Muhammad Rasheed's Blog, page 214

Slight Discrepencies in a "Post-Racial" Society

Muhammad Rasheed - [shared link]

 Cop Refuses to Shoot Fellow White Citizen

Dear racists,

Your fake-ass argument is invalid. Fuck you.

Love,
Muhammad
 
Bakkah Rasheed-Shabazz - Was the suspect a white dude? That makes the difference. Where's the reports by the media about the difference in the number of white males shot by police compared to African Americans? The figures are outrageously different but never mentioned. 

Warren Murphy - more whites are shot. 

Walker Jones Tj - More Blacks are killed. 

J Arealia Crear - There's WAAAY more white people (78% of US population vs 13%). White people should get shot "more", but the question isn't about gross numbers, it's about rates (percentages). "The 1,217 deadly police shootings from 2010 to 2012 captured in the federal data show that blacks, age 15 to 19, were killed at a rate of 31.17 per million, while just 1.47 per million white males in that age range died at the hands of police." A rate 30 times higher is significant and merits reporting. Bill O'Reilly, Nick Kristof on race and police killings

Michael Hodges - The thing nobody seems to care about: While what J Arealia Crear posted above is absolutely correct inasmuch as the rates merit investigation (and by God, they certainly do!), people are treating this story as "proof" since the cop refused to shoot the man.

Am I the only one aware that the cop DID HIS JOB, because he's SUPPOSED to try to minimize force regardless of the suspect's/assailant's race?

When a white cop shoots a black man, we damn him for shooting, regardless of the circumstances. Don't read into that: ALL shootings need to be investigated, and anything which suggests something out of whack needs to be investigated further.

But we're damning this guy for NOT shooting. What the hell was he supposed to do, choose to specifically shoot because the perp was white in order to convey some crazy sense of appeasement?!? 

Karla Holland - Any thing that comes out of their mouth is pretty much invalid. 

Clark Willis - J Arealia Crear Yes, there is a 78% to 13% ratio there, but there is a 69% to 28% ration of crimes reported by race. Feel free to spin some racism on that. Keep in mind that "whites" also include hispanics here.

Clark Willis - Personally, in that situation, I would have shot him when he approached, and especially when I was on the ground. 

Karl Dabney - Good point. Not as diplomatic as I would say it, but you are on target. 

J Arealia Crear - "spin some racism on that"? LMAO. *quietly exits conversation* 

Tom Luth - Glad to see there are still some decent cops around. 

Andre Roberts - If he were black he would have been shot in the back, forget charging 

Reg Clinton Brown - This dude is white that's why 

Neil Bagozzi - Who is the literary genius muhammad. 

Chester Moyle - Andre, how would he have got shot in the back when he was charging. U-turn bullets? 

Muhammad Rasheed - In the future, unless you actually believe the following:

1.) blacks should be discriminated against for no other reason than because they are from the black american ethnic group,

2.) whites should be showered with preferential privileges for no other reason than because they are of the euro-ethnic groups,

3.) frequently wish that blacks would just "go back to africa"

4.) think that black people are inherently more savage and less intelligent than other groups

5.) believe white people are the apex of human evolution

6.) somehow believe there is no white-on-white crime with numbers comparable to the black-on-black crime rates,

7.) believe the world were better off if blacks were all killed off, put back in slavery, or controled by the state while everyone else lived freely

8.) racism is a fiction, or at least is no longer present in society

9.) and various combinations of ideologies developed from the above

...then please don't respond to these angry, anti-racism rants of mine while seemingly supporting discriminatory practices, unless you want to out yourself as a racist. FYI. It's fine if all you are doing is playing devil's advocate, but try to let people know that, please. 

Ayub Black Panther - A skin head will kill another shin head if his life is threatened.
Fuck being a cop. The Cop was a scared lil bitch and should quit or be fired. 

Luther Johnson - The officer did his job correctly. A police officer should not fire unless he absolutely has to. I dont think that the argument is: should the officer have shot the suspect....but rather: why are cops so quick to shoot black/brown people and fail to show restraint they show white people. 

Muhammad Rasheed - ^This. 

Muhammad Rasheed - They give white suspects every chance in the universe... that's why this clip is so powerful... no matter how heinous the crime. They could have just shot up an elementary school, but they won't shoot him because he might have a family, or everyone deserves to have their story told, you don't know what this poor mentally ill soul went through to make him take that dark road, what right do I have to take this man's life, we've all been there, it could've been anyone, etc.

But blacks? They will unload the gun into you casually because of what you might have done ("He was like a DEMON!!"), or what you probably did in your past ("Did you see him in that photo holding a gun and money? Disgusting. I wish someone had shot him that day.")

Neil Bagozzi - According you Muhammad every cop in the USA joins the police force to kill black people.

Muhammad Rasheed - lol

Muhammad Rasheed -  According to you, Neil, you read somewhere where I said every single cop in America is a racist. I must've deleted it. 

Muhammad Rasheed - You could've saved the typing time if the best you could do was a shallow strawman. 

Muhammad Rasheed - If you want to bring it then bring it. Throw down your rod. 

Clifton Hatchett - Most cases like this end with a dead body and an acquitted Cop.

Jeremy Travis - When A White Man Tries To Break Into A Car Nothing Happens, But Watch When A Black Man Tries The Same Thing

Muhammad Rasheed - "That poor, poor white man must've accidentally locked his keys in there. He's probably late picking up his kids from day care or something noble like that. CAN'T SOMEONE HELP THAT POOR WHITE MAN????"

Muhammad Rasheed - "Look at that thug getting within 50 feet too close to that parking lot...! SOMEBODY CALL THE POLICE!!!"

The Blatant Sabotage of a Man Trying to Help His People

Eddie Murphy at 60th Academy Awards

Muhammad Rasheed - Interesting. And the next year Hollywood treated Harlem Nights like it was the worst movie ever made, and tried to humiliate him for directing and writing his own film that was full of black people.

Muhammad Rasheed - I loved Harlem Nights. I didn't find out the critics said all those things about it until just a few years ago. Gene Siskel said it offended him. How, I wonder? 

Danny Bronson - Awesome movie! 

Raymond Gardner - You're absolutely right -- they couldn't wait to pounce on him for Harlem Nights. It was world class Nigger-breaking and I don't think he ever directed again. But to nearly every black American, Harlem Nights is a classic! 

Ricky Mujica - Harlem Nights was funny! A classic! 

Muhammad Rasheed - I don't think he's ever been as confident as he was in this clip again. He probably seriously started doubting himself after the critics, and his billionaire "friends" that he respected so much, ripped into his so-called "vanity project" film to break him from his ambitions. They didn't want their cash cow going anywhere.

Eric C. Martin - What the hell?... Muhammad, Harlem Knights was sooooooo disappointing. It should've had tons of laughs, instead it was just MEH. I was so upset. I loved Foxx, Pryor, and Murphy and I barely chuckled at it.

What does being "full of black people" have to do with anything?

Muhammad Rasheed - I thought it was awesome, and as the other thread posters before you mentioned, they also thought it was awesome. It WAS full of tons of laughs and was chock-full-of-quotable moments, and everyone I knew from my neighborhood in Detroit loved it, too.

Being "full of black people" is important in an industry that traditionally underserves the black community. Usually, more often than not, "black roles" are stereotypical roles created by white writers, where they treat being a black American as a stock character, like "the gangster," or "the bank teller," so the black character is always the same 3-4 archetypes from the stereotype playbook. Consequently, actors who don't fit easily into what white casting directors think is "really black" often find themselves rarely acting. The solution is for blacks to be in positions of power so we can make our own platforms. Eddie tried to do that for his people when he found himself in the role as "biggest box office draw," and the people closest to him in that world --who either didn't get it, like you seem not to, or wanted to discourage the competition -- burned him for it.

Muhammad Rasheed - Eric provide some insight into why you think Gene Siskel was offended by it, please.


See Also:

What's a "Vanity Project?"

No Room for You at the Top

Martin's Real Message

Kimberly Moseberry - [posted image] I did this messageon how I felt about MLK. In the media they always portray him as a old man almost. But He was young when he died. The never talked about this... speech he did. On how blacks needed to own their own businesses and build their own economy. 
By the time he did say wake up and began speaking on it. He was murdered.
I call this piece waking up from the dream into broken promises.

Muhammad Rasheed - Kimberly Moseberry wrote: “[They] never talked about this speech he did. On how blacks needed to own their own businesses and build their own economy.”
This was around the time period when the focus of the civil rights movement mysteriously shifted from the pursuit of “de-segregation” (which came with a list of objectives that needed to be conquered in order for the Black American community to get up to speed with joining the mainstream society without being held back by discriminatory laws), to a destructive “integration” goal, which came with a list of nothing that would strengthen the community, and in fact resulted in the middle class abandoning the black communities, plunging them into heartbreaking blight and desolation. This served only to widen the gap between the Black middle class and the lower classes, leaving the poor easy prey for other groups to take advantage of. Now they feel more helpless than they did during the height of jim crow, when at least all the socio-economic classes had little choice but to uplift each other in the face of a far more blunt demonstration of racism; an uplifting that mimicked the struggles of every other people who grew from poor struggling immigrant to successful ethnic group. This odd “integration” has functioned like a curse on the Black American, and it is impossible for me to believe it wasn't a calculated tactic slipped in from a greedy and predatory outsider, pretending to be a friend who had our best interests at heart.

I think in order for us to finally win free of our historical struggles in this country, we need to track down the source of this “integration” curse, call it out for what it is, and get back on the “de-segregation” train to continue on to our correct stopping point. We have to, because without our own power bloc composed of our own independent businesses and a control over our own sub-economy that contributes to the whole, any progress we've made in the last 50 years since integration will really be only shallow and illusory.

Did the American Founding Fathers Believe in God?

