# The Jeremiah Wright You Won't Hear on FOX News



## bustr (Apr 29, 2008)

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19837.htm

*                                                                      The Jeremiah                                                                      Wright You                                                                      Won't Hear                                                                      on FOX                                                                      News                                                                                     *  *By Mike                                                                      Whitney *

*29/04/08                                                                      "**ICH**"                                                                      --- - J*eremiah                                                                      Wright is 5'                                                                      10 '' of                                                                      tightly-packed                                                                      explosives.                                                                      He may be                                                                      the best                                                                      public                                                                      speaker                                                                      since Martin                                                                      Luther King.                                                                      He is                                                                      bright,                                                                      passionate,                                                                      insightful                                                                      and erudite.                                                                      When he                                                                      speaks; the                                                                      sparks fly                                                                      and the                                                                      ground                                                                      shakes.                                                                      Yesterday,                                                                      when                                                                        Wright took                                                                      the podium                                                                      at the                                                                      National                                                                      Press Club,                                                                      he knew he'd                                                                      be taken to                                                                      task no                                                                      matter what                                                                      he said. He                                                                      knew                                                                      that every                                                                      word he                                                                      uttered                                                                      would be                                                                      twisted by                                                                      the media to                                                                      make him                                                                      look like a                                                                      hate-monger,                                                                      or worse, a                                                                      racist. But                                                                      Wright faced                                                                      his critics                                                                      with                                                                      dignity and delivered                                                                      another barnburner. By                                                                      the end of                                                                      the speech,                                                                      everyone in                                                                      attendance                                                                      was on their                                                                      feet                                                                      applauding                                                                      wildly for                                                                      the man the                                                                      corporate                                                                      media has                                                                      chosen to                                                                      destroy.  






See Also...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiah_Wright


----------



## Twin Fist (Apr 30, 2008)

thats nice, but it doesnt change the fact that what we heard on Fox WAS Rev Wright

the usa invented aids to kill people of color
the usa and al quieda are equally evil
the usa deserved 9-11
nagasaki and hiroshima were terrorist acts
US of KKKA

yeah, I know ALL I need to about the good Reverand


----------



## Big Don (Apr 30, 2008)

Hugh Hewitt did what none of the MSM has done, he posted the audio and the transcripts of the COMPLETE sermons by Rev Wright.
Here is the link
Here are some excerpts:





> We believe we've got a right to all the oil on the face of the Earth, and we've got the military to take it if necessary


Oh, maybe liberals defend him because he says the same stupid things they do?


> The government lied in its founding documents, and the government is still lying today.


 Fine upstanding American.


> The government lied about Pearl Harbor. They knew the Japanese were going to attack. Governments lie. The government lied about the Gulf of Tonkin. They wanted that resolution to get us into the Vietnam War.


 Yeah, you'd never hear that on the DailyKos or DemocraticUnderground...


> The government lied about adventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color


----------



## RandomPhantom700 (Apr 30, 2008)

> The media is omniscient; they remain invisible behind the camera lens. But there's no doubt about their objectives or that they've become a big player in the electoral process. The media sees itself as a "kingmaker"; their job is to shape public opinion using the tools at their disposal. This particular incident brings back the infamous "Dean scream", which was replayed on commercial TV over 900 times during a 48 hour period, with a background narrative which suggested that Dean was mentally unstable. It worked, too. Dean's approval ratings plummeted after the onslaught and the threat of an antiwar candidate appearing in the general election disappeared. Another triumph for the blue suits.



I really have a problem with this paragraph, for two reasons. 1) We all know that "the media" is actually a variety of very different sources, with a variety of different biases, as it should be.  While there are certainly a number of common unifying truths such as "if it bleeds, it leads", they're still not a single omniscient, unilateral force.  CNN may want to deify Obama, while FOX will want to bring him down, which leads to my next problem with this paragraph....

