this type of thing. Change the subject and go in tangeants and just go, dont worry about connecting dots and making sense. Play the game And most of all...get their money. Emotional manipulations work good for that not reality. And Malcolm's credentials are not Umar Johnson's. People have pointed out various real inaccuracies, vagueness, flaws, and nonsensical positions he has taken. Its not about making up points its just seeing whats there. There is a lot of foolery.
The same reason why those people on the panel defelected into his lineage and his degrees and money for his school, they had a issue with him and used those things to deflect and discredit and y'all are in here doing the same. Y'all are hypocrites ? on Umar but give passes to others that y'all like. Either be consistent or shut the ? up.
Speaking specifically of Umars situation, this lack of paperwork will always leave a question mark over his head. Theres no running from that. If Umar was a white supremacist, he'd still need to have that ? .
Had dude not came on the scene with that, itd be different. But since he did, he needs to be consistent as well. If for nothing but to keep his enemy from having it as a weapon to use against him.
His so called lack of paperwork does not or should it take away from his message and the work he has put in.
No one gets a pass for false flagging a PhD.....
His main point in the interview was that blacks cannot marry white and truly be down for the cause....
Which has been proven as ? far before umar was born...
No hate and nothing wrong with being a lecturer.....
But...
What work has he put in....????
You would be hard press to find majority of black people down to fight white supremacy that will agree with interracial relationship.
Can you imagine Harriet Tubman with a white man talking about let's get free???
lol Frederick Douglas was every bit as involved in the fight against slavery as Harriet Tubman, but he married a white woman, so I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make.
There are good or at least understandable reasons why some are against interracial marriage. However, a lot of the reasons given are dumb. They usually boil down to charging every white person with being responsible for white supremacy, which is silly. Every white person is a beneficiary of white privilege to some extent, but not every white person is out their promoting white supremacy. Most whites aren't even in a position to do that with any effectiveness. The fact is a lot of people that are on this site have anti-white feelings and they believe those feelings are good reason tell other blacks that they shouldn't marry whites. Those anti-white feelings are understandable, but they don't make for a good argument against interracial marriage in general. -
5th Letter wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
True, but Malcolm himself also revised his stance and message in time. So you can't say people were wrong to criticize him, when in the end he had some of the same criticisms for himself.
Most of y'all arguments are about his degrees and about money for his school. How does any of that make his points invalid? Just like bringing up Malcolm's past, it's a deflection tactic and a way to discredit. That's my point.
That's still a bad comparison. Malcom X actually used his past as a way talking point to tell people what to avoid and how it had his mind ? up. He used his past as a way to give a foundation to what he would speak on. Same as Umar uses his claims of having a degree to speak on certain things involving the education system. Ya'll have yet to give a good reason to ignore why someone who wants to start a school should be allowed to just bypass any question about their own academic history.
There you go being naive again. Did you even watch this interview? Didn't he not answer the questions about his degrees and where he attained them?
Yes I did...and no he didn't. It's like ya'll think any questioning of anything he says is wrong. If he's going to be saying ? then it needs to be factual. I mean ? this ? said on the BC that Mandarin is an official language of a republic in South Africa. That's just a straight up lie. He took a story about the SA school system adding it to the languages being taught and added his own ? ..but let some of ya'll tell it it's cool to spread misinformation -
5th Letter wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »NoCompetition wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
Ultimately though this guy has to stand on his own. Not deflecting to Hillary or Bill Maher as you did earlier. They have nothing to do with this. Why even go in that direction? Thats literally not connected. Maybe this is a glimpse into the mentality of those who are subsceptible to this type of thing. Change the subject and go in tangeants and just go, dont worry about connecting dots and making sense. Play the game And most of all...get their money. Emotional manipulations work good for that not reality. And Malcolm's credentials are not Umar Johnson's. People have pointed out various real inaccuracies, vagueness, flaws, and nonsensical positions he has taken. Its not about making up points its just seeing whats there. There is a lot of foolery.
The same reason why those people on the panel defelected into his lineage and his degrees and money for his school, they had a issue with him and used those things to deflect and discredit and y'all are in here doing the same. Y'all are hypocrites ? on Umar but give passes to others that y'all like. Either be consistent or shut the ? up.
Speaking specifically of Umars situation, this lack of paperwork will always leave a question mark over his head. Theres no running from that. If Umar was a white supremacist, he'd still need to have that ? .
