Black Missouri Football Players Boycotting Team Activities Until School President Leaves Office

a reply to: BubbaJoe

I won't say there isn't a problem, but again, what demands are being made beyond firing one man?

That isn't going to solve any problem that might be there. And what precedent will almost certainly be set when the Board of Curators meets on Monday .. smear a swastika and get the president fired.

This isn't going to fix any problems that exist and it might make them worse.

a reply to: ketsuko

I say this with absolutely no ire or bile, Ketsuko. If you agreed with me on something, I'd have to reconsider my position.

Your basic position here is if (and that's a big if for you) there's something happening that rises to the level of hate crime (actual endangerment of individuals) here, what is the university to do?

I gave my ideas about that above. Your ideas seem to be "do nothing."

It seems you and the university President have that in common.

As I said, let's see what the investigations show. Then we'll have some evidence to banter about.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: BubbaJoe

I won't say there isn't a problem, but again, what demands are being made beyond firing one man?

That isn't going to solve any problem that might be there. And what precedent will almost certainly be set when the Board of Curators meets on Monday .. smear a swastika and get the president fired.

This isn't going to fix any problems that exist and it might make them worse.

If he had been a man, and stepped up when this bovine feces started, he could fall back on that defense. He defended the fraternities, full of rich white kids. Honestly as an african american athelete on the MU squad, how could you defend this man? Sometimes, you just have to place yourself in someone else's shoes. Sad truth, but most normal people find themselves in that position once in a whilel

a reply to: BubbaJoe

Beg pardon for calling your state Mississippi earlier.

In Georgia, that'd be fightin' words, LOL.

a reply to: Metallicus

I say, drop them. If they don't want to play, get players that will. Maybe the team could even improve.

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
a reply to: Metallicus

I say, drop them. If they don't want to play, get players that will. Maybe the team could even improve.

Not surprised.

Of course, they're not simply saying that they "don't want to play."

No chance with you that there are legitimate grievances that needed attention?

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
a reply to: Metallicus

I say, drop them. If they don't want to play, get players that will. Maybe the team could even improve.

Not surprised.

Of course, they're not simply saying that they "don't want to play."

No chance with you that there are legitimate grievances that needed attention?

They are choosing not to play, because they claim they are in some sort of hostile environment, which they claim the school president is supposed to fix. From all I can see, they seem to expect him to prevent anyone from ever saying anything offensive, which is ridiculous. No one is being prevented from attending classes based on race. No one is being told they cannot participate in sports based on race. From what I have read, the only actual incidents are two claimed racial slurs, and a claimed swastika. There isn't proof for any of these, and none of these makes for a "hostile" school environment. Slurs? Seriously? Even if slurs were uttered, who knows who uttered them? People other that students can be on campuses, after all. Even if there was a swastika, who knows who made it, or why? I recall a hanging effigy some years back, claimed to be anti-black, that was placed by a black student. The entire rest of the timeline someone posted is nothing but protests by black students. Protests are not racism.

Demanding that a school president lose his job over this is bull. Who, I wonder, so they have in mind to replace him?

No, nothing about this is legitimate, based on the evidence we have thus far. None of this is grounds for firing a school president.

I stand by my statement - let them not play. Drop them from the team.

a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

They are bringing attention to a situation unacceptable to them by their choice not to play football for the university.

I see you take the tactic of repeating the word "claim" as if there is no chance that there actually is a hostile environment at the university.

No, no one expects the President to keep anyone from ever saying anything offensive. That's what keeps getting repeated here and it's preposterous. They are protesting the fact that the university President HAD DONE NOTHING to investigate these hateful acts.

You can arbitrarily "claim" that there's no evidence, but that's far, far weaker claim than the students are making, just on it's face.

The questions you ask (and pretend are unanswerable) can be resolved with investigation. President Wolfe had done nothing. The idea that there is no racism in this country is a point of political belief; it's probably one of the greatest loads of BS that the right-wing tries to push.

Your contentions are all merely personal which, of course, is totally fine. Your prerogative. You've obviously taken none of the facts of the matter into consideration, because, as usual, you've already formed your belief and whatever facts exist at this point twist around your confirmation bias.

Again, I recommend we wait to see what actual investigations of these matters reveal. Perhaps a significant portion of the student body have all conspired to make things up, and perhaps not.

Just out of curiosity though ... can you think of any reason the Black students are more likely to lie than the White ones?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

No, no one expects the President to keep anyone from ever saying anything offensive. That's what keeps getting repeated here and it's preposterous. They are protesting the fact that the university President HAD DONE NOTHING to investigate these hateful acts.

