I agree. He is a tool of justice for the African American community. I've always admired him.
Almost as much as he admires the closest camera.
I think "Al Sharpton's an activist" is closer to the truth.
I'd say 80/20, Jerry.
I'd say 90/10. And I'll take that to the bank.
I don't think Sharpton's helping the African American community. There have been voices...many of voices of reason such as Bill Cosby, Spike Lee, John Singleton and more recently, L Z Granderson who have tried to point out the truth....Racism DOES hurt the community but its really about what the community is doing to itself that is most important. As Granderson recently suggests: we can easilly get outraged about what Zimmerman did to Trayvon Martin. But when there's Black on White crime or Black on Black crime the Black community filters everything through a twisted prism of situational ethics. In sum, Sharpton is a rabble rouser...nothing more. This hurts me because the Right typically showcases Sharpton as an example of whats flawed about the Left.
He's a racist is much closer to the truth.Here he is bashing both whites AND gays, as he lies about Egyptian history:"“White folks was in the caves while we [blacks] was building empires … We built pyramids before Donald Trump ever knew what architecture was … we taught philosophy and astrology and mathematics before Socrates and them Greek homos ever got around to it.”
Marcus said: "This hurts me because the Right typically showcases Sharpton as an example of whats flawed about the Left."I don't do this, unless the Left happens to embrace him and his racism. Which is happening here. But on the whole I assume that the Left is too smart and rejects racism.
I don't recall dmarks ever accusing a white person of racism. It's always black people. Just recently he invented (out of whole cloth) racism charges against a black man who goes by the name of Toure. Supposedly Toure bashed Herrmann Cain for being black! When I pointed it out to dmarks that a black man bashing another black man for being black made no sense... he agreed! But, get this, he continued to insist it was true anyway!So, am I going to be lectured to by dmarks about racism and whether or not I should like Al Sharpton? Hell no. I *DO* reject racism, including the imaginary kind that dmarks often rails against.Regarding the quote posted by dmarks, "Sharpton defended his comments by noting that the term 'homo' was not homophobic but added that he no longer uses the term. Sharpton has since called for an end to homophobia in the African-American community".Believe or disbelieve that his using that word was not homophobic... I think his later actions speak for themself. He's against homophobia.I don't know what dmarks thinks Sharpton is lying about regarding Egyptian history.
WD muzzily said "I don't recall dmarks ever accusing a white person of racism."That is because you have selective memory."It's always black people."You are flat-out wrong. It all depends on the topic. This time it is Sharpton."Just recently he invented (out of whole cloth) racism charges against ... man who goes by the name of Toure."You are lying again. Toure specifically bashed someone for their skin color. Toure invented his own racism. "Supposedly Toure bashed Herrmann Cain for being black!"It happened."When I pointed it out to dmarks that a black man bashing another black man for being black made no sense..."That was just you being racist; denying the capability of someone to have racist views based on heir skin color"But, get this, he continued to insist it was true anyway!"If I denied this racist incident created by Toure happened, I would be lying."I *DO* reject racism"That's another flat-out lie. We have discussed certain affirmative action policies which engage in racial discrimination and thus fit the definition of racism. You did not reject these policies. In fact, you defend them."including the imaginary kind that dmarks often rails against."I oppose all racism, no matter who it is against or by."Sharpton defended his comments by noting that the term 'homo' was not homophobic but added that he no longer uses the term."This like Jersey who likes to bash people as "faggots" but insists it is not homophopbic."I don't know what dmarks thinks Sharpton is lying about regarding Egyptian history."Do you ever even research things before you comment? ancient Egypt was inhabited by Semites, not sub-saharan Black Africans. It is a common part of "Afrocentric" racism to claim certain achievements by non-blacks as being done by blacks.The worst of if I have seen have been claims about Cleopatra.
dmarks: You are lying again. Toure specifically bashed someone for their skin color.I am telling the truth. Toure did not do this. You're the one who is lying.dmarks: We have discussed certain affirmative action policies [and] you defend them.I defend them because they are anti-racist.dmarks: Do you ever even research things before you comment?Yes. I read the article, "Ancient Egyptian race controversy" on Wikipedia. It says there is a debate on how dark the ancient Egyptian's skin was, and that there are various theories. Sharpton agrees with the "Black African hypothesis". That isn't racism, it's a difference of opinion.dmarks: Ancient Egypt was inhabited by Semites, not sub-saharan Black Africans.Wikipedia says the term "Semitic", "was first used to refer to a language family of largely Middle Eastern origin, now called the Semitic languages".In other words, it's a reference to what language was spoken. It doesn't preclude ancient Egyptians from being dark skinned.
