Racist America

[Olde Europe]

There are WAAAY too many posts for me to address each one, but I wanted to give you, personally, my .02 cents worth. I hit the "winner" icon after reading your post and I have something to say that will help you answer your question. [...]

That was one lengthy jeremiad, Porter. There are even some worthy points in it, such as your rejection of efforts to unleash frustrations and resentments upon others. Good, so far.

However, if this...

I am a white male who believes in the advancement, protection and preservation of those of the white race.

... is a true expression of your culture - if you still can't see the shared humanity in everyone with a human face, and also not how Americans of all races are in the same boat trying to create something better than the past - it fully deserves to die out with you and all those like you.

Moreover, as you express pride in what your forebears achieved (you had no part in that, obviously) and their culture, and also decry that this culture is being done in by some jobless 350lb boys living and twittering in mom's basement, it doesn't seem that culture has much of value to offer. I mean, what culture would be deemed worth preserving that suffers defeat at the hands of such feeble, all-around inconsequential assailants?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Look at some of the the trash who post on here. .....

Yeah, look at you, ya chinless, ignorant hypocrite douche bag.

Didn't take long for your judgment to be confirmed, eh, Tommy?

Nope. But to be fair he is nowhere near the worst of them. He just lacks social skills. Possibly has issues.

 

[Olde Europe]

Nope. But to be fair he is nowhere near the worst of them. He just lacks social skills. Possibly has issues.

Yeah, you're right, he's not the worst. Still, you trampled on the nationalist parts of his ego, and he retaliated by doing his best unkotare (roughly: skid mark) impression.

Overall I'd say, racism is humankind's birth defect. It plays out in different societies in different ways, incorporated in, and infesting, traditions in different ways, but one thing remains pretty much the same: The most ardent racists are those who protest most stridently against that diagnosis.

 

[IM2]

No, the fact is, the first governing document of the New World was the Mayflower Compact in 1620. Let's look at a couple of lines:

"IN THE name of God, Amen. We whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dread sovereign Lord, King James, by the grace of God, of Great Britain, France and Ireland king, defender of the faith, etc., having undertaken, for the glory of God, and advancement of the Christian faith, and honor of our king and country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the Northern parts of Virginia"

Also check this out:

america a christian nation - barton - Bing video

Within six months of the signing of the Constitution, you could not become a citizen lest you be white

"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof"

naturalization laws 1790-1795

There was no new world. Nations existed here. We are not governed by the Mayflower Compact and the 14th amendment erased the 1790 laws. This is not a white Christian nation and that's all there is to it.

The whites took America by right of conquest. All nations recognize this principle because most existing nations were taken that way.

No, we are not governed by the Mayflower Compact. It's just that the Mayflower Compact was the first governing document of the New World.

On its face, the 14th Amendment did erase any law that favored the whites. The problem is, the 14th Amendment was illegally ratified.

https://www.constitution.org/14ll/no14th.htm

The Fourteenth Amendment is Unconstitutional - Judge L.H. Perez

That being said, John Adams, second President of the United States said "Cities may be rebuilt, and a People reduced to Poverty, may acquire fresh Property: But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty once lost is lost forever. When the People once surrender their share in the Legislature, and their Right of defending the Limitations upon the Government, and of resisting every Encroachment upon them, they can never regain it."

So, I concur with you at some level. The 14th Amendment, illegally ratified, repealed the Bill of Rights; reduced unalienable Rights into mere privileges to be doled out by a tyrannical government; took away the status of Preamble Citizens and began a course of action that the white people cannot recuperate from under the Constitution.

Today, non-whites want to force feed white people a false narrative of history, make them have feelings of false guilt, become prejudiced against their own race, wallow in self guilt, and forfeit their country to people who have virtually no investment in America.

1)

There was no new world. Nations existed here. We are not governed by the Mayflower Compact and the 14th amendment erased the 1790 laws. This is not a white Christian nation and that's all there is to it.

The whites took America by right of conquest. All nations recognize this principle because most existing nations were taken that way.

No, we are not governed by the Mayflower Compact. It's just that the Mayflower Compact was the first governing document of the New World.

On its face, the 14th Amendment did erase any law that favored the whites. The problem is, the 14th Amendment was illegally ratified.

https://www.constitution.org/14ll/no14th.htm

The Fourteenth Amendment is Unconstitutional - Judge L.H. Perez

That being said, John Adams, second President of the United States said "Cities may be rebuilt, and a People reduced to Poverty, may acquire fresh Property: But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty once lost is lost forever. When the People once surrender their share in the Legislature, and their Right of defending the Limitations upon the Government, and of resisting every Encroachment upon them, they can never regain it."

