Should Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson be considered terrorist?
Al Sharpton has repeatedly incited violence and encouraged mobs that have committed murder, burned buildings of legitimate businesses, threatened violence or death to uninvolved parties. Jesse Jackson is just a race pimp. He hits businesses and cities up for money, then slinks back under the kitchen sink. Al Sharpton may not be an actual terrorist, but if Osama Bin Ladin was considered a terrorist for inciting and planning terror attacks, Al Sharpton is ... 1/2 way there? Can we call him a 1/2 terrorist? People on the right have been arrested for SAYING that it would be good for someone to do what Al Sharpton actively worked to get people to do.
Would Al Shaprton and Jesse Jackson be considered hate mongers?
They live for controversy by spreading fear over something that doesn't exist. So yes, they are fear mongers.
What would happen if Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson went to North Korea and requested a meeting with Kim Jong-Un to discuss religion, politics and world peace?
What if? Why not include Bill Richardson and Jimmy Carter? The Dalai Lama? Bishop Desmond Tutu? The answer is pretty simple. Kim Jong Un either accepts or rejects the request. It’s a simple binary yes or no. Your question isn’t all that interesting or insightful. Would their meetings solve all the problems of the Korean Peninsula that date back to 1950? Rather doubtful. Would North Korea give up their nukes? Highly doubtful. The North Koreans only talk when they want to and if they need something. No offense to the esteemed gentlemen you and I both mention but they’re not going to solve the problems with North Korea.
Did you like Rev Jesse Jackson's Speech on Community Morals?
The man is a complete @ss. Just like when he went to Decatur Illinois over a fight at a football game. Some hooligans started a fight in the stands and got expelled, Jesse then thinks that it is wrong to keep these hooligans from attending school. To which the majority of those involved got into more trouble.
Do more African Americans wish that Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson addressed black on black crime, more specifically black on black murders?
Actually, I just wish people would just get off this made up concept of black on black crime. Let's focus on white on white crime for a while instead as its numbers are just as high :)I'm all for racial equality but damn, sometimes a brotha just wants to commit a crime in his own neighborhood. Is that so bad? Who wants to drive around looking for a white guy to rob just so that can get the black on black crime numbers down. Sounds stupid, right? So does the concept of black on black crime. Most petty crimes are crimes of opportunity. Most of these opportunities would occur in your own neighborhood. Most people in your neighborhood will be of the same race/social economic status as you. This means that you're not going to get much money from them. This means that you will have to steal much more often to make a living at it. This brings the numbers up. It's not that a whole lot of people are doing these crimes. It's that a few people are doing these crimes a whole lot of times. In the phrase "black on black", substitute the first word for Cop. Now you have cop on black crimes. Which happens all too frequently as well. But all I ever hear people say is that it's not all cops. It's just a few bad actors who are doing this very frequently. This is the same thing. If you can make excuses for one (insert your own reasons for said excuse here), then you can do it for the other. Do we need to mitigate crime, of course. But no matter how low the crime rates are. The percentage of black on black, white on white, Chinese on Chinese will likely not change.
Why do people think Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson are leaders of the "black community?
Because the predominately white controlled media always puts them on TV to speak for "black people". This has always mystified and annoyed me. Especially since most black people are middle class in 2015, but they only speak for the 25% who live in poverty (most of the time) and only address issues that are mainly issues for black people living in urban ghettos. They rarely speak to my lifestyle or my issues.I think this is a vestige of the civil rights movement. White Americans have gotten used to a"black leader" speaking about an issue involving "racism" that involves the black community. I notice they don't look for "leaders" when there are issues of racism involving Asians or Hispanics. And no one has the audacity to stand up on TV and claim to speak for such diverse groups. There are 40+ million black Americans spread out over the entire country, but mostly in the Deep South, East Coast, California, and around major urban centers in the Midwest. That is quite diverse.Why do these people claim to speak for such a diverse group? Well there is money in it, Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson are in a "civil rights business". Unlike Malcolm X or Martin Luther King, these men are both rich. They get paid by white people to speak on behalf of black people, who never elected them to do so. Then they shake down various organizations, businesses, etc. They get some moderate concessions for black people (maybe) and line their pockets. How do they do this? By agitating local blacks to protest and even potentially riot. THis is not what black leaders in the 1960's or 1950's did.
