| Author | Message | ||
     John James Leuchs Jr Citizen Username: Clairvoyant Post Number: 80 Registered: 8-2005 |
Yes, Farrahkan is extreme but were any of these quotes in the video? Do we start to censor all the leaders and writers that we disagree with? There are parts of the country where certain books are still banned from libraries. You cannot watch MTV in Utah. Where does censorship stop? The video has to be judged by its content alone. | ||
| bklyntonj Citizen Username: Bklyntonj Post Number: 636 Registered: 7-2003 |
You guys keep going ater Farrakhan's statements, even though I give you positive ways he's influenced the AA community. Now, give me an example where his words have had a negative impact on any non-black community? How have his words impeded or interfered with any white person's life? Minister Farrakhan challenges black men Transcript from Minister Louis Farrakhan's remarks at the Million Man March October 17, 1995 Web posted at: 1:25 a.m. EDT FARRAKHAN: And yet, I point out the evils of Black people like no other leader does, but my people don't call me anti-Black, because they know I must love them in order to point out what's wrong so we can get it right to come back into the favor of God! But, let me say in truth, you can't point out wrong with malice. You can't point out wrong with hatred. Because, if we point out wrong with bitterness and hatred, then the bitterness and the hatred becomes a barrier between you and the person whom you hope to get right, that they might come into the favor of God. I still haven't seen anyone acknowledge the other points I raised. Now, most blacks who grew up or moved out here did so to get away from the obstacles of urban communities and to get along with their fellow human beings for the common good. Just to find they're facing more racism here than where they came from. I even heard a parent say at a meeting at CHS, "that's the problem with blacks, they move out here thinking they're getting a better life just to find out these people aren't crazy about you being here and bringing down their quality of life". Not that I agree with it but it is something to think about. Plus, who would admit it openly anyway? | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 331 Registered: 1-2006 |
Well, for example, when I read his malicious, anti-Semitic filth, there is a powerful negative reaction from me. What should the members of what he describes as the "gutter religion" consider him? If you don't see his malice, and hatred, you are naive. I came here from Brooklyn also, to buy a house, and get my kids a good public school education. I succeeded. I find the racism on-line is anti-White, but, thankfully, limited to a few narrow-minded souls. jd | ||
| Glock 17 Citizen Username: Glock17 Post Number: 527 Registered: 7-2005  |
Racism and prejudice are two distinctly different things. Racism is the use of ones power over a system; economic, politcal, etc. to opress another race. Blacks as a race do not have this power and therefore can not be racist. I have to quote this again...because it is probably the single best speech I've ever read. "Now, several people have been upset because we’ve said that integration was irrelevant when initiated by blacks, and that in fact it was a subterfuge, an insidious subterfuge, for the maintenance of white supremacy. Now we maintain that in the past six years or so, this country has been feeding us a "thalidomide drug of integration," and that some negroes have been walking down a dream street talking about sitting next to white people; and that that does not begin to solve the problem; that when we went to Mississippi we did not go to sit next to Ross Barnett˛; we did not go to sit next to Jim Clarkł; we went to get them out of our way; and that people ought to understand that; that we were never fighting for the right to integrate, we were fighting against white supremacy. Now, then, in order to understand white supremacy we must dismiss the fallacious notion that white people can give anybody their freedom. No man can given anybody his freedom. A man is born free. You may enslave a man after he is born free, and that is in fact what this country does. It enslaves black people after they’re born, so that the only acts that white people can do is to stop denying black people their freedom; that is, they must stop denying freedom. They never give it to anyone." | ||
| Dave Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 9182 Registered: 4-1997  |
Racism is more like the belief that one's race determines one's capacities. Anyone can be racist. | ||
| bklyntonj Citizen Username: Bklyntonj Post Number: 637 Registered: 7-2003 |