Shane Gallup – [Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X] were both vehicles of change! American as a nation could truly be and I still pray will be "one nation under God"
Kimberly Moseberry - @Shane Gallup... the founding fathers didn't believe in god.
Shane Gallup - True... In this case my views and hopes.
Muhammad Rasheed - Kimberly Moseberry wrote: "the founding fathers didn't believe in god."

They did (except possibly for Washington), they just didn't adhere to a strict acceptance of the Christian "Apostle's Creed." Many strict Christians opted to toss them in the atheist group for not believing in the Judeo-Christian doctrine the specific way they wanted them to, but they certainly believed in God.
Kimberly Moseberry - George Washington nor did the few others. Don't believe me. Look it up.
Muhammad Rasheed -  I did look it up, Kimberly.  That’s why I know.
***********
James Watkins – [True or False: The Founding Fathers of The United States were Christians who formed a government based on godly principles.]  That’s a more complex answer. The “revisionist left” would like to make them secular and the “religious right” would like to make them saintly. Let’s take a look at some of the more prominent Founding Father’s beliefs . . . in their own words.
John AdamsThe second President (or tenth if you consider John Hanson the first) wrote to Thomas Jefferson on June 28, 1813:
The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were. . . . the general principles of Christianity. . . . I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God; and that those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature.
However, Adams is often quoted as saying, “This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it!” However, here’s the complete quotation in an April 19, 1817, letter to Thomas Jefferson:
Twenty times in the course of my late reading have I been on the point of breaking out, “This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion at all!!!” But in this exclamation I would have been as fanatical as Bryant or Cleverly. Without religion, this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in polite company, I mean hell.
As a Unitarian, Adams flatly denied the doctrine of eternal punishment, believing all would eventually enter heaven. (Many Unitarians reject the Trinity and most accept all religions as valid expressions of faith.) But being a good Unitarian, he was certainly open to the teachings of Christ.Jesus is benevolence personified, an example for all men. . . . The Christian religion, in its primitive purity and simplicity, I have entertained for more than sixty years. It is the religion of reason, equity, and love; it is the religion of the head and the heart (Letter to F.A. Van Der Kemp, December 27, 1816).
During Adam’s administration the Senate ratified the 1797 Treaty of Peace and Friendship with Tripoli, which states in Article XI that “the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion.” Some view this as “a smoking gun” that America was not founded as a Christian nation, while others argue that it was simply a concession to the Muslim nation (when the treaty was renegotiated eight years later, Article XI was dropped).
Samuel AdamsSamuel Adams organized the Boston Tea Party, and served as Governor of Massachusetts, a delegate to the Continental congress, and a signer of the Declaration of Independence.
In his 1772 work, The Rights of the Colonists, Adams wrote:
II. The Rights of the Colonists as Christians.The right to freedom being the gift of the Almighty…The rights of the colonists as Christians…may be best understood by reading and carefully studying the institutions of The Great Law Giver and Head of the Christian Church, which are to be found clearly written and promulgated in the New Testament.
In his Last Will and Testament he wrote:
Principally, and first of all, I resign my soul to the Almighty Being who gave it, and my body I commit to the dust, relying on the merits of Jesus Christ for the pardon of my sins.
Benjamin FranklinIn his autobiography, Franklin describes himself as “a thorough Deist.” “I began to be regarded, by pious souls, with horror, either as an apostate or an Atheist.”
According to a Deist publication, a Deist is “One who believes in the existence of a God or supreme being but denies revealed religion, basing his belief on the light of nature and reason.” Deists reject the Judeo-Christian accounts of God as well as the Bible. They do believe that God is eternal and good, but flatly reject having a relationship with Him through Christ.
Franklin certainly believed in the providence of God. In his famous speech to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia on June 28, 1787:
I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth•that God governs in the affairs of men… If a sparrow cannot fall to the ground unseen by him, is it probable an empire could arise without his aid? I firmly believe this, and I also believe that without his concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building not better than the builders of Babel.
Just five months before his death, he wrote to Dr. Stiles, the President of Yale, who had questioned Franklin about his faith:
I believe in one God, the Creator of the universe; that he governs it by his Providence; that be ought to be worshiped; that the. most acceptable service we can render to him is doing good to his other children; that the soul of man is immortal, and will be treated with justice in another life respecting its conduct in this. These I take to be the fundamental points of all sound religion, and I regard them as you do, in whatever sect I meet with them. As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think his system of morals and his religion, as be left them to us, the best the world ever saw, or is like to see; but I apprehend it has received various corrupting changes, and I have, with most of the present Dissenters in England, some doubts as to his divinity; though it is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it.
Alexander HamiltonThe Episcopalian authored many of the Federalist Papers, signed the Constitution, and became the first Secretary of the Treasury. In an April 1802 letter to James A. Bayard, Hamilton proposed The Christian Constitutional Society:
In my opinion, the present constitution is the standard to which we are to cling. Under its banner bona fide must we combat our political foes, rejecting all changes but through the channel itself provided for amendments. By these general views of the subject have my reflections been guided. I now offer you the outline of the plan they have suggested. Let an association be formed to be denominated “The Christian Constitutional Society,” its object to be first: The support of the Christian religion. second: The support of the United States.
Hamilton was shot and killed by Aaron Burr in a duel on July 12, 1804. His last dying words reportedly were:
I have a tender reliance on the mercy of the Almighty, through the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ. I am a sinner. I look to Him for mercy; pray for me.
Patrick HenryBest known for his “give me liberty or give me death” speech on March 23, 1775, he became the first governor of Virginia.
One of his most famous quotations, cannot be verified, although it’s used by many Christian ministers: “It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions but on the gospel of Jesus Christ!” It’s not found anywhere in his recorded writings or speeches.
However, here’s a verified quotation from a letter to his daughter dated August 20, 1796:
Amongst other strange things said of me, I hear it is said by the deists that I am one of the number; and indeed, that some good people think I am no Christian. This thought gives me much more pain than the appellation of Tory; because I think religion of infinitely higher importance than politics; and I find much cause to reproach myself that I have lived so long, and have given no decided and public proofs of my being a Christian. But, indeed, my dear child, this is a character which I prize far above all this world has, or can boast.
And in his will:
This is all the inheritance I give to my dear family. The religion of Christ will give them one which will make them rich indeed.
John JayOne of the authors of the Federalist Papers and first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, Jay wrote to Rev. Uzal Ogden, on February 14, 1796:
I have long been of opinion that the evidence of the truth of Christianity requires only to be carefully examined to produce conviction in candid minds. . . .
And in an April 23, 1811, letter to John Bristed, April 23, 1811, he wrote:
While in France . . . I do not recollect to have had more than two conversations with atheists about their tenents. The first was this: I was at a large party, of which were several of that description. They spoke freely and contemptuously of religion. I took no part in the conversation. In the course of it, one of them asked me if I believed in Christ? I answered that I did, and that I thanked God that I did.
Thomas JeffersonThe writer of the Declaration of Independence and the third President of the United States wrote to Charles Thomson in 1816:

I, too, have made a wee-little book from the same materials, which I call the Philosophy of Jesus; it is a paradigma of his doctrines, made by cutting the texts out of the book, and arranging them on the pages of a blank book, in a certain order of time or subject. A more beautiful or precious morsel of ethics I have never seen; it is a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus.
Jefferson was a Deist who respected Christ’s teachings, but rejected His divinity, His miracles, and His resurrection. In a letter to William Short dated April 13, 1820, he wrote:

I am a Materialist.
Among the sayings and discourses imputed to [Jesus] by His biographers, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence; and others, again, of so much ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism and imposture, as to pronounce it impossible that such contradictions should have proceeded from the same Being. I separate, therefore, the gold from the dross; restore to Him the former, and leave the latter to the stupidity of some, and roguery of others of His disciples. Of this band of dupes and impostors, Paul was the great . . . corruptor of the doctrines of Jesus.
In separating Jesus divine and human natures, Jefferson wrote to John Adams, January 24, 1814 that the divine aspects of Christ were “the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills.”
And so he compiled The Jefferson Bible: The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth Extracted Textually from the Gospels. Jefferson simply cut out anything of a supernatural or miraculous nature and so his Bible ends:
Then took they the body of Jesus, and wound it in linen cloths with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury. Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden; and in the garden a new sepulchre, wherein was never man yet laid. There laid they Jesus, And rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre, and departed.
George WashingtonThe first President’s faith is a bit harder to pin down.
Many Christian writers and commentators point to Washington’s twenty-four page manuscript book, titled, Daily Sacrifice. It was found in April 1891 among a collection of Washington’s papers in his confirmed handwriting when he was about the age of twenty. In it he prays:
Bless my family, kindred, friends and country, be our God & guide this day and for ever for his sake, who lay down in the Grave and arose again for us, Jesus Christ our Lord, Amen.
. . . in and for the sacrifice of Jesus Christ offered upon the cross for me; for his sake, ease me of the burden of my sins, and give me grace that by the call of the Gospel I may rise from the slumber of sin into the newness of life.
Let me live according to those holy rules which thou hast this day prescribed in thy holy word; make me to know what is acceptable in thy holy word; make me to know what is acceptable in thy sight, and therein to delight, open the eyes of my understanding, and help me thoroughly to examine myself concerning my knowledge, faith and repentance, increase my faith, and direct me to the true object Jesus Christ the way, the truth and the life, bless O Lord, all the people of this land, from the highest to the lowest, particularly those whom thou has appointed to rule over us in church & state. continue thy goodness to me this night. These weak petitions I humbly implore thee to hear accept and ans. for the sake of thy Dear Son Jesus Christ our Lord, Amen.
In his Speech to Delaware Indian Chiefs on May 12, 1779, Washington said:
You do well to wish to learn our arts and our ways of life and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ. These will make you a greater and happier people than you are. Congress will do everything they can to assist you in this wise intention.
However, during his presidency (1789-1797) and in his later life, Washington is not recorded referring to Jesus Christ and rarely to God. He preferred titles such as “the Divine Author of our blessed Religion,” “Almighty Being,” “Providence” and “Grand Designer” (all terms from Deist beliefs).
Washington also used the title “Supreme Architect” (a Freemasonary term of which he became a devout member, served as the head of the original Alexandria Lodge No. 22, and presided over the laying of the U.S. Capitol in a Mason apron).
According to Bishop White, Washington’s pastor for nearly 25 years at the Protestant Episcopal Church of America, as well as Washington’s adopted daughter Nelly Custis-Lewis, the President would leave the service before communion was served. (The Eucharist or Holy Communion is considered an essential part of salvation for Catholics and for many members of liturgical churches.)Lewis however defended her step-father’s faith in a letter:
I never witnessed his private devotions. I never inquired about them. I should have thought it the greatest heresy to doubt his firm belief in Christianity. His life, his writings, prove that he was a Christian. He was not one of those who act or pray, “that they may be seen of men” [Matthew 6:5]. He communed with his God in secret [Matthew 6:6].
Thomas Jefferson was less charitable:
"[Washington] had never, on any occasion, said a word to the public which showed a belief in the Christian religion, and they thought they should so pen their address as to force him at length to disclose publicly whether he was a Christian or not. However, he observed, the old fox was too cunning for them. He answered every article of their address particularly, except that, which he passed over without notice” (Jefferson’s Works, Vol. iv., p. 572).

