Jena and anywhere
I was listening to the news today and heard that there had been a protest in Jena, LA.
White supremacists were in lawful protest in opposition to the outcome of the "jena 6" case.
There were about 120 "counter protesters" to protest the white supremacists.
I reckon that, as much as you may disagree with the message, the white supremacists had the RIGHT to protest, or assemble, or whatever.
I knew a guy once that made it his hobby to follow the KKK around and harass them as they met. He was a self proclaimed liberal and activist. When I asked him who's rights were being trampled when he screamed at the klanspeople, he indicated that they had no rights as thier message was so absurd.
This unclear logic is what runs so rampant here on GB, and I would hope that those of us that espouse freedom at all costs proclaim that freedom for everybody and every idea, not just those we agree with.
White supremacists were in lawful protest in opposition to the outcome of the "jena 6" case.
There were about 120 "counter protesters" to protest the white supremacists.
I reckon that, as much as you may disagree with the message, the white supremacists had the RIGHT to protest, or assemble, or whatever.
I knew a guy once that made it his hobby to follow the KKK around and harass them as they met. He was a self proclaimed liberal and activist. When I asked him who's rights were being trampled when he screamed at the klanspeople, he indicated that they had no rights as thier message was so absurd.
This unclear logic is what runs so rampant here on GB, and I would hope that those of us that espouse freedom at all costs proclaim that freedom for everybody and every idea, not just those we agree with.
0
-
quote:Originally posted by SaxonPig
It's not our place to decide who were the criminals. That's for the legal system to adjudicate. You are still placing blame based on your own opinion.
The Jena court found the ring leader guilty of some sort of assault. Please notice the word "guilty.". The court did not find the lone white victim guilty of anything, nor was he charged. The charges against the others are still pending. Haven't you read anything at all posted by others above? If you did, maybe you and dheffley would be able to "form an opinion."0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
Saxonpig and dheffley. There has been a torrent of information about the Jena 6 on 1. From several different sources.
I learned a long time ago that facts from the liberal media (the only ones I know of in this case) are less than accurate or honest in most cases. Yes, I have a personal opinion, but it is based on information I can't be sure is accurate, so I keep it to myself.
I will say that kids were arrested and were to prosectuted, and I would trust a jury of 12 if it hadn't gotten blown out like it did. Once that crap starts, you won't get a fair prosecution or aquital because it will be drawn down racial lines, 100%.0 -
I would not deny the right to assemble, or the right to protest. But this was not a protest that got out of hand it was a mugging. remember when the gang originally jumped the young man there was no outcry from the media as to the color of the gang, or the color of the young man that got beat up and yet had the situation been reversed there would have been hell to pay, people screaming about 6 white guys jumping a black kid. We have seen this to often when the whites are attacking it is published in big letters, think back about the mexican fellow that was attacked because he was gay. and others also there is a distinct set of double standards in this country.
And that fuel the fire in the hearts of the bigoted. If i recall they even said they hesitated saying that it was a gang of blacks because of the fear of a backlash
Now put the shoe on the other foot had it been a gang of whites attacking a black kid what would the headlines have said. do you think they would have held back.
I wonder if the good rev sharpton been as outraged at a different set of circumstanses, remember the black girl in NewYork who carved KKK into her own chest, remember how outragious it was to the reverand, remember how he screamed hatred and bigotry. remember when it turned out to be a lie. his reaction was that it could have happened and that was cause enough, he even came to her defence and worked out some kind of deal. There is a destinct double standard. lets deal with that.0 -
Man, I just don't know what to say.
The white boys were wrong to do what they did and the six were wrong to do what they did.
The white boys got better treatment than the black boys by the legal system.
The white guys that protested today were wrong, they could have picked one of the other 365 days to "march".
The people that protested against them should have just ignored them, they should have been enjoying any number of different things that were available to them to do today, but they wanted the world to see them and hence got the world to see the "evil" white boys with their big guns all what? Twenty of them?
They all had certain rights, even the criminals, white and black, but that does not mean they have to use them.[V]
DSM0 -
dheffley and saxonpig. I know you both have worldly experience as do I. If a single black young man had been jump by 6 whites, like that young white was in Jena, you both would be screaming about what a racial crime that was even with less information than you have now.
Surely if you even have scant information, you know by now that there was some sort of sneak attack against a prone, unconcious white, by six blacks. If you can admit even that much, how the he!! could you, or anyone, even massage that situation into something other than a cowardly, vicious, black on white, racial gang attack?
