Kanye West causes controversy on NBC

[Cozmo D]

Could you supply some links please? You will notice that I always do. I am not interested in the argument, I am interested in the discussion and the truth.

http://www.nola.com/newslogs/breakingtp/in..._06.html#077479

This is a link to a story about ONE guy shooting at helicopters from his apartment in Algiers. He wasn't even in New Orleans.

http://www.nola.com/t-p/ - Times-Picayune Archive

This is a link to the newspaper, but not any story.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/n..._nm/notebook_dc

This is a link to a reporter's story about his personal experiences. The full extent of the violence that he reportedly witnesses is someone apparently throwing a bottle of milk. Oh yeah, it was full. I hope you notice the apparent paranoid tone of his writing. He obviously went there expecting the worse from the people, and even when he didn't find it he still painted them all negatively. Saying things like "the crowd was threatening but not yet violent" and blaming someone smashing the windows to his car and stealing his camera and laptop on "the crowd". I wouldn't leave my camera and laptop in my car in front of my house, and I live in one of the most high-rent areas of NYC. Yet, you will notice that he doesn't report ANY of the many bodies that he sees as having died by violent means.

I would love to see a link on this story about the bodies, as I have yet to find anything like it.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/9/6/213759/1319.

This is a link that I provided, that goes much further to prove my point than all of the links that you have provided so far put together prove yours.

I would still like that link to the bodies in the freezer.

As for the "we", when a person is part of a group it is quite common for them to refer to that group's experiences as "we", whether they were there or not. This does not make it necessarily first person.

As for the white shirt, I highly doubt that anybody running around in a filthy city for 4 days without being able to wash would still be wearing a shirt easily definable as white from a distance. My "wading in filth" remark was more figurative than literal.

I think I've made my point on these issues. I won't continue.

As for my usage of first person, most of the people on the ground that you quoted were relaying things that they were told. Regardless, it's not my statements that are in question here, but what TRULY happened in New Orleans. You write better than I do, hell, you write better than my lawyers, but this is not a debate. If what you're after is to be voted the smartest person here, you can have my proxy.

I don't wish to get into semantics, so I'll leave it at that.

Look... if your aim is to win the argument, fine...you win. I'm not interested in it, nor am I interested in your continued attempt to belittle me through your words. If you have PROOF of this rampant, rampaging violence, murder and mayhem, then please post it. If all you wish to do is catch errors in my phrasing or verbiage, go ahead and enjoy yourself, by yourself.

My goal is neither to "win an argument" nor to belitte anyone. It is to discuss opinions, come to agreement when agreement is present and to discuss differences where there are differences. If my goal were to simply win an argument, I would have stopped posting on this thread out of exasperation 22 pages ago.

By saying things like:

Sad atttempt... and the shooter could have been white. Maybe that would have changed your view on the story.

you are obviously saying that I have a racial or racist viewpoint, which is belittling, insulting, and completely non-evident in anything and everything that I have written so far. It also again tells me that you have completely ignored every point that I have made on race within the American psyche. Before our eyes the evidence is bearing me out though, will you continue to ignore that as well?

[Chief]

You know what would satiate my thirst here.......Is what the State and City records will have. Its open to the public, and usually will be able to access through the internet. I have a tough time buying into everything any news medium puts up. They all have this nasty habit of sensationalizing everything to bump viewership up. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[Cozmo D]

You know what would satiate my thirst here.......Is what the State and City records will have. Its open to the public, and usually will be able to access through the internet. I have a tough time buying into everything any news medium puts up. They all have this nasty habit of sensationalizing everything to bump viewership up. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Exactly! And you would think that the media wouldn't hesitate to jump all over any evidence of all of the murder and mayhem that they themselves were reporting. :shrug:

[Hero1]

yeah I wouldn't be relying to heavily on the news media :hmm:

[Cozmo D]

OK,

I had no luck finding the original article even on the paper's website, but I did find this C&P of it posted by someone in their forum. Let's examine it.

Tuesday, September 06, 2005

The Times Picayune

Mayor says Katrina may have claimed more than 10,000 livesBodies found piled in freezer at Convention Center

By Brian ThevenotStaff writer

Arkansas National Guardsman Mikel Brooks stepped through the food service entrance of the Ernest N. Morial Convention Center Monday, flipped on the light at the end of his machine gun, and started pointing out bodies.

"Don't step in that blood - it's contaminated," he said. "That one with his arm sticking up in the air, he's an old man."Then he shined the light on the smaller human figure under the white sheet next to the elderly man.

"That's a kid," he said. "There's another one in the freezer, a 7-year-old with her throat cut."

He moved on, walking quickly through the darkness, pulling his camouflage shirt to his face to screen out the overwhelming odor."There's an old woman," he said, pointing to a wheelchair covered by a sheet. "I escorted her in myself. And that old man got bludgeoned to death," he said of the body lying on the floor next to the wheelchair.

