Clearing up the Jena 6 Myths

[clemsontigers23]

I thought this was appropriate as Al Sharpton and many others are leading a march in Washington today.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20071024/cm_csm/yfranklin_1

Jena, La. - By now, almost everyone in America has heard of Jena, La., because they've all heard the story of the "Jena 6." White students hanging nooses barely punished, a schoolyard fight, excessive punishment for the six black attackers, racist local officials, public outrage and protests – the outside media made sure everyone knew the basics.

There's just one problem: The media got most of the basics wrong. In fact, I have never before witnessed such a disgrace in professional journalism. Myths replaced facts, and journalists abdicated their solemn duty to investigate every claim because they were seduced by a powerfully appealing but false narrative of racial injustice.

I should know. I live in Jena. My wife has taught at Jena High School for many years. And most important, I am probably the only reporter who has covered these events from the very beginning.

The reason the Jena cases have been propelled into the world spotlight is two-fold: First, because local officials did not speak publicly early on about the true events of the past year, the media simply formed their stories based on one-side's statements – the Jena 6. Second, the media were downright lazy in their efforts to find the truth. Often, they simply reported what they'd read on blogs, which expressed only one side of the issue.

The real story of Jena and the Jena 6 is quite different from what the national media presented. It's time to set the record straight.

Myth 1: The Whites-Only Tree. There has never been a "whites-only" tree at Jena High School. Students of all races sat underneath this tree. When a student asked during an assembly at the start of school last year if anyone could sit under the tree, it evoked laughter from everyone present – blacks and whites. As reported by students in the assembly, the question was asked to make a joke and to drag out the assembly and avoid class.

Myth 2: Nooses a Signal to Black Students. An investigation by school officials, police, and an FBI agent revealed the true motivation behind the placing of two nooses in the tree the day after the assembly. According to the expulsion committee, the crudely constructed nooses were not aimed at black students. Instead, they were understood to be a prank by three white students aimed at their fellow white friends, members of the school rodeo team. (The students apparently got the idea from watching episodes of "Lonesome Dove.") The committee further concluded that the three young teens had no knowledge that nooses symbolize the terrible legacy of the lynchings of countless blacks in American history. When informed of this history by school officials, they became visibly remorseful because they had many black friends. Another myth concerns their punishment, which was not a three-day suspension, but rather nine days at an alternative facility followed by two weeks of in-school suspension, Saturday detentions, attendance at Discipline Court, and evaluation by licensed mental-health professionals. The students who hung the nooses have not publicly come forward to give their version of events.

Myth 3: Nooses Were a Hate Crime. Although many believe the three white students should have been prosecuted for a hate crime for hanging the nooses, the incident did not meet the legal criteria for a federal hate crime. It also did not meet the standard for Louisiana's hate-crime statute, and though widely condemned by all officials, there was no crime to charge the youths with.

Myth 4: DA's Threat to Black Students. When District Attorney Reed Walters spoke to Jena High students at an assembly in September, he did not tell black students that he could make their life miserable with "the stroke of a pen." Instead, according to Walters, "two or three girls, white girls, were chit-chatting on their cellphones or playing with their cellphones right in the middle of my dissertation. I got a little irritated at them and said, 'Pay attention to me. I am right now having to deal with an aggravated rape case where I've got to decide whether the death penalty applies or not.' I said, 'Look, I can be your best friend or your worst enemy. With the stroke of a pen I can make your life miserable so I want you to call me before you do something stupid.'"

Mr. Walters had been called to the assembly by police, who had been at the school earlier that day dealing with some students who were causing disturbances. Teachers and students have confirmed Walters's version of events.

Myth 5: The Fair Barn Party Incident. On Dec. 1, 2006, a private party – not an all-white party as reported – was held at the local community center called the Fair Barn. Robert Bailey Jr., soon to be one of the Jena 6, came to the party with others seeking admittance.

