|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 26 2017 14:50 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 14:48 LegalLord wrote:On September 26 2017 14:38 Wegandi wrote:
I've gotten my parents to agree that policing is out of control and needs reform and that demilitarization and the 4th Amendment is important, but they cannot stand the kneeling/flag stuff and BLM/all white people are racist non-sense. (There are a million police abuse / killing videos of unarmed white people to show to white people. They aren't as publicized as when a black person is killed, but trust me there are a ton of them. Show this stuff to white people and they'll be a lot more open to police reforms. POLICE REFORMS is the goal right?) Stories like this multiplied across a wide swath of the population should perhaps be an indication that it's probably better to actually try to reform things than dick around with trying to prove everyone isnt* a racist. The will is there but the protesters haven't caught up to it. Now you're getting it. That's what people like you, wegandi, xdaunt, danglars, etc... are supposed to be doing.
The "everyone is a racist" ilk tend to bring up the matter of everyone being a racist in the first place. It would never see light without that accusation and maybe instead of these semantic footsies we could move onto talking about the issues.
|
On September 26 2017 14:53 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 14:50 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 26 2017 14:48 LegalLord wrote:On September 26 2017 14:38 Wegandi wrote:
I've gotten my parents to agree that policing is out of control and needs reform and that demilitarization and the 4th Amendment is important, but they cannot stand the kneeling/flag stuff and BLM/all white people are racist non-sense. (There are a million police abuse / killing videos of unarmed white people to show to white people. They aren't as publicized as when a black person is killed, but trust me there are a ton of them. Show this stuff to white people and they'll be a lot more open to police reforms. POLICE REFORMS is the goal right?) Stories like this multiplied across a wide swath of the population should perhaps be an indication that it's probably better to actually try to reform things than dick around with trying to prove everyone isnt* a racist. The will is there but the protesters haven't caught up to it. Now you're getting it. That's what people like you, wegandi, xdaunt, danglars, etc... are supposed to be doing. The "everyone is a racist" ilk tend to bring up the matter of everyone being a racist in the first place. It would never see light without that accusation and maybe instead of these semantic footsies we could move onto talking about the issues.
Are you arguing with my argument or a manifestation of several viewpoints to your left? Do you agree that the protesters should stop trying to prove everyone isn't racist and focus on reforming things?
|
Canada11279 Posts
People telling themselves they have nothing in common with the KKK doesn't mean they don't.
Easy claim to make and just as easily counter-claimed: Just because you say they have something of substance in common with the KKK doesn't mean they do.
So then we'd actually have to look at what do the KKK believe and what do those people believe. I'll tell you now though, I'm fairly certain I'd have a hard time finding someone in my own social and professional circles that values things like white-ethnostates, are concerned about white genocide, and otherwise hyperventilate over white people adopting black babies- the opposite, I know a couple that's in the process of adopting three Guyanan orphans. Good ol' race traitors and all that. What the KKK believe is pretty out there and pretty blatant. I certainly know waaay more people very supportive of the state of Israel and know zero people that think the Jews are conspiring to breed out the whites.
