Very disturbing hate crime video

57 posts / 0 new

This shows how demented of a society we have become. Laughing at the misery of others. Why has this not gotten media coverage? Oh, I remember, because the media does not like stories showing minorities as predators as they are in this case. As far as the media is concerned minorities cannot commit hate crimes. Had the roles in this video been reversed we all know what would happen. There would be a national outrage. All the networks would be devoting large segments to the story. The FBI would be investigating and the President would probably be weighing in. But the poor victim was the wrong color so nobody seems to care.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/video-of-white-man-being-stripped-and-beaten-outside-baltimore-courthouse-sparks-outrage-on-the-internet/

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 7:49 am

Comments

Are the local police treating it like a crime?

Phaedrus76's picture
Phaedrus76
Joined:
Sep. 14, 2010 8:21 pm
Quote Phaedrus76:Are the local police treating it like a crime?

I would hope so. I don't think its legal to attack a man like a pack of Jackals. Robbing him blind and cold cocking him is probably against the law.

Did it look like a hate crime to you? Is it possible that the attack was racially motivated?

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 7:49 am

yeah, you won't see Solodad O'brien covering that!

TChamp3121's picture
TChamp3121
Joined:
Nov. 16, 2010 5:20 pm

So a white person gets assaulted and robbed, and the local police investigate the act like it was a crime. Next up, in Rigel news man loves his wife, sun rises in East, and women like chocolate.

Phaedrus76's picture
Phaedrus76
Joined:
Sep. 14, 2010 8:21 pm
Quote Phaedrus76:So a white person gets assaulted and robbed, and the local police investigate the act like it was a crime. Next up, in Rigel news man loves his wife, sun rises in East, and women like chocolate.

Forgive me but I don't understand your reply. What do you mean by "act like it was a crime?"

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 7:49 am

He means if a black guy was robbed, there's a strong possibility that the police would throw the report in the trash and forget about it.

Karolina's picture
Karolina
Joined:
Nov. 3, 2011 7:45 pm

hey rigel1, relax, your hero's have arrived to save the white folks.

Updated:Police Deny Neo Nazi Vigilantes are Patroling Stanford's Streets


bamboo's picture
bamboo
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Let me try again...
A man was assaulted and robbed.
The police arrive and treat it as a crime, investigate and will search for the perps.
The are acting as if a crime were committed.

And that is news in your world.

Now, if the victim had been black, do you believe the same would be done?

Phaedrus76's picture
Phaedrus76
Joined:
Sep. 14, 2010 8:21 pm

I think Rigel's point was that the media only emphasizes crimes committed on ethnic minorities by whites (We're all one race). Not that the police aren't treating it as a crime.

TheFirstLeftist's picture
TheFirstLeftist
Joined:
Mar. 23, 2012 2:33 pm

Fact: 93% if homicides of african americans are perpetrated by other african americans. But, if there's a white person commiting that crime on african americans the media spin portreys is as thought the majority of these crimes are committed by whitey. Give it up! Quit playing the race card! This argument is being used over and over again for racist's like Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson who's sole purpose is to keep this sharade going in order to gin up their political (job) positions.

This whole thing will backfire on the african american community if it can be shown that this was not a racist crime. It really does a diservice to this community, and only serves to validate the suspicions of minorities that play the system.

TChamp3121's picture
TChamp3121
Joined:
Nov. 16, 2010 5:20 pm

No one is causing a stink over the murder of Mr. Martin because it a was a white on black crime.

The marches, and media attention is because the local law enforcement does not view the murder of a black man as a crime if committed by a white man.

As for playing the system, how is Mr. Martin gaining anything by this game? How did Mr. Zimmerman's father talking with the police and prosecutor affect the decision to not arrest Mr. Zimmerman?

In your video, the local police treated the act like a crime. It is being treated like a criminal act.

Mr. Zimmerman can call 9-1-1, tell the operator "they always get away with it." and complain about the "fucking coon", 2 minutes later on another 9-1-1 call you can hear a person crying and pleading for their life, for 40 seconds before you a hear a gun shot. Mr. Martin is then dead. And that is not a crime in America.

If rigel wants to understand the equivalence, if the Baltimore PD showed up, and charged the white man with the crime of assaulting the young black men, then you'd have the same situation.

Phaedrus76's picture
Phaedrus76
Joined:
Sep. 14, 2010 8:21 pm

It's opportunistic, unruly youths.

ADULTS create the world CHILDREN live in. If there is child delinquency, it is directly attributed to adult delinquency.

What bothered me was the women in the video. I don't know about you, but I couldn't imagine my sister or daughter doing that to a complete stranger. I know this type of behavior happens all of the time... but I somehow expect more out of women. That very well be a fault in my character.

I saw a stat recently where 1 out of 10 children born by black families in the 1950's were out of wedlock. Now it's 9 out of 10 children are born out of wedlock by black families. 52% of black pregnancies are aborted. Those are serious issues... this video is not a serious issue. It's not.

Government cannot legislate a "stupid" person into a "smart" person.

It's up to ourselves to act responsibly and to responsibly defend ourselves. That man did neither. The mob didn't act responsibly either.

I don't find it shocking, I find it rather disgusting and pathetic.

I don't think that there should have been cops there to break it up. We can't expect the role of government to spoon feed us throughout our existence. Again, we should act responsibly. We shouldn't get piss drunk in public and make bad decisions. We shouldn't beat people up and embarrass them.

Tell me that this type of behavior doesn't go on in Ireland... that would be "news" to me.

Fletcher Christian's picture
Fletcher Christian
Joined:
Feb. 15, 2012 12:49 pm

Ya'll are dodging the the question. We all know that if the roles were reversed and this was a white mob attacking a black man, there would be international outrage. It would be played non stop on all off the "news" stations. This is not even debatable. The president would be commenting as he likes to do if the victim is black. The FBI would be investigating this as a hate crime.

