Stop with the condescending BS. It's a white and black issue because you and your ancestors made it one to begin with. And trust me I'm not crying, you should be telling yourself and other white people that. Because that's all you all do anytime someone points out the obvious racism in America.
Nothing but Crickets!
- Thread starter rattfatt
- Start date
And yet you choose to live in America. . .
Last edited:
That's not me being condescending, that's a quote from Metta World Peace. I personally couldn't give a fattratts *** about you, but based on your lack of reasoning skills, your problem is evident.
Come on man, you can figure Tim Scott out! He is hilarious.
I don't even have a job, and I'd still consider it a tremendous waste of time to engage him. He's just the epitome of someone who "knows so much that isn't so." You'll never reach him or even get him to listen. Just blow him off and let him wallow in his hatred and stupidity.
Last edited:
No it's not bs. It's a policeman who almost died because he thought for a minute before shooting a black man.
Reminds me of an admonishment I once heard. It's hard to win an argument when your opponent is unencumbered by logic.
A gun can be drawn in a split second, and a decision must be made in a split second.
There aren't many jobs that require that kind of choice in so little time.
Ask yourself, what would you do? Hope for the best, or, protect yourself.
I agree that some of the shootings of black men have been done too quickly, I also know that most of the time we get the "after" video, we have no idea what led up to the confrontation. Mr. Castille is a perfect example. We don't know what led up to the shooting, we were only privy to the aftermath. It is interesting that in the video we did see, he had already handed the officer papers of some type, so I don't know what he was reaching for.
All races are quite capable of doing evil things. Look at New Orleans where tourists are being clubbed in the head after withdrawing money from AtMs by black youth. We can play tit for tat all day long. In the end, we all enjoy some type of privilege. Men, women, men of color, women of color--in different arenas there is privilege.
I was a hiring manager for a large corporation, and I had a quota for the number of black people I hired. Never mind I live in San Antonio, (black % ran about 8%) and my team of 14 was made up of only 3 white men, and 2 white women. I was dinged on every review because I couldn't find a black person to hire. That is black privilege. My team was incredibly diverse--Muslims, Asians, Mexicans, but those minorities didn't matter.
Another example of black privilege is the allowance of lower SAT scores, overall GPAs to gain acceptance to Universities. The poor Asians of the world get hosed in that department, but I don't hear them complaining.
Black people have their own TV channels, award shows, beauty pageants....I could go on and on, but why is it that this group is the only group that can't see to assimilate?
Over the last 40 years or so, people have bent over backwards to try and make things right. We have invested so much in programs, scholarships, mentor ships, and more, and it seemed as if, until the last few years, people were getting along pretty well.
I see interracial couples, and don't really "see" them. I watch tv shows where black and white people star, and I don't think "oh, there is a black person, and there is a white person".
For some reason, I don't think some black people want things to work out. I don't understand why. It seems some people are determined to view every single thing that happens in this world through a racial lens, and when that is the norm, things will never be ok. Do you like or need to be angry all the time?
Black people can't have every thing that they want, the world doesn't work that way. There is compromise, understanding of the other person, no matter their color.
You don't seem to want to do either. So live your bitter life, blaming everything bad that happens to you on white "folk" as you call them. I predict you will have a miserable life, and that is a shame. Open your mind. Read history books from different perspectives.
Personally, I think you are too scared to see what you will find.
There aren't many jobs that require that kind of choice in so little time.
Ask yourself, what would you do? Hope for the best, or, protect yourself.
I agree that some of the shootings of black men have been done too quickly, I also know that most of the time we get the "after" video, we have no idea what led up to the confrontation. Mr. Castille is a perfect example. We don't know what led up to the shooting, we were only privy to the aftermath. It is interesting that in the video we did see, he had already handed the officer papers of some type, so I don't know what he was reaching for.