2) The author makes it sound like the "kingmaker" media is trying to destroy Obama, but up until the Rev. White scandal broke out, most of the political commentary was that the media was making a messiah of Obama.  Is the media trying to tear him down or build him up?  The answer is one of two: either a variety of different media have been doing one or the other, or the media as a whole took a big 180 when the Rev. White scandal broke out.  Either way, the idea that a unified body called "the media" has had an agenda against Obama doesn't hold.


----------



## Big Don (Apr 30, 2008)

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/
A wonderfully unbiased site...



ooops, that should read UNBALANCED, as in nucking futs


----------



## crushing (Apr 30, 2008)

Don,

The quote you provided when questioning Rev. Wrights 'Americanism' or patriotism.



> The government lied in its founding documents, and the government is still lying today.



1776, from the Declaration of Independence (arguably, one of the founding documents):



> 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.



Finally in 1865, the 13th Amendment to the Constitution



> Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.



Then from the 15th Amendment ratified in 1870:



> The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.



Then not until 1920 the 19th Amendment:



> The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.



Can you see where someone could find a disconnect between the promise of the founding documents and how things really went down?


----------



## Big Don (Apr 30, 2008)

Yes, and I see it CORRECTED, too. 
As to his military service, Benedict Arnold, whose name is synonomous with treason today, was a big time hero...


----------



## CoryKS (Apr 30, 2008)

> He knew that every word he uttered would be twisted by the media to make him look like a hate-monger, or worse, a racist.


 
Interesting.  Apparently, quoting someone verbatim == twisting his words.


----------



## fireman00 (Apr 30, 2008)

It has come to light that the Rev. Wright setup this week's dog and pony show - getting his 15 minutes of fame in the limelight.  When most all religions  preach humbleness he's out there looking to pimp his name. 

Some folks need to wake up to the fact that the egomanical Rev Wright does NOT speak for the vast majority of blacks and that his comments are off the mark.   His brand of religion does not strive towards reconciliation but divisiveness.   Couple of good reads in today's papers include commentaries by the editor of the Easton Express Times and by Eugene Robinson.


----------



## Big Don (Apr 30, 2008)

Victor Davis Hanson has a nice column on National Review today.
An excerpt:


> The Scary Legacy of the 2008 Democratic Primary   [Victor Davis Hanson]
> 
> One of the strangest things about the NAACP Wright pseudo-scientific speech on learning, and its enthusiastic CNN coverage and analysis, was the abject racialism of Wright. It was sort of an inverse Bell-Curve presentation, based on assumed DNA differences.
> 
> His convoluted explanation of African-American right-brain 'oral' culture as more creative, musical, and spontaneous versus European left-brain traditional analysis could never have been given by someone white to that audience without justifiably earning booing and catcalls.


But, democrats are never racist...


----------



## ejaazi (May 1, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> thats nice, but it doesnt change the fact that what we heard on Fox WAS Rev Wright
> 
> the usa invented aids to kill people of color
> the usa and al quieda are equally evil
> ...


 
And as a US citizen, isn't he entitled to his own opinion?


----------



## Tez3 (May 1, 2008)

ejaazi said:


> And as a US citizen, isn't he entitled to his own opinion?


 
This is undeniably correct. You don't have to like or agree with the opinion just acknowledge he has the right to have one and express it if he wishes.
It's the test of free speech isn't it to allow people their say even when you abhor what they say? 
 Examining their viewpoints then refuting their arguments calmly and logically is much more effective than merely name calling or blandly stating this is biased or this is rubbish, it doesn't go anyway to making a coherent argument.
Posting up a site and saying merely it's biased isn't a great help to the non Americans here who have no idea who the personalities are in this. I know people that think The Sun and The Daily Sport over here are actually newspapers instead of being part of the porn industry here and quote them as being serious political commentators so we need a bit more before we can accept someones opinion as being fact.


----------



## Big Don (May 1, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> This is undeniably correct. You don't have to like or agree with the opinion just acknowledge he has the right to have one and express it if he wishes.
> It's the test of free speech isn't it to allow people their say even when you abhor what they say?


Actually, it is to DEFEND his right to say it.





