Discussion with Danny – Part 1 – The “BGI.”

On December 31, 2013, and by my invitation, Danny Warrior visited and posted several comments.  He was invited to dispel accusations by a harasser that he is my “mole.”  I promised him that after the first of the year we would continue discussion.

This post is under the Potpourri category and menu.  If it should scroll off “Recent Posts,” just go to the top menu under “Potpourri” to find it.

Danny,

I do appreciate your willingness to discuss and to do it here on this blog.  It bothers me that you closed your blog because of the malicious harassment and lies. Others have done the same, or made their blog private, or disallowed comments because of the same people and their malicious lies to work their agenda to slander.

The following is one of your comments and serves as a good basis to start.   I had asked you about the “BGI.”  (Danny, if you believe we should start on another issue, let me know.)

DannyWarrior commented on Shellie Zimmerman Injured In Car Crash.

So much to respond to. Where to start?
These are my views. This is how I see it.
BGI began to be coined as a racial adadge at the OutHouse during this case. But, the proper term is GI. The GI is a political philosophy that social issues are resolved through the use of laws and Government. Unlike the Civil Rights movement where the leaders intent was to seek racial equality into everyday life, BGI has leaders who seek out one situation and claim a whole race is discriminated against because of some law yet passed or overturned.

As history shows us, as well as these groups, laws may make it illegal to discriminate against someone because of color etc, the law is useless to grieve about how people feel. Feelings have nothing to do with law. So now, it has become the social argument of what is not fair is not equal. What is equal is not always fair.

As for the GZ case not being an example of SYG, or self defense? You hit the nail on the head with my position. And it has nothing to do with white vs. black law. He is not even white.

Danny,

As I stated in a previous comment, I don’t want to re-litigate the George Zimmerman case.  However, there are some areas misunderstood and/or that are grey.  This might be a good lead-in regarding “BGI.”  In my humble opinion, it’s important for people to validate what others understand and/or believe, even if or when they disagree.  That is impossible to do without understanding what people mean by the words they use.   For instance, some people use the word “white” to refer to skin color while others use the same word to refer to race.  For still others, they are one and the same.

There are people with white skin who are not White by race just as there are people with dark skin who are not African-American by race.  These differences in understanding have resulted in debate when identifying George Zimmerman’s race.

Before the Civil Rights movement, there were three races in America; Caucasian, Negro and Oriental.   The reason I know this is because my first job out of high school in 1968 was with a hospital as a “ward clerk,” and they placed me in what was then called the OB/GYNE ward.  Part of my job was to fill-out birth certificates.

Over the years, classifying people based on race has gone through transformations as more people from other countries became citizens of the United States by way immigration or birth.    Orientals are no longer Oriental but “Asian.”  Those descendants from Latin countries now have a choice of being Black Hispanic or White Hispanic.  Previous to the 1970’s, they were Caucasian regardless of the color of their skin.

Some people will tell you that “Hispanic” is not a race but a language.  The proper term for those descendants from Latin American countries is Latino.

On his police and medical reports, George Zimmerman’s race is “White.”  Remember Anthony Gorgone’s testimony at Zimmerman’s trial?  Zimmerman’s DNA is “Caucasian.”   George Zimmerman is White.  But know what Danny?  There are people who say that Whites and Blacks are “racist,” but they omit that Latinos and Asians can also be racist.  For instance, are you aware that your subject harasser is of Viet Nam descent?

How did race become an issue in Zimmerman’s case?  When nothing had been released to the public other than George Zimmerman’s non-emergency phone call, Police Chief Bill Lee appeared before cameras and said that Zimmerman claimed self-defense and until he could establish probable cause to dispute that, he didn’t have the grounds to arrest him.   When officers of the Sanford Police Department spoke with others on camera, they said they were obligated to do a fair investigation that included not only Trayvon’s position, but Zimmerman’s.

Trayvon was dead.  How were they to get his position?  How was Bill Lee to investigate for probable cause when he placed credibility in Zimmerman’s statements?  Those were dog whistles.  They were dog whistles because there is enough evidence in Zimmerman’s NEN call to question his credibility.

It was not the media that made race an issue in the case.  It wasn’t Trayvon’s parents, neither their attorneys, nor activists.  It was the Sanford Police Department’s dog whistles.   Even during WWII Nazi occupation in Europe, there were Jews who heard the dog whistles, and some who did not.  I don’t expect for everyone to recognize dog whistles but when someone does, it should be validated that is what they hear.

There were White Supremacist websites such as Wagist (now no longer available) that plotted the thugification on Trayvon as the only defense to what they believed was race baiting.  It wasn’t in support of Zimmerman but rather, an agenda of propaganda to oppress people by way of slander and humiliation.  Is that not exactly what the harasser tried doing to you?  Zimmerman is nothing more to them than an excuse, like an unclean salad fork that they use to argue that they shouldn’t pay for the meal by blaming the dishwasher, the chef, the server, the owner of the establishment.

 BGI has leaders who seek out one situation and claim a whole race is discriminated against because of some law yet passed or overturned.

Please bear with me, because what I’m about to write is not necessarily intended for you (unless you believe that the BGI exists).   Rather, it’s intended to present questions and by those questions, why I see the BGI as a label intended to oppress.

In order for there to be BGI leaders, there has to be a BGI.  BGI is a false hypothesis; a label placed on activists who know by history that as a nation of laws, if one person is served injustice, then it trickles down to all such persons.

Does the Dred Scott case meet the qualifications of the BGI?  Was it one situation that claimed a whole race was discriminated against because some states had some laws and some states had other laws? Were the abolitionists its leaders? Was that case not settled by a Civil War and amendments to the Constitution?

Was Rosa Parks one woman, and did the Jim Crow law that she resisted not affect all Blacks, even those visiting in Jim Crow states?

Was Emmett Till not one person who was murdered because he did not know the culture of racial bigotry and discrimination in the State of Mississippi?  Were those charged with his murder acquitted, and then admitted to their acts, because of racial bigotry and the law protecting them from double-jeopardy?  Does the same situation that applied to one person, Emmet Till and the trial of his murders not exist today because of the law?

By analogy, did abortion in America become legal because of one situation?  As the states have began making it humanely difficult as possible for women to have legal abortions, does it not discriminate against an entire gender?  Do activists supporting legal abortion seek out one situation to take action using law to support their position?

Should we place a WGI label on it?

Choice and equality are somewhat synonymous because discrimination deprives citizens of choices in life.   Women don’t have a choice of their birth gender anymore than people have a choice over their race but when it comes to their choices in life, our constitution is understood to hold that all are equal.

How many people have to be harmed before it becomes worthy of activism and advocacy?  What happens when the same situation happens to hundreds, or thousands, or tens of thousands?   Were numbers one through ten thousand not served an injustice?   Were they not equal?  Were they not good enough?

Feelings?  Some legal actions are decided based on what a “reasonable person” would or does do.  Even stand your ground law is based on reasonable belief, or reasonable fear of how a reasonable person would act.  Those things are based on feelings and the law individualizes it.   Zimmerman’s entire defense was based on what he felt.

What I’m beginning to see is that there is an hypocritical challenge by those coining and defining “BGI”, because they support a law based on feelings while asserting that those opposed to stand your ground do so based on “feelings.”  Do I understand that correctly?

Posted on 01/05/2014, in Cyber Abuse, Potpourri, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 201 Comments.

  1. the thing about Zimmerman’s race: I never gave a rats ass what color he was. The only time race came up was when Trayvon was disparaged because of his race. But now that we know for sure Santa, who originated in Greece/Turkey is White, and Jesus, who was born in the Middle East, is White, per Faux Spews/Megyn Kelly, how can Zimmerman not be White too? >.<

    Like

    • Hey Mindyme. I heard that the Easter Bunny is really yellow. 🙂

      Like

    • On a more serious note, when I first heard about the case it was via Zimmerman’s NEN call. Like you, I never gave a rat’s ass about his race. My first expression was “Here we go again,” because his call was setup like a cop’s “good shoot” call. Then when I heard that he was NW and not a deputized anything, I thought, but he knows how to setup to good shoot story. Either he wanted the cops to shoot the kid, or he wanted to be able to do it without legal consequences.

      Like

      • When I first heard about this was when Papi and then Robbie the Racist were interviewed on TV and the blatant lies. Robbie spoke in 1st person as if he was there and / or is close to Fogen then stated he hadn’t even spoken to him……in fact, hadn’t spoken to Fogen for over 10 years.

        At that point I knew there was far more to this than any BS “I was on my way to Target” story.

        It’s funny how NONE of the basic questions have ever been addressed by the Fogen side.

        He went out with no money
        It turns out they had a fight and she was NOT home
        They never mentored any kids….White, Asian, Hispanic, Latino and especially Black
        “…shot someone else”
        The actual attack spot (at the “T”) or 46 feet away ??
        Bullet trajectory
        Fogen was on top
        Fogen provoked this by getting out of his truck
        The timeline
        The video cameras
        Who was in the white T shirt

        On and on we could go, but the fact none of these are really answered by them says one thing to me……This was a race based murder or a thrill kill covered up from the git go.

        Like

        • roderick2012

          A huge question I have is this: The state deposed Shellie shortly before the trial, but didn’t call her to the witness stand?

          Then WTF was the point of wasting time asking her questions if they didn’t have a plan to use her testimony to show Piglet’s state of mind before he murdered Trayvon?

          They could have piled on the lies if they had called her to the stand and asked Shellie why she stuck all of those knuckle bandages all over George’s head when neither the EMTs nor the PA thought that bandages were necessary.

          Like

        • racerrodig.

          This was a race based murder or a thrill kill covered up from the git go.

          When the clubhouse videos were released, and evidence that George was not reporting the truth to dispatch, it is apparent that George definitely had something in mind because his call was a “good shoot” setup.

          Like

      • roderick2012

        My first expression was “Here we go again,” because his call was setup like a cop’s “good shoot” call.

