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.

 

'White flight' illegal in texas judge rules

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 01:38 AM
link   
I live in Texas.

I've seen this stuff, and yes, QuietSoul did a nice job of explaining it.

I've seen whites go to ridiculous lengths to keep their kids in a "racially pure" school. When my son was of age to go to school, he tested out in a very high IQ range. We went to a meeting on magnet schools (which were being put in Black neighborhoods) that was for parents whose kids were bright.

A number of parents stood up and yelled that this was just an evil excuse to segregate communities and how dare they put a school for the really intelligent kids in a Black neighborhood. And busing was part of the evil plot (I had been bussed for an hour each way during my school years, and I didn't see what the deal was about a 15 minute bus trip.)

Part of what they're trying to do is redistribute tax dollars so all schools get a fair share. Sadly, those in affluent White areas get a lot more money and better resources and teachers than those in other areas.




posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 01:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
And busing was part of the evil plot (I had been bussed for an hour each way during my school years, and I didn't see what the deal was about a 15 minute bus trip.)


Don't forget that public transport is for Homosexuals, Europeans & New Yorkers in the eyes of many.

I heart Public Transport!



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 01:43 AM
link   
Just a friendly reminder from your neighborhood Mod. Please refrain from personal attacks and the like. They add nothing to the debate at hand which given the topic can get heated at times.

Thanks
Fred



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 01:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
Part of what they're trying to do is redistribute tax dollars so all schools get a fair share. Sadly, those in affluent White areas get a lot more money and better resources and teachers than those in other areas.


That is how it is done in California. Property taxes go into a pool and each school district is paid per head per day of attendance or something like that.

While the property tax is split evenly, more affluent communties can afford, beter school infrastructure and the like because parents have more time and money to donate. Palo Alto, where I live has some of the areas top schools (One of the high schools is nationaly ranked) Why? One is that we can pay our teachers more than the local average so the district can be choosy. (We pay a $400 parcel tax to do so) other communties cannot afford this. So even if the money is divided evenly, other things are factors.



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 01:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by QuietSoul
How did I suffer from my education in my predominatly hispanic school? The teachers spoke perfect english, I took honor classes and went off to college without a hitch.


EXACTLY!!! Race does not determine the effectiveness of a school. Your premise seems to be on the assumption that the parents are pulling their kids out of that school because that school is predominantly Africna-American. I would propose they're doing it to help their children's future through a better education at a higher ranking school.

You had mentioned that there were better schools by you, but the education is what the student makes of it. This is true, but to a degree. Some teachers are capable of making learning fun, and others are good at making learning an education on working at a job you hate. Kids in school are immature. Looking back on it now, you see that you were able to get a good education out of the school you were going to despite the fact that there were others around you that ranked better. Some people mature faster than others, and it appears to me that you were fairly mature for your age, and recognized that this education you were getting was for the betterment of your future. That is awesome, and I am extremely happy for you. I cannot relate the same story, though. I was horribly immature when I was in highschool. Thankfully, I recognized that and have put off college until 8 years after I graduated high school (start on Monday
). I did go to a rather respected high school, though, like you, there were better schools in surrounding districts. Some of the teachers made learning interesting and fun, others made it a job for me. I did not see the future, though, when I went to school, I saw my immediate needs. Immature.

My english teacher my freshman year was incredible. He revolutionized my world by actually making grammar and writing fun. Mr. Johnson not only educated me in english, but I started writing short stories and other such things in my spare time. I would use my immature free time doing what could be considered schoolwork! My US history teacher was the same way. We'd be going over all the humdrum of history, "on this date, this representative proposed this legislation". Whoopdy-effin'-do. He had, however, a PhD in American history, and after telling us the stuff that was simple memorization, he would tell us something bizzare that happened during that time that influenced whatever it was we were talking about, in this case legislation. Bam! It was in my head. Dr. Epstein was the best teacher I ever had. He started my interest in history, and, believe it or not, I started learning about it in my free time. Mr. Shearer turned me on to science, making it fun and throwing experiments all over the place making science hands-on and making me interested. Heck, I joined the science club because he was the guy who led it. Nothing will captivate a young boy's attention like throwing a large chunk of pure sodium into the snow after we did an experiment placing it in a small amount of water. Would it blow up? Would it start a wicked fire? ...No, it didn't do anything...Why the heck did it do nothing? Suddenly an interest was formed. He didn't answer the question, either; I looked into it on my own.

