Rape of women in DR Congo 'tops 1000 a day'

reply to post by syrinx high priest


Believe it or not, I am not trying to "wind anybody up". I am simply trying to tell the truth.
As for the whole "out of Africa" thing, I really don't see how that's relevant. Really, I don't (even if it is true).

Now just as I've made clear before, all groups are capable of terrible things - Whites being no exception. But, again, it's a matter of frequency, attitudes, severity, etc.

Think about it: Mass rapes, cannibalism, ubiquitous violence.....stuff like this certainly happens among more civilized groups, but it is the exception, never the rule (a few wars instigated by Jews and religious fanatics with Whites used as cannon fodder do not count). But with groups like Black Africans, oh, it is apparently the rule. Again, just take an honest look at different human groups. Compare them. And see for yourself.....

reply to post by AngryOne


Have you considered the thought "you are a product of your enviroment". People in Africa live in developing conditions. They are more inclined to support religous values/ traditional values then those of free expression. This article: www.foreignaffairs.com... from foreign affairs illustrates the point clearly. I don't think it is a factor of being black but rather a factor of living in a developed state. Not to mention the country is in the midst of a civil war and we all know that during war the most evil come out to play and take advantage of others wether for their sick minds or for their pockets.

I am not surprised by this, this does not mean I am happy that much of sub saharan africa appears to be populated by beings that are barely human, but this is the nature of the region- one of the reasons I support the nation state and an end to mass immigration

Originally posted by SpeachM1litant
reply to post by AngryOne

 

Have you considered the thought "you are a product of your enviroment". People in Africa live in developing conditions. They are more inclined to support religous values/ traditional values then those of free expression. This article: www.foreignaffairs.com... from foreign affairs illustrates the point clearly. I don't think it is a factor of being black but rather a factor of living in a developed state. Not to mention the country is in the midst of a civil war and we all know that during war the most evil come out to play and take advantage of others wether for their sick minds or for their pockets.

Nothing unusual about this sort of behaviour in Africa unfortunately

reply to post by SpeachM1litant

Of course I'm aware of that concept; understand that I never fully disregarded it. But come on, this is obviously much more than just environmental. I mean, Blacks have had every chance - and a very long time - to get somewhere, to do something. And they have blown it. I think we can only assume that this is not about environments, but about genes. There's literally no reason to believe otherwise.

Before attacking me for being a hateful racist, just think about it - am I right or am I wrong?
This is not about hatred or bigotry. This is about truth.

there is only two allowable factors to this equation? genes and the environment?

that's a pretty narrow scope you got.

The USA, or the UK or some developed country should just go on air and call Congo a stupid country.
Nothing else, just condemn the country and call them intellectually challenge.



It's sad how blacks in America has accomplished more than sub-saharans have in their whole existence.

Click here for more information.

reply to post by AngryOne


I'm not attacking you for being racist- infact I believe you have put foward an important discussion, one that may be uncomftable for the politcally correct- however that isn't me.

My understanding of science is limited. However what I learnt is that there isn't a particular gene that controls human nature. Infact I am a firm believer that there is no such thing as human nature only human behaviour.

As for your claim that states they have had oppurtunities to progress- I must say that is incorrect. Take South Africa as a case example. Once Apartheid ended the Black people ended up poorer. Why? - They may have ended all racism on the politcal level but they didn't end it on the economic level. The same rich people (mostly white) control the economy and infact it became worse. The IMF and WBO forced upon South Africa unpopular and harsh economic reforms that caused extreme poverty in other countries where the reforms passed (Russia- 72 million people launched into poverty living on less than 4 dollars a day, Chile, Argentina, Indonesia, China, Brazil and many more which I can list). They passed these reforms to obtain debt relief- from a debt that they inherited from the apartheid years.

Colinization may be over, but Africans are subjected to economic imperialism. You may think it is bogus and I understand it is diffuclt to understand.

You do raise a good point. Many african socities are tribal socities and this means they are less advanced then we nation-states. However this dosen't mean they can't change- we white people lived in tribes once.

Have you noticed the most primitive tribes with the oldest technology in Africa rape the least, comit the least crimes and stay in touch with the land the most? It weird hey.

reply to post by ChaosMagician

Who are you talking to? Me? If so, please elaborate.



reply to post by DuceizBack

Hey. I wasn't able to see your comment (directed at me, from what I can gather from my profile) before the Mods removed it; could you please repeat yourself (being mindful of this site's terms, of course)?



reply to post by SpeachM1litant

When I talk about progress (or lack thereof), I'm speaking about all of Africa - certainly not just SA.