In addition, two of the Jena six on one young men were honored as presenters at the annual black achievement awards show. The two vicious, cowardly attackers were given a standing ovation. So much for the black community embracing non-violence as advocated by MLK.0 -
quote:Originally posted by phideaux4886
Man, I just don't know what to say.
The white boys were wrong to do what they did and the six were wrong to do what they did.
The white boys got better treatment than the black boys by the legal system.
The white guys that protested today were wrong, they could have picked one of the other 365 days to "march".
The people that protested against them should have just ignored them, they should have been enjoying any number of different things that were available to them to do today, but they wanted the world to see them and hence got the world to see the "evil" white boys with their big guns all what? Twenty of them?
They all had certain rights, even the criminals, white and black, but that does not mean they have to use them.[V]
DSM
Are you really saying that white boys that make a non-violent statement (hanging nooses, which is not illegal, BTW) cancels out 6 black young men cowardly and physical attacking a lone white from behind and then all six blacks beating that unconcious white victim?
Man, if that is your sense of fair play, then I am sure you would not be upset if you got road rage, flipped another driver off and then got shot. After all, with your apparent logic, both acts would cancel each other out and neither of you should have done what you did. Right?0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
dheffley and saxonpig. I know you both have worldly experience as do I. If a single black young man had been jump by 6 whites, like that young white was in Jena, you both would be screaming about what a racial crime that was even with less information than you have now.
Surely if you even have scant information, you know by now that there was some sort of sneak attack against a prone, unconcious white, by six blacks. If you can admit even that much, how the he!! could you, or anyone, even massage that situation into something other than a cowardly, vicious, black on white, racial gang attack?
In addition, two of the Jena six on one young men were honored as presenters at the annual black achievement awards show. The two vicious, cowardly attackers were given a standing ovation. So much for the black community embracing non-violence as advocated by MLK.
TR,
I gave my first opinion here when it first broke. I still believe the 6 on 1 was not justified by the later reports of the tree incident. But now, there is no way for me to sort through all of the claims and so called "facts" of the case, so I no longer think I have a real opinion of the crimes that have been committed. It's all been blurred in vocal rhetoric from both sides.
I believe the first convictions should have been respected and upheld. That's as far as I can go now that it's on the level of the OJ crap!0 -
Have it your way dheffley. But not one single person is claiming that the black 6 on 1 attack did not happen. And not one single person is claiming there was even remotely a similar physical white on black physical attack.
Pertaining to that part of the Jena situation, a reasonable person could easily form an opinion regarding unlawful violence. Unless they want to hold blacks to a lower standard than whites and that is a form of racism.0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
But not one single person is claiming that the black 6 on 1 attack did not happen.
I said I believed it happened (6 on 1), and I didn't believe the later claims that the incident in the tree justified it. I also said the original convictions were the most untanted evidence to me. At that point, it should have gone no farther. Now, it's just a bunch of he said / she said and tainted evidence that no one can believe. Same level of justice that prevailed in the OJ case.0 -
Not to worry. Things will surely get better in the near future. OBama just noted in the Democratic Presidential Debate co-sponsored by the Congressional Black Caucus, and held in Myrtle Beach, SC, that if he was elected to be president that he would form a, are your ready?, Civil Rights Justice Division. Such a division, of course, would be to look closely at discrimination issues. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by phideaux4886
Man, I just don't know what to say.
The white boys were wrong to do what they did and the six were wrong to do what they did.
The white boys got better treatment than the black boys by the legal system.
The white guys that protested today were wrong, they could have picked one of the other 365 days to "march".
The people that protested against them should have just ignored them, they should have been enjoying any number of different things that were available to them to do today, but they wanted the world to see them and hence got the world to see the "evil" white boys with their big guns all what? Twenty of them?
They all had certain rights, even the criminals, white and black, but that does not mean they have to use them.[V]
DSM
Are you really saying that white boys that make a non-violent statement (hanging nooses, which is not illegal, BTW) cancels out 6 black young men cowardly and physical attacking a lone white from behind and then all six blacks beating that unconscious white victim?
Man, if that is your sense of fair play, then I am sure you would not be upset if you got road rage, flipped another driver off and then got shot. After all, with your apparent logic, both acts would cancel each other out and neither of you should have done what you did. Right?
I think if you look back at the record, the black boy was jumped at a party, by more than one white boy first and the white boys got a slap on the wrist.