I quoted from your post what I wanted to respond to.

Hate speech. Not taking the side of it happened or didn't.

How is calling for someone's job related to hate speech OK, when the person whose job is on the line did not participate nor condone said hate speech? If you think not condemning the supposed or not hate speech is akin to promoting said hate speech, then you are arguing something that I would hope no one wants to see the fruition of.

Really, another group of minorities in America crying about something? What a shocker!! Well, nothing to do but acquiesce to their demands. It seems that minorities in America just can't catch a break, constantly under attack.

When does the right to free speech supersede the right of minorities to never hear an offensive word? The US has lost it's balls.

Here's some minority students at Yale suffering repression.
www.youtube.com...

a reply to: TycoonBarnaby

Yes, in the case of a university President, whose job is to the ultimate representative of the University (and supposedly of the student body), who refuses even investigate that a group of students is being harassed, threatened, etc., after numerous petitions to do so, after awareness that such threats could be happening, I think he had abdicated a significant function of his office and, if it were proven that he had knowingly or intentionally ignored the problem, certainly does need to step down.

And yes, for the record, someone in such a position who condones hate speech is also condoning the results of that speech.

a reply to: ketsuko

African Americans might find the swastika offensive, because under the rule of Nazi Germany, a great many persons of black and African origin were ostracised, rounded up, and forcibly sterilised, others murdered. Although the scale was not as vast as the extermination campaign launched against the Jews, there was a significant effort to ensure that persons of colour would not breed with white Germans. This was an effort inspired by their outrageous and scientifically invalid eugenics based beliefs.

They believed that the Jews had bought persons of colour to Germany to water down their blood, literally. That is how hateful, stupid, and ignorant the Nazis were. They prevented black people from joining universities, finding work, and generally engaging in the life of a citizen wherever possible, and ended many gene lines by enforcing their sterilisation policies. It was a bad time to be a black person in Europe.

There really are not that many demographics that the Nazis did not royally screw over during their reign.

Good heavens ... does the Anti Defamation League have any idea what the swastika means then?

Hate on Display - Hate Symbols Database - ADL

Since 1945, the swastika has served as the most significant and notorious of hate symbols, anti-Semitism and white supremacy for most of the world outside of Asia. Its display is prohibited in Germany and some other countries, leading some right-wing extremists to devise variants or alternatives to the swastika that would evoke a similar effect. In the United States, the swastika is overwhelmingly viewed as a hate symbol.

a reply to: Metallicus

This shouldn't even be a thing

Looks like some of the faculty is joining with the black students.

www.foxnews.com...


Seems that the university president wasn't even the one who initiated the diversity training idea - the Chancellor was:

Already, at Chancellor R. Bowen Loftin's request, the university announced plans to require diversity training for all new students starting in January, along with faculty and staff.

I'm getting the distinct impression from reading the news stories that these shenanigans have been going on for a while, with no action by the president. It was just the latest events (slurs yelled out, feces swastika) that have gotten press attention.

I personally think the protesting students are handling this wonderfully. Peaceful strikes and protests are the way to go when you want change - not violence.

a reply to: kaylaluv

Yep. Not surprised.

The numerous attempts to discredit first, ask questions later, quickly proved that there was little interest in the facts of the matter.

I'll be glad to see all the information come out; if anyone is lying, perhaps for once it will be obvious.

Some drunk asshat shouted a racial slur? Clearly the appropriate response would have been to round up and expel all non-minority students. How could a university President not know that, in our post-post-post-modern progressive utopia??

Wonder if the players also think Obama should step down? He has 'allowed' an awful lot of racist comments to be made in the last 7 years...

Welcome to ATS:


Stormfront 2.0

a reply to: buster2010

This timeline has 4 issues of racism, 3 of which are "Racial Slurs" and 1 of which is a feces swastika that could potentially have been put up by anyone for any reason. It's not like drunken college students don't do stupid things like that all the time.

So this guys got to lose his job because a bunch of people are upset bout some BIG BAD WORDS coming into their homes and robbing them blind, shooting them on the streets, and taking their kids away.

Sounds like a bunch of college babies in their "safe space" getting upset because they aren't the special little flower they've been told they were their whole lives.

What is the president supposed to do?? Muzzle people? Cut out tongues?

Random people can just walk up to you and say whatever they want. Part of being an adult is knowing that some people just aren't worth your time. I realize it on here all the time.

a reply to: Tsubaki

Not on my bloody watch it isn't.

God save the Queen, and death to the Reich, where ever it shows its face.