All people have dealt with oppression, including Whites - yet Whites seemed to have recovered quite well, even figuring out how to harness electricity, launch people into outer space, etc.
With Blacks it is apparently nothing of the sort. Just how does one explain this anyway? Economic imperialism? Come on, please.....

reply to post by AngryOne


I expected that to be your reaction. The fact is it does exist. Read into the globilization movement and the economic policies of the World Bank Orginization, the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Orginization. These policies include the privitization of state owned companies, reversing trade tariffs, opening up investment to multi-national corporations and selling natural resources to foreign corporation for extremely cheap prices- hense the term "economic imperialism" was coined. Just becuase you don't see an overt occupational force it does not mean that these orginizations are key-factors to the causes of hardships in not just Africa but across the board in many resource rich Third World countries.

I do agree with you, most of Africa lags behind the West and prodiminently white states. However I do not atribute genes to this being the cause. Please read this article: How Development Lead to Democracy before you continue to debate with me. You will be able to draw links between modernization/industrilization and the advancment of society- politcally and socially.

If you are going to make the assersion that Black people have a primitave gene which makes them more similiar to monkeys rather than humans then pleae provide me scientific evidence to support this claim. Otherwise you are rendering your argument moot.

There is evidence to point to the contrary of what you believe. The Black bushmen/ San people and Ancient African Tribes in the Omo Valley of Southern Ethiopia are the most primitve of all African people. However they also rape the least (less than we do in the West) and are the most socially responsible people on Earth.

If your theory is true than why aren't the Black people in the West that live in middle class conditions raping and murdering eachother so prevelently. There are to many holes in your logic.

Originally posted by TribeOfManyColours

Originally posted by R3N3G4D3
"more than 400,000 raped "

The actual number is 433, 785. Which would put the rapes down to.... get this ONE RAPE PER MINUTE!!! How disgusting is that?? We need to go into there and mess crap up not Iraq. The Bogey-mans dead now send some troops to there.

Why don't we go there, The troops will not go there, no money to be made

I worry that if an American soldier got captured, he'd be butt-raped by horny Congo men and then killed.

Different places, different treatment.

Why is it there never is any good news out of Africa? Why is there no big contribution to mankind out of Africa?

We hear of thoughtless murders, mass genocide, brutal terrorism, thousands raped daily, broad injustice, land theft, evil black magic, demonic dictators, cannibalism, animal sex, extreme diseases (HIV/AIDS, Ebola, etc), etc, etc.

It must be the cursed continent. Those miseries contaminate our planet.

Originally posted by SpeachM1litantIf you are going to make the assersion that Black people have a primitave gene which makes them more similiar to monkeys rather than humans then pleae provide me scientific evidence to support this claim. Otherwise you are rendering your argument moot.

I would not call it a primitive gene – I would just call it a gene. I do not assert that the gene makes blacks more like monkeys etc. These two statements are just an attempt to discount any discussion about the relationship between genes/DNA and human behavior seem to be racist in nature and hateful

We actually know very little about human DNA in general and even less about how it may influence behavior especially when combined with certain outside influences. However, as we do know there are differences in DNA that determine physical traits; skin and hair color, eye color, shape of the nose etc. All those things that were traditionally associated with racial division of the singular species Homo Sapiens Sapiens.

Now if we are expected to readily believe that DNA and certain genetic traits can determine physical characteristics why is it that we are to blindly have the absurd belief that the same DNA that makes us appear different from one another would have zero influence on how we behave? Here are some things that we do know:

Behavioral Genetics

What indications are there that behavior has a biological basis?

Behavior often is species specific. (snip for brevity)

Behaviors often breed true. (snip for brevity)

Behaviors change in response to alterations in biological structures or processes. For example, a brain injury can turn a polite, mild-mannered person into a foul-mouthed, aggressive boor, and we routinely modify the behavioral manifestations of mental illnesses with drugs that alter brain chemistry. More recently, geneticists have created or extinguished specific mouse behaviors—ranging from nurturing of pups to continuous circling in a strain called "twirler"— by inserting or disabling specific genes.

In humans, some behaviors run in families. For example, there is a clear familial aggregation of mental illness.

It is clear to anyone that physical traits are passed from generation to generation and that some in combination cause serious physical impairment and disease. However, why is it so hard to believe that the same could be true for inheriting and passing on genes for predisposition to violent behavior or say promiscuity and avoiding social responsibility, etc.?

Dogs are animals as are humans… not only do two breeds look different they behave different but are we saying that the same DNA that determines physical traits has little effect on their intelligence and predisposition to certain behavior? Dogs are one species but have different breeds – they look sometimes very different but they also exhibit very different behaviors from herding to retrieval. These behaviors are natural not learned.

Are we a different kind of animal so much so the same biological laws don't apply?

