Are Blacks More Racist Than Whites? Most Americans Say Yes

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I believe we've already established that you are a phony, attempting to claim benefits from issue that never applied to you....

.....sooooo.....why are you back?

Why are you upset? And who in the hell is "we"

 

[Wry Catcher]

Racism is not just individual hatred, it’s systemic.

So when BLACKS create a system denying whites of opportunities because they are white, then and only then can you say blacks are just as or more racist than, whites.

Some blacks want the very system you speak of here (vigilante style reverse racism), and the sad thing that we see today, is that they (in some cases) have alot of control over the megaphone instead of those with the more level cooler heads in which believe what King espoused about character.

Some whites want to overturn Brown v. BofEd and reestablish Jim Crow laws, some whites want to lynch black men who date white women and make laws against interracial marriage.

"Some" is much like watching Faux News, where the talking head says, "some people are saying ...". And the same people were the talking head on the first hour of the Fox Entertainment day, and repeated as breaking news all the rest of the day.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

.....sooooo.....why are you back?

Back where and from where?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I believe we've already established that you are a phony, attempting to claim benefits from issue that never applied to you....

.....sooooo.....why are you back?

Why are you upset? And who in the hell are "we"

The 'we' is you, and I.

I forced you to admit that none of the negative historical items impinge, in any way, on your existence.

Sooo...you simply pretend.

And, in the larger picture, we've also proven the adage "Democrats go with truth the way red wine goes with oysters…..or the way brown shoes go with a tuxedo."


And now, you're dismissed.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

The 'we' is you, and I.
I forced you to admit that none of the negative historical items impinge, in any way, on your existence.

Sooo...you simply pretend.

And, in the larger picture, we've also proven the adage "Democrats go with truth the way red wine goes with oysters…..or the way brown shoes go with a tuxedo."

And now, you're dismissed.

Do you under stand what delusions of grandeur are because you consistently display systems of the disorder. You might want to get that checked out because you seem to think you have forced me into admitting something that I have not and could not truthfully denounce but your condition may be interfering with your ability to see this.

You and others on this board keep making erroneous assumptions about me, my affiliations, etc. I am not a democrat, I am not a liberal, I am not anti-white but I am anti-white racists. And I'm a card carrying member of the ACLU which is the American Civil Liberties Union who fights for the constitutional rights of everyone in the United States irrespective of how vile their beliefs may be.

When you can't answer a question or the answer to the question will not support your position, then you deflect - that's what you've been doing during this entire conversation, not just with me but with other posters here who have been attempting to show how it's not factually possible due to the racist origins of our country for black people as a race to be more racists than whites. That means if anyone is pretending that would be you not I so do not include me in any of your fantasies. You and the others state things that are patently not true, attack the posters instead of their argument, throw out racial slurs and engage in behaviors that I suspect you would never do if you were facing any of us in real life. That alone is a sign of cowardice.

As far as your dismissal of me or my arguments which one it is is hard to tell since you equivocate so frequently, unless you depart from U.S. Message Board entirely so you don't have to see my posts or put me on ignore like a little kid hiding attempting to hide behind a curtain thinking that just because he can't see anyone no one can see him, I'll still be here and else where online and off exposing the bigots and racists in our environment.

 

[Correll]

Don’t you wish? In my rebuttal of your post you’ll notice that I use no fake news or quotes from Breitbart or Fox or any of the other racist supremacist rags. Farrakhan, apparently you think he’s radioactive or has bubonic plague. Farrakhan is who he is because of the society and times in which he was raised. The Black community and it’s leaders along with the Black political class of both parties have had the same common experiences with American Racism that helped form him. He speaks for a militant and disillusioned segment of Black America and will be heard. Obama’s bad relationship with Israel, come on now, more fake news from Fox. It should be Israel’s bad relationship with America and the rest of the world, or more succinctly, Benjamin Netanyahu thinks White American racism can be used with Republican help to usurp American foreign policy and use our world position as a weapon against the uniting Arab states. Also the Jewish government, i.e. Benjamin Netanyahu,inserted himself into our partisan politics by endorsing McCain and campaigning openly against Obama in the 2012 presidential race. He unprecedentedly accepted an invitation from Senate majority leader McConnell to speak before a special session of congress where he sought to embarrass the sitting President and his party, while mating his anti Palestinian agenda with the national security policies of his Republican hosts. Bernie Madoff as a democratic anti Semitic flash point, more Fox fake news. Come on, can’t you do any better than that ? I know if you and your hero Trump put your pea brains together you can invent something else to blame on Barack Hussein Obama, we all know it’s just a matter of time. You need to give up, you’re playing a weak hand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"In my rebuttal of your post you’ll notice that I use no fake news..."