James Watkins – So, were the Founding Fathers Christians?
They were certainly godly men who believed in a supreme being, but not everyone would subscribe to the Apostles’ Creed [of Christianity].  Both revisionists and the religious right have tried to make the Founding Fathers fit their ideology. It gives neither side of the debate any credibility when quotations are found to be fictitious or grossly out of context.
For instance, I’ve seen articles proclaiming that Jefferson claimed to be “a real Christian” while conveniently avoiding his opinion that belief in Christ’s divinity was “dung” (see contexts above).I am a subscriber to the Apostles’ Creed (I’ve had a “subscription” since second grade). I would love to document that the most prominent Founding Fathers were orthodox Christians.
However, I’m also a journalist who is committed to being an OAF (Objective, Accurate, and Fair), so I have only included quotations where I could find at least two collaborating, reliable sources.So this essay continues to be a work in progress. If you have a relevant quotation from one of the Founding Fathers regarding his faith or find an error, please email me with at least two reliable sources. Thanks!
SOURCE: Were the U.S. Founding Fathers Christians?

Harvard versus the 1964 Louisiana Literacy Tests

Muhammad Rasheed - [shared link]

Harvard Students Take 1964 Literacy Test Black Voters Had To Pass Before Voting — They All Failed

Muhammad Rasheed - Let me guess: The response from the racist community was that Harvard was full of stupid liberals anyway so they weren't surprised they failed the very fair, non-racist tests.

Chris Suess - I dont think that the fact that Harvard is full of stupid liberals has anything to do with it. In this case I think that fact is irrelevant. I think it is more of an indication of how shitty modern public indoctrination is in general.

Muhammad Rasheed - I don't understand. You think our modern indoctrination is shitty, that's why we find the tests designed to keep blacks from voting to be impossible to pass?

Please explain.

Chris Suess - Let me give you an example, recently my son and I went to a place called Wild West City. It's a western re-enactment entertainment attraction in West NJ. While there, we went into the school house there and up on the chalk board were some questions that young kids then had to know.

Neither of us could fully answer any of the questions.

Modern education sucks balls. People are stupider in general today, REGARDLESS of the pigmentation of their skin.

I think they found it impossible to pass, because they have never been taught the information to begin with.

Muhammad Rasheed - These tests weren't what you think they are, Chris. They were specifically created and designed to keep the jim crow era blacks out of the voting booths. This wasn't a matter of "education" but discrimination of the worst type.

Chris Suess - dude, I'm not saying that their original purpose was good.

Muhammad Rasheed - It was the only purpose for it.

Muhammad Rasheed - The KKK was formed because the former slave was educating him/herself and entering high offices in politics. The fear was that they would become so powerful that the whites would receive some kind of "payback" for it if they found themselves ruled by them. The KKK was created to "save the white race" as Griffin put it.

Muhammad Rasheed - These test laws were part of that old fear. Once blacks recovered their right to vote, their rivals still kept trying to hold them back. That's what these tests were.

Muhammad Rasheed - Obama's two landslide victories rekindled that same fear once again. That's why the "voter I.D." cards, the voter fraud controversy, and once again talk of more voting tests started all over again.

Chris Suess - I have never heard of any talk of re-establishing voting tests.

Voter ID is used in pretty much all countries. It's kind of how you prevent cheating. Proving who you are to vote should not be an issue except to those that plan on cheating the system.

Your use of landslide is laughable.

Muhammad Rasheed - Chris Suess wrote: "Voter ID is used in pretty much all countries. It's kind of how you prevent cheating."

Yes, that's the kind of rhetoric they invented when they found themselves on the losing end, with their worldview smashed.

Chris Suess wrote: "Your use of landslide is laughable."

1.) Obama would go on to win a decisive victory over McCain, winning both the popular vote and the electoral college, with 365 electoral votes to McCain's 173; he received the largest percentage of the popular vote for a Democrat since Lyndon Johnson in 1964.

2.) Obama would go on to defeat Romney, winning both the popular vote and the electoral college, with 332 electoral votes to Romney's 206. He became the eleventh President and third Democrat to win a majority of the popular vote more than once.

Diane J. Thalheimer - 1964, Lousiana, not surprising. I was six. My question is, are they still administering this test? And if not,what year were they forced to stop administering this test?

Muhammad Rasheed - No, they were just talking about some voting tests in some old articles.

Chris Suess - yeah it's kind of like the rhetoric that you hear about how getting an ID is too much of a burden for some people.

I will concede that the states that Dear Leader won were the ones with big leftist populations that have a lot of electoral votes.

Chris Suess - but those in favor of Voter ID laws cross party lines and are in a higher percentage than those that Dear Leader was voted in by...

Diane J. Thalheimer - the question really was rhetorical, although I do wonder how many years they did that. Racism exists every where one goes. This could easily be misconstrued as being done today and that type of test has nothing to do with voter id laws but bigotry. Rather like people being taught that the 3/5ths clause in the constitution proves that the founding america was pro slavery.

Muhammad Rasheed - Chris Suess wrote: "but those in favor of Voter ID laws cross party lines and are in a higher percentage than those that Dear Leader was voted in by..."

Based on what? If the states with huge "leftist populations" are the only ones he won, then how would "leftists" gain by allowing their political rivals to set up measures to control who gets to vote? The timing of these new voting control measures is certainly not insignificant in the wake of the two landslide victories of Obama.

Chris Suess - did you read the part that you copied about those in favor crossing party lines?

Muhammad Rasheed - Did you see the part where I asked "based on what?"

Muhammad Rasheed - lol Okay, Chris.

I have to go. I have work to do. See ya around.

Diane J. Thalheimer - It is important to remember the racism of the past, to study it and make sure, together, that it does not occur again. Instead of saying you people, it has to be we the people that fight the war of racism. Unlike small pox, racism will never be eradicated, ever, but it can be minimized and it is minimized by working together as Americans not thinking of each other as you people and those people. I happen to be for voter id. I am not sure who said it was to keep the black person submissive, personally, I would be more worried about the programs started under Johnson's "great society" those programs have negatively affected all Americans but particularly black Americans.
I have been a nurse for 35 years and have seen all sorts of behavior, fraud crosses all ethnic lines not just black people I believe it a false argument to say that voter id is to keep black people submissive.
This was just posted on the Frederick Douglass site: Confederate slavery brutalized one race on cotton plantations...while "Progressive Communism" inclusively, and equally, enslaves everyone to servitude to the state.
I suggest we join together to preserve our liberties and racism will be kept at bay.

Muhammad Rasheed - It's important to remember that whenever the African-American has achieved any type of milestone victory, members of that other group always took it as a threat of some kind, and attacked that community from a place of never-explained bitterness and resentment. This has happened whether we were working with you all or not, and the kind-hearted among you were not able to help.

Muhammad Rasheed - The subject of "voter IDs" only came up after Obama's victories, and never before that. The timing is not insignificant. Despite the rhetoric around it, it is merely more of the same ole, same ole.

Diane J. Thalheimer - well JFK and his darling brother had a bit to do with not only voter fraud, but voter intimidation and many before and after most likely. I think voter ID could protect people also. I have voted since I was 18 and have always had to prove who I was. back then you originally signed your name and they compared your signature, but ID had to be on your person as a back up Today I live in a town of 500 or less, one of the volunteers lives across from me and tells them who I am while I am still in the parking lot, guess that is a different form of voter id.
I was raised to be color blind, that does not mean I am a fool. My anti racism stance, against all races is not kind hearted, but based under the realization that anyone can be discriminated against, that was a horrifying day, again as a teen ager when I discovered that part of my own family would serve me up on a platter like John the Baptist head all because my maternal grandmother was Jewish. That was the day that I took my Mother's teachings one step further and gave my solemn vow to God that I would not allow racism in my prescence. My stance is quiet as I am no MLK or Ghandi, it has gotten me in hot water a few times. The racism that I am helpless against is black people against me all because I am white, and usually it is when I am working, I ignore the people on the street. There is an age difference in behavior. Black people my age who decide to hate me are usually just surly but I truly worry about the young black people who think it okay to be vile to a person because of their race. I have had to get black nurses to care for them because of their behavior. Because atrocities were committed by whites against blacks, is more reason to not repeat that behavior.
Besides studying history so as to not repeat it, like minded people need to stick together and work together to educate and prevent repetition and new hate crimes, stop talking about "you people" when something bad happens but think of each other as Americans who are in this together and to solve discrimination together, it is not a black problem or a white problem but an American problem. Before I die, I would like to see the America of my dreams, to be able to say as one people, this is the problem we had and this is how we solved it.