All races are quite capable of doing evil things. Look at New Orleans where tourists are being clubbed in the head after withdrawing money from AtMs by black youth. We can play tit for tat all day long. In the end, we all enjoy some type of privilege. Men, women, men of color, women of color--in different arenas there is privilege.
I was a hiring manager for a large corporation, and I had a quota for the number of black people I hired. Never mind I live in San Antonio, (black % ran about 8%) and my team of 14 was made up of only 3 white men, and 2 white women. I was dinged on every review because I couldn't find a black person to hire. That is black privilege. My team was incredibly diverse--Muslims, Asians, Mexicans, but those minorities didn't matter.
Another example of black privilege is the allowance of lower SAT scores, overall GPAs to gain acceptance to Universities. The poor Asians of the world get hosed in that department, but I don't hear them complaining.
Black people have their own TV channels, award shows, beauty pageants....I could go on and on, but why is it that this group is the only group that can't see to assimilate?
Over the last 40 years or so, people have bent over backwards to try and make things right. We have invested so much in programs, scholarships, mentor ships, and more, and it seemed as if, until the last few years, people were getting along pretty well.
I see interracial couples, and don't really "see" them. I watch tv shows where black and white people star, and I don't think "oh, there is a black person, and there is a white person".
For some reason, I don't think some black people want things to work out. I don't understand why. It seems some people are determined to view every single thing that happens in this world through a racial lens, and when that is the norm, things will never be ok. Do you like or need to be angry all the time?
Black people can't have every thing that they want, the world doesn't work that way. There is compromise, understanding of the other person, no matter their color.
You don't seem to want to do either. So live your bitter life, blaming everything bad that happens to you on white "folk" as you call them. I predict you will have a miserable life, and that is a shame. Open your mind. Read history books from different perspectives.
Personally, I think you are too scared to see what you will find.
And that's the whole point. There are legitimate areas in which racial grievance is appropriate. In fact I've raised them here at times. However, when someone plays the "white people suck," "America is the most racist place on earth," "the whole system is out to destroy blacks" nonsense, that person is an excuse monger trying to avoid responsibility. There's no point in engaging in dialogue with that person. My 3-year-old has a better grip on reality.
LOL, history shows that white people are the most violent human beings in the world and that's a fact.
Take that up with your ancestors who came here from Europe. They are the ones who invented racism and made America a system of white supremacy. America is as racist today as it was then and you benefit from all of it.
ProdigalHorn
10,000+ Posts
I feel like Atilla the Hun, Idi Amin and Mao Tse Tung are sitting in Hell going "Hey, what about us????"
ProdigalHorn
10,000+ Posts
Pol Pot also says hi.
Seriously just go back to bed. I've read some idiotic things on this board from both Left and Right, but you're breaking those records. In a way, you should be proud, because those are tough records to break. And what makes it even sadder (though more comical) is that you speak with the confidence of someone who thinks he's very intelligent and knows a lot. It's the mental equivalent of watching a 5'2" fat dude trying to dunk and truly believing he can do it.
Statalyzer
10,000+ Posts
OP: I can't believe all you scumbags whose first response is to blame all your political opponents for everything. Also, everything is the fault of my turd-headed political opponents.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
Fattratt, this article is for your amusement. (Link).
In Durham, North Carolina, the seat of Duke University, a gang of largely white males destroyed public property by pulling down a statue of a Confederate soldier. Perhaps they took their cue from the neo-Nazis installed in Ukraine by Obama and Hillary following the US-engineered coup that overthrew the elected democratic government. The first thing the new Obama-installed neo-Nazi regime did was to pull down all the Soviet war memorials of the liberation of Ukraine from Nazi Germany. The neo-Nazis who pulled down the war memorials were the descendants of the Ukrainians who fought for Nazi Germany. These neo-Nazis comprise the government of the “democracy” that Obama and Hillary brought to the Ukraine and is the government that the US government and its European vassals support.
What did the destruction of public property in Durham achieve, and where were the police?