When I was in school, I was very immature. If the education is left to the student, then I should be extremely ignorant. My heart an mind were not in school, it was the teachers I had that brought them there. When I have children, if I can afford it, they will be going to a private school. If not, I will do what my parents did; I will move to a district that has a high rating. However, there is also the chance that I will not be able to afford doing that, too. If I can't do it the other two ways, I will do everything in my power to get them into a school that will be able to compensate for the immaturity our children seemingly tend to have at a later and later age. In my mind, if I didn't, I would be telling my children that, if they're not mature enough to be going to high school and learning about subjects by a teacher that doesn't even know the subject matter very well, they're failures. I am sure I'm not the only person who feels that way, either. Race has nothing to do with it. The only reason race entered into it is because people are so focused on it these days.



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 01:59 AM
link   
Well, QuietSoul, let's first examine your response to my response. I responded tothe information given to me, and then you felt the need to expound. If you are curious about my response, reread what you initially said. What you said about Spanish class in your second post, for example, is a revised statement of your first. I'll not wrestle with someone who changes their line of reasoning.

What you get out of school is totally up to you, I know that. I also know, however, that there are school districts with better teachers and better facilities, and a better learning environment. I am totally aware as well that it is not racist to want your children in the best school one can find. The more of an education you get, it only makes sense that you can make more of it.

Byrd, while I am not from Texas, but Alabama, I am aware of the fact that I can't speak for the entire state of Alabama and all residents thereof simply because I live here. Know what I mean? Still, I am aware of the concept, and I also see the reasoning. In this area, for example, we have two small cities; Ozark and Enterprise. We are also a military community, with Fort Rucker being here. Soldiers come in and out of the area, rotating between every 18 months to 3 years. Ozark has a higher black population than Enterprise. Ozark has a higher disciplinary problem and a worse learning environment. When new military families come to the area, what town do you think they settle into? You betcha, Enterprise. By the way, the color of the military family plays no roll in it, either. I'm sure one is not going to claim that the black soldier who locates his family in Enterprise is a racist, right? I should certainly hope not! What I would say is that these soldiers are making the right choice for their children by providing them with the best chance for success. Facts are facts, and to claim that a family is racially motivated for wanting to do the best for their children is absurd, and from what I've seen, there is no legitimate reason to assume these people are racially motivated.

What should be the focal point of this whole episode is the real problem, not some people wanting to escape the problem.

For the record, I went to school in the Ozark school system, and I feel I have done ok. The point I was making earlier, QS, is that I don't know where I'd be had I been furnished a better system. Neither do you. We don't get the opportunity to see "alternate endings" in the real world, only on DVD's.



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 02:11 AM
link   
I think it's more of a class/income issue than a race issue. If you look at the blog posting, it's been updated to include this:



This article fits right in with an issue in Fort Worth. When I was down there visiting my sister, I read in the paper how this same issue was happening, WITH MIDDLE CLASS BLACKS. The middle and upper class blacks (there is a large population of them in FTWTH) were moving their kids from one predominantely black school district to another predominantely black upper class school district, and the school board was getting concerned.

La Shawn Barber's Corner


I know it's a broad generalization, but usually kids from low income families don't have the same support system and stress on education than people from higher income families, and therefore generally don't study and don't excel at school...this means fewer advanced courses can be offered because of lack of students to fill them. Plus, usually fighting, drugs, etc. are much more prevalent in such schools...it's kind of a viscious cycle.

From what I hear the high school I attended in Florida had a huge demographics shift due to redistricting and went from one of the top schools in the state for grades, SAT scores, and the offering of AP and DE classes, to one of the worst...I think everyone has to go through a metal detector now after there was actually a gunfight there!