Had dude not came on the scene with that, itd be different. But since he did, he needs to be consistent as well. If for nothing but to keep his enemy from having it as a weapon to use against him.
His so called lack of paperwork does not or should it take away from his message and the work he has put in.
No one gets a pass for false flagging a PhD.....
His main point in the interview was that blacks cannot marry white and truly be down for the cause....
Which has been proven as ? far before umar was born...
No hate and nothing wrong with being a lecturer.....
But...
What work has he put in....????
He broke down where he got his degrees and even said to call these institutions to verify.
And his main point was not about interracial relationships. It became the focus because the woman and Roland kept harping on it.
Going around the country educating black people on various issues that affect black people.
And there are discrepancies concerning his PhD....
Which have been thoroughly explained....
And that, (interracial marriage) will be the focus of most interviews that he gives.....
It overshadows the rest of his message....
As far as his "work"...
Do black people really need to pay to hear about the ills in their community?????
From his site...Services
Dr. Umar Johnson is available for Workshops, Professional panels, Motivational and Informational speaking engagements, Lectures, Professional development and ADHD child diagnosis consultations. Call for more information.
He also has a college tour that he charges a fee to attend....
Which I think is unethical....
We sponsor the same types of college tours at my school for free....
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »NoCompetition wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
Ultimately though this guy has to stand on his own. Not deflecting to Hillary or Bill Maher as you did earlier. They have nothing to do with this. Why even go in that direction? Thats literally not connected. Maybe this is a glimpse into the mentality of those who are subsceptible to this type of thing. Change the subject and go in tangeants and just go, dont worry about connecting dots and making sense. Play the game And most of all...get their money. Emotional manipulations work good for that not reality. And Malcolm's credentials are not Umar Johnson's. People have pointed out various real inaccuracies, vagueness, flaws, and nonsensical positions he has taken. Its not about making up points its just seeing whats there. There is a lot of foolery.
The same reason why those people on the panel defelected into his lineage and his degrees and money for his school, they had a issue with him and used those things to deflect and discredit and y'all are in here doing the same. Y'all are hypocrites ? on Umar but give passes to others that y'all like. Either be consistent or shut the ? up.
Speaking specifically of Umars situation, this lack of paperwork will always leave a question mark over his head. Theres no running from that. If Umar was a white supremacist, he'd still need to have that ? .
Had dude not came on the scene with that, itd be different. But since he did, he needs to be consistent as well. If for nothing but to keep his enemy from having it as a weapon to use against him.
His so called lack of paperwork does not or should it take away from his message and the work he has put in.
No one gets a pass for false flagging a PhD.....
His main point in the interview was that blacks cannot marry white and truly be down for the cause....
Which has been proven as ? far before umar was born...
No hate and nothing wrong with being a lecturer.....
But...
What work has he put in....????
You would be hard press to find majority of black people down to fight white supremacy that will agree with interracial relationship.
Can you imagine Harriet Tubman with a white man talking about let's get free???
lol Frederick Douglas was every bit as involved in the fight against slavery as Harriet Tubman, but he married a white woman, so I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make.
There are good or at least understandable reasons why some are against interracial marriage. However, a lot of the reasons given are dumb. They usually boil down to charging every white person with being responsible for white supremacy, which is silly. Every white person is a beneficiary of white privilege to some extent, but not every white person is out their promoting white supremacy. Most whites aren't even in a position to do that with any effectiveness. The fact is a lot of people that are on this site have anti-white feelings and they believe those feelings are good reason tell other blacks that they shouldn't marry whites. Those anti-white feelings are understandable, but they don't make for a good argument against interracial marriage in general.
Fredrick Douglass was already explained now answer my first part -
I think at the end of the day, he's supposed to be what he is. He's taking a page out of Fox news and that type of thing's handbooks. Appeal to people's emotions, get em on your path by talking fast and spike their emotions here and there. Some wont see the obvious holes because you have triggered a different part of their brain. They have to be "marks" though it doesnt work on everybody. There are so many inaccuracies and unrealistic nonsense and just lies its like the vast majority to his whole platform. When you on that get the money by any means you'll mislead people long as you say its "pro black" even though it will only lead em to confusion. Its cool as long as you can compartmentalize and know whats what but as we have seen with the Fox crowd, everybody cant discern. Which would probably be the biggest issue. At its heart tho, its just some clowns running their mouth on youtube trying to get some money basically. If your hip, good for you but he is trying to hit the "marks" who aint so hip. They are there so why not get what you can get? I dont agree but I see.
