Black KKK killed Sean Taylor

[PitBull]

I think the thing that I am trying to get at (from the CasteSystem angle) is
that it is far preferable for organized criminals looking to fix games to
have blacks with criminal backgrounds on the field than white suburban
kids without that kind of background, both in college and in the pros.
Those blacks would be much more likely to be corruptable, to be
compromised because of their backgrounds, to be compromised by
gambling problems of their own (like Vick/Mexico) or drug dealing/
addictions.

Just look at how the NFL and colleges are going into inner cities to recruit
these kids and put them at all the skill positions they can--ball handling
positions, or in the defensive secondary. Ideal positions to miss a tackle,
overthrow a receiver, drop a pass, or make a fumble.

After doing a bit more research, I found an author who addressed the
illegal gambling probem in thee NFL--Dan Moldea. I've got to check out
his book "Interference". But I'm beginning to believe that this is a lot
more common than we think.

I think that fans are a lot more accepting of PED use than the idea that
games are fixed, or that players are shaving points. The NFL and
gambling have a long and closely interlinked history. It is highly
important that the NFL hide the idea that games are fixed. All the other
problems are okay as long as that illusion is maintained. Hundreds of
billions are bet on NFL games every eyar--a figure that dwarfs the TV and
gate receipts for the teams. This is big, big business.

I'm beginning to come around to bigureal's viewpoint that a lot of
outcomes are fixed, and that a lot of upsets, bad calls, and funny
circumstances may indeed be a lot more significant than they appear. A
lot of the sports media pass it off as the "increased parity" of the league.
I don't find that convincing anymore.

The New England Patriots winning it all in 2002 (after 911)? The New
Orleans Saints 2006 season? I think that scripting for drama is occuring
in the NFL and other leagues. Things are looking a lot more manipulated
to me than before. That's my main point.

Sean Taylor's murder (not "death", as it is reported in the press--see how
they are downplaying it already?) looks very suspicious to me, and very
much like a gangland hit. I think Whitlock's job is to cover it up by saying
he was robbed by "street" criminals--the official line--instead of really
sifting through the facts. Keep people's eyes on the old "racism" angle,
now polished with a twist--that of a new class of black street "racists"
who are trying to keep the succesful black man down. Anything but
organized crime, and its relation to gambling in the NFL.Edited by: PitBull

 

[White Shogun]

To PitBull and bigunreal:

Who on the field would be involved in fixing games or point shaving? Is it a top to bottom conspiracy where all the players are involved, including owners, managers, coaches, GM's, players, refs...? Or would it be something more like having only certain refs and players involved?

How would you script an entire season, like the Patriots and Saints, without a huge number of players being involved? Would you say the outcomes are so fixed that they are written and performed, like wrestling? Or only manipulated sufficiently to get a 'close enough result?' For example, were the 2006 Saints scripted to win the Super Bowl, but the league couldn't quite pull it off or manipulate the game enough to make it happen?

Where huge sums of money are concerned, I have no doubt that someone, or multiple 'someones,' is attempting to control the outcome. No doubt. I just wonder how successful they can be and how deep (or high) it might run.

 

[Guest]

Well said Deadlift.

 

[PitBull]

White Shogun,

From what I understand, and I'm just starting to look into it, well over 20
NFL owners have had ties to organized crime. I think it goes all the way
up to the top. Same with colleges.

Just think about it. Get a coach to call a few bad plays, pay off a ref to
make a few bad calls, or get a compromised DB to miss a tackle or two
and you are in business. You don't need a whole team, just a few key
players in certain spots. You don't even have to lose the game, just blow
the point spread and you've made a lot of money.

Look at that NBA ref who got caught betting on games. What did he
know? Was he involved in throwing games? That one was nipped in the
bud pretty quickly--only that ref was lambasted, and no other refs were
investigated.