> Examining their viewpoints then refuting their arguments calmly and logically is much more effective than merely name calling or blandly stating this is biased or this is rubbish, it doesn't go anyway to making a coherent argument.
> Posting up a site and saying merely it's biased isn't a great help to the non Americans here who have no idea who the personalities are in this.


 Did you look at the site's homepage? A few headlines from there:*Black Hole in Bush's Brain, **America's War for Global **.**Domination **The **Plan is for the                         United States to rule the World... the bias is clear and unambiguous.*


> I know people that think The Sun and The Daily Sport over here are actually newspapers instead of being part of the porn industry here and quote them as being serious political commentators so we need a bit more before we can accept someones opinion as being fact.


----------



## CoryKS (May 1, 2008)

ejaazi said:


> And as a US citizen, isn't he entitled to his own opinion?


 
Absolutely, and no one has disputed it.  We are entitled to our opinions too.  My opinion is that someone who holds views like this is a moron who should be pointed to and laughed at.  My opinion is also that anyone who would consider such a person a "spiritual mentor" should only see the White House by paying for the tour.


----------



## Tez3 (May 1, 2008)

You have to allow free speech before you can think of defending it.

So someone thinks the United States is out to rule the world? Have you considered that there are people outside of the States who _perceive_ that is exactly how things are? You might think it's a piece of fantasy but the reason so many non Americans are interested in your elections is the fear of being dragged into a global war. Perhaps we too fear being invaded in some not far off distant future for not being your 'friend' anymore. I don't think you understand the relationship America has with the rest of the world.


----------



## Ray (May 1, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> You have to allow free speech before you can think of defending it.
> 
> So someone thinks the United States is out to rule the world? Have you considered that there are people outside of the States who _perceive_ that is exactly how things are? You might think it's a piece of fantasy but the reason so many non Americans are interested in your elections is the fear of being dragged into a global war. Perhaps we too fear being invaded in some not far off distant future for not being your 'friend' anymore. I don't think you understand the relationship America has with the rest of the world.


Quite possibily we in the US are more afraid of the rest of the world dragging us into another global war.  It's happened twice before.  Could it be that we're trying to prevent the next one?


----------



## FearlessFreep (May 1, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> You have to allow free speech before you can think of defending it.
> 
> So someone thinks the United States is out to rule the world? Have you considered that there are people outside of the States who _perceive_ that is exactly how things are? You might think it's a piece of fantasy but the reason so many non Americans are interested in your elections is the fear of being dragged into a global war. Perhaps we too fear being invaded in some not far off distant future for not being your 'friend' anymore. I don't think you understand the relationship America has with the rest of the world.



As an American, I have become somewhat curious, not about the world's opinions of the US but about the world's potential actions toward the US. I first started thinking about this in terms of global warming...  If all the world sees global warming as a threat... and the US is seen as one of the biggest contributers... and the US is not doing anything about it...at what point does the rest of the world reach the conclusion that the US is a very real threat to the life of the rest of the world...and what will they do about it?  I'm starting to have the same curiosities about politics. Regardless of of who gets elected President, the process has become very undemocratic and pretty messed up.  Now, the person who *is* president will be in control of a huge military, lot's of nuclear weapons, and an economy that can steer the world's fortunes.  Does there come a point where the method of choosing a president is perceived to produce a leader who cannot be trusted with that leadership?  Especially since the ramifications are such that said leader has power, directly or indirectly, over a lot of people who had no part in the process.

Or to sum up...I'm curious at what point will someone, or a lot of someone's decide that the US is too dangerous to the rest of the world, environmentally, economically, militarily, politically, to be allowed to continue on it's present courses, and what would they do?


----------



## Twin Fist (May 1, 2008)

ejaazi said:


> And as a US citizen, isn't he entitled to his own opinion?



  He is absolutely entitled to that opinion.

And we are absolutely entitled to jeer, ridicule, and dismiss him BASED on that opinion. "Freedom of speech" means you can say it, it doesnt mean you are free from the consequences of that speech.