-
5th Letter wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »NoCompetition wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
Ultimately though this guy has to stand on his own. Not deflecting to Hillary or Bill Maher as you did earlier. They have nothing to do with this. Why even go in that direction? Thats literally not connected. Maybe this is a glimpse into the mentality of those who are subsceptible to this type of thing. Change the subject and go in tangeants and just go, dont worry about connecting dots and making sense. Play the game And most of all...get their money. Emotional manipulations work good for that not reality. And Malcolm's credentials are not Umar Johnson's. People have pointed out various real inaccuracies, vagueness, flaws, and nonsensical positions he has taken. Its not about making up points its just seeing whats there. There is a lot of foolery.
The same reason why those people on the panel defelected into his lineage and his degrees and money for his school, they had a issue with him and used those things to deflect and discredit and y'all are in here doing the same. Y'all are hypocrites ? on Umar but give passes to others that y'all like. Either be consistent or shut the ? up.
Speaking specifically of Umars situation, this lack of paperwork will always leave a question mark over his head. Theres no running from that. If Umar was a white supremacist, he'd still need to have that ? .
Had dude not came on the scene with that, itd be different. But since he did, he needs to be consistent as well. If for nothing but to keep his enemy from having it as a weapon to use against him.
His so called lack of paperwork does not or should it take away from his message and the work he has put in.
No one gets a pass for false flagging a PhD.....
His main point in the interview was that blacks cannot marry white and truly be down for the cause....
Which has been proven as ? far before umar was born...
No hate and nothing wrong with being a lecturer.....
But...
What work has he put in....????
You would be hard press to find majority of black people down to fight white supremacy that will agree with interracial relationship.
Can you imagine Harriet Tubman with a white man talking about let's get free???
I try not to imagine if things were different in the the past.....
I'm a realist....
If "if" was a spliff.....
We'd all be high.....
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »NoCompetition wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
Ultimately though this guy has to stand on his own. Not deflecting to Hillary or Bill Maher as you did earlier. They have nothing to do with this. Why even go in that direction? Thats literally not connected. Maybe this is a glimpse into the mentality of those who are subsceptible to this type of thing. Change the subject and go in tangeants and just go, dont worry about connecting dots and making sense. Play the game And most of all...get their money. Emotional manipulations work good for that not reality. And Malcolm's credentials are not Umar Johnson's. People have pointed out various real inaccuracies, vagueness, flaws, and nonsensical positions he has taken. Its not about making up points its just seeing whats there. There is a lot of foolery.
The same reason why those people on the panel defelected into his lineage and his degrees and money for his school, they had a issue with him and used those things to deflect and discredit and y'all are in here doing the same. Y'all are hypocrites ? on Umar but give passes to others that y'all like. Either be consistent or shut the ? up.
Speaking specifically of Umars situation, this lack of paperwork will always leave a question mark over his head. Theres no running from that. If Umar was a white supremacist, he'd still need to have that ? .
Had dude not came on the scene with that, itd be different. But since he did, he needs to be consistent as well. If for nothing but to keep his enemy from having it as a weapon to use against him.
His so called lack of paperwork does not or should it take away from his message and the work he has put in.
No one gets a pass for false flagging a PhD.....
His main point in the interview was that blacks cannot marry white and truly be down for the cause....
Which has been proven as ? far before umar was born...
No hate and nothing wrong with being a lecturer.....
But...
What work has he put in....????
You would be hard press to find majority of black people down to fight white supremacy that will agree with interracial relationship.
Can you imagine Harriet Tubman with a white man talking about let's get free???
lol Frederick Douglas was every bit as involved in the fight against slavery as Harriet Tubman, but he married a white woman, so I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make.
There are good or at least understandable reasons why some are against interracial marriage. However, a lot of the reasons given are dumb. They usually boil down to charging every white person with being responsible for white supremacy, which is silly. Every white person is a beneficiary of white privilege to some extent, but not every white person is out their promoting white supremacy. Most whites aren't even in a position to do that with any effectiveness. The fact is a lot of people that are on this site have anti-white feelings and they believe those feelings are good reason tell other blacks that they shouldn't marry whites. Those anti-white feelings are understandable, but they don't make for a good argument against interracial marriage in general.