|
On September 26 2017 14:45 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 14:38 Wegandi wrote:On September 26 2017 14:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 26 2017 14:29 Wegandi wrote:On September 26 2017 14:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 26 2017 14:08 Wegandi wrote:
How are most people taking GH's definition at face value? Whites make up 65% of the population. Is GH saying that until white people (because obviously we're a monolithic entity...) have a lower (I'm guessing much lower) % of people in power than their per capita population, that we're by definition racist? People actually buy that shit? Or, are we always going to be racist because we make up 65% of the population and are thus a majority "race" in the country? I mean, I'm not quite sure what to make of his majority cultural/economic/political remark. Am I to assume, "whites" are racist, until 65% of the population becomes a minority group in their country? I seem to recall another similar system...apartheid. In fairness it's not "my" definition, it's the definition used by the people who study this stuff. I should clear up the confusion that I don't really think of it as "xDaunt and Danglars/ etc... are racist trash", more that they are advancing arguments that strengthen our white supremacist culture and xDaunt specifically voted for Trump to do that in his name. They interpret that to mean they are being called racists, then expanding it to encompass all white people/Trump voters. We could start over from somewhere as has been suggested, but I'm pretty sure no one bit the first time because the two places suggested are pretty much where the agreed upon reality ends. You didn't answer any of my questions and I don't really care about xDaunt's or Danglars views. If that's the working definition "for people who study this stuff", why should anyone take them seriously? I shouldn't be surprised though. 95% of the "academic" work that comes out of the sociology/humanities is trash by any scientific peer-reviewed process. It's rhetoric and personal bias presented as "science" and truth, when it's the furthest thing from it. Where are the specific ways in which systemic racism is perpetrated. What laws, what Government actions, what US Codes and Articles, etc. Are you going to point to requiring a State ID to vote as the epitome of oppression? Yes, black killed rates by police are higher (13% of population vs ~30% of deaths), but violation of rights isn't limited to blacks. Things like asset forfeiture overwhelmingly target non-blacks. It's not a black and white (pun not intended) issue. Plenty of white people are subject to the Judge Dredd policing we have going on now-a-days. I'd argue that if you broke down the people who suffer the most civil rights violations in this country the divide is actually a socio-economic one much more so than race. In the end though, you aren't going to effect change using your vinegar approach. You need a significant number of white people (whether you like it or not) to be on board, and alienating them by calling all whites by definition racist, but then saying, well, that's no so bad unless your KKK racist, isn't going to win many converts. If you made it an issue of overzealous and out of control policing that effects all of us (because yes, it does), you could actually have a real shot at reform. The way you're going about it now might make you feel good, but is going to accomplish the exact opposite of your stated aims. Violation of rights not being limited to black people is in no way a refutation of white supremacy. We know there's a class component as well and I'm certainly not arguing there isn't. What kind of honey do you want in order to support black people being entitled to the same rights you are? You've agreed that civil rights violations aren't limited to black people (which should you know...elicit some common cause pause, but I guess not), but then you pivot back to white supremacy non-sense. Do you understand yet, that if police reforms are your goal, you can accomplish this goal by winning whites over to the cause by not using rhetoric and argumentative flourishes that alienate a significant number ( all of whom do not share anything in common with KKK/Nazism...). I've gotten my parents to agree that policing is out of control and needs reform and that demilitarization and the 4th Amendment is important, but they cannot stand the kneeling/flag stuff and BLM/all white people are racist non-sense. If the substance of the argument is more important to you and those who share your beliefs than the stated reforms that are wanted, I don't really know what to say, except keep doing more of the same stuff you're doing. Don't expect anything to change though. By the way you still haven't answered my original post. Are whites racist until the share of white people in power is lower than their per capita population? How else am I to take the majority definition of racism? People telling themselves they have nothing in common with the KKK doesn't mean they don't. You're parents need to be informed about how the flag stuff is garbage and they shouldn't accept it as even a remotely acceptable characterization or interpretation of what is happening. Someone should explain to them that doing racist things and being a racist are not one in the same, basically you have a lot of teaching to do if you want to win them over. I'm not here to develop reforms, I keep posting on this because I refuse to let the garbage go unchallenged. Of course white people are more empathetic to other white people that's a significant part of why this is still a problem in the first place.Look at it this way, we could get the police to stop abusing white people's rights to a practical 0 number, but that wouldn't stop them from abusing PoC's rights, but if they weren't doing it to PoC, there's no way in hell they could get away with only doing to white people. To answer your question. No. But there's a good chance the majority of them will continue to reinforce the white supremacy this country was built on, intentionally or not.
Are blacks not more empathetic about other blacks? The point I was making is if you frame it as an issue that only effects black people, many people aren't going to care, and that's just a fact across a bunch of shit other than race. If something is happening two towns over, no one gives a shit if it doesn't effect them, etc. If you can show that yes, police abuse and civil rights violations do effect them/aren't a negligible occurrence, then yes, they're more likely to hop on board. You can lament how shitty that is, but that's reality, and yes, I often lament the same shit facts of life when it comes to my libertarian instincts and why it's so difficult to get people past partisanship, cognitive dissonance, etc. If you're going to be bull-headed and ignore those facts in lieu of purity of argument (which I disagree with the premise, but that's digressing a bit), you've lost the war before you've started.
Also, what the fuck does the flag have to do police abuse? You've staked your movement on an issue that is highly divisive and up to personal interpretation. Everyone under the sun has their own view of what the flag stands for. If you think you're going to win people over by changing their definition and view of the flag, that's fucking absurd. I can hardly get people to agree on small shit, let alone something like this, especially when military worship is far more popular than something like BLM. It just doesn't make any sense to me, unless you're intentionally sabotaging your own movement lmao.