Muhammad Rasheed - Diane, I don't think it is smart to direct all the "need for change in attitude" towards the traditional disenfranchised victims of historical racism. The African-American is the one who has endured race-based chattel slavery, jim crow, and policies designed to control that community's economic growth. Along the way, the response from the other side has been "Rush Limbaugh." So when the disenfranchised group feels bitterness and resentment from historical ill treatment, I find it offensive when your point seems to be that the African-American needs to change their attitude as the key to the whole thing turning around.

Of course, it's possible I've badly misinterpreted what you were actually trying to say, but that's usually how you come across with these speeches. "If only black people would stop complaining and change their attitude, racism will go away." But my people are not the ones who've been walking around like they have a right to oppress people though. The fact that successful economically black communities of the past were completely destroyed by jealous and resentful white people who were never held accountable for the crimes because the dominant mainstream society somehow understood that resentment and empathized with it over the deaths of the blacks, is the true key to the problem.

The issue is not with ME.

Muhammad Rasheed - Why wasn't there talk of "voter IDs" in the few years BEFORE Obama won the first election? Why did it only become a GOP talking point immediately AFTER they soundly and definitively lost the White House when their political rivals decided to truly flex their voting might? The voter ID concept suddenly became a major talking point in this new era, not because of "fairness," but because of fear.

Diane J. Thalheimer - I think you misunderstood me, I said we have to do it together. It is the only way to make change, not by one side standing there saying you have to do this, this and this. One can't stand aloof with arms crossed saying you are doing it wrong. We have a shared history, we have to come to that understanding, stop being an us and them and become a "we". There is absolutely no race in the world that has not practiced opression in some form or other, there is no perfect race. America will never be what she is promised to be unless we work together. And yes, part of the learning is that the black people who chose to hate all white people need to change their thought patterns too. Are you willing to stop distrusting white people just because they're white and work with me to change the society of America? I happen to believe that there are enough Americans of all races to make this change, but only if we join ranks and work on it together.

Diane J. Thalheimer - as far as voter id, I do not know, ever since I began to vote at 18, yearly I have received a yellow card asking me if I still lived there and if not what to do, maybe that was more about not voting in more than one district than that you were who you say you are, but I have aways seen signs saying you needed proof of identity.

Muhammad Rasheed - Diane J. Thalheimer wrote: "I think you misunderstood me, I said we have to do it together.”

I understood you fine, Diane. I also remember that when the KKK was formed, when Reconstruction was repealed, when black towns were massacred and razed to the ground, and in the post-Civil Rights Act era, when the short line of progress we had achieved was completely derailed and sabotaged, the kind-hearted among you were nowhere to be found.

The facts of history reveal that no matter what you may say, we never stopped being on our own when the very worst happens.

Muhammad Rasheed - Diane J. Thalheimer wrote: "as far as voter id, I do not know, ever since I began to vote at 18, yearly I have received a yellow card..."

I don't think you're talking about the same thing as what they are talking about. If the GOP talking heads were actually talking about that same yellow card that we all have been using for decades, then why would they be bringing it up now as something that needs to be newly imposed on their political rivals' voting base?

Diane J. Thalheimer - So, you chose to punish all white people for crimes they did not commit? I know of these things too, but that does not make me culpable for things I have not done. From your statement it appears to me you do not want a united America, but keep up a false wall for retribution of past deeds and possible new? There are evil people everywhere, if good people do not unite against them then all will be lost. What purpose does it serve to keep up the hate and suspicion? I side with Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King.

Muhammad Rasheed - Diane J. Thalheimer wrote: "So, you chose to punish all white people for crimes they did not commit?"

Punish them by doing what? Where did I say I wanted to punish someone? If anything I am distrustful of that kind of "Let's just all hold hands Kumbaya" talk. "Punish" is what you all say when you betray your secret fear of a long-coming payback. That's you projecting your mess on me, Diane.

Diane J. Thalheimer wrote: "I know of these things too, but that does not make me culpable for things I have not done."

And here I thought you would put yourself in the role of the "kind-hearted." Curious.

Diane J. Thalheimer wrote: "From your statement it appears to me..."

You really should just ask.

Diane J. Thalheimer wrote: "...you do not want a united America..."

I do. But I am offended that you somehow think the onus is on us to fix the race problem, when the other side has all the power and resource. Are you really saying that if only we were nicer to you racism would be over?

Diane J. Thalheimer wrote: "...but keep up a false wall for retribution of past deeds and possible new?"

What makes you think the wall is false?

Diane J. Thalheimer wrote: "There are evil people everywhere, if good people do not unite against them then all will be lost."

I know, I remember. We've gotten the shit end of that stick several times over the last half millennium.

Diane J. Thalheimer wrote: "What purpose does it serve to keep up the hate and suspicion?"

Because throw me in chains once, shame on you, etc.

Diane J. Thalheimer wrote: "I side with Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King."

Do you?

The Abandonment & Vilification of an Old Friend

Kamau Mkafele Mshale – [shared meme]




Brian Joseph - It's actually working perfectly.

Kamau Mkafele Mshale - Right

Yumy Odom - Indeed!



Brian Joseph - I'm gonna have to post this info graphic sir.

Muhammad Rasheed - The frustrating part is that none of those items have anything to do with capitalism. Capitalism is actually what will enable us to be economically empowered, that's why the plutocracy, and their political puppets, sabotage the life blood of that system to keep you poor, while allowing you to think that the very system you actually need to be free is your enemy.

Muhammad Rasheed - Of course, we won't recognize that until your misguided activism ends up destroying capitalism itself and replacing it with some over-the-top bullsh*t that's simply the next level up from what is reflected in this graphic.

Yumy Odom - Bro. Muhammad Rasheed, would you please define "capitalism" so that we are on the same page...



Kamau Mkafele Mshale - Yea rah I think that is all capitalism at work. I don't think you can do away with capitalism but I think we need a system that is far more socialist than capitalist. Like 85% socialist. Instead of socialism being a dirty word. Specially eurocentric capitalism. Most muslims dont like the idea of interest on loans. Thats another example of capitalist values. Greed and self intrest only does not work

Muhammad Rasheed - CAPITALISM - economic system in which: (1) private ownership of property exists; (2) the income from property or capital accrues to the individuals or firms that accumulated it and own it; (3) individuals and firms are relatively free to compete with others for their own economic gain; and (4) the profit motive is basic to economic life. Contrast with COMMUNISM; SOCIALISM

~Barron's Business Guide, Dictionary of Business Terms, Third Edition

Muhammad Rasheed - All of the things you hate about "capitalism" actually are not part of capitalism.

Joe Lovece - Capitalism exists to make profit. No other considerations. That's the problem. It gave us slavery, debt and poverty. Pure capitalism is dangerous, as we are seeing in this country.

Muhammad Rasheed - Joe Lovece wrote: “Capitalism exists to make profit.”

Capitalism exists to enable the individual to own his/her own stuff and live life free to pursue their own endeavors.

Joe Lovece wrote: “No other considerations.”

It doesn’t need to have any other considerations. That what the other systems in our lives are for. Individual humans add their morals, and laws and stuff to it to create a complete system.

Joe Lovece wrote: “That's the problem.”

The problem is those who preach the belief that capitalism is wrong because it isn’t a complete human system with morals built in.

Joe Lovece wrote: “It gave us slavery, debt and poverty.”

No. Individuals use the open road of capitalism to conduct the type of business that is allowed. Capitalism doesn’t give it to you, individuals give it to you. Debt doesn’t have anything to do with capitalism. In fact, our debt culture is controlled by a cartel, which is the traditional enemy of capitalism (another point to my frustration when y’all talk like this).

Joe Lovece wrote: “Pure capitalism is dangerous, as we are seeing in this country.”

We don’t have a pure capitalism system. That’s actually the real problem. The “fat cat” mega-corporations are in a continuous process of stifling the markets and obstructing capitalism so they won’t have any competition. They want the markets all to themselves and in many industries have already succeeded. That’s literally NOT capitalism.

Joe Lovece - Capitalism is an economic system designed to generate profits. Whatever you use the profits for is your business, whether to help people or enslave them. Without ethics capitalism leads to evil actions by greedy people. Debt is a capitalist structure.

Yumy Odom - Bro. Muhammad Rasheed, that definition you site is "capitalism" in an idealistic vacuum. That has never existed! YOU, I and many others would be millionaires if that were true! #1 - Truish; #2 - Not for the individual, generally, but perhaps for the "firm;" #3 - Has never been true; and #4 - Somewhat, depending on where... The plethora of "Black Wall Streets" in the USA submitted as evidence...



Muhammad Rasheed - Joe Lovece wrote: “Capitalism is an economic system designed to generate profits.”

There are lots of systems that are designed to generate profits. Even communistic systems do that. The part about capitalism that makes it special is enabling individuals to own the profit-generating means of production and compete with each other in the markets.

Joe Lovece wrote: “Whatever you use the profits for is your business, whether to help people or enslave them.”

No, it’s what generated the profits that is your business. What you use the profits for is up to your individual choice. You can add them back into your business if you like.

Joe Lovece wrote: “Without ethics capitalism leads to evil actions by greedy people.”

It’s not a matter of not having ethics, but bringing foul ethics to the table. If you are a foul jackass, then that’s the kind of businessman you will be, and the opposite way, too. Blaming capitalism is like blaming the highway when a motorist decides to run into a family.

Joe Lovece wrote: “Debt is a capitalist structure.”

Our specific debt culture is controlled by a banking cartel that has no competition. That’s 100% the opposite of a capitalistic structure.

Joe Lovece - Saying establishing monopolies is not capitalism is like saying fish don't swim. Without government regulation, greedy capitalists will always suck the money out of the system and create slavery, poverty and debt. It is inevitable in capitalism. That is why we have government regulations, because unbridled capitalism must inevitably lead to ruin.

Muhammad Rasheed - Yumy Odom wrote: “Bro. Muhammad Rasheed, that definition you site is ‘capitalism’ in an idealistic vacuum.”