So, I concur with you at some level. The 14th Amendment, illegally ratified, repealed the Bill of Rights; reduced unalienable Rights into mere privileges to be doled out by a tyrannical government; took away the status of Preamble Citizens and began a course of action that the white people cannot recuperate from under the Constitution.

Today, non-whites want to force feed white people a false narrative of history, make them have feelings of false guilt, become prejudiced against their own race, wallow in self guilt, and forfeit their country to people who have virtually no investment in America.

You are fed your own history. Whites should not have done what they did.

The 14 amendment was legally ratified and if you think not, take your case to the public.

LH Perez is dead. So is your dumb ass argument.

This is not the white mans country and most countries were not taken by conquest. White people have lost nothing and they aren't suffering.

Nor are unalienable rights the sole property of whites.

– Racism has distorted reality for many whites. Teachings about history, the world, the pursuits of thought, expressions of culture, and personal relationships have for most whites been both limited and false.

– Racism has taught whites that we are members of a race which is superior, and that assumption creates false expectations and warped illusions.

– Racism has taught whites that we are entitled to privilege as a right of birth, undercutting the assumption of achieved merit which is one of the cornerstones of democracy.

1) You seem to have a monopoly on human virtue and the only truth we need on this board

2) Whites should not have done what they did?

3) Posting on a board about the illegality of the 14th Amendment IS taking it to the public. This IS a public forum...duh

4) My "argument" certainly is not dead. We just discussed it

5) MLK is dead too. Did you have a point?

6) You might want to read up on the Right of Conquest before wasting bandwidth making yourself look foolish:

Right of conquest - Wikipedia

7) Unalienable Rights are given by our Creator and do belong to all men; that's a strawman argument for you. You obviously cannot keep up

8) You make generalized statements about "racism" that you've failed to support with any cogent argument, specifics statistics, or empirical evidence. All I can do is disagree with the generalizations

9) Racism is practiced in Japan (as in many other countries) and they claim to be the most racially pure race on the planet. Bet you have a lot of junk in your house - maybe even your car that says Made in Japan on it. Okay for them; just not acceptable for whites

10) America was not founded as a Democracy and it became the greatest nation in the annals of history as a REPUBLIC.

Actually, I'm reading your post and it doesn't make sense. Your first sentence starts out with whites should not have done what they did, as if they are or were in control of this country, but then dispute your own proclamations more and more with each succeeding paragraph you type.

Everything I said makes sense. You are the one with the problem.

We've had this discussion before, Humone.

Everything you just said does not compute. You should learn how to articulate your position a bit better. You sound like an individual living in his own world.

I've done very well articulating my position to non racist whites. You know, the sane ones who understand that the 14 amendment is legal.

 

[IM2]

Nope. But to be fair he is nowhere near the worst of them. He just lacks social skills. Possibly has issues.

Yeah, you're right, he's not the worst. Still, you trampled on the nationalist parts of his ego, and he retaliated by doing his best unkotare (roughly: skid mark) impression.

Overall I'd say, racism is humankind's birth defect. It plays out in different societies in different ways, incorporated in, and infesting, traditions in different ways, but one thing remains pretty much the same: The most ardent racists are those who protest most stridently against that diagnosis.

I would agree with this but there is such a thing as an angry reaction to racism that gets called racism by many white people.

 

[Papageorgio]

Is this forum a true reflection of the US ? It seems to gather the worst sort of trash who are enabled to spread their dumb shit.
Poor and uneducated white people seem to need somebody to scapegoat for their failures in life.

I'm not sure why they let trash like you on this board, maybe they like your hate and bigotry.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

There are WAAAY too many posts for me to address each one, but I wanted to give you, personally, my .02 cents worth. I hit the "winner" icon after reading your post and I have something to say that will help you answer your question. [...]

That was one lengthy jeremiad, Porter. There are even some worthy points in it, such as your rejection of efforts to unleash frustrations and resentments upon others. Good, so far.

However, if this...

I am a white male who believes in the advancement, protection and preservation of those of the white race.

... is a true expression of your culture - if you still can't see the shared humanity in everyone with a human face, and also not how Americans of all races are in the same boat trying to create something better than the past - it fully deserves to die out with you and all those like you.

Moreover, as you express pride in what your forebears achieved (you had no part in that, obviously) and their culture, and also decry that this culture is being done in by some jobless 350lb boys living and twittering in mom's basement, it doesn't seem that culture has much of value to offer. I mean, what culture would be deemed worth preserving that suffers defeat at the hands of such feeble, all-around inconsequential assailants?

America respects other cultures, including ones you would consider "racist." But, let's face it. Today's liberals want to denigrate the whites using the excuse of slavery. The fact is the white people did not start slavery; they were the ones who ENDED it. Furthermore, slaves in the U.S. were treated better than modern America is willing to admit.