That's your definition Dave, not in any dictionary I've seen. Glock's definition is from the dictionary. racism n 1: the prejudice that members of one race are intrinsically superior to members of other races. 2: The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others. And Joel, "What should the members of what he describes as the "gutter religion" consider him?" Consider who someone who speaks for and to black people specifically. You cannot name one member of the Nation of Islam who ever committed a crime or interfered with anyone's rights. NOT ONE! Now trying to interfere with their right to live, that's a different story. Then again, who wouldn't feel the same way? Me? Naive? It cracks me up to listen to so many people say how I, a black person, should feel or think but not accept my feelings or thoughts. Now tell me, why should I take anyone seriously who won't take me seriously? To anyone who disagrees, I'm sure if we met we could get along, laugh and speak intellectually and respectfully. Whether you agree or disagree is fine. But once you disrespect a person's character or way of thinking just for being in disagreement with you, that's going too far. | ||
| N. Bonaparte Supporter Username: Wendy Post Number: 2302 Registered: 5-2001 |
Bklyntonj, here's a hypothetical just for you - because I consider you reasonable unlike some of the other posters about this topic. Let's say there's this very interesting and progressive person - probably white - who holds some but clearly not all (as you'll soon see below) of the same values that our community values. However, this person has been known to have made statements about African-Americans that many would find derogatory. But this person hasn't done anything to incite violence against African-Americans just that his or her opinions/quotes could certainly be deemed to be pejorative, racist, or filled with certain generalizations that are offensive to the African-American community. This person organizes a march about getting out of Iraq or getting out of some other country. This person appears in a film or is willing to come and speak to the community or come to CHS. How do you feel? Farrakhan is antisemitic pure and simple. And unless that film shown at CHS was followed by those facts about him then showing it was wrong regardless of the merit of the rest of the film. Can you just imagine if the situation was reversed? Wendy Lauter | ||
| bklyntonj Citizen Username: Bklyntonj Post Number: 638 Registered: 7-2003 |
N. Bonaparte, thank you for considering me a reasonable person. First I'd want to know how this person feels about African-Americans supporting them in this march and if any were included. Also, does this person's statements claim all African-Americans or just a chosen few are a part of this derogatory group. Farrakhan clearly states, "those false or wicked Jews" that happen to be in positions of control in Hollywood or in any other field that have control over decisions. He speaks about the way blacks are portrayed or allowed to be portrayed. Without dignity. Surely no black adult (especially one with female children) would allow the music industry to portray blacks the way they do. Now, I don't know who runs these companies in Hollywood but I do know they're not black. I also know there's a lot of self-destruction within black people. For example, BET, one of the first black-run TV stations (not anymore) used to play videos 22 out of 24 hours a day. Robert Johnson (former owner of BET) was asked, why does he continue to play so many videos. His response was, "if you look at our viewing statistics, our numbers are high while videos are being played. When our black news show would come on, our numbers significantly drop until the videos come back on. I try to give more of a variety but this is what black viewers seem to want". Farrakhan is trying to raise the thinking of black people and not letting them settle for being treated like second-class citizens or accepting it. Something the majority of us in lower-class circumstances have come to accept too often. | ||
| N. Bonaparte Supporter Username: Wendy Post Number: 2305 Registered: 5-2001 |
Farrakhan could easily point to any people in power who are pandering to the perceived tastes of the majority culture for the profit motive. Whether it's Henry Ford, Louis B. Mayer, or Robert Johnson. The fact that he's defining a portion of those people by their religion and insulting their religion to boot is just one of the reasons he's antisemitic. I'm sorry you don't see it. I really don't think you would feel this way if the shoe were on the other foot. (Ironically if one is going to define people by their religion when making assessments about them, I understand that Jews were quite overrepresented during the Civil Rights era.) Anyone who tries to raise the "thinking of blacks" by castigating another group is trying to do more than raise the thinking. | ||
| Glock 17 Citizen Username: Glock17 Post Number: 528 Registered: 7-2005 |
The difference is that if a person looks at a black...after hearing deragatory things about them..they probably wont hire them If a person is jewish and the employer has heard deragatory things about them...it wouldnt matter | ||
| N. Bonaparte Supporter Username: Wendy Post Number: 2306 Registered: 5-2001 |
Glock, perhaps you missed that part of history which covered the Holocaust. Or perhaps people like Farrakhan have convinced you it wasn't a big deal or didn't happen. Don't even try to say that was the past if you want to maintain any credibility. | ||
| Glock 17 Citizen Username: Glock17 Post Number: 529 Registered: 7-2005 |