Yeah, Sharpton was a little off on his ancient history. LOL And the "Greek homo" comment was absolutely loathsome, too.
From Wikipedia: "Recent DNA studies have indicated that ancient Egyptians had an approximate 90% genetic commonality with modern Egyptians, which would make the current population largely representative of the ancient inhabitants." Mr. Sharpton's Afrocentric feel-good approach to history is exceedingly telling here.
Will: Mr. Sharpton's Afrocentric feel-good approach to history is exceedingly telling here.So Sharpton may very well be wrong to believe the "Black African hypothesis", that doesn't make him a racist. It isn't racist to want to be proud of your ancestors. Me, I could care less, but to some people it has some importance.Egypt is located on the African continent, btw.It's only "exceedingly telling" due to your bias against Mr. Sharpton and eagerness to believe bad things about him.
Given that humans have a genetic commonality of 98.8% with chimps, modern Egyptians are closer to chimps than they are ancient Egyptians.
Jerry, and they're closer to ancient Egyptians than they are to modern Sudanese.......wd, I didn't say that Mr. Sharpton was a racist here, just a lousy historian/anthropologist.
" they're closer to ancient Egyptians than they are to modern Sudanese"Where do you get that?
They're (i.e., modern Egyptians) closer in DNA to ancient Egyptians than they are to either modern or ancient Sudanese (i.e., Black African peoples as opposed to Arab peoples).
Do you have a reference or is that an opinion?
The Wikipedia reference that I cited above. I'll go get the URL address.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egyptian_race_controversy Second paragraph. Sharpton was wrong.
Thanks, Will, although I would question the 90% figure they give but do not reference especially since humans are 98.8% genetically similar to chimps. And I read no reference to them being closer to ancient Egyptians than to Sudanese.
If there's a five dollar bill lying on the ground and a black guy in handcuffs sure as shootin Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are close by.
That was just an example, Jerry - Egyptians and sub-Saharan black Africans of any nationality would have sufficed.
Rusty, don't forget the cameras.......That, and I can't help but harken back to that classic Claude Rains line from "Casablanca", "Go round up the usual suspects."
Crickets from dmarks I see. That, after his buddy Will disagrees with his nonsense about Al Sharpton lying.Even if Al Sharpton is wrong about a few things I still believe he is a great activist. I believe he does a lot of good and I'll continue to admire him for that reason.
"So Sharpton may very well be wrong to believe the "Black African hypothesis"That hypothesis is intself racist and supremacist. So belief in it makes him racist."Egypt is located on the African continent, btw.So? It is located on a continent populated, now as in ancient times, by Caucasians, black Africans, various combinations thereof, and others."It's only "exceedingly telling" due to your bias against Mr. Sharpton and eagerness to believe bad things about him."I only believe what he says himself. If he says something bad, I won't ignore it. As for your entirely false claim that I only condemn racism against black racists, you are being deceptive and disingenuous.Do you forget...1) The discussion of Columbus, one of the worst white racists of all time.2) When I lit into Rusty because I thought he was making some racist Motown Robinson joke.Either you forget, or you remember and chose to present a false case.--------Will said: "Mr. Sharpton's Afrocentric feel-good approach to history is exceedingly telling here."And it has nothing to do with actual events, and everything to do with Sharpton's racism.---------Rusty said "If there's a five dollar bill lying on the ground and a black guy in handcuffs sure as shooting Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are close by."And because Al and Jessie are such racists, they will never do the same about a white guy in handcuffs.And thank you Will, thank you for providing some facts about Egyptian history which supported what I was saying.
p.s. How can anyone defend Sharpton?Remember the Tawana Brawley hoax. Inexcusable, and Sharpton still hasn't come clean about it.