Check out Dan Moldea's web site at www.moldea.com. Moldea claims
that he can prove that no fewer 70 games were fixed. That is just the tip
of the iceberg that he can prove, and he wrote his book back in 1989.

 

[Guest]

Seen the prior owner of the Eagles back in 92 and he had mob written all over him and his crew. Edited by: wile

 

[Menelik]

Seen the prior owner of the Eagles back in 92 and he had mob written all over him and his crew.

How does one have mob written all over them? I hope that you aren't engaging in American-Italian stereotypes Wile.

Tartan Pride I would be careful if I was you I'd hate to see you "disapeared"
for expressing such views.

 

[bigunreal]

Pitbull,

Thanks for considering my outlandish notion that NFL games are fixed. I wouldn't trust anything that Dan Moldea says about the subject, however. I read his book about the NFL years ago. At the time, I was very excited about it, because I thought he was one of the few honest mainstream journalists in America. I found the book to be disappointing and lame. It reminded me of a "60 Minutes" "investigation" of something. There was no mention, for instance, of the most obviously fixed game in league history; Super Bowl III (Jets vs. Colts).

Later, I lost all respect for Moldea when wrote a dishonest, ridiculous book on the RFK assassination. Prior to that time, he had been a well-respected critic of the official report on RFK's assassination, but he abruptly switched allegiences (much like Norman Mailer and Mark Fuhrmann would later do on the JFK assassination) in order to make a buck. I had the chance to try and confront Moldea with all this some years ago, when he was a fairly frequent poster on the Free Republic web site. He dodged all my questions, and shortly afterwards, I was banned from Free Republic, much like all the other non-Republicrats who posted there.

Btw, I must say that I was shocked at the Bills victory over the Redskins today. Any way you looked at it, it seemed like the Redskins would win (either through the emotion of the moment, or through the pen of a script writer). I guess that's why I don't bet on these games.

 

[PitBull]

Bigunreal,

Can you provide me with somebody who has done some investigations into
NFL or college game fixing?

 

[bigunreal]

Shogun,

I can only speculate about exactly how the NFL fixes games. They don't invite me to the meetings, so I don't know the details! If I did, you can bet that I'd profit by betting on the games (much like I believe those in the know do profit).

Over the years, I've tossed around the idea that all players know about the fix, and are involved, to the extent they have to be involved, much like WWE wrestlers participate in their staged matches. The more I see of media darlings like T.O. and Chad Johnson, with their props set up for them on the sidelines, and their contrived, obviously rehearsed endzone celebrations, with the "journalists" reacting to these idiotic routines exactly like the announcers react to the nonsense during WWE matches, the more I tend towards this view. I realize that would mean a huge, complex conspiracy, but is it really any less believable than the fairy tale that these mostly moronic players memorize allegedly massive and intricate playbooks? As for any of them talking about it, a few of them have. I mentioned the case of Bubba Smith. He was well-known, and his comments were quietly ridiculed and then discarded. The same thing with Irving Fryar, whose explosive revelation that he personally was paid to throw an NCAA championship game was treated with a gigantic media yawn. Perhaps more of them actually do question things and desire to talk about it; when the media is completely controlled and, under this theory, an active particpant in the entire fixed conspiracy, they would have nowhere to turn in order to be publicly heard. Kind of like the situation the victims of the Caste System are in.

The other, more limited fixed conspiracy would involve the referees, the team owners and the mass media. I don't see how anyone cannot queston the way the officials make their inconsistent calls, which directly impact the outcome of so many games. It is acknowledged by everyone-players, coaches and even jock-sniffing journalists-that holding could be called on every play. If that's the case, then someone needs to question why it isn't, or why, if it's ignored so often, it is called at all. The same thing goes for pass interference. We hear the term "incidental contact" used reguarly to explain the interference calls that are not made, when it certainly appears that some kind of contact is made on virtually every pass play. This is similar to how the term "irrefutable evidence" is used to explain away wrong calls that are not overturned by instant replay. The fact that the referees often huddle for minutes to examine a replay that the average drunk white fan can make an educated decision on in ten seconds just contributes to the whole phony, staged, WWE-like atmosphere of today's NFL games.

