Well if its bs then it is bs that has come straight from Ali's mouthapophenic wrote:
ali never spoke at a klan rally...that's total bs that's been floated about for years.
http://www.BS.com/forums/showt ... p?t=426709
Well if its bs then it is bs that has come straight from Ali's mouthapophenic wrote:
ali never spoke at a klan rally...that's total bs that's been floated about for years.
doctorboxing wrote:Well if its bs then it is bs that has come straight from Ali's mouthapophenic wrote:
ali never spoke at a klan rally...that's total bs that's been floated about for years.
http://www.BS.com/forums/showt ... p?t=426709
Cas wrote:I love listening to Merchant interview people. Dude straight up doesn't mess around.
welcome back, DGLION KING1 wrote:Carbo wrote:Merchant asks all fighters tough questions if tough questions are needed. If there is something that needs to be said or asked, Merchant is brave enough to do it. But Floyd thinks that if someone stops his infomercial or pulls him for not answering a question, or generally isn't the sycophantic sort he usually surrounds himself with, then they're 'haters'. Alas, his fans, as you prove, take the same idiotic attitude.LION KING1 wrote: Baseless? Merchant does this to fighters he hates.
Floys is a fighter. A reporter is to be impartial and level. Merchant is just an attention whore.
Which part of telling a fighter you would 'kick his ass' is in Merchants job description?
Answer that.
Floyd followd the rules of boxing hence no complaintfrom ANYONE on the Ortiz team.
And dont forget to answer the question about Merchant job description.
You really need to understand the MO of Larry Merchant. Larry Merchant is a 'hater'.
Money Mayweather won according to the rules of boxing. Not his fault that Ortiz was enjoying the stage.
LARRY MERCHANT IS UNPROFESSIONAL
FLOYD IS A PROFESSIONAL FIGHTER AND FIGHTS LIKE ONE.
MERCHANT IS A PRO COMMENTATOR AND HAS BEEN ROUTINELY DRUNK ON THE JOB.
WHO BEHAVED UNPROFESSIONALLY LAST NIGHT - IN THEIR CHOSEN FIELD?
MERCHANT!!!!
George Benton, who was in Frazier's corner in the Thrilla in Manila, passed away this morning.jamesmcdonnell wrote:Carbo wrote:There's no revisionism of Ali's "legend' there. The only revisionism is from those who seek to beatify the man and expunge all the nastier aspects of his life. He was a racist, and a member of an overtly racist cult, he was a womaniser who cheated on numerous wives and he certainly was misogynistic and bigoted. That's not revisionism, it's part of the truth.Gray-Fox wrote: James, you're usually bang on with your boxing knowledge, but this revisionism of Ali's legend is just plain silly.
Quite - I have read extensively about Ali, and I've no doubt that he was racist for at least a time in his views.
His treatment of Joe Frazier was also extremely shameful when you consider that Frazier was instrumental in Ali getting his license back - Ali humiliated the man and his reference to Frazier being a gorrilla were rather dodgy for me, considering Ali was of mixed race heritage.
Ali got away with it all because he was funny and charming, but in his younger days, he really wasn't a very nice individual.
Maybe it is but to even want to be associated with such a group and their views speaks volumes. Despite his in-ring intelligence, young Ali did not come across as a particularly bright guy and was clearly easily influenced. American society was hugely racist towards black people and I agree that Ali joining the nation of islam has to be seen in that context. However, Ali did hold views that were considered racist, both now and also at the time so for you to say "Ali was no racist" is wrong. To say that the white man was "the devil" and that white people were not "righteous" is racist. I am quite sure that Ali, who has now renounced these views, would be the first to admit that his views were overtly racist - no matter whether he had a reason for these views or not.apophenic wrote:doctorboxing wrote:Well if its bs then it is bs that has come straight from Ali's mouthapophenic wrote:
ali never spoke at a klan rally...that's total bs that's been floated about for years.
http://www.BS.com/forums/showt ... p?t=426709![]()
it's bullshit! Ali's said as much several times...
DANGbennie wrote:George Benton, who was in Frazier's corner in the Thrilla in Manila, passed away this morning.jamesmcdonnell wrote:Carbo wrote: There's no revisionism of Ali's "legend' there. The only revisionism is from those who seek to beatify the man and expunge all the nastier aspects of his life. He was a racist, and a member of an overtly racist cult, he was a womaniser who cheated on numerous wives and he certainly was misogynistic and bigoted. That's not revisionism, it's part of the truth.
