Will Simpson be in court as a plaintiff

[William Anthony]

I was talking more of mental pain. :)

When I made it back to the other side of the street, my mind was at ease. :) Nothing but happy happy feelings. :)

[tv]

When I made it back to the other side of the street, my mind was at ease. :) Nothing but happy happy feelings. :)

Exactly the same way I felt after getting lost in the back streets of Baltimore...once I was back on track I felt happy, happy...:)

[tv]

San Antonio is a wonderful, beautiful city with a very diverse population (permanent/visiting/military). We've just had our first cold snap of the season (although I'm sure the 40's isn't considered by the real cold weather folks as being cold -- LOL) but looks like Thanksgiving is going to be beautiful. Nothing as pretty as the night the Christmas lights are lit on the RiverWalk --

I been to Texas only once and really liked it but I've never been to San Antonio. I have a niece who teaches school there and she loves it . You're right -- I wouldn't call 40 a cold snap -- I'd take it anytime from November through mid-April! But then, we don't have the heat you have in the summer. Six of one, half a dozen of another. :tongue:

[William Anthony]

Exactly the same way I felt after getting lost in the back streets of Baltimore...once I was back on track I felt happy, happy...:)

Yes, that's what I mean. We will not know what would have happened to us in either situation, if I asked to use the phone or if you asked for directions. That is why I feel that open and honest communication is the key to resolution. The sad part is that we both felt uncomfortable in our respective situations, because of the difference in skin colors.

[martin II]

San Antonio is beautiful and they often get visitors from nearby towns, who claim to live in San Antonio or they did when I was there. When I moved off post, I moved in with a girl, who swore she was from SA. We were going through her albums, when I saw a picture of an out house. I asked what part of SA had out houses and she laughed and said she was from Beaumont.

I did my ten days in SA but never got to see much of the city.

[William Anthony]

I did my ten days in SA but never got to see much of the city.

I was there for almost a year. It was a pretty city with plenty of pretty sites. The World's Fair brought in people from all over the globe. I was in seventh heaven. Saturday's at Brakenridge park was a delight. There was an all girl college nearby-St Mary's, IIRC.

[William Anthony]

It looks like the next time Simpson will be in court will probably be for sentencing.

[susie31023]

You are sadly mistaken. I think that, if you know something you should post it. It was not me that ran her off, unless she has taken offense with the way I respond to one of her friends, which I have reason to believe she did not, or, if she did she got over it ;):cool:

[QUOTE]
[quote=William Anthony;9135710]I think you have forgotten that LE allegedly filed a written report. That written report would have caused an investigation to be initiated. Let's say that I report that a saw a woman running after a man shouting he has stolen my purse and give LE the location where the man is hiding. The woman is running all about and I have lost track of her. I guess in that event LE could justify any inaction because I did not have first hand knowledge that the purse was stolen, and they could just write a report, allowing the thief to escape, and drink coffee and eat pastries where you live, correct?.

Read her post, she made it clear it was because of how you were responding to her.

Thank you Kayleighjo for understanding my post about why I left this board. William, you whom I thought of as a friend, continuously negated whatever information I brought to the board. I said in every post I believe, that it was what LE had told me. The snide remark about LE was totally uncalled for as I have LE in my family and they do happen to do their job. So for the record I did stop posting here. When I feel that my posts are a waste of time then I choose not to waste my time.

Not once have I tried to insult anyone on this board. I have tried to post in a respectful manner. I know you and martin have done a lot of research but unless you are in fact lawyers practicing in the state of Nevada you can not say for certain what could and could not have been done in this or any other case. It is all just our opinions. I hope everyone will forgive me for being off topic. I wish you all well.~Suz

[martin II]

[QUOTE][quote=William Anthony;9139589]You are sadly mistaken. I think that, if you know something you should post it. It was not me that ran her off, unless she has taken offense with the way I respond to one of her friends, which I have reason to believe she did not, or, if she did she got over it ;):cool:





Thank you Kayleighjo for understanding my post about why I left this board. William, you whom I thought of as a friend, continuously negated whatever information I brought to the board. I said in every post I believe, that it was what LE had told me. The snide remark about LE was totally uncalled for as I have LE in my family and they do happen to do their job. So for the record I did stop posting here. When I feel that my posts are a waste of time then I choose not to waste my time.

Not once have I tried to insult anyone on this board. I have tried to post in a respectful manner. I know you and martin have done a lot of research but unless you are in fact lawyers practicing in the state of Nevada you can not say for certain what could and could not have been done in this or any other case. It is all just our opinions. I hope everyone will forgive me for being off topic. I wish you all well.~Suz

suz
I usually post my opinions IMO or 'Facts' from various sites. You have the options of accepting or rejecting my post. I think to post here as on most sites one has to accept the fact some will not agree with your post and one has to be able not to take others post as personal when there is dissagreement.

There is no guarantee that all will accept your post.
I think you should consider posting again.

[tv]

Yes, that's what I mean. We will not know what would have happened to us in either situation, if I asked to use the phone or if you asked for directions. That is why I feel that open and honest communication is the key to resolution. The sad part is that we both felt uncomfortable in our respective situations, because of the difference in skin colors.

It's possible neither situation was as bad as we perceived. However, we'll never know and discretion is the better part of valor. :) I agree it's sad but I have the heart of an optimist and faith in my fellow humans that it's getting better.

[William Anthony]

[QUOTE][quote=William Anthony;9139589]You are sadly mistaken. I think that, if you know something you should post it. It was not me that ran her off, unless she has taken offense with the way I respond to one of her friends, which I have reason to believe she did not, or, if she did she got over it ;):cool:





Thank you Kayleighjo for understanding my post about why I left this board. William, you whom I thought of as a friend, continuously negated whatever information I brought to the board. I said in every post I believe, that it was what LE had told me. The snide remark about LE was totally uncalled for as I have LE in my family and they do happen to do their job. So for the record I did stop posting here. When I feel that my posts are a waste of time then I choose not to waste my time.

Not once have I tried to insult anyone on this board. I have tried to post in a respectful manner. I know you and martin have done a lot of research but unless you are in fact lawyers practicing in the state of Nevada you can not say for certain what could and could not have been done in this or any other case. It is all just our opinions. I hope everyone will forgive me for being off topic. I wish you all well.~Suz

It was my understanding that you had lurked for a long time before posting. Therefore, I thought that Martin and I had made several posts about LE doing their duty and eating pastries, which we were not the only ones in this instance who posted that they should have investigated the complaint. I thought of you as a friend also, even after you publicly entered your opinion about my posts with JB. The rules prevent me from saying certain things, but suffice it to say that I was surprised not to see you publicly take JB to task. As much as it may displease you, you should allow me the privilege of having feelings I have about LE, who do not investigate, and about certain posters. You offered your opinion about what LE in your state told you was their procedure, which did not include the procedure for the FBI. However, let me go a step further. I offered an opinion as to what I thought was the duty of LE and was not limited to just your state but what I believe is common to the duties of police in all states.

I will not take offense at your last sentence, although I could. What I said was said in a joking manner and you chose to say it was sarcastic and angry. Because I valued your friendship and did not want to jump to conclusions, I publicly apologized for any misunderstanding. I see that you did not mention that. When I take someone as a friend, I do not play games with them. I too have LE in my family. One works with the DEA and is not well liked where he lives, because he does his duty and is often seen on television making drug busts. I had a friend, who was on our local police force for about 10 years, stayed intoxicated made no busts and wrote no tickets. He was well liked by the community but did not do his job.

Going back to your last sentence about lawyers and I and martin not being able to say for certain what could or could not be done, let me supply this link.

http://www.degrees4criminaljustice.com/Career.asp

You see there are other fields of study other than practicing law that allow one to speak as to what LE could do. The duties of police are often brought into the legislative arena. The bottom line is that I did not run you off. You chose to leave for your own personal reasons, which I will take was that you considered posting here as a waste of your time. In my apology, I asked you to reconsider as your posts added value to the threads. I again extend that invitation to you and ask you to dismiss any personal feeling you may have toward me and any other posters, so that we can again post in civil and respectful discussions and disagreements. I have told you what your friendship means to me and I reserve the right not to be friends with those I choose not and to respond in kind, if I choose, despite their friendship with you. Thanks.

[William Anthony]

It's possible neither situation was as bad as we perceived. However, we'll never know and discretion is the better part of valor. :) I agree it's sad but I have the heart of an optimist and faith in my fellow humans that it's getting better.

I agree that it is getting better but wonder why it ever existed.

[tv]

I agree that it is getting better but wonder why it ever existed.Human nature. :)

[William Anthony]

Human nature. :)

Sadly, you are probably right. Something for you to consider, if the law had not stepped in, do you think human nature would have progressed to its current level independently?

[William Anthony]

Simply, because it has become a point of contention, I did some quick research and came up with this link.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=6th&navby=case&no=00a0075p

Here is what the court said in that case and I do not think that the case law on reasonable suspicion, police duty and probable cause varies significantly from state to state.

“Consider the following situation: a woman flags down a police officer and points out a Porsche being driven by a young man, which the woman claims is her car and which has been stolen by the man. Would the officer have probable cause to arrest the Porsche's driver at that point? We think not. The officer would have a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity justifying a brief investigatory detention pursuant to Terry v. Ohio , 392 U.S. at 30. But, without more, the officer would not yet have the requisite "reasonably trustworthy information" sufficient to warrant a prudent man in believing that the young man driving the Porsche had committed or was committing an offense. See Beck v. Ohio , 379 U.S. at 91. Rather, the police officer would have the right and duty to detain and question the driver for a short time: to ask if the car was his, research his licence plate, and request to see his drivers licence, registration and insurance. Perhaps this investigation would reveal additional evidence of theft sufficient to establish probable cause. But, standing alone, the woman's mere allegation that the car was hers would not create probable cause that the man stole the Porsche. ‘

[William Anthony]

BY POPULAR DEMAND :rose:

[tv]

Sadly, you are probably right. Something for you to consider, if the law had not stepped in, do you think human nature would have progressed to its current level independently?I really don't know but I don't think you can legislate human nature. All men are created equal and unfortunately it took laws to insure everyone had equal rights in this country.

It could be that laws forced some people to tolerate things they otherwise wouldn't and they discovered the reality of what they feared wasn't nearly as bad as what their imaginations had dreamed up. Just one example -- women getting the vote.

[tv]

BY POPULAR DEMAND :rose:

Did I miss something?

[William Anthony]

I really don't know but I don't think you can legislate human nature. All men are created equal and unfortunately it took laws to insure everyone had equal rights in this country.

It could be that laws forced some people to tolerate things they otherwise wouldn't and they discovered the reality of what they feared wasn't nearly as bad as what their imaginations had dreamed up. Just one example -- women getting the vote.

yes, and that is what I mean. That is why I have the passion I have for the law. The law was enacted, measures taken to enforce it and people found they had no reason to not obey it, because obeying it wasn't as bad as they had thought.

[William Anthony]

Did I miss something?

It seems that three of us here have expressed our desire to have Susie return.

[martin II]

[QUOTE=susie31023;9140013][QUOTE]

It was my understanding that you had lurked for a long time before posting. Therefore, I thought that Martin and I had made several posts about LE doing their duty and eating pastries, which we were not the only ones in this instance who posted that they should have investigated the complaint. I thought of you as a friend also, even after you publicly entered your opinion about my posts with JB. The rules prevent me from saying certain things, but suffice it to say that I was surprised not to see you publicly take JB to task. As much as it may displease you, you should allow me the privilege of having feelings I have about LE, who do not investigate, and about certain posters. You offered your opinion about what LE in your state told you was their procedure, which did not include the procedure for the FBI. However, let me go a step further. I offered an opinion as to what I thought was the duty of LE and was not limited to just your state but what I believe is common to the duties of police in all states.

I will not take offense at your last sentence, although I could. What I said was said in a joking manner and you chose to say it was sarcastic and angry. Because I valued your friendship and did not want to jump to conclusions, I publicly apologized for any misunderstanding. I see that you did not mention that. When I take someone as a friend, I do not play games with them. I too have LE in my family. One works with the DEA and is not well liked where he lives, because he does his duty and is often seen on television making drug busts. I had a friend, who was on our local police force for about 10 years, stayed intoxicated made no busts and wrote no tickets. He was well liked by the community but did not do his job.

Going back to your last sentence about lawyers and I and martin not being able to say for certain what could or could not be done, let me supply this link.

http://www.degrees4criminaljustice.com/Career.asp

You see there are other fields of study other than practicing law that allow one to speak as to what LE could do. The duties of police are often brought into the legislative arena. The bottom line is that I did not run you off. You chose to leave for your own personal reasons, which I will take was that you considered posting here as a waste of your time. In my apology, I asked you to reconsider as your posts added value to the threads. I again extend that invitation to you and ask you to dismiss any personal feeling you may have toward me and any other posters, so that we can again post in civil and respectful discussions and disagreements. I have told you what your friendship means to me and I reserve the right not to be friends with those I choose not and to respond in kind, if I choose, despite their friendship with you. Thanks.

William, you study law i am not a lawyer.I am wonderig if all of the other posters posting here are lawyers when they post.:shrug:

[William Anthony]

[QUOTE=William Anthony;9140023][QUOTE=susie31023;9140013]

William, you study law i am not a lawyer.I am wonderig if all of the other posters posting here are lawyers when they post.:shrug:

I took the sentence to mean that your and my opinion had no more value than any other posters, which I will agree with and why I did not take offense, regardless of how it was worded. Lawyers sometimes misinterpret the law or are ruled against, as evidence by the other link I supplied and Galanter's argument on the claim of right defense. I think a lawyer's opinion are sometimes no better than any other poster's.

[weezer]

[QUOTE][quote=William Anthony;9139589]You are sadly mistaken. I think that, if you know something you should post it. It was not me that ran her off, unless she has taken offense with the way I respond to one of her friends, which I have reason to believe she did not, or, if she did she got over it ;):cool:

Thank you Kayleighjo for understanding my post about why I left this board. William, you whom I thought of as a friend, continuously negated whatever information I brought to the board. I said in every post I believe, that it was what LE had told me. The snide remark about LE was totally uncalled for as I have LE in my family and they do happen to do their job. So for the record I did stop posting here. When I feel that my posts are a waste of time then I choose not to waste my time.

Not once have I tried to insult anyone on this board. I have tried to post in a respectful manner. I know you and martin have done a lot of research but unless you are in fact lawyers practicing in the state of Nevada you can not say for certain what could and could not have been done in this or any other case. It is all just our opinions. I hope everyone will forgive me for being off topic. I wish you all well.~Suz

Susie, your posts were and are welcome. I'm sure you have figured out by now that there are some posters on this board that see the negative in every situation and see a boogey man in every crowd.

[weezer]

I really don't know but I don't think you can legislate human nature. All men are created equal and unfortunately it took laws to insure everyone had equal rights in this country.

It could be that laws forced some people to tolerate things they otherwise wouldn't and they discovered the reality of what they feared wasn't nearly as bad as what their imaginations had dreamed up. Just one example -- women getting the vote.

I've always believed the laws are made by the people -- there would be no right or wrong unless the People believed in right and wrong. Does this make sense at all?

[martin II]

I've always believed the laws are made by the people -- there would be no right or wrong unless the People believed in right and wrong. Does this make sense at all?