What the films of the event reveal is a collection of crazed white people, mainly white men, kicking and spitting at a bronze statue and jumping back as if the statue were going to strike back. It was a display of ignorant psychopathic hatred.
Where did this hatred come from and why was it directed at a statue? To the ignorant gangsters, most likely Duke University students, the destroyed statue is a symbol of slavery.
This ignorant association between a Confederale soldier and slavery contradicts all known history. Slavery in the Southern states was confined to large argicultural tracts known as plantations. Slaves were the agricultural workforce. This institution long predated the Confederacy and the United States itself. It was an inherited institution from the time that the New World was colonized by European economic interests. Slaves were not a Southern invention. They were brought in long prior to the Declaration of Independence, because there were resources to be exploited but no work force.
The first slaves were white slaves, but they died like flies from malaria and yellow fevor. Next indigenious Americans (“Indians”) were used as slaves, but they would not work. Then it was discovered that some Africans had immunity to malaria and resistance to yellow fever, and finally a work force was located. The slaves were purchased from the African tribes that annually conducted warfare between themselves, the booty of which was slaves. Socialist historians, such as Karl Polanyi, the Jewish brother of my Jewish Oxford professor, the distinguished physical chemist and philosopher Michael Polanyi, to whom my first book is dedicated, wrote detailed and exacting histories of the African slave trade conducted by black Africans.
Confederate soldiers did not own slaves, and as every honest historian knows, they were not fighting for slavery. They were fighting, because their country had been invaded.
The Confederacy was not their country any more than the United States had been. Their country was their state. In those days people’s loyalty was to their state. They thought of their state as their country. To their minds, the United States was something like the EU is to the French, Italians, Dutch, British, etc. The French still think of themselves as French, not as EU.
Remember, when Robert E. Lee was offered command of the Union Army, he declined on the grounds that he could not bring war to his own country, by which he meant Virginia.
Lee’s army was the Army of Northern Virginia.
As President Lincoln said over and over, the war is not about slavery. It is about “preserving the union,” that is, the empire. If the South were permitted to separate, it would mean that there would be two countries competing for the vast lands to the west of the Mississippi River. The budding empire in Washington did not want any such competition.
If the South were permitted to seperate, the North would lose its market for its relatively high priced manufactured goods that it hoped to sell to the South by placing a tariff against the cheaper British goods.
The South figured, correctly, that it would be doubly hit. Higher prices from the North and retaliatory tariffs from the British on its cotton exports.
This economic conflict between the North and South went on for a long time before it provoked secession. The left-wing American Historian, Charles Beard, explains the so-called “Civil War” in the economic terms that provoked it. It had nothing whatsoever to do with slavery.
The very designation, “Civil War,” is a lie. A civil war is when two sides fight for control of the government. The South was not fighting for control of the US government. It was fighting, because the North had invaded.
Lincoln did not free the slaves. Moreover, had Lincoln not been assassinated, his plan was to send the blacks, whom he regarded as inferior to whites, back to Africa. This is not a “conspiracy theory.” It is the documented fact. It is totally impossible to refute this documented fact.
The Emancipation Proclamation was propaganda. It had two purposes: one was to shut up the abolitionists. The other was to promote a slave rebellion in the Southern states that would draw Confederate troops out of the front lines to protect the women and children at home. As Lincoln’s own Secretary of State, William H. Seward, said, we have freed the slaves where we have no jurisdiction and left them in slavery where we have jusistiction. Seward’s exact words: “We show our sympathy with slavery by emancipating slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free.”
The left-wing historian Richard Hofstadter ridiculed Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation for freeing only the slaves over which Lincoln had no power.
Lincoln’s purpose was not to free slaves but to provoke the slave rape of Southern women and murder of Southern children that would pull the Southern troops his generals could not defeat off the front lines and impel them home to protect their families from Lincoln’s slave revolt.
But the slaves did not revolt even though there was no one there to conrol them but women and children. So what kind of oppression was this?
