How are blacks treated in the UK?

[Trainer Monkey]

Keanu- horrible. Just horrible. Did you know they're actually making a Point Break 2?

But here's where we're going to split hairs over the entertainment industry versus the news media; I would argue that it was the former not the later that makes "stars" out of completely meaningless people, but it's news media that demonizes people. My direct point about the media was that they lead the charge for blaming white America for the nation's problems, especially the problems of minorities and special interest groups.

But that's a completely different thread.

See,you really cant seperate the two, the same AP news wire that let me know repeatedly about Jesse Jacksons illegitimate child,is the exact same news wire thats going to beat me over the head over and over with Paris Hilton's latest exploits.
Its all on the AP wire.
And I concur Keannu Reeves is the worst actor who has ever gotten to become a star,ever. Not only can he not act his way out of a brown paper bag,if you cast him as the brown paper bag,he wouldnt be believable in the role

I dunno about that. He was pretty convincing as Ted.

Thats part of the problem
I dont think he was acting when he starred in Bill And Ted, I think he was just reading the lines
He's ruined more potentially good films, then the rating system

[Wayne]

See,you really cant seperate the two, the same AP news wire that let me know repeatedly about Jesse Jacksons illegitimate child,is the exact same news wire thats going to beat me over the head over and over with Paris Hilton's latest exploits.
Its all on the AP wire.
And I concur Keannu Reeves is the worst actor who has ever gotten to become a star,ever. Not only can he not act his way out of a brown paper bag,if you cast him as the brown paper bag,he wouldnt be believable in the role

I dunno about that. He was pretty convincing as Ted.

Thats part of the problem
I dont think he was acting when he starred in Bill And Ted, I think he was just reading the lines
He's ruined more potentially good films, then the rating system

In direct contrast I think Brad Pitt has actually improved as an actor. In "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" he seems like he might be showing off his chops.

Imagine if Keanu had played his character in the Matrix as Ted. "Duuuude, there is no spoooon."

[Trainer Monkey]

I dunno about that. He was pretty convincing as Ted.

Thats part of the problem
I dont think he was acting when he starred in Bill And Ted, I think he was just reading the lines
He's ruined more potentially good films, then the rating system

In direct contrast I think Brad Pitt has actually improved as an actor. In "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" he seems like he might be showing off his chops.

Imagine if Keanu had played his character in the Matrix as Ted. "Duuuude, there is no spoooon."

Pitt often excels when you let him be a total Psycho
Kalifronia,an episode of Tale From The Crypt,Fight Club,7,12 Monkeys,he's great at that kind of stuff

[Wayne]

Agreed. He comes across as a piece of cardboard when he can't emote. He was pretty good in that Jesse James movie too.

[hfahrenheit]

[quote=Killface;646540]

this isn't a generalization, this is very specific. "I also fault the modern day blacks who whine and complain about mistreatment AND all the while are squandering the greatest opportunity in history--we have a black president after all."

I honestly can't see what you're missing here so I'll break it down for you:

i'm saying that I find fault with black people in today's society that cite mistreatment as the reason they can't be successful, and use the President-elect as an example that black people can attain anything they want in America, that's it's not a problem of opportunity.

Not to be redundant, but just so we're clear, I'm exclusively talking about only the aforementioned black people, not all black people. Once again, if you had bothered to read the other posts, I mentioned that my last four bosses were black, and they're definitely successful people, and the funny thing is, most of what I have to say comes from them.

In the future, please read everything carefully before you find anything "deeply offensive" and allow your emotions to get the better of you, and allow you to read things that just aren't there.

So I look at your photo's and video's above and I see terrible, unforgivable things that are universal, unique to no one, and are as old as time.

I think I was very clear by my meaning. By stating 'modern day blacks' that is a general statement. And perhaps you need to reread what I wrote, because I partially agreed with you. There ARE some black people who whine, but you just threw that statement out without any qualification. That would be just like me writing 'modern day white people are racist'. That's talking about white people in general, not specific. Having a black president is irrelevant. It does not stop ANYONE from being racist; whoever was yesterday still is today.

And by 'stripping the blindfold' I think I offered an argument in refutation of your 'modern day blacks' statement by citing pictures of 'modern day blacks' who were murdered for no better reason than because they were black. So are they whiners?

And this business of what blacks do to whites is a separate issue. I don't think the thread has anything to do with that, but it is definitely an interesting topic worth starting. But essentially saying 'they do it to us too' is not a valid argument. One of the foundations this country was built on was institutionalized racism. Last I checked black people were never in control of the machinations of government and used them to grind down their white counterparts. But that is something experienced by 'modern day blacks' by governments run in whole or in large part, by whites. Segregated water fountains, being snatched off the street and beaten by police, the Tuskegee Syphillis Experiments all within the last 100 years- would any of those people be classified as whiners?

Essentially you're saying black people don't have anything to complain about because we got it so good and that's not what being an American is about. The love it or leave it attitude is ass backwards because that isn't what America was founded on.

