NFL: Saints Bounty Thread

[AsylumGuido]

(05-11-2012 02:22 PM)Beef Wrote:  This is nothing more than you choosing to misrepresent what the declaration really means, how it's context should be interpreted, and why it was really written.

Mary Jo White is absolutely correct.

It acknowledges the existance of a bounty because it is completely irrational to try to pass blame on to Williams and Vitt for something that didn't exist.

It does acknowledge Hargroves participation by the mere fact he was singled out by coaches and directed to do/say William's and Vitt's side of the story (be on the same page). If he wasn't involved in bounties, then there is no rational reason to tell him to play dumb and stay on the same page.

It does acknowledge Hargrove was told to lie. For Christ sakes, THAT'S IT'S PURPOSE! He thinks that by throwing Williams and Vitt under the bus by infering they told him to lie, it will lessen his punishment. But use your head... If there's really no bounty, then how could passing culpability to someone else for something that doesn't really exist possibly lessen his punishment????????

Guess what... IT CAN'T! That's why the declaration is FUTILE/WORTHLESS/STUPID AS FUCK unless there REALLY IS A BOUNTY!

And EVERYONE knows that's exactly what it infers in it's real context.

Your bizzarro world delusional and overwhelmingly dishonest interpretation of the declaration's context is BS. You're misrepreseting it and essentially lying because you refuse to state the truth about what it REALLY infers.

Choosing to ignore the true context and spin something other than the truth is the same as lying. You are not fooling anyone. (except maybe falconidae)

That is exactly what Goodell and White did with the declaration. The ignored the true context and spun it to mean what they wanted it to mean.

It appears to you that is living in the bizzaro world. Take the time to read what others are saying about the declaration. Nobody of note is saying that it supports the league's claims of proof that players, including Hargrove, took part in a bounty scheme. Nobody! Yet, several stories from publications all over have said just the opposite and echo what I am saying.

Let's just agree to disagree on this point because you do not need any proof.