There is much more to our culture than a couple of hundred years of slavery - an institution that many generations have paid for in wars all across the world in the name of Freedom and Liberty AND paid in full with the lives of American soldiers.

Admittedly, I'm not sure the same blood flows through the veins of today's white people. They've been dumbed down and they have strayed from the ethics, principles, and values that made up the race of people who had so many advances in science, technology, law ,arts, music, and religious values. There is so much potential and they waste it. Today all they can say is that there are more of them in prison than any nation in the world; more of them on drugs than the rest of the world's people combined; more of them with body piercings and tattoos than anywhere else and the laziest and most apathetic people on the globe. It's not much to be proud of.

 

[Olde Europe]

I would agree with this but there is such a thing as an angry reaction to racism that gets called racism by many white people.

I've seen the like, and agree with that observation. It doesn't counter what I have said as far as I can see.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

There was no new world. Nations existed here. We are not governed by the Mayflower Compact and the 14th amendment erased the 1790 laws. This is not a white Christian nation and that's all there is to it.

The whites took America by right of conquest. All nations recognize this principle because most existing nations were taken that way.

No, we are not governed by the Mayflower Compact. It's just that the Mayflower Compact was the first governing document of the New World.

On its face, the 14th Amendment did erase any law that favored the whites. The problem is, the 14th Amendment was illegally ratified.

https://www.constitution.org/14ll/no14th.htm

The Fourteenth Amendment is Unconstitutional - Judge L.H. Perez

That being said, John Adams, second President of the United States said "Cities may be rebuilt, and a People reduced to Poverty, may acquire fresh Property: But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty once lost is lost forever. When the People once surrender their share in the Legislature, and their Right of defending the Limitations upon the Government, and of resisting every Encroachment upon them, they can never regain it."

So, I concur with you at some level. The 14th Amendment, illegally ratified, repealed the Bill of Rights; reduced unalienable Rights into mere privileges to be doled out by a tyrannical government; took away the status of Preamble Citizens and began a course of action that the white people cannot recuperate from under the Constitution.

Today, non-whites want to force feed white people a false narrative of history, make them have feelings of false guilt, become prejudiced against their own race, wallow in self guilt, and forfeit their country to people who have virtually no investment in America.

1)

The whites took America by right of conquest. All nations recognize this principle because most existing nations were taken that way.

No, we are not governed by the Mayflower Compact. It's just that the Mayflower Compact was the first governing document of the New World.

On its face, the 14th Amendment did erase any law that favored the whites. The problem is, the 14th Amendment was illegally ratified.

https://www.constitution.org/14ll/no14th.htm

The Fourteenth Amendment is Unconstitutional - Judge L.H. Perez

That being said, John Adams, second President of the United States said "Cities may be rebuilt, and a People reduced to Poverty, may acquire fresh Property: But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty once lost is lost forever. When the People once surrender their share in the Legislature, and their Right of defending the Limitations upon the Government, and of resisting every Encroachment upon them, they can never regain it."

So, I concur with you at some level. The 14th Amendment, illegally ratified, repealed the Bill of Rights; reduced unalienable Rights into mere privileges to be doled out by a tyrannical government; took away the status of Preamble Citizens and began a course of action that the white people cannot recuperate from under the Constitution.

Today, non-whites want to force feed white people a false narrative of history, make them have feelings of false guilt, become prejudiced against their own race, wallow in self guilt, and forfeit their country to people who have virtually no investment in America.

You are fed your own history. Whites should not have done what they did.

The 14 amendment was legally ratified and if you think not, take your case to the public.

LH Perez is dead. So is your dumb ass argument.

This is not the white mans country and most countries were not taken by conquest. White people have lost nothing and they aren't suffering.

Nor are unalienable rights the sole property of whites.

– Racism has distorted reality for many whites. Teachings about history, the world, the pursuits of thought, expressions of culture, and personal relationships have for most whites been both limited and false.

– Racism has taught whites that we are members of a race which is superior, and that assumption creates false expectations and warped illusions.

– Racism has taught whites that we are entitled to privilege as a right of birth, undercutting the assumption of achieved merit which is one of the cornerstones of democracy.

1) You seem to have a monopoly on human virtue and the only truth we need on this board

2) Whites should not have done what they did?

3) Posting on a board about the illegality of the 14th Amendment IS taking it to the public. This IS a public forum...duh

4) My "argument" certainly is not dead. We just discussed it

5) MLK is dead too. Did you have a point?