It's been a holocaust for blacks in america ever since they dragged the first african brother to these shores. | ||
| N. Bonaparte Supporter Username: Wendy Post Number: 2307 Registered: 5-2001 |
But the subject is/was the antisemitic nature of Louis Farrakhan. Your response, even if arguably true (the term holocaust has very specific meanings) is not germane, not helpful and not relevant. | ||
| Parkbench87 Citizen Username: Parkbench87 Post Number: 4006 Registered: 7-2001  |
"Parkbench. If so...why is the general black population still in such a state of despair?" Glock, I'm not sure what you are referring to when you say the general black population. What comprises the general black population? To be sure there are serious problems in certain parts of the community but there are also alot of people doing well. Whatever problems exist are surely not due to integration. I'm not going to get into this argument about who has suffered more because it serves no purpose. I also don't think a person like Farrakhan can truly claim any moral standing with all of the prejudical statements he has made. However in the big picture Farrakhan really has no relevance. I think that HS kids are smart enough to view a documentary that refers to him and be able to process their thoughts. | ||
| John James Leuchs Jr Citizen Username: Clairvoyant Post Number: 81 Registered: 8-2005 |
Thanks, Wendy. That was well expressed. Farrakhan has made many prejudicial statements, but "HS kids are smart enough to view a documentary that refers to him and be able to process their thoughts." | ||
| Flimbro Citizen Username: Flimbro Post Number: 27 Registered: 6-2005 |
Does anyone know if any of the films presented at the HS will be screened anywhere else or are available for viewing? | ||
| Glock 17 Citizen Username: Glock17 Post Number: 530 Registered: 7-2005 |
MOL should upload them. | ||
| bklyntonj Citizen Username: Bklyntonj Post Number: 639 Registered: 7-2003 |
NB, I do see that if anyone says something derogatory about Farrakhan they're not considered anti-muslim, if anyone says something derogatory about Rev Al Sharpton they're not anti-christian. Because no one sees past their skin. They're black first, whatever else second. Now let me ask you a question, if someone constantly says things that are religion-based that you disagree with and you lash out at them for saying these things, would you be considered anti-their religion or just in disagreement? What I don't see is why if someone is in disagreement with one or even several Jews, that makes them anti-semetic against all Jews. Or, if one or a group of blacks steal a car or mug someone, all blacks are considered criminals. No offense but I don't think Jews have the right to bring up the holocaust to blacks as being more severe than what we've been through and are still going through here in America. Whites are categorized by their nationality first. German, Irish, Italian, Russian, etc. The only way you can tell if a white person is jewish is by their attire. If you or any other white person met a black person from America, you wouldn't ask or think are they haitian, from the carribean, nigerian, ethiopian. No, they're just black. Now let me bring this back home. Me and my children moved here from an all black community, with all black schools and all black or non-white store owners. They probably never saw whites until we went out of the neighborhood or across Eastern Pkwy (dividing street in Bklyn between the black and jewish parts of the Crown Hts. section). They never experienced overt racism. We move here and now they see a town where some whites look at them differently, racial tension within the school system and people being judged unfairly just because of the color of their skin? Not exactly what I had in mind in showing them a better and diverse quality of life. I'm sure many blacks agree with me too. That's why there's so much division between the races in our towns. | ||
| mamatamu Citizen Username: Mamatamu Post Number: 157 Registered: 7-2002  |
Napoleon: Look in the mirror. The discussion is not about anti-semitism. What the discussion is about the right for a people to interpret their own history. This right was denied when the principal and the superintendent initially nixed the scheduled Black History Month Assembly. This was a Black History program, not a Jewish history program. Moreover, I can tell you for fact that the average black nine year old child can tell you more about the Holocaust than they could about the Black Panthers or Louis Farrakhan. "I'm sorry you don't see it. I really don't think you would feel this way if the shoe were on the other foot." | ||
| bklyntonj Citizen Username: Bklyntonj Post Number: 640 Registered: 7-2003 |
Good point sweet born on a Saturday. | ||
| Bob K Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 11160 Registered: 5-2001 |