Quite - I have read extensively about Ali, and I've no doubt that he was racist for at least a time in his views.
His treatment of Joe Frazier was also extremely shameful when you consider that Frazier was instrumental in Ali getting his license back - Ali humiliated the man and his reference to Frazier being a gorrilla were rather dodgy for me, considering Ali was of mixed race heritage.
Ali got away with it all because he was funny and charming, but in his younger days, he really wasn't a very nice individual.
you're missing the point. at that moment in history those views of white people were valid. we WERE acting like devils towards the black population of america in a less than righteous manner.....and to state that was not, at that point, racist.doctorboxing wrote:Maybe it is but to even want to be associated with such a group and their views speaks volumes. Despite his in-ring intelligence, young Ali did not come across as a particularly bright guy and was clearly easily influenced. American society was hugely racist towards black people and I agree that Ali joining the nation of islam has to be seen in that context. However, Ali did hold views that were considered racist, both now and also at the time so for you to say "Ali was no racist" is wrong. To say that the white man was "the devil" and that white people were not "righteous" is racist. I am quite sure that Ali, who has now renounced these views, would be the first to admit that his views were overtly racist - no matter whether he had a reason for these views or not.apophenic wrote:doctorboxing wrote: Well if its bs then it is bs that has come straight from Ali's mouth
http://www.BS.com/forums/showt ... p?t=426709![]()
it's bullshit! Ali's said as much several times...
You do understand that the NOI believe(d) that the white race were created in the laboratory by a mad scientist?apophenic wrote:you're missing the point. at that moment in history those views of white people were valid. we WERE acting like devils towards the black population of america in a less than righteous manner.....and to state that was not, at that point, racist.doctorboxing wrote:Maybe it is but to even want to be associated with such a group and their views speaks volumes. Despite his in-ring intelligence, young Ali did not come across as a particularly bright guy and was clearly easily influenced. American society was hugely racist towards black people and I agree that Ali joining the nation of islam has to be seen in that context. However, Ali did hold views that were considered racist, both now and also at the time so for you to say "Ali was no racist" is wrong. To say that the white man was "the devil" and that white people were not "righteous" is racist. I am quite sure that Ali, who has now renounced these views, would be the first to admit that his views were overtly racist - no matter whether he had a reason for these views or not.apophenic wrote:![]()
it's bullshit! Ali's said as much several times...
because of Ali i've studied the NOI, got to know a few of the members...and they're really not what the majority of people think they are...and with my blonde hair and blue eyes i'm really not what you may call their cup of tea..
that's not exactly what they believe...they believe the white race was created via 'selective breeding' by a mad scientist called yakub...completely bonkers....but no more bonkers than ant other religion....Ezzard wrote:You do understand that the NOI believe(d) that the white race were created in the laboratory by a mad scientist?apophenic wrote:you're missing the point. at that moment in history those views of white people were valid. we WERE acting like devils towards the black population of america in a less than righteous manner.....and to state that was not, at that point, racist.doctorboxing wrote: Maybe it is but to even want to be associated with such a group and their views speaks volumes. Despite his in-ring intelligence, young Ali did not come across as a particularly bright guy and was clearly easily influenced. American society was hugely racist towards black people and I agree that Ali joining the nation of islam has to be seen in that context. However, Ali did hold views that were considered racist, both now and also at the time so for you to say "Ali was no racist" is wrong. To say that the white man was "the devil" and that white people were not "righteous" is racist. I am quite sure that Ali, who has now renounced these views, would be the first to admit that his views were overtly racist - no matter whether he had a reason for these views or not.
because of Ali i've studied the NOI, got to know a few of the members...and they're really not what the majority of people think they are...and with my blonde hair and blue eyes i'm really not what you may call their cup of tea..
I’ll sleep better tonight, thanks…apophenic wrote:that's not exactly what they believe...they believe the white race was created via 'selective breeding' by a mad scientist called yakub...completely bonkers....but no more bonkers than ant other religion....Ezzard wrote:You do understand that the NOI believe(d) that the white race were created in the laboratory by a mad scientist?apophenic wrote: you're missing the point. at that moment in history those views of white people were valid. we WERE acting like devils towards the black population of america in a less than righteous manner.....and to state that was not, at that point, racist.
because of Ali i've studied the NOI, got to know a few of the members...and they're really not what the majority of people think they are...and with my blonde hair and blue eyes i'm really not what you may call their cup of tea..