6) You might want to read up on the Right of Conquest before wasting bandwidth making yourself look foolish:

Right of conquest - Wikipedia

7) Unalienable Rights are given by our Creator and do belong to all men; that's a strawman argument for you. You obviously cannot keep up

8) You make generalized statements about "racism" that you've failed to support with any cogent argument, specifics statistics, or empirical evidence. All I can do is disagree with the generalizations

9) Racism is practiced in Japan (as in many other countries) and they claim to be the most racially pure race on the planet. Bet you have a lot of junk in your house - maybe even your car that says Made in Japan on it. Okay for them; just not acceptable for whites

10) America was not founded as a Democracy and it became the greatest nation in the annals of history as a REPUBLIC.

Actually, I'm reading your post and it doesn't make sense. Your first sentence starts out with whites should not have done what they did, as if they are or were in control of this country, but then dispute your own proclamations more and more with each succeeding paragraph you type.

Everything I said makes sense. You are the one with the problem.

We've had this discussion before, Humone.

Everything you just said does not compute. You should learn how to articulate your position a bit better. You sound like an individual living in his own world.

I've done very well articulating my position to non racist whites. You know, the sane ones who understand that the 14 amendment is legal.

It may be "legal," however; you cannot undo the facts of history. It was unconstitutionally ratified. So, just like during the civil rights era, patriots do not let the current interpretations be a hindrance. You keep bringing the case before the people, keep pointing out why that travesty of justice exists, and eventually public opinion swings back to the correct interpretation of law - that or revolutions take place.

 

[IM2]

Case of the Covington kids is a perfect example of media bias

By Kyle Smith

January 21, 2019 | 9:55pm


If you are in a public place and someone starts heckling you, are you entitled to heckle back? What if your heckler starts banging a drum in your face? Are you allowed to answer him with a smirk?

I think you are, even if you are wearing a MAGA hat. Even if you’re an entitled brat.

https://nypost.com/2019/01/21/case-of-the-covington-kids-is-a-perfect-example-of-media-bias/





Sent from my LG-M154 using Tapatalk

No, it is a case of white privilege. Had these kids been black all his defending would not happen.

Had the "kids" been black, they would have likely been forcibly dispersed by law enforcement.

I could imagine it playing out in either direction.

The Black kids being seen as potential threats.

Or with the Black kids being deferred to by Police out of an effort to bend over backwards in order to prevent it from becoming a legal or P.R. nightmare for the Dept.

And after a couple more moments of thought, I can see it playing out fairly, and by the book professionally.

I am not so sure of the third one.

And despite personal experiences which might color your personal expectations, the statistics suggest Police are not likely to act in a racist way.

Are Cops Racist?
Book by Heather Mac Donald

"In careful
reports from New York and other major cities across the country, Ms. Mac Donald investigates the workings of the police, the controversy over racial profiling, and the anti-profiling lobby's harmful effects on black Americans. The reduction in urban crime, one of the nation's signal policy successes of the 1990s, has benefited black communities even more dramatically than white neighborhoods, she shows. By policing inner cities actively after long neglect, cops have allowed business and civil society to flourish there once more. But attacks on police, centering on charges of police racism and racial profiling, and spearheaded by activists, the press, and even the Justice Department, have slowed the success and threaten to reverse it. Ms. Mac Donald looks at the reality behind the allegations and writes about the black cops you never heard about, the press coverage of policing, and policing strategies across the country."

Are Cops Racist?

I've done far too much reading and research to consider what Heather McDonald says. McDonald herself has racial issues.

"'Starting with black crime and not with racism, is always the major flaw in Mac Donald’s work. Still, she remains an opponent to both learn from and take oh so seriously. Thankfully, Mother Jones is among the few progressive organizations which work as hard as Mac Donald does to disprove the notion that blacks have no one to blame but themselves. It’s just that we’re going to need a lot more folks doing work at this level to drown out the Mac Donalds."

Know Your Enemy: Heather Mac Donald



My experience is echoed by millions of other blacks.

Race, racism and law enforcement: A call to action
Hard Truths: Law Enforcement and Race — FBI
FBI warned of white supremacists in law enforcement 10 years ago. Has anything changed?

Eighteen academic studies, legal rulings, and media investigations shed light on the issue roiling America.
What the Data Really Says About Police and Racial Bias

How Structural Racism is Linked to Police Violence - CityLab
Structural and Institutional Racism Exists Within Police Forces - NYTimes.com

Heather McDonald is the last one to be reading in regards to this matter.

 

[IM2]

I would agree with this but there is such a thing as an angry reaction to racism that gets called racism by many white people.

I've seen the like, and agree with that observation. It doesn't counter what I have said as far as I can see.

Fair enough.

 

[leecross]

No, it is a case of white privilege. Had these kids been black all his defending would not happen.

Had the "kids" been black, they would have likely been forcibly dispersed by law enforcement.

I could imagine it playing out in either direction.

The Black kids being seen as potential threats.

Or with the Black kids being deferred to by Police out of an effort to bend over backwards in order to prevent it from becoming a legal or P.R. nightmare for the Dept.