----------



## Twin Fist (May 1, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> You have to allow free speech before you can think of defending it.
> 
> So someone thinks the United States is out to rule the world? Have you considered that there are people outside of the States who _perceive_ that is exactly how things are? You might think it's a piece of fantasy but the reason so many non Americans are interested in your elections is the fear of being dragged into a global war. Perhaps we too fear being invaded in some not far off distant future for not being your 'friend' anymore. I don't think you understand the relationship America has with the rest of the world.



yes, I have traveled the world and I have seen how the world views America.

1. they all want to come here, to big bad america
2. they hate us because we are the super power and they, the former world powers are now irrelevant
3. As soon as any country's butt is in the fire, they scream for America to come help
4. at the same time, they scream about american interference in the world

add it all up and I for one, and lots of other are getting sick of the rest of the worlds crap


----------



## Bodhisattva (May 1, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> thats nice, but it doesnt change the fact that what we heard on Fox WAS Rev Wright
> 
> the usa invented aids to kill people of color
> the usa and al quieda are equally evil
> ...


Some of those things are true.


----------



## Ray (May 1, 2008)

Bodhisattva said:


> Some of those things are true.


You really, really believe that?


----------



## JBrainard (May 1, 2008)

Ray said:


> You really, really believe that?


 
He's not the only one.


----------



## Twin Fist (May 1, 2008)

Bodhisattva said:


> Some of those things are true.


please enlighten us how ANY of those statements are in any way true?


----------



## Empty Hands (May 1, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> please enlighten us how ANY of those statements are in any way true?



Well, I don't want to get into this too much.  However, the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (and Dresden and Tokyo and London and...) deliberately targeted civilian populations in order to force the government into surrender.  We usually call that terrorism nowadays.  The reason we don't consider those actions terrorism is because we were the "good guys" and we won.  If we had lost, the Americans would have been the ones in the docket in Nuremberg up on war crimes charges, and the Germans would have been the ones telling themselves feel-good stories.  They probably would have even managed to whitewash the Holocaust by now.

While I disagree with most of Wright says, particularly the AIDS story, I can understand why he feels that way.  This guy grew up in a time when he couldn't use the same water fountains as whites or when lynching was still a very real fear.  I can understand why he might have a...complicated...relationship with the good ol' US of A.


----------



## Twin Fist (May 1, 2008)

I think he tells people that WANT to be victims that they ARE victims. I dont for one second think that he believes his own tripe. Considering the multi-million dollar home he lives in and the 10 MILLION dollar line of credit he has at his disposal.

Plus:
"We usually call that terrorism nowadays"

it is patantly unfair to label things by todays definitions that happened in the past. In the past, targeting the civilian workforce of cities was a viable and legal military target.


----------



## Twin Fist (May 1, 2008)

But you are right, lets stay on topic. Sorry for the slight derail.

Wright, more than anything else will be remembered as the man that kept Obama out of the whitehouse.


----------



## CoryKS (May 1, 2008)

Here's a fun government conspiracy theory from yet another veteran lunatic:  Wright paid to keep talking in order to sabotage Obama's campaign? 

Wright as right-wing operative.  His thought process is a Moebius strip of stupidity.


----------



## Twin Fist (May 1, 2008)

Ah Spike lee

I had actually managed to let myself forget that idiot was still alive.

There is a much simpler reason for Wright to keep yapping. If America elects a black President, all of Wrights crap starts sounding really weak.

Think about it, you can say "The US of KKKA" when there is a BLACK president. It just wont work.

And if blacks found out how NOT bad they have it, Wright is out of a job. Just like Sharpton and Jackson would be.


----------



## elder999 (May 1, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> And if blacks found out how NOT bad they have it, Wright is out of a job. Just like Sharpton and Jackson would be.


 
Mmmm.....how "NOT bad" do they "have it" ???!!!


----------



## Twin Fist (May 1, 2008)

no worse than anyone else. A lot of things have changed. Hell, EVERYTHING has changed. 

Prejudice is out there, but it always will be. In every "group" there will be people there that dont like people of some other group.

Racism is by and large a thing of the past. And I am in TEXAS for crying out loud, we are supposed to be racist, and I just dont see it around anymore.