Brooks and several other Guardsmen said they had seen between 30 and 40 more bodies in the Convention Center's freezer. "It's not on, but at least you can shut the door," said fellow Guardsman Phillip Thompson.

The scene of rotting bodies inside the Convention Center reflected those in thousands of businesses, schools, homes and shelters across the metropolitan area. The official death count from Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana was 71 as of Monday evening, but that included only those bodies that had been brought to a make-shift morgue in St. Gabriel.

Nearly a full week after Hurricane Katrina, a rescue force the size of an invading army had not yet begun the task of retrieving the bodies Sunday. What's more, officials appeared to have no plan.

Daniel Martinez, a spokesman for FEMA working on Interstate 10 in eastern New Orleans, said plans for body recovery "are not being released yet."

Dozens of rescue workers questioned Monday said they knew of no protocol or collection points for bodies; none said they had retrieved even one of the many corpses seen floating in neighborhoods around the city as they searched for survivors.

Scores of rescue workers this week repeated the same mantra, over and over: We can't worry about the dead; we're still trying to save the living.

But as rescue teams across the city said they had checked nearly every house for survivors, the enormity of the death that lay in Hurricane Katrina's wake came into sharp focus even as the plans for taking care of the dead remained murky.

Mayor Ray Nagin, addressing the potential body count for the storm for the first time, said the storm may have claimed more than 10,000 lives.

In a news conference Monday morning, Deputy Chief Warren Riley said his department was "not responsible for recovery."

"We don't have a body count, but I can tell you it's growing. It's growing," he said.

As the rescue missions covered more and more ground but yielded fewer survivors, New Orleans Police Deputy Chief Steve Nicholas said that the time has come to start dealing with the dead.

"I know we're still rescuing people, but I think it's time we start pulling out the bodies," he said.

The highest concentration of casualties from Hurricane Katrina likely will come in the Lower 9th Ward, St. Bernard Parish, areas first inundated on Aug. 29 with floodwaters that engulfed second story homes in minutes. New Orleans also will likely see mass casualties, New Orleans Police Capt. Timothy Bayard said.

"We're going see a lot more bodies out of New Orleans East than we anticipated," he said.

In just one subdivision, Sherwood Forest, survivors who showed up to the Convention Center on Monday said police told them roughly 90 people in the subdivision had died.

In St. Bernard, 22 bodies were found lashed together. Officials surmised the drowning victims had tried to stay together to keep themselves from being washed away in the storm.

Lt. Governor Mitch Landrieu said "more than a thousand" people had died in St. Bernard. "When the death toll comes out, it's going to be a jolt for everybody," he said. "I'll be surprised if the casualties in St. Bernard are less than a thousand."

Even Uptown near the river, one of the few spots of dry land, a body lay in front of a white wooden shotgun double at 4732 Laurel St. The body of an older woman lay under a gray blanket, pinned down at the corners by brick and slate, adorned with a plastic-wrapped flower bouquet. Above her, a yellow cardboard sign quoting John 3:16 had been taped to the window.

Alcede JacksonRest in PeaceIn the loving arms of Jesus

Given the length of time many had been dead, and in the water, some of the bodies already might be unrecognizable, and some may never be recovered.

Many trapped by flood waters in shelters found their own ways of dealing with those who died in their midst.

Now, though the story says that National Guardsmen had seen "between 30 and 40 more bodies in the Convention Center's freezer", I think that we can all agree that this is hardly a scientific count. Could be 20 bodies, or perhaps 50. I would bet that study into the causes of death to these people would be pretty minimal as well. Yet, even with all of this opportunity to over-exagerate the violent deaths, only TWO are mentioned. One, an old man who was reportedly a bludgeoning victim, and two, an unseen 7-year-old girl with her throat cut. Now, I guess that the family may have been on hand to tell everyone exactly how old this little girl with the cut throat was. However, it's funny that the most talked about victim of violence in this whole thing's age is known, but not her name? Where is her grief-stricken and outraged family? And what happened to her body, did somebody steal it out of the freezer? Could it be that the National Guardsman was just repeating what he was told? After all, everybody knew that a 7-year-old girl had been raped and had her throat cut, and that they threw her body in the freezer with the others.

Again, New Orleans Police superintendent Edwin Compass said "We don't have any substantiated rapes." Is he lying? He's waiting for victims to come forward? That victim was already laying in that freezer, waiting to tell her story...what happened to her? Might I also refresh our memories that the paper that interviewed the Police superintendent also reported that "While many claim they happened, no witnesses, survivors or survivors' relatives have come forward. Nor has the source for the story of the murdered babies, or indeed their bodies, been found." Huh? Are they lying?