Anybody know why Al & Jessie are ignoring this?

My question is simple: Why the selective outrage? Why do situations such as this get ignored due to the race of the victim? I'm looking for an answer to this question first before we pose additional questions. Please judge this case based only on this case. No more dodging.

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 7:49 am

Your accusation is the problem. Is this case being ignored? Does it represent a history of little or no prosecution? Or, is it a case of "pay-back" where the reversed roles make that the story?

You can get general agreement that violence should not happen. You will not find people defending those using violence even if it does raise the questions above. It can raise questions about the coverage and what the story is supposed to imply, but unless there is something very important about what caused an incident, nobody will be saying that assault should be allowed or excused.

The same Black authorities your friends here demean for responding to the defense of the ignored by the courts case of Trayvon are also active in their opposition to gangs and violence in their urban locations, so what is the phony outrage all about? It really is hard to appreciate any point to your post because there is no equivalance. As others have told you, a crime is committed, the cops respond and the courts are dealing with it. Had that happened in Florida, there would have been no national furor, just sadness about a kid killed by an idiot vigilante.

What is the answer you think needs to be given that has not been, and why?

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

http://www.albany.edu/sourcebook/pdf/t31292010.pdf

According to this in 2010, 218 blacks were murdered by whites. How many of those stories were breaking news? A murder is a murder no matter what the circumstances or the races of the people involved. Most murders are commited by persons of the same race against each other. There is no story here rigel. As a matter of fact when you google "how many blacks are murdered by whites in the usa" all you get are pages upon pages about how many blacks murder whites. Is that some kind of media bias?

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 7:53 am
Quote DRC:

Your accusation is the problem. Is this case being ignored? Does it represent a history of little or no prosecution? Or, is it a case of "pay-back" where the reversed roles make that the story?

You can get general agreement that violence should not happen. You will not find people defending those using violence even if it does raise the questions above. It can raise questions about the coverage and what the story is supposed to imply, but unless there is something very important about what caused an incident, nobody will be saying that assault should be allowed or excused.

The same Black authorities your friends here demean for responding to the defense of the ignored by the courts case of Trayvon are also active in their opposition to gangs and violence in their urban locations, so what is the phony outrage all about? It really is hard to appreciate any point to your post because there is no equivalance. As others have told you, a crime is committed, the cops respond and the courts are dealing with it. Had that happened in Florida, there would have been no national furor, just sadness about a kid killed by an idiot vigilante.

What is the answer you think needs to be given that has not been, and why?

My question is simple: Why the selective outrage? Why do situations such as this get ignored due to the race of the victim?

I don't see an answer to this question.

I kinda hope the guy was a liberal. Because after that. He probably isn't anymore.

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 7:49 am
I don't see an answer to this question.
OK. I think this is awful . . . just awful.

Art's picture
Art
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

If it happened to black man, and the attackers were white and if it were treated as a crime by local law enforcement, arrests were made and indictments followed, it would not be news.

If the white men were wearing hoods, and the attack ended with the lighting of a cross, some arson, and the black man getting lynched, then that is a bigger news story.

Phaedrus76's picture
Phaedrus76
Joined:
Sep. 14, 2010 8:21 pm
Quote Phaedrus76:

If it happened to black man, and the attackers were white and if it were treated as a crime by local law enforcement, arrests were made and indictments followed, it would not be news.

If the white men were wearing hoods, and the attack ended with the lighting of a cross, some arson, and the black man getting lynched, then that is a bigger news story.

That's not what I asked. You changed the circumstances and made it a murder. This was not a murder. What would of happened if the EXACT same thing happened to a black man? What if a black man wandered into a white neighborhood and he was set upon by a wild predatory mob mob?

1) Would the media ignore it?

2) Would the FBI be investigating it as a hate crime?

3) Would the president be weighing in?

4) Would Al and Jessie be parading throught the streets?

No more dodge ball P. Answer the question as it is posed.

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 7:49 am

Here's a story about hate crime that made the news of white-on-white violence based on food discrimination, or possibly waitress discrimination. It's true. White misbehavior gets all the press. They never report when this kind of thing happens in women's restaurants, or afro-american restaurants, or chinese restaurants, or Ethiopian restaurants.

Art's picture
Art
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Anyone can go on youtube and watch "ghetto fights". Are all of those being investigated or making news?

Kimbo Slice has made a nice living off of it.

Anyone can buy videos of "bum fights". Those "fights" are not sanctioned events. They are illegal. Are they being investigated and covered in the news?

Would it make news if it were the situation was reversed. I'm guessing, probably.

Would there be an arrest if a black man hunted down an killed an unarmed white teenager? I'm guessing, probably.

Your question is unanswerable. Why does one story make the news and what doesn't make the news? I often find some news stories infinitely interesting, yet other people do not.

I think the murder of a president in Dallas, Texas should STILL be making news. I think there are guilty men still alive and should be prosecuted. Why isn't that being covered?

I think it's news worthy that the police just kill people now instead of beating them up like Rodney King. I think that would make a GREAT story.

Is there a direct motive for pushing a made up racial agenda? I say, "YES, there is."

I've written about it on the Chicago Murder statistics. Why isn't that story making the news?

I think the owner of the World Trade Center saying that a decision was made to "pull" building #7 should be making news. I roll my eyes when I hear on the radio that Bin Laden was the arch enemy and the perpetrator of the attacks on 9/11. I heard it just last night on Marc Levin's propaganda machine.

If we're really scared of terrorists, why aren't the borders sealed? Why isn't that news?

