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.

 

Slave Descendants Try to Revive Lawsuit

page: 11
9
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by ceci2006
People paid the 9/11 survivors money and the topic regarding 9/11 is brought up often.

People paid the Holocaust survivors money and the topic about the Holocaust is still brought up more than often.

And neither of these recipients requested to put their money in a general fund. Does that mean they are more greedier than the descendents bringing up the lawsuit?

Explain what the difference is between them and not bringing up slavery again?

[edit on 29-9-2006 by ceci2006]


Keywords in your sentence, " PAID SURVIVORS"

[edit on 30-9-2006 by IspyU]




posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 12:37 AM
link   
I'm not sure that people are looking at this realistically.
Firstly aren't corporations viewed as people legally? So a corporation that profited from slavery is every bit as guilty as a slave owner that was actually there at the time. The individual shareholders are irrelevant I mean not every tobacco shareholder owned shares when Big Tobacco did most of things it gets sued for yet they still have to pay the price with those who were.

Secondly I'm not sure the laches thing really applies. I mean from what I understand it means the litigant essentially slept on their rights to seek legal recourse and allowed too much time to elapse. Yet this is obviously not the case with slavery reparations. The litigants weren't even granted equal rights until recently not to mention the fact that the traditionally the judicial system has been biased against them essentially overruling their rights.

Thirdly just because something was legal at the time does not mean you can't be sued for it later. As has been pointed out the Holocaust was legal in Germany at the time yet this does not mean that those entities that profited from it could not be sued. I would imagine the same thing applies here.

I'm not a lawyer but it seems pretty clear cut to me. Comparing this to sueing the Mongols or Imperial Spain really don't make sense because neither are existing legal entities. You may not like the legal rights we're granted in this country but that doesn't mean they don't exist.


[edit on 30-9-2006 by boogyman]



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by boogyman
I'm not sure that people are looking at this realistically.
Firstly aren't corporations viewed as people legally? So a corporation that profited from slavery is every bit as guilty as a slave owner that was actually there at the time. The individual shareholders are irrelevant I mean not every tobacco shareholder owned shares when Big Tobacco did most of things it gets sued for yet they still have to pay the price with those who were.

Secondly I'm not sure the laches thing really applies. I mean from what I understand it means the litigant essentially slept on their rights to seek legal recourse and allowed too much time to elapse. Yet this is obviously not the case with slavery reparations. The litigants weren't even granted equal rights until recently not to mention the fact that the traditionally the judicial system has been biased against them essentially overruling their rights.

Thirdly just because something was legal at the time does not mean you can't be sued for it later. As has been pointed out the Holocaust was legal in Germany at the time yet this does not mean that those entities that profited from it could not be sued. I would imagine the same thing applies here.

I'm not a lawyer but it seems pretty clear cut to me. Comparing this to sueing the Mongols or Imperial Spain really don't make sense because neither are existing legal entities. You may not like the legal rights we're granted in this country but that doesn't mean they don't exist.


[edit on 30-9-2006 by boogyman]


The money that those tobacco company paid was toward the victums or the victums families who presently had to endure through the pain

Those family had to pay for the funeral, medical bills or whatever..

[edit on 30-9-2006 by IspyU]



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by ceci2006
.
People paid the Holocaust survivors money and the topic about the Holocaust is still brought up more than often.

Explain what the difference is between them and not bringing up slavery again?

[edit on 29-9-2006 by ceci2006]


The difference, in my book, is that the money that was paid to the Holocaust victims was to wives, daughters, sons, and/or very close living relatives. These were people that lived through the "wrong" done to them. They saw the horrors or lost someone very close to them.

It wasn't three or four generations down line were people were compensated or received reparations that did not suffer at the time the act took place that get compensated for it. It was people who suffered at the time of the Holocaust and lived thru it that received reparations.



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Keyhole

Originally posted by ceci2006
.
People paid the Holocaust survivors money and the topic about the Holocaust is still brought up more than often.

Explain what the difference is between them and not bringing up slavery again?

[edit on 29-9-2006 by ceci2006]


The difference, in my book, is that the money that was paid to the Holocaust victims was to wives, daughters, sons, and/or very close living relatives. These were people that lived through the "wrong" done to them. They saw the horrors or lost someone very close to them.

It wasn't three or four generations down line were people were compensated or received reparations that did not suffer at the time the act took place that get compensated for it. It was people who suffered at the time of the Holocaust and lived thru it that received reparations.



Exactly my point...