dmarks: And thank you Will, thank you for providing some facts about Egyptian history which supported what I was saying.His facts didn't support what you're saying at all. You're lying. Will SPECIFICALLY said, "I didn't say that Mr. Sharpton was a racist here, just a lousy historian/anthropologist".dmarks lied: That hypothesis is itself racist and supremacist. So belief in it makes him racist.Prove it. There are 8 total theories regarding the racial heritage of ancient Egyptians listed on Wikipedia. Are all that disagree with what dmarks believes based on racism and supremacy?Regarding the "Black African hypothesis" Wikipedia says, "Modern scholars such as W.E.B. DuBois, Chancellor Williams, Cheikh Anta Diop, John G. Jackson, Ivan van Sertima, and Martin Bernal all supported the theory that the Ancient Egyptian society was indigenous to Africa... and a mostly Black civilization".So, according to dmarks every one of these modern scholars is a racist? But the entry says these scholars presented "extensive and painstakingly researched evidence to support their views". So I guess that makes them liars and frauds as well as racists?Please share with us the evidence you have that supports these serious accusations (faking research). What is your proof that these scholars are lying racists? Please link to the research you've read that specifically calls these lying racists out.You can't do it. I predict crickets.
WD: About Will, his statements about the facts of Egyptian history supported what I was saying all along.I told the truth when I said "That hypothesis is itself racist and supremacist. So belief in it makes him racist."Regarding the "Black African hypothesis".... All a bunch of racial supremacist BS. I have even seen posters put up by these nuts in university, showing a Cleopatra with nearly jet-black skin. If you don't know what is wrong with that picture, you really have no idea what you are talking about here and should go home and let the adults talk."So, according to dmarks every one of these modern scholars is a racist?"If not racist, they are stupid or at best ignorant. They are supporting faked history."So I guess that makes them liars and frauds as well as racists?"Of course. If they put forth this junk after being presented with the facts."What is your proof that these scholars are lying racists?"Check into actual Egyptian history
By the way, have you recalled your disingenuous and false accusation that I only oppose racism from blacks?
dmarks: By the way, have you recalled your disingenuous and false accusation that I only oppose racism from blacks?I recall making that assertion, but it was neither disingenuous or false. In fact, this is another example of it.
dmarks: Check into actual Egyptian history.dmarks gets a "fail" on backing up his accusation that the scholars who came up with the "Black African hypothesis" faked their research. In response he says (basically) that I should get a time machine and then I'll see that he's right (which is the ONLY way I could check out the ACTUAL history).I don't have a time machine dmarks. How about you pick me up and we go for a spin in yours? Then you'll be able to prove those "Black African hypothesis" racists wrong. Maybe we'll even be able to eavesdrop on the conversation where the scholars talked about faking their research.However, in the real world (where time machines don't exist) there are only limited records of the actual Egyptian history. It isn't known what "race" they were. Hence the reason for the multiple hypotheses.
We don't need a time machine, wd. DNA analysis no doubt will suffice.
DNA can be used to prove research was faked? I don't think so. Next you'll be telling me that the scholars that came up with the "Black African hypothesis" can have their DNA tested to see if they have the "racist gene".
No, wd, my point is that DNA analysis has shown that ancient Egyptians had essentially the same genetic make-up as present day Egyptians. I have no idea whatsoever if Mr. Sharpton or others falsified anything. My suspicion here is that this was simply a case of intellectual laziness and of him believing the first positive thing that came to him.
WD said: "dmarks gets a "fail" on backing up his accusation that the scholars who came up with the "Black African hypothesis" faked their research. "I get an A+. Since the "theory" is junk science on a par with Atlantis, they either intentionally faked the research, or uncritically cribbed stuff from others. Either way, they are jokes. Hoaxsters."It isn't known what "race" they were. Hence the reason for the multiple hypotheses."We already known what race they were. Have for a very long time. The only reason we have multiple hypothesis is because of hoaxksters making up new ones without evidence.
I ask for proof and dmarks gives zero proof and instead offers guesses. And he gives himself an A+. What a dope.
Post a Comment