This just goes to show how ignorant whites really are when it comes to the struggle.

2»

Comments

  • Jabu_Rule
    Jabu_Rule Members Posts: 5,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2011
    She ""called slavery an "evil" and "scourge" and "stain on our history."" ,......

    If the founding fathers had fiat declared slavery illegal in 1776,
    then independence from Britain could not have come about in 1776.

    Nor would legal slavery have ended due to a 1776 fiat declaration.
    We can only speculate at when independence might have come about later.

    Before whites could even begin serious debate regarding freeing black slaves,
    whites had to free themself from their old world masters.

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator
    with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

    It took took much debate,

    [ which in hindsight seems terrible to ignoramuses who judge people of other eras by their modern sensibilities]

    but the founding fathers planted seed that grew into ending legal slavery.

    After the dust settled, slaves, became legally fully equal citizens of the USA.
    After the dust settled, slaves were acknowledged to be men and women - fully human.

    Some appreciation should be rendered to those contended
    " all men are created equal, ... endowed by CREATOR with ... Rights"
    back when that was a highly debated novel notion.

    And appreciation to Christ who had no involuntary temporal slaves
    and who taught "love one another" [without regard to color]
    and whose "good Samaritan" story helped greatly to create whatever racial harmony we do have.

    You can't build the roof till after you finish the foundation.
    Now if we could just end slavery to the pursuit of the almighty dollar.

    She made that statement to buffer her following statements as if no one would see her revisionist comments. It's not hard to see that people like her are slick with how they phrase their words. But not slick enough.

    Yeah i get your idea about building houses and all that ? but that doesn't change the fact that the founding fathers held slaves while creating the deceleration of independence and the constitution. Modern sensibilities have nothing to do with the fact that too many wanted to keep slaves when there was plenty arguing against the sensibilities of slavery besides the founding fathers for centuries proceeding. How slavery could exist during the time of enlightenment baffles me.

    Your if statements hold no weight because it so happens that they did not free the slaves and you don't know what would have happened if they did with your selective history. There could have been the factor that slaves would have joined their cause. Also, this did not change the fact that the country had a civil war regardless over their various positions not limited to but including slavery. I don't subscribe to your theist beliefs so that's neither here nor there.

    The dust didn't settle until over 200 years later and there is still residue. There was no debate, there was a war. The only reason it ended in the north is because they didn't need us anymore with their business focus placed elsewhere. It took an amendment to the constitution to include us post freedom. The only founding father that was enlightened enough to stand against slavery was Benjamin Franklin.
  • Jabu_Rule
    Jabu_Rule Members Posts: 5,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2011
    Sh0t wrote: »
    I'm a libertarian in a black body. Most whites have bad politics, including the 3.5 mentioned above.

    Same difference, especially when you defend the indefensible against the history of your own people. Libertarians created the tea party (that are full of white supremacist and a few sprinkles of black pepper) and they want individual state rule. They want states to be able in enact draconian laws. You continue to beat that drum white man.
  • John Prewett
    John Prewett Members Posts: 755
    edited January 2011
    Wanna be miserable, ...stay ? at ? about what you aint got it.
    Wanna be happy, ...... thank ? what you have got.
  • Jabu_Rule
    Jabu_Rule Members Posts: 5,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2011
    Wanna be miserable, ...stay ? at ? about what you aint got it.
    Wanna be happy, ...... thank ? what you have got.

    I can't be ? at what i don't believe in. I never did. I can be ? at myself for failing at something or when i've made a bad decision.
  • John Prewett
    John Prewett Members Posts: 755
    edited January 2011
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    What you do is react to anybody who attempts to illuminate misdeeds
    of white people that were perpetrated on blacks,
    and you throw around quotes of random acts by us that hold no water
    and have nothing to do with the issue of institutionalized racism and denial.

    Funny how McCall's book was brought to my attention about the same time as chancing upon this forum.
    I'm only about a quarter way through it, ......

    By all means continue to "illuminate misdeeds of white people that were perpetrated on blacks",
    and from time to time
    I may react by illuminating widespread misdeeds of black people that were and are perpetrated on whites.
    [and on some blacks who try to "act white" by doing "white things" like studying in school]

    By all means tell us of the "institutional" racism that now exist in USA.