I could go on and on (I already have, sorry). But you're questions can't be answered by me or anyone on this site.

Who decides what makes the news? I would guess it's a shadowy, menacing presence called the New World Order. Maybe you should ask them.

When you can get a straight answer from the official New World Order spokesman, let us know what they told you, OK?

Fletcher Christian's picture
Fletcher Christian
Joined:
Feb. 15, 2012 12:49 pm

rigel, it takes more than the perp and victim being different races to declare something a racially motivated crime or a hate crime. What evidence do you gather from this video other than that they are different races that indicates this is racially motivated?

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 10:00 pm
Quote ah2:

rigel, it takes more than the perp and victim being different races to declare something a racially motivated crime or a hate crime. What evidence do you gather from this video other than that they are different races that indicates this is racially motivated?

It appears to be racially motivated. Would I swear that it is all about race? No. I give people the benefit of the doubt. But I do know the answer to the questions that I posed if the races were reversed.

1) Would the media ignore it?

Answer: Nope

2) Would the FBI be investigating it as a hate crime?

Answer: Uh huh.

3) Would the president be weighing in?

Answer: Of course.

4) Would Al and Jessie be parading throught the streets?

Answer: You betcha.

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 7:49 am
Quote rigel1:

That's not what I asked. You changed the circumstances and made it a murder. This was not a murder. What would of happened if the EXACT same thing happened to a black man? What if a black man wandered into a white neighborhood and he was set upon by a wild predatory mob mob?

1) Would the media ignore it?

2) Would the FBI be investigating it as a hate crime?

3) Would the president be weighing in?

4) Would Al and Jessie be parading throught the streets?

No more dodge ball P. Answer the question as it is posed.

I've been and am still busy with taxes but had to respond to this post:

First and foremost, I want to point out that your question compares two situations which do not share circumstances and needs to be bore out for proper perspective. The original premise of the question is flawed.

You pose the question without regards to what happened AFTER the incident between the police and potential defendent(s) which is MORE important than the actual event itself.

I do not know your motives but you conviniently leave out any facts pertaining to how the case in the video was pursued by police. The onus is on you to provide such information. The answer you seek depends highly on what the answer to that matter is. If you can answer that question I will gladly provide the answer you have so seeked throught the thread.

Dominic C
Joined:
Jun. 27, 2011 10:39 am
Quote rigel1:

I kinda hope the guy was a liberal. Because after that. He probably isn't anymore.

You need to think HARD and WHY you made this statement...

Dominic C
Joined:
Jun. 27, 2011 10:39 am
Quote Dominic C:
Quote rigel1:

I kinda hope the guy was a liberal. Because after that. He probably isn't anymore.

You need to think HARD and WHY you made this statement...

Okay. I thought. Now what?

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 7:49 am
Quote Dominic C:
Quote rigel1:

That's not what I asked. You changed the circumstances and made it a murder. This was not a murder. What would of happened if the EXACT same thing happened to a black man? What if a black man wandered into a white neighborhood and he was set upon by a wild predatory mob mob?

1) Would the media ignore it?

2) Would the FBI be investigating it as a hate crime?

3) Would the president be weighing in?

4) Would Al and Jessie be parading throught the streets?

No more dodge ball P. Answer the question as it is posed.

I've been and am still busy with taxes but had to respond to this post:

First and foremost, I want to point out that your question compares two situations which do not share circumstances and needs to be bore out for proper perspective. The original premise of the question is flawed.

You pose the question without regards to what happened AFTER the incident between the police and potential defendent(s) which is MORE important than the actual event itself.

I do not know your motives but you conviniently leave out any facts pertaining to how the case in the video was pursued by police. The onus is on you to provide such information. The answer you seek depends highly on what the answer to that matter is. If you can answer that question I will gladly provide the answer you have so seeked throught the thread.

I conveniently left out nothing. You know better than to accuse me of that. I saw the same video that you did and we both know that IF The roles were reversed:

1) Would the media ignore it?

Answer: Nope

2) Would the FBI be investigating it as a hate crime?

Answer: Uh huh.

3) Would the president be weighing in?

Answer: Of course.

4) Would Al and Jessie be parading throught the streets?

Answer: You betcha.

The media doesn't need any of the details. They see something, make a judgement and run the story.

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 7:49 am
Quote rigel1:
Quote ah2:

rigel, it takes more than the perp and victim being different races to declare something a racially motivated crime or a hate crime. What evidence do you gather from this video other than that they are different races that indicates this is racially motivated?

It appears to be racially motivated. Would I swear that it is all about race? No. I give people the benefit of the doubt. But I do know the answer to the questions that I posed if the races were reversed.

1) Would the media ignore it?

Answer: Nope

2) Would the FBI be investigating it as a hate crime?

Answer: Uh huh.

3) Would the president be weighing in?

Answer: Of course.

4) Would Al and Jessie be parading throught the streets?

Answer: You betcha.

Rigel you are such an ass. The title of this thread is about a "hate crime" video and now you are backpedaling because I called you on your bullshit. Typical conservative asshattery.

The "motivation" for this crime? Alcohol.

The media covered this event to you moron. Your clip is from a news station.

No the FBI wouldn't be investigating it as a hate crime.

Obama would comment on it if asked. Obama commented on the Martin incident because he was asked by media, not because he had some agenda to bring it up. The press conference that this was done in was not even about the Martin incident.

Would sharpton and jackson be parading? Maybe just like the white supremacists parading down in Sanford right now. But you are talking about them are you? No. Why not? Because you are probably one of the most racially biased individuals in this thread.

As stated above, the issue with the Martin case for liberals was NOT that it was a hate crime. It was NOT that the victim was black. It was that THERE WAS VIRTUALLY NO INVESTIGATION AND NO INITIAL ARREST FOR A MURDERER AND BECAUSE A LAW WAS PROTECTING A MURDERER FROM BEING BROUGHT TO JUSTICE.