No, that’s what it actually is. You want to add stuff that vilifies it based on doctrinal misinformation.

Yumy Odom wrote: “That has never existed!”

That’s not true. That’s what people say when they don’t really know what it is or how it actually functions. The Federal government just prevented the Internet providers from forming a new cartel to stifle that market, and the effort was a success. The free market of the Internet highway is now a classic capitalistic system, and you are free to create an Internet business of your choosing, and freely compete with other Internet businesses if you wish. What kind of person you are when you do it is irrelevant. The same is true of the cell phone companies. They also attempted to form a cartel to stifle new competition, but the Obama Administration prevented it, and thus that market is now a classic capitalistic system.

Yumy Odom wrote: “YOU, I and many others would be millionaires if that were true! #1 - Truish;”

You are 100% free to start-up a cell phone and/or Internet provider business if you like. Or a health care provider company, too, since the Affordable Care Act also broke up that long-standing cartel. Now you can freely enter that field with your own start-up with nothing preventing you from competing directly with the big dogs. Nothing is keeping you from being a millionaire in those fields but you. Literally.

Yumy Odom wrote: “#2 - Not for the individual, generally, but perhaps for the ‘firm;’"

I’m a capitalist, and I am a sole proprietor, not a firm. So is the family down the street selling their chicken dinners to the members of their mosque/church.

Yumy Odom wrote: “#3 - Has never been true;”

You don’t know enough about this topic, Yumy.

Yumy Odom wrote: “and #4 - Somewhat, depending on where... The plethora of "Black Wall Streets" in the USA submitted as evidence...”

Citing examples of when capitalism is stifled as evidence of capitalism in practice is only a demonstration of misinformation.

Muhammad Rasheed - Joe Lovece wrote: “Saying establishing monopolies is not capitalism is like saying fish don't swim.”

smh. lol

My people, my people.

The life blood of capitalism is the Free Market. Without it, and the competition between businesses that it provides, there is no capitalism. The monopoly is when a business prevents other companies from doing business in a particular industry or sector; a cartel is when a group of business agrees to share an industry and together prevent new businesses from competing. When they do this, the Free Market is plugged up and it is no longer capitalism, it is now “corporatism.” That is the face of your true enemy. Capitalism is your friend, and the secret to your own economic power bloc. Corporatism is the enemy that has prevented you from entering certain fields for yourself (Like the Korean business cartel preventing you from competing on an equal market in black hair care, for example). NO one wants you competing with them in business on that level… do you think they WANT you to have another Black Wall Street? No way. That’s why they’ve been feeding you that foolishness that capitalism is your enemy. And unfortunately you bought into it. For generations now. I have no illusions that some guy on Facebook is going to cure you of that long-time indoctrination though. But capitalism really is exactly what my people need. It always has been. Once upon a time you knew that.

Joe Lovece wrote: “Without government regulation, greedy capitalists will always suck the money out of the system and create slavery, poverty and debt. It is inevitable in capitalism. That is why we have government regulations, because unbridled capitalism must inevitably lead to ruin.”

Again you are blaming capitalism, but the problem is the unscrupulous individual with a criminal mind. HE’S the problem, and why laws/regulations are needed. Do you expect the family down the street to eventually start throwing their neighbors into slavery once they make a certain amount in chicken dinner sales per month?

Joe Lovece - History shows us what happens when capitalism is not restrained. Blame individuals if you like, but we're talking about macro behavior, and on a macro level free markets always lead to slavery, poverty and debt.

Muhammad Rasheed - Joe, I have little patience for people that have convinced themselves that systems somehow have a life outside of the humans that are needed to run them. It's crazy to me.

Muhammad Rasheed - In fact, I'm sure it's some form of batshit paganism.

Joe Lovece - Systems do have a life of their own. Take the justice system for example. Laws and procedures must be followed equally and across the board. Everything must be done a certain way or a procedure cannot move forward. One person's opinion is irrelevant. For example, most people thought the Clinton Impeachment trial was ridiculous, but it was legal and had to be carried out. Capitalism is only as good as humans, and in human hands, unbridled capitalism leads to misery.

Muhammad Rasheed - Joe Lovece wrote: “Systems do have a life of their own. Take the justice system for example.”

Yes, let’s. Pull away all the humans, and will the gavel strike the podium all on its own? Who with prosecute, who will defend, if there are no humans around to perform the roles needed to make the system function?

Joe Lovece wrote: “Laws and procedures must be followed equally and across the board. Everything must be done a certain way or a procedure cannot move forward.”

Of course. And why? Because structure and order are needed for civilization to work. The criminal element always seeks to circumvent the laws, and it is he specifically that must be guarded against.

Joe Lovece wrote: “Capitalism is only as good as humans, and in human hands, unbridled capitalism leads to misery.”

The first half of that statement made perfect sense, and the last half went off into La-La Land again.

“Capitalism is only as good as humans, and in the hands of unscrupulous, morally bankrupt humans, capitalism will collapse.”

That’s better. Now it actually makes sense.

Joe Lovece - It makes perfect sense historically. Since there are, and always will be, too many morally bankrupt humans, capitalism is like an unguarded hen house that will be used to create misery to their benefit. Is your point that you are against regulation of the market? That led to our bank meltdown.

Joe Lovece - Also, you are coming very close to insulting me, and you don't want to do that.

Muhammad Rasheed - Joe Lovece wrote: “It makes perfect sense historically.”

No. When the system has been thoroughly sabotaged to no longer function as that system at all, it doesn’t make a lick of sense to continue to refer to it as that system, let alone vilify the system it no longer functions as.

Joe Lovece wrote: “Since there are, and always will be, too many morally bankrupt humans, capitalism is like an unguarded hen house that will be used to create misery to their benefit.”

lol The government’s job is to protect the integrity of the capitalistic structure. Those very morally bankrupt humans spend all of their greedy time trying to figure out the best way to make it not be a capitalistic society to their selfish benefit. Attacking capitalism itself is 100% wrong when it is actually the victim.

Joe Lovece wrote: “Is your point that you are against regulation of the market?”

Regulation of the Free Market is what Obama demonstrated in the Internet provider/cell phone examples mentioned above.

Joe Lovece wrote: “That led to our bank meltdown.”

There is NO free market in the finance game, consequently there is NO capitalism in it either. That is a cartel controlled industry, in partnership with the US government. Nothing about that system is capitalism. That relationship is directly responsible for the continuous recessions, bubbles, meltdowns, etc.

Joe Lovece - You don't have to keep repeating you point. I understand it. But I'm talking practical and you're talking theoretical. So do you agree that we need government regulation to stop the morally bankrupt humans?

Muhammad Rasheed - Joe Lovece wrote: "Also, you are coming very close to insulting me, and you don't want to do that."

Honestly you're insulting yourself by not actually educating yourself on this topic. You don't want to continue in that state.

Muhammad Rasheed - Joe, NOTHING you've said was practical. How is it practical to vilify a system that was directly sabotaged not to work anymore for the benefit of a few???

Muhammad Rasheed - ARGH!!!

Muhammad Rasheed - THIS right here is the barrier preventing my people from economic empowerment!

Joe Lovece - I'm insulting myself. I think you have crossed a line. Now look who's morally bankrupt. You actually did insult me earlier ("lala land") but I let it slide because I don't want a fuss. You want to have a discussion keep the editorializing out of it. You want to disagree with me fine, but be civil. And you contradict yourself. You admit that the system was never able to work as it should. In other, the theory of capitalism, not the actual, practical application which led to slavery, etc.

Muhammad Rasheed - Joe Lovece wrote: “I'm insulting myself.”

I pray that one day you may actually educate yourself on this topic, and look back on discussions like this and see what you actually sounded like to your future enlightened self.

Joe Lovece wrote: “I think you have crossed a line. Now look who's morally bankrupt. You actually did insult me earlier ("lala land") but I let it slide because I don't want a fuss. You want to have a discussion keep the editorializing out of it.”

Don’t pretend you have any power over me, Joe. I will type whatever I want. I will respond in whatever way I see fit. If you don’t like how I respond, then stop talking to me. Easy. If you keep talking to me then I’ll know you actually like it.

Joe Lovece wrote: “And you contradict yourself. You admit that the system was never able to work as it should.”

The system is designed to run by humans, just like every single system we develop. If the humans do not protect it from the criminal element, then it won’t function any more after it is sabotaged and destroyed. Continuing to refer to the now devastated system as “capitalism” when it no longer functions as such is ignorant.

Joe Lovece wrote: “In other, the theory of capitalism, not the actual, practical application which led to slavery, etc.”

It didn’t lead to slavery. People decided to buy/sell slaves in a market that supported it. When it was made illegal and checked, they could no longer do that business. Capitalism was not the bad guy in that scenario, it was the individuals stealing, buying and selling people who were the bad guys.

Joe Lovece - Type whatever you like, huh? So it's OK for you to insult me? What is your problem?

Muhammad Rasheed - You are the one deciding to be sensitive.

Muhammad Rasheed - You want to talk about a subject you need to actually learn about, and then have the nerve to be thin-skinned?

Muhammad Rasheed - Joe Lovece wrote: "Type whatever you like, huh?"

Yes. If you lot can type drivel like "capitalism led to slavery," then I can certainly type the counter to it.

Joe Lovece - You're the second guy today that insulted me without provocation instead of having a civil discussion and refused to own up to it. You're a capitalist all right. You don't know me, you don't know what I know. Disagree all you want, but if you're going to insult me than fuck off.

Muhammad Rasheed - It was actually more fun before you decided to get extra sensitive. I don't know where to put that really. Maybe you started to see how ignorant you were sounding, and this is your way of backing out of the discussion...?

Muhammad Rasheed - What are you? 12?

Joe Lovece - What part of fuck off don't you understand. You think that if I defend myself from attack that makes me childish. You're the child for not having an adult discussion in the first place.

Muhammad Rasheed - You're the child for holding on to ignorant nonsense as if it was truth. Please stop doing that.