Fredrick Douglass was already explained now answer my first part
What explanation? That he was old? That he married a black woman first? Neither of those change the fact that he married a white woman.
And in this very video Roland Martin gave a laundry list of people who were instrumental in the fight against white supremacy. You dudes just like to dismiss them despite the fact that most of the people named struggled more in the name of black people than anyone on this site ever has and likely ever will. That's why this whole line of reasoning is bogus. There really has never been any era of struggle in the name of black rights where some of the people in that fight didn't end up marrying someone from the other side. ? happens. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
True, but Malcolm himself also revised his stance and message in time. So you can't say people were wrong to criticize him, when in the end he had some of the same criticisms for himself.
Most of y'all arguments are about his degrees and about money for his school. How does any of that make his points invalid? Just like bringing up Malcolm's past, it's a deflection tactic and a way to discredit. That's my point.
I don't know who ya'll is, but I've never made an argument about his degrees or his money. I've always addressed the points he's made. So the first thing you cats need to do is stop treating everyone who is critical of Umar as if they are the same.
The second thing ya'll need to stop doing is acting like a person's credibility doesn't matter. Again, I believe people should move on from the degree argument, but it's silly to act like a man lying about his credentials isn't pertinent when he's using those credentials as proof that his ideas are valid. When the ? says he has the expertise to create and run a school, he always leans on his credentials. If those credentials are a lie, then that should throw his expertise into question. So stop throwing that argument out as if it's just fluff. It's not. If you believe them questioning his credentials is unfounded, fine, but honestly Umar himself should have been able to shut it down a long time ago. I got degrees. If people questioned my degrees, it would be as easy as getting my phone and taking pictures of those degrees. He seems to get ? that people keep harping on this, but doesn't seem to take even the easiest steps towards proving the naysayers wrong.
Bringing up Malcolm's past also wasn't a deflection. You can't say "Forget the white man. Let's build our own" if you are out there chasing white women. That's a legitimate criticism. The difference is Malcom addressed it and denounced his old life. Umar addresses the criticisms but he seems to get defensive and hostile about it, which is understandable when people are coming at you a certain way, but it doesn't make the criticisms unfounded.
You're contradicting yourself buddy. Your first paragraph says you've "never made an argument about his degrees and money". Then in your next paragraph go on to tell us about his degrees? Interesting. Then you use a strawman argument about no one questioning his credentials, no one has said that in here, the main point that you're purposely acting obtuse on is that he's giving black people good information but y'all choose to deflect to dismiss and deflect. He addressed where and how he got his degrees so if you think he's lying then you can investigate yourself. He even said so himself. Lastly you are purposely missing my point about Malcolm.
-
5th Letter wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
True, but Malcolm himself also revised his stance and message in time. So you can't say people were wrong to criticize him, when in the end he had some of the same criticisms for himself.
Most of y'all arguments are about his degrees and about money for his school. How does any of that make his points invalid? Just like bringing up Malcolm's past, it's a deflection tactic and a way to discredit. That's my point.
I don't know who ya'll is, but I've never made an argument about his degrees or his money. I've always addressed the points he's made. So the first thing you cats need to do is stop treating everyone who is critical of Umar as if they are the same.
The second thing ya'll need to stop doing is acting like a person's credibility doesn't matter. Again, I believe people should move on from the degree argument, but it's silly to act like a man lying about his credentials isn't pertinent when he's using those credentials as proof that his ideas are valid. When the ? says he has the expertise to create and run a school, he always leans on his credentials. If those credentials are a lie, then that should throw his expertise into question. So stop throwing that argument out as if it's just fluff. It's not. If you believe them questioning his credentials is unfounded, fine, but honestly Umar himself should have been able to shut it down a long time ago. I got degrees. If people questioned my degrees, it would be as easy as getting my phone and taking pictures of those degrees. He seems to get ? that people keep harping on this, but doesn't seem to take even the easiest steps towards proving the naysayers wrong.
Bringing up Malcolm's past also wasn't a deflection. You can't say "Forget the white man. Let's build our own" if you are out there chasing white women. That's a legitimate criticism. The difference is Malcom addressed it and denounced his old life. Umar addresses the criticisms but he seems to get defensive and hostile about it, which is understandable when people are coming at you a certain way, but it doesn't make the criticisms unfounded.