Also, your presupposition that if we made police abuse illegal and punished for whites, that the same juries/courts would then hand down opposite verdicts for blacks, is sure, a possibility (remote, but the possibility exists), but thin on substance (again, we're back to all whites are racist here...). At that point, your point becomes IRREFUTABLE. For the average person you're going to win that argument unless you do something real stupid. As it is now, there's no real difference in conviction rates of officers involved in shooting deaths with whites or blacks. The system is overwhelmingly protective of its gendarme. Take away its protection and you'll see a lot less violations against PoC.
Let me ask a more blunt question then. What would it take for you to be dispelled of the notion that whites are by definition racist? I'm genuinely curious.
PS: At least you finally admitted that accomplishments and change isn't your goal, it's just an argument "to win" or bludgeon white people over. I'm not sure how your fellow PoC would take that, but OK.
|
On September 26 2017 14:58 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +People telling themselves they have nothing in common with the KKK doesn't mean they don't. Easy claim to make and just as easily counter-claimed: Just because you say they have something of substance in common with the KKK doesn't mean they do. So then we'd actually have to look at what do the KKK believe and what do those people believe. I'll tell you now though, I'm fairly certain I'd have a hard time finding someone in my own social and professional circles that values things like white-ethnostates, are concerned about white genocide, and otherwise hyperventilate over white people adopting black babies- the opposite, I know a couple that's in the process of adopting three Guyanan orphans. Good ol' race traitors and all that. What the KKK believe is pretty out there and pretty blatant. I certainly know waaay more people very supportive of the state of Israel and know zero people that think the Jews are conspiring to breed out the whites.
the KKK fundamentally boils down to an illicit enforcement arm of white supremacy, attempting to secure it's perpetuation. That's something they have in common with a lot of people, enough so, it warrants it being considered supporting white supremacy.
Me or MLK aren't saying they are the same thing, but we are saying they are bigger obstacle to progress than their KKK counterparts.
|
On September 26 2017 15:01 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 14:45 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 26 2017 14:38 Wegandi wrote:On September 26 2017 14:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 26 2017 14:29 Wegandi wrote:On September 26 2017 14:17 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 26 2017 14:08 Wegandi wrote:
How are most people taking GH's definition at face value? Whites make up 65% of the population. Is GH saying that until white people (because obviously we're a monolithic entity...) have a lower (I'm guessing much lower) % of people in power than their per capita population, that we're by definition racist? People actually buy that shit? Or, are we always going to be racist because we make up 65% of the population and are thus a majority "race" in the country? I mean, I'm not quite sure what to make of his majority cultural/economic/political remark. Am I to assume, "whites" are racist, until 65% of the population becomes a minority group in their country? I seem to recall another similar system...apartheid. In fairness it's not "my" definition, it's the definition used by the people who study this stuff. I should clear up the confusion that I don't really think of it as "xDaunt and Danglars/ etc... are racist trash", more that they are advancing arguments that strengthen our white supremacist culture and xDaunt specifically voted for Trump to do that in his name. They interpret that to mean they are being called racists, then expanding it to encompass all white people/Trump voters. We could start over from somewhere as has been suggested, but I'm pretty sure no one bit the first time because the two places suggested are pretty much where the agreed upon reality ends. You didn't answer any of my questions and I don't really care about xDaunt's or Danglars views. If that's the working definition "for people who study this stuff", why should anyone take them seriously? I shouldn't be surprised though. 95% of the "academic" work that comes out of the sociology/humanities is trash by any scientific peer-reviewed process. It's rhetoric and personal bias presented as "science" and truth, when it's the furthest thing from it. Where are the specific ways in which systemic racism is perpetrated. What laws, what Government actions, what US Codes and Articles, etc. Are you going to point to requiring a State ID to vote as the epitome of oppression? Yes, black killed rates by police are higher (13% of population vs ~30% of deaths), but violation of rights isn't limited to blacks. Things like asset forfeiture overwhelmingly target non-blacks. It's not a black and white (pun not intended) issue. Plenty of white people are subject to the Judge Dredd policing we have going on now-a-days. I'd argue that if you broke down the people who suffer the most civil rights violations in this country the divide is actually a socio-economic one much more so than race. In the end though, you aren't going to effect change using your vinegar approach. You need a significant number of white people (whether you like it or not) to be on board, and alienating them by calling all whites by definition racist, but then saying, well, that's no so bad unless your KKK racist, isn't going to win many converts. If you made it an issue of overzealous and out of control policing that effects all of us (because yes, it does), you could actually have a real shot at reform. The way you're going about it now might make you feel good, but is going to accomplish the exact opposite of your stated aims. Violation of rights not being limited to black people is in no way a refutation of white supremacy. We know there's a class component as well and I'm certainly not arguing there isn't. What kind of honey do you want in order to support black people being entitled to the same rights you are? You've agreed that civil rights violations aren't limited to black people (which should you know...elicit some common cause pause, but I guess not), but then you pivot back to white supremacy non-sense. Do you understand yet, that if police reforms are your goal, you can accomplish this goal by winning whites over to the cause by not using rhetoric and argumentative flourishes that alienate a significant number ( all of whom do not share anything in common with KKK/Nazism...). I've gotten my parents to agree that policing is out of control and needs reform and that demilitarization and the 4th Amendment is important, but they cannot stand the kneeling/flag stuff and BLM/all white people are racist non-sense. If the substance of the argument is more important to you and those who share your beliefs than the stated reforms that are wanted, I don't really know what to say, except keep doing more of the same stuff you're doing. Don't expect anything to change though. By the way you still haven't answered my original post. Are whites racist until the share of white people in power is lower than their per capita population? How else am I to take the majority definition of racism? People telling themselves they have nothing in common with the KKK doesn't mean they don't. You're parents need to be informed about how the flag stuff is garbage and they shouldn't accept it as even a remotely acceptable characterization or interpretation of what is happening. Someone should explain to them that doing racist things and being a racist are not one in the same, basically you have a lot of teaching to do if you want to win them over. I'm not here to develop reforms, I keep posting on this because I refuse to let the garbage go unchallenged. Of course white people are more empathetic to other white people that's a significant part of why this is still a problem in the first place.Look at it this way, we could get the police to stop abusing white people's rights to a practical 0 number, but that wouldn't stop them from abusing PoC's rights, but if they weren't doing it to PoC, there's no way in hell they could get away with only doing to white people. To answer your question. No. But there's a good chance the majority of them will continue to reinforce the white supremacy this country was built on, intentionally or not. Are blacks not more empathetic about other blacks? The point I was making is if you frame it as an issue that only effects black people, many people aren't going to care, and that's just a fact across a bunch of shit other than race. If something is happening two towns over, no one gives a shit if it doesn't effect them, etc. If you can show that yes, police abuse and civil rights violations do effect them/aren't a negligible occurrence, then yes, they're more likely to hop on board. You can lament how shitty that is, but that's reality, and yes, I often lament the same shit facts of life when it comes to my libertarian instincts and why it's so difficult to get people past partisanship, cognitive dissonance, etc. If you're going to be bull-headed and ignore those facts in lieu of purity of argument (which I disagree with the premise, but that's digressing a bit), you've lost the war before you've started. Also, what the fuck does the flag have to do police abuse? You've staked your movement on an issue that is highly divisive and up to personal interpretation. Everyone under the sun has their own view of what the flag stands for. If you think you're going to win people over by changing their definition and view of the flag, that's fucking absurd. I can hardly get people to agree on small shit, let alone something like this, especially when military worship is far more popular than something like BLM. It just doesn't make any sense to me, unless you're intentionally sabotaging your own movement lmao. Also, your presupposition that if we made police abuse illegal and punished for whites, that the same juries/courts would then hand down opposite verdicts for blacks, is sure, a possibility (remote, but the possibility exists). At that point, your point becomes IRREFUTABLE. For the average person you're going to win that argument unless you do something real stupid. As it is now, there's no real difference in conviction rates of officers involved in shooting deaths with whites or blacks. The system is overwhelmingly protective of its gendarme. Take away its protection and you'll see a lot less violations against PoC. Let me ask a more blunt question then. What would it take for you to be dispelled of the notion that whites are by definition racist? I'm genuinely curious. PS: At least you finally admitted that accomplishments and change isn't your goal, it's just an argument "to win" or bludgeon white people over. I'm not sure how your fellow PoC would take that, but OK.
Have I ever said that I believe that whites are by definition racist? I feel like I've said at least 4 times in the recent pages that I don't.
Which would explain why you wrote a bunch of other stuff that doesn't make any sense.
Have fun though, I'm ready for a break from this drivel (not picking on you).
|
On September 26 2017 15:03 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 14:58 Falling wrote:People telling themselves they have nothing in common with the KKK doesn't mean they don't. Easy claim to make and just as easily counter-claimed: Just because you say they have something of substance in common with the KKK doesn't mean they do. So then we'd actually have to look at what do the KKK believe and what do those people believe. I'll tell you now though, I'm fairly certain I'd have a hard time finding someone in my own social and professional circles that values things like white-ethnostates, are concerned about white genocide, and otherwise hyperventilate over white people adopting black babies- the opposite, I know a couple that's in the process of adopting three Guyanan orphans. Good ol' race traitors and all that. What the KKK believe is pretty out there and pretty blatant. I certainly know waaay more people very supportive of the state of Israel and know zero people that think the Jews are conspiring to breed out the whites. the KKK fundamentally boils down to an illicit enforcement arm of white supremacy, attempting to secure it's perpetuation. That's something they have in common with a lot of people, enough so, it warrants it being considered supporting white supremacy. Me or MLK aren't saying they are the same thing, but we are saying they are bigger obstacle to progress than their KKK counterparts.
Honest question, would a less racist society according to the wishes of people involved in the modern anti-racist movement be a better and more livable society? Cops abusing their power aside of course, I am talking about the normal white people who are part of the ideological superstructure of "white supremacy"
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 26 2017 14:58 GreenHorizons wrote:
Are you arguing with my argument or a manifestation of several viewpoints to your left?
Yeah, the problem is that there's no way to give a proper answer to that since it's completely and utterly unclear what you stand for. You do seem to think Coates has some deep point, so I think you fit nicely into what it is I'm arguing against. And you are one of the most prominent "everybody admit you're racists" advocates around here.
On September 26 2017 14:58 GreenHorizons wrote:
Do you agree that the protesters should stop trying to prove everyone isn't racist and focus on reforming things?
No, because it's not their fight. Sure, if in the pursuit of actual reform they stand as a steadfast opposition to any form of change that's one thing. But noting how the pro-call-everything-racism crowd is really a joke that needs to be dismissed without consideration, that's something they can go on and respond to. Because it's a real stretch to say they the anti-call-everything-racist crowd started it.
|
Canada11279 Posts
On September 26 2017 15:03 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 14:58 Falling wrote:People telling themselves they have nothing in common with the KKK doesn't mean they don't. Easy claim to make and just as easily counter-claimed: Just because you say they have something of substance in common with the KKK doesn't mean they do. So then we'd actually have to look at what do the KKK believe and what do those people believe. I'll tell you now though, I'm fairly certain I'd have a hard time finding someone in my own social and professional circles that values things like white-ethnostates, are concerned about white genocide, and otherwise hyperventilate over white people adopting black babies- the opposite, I know a couple that's in the process of adopting three Guyanan orphans. Good ol' race traitors and all that. What the KKK believe is pretty out there and pretty blatant. I certainly know waaay more people very supportive of the state of Israel and know zero people that think the Jews are conspiring to breed out the whites. the KKK fundamentally boils down to an illicit enforcement arm of white supremacy, attempting to secure it's perpetuation. That's something they have in common with a lot of people, enough so, it warrants it being considered supporting white supremacy. Me or MLK aren't saying they are the same thing, but we are saying they are bigger obstacle to progress than their KKK counterparts.
That's a bit of sleight of hand there- because I have to assume you're still using that academic definition of white supremacy. So in other words, fundamentally whites are in power and the KKK are the goon squad that makes sure that whites continue to stay in power. But at this point, we are actually ignoring what anyone actually believes about ethnic groups and whether there is any coordination or tacit approval of the keep-whitey-in-power-goon squad or whether most white people would like to see the KKK disappear altogether. Turns out, when most people think of racism, that actually matters a bit.
|
On September 26 2017 14:53 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 14:50 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 26 2017 14:48 LegalLord wrote:On September 26 2017 14:38 Wegandi wrote:
I've gotten my parents to agree that policing is out of control and needs reform and that demilitarization and the 4th Amendment is important, but they cannot stand the kneeling/flag stuff and BLM/all white people are racist non-sense. (There are a million police abuse / killing videos of unarmed white people to show to white people. They aren't as publicized as when a black person is killed, but trust me there are a ton of them. Show this stuff to white people and they'll be a lot more open to police reforms. POLICE REFORMS is the goal right?) Stories like this multiplied across a wide swath of the population should perhaps be an indication that it's probably better to actually try to reform things than dick around with trying to prove everyone isnt* a racist. The will is there but the protesters haven't caught up to it. Now you're getting it. That's what people like you, wegandi, xdaunt, danglars, etc... are supposed to be doing. The "everyone is a racist" ilk tend to bring up the matter of everyone being a racist in the first place. It would never see light without that accusation and maybe instead of these semantic footsies we could move onto talking about the issues.
How does the conversation go?
Cop shoots unarmed black guy
blacks protest that their rights are being violated
whites go "stop protesting, the police did nothing wrong"
blacks go "your racist"
or is it
Cop shoots unarmed black guy
blacks protest that their rights are being violated
whites go "your right, lets reform the police"
blacks go "hold on, I think your racist"
Because to me it looks like the first one pretty much every single time.
I'm not seeing the massive uproar of the country going "we need reforms" every time this happens.
(and yes, ofc its not all whites, or all blacks. I'm generalizing).
|
|
|
I left around noon yesterday and nothing has changed except the page count. GH I applaud you for keeping all of the replies to posters in order and giving your all to seek understanding. Falling was in there for a bit, as well as a LL and a few others. Now I urge you all to go back 10 pages to read all of the posts and see if you aren't, mostly, talking around/past each other. See the words typed and understand them and then see if they jive with what you're arguing. I feel a lot of things in this thread are being skipped to reply quickly (guilty myself some of the time).
Also, Wegandi, if you're not Native American, it's not your country. Just refer to it as America.
|
|
|
|
|
In the past century Canada's most popular Prime Minister was Pierre Elliott Trudeau. The time period where Trudeau was most hated occurred shortly after he called Canada's Hockey Team a bunch of "hooligans" in 1972. If Trudeau in the middle of "Trudea-Mania" can quickly became hated ... Trump.. umm ya..
Trump is fighting the wrong battle getting into a war of words with all these Football and Basketball players.
"Most lower class people of all ethnicities quickly learn that universal justice doesn’t exist, and probably never will, yet unbridled fantasies of fairness are continually thrust upon them from above."
if you got some money things are ok. if you got no money you're fucked. period. end of story. if you are poor: Get Money.
|
And these people are not in Jail because...?
An evangelical church already under investigation for luring foreign believers to the U.S., where they were kept as virtual slaves, has been accused of encouraging parishioners to file fraudulent unemployment claims so they could keep tithing.
According to an Associated Press investigation, the founder of the Word of Faith Fellowship reportedly encouraged church members to defraud the government so that they could keep filling her coffers at Sunday services, saying it was “God’s plan.”
In an interview, contractor Randy Fields related how he appealed to church founder Jane Whaley to allow him to scale back his tithing because his business was faltering, only to have the religious leader encourage him to file fraudulent unemployment claims in the names of his employees.
According to the report, Fields was not alone, with multiple other church members — and fellowship employees – also admitting they committed fraud in the name of the church. The report goes on to note that the allegations are being investigated by the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
Detailing years of fraud, former church adherents estimated that the fake claims — including “some filed by the business owners’ wives and other family members” — would have diverted hundreds of thousands of tax dollars to the church over a six-year period.
This is not the first time the Word of Faith Fellowship has been scrutinized.
In June of this year, a church member admitted that she led approximately 30 parishioners from her church to attack and beat a gay member of the church in an effort to “expel his demons.”
Source
|
On September 26 2017 22:02 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:And these people are not in Jail because...? Show nested quote +An evangelical church already under investigation for luring foreign believers to the U.S., where they were kept as virtual slaves, has been accused of encouraging parishioners to file fraudulent unemployment claims so they could keep tithing.
According to an Associated Press investigation, the founder of the Word of Faith Fellowship reportedly encouraged church members to defraud the government so that they could keep filling her coffers at Sunday services, saying it was “God’s plan.”
In an interview, contractor Randy Fields related how he appealed to church founder Jane Whaley to allow him to scale back his tithing because his business was faltering, only to have the religious leader encourage him to file fraudulent unemployment claims in the names of his employees.
According to the report, Fields was not alone, with multiple other church members — and fellowship employees – also admitting they committed fraud in the name of the church. The report goes on to note that the allegations are being investigated by the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
Detailing years of fraud, former church adherents estimated that the fake claims — including “some filed by the business owners’ wives and other family members” — would have diverted hundreds of thousands of tax dollars to the church over a six-year period.
This is not the first time the Word of Faith Fellowship has been scrutinized.
In June of this year, a church member admitted that she led approximately 30 parishioners from her church to attack and beat a gay member of the church in an effort to “expel his demons.” Source
Because the law requires evidence and its not easy to prove the church put them up to it rather then the people doing it on their own accord?
|
On September 26 2017 22:02 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:And these people are not in Jail because...? Show nested quote +An evangelical church already under investigation for luring foreign believers to the U.S., where they were kept as virtual slaves, has been accused of encouraging parishioners to file fraudulent unemployment claims so they could keep tithing.
According to an Associated Press investigation, the founder of the Word of Faith Fellowship reportedly encouraged church members to defraud the government so that they could keep filling her coffers at Sunday services, saying it was “God’s plan.”
In an interview, contractor Randy Fields related how he appealed to church founder Jane Whaley to allow him to scale back his tithing because his business was faltering, only to have the religious leader encourage him to file fraudulent unemployment claims in the names of his employees.
According to the report, Fields was not alone, with multiple other church members — and fellowship employees – also admitting they committed fraud in the name of the church. The report goes on to note that the allegations are being investigated by the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
Detailing years of fraud, former church adherents estimated that the fake claims — including “some filed by the business owners’ wives and other family members” — would have diverted hundreds of thousands of tax dollars to the church over a six-year period.
This is not the first time the Word of Faith Fellowship has been scrutinized.
In June of this year, a church member admitted that she led approximately 30 parishioners from her church to attack and beat a gay member of the church in an effort to “expel his demons.” Source
Because we can't go after churches without hearing about the War on Christianity. The only churches allowed to be looked down upon in White America sell chicken.
|
Norway28559 Posts
On September 26 2017 11:18 xDaunt wrote:
See, if you adopt that definition of "white supremacy," then you might as well just get back on the boat and go back to Africa. There's no room for hope. You're just a mirror image of the Alt Right, recognizing as they do that racial strife is unavoidable.
this continues to be nonsense. We're not advocating for black supremacy, we're advocating equality. We can recognize that racial strife is unavoidable in a world plagued by inequality, but then rather than accept inequality and accept racial strife, we seek to combat inequality so that racial strife loses its foundation.
|
On September 26 2017 22:14 Liquid`Drone wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 11:18 xDaunt wrote:
See, if you adopt that definition of "white supremacy," then you might as well just get back on the boat and go back to Africa. There's no room for hope. You're just a mirror image of the Alt Right, recognizing as they do that racial strife is unavoidable. this continues to be nonsense. We're not advocating for black supremacy, we're advocating equality. We can recognize that racial strife is unavoidable in a world plagued by inequality, but then rather than accept inequality and accept racial strife, we seek to combat inequality so that racial strife loses its foundation.
I see two problems with xDaunt line of reasoning.
One is about what racist and racism mean. Racism is simply the belief that people are inherently different, can't be trusted the same way or have inherently different merits based on their ethnicity or skin colour. And a racist is simply someone who is racially biaised.
I think it's quite obvious a shit ton of people don't react the same way to a white or black person, and that it's harder to do certain things or be accepted in certain situation for a black person than for a white. It doesn't mean every one of those people is an evil asshole but that there is a latent racism in most western societies that needs to be solved.
In France it's proven that it's much harder for a black person to rent an appartment; people simply prefer renting to white folks. They are not all Hitler, it just happen a lot of frenchmen have a small racial bias that make your life a hell if you are black and looking for a flat. I think making "racist" a super offensive insult is just cheating with reality, which is that in that case, most french people are a bit racially biaised and that it turns into extremely different perspectives in terms of opportunities if you happen to have a brown skin.
The second point is that when a situation is imbalanced, you correct it by taking the weaker side, not by ignoring the whole thing altogether. Fighting for the right of a minority doesn't mean one wants this minority more rights than anyone else. It means we take note of the situation and try to correct it by raising the minority's rights to everyone else's level.
The All Life Matter slogan is a joke, for example. BLM doesn't mean we care more about the lives of black people, it implies that we all know white lives matter and what needs awareness and action are black lives, so they can matter just as much.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
