donelsonfiles

Pariah: The Lives and Death of Sonny Liston By Tom Donelson

Showtime special on Sonny Liston, Pariah: The Lives and Deaths of Sonny Liston, reveals the various controversy and conspiracy theories surrounding Liston career and death. Liston, like Joe Frazier, George Foreman and even Larry Holmes were overshadowed by Muhammad Ali and his talent has often been ignored and never truly appreciated. He was not just a powerful puncher or brawler, but he had good boxing skills to go with that awesome power.

The problem with Liston is that the truth about his life often overshadowed his skills in the boxing ring and often led to various conspiracy stories. There is no doubt of his connection to organized crime and his rise to prominence occurred during the time in which Mob controlled boxing and he did work for the mob as an enforcer outside the ring.

During the 50’s, mob control of the boxing became part of congressional investigation and Liston connection to the mob became part of the hearing. This did two things. It first delayed his shot at a title as Cus D’Amato had a good reason to keep Liston from fighting Patterson despite Liston defeating top contenders. The second thing is that reinforce Liston as a villain.

As the 1950’s ended and the 60’s begin, the Civil Rights movement was in full swing, challenging the racism existed and the documentary made it clear that many in the Civil Rights movement didn’t want Liston as a representative of their movement, a man perceived as a thug by much of American. Floyd Patterson was the polite gentleman who many viewed as a role model plus he was the heavyweight champion.

Floyd Patterson decided that he had to give Liston a chance for the title while many around him knew Patterson couldn’t beat Liston. Liston knocked Patterson out in one round and follow up that victory with another first round knockout of Patterson. It is here where the documentary goes in interesting directions with various conspiracy theories like the Ali-Liston fights were fixed. One individual who is listed as expert on fight fixing made the case of the first fight between Ali-Liston was fixed but anyone who saw the fight and most of those interviewed agreed with me, this was Ali beating up Liston. Ali pounded Liston, open up a cut under his eye and one individual observed, Liston may even laced his gloves with compound designed to burn Ali’s eye and blind him. Throughout the fifth round, Ali moved around the ring nearly blind, but Liston failed to finish him. At the end of the round, Ali’s eyesight returned and nailed Liston with a combination. In the sixth round, Ali nailed Liston with powerful combinations. Liston did not come out for the seventh round as he merely had enough. The indestructible Liston ended the fight on his stool. Ali won the second fight with a first round knockout. I agree with Mike Tyson view that you can get knock out by the punch you don’t see. There is not doubt that the right hand, for years called the phantom punch nailed Liston and Liston didn’t see the punch. I remember an amateur kick boxing match I fought in. It was a tough fight with both of us nailing each other with kicks and punches but the in the final round, I hit my opponent with a punch that caught him off guard and send him down It wasn’t the hardest punch of the fight but it hit my opponent perfectly. (He got back up to finish the fight, but it showed me that a punch no matter how hard landing in the right place can send another fighter down.) Liston with his contact with the mob lend itself to many conspiracy theories and why would the mob give up the heavyweight title, especially since the fighter who won it was beyond their control.

After the second fight, Liston career was pretty much over even though he would continue to fight. He was never a true contender after that and the only time that he would even been remotely liked as a fighter was the second Ali fight as more Americans feared the recent Nation of Islam convert Ali than Liston. He found himself back at the bottom of the contender ring. The reason is that his past reputation hurt him and other fighters like Jerry Quarry and Joe Frazier became the new contenders. Liston would fought sixteen more fights winning 15 of them. All of his victories but one by knock out but the one fight that ended his chance any shot at a title was his loss to Leotis Martin.

Liston was hoping for one more shot and in 1969, Ali was stripped of his title when he refused to enter the United States Army so there was opportunity for one more shot at the title. A win over Leotis Martin could have put him in the position for another title and he knocked Martin down in the fourth and was winning on points before Martin stopped him in the ninth round.

His last fight was a battering of Wepner and in the documentary, it was stated that he was supposed to take a dive against Chuck Wepner, but Wepner wasn’t called the Bayonne Bleeder for nothing as a Liston piston like jab open up a cut. If there was a fix, it would have been difficult to throw a fight when the guy you are fighting bleeding all over and the fight was stopped over Wepner cuts. Again I don’t buy this conspiracy theory.