        Let’s say that Piglet was being authentic.

        The fact that the Martins had to sue to obtain a copy of NEN call and it’s contents told me all I needed to know about former police chief Billy Bob Lee, the SPD and and the shithole known as the city of Sanford.

        Like

        • Roderick2012

          The fact that the Martins had to sue to obtain a copy of NEN call and it’s contents told me all I needed to know about former police chief Billy Bob Lee, the SPD and and the shithole known as the city of Sanford.

          BINGO! That’s a dog whistle I hadn’t thought about.

          Like

          • roderick2012

            I wouldn’t consider it a dog whistle just that it proves that Piglet was in the wrong that night.

            Like

            • roderick2012,
              That’s a dog whistle. It whistled out that the law can be disregarded depending on who violates it. The SPD was keeping it hidden because knowing that Zimmerman got out of his vehicle and followed Trayvon on foot should have resulted in charges without further investigation. That is also why O’Mara and West fought hard for jury instructions that included SYG instructions that omitted the initial aggressor part of the law. Judge Nelson obliged them because the initial aggressor portion was evidenced by Zimmerman’s NEN call.

              Like

    • You are absolutely correct Ms. Mindy. Race was played by the “caucasian” defense team of George Zimmerman, who thinks he is caucasian. “white” does not refer to race or skin color. There is no such race as white, there are 3 races and they are Negroid, Caucazoid, and Mongoloid.

      Hold up white paint next to a “white” person’s skin and you will quickly see the skin is not close to being “white.”

      Danny is…well I won’t waste time on what I think Danny to be, but he responded to a comment I left on his now defunct blag with racism and stupidity, in support of the George Zimmerman verdict. Enough said.

      Like

    • I recommend Nell Irvin Painter’s book entitled “The History of White People”

      A mind-expanding and myth-destroying exploration of notions of white race—not merely a skin color but also a signal of power, prestige, and beauty to be withheld and granted selectively

      http://books.wwnorton.com/books/detail.aspx?ID=5396

      Like

  2. What does BGI stand for? Is it secret?

    Like

    • CarolMae. Sorry. I linked to Danny’s comment but not the definition. BGI is the acronym for “Black Grievance Industry.” When the harassers first accused me of being “BGI” and I Googled it, the search engine returned “Bainbridge Graduate Institute.” I thought gee!! I attended DePaul University, so what is it about Bainbridge that they are going to try and use to slander me with now?

      Like

      • I goggled it and got no clue. 😉 Thanks.

        Like

      • Coining the term “Black Grievance Industry” is one more gimmick used by racists to refuse to ACKNOWLEDGE truth:

        the FACT that Blacks experience inequality in our justice system,

        the FACT that Blacks are indeed stereotyped and profiled,

        the FACT that Blacks do NOT experience the benefits and advantages that Whites do in our White-powered society;

        the FACT that Blacks do not have the political power of Whites due to gerrymandering and other such things,

        and the FACT that racism and discrimination STILL exist both covertly and overtly.

        Like

        • These inequalities DO need to be addressed and corrected. Racists refused to do this.

          This year I have witnessed a movement by some to turn the clock back. I am committed to standing up against this and to continue to stand up and fight for justice and equality of all citizens in our society.

          Like

        • Yahtzee, when I first began looking on the internet for a blog to share, I ran into the Wagist website and Riehl World View blog. What they had can be summed up as saying We let them have a Black president so what more do they want? And, now that we have a Black president, let’s humiliate and shame Blacks, especially young Black men, so they will never aspire to be President.

          Then, I read a comment on a Yahoo article that asked, “How did that shoeshine boy get in the White House?”

          It shocked me.

          I thought that the last generation with that attitude had gone the way of the dinosaur. Yes, there are people who still have racial prejudice because they are not exposed to diversity. There are bigots who put down not only other races, but women, the disabled, whomever they choose as the flavor of the week. However, to repeat historical myths as fact, and represent that anyone deserves to be killed because of the color of their skin, or because they are not submissive, is uncivilized.

          America has already had that war. That ship has sunk. America has already had a Civil Rights movement. That ship has sailed.

          Welcome to 2014!!! We can educate, inform, encourage, and do unto others as we will have them do unto us.

          Like

  3. Two sides to a story

    Danny at least is critical of GZ’s recent behavior. He is not an apologist who excuses all GZs recent violent and misogynist temper tantrums. He may feel that GZ acted in self-defense, but he (or she) is at least able to view the man more critically than the supporters who think GZ can do no wrong. When he challenged people to view GZ’s behavior more critically over at Annette K’s blog, it blew their minds and they bullied him for daring to criticize GZ.

    Like

    • Two sides, I admit that when it comes to those who were not on the blogs I commented on, that I was ignorant of them until they contacted me or someone else told me about them.

      There are some hound dogs who smell out blogs that allow their participants to violate laws, and that is how I first heard of Danny Warrior. He was taking heat for not supporting Zimmerman and heat for not bashing Shellie.

      What he and I have in common are harassers. They accused Danny of being my “mole.” That tells more about them than it does Danny because a “mole” is an informant. If the harassers were not violating law in their slanderous attacks on me, then they would have no need to worry about a “mole.”

      Danny felt comfortable to come here and I’m looking forward to having respectful discussions on issues that we all might find interesting surrounding Zimmerman’s case without re-litigating it.

      Like

      • I, too, hope that Danny will feel comfortable to come here. I, for one, will be respectful
        in any comment that I have with him.

        Like

  4. roderick2012

    Xena: As I stated in a previous comment, I don’t want to re-litigate the George Zimmerman case.

    That’s impossible considering the amount of evidence that was never presented in court.

    What bothers me even more is that O’Mara guessed how long the trial would take give or take a couple of days.

    He also knew that Judge Nelson would include SYG in the jury instructions.

    IIRC the State presented 58 witnessed during their portion of the trial. Jodi Arias spent over two weeks on the witness stand alone.

    Another thing that bothers me is that Judge Lester made the proclamation that the evidence against Piglet was ‘strong’.

    So WTF happened?

    Like

    • Roderick2012

      So WTF happened?

      Excellent points. I think we need another page. 🙂

      Give me a title, and I’ll put it up. For this one, I would like to stay on subject.

      What saith thou?

      Like

    • Btw roderick, I can post your comment to start the page for discussion.

      Like

      • roderick2012

        LOL.

        No, Xena, I am just venting because I have had a horrible head cold since last Tuesday and I am trying to get focused so I can go back to work tomorrow.

        I really need to disconnect from anything and everything associated with this case because it’s become very corrosive to my spirit and mind.

        Piglet doesn’t deserve any more of my attention.

        Good luck!!

        Like

        • roderick2012.
          Here’s hoping the best for your cold. Do the onion. It works. A white or yellow onion. Cut the top — not the root. Take the first layer of peel off and place it in something disposal, such as paper saucer. Put it on your night stand or next to your bed. It draws all viruses and germs to itself. If you’re really sick, it should be all shriveled up and dark after a few hours.

          Then take a shower and Febreeze the room. 🙂

          I can’t totally disconnect because Zimmerman stays in the news, the haters use him as their excuse to turn a post wishing Happy Thanksgiving into racial rants, and this blog is still their focus point and love of their life. 🙂

          Like

  5. Danny says no, I say no, but D.P. continues the lie.

    https://twitter.com/support4GZ/status/420046422797336576

    Like

    • Great that you caught D.P. lying, Xena!

      Like

      • Yahtzee,
        I think most people know that D.P. intentionally makes spurious allegations. Before Nettles banned Danny, D.P. denigrated him calling him “Danielle.” Accusing Danny of being my “mole” is like their other lies intended to slander and harass — there’s no proof to support them.

        Like

    • Two sides to a story

      David, Take your meds and then tweet!

      Like

  6. Me, from the article above;

    It was not the media that made race an issue in the case. It wasn’t Trayvon’s parents, neither their attorneys, nor activists. It was the Sanford Police Department’s dog whistles.

    D.P., with no supporting links or quotes:

    https://twitter.com/support4GZ/status/420046947278286848

    Like

  7. Still no support. No quote, just spurious accusation.

    https://twitter.com/support4GZ/status/420091774606913536

    Like

  8. Well, this is a great reason to harass and wrongfully accuse someone. Also, how is a cure for a cold a “cure all”?

    https://twitter.com/support4GZ/status/420090462980960256

    Like

  9. Hello Xena,
    We have a part 1? LOL. I was notified of this thread by someone a little bit ago. I will have to comment in detail a bit later today. Great topics, and I agree this is a great start to part 1!

    Like

    • BTW I removed my avatar from WP. I am in the process of creating a forum and am removing DW stuff from WP. Xena can confirm it is me. She has my IP and email ;0) I am her lil mole and all ya know? LOL

      Like

      • Danny,
        HELLO! I was thinking for a moment that someone had captured and taken you to a place of torture, with toothpicks under your fingernails, injecting you with truth serum to tell all your mole secrets.

        Like

        • Well, I am now a RAT.. not a “mole” anymore. lol. I am unsure if I am male or female today. I wish they would make up my mind! I had technical difficulties today with my post. My paws just would not cooperate with the key pad.
          ;0)

          In all seriousness I lost my long reply because I did not save in a Word Doc. I will work on it and post a reply to the thread soon.

          I saw O’Conner posted some damaging information on Zimmy. I would like to review the docs! The diaper changers a have been silent on it though. They are too busy involving themselves with the Macbeth family now it seems.

          Like

          • Danny,
            I’m sorry to hear that your response was lost. Those paws hitting the wrong key can do that. LOL!!

            I’m writing on the federal grand jury now and should have it up in the next 15 minutes.

            Like

    • Danny,
      Yes, part 1. 🙂

      You said;

      So much to respond to.

      Just in case — want to allow for plenty of discussion.

