Drug War Was Meant To Target Black People

[BoberFett]

Never said that. It's "because republicans and democrats". You should know by know I despise the establishment of both.

You can only be one or the other in this forum. No room for nuance here.

 

[woolfe9998]

I would argue that Clinton is a centrist neo-liberal while Sanders is a progressive New Deal liberal. Neither are socialists, I haven't heard any talk of nationalizing any industries.
Right, left, and center in American politics is IMO a bit relative of late given how far the right has swung to the extreme, but I think that was his point.

Where a candidate stands on particular issues means a lot more than labels like "neo liberal" or "New Deal liberal." Labels are semantics. Stances on issues are real. Based on all available evidence - voting records and public statements both - there is very little difference between Sanders and Clinton on any sort of domestic policy, whether the issue is social or fiscal/economic. There is some difference on foreign policy. Clinton is more willing to use the military than Sanders. That has earned her the "neo conservative" label by some, another semantic exercise which has little value.

 

[Victorian Gray]

I would argue that Clinton is a centrist neo-liberal while Sanders is a progressive New Deal liberal. Neither are socialists, I haven't heard any talk of nationalizing any industries.
Right, left, and center in American politics is IMO a bit relative of late given how far the right has swung to the extreme, but I think that was his point.

Your 'Right' has, over the past several decades, completely redefined the political discourse of the US. They set the terms and conditions and that's all filtered through a 'Newspeak' of redefined terms and meanings that's breathtaking in both scope and gall. And for some reason the Democratic Party let them. <shrug>

 

[MongGrel]

Nothing new in this one.

 

[pcgeek11]

Like they used to fly over Harlem and sprinkle drugs all over...

Yeah, Right. Let me get my aluminum foil out for a hat.

 

[elitejp]

Thats what I said, African americans were much better off after 8 years of the clinton administration. Why do you think hillary is doing so much better against sanders in the elections amongst black voters. How is this racist?

you said african americans. your racist

 

[michal1980]

Your 'Right' has, over the past several decades, completely redefined the political discourse of the US. They set the terms and conditions and that's all filtered through a 'Newspeak' of redefined terms and meanings that's breathtaking in both scope and gall. And for some reason the Democratic Party let them. <shrug>

LOL, and the left hasn't? All SJWs and the PC police are about controlling discourse and redefining terms.

For example, the left is making it racist to wear a sombrero.
Or; Against abortion - You hate woman.

Don't worry VG your side is a master of controlling language and narrative, and you have the lmsm to help you out.

 

[HomerJS]

Like they used to fly over Harlem and sprinkle drugs all over...

Yeah, Right. Let me get my aluminum foil out for a hat.

The Federal government isn't capable of targeting black people?

Google "The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment" and get back to me.

 

[Victorian Gray]

LOL, and the left hasn't? All SJWs and the PC police are about controlling discourse and redefining terms.

For example, the left is making it racist to wear a sombrero.
Or; Against abortion - You hate woman.

Don't worry VG your side is a master of controlling language and narrative, and you have the lmsm to help you out.

You keep on punching those men made of straw.

 

[Jhhnn]

The Democratic party of today would have been right of the Republican party all the way up to the Reagan admin. In fact, many of Reagan's views and policies would be ridiculed today by Republicans as leftist.

Which puts Republicans where, exactly?

Hillary is a DINO in the areas that matter most to the middle class -- trade and business. Hillary was gung-ho for war in Iraq. Hillary has deep connections with the Banking industry. Bill Clinton, Hillary's husband, signed into law GAIT, NAFTA, the WTO and a myriad of trade deals that have thrown the middle class under the bus.

Your comment on the Iraq war is bullshit-

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/8/21/1413063/-Hillary-Clinton-s-Vote-on-the-AUMF

NAFTA & the WTO supersede GATT which was instituted in 1949 iirc.

There's a helluva lot more to job loss than offshoring-

http://www.scdigest.com/assets/newsViews/08-06-12-2.php

That kind of trend covers nearly all aspects of employment right down to who's answering the phone.