I can remember some twenty to thirty years back when you did not go into each others neighborhoods or you might get jumped and I can say from first hand information them boys are fast.
My buddy got his arse whooped pretty bad back in the day, I don't recall it make the paper or the evening news.
An ancient Chinese proverb comes to mind, "Man it forest need not out run bear, only outrun his traveling partner".
DSM0 -
quote:Originally posted by phideaux4886
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by phideaux4886
Man, I just don't know what to say.
The white boys were wrong to do what they did and the six were wrong to do what they did.
The white boys got better treatment than the black boys by the legal system.
The white guys that protested today were wrong, they could have picked one of the other 365 days to "march".
The people that protested against them should have just ignored them, they should have been enjoying any number of different things that were available to them to do today, but they wanted the world to see them and hence got the world to see the "evil" white boys with their big guns all what? Twenty of them?
They all had certain rights, even the criminals, white and black, but that does not mean they have to use them.[V]
DSM
Are you really saying that white boys that make a non-violent statement (hanging nooses, which is not illegal, BTW) cancels out 6 black young men cowardly and physical attacking a lone white from behind and then all six blacks beating that unconscious white victim?
Man, if that is your sense of fair play, then I am sure you would not be upset if you got road rage, flipped another driver off and then got shot. After all, with your apparent logic, both acts would cancel each other out and neither of you should have done what you did. Right?
I think if you look back at the record, the black boy was jumped at a party, by more than one white boy first and the white boys got a slap on the wrist.
I can remember some twenty to thirty years back when you did not go into each others neighborhoods or you might get jumped and I can say from first hand information them boys are fast.
My buddy got his arse whooped pretty bad back in the day, I don't recall it make the paper or the evening news.
An ancient Chinese proverb comes to mind, "Man it forest need not out run bear, only outrun his traveling partner".
DSM
You, sir, are operating on incorrect information. The only white and black "fight" AT ALL during this whole mess was when one young man tried to get into a party at a house and the young man manning the door and the party crasher got into a very minor scuffle. NO injuries, NO hospital emergency room treatment and NO 6 (or 5 or 4 or 3 or 2) whites on 1 black. In fact, it was such a minor "fight" there were no charges filed. So much for the 6 on 1 violence having even the tiniest justification.0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by phideaux4886
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by phideaux4886
Man, I just don't know what to say.
The white boys were wrong to do what they did and the six were wrong to do what they did.
The white boys got better treatment than the black boys by the legal system.
The white guys that protested today were wrong, they could have picked one of the other 365 days to "march".
The people that protested against them should have just ignored them, they should have been enjoying any number of different things that were available to them to do today, but they wanted the world to see them and hence got the world to see the "evil" white boys with their big guns all what? Twenty of them?
They all had certain rights, even the criminals, white and black, but that does not mean they have to use them.[V]
DSM
Are you really saying that white boys that make a non-violent statement (hanging nooses, which is not illegal, BTW) cancels out 6 black young men cowardly and physical attacking a lone white from behind and then all six blacks beating that unconscious white victim?
Man, if that is your sense of fair play, then I am sure you would not be upset if you got road rage, flipped another driver off and then got shot. After all, with your apparent logic, both acts would cancel each other out and neither of you should have done what you did. Right?
I think if you look back at the record, the black boy was jumped at a party, by more than one white boy first and the white boys got a slap on the wrist.
I can remember some twenty to thirty years back when you did not go into each others neighborhoods or you might get jumped and I can say from first hand information them boys are fast.
My buddy got his arse whooped pretty bad back in the day, I don't recall it make the paper or the evening news.
An ancient Chinese proverb comes to mind, "Man it forest need not out run bear, only outrun his traveling partner".
DSM
You, sir, are operating on incorrect information. The only white and black "fight" AT ALL during this whole mess was when one young man tried to get into a party at a house and the young man manning the door and the party crasher got into a very minor scuffle. NO injuries, NO hospital emergency room treatment and NO 6 (or 5 or 4 or 3 or 2) whites on 1 black. In fact, it was such a minor "fight" there were no charges filed. So much for the 6 on 1 violence having even the tiniest justification.
Wrong.
The white male was charged and arrested and I have yet to say any beating was justified, or acceptable.
You seem to have blinders on that do not allow you to see any fault, other than that of the black boys.
DSM0 -
quote:Originally posted by phideaux4886
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by phideaux4886
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by phideaux4886
Man, I just don't know what to say.
The white boys were wrong to do what they did and the six were wrong to do what they did.
