"Whites killed MLK. Now we honor him" - USA Today

[The Beast Within]

And?

Koran 2:191 "slay the unbelievers wherever you find them"
Koran 3:21 "Muslims must not take the infidels as friends"
Koran 5:33 "Maim and crucify the infidels if they criticize Islam"
Koran 8:12 "Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Koran"
Koran 8:60 " Muslims must muster all weapons to terrorize the infidels"
Koran 8:65 "The unbelievers are stupid, urge all Muslims to fight them"
Koran 9:5 "When the opportunity arises, kill the infidels wherever you find them"
Koran 9:123 "Make war on the infidels living in your neighborhood"
Koran 22:19 "Punish the unbelievers with garments of fire, hooked iron rods, boiling water, melt their skin and bellies"
Koran 47:4 "Do not hanker for peace with the infidels, behead them when you catch them".

 

[Lord Commander Palis]

But that's not what he said so it's not a good analogy. The title is clickbait. The content is far more reasonable.

So because I left out a sensationalist title it's not a good analogy?

The piece was dumb, hardly reasonable, however is opinion. So it is what it is, USA Today are the ones who have to deal with the backlash and if you check the comments, they gettin' lashed!

I don't think White people are as silent anymore and whether that is a good thing or not collectively, it's not really a good thing for the minorities who hate White people.

 

[ILLogic]

Koran 2:191 "slay the unbelievers wherever you find them"
Koran 3:21 "Muslims must not take the infidels as friends"
Koran 5:33 "Maim and crucify the infidels if they criticize Islam"
Koran 8:12 "Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Koran"
Koran 8:60 " Muslims must muster all weapons to terrorize the infidels"
Koran 8:65 "The unbelievers are stupid, urge all Muslims to fight them"
Koran 9:5 "When the opportunity arises, kill the infidels wherever you find them"
Koran 9:123 "Make war on the infidels living in your neighborhood"
Koran 22:19 "Punish the unbelievers with garments of fire, hooked iron rods, boiling water, melt their skin and bellies"
Koran 47:4 "Do not hanker for peace with the infidels, behead them when you catch them".

Are you trying to equate the Nation of Islam from the 1960's with radical Islam?

 

[panamaican]

So because I left out a sensationalist title it's not a good analogy?

The piece was dumb, hardly reasonable, however is opinion. So it is what it is, USA Today are the ones who have to deal with the backlash and if you check the comments, they gettin' lashed!

I don't think White people are as silent anymore and whether that is a good thing or not collectively, it's not really a good thing for the minorities who hate White people.

But the author is white. His opinion is that of a white person. I'm not sure how his particular lack of silence is not really a good thing for anyone.

The content of his op-ed was reasonable as op-ed's go. He stated an opinion but kept it within the framework of his opinion. He didn't generalize or over-extend his opinion. He didn't rely on junk science or disproven theories. It was reasonable.

So when you say the piece was dumb, was it actually unintelligent or was it an opinion you disagree with. They are 2 completely different things. You're entitled to disagree with an op-ed so there's nothing abnormal with doing so.

I don't need to read the comments on an op-ed because people will respond however they choose. It's like posting. I don't need to read every response to something I post. Some will agree, some will disagree. But so long as my opinion is properly presented, it remains exactly that - my opinion. If I reached it after careful consideration, random love and random hate won't change it.

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

Good post, but he was white. In the segregated south. As a white person systemic racism was forced into him.

Oh. Join date "wednesday". 240 posts. Seems legit.

 

[Buck Swope]

Oh. Join date "wednesday". 240 posts. Seems legit.

Refute my argument.

 

[Lord Commander Palis]

But the author is white. His opinion is that of a white person. I'm not sure how his particular lack of silence is not really a good thing for anyone.

The content of his op-ed was reasonable as op-ed's go. He stated an opinion but kept it within the framework of his opinion. He didn't generalize or over-extend his opinion. He didn't rely on junk science or disproven theories. It was reasonable.