      Like

  10. Sharon Burney

    It can be so exhausting to be Black, honestly it can, constantly being oppressed and denied the acknowledgment of your daily oppression. Followed in stores, systematic glass ceilings of opportunity, constant negative media sterotyping, the chance of a traffic stop ending your life or that of your family memeber, now afraid to call 911 and have them come to your home, with this non stop advent of the cowardly racists hiding behind the safety of their computers and tablets. Ranting their hidden fears, and fake bravado with unihibited abandon, never having the courage to go outside their confines to have true dialogue about something that is real for me everyday. I avoid comment sections because it brings tears to my eyes to know i sit amongst people everyday that hate the idea of the existence of me based on lies and propoganda. I applaud Danny, because this is how we start the process, I applaud Xena for creating this forum to enlighten everyone that racism is a societal problem regardless of skin color and allowing there to be a respectable forum to discuss the unspeakable. I, like most of my friends and family are exhausted from having to validate, debate, educate, and justify whether or not I have been racially offended or oppressed. Yes, any use of stereotypes, racial slurs, blackface, race jokes, is RACISM, denying that its existence is RACISM. Not off topic but to note, I have been black all my life and never been in a setting where someone said a joke that started off with Two white people walk in a room, I dont understand race jokes. I fine the notion of visting or living in a community entitled Plantation, as inviting as a Jewish person would find visting or living in a community entiteled Concentration Camp. There is no such thing as the race card, my race is not a card i get to take in and out of pocket like a credit card, i wear it 24 hours a day, and thus far, it truly has not been monetarily prosperous. So, back to my original comment,( lol sorry ) race became an issue because of the Sanford Police Departments long standing historical record of police brutality, cover ups and racism towards black men and their inital decison to not investigate this Martin murder properly based on that standard . That is factual look it up.

    Like

    • Oh, Sharon, thank you so much for sharing your truth with us. I am going to copy it, print it out, and put it in my notebook with other people’s comments on their own personal experience.

      Bless you!

      Like

    • @Sharon, maybe someone has already said it and i just haven’t heard, but
      i believe stories like yours are sorta more important for white ppl to hear than racist killings in the news. yours is a first person narrative of your everyday life experiences. and i think most ppl can relate to some aspect in your life better than with someone who was murdered because of their race.
      not everyone worries about getting murdered but everyone worries about being treated fairly, so almost everyone relates to something you’ve pointed out. and i think this is a strong way to change the perspectives of apathetic ppl who think everything is just fine since the civil war AND those basically ignorant-type racists.

      don’t ppl relate to each others similarities? form bonds based on similar interests/experiences. wouldn’t this explain why for example gay ppl are inclined to support of racial equality?
      and there’s the increasing mixed population and the white women who have mixed kids who are relating to black parent’s experiences and specifically seeking to include black ppl in their lives.

      i keep seeing more and more diverse groups of ppl together in any environment, be it a neighborhood, a school, a family, as being the greatest, most successful equalizer.

      i’ve started to look at everything so differently since the racists attacks on Trayvon. TV commercials, books etc.. i keep thinking is this bigotry, racism? are there no black ppl in this movie just because the largest population group is white?? if so is that ok? innocent? or wrong?
      eh.. random thoughts! lol

      initially i said the same thing as Sybrina said; this case isn’t about race it’s about right and wrong. i still believe that, but i believe it’s also abt race. i believe the wrong was done in the first place with racism along for the ride. not just in zimmerman’s head, but because of the institutional racism that fed the thoughts in zimmerman’s head. i think he knew he could get away with killing a black boy in a racist way and the racist police (society in sanford) would coddle him.
      the only thing i’m still confused about is why anyone on this planet is actually denying this.
      i wonder are they lying to themselves or is it not as clear cut as i see it?

      Like

      • shannoninmaimi,

        I think they are lying to themselves. It’s hard for them to move forward when they can’t figure out how to lift their feet.

        Like

  11. Sharon Burney

    Bless you Yahtzee, I am always enlightened and encouraged by your comments.

    Like

  12. Sharon Burney

    shanononinmiami, it is your response that opens the doors to the beginings of dialogues, and i appreciate the retrospect. I think more people across race related to the Martin Murder for a few reasons, one because he was so clarely a child, with a baby face, scrawny and the gut wrenching fear ridden cries for help reached out to any parent. It was a parents innate ability to reach for a crying child appealed to the heart of Americans. Race especially as it pertains to Blacks, is peculair because America has an embarrassed history specifically in institutionalized law specfic to BLACK people that did not stop at slavery. It is engrained in every aspect as you have begun to notice (media etc) it permeates in every facet of our societal systems(educational, financial, environmental, health care, language, judicial, penal, etc) in order to address we honestly should accpet that we have either been conditioned through these mediums to interact and react as an oppressed person or an oppressor. Once we have accepted that fact, through true historical context, not altered, we can begin to fight that conditioning and have these honest dialogues.

    Like

    • You know, Sharon, I learn so much from you and others when I just “LISTEN.”

      Like

      • Then I can more easily engage in the conversation and there can be relaxed openness.

        I so love and believe your words of “education” and guidance that I will now quote:

        Race especially as it pertains to Blacks, is peculair because America has an embarrassed history specifically in institutionalized law specfic to BLACK people that did not stop at slavery. It is engrained in every aspect as you have begun to notice (media etc) it permeates in every facet of our societal systems(educational, financial, environmental, health care, language, judicial, penal, etc) in order to address we honestly should accpet that we have either been CONDITIONED through these mediums to interact and react as an oppressed person or an oppressor.

        Once we have accepted that fact, through true historical context, not altered, we can begin to fight that conditioning and have these honest dialogues.

        Like

  13. Hello Xena and welcome to 2014. Keep up the good work. If racism is minor ,non existent and there’s a BGI, explain this? How is it Trayvon Martin can be demonized more than Ethan Couch?

    Like

    • M1. Hey!

      How is it Trayvon Martin can be demonized more than Ethan Couch?

      Excellent point! Affluenza defense — the defense that rich kids who kill are not sentenced to prison, as opposed to a kid in a hoodie who runs from a grown man following him not being able to testify because the grown man shot him in the heart.

      Like

      • The same grown man who had been arrested for felony resisting arrest “with violence” and with “battery” of a law enforcement officer, had domestic violence issues with his ex-girlfriend, according to a co-worker, lost his cool at a woman who was drunk and picked her up and threw her, and according to his cousin, molested her over a ten year period. After killing Trayvon, his wife states he threatened her, and his girlfriend had him arrested on domestic violence. In every instance, he blamed the other person.

        What do you call a grown man who has a violent background, accussed of throwing, smacking, kicking, choking, stalking, molesting, sexually groping, pointing a gun in a threatning manner, smashing an ipad, breaking a glass table, cheater, liar, who turns off his mothers electricity, leaves his wife a bullet riddled target, shoots and kills a young man with one shot aimed directly at his heart, and states it was god’s plan?

        Popcorn time, I threw the Cheez-its away a couple of weeks ago, they were so stale the dog wouldn’t even eat them. LOL

        Like

  14. D.P. must have reason for being concerned whether Danny was my “mole.” Just maybe Danny and I have discussed how D.P. and others planned on violating law??? Insisting that Danny was my mole doesn’t help them sleep nights, I’m sure.

    https://twitter.com/support4GZ/status/420091774606913536

    Like

  15. OT….

    Video interview:

    http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=11294

    In their first televised interview, the Tawanda Jones and Jamie Richardson sister and cousin of Tyrone West, an unarmed African Man Baltimore resident speak out after Baltimore’s State’s Attorney fails to press charges against the police officers involved in his death. 60 minutes ago

    Like

  16. BGI is a derogatory term used by racists who do not want to admit that Blacks still face inequality in the justice system, that Blacks are still discriminated against, that Blacks are stereotyped and profiled, etc.

    In fact, it is these very racists that want these conditions to stay the way they are. In fact, it is many of these racists who are involved in creating these conditions.

    The Black responses to these unjust conditions ARE legitimate. Racists and White Supremacists try to de-legitimize the Black response by calling it a BGI response.

    Does anyone have any thoughts about what I have just written?

    Like

    • Yahtzee,
      I agree with you but am waiting for Danny’s response because he appears to know how “BGI” was introduced by Sundance and what others mean when using it.

      To me, it appears to be another Jim Crow strategy intended to depress and deprive Blacks of federal protected rights.

      Like

    • BGI may be derogatory depending on the context one is using. Personally I feel the N word between blacks and the whole concept of “taking it back” or as a “term of endearment” is derogatory, a double standard, and confusing for those who do not know black struggles and black culture. White people don’t call each other “Crackers.”
      Whites bash each other too. Look at the term ” White Guilt”. WTF is white guilt? Can whites change their color anymore then a black. If someone other then a Jew acknowledges the struggles of Jews, does that make me a “Jew sympathizer” ?
      BGI is not what they support, it is how they support it which is at issue.

      Like

      • Danny, as far as any form of the “n” word, all I can say is that I as a White person should never use it.

        Also, I as a White person should not comment on the appropriateness of its use among Black individuals.

        It is only the Black community, in my opinion, that should have that discussion. I should respect the feelings that Black individuals have.

        Like

        • I find it totally appropriate to comment on something that confuses others when the goal is equality and fairness.

          Like

          • Xena opened the conversation and I praise her for it in how some find certain terms derogatory while others do not. Including some whites fine “white” offensive. I believe Xena and I are willing to put down our guard on the political correctness.

            I feel it is VERY VERY important to discuss why it is political correctness affects race relations.

            Like

            • Danny,

              I believe Xena and I are willing to put down our guard on the political correctness.

              No need to worry about being PC.

              I feel it is VERY VERY important to discuss why it is political correctness affects race relations.

              Absolutely. And that really depends on relationship or knowing the person speaking because knowing the individual also leans to knowing their motivation. Here’s an example; I know an older White farmer who, because of his generation, refers to Blacks as “colored.” The day that I heard him refer to someone as a “Black ass,” I understood that he used it to insult, (even if we left “ass” off.).