i think the question about Ms. Pollock's original decision not to show the film in question centers around if the film dealt with Farrakhan's anti-semitism and most importantly presented it in a positive light. Farrakhan is one of those figures from the civil rights movement you either respect or don't. I don't, but then I am a white guy. I think African Americans are probably going to look at him in a different light. If the film was anti-semitic Ms. Pollock was within her rights to censor it. However, censoring a student film because the principal doesn't like one of the people mentioned is wrong. One way or another when it was finally shown there wasn't a race riot. In fact, it was used as a subject of discussion in classes later in the day. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 336 Registered: 1-2006 |
Farrakhan and civil rights, perfect together. jd | ||
| ffof Citizen Username: Ffof Post Number: 4654 Registered: 5-2001  |
bkln- you are way off if you think that people don't like Farrakhan and Sharpton because they are black. Do people dislike Pat Robertson because he is white? CHristian? NO, it's because he says ridiculous outrageous things. Just like Farrakhan and Sharpton (to a lesser degree). Sure, there are people who agree with ridiculous outrageous things whether said by Farrakhan or Sharpton or Robertson, but it doesn't mean we can paint a racial broadbrush about why they are disliked. Glock- who sold your black brothers from Africa? That could have been included in the MLK assembly. Maybe next year. Ms Taylor, social studies teacher at MMS, and is AA, teaches that. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 337 Registered: 1-2006 |
First they were captured, tribal stuff, then sold. jd | ||
| SO Ref Citizen Username: So_refugee Post Number: 1680 Registered: 2-2005  |
Suge Knight, Percy Miller (Master P), Sean "P. Diddy" Combs, and Russell Simmons are all black men who own their own record labels. Do their labels do a better job of promoting the black image? | ||
| Cynicalgirl Citizen Username: Cynicalgirl Post Number: 2600 Registered: 9-2003  |
Somehow seemed related, this quote from Shirley Chisolm: "Of my two "handicaps" being female put more obstacles in my path than being black." Not true anymore? As an over 50 Feminist, white, sorta Protestand female I tend to be more interested in what the affected women think of the movements, issues and male leaders more than anything else, including Farrakhan. It always strikes me that organizations and religions that try to lift men up -- whether Promisekeepers, or conservative sects of prominent religions -- often have a way of putting women down, or at least off to the side in "special" roles. Clothes rules, dietary/hygiene rules that mostly affect women's work in the home, worship separation. Not my cuppa tea, and I guess if they're consenting adults, their choice. Whether or not it's OK to represent at school would seem to be a matter of balance, and could be Farrakhan has moderated his position since the '70's. | ||
| bklyntonj Citizen Username: Bklyntonj Post Number: 641 Registered: 7-2003 |
ffof, I did not say Farrakhan & Sharpton are not liked because they're black, I said they're categorized or seen as black first. When referred to in the news, its always the black civil rights activist or the black hatemonger or leader. Never the christian or the muslim. Is Robertson referred to as the white leader? Another example, the riot that took place in Bklyn after one person (jewish) was confronted by an officer to move his car and didn't hear him because he was talking on a cell phone turned into a fight between him and the cop which led to a riot. The cop is now being called an anti-semite. Why? Should anyone who is disagreement with me or personally attacked my character on MOL be considered anti-black? SO Ref, they do own their labels but their label is owned by another company. Interface owns Death Row (Suge Knight's co.), Priority owns No Limit (Master P's co.), BBWEG owns Bad Boy (P Diddy's co.). Also, smaller-owned labels do not have the same power and influence with radio & TV stations that larger companies do, so their chances of getting the same air play are slim. And, if you see the industry going in one direction, as in my earlier BET example, that's the route people who're in it for the $ will chosse to take. Unfortunately, it gets them more air play and exposure than going against the trend. There are pop rappers, gospel rappers, political rappers, etc. But they will not get the same air play as gangster rappers or rappers who provocatively exploit black females. Cynicalgirl, I agree. The million woman's march was supported by Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam. There are also many female ministers in which there were none in the past. Shirley Chisolm, good example. I'm impressed. | ||
| John James Leuchs Jr Citizen Username: Clairvoyant Post Number: 82 Registered: 8-2005 |
Yes, he has moderated his position in the past ten years after receiving support from certain key Republicans. But, on tour a year after the Million Man March he was still selling anti-semitic books such as The Jews and Their Lies. While I support the showing of the film as it's content was not anti-semitic, it is a ridiculous stretch to argue that Farrakhan is not anti-semitic. If he was White and the same collection of quotes was made about Blacks he would definitely be considered a racist. Arguing his contributions to Black society doesn't negate his anti-semitism. Prejudice is prejudice whether it is against Blacks, Jews, or homosexuals. Arguing whether they are discernible in the regular population by their appearance has nothing to do with the prejudice that each group experiences once it is known to which group they belong. | ||