And after a couple more moments of thought, I can see it playing out fairly, and by the book professionally.

I am not so sure of the third one.

And despite personal experiences which might color your personal expectations, the statistics suggest Police are not likely to act in a racist way.

Are Cops Racist?
Book by Heather Mac Donald

"In careful
reports from New York and other major cities across the country, Ms. Mac Donald investigates the workings of the police, the controversy over racial profiling, and the anti-profiling lobby's harmful effects on black Americans. The reduction in urban crime, one of the nation's signal policy successes of the 1990s, has benefited black communities even more dramatically than white neighborhoods, she shows. By policing inner cities actively after long neglect, cops have allowed business and civil society to flourish there once more. But attacks on police, centering on charges of police racism and racial profiling, and spearheaded by activists, the press, and even the Justice Department, have slowed the success and threaten to reverse it. Ms. Mac Donald looks at the reality behind the allegations and writes about the black cops you never heard about, the press coverage of policing, and policing strategies across the country."

Are Cops Racist?

I've done far too much reading and research to consider what Heather McDonald says. McDonald herself has racial issues.

"'Starting with black crime and not with racism, is always the major flaw in Mac Donald’s work. Still, she remains an opponent to both learn from and take oh so seriously. Thankfully, Mother Jones is among the few progressive organizations which work as hard as Mac Donald does to disprove the notion that blacks have no one to blame but themselves. It’s just that we’re going to need a lot more folks doing work at this level to drown out the Mac Donalds."

Know Your Enemy: Heather Mac Donald



My experience is echoed by millions of other blacks.

Race, racism and law enforcement: A call to action
Hard Truths: Law Enforcement and Race — FBI
FBI warned of white supremacists in law enforcement 10 years ago. Has anything changed?

Eighteen academic studies, legal rulings, and media investigations shed light on the issue roiling America.
What the Data Really Says About Police and Racial Bias

How Structural Racism is Linked to Police Violence - CityLab
Structural and Institutional Racism Exists Within Police Forces - NYTimes.com

Heather McDonald is the last one to be reading in regards to this matter.

This is news to me.

I must take time to consider the information you have posted here.

It is disturbing at first blush and comes as a surprise.

Thank you.

This may take a while.

 

[IM2]

The whites took America by right of conquest. All nations recognize this principle because most existing nations were taken that way.

No, we are not governed by the Mayflower Compact. It's just that the Mayflower Compact was the first governing document of the New World.

On its face, the 14th Amendment did erase any law that favored the whites. The problem is, the 14th Amendment was illegally ratified.

https://www.constitution.org/14ll/no14th.htm

The Fourteenth Amendment is Unconstitutional - Judge L.H. Perez

That being said, John Adams, second President of the United States said "Cities may be rebuilt, and a People reduced to Poverty, may acquire fresh Property: But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty once lost is lost forever. When the People once surrender their share in the Legislature, and their Right of defending the Limitations upon the Government, and of resisting every Encroachment upon them, they can never regain it."

So, I concur with you at some level. The 14th Amendment, illegally ratified, repealed the Bill of Rights; reduced unalienable Rights into mere privileges to be doled out by a tyrannical government; took away the status of Preamble Citizens and began a course of action that the white people cannot recuperate from under the Constitution.

Today, non-whites want to force feed white people a false narrative of history, make them have feelings of false guilt, become prejudiced against their own race, wallow in self guilt, and forfeit their country to people who have virtually no investment in America.

1)

You are fed your own history. Whites should not have done what they did.

The 14 amendment was legally ratified and if you think not, take your case to the public.

LH Perez is dead. So is your dumb ass argument.

This is not the white mans country and most countries were not taken by conquest. White people have lost nothing and they aren't suffering.

Nor are unalienable rights the sole property of whites.

– Racism has distorted reality for many whites. Teachings about history, the world, the pursuits of thought, expressions of culture, and personal relationships have for most whites been both limited and false.

– Racism has taught whites that we are members of a race which is superior, and that assumption creates false expectations and warped illusions.

– Racism has taught whites that we are entitled to privilege as a right of birth, undercutting the assumption of achieved merit which is one of the cornerstones of democracy.

1) You seem to have a monopoly on human virtue and the only truth we need on this board

2) Whites should not have done what they did?

3) Posting on a board about the illegality of the 14th Amendment IS taking it to the public. This IS a public forum...duh

4) My "argument" certainly is not dead. We just discussed it

5) MLK is dead too. Did you have a point?

