Tariq Nasheed Is On Fox News Again 12/20/16

[playmaker88]

He just dont know when to quit.

Niggas were replaced as the target of the subject of the mack.. but he loooooooooooves me

and niggas talk that shit about jesse and al sharpton.. let em have it though..

 

[xxCivicxx]

He's a podcast host..not a political scientist......doesn't take away hidden colors and his contributions....

It's misinformation all throughout hidden colors...

Shit was all about getting negroes to get in they emotions...wether that was to make niggas feel good or to make them angry.

Can you please post up what was misinformation and then correct it? Thanks

It seems like a lot of you enjoy speaking in vague generalities

 

[xxCivicxx]

He's a podcast host..not a political scientist......doesn't take away hidden colors and his contributions....

It's misinformation all throughout hidden colors...

Shit was all about getting negroes to get in they emotions...wether that was to make niggas feel good or to make them angry.

Where exactly did you find the misinformation and what is the correct information regarding that error?

I'm gonna watch this, but this post doesn't answer my question at all

What specifically in HC is incorrect? The vid you posted doesn't seem to be a refutation of HC

 

[xxCivicxx]

Ok I'm going to assume there is gonna be a Rd 3. Rd 1 was debatable. It was a long thread and niggas was riding for tariq. The race casino line was good. So I'm in a generous mood tonight so I will give Rd 1 to tariq by the smallest of margins.

Rd 2 is Tucker. No debate! That shit got ugly when he started reading shit from Tariq's book. Now I know some of y'all ride for Tariq but nope not this time. Rd 2 is not debatable.

In Rd 3 Tariq is gonna have to do some subtitles, translations, and do which room I'm in. We shall see.

I don't understand what his books from over a decade ago have to do with his statements on trump

Y'all pulled the same shit in the last thread and it baffled me

 

[CapitalB]

ugh.. @leftcoastkev couldnt even get thru 30seconds of that. :joy: :joy:

It's a wild world fam. I ran across this. I'm aware.

Figured I'd toss it out there for the hell of it. Maybe I should start rhyming when I'm talking too, lol.

yeh and i know that weird ass nigga im ashamed to say. lol

he wasnt always like this..

its a Chicago thing i guess..

sad shit his moms passed (rest her soul) and he aint been the same since..

I dunno. Losing ya mom is a tough pill to stomach. I hope I'm the same person after that inevitably happens in my life.

Watched a few of his vids since. Drops gems here and there. From the outside looking in...ain't too bad.

He killing me with the "spectacular vernacular" tho....and 3 piece suits at the kitchen table. I'mma give him the benefit of the doubt and chalk it up to being presentation for the broads.

lol yeh..

the spectacular vernacular masterpiece mouthpiece whatever the fuck he be sayin he been sayin.. for a minute..

and the suits he been doin for years..always the same 3..now that he got a lil money i think its up to 6 now wit better quality. hahaha

he's actually a smart cat.. but we fell out after his moms passing.. nigga changed and went into character mode.. he dont know if he wants to be a preacher or a pimp amd makin the shit look bad in the process..

almost like this Tariq nigga...

 

[xxCivicxx]

He's a podcast host..not a political scientist......doesn't take away hidden colors and his contributions....

It's misinformation all throughout hidden colors...

Shit was all about getting negroes to get in they emotions...wether that was to make niggas feel good or to make them angry.

Where exactly did you find the misinformation and what is the correct information regarding that error?

I'm gonna watch this, but this post doesn't answer my question at all

What specifically in HC is incorrect? The vid you posted doesn't seem to be a refutation of HC

Ok I'll check this out

 

[Will Munny]

They did a better job having civil conversation than the first go around.

 

[semi-auto-mato]

Ok I'm going to assume there is gonna be a Rd 3. Rd 1 was debatable. It was a long thread and niggas was riding for tariq. The race casino line was good. So I'm in a generous mood tonight so I will give Rd 1 to tariq by the smallest of margins.

Rd 2 is Tucker. No debate! That shit got ugly when he started reading shit from Tariq's book. Now I know some of y'all ride for Tariq but nope not this time. Rd 2 is not debatable.