Of course what racism is is a tool to not see a fellow human being as a human being. I'm not saying it isn't. But what has gone on in this country is a little more particular than just not seeing someone as human. It went on a little longer than it should have for that to be said and it went a lot deeper. For me to just walk up to another person and blow his brains out I have to not see him as a human being. That's not the same thing as that hate for that person being passed down inter-generationally and installed into me because of race. Racism is more specific than simply dehumanizing someone.

You are aware that the word "and" is used to conjoin two clauses, right? I'm assuming that by now you've read this at least three times, and each time you've failed to take in both parts of the compound sentence,

( Compound Sentences )

[ pay close attention to #4,
"The linking word shows the relationship between the ideas:
and = the 2nd sentence contains the same type of idea" ].

So, here's the sentence again:

"I also fault the modern day blacks who whine and complain about mistreatment AND all the while are squandering the greatest opportunity in history--we have a black president after all."

Now, typically, when people see the word "and", they realize that the sentence isn't over, and the rest of the idea will be in the second clause.

You're acting as if the sentence ends with the word "mistreatment", completely negating the second part of the sentence. "but you just threw that statement out without any qualification" --either you have no idea what "without any qualification" means or you just refused to read the second clause.

That would be just like me writing 'modern day white people are racist'-- No, my sentence has two things to say whereas yours just has the one:

[ "modern day" "white people" "are" "racist" ] (1 clause)

versus

[ "modern day" "blacks" "who" "whine and complain" "about mistreatment" ] AND
[ "all the while" "are squandering" "the greatest opportunity" "in history" ] --
[ "we have" "a black president" "after all" ]
(3 clauses)

Do you get it now?...

I'm not talking about just "blacks",
nor "modern day blacks",
or just "modern day blacks who whine and complain about mistreatment"

but to be included in my subject, you'd have to be/to:

A. black
B. of the modern era (debatable what this time period actually is)
C. whine and complain about mistreatment
D. currently squandering the greatest opportunity in history

all of these, not just one or two. So, if you're a black person who's not squandering opportunity, and/or not of the modern era, and/or not whining and complaining specifically about mistreatment, then you're not included in my subject. Do you get that? You have to meet all the above criteria... that is very specific, not a generalization.

The statement about the black president is just underscoring the point about opportunity.

What's not in the sentence: any statement or inference that racism is over because of Obama.

Obama just proves there is not a problem of opportunity in America.

Again, if you'd read the previous posts you'd know why I don't think racism will ever go away. Feel free to read them and update your discussion.

"Essentially you're saying black people don't have anything to complain about because we got it so good and that's not what being an American is about. The love it or leave it attitude is ass backwards because that isn't what America was founded on."

The only thing I'm saying is that there's plenty of opportunity for everyone here in America, and that I find fault with Black people who complain about mistreatment instead of capitalizing on it, (only those Black people, not Black people in general, or any other deviation from the subject).

But, I do mostly agree with that statement. I think Black people have plenty to complain about, just like everybody else, but have no reason to not seize opportunity. Black people, like the rest of the US, do have it "so good". A trip to Mexico can prove that, not to mention how much better a life we have compared to the Third World.

So yes, in regard to your "love it or leave it" attitude, anybody that thinks it would be so much better somewhere else, by all means, get the fuck out. If you disagree with that, it's your right. The conversation stops there.

Of course what racism is is a tool to not see a fellow human being as a human being. I'm not saying it isn't. But what has gone on in this country is a little more particular than just not seeing someone as human. It went on a little longer than it should have for that to be said and it went a lot deeper. For me to just walk up to another person and blow his brains out I have to not see him as a human being. That's not the same thing as that hate for that person being passed down inter-generationally and installed into me because of race.

The majority of this paragraph we'll continue to disagree on too. Cruelty and brutality are the same historically and globally. A "racial" killing has no more significance than a "social" killing. Murder is murder, cruelty is cruelty, brutality is brutality, torture is torture, etc... it all falls under the same umbrella. I'm not saying they're the same thing, but, again, one's not more important than the other.

Racism is more specific than simply dehumanizing someone.

No, it's just a specific way of dehumanizing.

[Trainer Monkey]

Why a hate crime verdict is available,is thats a fed crime
Odds are,if I put 3 white boys on trial for murdering a black boy in Georgia,odds are they walk in a state trial.Even if their guiltier then sin
This ensures that the feds have an option to retry them without interfering with double indemnity laws
Thats why hate crime laws exist

[Wayne]

[quote=hfahrenheit;647801]

I think I was very clear by my meaning. By stating 'modern day blacks' that is a general statement. And perhaps you need to reread what I wrote, because I partially agreed with you. There ARE some black people who whine, but you just threw that statement out without any qualification. That would be just like me writing 'modern day white people are racist'. That's talking about white people in general, not specific. Having a black president is irrelevant. It does not stop ANYONE from being racist; whoever was yesterday still is today.

And by 'stripping the blindfold' I think I offered an argument in refutation of your 'modern day blacks' statement by citing pictures of 'modern day blacks' who were murdered for no better reason than because they were black. So are they whiners?