              Like

            • Someone found offense to me saying African American. They said they did not come from Africa.
              So the offense factor to me is the level of PC.
              References do not offend it is the context.
              But I think we need to discuss why it is important for some and not important for others. Some may lack education on cultures, some may live in different parts of the country. Hey I live between Philly and NY and I have an idiot neighbor who is from Florida who hangs the Confederate Flag. I’m like OK idiot you are seriously a few hrs away from where the south retreated in Gettysburg. “Let’s go on a tour!”

              Like

            • Danny,

              But I think we need to discuss why it is important for some and not important for others.

              I use “Black” as opposed to “African American” and this is why. I have a friend whose American parents were missionaries in Africa. She was born in Africa and with the exception of returning to the U.S. for about one month per year, lived in Africa until the age of 13. Then she came to the States to attend high school. She considers herself African-American but she is White, of Scottish/Irish descent.

              My friend is the one who first discussed with me how in the U.S., “African-American” is used to define people of color whose descendants were slaves in America. That’s because America has a racial classification of “Hispanic, not of African descent” which simply put, means a Black person whose forefathers were slaves in countries other than the U.S.

              Like

            • It was the exact same situation with me where they took offense. But do you know how she explained it? The exact same way you did in the titled post. No lying! It was expansive on my world view, and I had at that time so many black friends. Of course we all were young but that encounter stuck with me. She felt offended by the PC because it was to the American view. I do want a solution where people do not take offense to those who are nor familiar with all cultures or beyond the American culture.

              Like

          • You speak of equality, yet the term “cracker”, as I understand it, was originally (in history that I read somewhere) used to designate the White person who would “CRACK” the whip on a Black individual.

            Our society has historically always been a White-power, White-stuctured society in which Whites are gifted with advantages, benefits, and privilege at birth.

            Like

          • Danny, you wrote,

            I believe Xena and I are willing to put down our guard on the political correctness.

            I just want you to know that what I write or assert has nothing to do with “political correctness.” I do not say to myself, “What is the politically correct thing to say?”

            It is my heart that moves me.

            Like

            • I hope your heart does move you. I hope you see beyond your color and all colors. I hope you see through MY advocacy God created everyone and to put any color in the forefront is not equality or advocacy. There is one race. Human.

              Like

          • Actually, what comes to my mind when I think of Italians is our wonderful Italian next door neighbors that I so enjoyed as a child growing up.

            Like

          • Also the great Italian sculptures, painters, scientists….

            Like

          • sculptors

            Like

          • No, Xena….I did not think of them LOL!

            Just people like Michaelangelo, DaVinci, etc.

            Like

        • Here’s Tim Wise on that subject.

          Like

  17. First allow me to apolize for such a late response to the thread topic.
    I still am trying to figure out how to begin this conversation without “relitigating” the GZ case. I was feeling around first to get to know the community members and everyones positions and personality.

    If this discussion was easy we would not need the discussion. I was initially just going to jump in and begin reply to the first half of Xena’s post. I agree with her there. My lost post…. Maybe was a blessing. I jumped in with two feet.

    Discussing the “Racial Grievence Industry” will at times lead to topics of the case we do not agree on. It would be unfair to me to not allow me to explain my position. For instance if relitigating is considered my position where BGI used the GZ case to attempt to repeal SYG through judicial activism which is part of BGI, IMO, then the discussion is very limited and I am forced into telling you what you want to hear. I feel it is a least important for reference purposes that readers, now and in the future, are aware of my position on the case and why I felt it was self defense. I made those comments on the newest thread because we were discussing federal charges. I feel the Feds are not limited to law concerning just race due to the shooting. I made those comments because a State Civil Rights investigation was conducted and found no racial bias. So IF this current investigation does bring an indictment the Feds will have a to have something other then what the State investigation had not found concerning the racial issue. That is why I was asking Xena her position on whether or not the Feds. may indict on something other then shooting. Xena provided case law from another discussion. I appreciate it very much. That is not relitigating IMO. Discussing my position is in no way an attempt to relitigate. I hold the position the law and due process was applied and there is no reason to relitigate. Relitigating would be me adding evidence and vetting it, againt your evidence and you vetting it. I have not done that. I do not plan to. We will have to agree to disagree. I feel everyone is aware or should be there are issues in the case we do not agree on, but there will be times I have to, and maybe others have to as well, discuss examples to support their position on Racial Grievences in the GZ case or any case similar. If this causes issue in this community I am unsure if it is best to begin at all. I am unsure if some are willing to allow me to explain specifically why I view BGIs hand is what promoted the racial issue, why GZ promoted it, and perhaps inserting race at all is the true oppressor here.

    Like

    • Danny,
      Thanks for your response.

      I am unsure if some are willing to allow me to explain specifically why I view BGIs hand is what promoted the racial issue, why GZ promoted it, and perhaps inserting race at all is the true oppressor here.

      I’d like to hear you explain it. IIRC, you said it was something coined by Sundance. To me, that means it is only something recognized by him and those who follow him. The theory also appears to target or only apply to Blacks and Whites with positions of authority, or with money, or in the media or access to the media, even the media of blogs.

      If that is a basis for coining “BGI,” then the same basis applies to those who advocate for human rights in any of its issues, period. As the title says, it applies to Blacks, so race is the motivation and driving factor.

      Like

  18. I did not coin it. And I never was a part of CTH. So I can’t help you there. Maybe I should open my Pot Meet Kettle Post

    http://dannywarrior.wordpress.com/2013/08/16/pot-meet-kettle/#more-883

    Like

    • Danny,
      Thanks for opening that page. I read it — can’t say I grasp it in full because for one, I’m not that familiar with Sundance and his overall opinions.

      You wrote:

      Despite my being pretty silent here about the racial aspects, and BGI, I have had very successful conversations for years prior to this case, with various people of all backgrounds and ideologies. Never once was I called a racist, or sympathizer. I took very logical approaches to the discussions and debates and 100% of the time was commended by both sides for mediating.

      Okay, so maybe I didn’t express myself clear or maybe you have no way of knowing unless I tell you. Alexandra M, arkansasmimi, David Piercy and some others in that gang, have said that I am “BGI all the way.” The racial slurs and dog whistles such as “savages” that they use in their comments sent here and posted publicly, sends a clear message that they hold to White Supremacist ideology.

      They send comments to other blog administrators threatening to “out” and slander them unless they disassociate with me because of what they perceive as my race. They accuse everyone who they think is White and associates with this blog of being people who hate being White. Just like White Supremacist ideology, a White person who does not adopt that ideology is just another “n-gg–.”

      When Jessica accused you of being my “mole,” I understand that to mean that they accuse you of also being “BGI.” That is why I’m interested in knowing more about “BGI.” Indeed, it’s not to put you on the defense. I am clueless as to why they would coin that and also why they believe it’s their mission to eliminate it.

      Like

      • I am not aware of there actions besides my interaction on Nettles. I do not have a twitter or a FB. The forum I spoke with them was very limited in those topics. I recently was directed there as my base expanded.

        None of my racial discussions occurred with those groups. My discussion began on Diwatamans and initially was limited to SD. Then I went over to my blog and from there Annette’s because it was strictly legal eagle talk I was interested in.
        Only until recently when I saw them posting tweets on the blogs did I investigate.

        Then I became aware that TM supporters discussed my blog and that was known to me because I shut down.

        I have no type of outside communication with those people. All my communications were public.

        I am opening posts on my blog that I closed. It explains my position without having to here.

        Like

        • Danny,

          Then I became aware that TM supporters discussed my blog and that was known to me because I shut down.

          I heard about your blog because Jessica sent a comment here saying I should close this blog down because …. then she listed Thacker, Madigan, and some other blogs that closed after the verdict. It was as if she thought this blog was to compete with blogs that frankly, I didn’t know existed.

          I have no type of outside communication with those people. All my communications were public.

          They use fake email addresses in their filthy comments to blogs so there is no way to communicate with them other than publicly. That also conveys that they don’t want to communicate — just throw stones and run.

          Like

          • I emailed SD once it was about my knowledge of his history. I emailed Nettles twice. It was regarding sock accounts and for a counter which would allow her to know who to block.

            Other bloggers besides you discussed this blog that I know Jessica was not a part of. She has a PO and she was not a part of those blogs. They were too “advanced” for her kind. I saw a twitter post prolly a Jessica sock mentioning me here. But I think she did that because I baited her and she got t you before me. She knew to go to you.

            But Xena. Funny thing is I talked on Annette blog about the Anthony case and there is only ONE person who kept mention the Anthony Case and comparing it to GZ. It was not MIMI. I found the sock. And that sock is also on the Anthony boards.

            Now who is the rat? Danny? Ahhhh….
            I have one IP from Arkansas but I do not think she is even from there that is a secure proxy. I confirmed her email. The same one from JBM. It was not a Arkansans IP. And she creates many accounts to throw red herrings even with pics. Give me time.

            Like

            • Danny,
              Here’s something to keep in mind. The person who first threatened me resides in the State of Washington, but attended college in Kansas. The person in Jacksonville has a daughter who resides in Kansas.

              The person in Arkansas is not a free thinker. She is told what to post and/or send by way of comment. She does what she is told.

              They are 3 different individuals.

              Like

            • Ok. I got it! I had no Kansas though. I think the Kansas is private proxing through the Arkansas IP. Jacksonville YES many hits. I have two within the same distance and I know one is a work IP because it was on a specific server. I could trace the IP but it takes days to do that and I have no reason to ATM. I have the IP’s if they help you. But I’d have to give them PM.

              Like

  19. please forgive my spelling above.

    Like

    • Danny, there’s no spelling nor grammar police here. I read/translate typos too. 🙂

      There are times when someone makes an error that takes away from the context of what they mean, that I might edit to correct it. I don’t even tell them because editing is not to embarrass or make them feel uncomfortable.