| Cynicalgirl Citizen Username: Cynicalgirl Post Number: 2604 Registered: 9-2003 |
bklntonj, I'm just old! I remember hearing Ms. Chisolm speak, and Angela Davis, and a few others no one seems to quote anymore. A lot of younger people seem to forget that Ms. Chisolm tried for the Democratic party nomination back when. I often wonder why more isn't made of her and a few others these days. She certainly surmounted some serious odds, and was her own person not "the wife of..." | ||
| Cynicalgirl Citizen Username: Cynicalgirl Post Number: 2605 Registered: 9-2003 |
...and let's not forget Flo Kennedy, whose mouth I admired: Dubbed "radicalism's rudest mouth" by People magazine in 1974, Flo knew how to formulate a concept as neatly as the meat in a nutshell. "If you want to kill poverty, go to Wall Street and disrupt," she wrote in her autobiography, "Color Me Flo: My Hard Life and Good Times." A friend remembers her telling a judge who reprimanded her in the early 1970s for wearing pants, "I'll ignore your dress if you ignore my pants." When asked by a man who heckled her during a public lecture if she was a lesbian, she responded, "Are you my alternative?" http://www.workers.org/ww/2001/flokennedy0201.php | ||
| Bob K Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 11164 Registered: 5-2001 |
I think this thread has morphed a long way from the MLK assembly at CHS and young Chris Thorn's documentary. Has anyone seen it? Did it portray Farrakan's anti-semitism possitively? Did it mention it at all? If a school is going to ban anything to do with historical figures who expressed anti-semitism there is going to be a long list of people such as Henry Ford and Harry Truman. As I said before; if the film supported Farrakan's anti-semitism I agree with Ms. Pollock not to show it. If it touched on other aspects of the man she was wrong. BTW, I remember Farrakan used to have women bodyguards, kinda unusual for a guy claiming to be a Muslim. | ||
| crabby Citizen Username: Crabbyappleton Post Number: 557 Registered: 1-2004 |
Henry Ford? Harry Truman? I'd say we've come a long way since then. | ||
| Cynicalgirl Citizen Username: Cynicalgirl Post Number: 2606 Registered: 9-2003 |
Sorry for my role in the drift... | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 339 Registered: 1-2006 |
Yes, the 75 year old retired baker fights the young white cops. Sound familiar? | ||
| bklyntonj Citizen Username: Bklyntonj Post Number: 642 Registered: 7-2003 |
(Why do I find myself saying the same thing over and over again) Farrakhan does NOT speak against all Jews. I can even show you lectures and dinners where his guests were rabbis and others of the jewish faith. Why aren't some of you getting this point? Why aren't some of you answering if you go against one Jew, you're considered going against all? Why isn't anyone answering why if some blacks commit crimes all blacks are considered criminals or at least intimidating in public? This all ties into broad comments made by Pollack and others. At an event to celebrate MLK and black accomplishments for Black history month, why would anyone choose to bring up negative statistics (absentee fathers, which have nothing to do with Farrakhan), whether true or not at an event honoring accomplishments? That's inexcusable! Also, to assume since some black students are not at CHS to learn means to assume all are probably the same? That's ludicrous! Its the same thing with this discussion, too many broad paintbrushes being used against Farrakhan's statements. Just like Pollack's using too broad a paintbrush to judge all of her black student body. | ||
| Glock 17 Citizen Username: Glock17 Post Number: 531 Registered: 7-2005 |
Keep it up, bklyn! And ffof, I should hope you are not saying that because a few Africans were tricked and used(in exactly the same way American Indians were)...that the slave trade is justified and that white imperialists should not be held accountable? | ||
| Spanish Inquisitor Citizen Username: Sinq Post Number: 53 Registered: 4-2004  |
Just because Hitler targeted Jewish shop owners on Kristallnacht didn't mean he was against all Jews either, I guess. When someone titles a book "The Jews and their Lies" he's waging a hate war and he must know it. He's not saying "Some Jews and Their Lies". | ||
| frannyfree Citizen Username: Frannyfree Post Number: 183 Registered: 1-2004 |
When my grandmother's home was taken and she was taken to a Concentration Camp, her neighbors said "But we didn't mean Jews like YOU" Let's hear again how hating a few is okay. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 340 Registered: 1-2006 |
That's easy, just read this thread. jd | ||
| ffof Citizen Username: Ffof Post Number: 4655 Registered: 5-2001 |
I would never say they were tricked. And last I checked, slavery was defeated. Thank g*d. |