I, the same.

I notice you didn't rebut any of the items I documented the posts with......

QED....the Democrat Party is syncretic in relation to those of the Jewish persuasion.

No self-respecting Jewish individual should be associated with this cult.




Let's rub your face in it some more.....

“Michelle Obama and John Kerry to Honor Anti-Semite and 9/11 Fan

….one of the women to be recognized [for praise by the Democrats] is an anti-Semite and supports the 9/11 attacks on the United States.

Samira Ibrahim….is quite blunt regarding her views. On July 18 of last year, after five Israeli tourists and a Bulgarian bus driver were killed a suicide bombing attack, Ibrahim jubilantly tweeted: “An explosion on a bus carrying Israelis in Burgas airport in Bulgaria on the Black Sea. Today is a very sweet day with a lot of very sweet news.”

[If this is not the view of the Democrats....why wasn't this savage crossed off the list of honorees??????]


Ibrahim frequently uses Twitter to air her anti-Semitic views. Last August 4,commenting on demonstrations in Saudi Arabia, she described the ruling Al Saud family as “dirtier than the Jews.” Seventeen days later she tweeted in reference to Adolf Hitler: “I have discovered with the passage of days, that no act contrary to morality, no crime against society, takes place, except with the Jews having a hand in it. Hitler.”

[Had she said this about blacks or Hispanics.....would she be on the Democrat's list???]


Ibrahim holds other repellent views as well. As a mob was attacking the United States embassy in Cairo on the eleventh anniversary of 9/11, pulling down the American flag and raising the flag of Al Qaeda, Ibrahim wrote on twitter: “Today is the anniversary of 9/11. May every year come with America burning.” Possibly fearing the consequences of her tweet, she deleted it a couple of hours later, but not before a screen shotwas saved by an Egyptian activist.” Michelle Obama and John Kerry to Honor Anti-Semite and 9/11 Fan

We've got us a japanese right winger. LOL!

Don’t you love how the trump trolls all show up at once?

So, you still standing by your man, Paul, in his support of genocide and rape?

Are you still trying to pawn off that lie about white genocide in South Africa?

I referring to Paul explicitly stating his support for genocide and the use of rape as a weapon of war.


I attacked him for that, and Jillian rushed to defend him.

 

[Correll]

THanks. YOu just strongly supported my dismissal of the EEOC wins.

So the courts are wrong, the juries were wrong, the EEOC is wrong and the only case anyone got right was New Haven Firefighter case in which the white firefighters prevailed? And you don't see why this makes you look a bit biased?

Can you see how easily you start calling me names, based on "subtle clues" calls into question the judgement of everyone that shares your viewpoint on this issue?

Subtle clues are not what people are supposed to be convicted on in this country. YOu need compelling evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

Wrong. Reasonable doubt applies to criminal cases and it is said that the measure is 98%. The reason being if the government is going to take away a person's freedom and/or life then they want to be reasonably sure that the defendant actually committed the crime.

The EEOC's cases are civil and the threshold is a "preponderance of the evidence" which in layman terms means if you weigh the evidence from each side on a scale whichever side tips the scales prevails (51%).

Race Discrimination Based on Disparate Treatment

Race discrimination can arise as disparate treatment, where an employer intentionally treats employees of a particular race less favorably than employees of a different race. ***In Postal Service v. Aikens, the Supreme Court made clear that victims of race discrimination need not submit direct evidence of discriminatory intent. Rather, in acknowledging that such cases rarely involve “smoking gun” evidence, the Supreme Court held that circumstantial evidence can be used to prove the existence of unlawful motive in race discrimination cases:

The prohibitions against discrimination contained in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 reflect an important national policy. There will seldom be “eyewitness” testimony as to the employer’s mental processes. But none of this means that trial courts or reviewing courts should treat discrimination differently from other ultimate questions of fact.
​

I stand corrected.


But, again, the test was about fighting fires. Assuming that cultural bias or a corrupt grader is responsible, when the city showed such strong determination to promote black firefighters, is not reasonable.

Nor is calling me racist based on that statement.


Page after page, and you never FUCKING ASKED ME, why I thought the black firefighters scored poorly, you just started smearing me with what in our culture is a very serious slur.


With all due respect. That is a dick move.

.