I wish I could predict with more certainty the outcomes of these games, but if there is a fix, the script writers have become much less predictable than they were 30 years ago. As I mentioned in my previous post, I would have bet my life savings that the Redskins would beat the Bills on Sean Taylor Day. And St. Joe Gibbs being the goat- wow! I guess it's a good thing I don't bet. I'm not 100% sold on my own theory, but I do believe it's very likely that all NFL games are fixed by the same powers that "fix" things in order to maintain the Caste System. Edited by: bigunreal

 

[Guest]

Menelik Even my buddy from Cicero (mob town Illinois) remarked that the owners were mobbed up, and trust me he would know (most mobsters are not Sicilian). Mike Ditka was a co-owner of a bowling alley in a place called Willow Springs, IL, and while it has a pleasant sounding name it was owned top to bottom by the mob at one time. Lawrence Taylor buddy buddy with the Gambino mobsters during his playing days. And don't get me going about Favre in his team's blowout losses, I'll then start talking about the over/under.

 

[sport historian]

Again, why didn't the powers that be fix a Super Bowl win for Michael Vick? That would have shot his corporate endorsements even higher, as well as making the case for "The 21st Century QB."

Also, a LOT of people talk in criminal conspiracies. They don't go on without a peep for decades.

 

[Matt_Bowen_Fan]

Or Radio, for that matter. He's no doing so good this season.

 

[LabMan]

Deadlift,
your post is right on the money,as usual,hope to hear more from you!

LabMan

 

[Poacher]

I don't know about entire games being fixed but it certainly wouldn't surprise me if individual players had been paid off or threatened.

One possible example of this I've always remembered is from Superbowl XXII (Redskins/ Broncos). It was very conspicuous to me even as a teen, so much so that I still remember it.

It involved Denver DB Mark Haynes (I think it was him but could have been another one). Usually before a play a DB will get in front of his man or a couple yards off and crouch down, feet apart ready for action. I distinctly remember before one play (maybe more than one, it's been awhile) seeing Haynes (or whoever) go to cover his man and just simply stand in front of him, fully erect like he was waiting on a street corner for a bus or something.

I don't suppose anyone else remembers this. If anyone has the game tape take a look and tell me if I'm right.

It just seemed to me like he was being very lazy on the play. Of course it doesn't prove anything one way or another but it did catch my eye.

 

[bigunreal]

PitBull,

Sorry, Moldea's half-hearted look at the subject is the only thing I know of. It's not surprising, of course, that none of the jock-sniffers who masquerade as "journalists" have the slightest interest in anything that smacks of controversy. Each and every one of them would scoff at the very notion that any NFL game could be fixed. Remember a few years ago, when Pro Rassling impresario Vince McMahon started his XFL football league? Not a single "journalist" questioned whether the games would be legitimate, considering that the man behind it was the same guy who ran an entertainment business that even they acknowledge is rigged.

Sport Historian,

I don't know why they didn't fix it for Mike/Michael Vick or some other beloved black QB to win a Super Bowl. That would seem like something natural for them to do. As for people talking in criminal conspiracies, when you're dealing with something of this magnitude, anyone who wanted to talk would not have any available public outlets in which to do so. The myth that "someone would have talked" has been promoted for decades by those who continue to cover up the facts about JFK's assassination. If all the television networks and major newspapers are controlled by the same forces who are behind the conspiracies, then exactly where would any whistle blower go in order to be heard?

 

[White Shogun]

I can't accept that the league is entirely scripted, top to bottom. Way too many holes.

But it wouldn't surprise me if the league had 'ideas' from time to time, like the Patriots winning the Super Bowl after 9/11 and the Saints winning it after Katrina. A couple of calls by the refs, a bad play call here or there, a few players taking plays off or giving up a turnover would all be very plausible ways of turning the outcome of a game here or there.