I would love to discuss this in depth with you, but in a new thread please. I dont want the evil over-mods to ding me for derailing a thread..LOL


----------



## elder999 (May 1, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> no worse than anyone else. A lot of things have changed. Hell, EVERYTHING has changed.
> 
> Prejudice is out there, but it always will be. In every "group" there will be people there that dont like people of some other group.
> 
> ...


 

It's not derailing the thread. Racism is at the root of everything that Jermiah Wright says-both the ones that are arguably true, and the ones that seem insane.

While it isn't likely, it's entirely _possible_ that HIV/AIDS was manufactured, and manufactured to be targeted at a certain populace. That it hasn't worked quite that way, and that we can clearly document the way it was introduced into the U.S. (by an gay airline attendant who was probably exposed to it in Haiti, and really, really, REALLY got around...and happened to be white_ kind of puts the lie to this notion, if not entirely. We do have some history of trying to devlelop weapons of that sort,and this is still the U.S. where doctors deliberately withheld treatment from 399 black men with syphillis,in what came to be called The Tuskeegee Experiment just to see and document what would happen-their intention was to let these men die. If that sort of thing could happen-with government support right up to the Surgeon General, right up until *1972*(and, at this point, I mentally say _nineteen seventy *effing* two!_) then how farfetched is the notion of the U.S. developing and introducing HIV?

I'm sorry, it's a little too easy for people in this country-and I'm deliberately not singling out "white people"-to say that racism is largely a thing of the past. It isn't, trust me-this election, the comments (some racist) of Jeremiah Wright, and the various reactions to it are all proof positive that it isn't. It's great that you're in TEXAS and don't see it, but I'm pretty sure that you're not looking for it, probably because you don't have to. I mean, I'm sorry, but *this crime* was the product of racism, and it happened in TEXAS.......in _*nineteen ninety effing nine!*_


----------



## Empty Hands (May 1, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> And I am in TEXAS for crying out loud, we are supposed to be racist, and I just dont see it around anymore.



Of course YOU don't see it.  Why don't you try asking some black folks if THEY see it?  I have, and their stories are considerably different.


----------



## Empty Hands (May 1, 2008)

elder999 said:


> While it isn't likely, it's entirely _possible_ that HIV/AIDS was manufactured, and manufactured to be targeted at a certain populace.



No, it is not possible.  I can elaborate if you are really interested.


----------



## Twin Fist (May 1, 2008)

Empty Hands said:


> Of course YOU don't see it.  Why don't you try asking some black folks if THEY see it?  I have, and their stories are considerably different.



not really, if anything, the white racists would be more inclined to show thier racism around ME as a fellow white man.

Think about it this way, you want to know what men think about women, ask them when there are no women around. Same thing.


----------



## Twin Fist (May 1, 2008)

elder999 said:


> I'm sorry, it's a little too easy for people in this country-and I'm deliberately not singling out "white people"-to say that racism is largely a thing of the past. It isn't, trust me-this election, the comments (some racist) of Jeremiah Wright, and the various reactions to it are all proof positive that it isn't. It's great that you're in TEXAS and don't see it, but I'm pretty sure that you're not looking for it, probably because you don't have to. I mean, I'm sorry, but *this crime* was the product of racism, and it happened in TEXAS.......in _*nineteen ninety effing nine!*_



uh, NO

that crime is proof that prejudice is still alive. But racism, the systematic dis-empowerment of people because of race isnt an issue any more. His killers were punished just like everyone else. Colin Powel and Condi Rice are proof that people rise to the level of their abilities, and are not limited by the system because of race.

Prejudice is everywhere, from every group. Racism, where the SYSTEM limits your potential?

thats not happening any more.


----------



## elder999 (May 1, 2008)

Empty Hands said:


> No, it is not possible.  I can elaborate if you are really interested.



I understand that HIV is probably so old as to be positively Biblical, if that's what you mean. I meant possible in a sci-fi, flying car sort of way.....