Anyone white that says blacks we should be grateful to whites for freeing us from slavery is a racist. You said that, now stop lying and whining abut being called what you are[/QUOTE]


DId I say that? Or did I say that you should be grateful to the whites that freed you from slavery?

 

[mudwhistle]

I believe we've already established that you are a phony, attempting to claim benefits from issue that never applied to you....

.....sooooo.....why are you back?

Why are you upset? And who in the hell is "we"

She's never upset.....and "we" is anyone rational and able to think logically who has been trying to knock some sense into your Mellon for the last couple of days.

 

[katsteve2012]

THanks. YOu just strongly supported my dismissal of the EEOC wins.

So the courts are wrong, the juries were wrong, the EEOC is wrong and the only case anyone got right was New Haven Firefighter case in which the white firefighters prevailed? And you don't see why this makes you look a bit biased?

Can you see how easily you start calling me names, based on "subtle clues" calls into question the judgement of everyone that shares your viewpoint on this issue?

Subtle clues are not what people are supposed to be convicted on in this country. YOu need compelling evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

Wrong. Reasonable doubt applies to criminal cases and it is said that the measure is 98%. The reason being if the government is going to take away a person's freedom and/or life then they want to be reasonably sure that the defendant actually committed the crime.

The EEOC's cases are civil and the threshold is a "preponderance of the evidence" which in layman terms means if you weigh the evidence from each side on a scale whichever side tips the scales prevails (51%).

Race Discrimination Based on Disparate Treatment

Race discrimination can arise as disparate treatment, where an employer intentionally treats employees of a particular race less favorably than employees of a different race. ***In Postal Service v. Aikens, the Supreme Court made clear that victims of race discrimination need not submit direct evidence of discriminatory intent. Rather, in acknowledging that such cases rarely involve “smoking gun” evidence, the Supreme Court held that circumstantial evidence can be used to prove the existence of unlawful motive in race discrimination cases:

The prohibitions against discrimination contained in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 reflect an important national policy. There will seldom be “eyewitness” testimony as to the employer’s mental processes. But none of this means that trial courts or reviewing courts should treat discrimination differently from other ultimate questions of fact.
​

I stand corrected.


But, again, the test was about fighting fires. Assuming that cultural bias or a corrupt grader is responsible, when the city showed such strong determination to promote black firefighters, is not reasonable.

Nor is calling me racist based on that statement.


Page after page, and you never FUCKING ASKED ME, why I thought the black firefighters scored poorly, you just started smearing me with what in our culture is a very serious slur.


With all due respect. That is a dick move.

.

Anyone white that says blacks we should be grateful to whites for freeing us from slavery is a racist. You said that, now stop lying and whining abut being called what you are

DId I say that? Or did I say that you should be grateful to the whites that freed you from slavery?[/QUOTE]

No whites "freed" anyone from slavery. They fought to save the Union, and by default slaves were "freed", then literally overnight, ended up in the Jim Crow system.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

She's never upset.....and "we" is anyone rational and able to think logically who has been trying to knock some sense into your Mellon for the last couple of days.

Sure she was and I don't take advice or counsel from racists so you can just butt out of this portion of the conversation.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

This was in my email box this morning:

As one of the original Tuskegee Airmen, Colonel Charles McGee knew what it meant to face overwhelming odds.

He and his fellow Tuskegee Airmen and are credited with some 15,500 combat sorties. They earned a reputation for excellence as escort pilots, because of their unwavering commitment to staying with the bombers they were assigned to protect.

We believe Colonel McGee’s story still contains lessons that Americans of every generation ought to hear. He has lived through some incredible history, and is proud to be a Tuskegee Airman.

When Charles McGee joined the war effort in the 1940s, the U.S. military still upheld a 1925 report published by the Army War College full of cruel and racist remarks about African Americans’ intelligence.

But in 1941, The U.S. Army Air Corps opened an experimental program that allowed African Americans to train and become licensed military aviators.

Right around that time, news of the Army’s recruiting efforts began to spread through the black community. Colonel McGee already had a draft card, so he filled out a pilot’s application.

The program at Tuskegee Army Air Field was experimental because it was expected to fail. He could feel just how different things were as he entered the South. Their facilities were segregated, a situation that was new to him.

Colonel McGee’s motto, which he’s carried in his heart and still strives to live by, is, “Do while you can.” Colonel McGee completed a total of 136 combat missions during World War II, and stayed on active duty for 30 years. He even set a record as the only fighter pilot to fly 100 or more combat missions in World War II, Korea and Vietnam.