Drug overdoes was listed as one reason for Liston’s death and while he officially listed as dying as result of an overdose, the one conspiracy theory that I can buy is that Liston was murdered and didn’t die from an overdose. The one theory is the Mob decided to punish him for money lost in the Wepner fight (even though I don’t buy that the fight was fixed. Why fix a fight with Wepner whose reputation was bleeding during the nation anthem) but he did hang out with many unsavory characters in Las Vegas and got into to the drug scene including pushing so it is more realistic that he was murdered by one of those characters who he dealt with. The special mention one raid that he was caught in by FBI, but they allowed him to go free and this may have led others to think he was informant. (FBI agents involved in the raid were shocked to see him there and decided to get him out there while arresting the others.)

Liston had a stellar career with 50 wins and only four losses, that in between violent crimes, prison and allegations of fixes and he was not just a powerful fighter but a technically skilled to go with his power. He couldn’t read or write, a black man with a troubled past and while he appeared as tough and sullen, the documentary showed that he was sensitive and loved to be around children. Throughout his career, Sports writers attacked him and labeled him a ignorant thug and he didn’t talk to them. When he won his championship, he thought that he would be treated differently but there were no parades or even acknowledgment of his accomplishment.

Before the Ali fight, he was considered indestructible, but Ali destroyed Liston image as the tough guy in the ring and while he continued to fight, he became invisible to fight fans as the thug was defeated and boxing fans moved on.

The documentary viewed Liston as a black man lost in 1950’s and 1960’s America as much of the Black leadership flocked to Floyd Patterson, and more radical blacks as well as the political left drifted to Muhammad Ali. Liston was abandoned by his own race and much of America as well, he was the villain throughout his career except for one brief moment in Lewiston Maine but that fell apart in one minute.

Democratic race as of November 21st

My view of last night debate in case anyone was even paying attention. Mayor Pete did enough to keep his major seat at the table but being less crazy than Warren or Sanders. Warren didn’t lose ground but didn’t gain any. Biden is a time bomb waiting to happen. continue

The impeachment trial has highlighted his swamp like corruption in Ukraine and that is the tip of the iceberg but for now he is still in top three. Bernie kept himself in fourth and Kamala Harris needs to go back to her day job.

Tulsi has a future in the Democratic Party, especially if the old folks in the lead loses big. This is not her year and Mayor Pete can be part of any rebuild but the present Dems are Venezuela socialists.

Impeachment hearings lesson November 21,2019

What we found out so far and its implications. Well so far there is very little evidence of a quid or quo. We know Ukraine is one of the most corrupt country and that Trump had his doubt how much more aid to give. (Note weapons were already given.)

Trump also had no trust in his state department and after these testimonies, this distrust is well deserve since many of these individuals worked to undermine the President policies and substitute their own policies.

The role of Rudy shows this distrust. Remember in the early 1970’s, Richard Nixon had Henry Kissinger go around his own state department to deal with China. Rudy is not Henry but the principles is the same.

What we are witnessing is the criminalization of political differences and the attempt not just to overturn the 2016 elections but impact the 2020 elections. These hearings show that Trump had legitimate concerns and in the end, gave the arms without any quid for quo.

Senator Ron Johnson was one of those who pushed Trump in this direction. Read his letter. He pushed his POV but made it clear that in the end, it is the President who makes policies not him or the State Department bureaucracy.

The final lesson is that future Republicans whether their name is Pence, Rubio or Haley must understand that the bureaucracy and even some in the intelligence community will undermine policies they disagree with.

This can be seen that many within the State bureaucracy and whistleblowers in the intelligence community (Initial EC) are willing to work with Democrats to overthrow a Republican President and an election. Not a good thing if the bureaucracy behaves as a Deep State.

today’s tweets Science

This is one of those inaccurate and stupid statements made about the climate debate. Skeptics and Alarmists have from the very beginning agreed the climate has been warming. The Alarmist arguments that it is human driven. ContinuedQuote Tweet

Doug Cottrell

@DCottrell1956 · 15hReplying to @BadgersNo @TheDisproof and 43 othersThe debate about WHETHER there is climate change is long past. It is happening. It is in the news. The changes have primary and secondary and tertiary impacts.

The skeptics are not as certain what human role is and whether C02 is the driving force. If one looks at the actual empiric evidence, it favors the skeptics from the failure of computer models and overall failed predictions by alarmists on what the nature of the planet would be.