Is that clear enough for you? I put it in all caps so you can get over yourself and join us here in reality. The person above was correct in saying that this post was predicated on a false premise - that you think liberals simply jump on top of any case where a minority was harmed by a white person. Are you effing kidding me? You know how many cases like that happen every damn day? Wake the hell up.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 10:00 pm

Don't we know about mob mentality? Something happens to humans in groups, whether they're black, white, male or female, and, when violence erupts, it takes the conscious people among us to end it. Remember after the Rodney King verdict in 1992, how the white truck driver Reginald Denny was pulled from his truck and beaten nearly to death by outraged and rioting blacks? He would have died, except that other blacks rescued him. Later, he forgave his attackers, face to face.

The reason rigel1's video doesn't inspire the same sort of outrage as did the Trayvon Martin case is that it was a case of a crime committed by citizens, rather than an apparent miscarriage of justice done by the authorities, that is, those in power. Yes, the bullying done in rigel's video disgraces the bullies themselves and should be prosecuted. But a miscarriage of justice, where the police appear to ignore a crime against a minority, as if by racist policies, shocks us deeply. That's the kind of official bullying that adds insult to the injuries of inequality, insults which people of color face every day of their lives in ways white people can't even imagine.

I, for one, found myself forgiving the LA riots for that very reason. A people can take only so much, just so many miscarriages of justice. At a certain point, something breaks.

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote rigel1:
Quote Dominic C:
Quote rigel1:

I kinda hope the guy was a liberal. Because after that. He probably isn't anymore.

You need to think HARD and WHY you made this statement...

Okay. I thought. Now what?

I guess the fact that you don't understand what you imply shows a level of not getting it. I'm not saying this as a matter of attacking you but I truly believe you don't realize what a statement like this implies.

Why do you wish he was a "liberal" and why would he not be one any longer after this incident?

This statement, simple as it is, reveals much about your thought processes relating to race relations and politics even though you may not realize it.

I'm asking you to think hard about it because if YOU come up with the answer it will make much more sense to you rather than me trying to TELL you. I sincerely mean this to educate and enlighten since as I have said before, I can have a discussion with you regardless of area of agreement. Self discovery is so much more enlightening than being preached to.

I'm sure there are others that know exactly what I mean if you mind chipping in..

Dominic C
Joined:
Jun. 27, 2011 10:39 am
Quote rigel1:
Quote ah2:

rigel, it takes more than the perp and victim being different races to declare something a racially motivated crime or a hate crime. What evidence do you gather from this video other than that they are different races that indicates this is racially motivated?

It appears to be racially motivated. Would I swear that it is all about race? No. I give people the benefit of the doubt. But I do know the answer to the questions that I posed if the races were reversed.

1) Would the media ignore it?

Answer: Nope

2) Would the FBI be investigating it as a hate crime?

Answer: Uh huh.

3) Would the president be weighing in?

Answer: Of course.

4) Would Al and Jessie be parading throught the streets?

Answer: You betcha.

1. Would the media ignore it? Probably because the thugs were probably arrested.

2. Would the FBI be treating it as a hate crime? Nope. It was after hours thugerry on a "drunkards" holiday. Happens all of the time. It's not an unusual case.

3. Would the president be weighing in? No, does he weigh in on every after hour fight that's reported or video'd.

4. Would Al & Jesse be parading the streets? Al, doubtful. Jesse, by all means if it was brought to his attention.

You miss the point rigel. If the cops would have come across your example and sent the suspects home then this would probably have made the interweb media circus. You are making the Travon story about race when it's really about the way the police handled it and about how the law was enforced. Race is what fueled the story after it made headlines.

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 7:53 am
Quote ah2:
Quote rigel1:
Quote ah2:

rigel, it takes more than the perp and victim being different races to declare something a racially motivated crime or a hate crime. What evidence do you gather from this video other than that they are different races that indicates this is racially motivated?

It appears to be racially motivated. Would I swear that it is all about race? No. I give people the benefit of the doubt. But I do know the answer to the questions that I posed if the races were reversed.

1) Would the media ignore it?

Answer: Nope

2) Would the FBI be investigating it as a hate crime?

Answer: Uh huh.

3) Would the president be weighing in?

Answer: Of course.

4) Would Al and Jessie be parading throught the streets?

Answer: You betcha.

Rigel you are such an ass. The title of this thread is about a "hate crime" video and now you are backpedaling because I called you on your bullshit. Typical conservative asshattery.

Wake the hell up.

Very, very good!!! Did you stay up all night with your little playground friends to come up with this ingenious response? Well thought and well played big boy. Your mamma should be congratulated.

Ya'll know that my four points are absolutely correct. Which is exactly why you have come unglued. Anyone who is not enslaved by ideology can recognize the truth. Free your mind.

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 7:49 am
Quote rigel1:
Quote ah2:
Quote rigel1:
Quote ah2:

rigel, it takes more than the perp and victim being different races to declare something a racially motivated crime or a hate crime. What evidence do you gather from this video other than that they are different races that indicates this is racially motivated?

It appears to be racially motivated. Would I swear that it is all about race? No. I give people the benefit of the doubt. But I do know the answer to the questions that I posed if the races were reversed.

1) Would the media ignore it?

Answer: Nope

2) Would the FBI be investigating it as a hate crime?

Answer: Uh huh.

3) Would the president be weighing in?

Answer: Of course.

4) Would Al and Jessie be parading throught the streets?

Answer: You betcha.

Rigel you are such an ass. The title of this thread is about a "hate crime" video and now you are backpedaling because I called you on your bullshit. Typical conservative asshattery.