What he is most proud of is that he gave all he could, even as he battled the doubts and hatred rooted in the racism that was still prevalent in American society. The values and lessons he held onto gave him strength.

These lessons shaped his life, and he has worked hard to pass them on. He tells youngsters all the time, “The things you do to improve your own life are also strengths to the country.”

McGee graduated from primary flight training at Tuskegee in 1943 and was commissioned to the 302nd Fighter Squadron, one of the four all-black units of the 332nd Fighter Group. They flew sweeps – sweep in and strafe targets on the ground – and bomber escort missions.

Charles McGee with his Crew Chief, Nathaniel Wilson, standing by "Kitten,"
the P-51C Mustang named for his wife.

In combat, the Airmen painted the tails of their P-47s to make it easier for the bomber pilots they were protecting to identify them. McGee told History Net a few years ago that everything changed for him when he took his first flight in the P-51C. He soon flew the P-51C regularly, and named it Kitten, his wife’s nickname. HIs crew chief, Nathaniel Wilson, kept it purring, too.

When enemy airplanes appeared on bomber escort missions, commander Colonel Benjamin O. Davis Jr. ordered one airplane to pursue while the rest stayed with the bombers to protect against enemy fire. Because of this, bomber pilots often asked specifically for the “Red Tails,” and Col. Davis renamed his airplane By Request.

Even amidst the doubts of white officers and the humiliation of segregation, Col. Davis inspired his men to RISE ABOVE™ and focus on their skill as aviators. He often said, “Excellence is the best response to racism.”

The Airmen all knew they were fighting two battles: the battle against Hitler and Nazi Germany over there, and the battle against racism back here at home.

Discipline. Commitment. Strength of Character. These are the lessons of the Tuskegee Airmen. Lessons that are every bit as applicable today as they were in the 1940s. Lessons that can help youngsters gain the strength to overcome adversity in their own lives.

​

 

[beagle9]

Racism is not just individual hatred, it’s systemic.

So when BLACKS create a system denying whites of opportunities because they are white, then and only then can you say blacks are just as or more racist than, whites.

Some blacks want the very system you speak of here (vigilante style reverse racism), and the sad thing that we see today, is that they (in some cases) have alot of control over the megaphone instead of those with the more level cooler heads in which believe what King espoused about character.

Some whites want to overturn Brown v. BofEd and reestablish Jim Crow laws, some whites want to lynch black men who date white women and make laws against interracial marriage.

"Some" is much like watching Faux News, where the talking head says, "some people are saying ...". And the same people were the talking head on the first hour of the Fox Entertainment day, and repeated as breaking news all the rest of the day.

Who are these whites who are specifically calling for what you say they are openly calling for or are you just race baiting because it's something that you just do ??

 

[beagle9]

This was in my email box this morning:

As one of the original Tuskegee Airmen, Colonel Charles McGee knew what it meant to face overwhelming odds.

He and his fellow Tuskegee Airmen and are credited with some 15,500 combat sorties. They earned a reputation for excellence as escort pilots, because of their unwavering commitment to staying with the bombers they were assigned to protect.

We believe Colonel McGee’s story still contains lessons that Americans of every generation ought to hear. He has lived through some incredible history, and is proud to be a Tuskegee Airman.

When Charles McGee joined the war effort in the 1940s, the U.S. military still upheld a 1925 report published by the Army War College full of cruel and racist remarks about African Americans’ intelligence.

But in 1941, The U.S. Army Air Corps opened an experimental program that allowed African Americans to train and become licensed military aviators.

Right around that time, news of the Army’s recruiting efforts began to spread through the black community. Colonel McGee already had a draft card, so he filled out a pilot’s application.

The program at Tuskegee Army Air Field was experimental because it was expected to fail. He could feel just how different things were as he entered the South. Their facilities were segregated, a situation that was new to him.

Colonel McGee’s motto, which he’s carried in his heart and still strives to live by, is, “Do while you can.” Colonel McGee completed a total of 136 combat missions during World War II, and stayed on active duty for 30 years. He even set a record as the only fighter pilot to fly 100 or more combat missions in World War II, Korea and Vietnam.

What he is most proud of is that he gave all he could, even as he battled the doubts and hatred rooted in the racism that was still prevalent in American society. The values and lessons he held onto gave him strength.

These lessons shaped his life, and he has worked hard to pass them on. He tells youngsters all the time, “The things you do to improve your own life are also strengths to the country.”