    Somehow I don't think you are referring to the antiwhite institutional racism
    of "affirmative action" and "minority set asides" and quotas and all that.
  • Jabu_Rule
    Jabu_Rule Members Posts: 5,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2011
    Funny how McCall's book was brought to my attention about the same time as chancing upon this forum.
    I'm only about a quarter way through it, ......

    By all means continue to "illuminate misdeeds of white people that were perpetrated on blacks",
    and from time to time
    I may react by illuminating widespread misdeeds of black people that were and are perpetrated on whites.
    [and on some blacks who try to "act white" by doing "white things" like studying in school]

    By all means tell us of the "institutional" racism that now exist in USA.

    Somehow I don't think you are referring to the antiwhite institutional racism
    of "affirmative action" and "minority set asides" and quotas and all that.

    Black people didn't create affirmative action. That's your white guilt at play. I also don't know anyone personal that benefited from affirmative action or white set asides (what ever the ? that is) being that most are still struggling and working hard in whatever job they can get. But i see your reverse racism card playing.. That person that i outed for being white is so not because of education but because of his stances against his black culture with support of white racist revisionist. I a degree in networking john and I'm going for my BA in CS. I'm sure you think that generally, all black people are uneducated, don't you.

    That one passage out of that one book does not indicate widespread misdeeds against whites. It also pales in comparison to the widespread slavery and systematic racism that led to those kids in that book reacting in that way. I don't condone their actions though as your doing here today with Bachmann.

    If you want to illuminate our misdeeds, make a topic and see how far that goes with honest debate. Be sure to include the factors of history and inherited psychological effects also. With that, be sure to include the systematic destruction of our communities and organizations.
  • John Prewett
    John Prewett Members Posts: 755
    edited January 2011
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    I can't be ? at what i don't believe in. I never did.
    I can be ? at myself for failing at something or when i've made a bad decision.

    I'm only about a quarter through McCall's book,... at this point he and many of his [financially middle class] teenage friends seeth with anger [especially angry at whites in general]
    and one major reason they are so angry is cause [he may well be a changed man by now, or by the end of the book] they have no appreciation for what they do have
    [which is common attitude in all races,.... especially common among the young].
    Nor did it matter to them that many whites were more financially poor than they were.


    Even if one doesn''t believe in traditional "? ", one helps ones own state of mind by reminding oneself of the good things one does have.
  • Jabu_Rule
    Jabu_Rule Members Posts: 5,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2011
    I'm only about a quarter through McCall's book,... at this point he and many of his [financially middle class] teenage friends seeth with anger [especially angry at whites in general]
    and one major reason they are so angry is cause [he may well be a changed man by now, or by the end of the book] they have no appreciation for what they do have
    [which is common attitude in all races,.... especially common among the young].
    Nor did it matter to them that many whites were more financially poor than they were.


    Even if one doesn''t believe in traditional "? ", one helps ones own state of mind by reminding oneself of the good things one does have.

    All of this is irrelevant to the statement that you put in quotes. Thanks for playing though.

    Also the topic isn't about our concept of ? or being happy. It's about a US congressmen revising history.
  • John Prewett
    John Prewett Members Posts: 755
    edited January 2011
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    Black people didn't create affirmative action.

    Agreed.
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    That's your white guilt at play.

    Some whites may have felt "guilty." Whites generally came to believe legal discrimination against blacks was wrong.
    Most whites supported EQUAL treatment before the law.
    Most whites NEVER felt "guilty." Most whites agreed with a famous American who proclaimed
    that one should be judged by the "content of ones character, not the color of ones skin."
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    But i see your reverse racism card playing..
    That person that i outed for being white is so not because of education
    but because of his stances against his black culture with support of white racist revisionist.
    I a degree in networking john and I'm going for my BA in CS.

    I wasn't referring to your interaction with Shot.
    I was still thinking of revelations from the McCall book.
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    I'm sure you thing all black people are uneducated though, don't you.

    No. You had no grounds to be "sure" of that.
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    That one passage out of that one book does not indicated widespread misdeeds against whites.
    It also pales in comparison to the widespread slavery and systematic racism
    that led to those kids in that book reacting in that way.
    I don't condone their actions though as your doing here today with Bachmann.

    Her disagreeing with you about the thinking of the founding fathers pales in comparison
    to gangs of teenage thugs attacking white boys just cause they were white.