Lincoln issued the proclamation intended to produce a slave rebellion because he had run through countless generals, and although the Union army in its engagements with Robert E. Lee always outnumbered the Southerns by two or three to one, and sometimes more, the Army of Northern Virginia did not lose a battle for the first two years of the War. If the South had had more people, a number of Southern battle victories would have ended in the capture of Washington and the end of the war. But the South never had the number of soldiers sufficient to have a reserve to capitalize on its military victories. In contrast, the North had an endless supply of immigrants from Ireland, most of whom died for the American Empire.
Oppositon to the war in the North was high. Lincoln had to arrest and imprison 300 northern newspaper owners and editors and exile a US Congressman.
Slavery was an inherited institution, not a Southern construct. Slavery would have gradually disappeared as immigrants into the South begin forming a work force and the over-cultivated plantation lands begin losing their fertility. Slavery existed as long as it did because new immigrants, instead of becoming a local work force, moved west, occupied Indian land and became independent farmers.
Of course, the abolitionist created all the hatred of the South that they possibly could. Indeed, during my entire life, lived almost exclusively outside the South, I have observed the liberals foment racial hatred of blacks toward whites, and I have watched feminists foment gender hatred of women toward men. Hatred is the great cause of the liberals. It is what defines them.
The stupid liberals have sowed social enmity between races and genders. The destruction of America will be the result.
Perhaps we will fall apart, occupied in racial and gender warfare, before the Russians and Chinese have to blow us off the face of the earth.
What did the destruction of public property in Durham achieve, and where were the police?
What the films of the event reveal is a collection of crazed white people, mainly white men, kicking and spitting at a bronze statue and jumping back as if the statue were going to strike back. It was a display of ignorant psychopathic hatred.
Where did this hatred come from and why was it directed at a statue? To the ignorant gangsters, most likely Duke University students, the destroyed statue is a symbol of slavery.
This ignorant association between a Confederale soldier and slavery contradicts all known history. Slavery in the Southern states was confined to large argicultural tracts known as plantations. Slaves were the agricultural workforce. This institution long predated the Confederacy and the United States itself. It was an inherited institution from the time that the New World was colonized by European economic interests. Slaves were not a Southern invention. They were brought in long prior to the Declaration of Independence, because there were resources to be exploited but no work force.
The first slaves were white slaves, but they died like flies from malaria and yellow fevor. Next indigenious Americans (“Indians”) were used as slaves, but they would not work. Then it was discovered that some Africans had immunity to malaria and resistance to yellow fever, and finally a work force was located. The slaves were purchased from the African tribes that annually conducted warfare between themselves, the booty of which was slaves. Socialist historians, such as Karl Polanyi, the Jewish brother of my Jewish Oxford professor, the distinguished physical chemist and philosopher Michael Polanyi, to whom my first book is dedicated, wrote detailed and exacting histories of the African slave trade conducted by black Africans.
Confederate soldiers did not own slaves, and as every honest historian knows, they were not fighting for slavery. They were fighting, because their country had been invaded.
The Confederacy was not their country any more than the United States had been. Their country was their state. In those days people’s loyalty was to their state. They thought of their state as their country. To their minds, the United States was something like the EU is to the French, Italians, Dutch, British, etc. The French still think of themselves as French, not as EU.
Remember, when Robert E. Lee was offered command of the Union Army, he declined on the grounds that he could not bring war to his own country, by which he meant Virginia.
Lee’s army was the Army of Northern Virginia.
As President Lincoln said over and over, the war is not about slavery. It is about “preserving the union,” that is, the empire. If the South were permitted to separate, it would mean that there would be two countries competing for the vast lands to the west of the Mississippi River. The budding empire in Washington did not want any such competition.
If the South were permitted to seperate, the North would lose its market for its relatively high priced manufactured goods that it hoped to sell to the South by placing a tariff against the cheaper British goods.
