racism in America

[mattskramer]

Affirmative Action -- This term has two very different definitions! Never use this term without indicating the version you are using!

Definition 1: Race-neutral, gender-neutral assurance against actual discrimination. This is the type of Affirmative Action contemplated by President Lyndon Johnson's Executive Order 11246, in which he sought to ensure that individuals have equal opportunity WITHOUT regard to their race, sex, or ethnicity. In this 1965 Executive Order, President Johnson consistently and repeatedly used the term non-discrimination and never once mentioned racial quotas or preferences. The original, unamended version of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 similarly emphasized race-neutrality and non-discrimination.

Definition 2: Racial-preferences and gender-preferences for the correct races and genders. Under this definition, Affirmative Action is comprised of programs and policies that grant favorable treatment on the basis of race or gender to government-defined "disadvantaged" individuals. Under this definition, racial or gender preference must be granted even when the favored / aggrieved minority or gender has no actual evidence or proof that a company, boss, individual, or government agency has discriminated against them due to their race or gender. Definition 2 is based upon the Constitutionally dubious notion of proportional representation based upon skin color or gender in all occupations and endeavors in the U.S.

Check out the "horror stories" at http://www.adversity.net/

 

[007]

Originally posted by Big D
http://www.planetpapers.com/Assets/3874.php

That was a good article. It says what a lot people don't like to hear, and still won't admit the validity of it.

 

[Big D]

Originally posted by mattskramer
Affirmative Action -- This term has two very different definitions! Never use this term without indicating the version you are using!

Definition 1: Race-neutral, gender-neutral assurance against actual discrimination. This is the type of Affirmative Action contemplated by President Lyndon Johnson's Executive Order 11246, in which he sought to ensure that individuals have equal opportunity WITHOUT regard to their race, sex, or ethnicity. In this 1965 Executive Order, President Johnson consistently and repeatedly used the term non-discrimination and never once mentioned racial quotas or preferences. The original, unamended version of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 similarly emphasized race-neutrality and non-discrimination.

Definition 2: Racial-preferences and gender-preferences for the correct races and genders. Under this definition, Affirmative Action is comprised of programs and policies that grant favorable treatment on the basis of race or gender to government-defined "disadvantaged" individuals. Under this definition, racial or gender preference must be granted even when the favored / aggrieved minority or gender has no actual evidence or proof that a company, boss, individual, or government agency has discriminated against them due to their race or gender. Definition 2 is based upon the Constitutionally dubious notion of proportional representation based upon skin color or gender in all occupations and endeavors in the U.S.

Check out the "horror stories" at http://www.adversity.net/

Nice work Matt

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by west2004
Why is that?

Long before your arrival we had a very very long and heated discussion regarding affirmative action. I'm thinking you just might take some heat for your stance. Just a fair warning, nothing else.

 

[no1tovote4]

Originally posted by Big D
http://www.planetpapers.com/Assets/3874.php

Not as good as one might think. In Germany they actually have anti-racist laws. If one is openly racist they may be arrested there. While here the KKK can rally on the steps of a major city capital building on MLK Day because they reserved the place before the pro-MLK crowd.

To say the US has a monopoly on this is ludicrous. Yes we do have hate crimes laws but nothing like the Germans do it.

 

[007]

Originally posted by no1tovote4
Not as good as one might think. In Germany they actually have anti-racist laws. If one is openly racist they may be arrested there. While here the KKK can rally on the steps of a major city capital building on MLK Day because they reserved the place before the pro-MLK crowd.

To say the US has a monopoly on this is ludicrous. Yes we do have hate crimes laws but nothing like the Germans do it.

Well here in America, the people that scream racist the loudest are the ones that are the biggest racists. Take for instance this black piece of crap racist.

http://www.dcwatch.com/archives/election98/shabazz-1.htm

Ask Yourself... Why Should I
VOTE FOR
ATTY. MALIK Z. SHABAZZ
FOR CITY COUNCIL AT LARGE?

Because everyone agrees we need fresh, new, intelligent& courageous leadership. Atty. Malik Shabazz represents that new leadership.

Because Councilman Malik Shabazz is and will be 100% for self determination, statehood, freedom and independence for our people. The rule of the control board must come to an end! The racist and republican conspiracy to strip power from our people must be stopped.

Because Councilman Malik Shabazz will be 100% in support of our workers rights and is a known advocate and friend of the poor and “rejected” in society.

Because Atty. Malik Shabazz is 100% in support of Black business development, entrepreneurship, vendors rights and bringing the money into our nieghborhoods. The business economy in the Black community must be owned and controlled by the Black community!

Because Councilman Malik Shabazz will be a good role model for our youth and is sure to fight for quality education, recreation facilities, jobs and a clean environment benefit Black & Hispanic youth. He is also an ally for our elders and “senior citizens”.

Because Atty. Malik Shabazz is a successful lawyer and businessman, he will be an effective legislator and budget maker.

Because Atty. Malik Shabazz supports a strong & influential Black church and faith community.

Because Councilman Malik Shabazz will be 100% for full equality and power for the Hispanic/lndigenous Community.

Because Councilman Malik Shabazz will fight to establish a PEOPLE’S GOVERNMENT where A.N.C.’s, organizations and concerned people are empowered and can implement legislative change through Councilman Shabazz. Atty. Shabazz will be the reflection and voice of the will of the people.

Because as Councilman, Atty. Malik Shabazz is guaranteed not to “Sell You Out”! He has proven, over and over again that he will stand firm for the needs of our people. All of the others are typical candidates, except Malik Shabazz who is most likely to establish True Change!

 

[007]

http://www.cnsnews.com/Culture/archive/200402/CUL20040224f.html


Jesus Was Black, Not White, Group Says
By Melanie Hunter
CNSNews.com Deputy Managing Editor
February 24, 2004

(Clarification: Corrects reference to Bible verse in third paragraph.)

(CNSNews.com) - One day before it debuts in theaters, a black activist group is protesting the Mel Gibson-written, directed and produced "The Passion of the Christ" film, not because of the film's violent depiction of Jesus Christ's final hours. Instead, they say the film is historically inaccurate because Jesus is portrayed as a white man, not a black man.

"Strangely absent from the debate is one very basic inaccuracy which has been long promoted in order to bolster white supremacy and maintain a revisionist history that is beneficial to only people of European descent," said Malik Z. Shabazz, national chairman of the New Black Panther Party in a statement Tuesday.

"This purposely omitted fact is that Jesus was not a European white man. Jesus Christ was a black man - a dark skinned Hebrew Israelite from Northern Africa and even the only Biblical physical description confirms this (Rev. 13:20)," said Shabazz in a statement..