McGee graduated from primary flight training at Tuskegee in 1943 and was commissioned to the 302nd Fighter Squadron, one of the four all-black units of the 332nd Fighter Group. They flew sweeps – sweep in and strafe targets on the ground – and bomber escort missions.

Charles McGee with his Crew Chief, Nathaniel Wilson, standing by "Kitten,"
the P-51C Mustang named for his wife.

In combat, the Airmen painted the tails of their P-47s to make it easier for the bomber pilots they were protecting to identify them. McGee told History Net a few years ago that everything changed for him when he took his first flight in the P-51C. He soon flew the P-51C regularly, and named it Kitten, his wife’s nickname. HIs crew chief, Nathaniel Wilson, kept it purring, too.

When enemy airplanes appeared on bomber escort missions, commander Colonel Benjamin O. Davis Jr. ordered one airplane to pursue while the rest stayed with the bombers to protect against enemy fire. Because of this, bomber pilots often asked specifically for the “Red Tails,” and Col. Davis renamed his airplane By Request.

Even amidst the doubts of white officers and the humiliation of segregation, Col. Davis inspired his men to RISE ABOVE™ and focus on their skill as aviators. He often said, “Excellence is the best response to racism.”

The Airmen all knew they were fighting two battles: the battle against Hitler and Nazi Germany over there, and the battle against racism back here at home.

Discipline. Commitment. Strength of Character. These are the lessons of the Tuskegee Airmen. Lessons that are every bit as applicable today as they were in the 1940s. Lessons that can help youngsters gain the strength to overcome adversity in their own lives.

​

And in all of this he can surely thank the white officers who stuck their necks out, and gave these guy's the chance that they deserved in all of this. IM2 just threw up in his throat reading this post. Yes it's true IM2.

Have you thanked a white person lately ?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

And in all of this he can surely thank the white officers who stuck their necks out, and gave these guy's the chance that they deserved in all of this. IM2 just threw up in his throat reading this post. Yes it's true IM2.

Have you thanked a white person lately ?

And what about the white pilots whose lives they protected who wouldn't

And in all of this he can surely thank the white officers who stuck their necks out, and gave these guy's the chance that they deserved in all of this. IM2 just threw up in his throat reading this post. Yes it's true IM2.

Have you thanked a white person lately ?

You know I believe in giving credit where credit is due and I have never denied the existence of white abolitionists or how invaluable their assistance was to the underground railroad, or those people anywhere who recognized the injustice of racial discrimination and the lingering effects of all of the statutes that made legal segregation the law of the land and stood up to it. But that's not really what is in the dispute here. By the same turn, one of the white pilots who didn't realize that the Redtails were black and asked to shake the hand of the pilot who saved his life, then refused to do so once they were back on the ground and he realized he was black. And it was reported that the German prisoners of war were treated better by our own military simply because they were white than were the black Tuskegee officers.

I do personally express gratitude to anyone and everyone who assists me in ways big and small however sometimes it sounds (and feels) more like a situation where someone steals something from you and expects you to thank them for giving or selling it back to you. And this is because of the original premise that the white race was entitled to everything within their domain and that the only purpose of the black race was to be subservient to the white race.

So when some of us aren't jumping up and down with gratitude it's not that we're not cognizant of the sacrifices made on our behalf by those not of our own race, it's because of others of your [white] race presuming that you are white, that are still in full-on racist mode and doing all the things that racists do including trying to denigrate others and devalue their contributions, work, accomplishments, sabotage opportunities, etc. the whole nine yards and then turn around and play the victim. The same tactics that they use on these boards are the same tactics that they use everywhere else in life to wreck havoc and deprive non-whites of their rights.

That's what the complaints are about, at least from my perspective.

 

[Correll]

But, again, the test was about fighting fires. Assuming that cultural bias or a corrupt grader is responsible, when the city showed such strong determination to promote black firefighters, is not reasonable.

Nor is calling me racist based on that statement.

[Edited]
I've never said anything about cultural bias, but I did post information regarding 'literacy tests' that were used in order to deny blacks the right to vote. The circumstances may be different but the tactic is the same. I'm not saying nor have I ever stated that is what happened, I merely pointed out that saying the white firefighters passed the test, the blacks did not, seal the tests and that's the end of it precludes any investigation into what really happened. Because you didn't want to discuss the test and considered the test as the ONLY end-all and be-all for determining merit then yes you appear to consider the black candidates inferior when it comes to merit.