You certainly can't blame parents for wanting to send their children to the best school they possibly can...now I live in NYC and most people here send their children to private schools or move to the suburbs after having children because most of the city schools are so bad.



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan

Originally posted by QuietSoul
All Texas is trying to do is put an end to this squabble by mixing the smart kids with the dumb kids to even out the schools. Essentially, putting whites with blacks. Oh no!!


what you just said was rascist and you dont even realise it yet you lecture us on 'rascism'
. You just implied blacks are stupid compared to whites.


[edit on 18-8-2005 by XphilesPhan]


Thats your interpretation of it.
Who sais he ment the white kids as the smart ones?


[edit on 18/8/05 by thematrix]



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 10:58 AM
link   
Is that public schools are a holdover from the "nanny state" of the New Deal era.

The main things they teach are regimentation, socialization, and the passing of tests.

The real problem is that market forces are the ultima res in determining how groups of people behave.

The socialist style big government tries to turn back the tide of individual choices, and this skews everything.

There IS a lot of racism/classism, on all sides of the debate. But no one mentions the government's own elitist attitude.

Because everyone has to pay school tax, only the wealthy can afford to pay private tuition on top of the public school tuition (taxes). So only the poor kids are forced to attend a specific school.

True egalitarianism would be for everyone to pay the tax, and everyone receive a voucher for any accredited school, whether public or private. Market forces would drive ALL schools toward excellence, which is what the teachers' unions and the government most fear.

This is just like the old Democrat/socialist system of US farm subsidies that finally collapsed in the 1990's. Denying market forces simply impoverishes the deniers, and causes the forces to magnify over time, to the point where they are unstoppable.

I look for a school voucher system in TX in about 10 years. The party that signs on will get most of the ethnic vote here in TX, who are to main proponents of vouchers.



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
Apparently few people want to even touvh this thread, actually im surprised some mod hasnt trashed it yet.

Yeah, after all, it'd been a whole....hour since you started it at that point.
I really love the implication that we're all 'reverse racists' here, its great.



the news article (the orig link is to a blog commenting on it)
The lawsuit was filed by the Hearne school district and three of its students in July 2003. It was based, in part, on the argument that Mumford's actions have been in direct contrast to "No. 5821" - shorthand for a 1970 civil case that stated "no student in Texas will be effectively excluded from equal educational opportunities based on race, color or national origin."

WTF???? Thats a rather weird reading of what's going on. I guess they are saying that if the school has no white kids, then its going to get less funding and the like, which was the major problem with segregation in the first place.


The judge's ruling permanently bars the Texas Education Agency from funding transfers to Mumford that "reduce or impeded racial desegregation at Hearne Independent School District."

Looks like the major gripe is that some people want more money from the State Government. The title is inaccurate. You do what you want, the state's just not going to support you in everything. By supporting the movement of white students from a predominantly black school, they're reasoning that desegregation is being undone. Makes sense, to a degree.


Hearne desegregated its schools in the 1970s as a result of No.5281

This mess, really, is all just another hateful vestige of the rampages of slavery and racism. The parents have a point, the school sucks, they can leave if they want. But the problem wouldn't've existed in the first place if the state and culture hadn't segregated the schools in the first place. The state's policy has changed on segregation of schools, its sensibly agreed that its stupidly illegal and unconstitutional. So the state isn't going to help re-store the segregation status quo.
So these parents can 'suck it'.


In the ruling, Justice specifically scolded Mumford Superintendent Pete Bienski. The district illegally didn't report transfers at all until 1998, and after that point, Bienski began fraudulently using narrow exemptions to continue the exodus, the ruling states.


Do the crime, do the time. Who cares if they're racists. The effect of the transfers is segregation of the schools into racial groups. There's no reason for the state and fed to fund that.


junglejake
. If the roles were reversed, and this child's parents were black and they were leaving a predominantly white school to go to a higher ranking school with a predominantly black population, it would be their right.

It would be just as 'illegal' as whats going on here. If the effect is segregation of the public schools, then the state won't fund it.


