The Jeremiah Wright You Won't Hear on FOX News

[Empty Hands]

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.

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

Understood.

 

[Empty Hands]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

ADMIN NOTE: THREAD LOCKED PENDING REVIEW

G Ketchmark / shesulsa
MT Assist. Administrator

 

[MJS]

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]

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]

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?