I have no problem believing that the reported atrocities may have happened. I know all about the inhumanity of man. But, I have even less problems believing rumors may run so rampant as to be believed to be true by the masses, especially in times of turmoil and tragedy. And I have even less problems still believing that the media would sensationalize unsubstantiated rumors as tragic fact, even to the point of fabrication. It is MUCH more common than most may think.

If we all open our minds and nostrils in this matter and take a deep objective breath, it's pretty easy to tell that it stinks!

[Hero1]

a lot of people were lost missing etc though so the family not coming forward isnt a shock..maybe the rest of the family is dead? maybe they think she is dead? I agree a lot of stories being told its hard to get the truth in such a situation..

[Cozmo D]

a lot of people were lost missing etc though so the family not coming forward isnt a shock..maybe the rest of the family is dead? maybe they think she is dead? I agree a lot of stories being told its hard to get the truth in such a situation..

If the family is dead who told everybody how old the girl was? If the girl told everybody herself why didn't she tell them her name as well? And, if this girl really exists, HOW COME THERE IS NO SIGN OF HER BODY???

:shrug:

[MaxFly]

you are obviously saying that I have a racial or racist viewpoint, which is belittling, insulting, and completely non-evident in anything and everything that I have written so far. It also again tells me that you have completely ignored every point that I have made on race within the American psyche. Before our eyes the evidence is bearing me out though, will you continue to ignore that as well?

I haven't said that you have a racist viewpoint nor have I tried to hint or allude to it. I am saying that you have been decidedly one sided on these matters. I posted a "first person statement" of which you said "not ONE" existed. Choosing to ignore the fact that it was indeed a first person statement, you said in response...

Hmmm... guy with a white shirt. Must have been the only white shirt in New Orleans, considering everybody there had been wading in filth for days. Strange that he could make out the guy in the white shirt but the National Guard couldn't get a bead on the guy. I wonder if this guy actually saw all of this himself, or if he's basically repeating something that was told to him by his colleagues.

As if everyone in New Orleans has only one shirt and has been wading in filth with that one shirt for days. You also tried to explain away the person's use of first person pronous by saying that he could have been repeating something a colleague related to him. You say that there are no "first person statements," you get one, and then you try to explain it away, along with others? And then you ask me if I'm just trying to win an argument?

Earlier, you said...

BUT, these people were overwhelmingly black. So, it is easy to believe all of these horrible rumors about what was going on...

But in this account, the shooter's race wasn't even mentioned. There are no racial overtones in this person's story. We are only left with the notion that someone shot at innocent people. Now if he was white, maybe that would have changed your view on this story that this and other crimes were just rumors that were easy to believe because blacks were involved. If the person were white, you couldn't claim this.

Concerning race in the American psyche... Let me make myself crystal clear.

Last year, during a riot on the night the Red Sox clinched the pennant, a college age student was shot in the eye with a pellet containing tear gas. The student died. No one else was shot. No one else was killed. The student was white. If the student had been black, the black community's perception would have been that racism or race played some part.

Officials called on Boston University to suspend students of the school who took part in the riot. The majority of students that took part in the riot were white. If the majority of students that had taken part in the riots were black, the black community would have looked upon the call for suspensions as harsh and prejudiced.

A few years ago, the party hours at Harvard University were cut back. Residents in the community claimed that music was often too loud and that students were often loud, drunk, and disorderly late at night. Upon receiving word, the initial perception of the situation in the black community was that this had something to do with race... that was until they found out that all school organizations that threw parties were affected.

Race would have had nothing and had nothing to do with these situations whether whites or blacks were involved, but that's not the way the black community would perceive it.

What is my point? You are correct in saying that ideas of race and racism are imbedded in the American psyche and that racism can exist without racist. You arrogantly claimed that I couldn't "wrap my head around the concept" even though I previously agreed with the concept that this matter deals mainly with perception. Thank you for your kind words.

But this is the point I made.

While racism is so deeply imbedded in the American psyche that it can exist without racists, it can also exist without racism itself in any form whatsoever. Perceptions of racism can exist where there are no racists, where there is no racism or prejudice, conscious or subconscious, no alterior motives... They can exist when a situation has absolutely nothing to do with racism at all as in the examples above. All it takes is for whites and blacks to be involved and for blacks to be affected negatively. Oftentimes, all it takes if for whites and blacks to be involved, period.

[Hero1]

If the girl told everybody herself why didn't she tell them her name as well?

:shrug:

ha you got me there.. hmm :sick:

[MaxFly]

If we all open our minds and nostrils in this matter and take a deep objective breath, it's pretty easy to tell that it stinks!

So getting back to the reason that we are talking about violence and crime... does it stink enough that the govenor of Louisiana shouldn't have given her shoot to kill orders. This is where this whole debate about crime originated. We've gone far and wide, but we come back to the main question...

