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.
originally posted by: TheBulk
originally posted by: eNumbra
originally posted by: TheBulk
Apparently there is a full video which has no been taken down. The guys who uploaded the video posted this picture of people discussing how to get the full video taken down.
Image: i.imgur.com...
All the comments are referring to the Infowars article, while the comment at the bottom could be referring to the original on allegedly on Vimeo, this isn't proof of it.
One of the articles I found while searching for the full videos yields some fun assertions.
“The black debaters simply ‘chose’ to point out their opponents’ skin color and begin advocating genocide,” reported InvestmentWatchdogBlog.com. “They expressly stated that these were their ‘sincere beliefs,’ not just an argument to win a debate.”
Someone supposedly found and interviewed the debaters featured but they're the only ones and have no evidence their own reported statement was ever said.
I'm with you on that. There is very little information and that does raise a flag. However, what is said in this video is said and that guy is confirmed as part of the UWG debate team. Besides that, his body language and demeanor just ooze hatred. I dont see what added context would change any of that.
originally posted by: theantediluvian
Let me guess, you were obsessed with a black chick and she just wasn't that into you?
This would probably be more meaningful if it wasn't some super edited video on YouTube
with a wholly inaccurate title
posted to ATS by a guy with a race baiting agenda.
We get it, you hate black people.
Maybe this kid hates white people. Maybe you two should go do your thing and stop trying to incite racial animosity.
originally posted by: DexterRiley
With respect to these black students advocating genocide/suicide of white people, this is ridiculous in the extreme. These statements, when interpreted without the necessary context, should have been cause enough for the debate to be forfeited by the offending team.
-dex
originally posted by: combatmaster
a reply to: TheBulk
These are Harvard students?
If so that is messed up!
What context would make white genocide acceptable to you?
originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: TheBulk
You gotta facepalm at how PATHETIC the white SJW's are who extend their hand only to see it slapped away. Reminds me of something that happened to me once.
Let me guess, you were obsessed with a black chick and she just wasn't that into you?
This would probably be more meaningful if it wasn't some super edited video on YouTube with a wholly inaccurate title, posted to ATS by a guy with a race baiting agenda. We get it, you hate black people. Maybe this kid hates white people. Maybe you two should go do your thing and stop trying to incite racial animosity.
For what it is worth, I sent an email to the president of the University of West Georgia, the school where the two black debaters were studying. His response, in my opinion, is worth sharing so you get the entire context.
Dear Mr. Davis, (this is not the same Davis from the debate team)
I sincerely appreciate you taking the time to email me directly concerning the posting of this video clip. We understand the concern surrounding a video posted this week that includes comments made by two former University of West Georgia debate students. While these students participated in a nationally sanctioned debate event in 2012 representing UWG, their comments, or the comments made in any debate, do not reflect the University’s views or values.
We take diversity and inclusion very seriously. We work hard every day to ensure our students, faculty and staff from all backgrounds feel welcome and valued. Our top priority remains fostering the safest learning environment we can in which students can learn, grow and achieve.
As part of that commitment, UWG will not tolerate or allow comments or behavior that incite prejudice or violence against any individual or group. Any student who engages in such behavior will be investigated under the university’s student code of conduct, resulting in appropriate sanctions.
Comments made during debate training or debate events or theater rehearsals are rare exceptions to this policy. College debate programs operate in a manner similar to laboratories, where events like those depicted in the video are closely controlled and monitored. One team presents a position and the other responds, often using extreme arguments to show that a particular point is illogical.
In the case of the 2012 video, the debate centered on energy policy. The first team argued that white people embracing the location of wind turbines in their neighborhoods would be a way to address criticism that racism is inherent in the movement of white populations from urban areas. The former UWG students countered that argument by claiming that the extreme would not be for white people to locate themselves near wind turbines, but rather for white people to sacrifice themselves to remove racism altogether. The purpose of the statement was to show the absurdity of their opponents’ position.
Unfortunately, the purposefully-edited video posted this week does not capture the complete discussion. It includes less than a minute and a half of a debate that lasted more than an hour and a half. It does not show that the first team injected the element of racism. Ultimately, it focuses solely on the extreme points used by one of the UWG students to counter an argument in a sanctioned debate. When taken out of the context of a competition in which one team commonly uses extreme rhetoric to argue against an opponent’s extreme rhetoric, the scenes from the video are shocking. The fact that the debate was not halted and authorities were not notified shows the controlled environment in which the comments were made.
Again, the students’ comments included in the video do not reflect the values of our university. They do not represent beliefs or doctrines we teach to students.
I sincerely hope that by providing the context in which this video is depicted helps restore your faith in our university and in future generations of leaders.
Sincerely,
Kyle Marrero
originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: TheBulk
If we get rid of all the white people, then the remaining people can start blaming everything that is wrong on the hazel-eyed people.
Then after they are all gone, we can blame everything on the people with shorter ear lobes.
Then after they are all gone, we can blame everything on people with long toes.
Then after they are all gone. . . . . . . .
. . . . . sigh.
Hopefully I'll be long gone before this utopia ever comes about.
originally posted by: Raxoxane
a reply to: theantediluvian
Oh so if one is concerned or outaged over hate speech advocating the genocide of all white people-it is because one hates black people. Even if the black person is doing the advocating of white genocide,it is the concerned White person who hates Black people? Jesus the mental gymnastics..pathetic on a scale i have seldom seen.
When taken out of the context of a competition in which one team commonly uses extreme rhetoric to argue against an opponent’s extreme rhetori
originally posted by: Raxoxane
a reply to: Gryphon66
Yes it is very clear what it is.
It's a black person advocating white genocide.
But i understand,excuses Must be made. Lest we are seen as racists,for taking issue with the black advocaters of white genocide.Because it is Racist to be outraged when someone advocates the wholesale genocide of a whole ethnicity.Because racism is not racism when it's the White ethnicity's genocide being advocated. If we are concerned about such hatred and hate speech against White people,WE are the racist ones..
Gotcha loud and clear.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
Also, it's an "argument" in a collegiate debate that was recorded three years ago.