Wake the hell up.

Very, very good!!! Did you stay up all night with your little playground friends to come up with this ingenious response? Well thought and well played big boy. Your mamma should be congratulated.

Ya'll know that my four points are absolutely correct. Which is exactly why you have come unglued. Anyone who is not enslaved by ideology can recognize the truth. Free your mind.

Rigel you forgot to address my post...

Dominic C
Joined:
Jun. 27, 2011 10:39 am
Quote rigel1:

I conveniently left out nothing. You know better than to accuse me of that. I saw the same video that you did and we both know that IF The roles were reversed:

You leave out the most important piece of information pertaining to your question which is how this matter was treated in relation to the Martin-Zimmerman case.

Was the matter handled in the same manner as the Martin case or did the police vigorously pursue justice that was reasonablly "normal"?

If the matter was handled in the same manner of the Martin case then your question is valid.

Otherwise you are just tossing a red herring out there as there is no comparison to be made. I think you can understand this without me elaborating further.

Edit: For spelling

P.S. The main point you seem to be missing here in all your responses are that you are comparing a case where the police whitewashed the matter and one where most likely the police did not. The outcry for juistice was NOT over the victim being black and the perpretrator being white but HOW the matter was handled. People were outraged that essentially a armed man shot a unarmed man and the police did not treat it as they would in MOST homicide cases. The fact that you try to compare these two things is a disingenuous debating tactic to "prove" your point.

Dominic C
Joined:
Jun. 27, 2011 10:39 am

Wow, reading this post really does offer evidence that there is an agenda by very powerful people-- who are getting away with far bigger crimes against humanity--to pit common people against common people. The global elite: banksters, oil tycoons, military, security, intelligence agency heads, organized religious leaders are all sociopathic billionaires and are busy overthrowing governments, using our soldiers as pawns to steal precious resources in other countries to sell on the world market. They mount this assault with the implied consent and funding from the duped American public that is so busy fighting among themselves over contrived issues they become myopic. Once the two party debacle is figured out, once racism, bigotry and sexism is figured out, once people realize we are all in this together, this cabal is in trouble--and they know it. Distractions and contrived issues are their smokescreen.

Please folks, not to suggest that this video isn't disturbing and the responses and implications are also not disturbing, they are, but go take a long hard review of this TH thread and try to see why the real issues are being covered up. This distraction from the real criminal activities that may actually lead to WWIII is by design. The people at the highest echelons of power are sociopaths. Believe it. http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2012/04/war-drums-pounding-same-old-culprits

Please review this thread, go from top to bottom, click the links, read them and watch the video. You will understand the gravity of the situation then and you will understand the peril we face if we don't focus and come together. Forget liberal vs conservative, republican vs democrat, black vs white, vs hispanic, male vs female. We all are in this together and those in power who are commiting the very worst crimes want us to be distracted. It's still working it appears. We are smarter than that.

Don't be fooled again.

Choco's picture
Choco
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Everyone knows that my four points are true. There is really no debate on that. So my point being made, its time to move on.

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 7:49 am

Do you really think a woman who has just been beaten and raped by her misogynistic next door neighbor gives a shit about your "global elite?" Do you think she could be convinced not to prosecute based on the notion that rape and violence against women is a "contrived issue?"

Do you think a black man who has been dragged behind a car driven by white, neo-Nazi punks gives a shit about your "global elite?" Do you think his "issue" is a contrived one?

And so forth.

In short, Choco, that's a load of BS.

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote rigel1:

Everyone knows that my four points are true. There is really no debate on that. So my point being made, its time to move on.

Rigel I'm going to be blunt since you are being a disingenuos debater.

You're points bear no vailidity because of what numerous people have told you in varying degrees of directness. I guess you are more of a idealogue than I thought since you cannot get past the simple TRUTH that these are two COMPLETELY different matters.

I will bet you any amount of money you want that the people in the video instigating the beating were dealt with through legal channels whereas Zimmerman was basically let go Scott-free. He would NEVER face justice and the case would be buried UNLESS it got the media attention it did. The media attention FORCED those in power to act ACCORDING to the law and INVESTIGATE the matter.

Your blatant disregard for these facts tell me that you are just pushing a race based agenda. My proof is that statement you make about wishing the guy in the video was a liberal. I'm through beating around the bush and playing nice because you're basically being an ass and I'm going to call your statement exactly what it is: RACIST.

That statement speaks volumes about your line of thinking regarding politics and race and is implictly a racist remark backed by said ideology. It implies the following:

1. Liberals love minorities

2. See how the white liberal was beaten by blacks he thought were his friend?

3. He got what he deserved for trusting those minorities who all hate the white man.

4. Now he has experienced the "real" race situation and woke up and will no longer support blacks and other minorities.

I don't know you but I am almost 100% sure that you are a white person who claims to be "race neutral" and that "liberals" are the race baiters.

What that really means is that any wrongdoings done to minorities by whites should NEVER be looked through a racial lens because according to you, whites like yourself never see the race of a person and only minorities and liberals bring it up to create a problem.

I do not think I have called out anybody here for being a racist or even pointed out racist comments but with you DODGING the main issue here and then claiming victory, I decided to quit pulling punches.

If you show me the same level of morals and debate ettiquette as Calperson, Capital, and other pure right wing mouthpieces, I will treat you as such.

I'm only willing to listen and debate a conservative if they are willing to follow the rules and keep the discussion relevant.

I really thought that you may be worth engaging but now my doubts have grown enormously.

Notice that Blacks are being charged with hate crimes versus Whites or are the FBI statistics made up to satisfy my agenda?