The tactic is from generations ago, and New Haven, Conn. is not the Deep South of the Jim Crow era.


The test was picked by the City, who's commitment to diversity has been strongly demonstrated, (fighting against promoting whites to the Supreme Court)

and is what we have to judge the firefighters by.


THIS PARTICULAR group of black firefighters did not score high enough to warrant promotion based on the rules of the Department.


Recognizing that one small group of blacks, did not score well enough on a promotions test, is not reason to call someone a racist.

Page after page, and you never FUCKING ASKED ME, why I thought the black firefighters scored poorly, you just started smearing me with what in our culture is a very serious slur.

With all due respect. That is a dick move.

First of all, I didn't smear you, I have NO idea what your culture is but you're on a message board arguing that black people are more racist than the people who put into writing that the black race was created to be subservient to the white race ***FOR ALL TIME***. The race who then created a social structure by way of laws specifically restricting and prohibiting the rights of people of African descent (the alleged inferior and subservient race) to ensure that they could continue to be legally oppressed and that many of the people here on this board arguing for the white race are arguing that the white race as a whole is LESS RACIST than the people they enslaved, murdered, raped, lynched & oppressed. That's a hard sell.[/QUOTE]


First of all, you did smear me. I've given you no call to call me that name.

Second of all, once again you are citing the actions of whites from centuries ago, as though it was yesterday, and holding modern whites, whites who have been voting for pro civil rights policies for generations, responsible for those ancient wrongs.


Third, the OP poll shows that more blacks thinks blacks are more racist, than whites, so it is not that hard of a sell.

Furthermore, why do I need to ask you anything? Can't you make your argument yourself? You want me to argue my side and help you argue yours as well by asking you your position? From everything you've posted it's pretty clear that you only value the rights of the white firefighters per the examples we used. You don't care that anything could have been wrong with the test used to determine merit. You don't care that the EEOC found racial discrimination in some 50 odd cases over the last several years. You haven't shown any care for the rights that have been violated by all of those people of color in the EEOC cases or even the black firefighters ONLY care for the white firefighters. That is completely your right but when people believe you to be a closet racist or to be harboring racist thoughts or feelings or that you may be a bit prejudiced it's because of things you've stated here on this message board not because of any ill will or animosity I have towards you since I can only speak for myself.[/edited]

Making an assumption instead of asking a question, and then smearing someone based on the assumption, is a dick move.


That's not me asking you to make my argument for me.

With all due respect. That is a dick move.

What do you mean by "that is a dick move"?[/QUOTE]



It is the type of thing a person who is a dick would do.

 

[Correll]

THanks. YOu just strongly supported my dismissal of the EEOC wins.

So the courts are wrong, the juries were wrong, the EEOC is wrong and the only case anyone got right was New Haven Firefighter case in which the white firefighters prevailed? And you don't see why this makes you look a bit biased?

Can you see how easily you start calling me names, based on "subtle clues" calls into question the judgement of everyone that shares your viewpoint on this issue?

Subtle clues are not what people are supposed to be convicted on in this country. YOu need compelling evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

Wrong. Reasonable doubt applies to criminal cases and it is said that the measure is 98%. The reason being if the government is going to take away a person's freedom and/or life then they want to be reasonably sure that the defendant actually committed the crime.

The EEOC's cases are civil and the threshold is a "preponderance of the evidence" which in layman terms means if you weigh the evidence from each side on a scale whichever side tips the scales prevails (51%).

Race Discrimination Based on Disparate Treatment

Race discrimination can arise as disparate treatment, where an employer intentionally treats employees of a particular race less favorably than employees of a different race. ***In Postal Service v. Aikens, the Supreme Court made clear that victims of race discrimination need not submit direct evidence of discriminatory intent. Rather, in acknowledging that such cases rarely involve “smoking gun” evidence, the Supreme Court held that circumstantial evidence can be used to prove the existence of unlawful motive in race discrimination cases:

The prohibitions against discrimination contained in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 reflect an important national policy. There will seldom be “eyewitness” testimony as to the employer’s mental processes. But none of this means that trial courts or reviewing courts should treat discrimination differently from other ultimate questions of fact.
​

I stand corrected.


But, again, the test was about fighting fires. Assuming that cultural bias or a corrupt grader is responsible, when the city showed such strong determination to promote black firefighters, is not reasonable.

Nor is calling me racist based on that statement.


Page after page, and you never FUCKING ASKED ME, why I thought the black firefighters scored poorly, you just started smearing me with what in our culture is a very serious slur.