In Rd 3 Tariq is gonna have to do some subtitles, translations, and do which room I'm in. We shall see.

I don't understand what his books from over a decade ago have to do with his statements on trump

Y'all pulled the same shit in the last thread and it baffled me

man its too early for this right now. dude quoted the book and Tariq said its satire, comedic, and tongue in cheek. he then asked why should we take u seriously now? He also made the comment that Tariq was profiting off his views. Tariq had no defense for the shit other than to basically say tucker is reaching.

now im not the dude u should try to use the Socratic questioning technique on. u like to ask question after question and then come back and say ur questions are not being answered. I cant do that with u. u saw the video and im sure u understood, ovastood, comprehended, grasped, and got the gist of what the book had to do with his statements on Trump.

talk to me after my second cup of coffee.

 

[Elzo69Renaissance]

Tariq takes an L on this one....shit is becoming hard to watch ....but low key is this nigga becoming a contributor to Carlson s show?

 

[Elzo69Renaissance]

Man fuck this nigga. I keep telling you nignogs he's a sham but but but but he made Hidden Colors he know what he talking about. KYS

U have now been marked for assassination lmao

 

[a.mann]

Ok I'm going to assume there is gonna be a Rd 3. Rd 1 was debatable. It was a long thread and niggas was riding for tariq. The race casino line was good. So I'm in a generous mood tonight so I will give Rd 1 to tariq by the smallest of margins.

Rd 2 is Tucker. No debate! That shit got ugly when he started reading shit from Tariq's book. Now I know some of y'all ride for Tariq but nope not this time. Rd 2 is not debatable.

In Rd 3 Tariq is gonna have to do some subtitles, translations, and do which room I'm in. We shall see.

I don't understand what his books from over a decade ago have to do with his statements on trump

Y'all pulled the same shit in the last thread and it baffled me

man its too early for this right now. dude quoted the book and Tariq said its satire, comedic, and tongue in cheek. he then asked why should we take u seriously now? He also made the comment that Tariq was profiting off his views. Tariq had no defense for the shit other than to basically say tucker is reaching.

now im not the dude u should try to use the Socratic questioning technique on. u like to ask question after question and then come back and say ur questions are not being answered. I cant do that with u. u saw the video and im sure u understood, ovastood, comprehended, grasped, and got the gist of what the book had to do with his statements on Trump.

talk to me after my second cup of coffee.

 

[xxCivicxx]

Ok I'm going to assume there is gonna be a Rd 3. Rd 1 was debatable. It was a long thread and niggas was riding for tariq. The race casino line was good. So I'm in a generous mood tonight so I will give Rd 1 to tariq by the smallest of margins.

Rd 2 is Tucker. No debate! That shit got ugly when he started reading shit from Tariq's book. Now I know some of y'all ride for Tariq but nope not this time. Rd 2 is not debatable.

In Rd 3 Tariq is gonna have to do some subtitles, translations, and do which room I'm in. We shall see.

I don't understand what his books from over a decade ago have to do with his statements on trump

Y'all pulled the same shit in the last thread and it baffled me

man its too early for this right now. dude quoted the book and Tariq said its satire, comedic, and tongue in cheek. he then asked why should we take u seriously now? He also made the comment that Tariq was profiting off his views. Tariq had no defense for the shit other than to basically say tucker is reaching.

now im not the dude u should try to use the Socratic questioning technique on. u like to ask question after question and then come back and say ur questions are not being answered. I cant do that with u. u saw the video and im sure u understood, ovastood, comprehended, grasped, and got the gist of what the book had to do with his statements on Trump.

talk to me after my second cup of coffee.

Nah you'll never get me to understand what his books have to do with his trump statements because they have nothing to do with his trump statements

It was non sequitur period

And I find it funny how you niggas wait til way after the fact to comment on the fact that I ask simple questions that you niggas are incapable of answering smh

Y'all keep saying he's race hustling but I have yet to see anyone accurately explain where all this "black empowerment" money is coming from that he's supposedly making

 

[Cinco]

Fell for the deflection when the cac tried to discredit him.