As another stated, only in the USA would anyone call Hillary a liberal. The only thing that reliably separates modern R's for D's is the issues related to sexual orientation, abortion and government association with religion. Not that those are unimportant, but to the middle class family that's lost there factory jobs and is living with 50% less income they have more to worry about than whether it's OK or not to put up a Christmas display on government property.


Brian

More scattershot bullshit. There are a lot of other issues separating the Parties. Energy. Taxes. Environment. Public lands. Healthcare & even the overall role of Govt. That's only part of it.

Repub leaders believe that tech progress should result in greater profit for capitalists even if it means reduced national income share & purchasing power for working people in this country. That's obvious. It's even more pronounced now that they've gone multinational & derive increasing profit from the world market that's much larger than our own.

So if I'm a widget maker offshored to China & the US institutes high tariffs on widgets it just means that Americans will pay more for widgets because the numbers don't work out right to move production to the US. I sell widgets world wide & the US is only a part of the market.

OTOH, if US taxes on my corporate entity & my personal income go up then the govt has more money to spend to compensate for job loss & stagnant US wages, even to create more steady govt jobs.

Beyond that, there are issues of social justice & holding our economic leadership responsible. Why should we allow them to soar to new heights while leaving the rest of us beat down on the false promises of trickle down? Because they own? All things considered, that's become insufficient cause for policies Righties embrace like a lover.

 

[zinfamous]

I suggest watching Nixon on Nixon.

Essentially composed of Nixon and Eirlichman going on and on and on about all of their enemies and the evils of the world, in their own private conversations. None of his is really "news" today, because this stuff has been available for some time, and it is completely uncontroversial because they lay this all out so directly.

It's terrifyingly fascinating how truly despicable these humans were.

 

[zinfamous]

The Democratic party of today would have been right of the Republican party all the way up to the Reagan admin. In fact, many of Reagan's views and policies would be ridiculed today by Republicans as leftist.

Hillary is a DINO in the areas that matter most to the middle class -- trade and business. Hillary was gung-ho for war in Iraq. Hillary has deep connections with the Banking industry. Bill Clinton, Hillary's husband, signed into law GAIT, NAFTA, the WTO and a myriad of trade deals that have thrown the middle class under the bus.

As another stated, only in the USA would anyone call Hillary a liberal. The only thing that reliably separates modern R's for D's is the issues related to sexual orientation, abortion and government association with religion. Not that those are unimportant, but to the middle class family that's lost there factory jobs and is living with 50% less income they have more to worry about than whether it's OK or not to put up a Christmas display on government property.


Brian

:thumbsup:

 

[soulcougher73]

Why would you target the non-drug users? :sneaky:

 

[WHAMPOM]

And hippies.

Journalist Dan Baum wrote in the April cover story of Harper’s about how he interviewed Ehrlichman in 1994 while working on a book about drug prohibition. Ehrlichman provided some shockingly honest insight into the motives behind the drug war. From Harper’s:

“You want to know what this was really all about?” he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. “The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/nixon-drug-war-racist_us_56f16a0ae4b03a640a6bbda1

Black guy with a gram of crack gets jail time, white guy with 6 ounces of coke gets probation especially if he is the white collar supplier.

 

[hal2kilo]

Black guy with a gram of crack gets jail time, white guy with 6 ounces of coke gets probation especially if he is the white collar supplier.

We have the best justice system money can buy.

As far as the OP. Ancient news.

 

[dank69]

The Democratic party of today would have been right of the Republican party all the way up to the Reagan admin. In fact, many of Reagan's views and policies would be ridiculed today by Republicans as leftist.

Hillary is a DINO in the areas that matter most to the middle class -- trade and business. Hillary was gung-ho for war in Iraq. Hillary has deep connections with the Banking industry. Bill Clinton, Hillary's husband, signed into law GAIT, NAFTA, the WTO and a myriad of trade deals that have thrown the middle class under the bus.