This is above any games that might be 'fixed' for gambling purposes through point shaving and the like.

It wouldn't always work of course because not every one is in on it. Sometimes teams can overcome bad calls, blown plays, turnovers and the like and still win the game.

Who knows, maybe Vick was supposed to make it to the Super Bowl that year but lost in Green Bay because the Packers were just better. Maybe McNabb was supposed to win against the Patriots but they didn't count on him getting sick in the huddle in the middle of the 4th quarter.

Sounds very far fetched, but I also don't accept the official story for WTC 7, JFK, the Gulf of Tonkin....

Edited by: White Shogun

 

[PitBull]

Shogun,

I don't think its far-fetched anymore. What do you mean by "holes in the
theory"?We're all working on speculation here, even in a number of
cases of anti-white discrimination.

The NFL walks a fine line in trying its keep its wide appeal and promoting
the pro-black agenda we all see here. And that means letting whites win
and having a number of white stars to promote. The NBA is the same
way. That's why they are letting the Europeans in. Too bad Europeans
don't really play much American football, or there would be almost NO
American whites in the NFL!

I don't see why games wouldn't be fixed most of the time. In fact,
the less possible people think it is, the easier it would be to get away
with.

The NFL and its owners have LOTS of ties to gambling, and that means
lots of ties to organized crime. Its a lot easier to hide if nobody's looking
and nobody ever gets investigated.

My last thoughts on the subject are these:

1) That other DB who was murdered was killed the day after a big playoff
game loss

2) Sean Taylor's murder sure looks like a gangland hit. I live in Chicago
now (and I've see movies, dammit!).

We are spun with many other illusions everday from our overlords. Why
not this one?

 

[guest301]

There are just too many moving parts and too many different ways for widespread fixing of games to be exposed for this theory to make sense too me. I acknowledge that I could be proven wrong one day on this, but that's what it would take for me to believe otherwise. I could just see one day a congressional investigation into the NFL and having a number of players behind a curtain with their voices distorted testifying about the widespread fixing of games. Again, that's what it would take for me to believe this theory.

 

[screamingeagle]

It is possible that some games are fixed. NFL owners are imfamous gamblers. I remember Carroll Rosemblum(SP?) of the Baltimore colts died in a questionable manner. To fix a game, you have to use as few. Blacks have a habit of talking too much, so they not be part of the scam. There are too few whites in the NFL left so may not be able to affect the play.
Then things may still go wrong.
Lets say, we are trying to rid a game so St. Michael Vick in the Super Bowl. The defending CBs agree to allow Vick's passes to go through. But if Vick keeps on fumbling or can't get the ball near a receiver...
I believe that 99% of the games are on the level. I believe that playoff games and the Super Bowl are not rigged because too many people are watching. Watch the games near the end of the season. That is when an owner would order a game thrown to pay off a gambling debt.

 

[bigunreal]

The point about too many people having to be involved in fixing games, and the fact someone would talk about it, has been addressed before, but let me reiterate my response. This would be a very logical argument, if we had a free press in this country. We don't. Therefore, anyone who wanted to expose the "fix" wouldn't have anywhere to go to make his claims public. This is almost identical to the situation any white whistle-blower would face if he tried to "talk" about the discrimination inherent in the Caste System. Do you honestly think that ESPN, the NFL Network or any of the major television networks would give a Luke Staley or a Jesse Lumsden even a minute of air time in which to tell their story? In the unlikely event they did allow a white player to publicly claim he'd been discriminated against, there would be an instant group rebuttal by a panel of predictable talking heads, who would all make fun of him and scoff at any notion of anti-white discrimination in the NFL.