When they were denied entrance by the renter of the facility, a white male named Justin Sloan (not a Jena High student) at the party attacked Bailey and hit him in the face with his fist. This is reported in witness statements to police, including the victim, Robert Bailey, Jr.

Months later, Bailey contended he was hit in the head with a beer bottle and required stitches. No medical records show this ever occurred. Mr. Sloan was prosecuted for simple battery, which according to Louisiana law, is the proper charge for hitting someone with a fist.

Myth 6: The "Gotta-Go" Grocery Incident. On Dec. 2, 2006, Bailey and two other black Jena High students were involved in an altercation at this local convenience store, stemming from the incident that occurred the night before. The three were accused by police of jumping a white man as he entered the store and stealing a shotgun from him. The two parties gave conflicting statements to police. However, two unrelated eye witnesses of the event gave statements that corresponded with that of the white male.

Myth 7: The Schoolyard Fight. The event on Dec. 4, 2006 was consistently labeled a "schoolyard fight." But witnesses described something much more horrific. Several black students, including those now known as the Jena 6, barricaded an exit to the school's gym as they lay in wait for Justin Barker to exit. (It remains unclear why Mr. Barker was specifically targeted.)

When Barker tried to leave through another exit, court testimony indicates, he was hit from behind by Mychal Bell. Multiple witnesses confirmed that Barker was immediately knocked unconscious and lay on the floor defenseless as several other black students joined together to kick and stomp him, with most of the blows striking his head. Police speculate that the motivation for the attack was related to the racially charged fights that had occurred during the previous weekend.

Myth 8: The Attack Is Linked to the Nooses. Nowhere in any of the evidence, including statements by witnesses and defendants, is there any reference to the noose incident that occurred three months prior. This was confirmed by the United States attorney for the Western District of Louisiana, Donald Washington, on numerous occasions.

Myth 9: Mychal Bell's All-White Jury. While it is true that Mychal Bell was convicted as an adult by an all-white jury in June (a conviction that was later overturned with his case sent to juvenile court), the jury selection process was completely legal and withstood an investigation by the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. Court officials insist that several black residents were summoned for jury duty, but did not appear.

Myth 10: Jena 6 as Model Youth. While some members were simply caught up in the moment, others had criminal records. Bell had at least four prior violent-crime arrests before the December attack, and was on probation during most of this year.

Myth 11: Jena Is One of the Most Racist Towns in America. Actually, Jena is a wonderful place to live for both whites and blacks. The media's distortion and outright lies concerning the case have given this rural Louisiana town a label it doesn't deserve.

Myth 12: Two Levels of Justice. Outside protesters were convinced that the prosecution of the Jena 6 was proof of a racially biased system of justice. But the US Justice Department's investigation found no evidence to support such a claim. In fact, the percentage of blacks and whites prosecuted matches the parish's population statistics.

These are just 12 of many myths that are portrayed as fact in the media concerning the Jena cases. (A more thorough review of all events can be found at www.thejenatimes.net – click on Chronological Order of Events.)

As with the Duke Lacrosse case, the truth about Jena will eventually be known. But the town of Jena isn't expecting any apologies from the media. They will probably never admit their error and have already moved on to the next "big" story. Meanwhile in Jena, residents are getting back to their regular routines, where friends are friends regardless of race. Just as it has been all along.

• Craig Franklin is assistant editor of The Jena Times.

So here it is. Take it or leave it, but this is someone who actually lives there. ;)

[kiwisongbird]

wow, you gotta love press don't ya?? That is why we need more upright, honest people in there - but you know it's tricky - if you report the truth often it doesn't get published - not gonna make enough money!

Just goes to show you that you MUST NOT believe all you read or see in the media - even if it is the station you think reports things truthfully!

[clemsontigers23]

wow, you gotta love press don't ya?? That is why we need more upright, honest people in there - but you know it's tricky - if you report the truth often it doesn't get published - not gonna make enough money!

Just goes to show you that you MUST NOT believe all you read or see in the media - even if it is the station you think reports things truthfully!