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/tables/table-5-offenses-known-offenders-race-by-bias-motivation-2010.xls

P.S. I want to add that you're implying that minorities get away with hate crimes against whites and nobody cares but whites never get away with even defending themselves against a minority. See you framed the argument in a fully racially biased and motivated way and act like it is somehow a legitimate neutral question. YOU are the one engaged in race baiting my friend.

Dominic C
Joined:
Jun. 27, 2011 10:39 am
Quote Zenzoe:

Do you really think a woman who has just been beaten and raped by her misogynistic next door neighbor gives a shit about your "global elite?" Do you think she could be convinced not to prosecute based on the notion that rape and violence against women is a "contrived issue?"

Do you think a black man who has been dragged behind a car driven by white, neo-Nazi punks gives a shit about your "global elite?" Do you think his "issue" is a contrived one?

And so forth.

In short, Choco, that's a load of BS.

You missed this in the context: "Please folks, not to suggest that this video isn't disturbing and the responses and implications are also not disturbing, they are, . . . "

Now Zenzoe, just what point are you making? Because you are not making any sense to me.

In the meantime I will try to clarify my point for you. The original video was very disturbing. The follow up comments devolved almost immediately into black vs. white and how the conservatives and liberals have different takes on the attack and how the media would have or should have covered it. The division part is what I was talking about being contrived by people who love to foment hate based on differences. People adopt a tribe mentality. This division is contrived and fomented for a purpose, those examples you mentioned are not contrived and I'm sure the victims are not thinking about a global elite during the attacks if at all. To jump to the conclusion that I'm suggesting otherwise is ridiculous.

Choco's picture
Choco
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote rigel1:
Quote ah2:
Quote rigel1:
Quote ah2:

rigel, it takes more than the perp and victim being different races to declare something a racially motivated crime or a hate crime. What evidence do you gather from this video other than that they are different races that indicates this is racially motivated?

It appears to be racially motivated. Would I swear that it is all about race? No. I give people the benefit of the doubt. But I do know the answer to the questions that I posed if the races were reversed.

1) Would the media ignore it?

Answer: Nope

2) Would the FBI be investigating it as a hate crime?

Answer: Uh huh.

3) Would the president be weighing in?

Answer: Of course.

4) Would Al and Jessie be parading throught the streets?

Answer: You betcha.

Rigel you are such an ass. The title of this thread is about a "hate crime" video and now you are backpedaling because I called you on your bullshit. Typical conservative asshattery.

Wake the hell up.

Very, very good!!! Did you stay up all night with your little playground friends to come up with this ingenious response? Well thought and well played big boy. Your mamma should be congratulated.

Ya'll know that my four points are absolutely correct. Which is exactly why you have come unglued. Anyone who is not enslaved by ideology can recognize the truth. Free your mind.

I've come unplugged rigel because you have a standard format from which you have never deviated and it really pisses me off:

1. Come on here and make some asinine claim based on poor information and conservative talking points.

2. When someone calls you on your crap you backpedal, backpedal, backpedal like my 3 year old who is trying to get away with as much as she can when she wants to do something she knows is wrong.

3. Then you turn around and attempt to reassert portions of your argument, again like a child trying to get away with stuff.

4. When a thread has been beaten down, you rinse repeat and start another one doing the same damn thing.

None of your claims were true. You are basically a waste of time. The only reason I ever respond to people like you is on the off chance that a low-information voter and comes on here reading your garbage and thinks that portions of it are true. Spreading your dogmatic idiocy to others would be a travesty, so I feel a ethical obligation to rectify it.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 10:00 pm
Quote rigel1:

Everyone knows that my four points are true. There is really no debate on that. So my point being made, its time to move on.

And you stay true to form. Be on the lookout for another bullshit thread from rigel in the next day or so.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 10:00 pm

Choco, I didn't miss your comment on the disturbing nature of the video. I don't think I misunderstood you in general, either. Let's look at your first paragraph, for starters.

Quote Choco:

Wow, reading this post really does offer evidence that there is an agenda by very powerful people-- who are getting away with far bigger crimes against humanity--to pit common people against common people. The global elite: banksters, oil tycoons, military, security, intelligence agency heads, organized religious leaders are all sociopathic billionaires and are busy overthrowing governments, using our soldiers as pawns to steal precious resources in other countries to sell on the world market. They mount this assault with the implied consent and funding from the duped American public that is so busy fighting among themselves over contrived issues they become myopic. Once the two party debacle is figured out, once racism, bigotry and sexism is figured out, once people realize we are all in this together, this cabal is in trouble--and they know it. Distractions and contrived issues are their smokescreen.

I'd say that paragraph states your position quite well. There's not much to be confused about. So, thanks for being a clear writer.

The thing is, Choco, it doesn't seem to me you were complaining about the specific debate within this thread, as a pissing contest or any such trivial thing, which would be wasted effort. Instead, you said what you repeat now, essentially, which is to bemoan "fighting" among the "common people," because you think we're being manipulated by the global elite, and thereby divided and conquered in the process. You wrote, "Forget liberal vs conservative, republican vs democrat, black vs white, vs hispanic, male vs female. We all are in this together and those in power who are commiting the very worst crimes want us to be distracted. It's still working it appears. We are smarter than that." And now you write that, "comments devolved almost immediately into black vs. white and how the conservatives and liberals have different takes on the attack and how the media would have or should have covered it." I mean, forgive me if I took you wrong (I have a cold today, so maybe I missed something while coughing and blowing my nose), but aren't you saying that it's impossible to walk and chew gum at the same time? That is to say, aren't you saying that while marching in opposition (metaphorically) to the "global elite," that debating, discussing, being passionate about our values and issues, and educating each other runs counter to the goal of defeating the 1%, so don't do it? We're too smart to allow ourselves to be manipulated like that?