[edit on 30-9-2006 by IspyU]

[edit on 30-9-2006 by IspyU]



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 01:32 AM
link   
Is this a joke? If you can sue for that pretty much u can sue for anything.

In that case, I want to sue the goverment for the Vietnam war, they killed my great grandfather who was a civilian in a bomb raid.



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 01:38 AM
link   
Again, what prevented the Holocaust or 9/11 survivors from putting their money into a general fund?

They did make the decision to keep the money, didn't they? They also had the choice to put their money into the general fund as well.

Well, they kept the money. And that, in turn, makes them far more greedier than the descendants of slaves in this lawsuit. And because the 9/11 and Holocaust survivors made the choice to keep the money, the shoe fits.

The same could not be said for the descendants of slaves because they requested a general fund if they won the suit.

Unfortunately, I hadn't heard a direct answer about this yet.



[edit on 30-9-2006 by ceci2006]



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 01:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by ceci2006
Again, what prevented the Holocaust or 9/11 survivors from putting their money into a general fund?

They did make the decision to keep the money, didn't they? They also had the choice to put their money into the general fund as well.

Well, they kept the money. And that, in turn, makes them far more greedier than the descendants of slaves in this lawsuit. And because the 9/11 and Holocaust survivors made the choice to keep the money, the shoe fits.

The same could not be said for the descendants of slaves because they requested the money would be put in a general fund if they won the suit.

Unfortunately, I hadn't heard a direct answer about this yet.


[edit on 30-9-2006 by ceci2006]


What prevent those families from putting those money into general funds is that they lost financial partners/supporter. And they have to suffer the grief

By getting that money and put it into general fund, you created another problem, like employees who work at the bank will lose there jobs... This lawsuit will not be settle for few thousands either



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 02:05 AM
link   
Funny. Germany, the companies that participated in the Holocaust, nor the American Government didn't go into financial straits from the money they paid out to the survivors.

Why do you think that these companies (lasting a long time) would suffer?

As for the survivors of both the Holocaust and 9/11, I guess that only they can be pitied for their dire financial need.

What if some of these survivors were just as lazy and shiftless? Would you pay them as much empathy as you do now?

After all, "lazy", "shiftless" and other derogatory stereotypes were used to describe Black people mentioning their connection to slavery and reparations.




[edit on 30-9-2006 by ceci2006]



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 02:08 AM
link   
this is a little off_topic but similiar just the same.
Here in Australia, i recently heard of a lawsuit where Aboriginals were suing for
wages that werent received for farm work done by thier ancestors decades ago.
Again, it is THIS generation that is sueing for wages from work done by previous
generations.
Compensatoin has been paid in various native titles, treaties and also gererous welfare
benefits where they get MORE than the general population but once they get one
allowance, they seem to want more, more , more, It never stops.
The common thread with this and the topic here, is a new generation sueing for
compensation (reparation seems to be the same thing) that was OWED to someone
generations back. We also have to contend with the Stolen Generatoin issue and the
aboriginals wanting compensatoin for that. Of course, they SAY that they only want
a formal apology but we all know once that is given, where it will all go. $$$$$
Austalians too are getting sick of hearing about the hard done by aboriginal who
dont appear to want to help themselves. They have the highest incidence of child
abuse, domestic violence, drug and alcohol abuse, even though as a community they
get more money per person than a person here of any other descent.

I agree with the posters who have said that many injustices and atrocities have
happened to EVERY culture/race at some point in history. We cant all sue the
perpetrators . Some injustices just happened too long ago to hold anyone accountable. I think it is a sign of character when, despite the past, people can pick
themselves up and take advantage of the opportunities that are available to them
NOW to make their children and future descendants lifes better. Someone has to
start somewhere. Otherwise, future generations will be stuck in an injustice that
happened in the past.



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 02:09 AM
link   
I'm not saying the company would suffer, i'm saying the employees will.. They will layoff some people.

As for the survivors of both the Holocaust and 9/11, they should be pitied because they are affected by it...

Is those generations of slaves affected financially by their slave ancester?

Who care if they are lazy? They lost the ones who were making money for them RIGHT NOW....

[edit on 30-9-2006 by IspyU]



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 02:15 AM
link   
Well, the employees probably know full well who they were working for. So, they've got to handle exactly what they've got themselves into. They did make a choice to apply for the job at the suspected companies, did they not?

So, unfortunately, they have to live with their own choices for working at a company that has dealt in slavery in the past. The companies listed are perpetrators of this action, past and present. What is so hard to realize that they made money off the backs of a race of people?