[Cozmo D]

you are obviously saying that I have a racial or racist viewpoint, which is belittling, insulting, and completely non-evident in anything and everything that I have written so far. It also again tells me that you have completely ignored every point that I have made on race within the American psyche. Before our eyes the evidence is bearing me out though, will you continue to ignore that as well?

I haven't said that you have a racist viewpoint nor have I tried to hint or allude to it. I am saying that you have been decidedly one sided on these matters. I posted a "first person statement" of which you said "not ONE" existed. Choosing to ignore the fact that it was indeed a first person statement, you said in response...

Hmmm... guy with a white shirt. Must have been the only white shirt in New Orleans, considering everybody there had been wading in filth for days. Strange that he could make out the guy in the white shirt but the National Guard couldn't get a bead on the guy. I wonder if this guy actually saw all of this himself, or if he's basically repeating something that was told to him by his colleagues.

As if everyone in New Orleans has only one shirt and has been wading in filth with that one shirt for days. You also tried to explain away the person's use of first person pronous by saying that he could have been repeating something a colleague related to him. You say that there are no "first person statements," you get one, and then you try to explain it away, along with others? And then you ask me if I'm just trying to win an argument?

I wasn't trying to explain away anything, I was trying to point out other possibilities. As for the first person thing, it was not an important point, though I did try to show you where there was a POSSIBILITY that the example you cited was not first person. I will concede that point if you wish, it still means nothing towards the totality of the assessment.

Earlier, you said...

BUT, these people were overwhelmingly black. So, it is easy to believe all of these horrible rumors about what was going on...

But in this account, the shooter's race wasn't even mentioned. There are no racial overtones in this person's story. We are only left with the notion that someone shot at innocent people. Now if he was white, maybe that would have changed your view on this story that this and other crimes were just rumors that were easy to believe because blacks were involved. If the person were white, you couldn't claim this.

No, that is NOT the way that my mind works, though I'm starting to suspect that maybe it's the way that YOURS does. My reason for DOUBTING these stories has NOTHING to do with ANYBODY'S skin color, it has to do with an almost COMPLETE lack of collaborating EVIDENCE!!! I deal in FACTS!!! Now, you tell me, what are your reasons for BELIEVING them?

Concerning race in the American psyche... Let me make myself crystal clear.

Last year, during a riot on the night the Red Sox clinched the pennant, a college age student was shot in the eye with a pellet containing tear gas. The student died. No one else was shot. No one else was killed. The student was white. If the student had been black, the black community's perception would have been that racism or race played some part.

You're absolutely right, and if the shooter had been black, the white community would've thought either the same thing, or that it had been a racially motivated robbery. So, what's your point?

Edit: After re-reading this I realized that the shooter must have been a police officer, which changes the circumstances. So, you're saying that if it was the 1 black student amongst all of these white ones the black community would have suspected race played a part, which is correct. However, if it was one white student amongst mostly black ones, the white community would have thought that he was probably shot by mistake, or that the poor kid had fallen under the influence of these black kids, or that he deserved what he got for running with the black students in the first place.

Officials called on Boston University to suspend students of the school who took part in the riot. The majority of students that took part in the riot were white. If the majority of students that had taken part in the riots were black, the black community would have looked upon the call for suspensions as harsh and prejudiced.

You're absolutely right, and the white community would have complained that they weren't harsh enough, and there would have been calls for more security and an increase in weapons bought in the area. So, what's your point?

A few years ago, the party hours at Harvard University were cut back. Residents in the community claimed that music was often too loud and that students were often loud, drunk, and disorderly late at night. Upon receiving word, the initial perception of the situation in the black community was that this had something to do with race... that was until they found out that all school organizations that threw parties were affected.

And what was the initial perception in the white community? Link please.

Race would have had nothing and had nothing to do with these situations whether whites or blacks were involved, but that's not the way the black community would perceive it.

Or how the white community would perceive it either. In fact, switch the roles and the stories around any way you like and you will find different perceptions by the involved communities, and they will ALL be tainted by race! This is an AMERICAN problem, not a black one!

What is my point? You are correct in saying that ideas of race and racism are imbedded in the American psyche and that racism can exist without racist. You arrogantly claimed that I couldn't "wrap my head around the concept" even though I previously agreed with the concept that this matter deals mainly with perception. Thank you for your kind words.

But this is the point I made.

While racism is so deeply imbedded in the American psyche that it can exist without racists, it can also exist without racism itself in any form whatsoever. Perceptions of racism can exist where there are no racists, where there is no racism or prejudice, conscious or subconscious, no alterior motives... They can exist when a situation has absolutely nothing to do with racism at all as in the examples above. All it takes is for whites and blacks to be involved and for blacks to be affected negatively. Oftentimes, all it takes if for whites and blacks to be involved, period.