As another stated, only in the USA would anyone call Hillary a liberal. The only thing that reliably separates modern R's for D's is the issues related to sexual orientation, abortion and government association with religion. Not that those are unimportant, but to the middle class family that's lost there factory jobs and is living with 50% less income they have more to worry about than whether it's OK or not to put up a Christmas display on government property.


Brian

It does nobody any good to falsely portray Hillary as "gung-ho" for the Iraq War or to claim she has "deep connections" to the banking industry. Does every paid speaker automatically have deep connections to whoever pays them to speak? Ridiculous, and I am a Bernie supporter.

 

[pcgeek11]

The Federal government isn't capable of targeting black people?

Google "The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment" and get back to me.

No, I never said that, but "seeding" the black community with drugs is BS.

As for the "The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment" which was started in 1932 with a good intention ( 35 % Infection Rate of Black Males ) was not a seeded infection and there was a lot more ignorance on the disease than there was knowledge. As it was officially known as the "Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male." That was also before penicillin was used to treat Syphilis. The treatments they did have at the time often resulted in death ( intense treatments with mercury and bismuth ).

Granted they did get out of hand in allowing the study to continue for 40 years and not properly informing the test subjects prior.

There were more than just the Public Health Service involved as there were the Tuskegee Institute, the AMA and the NMA.

Your comparison is apples and oranges.

 

[ivwshane]

No, I never said that, but "seeding" the black community with drugs is BS.

As for the "The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment" which was started in 1932 with a good intention ( 35 % Infection Rate of Black Males ) was not a seeded infection and there was a lot more ignorance on the disease than there was knowledge. As it was officially known as the "Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male." That was also before penicillin was used to treat Syphilis. The treatments they did have at the time often resulted in death ( intense treatments with mercury and bismuth ).

Granted they did get out of hand in allowing the study to continue for 40 years and not properly informing the test subjects prior.

There were more than just the Public Health Service involved as there were the Tuskegee Institute, the AMA and the NMA.

Your comparison is apples and oranges.

I take it you've never heard of Gary webb or the CIA and the contras?

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/gary-webb-dark-alliance_n_5961748.html

 

[pcgeek11]

I take it you've never heard of Gary webb or the CIA and the contrast?

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/gary-webb-dark-alliance_n_5961748.html

You mean the Contra's not contrast.

Yes I have. They had a rich customer base that just so happened to be black. That doesn't make them targeted for anything. As a matter of fact Webb stated as much:

“It’s not a situation where the government or the CIA sat down and said, ‘Okay, let’s invent crack, let’s sell it in black neighborhoods, let’s decimate black America,’” Webb says. “It was a situation where, ‘We need money for a covert operation, the quickest way to raise it is sell cocaine, you guys go sell it somewhere, we don’t want to know anything about it.’”

 

[ivwshane]

You mean the Contra's not contrast.

Yes I have. They had a rich customer base that just so happened to be black. That doesn't make them targeted for anything. As a matter of fact Webb stated as much:

Damn auto correct.

The reasoning behind their actions doesn't excuse their actions. Crack was indeed seeded, it just so happened to be in black communities. Just because they didn't care where it was sold doesn't change the fact that that's where it was sold.

 

[pcgeek11]

I wasn't trying to excuse the actions. They happened to be selling in Southern Los Angeles which did have a lot of African Americans living there along with a lot of Hispanics and quite a few whites. No particular race was targeted. Just any old body willing to screw up there life with drugs. They didn't force anyone to buy anything.

It was a crappy underhanded move by some in the government, but it was far from "seeding" a particular race of people.

&#8217;&#8221; Webb says. &#8220;It was a situation where, &#8216;We need money for a covert operation, the quickest way to raise it is sell cocaine, you guys go sell it somewhere, we don&#8217;t want to know anything about it.&#8217;&#8221;

They could have sold it in Kansas... Southern California was way more accessible to sell their goods.

 

[HomerJS]

No, I never said that, but "seeding" the black community with drugs is BS.