The white boys got better treatment than the black boys by the legal system.
The white guys that protested today were wrong, they could have picked one of the other 365 days to "march".
The people that protested against them should have just ignored them, they should have been enjoying any number of different things that were available to them to do today, but they wanted the world to see them and hence got the world to see the "evil" white boys with their big guns all what? Twenty of them?
They all had certain rights, even the criminals, white and black, but that does not mean they have to use them.[V]
DSM
Are you really saying that white boys that make a non-violent statement (hanging nooses, which is not illegal, BTW) cancels out 6 black young men cowardly and physical attacking a lone white from behind and then all six blacks beating that unconscious white victim?
Man, if that is your sense of fair play, then I am sure you would not be upset if you got road rage, flipped another driver off and then got shot. After all, with your apparent logic, both acts would cancel each other out and neither of you should have done what you did. Right?
I think if you look back at the record, the black boy was jumped at a party, by more than one white boy first and the white boys got a slap on the wrist.
I can remember some twenty to thirty years back when you did not go into each others neighborhoods or you might get jumped and I can say from first hand information them boys are fast.
My buddy got his arse whooped pretty bad back in the day, I don't recall it make the paper or the evening news.
An ancient Chinese proverb comes to mind, "Man it forest need not out run bear, only outrun his traveling partner".
DSM
You, sir, are operating on incorrect information. The only white and black "fight" AT ALL during this whole mess was when one young man tried to get into a party at a house and the young man manning the door and the party crasher got into a very minor scuffle. NO injuries, NO hospital emergency room treatment and NO 6 (or 5 or 4 or 3 or 2) whites on 1 black. In fact, it was such a minor "fight" there were no charges filed. So much for the 6 on 1 violence having even the tiniest justification.
Wrong.
The white male was charged and arrested and I have yet to say any beating was justified, or acceptable.
You seem to have blinders on that do not allow you to see any fault, other than that of the black boys.
DSM
Let's say you are correct that it was one white male on one black and the white was charged. Your own words describe a "one on one" actual fight. Fight meaning that both parties attempted to harm the other. I don't have time to search and dispute this scene you describe. So say it is true.
How does that even remotely justify calling the Jena 6 on 1 attack a "fight?". If you had been the unconcious white on the ground, being beaten by 6 blacks, would you tell the police that you were MERELY IN A FIGHT? Geez, I hope you are more sensible than that.0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by phideaux4886
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by phideaux4886
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
quote:Originally posted by phideaux4886
Man, I just don't know what to say.
The white boys were wrong to do what they did and the six were wrong to do what they did.
The white boys got better treatment than the black boys by the legal system.
The white guys that protested today were wrong, they could have picked one of the other 365 days to "march".
The people that protested against them should have just ignored them, they should have been enjoying any number of different things that were available to them to do today, but they wanted the world to see them and hence got the world to see the "evil" white boys with their big guns all what? Twenty of them?
They all had certain rights, even the criminals, white and black, but that does not mean they have to use them.[V]
DSM
Are you really saying that white boys that make a non-violent statement (hanging nooses, which is not illegal, BTW) cancels out 6 black young men cowardly and physical attacking a lone white from behind and then all six blacks beating that unconscious white victim?
Man, if that is your sense of fair play, then I am sure you would not be upset if you got road rage, flipped another driver off and then got shot. After all, with your apparent logic, both acts would cancel each other out and neither of you should have done what you did. Right?
I think if you look back at the record, the black boy was jumped at a party, by more than one white boy first and the white boys got a slap on the wrist.
I can remember some twenty to thirty years back when you did not go into each others neighborhoods or you might get jumped and I can say from first hand information them boys are fast.
My buddy got his arse whooped pretty bad back in the day, I don't recall it make the paper or the evening news.
An ancient Chinese proverb comes to mind, "Man it forest need not out run bear, only outrun his traveling partner".
DSM
You, sir, are operating on incorrect information. The only white and black "fight" AT ALL during this whole mess was when one young man tried to get into a party at a house and the young man manning the door and the party crasher got into a very minor scuffle. NO injuries, NO hospital emergency room treatment and NO 6 (or 5 or 4 or 3 or 2) whites on 1 black. In fact, it was such a minor "fight" there were no charges filed. So much for the 6 on 1 violence having even the tiniest justification.
Wrong.
The white male was charged and arrested and I have yet to say any beating was justified, or acceptable.
