Can somebody explain to me what the writer of this column means?

[XMan]

White Man, White Van

Is she happy? Mad? I don't get it.

 

[Aves]

I'm not really sure either.

 

[Jzero]

Me either.
She's peeved that the canonical serial killer profile was used and guessed that the guy was white, and then later on she laments how blacks are often demonized by American culture. So which is it?

 

[freakflag]

Uh, she's saying...well...she means that, um....I think in a round-about way she's trying to.............................................

I don't know WTF her point is.

 

[FoBoT]

uh, it almost sounds like the author thinks its good the sniper is black

A friend of mine said, only half kidding, "They didn't think a black person could be smart enough" to pull off three weeks of terror, driving into very public places, hitting his mark, then eluding all the local, state and federal officers.

The surprise expressed by many in recent days that a former Army mechanic, John Allen Muhammad, was such a sharpshooter



In a curious way, blacks - long excluded from the all-American ideal - are now in the big leagues. A friend of mine who is Jewish indicated the same precarious tether to all-American when she said, "I'm glad his name wasn't Schwartz!"

 

[Cyberian]

It sounds to me like she is just criticizing 'profiling' in general, albeit in a somewhat roundabout manner.

 

[Spooner]

I don't trust anyone that use two initials for their first name

 

[Jzero]

Originally posted by: Spooner
I don't trust anyone that use two initials for their first name

LOL...lots of writers use just their initials. Gonna start raggin on J.R.R. Tolkein or C.S. Lewis? W.E.B. DuBois? e e cummings?

Anyway, as much as I think this article is rubbish, she DID win a Pulitzer, so I'm inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt....if only I could figure out what the point is

 

[Tallgeese]

So...she's pissed at "The Man" for NOT accusing a black man/men of this crime at the outset....
Dayum! That's a SWITCH! :Q

Strangely enough, in this case, the head of the investigation is...a black man.
And the profiling targeted WHITES based on historical trends and data, even tho the killer(s) turned out to be a black man/men, not white.

AS A WHITE MAN....MY CIVIL RIGHTS HAVE BEEN VIOLATED!

My question is:
What do you think the leaders of the black community would have said HAD a minority been targeted at the outset? Think: Sharpton, Jackson, King III

IMHO: I think this woman's desperately trying to spin this some way, ever since it was announced that the killer/killers were minorities.
As my mama used to say: "Only a hit dog howls."

 

[Moonbeam]

A lot, I think, rests on what she means by this: "Unlike white people, we are too often identified with the American nightmare." If she means identified as equated where the equation is true, her essay makes sense to me. If she means that blacks are equated falsely with the American nightmare by assumptions, it is harder to follow any logical consistency.

She's saying, I think, that people see what they choose to see or believe. She lists a number of reasons that a black was not suspected and the car was wrong. She goes on to point out that now that we know he's black the presence of many minorities blunts the lynch mob effect of getting the two to execution because blacks have arrived and become examples of the American dream. If what I said about the nightmare thing is correct she then goes on to warn Americans not to forget that blacks are still a real part of the American nightmare and not to discount the possibility that it could well be a Black who is the shooter. That's my take on it.

 

[Tallgeese]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
If what I said about the nightmare thing is correct she then goes on to warn Americans not to forget that blacks are still a real part of the American nightmare and not to discount the possibility that it could well be a Black who is the shooter.

If this is true, then that is a VERY volatile column, especially for African-Americans.

Unfortunately, I don't think her writing is coherent enough to successfully get that particular point across.
So I'm wondering if she backed off midway, for fear of a backlash (which is a very real possibility)?

For someone of her race (and I'm only mentioning this since the column is ABOUT race and racial assumptions) to say that "Black men (and by extension, women) CAN and DO commit negative acts, just as they as they CAN and DO commit postive acts" is to my mind a VERY significant stance, especially since the travesty of the O.J. Simpson trial (altho a SERIOUS argument can be made that the Simpson acquittal was less about race--despite Fuhrman--than about the affect of socio-economics on our justice system).

It's simply a shame her position isn't clarified.

 

[Moonbeam]

I think the implication of her point is that Blacks have a long way to go before they are not a part of the American nightmare ant that what white people do by profiling, seeing what they want to believe, is continually ignoring the poor conditions too many Blacks live under. The price will be continued violence and social unrest.

 

[Tallgeese]

But that's like saying that Whites are NOT a part of the American nightmare, and that's fallacious too.

Let's start with ultra-violent kooks who happen to be Caucasian:
Timothy McVeigh
The kids at Columbine
Dahmer (and go down the list of serial killers)
Manson (world of nutbaggedness unto his own)
Richard Speck
the motherfvcker who murdered my wife's uncle eight years ago this March :|

Now, how about some of the non-Caucasian?
Wayne Williams
Richard Ramirez

And for those of the Jewish persuasion:
Joel Steinberg

I guess I'm just kind of amazed that she would take some kind of satisfaction from the fact that these two nutbags were African-Americans.
That, in effect, it takes a couple of psychos to elude capture for a minority to "overcome."
IMHO all that does is perpetuate, and in many ways EXTEND, the worst kind of myths about African-Americans...which are the very things she claims are shattered by these two.

 

[Moonbeam]

Apparently the profilers and witnesses agreed. They did not see a black man or a blue car. They saw the content of their own mind. The fact that you seem to see an argument here sort of proves her point to me. Who had you thought the shooters were. Ask yourself that. If you were trapped by the same illusion, ask yourself why.