6) You might want to read up on the Right of Conquest before wasting bandwidth making yourself look foolish:

Right of conquest - Wikipedia

7) Unalienable Rights are given by our Creator and do belong to all men; that's a strawman argument for you. You obviously cannot keep up

8) You make generalized statements about "racism" that you've failed to support with any cogent argument, specifics statistics, or empirical evidence. All I can do is disagree with the generalizations

9) Racism is practiced in Japan (as in many other countries) and they claim to be the most racially pure race on the planet. Bet you have a lot of junk in your house - maybe even your car that says Made in Japan on it. Okay for them; just not acceptable for whites

10) America was not founded as a Democracy and it became the greatest nation in the annals of history as a REPUBLIC.

Actually, I'm reading your post and it doesn't make sense. Your first sentence starts out with whites should not have done what they did, as if they are or were in control of this country, but then dispute your own proclamations more and more with each succeeding paragraph you type.

Everything I said makes sense. You are the one with the problem.

We've had this discussion before, Humone.

Everything you just said does not compute. You should learn how to articulate your position a bit better. You sound like an individual living in his own world.

I've done very well articulating my position to non racist whites. You know, the sane ones who understand that the 14 amendment is legal.

It may be "legal," however; you cannot undo the facts of history. It was unconstitutionally ratified. So, just like during the civil rights era, patriots do not let the current interpretations be a hindrance. You keep bringing the case before the people, keep pointing out why that travesty of justice exists, and eventually public opinion swings back to the correct interpretation of law - that or revolutions take place.

The facts of history show us this land had nations already existing here with laws and boundaries. And they were not white.

 

[IM2]

Had the "kids" been black, they would have likely been forcibly dispersed by law enforcement.

I could imagine it playing out in either direction.

The Black kids being seen as potential threats.

Or with the Black kids being deferred to by Police out of an effort to bend over backwards in order to prevent it from becoming a legal or P.R. nightmare for the Dept.

And after a couple more moments of thought, I can see it playing out fairly, and by the book professionally.

I am not so sure of the third one.

And despite personal experiences which might color your personal expectations, the statistics suggest Police are not likely to act in a racist way.

Are Cops Racist?
Book by Heather Mac Donald

"In careful
reports from New York and other major cities across the country, Ms. Mac Donald investigates the workings of the police, the controversy over racial profiling, and the anti-profiling lobby's harmful effects on black Americans. The reduction in urban crime, one of the nation's signal policy successes of the 1990s, has benefited black communities even more dramatically than white neighborhoods, she shows. By policing inner cities actively after long neglect, cops have allowed business and civil society to flourish there once more. But attacks on police, centering on charges of police racism and racial profiling, and spearheaded by activists, the press, and even the Justice Department, have slowed the success and threaten to reverse it. Ms. Mac Donald looks at the reality behind the allegations and writes about the black cops you never heard about, the press coverage of policing, and policing strategies across the country."

Are Cops Racist?

I've done far too much reading and research to consider what Heather McDonald says. McDonald herself has racial issues.

"'Starting with black crime and not with racism, is always the major flaw in Mac Donald’s work. Still, she remains an opponent to both learn from and take oh so seriously. Thankfully, Mother Jones is among the few progressive organizations which work as hard as Mac Donald does to disprove the notion that blacks have no one to blame but themselves. It’s just that we’re going to need a lot more folks doing work at this level to drown out the Mac Donalds."

Know Your Enemy: Heather Mac Donald



My experience is echoed by millions of other blacks.

Race, racism and law enforcement: A call to action
Hard Truths: Law Enforcement and Race — FBI
FBI warned of white supremacists in law enforcement 10 years ago. Has anything changed?

Eighteen academic studies, legal rulings, and media investigations shed light on the issue roiling America.
What the Data Really Says About Police and Racial Bias

How Structural Racism is Linked to Police Violence - CityLab
Structural and Institutional Racism Exists Within Police Forces - NYTimes.com

Heather McDonald is the last one to be reading in regards to this matter.

This is news to me.

I must take time to consider the information you have posted here.

It is disturbing at first blush and comes as a surprise.

Thank you.

This may take a while.

No problem Lee.

 

[leecross]

1)
1) You seem to have a monopoly on human virtue and the only truth we need on this board

2) Whites should not have done what they did?

3) Posting on a board about the illegality of the 14th Amendment IS taking it to the public. This IS a public forum...duh

4) My "argument" certainly is not dead. We just discussed it

5) MLK is dead too. Did you have a point?

6) You might want to read up on the Right of Conquest before wasting bandwidth making yourself look foolish:

Right of conquest - Wikipedia

7) Unalienable Rights are given by our Creator and do belong to all men; that's a strawman argument for you. You obviously cannot keep up

8) You make generalized statements about "racism" that you've failed to support with any cogent argument, specifics statistics, or empirical evidence. All I can do is disagree with the generalizations

9) Racism is practiced in Japan (as in many other countries) and they claim to be the most racially pure race on the planet. Bet you have a lot of junk in your house - maybe even your car that says Made in Japan on it. Okay for them; just not acceptable for whites

10) America was not founded as a Democracy and it became the greatest nation in the annals of history as a REPUBLIC.