NOI members tend to get a little evasive when that subject is broached..
tho not half as evasive as they get when it's pointed out that they were founded by a white guy anyway.
You must have your Money Mayweather shades on if you believe Floyd came across well in his post fight interview or even in the build up. He'd just turned in a aggresively exciting performance and took a big fornicating dump on it in reverting to the everyone hates me because I'm so great schtick when it's they hate you becuase your a crass trailer trash loudmouth who threatens old men.King Geedorah wrote:I can understand why fighters may get narked with Merchant as he does play favourites, once he has a perspective on a fight he treats it as gospel even when he is clearly in the wrong. For example, he treated Lewis pretty badly when Lennox fairly defeated Vitali and was a key part of HBO’s misreading of the stoppage, leading to fans who to this day have not seen the fight since (I presume they haven’t given their lack of understanding about it when they attempt to debate it) who will tell you that the ending was ‘controversial’.
Larry also treated Vernon Forrest with a fair amount of disdain after Forrest defeated Mosley, picked by Larry as the next Sugar Ray. Sure, Forrest was exuberant and a bit OTT but the, “Just because you beat Tiger Woods doesn’t mean you are Tiger Woods,” seem more like sour grapes than analysis, although it was a fair point it was churlishly made.
There’s been a few occasion where Larry takes a fighter to task for the fights they take, Hopkins post-Tito for example, this is a good thing as long as he’s equally as vocal with the HBO suits who sanction the fights.
“It is not bragging when you back it up in the ring,” to Toney after Barkley, I think, was another one that seemed a bit pissy. Toney had a mixed 1992, a superb 1991 and had just put in a fine performance. Again it seemed a case of Larry having to interview someone he didn’t like and finding it tough to disguise this.
I actually preferred Floyd to Ortiz throughout the build up, fight and post-fight stuff as Floyd was himself, Ortiz’s personality seems very forced, a bit unnatural and unnerving, all a bit bottled up. I think he’ll go off his nut De La Hoya style at some point.
Kellerman’s wide eyed look makes me think that someone has just fingered his arsehole, it is very disconcerting, I tend to skip his interviews and look for something elsewhere.
No you dont know where you stand with him.King Geedorah wrote:Nowt wrong with wearing glasses, if you had yours on you’d have noticed that at no point do I say, ‘Floyd came across well’. I said that I preferred him to Ortiz and pointed out that Merchant has previous form when it comes to fighters he doesn’t care for.Final round wrote:You must have your Money Mayweather shades on if you believe Floyd came across well in his post fight interview or even in the build up. He'd just turned in a aggresively exciting performance and took a big effing dump on it in reverting to the everyone hates me because I'm so great schtick when it's they hate you becuase your a crass trailer trash loudmouth who threatens old men.King Geedorah wrote:I can understand why fighters may get narked with Merchant as he does play favourites, once he has a perspective on a fight he treats it as gospel even when he is clearly in the wrong. For example, he treated Lewis pretty badly when Lennox fairly defeated Vitali and was a key part of HBO’s misreading of the stoppage, leading to fans who to this day have not seen the fight since (I presume they haven’t given their lack of understanding about it when they attempt to debate it) who will tell you that the ending was ‘controversial’.
Larry also treated Vernon Forrest with a fair amount of disdain after Forrest defeated Mosley, picked by Larry as the next Sugar Ray. Sure, Forrest was exuberant and a bit OTT but the, “Just because you beat Tiger Woods doesn’t mean you are Tiger Woods,” seem more like sour grapes than analysis, although it was a fair point it was churlishly made.
There’s been a few occasion where Larry takes a fighter to task for the fights they take, Hopkins post-Tito for example, this is a good thing as long as he’s equally as vocal with the HBO suits who sanction the fights.
“It is not bragging when you back it up in the ring,” to Toney after Barkley, I think, was another one that seemed a bit pissy. Toney had a mixed 1992, a superb 1991 and had just put in a fine performance. Again it seemed a case of Larry having to interview someone he didn’t like and finding it tough to disguise this.
I actually preferred Floyd to Ortiz throughout the build up, fight and post-fight stuff as Floyd was himself, Ortiz’s personality seems very forced, a bit unnatural and unnerving, all a bit bottled up. I think he’ll go off his nut De La Hoya style at some point.
Kellerman’s wide eyed look makes me think that someone has just fingered his arsehole, it is very disconcerting, I tend to skip his interviews and look for something elsewhere.