With all due respect. That is a dick move.

.

Anyone white that says blacks we should be grateful to whites for freeing us from slavery is a racist. You said that, now stop lying and whining abut being called what you are

DId I say that? Or did I say that you should be grateful to the whites that freed you from slavery?

No whites "freed" anyone from slavery. They fought to save the Union, and by default slaves were "freed", then literally overnight, ended up in the Jim Crow system.[/QUOTE]



Your inability to show gratitude is a personal flaw.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The 'we' is you, and I.
I forced you to admit that none of the negative historical items impinge, in any way, on your existence.

Sooo...you simply pretend.

And, in the larger picture, we've also proven the adage "Democrats go with truth the way red wine goes with oysters…..or the way brown shoes go with a tuxedo."

And now, you're dismissed.

Do you under stand what delusions of grandeur are because you consistently display systems of the disorder. You might want to get that checked out because you seem to think you have forced me into admitting something that I have not and could not truthfully denounce but your condition may be interfering with your ability to see this.

You and others on this board keep making erroneous assumptions about me, my affiliations, etc. I am not a democrat, I am not a liberal, I am not anti-white but I am anti-white racists. And I'm a card carrying member of the ACLU which is the American Civil Liberties Union who fights for the constitutional rights of everyone in the United States irrespective of how vile their beliefs may be.
IWhen you can't answer a question or the answer to the question will not support your position, then you deflect - that's what you've been doing during this entire conversation, not just with me but with other posters here who have been attempting to show how it's not factually possible due to the racist origins of our country for black people as a race to be more racists than whites. That means if anyone is pretending that would be you not I so do not include me in any of your fantasies. You and the others state things that are patently not true, attack the posters instead of their argument, throw out racial slurs and engage in behaviors that I suspect you would never do if you were facing any of us in real life. That alone is a sign of cowardice.

As far as your dismissal of me or my arguments which one it is is hard to tell since you equivocate so frequently, unless you depart from U.S. Message Board entirely so you don't have to see my posts or put me on ignore like a little kid hiding attempting to hide behind a curtain thinking that just because he can't see anyone no one can see him, I'll still be here and else where online and off exposing the bigots and racists in our environment.

OK....OK.....stop begging!

You can have another chance to answer:


Which of those anti-black regulations that you try to push, applied to you?

If none,....just slither away and stop whining.

 

[PoliticalChic]

THanks. YOu just strongly supported my dismissal of the EEOC wins.

So the courts are wrong, the juries were wrong, the EEOC is wrong and the only case anyone got right was New Haven Firefighter case in which the white firefighters prevailed? And you don't see why this makes you look a bit biased?

Can you see how easily you start calling me names, based on "subtle clues" calls into question the judgement of everyone that shares your viewpoint on this issue?

Subtle clues are not what people are supposed to be convicted on in this country. YOu need compelling evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

Wrong. Reasonable doubt applies to criminal cases and it is said that the measure is 98%. The reason being if the government is going to take away a person's freedom and/or life then they want to be reasonably sure that the defendant actually committed the crime.

The EEOC's cases are civil and the threshold is a "preponderance of the evidence" which in layman terms means if you weigh the evidence from each side on a scale whichever side tips the scales prevails (51%).

Race Discrimination Based on Disparate Treatment

Race discrimination can arise as disparate treatment, where an employer intentionally treats employees of a particular race less favorably than employees of a different race. ***In Postal Service v. Aikens, the Supreme Court made clear that victims of race discrimination need not submit direct evidence of discriminatory intent. Rather, in acknowledging that such cases rarely involve “smoking gun” evidence, the Supreme Court held that circumstantial evidence can be used to prove the existence of unlawful motive in race discrimination cases:

The prohibitions against discrimination contained in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 reflect an important national policy. There will seldom be “eyewitness” testimony as to the employer’s mental processes. But none of this means that trial courts or reviewing courts should treat discrimination differently from other ultimate questions of fact.
​

I stand corrected.


But, again, the test was about fighting fires. Assuming that cultural bias or a corrupt grader is responsible, when the city showed such strong determination to promote black firefighters, is not reasonable.

Nor is calling me racist based on that statement.


Page after page, and you never FUCKING ASKED ME, why I thought the black firefighters scored poorly, you just started smearing me with what in our culture is a very serious slur.


With all due respect. That is a dick move.

.