Actually, I'm reading your post and it doesn't make sense. Your first sentence starts out with whites should not have done what they did, as if they are or were in control of this country, but then dispute your own proclamations more and more with each succeeding paragraph you type.

Everything I said makes sense. You are the one with the problem.

We've had this discussion before, Humone.

Everything you just said does not compute. You should learn how to articulate your position a bit better. You sound like an individual living in his own world.

I've done very well articulating my position to non racist whites. You know, the sane ones who understand that the 14 amendment is legal.

It may be "legal," however; you cannot undo the facts of history. It was unconstitutionally ratified. So, just like during the civil rights era, patriots do not let the current interpretations be a hindrance. You keep bringing the case before the people, keep pointing out why that travesty of justice exists, and eventually public opinion swings back to the correct interpretation of law - that or revolutions take place.

The facts of history show us this land had nations already existing here with laws and boundaries. And they were not white.

Dinesh D'Souza made the point in a video during the 2016 (or was it the 2012?) campaign, iinm, that the settlers here did what was the commonly accepted practice done in ALL LANDS and all territories and newly discovered continents.

They explored, conquered, expanded, and settled.

It happened in Europe and Africa and Asia and South America and Australia and North America.

It was what explorers and settlers did.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

1)
1) You seem to have a monopoly on human virtue and the only truth we need on this board

2) Whites should not have done what they did?

3) Posting on a board about the illegality of the 14th Amendment IS taking it to the public. This IS a public forum...duh

4) My "argument" certainly is not dead. We just discussed it

5) MLK is dead too. Did you have a point?

6) You might want to read up on the Right of Conquest before wasting bandwidth making yourself look foolish:

Right of conquest - Wikipedia

7) Unalienable Rights are given by our Creator and do belong to all men; that's a strawman argument for you. You obviously cannot keep up

8) You make generalized statements about "racism" that you've failed to support with any cogent argument, specifics statistics, or empirical evidence. All I can do is disagree with the generalizations

9) Racism is practiced in Japan (as in many other countries) and they claim to be the most racially pure race on the planet. Bet you have a lot of junk in your house - maybe even your car that says Made in Japan on it. Okay for them; just not acceptable for whites

10) America was not founded as a Democracy and it became the greatest nation in the annals of history as a REPUBLIC.

Actually, I'm reading your post and it doesn't make sense. Your first sentence starts out with whites should not have done what they did, as if they are or were in control of this country, but then dispute your own proclamations more and more with each succeeding paragraph you type.

Everything I said makes sense. You are the one with the problem.

We've had this discussion before, Humone.

Everything you just said does not compute. You should learn how to articulate your position a bit better. You sound like an individual living in his own world.

I've done very well articulating my position to non racist whites. You know, the sane ones who understand that the 14 amendment is legal.

It may be "legal," however; you cannot undo the facts of history. It was unconstitutionally ratified. So, just like during the civil rights era, patriots do not let the current interpretations be a hindrance. You keep bringing the case before the people, keep pointing out why that travesty of justice exists, and eventually public opinion swings back to the correct interpretation of law - that or revolutions take place.

The facts of history show us this land had nations already existing here with laws and boundaries. And they were not white.

And this land was taken over by a Right of Conquest

Right of conquest - Wikipedia

 

[ptbw forever]

No, it is a case of white privilege. Had these kids been black all his defending would not happen.

Had the "kids" been black, they would have likely been forcibly dispersed by law enforcement.

I could imagine it playing out in either direction.

The Black kids being seen as potential threats.

Or with the Black kids being deferred to by Police out of an effort to bend over backwards in order to prevent it from becoming a legal or P.R. nightmare for the Dept.

And after a couple more moments of thought, I can see it playing out fairly, and by the book professionally.

I am not so sure of the third one.

And despite personal experiences which might color your personal expectations, the statistics suggest Police are not likely to act in a racist way.

Are Cops Racist?
Book by Heather Mac Donald

"In careful
reports from New York and other major cities across the country, Ms. Mac Donald investigates the workings of the police, the controversy over racial profiling, and the anti-profiling lobby's harmful effects on black Americans. The reduction in urban crime, one of the nation's signal policy successes of the 1990s, has benefited black communities even more dramatically than white neighborhoods, she shows. By policing inner cities actively after long neglect, cops have allowed business and civil society to flourish there once more. But attacks on police, centering on charges of police racism and racial profiling, and spearheaded by activists, the press, and even the Justice Department, have slowed the success and threaten to reverse it. Ms. Mac Donald looks at the reality behind the allegations and writes about the black cops you never heard about, the press coverage of policing, and policing strategies across the country."