You're contradicting yourself buddy. Your first paragraph says you've "never made an argument about his degrees and money". Then in your next paragraph go on to tell us about his degrees? Interesting. Then you use a strawman argument about no one questioning his credentials, no one has said that in here, the main point that you're purposely acting obtuse on is that he's giving black people good information but y'all choose to deflect to dismiss and deflect. He addressed where and how he got his degrees so if you think he's lying then you can investigate yourself. He even said so himself. Lastly you are purposely missing my point about Malcolm.
lol How did I contradict myself? I'm pretty sure my second paragraph came after my first paragraph. Even then, I wasn't making the argument that people shouldn't listen to Umar because his degrees might not be real. I was just pointing out why it was silly for you and others to act like that issue shouldn't be addressed. Even now, I still don't really give a ? about his degrees, but I'm not going to act like it's not something important enough for others to care about.
And here we go with the "straw man" ? . I know whenever one you bring that up, you're about say some stupid ? . Nowhere did I say that anyone said verbatim "no one should question his credentials." It's insane how you and @soul rattler have this tendency to claim someone is using a straw man and then back your claim by using a straw man. That has to be the dumbest ? I've ever seen, real talk. I said "It's silly to act like a man lying about his credentials isn't pertinent..." That's in direct reference to you and others implying that there should be less focus put on the degree matter and more one what Umar is saying. Once again, you pull the same ? that you keep on doing. You claim that people bringing up the degrees is an attempt to "dismiss and deflect." I believe that's true for some, but I just explained why you can't just accuse every critic of bringing up the degrees for that reason. You say Umar gives good information. Maybe he does, but when it comes to the educational ? he discusses, he uses his credentials as part of the reasoning for why the information he's giving is "good." I'm at a loss of understanding, why you can't seem to understand why a discussion of those credentials is pertinent and not just a deflection. Once again, I'll say, I don't give a ? about his degrees, but if he really wanted to dead this matter, he's show pictures of the degrees or transcripts or any one of a dozen official documents that people who get degrees would have access too. He doesn't do that. He just keeps on repeating the credentials he supposedly has and puts the burden on his critics to prove that he's wrong. That's not how burden of proof works.
At the end of the day. I care about messages, goals, and principles. I like Umar's goals. I think his message overall is good, but he delivers it poorly sometimes. I agree with some of his principles and disagree with some. However, Umar is just a man. He's not the mission, and he's not above reproach. If people have legitimate criticisms, they have every right to voice them. The compulsion some of you feel to defend him by attacking anyone who doesn't support him in the way you do is weird to me. It's fanboyshit. I'm not even anti-Umar. I'm more neutral on him, yet you're purposely misrepresenting my statements to be more negative all so you can try to come at me a certain way. What kinda sense does that make? -
5th Letter wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »NoCompetition wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
Ultimately though this guy has to stand on his own. Not deflecting to Hillary or Bill Maher as you did earlier. They have nothing to do with this. Why even go in that direction? Thats literally not connected. Maybe this is a glimpse into the mentality of those who are subsceptible to this type of thing. Change the subject and go in tangeants and just go, dont worry about connecting dots and making sense. Play the game And most of all...get their money. Emotional manipulations work good for that not reality. And Malcolm's credentials are not Umar Johnson's. People have pointed out various real inaccuracies, vagueness, flaws, and nonsensical positions he has taken. Its not about making up points its just seeing whats there. There is a lot of foolery.
The same reason why those people on the panel defelected into his lineage and his degrees and money for his school, they had a issue with him and used those things to deflect and discredit and y'all are in here doing the same. Y'all are hypocrites ? on Umar but give passes to others that y'all like. Either be consistent or shut the ? up.
Speaking specifically of Umars situation, this lack of paperwork will always leave a question mark over his head. Theres no running from that. If Umar was a white supremacist, he'd still need to have that ? .
Had dude not came on the scene with that, itd be different. But since he did, he needs to be consistent as well. If for nothing but to keep his enemy from having it as a weapon to use against him.
His so called lack of paperwork does not or should it take away from his message and the work he has put in.
No one gets a pass for false flagging a PhD.....
His main point in the interview was that blacks cannot marry white and truly be down for the cause....
Which has been proven as ? far before umar was born...
No hate and nothing wrong with being a lecturer.....
But...
What work has he put in....????
He broke down where he got his degrees and even said to call these institutions to verify.