The South figured, correctly, that it would be doubly hit. Higher prices from the North and retaliatory tariffs from the British on its cotton exports.
This economic conflict between the North and South went on for a long time before it provoked secession. The left-wing American Historian, Charles Beard, explains the so-called “Civil War” in the economic terms that provoked it. It had nothing whatsoever to do with slavery.
The very designation, “Civil War,” is a lie. A civil war is when two sides fight for control of the government. The South was not fighting for control of the US government. It was fighting, because the North had invaded.
Lincoln did not free the slaves. Moreover, had Lincoln not been assassinated, his plan was to send the blacks, whom he regarded as inferior to whites, back to Africa. This is not a “conspiracy theory.” It is the documented fact. It is totally impossible to refute this documented fact.
The Emancipation Proclamation was propaganda. It had two purposes: one was to shut up the abolitionists. The other was to promote a slave rebellion in the Southern states that would draw Confederate troops out of the front lines to protect the women and children at home. As Lincoln’s own Secretary of State, William H. Seward, said, we have freed the slaves where we have no jurisdiction and left them in slavery where we have jusistiction. Seward’s exact words: “We show our sympathy with slavery by emancipating slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free.”
The left-wing historian Richard Hofstadter ridiculed Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation for freeing only the slaves over which Lincoln had no power.
Lincoln’s purpose was not to free slaves but to provoke the slave rape of Southern women and murder of Southern children that would pull the Southern troops his generals could not defeat off the front lines and impel them home to protect their families from Lincoln’s slave revolt.
But the slaves did not revolt even though there was no one there to conrol them but women and children. So what kind of oppression was this?
Lincoln issued the proclamation intended to produce a slave rebellion because he had run through countless generals, and although the Union army in its engagements with Robert E. Lee always outnumbered the Southerns by two or three to one, and sometimes more, the Army of Northern Virginia did not lose a battle for the first two years of the War. If the South had had more people, a number of Southern battle victories would have ended in the capture of Washington and the end of the war. But the South never had the number of soldiers sufficient to have a reserve to capitalize on its military victories. In contrast, the North had an endless supply of immigrants from Ireland, most of whom died for the American Empire.
Oppositon to the war in the North was high. Lincoln had to arrest and imprison 300 northern newspaper owners and editors and exile a US Congressman.
Slavery was an inherited institution, not a Southern construct. Slavery would have gradually disappeared as immigrants into the South begin forming a work force and the over-cultivated plantation lands begin losing their fertility. Slavery existed as long as it did because new immigrants, instead of becoming a local work force, moved west, occupied Indian land and became independent farmers.
Of course, the abolitionist created all the hatred of the South that they possibly could. Indeed, during my entire life, lived almost exclusively outside the South, I have observed the liberals foment racial hatred of blacks toward whites, and I have watched feminists foment gender hatred of women toward men. Hatred is the great cause of the liberals. It is what defines them.
The stupid liberals have sowed social enmity between races and genders. The destruction of America will be the result.
Perhaps we will fall apart, occupied in racial and gender warfare, before the Russians and Chinese have to blow us off the face of the earth.
I35
5,000+ Posts
that's hard to do when you are so irrational.
So a population of more the 300 million and only black people have been killed by police officers for doing nothing? By the way, your complaint about innocent blacks getting killed by police officers is such a small fraction of a fraction of a fraction and on and on ............
Oh Boy, the ignorance in that statement. So with your incredible knowledge on that subject, how did they measure the "most violent human beings." I think all those innocent people killed in Chicago by stray bullets or how about the knockout game where young black men sucker punch white people for no reason would disagree with your study. Did you conduct this study yourself?
rattfatt = always the victim
Don't confuse him with facts. Might cause his brain to explode, and then he would blame whites.Did you mean "were"?
ProdigalHorn
10,000+ Posts
I have to give it to Rattfatt. He has managed to single-handedly unite the entire West Mall. That only usually happens on Fall Saturdays. (Speaking of which... !!!!!!! 