And this business of what blacks do to whites is a separate issue. I don't think the thread has anything to do with that, but it is definitely an interesting topic worth starting. But essentially saying 'they do it to us too' is not a valid argument. One of the foundations this country was built on was institutionalized racism. Last I checked black people were never in control of the machinations of government and used them to grind down their white counterparts. But that is something experienced by 'modern day blacks' by governments run in whole or in large part, by whites. Segregated water fountains, being snatched off the street and beaten by police, the Tuskegee Syphillis Experiments all within the last 100 years- would any of those people be classified as whiners?

Essentially you're saying black people don't have anything to complain about because we got it so good and that's not what being an American is about. The love it or leave it attitude is ass backwards because that isn't what America was founded on.

Of course what racism is is a tool to not see a fellow human being as a human being. I'm not saying it isn't. But what has gone on in this country is a little more particular than just not seeing someone as human. It went on a little longer than it should have for that to be said and it went a lot deeper. For me to just walk up to another person and blow his brains out I have to not see him as a human being. That's not the same thing as that hate for that person being passed down inter-generationally and installed into me because of race. Racism is more specific than simply dehumanizing someone.

You are aware that the word "and" is used to conjoin two clauses, right? I'm assuming that by now you've read this at least three times, and each time you've failed to take in both parts of the compound sentence,

( Compound Sentences )

[ pay close attention to #4,
"The linking word shows the relationship between the ideas:
and = the 2nd sentence contains the same type of idea" ].

So, here's the sentence again:

"I also fault the modern day blacks who whine and complain about mistreatment AND all the while are squandering the greatest opportunity in history--we have a black president after all."

Now, typically, when people see the word "and", they realize that the sentence isn't over, and the rest of the idea will be in the second clause.

You're acting as if the sentence ends with the word "mistreatment", completely negating the second part of the sentence. "but you just threw that statement out without any qualification" --either you have no idea what "without any qualification" means or you just refused to read the second clause.

That would be just like me writing 'modern day white people are racist'-- No, my sentence has two things to say whereas yours just has the one:

[ "modern day" "white people" "are" "racist" ] (1 clause)

versus

[ "modern day" "blacks" "who" "whine and complain" "about mistreatment" ] AND
[ "all the while" "are squandering" "the greatest opportunity" "in history" ] --
[ "we have" "a black president" "after all" ]
(3 clauses)

Do you get it now?...

I'm not talking about just "blacks",
nor "modern day blacks",
or just "modern day blacks who whine and complain about mistreatment"

but to be included in my subject, you'd have to be/to:

A. black
B. of the modern era (debatable what this time period actually is)
C. whine and complain about mistreatment
D. currently squandering the greatest opportunity in history

all of these, not just one or two. So, if you're a black person who's not squandering opportunity, and/or not of the modern era, and/or not whining and complaining specifically about mistreatment, then you're not included in my subject. Do you get that? You have to meet all the above criteria... that is very specific, not a generalization.

The statement about the black president is just underscoring the point about opportunity.

What's not in the sentence: any statement or inference that racism is over because of Obama.

Obama just proves there is not a problem of opportunity in America.

Again, if you'd read the previous posts you'd know why I don't think racism will ever go away. Feel free to read them and update your discussion.

"Essentially you're saying black people don't have anything to complain about because we got it so good and that's not what being an American is about. The love it or leave it attitude is ass backwards because that isn't what America was founded on."

The only thing I'm saying is that there's plenty of opportunity for everyone here in America, and that I find fault with Black people who complain about mistreatment instead of capitalizing on it, (only those Black people, not Black people in general, or any other deviation from the subject).

But, I do mostly agree with that statement. I think Black people have plenty to complain about, just like everybody else, but have no reason to not seize opportunity. Black people, like the rest of the US, do have it "so good". A trip to Mexico can prove that, not to mention how much better a life we have compared to the Third World.

So yes, in regard to your "love it or leave it" attitude, anybody that thinks it would be so much better somewhere else, by all means, get the fuck out. If you disagree with that, it's your right. The conversation stops there.

Of course what racism is is a tool to not see a fellow human being as a human being. I'm not saying it isn't. But what has gone on in this country is a little more particular than just not seeing someone as human. It went on a little longer than it should have for that to be said and it went a lot deeper. For me to just walk up to another person and blow his brains out I have to not see him as a human being. That's not the same thing as that hate for that person being passed down inter-generationally and installed into me because of race.

The majority of this paragraph we'll continue to disagree on too. Cruelty and brutality are the same historically and globally. A "racial" killing has no more significance than a "social" killing. Murder is murder, cruelty is cruelty, brutality is brutality, torture is torture, etc... it all falls under the same umbrella. I'm not saying they're the same thing, but, again, one's not more important than the other.

Racism is more specific than simply dehumanizing someone.

No, it's just a specific way of dehumanizing.

Finally you've clarified your meaning. Your English lesson is fine and dandy, but you forget that the language is a lot more fluid than that. That being said, your meaning could have been taken EITHER way and NEITHER could be considered incorrect.