That's the main thing I want people to get out of this. Al and his henchmen have turned this into a civil rights cause, but they've done so based on misinformation. As a result, thousands of people are marching for a criminal who brutally attacked a young man.

We all know how much Al loves the camera, so I can't say I'm not surprised he has chosen to ignore facts in order to put his face on TV.

[Andi]

Interesting. This was huge in Atlanta....they had a whole bunch of people go and rally there.

[kiwisongbird]

Yeah, but both sides of the coin do it - we just think the 'goodies' don't.

I truly believe there are three truths

My side, their side and what God sees! Oh, I guess that's one truth!!!

I'm sure if God had a news channel it would be nothing like any of the ones anyone on this earth watches!

The story of the blind men and the elephant is really quite valid - you know the Buddhist thing about 'truth'.. and elephant is like a rope, no, it's like a tree etc... what the Buddhist teaching doesn't end with is that whatever you may think an elephant looks like, it is still an elephant which looks and is a certain way - same with current events and politics etc... :):) no matter what we think about things, the truth is always the truth and NOT always what we want it to be either! :)

[Pouye]

If Al Sharpton is for it, then it has to be right! :rolleyes:

Rock

I've seen justice perverted terribly before because of faulty reports.

My friend was sued, and ended up paying big bucks to a kid's family. The report said that a careless man had started a fire and left it unattended. A boy, walking to school, tried to cross through a brush pile and didn't see it was still burning. The report said that he was nearly burned to death.

What a load of crud!

The truth:
A friend of mine owns a heavy equipment operation. He was clearing one of his properties with a bulldozer and had heaped up some limbs and stumps to be burned. He called the fire department (normal procedure) and asked them if it was ok to burn that day, and they said their was no burn bans on, and that it was fine, as long as he cleared the area of debris to make a "fire break" (which he did). The private property he was working on was clearly marked with "No Trespassing" signs. He did his burning, and when the flames were no longer visible, he left the pile to slowly smolder overnight. His plan was to come back the next day and do some more clearing and burning.

An 11 year old boy (not very little) trespassed on the property, which was not at all part of his usual route to school. He left the road and decided to climb on the pile of charred stumps that many hours before were being burned (legally at the time), and there were still hot coals at the bottom of the pile (the fire had gone out, but the pile was still hot at the base -- the ground stays hot for quite some time after a large fire).

He stepped in some hot ashes and burned his boots-- they got hot and he panicked and sat down to take his boots off, sitting in the coals. He never caught on fire or anything, but his clothes got singed, and his skin had a couple small burn marks where the coals singed his shirt. The boy went to school, but was sent home. Later, his parents found out that the guy who burned the pile was a fairly wealthy man... and they saw $$$$ signs. My friend is a generous Christian man, and he offered to pay for the boys doctor bill and medical expenses, which totaled $50 dollars to see the doctor, plus about $5 bucks for tape and gauze. He also offered to buy the boy some new clothes. The parents wanted $10,000 dollars instead -- and they ended up with $6,000.

My friend mentioned to the court that the boy was trespassing, but that didn't seem to matter.

The boy was back in school the next day...

Rock

[sandyandporter]

If Al Sharpton is for it, then it has to be right! :rolleyes:

Rock

I've seen justice perverted terribly before because of faulty reports.

My friend was sued, and ended up paying big bucks to a kid's family. The report said that a careless man had started a fire and left it unattended. A boy, walking to school, tried to cross through a brush pile and didn't see it was still burning. The report said that he was nearly burned to death.

What a load of crud!

The truth:
A friend of mine owns a heavy equipment operation. He was clearing one of his properties with a bulldozer and had heaped up some limbs and stumps to be burned. He called the fire department (normal procedure) and asked them if it was ok to burn that day, and they said their was no burn bans on, and that it was fine, as long as he cleared the area of debris to make a "fire break" (which he did). The private property he was working on was clearly marked with "No Trespassing" signs. He did his burning, and when the flames were no longer visible, he left the pile to slowly smolder overnight. His plan was to come back the next day and do some more clearing and burning.