Yet if your skintone isn't dark enough, you're not allowed to want better for your children, you're just a racist.

Lets just be realistic here. This is a community that was racially segregated until the massive nationwide civil rights movements of the 60s and 70s. Lets not pretend that there's no likelyhood of racist attitudes here. Communitieis get racially segrgated because of

  1. History
  2. Racism


And the 'historical' factor in this case is rampant state sponsored racism and culture-wide acceptance of it.
They get economically segregated because of econimics, and political segregated because of politcs. They get racially segregated because of racism. Its exceedingly difficult to beleive that in a short 30 odd years, all racism has been obliterated in this county and that these parents only have the educational quality as a concern.
But it doesn't matter, because Racism has nothing to do with the decision (outside of racism being a big part of the reason why segregation is something that the state tries to prevent and undo).


dr stangcraft
Are THEY racist, or just me, the Anglo?

You don't think that there is a likelyhood that lots of these hispanic parents want to send their kids to a school with other hispanics, purely for that purpose? To preserve their 'culture' and to not mix too much with 'anglos'??


Yet all of her kids ended up much better off in life when they grew up. They got jobs, and worked their buts off to secure a future for themselves. No one gave them a dime.

Not for nothing, but the discrimination agianst blacks was a hell of a lot worse than it was for pollacks, talies, and jerries. Its also a heck of a lot easier to tell who's black and who's not than it is to see who's from a primarily eastern european background and who's from a primariyl slightly more western european background.
I mean, the state's not responsible for people not doing well in life in instances where the state has not purposely set it up so that they can't do well in life. In instances where it effectivelty did, such as purchasing human beings on the open market, working them as slaves, instutiting laws that determine where they can and cannot work, live, drink and #, well, then its the state's responsiblity to try and work against that trend, not simply say 'sorry, we won't legally make you sub-human anymore'.
So that's something of the justification for de-segration and that state doing what it can to prevent re-segration, such as not paying for one race to abandon a school dominated by another.

And if everyone in the community there put the same amount of effort and attention into actually educating their kids, this wouldn't be a problem anways.


jake1997
Race does not determine the effectiveness of a school.

Agreed. With caution. There are other factors that do determine the effectiveness of a school, and those factors (while certainly not determined by race) are strongly correlated with it. Desegregation tries to undo these correlated factors, largely because other governmental policies are largey responsible for them (along, of course, with the individuals that make up the communities).


TC
When new military families come to the area, what town do you think they settle into? You betcha, Enterprise

And presumably they get lots of federal funding in doing so. However, in the school case, its overwhelmingly the white students that are leaving, not the black students. The problem isn't the movement, its that the movement is affecting the racial 'balance' of the public school such that the school is becomming more segregated. It sounds like in the above example, you are moving a decent number of non-whites into the primarily white community, while not removing whites from teh primarily black community. The over-riding concern is that the schools not become segregated. A concern over quality of education was a major reason why many people were completely opposed to desegrgation in the first place, but practically everyone agrees that racial segragation is 'bad'.



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
Apparently few people want to even touvh this thread, actually im surprised some mod hasnt trashed it yet.

Yeah, after all, it'd been a whole....hour since you started it at that point.
I really love the implication that we're all 'reverse racists' here, its great.


So are you implying that i am?


This mess, really, is all just another hateful vestige of the rampages of slavery and racism. The parents have a point, the school sucks, they can leave if they want. But the problem wouldn't've existed in the first place if the state and culture hadn't segregated the schools in the first place. The state's policy has changed on segregation of schools, its sensibly agreed that its stupidly illegal and unconstitutional. So the state isn't going to help re-store the segregation status quo.
So these parents can 'suck it'.


Oh thats cute, your very intelligent response is "suck it"



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Lashawnbarber.com
In Texas, it’s illegal for white parents to disregard arbitrary notions of skin color diversity and send their kids to better schools. [subliminal message: Homeschool your kids!]

Apparently the Hearne Independent School District in Texas is predominantly black, and white parents were transferring their kids to the Mumford Independent School District, apparently predominantly white.