AGREED! In fact, whites need not be involved at all, nor do blacks need to be affected negatively. Anything that involves blacks in this country will trigger both racial and racist perceptions in almost ALL Americans, regardless of color. If a black man becomes a CEO, many blacks will think he "sold out" to get there, while many whites will suspect affirmative action. It taints every aspect of American life, from the old lady who crosses the street to avoid the young black men, to the reporter who sees a crowd of desperate, suffering and dying black people and thinks that they haven't gotten violent "YET", to the Mayor and Police Superintendent who hear rumors of rumors and decide to stop rescuing people and concentrate on stopping the "lawlessness", to the NATION who BELIEVED all of these horrible rumors, even though they watched this city 24/7 through a myriad of reporters and recorders and cameras... AND NEVER SAW OR HEARD ANY REAL EVIDENCE OF IT!!!

So yes, perhaps you understand that racism is imbedded in the American psyche, but what you seem not to understand is that it effects ALL Americans! If you did then you would realize how it even now effects YOU! For here you are now, insisting on believing that these heinous crimes happened to the degree and scale that was reported, regardless of the gross absence of evidence, regardless of the words of the Police Superintendent, regardless of your own common sense. Even if this evidence was to somehow miraculously appear now it would not change the fact that you gave into your racist perceptions in the absence of that evidence, it would only make you feel vindicated in your prejudice.

So yes, much of the media coverage of this tragedy was racist, much of the response to it was racist, and much of OUR reaction to the entire episode was racist, and it was all brought about not by any person or persons, but by OUR racist American perceptions.

BTW...here's a little saying that I wrote a long time ago, and still try to live by. Hero and Cookies know it well.

IT IS FAR, FAR BETTER TO OPEN YOUR EYES AND SAY "I DON'T KNOW", THAN TO CLOSE YOUR MIND AND SAY "I DON'T BELIEVE".

If we all open our minds and nostrils in this matter and take a deep objective breath, it's pretty easy to tell that it stinks!

So getting back to the reason that we are talking about violence and crime... does it stink enough that the govenor of Louisiana shouldn't have given her shoot to kill orders. This is where this whole debate about crime originated. We've gone far and wide, but we come back to the main question...

I don't believe in shoot to kill orders when it comes down to dealing with problems in this country. The net result is usually dead Americans. The average peace officer or member of the military knows fully well when and how to kill anyway, and demonstrate their abilities often. "Shoot To Kill" orders are usually translated by those that are given them to mean "shoot now, ask questions later".

Edited September 21, 2005 by Cozmo D

[MaxFly]

No, that is NOT the way that my mind works, though I'm starting to suspect that maybe it's the way that YOURS does. My reason for DOUBTING these stories has NOTHING to do with ANYBODY'S skin color, it has to do with an almost COMPLETE lack of collaborating EVIDENCE!!! I deal in FACTS!!! Now, you tell me, what are your reasons for BELIEVING them?

I'll post what you said again. Now I'm specifically posting what you said, not what I think you may have thought or what I think you may have wanted to say.

BUT, these people were overwhelmingly black. So, it is easy to believe all of these horrible rumors about what was going on...

In another post, you said

Yet, the racist perceptions of much of our nation, including many many blacks, somehow managed to morph them together as if they were one and the same. We seemed to believe that these crimes were committed by those who were suffering, instead of by criminals who were adding to their suffering. In fact, it seemed that the very blackness of many of the victims was at fault. Black people don't listen to warnings so they deserve to be stuck there. Black people shoot at rescue workers so they deserve to be left there. Black people loot whenever they get a chance so they deserve no provisions.

You brought the issue of race into this discussion about violence and disorder in New Orleans. This was your initial argument... "these people were overwhelmingly black. So, it is easy to believe all of these horrible rumors about what was going on." My position was and still is that regardless of the race of those involved in crimes and lawlessness, order had to be established to help those who so desperately needed help. You made it race specific. The natural question to ask then is what if white people were the ones we were looking at? Would you then say that your statements would have been...

BUT, these people were overwhelmingly white. So, it is easy to believe all of these horrible rumors about what was going on...

The underlying current of your argument has as much to do with race as it has to do with "facts."

You're absolutely right, and if the shooter had been black, the white community would've thought either the same thing, or that it had been a racially motivated robbery. So, what's your point?

Edit: After re-reading this I realized that the shooter must have been a police officer, which changes the circumstances. So, you're saying that if it was the 1 black student amongst all of these white ones the black community would have suspected race played a part, which is correct. However, if it was one white student amongst mostly black ones, the white community would have thought that he was probably shot by mistake, or that the poor kid had fallen under the influence of these black kids, or that he deserved what he got for running with the black students in the first place.

No, that's not what I'm saying. What I am saying is that if it was a black person shot by a white person, period, the black community would have perceived it as racism, whether the person shot was surrounded by whites, blacks, asians, or latinos, even in the absence of any evidence of racism. The color of the officer's skin would have been motive enough.

