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.

 

Racism is for Ignorant Fools, not ATS.

page: 25
111
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 12:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nichiren
"You lie!" wouldn't have happened to a white Prez. The threshold of respect seems to be a lot lower.


I disagree strongly with this. George W. Bush (whom I assume was "white") was called a liar so often in the media and in Congress that I'm amazed you don't remember it. A number of Congressional members — not the least of whom was Sen. Hillary Clinton — did not hesitate to claim that Bush lied about WMD in Iraq, and they made such claims right there in Congress.

So, are you saying that it would be "more respectful" for Rep. Joe Wilson to wait to deliver his "You Lie!" on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives the next day? "Mr. President, You Lie!" is more respectful if you don't say it to the president's face?

Again, I disagree strongly.

For members of the U.S. Congress to call the president a liar in any venue except in the president's presence is COWARDLY. I applaud Joe Wilson for having the guts to say it to the man's face and in front of the nation. I additionally applaud him for personally apologizing to the president — which the Bush-bashers in Congress NEVER DID.

— Doc Velocity




posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 12:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Doc Velocity
 


When was the last time a POTUS was shouted at when he addressed a joint session of Congress? And why exactly did Mr. Wilson apologize? Bad decorum



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nichiren
When was the last time a POTUS was shouted at when he addressed a joint session of Congress? And why exactly did Mr. Wilson apologize? Bad decorum


Personally, I don't think a POTUS deserves ANY crowd response from a joint session of Congress. No applause, no cheers, no laughter, no heckling. The POTUS should walk in there, recite his proposals or excuses or whatever, then leave in complete silence. The Legislative Branch owes the Executive Branch no special respect.

What IS a televised presidential address of a joint session of Congress except a sales pitch to the American People? WHY should this sales pitch ONLY receive accolades and applause from Congress, but not dissent?

This is about banning dissent, make no mistake. Again, I applaud Joe Wilson for saying it loud and clear:

The Emperor Has No Clothes!!

— Doc Velocity



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 12:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Doc Velocity
 


Not able to answer my two questions

Disinfo specialist. I see now.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by harpsounds
IQ in the United States

Asians score the highest
Then Whites
Then Native Americans
Then Blacks

Berry, J. W. (1966). Temne and Eskimo perceptual skills. International Journal of Psychology, 1, 207-222.
MacArthur, R. S. (1968). Some differential abilities of northern Canadian native youth. International Journal of Psychology, 3, 43-51.
Roth, P. L., Bevier, C. A., Bobko, P., Switzer, F. S. III, & Tyler, P. (2001). Ethnic group differences in cognitive ability in employment and educational settings: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 54, 297-330.
Hunt, Earl & Carlson, Jerry. Considerations Relating to the Study of Group Differences in Intelligence. Perspectives on Psychological Science 2 (2), 194-213.

What happens with cases like this? It's true, but also probably racist to mention. We can deny ignorance on the racism, but what if that involved denying ignorance on scientific truth?

I've seen a lot of people on ATS make those kind of posts. Are they no longer tolerated, even if they cite studies to back up their claims?

Personally I'm not a fan of that kind of racism, but when people use scientific studies, we pretty much have to accept it. It seems a tough conflict to resolve.

I think it's better to argue the points than to censor the racists, because that just forces them underground into closed off societies where they can never be debated with again, with the intent of changing their opinion.



In fact, the evidence heavily favors the view that race differences in IQ are environmental in origin, not genetic.


The whole article is quite the interesting read ...

All Brains Are the Same Color

Beware of selective scientific cherry picking, lest we go down The Bell Curve path once more ... or worse.

Though your point is valid, inasmuch as this very conversation is a worthy one to have, if only to clarify such misrepresentations as the one proposed in your post. But it also shows that such discourse can happen without race baiting or name calling.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nichiren
Not able to answer my two questions

When was the last time somebody shouted at the president during an address of a joint session of Congress?

I have no idea. Has it ever been done before? If not, I applaud Joe Wilson for setting an historic precedent, and I hope we see more dissent from Congress right into the president's face in the future.

Why exactly did Mr. Wilson apologize?

Because he embarrassed the POTUS, he pissed right into Obama's cornflakes on national TV, and he mortified the Congressional leadership. RIGHT ON. He apologized to the president for breaking with decorum.

Keep breaking with decorum, people. If you're going to call a man a liar, do it to his face. Calling a man a liar behind his back is cowardly.

I think, in that one act, Joe Wilson showed Barack Obama MORE RESPECT than Congressional Democrats EVER showed to GWB.

— Doc Velocity



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 01:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Doc Velocity
 


First of all, you can applaud Joe Wilson for his Jerry Springer antics to your heart's content ... that's actually what they do on the Springer show.

That incident however is hardly relevant to this thread ... now if you wanna talk confederate flags that's another thing.

I'm pretty sure there's a thread for both topics.


[edit on 20 Sep 2009 by schrodingers dog]



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Doc Velocity

I think, in that one act, Joe Wilson showed Barack Obama MORE RESPECT than Congressional Democrats EVER showed to GWB.

— Doc Velocity


I have one question for you.

Why are you defending and applauding Joe Wilson in the "Racism is for Ignorant Fools" thread?



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 01:10 AM
link   
Just came to me.... racism is for ignorant fools.

disagree with Obama = racism.

Obama = racist for attending black power church for 20 years.

So, Obama supporters are either 1)guilty of racism by not supporting Obama's racist views (can't disagree with a black man without being racist), or 2)think Obama is an ignorant fool. (which, since he's black, makes you a racist.)

Some great logic you have there.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 01:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by 21cdb
Just came to me.... racism is for ignorant fools.

Some great logic you have there.


Ok, I'm in.

Now, since you are in dissent, please explain your logic for the inverse.

"Racism is for Educated Sages"

Be my guest.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 02:05 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 02:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by clcreek

I really wish the ____ that are in control of this site would delete my account as I asked.


You can always just go away.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 02:28 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 02:30 AM
link   
Racism : one of the most abused words on the planet.

I know of only ONE, RACE, on this planet we all call Earth. The HUMAN race. Thats it, there arent anymore, that are acknowledged that is. But thats for a different thread.

Color, does not a race make. White, Black, Brown, Red, Yellow are just colors that are most likely adaptations to the sun, or not depending on which theory you follow.

If you want to get specific then you can say this, there are THREE species of Humans, Caucasian/Negro/Mongol as defined by skeletal differences, however minor, by the scientific community.

Therefore, every single people who yells "race" as an reason for some injustice is merely being an idiot and is contributing to the inevitable decline in Human intelligence generated by such ignorance. The only way to start changing this "excuse" is to deny it any traction by calling the person out and shaming them publically for using it.

It will require courage and resolve, but doesnt everything that is "right" in this world require such character and principles.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 02:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by clcreek

Originally posted by ziggystrange

Originally posted by clcreek

I really wish the ____ that are in control of this site would delete my account as I asked.


You can always just go away.


Every once in a while I come around to see how ignorant y'all are...


So......

How are we doing?

How ignorant are we?



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 02:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Greg Clark
Racism : one of the most abused words on the planet.

snip

Therefore, every single people who yells "race" as an reason for some injustice is merely being an idiot and is contributing to the inevitable decline in Human intelligence generated by such ignorance. The only way to start changing this "excuse" is to deny it any traction by calling the person out and shaming them publically for using it.

It will require courage and resolve, but doesnt everything that is "right" in this world require such character and principles.


You're confusing me Greg.

Are you saying that injustice in general should not be labeled under any circumstances? or just related to race specifically?

Are you saying that since there is a science that defines a "species" That the concepts of race and racism are null and void? That's a stretch.

The word Race is like all language, a way to express a concept, as is what people call racism. Generally meaning a person that has pre-conceived negative notions related to another on the basis of what they consider to be the others "race". or the concept thereof. Ergo, Racism.

Not a difficult thing to understand for a smart guy like you.

I also have to disagree with your premise that the way to resolve injustice and "racism" is to publicly shame any idiot that uses the word "race".

That's completely absurd.

Sorry guy, you are just over "my" head.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 03:09 AM
link   
reply to post by ziggystrange
 


To me, your post makes no sense. You try to take a stance against racism, then proceed to divide people into groups.

The American gun owners DO have legitimate reason to worry about their 2nd amendment rights. www.youtube.com...

It IS about the Constitution. NOT about skin color. It's about the FACT that the SAME GLOBALIST POLICIES SUPPORTED UNDER BUSH AND OTHERS ARE STILL SUPPORTED (AND EVEN EXPANDED) UNDER OBAMA. CAN I SPELL THIS OUT ANY MORE CLEARLY?



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 03:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by ziggystrange

Originally posted by clcreek

Originally posted by ziggystrange

Originally posted by clcreek

I really wish the ____ that are in control of this site would delete my account as I asked.


You can always just go away.


Every once in a while I come around to see how ignorant y'all are...


So......

How are we doing?

How ignorant are we?


Well considering that everyone is ignorant, admission is the first step to recovery... the second step would be to get a new motto.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 03:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by MontanaMike
reply to post by ziggystrange
 


It IS about the Constitution. NOT about skin color. It's about the FACT that the SAME GLOBALIST POLICIES SUPPORTED UNDER BUSH AND OTHERS ARE STILL SUPPORTED (AND EVEN EXPANDED) UNDER OBAMA. CAN I SPELL THIS OUT ANY MORE CLEARLY?


No need to yell Greg.

I did not divide people by color, but that is not what is important here.

What is important is this.

If what you say, that I quoted is the truth, (even just for you).

Then why are you debating it in the topic designated for racists to post their whacko rationalizations for objecting to ATS deciding to stop the obvious "racism" depicted in the Forum?



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 03:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by jackflap
reply to post by Nutter
 



Can I say that acorn is bunch of crooks? Or does it become rascist when I say acorn is a bunch of minority crooks who have spent billions of taxpayer dollars just to help out minorities get one over on the man? When does it become rascist? When I use the "n-word"? Or is it a subjective view that a moderator gets to decide? If so, then you are inherently adding moderator biassness in to the equation.


Why not just say that the illegal activities of Acorn are well known. You can leave the man and the minority crooks out of it.


Well said.



new topics

top topics



 
111
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join