So when you say the piece was dumb, was it actually unintelligent or was it an opinion you disagree with. They are 2 completely different things. You're entitled to disagree with an op-ed so there's nothing abnormal with doing so.

I don't need to read the comments on an op-ed because people will respond however they choose. It's like posting. I don't need to read every response to something I post. Some will agree, some will disagree. But so long as my opinion is properly presented, it remains exactly that - my opinion. If I reached it after careful consideration, random love and random hate won't change it.

Dumb generally means unintelligent, so yes unintelligent. I know he's White, there are a lot of self-haters in this world and it isn't always tied to self-esteem or ones past choosing morality. Sometimes this people are just easily influenced, have extreme identity issues and I would assume either a very low Testosterone level or a indoctrination into feminism being raised by a bitter single Mother. Sweeping generalizations aside, there is a lot of real world truth in what I just said.

But yes I guess that is your opinion on the piece, glad you liked it. It did nothing for me other than confirm that people who identify as progressive have gone through a metamorphosis similar to how a Gremlin does eating food after midnight.

People post opinion pieces for reactions. Whether you say you read peoples responses or not, you are looking for a response posting a opinion, your opinion. Anyways, hope you're having fun playing Devil's Advocate pan.

 

[Lord Commander Palis]

Oh. Join date "wednesday". 240 posts. Seems legit.

He'll slip up and be banned again. The poor lass just needs attention so bad though.

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

Refute my argument.

Your post implies that every white person from the South became racist to a certain extent because of systemic racism.

There are plenty of white people from the South that were never racist so there you go, I just refuted your argument.

 

[Buck Swope]

Your post implies that every white person from the South became racist to a certain extent because of systemic racism.

There are plenty of white people from the South that were never racist so there you go, I just refuted your argument.

That refuted nothing. Try harder.

He'll slip up and be banned again. The poor lass just needs attention so bad though.

I'm here to stay. Enjoy your day.

 

[panamaican]

Dumb generally means unintelligent, so yes unintelligent. I know he's White, there are a lot of self-haters in this world and it isn't always tied to self-esteem or ones past choosing morality. Sometimes this people are just easily influenced, have extreme identity issues and I would assume either a very low Testosterone level or a indoctrination into feminism being raised by a bitter single Mother. Sweeping generalizations aside, there is a lot of real world truth in what I just said.

But yes I guess that is your opinion on the piece, glad you liked it. It did nothing for me other than confirm that people who identify as progressive have gone through a metamorphosis similar to how a Gremlin does eating food after midnight.

People post opinion pieces for reactions. Whether you say you read peoples responses or not, you are looking for a response posting a opinion, your opinion. Anyways, hope you're having fun playing Devil's Advocate pan.

I'm not playing Devil's Advocate. Don't take this the wrong way but you're being super sensitive about the subject.

First, I never said I liked it. I said it was reasonable. Critiquing the writing itself is very different from whether or not I agree with the content. People who are emotionally sensitive in these areas tend to combine the 2. They dislike something therefore it's quality is poor. They like something therefore it's quality is good.

I read a great article on "criticism" which spoke to that exact point. THe ability to separate out one's personal feelings on art, movies, opinions from the quality of the art, movies, opinions. I can dislike a painting and still recognize the skill of the painter. I can love a movie and still recognize that the plot was bad.

I can read an op-ed piece and see that it's reasonable without having an opinion on its content.

So, when you say it was "unintelligent" what exactly was "unintelligent" about it as opposed to what part of the content that you didn't like.

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

That refuted nothing. Try harder.



I'm here to stay. Enjoy your day.

Nice try but you tell me how that refuted nothing.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

If he really posted that it reveals a great deal of ignorance regarding what it means to obtain a doctorate and the conferring of honorary titles.
Sad.

 

[RockstarChris]

ghina

 

[Lord Commander Palis]

I'm not playing Devil's Advocate. Don't take this the wrong way but you're being super sensitive about the subject.