Joe Lovece - Another insult. Classy. Are you one of those Ayn Rand assholes?

Muhammad Rasheed - No. I hate her.

Muhammad Rasheed - Why do you ask?

Muhammad Rasheed - Now you have me trying to process the idea if I don't vilify capitalism for something that it is not, then I must be into that Ayn Rand wench?

dafuq...?
 
Muhammad Rasheed - lol
 
Muhammad Rasheed - Really, how did you come up with that?
 
Muhammad Rasheed - Actually I REALLY want to ask what the source is for this treating capitalism as the bad guy mess, so I can finally track it down to its lair and beat the shit out of it like Joe Pesci, but it probably is coming from that Marxist bullshit.
 
Muhammad Rasheed - I'm not really mad at you, Joe. I apologize for going overboard, but this is an old pet peeve of mine. It's not personal. I know this is a hard up hill battle to free my folk from this craziness. Doesn't have anything to do with you.
 
Muhammad Rasheed - The plutocratic 1% hate capitalism because they hate competition for the wealth they hoard. The very last thing they want is competition from YOU. I fully expect them to help you win this painfully misguided war against capitalism you wage, and it will be a dark day indeed.

I advise you in all seriousness to let go of this idea you have about it, embrace it instead, and grow your businesses, working together to have a strong black economic power bloc. Please do not let the bad guys win. Capitalism is NOT your enemy. Please believe me.
 
Kamau Mkafele Mshale - M rah stop trollin. Also its amazing people defend capitalism like its synonymous with freedom when the biggest thing working against freedom today is big financial intrest. Racism would be half as bad if not for capitalism. All the incentives are in the wrong places

Muhammad Rasheed - I'm am not "trolling." You are part of a sub-demographic that has been generationally vilifying capitalism without cause. Tell me where you and Yumy are getting this info from. Can you even tell me? Why are you so sure that what you think you know about this topic is accurate? Even Joe gave himself away when he said, "Well, that's the theory of it, but the practical...!" and then immediately started saying stuff about this field that literally was technically untrue. This is a biased doctrine that you three have blind faith is true, while you hold no certain knowledge. Tell me where you are getting this stuff.

The "financial interests" LITERALLY work outside of the grid of capitalism. They used to work inside of capitalism, back before their partnership with the government began in 1913, but now they function as their own separate entity, that makes up its own closed-walled rules, in a classic cartel. There is ZERO competition with the Federal Reserve, therefore there is ZERO capitalism involved.

Everything you know about this topic is wrong. Stop calling me a damn troll.

Kamau Mkafele Mshale - well its trolling because with joe your actual intelligent conversation devolve into you calling him a baby.
I think you want to be academic about capitalism and your not acknowledging the realities.
the truth is everything we are talking about is theory vs. practice and practicality and more theory.
capitalism took power from lords, for people the problem is that just started a race to the top. there was no people incentive. which is why we have robber barons, unions, pollution, slavery and the fight continues today for, livable wages, fair housing and a whole host of things that would improve lives but not pickets and because of such do not get funded or enacted.
nothing i know bout this topic is wrong. i'm not the greatest with dates but i know where it came from and how it works. and it doesn't take a genius to look at current and past events and see its not panning out the way people thought, or it is for the few and that was all part of it to begin with. essentially capitalism has resulted in a power shift but the same status exist. rich with the ability to run things and poor working to live with their rights stomped on daily.

Drew G Watson - someone has been reading a bit too much of the end of history HAHAHA

Muhammad Rasheed - Kamau Mkafele Mshale wrote: “well its trolling because with joe your actual intelligent conversation devolve into you calling him a baby.”

I apologized for letting my frustration with butting my head against this wall take me over the top, so for you to tell me to “stop trollin’” well after the fact was kind of redundant, don’t you think?

Kamau Mkafele Mshale wrote: “I think you want to be academic about capitalism and your not acknowledging the realities.”

No. The truth of the matter is you don’t know about this topic, have been downloaded with a lot of pseudo-militant, semi-marxist nonsense about it, that you inherited from that old NOI talk, and you do not know how it functions. You’re just saying shit that you think is real. It is not.

Kamau Mkafele Mshale wrote: “the truth is everything we are talking about is theory vs. practice and practicality and more theory.”

You don’t know what parts are theory and which parts are the actual functions of the principles involved, and you reveal it more and more with every new post. Passionate, inflamed militant rhetoric without a solid knowledge base of facts IS childish. That’s what you all are demonstrating in this thread. You have no idea what capitalism actually is and how it functions, but you operate on blind faith that you do based on some inherited doctrine that you don’t even know where you picked it up from.

Kamau Mkafele Mshale wrote: “...capitalism took power from lords...”

This doesn’t even make sense. You’re subscribing something to it that it doesn’t even do, like it’s a pagan dark god or something. And I’m not supposed to consider something like that to be childish? If you’re so sure, then tell me exactly how capitalism “takes power from lords.” How does it work exactly? Break it down for me.

Kamau Mkafele Mshale wrote: “...for people the problem is that just started a race to the top.”

So? Capitalism functions on competition. Are you saying competition is inherently bad? Why?

Kamau Mkafele Mshale wrote: “...there was no people incentive.”

As a business owner, if your company didn’t have a “people incentive,” it’s because you didn’t want it to have one. It’s YOUR business after-all. What does that have to do with capitalism? Do you think the mom & pop shop in the neighborhood – who are ABSOLUTELY capitalists – don’t have a “people incentive” in their business? You have no idea how capitalism actually fits into reality; you’re just spouting nonsense blind faith doctrine from that poor mindset that thinks capitalism is a magical force that functions outside of human effort. It’s crazy.

Kamau Mkafele Mshale wrote: “...which is why we have robber barons, unions...”

The robber barons were monopolies, the ENEMY OF CAPITALISM!!! and the unions were one of the tools that gave power to the people to make that relationship between employer/employee better while inside of a broken, anti-capitalist system. As a monopoly with zero competition, the robber baron could rule over the people any way he wanted to, and the union helped keep his power in check, but it never stopped being a monopoly. Once again, everything you know about this topic is wrong.

Kamau Mkafele Mshale wrote: “...pollution...”

What the hell does pollution have to do with capitalism? Are you somehow equating “capitalism” with “Industrial Revolution smog imagery?” Are you? If this is accurate that I am sensing, then please justify this idea so I’ll know exactly what this is that I am fighting against.

Kamau Mkafele Mshale wrote: “...slavery...”

I know you all are fond of associating slavery with capitalism because you are programmed to do so, but do you think that there would be no enslaved humans in a communistic society? Everyone working under the all powerful State would be a slave to the handful of elitists that run it, and divvy out the fairly portioned rations you all crave. lol

Kamau Mkafele Mshale wrote: “...and the fight continues today for, livable wages...”

The livable wage controversy is directly related to capitalism not being present in those areas. If it was then there wouldn’t be a problem.

Kamau Mkafele Mshale wrote: “...fair housing...”

Define “fair housing” and explain to me how capitalism keeps us from having it. Go.

Kamau Mkafele Mshale wrote: “...and a whole host of things that would improve lives but not pickets and because of such do not get funded or enacted.”

“Getting funded” is the giveaway. Capitalism is a competition, a competition between production owners to take advantage of opportunities and provide goods/services to people that there is a market demand for. If there is no demand for it, the people are letting you know with their dollars how they feel about it. If you want to set up a system that provides something to them for free, that they didn’t ask for, nor wish to pay for, then that is your prerogative. Blaming capitalism as to why this isn’t already set up is crazy. Do you!

Kamau Mkafele Mshale wrote: “nothing i know bout this topic is wrong.”

EVERYTHING you think you know about this topic is wrong as hell, and it’s embarrassing.

Kamau Mkafele Mshale wrote: “i'm not the greatest with dates...”

It doesn’t matter. Those would be wrong, too.

Kamau Mkafele Mshale wrote: “...but i know where it came from and how it works.”

No you don’t. Try me. Where did it come from, and how does it work. Go.

Kamau Mkafele Mshale wrote: “...and it doesn't take a genius to look at current and past events and see its not panning out the way people thought”

lol What isn’t playing out the way who thought, Mshale?

Kamau Mkafele Mshale wrote: “...or it is for the few and that was all part of it to begin with.”

“The few” are the corporatist group of cartels and monopolies that shut down capitalism so no new blood would be able to join that club. You are NOT describing “capitalism” when you bitch about that stuff, and it is embarrassing when you blame it for things that its enemy performs against it.

Kamau Mkafele Mshale wrote: “...essentially capitalism has resulted in a power shift but the same status exist. rich with the ability to run things and poor working to live with their rights stomped on daily.”

You’re describing the corporatism vs capitalism conflict, see the corporatists abusing the system by sabotaging capitalism, and blaming capitalism for the problem.

And you KEEP doing it.



See Also:

Do Not Mistake Your Friend For Your Enemy

Believing in Success: Overcoming a Mindset of Poverty

The Downside of PC: Empty Words Alone Aren't Wide Enough to Cover Real Problems (pt 1 of 2)

Defense of the Gold Standard & the Discovery of Freedom, pt 1 of 7

The Civilizations of Man Through the Cycles of Time

McCarthy's War

Extra Cuddle Love... OF DEATH!

Tamara Rasheed - [shared meme]


Andy Wurtz - THAT....would come in handy

Tamara Rasheed - LOL

Muhammad Rasheed - WE call it "cuddle death." The bees call it "fuck that bitch."

Tamara Rasheed - LMFAO That's messed up

Jeremy Travis - What asshole came up with that term, though?

Sacrifice to the Snake God!