Officials called on Boston University to suspend students of the school who took part in the riot. The majority of students that took part in the riot were white. If the majority of students that had taken part in the riots were black, the black community would have looked upon the call for suspensions as harsh and prejudiced.

You're absolutely right, and the white community would have complained that they weren't harsh enough, and there would have been calls for more security and an increase in weapons bought in the area. So, what's your point?

Funny how many whites said the same things concerning these white students. Many of those students were kicked out of school, and those who were found committing serious crimes got jail time, the harsher penalties that were called for.

A few years ago, the party hours at Harvard University were cut back. Residents in the community claimed that music was often too loud and that students were often loud, drunk, and disorderly late at night. Upon receiving word, the initial perception of the situation in the black community was that this had something to do with race... that was until they found out that all school organizations that threw parties were affected.

And what was the initial perception in the white community? Link please.

There was no racial perception in the white and asian communities. No one liked it. Students complained. The reduction still stands.

So yes, perhaps you understand that racism is imbedded in the American psyche, but what you seem not to understand is that it effects ALL Americans! If you did then you would realize how it even now effects YOU! For here you are now, insisting on believing that these heinous crimes happened to the degree and scale that was reported, regardless of the gross absence of evidence, regardless of the words of the Police Superintendent, regardless of your own common sense. Even if this evidence was to somehow miraculously appear now it would not change the fact that you gave into your racist perceptions in the absence of that evidence, it would only make you feel vindicated in your prejudice.

Earlier you posted the following...

you are obviously saying that I have a racial or racist viewpoint, which is belittling, insulting, and completely non-evident in anything and everything that I have written so far

Though I honestly said nothing of the kind.

Now you have charged me with having "racist perceptions" and basically a racist viewpoint on these matters. The hypocrisy in your statements is evident, but I'll give you some leeway. I'm sure you simply used stronger words than you meant to. I hope this is truly the case. Any charge with the word "racist" in it is very serious. Tone down your rhetoric.

The reason that I believe that there was a great deal of crime has nothing to do with the race of those involved, absolutely nothing at all. You are woefully off base. I can't stress that enough. If those effected by the hurricane where mostly white, hispanic, or asian and the same things were being reported in the same volume as they are now, my honest response would be the same. The National Guard would need to be sent in to restore order with shoot to kill orders if the situation were the same. The problem in this case is that the reports are numerous as are the sources. Reporters, doctors, rescue workers, police and city officials have all reported quite a bit of crime. The real issue however is that citizens of New Orleans themselves have reported that there has been a lot of crime. Now you've attributed that to mass hysteria, but you're reaching, and you know it, whether you admit it or not. Are these black citizens trying to demonize other black citizens? People have reported that rescue helicopters were shot at. One person has been arrested so far. Was the press attempting to demonize blacks by reporting the shootings? Even in the face of numerous reports from numerous sources, am I to ignore what those on the ground are saying because it doesn't sound good or because I don't want to believe it?

You go on to say this...

Even if this evidence was to somehow miraculously appear now it would not change the fact that you gave into your racist perceptions in the absence of that evidence, it would only make you feel vindicated in your prejudice.

It seems that you have already decided that much of the crime that the press, even the New Orleans press, and citizens have reported hasn't really happened. Your use of the phrase "miraculously appear" bears witness. Is it so unlikely that some of these things have happened that it would take a miracle for evidence to appear?

You have bent over so far in the other direction that you discount things that are well documented.

And then you go on to say that I am prejudiced because I believe what citizens are saying? Again, it has nothing to do with race for me. It has everything to do with what these people are saying and the preponderance of the claims and reports in general. They say that they are hungry and thirsty, and that they are being mistreated by troops... I will believe them. Why then shouldn't I believe them when they say crime has taken place? Because the police superintendent who has lost much of his police force has said that they haven't found evidence yet, even though bodies have been reportedly found in both the convention center and the superdome? This has nothing to do with race for me, and in going so far as to address my "prejuduce," you are way out of line. Tread lightly.

I don't believe in shoot to kill orders when it comes down to dealing with problems in this country. The net result is usually dead Americans. The average peace officer or member of the military knows fully well when and how to kill anyway, and demonstrate their abilities often. "Shoot To Kill" orders are usually translated by those that are given them to mean "shoot now, ask questions later".

No, the net result is usually stability. Think the worst, but this was proven in New Orleans. Troops weren't shooting people stealing bread. They weren't shooting people indiscrimintately as some want to think. They went in with shoot to kill orders and were still shot at. How much more bold would criminals have been if they believed that the national guard would have been passive? The severity of the situation, both the crimes taking place and more importantly, the need to help those who were suffering, called for the decision.

So yes, much of the media coverage of this tragedy was racist, much of the response to it was racist, and much of OUR reaction to the entire episode was racist, and it was all brought about not by any person or persons, but by OUR racist American perceptions.