And his main point was not about interracial relationships. It became the focus because the woman and Roland kept harping on it.
Going around the country educating black people on various issues that affect black people.
And there are discrepancies concerning his PhD....
Which have been thoroughly explained....
And that, (interracial marriage) will be the focus of most interviews that he gives.....
It overshadows the rest of his message....
As far as his "work"...
Do black people really need to pay to hear about the ills in their community?????
From his site...Services
Dr. Umar Johnson is available for Workshops, Professional panels, Motivational and Informational speaking engagements, Lectures, Professional development and ADHD child diagnosis consultations. Call for more information.
He also has a college tour that he charges a fee to attend....
Which I think is unethical....
We sponsor the same types of college tours at my school for free....
If there are discrepancies then you can call these schools and verify for yourself, why take their word for it? Interracial dating is a "focus" because certain black people don't not want to give up sex with white people.
When other groups charge to give lectures and speeches it's fine but Umar is "unethical", you nitpicking. -
5th Letter wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »NoCompetition wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
Ultimately though this guy has to stand on his own. Not deflecting to Hillary or Bill Maher as you did earlier. They have nothing to do with this. Why even go in that direction? Thats literally not connected. Maybe this is a glimpse into the mentality of those who are subsceptible to this type of thing. Change the subject and go in tangeants and just go, dont worry about connecting dots and making sense. Play the game And most of all...get their money. Emotional manipulations work good for that not reality. And Malcolm's credentials are not Umar Johnson's. People have pointed out various real inaccuracies, vagueness, flaws, and nonsensical positions he has taken. Its not about making up points its just seeing whats there. There is a lot of foolery.
The same reason why those people on the panel defelected into his lineage and his degrees and money for his school, they had a issue with him and used those things to deflect and discredit and y'all are in here doing the same. Y'all are hypocrites ? on Umar but give passes to others that y'all like. Either be consistent or shut the ? up.
Speaking specifically of Umars situation, this lack of paperwork will always leave a question mark over his head. Theres no running from that. If Umar was a white supremacist, he'd still need to have that ? .
Had dude not came on the scene with that, itd be different. But since he did, he needs to be consistent as well. If for nothing but to keep his enemy from having it as a weapon to use against him.
His so called lack of paperwork does not or should it take away from his message and the work he has put in.
No one gets a pass for false flagging a PhD.....
His main point in the interview was that blacks cannot marry white and truly be down for the cause....
Which has been proven as ? far before umar was born...
No hate and nothing wrong with being a lecturer.....
But...
What work has he put in....????
He broke down where he got his degrees and even said to call these institutions to verify.
And his main point was not about interracial relationships. It became the focus because the woman and Roland kept harping on it.
Going around the country educating black people on various issues that affect black people.
And there are discrepancies concerning his PhD....
Which have been thoroughly explained....
And that, (interracial marriage) will be the focus of most interviews that he gives.....
It overshadows the rest of his message....
As far as his "work"...
Do black people really need to pay to hear about the ills in their community?????
From his site...Services
Dr. Umar Johnson is available for Workshops, Professional panels, Motivational and Informational speaking engagements, Lectures, Professional development and ADHD child diagnosis consultations. Call for more information.
He also has a college tour that he charges a fee to attend....
Which I think is unethical....
We sponsor the same types of college tours at my school for free....
If there are discrepancies then you can call these schools and verify for yourself, why take their word for it? Interracial dating is a "focus" because certain black people don't not want to give up sex with white people.
When other groups charge to give lectures and speeches it's fine but Umar is "unethical", you nitpicking.
They want ? for free in a capitalist society lol you simply can't make this ? up...
These guys are nothing but professional question Dodgers. All they want to do is straw mad and troll over the same issue that doesnt solves problems -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
True, but Malcolm himself also revised his stance and message in time. So you can't say people were wrong to criticize him, when in the end he had some of the same criticisms for himself.
Most of y'all arguments are about his degrees and about money for his school. How does any of that make his points invalid? Just like bringing up Malcolm's past, it's a deflection tactic and a way to discredit. That's my point.
I don't know who ya'll is, but I've never made an argument about his degrees or his money. I've always addressed the points he's made. So the first thing you cats need to do is stop treating everyone who is critical of Umar as if they are the same.
