It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Town's White Police Official Calls Obama N-word - Refuses to Apologize

page: 5
34
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: kruphix

Look up Joe Mitchell...there are plenty of others. The mere fact that some of you are saying he can have a private conversation but face the consequences it absurd. Is this Rome? Germany? You cannot have a conversation without someone complaining.

I can turn on MTV any day of the week and hear cracka ss cracka and nigga nigga nigga and that is ok? Really?

RACISM needs to end. A black man who sees himself as black is just as bad as a white man who calls that same person black.


Maybe because I'm not American or maybe because I was raised without any mention of colour or race, I always feel strange that words hurt that much. I loved hiphop as youth and like the poster I quoted was exposed to the N word. I was 14 in 14 years I had never heard the word EVER! until I heard rappers say it.I wasn't really aware of racism, I always wondered why the asians who ran the newsagent got upset that people casually called it the paki shop. I just figured it was short for pakistani. I judge people as people and I actually find racism comical and yeah I've used words that others might get all cry baby about but only ever in jest and light hearted laughs and would never result to name calling. If you are an idiot you are an idiot whatever your race.

I'm also from Scotland the most racist yet most welcoming country on the planet.

I don't like the idea of a poilce official being racist, but i dont know the context and neither does the waitress. I dont like tell tales and i certainly dont like the idea that when i eat out or drink out my conversations are being screened by the staff.
When there is no color there will be no more hate.

words are words its the way they are percieved by both the person saying it and the person hearing it that is the problem not the damn words!
edit on 16.5.2014 by Scotscorps84 because: messed up and put my post in the quote




posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: minusinfinity
A person is allowed opinions in a "free country".


And his opinion is intact, just as his right to free speech.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic
He was having a private conversation in a place that privacy at a table can be expected. No one expects a waitress to listen in on conversations and then go repeating what she overhears. If people thought that, then they wouldn't go to restaurants.

The man made a comment about a politician to a friend at a table.
He didn't announce it from a loudspeaker.
He didn't take out a newspaper advertisement.
He didn't get on the radio or tv and blast his opinion.
He simply made a statement to a friend regarding what he felt about one politician.
Not an entire group of people ... not loudly ... just spoke to one man about one other man.
That's it.

It's a bunch of faux manufactured outrage.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: intelligenthoodlum33
Oh goodie! Another thread defending bigots. Ignorance runs deep around here.


I don't think anyone is defending bigotry but we are defending free speech.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
And his opinion is intact, just as his right to free speech.

Tell that to the 'grab the torches and pitchforks' mob coming after him.
If he had a right to free speech in a private conversation ... none of this would be happening.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

No, his right to free speech is not intact according to what you are stating.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:31 PM
link   
a reply to: kruphix

okay...so how many examples would you like ?

www.theblaze.com...

www.mediaite.com...

nymag.com...

Countless examples are available. Does that make this incident anymore correct ? No...in my opinion any way, he is a professional and I assume in uniform and should not use derogatory words to describe anyone. And while I am no fan of President Obama...he is the President...we should have a little respect for the office if not the man.

As far as a private conversation...its not private when someone else can hear it. No expectation of privacy in a public setting. Its a hard call to say he should be fired or what but he is a man with power over people and in charge of people and if his personal views get in the way of that duty then yes he must be replaced. This incident will no doubt get in the way of those duties so perhaps he should step aside, as it will only cause more animosity.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: minusinfinity
A person is allowed opinions in a "free country".


And his opinion is intact, just as his right to free speech.


I don't understand the reply / question so I can't provide an answer. Please clarify.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: minusinfinity

originally posted by: intelligenthoodlum33
Oh goodie! Another thread defending bigots. Ignorance runs deep around here.


I don't think anyone is defending bigotry but we are defending free speech.



You are defending hate speech....by playing the "victim card"



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic
He was having a private conversation in a place that privacy at a table can be expected. No one expects a waitress to listen in on conversations and then go repeating what she overhears. If people thought that, then they wouldn't go to restaurants.


You can't go through life only experiencing what you "expect" to experience. The waitress is just another person. It could have been the man at the next table or the restaurant owner. Someone overheard him in a PUBLIC venue (regardless what he "expected") and was offended. I'm fine letting the town deal with it.