How was the media coverage racist? How was the response, both from the American people and the govenment racist? False or vague blanket statements declared in certainty are still false or vague.

Edited September 22, 2005 by MaxFly

[Cozmo D]

No, that is NOT the way that my mind works, though I'm starting to suspect that maybe it's the way that YOURS does. My reason for DOUBTING these stories has NOTHING to do with ANYBODY'S skin color, it has to do with an almost COMPLETE lack of collaborating EVIDENCE!!! I deal in FACTS!!! Now, you tell me, what are your reasons for BELIEVING them?

I'll post what you said again. Now I'm specifically posting what you said, not what I think you may have thought or what I think you may have wanted to say.

BUT, these people were overwhelmingly black. So, it is easy to believe all of these horrible rumors about what was going on...

I was speaking about perceptions and you know it.

In another post, you said

Yet, the racist perceptions of much of our nation, including many many blacks, somehow managed to morph them together as if they were one and the same. We seemed to believe that these crimes were committed by those who were suffering, instead of by criminals who were adding to their suffering. In fact, it seemed that the very blackness of many of the victims was at fault. Black people don't listen to warnings so they deserve to be stuck there. Black people shoot at rescue workers so they deserve to be left there. Black people loot whenever they get a chance so they deserve no provisions.

I was speaking about perceptions and you know it.

You brought the issue of race into this discussion about violence and disorder in New Orleans. This was your initial argument... "these people were overwhelmingly black. So, it is easy to believe all of these horrible rumors about what was going on." My position was and still is that regardless of the race of those involved in crimes and lawlessness, order had to be established to help those who so desperately needed help. You made it race specific. The natural question to ask then is what if white people were the ones we were looking at? Would you then say that your statements would have been...

BUT, these people were overwhelmingly white. So, it is easy to believe all of these horrible rumors about what was going on...

No, because that is NOT the perceptions that America has about white people.

The underlying current of your argument has as much to do with race as it has to do with "facts."

My argument has everything to do with race, and there is nothing underlying about it. My conclusions are based on FACTS, what are yours based on? Why don't you answer that question?

You're absolutely right, and if the shooter had been black, the white community would've thought either the same thing, or that it had been a racially motivated robbery. So, what's your point?

Edit: After re-reading this I realized that the shooter must have been a police officer, which changes the circumstances. So, you're saying that if it was the 1 black student amongst all of these white ones the black community would have suspected race played a part, which is correct. However, if it was one white student amongst mostly black ones, the white community would have thought that he was probably shot by mistake, or that the poor kid had fallen under the influence of these black kids, or that he deserved what he got for running with the black students in the first place.

No, that's not what I'm saying. What I am saying is that if it was a black person shot by a white person, period, the black community would have perceived it as racism, whether the person shot was surrounded by whites, blacks, asians, or latinos, even in the absence of any evidence of racism. The color of the officer's skin would have been motive enough.

And I agreed with you. What you refuse to admit is that the white community would have perceived it in a racial context as well, albeit likely one that was different than that of the black community..

Officials called on Boston University to suspend students of the school who took part in the riot. The majority of students that took part in the riot were white. If the majority of students that had taken part in the riots were black, the black community would have looked upon the call for suspensions as harsh and prejudiced.

You're absolutely right, and the white community would have complained that they weren't harsh enough, and there would have been calls for more security and an increase in weapons bought in the area. So, what's your point?

Funny how many whites said the same things concerning these white students. Many of those students were kicked out of school, and those who were found committing serious crimes got jail time, the harsher penalties that were called for.The reaction would have been far more severe by the white community if it was black students rioting, and you know it.

A few years ago, the party hours at Harvard University were cut back. Residents in the community claimed that music was often too loud and that students were often loud, drunk, and disorderly late at night. Upon receiving word, the initial perception of the situation in the black community was that this had something to do with race... that was until they found out that all school organizations that threw parties were affected.

And what was the initial perception in the white community? Link please.

There was no racial perception in the white and asian communities. No one liked it. Students complained. The reduction still stands.So you say. I don't blindly take the word of others like some easily persuaded people, I believe in researching and thinking for myself. Please provide a link or as far as I'm concerned you've made the whole thing up.

So yes, perhaps you understand that racism is imbedded in the American psyche, but what you seem not to understand is that it effects ALL Americans! If you did then you would realize how it even now effects YOU! For here you are now, insisting on believing that these heinous crimes happened to the degree and scale that was reported, regardless of the gross absence of evidence, regardless of the words of the Police Superintendent, regardless of your own common sense. Even if this evidence was to somehow miraculously appear now it would not change the fact that you gave into your racist perceptions in the absence of that evidence, it would only make you feel vindicated in your prejudice.