The second thing ya'll need to stop doing is acting like a person's credibility doesn't matter. Again, I believe people should move on from the degree argument, but it's silly to act like a man lying about his credentials isn't pertinent when he's using those credentials as proof that his ideas are valid. When the ? says he has the expertise to create and run a school, he always leans on his credentials. If those credentials are a lie, then that should throw his expertise into question. So stop throwing that argument out as if it's just fluff. It's not. If you believe them questioning his credentials is unfounded, fine, but honestly Umar himself should have been able to shut it down a long time ago. I got degrees. If people questioned my degrees, it would be as easy as getting my phone and taking pictures of those degrees. He seems to get ? that people keep harping on this, but doesn't seem to take even the easiest steps towards proving the naysayers wrong.
Bringing up Malcolm's past also wasn't a deflection. You can't say "Forget the white man. Let's build our own" if you are out there chasing white women. That's a legitimate criticism. The difference is Malcom addressed it and denounced his old life. Umar addresses the criticisms but he seems to get defensive and hostile about it, which is understandable when people are coming at you a certain way, but it doesn't make the criticisms unfounded.
You're contradicting yourself buddy. Your first paragraph says you've "never made an argument about his degrees and money". Then in your next paragraph go on to tell us about his degrees? Interesting. Then you use a strawman argument about no one questioning his credentials, no one has said that in here, the main point that you're purposely acting obtuse on is that he's giving black people good information but y'all choose to deflect to dismiss and deflect. He addressed where and how he got his degrees so if you think he's lying then you can investigate yourself. He even said so himself. Lastly you are purposely missing my point about Malcolm.
lol How did I contradict myself? I'm pretty sure my second paragraph came after my first paragraph. Even then, I wasn't making the argument that people shouldn't listen to Umar because his degrees might not be real. I was just pointing out why it was silly for you and others to act like that issue shouldn't be addressed. Even now, I still don't really give a ? about his degrees, but I'm not going to act like it's not something important enough for others to care about.
And here we go with the "straw man" ? . I know whenever one you bring that up, you're about say some stupid ? . Nowhere did I say that anyone said verbatim "no one should question his credentials." It's insane how you and @soul rattler have this tendency to claim someone is using a straw man and then back your claim by using a straw man. That has to be the dumbest ? I've ever seen, real talk. I said "It's silly to act like a man lying about his credentials isn't pertinent..." That's in direct reference to you and others implying that there should be less focus put on the degree matter and more one what Umar is saying. Once again, you pull the same ? that you keep on doing. You claim that people bringing up the degrees is an attempt to "dismiss and deflect." I believe that's true for some, but I just explained why you can't just accuse every critic of bringing up the degrees for that reason. You say Umar gives good information. Maybe he does, but when it comes to the educational ? he discusses, he uses his credentials as part of the reasoning for why the information he's giving is "good." I'm at a loss of understanding, why you can't seem to understand why a discussion of those credentials is pertinent and not just a deflection. Once again, I'll say, I don't give a ? about his degrees, but if he really wanted to dead this matter, he's show pictures of the degrees or transcripts or any one of a dozen official documents that people who get degrees would have access too. He doesn't do that. He just keeps on repeating the credentials he supposedly has and puts the burden on his critics to prove that he's wrong. That's not how burden of proof works.
At the end of the day. I care about messages, goals, and principles. I like Umar's goals. I think his message overall is good, but he delivers it poorly sometimes. I agree with some of his principles and disagree with some. However, Umar is just a man. He's not the mission, and he's not above reproach. If people have legitimate criticisms, they have every right to voice them. The compulsion some of you feel to defend him by attacking anyone who doesn't support him in the way you do is weird to me. It's fanboyshit. I'm not even anti-Umar. I'm more neutral on him, yet you're purposely misrepresenting my statements to be more negative all so you can try to come at me a certain way. What kinda sense does that make?
When dealing with the message then focus on the message. If we're talking about certain things where his credentials might be relevant then that's when it's fine to discuss it and question them. Bringing up degrees after Umar spoke on black issues is a deflection. That's the point. The man himself said anyone can call these schools and verify so to continue to nip at this man over this is simply beating a dead horse. If you don't want me mentioning your strawman arguments then stop using them. No one is saying he's beyond reproach nor did anyone say you can't voice certain criticism about him, but you have to expect people to counter your arguments against him if people don't agree. -
5th Letter wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
True, but Malcolm himself also revised his stance and message in time. So you can't say people were wrong to criticize him, when in the end he had some of the same criticisms for himself.
