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.

 

South Carolina NAACP rally covers statue of George Washington to not offend anybody

page: 2
28
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Is there another source for this? All I can find are blogs. And as to the REASON this statue has a box around it, I'd like to hear from something other than blogs... It's hard to believe ANYONE would cover up our first president to prevent someone getting offended...

Something sounds fishy about this story.


I couldnt find anything else.. but I didnt look too hard either! LOL! If it happened it would NOT surprise me in the least though. Theyve done plenty of other things that are worse than covering a statue. IMO... you just dont hear about it much. The media doesnt like to say negative things about the wonderful and benevolent NAACP.




posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:23 PM
link   
People should learn on this forum already not to jump the gun especially when information is coming from a blog. Anybody can write a blog and we've seen false hyped up information time and time again, in particular from rightwing sources. I know I know, everybody is desperate to bash the NAACP, the president and whatever else but atleast have the courtesy to assure the facts are straight.

If this is true then I gotta say, the NAACP is over it's head for doing this, I do not know what it achieves? But yes, we need straight sources to verify that George washing was covered not to offend anybody.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Advantage
I couldnt find anything else.. but I didnt look too hard either! LOL!


Yeah, that seems to be the norm. People are so quick to jump on the anti-NAACP Bandwagon AND to make this an issue of race. People make me sick.
Who cares why they REALLY did it when we can smear the NAACP with our assumptions?

Maybe they did it so people wouldn't be running into the statue. Maybe they did it to PROTECT the statue.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:25 PM
link   
I had to go find the article Id read about it on Education News..

www.educationnews.org...



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Advantage

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Is there another source for this? All I can find are blogs. And as to the REASON this statue has a box around it, I'd like to hear from something other than blogs... It's hard to believe ANYONE would cover up our first president to prevent someone getting offended...

Something sounds fishy about this story.


I couldnt find anything else..


Exactly, couldn't find anything else. All you have is a blog and this your opportunity to promote this assumptive source before legitimate information comes out. That is not denying ignorance. Any true ATSer would assure the facts are searched from real sources.

Some people are just so desperate.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by Advantage
I couldnt find anything else.. but I didnt look too hard either! LOL!


Yeah, that seems to be the norm. People are so quick to jump on the anti-NAACP Bandwagon AND to make this an issue of race. People make me sick.
Who cares why they REALLY did it when we can smear the NAACP with our assumptions?

Maybe they did it so people wouldn't be running into the statue. Maybe they did it to PROTECT the statue.


So sorry to make you sick. Id read it way before this thread.. Ive also had my own experiences with the NAACP.. no need to make anything up with that group in my case.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Advantage
I had to go find the article Id read about it on Education News..

www.educationnews.org...


The source references it's information back from the OP's blog.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by Advantage
I had to go find the article Id read about it on Education News..

www.educationnews.org...


The source references it's information back from the OP's blog.


Yeah, but thats where I had personally read it first. Id not seen the rally covered by the MSM at all. There are several pages on google, but they are all blogs as well. When Id read it it fit in with what the NAACP was saying to us when I was attending Ole Miss in 1987.. that long ago.. along with Indian affairs.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   
Just to point out, in this era of media bias, maybe the only source to a story will be a blog. We all here distrust the media to one extent or another. Yet clamour for media approved sound bites when a story occurs.

Folks. WE ARE the new media.

Just throwing that out there.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
Just to point out, in this era of media bias, maybe the only source to a story will be a blog. We all here distrust the media to one extent or another. Yet clamour for media approved sound bites when a story occurs.

Folks. WE ARE the new media.

Just throwing that out there.


I know.. but I think its just the way people are wired these days. The media lies.. they admit.. but they demand a media based source. Go figure. I didnt see the media cover what happened with the Jena 6 concerning the NAACP either. Guess that was false too.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
Just to point out, in this era of media bias, maybe the only source to a story will be a blog. We all here distrust the media to one extent or another.


You distrust the media because you believe that people tend to be biased there. However a blog is no different, infact a blog is more so likely to be biased. People holding misguided views are not going to be held accountable as opposed to those in the mainstream media. Nobody will care about misinformation being spread from a blog, people do care abour information coming from major news networks.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by beezzer
Just to point out, in this era of media bias, maybe the only source to a story will be a blog. We all here distrust the media to one extent or another.


You distrust the media because you believe that people tend to be biased there. However a blog is no different, infact a blog is more so likely to be biased. People holding misguided views are not going to be held accountable as opposed to those in the mainstream media. Nobody will care about misinformation being spread from a blog, people do care abour information coming from major news networks.


You are right. But when someone blogs a story, maybe, juuuuust maybe, they might be telling the truth. I'd give them the benefit of doubt over MSM any day.
But that's me.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:38 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Advantage
 


OH COME ONE!



The Main Stream Media does not lie!

Oh wait-The New York Times admits it is a propaganda paper!

Nevermind, they prove it day in and day out that they are liars and propagandists.

Sorry, if a blog gives proof that is verfiable, I trust blogs now more than I trust MSM sources. I actually trust blog site now more than I do MSM sites. Since MSM sites have proven the fact that they are propaganda.

I proved that the New York Times is a propagandist site by that thread. That is why I did not get many comments. It is too obvious.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 



I definitely get where you are coming from,but if those of us that walked out in 87 would have told the truth of what happened (because the media refused to even hear us on it, though tribal counsel did) .. would we have not been believed either? When there is a pattern of behavior on the part of an organization, a long standing pattern, you can weigh the probability of the event having occurred. I would not doubt this a bit coming from the NAACP personally. I pretty well doubt a white person having no real dealings with the NAACP knows what they are talking about concerning it either. But they keep talking and they keep reporting false things in the MSM.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by beezzer
You are right. But when someone blogs a story, maybe, juuuuust maybe, they might be telling the truth.


There is always that "maybe". Not every blog is biased, and we do not get misinformation all the time from the media outlets.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


Hey SG, why not walk on over and dispute the thread I wrote about the New York Times?

Give it a try and dispute my conclusions. YOU might be able to come up with something.

Doubtful, but possible.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   
I was able to find this from SC's newspaper site called The State. It's a photo gallery of the event. Go to about the 7th picture in the gallery.

www.thestate.com...://media.thestate.com/smedia/2011/01/17/17/KingDay_kkft530.standalone.prod _affiliate.74.JPG



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by topher475
I was able to find this from SC's newspaper site called The State. It's a photo gallery of the event. Go to about the 7th picture in the gallery.

www.thestate.com...://media.thestate.com/smedia/2011/01/17/17/KingDay_kkft530.standalone.prod _affiliate.74.JPG


SOme here in their support for the NAACP will claim that was to protect the statue.. like Obama protected the religious symbols at the speech.. like they tried to protect these ignorant savage indian kids attending a white university.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
reply to post by Advantage
 


OH COME ONE!



The Main Stream Media does not lie!


Who said the mainstream media does not lie? You appear to be the only one making this claim here. And yes, just because somebody says that blogs are often misleading does not equate to claiming that the mainstream media is never biased. This is one of those fallacies in your arguments saltheart.


Sorry, if a blog gives proof that is verfiable, I trust blogs now more than I trust MSM sources.


That is if blogs provide verifiable proof, none of which I see on this thread aside from alot of assumptions and a picture. And you do know the mainstread media provides veriable proof for many many reports right? Even fox news provides legit news at times, that doesn't mean that they are truthful all the time. Blogs are no different other than that they are held less accountable for their misinformation.



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join