      If you ever make an error that you think changes what you meant, don’t be afraid to ask me to correct it.

      Like

  20. Can you bring the conversation down here where the margins will be wider?

    Danny wrote:

    I found my BGI post. I have to explain “Cassandra” later.

    Like

    • sure…
      I think my position would best be served if I quote a post I wrote from my blog slighted redacted

      Extremism, is an emotional outlet for experiences of oppression, insecurity, humiliation, resentment, loss, and rage. Instead of taking a philosophical approach to life, which allows one to have an open mind and willingness to listen to criticism, the extremist takes an ideological approach where they will refute anything challenging his or her ideology.
      Extremists discourage any type of thinking that goes against their ideology that back a certain social institution or a particular organization.
      The purpose of any philosophical approach is to seek knowledge for the sake of wisdom and truth. An ideologue’s sole aim is to advocate and enforce his or her ideology wherever he can. There aim is not to discover truth, their aim is to show others the “truth of their experiences”. If their experiences were oppression, insecurity, humiliation, resentment, loss, and rage these things being very true to them, are what they attempt to enforce and advocate to others that this is what their common enemies does/is.

      The Extremist rarely achieves his or hers intended goals that they say they are attempting to achieve. For instance “Freedom”, or ‘Truth.”( I am speaking more so on non-violence extremism. There is violent extremist however) Because, they have destructive strategies. Not because they are not instrumental in attaining other goals, it is because they feel righteous, vengeful, and good.
      Their strategy is to attain and maintain power. This unites their group against a common enemy.
      I may call it Ideology vs. Philosophy but Gruen, Arno (2003). Write in:
      “An unrecognized pathology: The mask of humaneness.” Journal of Psychohistory. Vol 30(3) Win 2003, 266-272. Association for Psychohistory, U.S.
      “The lack of identity associated with extremists is the result of self-destructive self-hatred that leads to feelings of revenge toward life itself, and a compulsion to kill one’s own humanness.”[2] Thus extremism is seen as not a tactic, nor an ideology, but as a pathological illness, which feeds on the destruction of life. In effect extremism is a pathological illness.

      In fact when Extremists fail in their agenda, they begin to blame their own group members, and they create inter-group conflicts. Coincidentally, there are examples I can give where one extremist group fights another extremist group
      For instance, the Italian Communist party did this while fighting the Fascist regime. French revisionists used this tactic as well while fighting against the Marxist. The tactic is known as “Doves and Hawks.”

      Like

      • And before I receive feedback let me say my comment in no way is indicating that anyone should minimize a persons experiences. It just means that to expect all others to feel as emotional as as you BECAUSE of your experience is irrational and to a level selfish to expect special treatment from people who have not caused your experience.

        Like

        • Danny,

          BECAUSE of your experience is irrational and to a level selfish to expect special treatment from people who have not caused your experience.

          That is where validation comes in. Let’s put experience and emotion to a matter unrelated to race — let’s say, women rape victims. They’re not expecting special treatment from men and they certainly would not expect ANYTHING from the men who raped them. Rather, because of their experience, there is potential for them to be cautious and maybe not too trusting until they get to know them as an individual.

          Here’s another — a person who was hit by a car. They don’t expect for drivers to give them special treatment, but they will no doubt look twice, three or four times, in every direction before they cross the street. If they were asked why and told of their experience, it should not be construed as expecting special treatment.

          If we look at it from this point of view, I would chance to say that everyone who has entered an environment where they were the only person who was different, has a little prejudicial anticipation on how others are going to treat them.

          Like

          • I agree. But see the rape victim will always view every man as a potential rapist. Is it equality because some women were raped by rapist to view all men as rapist? Should all men have to suffer discrimination because some men are rapist? If women march to capital hill demanding a bill that would label all men rapist because some women view all men as potential rapist because of their experience… if they are successful in creating a bill that labels all men as potential racial stopping men who are rapists. No. Logically all men will just avoid all women. They may even resent then because they are labeled and have to pay for what some men have done.

            Like

          • I think the issue is catering to the affliction created by the offender. So is that not oppression? Marching and a bill and the police obviously can not stop the offense of rape.
            So if something is not working to stop rape, the logical conclusion would be not to further oppress the victim.
            Understand Xena. Some whites have been afflicted by black crime the same way women have been affected by rape, and blacks by discrimination.

            Like

            • Marching and a bill and the police obviously can not stop the offense of rape.
              So if something is not working to stop rape, the logical conclusion would be not to further oppress the victim.

              Using the rape example, marching and a Bill is to make rape an offense punishable by law. It pertains not to stop the actions, but for there to be consequences. It’s the consequences that reasonable people consider before doing those actions.

              Understand Xena. Some whites have been afflicted by black crime the same way women have been affected by rape, and blacks by discrimination.

              Some Asians have been afflicted by people who are bigoted against Muslims. Some children have been afflicted by sexually abusive priests. We could go on and on and on. That’s nothing more than a comparison game, the roots of which are found in White Supremacist ideology. It seeks to divert to excuses; justification or denial. What brought this about was your comment about “special treatment.”

              My point is that we need to validate how experiences can cause people to be cautious, or distrusting, or stand-offish.

              Like

            • “It’s the consequences that reasonable people consider before doing those actions. ”
              The legal application of “reasonable person” does not apply to one person. It applies to what society accepts a reasonable person would do in a similar situation. It does not and IMO consider the race, gender, religion, or personal experience of an individual. The constitutionality of those issues can be raised in the proper forum. External factors in the reasonable standard are not excluded, but standard of reasonable behavior exists in criminal law, and it is not mitigated by considerations of unresolved social factors. The reasonable standard is not inclusive. It is conclusive by applying burden of proof.

              Like

            • The legal application of “reasonable person” does not apply to one person. It applies to what society accepts a reasonable person would do in a similar situation.

              “Reasonable” is determined by case law. The first case that goes before an appellate court sets the standard for what a reasonable person would do. That case was individual application.

              If you want to get technical, it’s the members of the jury who use a standard based on their experience. Juries can place that standard on victims as well as defendants. In the Dooley case, they applied their reasonable standard to the victim when saying that David James had the right to attack Dooley because he felt threatened. In the Zimmerman case, no consideration of reason was given to Trayvon. It was only applied to Zimmerman absent the initial aggressor part of the law.

              External factors in the reasonable standard are not excluded, but standard of reasonable behavior exists in criminal law, and it is not mitigated by considerations of unresolved social factors.

              Then why did O’Mara use a cardboard cut-out to represent Trayvon wearing a hoodie? The hoodie was a social factor in that case.

              Like

            • “”Reasonable” is determined by case law.”
              Only to the extent the individual is greater then average, or is specially trained are they held to a higher standard then a typical person. the jury generally considers the defendant’s conduct in light of what the defendant actually knows, has experienced, or has perceived. A jury also considers knowledge that should be common to everyone in society IE common sense.

              I understand a jury can and should consider both the defendant and victim abilities in a case but it should remain relevant to what its intentions are or it prejudices the jury.

              The cardboard cut outs were submitted as evidence and that was the Judges call on relevance. I suppose to show the jury the difference in size of the defendant and victim because the prosecutors encased the hoodie in a frame and showed the hoodie and pants to the jury . Both sides used the hoodie.

              Like

            • I asked,

              Then why did O’Mara use a cardboard cut-out to represent Trayvon wearing a hoodie? The hoodie was a social factor in that case.

              You answered:

              The cardboard cut outs were submitted as evidence and that was the Judges call on relevance.

              The card board cut-out with the one representing Trayvon wearing a hoodie was a social factor. It was not admitted into evidence but during O’Mara’s closing argument and was used by O’Mara to appeal to the biases of the jury.

              Remember what I said in the article opening this discussion about dog whistles and the SPD use of them is what made race an issue in this case? Dog whistles can appeal to biases, or expose biases.

              The video below demonstrates how O’Mara used them during his closing argument.

              Like

      • Oppressors are extremists.

        Like

        • Yahtzee. Do me a favor, please? Can you expound on oppressors and oppression?

          Like

          • Oppression is a societal system to keep a segment of a society down.

            Oppressors can be part of such a system or there to reinforce it through using that systems laws to keep individuals or groups down.

            Like

        • Sorry, I am going to jump into the conversation here because there is no repy button to allow me to do so where I wanted to. This is in response to Danny’s comment about a woman viewing all men as rapist after she has been raped. I disagree with that comment. I agree she will be more cautious.

          I will use myself as a good example. Many moons ago I worked in a coffee shop. One morning a man walked in at opening time and drank coffee for about an hour. It was a small place so I was the waitress and there was the owner/cook there as well. Most customers were regulars and it was a very friendly/gossiply place. He sat and chatted for about an hour, and went to the front to pay. I rang him up and he reached inside his jacket, pulled out a gun, and pointed it directly at my face, and told me to reach down under the register and give him all the money in the safe.

          Most people would have done that, but for one brief moment I stood frozen in fear, and then I turned around, walked a short distance to the kitchen, told the owner. By then he had helped himself, and was out the door. The owner yelled to a group of regulars (a group of about 5 men in their 70’s and 80’s) and they chased him thru the shopping center parking lot, onto to the freeway entrance, and caught him, and the police took over.

          Danny, under your example, I then should view every man who came to the counter to pay as a robber, and expect them to perhaps have their money out and place it on the counter. Certainly I was shook up for alittle while, put that pretty well ended when I heard he was caught. I guess I could have marched for a bill to be passed that every man be frisked before entering the shop, but most reasonable people would only want the robber to be prosecuted. And he was, sentenced to 44 years. He was a heroin addict, and had robbed 30 businesses in a month, known as the Marlboro bandit, after he robbed you, he asked for a pack of marlboro’s on his way out.

          Like

          • dreamer,
            Thanks for sharing your experience.