It's a bunch of faux manufactured outrage.


Seems to me you're the one that's outraged.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: FlyersFan

And that is why I think the waitress should be let go from her job or maybe some mind your own business classes.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: kruphix
Most crimes are committed privately...does that excuse the person from the crime? If a man beats his wife in the privacy of his own home, is he justified just because it was "private"?

Having a private conversation with a friend over a meal at a restaurant in which you call the POTUS a name isn't a 'crime' Well ... except to those who really don't approve of a person having a right to a private opinion.



A person with a private opinion, who holds an elected public office, making statements in a Public establishment, yea that holds up.

He has a right to say it,

and he has a right to be shunned by the public for it.

Free speech, does not mean freedom from consequences from said speech, which could include the Public deciding he shouldn't run.

Its not a right or left issue,

Its a common sense one.

Does anyone honestly feel, that ANYONE, who would see race as something to divide us on should have the authority that is currently provided by elected offices?

Positions of authority attract the worse type of people, and when they make the mistake of speaking honestly, we should jump down their throats at any opportunity to remove such people from office.

From a local sheriff to the highest office in the land.

You have the freedom to say what you will, just as the people have a right to vote the electorate out of office when given the chance.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: intelligenthoodlum33
You are defending hate speech....by playing the "victim card"

How exactly is a man having a private conversation ... and complaining about one politician ... 'hate speech'??



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:34 PM
link   

edit on 16-5-2014 by ScientiaFortisDefendit because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
Seems to me you're the one that's outraged.

Seems to me you don't have a clue as to how I feel.

It's just a conversation. If I was outraged ... you'd know it.
Obviously I'm not. So don't even try to go there ....



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:35 PM
link   
A)Theres nothing private about a conversation in a public place

B)You are an idiot if you are a public figure of ANY sort and think that people arent going to notice what you say.

On top of that, the situation raises the very pertinent question of whether or not this person is qualified to do with job without prejudice.

Sorry, not feeling bad for this guy.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan
If I'm sitting here with my husband, and I say that the owner of the Clippers is a Red Neck S.O.B. ... does that mean that I hate all white people and think they are all Red Neck S.O.B.s ... or does it just refer to the one person I was talking about? It's just the one. Right?

This guy was having a private conversation and he referred to a politician as a slur. We all call politicians names in private. And just because we refer to one politician by a slur in a conversation, that doesn't mean we label an entire group of people by that slur.



I look at this in a similar light as I do police officers and filming them. When you are a public official, on the public payroll and dumb enough to say or do something unbecoming of your office in a public place then there just might be some consequences. It may have been a private conversation between two adults but that conversation was held in a public restaurant in earshot of the public/taxpayers who pay his salary. His slur makes the community as a whole look poorly if they don't do anything. If he really was concerned one way or another he would have been cognizant enough of his surroundings to know someone might overhear him. If he wanted a truly private conversation, a public restaurant just isn't the most private place that comes to mind. I don't necessarily agree with the witch hunt that is in effect, just that seem times free speech does have consequences. I can make any insane statements I want in the privacy of my hone but once those statements enter a public arena where others are subjected to it, depending on the level of rhetoric and exact language I am using, those words can now be used to prosecute American civilians for any number of non crimes. It's kind of like the line from SpiderMan, "with great power comes great responsibility". The free speech is the great power, what you choose to do with that freedom is the responsibility aspect.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:36 PM
link   
a reply to: FlyersFan


How private was it if we are talking about it now. So he is the victim? Incredible.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:36 PM
link   
a reply to: minusinfinity

You say you are defending free speech and the right for the man to have an opinion.

He HAS free speech (he wasn't arrested for what he said) and no one took away his opinion. Freedom of speech is not freedom from the consequences of one's speech.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: intelligenthoodlum33

originally posted by: minusinfinity

originally posted by: intelligenthoodlum33
Oh goodie! Another thread defending bigots. Ignorance runs deep around here.


I don't think anyone is defending bigotry but we are defending free speech.



You are defending hate speech....by playing the "victim card"


And you are doing the same exact thing...

Playing the victim card.

Not a single person defended what he said.



new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join