    Regarding STREET LEVEL, personal contact crime, you are currently in denial
    of the far greater instance of black on white than the other way around.
    And it's been that way for DECADES,....
    McCalls book reveals the early stages of and the mentality of the blacks
    causing the black on white crime statistical disparity.

    [now if you want to discuss "white collar" crime,... then fine,... whites commit most of that]

    Presently Detroit woman in jail cause she was desparate to have her two daughters NOT attend their local school.
    Think she was fearful of bad azz white trash ? crackers hurting her daughters at the local school ?
  • John Prewett
    John Prewett Members Posts: 755
    edited January 2011
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    All of this is irrelevant to the statement that you put in quotes. Thanks for playing though.

    Also the topic isn't about our concept of ? or being happy. It's about a US congressmen revising history.

    My post #32 was not addressed to you. But thanks for playing.
  • Jabu_Rule
    Jabu_Rule Members Posts: 5,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2011
    My post #32 was not addressed to you. But thanks for playing.

    How wasn't it when you mentioned ? and i said i don't believe.. And you quoted me and that is what i mentioned.
  • John Prewett
    John Prewett Members Posts: 755
    edited January 2011
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    How wasn't it when you mentioned ? and i said i don't believe.. And you quoted me and that is what i mentioned.

    # 32 was not addressed [to anyone].

    # 36 was addressed to you. [due to your # 33]
  • Jabu_Rule
    Jabu_Rule Members Posts: 5,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2011
    Agreed.



    Some whites may have felt "guilty." Whites generally came to believe legal discrimination against blacks was wrong.
    Most whites supported EQUAL treatment before the law.
    Most whites NEVER felt "guilty." Most whites agreed with a famous American who proclaimed
    that one should be judged by the "content of ones character, not the color of ones skin."

    That statement was made while black leaders were being assassinated while attempting to gain civil rights. There was also the case of Jim Crow that created unequal treatment and the general treatment of blacks from the south all the way to the north.
    I wasn't referring to your interaction with Shot.
    I was still thinking of revelations from the McCall book.

    Ok, i'll let you pass on that but it did seem like that was the case. You are right about certain blacks thinking education is for the birds. That comes from jealousy which is a trait of all cultures. It's the nerd vs ? factor. It is the Tea Party that is attacking those with intelligence in this day and age. Many young blacks are not attending college rather then holding on to hoop or rap dreams. But nothing is general amongst a people.
    No. You had no grounds to be "sure" of that.

    The grounds were generated from the last statement which you clarified.

    Her disagreeing with you about the thinking of the founding fathers pales in comparison
    to gangs of teenage thugs attacking white boys just cause they were white.

    She said that they eradicated slavery which is a blatant falsehood. She also said all whites were equal which you should raise an eyebrow at also. she used all of this to support an argument that is already at odds with logical thinking. I don't recall her mentioning gangs of rabid ******s ? white women mel. But i guess that's what happens huh?
    Regarding STREET LEVEL, personal contact crime, you are currently in denial
    of the far greater instance of black on white than the other way around.
    And it's been that way for DECADES,....
    McCalls book reveals the early stages of and the mentality of the blacks
    causing the black on white crime statistical disparity.
    [now if you want to discuss "white collar" crime,... then fine,... whites commit most of that]

    Sorry bank robbery, Arson, Extortion, ? Dealing, terrorist acts, acts of vandalism, assault after bar fights, mass murder, assassinations and serial killing are all white collar? Of course the crimes we commit destroy financial systems right?

    Don't mention statics with out posting a link. You also mention the mentality of blacks as if that is the mentality of all blacks. Then this is the fact that this is only one case that you continue to harp on without reviewing the factors of what mad people in the community act that way towards whites. White people created these devisions and generated the segregation and mistrust and anger. You can take his word for it though. still i condone non of that.


    Presently Detroit woman in jail cause she was desparate to have her two daughters NOT attend their local school.
    Think she was fearful of bad azz white trash ? crackers hurting her daughters at the local school ?

    Yeah our community has problems that we need to work on. Gangs came about from a racist atmosphere of poverty though so it's still with us.
  • Jabu_Rule
    Jabu_Rule Members Posts: 5,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2011
    # 32 was not addressed [to anyone].

    # 36 was addressed to you. [due to your # 33]

    Does it matter? I responded to something that was posted in this topic. You gotta problem with that?
  • John Prewett
    John Prewett Members Posts: 755
    edited January 2011
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    Does it matter? I responded to something that was posted in this topic. You gotta problem with that?