Most of y'all arguments are about his degrees and about money for his school. How does any of that make his points invalid? Just like bringing up Malcolm's past, it's a deflection tactic and a way to discredit. That's my point.
That's still a bad comparison. Malcom X actually used his past as a way talking point to tell people what to avoid and how it had his mind ? up. He used his past as a way to give a foundation to what he would speak on. Same as Umar uses his claims of having a degree to speak on certain things involving the education system. Ya'll have yet to give a good reason to ignore why someone who wants to start a school should be allowed to just bypass any question about their own academic history.
There you go being naive again. Did you even watch this interview? Didn't he not answer the questions about his degrees and where he attained them?
Yes I did...and no he didn't. It's like ya'll think any questioning of anything he says is wrong. If he's going to be saying ? then it needs to be factual. I mean ? this ? said on the BC that Mandarin is an official language of a republic in South Africa. That's just a straight up lie. He took a story about the SA school system adding it to the languages being taught and added his own ? ..but let some of ya'll tell it it's cool to spread misinformation
Let's play yes or no.
Did he answer the questions about his degrees?
Did he answer the questions about his lineage as it pertains to Frederick Douglas?
Did he clarify his statement about Mandarin as a language in South Africa?
Did he answer the questions about interracial dating?
-
5th Letter wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »NoCompetition wrote: »5th Letter wrote: »If we were living in the 60's ? would've been like "why should we listen to Malcolm X, he was a criminal he was a ? , he used to date white women, anybody that listens to him is a sheep, he's a fake Muslim"
Ultimately though this guy has to stand on his own. Not deflecting to Hillary or Bill Maher as you did earlier. They have nothing to do with this. Why even go in that direction? Thats literally not connected. Maybe this is a glimpse into the mentality of those who are subsceptible to this type of thing. Change the subject and go in tangeants and just go, dont worry about connecting dots and making sense. Play the game And most of all...get their money. Emotional manipulations work good for that not reality. And Malcolm's credentials are not Umar Johnson's. People have pointed out various real inaccuracies, vagueness, flaws, and nonsensical positions he has taken. Its not about making up points its just seeing whats there. There is a lot of foolery.
The same reason why those people on the panel defelected into his lineage and his degrees and money for his school, they had a issue with him and used those things to deflect and discredit and y'all are in here doing the same. Y'all are hypocrites ? on Umar but give passes to others that y'all like. Either be consistent or shut the ? up.
Speaking specifically of Umars situation, this lack of paperwork will always leave a question mark over his head. Theres no running from that. If Umar was a white supremacist, he'd still need to have that ? .
Had dude not came on the scene with that, itd be different. But since he did, he needs to be consistent as well. If for nothing but to keep his enemy from having it as a weapon to use against him.
His so called lack of paperwork does not or should it take away from his message and the work he has put in.
No one gets a pass for false flagging a PhD.....
His main point in the interview was that blacks cannot marry white and truly be down for the cause....
Which has been proven as ? far before umar was born...
No hate and nothing wrong with being a lecturer.....
But...
What work has he put in....????
He broke down where he got his degrees and even said to call these institutions to verify.
And his main point was not about interracial relationships. It became the focus because the woman and Roland kept harping on it.
Going around the country educating black people on various issues that affect black people.
And there are discrepancies concerning his PhD....
Which have been thoroughly explained....
And that, (interracial marriage) will be the focus of most interviews that he gives.....
It overshadows the rest of his message....
As far as his "work"...
Do black people really need to pay to hear about the ills in their community?????
From his site...Services
Dr. Umar Johnson is available for Workshops, Professional panels, Motivational and Informational speaking engagements, Lectures, Professional development and ADHD child diagnosis consultations. Call for more information.
He also has a college tour that he charges a fee to attend....
Which I think is unethical....
We sponsor the same types of college tours at my school for free....
If there are discrepancies then you can call these schools and verify for yourself, why take their word for it? Interracial dating is a "focus" because certain black people don't not want to give up sex with white people.
When other groups charge to give lectures and speeches it's fine but Umar is "unethical", you nitpicking.
They want ? for free in a capitalist society lol you simply can't make this ? up...
These guys are nothing but professional question Dodgers. All they want to do is straw mad and troll over the same issue that doesnt solves problems
Ironic you use the bold in defense of Umar