Legislators say that, but laws are made for the people to live by.imo

[weezer]

Legislators say that, but laws are made for the people to live by.imo

martin, I understand that Congress makes the laws -- that isn't the point I was making.

[William Anthony]

[QUOTE=susie31023;9140013][QUOTE]

Susie, your posts were and are welcome. I'm sure you have figured out by now that there are some posters on this board that see the negative in every situation and see a boogey man in every crowd.

You have decided to break your own rule, so I will now assume it is fair for me to do the same. As usual you make statements without knowing all the facts and, in this instance, unless Susie cares to share, you shall remain in that negative corner with the boogey man. I only chose to respond directly to this post because it contained one that I made. I personally enjoyed our latest arrangement and, was elated to continue after the series, imho, of evil, mean spirited, despicable, vile, reprehensible, callous and unthinking posts you placed on this board, which thanks to the efforts of some were, imho, appropriately deleted.

[William Anthony]

Legislators say that, but laws are made for the people to live by.imo

The law often reflects not what is right or wrong morally but what lobbyist and other pressure groups desire. President Theodore Roosevelt and the New Deal Administration had to put forth a battle to get what the people wanted and were initially met with opposition from the Supreme Court, It wasn't until he threatened to stack the Court that his and the people's desires were met to some extent. It was the ideology of the Chief Justice Earl Warren that enabled the advancements in the area of civil rights. His Court overturned the doctrine of Separate but Equal, while the majority of the people were against integration of public schools. Sometimes in the course of human endeavors, the law speaks not what the people want but what should be morally wrong or right and the debate still occurs as to whether or not that is the laws proper purpose. Hence, the debates over Roe v. Wade and the rights of homosexuals to marry partners of the same sex.

[weezer]

[QUOTE=fbgweezer;9140063][QUOTE=susie31023;9140013]

You have decided to break your own rule, so I will now assume it is fair for me to do the same. As usual you make statements without knowing all the facts and, in this instance, unless Susie cares to share, you shall remain in that negative corner with the boogey man. I only chose to respond directly to this post because it contained one that I made. I personally enjoyed our latest arrangement and, was elated to continue after the series, imho, of evil, mean spirited, despicable, vile, reprehensible, callous and unthinking posts you placed on this board, which thanks to the efforts of some were, imho, appropriately deleted.

This posts needs clarifications:

1. I have no 'rule' that I broke
2. some 'posters' take credit where credit isn't due

[martin II]

The law often reflects not what is right or wrong morally but what lobbyist and other pressure groups desire. President Theodore Roosevelt and the New Deal Administration had to put forth a battle to get what the people wanted and were initially met with opposition from the Supreme Court, It wasn't until he threatened to stack the Court that his and the people's desires were met to some extent. It was the ideology of the Chief Justice Earl Warren that enabled the advancements in the area of civil rights. His Court overturned the doctrine of Separate but Equal, while the majority of the people were against integration of public schools. Sometimes in the course of human endeavors, the law speaks not what the people want but what should be morally wrong or right and the debate still occurs as to whether or not that is the laws proper purpose. Hence, the debates over Roe v. Wade and the rights of homosexuals to marry partners of the same sex.


The recent new bankruptcy laws passed by congress was actually imo anti the people and in support of the U.S. Banks.imo

I agree with your comments on Brown vs Board of education most Americans did not want their white children to go to school with black children.

[martin II]

[QUOTE=fbgweezer;9140063][QUOTE=susie31023;9140013]

You have decided to break your own rule, so I will now assume it is fair for me to do the same. As usual you make statements without knowing all the facts and, in this instance, unless Susie cares to share, you shall remain in that negative corner with the boogey man. I only chose to respond directly to this post because it contained one that I made. I personally enjoyed our latest arrangement and, was elated to continue after the series, imho, of evil, mean spirited, despicable, vile, reprehensible, callous and unthinking posts you placed on this board, which thanks to the efforts of some were, imho, appropriately deleted.

The post by the poster were as you described it and i am pleased that it was deleted.But we did loose one great poster as a result.imo

[weezer]

[QUOTE=William Anthony;9140070][QUOTE=fbgweezer;9140063]

The post by the poster were as you described it and i am pleased that it was deleted.But we did loose one great poster as a result.imo

want some ice with that kool-aid? :eek:

[martin II]

[QUOTE=martin II;9140079][QUOTE=William Anthony;9140070]

want some ice with that kool-aid? :eek:

It was deleted.

[martin II]

People post and leave these threads for various reasons. When W&C was insulted and hurt by that deleted post no G said one word.Same was true with Sassy lassie when she was attacked for her avatar.Whereas i had no problem with Suzies post She seemed to have been offended by some post critical of le maby because she has family members in le.But i did not take the critcism to be directed at her family members.

I think it is unfair to blame any poster for Suzies absence. What i know is that the thread had remained on topic until a certain poster returned and has been filled with attacks and meaness since then.

There is no guarantee that a posters post will not have those that dissagree
as that is the nature of debate. Regardless of how many new posters appear and complain on the how posters post, or suggest that a softer tone be the rule of the day it has not happened and i am not sure it will change.

I am not bothered as long it is not personal, nasty and mean spirited.

imo

[William Anthony]

[QUOTE=William Anthony;9140023][QUOTE=susie31023;9140013]

Well, what do you think Susie? This bloke went on and on in how many posts? about how well he treats other posters and how civil he is. Then he brings you in and gee whiz why did Susie stop posting on this thread? It couldn't be anything to do with me! You tell him in no uncertain terms that it was his fault and he still doesn't get it!:eek:

Look, Susie is quite capable of figuring out that you're a hypocrite. She doesn't need you to 'interpret' her posts for her.

Did you know, Simpson has been found guilty, he's still guilty, and he's not leaving prison! Oh yeah.

Well Joe,

What do you know? It seems that Susie took some offense at my post about where Australian school teachers come from and decided to comment on it. She then commented on the fact that LE had no duty to investigate Riccio's report, with which I disagreed. She then said that I was sarcastic and angry. Believing that she was as much my friend as she was yours and not wanting to see her leave, I apologized even though what I said was not meant in the way she took it. As I said and without being too specific, I was surprised to see you continue to post in the manner that you have and nothing was said publicly by Susie about you name calling and rude posts. It did not take me long to figure out what was truly going on. In any event I don't know what was said between the two of you privately and truly I am not concerned.

I am concerned with your continued name calling. You may fool some of the people all of the time and you may fool all of the people some of the time but you can't fool all the people all the time. I get what was said but I am not fool enough to buy it. It seems that, if Susie was intent on being honest she would have posted my publicly apology. I am not blaming you for anything that Susie did. I am just questioning her motivation. You may want to view things through a one-eyed or cloudy perspective but I choose to view them with both eyes open so that I can see the proper light that has been shed on the subject. Thanks. Did you meet Susie while you were in Georgia on the occasion that the Black woman took you to the best fried chicken place in Georgia? Never mind-don't answer that-I am truly not interested.

[William Anthony]

People post and leave these threads for various reasons. When W&C was insulted and hurt by that deleted post no G said one word.Same was true with Sassy lassie when she was attacked for her avatar.Whereas i had no problem with Suzies post She seemed to have been offended by some post critical of le maby because she has family members in le.But i did not take the critcism to be directed at her family members.

I think it is unfair to blame any poster for Suzies absence. What i know is that the thread had remained on topic until a certain poster returned and has been filled with attacks and meaness since then.

There is no guarantee that a posters post will not have those that dissagree
as that is the nature of debate. Regardless of how many new posters appear and complain on the how posters post, or suggest that a softer tone be the rule of the day it has not happened and i am not sure it will change.

I am not bothered as long it is not personal, nasty and mean spirited.

imo

I agree. However, I consider the source when I see the personal attacks coming and I was warned of the efforts by some who want to see me banned. It is quite funny to me that they all went post haste to another cite and, when I was improperly banned from that cite and the cite closed, they all came back to this one and now have continued the effort, smile. It seems to me that some want to turn this board into an opinion board, without regard to facts, evidence or information about the trials and the manner in which the law was applied and jut want to engage in bashing of the participants and other members.

I have no problem with posters posting their opinions. However, when a poster put's up links, as I did on the subject of LE's duty, I would think that any poster interested in having an informed opinion, as opposed to wanting to bait, inflame and accuse, would say, "I stand corrected."

[William Anthony]

This seems to have been left out and is relevant to a discussion we are having.

I truly was not angry with you or anyone else, save maybe three, and one is not TV (that poetry thing again). I welcome your input. I guess I should have used the icon of the smile as my last sentence was a joke or intended to be. I thought you would have understood. I do apologize if you took that wrongly. I think you add great value to the threads and would never want you to feel unwelcomed.

[William Anthony]

Martin,

Given your post on the other thread about surreptitious taping, it seems that Simpson may have grounds, if he chooses, to sue Riccio. However, I think that money is long gone and he may find himself, if he is successful should he choose to sue, in the same place as Mr. Goldman. Wouldn't that be ironical-Simpson sues Riccio and Mr. Goldman then sues Simpson and Riccio's money goes toward the judgment?

[susie31023]

[quote=Joseph Bell;9140100][quote=William Anthony;9140023]

Well Joe,

What do you know? It seems that Susie took some offense at my post about where Australian school teachers come from and decided to comment on it. She then commented on the fact that LE had no duty to investigate Riccio's report, with which I disagreed. She then said that I was sarcastic and angry. Believing that she was as much my friend as she was yours and not wanting to see her leave, I apologized even though what I said was not meant in the way she took it. As I said and without being too specific, I was surprised to see you continue to post in the manner that you have and nothing was said publicly by Susie about you name calling and rude posts. It did not take me long to figure out what was truly going on. In any event I don't know what was said between the two of you privately and truly I am not concerned.

I am concerned with your continued name calling. You may fool some of the people all of the time and you may fool all of the people some of the time but you can't fool all the people all the time. I get what was said but I am not fool enough to buy it. It seems that, if Susie was intent on being honest she would have posted my publicly apology. I am not blaming you for anything that Susie did. I am just questioning her motivation. You may want to view things through a one-eyed or cloudy perspective but I choose to view them with both eyes open so that I can see the proper light that has been shed on the subject. Thanks. Did you meet Susie while you were in Georgia on the occasion that the Black woman took you to the best fried chicken place in Georgia? Never mind-don't answer that-I am truly not interested.

William I have never met JB, nor anyone else that posts on these boards. I do take offense that you seem to think that I should have chastised JB for his posts to you. The only thing I said in a pm to you was that you were not being nice when you made a comment that only certain posters were not invited to the party thread.

I have chosen not to participate in the racial remarks of anyone on this board. If that seems wrong to you then so be it. I have been accused of many things but never of being dishonest.
I will say that all my posts are my honest opinion and are not brought about by what others think I should post. I have never been rude to you or anyone else on his board and for you to imply that I conspired with JB was not only rude but very very wrong. I speak only for myself and never for anyone else.

I have read this board for a long time and could never understand why the main subject is never discussed. I have always tried to be respectful of each and every one of the posters here. For you to imply that I have in any way been dishonest really shows me that you were never my friend. If you were you would know that when I say something it is my own opinion and not some contrived lie that I have conspired with someone else to post to make you or anyone else feel bad.

I see race brought up here many times, but may I ask just one question please? Do you believe that there is such a thing as reverse discrimination? Truly there is, and I along with other's have been victims of it but you don't see anyone bringing this up. Race will always play a part in this world. But, that doesn't mean it is right, any form of racial discrimination is horrible and should never be accepted. I have fought for equal rights my whole life, and it may interest some to know that I have an adopted son who is black. He calls me mom and has for many years now. In fact I have been called mom by just about any race you can name. I don't see color when I look at a person I see what is inside of that person. I don't care if that pleases or displeases anyone. I take a person for what they are not what their skin color is not how much money they make not for any other reason but that they deserve to be treated the same as I would like to be treated. I never expected everyone to agree with my posts, only that they would at least take the time to study them before shooting them down so very quickly.

As to your apology, yes you did apologize but honestly I didn't feel you meant it. If I was wrong then I am truly sorry, but for you to post what you did above makes me feel that it wasn't entirely sincere. I never said anyone had to be lawyers to post here. I simple said unless someone knows all of the laws then we are not able to say what is required of LE. A lot of laws and rules of conduct can't be found on the internet, that is all that I meant.

I sincerely apologize for once again taking this thread off topic. I also sincerely hope everyone understands what I have tried very hard to convey in this post. William if you still feel that I am dishonest and a liar[ not a direct quote] then I really don't know what else to say. I have tried in every way to honestly show who I am as a person and if that does not please you then so be it. I simply was replying to your post about my honesty and sincerety. I wish you all nothing but happiness~Suz

[William Anthony]

[QUOTE][quote=William Anthony;9140118]

William I have never met JB, nor anyone else that posts on these boards. I do take offense that you seem to think that I should have chastised JB for his posts to you. The only thing I said in a pm to you was that you were not being nice when you made a comment that only certain posters were not invited to the party thread.

I have chosen not to participate in the racial remarks of anyone on this board. If that seems wrong to you then so be it. I have been accused of many things but never of being dishonest.
I will say that all my posts are my honest opinion and are not brought about by what others think I should post. I have never been rude to you or anyone else on his board and for you to imply that I conspired with JB was not only rude but very very wrong. I speak only for myself and never for anyone else.

I have read this board for a long time and could never understand why the main subject is never discussed. I have always tried to be respectful of each and every one of the posters here. For you to imply that I have in any way been dishonest really shows me that you were never my friend. If you were you would know that when I say something it is my own opinion and not some contrived lie that I have conspired with someone else to post to make you or anyone else feel bad.

I see race brought up here many times, but may I ask just one question please? Do you believe that there is such a thing as reverse discrimination? Truly there is, and I along with other's have been victims of it but you don't see anyone bringing this up. Race will always play a part in this world. But, that doesn't mean it is right, any form of racial discrimination is horrible and should never be accepted. I have fought for equal rights my whole life, and it may interest some to know that I have an adopted son who is black. He calls me mom and has for many years now. In fact I have been called mom by just about any race you can name. I don't see color when I look at a person I see what is inside of that person. I don't care if that pleases or displeases anyone. I take a person for what they are not what their skin color is not how much money they make not for any other reason but that they deserve to be treated the same as I would like to be treated. I never expected everyone to agree with my posts, only that they would at least take the time to study them before shooting them down so very quickly.

As to your apology, yes you did apologize but honestly I didn't feel you meant it. If I was wrong then I am truly sorry, but for you to post what you did above makes me feel that it wasn't entirely sincere. I never said anyone had to be lawyers to post here. I simple said unless someone knows all of the laws then we are not able to say what is required of LE. A lot of laws and rules of conduct can't be found on the internet, that is all that I meant.

I sincerely apologize for once again taking this thread off topic. I also sincerely hope everyone understands what I have tried very hard to convey in this post. William if you still feel that I am dishonest and a liar[ not a direct quote] then I really don't know what else to say. I have tried in every way to honestly show who I am as a person and if that does not please you then so be it. I simply was replying to your post about my honesty and sincerety. I wish you all nothing but happiness~Suz

I know that the subject of pms are not allowed. However, you brought it squarely to the board, so i will try to set the record straight. You indicated it was mean for me not to invited JB to the party and I mentioned his first fried chicken remark, to which you responded you would talk to him privately, after you had commented on my Australian teacher remark. I have never said that you were dishonest nor was that my intent. Perhaps, it was a poor choice of words when I should have said complete. I do apologize for that. We may sometimes unconsciously conspire with others and I ask that you consider that possibility. "We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people.-- "Letter from Birmingham Jail," April 16, 1963"

Perhaps, if you had asked me if my apology was sincere, as opposed to wanting to think the worst of me, for whatever reason then things would not have gotten to this level. I will take this opportunity to inform the community that I apologized to you in a pm. I will accept what you say you meant by your comment and not say that you are insincere. There were a couple of ways to take your comment, which was that unless someone has practiced law in Nevada.... I said that I did not take offense at it, because it could be interpreted as one poster's opinion being of no more value than another's. I was not quickly shooting your post down and I truly believe someone from LE told you that. However, what I was saying and should have said more artfully was a comment on the cohesiveness of that brotherhood. I think that all citizens expect LE to investigate the reports of crime and that is all I meant.

At this point I would like to reiterate my request for you to stay on this board and will add please, because I said you had much value to add to the board. Your question to me is a prime example of that. No, I do not believe in reverse discrimination. First, because it is an oxymoron. Discrimination in reverse is equality. That may seem to be simplistic. However, the courts have fashioned remedies to make whole those who have been victimized by discrimination. That was part of the process to eradicate it. It seems that shortly after 30 years of policies designed to make whole the victims of 300 years of discrimination, some felt that there had been enough remedial measures. What I do believe in is the eradication of discrimination, meaning regardless of immutable characteristics or lifestyles that any should be oppressed or not provided equal opportunities and rights. I will not go into the future effects of cultural alienation as a result of 300 years of oppression and only say that the oppressor seemed to have called foul all too prematurely. I sincerely hope that you reconsider and stay in our community. Perhaps, we will all learn something from you. I know how you feel about teachers and maybe you can be ours. :) Again, please stay and let's continue our friendship. Let me add that I am being sincere and honest in those requests. Thanks.

[William Anthony]

I really couldn't understand the disagreement on LE duties so I did some further research and it occurred to me that the use of the term LE may have different meaning for some and others. I think that perhaps a patrolman had the duty to ensure that the report got to the detective or that the detective had the responsibility to review the reports.

[William Anthony]

Susie,

This is commendable and I truly mean that.

"any form of racial discrimination is horrible and should never be accepted. I have fought for equal rights my whole life, and it may interest some to know that I have an adopted son who is black. He calls me mom and has for many years now. In fact I have been called mom by just about any race you can name."

Did you know, well at least in my state, that Blacks are not allowed to adopt White children? There are some highly suspect motives behind that decision, imho, that may very well be linked to the illusion of the concept of reverse discrimination.

http://books.google.com/books?id=0isJkiP4t0AC&pg=PA247&lpg=PA247&dq=Blacks+not+permitted+to+adopt+White+children&source=web&ots=x1KC5YFR-L&sig=nRGOD68NmF64okWnZ_HULBa3qjc&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result#PPA269,M1

http://www.pactadopt.org/press/articles/perceptions.html

"The rise of Black adoption recruitment efforts is changing all of this. Birth mothers who hear about Black adoption figure that if agencies are accepting Black people as adoptive applicants, they must be accepting Black babies, because agencies sure are not going to give White kids to Black people. And so, gradually, an African American birth parent has a does-she-parent or does-she-not-parent choice that White pregnant women have had for years."

[weezer]

"Psychologists, researchers and adoptees themselves say many children adopted transracially in past decades suffered from philosophies focused on assimilation, with little or no acknowledgment of racial and cultural conflict."

"In 2004, 26 percent of black children adopted from foster care, about 4,200, were adopted transracially, nearly all by whites. That is up from roughly 14 percent, or 2,200, in 1998, according to a New York Times analysis of data from the National Data Archive on Child Abuse and Neglect at Cornell University and from the Department of Health and Human Services."

"The Multiethnic Placement Act and its amendments prohibited federally financed agencies from denying adoption based on race."

"In practice, however, decisions about adoption placements are still influenced by racial considerations, many families say. Since 1994, white prospective parents have filed, and largely won, more than two dozen discrimination lawsuits, according to state and federal court records. Many more disputes have been settled in arbitration."

"Rhetoric around the issue has softened considerably since the National Association of Black Social Workers, in 1972, likened whites adopting black children to “cultural genocide.” The group removed the genocide reference from its policy statement in 1994, but it still recommends same-race placements. And organizations like the Child Welfare League have argued in recent years that while race need not be the primary consideration in placements, it should not be disregarded."

[William Anthony]

The law often reflects not what is right or wrong morally but what lobbyist and other pressure groups desire. President Theodore Roosevelt and the New Deal Administration had to put forth a battle to get what the people wanted and were initially met with opposition from the Supreme Court, It wasn't until he threatened to stack the Court that his and the people's desires were met to some extent. It was the ideology of the Chief Justice Earl Warren that enabled the advancements in the area of civil rights. His Court overturned the doctrine of Separate but Equal, while the majority of the people were against integration of public schools. Sometimes in the course of human endeavors, the law speaks not what the people want but what should be morally wrong or right and the debate still occurs as to whether or not that is the laws proper purpose. Hence, the debates over Roe v. Wade and the rights of homosexuals to marry partners of the same sex.

Correction- President Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal Administration...

[William Anthony]

Something about an above post did not seem quite right. So, I did some research and noticed a link had not been supplied. Here is the link.

http://ucbgsa.blogspot.com/2006/08/white-parents-black-children.html

Here is some of what that link went on to say.

"Many blacks still worry that white families cannot equip black children to navigate the country’s complicated racial landscape.

“Adoption, like everything else in this country, gets filtered through the lens of race,” said Joseph Crumbley, a black social worker in Philadelphia and a consultant on transracial adoptions. “For blacks, it is about how comfortable can whites be in dealing with the issue of race when their race is in conflict with the race of the child.”

At the same time, some blacks view international adoptions by whites as a slight to black children in need of permanent and stable homes. “I can’t help but wonder why Angelina and Brad can’t adopt an African-American baby here with so many in need,” said Ishia Granger, 36, a black friend of Ms. Brockway.

More than 45,000 black children were waiting to be adopted from foster care in 2004. There are no reliable national figures for private adoptions.

Advocates of black adoption criticize adoption agencies as not doing enough to recruit black families. But one strategy agencies use, in part, to recruit black families — reducing fees for African-American adoptions — seems to some critics like a literal devaluing of black children. And while current adoption laws impose penalties on federally financed agencies that discriminate, there are no penalties for failure to identify black adoptive families.

Both black and white families, at times, feel discriminated against. Charlene White, a black adoptive mother in Richmond, Va., said that when she and her husband, Malachi, began the process in 1997, a counselor asked them about drug and criminal records — questions a white couple they knew who were also adopting were not asked.

“It was definitely because we were black,” Ms. White said.

A white judge initially denied Nick and Emily Mebruer’s petition to adopt a black child, ruling that the Mebruers, a white couple who live in rural Lebanon, Mo., were “uniquely unqualified” to parent a black child because of their limited interaction with black people and culture. The ruling was overturned, and their daughter, Maggie, is now 3.

“We felt like it was an indictment of us and our entire community,” said Mrs. Mebruer, a family doctor, as Maggie played with a black doll in the center of the living room and danced to the Australian children’s group the Wiggles. “It was assuming that we didn’t have the desire or the capacity to learn.”

The Mebruers did not explicitly set out to adopt a black child. But when the Kansas City office of Catholic Charities called one spring afternoon to say that an infant was available and that they needed the couple’s decision within hours, the race of the child, Mr. Mebruer said, was secondary.

White families adopting black children are increasingly learning that the “love is enough” approach to adoption that families bring to the process is often met with skepticism.

Psychologists, researchers and adoptees themselves say many children adopted transracially in past decades suffered from philosophies focused on assimilation, with little or no acknowledgment of racial and cultural conflict.

Robert O’Connor, 39, who was raised by a white family in Rush City, Minn., recalled his struggles growing up in a small town with few other blacks. Throughout his youth, he said, he felt awkward around other blacks. He did not understand black trends in fashion or music or little things like playing the dozens, the oral tradition of dueling insults.

“I always felt like I had this ‘A’ on my forehead, this adoptee, that people could see from a far distance that I was different,” said Mr. O’Connor, who now researches transracial adoptions as assistant professor of social work at Metropolitan State University in St. Paul.

Today, some agencies are working to avoid mistakes of the past. Ms. Brockway and Mr. Timble are adopting through the Cradle, a Chicago agency that gives transracial adoptive parents extensive counseling as well as a course on “conspicuous families.”

One exercise meant to assess parents’ comfort level in confronting racial issues lists a roster of stereotypes including, “lazy,” “passive” and “athletic,” and asks parents to assign them to the race or ethnic group to which they are often applied.

Judy Stigger, a counselor at the Cradle and herself a white adoptive mother of two black children, now adults, makes the issues tangible to prospective parents by relating personal stories. She tells about the time when her son, then a teenager, reached into her purse at a McDonald’s and a clerk called security; and the time when her daughter began crying while looking through congratulatory cards sent by family and friends when they took her home."

[weezer]

I think the poster who stated that there were restrictions on adoption based on race, should do his/her civic duty and report that finding.

"The Multiethnic Placement Act and its amendments prohibited federally financed agencies from denying adoption based on race."

[William Anthony]

I think the poster should read what I said and I do believe I said it was not allowed. I did not say what the law was. I think that, if the poster, would read further than the portion of the quote that was supplied and supply the link, although I was able to find it, the poster would find the following.


"In practice, however, decisions about adoption placements are still influenced by racial considerations, many families say. Since 1994, white prospective parents have filed, and largely won, more than two dozen discrimination lawsuits, according to state and federal court records. Many more disputes have been settled in arbitration."

[weezer]

"The Multiethnic Placement Act and its amendments prohibited federally financed agencies from denying adoption based on race."

[William Anthony]

Here is an interesting case on how the law is applied to circumvent its purpose.

http://supreme.justia.com/us/189/475/case.html

"In practice, however, decisions about adoption placements are still influenced by racial considerations, many families say."

"because agencies sure are not going to give White kids to Black people."

Law without enforcement is a mockery.

[weezer]

"The Multiethnic Placement Act and its amendments prohibited federally financed agencies from denying adoption based on race."

[William Anthony]

Law without enforcement is a mockery. I said they were not allowed and not that they were lawfully denied.

[weezer]

"The Multiethnic Placement Act and its amendments prohibited federally financed agencies from denying adoption based on race."

[William Anthony]

It seems that some just want to argue to argue and that is petty. For fear that I will make myself look petty, I will retire from the game and devote my time ;to larger endeavors. Thanks for making others see my point;):cool:

[William Anthony]

Another example of the power of the courts can be seen in the case of Bush v. Gore. In that case the Supreme Court stopped the recount of votes, before the deadline for counting them and then, after the deadline, wrote an opinion that the Democrats could not count them, because they had missed the deadline. Given the examples it is easy to see how courts could justify LE's refusal to investigate and Riccio's surreptitious tapes.

[martin II]

I think the poster who stated that there were restrictions on adoption based on race, should do his/her civic duty and report that finding.

"The Multiethnic Placement Act and its amendments prohibited federally financed agencies from denying adoption based on race."


Why are so many white people going to Bulgaria,Poland,Romania, Korea,China etc to adopt when there are so many white and black children in America that need a home.There is a big business in India for surrogant mothers ($10,000.00 )for American women.imo
:shrug:

[weezer]

not sure what voting has to do with the erroneous statement ". . .Did you know, well at least in my state, that Blacks are not allowed to adopt White children? There are some highly suspect motives behind that decision, imho, that may very well be linked to the illusion of the concept of reverse discrimination. . ." made by a poster.

The fact is: "The Multiethnic Placement Act and its amendments prohibited federally financed agencies from denying adoption based on race."

I believe it is the duty of the poster to report his/her state to the authorities for breaking federal law. If the poster overstated, then he should at least apologize to the board.

[Kayleighjo]

What I thought was that you had been paying attention but not posting. Please, do not think that I am unfair? I am hard but fair. You want to try this friendship thing?

Alright-all sarcasm and insults aside-I actually like you and could probably kick back and have a beer with you, but your presentation of yourself is beyond frustrating!

At this point I am feeling like your unfair because you went on and did what you were telling me not to-you presumed to know something about me and some posts that happened here and acted as though I somehow had an agenda with not responding to something that I still have no idea of.

You presume to know about a position you claim I've gotten myself into and I definitely don't know what you're talking about with that but by the sound of the post it was a dig.

I'm definitely not perfect-and you might find me unfair too-but one thing I don't do is blow smoke and then preach to the rest of the board about a higher standard and fairness.

Send me back your thoughts and let's see what we can come up with. In the meantime, I'm going to steal more food.

[martin II]

"The Multiethnic Placement Act and its amendments prohibited federally financed agencies from denying adoption based on race."

Williams post is clear. Why do you continue to post ???:read:

[weezer]

Williams post is clear. Why do you continue to post ???:read:

the post stated as fact: ". . .Did you know, well at least in my state, that Blacks are not allowed to adopt White children? There are some highly suspect motives behind that decision, imho, that may very well be linked to the illusion of the concept of reverse discrimination. . ." made by a poster.

The fact is: "The Multiethnic Placement Act and its amendments prohibited federally financed agencies from denying adoption based on race."

do you not believe that he should report this illegality to the authorities?

[William Anthony]

Alright-all sarcasm and insults aside-I actually like you and could probably kick back and have a beer with you, but your presentation of yourself is beyond frustrating!

At this point I am feeling like your unfair because you went on and did what you were telling me not to-you presumed to know something about me and some posts that happened here and acted as though I somehow had an agenda with not responding to something that I still have no idea of.

You presume to know about a position you claim I've gotten myself into and I definitely don't know what you're talking about with that but by the sound of the post it was a dig.

I'm definitely not perfect-and you might find me unfair too-but one thing I don't do is blow smoke and then preach to the rest of the board about a higher standard and fairness.

Send me back your thoughts and let's see what we can come up with. In the meantime, I'm going to steal more food.

Thanks. Let me begin with things I am unclear about-my presentation of myself-I was talking about your story and I just want you to know that all men are not abusive (not that I think you think that but that it had to have some impact on how you feel). I like you too is why I asked about the friendship thing. I have never set myself out to be perfect, or at least hope I haven't. I am far from that and realize its a level I will never reach, so no sense in trying:). I am truly interested in fairness and believe that the group of posters on this board have a chance to make this board a cut above some I have seen. That's all I meant. I hope you aren't stealing from the RAPP inventory.:) There are certain things that raise my ire and, although I try, I cannot resist responding in kind. I will try harder. Thanks. I did not mean anything as a dig. We all bring our unique set of life experiences to the board and that is all that I meant. Again, I am forced to apologize if I said something that was not clear. Thanks for allowing me the opportunity to explain.

[William Anthony]

I think the authorities are well aware of the unlawful acts. Law without enforcement is a mockery. See what I mean, Kalieghjo? :)

[Kayleighjo]

Thanks. Let me begin with things I am unclear about-my presentation of myself-I was talking about your story and I just want you to know that all men are not abusive (not that I think you think that but that it had to have some impact on how you feel). I like you too is why I asked about the friendship thing. I have never set my self out to be perfect, or at least hope I haven't. I am far from that and realize its a level I will never reach, so no sense in trying:). I am truly interested in fairness and believe that the group of posters on this board have a chance to make this board a cut above some I have seen. That's all I meant. I hope you aren't stealing from the RAPP inventory.:) There are certain things that raise my ire and, although I try, I cannot resist responding in kind. I will try harder. Thanks.

To be very clear-I don't think all men are abusive and my experience didn't ever make me feel that way. Unfortunately, there is someone on this board who assumes that just because I have alot to say on the subject means that I'm throwing a pity party or that I have it out for all men. I guess he doesn't realize when he posts his nonsense that he makes it seem like he undermines the importance of domestic violence-which whether he wants to recognize it or not-is a HUGE problem in the U.S.

And yes of course I'm stealing from the RAPP inventory-where else would I get the goods from?

[William Anthony]

To be very clear-I don't think all men are abusive and my experience didn't ever make me feel that way. Unfortunately, there is someone on this board who assumes that just because I have alot to say on the subject means that I'm throwing a pity party or that I have it out for all men. I guess he doesn't realize when he posts his nonsense that he makes it seem like he undermines the importance of domestic violence-which whether he wants to recognize it or not-is a HUGE problem in the U.S.

And yes of course I'm stealing from the RAPP inventory-where else would I get the goods from?

Okay, let me see if I can ask you a question. Do you think that your experience had any impact on how you view Simpson as it related to the murder trial and to the armed robbery trial. I think the evidence was insufficient in the murder trial to make the necessary link from domestic abuser to murderer. That is just my way of saying what the jury heard. I gave him the benefit of the doubt, presumption of innocence, in the armed robbery trial until I reviewed Nevada Law on armed robbery. I am going to ask you one more time. Do you want to try this friendship thing? :)

[Kayleighjo]

Okay, let me see if I can ask you a question. Do you think that your experience had any impact on how you view Simpson as it related to the murder trial and to the armed robbery trial. I think the evidence was insufficient in the murder trial to make the necessary link from domestic abuser to murderer. That is just my way of saying what the jury heard. I gave him the benefit of the doubt, presumption of innocence, in the armed robbery trial until I reviewed Nevada Law on armed robbery. I am going to ask you one more time. Do you want to try this friendship thing? :)

I think that my experience made me more open to the possibility of Simpson being a batterer and a murderer. Let's face it-personal experience gives you insight to things that people who have never been through it maybe don't see. I grew up on football and knew all about the Juice-his football stats are still something I can quote you off the top of my head-and I saw him as the fun loving and super charismatic guy in the commercials and the movies. Loved watching him as a commentator for the NFL. But when the murders happened and the allegations of abuse started to come out it didn't surprise me as much as it did most people. That came from knowing that charismatic people can have a dark side too and from knowing that most of what a batterer does is in private. I don't think the stuff allowed or presented in the criminal trial made the connection between abuser=murderer but I think that outside of the trial the puzzle pieces fit together. But, without the other evidence I don't think I would have assumed that because he abused her had to mean he killed her-although I guess I can't answer that for sure because the other evidence WAS there. IMO.

My personal experience didn't impact how I view the guy as it relates to the armed robbery trial-his own presentation of himself through the years is what causes me to believe that he was shady through this whole thing too. And frankly, I'm not sad to see him take the hit-whether the charges were pumped up or not. I'm sure that's gonna offend your ideals, but it's time for the guy to answer for the illegal nonsense he partakes in.

[William Anthony]

I think that my experience made me more open to the possibility of Simpson being a batterer and a murderer. Let's face it-personal experience gives you insight to things that people who have never been through it maybe don't see. I grew up on football and knew all about the Juice-his football stats are still something I can quote you off the top of my head-and I saw him as the fun loving and super charismatic guy in the commercials and the movies. Loved watching him as a commentator for the NFL. But when the murders happened and the allegations of abuse started to come out it didn't surprise me as much as it did most people. That came from knowing that charismatic people can have a dark side too and from knowing that most of what a batterer does is in private. I don't think the stuff allowed or presented in the criminal trial made the connection between abuser=murderer but I think that outside of the trial the puzzle pieces fit together. But, without the other evidence I don't think I would have assumed that because he abused her had to mean he killed her-although I guess I can't answer that for sure because the other evidence WAS there. IMO.

My personal experience didn't impact how I view the guy as it relates to the armed robbery trial-his own presentation of himself through the years is what causes me to believe that he was shady through this whole thing too. And frankly, I'm not sad to see him take the hit-whether the charges were pumped up or not. I'm sure that's gonna offend your ideals, but it's time for the guy to answer for the illegal nonsense he partakes in.

I think you have answered the question. Thank you for understanding what I meant. There have been some who have criticized the criminal jury without considering that the evidence did not make domestic violence murder and I am glad we can agree on that. I also understand that to you the other information made him possibly a murderer in your mind.

It does not offend my ideals that you are not saddened to see him take the hit whether the charges are pumped up or not. I believe that under Nevada law he was guilty as charged and the prosecution proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt. I do question what circumstances should be allowed to be considered in his sentencing and whether or not he was unconstitutionally deprived of a defense, and the admissibility of the tapes. My concern is not just for him alone but to all citizens who may find themselves in similar situations as to the application of the law, if that makes sense.

[William Anthony]

I do not know why but I feel that this may be the appropriate time to explain why I am so passionate about the law and the courts. The Supreme Court long ago usurped the power "to say what the law is". In so doing they gave themselves the power to determine what rights/privileges we have and how they can be interfered with. The law is the paramount force in our futures and it is sometimes dependent on the philosophies and ideologies of the courts. The Court in Giles gave one of the most convoluted rulings to deny the right of a Black man to register to vote, denying the rights guaranteed under the 14th Amendment to equal protection, by stating that, if he was correct that the statute denying Blacks the right to register was unconstitutional, then allowing him to register would only add to the unconstitutionality of the law and did not strike the law or those registered under it. The Court created a catch-22 to deny rights. The law can be applied or not applied, depending on the reasoning of the court. I think a lot of the disagreements on this board are due to the application of the law and not understanding why it was applied in the manner it was.

[William Anthony]

Off topic-Thanksgiving is four days away.

[Kayleighjo]

I think you have answered the question. Thank you for understanding what I meant. There have been some who have criticized the criminal jury without considering that the evidence did not make domestic violence murder and I am glad we can agree on that. I also understand that to you the other information made him possibly a murderer in your mind.

It does not offend my ideals that you are not saddened to see him take the hit whether the charges are pumped up or not. I believe that under Nevada law he was guilty as charged and the prosecution proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt. I do question what circumstances should be allowed to be considered in his sentencing and whether or not he was unconstitutionally deprived of a defense, and the admissibility of the tapes. My concern is not just for him alone but to all citizens who may find themselves in similar situations as to the application of the law, if that makes sense.

I criticize the criminal jury too, just not for not connecting the DV and murder. I think Cochran incited alot of racial tension that was too big for some people to ignore and I resent it. I've got bi-racial kids and I want to see blacks and whites alike doing things to heal the wounds instead of wanting to constantly keep them open and gaping-which is exactly what I think Cochran wanted to use to his advantage. Wasn't sorry to see that guy take his hit either.

I'm the first to admit that I don't anything about mitigating circumstances or anything of the sort, so I keep pretty quiet on that.

[tv]

Susie,

This is commendable and I truly mean that.

"any form of racial discrimination is horrible and should never be accepted. I have fought for equal rights my whole life, and it may interest some to know that I have an adopted son who is black. He calls me mom and has for many years now. In fact I have been called mom by just about any race you can name."

Did you know, well at least in my state, that Blacks are not allowed to adopt White children? There are some highly suspect motives behind that decision, imho, that may very well be linked to the illusion of the concept of reverse discrimination.

http://books.google.com/books?id=0isJkiP4t0AC&pg=PA247&lpg=PA247&dq=Blacks+not+permitted+to+adopt+White+children&source=web&ots=x1KC5YFR-L&sig=nRGOD68NmF64okWnZ_HULBa3qjc&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result#PPA269,M1

http://www.pactadopt.org/press/articles/perceptions.html

"The rise of Black adoption recruitment efforts is changing all of this. Birth mothers who hear about Black adoption figure that if agencies are accepting Black people as adoptive applicants, they must be accepting Black babies, because agencies sure are not going to give White kids to Black people. And so, gradually, an African American birth parent has a does-she-parent or does-she-not-parent choice that White pregnant women have had for years."

Your use of this word makes me believe that you indeed thought it was not allowed under law. I don't intend to argue with you about this -- I just wanted you to know why it looks like you meant it was the law. There's nothing wrong with admitting you made a mistake.

[William Anthony]

Your use of this word makes me believe that you indeed thought it was not allowed under law. I don't intend to argue with you about this -- I just wanted you to know why it looks like you meant it was the law. There's nothing wrong with admitting you made a mistake.

I can understand your confusion. However, I usually say the court's decision or the judge's decision or under the law when I am speaking in a legal context. What I meant was that there was a conscientious decision not to allow Blacks to adopt White children and that may be related to the illusion of the concept of reverse discrimination, in that white children raised by Blacks may grow up to hold Black values and see the inequality perpetrated by marcosystems designed to perpetrated the inequality, You will see that I made no reference to the law or the court when I used the word decision.

[William Anthony]

I criticize the criminal jury too, just not for not connecting the DV and murder. I think Cochran incited alot of racial tension that was too big for some people to ignore and I resent it. I've got bi-racial kids and I want to see blacks and whites alike doing things to heal the wounds instead of wanting to constantly keep them open and gaping-which is exactly what I think Cochran wanted to use to his advantage. Wasn't sorry to see that guy take his hit either.

I'm the first to admit that I don't anything about mitigating circumstances or anything of the sort, so I keep pretty quiet on that.

I tend to see it differently. He did not incite racial tensions but he did bring to light those tensions that were there and may have played a part in the investigation. I do not think he took an UNFAIR advantage of those tensions. I think that if MF and people like him had been weeded out of LE long before the murders, then there would not have been any reason to bring forth how those feelings could have tainted the investigation. I too want racial healing. I think that, if these things are not exposed, so that they can be corrected, then those tensions will remain and some day explode. I will ask you to explain what you meant by "that guy take his hit".

Mitigating circumstances have to do with things like a person being abused or disadvantaged or being of good moral character before committing a crime and that could possibly lead to a reduction in his sentence. I know that people take a lot of interest in them in death penalty cases.

[William Anthony]

This may help as it pertains to mitigating circumstances.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/mitigating+circumstances

[tv]

I can understand your confusion. However, I usually say the court's decision or the judge's decision or under the law when I am speaking in a legal context. What I meant was that there was a conscientious decision not to allow Blacks to adopt White children and that may be related to the illusion of the concept of reverse discrimination, in that white children raised by Blacks may grow up to hold Black values and see the inequality perpetrated by marcosystems designed to perpetrated the inequality, You will see that I made no reference to the law or the court when I used the word decision.

I'm not confused.

[tv]

I can understand your confusion. However, I usually say the court's decision or the judge's decision or under the law when I am speaking in a legal context. What I meant was that there was a conscientious decision not to allow Blacks to adopt White children and that may be related to the illusion of the concept of reverse discrimination, in that white children raised by Blacks may grow up to hold Black values and see the inequality perpetrated by marcosystems designed to perpetrated the inequality, You will see that I made no reference to the law or the court when I used the word decision.

How did this 'decision' come about? Did all the adoption agencies and child welfare agencies in your state have a big meeting and decide this? How was a consensus on perpetuating this practice reached?

[William Anthony]

I'm not confused.

The reason I said that was because you seemed to be telling me that there was no reason not to admit I made a mistake and when I speak of the law I sometimes use the word decision. However when I speak of legal decisions I do so in the context that I posted. I also say ruling and opinion. I have said that I did not say that they were lawfully denied. I do not know if you read that. However, what I am saying is that I understand how you could have thought that but that is not what I said. I don't know how to say it much better than this.

[William Anthony]

How did this 'decision' come about? Did all the adoption agencies and child welfare agencies in your state have a big meeting and decide this? How was a consensus on perpetuating this practice reached?

I have no idea on that. I can only tell you what the practice is and that is substantiated by the link I supplied. My sister is the second in command in her state's mental health system and often travels the country, meeting with other heads from other states. I am sure that policies are discussed in those meetings to find out what works in one state and may or may not be adopted. I can only go by the literature on the subject and what I have observed and what my sociology instructor, who is the head of the Children and Youth Services in my State has told me. She has a doctorate degree and is Black and the subject of social inequality has greatly effected her. I got the feeling from her that it was an unwritten policy but after the break I will be glad to ask her to expound on the subject.

[tv]

The reason I said that was because you seemed to be telling me that there was no reason not to admit I made a mistake and when I speak of the law I sometimes use the word decision. However when I speak of legal decisions I do so in the context that I posted. I also say ruling and opinion. I have said that I did not say that they were lawfully denied. I do not know if you read that. However, what I am saying is that I understand how you could have thought that but that is not what I said. I don't know how to say it much better than this.

Have black welfare agency and adoption agency workers spoken out against this or are they part of the white wall of silence?

[tv]

I have no idea on that. I can only tell you what the practice is and that is substantiated by the link I supplied. My sister is the second in command in her state's mental health system and often travels the country, meeting with other heads from other states. I am sure that policies are discussed in those meetings to find out what works in one state and may or may not be adopted. I can only go by the literature on the subject and what I have observed and what my sociology instructor, who is the head of the Children and Youth Services in my State has told me. She has a doctorate degree and is Black and the subject of social inequality has greatly effected her. I got the feeling from her that it was an unwritten policy but after the break I will be glad to ask her to expound on the subject.

I appreciate your offer to speak to your instructor but I have the feeling I'm not going to be in the mood for it. If you can't cite a law I'd prefer to let the subject rest.

[weezer]

How did this 'decision' come about? Did all the adoption agencies and child welfare agencies in your state have a big meeting and decide this? How was a consensus on perpetuating this practice reached?

there was no equivocation in the statement: ". . .Did you know, well at least in my state, that Blacks are not allowed to adopt White children? There are some highly suspect motives behind that decision, imho, that may very well be linked to the illusion of the concept of reverse discrimination. . ."

I wonder how this state is getting by with defying federal law? doh -- maybe they're not. maybe the poster simply overstated the case :eek:

[William Anthony]

Have black welfare agency and adoption agency workers spoken out against this or are they part of the white wall of silence?

I do not know what you mean by Black welfare agency. I think your post was addressed to my other post. I did some quick research and found this link.

http://www.futureofchildren.org/information2827/information_show.htm?doc_id=77436

You will see that the article speaks to the law, practice written and unwritten policies. I am not part of the adoption arena but my gut feeling, since there are so many articles on it, is that they have spoken out and that those involved would be against transracial adoptions in any form but that does not speak to the issue that Whites are allowed to adopt Black children and for the most part Blacks are not allowed to adopt White children.

[William Anthony]

I appreciate your offer to speak to your instructor but I have the feeling I'm not going to be in the mood for it. If you can't cite a law I'd prefer to let the subject rest.

Why would I cite a law, if I was speaking of policy. You decided to step into the discussion and now you want to tiptoe out (all puns intended).:)

[tv]

there was no equivocation in the statement: ". . .Did you know, well at least in my state, that Blacks are not allowed to adopt White children? There are some highly suspect motives behind that decision, imho, that may very well be linked to the illusion of the concept of reverse discrimination. . ."

I wonder how this state is getting by with defying federal law? doh -- maybe they're not. maybe the poster simply overstated the case :eek:

I agree. Overstated is a fair way to put it. :)

[tv]

Why would I cite a law, if I was speaking of policy. You decided to step into the discussion and now you want to tiptoe out (all puns intended).:)

I'm not tiptoeing anywhere. You're trying to talk your way out of a misstatement. It's okay, William, we all make mistakes. :)

[William Anthony]

First and I reiterate, I was not speaking legally. Second, I refer to the statements in the links that there are ways to circumvent the law and what is actually practiced. Third I point to the court's own interpretation on how to selectively apply the law. I sense that some here can not appreciate the fact that some can disagree with me and still find value in what I say, learn something, and even somewhat like me. They seem to want to engage in petty arguments for the sake of arguing.

[tv]

I do not know what you mean by Black welfare agency. I think your post was addressed to my other post. I did some quick research and found this link.

http://www.futureofchildren.org/information2827/information_show.htm?doc_id=77436

You will see that the article speaks to the law, practice written and unwritten policies. I am not part of the adoption arena but my gut feeling, since there are so many articles on it, is that they have spoken out and that those involved would be against transracial adoptions in any form but that does not speak to the issue that Whites are allowed to adopt Black children and for the most part Blacks are not allowed to adopt White children.I said black workers not black agency. Don't try to twist this around on me, please.

[William Anthony]

I agree. Overstated is a fair way to put it. :)

I think it was you who asked me not to put words in your mouth and I ask you to do the same. Other than your mistake on the word decision, when I mentioned nothing about the law in my original post, no mistake has been made.:)

[tv]

First and I reiterate, I was not speaking legally. Second, I refer to the statements in the links that there are ways to circumvent the law and what is actually practiced. Third I point to the court's own interpretation on how to selectively apply the law. I sense that some here can not appreciate the fact that some can disagree with me and still find value in what I say, learn something, and even somewhat like me. They seem to want to engage in petty arguments for the sake of arguing.

No, you are wrong again William. I'm sick of all these things being posted that make white people look like their main goal in life is to oppress blacks and make their lives miserable. It's just not so.

[tv]

I think it was you who asked me not to put words in your mouth and I ask you to do the same. Other than your mistake on the word decision, when I mentioned nothing about the law in my original post, no mistake has been made.:)

You screwed up what you said about a law and I'm mistaken? I'm leaving before this escalates. :seeya:

[William Anthony]

I said black workers not black agency. Don't try to twist this around on me, please.

Originally Posted by tvdinner View Post
Have black welfare agency and adoption agency workers spoken out against this or are they part of the white wall of silence?

See how things can be misinterpreted by an inexact language. I will accept that you meant workers and hope that you will out of fairness not say I said or meant something I did not. :)

[William Anthony]

You screwed up what you said about a law and I'm mistaken? I'm leaving before this escalates. :seeya:

Show me in my original post where I said anything about a law before you tiptoe away, please?:) Here is my original post.

"Did you know, well at least in my state, that Blacks are not allowed to adopt White children? There are some highly suspect motives behind that decision, imho, that may very well be linked to the illusion of the concept of reverse discrimination."

[William Anthony]

No, you are wrong again William. I'm sick of all these things being posted that make white people look like their main goal in life is to oppress blacks and make their lives miserable. It's just not so.

You misunderstand again. I believe that those Whites, who have adopted Black children have done so, because they love them. Did you not read my post to Susie? What I am saying is that those in power have perpetrated a system, albeit not out of racial hatred so much as preservation of the status quo, that maintains the balance of power by perpetrating inequality. I am saying that Black welfare workers and adoption agency workers probably did speak out about the injustice as part of the inequality they observed, whether or not they were speaking against assimilation and the courts made the law that race could not be a consideration but there are so many ways to circumvent that law and the practice still remains.

[weezer]

maybe it's not so much the 'inexact language' as it is some readers comprehension? :shrug:

[weezer]

not sure how this became the oppression of the Black community --

"Rhetoric around the issue has softened considerably since the National Association of Black Social Workers, in 1972, likened whites adopting black children to “cultural genocide.” The group removed the genocide reference from its policy statement in 1994, but it still recommends same-race placements. And organizations like the Child Welfare League have argued in recent years that while race need not be the primary consideration in placements, it should not be disregarded."

[William Anthony]

I may agree on some readers comprehension, especially one, since they placed on the board only partial excepts and do not supply links and a law that had nothing to do with an original post. ;):cool:

[William Anthony]

This comprehension thing. Did the poster not read the portion she last posted from the article before stating not sure how this came to be a black suppression thing. Perhaps, the poster is unaware of the benefits to class consciousness, members of a particular class uniting to promote a common goal, and that effects of the alienation of members from that class.

[weezer]

was orenthal james simpson adopted? did orenthal james simpson adopt any children? and, last but not least, would someone kindly report the state where william lives because there are people/agencies there breaking federal law and evidently the citizens don't care. :shrug:

[William Anthony]

There seemed to be a poster here, who desired to walk barefoot into a conversation, not knowing that those toes opened a can which she filled with worms through tackling things she had limited knowledge about, such as placing a law on the board that had nothing to do with the subject matter of the discussion that was being held and then proceeded to walk on the worms by not fully understanding what she read and then wants to accuse a whole state of people for not reporting, when the evidence is that there are ways to circumvent that law through practices (which I do not think it irrational to apply to most states) and has not provided any evidence that there have not been reports, when the articles in the links indicate that there have been reports. I think some will let their personal feelings cloud their judgment. ;):cool: Least I forget, the poster was fully eager to engage in the discussion, despite another poster's suggestion that she read and now wants to ask about Simpson being adopted. wink, cool.

[weezer]

the character of a man can be found in the truth of his words --

[William Anthony]

The path of one not so wise may be found in the journey that the feet take.

[weezer]

and a liar is a liar; a hypocrite a hypocrite. . . .

:seeya:

[William Anthony]

A mirror never lies.

[weezer]

but we know one poster who does blatantly --

hi william.

[William Anthony]

I did not know that you did so blatantly. I thought you truly believed the false information and accusations you post. ;):cool:

[Kayleighjo]

I tend to see it differently. He did not incite racial tensions but he did bring to light those tensions that were there and may have played a part in the investigation. I do not think he took an UNFAIR advantage of those tensions. I think that if MF and people like him had been weeded out of LE long before the murders, then there would not have been any reason to bring forth how those feelings could have tainted the investigation. I too want racial healing. I think that, if these things are not exposed, so that they can be corrected, then those tensions will remain and some day explode. I will ask you to explain what you meant by "that guy take his hit".

Mitigating circumstances have to do with things like a person being abused or disadvantaged or being of good moral character before committing a crime and that could possibly lead to a reduction in his sentence. I know that people take a lot of interest in them in death penalty cases.

Meaning the absolute outrage sent his way in the aftermath, not that he really cared-but I was gleeful with the constant barrage of jokes at his expense. I can't say that I was sympathetic at the news of his death-I wouldn't take pleasure in it the way tons of people did-but it definitely didn't make me feel as though we lost a great person.

Sooooo, is mitigating circumstances something that is always considered during the sentencing phase?

[William Anthony]

Meaning the absolute outrage sent his way in the aftermath, not that he really cared-but I was gleeful with the constant barrage of jokes at his expense. I can't say that I was sympathetic at the news of his death-I wouldn't take pleasure in it the way tons of people did-but it definitely didn't make me feel as though we lost a great person.

Sooooo, is mitigating circumstances something that is always considered during the sentencing phase?

I am saddened by the death of anyone. I did admire his skills in the courtroom. I think he was man enough to take the jokes and saw them for what they were.

I do not know if a hearing is always held but I do think the judge takes both mitigating and aggravating circumstances into consideration before imposing sentence.

[tv]

Show me in my original post where I said anything about a law before you tiptoe away, please?:) Here is my original post.

"Did you know, well at least in my state, that Blacks are not allowed to adopt White children? There are some highly suspect motives behind that decision, imho, that may very well be linked to the illusion of the concept of reverse discrimination."

I know what your original post states. I haven't changed my opinion of what you meant.

Another thing -- of course you don't believe in reverse discrimination because that would mean a race other than white could be guilty of racial prejudices. I've been the victim of reverse discrimination and I've seen it in practice several times. Would you like an example?

[martin II]

I know what your original post states. I haven't changed my opinion of what you meant.

Another thing -- of course you don't believe in reverse discrimination because that would mean a race other than white could be guilty of racial prejudices. I've been the victim of reverse discrimination and I've seen it in practice several times. Would you like an example?

Maby you only thought that was what it was?

[tv]

Maby you only thought that was what it was?Maybe you only think that blacks have been discriminated against?

[martin II]

See how things can be misinterpreted by an inexact language. I will accept that you meant workers and hope that you will out of fairness not say I said or meant something I did not. :)

Welfare agencies are operated by the State. Is there a Black state that i am not aware of.Please inform.

[tv]

Welfare agencies are operated by the State. Is there a Black state that i am not aware of.Please inform.martin, I didn't say anything about a black state. You need to stop stirring up trouble where none exists.

[martin II]

Maybe you only think that blacks have been discriminated against?

What i am thinking is that you believe the last part of your post is true.
Brown vs Board of education U.S. Supreme Court.

[martin II]

martin, I didn't say anything about a black state. You need to stop stirring up trouble where none exists.

What is black welfare agencies??

[tv]

What i am thinking is that you believe the last part of your post is true.
Brown vs Board of education U.S. Supreme Court.

Which post are you referring to? If you think only blacks are the victims of discrimination you need to get your head out of the sand. The whining that you do about being oppressed doesn't hold as much water as it used to. In case you hadn't noticed our new President is a black man elected by popular vote. He couldn't have been elected without white votes. Is there some reason we can't move on from this 17th century mindset that you seem to enjoy so much?

[tv]

What is black welfare agencies??

Black WORKERS, martin. Black people that WORK for welfare agencies. You're starting to look silly.

[susie31023]

Maybe you only think that blacks have been discriminated against?

TV, I too have been a victim of it and I do know that it exists. Anyone who fools themselves by saying it doesn't exist is just hiding their head in the sand. No offense intended but it truly does. I wont go into details but I have seen it many times over the course of my time on this earth.

Equality is one thing but this in no way can be said to be equality. I believe everyone of every color is equal, but that doesn't mean that all are treated equal, nor does that mean that only blacks have been discriminated against.

If anyone doubts what I say please ask the American Indian, who was not only discriminated against but almost anhialated[sp?]. I believe FBG was correct in what h/she said and that was that none of this has anything to do with the OJ Simpson case. I apologize for my part in derailing this thread.~Suz

[tv]

TV, I too have been a victim of it and I do know that it exists. Anyone who fools themselves by saying it doesn't exist is just hiding their head in the sand. No offense intended but it truly does. I wont go into details but I have seen it many times over the course of my time on this earth.

Equality is one thing but this in no way can be said to be equality. I believe everyone of every color is equal, but that doesn't mean that all are treated equal, nor does that mean that only blacks have been discriminated against.

If anyone doubts what I say please ask the American Indian, who was not only discriminated against but almost anhialated[sp?]. I believe FBG was correct in what h/she said and that was that none of this has anything to do with the OJ Simpson case. I apologize for my part in derailing this thread.~Suz

Thanks, Susie, you said it much more clearly and much better than I did. I don't mean to minimize the discrimination that blacks have endured but I think it's a bright new day and we should look forward instead of continually playing the blame game. I agree about the American Indian...a very sad history in that they were nearly destroyed.

Don't worry about derailing. This thread went south long ago. :)

[William Anthony]

I know what your original post states. I haven't changed my opinion of what you meant.

Another thing -- of course you don't believe in reverse discrimination because that would mean a race other than white could be guilty of racial prejudices. I've been the victim of reverse discrimination and I've seen it in practice several times. Would you like an example?

I see so you do not desire to play fair. :) You want to tell me what I meant.

There is no such thing as reverse discrimination. There is simply discrimination. Discrimination reversed is equality. Studies and the law realized that Blacks and yes Indians and other minorities, including women, have been discriminated against and put forth remedies to make whole the victims of discrimination. I think you realize that the discrimination I referred to was political, employment, housing, education, and financial discrimination. As ugly as it is to face, Blacks were chattle slaves and no other race endured that and then there were jim crow laws. I do not think that 30 years of remedies adequately addresses the 300 years of those types of inequalities. Although I do believe those remedies adversely impacted some Whites, I do think that it may have been necessary to even the playing field.

[martin II]

No, you are wrong again William. I'm sick of all these things being posted that make white people look like their main goal in life is to oppress blacks and make their lives miserable. It's just not so.

Maby you don't believe that Racism against blacks/Minorities is a hugh problem in America.

[martin II]

I see so you do not desire to play fair. :) You want to tell me what I meant.

There is no such thing as reverse discrimination. There is simply discrimination. Discrimination reversed is equality. Studies and the law realized that Blacks and yes Indians and other minorities, including women, have been discriminated against and put forth remedies to make whole the victims of discrimination. I think you realize that the discrimination I referred to was political, employment, housing, education, and financial discrimination. As ugly as it is to face, Blacks were chattle slaves and no other race endured that and then there were jim crow laws. I do not think that 30 years of remedies adequately addresses the 300 years of those types of inequalities. Although I do believe those remedies adversely impacted some Whites, I do think that it may have been necessary to even the playing field.


William you are doing quite well.:beer:

[William Anthony]

TV, I too have been a victim of it and I do know that it exists. Anyone who fools themselves by saying it doesn't exist is just hiding their head in the sand. No offense intended but it truly does. I wont go into details but I have seen it many times over the course of my time on this earth.

Equality is one thing but this in no way can be said to be equality. I believe everyone of every color is equal, but that doesn't mean that all are treated equal, nor does that mean that only blacks have been discriminated against.

If anyone doubts what I say please ask the American Indian, who was not only discriminated against but almost anhialated[sp?]. I believe FBG was correct in what h/she said and that was that none of this has anything to do with the OJ Simpson case. I apologize for my part in derailing this thread.~Suz

I, for one, have never said that Blacks were the only race discriminated against. There was enough to go around and the Anglo-Saxon White Protestant male made sure that he doled it out. The thread is not derailed. It was somewhat quizzical to hear the White man complain so rapidly when Blacks, whom he had for years denied the right to receive an education, complain of reverse discrimination because Blacks were picked over him to attend college. The poster to whom you refer was eager to engage in the conversation until she was called out on some of her posts. Being off topic did not bother her up until that point. Because the American Indian was almost annihilated does not negate the discrimination others suffered, to include women.

[martin II]

TV, I too have been a victim of it and I do know that it exists. Anyone who fools themselves by saying it doesn't exist is just hiding their head in the sand. No offense intended but it truly does. I wont go into details but I have seen it many times over the course of my time on this earth.

Equality is one thing but this in no way can be said to be equality. I believe everyone of every color is equal, but that doesn't mean that all are treated equal, nor does that mean that only blacks have been discriminated against.

If anyone doubts what I say please ask the American Indian, who was not only discriminated against but almost anhialated[sp?]. I believe FBG was correct in what h/she said and that was that none of this has anything to do with the OJ Simpson case. I apologize for my part in derailing this thread.~Suz

The thread was derailed long before your post.

[William Anthony]

Thanks, Susie, you said it much more clearly and much better than I did. I don't mean to minimize the discrimination that blacks have endured but I think it's a bright new day and we should look forward instead of continually playing the blame game. I agree about the American Indian...a very sad history in that they were nearly destroyed.

Don't worry about derailing. This thread went south long ago. :)

I totally agree that we should look forward and hope that change is really in the future. However, as we look forward we should not forget to look behind us. It is kinda like the football running back that has broken away and slowed down not looking behind him to know that his progress in reaching the goal line was in danger and finds that he has been tackled 10 yards short of the goal. The game can be lost through complacency, imho.

[weezer]

your hatred toward white people is pathetic. imo

so, we do all agree that orenthal didn't suffer discrimination don't we?

[weezer]

TV, I too have been a victim of it and I do know that it exists. Anyone who fools themselves by saying it doesn't exist is just hiding their head in the sand. No offense intended but it truly does. I wont go into details but I have seen it many times over the course of my time on this earth.

Equality is one thing but this in no way can be said to be equality. I believe everyone of every color is equal, but that doesn't mean that all are treated equal, nor does that mean that only blacks have been discriminated against.

If anyone doubts what I say please ask the American Indian, who was not only discriminated against but almost anhialated[sp?]. I believe FBG was correct in what h/she said and that was that none of this has anything to do with the OJ Simpson case. I apologize for my part in derailing this thread.~Suz

nice job Suzie -- unfortunately, there is a whole generation that was brought up believing the they are entitled to something because somewhere in the past people were wronged. I think we all agree that discrimination is wrong and is not to be tolerated. I also believe that the tolerance is a two-way street. imo

[William Anthony]

My hatred is toward ignorance and not a race. Inequality in America is the product of ignorance. No, we do not agree that Simpson was not the product of discrimination. Perhaps, it is just blind disregard to want to deny the truth of history and the effect it has on us.

[weezer]

well guess what? it's time to get over it and move on. . . .

[William Anthony]

I guess that some here want to disagree with the law that said a whole generation of people were entitled to something, namely the American Indians, Blacks and Women, because of past discrimination. I am glad that some feel that discrimination should not be tolerated any longer, even though it was tolerated past 1965. Does that lack of tolerance include calling the criminal jury uneducated, ignorant and racially biased because we did not agree with their verdict? Does that tolerance include the appalling silence of good people when they see racially offensive posts?

[martin II]

Which post are you referring to? If you think only blacks are the victims of discrimination you need to get your head out of the sand. The whining that you do about being oppressed doesn't hold as much water as it used to. In case you hadn't noticed our new President is a black man elected by popular vote. He couldn't have been elected without white votes. Is there some reason we can't move on from this 17th century mindset that you seem to enjoy so much?

Racism and discrinmination ended on Nov 4.Right?

[William Anthony]

I don't think any one who has not placed their toes in the footprints of those who have suffered and whose ancestors suffered the effects of chattle slavery has the right to tell another when it is time to move on. However, I must consider the source, since the poster has shown that they are capable of making vile, reprehensible, evil, mean spirited and unthinking posts, imho.

[weezer]

it's time to get over it and move on -- you just simply can't be the victim forever. be a part of the change -- contribute -- quit sitting there complaining -- start treating fellow Americans equal --

[martin II]

well guess what? it's time to get over it and move on. . . .

That is what i have said to fred but you always dissagree and call me names for suggesting that he do what you are now telling blacks to do.More nonsense from you.:cool:

[weezer]

I don't think any one who has not placed their toes in the footprints of those who have suffered and whose ancestors suffered the effects of chattle slavery has the right to tell another when it is time to move on. However, I must consider the source, since the poster has shown that they are capable of making vile, reprehensible, evil, mean spirited and unthinking posts, imho.

don't tell martin -- he thinks he knows what Mr. Goldman should do and Mr. Goldman actually felt the pain. . . .

[William Anthony]

Racism and discrinmination ended on Nov 4.Right?

Martin,

I made a comment in class to one of my instructors who is a judge. I told him that I was proud and hope that the Nov. 4th election would have a beneficial effect on the world and America but it may impact Blacks adversely in local communities. He thought about what I said and at the end of class when we got on the elevator he admitted he had not previously considered it. He asked a female classmate who was also on the elevator if she ever heard of DWB and she said not until she came here. She was from a small all White town.

[weezer]

That is what i have said to fred but you always dissagree and call me names for suggesting that he do what you are now telling blacks to do.More nonsense from you.:cool:

nope -- actually I've said no one has the right to tell someone else when to 'get over it' -- especially not someone who hasn't felt the pain. I still feel that way toward people who have actually felt the pain. I don't so much feel that way toward people who are 'victims' --

[William Anthony]

I have never told Mr. Goldman what he should do. I have said that hatred is a useless emotion. That is why I appreciate history and do not hate anyone. Wouldn't you agree that the past should be the light that guides our future? Wouldn't you agree that hatred makes you say vile, reprehensible, callous, unthinking, evil and mean spirited things?

[weezer]

I have never told Mr. Goldman what he should do. I have said that hatred is a useless emotion. That is why I appreciate history and do not hate anyone. Wouldn't you agree that the past should be the light that guides our future? Wouldn't you agree that hatred makes you say vile, reprehensible, callous, unthinking, evil and mean spirited things?

I've certainly witnessed those traits on this board by at least two posters. . .

[William Anthony]

I've certainly witnessed those traits on this board by at least two posters. . .

Me too,

JB and you (oops, that poetry thing, again).

[weezer]

Me too,

JB and you (oops, that poetry thing, again).

not nice to call names william. that's the kind of stuff that gets people in trouble.

[William Anthony]

not nice to call names william. that's the kind of stuff that gets people in trouble.

I have not called any names my remark was in regard to the types of posts that you say were placed on the board by two people. I have always believed you do not trouble trouble, unless trouble troubles you. I think you entered into this conversation with some remarks about comprehension.


Quote:
Originally Posted by William Anthony View Post
I have never told Mr. Goldman what he should do. I have said that hatred is a useless emotion. That is why I appreciate history and do not hate anyone. Wouldn't you agree that the past should be the light that guides our future? Wouldn't you agree that hatred makes you say vile, reprehensible, callous, unthinking, evil and mean spirited things?

I've certainly witnessed those traits on this board by at least two posters. . . by fbgweezer

[weezer]

I have not called any names my remark was in regard to the types of posts that you say were placed on the board by two people.

again with the 'not so truthful' posts --

oh well, I should tell you that your ranting is my afternoon entertainment. Now if I can just get you to tell me again about how mistreated you are (and always have been), my afternoon will be complete.

[William Anthony]

again with the 'not so truthful' posts --

oh well, I should tell you that your ranting is my afternoon entertainment. Now if I can just get you to tell me again about how mistreated you are (and always have been), my afternoon will be complete.

If you insist, I have been mistreated and, imho, so have others who have tried to post to you unless they agree with you. ;):cool:

[William Anthony]

not nice to call names william. that's the kind of stuff that gets people in trouble.

Did you call me a liar and a hypocrite, today? It seems some like trouble. ;):cool:

[weezer]

Did you call me a liar and a hypocrite, today? It seems some like trouble. ;):cool:

that's not calling names william -- that's stating fact. You lied about the post where you said your state did not allow black people to adopt white babies and stood by that lie even when it was pointed out that there was a federal law prohitibing those acts. even given the opportunity to bow out gracefully, you couldn't be honorable about it --you hung with your lie.

hypocrite: person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.

[William Anthony]

that's not calling names william -- that's stating fact. You lied about the post where you said your state did not allow black people to adopt white babies and stood by that lie even when it was pointed out that there was a federal law prohitibing those acts. even given the opportunity to bow out gracefully, you couldn't be honorable about it --you hung with your lie.

hypocrite: person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.

I have told the board that I am no Christian but that I do believe in God. I have told the board where I stand on equality and racial prejudice. I have reserved the right to respond in kind, although I said I would try harder. If you find any hypocrisy in that it must be hidden in some shoes. ;):cool:

That my dear woman is name calling. Yes, that is what I said. I did not say that what they did was legal. I have spoken to the head of CYS and that is what she relayed. I have provided a link to prove what I said as to the practice, despite the law. You again call me a liar. You act as if laws are not broken every day. You want me to bow out gracefully when you stumbled over your own feet and read into something I did not say. Martin advised you to :read:, which seemingly you chose to ignore and now you have stooped to name calling when you put your toes in your mouth. I will consider the source. ;):cool:

[weezer]

I have told the board that I am no Christian but that I do believe in God. I have told the board where I stand on equality and racial prejudice. I have reserved the right to respond in kind, although I said I would try harder. If you find any hypocrisy in that it must be hidden in some shoes. ;):cool:

That my dear woman is name calling. Yes, that is what I said. I did not say that what they did was legal. I have spoken to the head of CYS and that is what she relayed. I have provided a link to prove what I said as to the practice, despite the law. You again call me a liar. You act as if laws are not broken every day. You want me to bow out gracefully when you stumbled over your own feet and read into something I did not say. Martin advised you to :read:, which seemingly you chose to ignore and now you have stooped to name calling when you put your toes in your mouth. I will consider the source. ;):cool:

whatever -- you know, your continual innuendoes to toes/feet are not lost one me. is the color that bothers you?

[William Anthony]

whatever -- you know, your continual innuendoes to toes/feet are not lost one me. is the color that bothers you?

No, I just think they should be covered up for reasons that will remain personal out of politeness. ;):cool:

[weezer]

No, I just think they should be covered up for reasons that will remain personal out of politeness. ;):cool:

riiiiight -- I'm thinking/believing it's the color. well, it's usually too hot to wear shoes so I guess this is one more thing you need to get over. sorry.

[William Anthony]

riiiiight -- I'm thinking/believing it's the color. well, it's usually too hot to wear shoes so I guess this is one more thing you need to get over. sorry.

Why am I not surprised to hear that you do not believe me?:) Come now, did you forget that I spend two years in Texas? I wore combat boots laced to the top and pants bloused in them. Couldn't you at least wear shoes that covered the toes? Never mind-I spent my time in the service fighting for your right to not wear them and when I returned I still did not have equal rights. I can get over the toes but some things are harder to get over than others.

[martin II]

nope -- actually I've said no one has the right to tell someone else when to 'get over it' -- especially not someone who hasn't felt the pain. I still feel that way toward people who have actually felt the pain. I don't so much feel that way toward people who are 'victims' --

Considering some of your past post i doubt you are in a position or have the knowledge to inform blacks or any othet miniroty what they should do.

[martin II]

not nice to call names william. that's the kind of stuff that gets people in trouble.

You have called more posters names here than all posters put togeather.IMO
Your last mean spirited post which i took to be aimed at certain posters was over the top for me.

[martin II]

riiiiight -- I'm thinking/believing it's the color. well, it's usually too hot to wear shoes so I guess this is one more thing you need to get over. sorry.

I was told that they looked deformed.

[martin II]

that's not calling names william -- that's stating fact. You lied about the post where you said your state did not allow black people to adopt white babies and stood by that lie even when it was pointed out that there was a federal law prohitibing those acts. even given the opportunity to bow out gracefully, you couldn't be honorable about it --you hung with your lie.

hypocrite: person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.

You need to :read: and stop calling posters names.Not everyone feels compelled to ageree with you.

[martin II]

again with the 'not so truthful' posts --

oh well, I should tell you that your ranting is my afternoon entertainment. Now if I can just get you to tell me again about how mistreated you are (and always have been), my afternoon will be complete.

Don't worry, i doubt any minority is waiting for or need your assistance so just keep on keeping on.

[William Anthony]

Considering some of your past post i doubt you are in a position or have the knowledge to inform blacks or any othet miniroty what they should do.

Martin,

What don't you understand? When you hear stories of how your people were treated and you read on it, you could not possibly feel pain. When I cried when I saw Reverend Jessie Jackson cry, I could not feel his pain, wishing MLK had not been killed so that he could see that day. I could not feel his joy at seeing that day. I could not see that the images of those who were killed and beaten in the struggle for equal rights through his eyes haunted him. Don't you understand that we are not entitled in the minds of some to feel pain? Don't you understand that we could not feel the pain of our mothers and fathers, who were forced to work as much overtime as possible to give us a better life and had to work harder than others to keep jobs that paid less than others received for doing the same work? Don't you understand that we cannot feel their pain when supervisors talked to them as if they were dirt? Don't you understand that we are simply victims?

[weezer]

wait, wait -- I need more tissue. . .

[martin II]

wait, wait -- I need more tissue. . .

Weezer Believe me no one has asked for your assistance on concern.I understand where you are comming from.

[weezer]

Weezer Believe me no one has asked for your assistance on concern.I understand where you are comming from.

oh but martin I am concerned. I worry about your health like you've worried about Mr. Goldman's health. I really believe you need to get over this 'victim mentality' and move on. Don't you?

[tv]

I, for one, have never said that Blacks were the only race discriminated against. There was enough to go around and the Anglo-Saxon White Protestant male made sure that he doled it out. The thread is not derailed. It was somewhat quizzical to hear the White man complain so rapidly when Blacks, whom he had for years denied the right to receive an education, complain of reverse discrimination because Blacks were picked over him to attend college. The poster to whom you refer was eager to engage in the conversation until she was called out on some of her posts. Being off topic did not bother her up until that point. Because the American Indian was almost annihilated does not negate the discrimination others suffered, to include women.

Did I miss the post where someone said they were discriminated against for college admission? I truly didn't see it.

There are other forms of discrimination which comes directly from the treatment of whites by blacks. Sorry if you refuse to admit it exists but it does. However, I put my big girl pants on and move forward from situations such as that. I prefer to learn from experiences rather than throw myself a pity party.

[William Anthony]

We have moved up because we have not forgotten or gotten over the past and America has not either. The tribute to America's greatness is that a step has been made in cashing that check it wrote a long time ago.

[tv]

That is what i have said to fred but you always dissagree and call me names for suggesting that he do what you are now telling blacks to do.More nonsense from you.:cool:There's a bit of a difference between 14 years and 143 years don't you think?

[William Anthony]

Did I miss the post where someone said they were discriminated against for college admission? I truly didn't see it.

There are other forms of discrimination which comes directly from the treatment of whites by blacks. Sorry if you refuse to admit it exists but it does. However, I put my big girl pants on and move forward from situations such as that. I prefer to learn from experiences rather than throw myself a pity party.

What type of discrimination would that be that comes from Blacks to Whites? When have Blacks enslaved Whites, treated them as subhumans, denied them an education, told them that they could have an inferior education, denied them the right to vote, said their vote was 3/5 of a Black man's, paid them less money for the same work? What big girl pants pity parties have you moved away from?

[weezer]

I'm afraid it will not be this generation that sees the real changes -- it will take a generation seizing the moment and moving forward to realize the real changes.

[William Anthony]

there's a bit of a difference between 14 years and 143 years don't you think?

2008-1619=389

[tv]

We have moved up because we have not forgotten or gotten over the past and America has not either. The tribute to America's greatness is that a step has been made in cashing that check it wrote a long time ago.You may consider it cashing a check but it was a vote from the American people on who they wanted for president. You do Barack Obama and all American citizens who voted for him (black and white) a grave disservice and insult when you characterize his election to leader of the free world as 'cashing a check'. Good heavens, William.

[William Anthony]

My sociology instructor asked the question about what made some a good quarterback. The class went into the innate talents, body structure and practice to name a few. I thought about what she was really asking and knew it pertained to the recent election. One may be blessed with a unique set of characteristics that let him rise above and a lot of that has to do with life chances. For instance, Obama was not raised in a ghetto and was raised in Hawaii with a diverse population. He was not raised in the Chicago ghetto but went there to understand who he is. The question did not deal solely with innate characteristics but dealt with the condition of the masses and the opportunities they will be afforded. Real change hasn't arrived yet and I hope all generations realize that.

[William Anthony]

You may consider it cashing a check but it was a vote from the American people on who they wanted for president. You do Barack Obama and all American citizens who voted for him (black and white) a grave disservice and insult when you characterize his election to leader of the free world as 'cashing a check'. Good heavens, William.

You do a disservice to America, the Constitution, unbiased Black and White Americans, and the late Dr. Martin Luther King and all those who died for America to cash that promised check that "all men are created equal." Do you seriously think that every thing in America was changed forever when he was elected. He is just the President and there is only so much he can do in that executive position. I have said that we cannot afford to become complacent or deceived into believing we can. I am sure you heard of the two who met over the internet and conspired to kill a certain number of Blacks, decapitate a certain number and Kill the president elect and they were not of my generation. It is not the stupid ones that I fear. It is the intelligent ones that harbor those type of feelings. When that changes, America has changed. Let's continue open and honest discussion in search of a resolution.

[tv]

What type of discrimination would that be that comes from Blacks to Whites? When have Blacks enslaved Whites, treated them as subhumans, denied them an education, told them that they could have an inferior education, denied them the right to vote, said their vote was 3/5 of a Black man's, paid them less money for the same work? What big girl pants pity parties have you moved away from?Sorry, I don't intend to give you more ammunition for your tirade against whites. You'll just have to take my word for it or dismiss me as a liar. Your choice.

[tv]

My sociology instructor asked the question about what made some a good quarterback. The class went into the innate talents, body structure and practice to name a few. I thought about what she was really asking and knew it pertained to the recent election. One may be blessed with a unique set of characteristics that let him rise above and a lot of that has to do with life chances. For instance, Obama was not raised in a ghetto and was raised in Hawaii with a diverse population. He was not raised in the Chicago ghetto but went there to understand who he is. The question did not deal solely with innate characteristics but dealt with the condition of the masses and the opportunities they will be afforded. Real change hasn't arrived yet and I hope all generations realize that. This puts me in the mind of a character from your favorite movie...will nothing ever be enough to satifsy the empty hole in your soul?

[William Anthony]

Sorry, I don't intend to give you more ammunition for your tirade against whites. You'll just have to take my word for it or dismiss me as a liar. Your choice.

I choose to do neither. I just think that you do not understand. It is not that Blacks are not invited to your big girl pants parties that matters. It is not that you are not invited to Blacks big men pants parties that matters. it is that you and I both have equal rights and opportunities to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and to our posterity that matters.

[tv]

2008-1619=389
Slavery ended in 1865.

[William Anthony]

This puts me in the mind of a character from your favorite movie...will nothing ever be enough to satifsy the empty hole in your soul?

A very astute observation on your part. True equality will make that hole overflow with joy.

[William Anthony]

Slavery ended in 1865.

Inequality of opportunity did not.

[tv]

I choose to do neither. I just think that you do not understand. It is not that Blacks are not invited to your big girl pants parties that matters. It is not that you are not invited to Blacks big men pants parties that matters. it is that you and I both have equal rights and opportunities to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and to our posterity that matters.

Exactly. We are equal.

[weezer]

Exactly. We are equal.

good post.

[William Anthony]

Exactly. We are equal.

Not yet. If you think that is true, then let a Black raised in the ghetto move into an all white neighborhood married to a blue-eyed blond White woman. Oh yes, that happened and some White people said he abandoned his race. However, if you married a Black man that had been living alone in an all White neighborhood, no Black person would say you abandoned your race.

[William Anthony]

I see some continue their unthinking and callous posts and may truly not know good from bad.

[tv]

A very astute observation on your part. True equality will make that hole overflow with joy.
That hole will never be filled for you and for that I'm sorry. You hold whites collectively responsible for the institution of slavery and the inequality of hundreds of years but berating people on this message board isn't going to fix it.

[weezer]

Not yet. If you think that is true, then let a Black raised in the ghetto move into an all white neighborhood married to a blue-eyed blond White woman. Oh yes, that happened and some White people said he abandoned his race. However, if you married a Black man that had been living alone in an all White neighborhood, no Black person would say you abandoned your race.

you know william, I'm beginning to really believe that you are so blinded by your hatred that you really don't see past your own perceived victimization. that's sad. truly, truly sad.

[weezer]

That hole will never be filled for you and for that I'm sorry. You hold whites collectively responsible for the institution of slavery and the inequality of hundreds of years but berating people on this message board isn't going to fix it.

:beer::beer:

[William Anthony]

Exactly. We are equal.

It continues to matter simply because we are not equal. You are not equal in rights to men and neither of us are equal in rights to White men and the Black woman is not equal to either of us.

[William Anthony]

you know william, I'm beginning to really believe that you are so blinded by your hatred that you really don't see past your own perceived victimization. that's sad. truly, truly sad.

I see you have your cheerleader.:) The truth is that I speak reality and you speak of an illusion. You want to make me hate, because it pains you to see reality, imho. I hate stupidity.

[weezer]

It continues to matter simply because we are not equal. You are not equal in rights to men and neither of us are equal in rights to White men and the Black woman is not equal to either of us.

only when looking through eyes of hatred could such a statement be made. you assume everyone harbors your hatred -- you are wrong. why do you find it so hard to embrace this time in history and move forward? what are you afraid of losing? could it possibly that cloak you've wrapped yourself in? give it up william and try to help make this America better --

[tv]

Not yet. If you think that is true, then let a Black raised in the ghetto move into an all white neighborhood married to a blue-eyed blond White woman. Oh yes, that happened and some White people said he abandoned his race. However, if you married a Black man that had been living alone in an all White neighborhood, no Black person would say you abandoned your race.

William, I don't have a problem with OJ Simpson living in a white neighborhood or marrying a white woman and having mostly white friends. That means nothing to me. My problem is that when the going got tough he turned to the very community that he chose to no longer be a part of and used them for his own benefit. He knew he could maniipulate the feelings of the people that may have had less than good interactions with LE. Or let me restate that-- Johnny Cochran knew he could manipulate those feelings and OJ Simpson happily went along with it.

[William Anthony]

That hole will never be filled for you and for that I'm sorry. You hold whites collectively responsible for the institution of slavery and the inequality of hundreds of years but berating people on this message board isn't going to fix it.

I think that you really need to study history. I berated no one. I was called a liar and a hypocrite. You started talking about what I meant but could not offer one shred of evidence to support what you thought I meant and did not believe me after I told you what I meant. I was the one that was berated. Please, don't distort history. I accepted what you said you meant. Please, don't distort inequality. ;):cool:

[tv]

It continues to matter simply because we are not equal. You are not equal in rights to men and neither of us are equal in rights to White men and the Black woman is not equal to either of us.

I am equal to any man or woman, black or white. As long as you think you're not equal to others then you won't be. Yours is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

[William Anthony]

William, I don't have a problem with OJ Simpson living in a white neighborhood or marrying a white woman and having mostly white friends. That means nothing to me. My problem is that when the going got tough he turned to the very community that he chose to no longer be a part of and used them for his own benefit. He knew he could maniipulate the feelings of the people that may have had less than good interactions with LE. Or let me restate that-- Johnny Cochran knew he could manipulate those feelings and OJ Simpson happily went along with it.

Please, stop distorting history? It was the prosecution that sought the change of venue. LE manipulated the feelings of those people. LE took the oath to serve and protect.

[William Anthony]

I am equal to any man or woman, black or white. As long as you think you're not equal to others then you won't be. Yours is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I have often said that I am as good as any man and better than none, which is how I live my life. However, that doesn't mean that I have the same rights as any man nor does it mean that women are currently receiving equal pay for equal work. Have you seen the documentary, "Uncounted". It is worth watching.

[tv]

Please, stop distorting history? It was the prosecution that sought the change of venue. LE manipulated the feelings of those people. LE took the oath to serve and protect.Riiight. ;)

[weezer]

William, I don't have a problem with OJ Simpson living in a white neighborhood or marrying a white woman and having mostly white friends. That means nothing to me. My problem is that when the going got tough he turned to the very community that he chose to no longer be a part of and used them for his own benefit. He knew he could maniipulate the feelings of the people that may have had less than good interactions with LE. Or let me restate that-- Johnny Cochran knew he could manipulate those feelings and OJ Simpson happily went along with it.

it became obvious that it was not the White community that had a problem with orenthal marrying a white woman but rather the Black community. cochran made his living off the distortions and manipulations of the Black community - a very, very good living. imo

[tv]

I have often said that I am as good as any man and better than none, which is how I live my life. However, that doesn't mean that I have the same rights as any man nor does it mean that women are currently receiving equal pay for equal work. Have you seen the documentary, "Uncounted". It is worth watching.
At the risk of opening the floodgates what rights do you not have that other men do?

[weezer]

At the risk of opening the floodgates what rights do you not have that other men do?

ahh geez tv --- :punch:

[tv]

it became obvious that it was not the White community that had a problem with orenthal marrying a white woman but rather the Black community. cochran made his living off the distortions and manipulations of the Black community - a very, very good living. imo

Yes, he did. He knew his audience well during the trial and took full advantage of it. Poor Marcia Clarke actually thought the black women of the jury would sympathize with Nicole...Johnny Cocran had to be laughing at her.

[tv]

ahh geez tv --- :punch:

Sorry, I lost my head for a minute. :tongue:

[weezer]

sorry, i lost my head for a minute. :tongue:

lol -- :d

[William Anthony]

If the Black community had a problem, why do you think they acquitted?

[weezer]

If the Black community had a problem, why do you think they acquitted?

I don't have to 'think' -- they told us: we take care of our own and black power salute.

[tv]

only when looking through eyes of hatred could such a statement be made. you assume everyone harbors your hatred -- you are wrong. why do you find it so hard to embrace this time in history and move forward? what are you afraid of losing? could it possibly that cloak you've wrapped yourself in? give it up william and try to help make this America better --

Great post. :)

[William Anthony]

At the risk of opening the floodgates what rights do you not have that other men do?

All. Let me give you an example. I worked for a company that took care of mentally challenged adults in community living arrangements. There was one apartment that none of the staff cared to work. However, other Blacks and me were sent to work there and none of the Whites. One day one of the clients who lived there told me to get out of his apartment, which is their right by law. When I informed the supervisor and told her that I would not violate his rights until he changed his mind, she got mad and ordered me to stay. She heard him tell me to get out. I told her I was leaving and would work any other apartment I was fired for insubordination. In deposition, I asked her why no whites were assigned to that apartment. She told me that the Blacks fit the profile, assertive and not easily intimidated. I asked her were all the Whites non-assertive and easily intimidated. She said yes. Their lawyer wanted to settle right after the deposition. What you have on paper is altogether different that what is practiced. See what I mean. ;):cool:

[William Anthony]

According to the prior theory he was not one of their own.

[William Anthony]

Great post. :)

The only one who harbors hatred is the one that speak so viciously, callously, reprehensibly, vilely, mean spiritedly and unthinkingly. Try as you may I have no hatred only a realistic outlook of the future based on the past. Only those who do not want to see the truth would call that post great or want to be a co-cheerleader. I think that the community got a good look for themselves at what is going on and the levels to which some will stoop. I think I have accomplished my purpose, today. May the two of you have a good evening, tiptoeing around the truth taking that path reserved for you and please do not harm you hands patting each other on the back, smile.

[tv]

According to the prior theory he was not one of their own.Taking care of their own trumped everything else. Besides, Johnny Cochran was so slick I don't think they even realized they were being manipulated.

[tv]

The only one who harbors hatred is the one that speak so viciously, callously, reprehensibly, vilely, mean spiritedly and unthinkingly. Try as you may I have no hatred only a realistic outlook of the future base on the past. Only those who do not want to see the truth would call that post great or want to be a co-cheerleader. I think that the community got a good look for themselves at what is going on and the levels to which some will stoop. I think I have accomplished my purpose, today.I thought your purpose was open and honest communication. I think everyone can make their own judgment about today's discussion.

[William Anthony]

I thought your purpose was open and honest communication. I think everyone can make their own judgment about today's discussion.

Exactly and you and the other poster whose name I choose not to speak expressed your feelings in open and honest discussion. Maybe tomorrow we can move toward resolution. :)

[tv]

All. Let me give you an example. I worked for a company that took care of mentally challenged adults in community living arrangements. There was one apartment that none of the staff cared to work. However, other Blacks and me were sent to work there and none of the Whites. One day one of the clients who lived there told me to get out of his apartment, which is their right by law. When I informed the supervisor and told her that I would not violate his rights until he changed his mind, she got mad and ordered me to stay. She heard him tell me to get out. I told her I was leaving and would work any other apartment I was fired for insubordination. In deposition, I asked her why no whites were assigned to that apartment. She told me that the Blacks fit the profile, assertive and not easily intimidated. I asked her were all the Whites non-assertive and easily intimidated. She said yes. Their lawyer wanted to settle right after the deposition. What you have on paper is altogether different that what is practiced. See what I mean. ;):cool:
Of course I see what you mean. You're going to find ignorance in every walk of life. Armed robbery is illegal on paper also but it doesn't mean that no one is going to do it.

[tv]

Exactly and you and the other poster whose name I choose not to speak expressed your feelings in open and honest discussion. Maybe tomorrow we can move toward resolution. :)William, you continually accuse me of tiptoeing. Just so there is no misunderstanding I'm not going to handle you with kid gloves any longer. It's giving me an ulcer.

[William Anthony]

Taking care of their own trumped everything else. Besides, Johnny Cochran was so slick I don't think they even realized they were being manipulated.

Not even he could have manipulated a jury that thought Simpson was a sell out, imho. Of course, I am speaking from a Black perspective. You may Know better than me but remember how angry the Black man got that begged McCain to win when he was called a sell out. There is truly a negative reaction to and no one, well not many, want to be viewed as sell outs.

[William Anthony]

William, you continually accuse me of tiptoeing. Just so there is no misunderstanding I'm not going to handle you with kid gloves any longer. It's giving me an ulcer.

Well you are a nurse and should know how to treat it. :)

[William Anthony]

Of course I see what you mean. You're going to find ignorance in every walk of life. Armed robbery is illegal on paper also but it doesn't mean that no one is going to do it.

Eureka. Employment discrimination is illegal on paper but that does not stop those intent upon engaging in it. Simpson paid the price and so did the company. :)

[tv]

Well you are a nurse and should know how to treat it. :)
I'm a big believer in preventive medicine. :)

[William Anthony]

I'm a big believer in preventive medicine. :)

Alrighty then, don't trip over anyone's toes. :) Have a good night.