 

[0roo0roo]

i dunno, she's just ranting. assuming she doesn't sport a wang

 

[Tallgeese]

I personally had no idea...even with all the media reports.
You want me to ask why:
Because as an individual I didn't have access to direct information about the case.
What I got was filtered through the media.

Is the media biased?
You bet your sweet bippy.

Do they admit it?
Only if they are forced to.

Is media bias simply a reflection of larger bias in society at large?
Hmmm...I'll straddle the fence here and say...yes and no.
I think they both at times influence each other.

Take it another step:
Do I think bias in response to a previous bias (or to correct a previous bias) is appropriate?
Never.

So in the end, why did I care about this case?
Because in the more immediate sense, I have friends in DC, and was dreading losing one or more of them (even as slim a chance as it was).
Because I have a wife and a child (soon-to-be two) and the thought of losing them, or of being taken away from them, because of some psychotic piece(s) of trash truly angers me.
And the additional thought of a possible breakdown in our justice system actually allowing criminals like this (and I'm not making the assumption that these two ARE the killers, but only that other, similar cases have resulted in obviously guilty defendants getting off on technicalities, loopholes, etc.) to escape justice disgusts me.

And honestly I don't see an argument here, at least not with you.
I always get like this in semi-rant mode
Come in AT's Networking forum sometime and call my opinion worthless, then watch what happens.
BTW: that won't work in OT, since I don't nef for a living

 

[WinkOsmosis]

She is saying that no one expected a black man. Deny it all you want, but black people are subconsciously not seen as cunning enough to be terrorists. Which is why witnesses claimed they saw white or middle eastern men.
It also shows the invalidity of witness testimony. Witnesses see what they want to see. The only reliable witness is a video camera.

 

[Tallgeese]

Originally posted by: Jellomancer
Deny it all you want, but black people are subconsciously not seen as cunning enough to be terrorists.

And what kind of assumption is that? Where have I said in this thread that I thought Blacks weren't smart enough to be terrorists? That must be your bias there, pal.

Here's a question: Were the Black Panthers terrorists?

My personal view is that 99% of the general population of ANYWHERE, if determined enough, can be pretty darned good terrorists.
More about willpower and dedication than intelligence, honestly.

 

[Moonbeam]

I can except your answer that you didn't know, but are you sure you are being forthcoming about what you imagined. We all know now that we didn't know, but at the time, are you absolutely sure that you were a blank slate with no suspicions whatsoever?

 

[Tallgeese]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
you sure you are being forthcoming about what you imagined.

Any examples from this thread of what I "imagined" in case I missed them? Seriously.

I can honestly say that I had no preconceived notions about the shooter(s), EXCEPT that I did expect there was some of background with arms training, most likely military.
Not necessarily because of the choice of shot location on the victims, but because of the quick exits and/or camouflaging (think: hiding in plain sight).

I also didn't assume how many shooters there were.

I will admit I've been working A LOT lately, and haven't had much time to get engrossed in news reports.
Maybe that helps?

I DID think the reports of a link to Counter-Strike were ludicrous beyond the point of asinine.

 

[dethman]

she seems so proud. that's so wrong.

she also looks like a fat steve urkel.

 

[WinkOsmosis]

Originally posted by: TallGeese

Originally posted by: Jellomancer
Deny it all you want, but black people are subconsciously not seen as cunning enough to be terrorists.

And what kind of assumption is that? Where have I said in this thread that I thought Blacks weren't smart enough to be terrorists? That must be your bias there, pal.

Here's a question: Were the Black Panthers terrorists?

My personal view is that 99% of the general population of ANYWHERE, if determined enough, can be pretty darned good terrorists.
More about willpower and dedication than intelligence, honestly.

It's a valid assumption. You see a black guy and an Arabian guy, and you subconsciously assume the Arab is smarter. It's a part of the western collective intelligence. Why do you think Egypt is considered the Middle East and not Africa? Because Africans can't possibly be smart enough to create a cultural center of the world! Of course we don't think that. Only people found on HardForum soapbox would think that. We feel it. We feel that Asian kids are smarter than white kids. It's called prejudice, and everyone is subject to it. No one can be blamed for it. I'm just stating that that is the way it is.

 

[AnyMal]

This article is full of racist hatred. The only difference is that noone will dare to challeneg her openly for fear of being branded as racist. I guarantee that if this article was written word for word by a white journalist if would never have been published.

 

[Tallgeese]

Originally posted by: Jellomancer
It's a valid assumption. You see a black guy and an Arabian guy, and you subconsciously assume the Arab is smarter. It's a part of the western collective intelligence. Why do you think Egypt is considered the Middle East and not Africa? Because Africans can't possibly be smart enough to create a cultural center of the world! Of course we don't think that. Only people found on HardForum soapbox would think that. We feel it. We feel that Asian kids are smarter than white kids. It's called prejudice, and everyone is subject to it. No one can be blamed for it. I'm just stating that that is the way it is.

Replace all the instances of "you" and "we" above with "I," and speak for yourself.

I have no doubt that there is PLENTY of stupidity among ANY and ALL races, as evidenced by your "assumptions" above.

I'll attempt to quote baffled2 here (if I screw it up, please correct me Jean):
I'm responsible for no one's opinion but my own