Muhammad Rasheed - [shared photo]


Muhammad Rasheed - Yeah, okay. They knew they didn't want that kid the very second they laid the newborn baby next to the apex super predator.
"Did it eat him yet?"
"No. What do you think is wrong?"
"Fuck. I don't know. I guess it's a sign from the gods."
"oh noooo..."
Abdur Rasheed - The kid must taste like pure curry.
Muhammad Rasheed - Do they use curry in China? I don't think so...
Abdur Rasheed - Oh. Well he must emit a powerful and distinctive smell of strong Kung fu.
Josh Smart - This is wrong on levels I can't even think about. Yuck.
Muhammad Rasheed - Josh they were trying to kill the newborn, and when they returned from dance class or whatever, were like, "Oh, the snake is an old friend! I KNEW he wouldn't hurt him!"
Abdur Rasheed - No they were NOT.
They were all like, "For the final stage of your training..."
Muhammad Rasheed - Psh. 
"We cannot afford condoms, but let's pray to the great snake gods we won't get pregnant. If we do, it just means they are hungry."
Abdur Rasheed - You make a compelling argument.

So Close and Yet, So Far: The Sequel?

Muhammad Rasheed - I know a lot of folk are expecting Hillary to take it in '16, but I remember watching Ted Kennedy's sons get interviewed during the 2012 Democratic Convention, and wondering if another charismatic guy would come out of nowhere and take it from her again...

Geoff Freeman - I'm British, please explain....

Muhammad Rasheed - Well, leading up to the Obama election, everyone pretty much just assumed Hillary Clinton would be the first female president in 2008, but Barrack Obama came out of nowhere and snatched the Democratic Nomination out of her very surprised hands to become president. A lot of Hillary supporters were confused as to how an unknown could do that to the highly favored to win Clinton, so much so, that many of them jumped ship from the Democrat side and supported McCain when he nominated a female to run as his vice president.

Now once again a lot of people are just assuming Hillary has it in the bag for the 2016 election, but what if one of the legendary members of fabled Camelot decided to make a strong bid?

Kennedy > Clinton

Who is Worst? Battle of the Terrorists

Raven Black – [shared meme]




Russell Odal - The clan doesn't do half the things ISIS does, they are two completely different worlds. You cannot get proper results when you compare apples to oranges. Fuck Islam and the klan and everyone who affiliates with either.

Raven Black - @Russell Odal… there are 1.5 BILLION Muslims in the world and maybe several thousand radical nut jobs., IF it was really all of Islam we would have far far greater problems.

Andrew Sadtler - You can't compare the clan to Isis? Are you serious? How are they different? The clan murdered and hung black people, Jews & gays with impunity. They were in many cases supported by the southern states. They based their beliefs off a religious book. They tried to eradicate an entire culture. How is that different then Isis again?

Andrew Sadtler - Heck; the clan even killed non Jewish white people who simply didn't agree with them

Benvolio Dietrich - Cause they are wearing Black

Benvolio Dietrich - Well I'm good cause I hate the Christian faith just as much as i hate the Muslim faith ayyyyyy

Russell Odal - You know what, you guys are right. The KKK is a much bigger problem than ISIS could ever be, not all Islamists are pieces of shit...

Raven Black - They both are senseless hate but one is given a pass and the other is not . The KKK does not reflect all Christians and Isis does not reflect all Islam.

Rachel Dwane - ISIS is also run by Americans

Russell Odal - *funded, but hollywood used to do the same with the klan to "combat the Italian gangs," or however they excused themselves. Last comment was also sarcastic as fuck, just saying.

Rachel Dwane - Funded to me also means run. Without the funds and media they wouldn't exist

Andrew Sadtler - Lol, what? Are you guys actually suggesting Isis is run by the US and that Hollywood funded the klan?

Please stop reading info wars!

Rachel Dwane - Please stop being brainwashed

Andrew Sadtler - Russel; we're not talking about the current day klan. Their numbers have diminished because our federal government got involved. Yet several klan members are now running for elected office all over the south. So we are seeing a resurgence.

Raven Black - Anderw is right but i think part of it is the grandkids of the KKK members in general dont have the same level of hate

Zach Testerman - I have been reading the Quran lately and have to say there is nothing good about that religion. It is evil and every one of its follower belongs in the middle east or dead. Not fond of Christians either, but their religion is better than the other two Abrahamic religions.

Russell Odal - I used to think that Christianity would reveal to the world how shitty religion is, and then I met Islam.

Zach Testerman - Yeah, I mean Christianity is definitely a pile of shit. It could have been something good if it was actually modeled around Jesus, but the early followers fucked up big time and it has just continued to be a mess. Mostly due to Paul writing majority of new testament. Quran is the joke though. Every other sentence is something bad, you will burn, praise Allah he is a forgiving. Its brainwashing bullshit and pretty sad anyone is willing to follow that crap. I always find it fun when western women defend Islam. It straight up says when a woman does something against Allah that she should be locked up for the rest of her life, but if a man does it than he can repent. When I have a woman I see her as my equal, fuck any philosophy that says she isn't.

Rachel Dwane - Bias behaviour.

Zach Testerman - You are correct Rachel, I am bias. Having read their books I decided what I read was some pretty bad stuff considering how they say to treat people. So now I have a healthy educated bias. You also are bias, but I wonder what your reasons are. When I study a subject, I approach with as little bias as possible. If I am leaning one way or the other I allow the possibility I am wrong or else I would not bother to look into in the first place. Often times I thought something before research and came out with the opposite view because I was willing to look at all sides when looking into it. When I am done I certainly have an opinion or bias on it one way or another, but it is based on the facts presented from the subject.

Kamajian Kamajinator - I have seen this before and it really isn't an accurate comparison. While only a few Muslims are committing the acts of terror, a significant number of moderate Muslims agree with or will not condemn what the terrorists are doing. While the vast majority of modern day Christians condemn the acts of the KKK. This is coming from a Christian who , understands probably better than most, why muslims are so angry. The situation is much more complex than this picture paints it to be.

Rachel Dwane - I also studied the Quran too. It paints a different picture to me. I also visited Tunisia many times and Egypt on my studies. I have been to kahoan. A place where all religions co exist in harmony and women have rights and wear what they choose.

Yes you are bias because you are American. You are brainwashed by what the news tells you and what your governments allows you to feel. You talk of education. Then educate your self without the American flag waving the fire from your ass

Unfollows*

Ashar Aziz - Rachel Dwane is 100% right on!!! I have been with her on her life journey and yes she studied in University of Liverpool and toured Tunisia and Turkey in blistering summer heat of 2008.

Kamajian Kamajinator - How many innocent families did we kill maim and destroy when the U.S. "Shocked and Awed" Iraq? and how do we as a nation condem terroism , after having decimating so many lives? If the killing isn't accomplished with hi-tech weaponry then it is an act of terror? THAT is the discussion /comparison we should be having. (IMO)

Muhammad Rasheed - Zach Testerman wrote: "Quran is the joke though. [...] It straight up says when a woman does something against Allah that she should be locked up for the rest of her life, but if a man does it than he can repent."

The Qur'an says several witnesses have to have actually seen the woman commit the crime in order for her to be punished, and even in that case, if she repents you have to let her go.

Raven Black - There was stoning women to death in the Christian and old testament , people forget that too.

Ashar Aziz - Faggotry is also condemned in bible. Anal sex with wife breaks marriage in islam. It's all about DAT BOOTY thing, my nigga!

Muhammad Rasheed - Kamajian Kamajinator wrote: "I have seen this before and it really isn't an accurate comparison. While only a few Muslims are committing the acts of terror, a significant number of moderate Muslims agree with or will not condemn what the terrorists are doing."

Here:  Reza Aslan - Anyone Who Asks Why Muslims Aren't Denouncing Attacks "Doesn't Own Google"

Kamajian Kamajinator wrote: "While the vast majority of modern day Christians condemn the acts of the KKK."

The "vast majority" of white Christians sided with the racist cops who gun down these unarmed black kids because of what they "probably" did in their pasts because of the black thug stereotypes they like to believe.

Kamajian Kamajinator wrote: "This is coming from a Christian who , understands probably better than most, why muslims are so angry."

lol Apparently not.

Kamajian Kamajinator wrote: "The situation is much more complex than this picture paints it to be."

That part is true.

Muhammad Rasheed - Ashar Aziz Faggotry wrote: "Anal sex with wife breaks marriage in islam."

"In Islam" or in some cultural laws?

Raven Black - Straight or gay a lot of relgions have issues with anal

Ashar Aziz - I am an atheist.  Islamic views on anal sex

Muhammad Rasheed - Raven Black wrote: "Straight or gay a lot of relgions have issues with anal"

"A lot of religions have issues with" is one thing, but what does the scripture say specifically? Any guy with a handful of beads can say whatever, but what did God say about it specifically?

Muhammad Rasheed - Ashar Aziz posted: "Islamic views on anal sex (Wiki)"

So the Qur'an strongly condemns male-on-male homosexual acts and literally says nothing at all against consenting anal sex between a husband and a wife, yet the people placed that restriction upon themselves. Interesting. The Muslims are turning themselves into the previous People of the Book by inventing things that were not restrictions (see: shellfish in the OT) and claiming the restrictions came from Allah. They should knock it off and confine the religious rules to what God actually did say and be free.

Kamajian Kamajinator - I am familiar with Reza Aslan, I have heard him speak on the news. He makes some valid points. He also draws some comparisons that I feel are biased. Still, the ratio of Muslims that condemn Islamic extremist is lower than Christian that condem the KKK. (Today) The real question then becomes does the Muslim world have good reason to support or at least be less critical of Islamic Terrorism? THAT is what we should be talking about. What are the real reason they are outraged with the U.S. ? and not trying to draw a comparison to the KKK.

Muhammad Rasheed - Kamajian Kamajinator wrote: "Still, the ratio of Muslims that condemn Islamic extremist is lower than Christian that condem the KKK. (Today)"

Please post the links to the facts that support this claim.

Rachel Dwane - Muslims worry a lot on pride and acts that could bring shame. By not fighting back the terrorist regimes they feel they aren't as tied to it so much. Silence is golden essentially

Muhammad Rasheed - Kamajian Kamajinator wrote: "The real question then becomes does the Muslim world have good reason to support or at least be less critical of Islamic Terrorism?"