So, if the companies lose, then the employees will just have to look for another job and face a black mark on their resumes for working for a business sponsoring human trafficking.
--------------------------------------------------------------

And, my second question is, why is it all right for everyone else to sue for their mistreatment? It seems when it comes to Black people, we cannot have our day in court.

Is it because only certain people can sue companies and no one complains?

I call that present day racism because of the reaction against the people bringing the lawsuit.

The reasoning in the comments against the lawsuit harbors on personal and institutional racism.

After all, the residue of slavery has not disappeared. It just manifests into another form.

[edit on 30-9-2006 by ceci2006]



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 02:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by ceci2006
Well, the employees probably know full well who they were working for. So, they've got to handle exactly what they've got themselves into. They did may a choice to apply to the job at the suspected companies, did they not?

--------------------------------------------------------------

And, my second question is, why is it all right for everyone else to sue for their mistreatment. But when it comes to Black people, we cannot have our day in court?

Is it because only certain people can sue companies and no one complains?

I call that present day racism because of the reaction against the people bringing the lawsuit.

This is part of the institutional and personal racism directed against anything that has to do with a particular group happening today.

After all, the residue of slavery has not disappeared.


How often do you apply at a company and look far back into the History of that company?

If the job is available and pay well, wouldn't we all work there..

Do you think black people are the only victums in America?

Do you see the chinese community sueing for the ancestor lose while building the railroad?

Welcome to reality, racism is all around you and every race is a victum..

Just for the record i'm not white or black... I'm Laos which is around asia... and my people got bomb the crap out by americans during vietnam war.
[edit on 30-9-2006 by IspyU]

[edit on 30-9-2006 by IspyU]



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 02:33 AM
link   

Originally quoted by IspyU

Is those generations of slaves affected financially by their slave ancester?


Yes. The institutional and personal racism that has evolved into violence, social segregation, unequal education and lack of employment is the cause of the residue from slavery. The very same violence which befell their ancestors affects the descendants today. The institutional racism derives from the rules that slavery and segregation set up against Black people.

You can talk all the while about how people were persecuted in the same way, but somehow no one seems to get that the government sponsored an entire set of laws to subjugate and restrict Black people. And these laws quietly make their imprint today in terms of unequal treatment in societal institutions.

If we were treated the same, no one here would be discussing how worthless Blacks are for taking a case about slavery to court. They wouldn't be putting down the behavior of Blacks as well, if things were truly equal. Not to mention, using every excuse in the book to minimalize the experience that Blacks had as slaves as being "so long ago".

For example, James Byrd's death most recently is indicative of the violence that is still going on as a result of the hatred that had gone on in the past. After all, he was the victim of a small town lynching. If anything, he could be a very strong symbol of things remaining the same as they did in slavery.


[edit on 30-9-2006 by ceci2006]



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 02:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by ceci2006

Originally quoted by IspyU

Is those generations of slaves affected financially by their slave ancester?


Yes. The institutional and personal racism that has evolved into violence, social segregation, unequal education and lack of employment is the cause of the residue from slavery. The very same violence which befell their ancestors affects the descendants today. The institutional racism derives from the rules that slavery and segregation set up against Black people.

You can talk all the while about how people were persecuted in the same way, but somehow no one seems to get that the government sponsored an entire set of laws to subjugate and restrict Black people. And these laws quietly make their imprint today in terms of unequal treatment in societal institutions.

If we were treated the same, no one here would be discussing how worthless Blacks are for taking a case about slavery to court. They wouldn't be putting down the behavior of Blacks as well, if things were truly equal. Not to mention, using every excuse in the book to minimalize the experience that Blacks had as slaves as being "so long ago".

For example, James Byrd's death most recently is indicative of the violence that is still going on as a result of the hatred that had gone on in the past. After all, he was the victim of a small town lynching. If anything, he could be a very strong symbol of things remaining the same as they did in slavery.


[edit on 30-9-2006 by ceci2006]


We were speaking "Financially"

No one said that this case was worthless because a black person is taking it to court and i will not repeat my point again...

I understand your strong motive for this case. But not everyone think this case is nonesense because they are racist.. By claiming people being racist is just a lame excuse..

[edit on 30-9-2006 by IspyU]



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 02:47 AM
link   

Originally quoted by IspyU
How often do you apply at a company and look far back into the History of that company?


When people investigate where they want to work, they not only look at the type of people there, they also find out the goings on of the company or institution. That's what "Google" is for.


If the job is available and pay well, wouldn't we all work there..


Who says that these companies have the best paying jobs in the first place?