    No problem at all. Certainly you are free to respond to any post,... even if it is just my off topic musing and not addressed to anyone in particular.

    Are you about 22 years old ?
  • Jabu_Rule
    Jabu_Rule Members Posts: 5,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2011
    No problem at all. Certainly you are free to respond to any post,... even if it is just my off topic musing and not addressed to anyone in particular.

    John
    And appreciation to Christ who had no involuntary temporal slaves
    and who taught "love one another" [without regard to color]
    and whose "good Samaritan" story helped greatly to create whatever racial harmony we do have.

    furious
    I don't subscribe to your theist beliefs so that's neither here nor there.

    John
    Wanna be miserable, ...stay ? at ? about what you aint got it.
    Wanna be happy, ...... thank ? what you have got.

    And then it goes on from there. Close enough to the topic you interjected into this thread for you?

    The comment you made about trying to act white and the quotes from the book were very relative to my conversations with another poster also.

    You should try to stay on topic.
    Are you about 22 years old ?

    No. I'm 33. But what's your point? Are you an ageist too. 22 years old shouldn't be a part of this conversation?
  • Justa Phella
    Justa Phella Members Posts: 315
    edited January 2011
    man i got something i will post later on this week, once this dam scanner is up in running. it will show how ignorant this (white) america is.
  • John Prewett
    John Prewett Members Posts: 755
    edited January 2011
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    ........... But nothing is general amongst a people. ............


    Presuming I understand you correctly, I agree.
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    She said that they eradicated slavery which is a blatant falsehood.

    If she said the 1776 founding fathers eradicated slavery, then she is obviously incorrect.
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    She also said all whites were equal which you should raise an eyebrow at also.

    We should be equal before the law. But we are plainly unequal in most any other way you can think of.
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    You also mention the mentality of blacks as if that is the mentality of all blacks.

    JP typed: Regarding STREET LEVEL, personal contact crime, ...................
    McCalls book reveals the early stages of and the mentality of the blacks causing the black on white crime statistical disparity.

    Sorry if it was not clear I was referring specifically to the faction of blacks "causing the ....disparity"
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    Then this is the fact that this is only one case that you continue to harp on
    without reviewing the factors of what mad people in the community act that way towards whites. ........

    When one hears of [much less experiences oneself] a gang attack on a person just cause they were
    ones own skin color, and, one has no way of knowing or eliminating the "factors that made them do it",
    ..... then it does not matter to one what factors made the gang do it.

    NO matter what some black person(s) did to me or a loved one,
    it is not right for me to retalitate by hurting a random black that randomly crosses my path.
    Or even to hate blacks in general. Same vica versa.

    McCall and his gang deemed it right to hate and gang beat any white kid that just randomly crossed their path.
    To date, none beaten to death (but I'm only 1/4 into his book, and he's just now at the stage of acquiring guns).

    When mad dogs room your neighbohood,
    and you know YOU didn't make them mad, ....
    and you know of no cure,
    ..........
    then you don't care what made them mad.
    All you care about is either eliminating them or, if you can't do that, then getting away from them.
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    ....... Gangs came about from a racist atmosphere of poverty though so it's still with us.

    McCall and his gang were not raised in poverty.
  • Jabu_Rule
    Jabu_Rule Members Posts: 5,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2011
    If she said the 1776 founding fathers eradicated slavery, then she is obviously incorrect.

    This is all i was trying to expound. The bigger issue is that her and a large group of influential politicians like her do this often with other topics besides this one. Black people are not the only offended group here but this topic of conversation was focused on this particular incident. No one should sit around and allow these sorts sorts of people to influence our politics and history. Illuminating it just as you are doing for the disgusting ways of our community and all communities (and many in our community do this to to a great degree) helps to battle the problem. Racism is also a particular issue that isn't completely off the table.
    JP typed: Regarding STREET LEVEL, personal contact crime, ...................
    McCalls book reveals the early stages of and the mentality of the blacks causing the black on white crime statistical disparity.

    Sorry if it was not clear I was referring specifically to the faction of blacks "causing the ....disparity"

    Which is a reaction mainly to what was done to blacks in the era as a whole. This was obviously a wrong approach and i say again, i wouldn't support nor condone such actions.
    When one hears of [much less experiences oneself] a gang attack on a person just cause they were
    ones own skin color, and, one has no way of knowing or eliminating the "factors that made them do it",
    ..... then it does not matter to one what factors made the gang do it.