 

[PitBull]

bigunreal, et al.,

Does anybody but me find it odd that, in our world of ever-increasing
corporatization, with corporations buying up everything in sight and
opening franchises on every street corner, that the NFL is a league of
privately-owned teams? Oh, I know the stories of families that started
the league, with the meager gates, ridiculous travel, and the wife of the
owner cooking dinner or giving a player a few extra dollars at Christmas.
Truly heartwarming. But these teams are big business now. Times have
changed.

The advantage of making a team a corporation and selling stock shares to
the public is that you make an absolute killing selling the stock initially,
retain control of the business by giving yourself majority interest, pay
yourself first and spread the losses to the public, and generally make out
like a bandit. For the life of me I can't figure out why this isn't the case in
the NFL, since it would mean so much more money for the owners.

One big advantage of not having a public corporation is that you never
have to deal with corporate boards--the company really is a dictatorship
or run by a small handful of individuals. Another big advantage is that
your company never has to make its financial records public, is never,
ever going to have to deal with the SEC, and in general, is a very private
enterprise that only has to worry about the IRS poking about from time to
time. Yes, the NFL is truly a modern anomaly. It sticks out like a sore
thumb.

Another curious aspect to these businesses is the inordinate power and
influence they have over the press--TV, radio, magazine and newspaper.
It seems that all of these media need programming to attract the
attention of the public in order to sell advertising. College and
professional sports are astoundingly good at attracting that interest.
Hence, the goodwill and cozy realtionship of the sports and media
worlds. Ditto with politics and politicians.

NFL teams also do a lot of cash business, and license vendors who do
cash business. Its a funny thing about a cash business--how much
money you make depends on who's doing the counting. What kind of
things you say you sell also depends on who's doing the saying. And of
course, the NFL team gets a cut from all these vendors. And its not open
to public scrutiny.

An NFL team is the ideal shell company (or "front") for organized crime.
You don't have buy off the athletes if you control the coaching staffs,
have inside information not open to the public on injuries, lineups, etc.,
and directly hire the refs. You can rig the outcome of games, and make a
hell of a lot of money that is then laundered through the shell company
and completely avoid media and legal scrutiny. Very large sums of
money. Huge money.

So where do the black street gangs come in? Well they have to launder
their drug/prostitution/gambling/counterfeit merchandise/etc. money
too. And the NFL team shell company would just get a cut, as long as
they agreed to hire as many black athletes as possible. Or hispanic
athletes for hispanic gangs. But you need just so many whites to keep
fan interest and TV ratings. Maybe over time the white fans can be
conditioned to not care about seeing white players on the field at all.

Is it my imagination, or does New York state have the greatest number of
blacks? Well Florida, Texas, and California have lots of blacks too. But
Florida, Texas, and California are also the states where all the illegal
narcotics enter the US--California for asian opium, Texas and Florida for
Central and South American marijuana and cocaine. Black and hispanic
gangs make a lot of money in those states. And just by happenstance,
CA, TX, and FL have the most college and NFL football recruits. But not
NY. Funny, that.

No wonder the professional sports leagues want to expand their
"operations" all over the globe. Its nice work if you can get it. Another
day in the life in Don King's America.

Bigunreal, I've come to appreciate your point of view more and more
lately. Thanks for steering me in the right direction. I tip my hat to your
cynicism and keen eye.Edited by: PitBull

 

[Deadlift]

I don't buy "Robbery/burglary gone bad" for 1 second. No way.


I'm not saying they couldn't have shot him, but why must it be "unintended." Blacks are "conveniently" type-casted in THIS ROLE. To clarify, just because black criminals tend to be sloppy and trigger-happy doesn't mean that this is ALWAYS the TRUE ANSWER or EXPLANATION. Across the board, the media denies that blacks can actually INTEND to do something and then they go out and do it (it doesn't matter if they planned it all themselves or were a proxy that was carrying out orders for some higher power).

I believe HE was the sole target and THEY (media/powers) are sweeping it under the rug. What if the message was supposed to be a gunshot wound, but not death itself? Maybe end his career by crippling him? This would also send a message to others.