If folks are complaining about white students leaving a school district, the implication is that the presence of whites is beneficial to blacks, yet the same people will argue that blacks and whites are equally capable of performing well and, to extend the implication, blacks admitted or hired through skin color preferences are just as qualified as the whites who didn’t get admitted or hired so that someone black could be admitted or hired instead.

If racism is holding blacks down, as Jesse Jackson would argue, shouldn’t the absence of “racist” whites in a school district (no white students or staff) improve the performance of black students? Research a few predominantly black school districts and let me know what you find.


If this article is correct this has got to be the basis for the best circular arguement of all times.

Let me see if I can lay it out without offending anyone.
(hear the theme from Mission Impossible playing in the background)

Schools seperated by race are racist and illegal.

If white and black students are in mixed schools, the black students are not achieving because the white students are holding them back.

If this is true, then if the white students leave, there is nothing preventing the black students from achieving.

According to this article all black schools are not achieving.

Schools seperated by race are racist and illegal.

Make the white students come back to the schools.

If white and black students are in mixed schools, the black students are not achieving because the white students are holding them back.

I am starting to see a pattern here.

Anybody else see it ? What is common thru the whole cycle?


THE SCHOOLS!!!!! There is no reason why one school should be better than another in the same state!

Before you dismiss this as a racist point of view this is the author of the article La Shawn Barber.


I don't agree with her on homeschooling, but everything else I do. Maybe there is hope yet.



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by JIMC5499
Before you dismiss this as a racist point of view this is the author of the article La Shawn Barber.



Mission: Impossible music falters as the band crashes to the floor. This comment right here I find really disturbing. I don't fault you for it JIMC, not at all. It's the culture. The only people who are permitted to be critical of the African-American community are African-Americans. Anyone else says something, true or not, they're racists. You felt that expressing a valid point would be invalidated because, I'm guessing, you're not African-American. Yet, if you put a picture of the author and she turns out to be black, half of the people will actually pay attention. The other half will probably call her an Uncle Tom working for the racist Republicans, never realizing the enormous hypocracy of their statement. :shk:

Why are we so focused on race as a people?



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
So are you implying that i am?'

wtf? That doesn't even make sense, I'm implying that you are a reverse racist??? No, I have no idea if you're a reverse, forward, inverse racist or anything. I dout ya're.


Oh thats cute, your very intelligent response is "suck it"

Well, they can. This whole hoopla is over them not getting state funding to pay for their kids to get out of this school? 'Uck em.


junglejake
Why are we so focused on race as a people?

Its especially odd since there is no biological reality to race, its entirely a social construct.


[edit on 18-8-2005 by Nygdan]



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake

Originally posted by JIMC5499
Before you dismiss this as a racist point of view this is the author of the article La Shawn Barber.



Mission: Impossible music falters as the band crashes to the floor. This comment right here I find really disturbing. I don't fault you for it JIMC, not at all. It's the culture. The only people who are permitted to be critical of the African-American community are African-Americans. Anyone else says something, true or not, they're racists. You felt that expressing a valid point would be invalidated because, I'm guessing, you're not African-American. Yet, if you put a picture of the author and she turns out to be black, half of the people will actually pay attention. The other half will probably call her an Uncle Tom working for the racist Republicans, never realizing the enormous hypocracy of their statement. :shk:

Why are we so focused on race as a people?


You guess correctly that I am not African-American, but the reason that I included the author's picture is to applaud the fact that she believes enough in what she is saying to take the fallout for this article from her own race.
In answer to your question of "Why we are so focused on race as a people?" I believe that our so called leaders want it this way in order to control us. By leaders I mean political, religious and racial. They are afraid that if this issue is ever resolved that they lose the powerbase that they are addicted to.



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 05:24 PM
link   
Could you imagine an election year where the media isn't talking about tactics to pick up the African-American vote, the Mexican vote, etc. but instead the American vote?



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
Could you imagine an election year where the media isn't talking about tactics to pick up the African-American vote, the Mexican vote, etc. but instead the American vote?