Are Cops Racist?

I've done far too much reading and research to consider what Heather McDonald says. McDonald herself has racial issues.

"'Starting with black crime and not with racism, is always the major flaw in Mac Donald’s work. Still, she remains an opponent to both learn from and take oh so seriously. Thankfully, Mother Jones is among the few progressive organizations which work as hard as Mac Donald does to disprove the notion that blacks have no one to blame but themselves. It’s just that we’re going to need a lot more folks doing work at this level to drown out the Mac Donalds."

Know Your Enemy: Heather Mac Donald



My experience is echoed by millions of other blacks.

Race, racism and law enforcement: A call to action
Hard Truths: Law Enforcement and Race — FBI
FBI warned of white supremacists in law enforcement 10 years ago. Has anything changed?

Eighteen academic studies, legal rulings, and media investigations shed light on the issue roiling America.
What the Data Really Says About Police and Racial Bias

How Structural Racism is Linked to Police Violence - CityLab
Structural and Institutional Racism Exists Within Police Forces - NYTimes.com

Heather McDonald is the last one to be reading in regards to this matter.

Heather Mac Donald has proven that institutional racism against white people exists in this country several times over.

 

[IM2]

Everything I said makes sense. You are the one with the problem.

We've had this discussion before, Humone.

Everything you just said does not compute. You should learn how to articulate your position a bit better. You sound like an individual living in his own world.

I've done very well articulating my position to non racist whites. You know, the sane ones who understand that the 14 amendment is legal.

It may be "legal," however; you cannot undo the facts of history. It was unconstitutionally ratified. So, just like during the civil rights era, patriots do not let the current interpretations be a hindrance. You keep bringing the case before the people, keep pointing out why that travesty of justice exists, and eventually public opinion swings back to the correct interpretation of law - that or revolutions take place.

The facts of history show us this land had nations already existing here with laws and boundaries. And they were not white.

Dinesh D'Souza made the point in a video during the 2016 (or was it the 2012?) campaign, iinm, that the settlers here did what was the commonly accepted practice done in ALL LANDS and all territories and newly discovered continents.

They explored, conquered, expanded, and settled.

It happened in Europe and Africa and Asia and South America and Australia and North America.

It was what explorers and settlers did.

The facts of history show us this land had nations already existing here with laws and boundaries. And they were not white.

 

[ptbw forever]

Everything you just said does not compute. You should learn how to articulate your position a bit better. You sound like an individual living in his own world.

I've done very well articulating my position to non racist whites. You know, the sane ones who understand that the 14 amendment is legal.

It may be "legal," however; you cannot undo the facts of history. It was unconstitutionally ratified. So, just like during the civil rights era, patriots do not let the current interpretations be a hindrance. You keep bringing the case before the people, keep pointing out why that travesty of justice exists, and eventually public opinion swings back to the correct interpretation of law - that or revolutions take place.

The facts of history show us this land had nations already existing here with laws and boundaries. And they were not white.

Dinesh D'Souza made the point in a video during the 2016 (or was it the 2012?) campaign, iinm, that the settlers here did what was the commonly accepted practice done in ALL LANDS and all territories and newly discovered continents.

They explored, conquered, expanded, and settled.

It happened in Europe and Africa and Asia and South America and Australia and North America.

It was what explorers and settlers did.

The facts of history show us this land had nations already existing here with laws and boundaries. And they were not white.

Their nations were their tribes. Same as anyone else.

That is far different than having national borders and a binding legal document for an entire country.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Everything you just said does not compute. You should learn how to articulate your position a bit better. You sound like an individual living in his own world.

I've done very well articulating my position to non racist whites. You know, the sane ones who understand that the 14 amendment is legal.

It may be "legal," however; you cannot undo the facts of history. It was unconstitutionally ratified. So, just like during the civil rights era, patriots do not let the current interpretations be a hindrance. You keep bringing the case before the people, keep pointing out why that travesty of justice exists, and eventually public opinion swings back to the correct interpretation of law - that or revolutions take place.

The facts of history show us this land had nations already existing here with laws and boundaries. And they were not white.

Dinesh D'Souza made the point in a video during the 2016 (or was it the 2012?) campaign, iinm, that the settlers here did what was the commonly accepted practice done in ALL LANDS and all territories and newly discovered continents.

They explored, conquered, expanded, and settled.

It happened in Europe and Africa and Asia and South America and Australia and North America.

It was what explorers and settlers did.

The facts of history show us this land had nations already existing here with laws and boundaries. And they were not white.

And this land was taken over by a Right of Conquest

Right of conquest - Wikipedia

I could have sworn we have already addressed this once today.