(Note: What I said in the large paragraph is something that really irks me. I know what's really up with the media, but still. Blacks murder and then take Whitey's car and the media instantly puts out the standard write-up of "carjacking gone bad." Thanks for letting me know that there was no "hatred" behind the finger that pulled the trigger!! WOW, and I was just starting to think that integration equaled war and death, but I guess not!

Blacks break into house and slaughters White family and the media instantly puts out the standard write-up of "burglary gone bad." Yeah f**kin' right

Someone needs to tell these lil media pricks that one doesn't have to be MENSA to possess hatred of another race, or to carry out actual intentions.....

Edited by: Deadlift

 

[jaxvid]

I don't buy "Robbery/burglary gone bad" for 1 second. No way.


I'm not saying they couldn't have shot him, but why must it be "unintended." Blacks are "conveniently" type-casted in THIS ROLE. To clarify, just because black criminals tend to be sloppy and trigger-happy doesn't mean that this is ALWAYS the TRUE ANSWER or EXPLANATION. Across the board, the media denies that blacks can actually INTEND to do something and then they go out and do it (it doesn't matter if they planned it all themselves or were a proxy that was carrying out orders for some higher power).

I believe HE was the sole target and THEY (media/powers) are sweeping it under the rug. What if the message was supposed to be a gunshot wound, but not death itself?


(Note: What I said in the large paragraph is something that really irks me. I know what's really up with the media, but still. Blacks murder and then take Whitey's car and the media instantly puts out the standard write-up of "carjacking gone bad." Thanks for letting me know that there was no "hatred" behind the finger that pulled the trigger!! WOW, and I was just starting to think that integration equaled war and death, but I guess not!

Blacks break into house and slaughters White family and the media instantly puts out the standard write-up of "burglary gone bad." Yeah f**kin' right

Someone needs to tell these lil media pricks that one doesn't have to be MENSA to possess hatred of another race, or to carry out actual intentions.....

Amen to all that brother!

 

[Deadlift]

According to the media, he could not have been targeted for injury or death (for whatever reason) because "he turned his life around."

So, instead, it's another "open and shut" case. As usual, the media got "their" angle out and they haven't asked tough questions. It's simply a tragedy, with no possibility of anything more going on.

You see the way it's "dictated" to us. Wouldn't it be "insensitive" if we asked tough questions?!

Probing for the truth is not insensitive. You have affletes with their thug entourages and parties and all kinds of things going on, and I'm sure they're "asked" to do things all the time.

 

[Deadlift]

I don't buy "Robbery/burglary gone bad" for 1 second. No way.


I'm not saying they couldn't have shot him, but why must it be "unintended." Blacks are "conveniently" type-casted in THIS ROLE. To clarify, just because black criminals tend to be sloppy and trigger-happy doesn't mean that this is ALWAYS the TRUE ANSWER or EXPLANATION. Across the board, the media denies that blacks can actually INTEND to do something and then they go out and do it (it doesn't matter if they planned it all themselves or were a proxy that was carrying out orders for some higher power).

I believe HE was the sole target and THEY (media/powers) are sweeping it under the rug. What if the message was supposed to be a gunshot wound, but not death itself?


(Note: What I said in the large paragraph is something that really irks me. I know what's really up with the media, but still. Blacks murder and then take Whitey's car and the media instantly puts out the standard write-up of "carjacking gone bad." Thanks for letting me know that there was no "hatred" behind the finger that pulled the trigger!! WOW, and I was just starting to think that integration equaled war and death, but I guess not!

Blacks break into house and slaughters White family and the media instantly puts out the standard write-up of "burglary gone bad." Yeah f**kin' right

Someone needs to tell these lil media pricks that one doesn't have to be MENSA to possess hatred of another race, or to carry out actual intentions.....

Amen to all that brother!

Thanks!