The Planet is greening (there is a debate on why including human conservation actions and slight increase of C02 aiding planet growth) and we are feeding more people and more people are living above the poverty line so the disaster predicted for our planet have failed to happen.

The irony is that countries that having problems are those countries that followed many of the policy recommendations of alarmist of heavy dose of government policies

In states or countries that depend more on wind and solar tend to have less dependable and more expensive energy. Those countries that depend upon nuclear, fossil fuels or hydro have more dependable energy sources and less expensive.

Alarmist policies have always included higher energy prices to move away from fossil fuels and nuclear so the cost of energy going up is not a surprise but part of the policies. Note: most people when confronted with cost don’t like it.

Skeptics as a group tend to believe in market approaches (even though there are liberal or leftist views on the economy) and those market approach will work to reduce pollution and C02 emissions. Plus allow the economy to grow and produce.

Some believers in AGW like Michael Shellenberger agrees with some of the Skeptics approaches as he has openly questioned the push to wind and solar and favors a more traditional approach including nuclear energy.

This is not a debate about warming but why it is warming, why it warmed in the past and best approach to provide energy policies that is a clean as possible while allowing economic growth. Alarmists like to bring up straw men that don’t exist. Thus their dishonesty.

From Swampgirl : History denied & Lorentide. Glacial maxima & interglacial periods. Our path around the sun has created the freeze or burn. 10,000 years ago during such time, the Earth came closest to the sun in July. The Northern hemisphere got 8% more radiation in summer than it does today.

More Bear News

Why be skeptical? Here is a thought, you think Polar Bears won’t adjust to the conditions around them and the Artic ocean will ice free or whatever and you find several years later, you find the bears are thriving and doing well.

Studies have shown the Bear population has stablished or increased, not dropped by 67% as predicted. (some keep predicting drops but considering past record, one has to be skeptical. ) Would you think great, the Bears are surviving

Instead of celebrating, you fire the scientist found this be true and try to prove the opposite. That is why climate science, which is relatively new, needs to question. It has been hijacked by political activists with PHD and activists with an agenda.

Why I am skeptical

The number one thing often missing in economics is not taking human ingenuity in account. That is why we are feeding more people today or that the world has become wealthier. Part of it began with Reagan Revolution and collapsed of Communism. India began its own reform.

South Korea showed what happens when markets are allowed as this country went from being one of the poorest to one of the richest within 50 years.

The biggest threat that we have is reversing the trends that made up for this success. We won’t see famine or poverty as result of a warmer planet but if we retreat from economic freedom and move toward socialism in the West and the developed countries.

The threat from warmer planet is overrated (look up the history and you will see humans in the past did better when the planet was warmer. It is recorded in the history book. ) More people die in colder weather than warmer and science backs that up.

Markets, Energy

This represent a serious of tweets on Energy with another individual.

It is amazing that over the years, we were told we are running out of energy but yet we keep finding even more.https://investors.com/politics/commentary/we-are-not-running-out-of-oil-earth-produces-crude/… This individual is wrong for so many reason and one reason Bonus doesn’t understand free market or study the energy market over the past decades

FROM Bonus i Sorry to burst your somewhat fragile bubble but fossil fuels are going to be replaced whether you like it ir not. Reason: they are finite and over 90% of the population of the world is covered by governments who signed up to the Paris accord.

From Bonus What year will we run out of fossil fuels? Do you understand the exponential growth function?

Me: Not anytime soon, do you not understand economics? Note also that if you examine past predictions of what we have left, it often UNDERESTIMATED energy sources. So you are debating the wrong person, I read your data and mine is superior. We are nowhere near running out.

Bonus Then what year? At what rate of annual growth in consumption?

Me: Well tell me what year do you predict? Let me explain this so even you can understand. We don’t know since we are finding more than expected with newer technology like fracking. So if you can’t answer the questions and you can’t, then history is our guide.

Bonus The problem you have is exponential growth. Do you know why?

Me: You are working on the assumption that we have a specific finite materials and refuse to see that we are finding more than original predictions. If you predict x and we find y which is triple of x, due to new technology then we have totally different scenario.

I find your point of exponential growth irrelevant since we have not clue what we will be able to find at the right price. What is expensive to find today is not tomorrow, then we find more. Your exponential growth is based that you think we have x amount.