See, if that's what you meant, I disagree. I think we can walk and chew gum at the same time. I think debate is healthy, even among the "common people." We're all in this together, I agree, but we're also a culture infected by the diseases of racism, sexism, ignorance and apathy, which we share in varying degrees, whether we want to admit it or not. Who will provide the cure for these diseases, if not We, the People? Certainly, the 1% doesn't want us educated. We must do it ourselves. And that involves debate, discussion, and sometimes fighting with each other. It's a learning process, a democratic process. Yes, it's messy, but please don't ask for "solidarity," because that, to my mind, is just another word for tyranny.

I used the raped woman and the dragged-behind-a-truck black man as examples, to deprive your meaning of the abstract notions of sexism and racism and give it a more concrete reality. You referred to "contrived issues," in the abstract: "Forget liberal vs conservative, republican vs democrat, black vs white, vs hispanic, male vs female..." But now you say those examples of mine are "victims," meaning their issues are not contrived. So no, their issues are not contrived, nor are liberal vs conservative, republican vs democrat, black vs white, vs hispanic, male vs female contrived, because what happens to individuals on the street directly relates to abstract thought—that is, world view and mind-set, those mind-sets we label as distinct ways of thinking that have consequences for all of us. The rapist approaches his victims loaded with a mind-set he absorbed from someplace, and to ignore what taught him to need to control and dominate women, or pretend misogyny doesn't exist or is a contrived issue, means the problem will always be with us. Unless, we confront each other, it goes on unimpeded.

Anyway, given an educated public, the manipulations of the 1% will be futile. Let them try to fuel the racism and sexism of an enlightened populace. Good luck with that. Look what happened to Limbaugh, when he went after Fluke. It gave us an opportunity to further educate ourselves, and most people saw his idiocy, anyway.

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Everyone knows that my four points are true.
Are these the four point you are talking about? (I'm just joining in).

1) Would the media ignore it?

2) Would the FBI be investigating it as a hate crime?

3) Would the president be weighing in?

4) Would Al and Jessie be parading throught the streets?

1) Who knows? The media will cover whatever will get them the biggest audience. Perhaps nobody but a few paranoid white people are really that interested in black-on-white crime. It isn't controversial. It isn't even news except on some backwater local TV news channel. Especially when there is no controversial law involved.

2) The FBI are interested in whether Florida law enforcement is handling the incident properly. Like me, I don't really care whether it is a hate crime.

3)The President has had practically nothing to say about the incident. He has only answered questions as concisely as possible. He has to do that when he is asked.

4)Al and Jesse have their own constituency. It should not surprise you that they are not concerning themselves with some drunken white tourist who shot off his mouth in the middle of a black crowd. White people have plenty of people to stand up for them against black people. You could join in with them if this is meaningful to you.

Art's picture
Art
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Zenzoe,

Thanks for clarifying your comments. I think we probably agree in essense. My point was that rigel posted a very disturbing video and asked why no public outrage? Why no media saturation coverage? He postulated that had this been a white thugs on a black person then there would have been public outrage and media saturation coverage. This is certainly subject for debate. What bothered me was that the responses took positions based on contrived differences among people (tribal) who actually have a lot more in common than we have differences. I am a progressive, rigel is claimed to be a conservative. I can't vouch for his alignment because I don't post here enough. Either way, the video and his comments should be taken at face value and his tribe affiliation should not be the issue. What I read were reactions based on his tribe affiliation more than on the essence of his analysis--that there is a reverse racist double standard in the media. He believes he's posted evidence to support that there is an element of double standard and the comments should have been directed to that, and a lot were, to be fair, but many drifted off to ad hominen guilt by association.

It is that tribal posturing that I feel has been fomented and cultivated by certain powerful people who would rather see internecine fighting among the 99 percent rather than have us intelligently and rationaly provide oversight of banking, military, resource extraction, global warming, human rights, etc. That's why, I believe, there are always wedge issues thrown at us by venal congress critters and political media pundits: abortion, gun control, racism, Biblical dominionism, celebrity scandals, etc. These wedge issues are constantly pushed by the media so we are not able to concentrate on the rapes and pillages of the middle class, on the environment, on peoples in foreign countries, on the symbiotic relationships among the military, banking, chemical and oil giants. Neither do people focus on just who controls our intelligence agencies. If Ron Paul and so many on this site are correct, that the democratic and republican parties are two sides of the same monolithic corporate political party, then the people who have created this banking/political system obviously must control the intelligence agencies. Catherine Austin Fitts has reams of documents on the CIA and drug running, laundering money through Wall St. Banks and the overthrowing of democratically elected governments. Ask John Perkins, Naomi Klein and Naomi Wolf as well. The global elite initiate shock events and manipulate the responses so that we fight among ourselves while the crimes of Oliver North, the Bush Crime Family, PNAC, etc are virtually ignored. Obama is a corporate puppet I hate to say but he appears better than the only alternative this global elite will give us. We are too busy fighting among ourselves to get to the root causes of widespread and growing corrupton and we instead fight about the symptoms and rigel's post and the responses are evidence to that in my opinion.

Zenzoe I do appreciate your civil and rational response.

Choco's picture
Choco
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Choco, don’t get me wrong—I do understand what you’re saying about the right-wing’s use of “wedge issues” to manipulate citizens into voting against their best interest. Abortion is the perfect example, where voters, who on every other issue would tend to be progressive, will vote for the “pro-life” candidate based on his or her position on that one issue, like idiots (my little bias, there). Other issues, such as race, get used in the same way. I get it.

I too would rather folks not prejudge opinions based on “tribe,” or political party, or stated ideology. Just because a conservative’s lips are moving doesn’t mean he’s lying. By the same token, just because a liberal’s lips are moving doesn’t mean he’s telling the truth.