Considering that for the vast majority of the last 1,500 years of Islamic history, the three Abrahamic faiths lived in peace with one another, the true "real question" is who is responsible for the current conflict, and who is it ultimately benefiting?

Kamajian Kamajinator - That ^ we def agree on.

Muhammad Rasheed - Rachel Dwane wrote: "Muslims worry a lot on pride and acts that could bring shame."

That sounds more like a cultural/ethnic trait than anything having to do with them being Muslim.

Muhammad Rasheed - The Semite tribes are notorious for being both nationalistic and over-the-top prideful.

Kamajian Kamajinator - I mean let's be honest here, If an American Christian like myself can understand why Islam has had to resort to terrorism, then most muslims, even moderate ones would most likely feel the same. My point is we must condemn violence consistently regardless of the reasons. Attacking Iraq is as wrong as the acts of terrorist organizations. I take issue with the picture because I feel the comparison over simplifies a complex issue. I'll hunt down those poll numbers….I really need to get some work done tho haha

Muhammad Rasheed - Kamajian Kamajinator wrote: "I mean let's be honest here..."

Let's.

Kamajian Kamajinator wrote: "If an American Christian like myself can understand why Islam has had to resort to terrorism..."

DO you understand, Kamajian? Tell us then your opinion as to why "Islam has had to resort to terrorism."

Kamajian Kamajinator wrote: "...then most muslims, even moderate ones would most likely feel the same."

Is it possible, perhaps, that the narrative involved is actually different than what an self-confessed American Christian might believe?

Kamajian Kamajinator wrote: "My point is we must condemn violence consistently regardless of the reasons."

Really? So if someone is using violence to defend themselves from a savage aggressor trying to destroy them, should we condemn the violence of the one being attacked? This is absurd. A basic level of insight, understanding and discernment is fundamental in social critique. If we prove to lack these tools, then we should focus on other items that are closer to what we are actually able to grasp and understand.

Kamajian Kamajinator wrote: "Attacking Iraq is as wrong as the acts of terrorist organizations. I take issue with the picture because I feel the comparison over simplifies a complex issue."

The meme photo above is 100% correct in it's message. I would only expect a card-carrying klansman to take issue with it.

Kamajian Kamajinator wrote: "I'll hunt down those poll numbers….I really need to get some work done tho haha"

Is this the part where we are being honest? lol

Kamajian Kamajinator - dude you don't need to copy everything I write , just reply. I am capable of figuring out which points you are addressing . sheesh! I needed to qualify , violence against civilians or civilian populations.. I thought that was understood. Clearly if someone is shoot at you then you get to shoot back. I do understand, in as much as I know a bit about the United States (and Europe's ) meddling and involvement in the region since WW1. and to that point I would ask So now in addition to elaborating on and justifying the points we disagree on. You want me to justify and elaborate on things we also agree on??? I wish I had the time for this discussion. I imagine we might agree on more than we disagree on.

Muhammad Rasheed - Kamajian Kamajinator wrote: "dude you don't need to copy everything I write , just reply."

Concentrate on your own writing style, while I concentrate on mine. I don't need your critique. Thank you.

Muhammad Rasheed - Kamajian Kamajinator wrote: "sheesh! I needed to qualify , violence against civilians or civilian populations..."

It's better to make sure you are clear on what you are attempting to convey, and not take for granted that a total stranger can "fill in the cracks" in your argument. Before I started responding in this thread, I read a LOT of nonsense here. I take nothing for granted.

Kamajian Kamajinator - here is a Pew poll which asks Muslim populations throughout the world their views on terrorist groups . As you can see the unfavorable rating is hovering in the 40%-60% range. If you can find polls of Christians in that same percentage range that find the acts of the KKK as unfavorable I will be more than happy to concede. I'm actually curious what you end up finding.

Kamajian Kamajinator - I would add that I was ostracized severely after 9/11 for urging people I had discussions with to look at the history of the wests involvement in the middle east before jumping to conclusions about the reasons for the attack. Simply asking people to research the history apparently made me un-American.

Kira Marburger - Bottom line. Religion is a fabulous way to control minds. I am spiritual and love God to the tips of my toes. But I just can't bring myself to follow a man made religion. "In God we trust. All others must pay cash."

Kira Marburger - Rachel Dwane, that's so cool about your travels. I was in Tunisia as a child, lived in India as a teen. I haven't been to Egypt yet. Maybe next Christmas. Fabulous time to be American touring Middle Eastern countries, eh?

Rachel Dwane - Indeed

Zach Testerman - Rachel, I am not brainwashed by the American flag. I would be happy to see this government government killed for what they do to us and other people in this world. My family has been here since the revolution and the country today is not what my ancestors risked or payed with their lives for. I look into things on my own and unlike the majority of people these days I do not ignore what is right in front of me simply because it is not politically correct. As for people talking about women being able to repent in Islam. I read the passage and there was no repenting for the woman, only a life locked in a house. Their countries laws may not be that way, but their religion is. From what I have seen if they follow the religion to a T it is not a nice one. As others have said many of the 'good' Muslims still wont condemn the actions of the extremist. They do not belong in the western world. If they want good lives they need to take their own countries. Allowing good ones in our countries still allows the bad ones in.

Russell Odal - MUSLIM STUDENT CHALLENGES JEWISH PROFESSOR, HE SHUTS HER UP ON THE SPOT (video)

Rafael Z Gomar - Both be representative of their extreme religious beliefs. Enuff said!!!

Rafael Z Gomar - The Caliphate of the Ottoman empire allowed religious freedoms, and science to florish. Today's lslamic religious leaders are more like Christians of the medieval era than the Ottoman or Berbers of Spain in the medieval times.

Rafael Z Gomar - BTW RELIGION SUCKS PERIOD! !!

Kyle Root - Numbers, and their claims.

Raven Black - Kyle Root when the Catholics went to years zero, they wanted to destroy all knowledge for the people to start over again. If it was not for the Muslims the classic Greek writings would have been lost.

Russell Odal - There are three kinds of people in this world... Culture bearers, culture creators, and culture destroyers. I think we know who's who here.

Pastor Ryan - Really? Smh

Cat Scratch Fever -



Muhammad Rasheed - Kamajian Kamajinator wrote: "Still, the ratio of Muslims that condemn Islamic extremist is lower than Christian that condem the KKK. [...] here is a Pew poll which asks Muslim populations throughout the world their views on terrorist groups . As you can see the unfavorable rating is hovering in the 40%-60% range. If you can find polls of Christians in that same percentage range that find the acts of the KKK as unfavorable I will be more than happy to concede. I'm actually curious what you end up finding.”

I’m unclear as to what it is that you’d be conceding. To me, as I mentioned above, the true question here is who is responsible for the current conflict between the two groups considering they’ve lived in peace among one another for the vast majority of their time sharing this planet. To you, the meat of the whole argument is hinged upon whether the average Muslim approves of “islamist” terrorism versus the average Christian approving of the KKK’s terrorism.

It’s an odd comparison considering the majority of Christians are brown people who the KKK would hate anyway – people from Latin America and Africa. Naturally I would reasonably expect the KKK’s potential prey to condemn them if they knew about that history and their historical track record at all. So in order for your comparison to make sense fundamentally, I would have to confine the Christian population poll specifically to White American Christians. I couldn’t find a specific poll asking that demographic what they thought of the KKK, so I needed to look to other sources that would provide some insight into that mindset.

1.) In the scientific, peer-reviewed research work entitled “Gutsell, J. N., & Inzlicht, M. Empathy constrained: Prejudice predicts reduced mental simulation of actions during observations of outgroups,” scientist uncovered an interesting phenomenon. White people seem to lack the ability to empathize with black people when watching them perform routine tasks; their brains fail to react the way they do when they watch their own people do the same tasks. They might as well be watching paint dry. This is the effect when operating at their default level, and it is curiously significantly amplified when the white person tested is actively prejudiced against the non-white person he/she was observing. This means that despite the “we are all one race!” and “all lives matter!” defensive responses to being confronted with the fruits of western institutionalized racism, they obviously don’t really feel that way. The only people who matter to them are themselves. They consider themselves to be the “normal” humans, while everyone else are “other.”

2.) Among other things, which includes the generational psychological damage cause from America’s racism legacy, one of the reasons why White Christian Americans may lack empathy towards non-whites is the fact that various white supremacist hate groups have targeted them for grooming for recruitment since Reconstruction, when the KKK formed. Especially going after White Christians in the mid-western heartland of the country, these marketing efforts have by no means been casual. According to “The Growth of Hate Groups,” the oft-sourced chapter from Osha Gray Davidson’s book “Broken Heartland,” white supremacist hate groups not only have targeted White Christians for grooming-recruitment, but have actively aided those communities economically, provided greatly needed community-building as needed, the way the Nation of Islam and the original Black Panther groups would help the poor Black American communities. In fact, white hate groups have literally done more good for those communities of whites than either Republicans or Democrats. Consequently, White Christians have been traditionally very open to listen to certain rhetoric from those groups, and it has saturated itself into their cultural speak. Whites who do not consider themselves racist will still think that “blacks are illiterate thieves who would rather be on welfare than work, taking food from the mouths of hard working whites” and other classic hate group belief talking points. This is normal talk from the average White Christian as seen in a casual scroll down my FB newsfeed every day. So although there are no specific polls asking them how they feel about the KKK, I suspect (fairly based on the available evidence) that the greater part of that demographic is pro-KKK terrorist activities, which explains the large amount of white apologists supporting Darren Wilson’s version of events in that high profile case, as an example.

Muhammad Rasheed - Kira Marburger wrote: “Bottom line. Religion is a fabulous way to control minds.”

What facts can you provide to support that claim?

Rafael Z Gomar wrote: “BTW RELIGION SUCKS PERIOD! !!”

lol It “sucks” in what way exactly? So that we’re clear.