    NO matter what some black person(s) did to me or a loved one,
    it is not right for me to retalitate by hurting a random black that randomly crosses my path.
    Or even to hate blacks in general. Same vica versa.

    McCall and his gang deemed it right to hate and gang beat any white kid that just randomly crossed their path.
    To date, none beaten to death (but I'm only 1/4 into his book, and he's just now at the stage of acquiring guns).

    No it isn't right, but blacks have experienced this to a greater degree to the point of lynchings. Two wrongs never make a right.
    Also the street crimes are committed to a greater degree on other blacks but this does not mean that people of other races and cultures will not get caught up in an equal opportunity crime. There is also the factor that black people generally don't report these crimes for fear of reprisal and the general feeling that nothing will be or can't be done about it, not to mention the general distrust of law enforcement. There is also the position of not wanting to be looked at as a snitch and taking care of the situation outside of the law. I'm not supporting those actions but the crimes that you mention aren't as race based as you imply (outside of that book). Their more crimes of opportunity.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States#Crime_victimology
    When mad dogs room your neighbohood,
    and you know YOU didn't make them mad, ....
    and you know of no cure,
    ..........
    then you don't care what made them mad.
    All you care about is either eliminating them or, if you can't do that, then getting away from them.

    McCall and his gang were not raised in poverty.

    There are greater disparities that creates and environment of festering resentment other then economic ones. McCall was wrong and he admitted to such in his book. That is also one case that you keep bringing up. I will read that book.
  • The Lonious Monk
    The Lonious Monk Members Posts: 26,258 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2011
    Takes some time to stop an ocean liner. Also took some time for W.Civilization to end a practice [slavery] that endured for over 4000 years all over the world.

    I'm not familiar enough with this woman's views, nor with the precise work of all the "founding fathers" to argue about what she may be "rewriting."

    However, I do know that legal slavery ended quite a while ago, whereas slavery is still a reality in some parts of Africa and Middle East.

    I guess this guy doesn't know that sex slavery is still alive and well throughout Europe.
  • John Prewett
    John Prewett Members Posts: 755
    edited January 2011
    I guess this guy doesn't know that sex slavery is still alive and well throughout Europe.

    Is it openly conducted/ legal throughout Europe ?

    I certainly agree it, along with all manner of crime exists all over the world.

    Do you know the Koran explicitly OKs/sanctions sex slavery ? [slave should be infidel, of course]

    I'm confident many sex slaves are imprisoned in the mansions of wealthy Saudi "Royalty."
    And such as the CIA know all about it.

    Some spiritual ignoramus scriptural cherry picker is going to counter [change subject]
    by pointing out OT law of Moses also condones slavery.

    They should bring that issue up with somone who promotes imposing the law of Moses on the world,
    as Islamist seek to impose KORAN/MOslem law on the whole world.

    Be advised CHRISTians [as I use the label, which is accurately] are led by CHRIST. Not by the OT law of Moses.
  • John Prewett
    John Prewett Members Posts: 755
    edited January 2011
    FuriousOne wrote: »
    ........................ McCall was wrong and he admitted to such in his book. That is also one case that you keep bringing up. I will read that book.

    Thus far he has not plainly unequivocally said "I was wrong",..... maybe later in the book he does.

    Maybe we'll discuss his account after we both have finished the book. Might even drop him a line at his website.

    A modification of something I previously stated:

    Previously I stated: "McCall and his gang deemed it right to hate and gang beat any white kid that just randomly crossed their path"

    I should have stated: "McCall and his gang specifically looked for and attacked lone white boys strictly cause they were white." [see page 62]
  • Jabu_Rule
    Jabu_Rule Members Posts: 5,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2011
    Thus far he has not plainly unequivocally said "I was wrong",..... maybe later in the book he does.

    Maybe we'll discuss his account after we both have finished the book. Might even drop him a line at his website.

    I'm with that.
  • kingblaze84
    kingblaze84 Members Posts: 14,288 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 2011
    Well somebody is voting for her..

    Smh @ Bachmann and Palin being the Political versions of Gucci Man and Souljah boy

    LOL, I could not have put it better myself. I'm shocked people still take Palin and Bachmann seriously.