We are at impasse since you coming from we have a limited amount and I am making the point that what we think we have today UNDERESTIMATE what we might have since new technology may find more price reasonable. I get your point

Just look at population, we were told for 200 plus years we have finite resources to support population but we find that due to human ingenuity, we find more resources supporting growing population. Exponential growth in population theories have already been proven wrong.

From October 30th Fitzgibbons and Swampgirl

https://www.blogtalkradio.com/la-batchelor/2019/10/30/the-donelson-files-on-the-batchelor-news-radio-network

From Larry Fedewa

The Dems’ huge gamble

By Dr. Larry Fedewa (November 2, 2019) The Democrat Party of the United States of America has apparently adopted the following strategy:
Put forth a list of second- and third-rate candidates for their 2020 Presidential nomination, almost all of whom represent positions on the significant issues of health care, immigration, environment, the Constitution, and foreign policy which are so far to the Left that they are never going to attract the majority support of the American electorate.To make this decision work, they made a frantic, last minute attempt to remove the current President by the vote of one house of the legislature, even though the Senate, which is controlled by the Republican Party — which must convict the President by a 2/3 majority — is virtually certain the exonerate the President, thus leaving the President in office.Nevertheless, proceed with the impeachment on the assumption that the process can be manipulated in such a way as to stain the President’s name and reputation and thereby divert enough independent voters to defeat Donald J. Trump in his quest for a second term. The goal appears to be to stir up so much hatred of Mr. Trump that the Democrat will win no matter who it is, washed into office by a flood of negative views of Trump and his Administration.

The customary strategy for an American election is to spend the pre-primary season testing one or more favored candidate(s) and discover whether their early choices have the required qualities to defeat the sitting president. If the field does not look strong enough, the elders of the party would start looking for a better candidate. To their credit, they did convince Joseph Biden to join the campaign, but that does not seem to be working too well.

Instead of this conventional approach, someone has convinced the Party to go with the impeachment strategy. From the outside at least, this looks like a death wish. If the goal is to sway public opinion to vote against Donald J. Trump at any cost, the early signs are suggesting that this strategy is having the opposite effect. This should not be surprising, given the basic proposition beneath the rhetoric, namely: the Dems want to remove the legitimately elected president by act of Congress and thereby usurp the prerogative of the electorate to decide whether Mr. Trump should be reelected or not. If the impeachment were to lead to his removal from office a few months before an election, the American public would never get the chance to make that decision. The polls show that this idea is not going over too well with the public.
On the other hand, President Trump’s record as President is filled with extraordinary accomplishments. The latest is his Syrian/Turkey/Kurd policy, which appears to have settled a nearly one-hundred-year old dispute between the Turks and the Kurds/Syrians. This is a monumental accomplishment, worth the price of allowing Russia to solidify its influence with all the parties. Let the Russians worry about the Kurds. As long as we have control of the oil and retain air support and Special Ops capability, the Kurds may be able to get along without us. We can then continue our withdrawal from the Middle East. This is only the latest achievement in a long list that this President has succeeded in executing. Besides changing the direction of the economy and trade policy, he has fulfilled many of his other campaign promises as well. If he can engineer a new trade agreement with China, and begin removing the tariffs, his record will be even harder to beat.
This makes his reelection much more likely. If the Dems want to beat him in 2020, they had better come up with a better plan. The current one won’t get the job done. In fact, it makes one wonder what on earth they are thinking?
(c) Richfield Press 2019. All rights reserved.

Notes from Nancy Hartwell interview on Donelson Files

Interesting conversation on Human Trafficking with Nancy Hartman on Donelson Files. A few facts: 1. at least 30 million held against their will.

2. Slavery is against the law in most countries but it continues in these countries and some conservative Islamic country, legal

3. One country in which slavery and workers forced to work against their will. Qatar in which one death a day occurs to build stadium for World Cup 2022. Maybe we should 2022 World Cup, the blood cup.

4. Slaves work as sex workers, nail salons, shoe manufacturing and farming.

5. 200,000 estimated in US, come in through our ports or Southern Border.

6. Majority of victims under 18 but college aged women, and even some men or boys are also victim.

7. Discussed Female Genital mutilation

8. Ms. Hartman also details how to prevent it and what steps to take. Worth listening to today Donelson Files.