----------



## Twin Fist (May 1, 2008)

yeah, it is POSSIBLE to create an HIV like disease

but it wasnt in 1978


----------



## Empty Hands (May 1, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> not really, if anything, the white racists would be more inclined to show thier racism around ME as a fellow white man.



Well, that makes it clear you haven't asked them.

It is pretty arrogant to assume that someone does or does not experience something without even bothering to ask them.


----------



## Big Don (May 1, 2008)

elder999 said:


> I understand that HIV is probably so old as to be positively Biblical, if that's what you mean. I meant possible in a sci-fi, flying car sort of way.....


If, since I sense you are a believer in evolution, evolution can produce bigger, stronger, smarter creatures over time, couldn't it also produce hardier, deadlier diseases?


----------



## elder999 (May 1, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> uh, NO
> 
> that crime is proof that prejudice is still alive. But racism, the systematic dis-empowerment of people because of race isnt an issue any more. His killers were punished just like everyone else. Colin Powel and Condi Rice are proof that people rise to the level of their abilities, and are not limited by the system because of race.
> 
> ...



Once again, I must resort to the slightly excellent _Merriam-Webster English-Language Technical Manual_, (that's a dictionary, for those of you who aren't engineers....:lol: )



> *racism*
> 
> One entry found.
> 
> ...



"*snark!snark!snark!*"


----------



## Empty Hands (May 1, 2008)

elder999 said:


> I understand that HIV is probably so old as to be positively Biblical, if that's what you mean.



I think it is fairly recent when the HIV strain mutated from it's precursor strain, actually.  In any case, what I meant is that the tools and knowledge necessary to sequence and create a viral genome had not even started to be discovered until the early 70's.  HIV had to have mutated before then.  Restriction enzymes weren't even discovered and shown to be useful until 1971!  That leaves out large scale sequencing, cloning, transfection, etc. etc. etc., all of which were developed in the mid to late 70's.



elder999 said:


> I meant possible in a sci-fi, flying car sort of way.....



Understood.


----------



## Empty Hands (May 1, 2008)

So cell phones and TV's justifies wholesale slavery and discrimination?  Hey, I thought you conservatives were supposed to be against situational ethics!  Wrong is wrong, eh Don?

Jesus, I've never actually seen anyone put this argument forth so boldly.  Do yourself a big favor, if you have any black friends, don't try this argument out on them.


----------



## elder999 (May 1, 2008)

Big Don said:


> If, since I sense you are a believer in evolution, evolution can produce bigger, stronger, smarter creatures over time, couldn't it also produce hardier, deadlier diseases?



Yes...so could genetic engineering in laboratory, though. Not saying that it did or didn't-in fact, if pressed, I'll say it wasn't from a lab. We can easily see how some without the technical knowledge could think as much, though....there's ignorance of all kinds, for instance:


So, what you're saying is that "African-Americans" are better off for being granted second class citizenship after years of non-citizenship, enforced servitude and de facto segregation and oppression? Or are you saying that they're simply better of _because_ of those things, and not having to be in Africa? 

Either way, it seems pretty disingenuous, ignorant and downright *racist* (See definition above) to me.....:


----------



## Empty Hands (May 1, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> Racism, where the SYSTEM limits your potential?
> 
> thats not happening any more.



Oh no, that would never happen.  Of course, now I expect you to quibble on the definition of "systemic."  As if racism can only be a problem in this country if it is formally written down in the policy books!

Once again, find some black people and ask them about their experiences.  I have never been followed by mall security.  I have never been pulled over for dubious reasons many times.  Nearly all of my well dressed, middle class black friends have.

Ask.  You might learn something.


----------



## Twin Fist (May 1, 2008)

Empty Hands said:


> Once again, find some black people and ask them about their experiences.  I have never been followed by mall security.  I have never been pulled over for dubious reasons many times.  Nearly all of my well dressed, middle class black friends have.
> 
> Ask.  You might learn something.



hmmm, I could say something, but i am sure it wouldnt make people happy. It would be true, but it would be controversial.And I HAVE asked people abotu thier experiences. Lots of times.