Anyone white that says blacks we should be grateful to whites for freeing us from slavery is a racist. You said that, now stop lying and whining abut being called what you are

DId I say that? Or did I say that you should be grateful to the whites that freed you from slavery?[/QUOTE]



Here's a man who went even further in his view of the positive effect of the issue:

"In the early 1970s Muhammad Ali fought for the heavyweight title against George Foreman. The fight was held in the African nation of Zaire; it was insensitively called the "rumble in the jungle."

Ali won the fight, and upon returning to the United States, he was asked by a reporter, "Champ, what did you think of Africa?"

Ali replied, "Thank God my granddaddy got on that boat!" There is a characteristic mischievous pungency to Ali's remark, yet it also expresses a widely held sentiment. Ali recognizes that for all the horror of slavery, it was the transmission belt that brought Africans into the orbit of Western freedom. The slaves were not better off—the boat Ali refers to brought the slaves through a horrific Middle Passage to a life of painful servitude—yet their descendants today, even if they won't admit it, are better off. Ali was honest enough to admit it."
Muhammad Ali - Wikiquote

 

[PoliticalChic]

She's never upset.....and "we" is anyone rational and able to think logically who has been trying to knock some sense into your Mellon for the last couple of days.

Sure she was and I don't take advice or counsel from racists so you can just butt out of this portion of the conversation.

Hardly.


I am the model of seraphic calm.


You should look that up.

 

[IM2]

THanks. YOu just strongly supported my dismissal of the EEOC wins.

So the courts are wrong, the juries were wrong, the EEOC is wrong and the only case anyone got right was New Haven Firefighter case in which the white firefighters prevailed? And you don't see why this makes you look a bit biased?

Can you see how easily you start calling me names, based on "subtle clues" calls into question the judgement of everyone that shares your viewpoint on this issue?

Subtle clues are not what people are supposed to be convicted on in this country. YOu need compelling evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

Wrong. Reasonable doubt applies to criminal cases and it is said that the measure is 98%. The reason being if the government is going to take away a person's freedom and/or life then they want to be reasonably sure that the defendant actually committed the crime.

The EEOC's cases are civil and the threshold is a "preponderance of the evidence" which in layman terms means if you weigh the evidence from each side on a scale whichever side tips the scales prevails (51%).

Race Discrimination Based on Disparate Treatment

Race discrimination can arise as disparate treatment, where an employer intentionally treats employees of a particular race less favorably than employees of a different race. ***In Postal Service v. Aikens, the Supreme Court made clear that victims of race discrimination need not submit direct evidence of discriminatory intent. Rather, in acknowledging that such cases rarely involve “smoking gun” evidence, the Supreme Court held that circumstantial evidence can be used to prove the existence of unlawful motive in race discrimination cases:

The prohibitions against discrimination contained in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 reflect an important national policy. There will seldom be “eyewitness” testimony as to the employer’s mental processes. But none of this means that trial courts or reviewing courts should treat discrimination differently from other ultimate questions of fact.
​

I stand corrected.


But, again, the test was about fighting fires. Assuming that cultural bias or a corrupt grader is responsible, when the city showed such strong determination to promote black firefighters, is not reasonable.

Nor is calling me racist based on that statement.


Page after page, and you never FUCKING ASKED ME, why I thought the black firefighters scored poorly, you just started smearing me with what in our culture is a very serious slur.


With all due respect. That is a dick move.

.

Anyone white that says blacks we should be grateful to whites for freeing us from slavery is a racist. You said that, now stop lying and whining abut being called what you are

DId I say that? Or did I say that you should be grateful to the whites that freed you from slavery?

Here's a man who went even further in his view of the positive effect of the issue:

"In the early 1970s Muhammad Ali fought for the heavyweight title against George Foreman. The fight was held in the African nation of Zaire; it was insensitively called the "rumble in the jungle."

Ali won the fight, and upon returning to the United States, he was asked by a reporter, "Champ, what did you think of Africa?"

Ali replied, "Thank God my granddaddy got on that boat!" There is a characteristic mischievous pungency to Ali's remark, yet it also expresses a widely held sentiment. Ali recognizes that for all the horror of slavery, it was the transmission belt that brought Africans into the orbit of Western freedom. The slaves were not better off—the boat Ali refers to brought the slaves through a horrific Middle Passage to a life of painful servitude—yet their descendants today, even if they won't admit it, are better off. Ali was honest enough to admit it."
Muhammad Ali - Wikiquote[/QUOTE]

You've already ben shown that's not the case. I know your Japanese ass is grateful to whites for your reparations but that doesn't mean you get to repost a silly comment from Ali.