Ortiz is slightly toubled I agree.
Floyd's a prick, but at least he is openly a prick so you know where you stand with him.
King Geedorah wrote:Nowt wrong with wearing glasses, if you had yours on you’d have noticed that at no point do I say, ‘Floyd came across well’. I said that I preferred him to Ortiz and pointed out that Merchant has previous form when it comes to fighters he doesn’t care for.Final round wrote:You must have your Money Mayweather shades on if you believe Floyd came across well in his post fight interview or even in the build up. He'd just turned in a aggresively exciting performance and took a big effing dump on it in reverting to the everyone hates me because I'm so great schtick when it's they hate you becuase your a crass trailer trash loudmouth who threatens old men.King Geedorah wrote:I can understand why fighters may get narked with Merchant as he does play favourites, once he has a perspective on a fight he treats it as gospel even when he is clearly in the wrong. For example, he treated Lewis pretty badly when Lennox fairly defeated Vitali and was a key part of HBO’s misreading of the stoppage, leading to fans who to this day have not seen the fight since (I presume they haven’t given their lack of understanding about it when they attempt to debate it) who will tell you that the ending was ‘controversial’.
Larry also treated Vernon Forrest with a fair amount of disdain after Forrest defeated Mosley, picked by Larry as the next Sugar Ray. Sure, Forrest was exuberant and a bit OTT but the, “Just because you beat Tiger Woods doesn’t mean you are Tiger Woods,” seem more like sour grapes than analysis, although it was a fair point it was churlishly made.
There’s been a few occasion where Larry takes a fighter to task for the fights they take, Hopkins post-Tito for example, this is a good thing as long as he’s equally as vocal with the HBO suits who sanction the fights.
“It is not bragging when you back it up in the ring,” to Toney after Barkley, I think, was another one that seemed a bit pissy. Toney had a mixed 1992, a superb 1991 and had just put in a fine performance. Again it seemed a case of Larry having to interview someone he didn’t like and finding it tough to disguise this.
I actually preferred Floyd to Ortiz throughout the build up, fight and post-fight stuff as Floyd was himself, Ortiz’s personality seems very forced, a bit unnatural and unnerving, all a bit bottled up. I think he’ll go off his nut De La Hoya style at some point.
Kellerman’s wide eyed look makes me think that someone has just fingered his arsehole, it is very disconcerting, I tend to skip his interviews and look for something elsewhere.
Ortiz is slightly toubled I agree.
Floyd's a prick, but at least he is openly a prick so you know where you stand with him.
apophenic wrote:you're missing the point. at that moment in history those views of white people were valid. we WERE acting like devils towards the black population of america in a less than righteous manner.....and to state that was not, at that point, racist.doctorboxing wrote:Maybe it is but to even want to be associated with such a group and their views speaks volumes. Despite his in-ring intelligence, young Ali did not come across as a particularly bright guy and was clearly easily influenced. American society was hugely racist towards black people and I agree that Ali joining the nation of islam has to be seen in that context. However, Ali did hold views that were considered racist, both now and also at the time so for you to say "Ali was no racist" is wrong. To say that the white man was "the devil" and that white people were not "righteous" is racist. I am quite sure that Ali, who has now renounced these views, would be the first to admit that his views were overtly racist - no matter whether he had a reason for these views or not.apophenic wrote:![]()
it's bullshit! Ali's said as much several times...
because of Ali i've studied the NOI, got to know a few of the members...and they're really not what the majority of people think they are...and with my blonde hair and blue eyes i'm really not what you may call their cup of tea..
King Geedorah wrote:Don’t forget the part where old Yakky and his white devils were sent to the ‘caves of Europe’ where their animal cunning and genetically developed vicious nature led them to world domination. They then exiled the Asiatic black man, he found his way to America, where they were promised ‘forty acres and a mule’ only to be sold into bondage. Fortunately for them W.D. Ford managed to escape from the clutches of the devil when he got paroled to Detroit and taught the truth that he had gleaned from smatterings of Garvey, bastardized Islam and black teachings then found someone idiotic enough to swallow it wholesale. I guess selling carpets really puts the oomph into your ability to sell religion.Ezzard wrote:I’ll sleep better tonight, thanks…apophenic wrote: that's not exactly what they believe...they believe the white race was created via 'selective breeding' by a mad scientist called yakub...completely bonkers....but no more bonkers than ant other religion....