I read that book back in the day. It was good but obviously some of it was satire Not to be taken literally. Here it came back to bite him

 

[jetlifebih]

He's a podcast host..not a political scientist......doesn't take away hidden colors and his contributions....

It's misinformation all throughout hidden colors...

Shit was all about getting negroes to get in they emotions...wether that was to make niggas feel good or to make them angry.

Where exactly did you find the misinformation and what is the correct information regarding that error?

Good information especially about mustafa hefney....there has to be many more people like him, but haven't spoken up because they weren't African in mind and heart and benefit from being labeled as white...but still didn't see any misinformation from hidden colors

If there is misinformation throughout it, you should be able to give me an example without a 3 hour video...

 

[5th Letter]

Ok I'm going to assume there is gonna be a Rd 3. Rd 1 was debatable. It was a long thread and niggas was riding for tariq. The race casino line was good. So I'm in a generous mood tonight so I will give Rd 1 to tariq by the smallest of margins.

Rd 2 is Tucker. No debate! That shit got ugly when he started reading shit from Tariq's book. Now I know some of y'all ride for Tariq but nope not this time. Rd 2 is not debatable.

In Rd 3 Tariq is gonna have to do some subtitles, translations, and do which room I'm in. We shall see.

I don't understand what his books from over a decade ago have to do with his statements on trump

Y'all pulled the same shit in the last thread and it baffled me

man its too early for this right now. dude quoted the book and Tariq said its satire, comedic, and tongue in cheek. he then asked why should we take u seriously now? He also made the comment that Tariq was profiting off his views. Tariq had no defense for the shit other than to basically say tucker is reaching.

now im not the dude u should try to use the Socratic questioning technique on. u like to ask question after question and then come back and say ur questions are not being answered. I cant do that with u. u saw the video and im sure u understood, ovastood, comprehended, grasped, and got the gist of what the book had to do with his statements on Trump.

talk to me after my second cup of coffee.

 

[(ob)Scene]

So basically what some of y'all are saying is that you fell sucker to "Fox News Deflections 101." Can't pop shit about their audience on any topic if you're victim to the same tactics.

 

[7figz]

If we're being straight up and judging this as a debate then you're borderline retarded if you think Tucker won that.

Let's examine the quote.

Trump has appointed people to his cabinet from the alt-right--**COMMA: what is the alt-right?**--a white supremacists sect that literally throws up Nazi salutes.

That there is a factual statement. With a basic understanding of punctuation and sentence structure you can establish that no where in the tweet does he even begin to insinuate that Bannon himself was throwing up Nazi salutes.

Then to deflect w/ the macking stuff is basically throwing in a white towel on the topic at hand in an effort to save face.

These people want to feel some type of way, they don't care about that.

Gotta agree with that statement ... and I'm not even a Tareeq fan. I might be giving people too much credit to expect them to have understood that it was a misquote and that the book wasn't relevant to the statement, let alone a satirical book.

 

[semi-auto-mato]

Ok I'm going to assume there is gonna be a Rd 3. Rd 1 was debatable. It was a long thread and niggas was riding for tariq. The race casino line was good. So I'm in a generous mood tonight so I will give Rd 1 to tariq by the smallest of margins.

Rd 2 is Tucker. No debate! That shit got ugly when he started reading shit from Tariq's book. Now I know some of y'all ride for Tariq but nope not this time. Rd 2 is not debatable.

In Rd 3 Tariq is gonna have to do some subtitles, translations, and do which room I'm in. We shall see.

I don't understand what his books from over a decade ago have to do with his statements on trump

Y'all pulled the same shit in the last thread and it baffled me

man its too early for this right now. dude quoted the book and Tariq said its satire, comedic, and tongue in cheek. he then asked why should we take u seriously now? He also made the comment that Tariq was profiting off his views. Tariq had no defense for the shit other than to basically say tucker is reaching.

now im not the dude u should try to use the Socratic questioning technique on. u like to ask question after question and then come back and say ur questions are not being answered. I cant do that with u. u saw the video and im sure u understood, ovastood, comprehended, grasped, and got the gist of what the book had to do with his statements on Trump.

talk to me after my second cup of coffee.