As for the "The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment" which was started in 1932 with a good intention ( 35 % Infection Rate of Black Males ) was not a seeded infection and there was a lot more ignorance on the disease than there was knowledge. As it was officially known as the "Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male." That was also before penicillin was used to treat Syphilis. The treatments they did have at the time often resulted in death ( intense treatments with mercury and bismuth ).

Granted they did get out of hand in allowing the study to continue for 40 years and not properly informing the test subjects prior.

There were more than just the Public Health Service involved as there were the Tuskegee Institute, the AMA and the NMA.

Your comparison is apples and oranges.

Not many people I know would characterize experimenting on black males without their knowledge as "good intentions".

At least we know where your heart lies.

 

[EOM]

The war on MJ has been that way since the start!

 

[glenn1]

Not many people I know would characterize experimenting on black males without their knowledge as "good intentions".

At least we know where your heart lies.

He's correct when speaking about the earlier phases of the experiment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_syphilis_experiment#Study_details

A Norwegian study in 1928 had reported on the pathologic manifestations of untreated syphilis in several hundred white males. This study is known as a retrospective study, since investigators pieced together information from the histories of patients who had already contracted syphilis but remained untreated for some time.

The Tuskegee study group decided to build on the Oslo work and perform a prospective study to complement it. In the earlier phases of the study, this was not inherently unethical since there was nothing the investigators could do therapeutically at the time. Researchers could study the natural progression of the disease as long as they did not harm their subjects. They reasoned that the knowledge gained would benefit humankind; however, it was determined afterward that the doctors did harm their subjects by depriving them of appropriate treatment once it had been discovered. The study was characterized as "the longest non-therapeutic experiment on human beings in medical history."

The US Public Health Study of Syphilis at Tuskegee began as a 6-month descriptive epidemiological study of the range of pathology associated with syphilis in the Macon County population. At that time, it was believed that the effects of syphilis depended on the race of those affected. For African Americans, physicians believed that their cardiovascular system was more affected than the central nervous system. Initially, subjects were studied for six to eight months and then treated with contemporary methods, including Salvarsan, mercurial ointments, and bismuth. These methods were, at best, mildly effective. The disadvantage that these treatments were all highly toxic was balanced by the fact that no other methods were known. The Tuskegee Institute participated in the study, as its representatives understood the intent was to benefit public health in the local poor population. The Tuskegee University-affiliated hospital effectively loaned the PHS its medical facilities, and other predominantly black institutions and local black doctors participated as well.

 

[HomerJS]

He's correct when speaking about the earlier phases of the experiment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_syphilis_experiment#Study_details

A Norwegian study in 1928 had reported on the pathologic manifestations of untreated syphilis in several hundred white males. This study is known as a retrospective study, since investigators pieced together information from the histories of patients who had already contracted syphilis but remained untreated for some time.

The Tuskegee study group decided to build on the Oslo work and perform a prospective study to complement it. In the earlier phases of the study, this was not inherently unethical since there was nothing the investigators could do therapeutically at the time. Researchers could study the natural progression of the disease as long as they did not harm their subjects. They reasoned that the knowledge gained would benefit humankind; however, it was determined afterward that the doctors did harm their subjects by depriving them of appropriate treatment once it had been discovered. The study was characterized as "the longest non-therapeutic experiment on human beings in medical history."

The US Public Health Study of Syphilis at Tuskegee began as a 6-month descriptive epidemiological study of the range of pathology associated with syphilis in the Macon County population. At that time, it was believed that the effects of syphilis depended on the race of those affected. For African Americans, physicians believed that their cardiovascular system was more affected than the central nervous system. Initially, subjects were studied for six to eight months and then treated with contemporary methods, including Salvarsan, mercurial ointments, and bismuth. These methods were, at best, mildly effective. The disadvantage that these treatments were all highly toxic was balanced by the fact that no other methods were known. The Tuskegee Institute participated in the study, as its representatives understood the intent was to benefit public health in the local poor population. The Tuskegee University-affiliated hospital effectively loaned the PHS its medical facilities, and other predominantly black institutions and local black doctors participated as well.

So let me understand this, they only experimented on black people and still early phases of experiment were justified?