            I don’t understand the “special treatment” argument. If being considerate, respectful, compassionate, and showing empathy is giving people special treatment, then I’ll do that my every waking moment.

            Like

          • And, I will do it every waking moment also!

            Like

  21. Danny,

    I have two within the same distance and I know one is a work IP because it was on a specific server.

    Like Sears? LOL!!

    I have the IP’s if they help you. But I’d have to give them PM.

    Thanks, but no need. I don’t know when the harassment started with you, but I was first threatened in September 2012. I ignored it until January 2013 when they started making up things to slander me. After I filed complaints with their ISPs, they took to using proxies. That was around May 2013. I still ignored it until about July. That is when they started slandering me to other blog administrators. I worked with the hosting companies of the proxy IP address websites. Everything is now in the hands of LE.

    Like

  22. I am moving down here.
    Let’s move on to what Justice is. What is Justice to you?

    Like

    • Danny,
      Sorry but I can’t move on to “justice” because I still want a better understanding of “BGI.”

      Like

      • BGI is not one thing Xena. It is a collective of specific ways to achieve judicial activism for the black race.

        Like

        • BGI is not one thing Xena. It is a collective of specific ways to achieve judicial activism for the black race.

          Trying to understand this, because I don’t see it. “Judicial activism” applies to judges. Maybe it doesn’t make sense because the person who coined it doesn’t understand the terms used to describe it, or because it is a false hypothesis in which nothing that makes sense can be built on.

          Like

          • You also believe BGI does not exist.

            Judicial activism are judicial rulings suspected of being based on personal or political considerations rather than on existing law. It is a personal and political career move and a way to create precedence for future rulings. BGI creates controversy in order to affect the rulings when legislative activism fails. Or they create controversy around a case to attempt to create judicial precedence to challenge legislative laws or create new ones.
            It is not just BGI. Look at the Casey Anthony case. It is now illegal to not report your child missing with 24 hours. A political move to shut up people who opposed the juries finding. Protesting a juries verdict by doing that is nothing more then trying to intimidate future juries. Do you not want due process?

            Like

            • You also believe BGI does not exist.

              Do you? Do you believe that your harassers who accuse you of being my mole believe you are a member of it?

              Like

            • I believe there is a difference between civil rights and judicial activism.

              No. They know I am not a mole. They are just attempting to dismiss me because I am destructive to their agenda.

              Like

            • … are just attempting to dismiss me because I am destructive to their agenda.

              What is their agenda? Maybe I started off on the wrong subject because they accuse me of being “BGI” when the real issue should be their agenda.

              Like

            • I am just not understanding why either side refuses to acknowledge their faults. Or why those stuck in between are the ones forced to be silent. Or why when a group offers compromise the one delivering compromise are the enemy. What did Jesus say? He said their will always be suffering and sorry because we are all sinners.

              Like

            • I asked:

              Do you? Do you believe that your harassers who accuse you of being my mole believe you are a member of it?

              You have replied:

              I am just not understanding why either side refuses to acknowledge their faults. Or why those stuck in between are the ones forced to be silent. Or why when a group offers compromise the one delivering compromise are the enemy. What did Jesus say? He said their will always be suffering and sorry because we are all sinners.

              I’m not the one who accused you of being a mole, and certainly not my mole. I’m not the one who coined “BGI” nor do I know its origin and how it is defined. I’m not the one threatening to “out” and “eliminate” BGI. I’m not the one using slander, lies, harassment and threats to eliminate anyone or anything.

              No, Jesus did not say there will always be suffering because we are all sinners. What he said is that in this world we shall have tribulation, but be of good cheer because he has overcome the world. (John 16:33) The Bible also says we are sinners, saved by grace.

              But know what else the Bible says? It says in Galatians 3:28;
              “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

              I am opposed to using the Bible in effort to persuade others to believe they are or should be oppressed and just live with it. In Christ, we are all one.

              Like

            • He said give to Cesar what is Cesars and give to God what is Gods.

              Like

            • He said give to Cesar what is Cesars and give to God what is Gods.

              So, the harassers who believe in the “BGI” should stop their accusing and go to church?

              Like

            • Danny,
              I see where you use the Wiki definition for judicial activism but the definition without the history is misleading. Wiki also says that the term was introduced in 1947 by Arthur Schlesinger Jr. Craig Green, in response to Schlesinger Jr., made the point that Schlesinger’s use of the term was doubly blurred because he failed to explain what counts as activism, and declined to say whether activism is good or bad.
              From Wiki:

              David Strauss has argued that judicial activism can be narrowly defined as one or more of three possible actions: overturning laws as unconstitutional, overturning judicial precedent, and ruling against a preferred interpretation of the constitution.

              According to Wiki, Theodore Olson, Solicitor General under George W. Bush, said on Fox News Sunday that “most people use the term ‘judicial activism’ to explain decisions that they don’t like.”
              Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy has said that, “An activist court is a court that makes a decision you don’t like.”

              You also use the term “legislative activism.” Is that when paid lobbyist get congress to pass laws that their constituents do not want?

              I know very little about the Casey Anthony case – didn’t follow it.
              What does due process have to do with reporting your child missing?

              Like

            • Xena,
              As for Judicial activism which is off topic from the BGI discussion the term is one with debate. But for all intents and purposes I was using it in the term where a Court disregards the prior case law of both the Supreme Court and a State Court. It has nothing to do with liking or disliking a decision. It has to do with HOW a court comes to its decision. There are far more cases to discuss with precedential revisionism. Congress creates law, not the Supreme Court. The Court lacks such discretion when Congress codifies prior judicial precedent.

              That a Supreme Court Justice would give his opinion on what Judicial activism is and is not I take with a grain of salt, as it is an opinion. A Judge is to read the law, interpret it AS IT IS written, and decided based on the law. This is what keeps the law impartial. If Justices are abdicated their responsibility to *fully review the applicable cases and legislative history to form the decision… it no longer is impartial.

              I feel the discussion has branched out beyond BGI. Perhaps it is our differences in what BGI is and is not. I do not feel I can continue the discussion in bits and pieces like this. For those who had interest on at least hearing my point I am posting it on my blog. If Xena and I get into all these other issues we will never get to the point of discussion.

              As far as proving if I am your mole or anyone’s mole… Here on this blog is my first ever interaction with Xena anywhere. I have no interest in proving to others I am not a mole. Those who had accused me are known trouble makers and use under handed tactics when someone disagrees with them. I speak on controversial topics.I debate as well.I debate because I believe it maintains democracy and a open society, and self examination. I debate because I like to remain open minded. I prefer to hear others opinions and positions. This is why ‘warrior” was added to my name. Because most times people are not interested in others opinions. They believe forcing their opinions and beliefs on others is the solution.
              “It is better to debate a question without settling it, than to settle a question without debating it.”

              I wish you well Xena.

              Like

            • Danny,

              As for Judicial activism which is off topic from the BGI discussion the term is one with debate.

              You brought up the term. Apparently, you see it as something or a building block within or that is important to those claiming there is a BGI and that it is something to be challenged, and/or eliminated.

              But for all intents and purposes I was using it in the term where a Court disregards the prior case law of both the Supreme Court and a State Court.

              Based on what I’ve read and heard about judicial activism, only the Supreme Court of the United States has that power.

              It has nothing to do with liking or disliking a decision. It has to do with HOW a court comes to its decision.

              That is how and why lower court decisions come before SCOTUS, because lower courts erred or it’s a constitutional issue.

              I feel the discussion has branched out beyond BGI. Perhaps it is our differences in what BGI is and is not.

              IMHO, based on how I was accused of being “BGI,” harassed on that basis, and other blog administrators threatened with slander on the basis of my being “BGI,” it is a phrase coined to use as evil against a race of people.

              If Xena and I get into all these other issues we will never get to the point of discussion.

              Danny, I didn’t introduce other issues. You did. You came across as making a presentation rather than a discussion. You even wanted to move on to discuss what “justice” means to me. My request was not for you to “teach” BGI but tell us what it is and why it is important to the agenda of those who coined it.

              I debate because I like to remain open minded.

              My mind is not so open that what is in it falls out. I hear “BGI” used negatively and last night, I remembered something about our constitution. Your comments did help. I’ll post it later.

              Wishing you the best too.

              Like

            • “I hear “BGI” used negatively and last night, I remembered something about our constitution.”

              Please take into consideration people use terms in derogatory ways all the time, it does not mean the term itself is derogatory or the topic itself is. Race hustlers come in all kinds of colors and packages.

              As for the rest of your comment…..
              I can not debate because you seem to pick something I say and add your own meaning to it. Perhaps because it is your belief I have the same argument about BGI as where you got information on BGI from. That is not the case. I can not debate someone else’s interpretation of BGI because that is not my position. I did not learn of Racial Grievance Industry from TCTH, or what come up on google searches.

              I never said you were not opened minded. If you were not opened minded you would not have invited the discussion :0) The debate does not allow the multiple topics to lead to into the next portion is what i was saying.
              Yes, I felt moving onto what you felt civil rights are in the form of Justice, as a way to get into what BGI is and isn’t, in the manner I have now posted on my blog.

              Like

            • Danny,

              Please take into consideration people use terms in derogatory ways all the time, it does not mean the term itself is derogatory or the topic itself is. Race hustlers come in all kinds of colors and packages.

              Please understand that those who have threatened myself and others, do so by using “BGI” in a negative light. Am I suppose to see that in a good light? No. They coined it and their intent in doing so is evil and committed based on THEIR perception of race.

              I can not debate because you seem to pick something I say and add your own meaning to it.

              You mean, for instance, “judicial activism”? I use the meaning as I’ve been taught. That might not agree with your meaning but the point is, you introduced “judicial activism” as having something to do with “BGI.”

              Perhaps because it is your belief I have the same argument about BGI as where you got information on BGI from. That is not the case.

              I thought you could and would explain “BGI” as used by those who use it to threaten and slander. That is the only reason “BGI” carries any interest with me. It is clear from their comments sent to this blog that they feel it’s their right to harm others and violate laws based on their belief in “BGI.”