Nah you'll never get me to understand what his books have to do with his trump statements because they have nothing to do with his trump statements

It was non sequitur period

And I find it funny how you niggas wait til way after the fact to comment on the fact that I ask simple questions that you niggas are incapable of answering smh

Y'all keep saying he's race hustling but I have yet to see anyone accurately explain where all this "black empowerment" money is coming from that he's supposedly making

ok so why ask a question and u already know u wont accept any answer other than ur answer? u wont ever understand the use of the book in their argument. don't ask about the use of the book ur mind is made up.

it was not non sequitor. tucker brought it up and connected the dots for u. he said if we couldnt take u serious then why should we take u are serious now? he went on to say how he basically feels Tariq statements on trump are to stir the pot and for him to make a profit. this interview aint debatable. CLEAR BODY BAG FOR TUCKER IN ROUND 2. dude stop it!

smh...here we go folks...the next 10 pages will be THE ATTACK OF THE TARIQ-CANS! y'all get ready.

 

[JDSTAYWITIT]

If we're being straight up and judging this as a debate then you're borderline retarded if you think Tucker won that.

Let's examine the quote.

Trump has appointed people to his cabinet from the alt-right--**COMMA: what is the alt-right?**--a white supremacists sect that literally throws up Nazi salutes.

That there is a factual statement. With a basic understanding of punctuation and sentence structure you can establish that no where in the tweet does he even begin to insinuate that Bannon himself was throwing up Nazi salutes.

Then to deflect w/ the macking stuff is basically throwing in a white towel on the topic at hand in an effort to save face.

These people want to feel some type of way, they don't care about that.

Gotta agree with that statement ... and I'm not even a Tareeq fan. I might be giving people to much credit to expect them to have understood that it was a misquote and that the book wasn't relevant to the statement, let alone a satirical book.

Stop riding your saviors dick ..... we simply AGREE with tucker carlson ....its not that hard to understand ... he showed you how to dismantle this race baiting "mack" with ease using true FACTS .... this is why all of these afrocentric clowns are afraid to show their faces on a legit news organization like fox news

 

[7figz]

If we're being straight up and judging this as a debate then you're borderline retarded if you think Tucker won that.

Let's examine the quote.

Trump has appointed people to his cabinet from the alt-right--**COMMA: what is the alt-right?**--a white supremacists sect that literally throws up Nazi salutes.

That there is a factual statement. With a basic understanding of punctuation and sentence structure you can establish that no where in the tweet does he even begin to insinuate that Bannon himself was throwing up Nazi salutes.

Then to deflect w/ the macking stuff is basically throwing in a white towel on the topic at hand in an effort to save face.

These people want to feel some type of way, they don't care about that.

Gotta agree with that statement ... and I'm not even a Tareeq fan. I might be giving people to much credit to expect them to have understood that it was a misquote and that the book wasn't relevant to the statement, let alone a satirical book.

Stop riding your saviors dick ..... we simply AGREE with tucker carlson ....its not that hard to understand ... he showed you how to dismantle this race baiting "mack" with ease using true FACTS ....

LOL, I never listened to one of Tareeq's videos or read any of his books and now he's my "savior" ?

The internet bruh, I tell you.

If we're being straight up and judging this as a debate then you're borderline retarded if you think Tucker won that.

Let's examine the quote.

Trump has appointed people to his cabinet from the alt-right--**COMMA: what is the alt-right?**--a white supremacists sect that literally throws up Nazi salutes.

That there is a factual statement. With a basic understanding of punctuation and sentence structure you can establish that no where in the tweet does he even begin to insinuate that Bannon himself was throwing up Nazi salutes.

Then to deflect w/ the macking stuff is basically throwing in a white towel on the topic at hand in an effort to save face.

These people want to feel some type of way, they don't care about that.

Gotta agree with that statement ... and I'm not even a Tareeq fan. I might be giving people to much credit to expect them to have understood that it was a misquote and that the book wasn't relevant to the statement, let alone a satirical book.

...this is why all of these afrocentric clowns are afraid to show their faces on a legit news organization like fox news

Just stop posting for today bruh, you just killed all your credibility.