NOI members tend to get a little evasive when that subject is broached..
tho not half as evasive as they get when it's pointed out that they were founded by a white guy anyway.
Elijah then misinterpreted the message to ‘spread the word’ as a call to spread his seed, mostly amongst his secretaries, before being exposed by X and, what, a decade or so later Ali himself opened a Koran for the first time, realised that what he was reading didn’t dovetail with what he had been told and decided to become a Muslim a near 20 years or so after first becoming a ‘black’ Muslim (hint to NOI members, the prefix ‘black’ runs contrary to inclusive creed of Islam).
In the midst of all this, Herbert Muhammad, son of Elijah, ripped Ali off, took the credit for ‘saving’ his charge from more Holmes punishment when he was in fact alleged to have asked for ‘one more round’ when it was clear that Ali was getting a clattering.
The moral of this tale, 200 years of the hopelessness of slavery will lead you to believe any old shite as long as it resonates with you. I’m much more partial to the Gods and Earth/Five Percent Nation teachings myself. One day we, the five percent, will rise up and spark the revolution of the underclass and take our place at the top, brothers.
As for their dealings with the KKK, X was said to have spoken with them, Jeremiah Shabazz the man said to have attended one of their gay rallies.
Peace.
No both Gatti & Ortiz both never knew where they stood with him, thats why they got sucker punched by king kunt.King Geedorah wrote:So you do know where you stand with him.Jon Saxon wrote:No you dont know where you stand with him.King Geedorah wrote: Nowt wrong with wearing glasses, if you had yours on you’d have noticed that at no point do I say, ‘Floyd came across well’. I said that I preferred him to Ortiz and pointed out that Merchant has previous form when it comes to fighters he doesn’t care for.
Floyd's a prick, but at least he is openly a prick so you know where you stand with him.
He's the best talent today but also the biggest gaping ashole on the planter.
Nah Ali knew how to act when a camera was pointed at him, he was quick, smart, and funnny (though incredibly ignorant at the same time), something most boxers aren't. Charm gets you a long way, and Ali was as charming as they came.King Geedorah wrote:Very few truly great fighters are normal by any definition. Ali was a piece of work, Duran was an animal, Hagler childish at times, Toney acted like a tool (then people realised it wasn’t an act), Ray Leonard is a hypocrite, Ray Robinson a bit of a one himself and so on. Imagine a 24/7 on one of those guys in the modern world. Ali would come across no better than Anthony Small. Hagler a bitter, sullen whinge, etc., etc.Final round wrote:King Geedorah wrote: Nowt wrong with wearing glasses, if you had yours on you’d have noticed that at no point do I say, ‘Floyd came across well’. I said that I preferred him to Ortiz and pointed out that Merchant has previous form when it comes to fighters he doesn’t care for.
Floyd's a prick, but at least he is openly a prick so you know where you stand with him.Fair enough although personally in life I prefer it if someone at least makes a bit of a effort to to be fairly normal even if they are not being quite true to themselves rather than embracing their innermost twat completely.
Floyd’s job is to win fights, not net himself a Noble Peace Prize for services to acting splendidly.
One good thing, May’s being painted as a cheat or unsportsmanlike, this may help him get Manny as we know Pac-Man is very charitable when it comes to giving cheats a crack at his legacy. The way he ushered the misunderstood victim of circumstance Antonio Margarito back into the sport brought a tear to my eye, it really did.
ohh thats a goodieEzzard wrote:Yes, but he'd be thanking G0d whilst he was doing it...
But he has AND he laughs while he lets the body gaurds do the beatings.King Geedorah wrote:Actually we can see it, but we don't them extrapolate the idea that he would beat boxing fans up if he bumped into them. You don't like him but at least try to think about it objectively.Jon Saxon wrote:No both Gatti & Ortiz both never knew where they stood with him, thats why they got sucker punched by king kunt.King Geedorah wrote: So you do know where you stand with him.
He's a wee neddy chavy thug and sadly none of you can see this.
In fact i can't believe you could all be so naive as to think that it's all an act, lol he can only play himself in life, he's hardy George Foerman when it comes to reinvention.
If you ever bump into him just remember what you have written while he's laughing as he's urinating on your face when your on the deck.
Agreed 100% Jessi but he is a kuntish kunt.jessi wrote:Mayweather broke no rules, ortiz did, merchant talks to the pair of them like it was the other way around, well done to Floyd for telling merchant what everyone else was thinking !