              Danny, there’s no way you can clean-up “BGI” because those using it as their basis to slander and violate law are not using it in a clean way. IMHO, it would be the same as trying to posture the KKK as a Christian charity organization who lynches, but is misunderstood if we can just understand “due process,” “judicial activism,” “legislative activism” and other “ism’s” that you’ve introduced.

              Lipstick on a pig doesn’t change its nature.

              Like

            • At this point you are arguing for arguments sake. I can not possibly know your conversations with others and I am not sure why you keep mentioning them to me.
              “That might not agree with your meaning but the point is, you introduced “judicial activism” as having something to do with “BGI.”
              Again you are misrepresenting my intentions. Read my new blog post. In your post you say “(Danny, if you believe we should start on another issue, let me know.)” I tried and now you are bashing me for it. I had no chance to tell you how judicial activism involved the debate. You assumed I meant something else I suppose.

              “Danny, there’s no way you can clean-up “BGI” because those using it as their basis to slander and violate law are not using it in a clean way. ”
              There is NOTHING to clean up on my end. I am not trying to clean the word up for them. All I was doing was trying to open a discussion on race.
              I am not sure what you mean by others using it to break the law.

              Like

            • Danny,

              I can not possibly know your conversations with others and I am not sure why you keep mentioning them to me.

              Here’s the beginning; I was informed that you named me on your blog based on a harasser accusing you of being my mole. I posted that on this blog and said you were welcomed to come here and address it. You did. I’ve had no conversations with the harassers — not engaged them. What I shared with you is that they use “BGI” in their threats to slander and also in their comments to others to encourage them to disassociate with me.

              Let me break it down so it is clear. The only form of communication that the harassers have with me is via comments that they send to this blog using fake email addresses to sign-in.

              In your post you say “(Danny, if you believe we should start on another issue, let me know.)”

              You said it starting with “BGI” was okay. Somewhere without clarifying questions you were asked, you jumped into “ism’s.” I think that I see where the misunderstanding is. You see “BGI” through various layers, whereas I simply wanted to know why it is being used as a tool to disparage, slander, and threaten with.

              All I was doing was trying to open a discussion on race.

              Okay. I see. Then maybe you should visit a blog that focuses on race in the manner that you want to discuss it. We discuss equality for all here, regardless of race.

              Like

            • >>>>>”You said it starting with “BGI” was okay. Somewhere without clarifying questions you were asked, you jumped into “ism’s.” I think that I see where the misunderstanding is. You see “BGI” through various layers, whereas I simply wanted to know why it is being used as a tool to disparage, slander, and threaten with.”<<<<<<<
              I apologize. I did not get the impression that is what you expected. However, the discussion could have produced the proper use of the definition for other purposes besides those reasons you mention. Xena, sometimes people are too ignorant to do reserach like Sundance and crew. Like Nettles and crew. It makes them look like asses andfor example in this situation blurs the lines of discussion. They use the term to dismiss all black people who seek legal grievence. The term is not what they portray it to be though. BGI ideology is multiracial. I never paid attention to their racial talks. So I can not tell you their use other then what I saw in passing. I saw enough to not want it on my blog.

              Like

            • Danny,

              However, the discussion could have produced the proper use of the definition for other purposes besides those reasons you mention.

              Danny, I appreciate your response, and I ask that you please understand that as far as myself and Blackbutterfly7 blog, there is no “other purposes” that can transform poison into a piece of cake by putting icing on it.

              Like

            • Sorry. I just believe you would fair better then allowing them to define you or add posion at all. Do their opinions matter that much? But you are right. You define do your space.

              Like

            • Danny,
              Sorry. I just believe you would fair better then allowing them to define you or add posion at all. Do their opinions matter that much? But you are right. You define do your space.

              Well, you certainly seem to understand that their problem is they cannot define nor re-define me. That means you can’t take something they use for evil, and sugar coat it because “BGI” in any form does not define me.

              Like

            • No. I just don’t feel they are relevant at all to define any topic they have an opinion on. I allow others to speak freely. If they are wrong I just tell them in a very different way then you do. And no, BGI, is BGI. There is no sugar coating the truth Xena. I can’t tell you what you want to hear. They take it and turn it racist and you take it as racist. Neither one is right. I decided to explain what it IS and IS NOT. How is that sugar coating?

              Like

            • Danny,

              take it and turn it racist and you take it as racist.

              I take it as attempts to violate the constitutional rights of others. When I get time, I might write on that. Until then, I’m not going around the same mountain again.

              Like

            • Xena,
              None of your commenters hit the reply to reply to me. The conversation is leaning in your favor.You can direct your comments to your audience not me. I am reading from my replies not your blog. You won. You drew me here under false pretense. I am not fighting your battles with those people.

              Like

            • Danny,

              You drew me here under false pretense. I am not fighting your battles with those people.

              Sorry you feel that way. If anything, you came here; I was warned by someone, defended you, and now suspect that you came here under false pretenses.

              I can’t speak for others, but suspect that those who are generally active here are not responding to your comments because they’ve heard it all before; didn’t agree with it then, and won’t agree with it now nor ever. It’s not that they agree with me in the sense of taking sides between you and I. Rather, WE agreed in spirit before we met here.

              Like

            • Unfortunate event.
              God Bless.

              Like

            • I woulWhere did I “Yahtzee,
              Thanks so much for sharing that. Little known is that in the City of Rockford, Illinois, a discrimination suit was filed against the Board of Education — not in 1953, 1954, or 1960, but in 1993.

              http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1993-11-04/news/9311040070_1_white-students-bilingual-schools

              It was not resolved until about 2003.”

              I never said it was resolved. It still is NOT resolved. This what I said on MY blog….One of the landmark cases was Brown v. Board of Topeka (1954) ,which today is widely used in the education system for people like myself who advocate for FAPE for children with disabilities, for school choice, better public education, and for Parental rights in the educational process .

              Like

            • What do you want me to do? What is it you would like me to do? Change my position? Go flip out on people who support GZ even after they see what he has done after trail? They are not rational. So what is the point?Those people read my blog. They get the point.

              Like

            • Danny,

              What do you want me to do?

              What do you want to do? You said, or at least conveyed several comments back that this discussion was over.

              Like

            • Xena,
              Do you believe black people who speak out against BGI are discriminating? Are you aware it was other blacks who initially raised the issue way back in the civil rights movement and they are called Uncle Tom’s?

              Like

          • May all people express their “grievance” when there is injustice, inequality, institutional and LE racism, stereotyping, profiling etc. so that we can move toward a better world.

            Like

            • Yahtzee,

              May all people express their “grievance” when there is injustice, inequality, institutional and LE racism, stereotyping, profiling etc. so that we can move toward a better world.

              Absolutely! Sounds just like something the founding fathers would say. America was settled by those who had grievances against the British.

              Martin Luther would agree also. He even listed his grievances on paper.

              Like

      • We can discuss oppression. because the term is being very narrowed.

        Like

  23. agree. But see the rape victim will always view every man as a potential rapist.

    Not true for every rape victim, neither every man that a rape victim meets. That is why it’s important to allow each person to have their own experiences, validate those experiences, and then respect their experiences so they can get to know you as an individual.

    Like

    • x2

      Like

    • But your version of reasonable person would require
      1.an all women jury
      2. that she too was raped
      3.that the defendant is guilty before proven innocent
      4. that a prosecutor can charge anyone without evidence

      Like

      • this is direct conflict of the 14th Amendment

        Like

      • Not true + You wrote what seems to be a non sequitur to Xena’s comment.

        Like

      • But your version of reasonable person would require
        1.an all women jury …
        2. that she too was raped

        Two different subjects. I used an analogy of rape victims to address your comment about “special treatment.” I thought you were addressing meeting people in general to validate the experiences of others.

        Danny, if you want to discuss the justice system, it will have to be based on cases because that is what makes the system what it is.

        Like

  24. We can discuss oppression. because the term is being very narrowed.

    I would like to stay on the subject of “BGI.” In the alternative, you can choose another issue from your Dec. 31st comments so we can do a “Part 2.”

    Like

  25. BGI is not one thing Xena. It is a collective of specific ways to achieve judicial activism for the black race.

    Such as?

    Like

    • I was wondering that also.

      Like

    • Okay, and I’m tying to figure out this BGI crap and how it relates to Travon Martin case, and how Xena was labled part of the BGI. For that to be true, we we have to believe that only blacks that have an issue with the verdict, and that is by no means true. People of all races believe the verdict was incorrect, just as there are people of all races, blacks included who believe the verdict was correct. So whoever labled this as BGI is out of there flippen mind. We see people of all races march at the rallies, not just blacks. Does that mean all the non blacks wish they were black? I don’t think so, I would rather believe that we all have one thing in common, some may believe race did or did not factor in, that this was not a self defence case, and the verdict was bs.

      I do from time to time check out other blogs, and we know which ones those are, and the race of the blog administrators. I dare not post on them, and we know why. It’s clear that it is not possible to “agree that we disagree”. It’s very clear why that is not possible. As a white person, I’m sorry, disapointed, embarressed, that there are people of my same race that can’t see past white, and still believe the whiter the righter.

      Like

      • For the record I never said Xena was a part of BGI. I personally do not think race was an issue in th Zimmerman case, and I never stated who I though introduced it.
        Although your statement is mostly true….. the definition of BGI is only part of it. White corporations enable the behavior by donating money to causes that obviously helping the blacks they say are oppressed.

        (edited by Administrator. The comment is a pattern of things that the harassers have said I refuse to say. This is not the blog for it. That stuff may be allowed on White Supremacist blogs, but not here. I will not allow this blog to be verbally vandalized with White Supremacist ideology.)

        Like

        • So help me to understand your belief Danny, with the comment about white corperations. Is it then your belief that blacks are opressed because they choose to be, and it’s there own fault they haven’t picked themselves up out of poverity, they have the sames rights as whites, EEOC.