An 11 year old boy (not very little) trespassed on the property, which was not at all part of his usual route to school. He left the road and decided to climb on the pile of charred stumps that many hours before were being burned (legally at the time), and there were still hot coals at the bottom of the pile (the fire had gone out, but the pile was still hot at the base -- the ground stays hot for quite some time after a large fire).

He stepped in some hot ashes and burned his boots-- they got hot and he panicked and sat down to take his boots off, sitting in the coals. He never caught on fire or anything, but his clothes got singed, and his skin had a couple small burn marks where the coals singed his shirt. The boy went to school, but was sent home. Later, his parents found out that the guy who burned the pile was a fairly wealthy man... and they saw $$$$ signs. My friend is a generous Christian man, and he offered to pay for the boys doctor bill and medical expenses, which totaled $50 dollars to see the doctor, plus about $5 bucks for tape and gauze. He also offered to buy the boy some new clothes. The parents wanted $10,000 dollars instead -- and they ended up with $6,000.

My friend mentioned to the court that the boy was trespassing, but that didn't seem to matter.

The boy was back in school the next day...

Rock

Wow. How in the world do people lie like that and live with themselves? That is what is beyond my comprehension.

[Jesuslove]

That's the main thing I want people to get out of this. Al and his henchmen have turned this into a civil rights cause, but they've done so based on misinformation. As a result, thousands of people are marching for a criminal who brutally attacked a young man.

We all know how much Al loves the camera, so I can't say I'm not surprised he has chosen to ignore facts in order to put his face on TV.

Wow! I'm glad you cleared this up for us Clemson. I was beginning to believe Racial Prejudice still exists in America. :rolleyes:

Just one question.... why is race such an important issue to you?

[middletree]

Wow! I'm glad you cleared this up for us Clemson. I was beginning to believe Racial Prejudice still exists in America. :rolleyes:

Just one question.... why is race such an important issue to you?

There is a huge difference between denying that prejudice exists, which Clemson didn't do, and sorting out the facts. The fact is that not every sensationalized story out there is based on race, even if the participants think it is. The Jena 6 story appears to be one in which some people claimed some things that were not true, and this story is calling them on it. There's nothing wrong with that. In fact, there's everything right with it.

In fact, this story goes to prove that racial prejudice is alive and well, not only in the hearts of some white people in Podunk, Louisiana, but in the hearts of Jesse, Al, and others who make a living by continually telling African-Americans that they are victims.

[VerbumReale]

Wow! I'm glad you cleared this up for us Clemson. I was beginning to believe Racial Prejudice still exists in America. :rolleyes:

Just one question.... why is race such an important issue to you?


Why the eyeroll and the accusatory tone?? He was simply pointing out the errors in how this case has been reported.

Your question seems like you are trying to imply Clemson is racist, but you intentionally keep it vague enough to allow you to deny that if he calls you on it.

[Valpo]

I gotta side with Jesus Love somewhat here. The boys, although they shouldn't have beat the crap out of these white boys, should not be charged with the crimes they are being charged with. I gotta think they felt threatened with nouses hangin around. The race issue isn't so "black and white" pun intended.

[middletree]

I gotta side with Jesus Love somewhat here.

You say that, but then you follow up with:

The boys, although they shouldn't have beat the crap out of these white boys, should not be charged with the crimes they are being charged with. I gotta think they felt threatened with nouses hangin around. The race issue isn't so "black and white" pun intended.

Those are two different things. Two reasonable people can disagree about whether or not the charges were too serious.

But JesusLove didn't address that. His entire post was about Clemson and his reasons for starting this thread. He implied that if someone disagrees with him on this, or posts an article or opinion that purports to clear up some misconceptions, that such an action equals either racism on the part of the poster, or denial that racism exists. In that, I hope that you don't side with him.

[Jesuslove]

Why the eyeroll and the accusatory tone?? He was simply pointing out the errors in how this case has been reported.

Your question seems like you are trying to imply Clemson is racist, but you intentionally keep it vague enough to allow you to deny that if he calls you on it.

I didn't call clemson a racist. I just said that he seems to bring up controversial race issues often.

[sandyandporter]

Wow! I'm glad you cleared this up for us Clemson. I was beginning to believe Racial Prejudice still exists in America. :rolleyes:

Just one question.... why is race such an important issue to you?

You do know that you make yourself look bad everytime you track down Clemson in a thread and attack him don't you? I think it's time for a little Christian behavior check! And instead of inserting the eye roll here, I will pray for you and your issues.

In Christ, Sandy

[middletree]

I didn't call clemson a racist. I just said that he seems to bring up controversial race issues often.
Your question seems to many to be an accusation. And it has nothing to do with the content of the article.

[VerbumReale]

I didn't call clemson a racist. I just said that he seems to bring up controversial race issues often.

Exactly my point. You didn't say he was a racist but you clearly implied it. If there were no subtle accusation in your question then you wouldn't have made the snide remark with the eyeroll.

[VerbumReale]

I gotta side with Jesus Love somewhat here. The boys, although they shouldn't have beat the crap out of these white boys, should not be charged with the crimes they are being charged with. I gotta think they felt threatened with nouses hangin around. The race issue isn't so "black and white" pun intended.

That's not the point. Of course there are probably nuances to this story that aren't being addressed on both sides.

But Jesuslove's reply didn't even address the content of the article. He immediately called Clemson's motives into question.

[Jesuslove]

You say that, but then you follow up with:



Those are two different things. Two reasonable people can disagree about whether or not the charges were too serious.

But JesusLove didn't address that. His entire post was about Clemson and his reasons for starting this thread. He implied that if someone disagrees with him on this, or posts an article or opinion that purports to clear up some misconceptions, that such an action equals either racism on the part of the poster, or denial that racism exists. In that, I hope that you don't side with him.

Let me make it clear, the charges were too serious. Nooses have a meaning, and I don't believe the message was harmless. Given the issues with nooses in the past, whoever hung the nooses (despite whatever message was trying to be conveyed to black OR whte students), was WRONG. Whoever hung the nooses should have known better.

I believe racism is alive and continues to be particularly bad (still) in the South.

[VerbumReale]

Let me make it clear, the charges were too serious. Nooses have a meaning, and I don't believe the message was harmless. Given the issues with nooses in the past, whoever hung the nooses (despite whatever message was trying to be conveyed to black OR whte students), was WRONG. Whoever hung the nooses should have known better.

I believe racism is alive and continues to be particularly bad (still) in the South.


You're still ignoring the fact that you presumed questionable motives on Clemson's part.

[Jesuslove]

Exactly my point. You didn't say he was a racist but you clearly implied it. If there were no subtle accusation in your question then you wouldn't have made the snide remark with the eyeroll.

Because on this board, certain individuals keep bringing up racially charged issues. It is inflamitory, particularly to racially diverse families.

[VerbumReale]

Because on this board, certain individuals keep bringing up racially charged issues. It is inflamitory, particularly to racially diverse families.

So somebody's motives must automatically be questioned if they bring up a racially charged issue??

Need I remind you that the topic of this forum is Current Events and Hot Topics??

[sandyandporter]

So somebody's motives must automatically be questioned if they bring up a racially charged issue??

Need I remind you that the topic of this forum is Current Events and Hot Topics??

Jesus Love hates Clemson. This is not the first or even the second thread where he has attacked him.

[Jesuslove]

So somebody's motives must automatically be questioned if they bring up a racially charged issue??

Need I remind you that the topic of this forum is Current Events and Hot Topics??

I see you have been on just a short time. Certain topics are controversial; some are even banned from being discussed. Have you gone back and read some other threads?

[middletree]

I see you have been on just a short time. Certain topics are controversial; some are even banned from being discussed. Have you gone back and read some other threads?

Actually, he's been on a long time, but lost his email password and forum password, and had to pick a new name.

[middletree]

I believe racism is alive

Yes it is. Al and Jesse are two of the biggest racists out there, and they are the ones who blew this up.

I also agree with what you meant, that small towns in the South, as well as North, East, and West, have racists, in them. Large cities, too. Racism is alive. That doesn't mean that it's acceptable to:

1. Make a career out of telling minorities that they will always be victims and that things are worse than they are, as Jesse and Al have done.

2. Fabricate stories (Google Tawana Bradley)

3. Make claims of racism when one is challenged by a boss, teacher, or coach, to correct his/her behavior (2 football players at a college here in TX were suspended for using profanity, then claimed racism; the NAACP investigated and found the coach did nothing wrong).

The fact is that Clemson posted a story that said that the truth is not being told about the Jena 6 story. There is nothing wrong with posting that, as it's a valid topic for discussion.

[3D NC fan]

This is an interesting article. The resulting discussion should be about this particular story which is why I never post in these forums. Being a racially diverse family can have its challenges, but it doesn't have to be an issue of prejudice. Being racist can work both ways.

[sandyandporter]

This is an interesting article. The resulting discussion should be about this particular story which is why I never post in these forums. Being a racially diverse family can have its challenges, but it doesn't have to be an issue of prejudice. Being racist can work both ways.

Agreed. As usual, it started off on track and then got sidetracked. There is bad blood between a number of board members, here and in the "word" thread. It's unfortunate that discussions can't be conducted in a more Christian manner.

[middletree]

Jesus Love hates Clemson.

Sorry, but that sentence made me giggle. ;)

[sandyandporter]

Sorry, but that sentence made me giggle. ;)

Picturing you giggle made me giggle! :D :cool: ;)

[VerbumReale]

I see you have been on just a short time. Certain topics are controversial; some are even banned from being discussed. Have you gone back and read some other threads?

As Middletree pointed out I have been on these boards for a while but I had to start a new account because of a lost password and having registered under an e-mail account that is no longer valid.

I am well aware of how certain topics are controversial to the point that some are even banned, such as homosexuality. And I have read much of the discourse that has gone on before between you and Clemson, such as the thread dealing with the confederate flag and whether or not it is a symbol of racism. I actually found that to be a very interesting dialogue between the two of you and appreciated much of the insight that both of you brought to the discussion.

And after reading the article that Clemson posted in the thread I actually anticipated that you would probably have an interesting response to it. But instead you simply responded by questioning his motives, which I felt was unfair and contributed absolutely nothing to the discussion.

I appreciate that you come from a racially diverse family and that you have adopted a child not of your own race. In fact you are to be commended for that. But your backgorund does not justify questioning someone's motives when they bring up a racially charged issue, even if it is someone whom you have had disagreement with in the past.

We should of course be sensitive when discussing controversial issues, but we don't necessarily need to avoid them all together. Quite to the contrary, when we discuss them we gain insight and understanding as we hear different perspectives. And we also certainly don't need to question the motives of someone who is simply bringing a controversial topic to the table for discussion.

[Jesuslove]

Jesus Love hates Clemson. This is not the first or even the second thread where he has attacked him.

First of all, I do not hate anyone. My family has been attacked on this board many times. I do take issue with some here on certain issues, but I feel as if I cannot defend myself on others. But I never said I hated anyone. I may disagree with some here, and challenge some peoples' beliefs on race, divorce, abortion, adoption sexual orientation, etc., but saying I hate someone goes too far.

[Jesuslove]

We should of course be sensitive when discussing controversial issues, but we don't necessarily need to avoid them all together. Quite to the contrary, when we discuss them we gain insight and understanding as we hear different perspectives. And we also certainly don't need to question the motives of someone who is simply bringing a controversial topic to the table for discussion.

I feel that there has been much insensitivity toward me and my feelings on these boards, some via private discussions. My motives have been questioned on this board many times, due to my political beliefs. And I have been personally attacked. If you want to set a bar by which discussions are handled, that's fine, but it should be applied evenly.

[middletree]

I feel that there has been much insensitivity toward me and my feelings on these boards, some via private discussions. My motives have been questioned on this board many times, due to my political beliefs. And I have been personally attacked. If you want to set a bar by which discussions are handled, that's fine, but it should be applied evenly.


I am not sure what you consider an attack. I have observed that a lot of people point to "attacks" that are really posts in which people just present an opposing opinion.

I can't say you haven't been attacked, because I haven't seen every post ever made. But I do view your post on page 1 of this thread, pointing out that Clemson has started two threads with race as a topic, as an attack, pure and simple. (On one of those threads, I actually agreed with you, if you recall). The fact that several people see it that way should count for something.

[clemsontigers23]

Wow, I've missed quite a bit. First off, I don't hate you JesusLove. I don't understand why you immediately call me a racist for posting a story that was front page news on Yahoo! News about a topic that was hotly debated recently on these boards. I have no obsession with race, but I do have a problem with the wide majority of people calling Jena a racist town and protesting for a man, Mychal Bell, who is a known criminal whose charges include punching a GIRL in the face. Because I go to a small town school, I can certainly relate with what the writer, who is actually from Jena, revealed to us about what really happened. This sounds like a typical small town school, no matter where you go.

However, it seems you don't feel up to intelligent conversation on this matter. It's not just a race issue: it's an issue with how certain public figures can take a story, twist the truth, and blow it out of proportion for their own selfish gain, as Jesse and Al do numerous times at the expense of others, such as the white kid who got beat up and the Duke lacrosse players. They also succeed in stirring up racial tension by doing this, doing the exact opposite of what they supposedly try to do, and that is rid America of racism. We all know this is a lie, though. If there was no racism, how would Al and Jesse ever get their faces on TV?

Anyways, I'm not going to address your personal attack any longer. If you want to have intelligent conversation about this topic, then we can do that. If you want to continue to follow me into every discussion and personally attack me, I'm going to refrain from responding to you. That's the best way I know how to handle your childish vendetta against me.

I personally think that you pride yourself on being a liberal because you're different from most here, so you feel threatened when anyone brings it into question. You feel proud that you are questioning the majority, and I wonder if your motives behind these posts are really pure or for your own personal enjoyment.

Also, thanks to everyone for the support. I appreciate everyone defending me while I wasn't here to speak for myself.

[middletree]

On a related note, but still a tangent, I want to address the "racism is alive in the south" item. My cousin moved to Minnesota (from a small town in West TX) a few years ago. He said that as far as he could tell, 100% of the residents of that town in Minnesota were racists. The Hershel Walker trace had happened a couple of years before, and he would hear from the locals how that "n****er" was the worst player that the Vikings ever had, and heard a lot worse stuff than that if a non-white happened to stop in town for any reason. Stuff he never heard in Texas.

Additionally, my great-great-great-grandfather was in Ohio, certainly not a Southern state, and spoke out against slavery. For this, his fellow residents ostracized him and nobody would do business with him. So the idea that racism is a Southern thing is, like racism, an unfounded stereotype.

[cheewiee]

On a related note, but still a tangent, I want to address the "racism is alive in the south" item. My cousin moved to Minnesota (from a small town in West TX) a few years ago. He said that as far as he could tell, 100% of the residents of that town in Minnesota were racists. The Hershel Walker trace had happened a couple of years before, and he would hear from the locals how that "n****er" was the worst player that the Vikings ever had, and heard a lot worse stuff than that if a non-white happened to stop in town for any reason. Stuff he never heard in Texas.

Additionally, my great-great-great-grandfather was in Ohio, certainly not a Southern state, and spoke out against slavery. For this, his fellow residents ostracized him and nobody would do business with him. So the idea that racism is a Southern thing is, like racism, an unfounded stereotype.

On a similar note, I recently moved from Orlando Fl to Charlotte NC. Fl while south, isn't really part of the south I was anticipating things to be different Racially in NC. In charlotte they really aren't.

However my Manger from Chicago, says that pretty much in Il, races stick to themselves, and is amazed that in the "South" race relations were so much better than they were in Chicago.

[middletree]

Exactly. My point is that JesusLove made a stereotypical comment about the South. And he isn't alone. Yet, he did it to renounce racism, which of course is extreme prejudice. So prejudging a group of people (southerners) in order to chastise them for prejudging others--there's some irony in there somewhere.

[clemsontigers23]

Yeah, racism being worse in the South is a common misconception. A majority of the population in Atlanta is African American, so take that how you will. For the most part, races stick to their own race anywhere you go, but we do a pretty good job of integrating where I live.

[sandyandporter]

First of all, I do not hate anyone. My family has been attacked on this board many times. I do take issue with some here on certain issues, but I feel as if I cannot defend myself on others. But I never said I hated anyone. I may disagree with some here, and challenge some peoples' beliefs on race, divorce, abortion, adoption sexual orientation, etc., but saying I hate someone goes too far.

I have never seen your family attacked on the boards. If they have been then I apologize. That would explain the huge chip on your shoulder. Please reference the thread and I will be happy to read it myself. I don't know anything about your various beliefs other than your stance on divorce. That is where the whole issue between you and Clemson started. You crossed the line there and attacked his mother and then followed him into other threads to continue your attack. I'm assuming as a Christian you're against abortion, for adoption (as we all know you have an adopted son) and against homosexuality (the practice, not the people... hate the sin, love the sinner).

As far as a standard of behavior for discussions.... let's just try being good Christians.

[Mr.Elwood]

This is really the point..
Yeah, but both sides of the coin do it - we just think the 'goodies' don't.

I truly believe there are three truths

My side, their side and what God sees! Oh, I guess that's one truth!!!


Something happened there to make this blow up. While obviously some of it was taken out of context and used as fodder by the "minority machine", we should also be weary of reporters proclaiming to know "all the truth" even if they were part of the event. We'll never really know at this point what triggered this event, but clearly there was enough kindling to keep the fire lit until it became news. I still hold true to my original wish and that "white" churches had gotten involved also. It might have exposed the people looking to use this for personal gain, and would have shown blacks, on a national scale, that there is no division in God's Church. "Seeking the Truth" could have been the message, rather than "Seeking Justice". Sad fact is, most of the TV ministries/news programs I noted were simply reciting what they found in news stories (like me) and not actually getting first-hand accounts from their own trusted sources.

But we didn't, and it stayed a black/white thing and people who use events like this for their own personal gain were allowed to run unchecked and create mass hysteria when clearly there was much more going on than what was portrayed in the media. Guess that's the lesson huh??

As aside note: I was flipp'n channels and saw Rev. Al doing a "Jena 2" rally somewhere... thought it just sorta interesting it's now down to 2

[Pouye]

This is really the point..


Something happened there to make this blow up. While obviously some of it was taken out of context and used as fodder by the "minority machine", we should also be weary of reporters proclaiming to know "all the truth" even if they were part of the event. We'll never really know at this point what triggered this event, but clearly there was enough kindling to keep the fire lit until it became news. I still hold true to my original wish and that "white" churches had gotten involved also. It might have exposed the people looking to use this for personal gain, and would have shown blacks, on a national scale, that there is no division in God's Church. "Seeking the Truth" could have been the message, rather than "Seeking Justice". Sad fact is, most of the TV ministries/news programs I noted were simply reciting what they found in news stories (like me) and not actually getting first-hand accounts from their own trusted sources.

But we didn't, and it stayed a black/white thing and people who use events like this for their own personal gain were allowed to run unchecked and create mass hysteria when clearly there was much more going on than what was portrayed in the media. Guess that's the lesson huh??


Nice post, Elwood. I couldn't agree more.


As aside note: I was flipp'n channels and saw Rev. Al doing a "Jena 2" rally somewhere... thought it just sorta interesting it's now down to 2

Looks like he is milking this one dry...:D

Rock