You got it right, that's the agenda as I see it, make racism seem so outrageous and pervasive that people act....but only white on black racism exists or matters in that agenda. If you have such a biased, racist agenda, it detracts from the message that racism is bad and makes you sound ignorant.
Yeah....he argued once that he believes in racist faucets as a real issue of institutional racism, not a function of physics, even when it was explained scientifically....but I sound ignorant.
And through the filter of that agenda any white vs black interaction that's not the white person kissing ass is obviously pure racial malice and bias, and the only possible explanation is because all white people are overtly racist....and I sound ignorant.
And outright lies are fine with that agenda, including 100% bullshit stories like the one about racist gangs kidnapping a kid that obviously never happened, and dozens of others that are never corrected when debunked...and I sound ignorant.
I've posted dozens and dozens of videos about racism, but I do it because I think it's a real problem not dog poo I get to shove someone's nose in, so I'm careful to not equate bullshit, lies, exaggeration, hyperbole, and other falsehoods with it, because that gives racists ammunition to "prove" racism is dead and only alive in some people's minds and agendas, and a license to ignore true stories of real racism as more of the same. Doing THAT is ignorant and harmful.
That's true no matter what the agenda is, and is especially misguided and ill advised when it's about something important.
*facepalm

So many red herrings, cries of "wolf!", that I'm hyper suspicious.

According to this report/video, it's about accident vs intentional, not white vs black, not man vs woman.
Both cases went to grand juries, so the seeming disparity is not so institutionalized either, maybe cultural, maybe fact based.
Also, the father's charges likely to be dropped to culpable negligence or nothing.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3606895/Mississippi-man-released-jail-daughters-death.html

Edit:apparently he pled to manslaughter for probation.
I think you are off the rails @C-note.

He could have been a great president, lifting up his people with encouragement instead he just help them create divisions towards the rich and whites VS black and put people more welfare instead of creating jobs.

>> ^Sigh:

At its core yes, but aside from the last 20 minutes of the finale, noone knew it was religious crap. I watched it and was still always hoping it was aliens. Man did they fool me!
>> ^honkeytonk73:
So at the core... Lost = Religious Bullshit
Glad I didn't watch it.



A lot of US produced (audience targeted) entertainment digresses to some spiritual nonsense. The film '9' for example had a highly interesting concept. It could have been FAR better, but in the end it just digressed to silly religious bunk. They have a target audience.. and a majority of that audience believes in magic, demons under the ground, and flying humanoids in the sky. So it caters to their their need to define their simplistic dichotomous existence of good vs evil, white vs black, friend or enemy of Jesus. Many are incapable of seeing the world as it is.. gray, ill defined, and indiscriminately cruel.

Though I do admit, the fantasy themes around religious myth (of whatever sect it may be from) CAN make for some interesting fiction. Because, that is exactly what it is. Fiction.

as a south african, this is a horrible to admit but this is _NOT_ a misrepresentation of african culture. sure it may not be an universal opinion but considering our high rape rate here (1 in 4 women can expect to be raped) I actually find it quite insulting that you guys are comparing this to 'prison rape' or say this claim is racist.

let me fill you in, you have several 'traditional' cultures for whom it's a 'right' to sleep with a women. they are 'supposed' to be raped if they refuse, irrespective of their being lesbian or not. t

his isn't a south african thing tho. it's a 'african' traditionalist culture thing. not a result of 'white' vs 'black' this is just how it's been and what is done , since the time of shaka zulu. (read up on traditional zulu culture , you'll wanna throw up at points and at other's you'll be dreaming of the the nobal savage)

there is a culture "war" that is going on at the moment here.. 'modern' 'westernised' african culture vs. 'traditionalist' culture.

traditionalism is winning just look at who president zuma is , what is attiude is to aids and women. hell, he literally said in court in _HIS_ rape "case" that 'when a women is wares a skirt' she's asking for it. she has no right to deny a man.
and this man is an apartheit war hero , viva le revolution..

i bet i can do someting very few of you can do .. name 6 women in my imidiate every day enviroment that have been raped/gang raped for the sake of raping , no 'justice' no legal recourse ... nothing .. because the cops are way too closely tied to the communities and because they are just as tradtitionalist as the government pretends not to be. no evidence, it goes missing, no treatment because the community clinics think you 'deserved' it. hell, you ever wonder why aids is so high here???

the 2010 viva world cup is going to be truely interesting , i wonder how many of your women are going to be raped and what excuses will be used to explain it away. (american / eurpeans)

But arsenault185, you seem to be of the steadfast opinion that evolution states that if ANYTHING comes along that is better, then it WILL become the dominant form for that given being. Not so... there have been many cases where some animal/human had a change which was for the better, and did make them improved compared to those around them, but that alone doesn't mean it'll become dominant. If it alone doesn't make for a good enough change then they can be killed off just like any other one of their tribe/group/herd.

It's only when some change happens and it is also passed on to enough children and those children keep passing alone said trait (ie. it has to be the sort that can be passed along), that it will start to become dominant.

And again, just because beings in one particular area starts developing in some way because that suits their climate/habitat/conditions better, it doesn't mean that all of those beings across the globe have to at one time... that's how we have different species and types of all sort of animals. African vs Indian Elephants, White vs Black Rhinos... black people vs white people vs small and hardy vs tall and lanky.

The same initial population of an animal spread all over the world and given enough time apart, will become a collection of different each animals better suited to their individual areas.

It's really not a case of... "Right... Monkeys came first, then People, so all monkeys must now be dead because we're better."

And it's not a case of "Everything about us is better than everything in those beings before us"... some things just became less important during some part of our evolution and just weren't needed. Elephants used to be Mammoths, used to have hair... because they lived in an ice age. Now they don't because they live in hotter areas... but that's not to say if you put an elephant in the cold it wouldn't do better if it had hair, but that's not where elephants live, so they no longer have it.

If Mammoths weren't hunted/killed off then they may still be around along with Elephants... two species related but not the same.

You seem to have interest in evolution, but haven't really given the time to look into it properly, I suggest you do, there are many great books out there that go into wonderful detail but in a very entertaining way...