I hope that I live long enough to see it. I stated on another thread that I can't understand how someone who can trace their family tree in America back five generations can say that they are anything else than an American-American.


GO STEELERS!!!



posted on Aug, 18 2005 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Excuse me? Are you saying that we are too PC here and aren't capable of critical thought?

Tread lightly, my friend.....


This is nothing new, really. Been going on for years. If you don't like where the government says you have to send your kids, you can always pay more money and send them to a private school. You don't get a tax break even though you prefer not to use substandard government issue crap, though.
Life in a socialist country; what can you do?



socialist country???U must be kidding right!!
Just because a government interferes with social life doesnt make it socialist.

I dont think there is a positive(objective) interpretation of the word socialist in the US.



posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Do you even work for a living? In my experience, statements like yours come from college students who are "trust fund babies." In other words, they hope their chances in life are influenced by their daddies' money!


ok, here we go. no I'm not a trust fund baby. I am a 29 year old male of mixed heritage, mom's white, dad's black. my father died at a young age. mom was disinherited, until a couple years ago, because of my father's race, so basically she was a young widowed white woman with two mixed kids raising them without help from her family, so needless to say we weren't well off while I was groing up. Her father just recently realized the error of his ways. better late than never, though I doubt I'll ever call him grandpa.

I do work for a living. senior software developer for a travel managment company, with no official training, 8 years running. but I had to work twice as hard to get to my position. when first applying to my company, I was trying to get into the IT dept, but they hired someone else instead(white guy, same age same experience). they called me back for a position in the ticket processing/delivery room. soon after I was hired they fired the guy who they hired for the IT dept and hired someone else(white guy, little older, no experience). I taught myself about computers and programming to pass the time since I couldn't find any free video games online. rewrote the distribution database to make my job easier. in other words I had to rewrite a whole system before they looked my way.

I'm not saying that all white people are well off. I saw my mom struggle everyday providing for my sister and I. but when one race enslaves another, "discourages" them from educating themselves with threat of beatings, dismemberment, family seperation and death, kills off the ones that did attempt to educate themselves against the wishes of the overseers, breeds the dumb and docile to produce dumb and docile offspring, does this for a few hundred years legally, does the same thing illegally and oppresses this race for another hundred or so with seperate but equal and other jim crow. and white folks still do it now, though they may not have the law behind them and it's not deemed "PC". and I might mention that all this was still legal when my Mom was a young woman. white folks could kill blacks without fear of prosecution. it's amazing to me that white folks think that a generation of "equality" can undo the few hundred years of injustice. all this "reverse racisim" is just a way to help undo all the injustice done in the past without starting from scratch.

I don't need help from affirmative action. but I know that some young person of color out there needs the law to tell some bigot that it's against the law for them to act as a bigot.





[edit on 19-8-2005 by passengername]



posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by passengername


I'm not saying that all white people are well off. I saw my mom struggle everyday providing for my sister and I. but when one race enslaves another, "discourages" them from educating themselves with threat of beatings, dismemberment, family seperation and death, kills off the ones that did attempt to educate themselves against the wishes of the overseers, breeds the dumb and docile to produce dumb and docile offspring, does this for a few hundred years legally, does the same thing illegally and oppresses this race for another hundred or so with seperate but equal and other jim crow. and white folks still do it now, though they may not have the law behind them and it's not deemed "PC". and I might mention that all this was still legal when my Mom was a young woman. white folks could kill blacks without fear of prosecution. it's amazing to me that white folks think that a generation of "equality" can undo the few hundred years of injustice. all this "reverse racisim" is just a way to help undo all the injustice done in the past without starting from scratch.


[edit on 19-8-2005 by passengername]


Another 'blame whitey' post.

Also, condoning the use of 'reverse rascism' by blacks of whites isn't really a good way to get your point across either.

How about this: get over the past. Quit using 'whitey' as the cause for all your problems. It was true 50-60 years ago, but not nowadays. By a person constantly bringing up the injustices done to blacks in the past, the -white vs. black- issue just keeps perpetuating itself.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join