First, I never said I liked it. I said it was reasonable. Critiquing the writing itself is very different from whether or not I agree with the content. People who are emotionally sensitive in these areas tend to combine the 2. They dislike something therefore it's quality is poor. They like something therefore it's quality is good.

I read a great article on "criticism" which spoke to that exact point. THe ability to separate out one's personal feelings on art, movies, opinions from the quality of the art, movies, opinions. I can dislike a painting and still recognize the skill of the painter. I can love a movie and still recognize that the plot was bad.

I can read an op-ed piece and see that it's reasonable without having an opinion on its content.

So, when you say it was "unintelligent" what exactly was "unintelligent" about it as opposed to what part of the content that you didn't like.

Ah the good ole Jack V and other countless snide bafoons adding of; "Don't take this the wrong way buuuuut...". As for you, you added, "you're being super sensitive". Do you even understand what sensitive, let alone super sensitive would actually entail?

I'm merely pointing out your DA approach to the opinion piece and how I thought the opinion piece was "dumb". Again, going back to my analogy, by your standards it would be reasonable because it's a opinion piece, as long as I provide certain "facts" right?

I'm not going to dissect this shit for you. I read it once, it was enough, it's a opinion piece right? I didn't agree on his opinion because funny enough, he doesn't know White people. He maybe White but he definitely doesn't speak for all of us.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

I don't know man, but you may want to wait for your sherdog account to become at least a week old before you start giving out your opinion on thread worthiness.

 

[lifelessheap]

Oh thank you bossman for givins us the rights that you stoles away from us in the first place. Yous so benevolent. Yous so humble.

Who stole and sold the Africans in the first place? Africans. At least blame them too if you are going to go back that far.

 

[Denter]

My dad called Martin Luther King an “agitator.” I bet a lot of white dads did. Seems like every time Dr. King showed up somewhere, things got torn up or burned up.

So we killed him. Not me, of course. I’m not a racist. But who thinks he is?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...315390/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Not satire.

Blacks killed Malcolm X. Now they honor him.

 

[AgonyandIrony]

"It took the National Guard to protect"....................

A National Guard comprised of white people, ordered by white leaders by a white government to protect people of color.

Maybe black neighborhoods can start forming groups to protect white people in their neighborhoods this year. That be cool.

Maybe black leaders could start talking about ending black on white crime?

So when speaking of the oppression of the Irish, its unfitting to blame the Anglos. The oppression of the Jews, its unfitting to say it was perpetuated by Germans.

When the national guard murdered blacks in my cities and biplanes dropped firebombs reducing the most wonderful African American neighborhood in the country to rubble as whites surged onto Black Wall Street to "run the negro out of Tulsa" out of jealousy and the lies of one white woman, are you saying that it's unfair to say whites were responsible?

I greatly admire white men in the past who stood up against the majority and fought to end slavery, segregation, and the oppression of African Americans and those men should be revered and honored. As I said before, John Brown my opinion is one of the greatest Americans to ever live. As were the Free Soil white rebels who fought against pro slavery forces.

It wasn't too long ago that grown white men were terrorizing black children without reprocussion from the police. The same police that used dogs on peaceful protesters for having the audacity to march for equal rights.

Now, I'm sure you will hone in on one sentence, but have you lived in all black neighborhoods before? My neighbors literally stopped a friend of mine who was borrowing my tv from leaving the parking lot lol. As to North Tulsa a rather gang ridden run down neglected part of the city, as long as I'm with my friends and their set I can basically go anywhere unharmed.

Also you spoke of black leaders,do you know many? Do you go to town halls about race relations often? Do you follow the rising collective of artists in Chicago and other parts of the country doing everything they can to help their communities? Talk to social workers about the issues in sub par education and most cities unequal policing methods and presence?

I think it's unfair and quite revisionist to act like there wasn't a problem with white America.

 

[RIPWarrior]

It's an interesting passage you quoted. What part of it is untrue?

Do you believe white society was only achieved because of slavery? Were muslim societies created the same way? White societies are created by white people and not violence.

The whole article just promotes hate and nothing else.