Do you think black people are the only victums in America?


No, I do not. But Blacks are at the center of this lawsuit. That means that they are the focus of this particular case in terms of their treatment in slavery. And because of that reason, no one seems to have any pity for them.

Yet, those expressing their chagrin can have the same pity for other races in a similar circumstances. That's because the stereotypes produced from institutional racism is built on the privilege of the dominant culture.


Do you see the chinese community sueing for the ancestor lose while building the railroad?


China asked for reparations from Japan for crimes committed during WWII.

Yes, the Chinese Community can sue on this account if they want to. They deserve to--knowing how badly they were treated by American society.

There are Asians who are highly active in their communities and have discussed their historical treatment and segregation into different neighborhoods affected by similar laws from the 19th century to the present day. And that covers the laws certain states made restricting their immigration to the U.S. These very same laws encouraged the "yellow peril" trend that happened during the last of the 19th to the early 20th century. Asian theorists, activists, writers and professionals have also campaigned against racism and ethnocentrism within their own communities and in American society.

Sometimes, the segregation laws originally used against Blacks affected other communities of color. For example, a Supreme Court ruling during the fifties said that someone of Asian descent must use the Black side of the "Separate But Equal" laws. Racism doesn't affect just Black people. It effects Asians, Latinos, Blacks, Native Americans and Whites as well.

But, racism toward each group is different, based on the history and circumstances.

These laws not only made life in society hard for many persons of color; the very same laws also restricted them financially by denying them educational and job opportunites. Thus, they were deprived of social mobility.

Trinh T. Minh-ha and Maxine Hong Kingston are some among many Asians who write about the different trends regarding cultural identity and awareness in the dominant culture.


Welcome to reality, racism is all around you and every race is a victum..


I am facing reality. Are you?


Just for the record i'm not white or black... I'm Laos which is around asia... and my people got bomb the crap out by americans during vietnam war.


Congratulations. I know people from Laos. They grew up among the H'mong, the Vietamese and the Cambodians in my hometown. They went to my elementary, middle and high schools and I was friends with all of them. So, yes, they all have suffered terribly by not only their own governments, but the American government as well.

But, I would like to ask you a question. What does "model minority" mean to you? Do you understand what it means when these arguments and assumptions by the dominant culture are used to pit people of color against each other when discussing oppression?



I understand your strong motive for this case. But not everyone think this case is nonesense because they are racist.. By claiming people being racist is just a lame excuse..


If something racist happened to you, would you think it was lame? If someone else called your reasons for racism a lame excuse, how would you react?

What if someone dismissed, derided and ridiculed the history and culture of your people? How would you feel?

[edit on 30-9-2006 by ceci2006]



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 06:37 AM
link   
GROW UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



I understand that black people are upset about the years of slavery, but that was how long ago???????? You got a problem with what one of my grandfather did to yours? fine I'll show you where he's buried and then you can argue with him. Other wise GET OVER IT!!!!! you can't change the past and this all sounds like someSTUPID UNEDUCATED way to get some free money, GET A JOB!!!!!!



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 06:47 AM
link   
So now the REAL reason for the Lawsuit is revealed!!!!


original quote by ceci:
No, I do not. But Blacks are at the center of this lawsuit. That means that they are the focus of this particular case in terms of their treatment in slavery. And because of that reason, no one seems to have any pity for them.


So, it's all about the Pity.

Shame, I thought it went deeper than that.

Semper



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 06:51 AM
link   
The people who are in the lawsuit (among others who research and ask for reparations) already have jobs. There are a lot educated people in the reparations movement, some of which whom are very distinguished in their own right.

So, I don't know what the heck you are talking about.

It just reflects a little more of the same old derogatory stereotypes brainwashing the dominant culture.

Perhaps the 9/11 survivors who got their money should get a job, since they are so financially strapped. To get money for their ills, they are probably also uneducated and shiftless--since we're putting down suffering people who ask for a monetary settlement.

------------------------------------------------------

You said it, Semper. I didn't.

But say what you must.

[edit on 30-9-2006 by ceci2006]



posted on Sep, 30 2006 @ 06:59 AM
link   

original quote by ceci:You said it, Semper. I didn't.


Just so we all know who we are dealing with in reference to this Lawsuit...


quote: original quote by ceci:
No, I do not. But Blacks are at the center of this lawsuit. That means that they are the focus of this particular case in terms of their treatment in slavery. And because of that reason, no one seems to have any pity for them.


no one seems to have any pity for them.


Semper



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join