----------



## Sukerkin (May 1, 2008)

There's never an easy answer when the question of 'racism' rears its ugly head.  Everything becomes so very easily heated and also is utterly dependant on your point of view.  That in turn is dependant on where and when you were born and your ability to absorb or resist social and media trends.

Hating someone you don't know because of their race is illogical.  Hating an entire race for past 'sins' is also illogical.  Playing the 'race card' to get your way is conniving and despicible - that applies equally to private citizens and public/political figures.

What we have in the modern world (oh the irony) is a refusal of people to hold fast to their community and an over eagerness to glorify their ethnicity.  This is more commonly observed amongst those who of a background which is not the majority in their host country.  Being proud of where you came from is one thing, refusing to become a true part of the society within whose borders you dwell is another entirely.  

In more 'ignorant' times, this was much less of a syndromic problem than it is now.  I am convinced that this is in part down to the recent (in historical terms) trend for people to think in terms of nations rather than 'tribes' (in the sense of 'a group know to me and to whom I am known').  Of course, there was the terrible exception of the Jews, who have had a rough ride for a couple of millenia thanks to religious zealotry .

Of course, all the rational words in the world can't override the tyranny of emotions and reactions learned young.  From my own life, as I've admitted before, I have a deep-seated dislike of _the French_ that I inherited partially from being English but mostly from my grandfathers's experiences in the wars.  Those French people I've actually met I've had no problems with at all ... which is where the nonsensical nature of racism is revealed.  How can I 'hate' the French and yet get along fine with people who happen to have been born in France?

It's a tricky question, racism but if we don't answer it *together* (glares at all those Black, Asian and varicoloured racists around the table) then it will divide us fatally when we need every human to pull together to deal with the much more serious problems that threaten the longevity of our cvilisation.


----------



## Empty Hands (May 1, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> It would be true, but it would be controversial.And I HAVE asked people abotu thier experiences. Lots of times.



Well, don't hold back on my account.  Big Don certainly isn't self-censoring!


----------



## Gordon Nore (May 1, 2008)

FearlessFreep said:


> Or to sum up...I'm curious at what point will someone, or a lot of someone's decide that the US is too dangerous to the rest of the world, environmentally, economically, militarily, politically, to be allowed to continue on it's present courses, and what would they do?




Fearless,

I think this is a very sound analysis. What you are saying essentially is that perception is reality. The fallout of the Gore v. Bush election in 2000 is a very good example. I do realize that it is the Electoral College which is the decider of elections, not the popular vote, and that the Electoral College is meant to prevent a small of states from holding sway of over national elections. However, if you grow up outside the US, as I did, you can probably overlook that fact by missing one lecture in history class.

That fact is not what is promoted to world. When the US brings democracy elsewhere, it says that one person's vote is as good as another's. One man, one vote. That's the sound byte to the world.

Look at the chaos in Florida from an outsider's point of view: dimpled chads, investigations, court challenges, accusations of discouraging certain voters from getting registered or showing up. Regardless of who said or did what, the world wonders why a country that apparently can't manage its own elections is monitoring anyone else's.


----------



## Twin Fist (May 1, 2008)

Empty Hands said:


> Well, don't hold back on my account.  Big Don certainly isn't self-censoring!



Empty, I know YOU are cool, but I dont know about everyone else.

*sigh*

ok, getting pulled over for DWB isnt racism, it is most often simply good police work.

The FACT is that black commit crimes WAY out of proportion the the percent of the  population they represent. Cops know this. (And trust me, they dont want the hassle of facing potential racial bias lawsuit crap.)

This is not cuz blacks are just "born criminals" it is cuz of poverty i think, and poor people commit a lot of crimes, and a lot of black people are poor. Plus you have an urban culture that idolizes the criminal life.

When 20% of your population is comitting 50% of the violent crimes, the police are going to give that 20% a lot of special attention.

Want it to end? really easy answer...........

some people will likely be very offended by this, but it is the way i see it


----------



## Empty Hands (May 1, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> The FACT is that black commit crimes WAY out of proportion the the percent of the  population they represent. Cops know this.