The White Side of the Black Story BUCHANAN TO OBAMA By Patrick J. Buchanan. What is your opinion of Mr. Buchanan's take on this issue? I am not saying I agree with him nor have I verified his statistics. I want to know your opinion of what he wrote.
Prof Hyttel, Like Pat Buchanan I am a right wing conservative [however not a Republican] and I would not blame you for the slavery issue we had in America prior to [and even for a while after] the Civil War. I would agree that America was not the best place for African Americans when they were originally uprooted from their homes, but there are two groups you have ignored in your diatribe.These two groups were suppliers of potential slaves; Arab slave traders and the African tribes themselves Both these groups profited mightily as well as the North and South divisions of the United states. The difference between America and the slave selling groups are that in America TODAY the African-American has an equal standing with any other ethnic group and even during the 19th Century not all African-Americans were slaves. If Frederick Douglass were alive today I doubt if he would agree with your appraisal. Unfortunately, Muslim Arabs have NOT given up their affinity for slavery as recent headlines tied to the Saudi's have proven. Africa itself is not any Utopian Paradise when you consider today's bloodshed of innocents during the many Genocides still being perpetrated [most Black on Black]. Today Black Americans need not fear for their lives due to Genocide or Slavery in the United States. They do need to worry for their lives when it comes to Black on Black crime that this Socialistic Administration [along with its lackeys in the Lame Stream Media] ignores along with you. The ONLY inequalities in effect today are due to the decline of the Black family group (73% of babies born out of wedlock); lack of education due to drop-outs (can make more money dealing drugs) and the continual stirring of the Racial pot by their so called leaders; Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Eric Holder & Barack Obama who choose to promote Trayvon Martin type cases as race related [which it was not] instead of trying to resolve the real problematic issues.Finally I whole-hardheartedly disagree with your "...the United States is a class society...". I understand your views but you and your Socialist and Progressive friends NEED this to be true in order to effectively Re-distribute the wealth and make sure that you and yours occupy the top slots. Classes do NOT exist in a Free Republic like America and that's what separates [or did separate] us from Europe. I think you have been listening to [and even worse believing in] Barrack Obama attempting to re-define America into a class system.
As an American, are you concerned about the reported rise of white nationalism in the United States? Why or why not?
No, I am not concerned about the the reported rise of White Nationalism. White Nationalism is not growing or expanding, it’s just coming out of the closet. Ever since the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 and 1965, racism gradually become a taboo in American society. In the old days you could yell out stuff like “I don’t want these ******* in my site” without being penalized or ostracized from society. Today, that is no longer an acceptable behavior. You say one racist thing, you could lose your job or career and your life will be ruined, Roseanne Bar for example.However, ever since the election of Donald Trump, white supremacist such as David Duke and Richard Spencer have come out of closet in praise of Donald Trump in hopes he will help them get a white only ethno-state. Trump all through out his presidency has pandered to racist and refuses to denounce them in public, thus giving them validation. White supremacist rallies have seem to become a normal thing.But despite all this, America is not getting more racist. More white people are not becoming racist or radicalized over night. Most hate crimes committed by white supremacists are committed by white people who have always been white supremacists. It’s just that they kept their racism to themselves for such a long time because it’s not socially acceptable in today’s American society to be openly racist.So with all that said, I am more concerned about the fact that white nationalist who have always been white nationalist coming out of the closet and preaching their vile hate agenda and spreading terrorism. What we need to do is continue to make sure that open racism is socially unacceptable.