Why do we know very little about the subject especially as it relates to biological differences between the different races of humans and their mental and behavioral traits? Because it is not politically correct to investigate the matter from that perspective.

Any scientist, who even hinted at a hypothesis of that kind would be shunned at least, defunded certainly, unemployed and black listed before the ink on his hypothesis and grant proposal was dry. No one will hear it; it is a taboo subject.

We are simply expected to believe – evidence to the contrary, that while physically the differences are glaring and obvious intellect and any behavioral differences are not biological but rather social and influenced solely by outside factors. Personally, I find that to be hogwash and unlikely.

More likely like the source I cited indicates the mater is a complecated one involving many different genes in combination and then those genes in conjusction with certain outside influances make certain types predisposed to certain self destructive behaviors - like those we see in Sub Saharan African and American inner cities.

Any work into the differences of the intelligence of the different races is met with swift and terrible resistance regardless of the merit and soundness of the study. See the controversy surrounding The Bell Curve.

Why? Primarily because any discussion of race and intelligence is too controversial to even discuss let alone generate enough interest to garner objective research and get the real facts. I doubt we ever will know the truth of the matter….

We KNOW different groups of people have different physical traits, whether it be propensity to certain illnesses or even the obvious point that the 100 metres (west africans), marathons (east africans), swimming (whites) etc throw up.

Why is it inconceivable to think that this could produce difference in other areas- I do think the "harshness" of the environments humans encountered further north advanced their ability to develop, organise etc- seems quite obvious really

these are pretty simple concepts that are backed up by statistics. It doesn't take a genius to figure out there is a lot of aggression in black populations.... however, it throws completely to the wind the massive pile of circumstance that plays a factor. One could easily say that by genetics, white people are better liars and thieves and know how to get away with # and that this is a problem in their races.

we could do this all day.

the bottom line is that there are plenty of fine examples of people within these populations that this concept just throws to the wolves along with this blame. it gets nothing accomplished is my point. no one is putting up much of an argument when there is plenty to argue about on the defense. Most are skipping it because they tire of a tiresome troll.

this conversation should not be on this thread. period.
the whole subject has gone into a racist direction simply because someone has nothing better to do than to rehash the old debate. who has got time to go through all the circumstances? If you are white and you know white people you know some of them can be bloodsucking killers. We've all got our own ways. Don't even kid yourself. It's so #ing annoying and I'm now going to completely ignore this whole thread. it's pissin me off how trite.

You wanna pretend to be productive and smart with it, then find the anatomical difference. Break that down for us if you can, if you think you have what it takes to discuss this issue in seriousness and stop pissin around with it like a highschool drop out that has found themselves some clippers and a pair of combat boots. Really? what do you know about the reasons why? nobody is going to give you a medal for making numerical generalizations. that's not how you resolve problems. you want resolve the problem then pull back that finger and work for a solution instead of being another ratchet jaw.

The rape of 1,100 women a day in a single country is an unacceptable behavior characteristic. Has nothing to do with physical or intellectual characteristics.

The behavior is appalling. The diseases that come out of Africa are atrocious. Seems to be a cursed continent.

reply to post by ChaosMagician

As for Whites supposedly being better liars and thieves.....please tell me that I'm taking you out of context, because that sounds a lot more racist than anything I've said.

You also seem to be speaking of exceptions as if that's particularly relevant to this argument. Not so. Exceptions do not negate rules.

But anyway, it seems as if you're sick of the speculation and desire some proof. Understandable. But you see, that's just the thing...if you ask me, the proof is everywhere you look.

Originally posted by R3N3G4D3
"more than 400,000 raped "

The actual number is 433, 785. Which would put the rapes down to.... get this ONE RAPE PER MINUTE!!! How disgusting is that?? We need to go into there and mess crap up not Iraq. The Bogey-mans dead now send some troops to there.

But there is nothing to exploit there.

Originally posted by AngryOneBut anyway, it seems as if you're sick of the speculation and desire some proof. Understandable. But you see, that's just the thing...if you ask me, the proof is everywhere you look.

Yeah, some real investigation would be good but like I said - we won't be having it anytime soon. I think people are still too afraid of the answers being counter to what they would like them to be. Until we get past the emotion of race we will never have any definative answers.

Anecdotal and circumstantial evidence is all we have for now and I am no Sherlock Holmes but I say there is no way the causation of the common failures in African American and African (Sub Saharan) culture can all be relegated to outside reasons.

Racism did and does still exist but not in the institutional way it once did; oppression, economic and otherwise was real, slavery sucked and was a pretty dick move by society (largely facilitated and still practiced by many Sub Saharan peoples) but that was a long time ago and there has been little to no improvement in the overall rate of social success for the people of the cultures.