[tv]

Not even he could have manipulated a jury that thought Simpson was a sell out, imho. Of course, I am speaking from a Black perspective. You may Know better than me but remember how angry the Black man got that begged McCain to win when he was called a sell out. There is truly a negative reaction to and no one, well not many, want to be viewed as sell outs.
I know not of what you speak. :confused:

[tv]

Eureka. Employment discrimination is illegal on paper but that does not stop those intent upon engaging in it. Simpson paid the price and so did the company. :)I'm happy you got the monetary settlement as you were obviously treated unfairly. It would seem in this case that money was the great equalizer. ;)

[tv]

Alrighty then, don't trip over anyone's toes. :) Have a good night.I hope you have a good night also. You can have pleasant dreams about how horrible everyone will think I am in the morning. :)

[William Anthony]

I'm happy you got the monetary settlement as you were obviously treated unfairly. It would seem in this case that money was the great equalizer. ;)

Money was to make me whole or to put me in the position I would have been had the discrimination not occurred. I did not win. They avoided a legal decision saying that the engaged in employment discrimination. They didn't win. That is why it is called a settlement. I realized that a jury would not likely have given me appreciably more than the settlement. I did have an attorney say to the judge at the settlement conference that he respected me. That was my win.

[William Anthony]

I hope you have a good night also. You can have pleasant dreams about how horrible everyone will think I am in the morning. :)

I hope no one thinks you horrible just loyal to a fault. :)

[martin II]

oh but martin I am concerned. I worry about your health like you've worried about Mr. Goldman's health. I really believe you need to get over this 'victim mentality' and move on. Don't you?

Speaking about past injustices and working to get support for change in attitudes is not being a victim. Labeling people that work and speak against racism as suffering from 'VICTIM MENTALITY" is just another example of racism in itself. I am not concern that you may be tired of the subject of discrimination as that is your problem and i am not sure you have any power to make any changes even if you happen to realize that change is required.
So i suggest you continue on your current path as it does not effect the issue.
imo
martin II

[martin II]

That hole will never be filled for you and for that I'm sorry. You hold whites collectively responsible for the institution of slavery and the inequality of hundreds of years but berating people on this message board isn't going to fix it.

Why is it that when slavery and discrimination is brought up here some just say get over it, i am tired of the victim mentality stuff?

[William Anthony]

I hope you have a good night also. You can have pleasant dreams about how horrible everyone will think I am in the morning. :)

We have had our disagreements and some of them have been stronger than others. I did not want anyone to imply that I thought you were a bad person. I have been informed that I have a way of saying things. Perhaps, I have been misunderstood. To me, you also have a way of speaking and sometimes you have informed me that they were meant as a joke. Believe me, I can understand posters not taking things as jokes. I think that you are loyal to your friends and would not speak ill of them no matter what they did and that is an admirable quality to me. There is much truth in what you posted, yesterday, about progress being made and the hope for a better future. I hope you understand my point in that I was not negating the progress but simply saying more can and should be done and all Americans cannot afford to rest until all Americans have equal rights and equal opportunities that are equally enforced, without regard to any differences. Yes, I believe America is moving in the right direction and hope it continues on that path. We as Americans must understand it is not us against them. It is all Americans fighting to make the words of the Constitution vibrant. You only need to look at the Government Bailout and consider who is receiving the money to see the true nature of our fight. If they can bailout the rich, why not the poor? Who needs it most, those who have squandered it or those who have never had the opportunity? Americans should not be satisfied with moving on, unless they are moving up. I hope you understand what I am saying and that it is quite unthinking to tell people who have been oppressed to move on and forget about it. I do not think anyone would tell the Jews that. I don't think anyone feels that way about the plight of Native Americans. Again I do admire your loyalty, even if I do not agree with where you placed it.

[Kayleighjo]

I was told that they looked deformed.

Doesn't take long for you does it martin? You stick your foot in your mouth so often it's no wonder you don't have a fondness for toes though.

[Kayleighjo]

What type of discrimination would that be that comes from Blacks to Whites? When have Blacks enslaved Whites, treated them as subhumans, denied them an education, told them that they could have an inferior education, denied them the right to vote, said their vote was 3/5 of a Black man's, paid them less money for the same work? What big girl pants pity parties have you moved away from?

So are you forgetting that blacks still enslave blacks over in Africa? Or is it only when whitey takes the black man that you feel the pain? And can we remember that women were once denied the right to vote too? Or the fact that women still to this day generally make less money than a man in the same position? God William, it is not ALL ABOUT black suffering.

[Kayleighjo]

However, if you married a Black man that had been living alone in an all White neighborhood, no Black person would say you abandoned your race.

That's not true ... I've lived that scenario-been there and done that- and the biggest grief I got was from blacks-and yes, many of them said I was a race traitor.

[William Anthony]

So are you forgetting that blacks still enslave blacks over in Africa? Or is it only when whitey takes the black man that you feel the pain? And can we remember that women were once denied the right to vote too? Or the fact that women still to this day generally make less money than a man in the same position? God William, it is not ALL ABOUT black suffering.

I was responding to this post, which is why I posed the questions.

Originally Posted by tvdinner View Post
Did I miss the post where someone said they were discriminated against for college admission? I truly didn't see it.

There are other forms of discrimination which comes directly from the treatment of whites by blacks. Sorry if you refuse to admit it exists but it does. However, I put my big girl pants on and move forward from situations such as that. I prefer to learn from experiences rather than throw myself a pity party.

I have also acknowledged in my posts that others suffered discrimination and did not mean to minimize their suffering. Having never been to Africa but one day wish that I might, I was limiting my response to what happened in America. However, you do bring up a valid point. Perhaps, America will soon become involved in the atrocity of slavery that is occurring in Africa and it too can be eliminated. I think America should have done more sooner.

[Kayleighjo]

I was responding to this post, which is why I posed the questions.



I have also acknowledged in my posts that others suffered discrimination and did not mean to minimize their suffering. Having never been to Africa but one day wish that I might, I was limiting my response to what happened in America. However, you do bring up a valid point. Perhaps, America will soon become involved in the atrocity of slavery that is occurring in Africa and it too can be eliminated. I think America should have done more sooner.

I think America needs to work on saving America right now.

[William Anthony]

That's not true ... I've lived that scenario-been there and done that- and the biggest grief I got was from blacks-and yes, many of them said I was a race traitor.

I think you might have missed my point. I said a Black man that had been living alone in an all White neighborhood. The point being that there were no Blacks there to criticize the White female. I appreciate what you are saying and I realize that you were being polite in what you were called. I too have been involved in interracial dating and know the accusations from both races. The point that I was making is that there is more acceptance in affluent communities of White women, who have crossed the color line, because of the financial status of the Black man and there would be limited contact with the Black community up and until a situation like Simpson's.

[weezer]

I think America needs to work on saving America right now.

AMEN! :patriot:

[William Anthony]

I think America needs to work on saving America right now.

I agree. As it pertains to eliminating inequality, poverty and slavery, I think America should have worked on that long long ago. I think that you then negate or disagree with the concept of manifest destiny. I think America can do both-don't you?

[Kayleighjo]

I think you might have missed my point. I said a Black man that had been living alone in an all White neighborhood. The point being that there were no Blacks there to criticize the White female. I appreciate what you are saying and I realize that you were being polite in what you were called. I too have been involved in interracial dating and know the accusations from both races. The point that I was making is that there is more acceptance in affluent communities of White women, who have crossed the color line, because of the financial status of the Black man and there would be limited contact with the Black community up and until a situation like Simpson's.

Yes-I'm being polite-but the point here is blacks are just as capable as whites of prejudices and racism-like I said, I lived it. These people knew nothing about me other than that I was a white, blonde chick and they hated me immediately. Presumed to know who I was as a person while knowing nothing about who I was as a person.

The old ways of this nation SUCKED William, and I don't think anyone here is denying that. Inequality shouldn't exist, and it does but I just want you to remember to understand that it's not just blacks that were once denied rights, or that still experience inequality.

The golf course that the Masters is played on won't let a woman on the course. They used to not let blacks on the course. Tiger Woods plays there now, and so have several other black men, but know what? Woman still can't step foot on it to play.

[Kayleighjo]

amen! :patriot:

love the toes weezer!!!

[William Anthony]

Yes-I'm being polite-but the point here is blacks are just as capable as whites of prejudices and racism-like I said, I lived it. These people knew nothing about me other than that I was a white, blonde chick and they hated me immediately. Presumed to know who I was as a person while knowing nothing about who I was as a person.

The old ways of this nation SUCKED William, and I don't think anyone here is denying that. Inequality shouldn't exist, and it does but I just want you to remember to understand that it's not just blacks that were once denied rights, or that still experience inequality.

The golf course that the Masters is played on won't let a woman on the course. They used to not let blacks on the course. Tiger Woods plays there now, and so have several other black men, but know what? Woman still can't step foot on it to play.

We are not disagreeing. I am not denying that some Blacks are racists and readily admit that women have and still do suffer from discrimination, which is why I commented on the equal pay. I think that you are aware women have gained rights soon after they were given to Blacks. I truly believe that this is not just a new day for Blacks but also for women. I hope I am right. My point and I really do not think that many may be interested in discussing it is that the larger inequality has to do with the financial aspect and the effects of cultural alienation, when I gave the example. My point is that Blacks have never been in power to discriminate against Whites in any meaningful way that would adversely impact Whites long into the future and toleration is largely based on finances. I hope I am making myself clearer.

[weezer]

love the toes weezer!!!

aw shucks -- thanks! :D

[William Anthony]

I love shoes and don't call me Neiman Marcus. :)

[weezer]

I love shoes and don't call me Neiman Marcus. :)

how about we just refer to you as Bruno?

[William Anthony]

how about we just refer to you as Bruno?

I prefer Stacy or Mr. Adams. When I am in a sporty kind of mood, You can say Timberland or Jordan. :)

[tv]

I hope no one thinks you horrible just loyal to a fault. :)I'm not sure who or what you're referring to but if it's fbgweezer then I'm sure you know she doesn't need my loyalty -- she's very capable of speaking for herself. I'm sorry if it annoys you that I'm friendly to weezer and Joseph Bell but I've been choosing who I associate with for over 40 years and will continue to do so.

[tv]

I prefer Stacy or Mr. Adams. When I am in a sporty kind of mood, You can say Timberland or Jordan. :)I think flip-flop will do.

[William Anthony]

I'm not sure who or what you're referring to but if it's fbgweezer then I'm sure you know she doesn't need my loyalty -- she's very capable of speaking for herself. I'm sorry if it annoys you that I'm friendly to weezer and Joseph Bell but I've been choosing who I associate with for over 40 years and will continue to do so.

Please, do not mistake my post as an attempted infringement on your right to freely associate. I was simply making an observation and agreeing with Dr. MLK's statement about the "appalling silence of good people". Why you have the right to associate with the NAACP, Black welfare agency workers or any other group that you may choose.;):cool:

[William Anthony]

I think flip-flop will do.

No, I was not going to share but WTH. I had ingrown toenails and had them surgically removed on my big toes and they were injected so that they would never grow back. I know I have ugly toes and have the decency and respect to keep them covered. See why I like shoes? :)

[tv]

No, I was not going to share but WTH. I had ingrown toenails and had them surgically removed on my big toes and they were injected so that they would never grow back. I know I have ugly toes and have the decency and respect to keep them covered. See why I like shoes? :)I see now why you have such a fixation on feet. Now, if only the reason behind some of your other obsessions were more clear...:)

[tv]

Please, do not mistake my post as an attempted infringement on your right to freely associate. I was simply making an observation and agreeing with Dr. MLK's statement about the "appalling silence of good people". Why you have the right to associate with the NAACP, Black welfare agency workers or any other group that you may choose.;):cool:Thank you, William. By the way, that's black workers not black welfare agencies. :) I didn't want any confusion.

[William Anthony]

I see now why you have such a fixation on feet. Now, if only the reason behind some of your other obsessions were more clear...:)

You misunderstand again. It's the decency and respect aspect. :) I don't know how much clearer I can be on other things without going into specifically how institutionalized inequality is perpetuated and sustained, which would require a dissertation, imho. :)

[tv]

You misunderstand again. It's the decency and respect aspect. :) I don't know how much clearer I can be on other things without going into specifically how institutionalized inequality is perpetuated and sustained, which would require a dissertation, imho. :)
I'll pass on the dissertation today if you don't mind. By all means keep your shoes on if it makes you feel better. :)

[William Anthony]

I'll pass on the dissertation today if you don't mind. By all means keep your shoes on if it makes you feel better. :)

Why, I do not mind at all and wish others would follow your sage advice on keeping shoes on. :)

[William Anthony]

Thank you, William. By the way, that's black workers not black welfare agencies. :) I didn't want any confusion.

You cleared that up yesterday and I accepted you representation without question, remember? It was my representation that went questioned, remember? :)

[tv]

You cleared that up yesterday and I accepted you representation without question, remember? It was my representation that went questioned, remember? :)
The clarification wasn't meant for you. :)

[William Anthony]

The clarification wasn't meant for you. :)

Then I stand corrected. :) By the way for those interested in attending Thursday's party, I may not have a variety of music that suits everyone's particular taste, so music contributions will be accepted on the RAPP thread.

[weezer]

I see now why you have such a fixation on feet. Now, if only the reason behind some of your other obsessions were more clear...:)

I was going to say that the toes are white with or without shoes. . . .:eek:

[Kayleighjo]

Please, do not mistake my post as an attempted infringement on your right to freely associate. I was simply making an observation and agreeing with Dr. MLK's statement about the "appalling silence of good people". Why you have the right to associate with the NAACP, Black welfare agency workers or any other group that you may choose.;):cool:

I know-I observe and agree with the same when I think about you associating with a certain person.

[martin II]

We are not disagreeing. I am not denying that some Blacks are racists and readily admit that women have and still do suffer from discrimination, which is why I commented on the equal pay. I think that you are aware women have gained rights soon after they were given to Blacks. I truly believe that this is not just a new day for Blacks but also for women. I hope I am right. My point and I really do not think that many may be interested in discussing it is that the larger inequality has to do with the financial aspect and the effects of cultural alienation, when I gave the example. My point is that Blacks have never been in power to discriminate against Whites in any meaningful way that would adversely impact Whites long into the future and toleration is largely based on finances. I hope I am making myself clearer.

When blacks started the campaign to get equality in getting business from the major u.s. corporations and the gov. in America there were many that expressed anger that blacks may take business from whites men and there was strong resistance for years. As blacks pushed more and more for this conceopt, and set asides became law women were able to join in as a minority like blacks and now years later the majority of the beneficiaries of this program has been white women.All the results of blacks complaining about inequality so i refuse to entertain ideas or advice of 'GET OVER IT AND MOVE ON" that is a recipe for more of the same.imo

[weezer]

When blacks started the campaign to get equality in getting business from the major u.s. corporations and the gov. in America there were many that expressed anger that blacks may take business from whites men and there was strong resistance for years. As blacks pushed more and more for this conceopt, and set asides became law women were able to join in as a minority like blacks and now years later the majority of the beneficiaries of this program has been white women.All the results of blacks complaining about inequality so i refuse to entertain ideas or advice of 'GET OVER IT AND MOVE ON" that is a recipe for more of the same.imo

like I said martin, I'm simply worried about your health like you are/were Mr. Goldman's health. remember your advice? carrying all that hate isn't good for a person. now, you take the advice you gave Mr. Goldman and quit being the victim, get over it and move on.

[martin II]

AMEN! :patriot:

The current guy did put the country into a large ditch so we will all have to give a hand to get it back on track if it is possible. The good news is he will be going home soon.
However, consider Global Economy, America cannot act alone on any issue.What happens in other places impacts on America as well. imo