          Couldn’t white corperations be donating money beccause they understand how their wealth was aquired, and perhaps they don’t agree with White Supremacist ideology. Perhaps they understand that it clearly was not and equal start to begin with, and their donations are a way of helping, because they believe we are one.

          Like

          • So help me to understand your belief Danny, with the comment about white corperations. Is it then your belief that blacks are opressed because they choose to be”
            I will be explaining further on my next blog post. I will answer your questions here though.
            It is my position, and there is evidence that some promote plantation progressivism. There are immigrant black that come to America that have a completely different ideology. They are successful, despite” black oppression in America”. Why is that? Perhaps it’s because of many things and not just one thing, but I can speculation it is partly because they are not indoctrinated that they are victims.

            The enterprises that support it do not do so in order to protest KKK ideology, any more then enterprises that support gay marriage support it through protest against Christian ideology. They support the progressive movements because they know that is where the power and money are.

            So in short yes, it is a choice, nobody forces anyone to have a specific ideology. No, these enterprises are not protesting anything. It is elitists helping other elitists because it benefits them to have dependents.

            Like

            • Danny

              There are immigrant black that come to America that have a completely different ideology. They are successful, despite” black oppression in America”. Why is that? Perhaps it’s because of many things and not just one thing, but I can speculation it is partly because they are not indoctrinated that they are victims.

              Because the systems and/or corporations do not see them as inferior as American Blacks. Sidney Poitier, Harry Belafonte and other Black actors for instance, were embraced by Hollywood while Black actors at the same time were only offered roles as maids and butlers. “Bingo Long Traveling All Stars” is a movie, but it brings forth how Whites perceive Blacks born in America as opposed to Blacks from other countries. In that movie, the character played by Richard Pryor (who was a good player in the “colored league”) posed as a Cuban so he could be drafted into professional baseball.

              What do you think inspired the “Birther” movement against President Obama? The motivating factor was not his birth certificate but rather, the ideology of the birthers that no Black man born, raised and educated in America would have the guts to seriously run for the highest office in the nation. The educational system was suppose to grade him unfairly, and steer him into careers.

              Like

            • So that they act as they are perceived? This is the issue then? I see. They are a victim of others perceptions. How come blacks are about the only people who are affected by this perception then?

              As far as the birther motives? That began with Hilary Clinton supporters not Republicans. The “movement” began when Obama refused to release the paperwork to stop ongoing conspiracy. It obviously was politically motivated and not by any means what you claim it to be. LOL

              Like

            • Danny,

              How come blacks are about the only people who are affected by this perception then?

              No response to what I presented regarding Black actors born in other countries and how even professional baseball choose Blacks from other countries before they choose Black Americans?

              Danny, Blackbutterfly7 is not going to allow White Supremacist ideology to be debated here. You have your own blog to present your own ideology. I’ve place your three IP addresses in moderation. Please don’t be the first person posting comments here to be banned.

              Like

      • dreamer,

        Okay, and I’m tying to figure out this BGI crap and how it relates to Travon Martin case, and how Xena was labled part of the BGI. For that to be true, we we have to believe that only blacks that have an issue with the verdict, and that is by no means true.

        The Zimmerman case is used by the harassers as a boot-strap. It’s an excuse for them to attack but not their real motivation for attacks. Their real motivation is demonstrated in their comments that the “BGI” must be exposed and eliminated. Understand that to mean that anyone is “BGI” regardless of race, unless their blogs only report Black on Black crime and/or crimes committed by Blacks.

        To say that another way, unless I turn this into a “Blacks are inferior” blog, I am “BGI.” Unless I turn this into a “raise your Black children to submit to Whites” blog, I am “BGI.” Unless I promote the idea that Blacks are to be silent about inequality, I am “BGI.”

        Like

        • You nailed it, Xena!

          I agree with your assessment!

          Like

          • Yahtzee,
            I believe that Danny said so much in his post to Jessica. My paraphrase, but she uses Zimmerman as an excuse, while threatening to “out” people who have absolutely nothing to do with the Zimmerman case. Based on her comments, “out” is not just making up identities for people to slander them, but also includes identity theft, and threatening others to disassociate with her target victims based on her perception of race.

            Like

  26. Danny,

    Do you believe black people who speak out against BGI are discriminating?

    In order to discriminate, one has to be denied the same rights as others. Someone or some group of people have to be favored above others.

    Do you believe that those accusing others of being “BGI” to justify slander, defamation, and threats are wrong?

    Like

  27. Xena, I just want you to know that I have been reading your comments on this page from this afternoon at 1:18 pm to the present.

    All of your comments are EXCELLENT!

    Like

  28. Xena, you wrote:

    The Zimmerman case is used by the harassers as a boot-strap. It’s an excuse for them to attack but not their real motivation for attacks. Their real motivation is demonstrated in their comments that the “BGI” must be exposed and eliminated. Understand that to mean that anyone is “BGI” regardless of race, unless their blogs only report Black on Black crime and/or crimes committed by Blacks.

    To say that another way, unless I turn this into a “Blacks are inferior” blog, I am “BGI.” Unless I turn this into a “raise your Black children to submit to Whites” blog, I am “BGI.” Unless I promote the idea that Blacks are to be silent about inequality, I am “BGI.”

    And, we who believe in justice and equality will NEVER be silent. We who believe in the civil rights guaranteed by our Constitution and our laws will NEVER be silent. We will stand up and march just as the great people did during the Civil Rights Era when cities and states refused to follow the law and the Supreme Court rulings.

    John Lewis, one of the leaders for Civil Rights, had this to say about those people and states who refused to follow the Supreme Court 1954 ruling in “Brown v The Board of Education”.

    From John Lewis’ autobiography entitled “Walking with the Wind” :
    Page 54-56 (note: freshman year refers to that in high school)

    Near the end of my freshman year, on a May morning in 1954, I read something that stunned me, just absolutely turned my world upside down. The U.S. Supreme Court had finally handed down its decision in the school desegregation case of “Brown v. The Board of Education of Topeka.” The ruling declared that the “separate but equal” doctrine, on which almost the entire institution of segregation was based, was unconstitutional. I remember the feeling of jubilation I had reading the newspaper story–ALL the newspaper stories–that day. Everything was going to change now. No longer would I have to ride a broken-down bus almost forty miles each day to attend classes at a “training” school with hand-me-down books and supplies. Come fall I’d be riding a state-of-the-art bus to a state-of-the-art school, an INTEGRATED school.

    All that spring I searched the papers for news of Alabama’s plans for desegregating its schools.

    Instead, what I saw were stories quoting state politicians derisively referring to the day of that Supreme Court decision as Black Mondy and making clear that they had no intention of obeying the ruling. I read about branches of something called White Citizens Councils–coat-and-tie versions of the Ku Klux Klan–forming in Georgia and Mississippi. As for the Klan itself, there were reports of hooded marches and midnight cross burnings across the state of Alabama……

    …….I began my sophomore year in the fall of 1954 by climbing onto the same beat-up school bus and making the same twenty-mile trip to the same segregated high school I’d attended the year before. “Brown v. The Board of Education” notwithstanding, nothing in my life had changed.

    Page 57(now the year 1955):

    In May of that year, in response to Southern states’ defiance of the 1954 decision, the Supreme Court issued an “implementation ruling” on “Brown,” ordering lower courts to require “a prompt and reasonable start toward full compliance.” Southern political leaders–avowed segregationists such as U.S. Senators James Eastland of Mississippi and Strom Thurmond of South Carolina and U.S. Representative James Davis of Georgia –swore that they would defy the Court to the death. That summer there seemed to be an increase of racial incidents–attacks on blacks. Some you would read about in the newspapers, others you’d hear about through the word-of-mouth grapevine by which black people in the South have long gotten much of their news–news not necessarily reported or even known by the white mainstream press.

    Like

    • Until the killing of Black men, Black mothers’ sons
      Is as IMPORTANT
      As the killing of White men, White mothers’ sons

      We who believe in freedom cannot rest
      We who believe in freedom cannot rest until it comes.

      Like

    • Yahtzee,
      Thanks so much for sharing that. Little known is that in the City of Rockford, Illinois, a discrimination suit was filed against the Board of Education — not in 1953, 1954, or 1960, but in 1993.

      http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1993-11-04/news/9311040070_1_white-students-bilingual-schools

      It was not resolved until about 2003.

      http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1375148.html

      Like

      • Oh my gosh, and now I have to read your second link again (after I take a break) to see if it is saying what I think it is saying.

        Like

        • Yahtzee,
          The federal magistrate judge said that the school district turned discrimination into an “art form.” Children were picked up by school buses, but Black and Latino children were required to stay on the bus while the White students were allowed to go inside the school.

          In the schools, the classrooms were segregated.

          Rockford is about 65% White; 20% Black, and 15% Latino.

          Like

          • Yes, I understood that, but did the 2003 decision undo his ruling?

            Like

            • No. The school board was required to meet certain conditions. Those conditions were monitored by the court. There was something involving real estate taxes to pay the costs of the suit, but I’m not familiar with that.

              Like

          • Thanks for correcting and helping me with that. I can get lost in the legal jargon.

            Like

            • Yahtzee,
              It was a looooooong case. At times there were be actions before the district court, and actions before the 7th circuit court of appeals, and back and forth and back and forth.

              When it started, I didn’t live in this area but understand that the Mayor of Rockford was Black. That is why, I suppose, I recognized certain mindsets that came forth after the 2008 presidential election; i.e., “What more can they want?” mindset.

              Like

        • Everyone:

          I suggest that you read these two links that Xena has provided us.

          Like

  29. Xena, I just noticed your communication above with Danny this evening. Your points are very good, and I agree with you completely.

    Like

  30. Comments are now closed on this page. Please see the Update in the above article.

    Like

%d bloggers like this: