In other news, the KKK was putting flyers onto cars in a few communities near me this morning. Wow. Just...wow. Where are these people coming from?
In other news, the KKK was putting flyers onto cars in a few communities near me this morning. Wow. Just...wow. Where are these people coming from?
In reply to pinchvalve:
They've been there all along, they're ghosts afterall 
Edit: FWIW, I can agree with Kareem's viewpoint.
T.J. wrote: best article on this mess that I've read so far (Kareem Abdul Jabaar content)
In reply to Kareem:
It's not a huge surprise this "incident" had way more impact then his previous episodes. Having someone, clearly recognizable, on tape (video or audio) has FAR more impact then accusations by others (which you almost always have to be cautious about 100% believing).
Now, if we can only find that horrible person that released that private tape of that poor Kardashian girl... it's clearly had a horrible effect one her... turned her into some sort of whore...
I had heard the chick was acting as a sort of biographer of this a-hole (recording for posterity the glory that is his life and thoughts I guess). So the fact that she was recording him (in rather high quality) was probably not that unusual.
I have to agree, while the guy is clearly a complete moron, he is entitled to not like whoever (person, group, whatever) he wants to dislike. If you do not like him, do not buy his tickets or merchandise
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuEBBwJdjhQ
The NBA also has the right (within the restrictions of any contract) to not want such a person owning one of their franchises. Without the NBA the team is nothing.
bigfoot21075 wrote: I have to agree, while the guy is clearly a complete moron, he is entitled to not like whoever (person, group, whatever) he wants to dislike. If you do not like him, do not buy his tickets or merchandise
That's the reason they kicked him, his players and the rest of the NBA wanted to avoid this happening.
bigfoot21075 wrote: I have to agree, while the guy is clearly a complete moron, he is entitled to not like whoever (person, group, whatever) he wants to dislike. If you do not like him, do not buy his tickets or merchandise
Except the NBA Constitution gives the owners the right to kick him out of the league.
In reply to aircooled:
Uhh, she doesn't sound very "intelligent" in that recording herself......so I highly doubt thats what was really going on there.
I have a serious problem with this. While I absolutely think the guy is a racist tool, we all have the right to say what we want in privacy. Even if he knew he was being recorded, it was a private tape between parties. There's not a single person on earth that couldn't be called something for what we've said at some point in our life. No one. If we all start getting "prosecuted" for what we say in private, it's a slippery slope from there to a "Nazi" state. And who is to decide what is bad enough in private?
Personally I believe it should never have been released, and if I were him (and he is a lawyer from what I understand), I'd start filing defamation suits against all parties.
If it had gotten out, to me, its a personal matter between the guy, whoever recorded it, and team members and personnel. The fact that the NBA got involved to me is also disturbing.
I don't like what the guy said, at all, but this is crazy.
you're ignoring one thing … he's not being prosecuted …. even "prosecuted" … all he's going to do is pocket nearly a Billion dollars profit … because his fellow club members don't want him around anymore
I think we all agree that it shouldn't be released … that said, it was released… it can't be unheard … it's more about the "club" itself than just the Clippers … club being the NBA and they can do what ever is necessary to protect that club …
the releasing of the tape is disturbing, not the NBA fighting back to protect their investments (just my opinion 
)
Control words and you control thoughts…control thoughts and you control people.
But, what of the first amendment…we’ll need to conjure up a reason to get it out of the way; how about hate speech.
Perfect, Tourette’s syndrome, senile dementia (lots of old rich people have that…how fortuitous), people that lose their cool and say something regrettable (AKA everyone), all are subject to the ramifications of this modern marvel called hate speech.
And to think, we used to burn books to stifle the exchange of thoughts and information…how primitive.
racerdave600 wrote: ...If we all start getting "prosecuted" for what we say in private, it's a slippery slope from there to a "Nazi" state....
Where are you getting "state" here? This has nothing to do with any government entity. There was nothing illegal in what he said (that I know of). This is a dispute between an employer (sort of) and an employee (sort of). It's splayed all over public media, but it's still has (almost) nothing to do with any government.
As you noted, the mater of the recording and it's release is a civil issue.
If you write an email defaming the company you work for (or the people that work for it, the boss etc.) and everyone finds out about it, you can very likely expect to get fired (as long as there are no contractual issues). If only a few knew about the email, maybe you can skate by with a harsh warning, but once it's public, it becomes an image / precedent issue for the company.
RX Reven' wrote: ...But, what of the first amendment…we’ll need to conjure up a term to get it out of the way; how about hate speech....
The first amendment only applies to state persecution of speech, not a business or a person (e.g. slander / liable).
In reply to wbjones:
Public Opinion is the new court of law, the memo went out years ago.
aircooled, that's why I used parenthesis, as I knew it wasn't the "state" per see, but there has been a lot of talk throw around about hate speech and what can be done. Personally, I believe this is a legal issue, and yes he was slandered. While we all do not agree with what he said, again, if you damage someone to that extent from something said in private, I do believe there are legal issues at stake.
In reply to racerdave600:
there appears to be legal issue at stake here, indeed.
But what the NBA does has nothing to do with that. Their standard of doing things is totally different than the actual legal system.
racerdave600 wrote: aircooled, that's why I used parenthesis, as I knew it wasn't the "state" per see, but there has been a lot of talk throw around about hate speech and what can be done. Personally, I believe this is a legal issue, and yes he was slandered. While we all do not agree with what he said, again, if you damage someone to that extent from something said in private, I do believe there are legal issues at stake.
If he was slandered, it was by himself. It's his words that started this. No person made false statements about him.
His personal opinion was made public and the NBA, which is a franchise he bought in to, decided they don't want them in their rich man's club anymore.
If he didn't know he was being recorded then the girlfriend should be taken to court but that doesn't mean that the NBA doesn't have the right to remove him from the league if the owners vote that way. The way the league is setup I am pretty sure there is not much of a leg to stand on as far as a lawsuit by him to prevent him from being kicked out. He signed the NBA constitution agreeing to its terms.
He has the legal right to say what he said and not be arrested but if you say those kinds of things in a work place I would imagine you would get fired. That is kinda what happened here.
When you have a franchise it is more or less at the whim of the franchiser. You need them for your product to be worth anything so they hold most of the power. Without the NBA all he can really do with his team is wait for the Globetrotters to pass through LA.
Cone_Junkie wrote: ...If he was slandered, it was by himself. It's his words that started this. No person made false statements about him...
Yeah, that's a good point. The only possibly illegal thing would be some sort of Illegal Wiretap / Recording. Maybe something involving Publishing Rights? If the woman did not make any money on it (directly), not sure that's even an issue (it's not like he was waiting to make money off of selling it himself!).
yamaha wrote: In reply to wbjones: Public Opinion is the new court of law, the memo went out years ago.
I agree … but what aircooled pointed out is what I was getting at … the Court of Public Opinion … yep … black robed judge and 12 jurors … nope
Wally wrote: When you have a franchise it is more or less at the whim of the franchiser. You need them for your product to be worth anything so they hold most of the power. Without the NBA all he can really do with his team is wait for the Globetrotters to pass through LA.
and they don't have to play them
aircooled wrote:Cone_Junkie wrote: ...If he was slandered, it was by himself. It's his words that started this. No person made false statements about him...Yeah, that's a good point. The only possibly illegal thing would be some sort of Illegal Wiretap / Recording. Maybe something involving Publishing Rights? If the woman did not make any money on it (directly), not sure that's even an issue (it's not like he was waiting to make money off of selling it himself!).
and that still leaves the NBA to do what they want …
right now the latest guesstament is that the vote will be unanimous
and to give this more weight … Pres. Obama thinks Silver did the right thing (sorry for the flounder)
You'll need to log in to post.