When rigel posted the video, I tried to look at it and his question fairly, even while knowing him to be a conservative. If he’d had a fair point, I would have agreed with him. But I didn’t agree; I thought he might have come up with a better example, considering that it looked less like violent, egregious bullying/crime and more like a fraternity prank (ugly as those can be). I brought up the Reginald Denny (LA Riots) example, but nobody picked up on that. That one would have denied rigel’s complaint nicely, if anybody had been paying attention. In the Denny case, the media was all over it. In fact, there’s so much more coverage of black on white crime in all kinds of media, including movies, it’s not even debatable. I would ask rigel how he thinks it happens that white people react in fear upon the approach of a black man, one who might just be innocently walking in the opposite direction and minding his own business? Something to do with media bias conditioning people to fear blacks?

Anyway, I agree with much of what you’ve written there. Your voice speaks with eloquence and truth. I understand the urgency of your complaints about the crimes of the powerful against civil liberty, peace, the middle class, democracy, and the environment. I share those concerns and also despise that the “news” media fails the American people by not reporting more on those issues.

However, I do believe you’re asking me to adopt a hierarchy of issues, with your issues at the top and cultural and social issues at the bottom. You mentioned Ron Paul. Well, he’s very good on the issues you want to bring forward: He’s good on civil liberty, good on foreign policy (end the wars), good on NAFTA/CAFTA, etc. But, hello, he’s way bad on the social issues. Hand over the reins of power to a Ron Paul, and we’ll have no wars, but there will be a war on women, the poor and the elderly like you’ve never seen before. Gone will be abortion rights and contraceptive rights; gone will be Social Security and Medicare. Now that may be worth it to you, Choco, a guy (I have no idea what your age or ethnicity is), but it won’t be worth it to me, a woman who lives by the grace of Social Security and Medicare. Nor do I want my grandchildren to grow up in a Ron Paul libertarian “paradise.”

Thus, I stand by my position. Regardless of what the righties do with “wedge issues,” it’s a mistake to ignore those issues when they come up. Instead, you want to use the opportunity to inform and educate; and the Dems and progressives need to do the same, loud and clear. I think it’s known as push-back? Look at what has happened to the Republican Party after their attacks against women’s reproductive rights—Obama’s numbers went up, not only because the Repugs made themselves look so bad, but because of PUSH BACK, by all fair-minded people, but also by Obama. (We can use those issues too, you know.)

Now, you may think abortion rights are a “wedge issue” and not worth discussing. I disagree! Social issues count too! We do not need a wedge between “hard” and “soft” issues, as if we're incapable of considering all issues. And also, I do not think our disagreement on this subject has inserted a wedge between us. I think we can discuss and try to learn from each other. Is that so bad?

I do apologize for being so ad hominish with my first response to you. That was unnecessary. :-)

Zenzoe
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

All's cool Zenzoe,

I do wish Ron Paul's foreign policy sense applied to domestic issues. He seems to be a walking conundrum in that he wants the government to step out of the way of free enterprise, but he never mentions how large corporations have corrupted the government. I have always believed that government was supposed to be body of lawmakers that represented the people. But that is not the case. The government is a body of people who represent power and wealth and enact laws that actually work against the people. We have a quid pro quo government, or as my dad used to say, "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours." Paul doesn't deal with that and I'm very displeased with the media, even progressive media when they won't grill him on these specific issues. It doesn't matter after all because he's not a corporate owned candidate so is not in the running. No candidate that isn't owned by Wall St and big oil has a chance. Land of the Free and Home of the Brave.

Take care, Zenzoe and I urge you to look at that post in the Iraq and World affairs section. I have laid it out more or less in chronological order and people can see who and how these people work, through what lobby groups and what is in store. If we allow our country to be completely taken over by these people there will be a lot more desperate crimes against everybody and more people will lose homes, more will go hungry and who knows if their next war will escalate beyond their means to control it. We need to stop the war mongers before it's too late. The Azerbaijan move by the NeoCons is very dangerous and precipitous. I urge everybody to review the material there. It's all substantiated.

Choco's picture
Choco
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Here is an update on this story from The Baltimore Sun web site:

$1 million bond for man charged in beating caught on tape | VIDEO

Suspect turned himself in Friday night

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Baltimore-Police-Department/58771761955

**********************************************************************************************************************

Related stories from The Baltimore Sun :

APR 4, 2012
Internet shock video helps Baltimore police find victim, possible suspect

APR 10, 2012
Bealefeld: Downtown beating not a hate crime

**********************************************************************************************************************

Related stories from WBFF FOX 45 in Baltimore :


Police Continue to Search for Downtown Beating Suspects

Baltimore police charge man in videotaped beating

miksilvr
Joined:
Jul. 7, 2011 12:13 pm

http://www.demotix.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/large_610x456_scal...

Here's the missing ingredient why there is race on race violence in the U.S. and other criminal capitalist societies. Get that miracle ingredient and all of societies troubles will fade into history in short order.

jmacneil's picture
jmacneil
Joined:
Mar. 6, 2012 7:24 pm

school uniforms?

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 10:00 pm

I guess I was stupid to think that rigel was different than the other conservative mouthpieces here....

Oh well, live and learn.

P.S. Although rigel claimed "victory" in his last post, it is obvious that he has LOST this debate BIG TIME.

Dominic C
Joined:
Jun. 27, 2011 10:39 am

Currently Chatting

GOP Blocks Equal Pay...again.

Just in time for election season, Senate Republicans blocked legislation aimed at closing the gender pay gap. For the third time since 2012, Republicans refused to allow debate on the Paycheck Fairness Act, and reminded women that the GOP doesn't believe in equal pay for equal work.

Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system