Yes, that is true.  But cops should (and do, I think) know the specifics - poor, young, black males are the ones committing the crimes.  Middle aged, middle class blacks of either sex and females of any class are not the ones in that category.  If you're going to profile, at least do it right.  It doesn't make any sense to follow around the well-dressed middle-aged black guy - unless you are operating from a position of prejudice.

Combine this analysis with the type of information shown by the study I linked.  Resumes with identical qualifications and a "black" name received half the call-backs.  What else can we conclude but pervasive bias and racism?


----------



## shesulsa (May 1, 2008)

_*ADMIN NOTE: THREAD LOCKED PENDING REVIEW

G Ketchmark / shesulsa
MT Assist. Administrator*_


----------



## MJS (May 3, 2008)

*Admin Note:*

*This thread is being reopened. It has been reviewed and cleaned up a bit. Please take note of the General Posting rules which can be found here. This thread is being watched and will be closed for good if it starts to head in the direction it did previously.*

*Mike Slosek*
*MT Asst. Admin*


----------



## Makalakumu (May 3, 2008)

Ray said:


> You really, really believe that?


 
Blowback.

Here's a book that Ron Paul put on Rudolph Guilliani's reading list.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowback_(intelligence)



> *Blowback* is a term used in espionage to describe the unintended consequences of covert operations. Blowback typically appears random and without cause, because the public is unaware of the secret operations that provoked it.[1]
> 
> In its strictest terms, blowback was originally informative only and referred to consequences that resulted when an intelligence agency participated in foreign media manipulation, which was then reported by domestic news sources in other countries as accepted facts. In looser terms, it can encompass all operational aspects. In this context, it can thus mean retaliation as the result of actions undertaken by nations.


 
This is how Chalmer's Johnson uses it in his writings.



> Johnson believes the enforcement of American hegemony over the world constitutes a new form of global empire. Whereas traditional empires maintained control over subject peoples via colonies, since World War II the US has developed a vast system of hundreds of military bases around the world where it has strategic interests. A long-time Cold Warrior, Johnson experienced a political awakening after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, noting that instead of demobilizing its massive armed forces, the US accelerated its reliance on military solutions to problems both economic and political. The result of this militarism (as distinct from actual domestic defense) is more terrorism against the US and its allies, the loss of core democratic values at home, and an eventual disaster for the American economy.


 
Did the US "deserve" 9/11?  No.  Did the US "cause" 9/11?  Yes, probably in more ways then we will ever know.

The difference between "deserve" and "cause" is rhetorical and depends on how angry you are with your country.  I would never say it because I don't think the people who died "deserved" anything of the sort.  Yet, if one is looking at the US as a not-so-benevolent hegemon that has flew around the world and messed things up, I can see where this attitude may come from.


----------



## Twin Fist (May 3, 2008)

upnorthkyosa said:


> Yet, if one is looking at the US as a not-so-benevolent hegemon that has flew around the world and messed things up, I can see where this attitude may come from.



But you see, that conclusion, by your own statement  requires a  pre-existing negative opinion about american activities.

Any decision based not on the facts but on pre-existing negative opinions is not entirely honest, and is therefore suspect, at BEST.

For example, I can "understand" that they (radical islam) dont like us because we support Israel.

But to go from that to "understanding" flying planes into buildings? I cant see that. I cant understand it. The re-action is simply so far out of proportion to the action, that it makes it totally un-defendable

I also cant understand the way some americans can say things like that.  There is no way the events of 9-11 are excusable under any circumstances. And for any american to blame the US for those events makes me seriously question their pre-existing attitude about America.

How does this relate to Rev Wright? Well, based on his statements, he is either insane, or pandering to a pre-existing attitude about America among the people in his parishiners.

Either way, he is wrong.

And Like I said before, I truely believe that he doesnt want Obama to win. If we elect a black President, he is essentially out of a job. Because who is gonna believe the USA is inherently racist when we have elected a black man to the most powerful position in the nation?


----------