Earlier you posted the following...

you are obviously saying that I have a racial or racist viewpoint, which is belittling, insulting, and completely non-evident in anything and everything that I have written so far

Though I honestly said nothing of the kind.

You are still saying it.

Now you have charged me with having "racist perceptions" and basically a racist viewpoint on these matters. The hypocrisy in your statements is evident, but I'll give you some leeway. I'm sure you simply used stronger words than you meant to. I hope this is truly the case. Any charge with the word "racist" in it is very serious. Tone down your rhetoric.

Because your perceptions are racist does not make YOU a racist, this has been my point from the beginning.

The reason that I believe that there was a great deal of crime has nothing to do with the race of those involved, absolutely nothing at all. You are woefully off base. I can't stress that enough. If those effected by the hurricane where mostly white, hispanic, or asian and the same things were being reported in the same volume as they are now, my honest response would be the same. The National Guard would need to be sent in to restore order with shoot to kill orders if the situation were the same. The problem in this case is that the reports are numerous as are the sources. Reporters, doctors, rescue workers, police and city officials have all reported quite a bit of crime. The real issue however is that citizens of New Orleans themselves have reported that there has been a lot of crime. Now you've attributed that to mass hysteria, but you're reaching, and you know it, whether you admit it or not. Are these black citizens trying to demonize other black citizens? People have reported that rescue helicopters were shot at. One person has been arrested so far. Was the press attempting to demonize blacks by reporting the shootings? Even in the face of numerous reports from numerous sources, am I to ignore what those on the ground are saying because it doesn't sound good or because I don't want to believe it?

I believed these stories as well at first, but became increasingly skeptical as I observed none of it, and no evidence of it was forthcoming. I would be just as skeptical regardless of the races involved.

You go on to say this...

Even if this evidence was to somehow miraculously appear now it would not change the fact that you gave into your racist perceptions in the absence of that evidence, it would only make you feel vindicated in your prejudice.

It seems that you have already decided that much of the crime that the press, even the New Orleans press, and citizens have reported hasn't really happened. Your use of the phrase "miraculously appear" bears witness. Is it so unlikely that some of these things have happened that it would take a miracle for evidence to appear?

I DOUBT them...severely. I doubted what happened in the Central Park Jogger case as well, and many people then accused me of a racial bias. I pointed out that even though the area where the woman was raped and beaten to within inches of her life was was covered and splattered with her blood, they found not 1 microscopic drop of her blood on any of the boys' clothes or bodies. Of course, I'm the idiot and they went to prison. BTW...do you know how that turned out? I DEAL IN FACTS!!!

You have bent over so far in the other direction that you discount things that are well documented.

I have yet to see any documentation. Link please.

And then you go on to say that I am prejudiced because I believe what citizens are saying? Again, it has nothing to do with race for me. It has everything to do with what these people are saying and the preponderance of the claims and reports in general. They say that they are hungry and thirsty, and that they are being mistreated by troops... I will believe them. Why then shouldn't I believe them when they say crime has taken place? Because the police superintendent who has lost much of his police force has said that they haven't found evidence yet, even though bodies have been reportedly found in both the convention center and the superdome? This has nothing to do with race for me, and in going so far as to address my "prejuduce," you are way out of line. Tread lightly.

What, are you threatening me? Ooooh, I'm scared. Unlike you, my identity is well known throughout the internet, so do your worse. As for believing what people say, when Orsen Wells did his "War Of The Worlds" broadcast hundreds of people thought we were being invaded by Martians. There were many sightings and eyewitness accounts. I wonder what happened to all of those alien bodies?

I don't believe in shoot to kill orders when it comes down to dealing with problems in this country. The net result is usually dead Americans. The average peace officer or member of the military knows fully well when and how to kill anyway, and demonstrate their abilities often. "Shoot To Kill" orders are usually translated by those that are given them to mean "shoot now, ask questions later".

No, the net result is usually stability. Think the worst, but this was proven in New Orleans. Troops weren't shooting people stealing bread. They weren't shooting people indiscrimintately as some want to think. They went in with shoot to kill orders and were still shot at. How much more bold would criminals have been if they believed that the national guard would have been passive? The severity of the situation, both the crimes taking place and more importantly, the need to help those who were suffering, called for the decision.

So, we got lucky, and only a few Americans died. This time. Sometimes we have lucked out, sometimes we haven't. Doesn't change how I feel about it.

So yes, much of the media coverage of this tragedy was racist, much of the response to it was racist, and much of OUR reaction to the entire episode was racist, and it was all brought about not by any person or persons, but by OUR racist American perceptions.

How was the media coverage racist? How was the response, both from the American people and the govenment racist? False or vague blanket statements declared in certainty are still false or vague.

I've already pointed it out to you, but your mind is closed to it.

[Hero1]

:paperbag:

[JumpinJack AJ]

Man, i'm in the mood for pizza.