That Klan without sheets has spoken. Hopefully few will listen.
WTF are you talking about dmarks? Who would call a group of black people a "klan"?! Certainly no rational person. Thankfully I think few share dmarks' twisted POV.Also, for the record, the original Black Panthers say these "new black panthers" aren't Black Panthers... that is, they don't endorse them, and in fact are peeved that this new group stole their name.
WD: I don't care what their skin color is. However, the Panthers are a group of racial supremacists who practice intimidation of people of the wrong skin color and threaten violence against them."Certainly no rational person"You will be alone here on this one, I'm sure. There's nothing "twisted" about my point of view which opposes all violent supremacist groups. Or any supremacist group, period.Klan is as Klan does.
That's totally messed up dmarks, and completely offensive to African Americans... even those who might agree with you if you simply omitted that slur. You could have criticized them without referring to them as a "klan".And I seriously doubt I'm alone in my disaproval of you calling them a "klan". I SERIOUSLY doubt it.
WD: You are intentionally misreading my condemnation of the new Black Panthers as a condemnation of all African-Americans. That's disingenuous and insincere, and also rather transparent.
dmarks: You are intentionally misreading my condemnation of the new Black Panthers as a condemnation of all African-Americans.I am doing no such thing. I'm simply pointing out that people could (rightly) be offended by you calling a black group a "klan".A black person hearing you say this would probably be just as insulted as a mentally challenged person would be by the use of the R-word.IMO this is further proof that your "offense" regarding what Bill Maher said is totally fake.
That last sentence sure was a leap of faith. You don't have any evidence, let alone proof. And you keep defending Maher's outrageous statements. The latest silly point you made that to Maher, saying that they are sub human and are like animals is good, because of Maher's support for PETA. How silly.
dmarks: The latest silly point you made that to Maher, saying that they are sub human and are like animals is good, because of Maher's support for PETA. How silly.I didn't say that. Bill Maher never said mentally challenged persons are sub-human, so why would I say something he didn't say was "good"? Silly? Yes, your comment is... very silly.Not silly at all is you calling a group made up of Black individuals a "Klan". It's incredibly offensive, and finding it offensive is not a "leap of faith" at all.
I compare any hate group of violent supremacists to the well known KKK. I don't care about the race of these ill intentioned individuals, as I am not a racist.The Klan and similar groups should be what is considered offensive. Not condemnation of them.
dmarks: I don't care about the race of these ill intentioned individuals, as I am not a racist.These "new black panthers" are a very small group. I suspect incredibly few take them seriously, yet you equate them to the KKK. It's VERY offensive.You are aware that the klan KILLED African-Americans, while the "new black panthers" have killed nobody, aren't you? IMO it would take an incredibly dense person to not realize how offensive calling a black group a "klan" is.
Not dense. Just aware. I'm not sure how many people the KKK has killed lately. Probably not many for a long time. They have diminished to a supremacist hate group that promotes violence. Like the new Black Panthers. Like their leader, Malik Shabazz, threatening to destroy a major American city by arson. Or the vigilantism where the offer a reward of $10,000 for committing violent crimes against Zimmerman.During the length of the of the existence of the new Black Panthers, their track record compared to the KKK during this time is comparable.
You think it would be OK if I called a Jewish group that thought Palestinians should be forced to leave their homes "Nazis"? It would be equally offensive.I'm sticking with dense. And "twisted" too. Both apply. It's pretty twisted to think calling a black group a "klan" is OK... and dense to to not understand why it's incredibly offensive.
My point on this one, gentlemen, is that the family of Trayvon Austin has expressly told these people to butt out and they won't.......Something about dressing up in those paramilitary outfits, apparently.
WD asked: "You think it would be OK if I called a Jewish group that thought Palestinians should be forced to leave their homes "Nazis"? It would be equally offensive."If the group had very similar aims to those of Nazis (extermination, etc) as the new Black Panthers are to the current KKK, it would be apt to point out how similar they are. Not dense. Not twisted. Just being accurate. The problem is that you are offended by equating very similar hate groups, instead of being offended by the hate groups themselves.Will: Trayvon's family is less tolerant of this modern black version of the KKK than WD is.
wd/dmarks, I kind of see both of your points here. Maybe if we simply referred to these New Black Panthers as dirt-bags, we could all have a Kumbaya moment.
dmarks: Trayvon's family is less tolerant of this modern black version of the KKK than WD is.The "new black panthers" are NOT a "modern black version of the KKK".Also, I said nothing in support of the so-called New Black Panthers. In fact, I pointed out that the REAL Black Panthers were not happy about this new group appropriating the name of their group. My point was that calling any group of black people a "klan" is extremely offensive.I think this is a prime example of the incredible tone deafness to racial issues that is typical among Republican Tea Party types. If they aren't outright racists then they believe too much has been made of the problems facing African-Americans.In fact, a CBS News poll found "52% [of Tea Partiers] believe too much has been made of the problems facing black people. Far fewer Americans overall -- 28% -- believe as much. ...one in four believe the administration favors blacks over whites, an opinion shared by just 11% of Americans overall and 7% of non-Tea Party whites".
"I think this is a prime example of the incredible tone deafness to racial issues"If calling racial issues as they really are makes me tone deaf, so be it.
Post a Comment