You seem to have blinders on that do not allow you to see any fault, other than that of the black boys.
DSM
Let's say you are correct that it was one white male on one black and the white was charged. Your own words describe a "one on one" actual fight. Fight meaning that both parties attempted to harm the other. I don't have time to search and dispute this scene you describe. So say it is true.
How does that even remotely justify calling the Jena 6 on 1 attack a "fight?". If you had been the unconcious white on the ground, being beaten by 6 blacks, would you tell the police that you were MERELY IN A FIGHT? Geez, I hope you are more sensible than that.
You are completely missing the point, at least my point.
I have never even remotely tried to say that what the black kids did was "right". Not once.
But I am also not going to say the white boys were "angels".
The whole thing from start to, yet to happen, finish has been wrong.
I also live in a small Louisiana town, but it is not as rural, along with black folks.
I for one am glad we treat each other better.
DSM0 -
I don't know what race you are and it is none of my business. But if you saw your son out in front of your house being attacked by 6 other young men, while your son lay unconcisous on the ground, I will bet $100.00 you would take that outrage serious enough that you would try to grab a gun and go out there and immedately stop that gang attack. REGARDLESS of what your son, or any other of your son's friends had done at school.
I just want people to call the Jena 6 on 1 what it was. A unjustified, violent, cowardly, criminal and vicous attack on a lone unconcious white by 6 blacks. Nothing else in Jena even remotely compares to that cowardly attack but so many here are acting like it was just one of a string of similar offenses.
It was not. That would be like comparing a school boy with stealing a kiss to a gang rape.0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
I don't know what race you are and it is none of my business. But if you saw your son out in front of your house being attacked by 6 other young men, while your son lay unconcisous on the ground, I will bet $100.00 you would take that outrage serious enough that you would try to grab a gun and go out there and immedately stop that gang attack. REGARDLESS of what your son, or any other of your son's friends had done at school.
I'm not going to take that bet, it would be like throwing money in the toilet.[;)]
DSM0 -
quote:Originally posted by phideaux4886
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
I don't know what race you are and it is none of my business. But if you saw your son out in front of your house being attacked by 6 other young men, while your son lay unconcisous on the ground, I will bet $100.00 you would take that outrage serious enough that you would try to grab a gun and go out there and immedately stop that gang attack. REGARDLESS of what your son, or any other of your son's friends had done at school.
I'm not going to take that bet, it would be like throwing money in the toilet.[;)]
DSM
Well then good for you [;)]0 -
holy smokes has this gone somewhere I had no idea it would go!
The point is not the rightness or wrongness of the jena 6.
The point is:
When you activly deny someone (or a group's) right to free speech, as the counter protesters did, (or as many of us do when we "talk over" an opposing view) you are wrong.
you are free to counter protest, but it makes you an idiot for being so narrow as not to be able to consider the alternative point.
That is not such a subtle point in light of the fact that we so veghemently defend our rights as defined by the constitution.0 -
quote:Originally posted by tacking1
When you activly deny someone (or a group's) right to free speech, as the counter protesters did, (or as many of us do when we "talk over" an opposing view) you are wrong.
I'll AMEN that statement. I think most of us got that before it made a left turn at Albuquerque!0 -
quote:Originally posted by dheffley
quote:Originally posted by tacking1
When you activly deny someone (or a group's) right to free speech, as the counter protesters did, (or as many of us do when we "talk over" an opposing view) you are wrong.
I'll AMEN that statement. I think most of us got that before it made a left turn at Albuquerque!
LOL at me then Danny...I get kinda focused on MY points and the hijacks make me worry!
Thanks for setting me straight!0 -
quote:Originally posted by dheffley
quote:Originally posted by tacking1
When you activly deny someone (or a group's) right to free speech, as the counter protesters did, (or as many of us do when we "talk over" an opposing view) you are wrong.
I'll AMEN that statement. I think most of us got that before it made a left turn at Albuquerque!
+10 -
IMHO I have to say it was a racial incident, and the Investigating Officer should have labled it as a hate crime if he didnt. If the shoe was on the other foot I would say the same. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Nighthawk
IMHO I have to say it was a racial incident, and the Investigating Officer should have labled it as a hate crime if he didnt. If the shoe was on the other foot I would say the same.
I couldn't agree more - the Jena 6 committed a hate crime if there ever was one. At least I hope that's where you were going with that statement.
The US Attorney investigated the FACTS, not the fictional media accounts, and found that no hate crime was committed.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
54 comments