)
)
It is good to see the board united against the very personification of a racist.
The matter of white privilege and defining racism in a way that immunizes all except for white people is an attempt to make holy all that is said and done by the Left. As I mentioned earlier, it provides blanket immunity for the actions of anyone who is not white. White privilege is a concept that is true on some levels but to insist on making a charge like that (and it is a charge with an end in mind; it is not merely an observation) completely marginalizes the lifelong efforts made by successful white people. For instance, I'm 59 years old and my credit rating is over 800. I point to that one fact as the indicator of my character and willingness to live a prudent life within my means. Think about how many years I've paid my bills on time month after month. And I've had cancer twice, lost my job and bought a condo in Dallas in the early 80's that lost 80% of its value in the big crash.
I can also say that I've paid every dime I owe to every taxing authority and have never been a burden on society. I am paying for my children's college fund and teach them daily by word and deed how not to be a burden on society. In short, I am passing along the advice that nobody owes them anything and that they should try their best even if their upside is not that of Bill Gates or Obama.
But, I'm white so it means nothing. It is apparently sinister. Well I reject that.
And for the record, my Father was born in Cuba and my mother is unfortunately an Okie (but God loves her!) so I look white. And in today's world, I am privileged even though my mother was uneducated and English was my Father's second language. But I am broad brushed by certain posters here on this board. And that I believe is a very unsophisticated way of looking at life; it is a political way of thinking and is meant to make themselves feel better about their lot in life and justify the riots and the demands for wealth redistribution.
I believe that all way. This is not to say that we don't have problems and I made my feelings known about the Nazi's earlier. Hitler, Goebbels, Himmler and Goering should have been burned alive. And anyone acting like a Nazi is absolute vermin. The lowest of the low.
By they way, I'm a Democrat and I voted for Hillary because I thought Trump was a clown back when he made his comments about Mexican immigrants but I'm sick of the extreme Left trying to normalize their rage.
I can also say that I've paid every dime I owe to every taxing authority and have never been a burden on society. I am paying for my children's college fund and teach them daily by word and deed how not to be a burden on society. In short, I am passing along the advice that nobody owes them anything and that they should try their best even if their upside is not that of Bill Gates or Obama.
But, I'm white so it means nothing. It is apparently sinister. Well I reject that.
And for the record, my Father was born in Cuba and my mother is unfortunately an Okie (but God loves her!) so I look white. And in today's world, I am privileged even though my mother was uneducated and English was my Father's second language. But I am broad brushed by certain posters here on this board. And that I believe is a very unsophisticated way of looking at life; it is a political way of thinking and is meant to make themselves feel better about their lot in life and justify the riots and the demands for wealth redistribution.
I believe that all way. This is not to say that we don't have problems and I made my feelings known about the Nazi's earlier. Hitler, Goebbels, Himmler and Goering should have been burned alive. And anyone acting like a Nazi is absolute vermin. The lowest of the low.
By they way, I'm a Democrat and I voted for Hillary because I thought Trump was a clown back when he made his comments about Mexican immigrants but I'm sick of the extreme Left trying to normalize their rage.
Last edited:
Brad Austin
2,500+ Posts
Tried to warn you guys not to engage from the jump. He used to pull the same bs in the sports boards.
Only spoke out when something negative happened. His MO was strongly condemning statements which often trashed players/coaches/program beyond the specific event.
Of course anytime White people are confronted with the truth about racism they have to defend it together.I have to give it to Rattfatt. He has managed to single-handedly unite the entire West Mall. That only usually happens on Fall Saturdays. (Speaking of which... !!!!!!!
Wrong, my MO is to speak the truth about the systematic racism and white supremacy of America.
I don't care who you voted for white liberals/demorcrats are just as racist as republicans. Once again, history proves that white people are the most violent human beings on the earth.
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
President Biden Accountability Thread
- Started by 2003TexasGrad
- Replies: 4K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
