Wachovia apoligizes for slavery ties

[SLU MD]

link

this is the stupidest thing i've ever seen. the CEO is apologizing for something that happened 150 yrs ago that he nor anyone else currently at the company had anything to do with. rediculous

who is coming up w/ these laws declaring that companies have to disclose this information. talk about a waste of time. come on

 

[Shawn]

that's asinine

 

[Rogue]

Let the floodgates for lawsuits open wide! Whoever in their PR department approved such a statement and whatever local governments are pushing them to investigate such things should be shot. Nothing like dredging up the past for no good reason.

 

[So]

Good grief. :roll:

 

[cain]

funny as hell, the report was 111 pages long? i wonder how many man hours they wasted on that one

 

[rh71]

did they bother apologizing for this ?

 

[labgeek]

Originally posted by: SLU MD
rediculous

I knew docs couldn't write legibly worth a damn, but they can't spell either??

 

[iroast]

sigh

 

[StageLeft]

PR nonsense.

 

[SLU MD]

Originally posted by: labgeek

Originally posted by: SLU MD
rediculous

I knew docs couldn't write legibly worth a damn, but they can't spell either??

oops, looks like my brain is fried today already from board studying. ha ha. not gonna fix it, screw it, its a message board; this isnt the ER.

 

[Amused]

Historians at the History Factory, a research firm specializing in corporate archival work, found that the Georgia Railroad and Banking Company and the Bank of Charleston -- institutions that ultimately became part of Wachovia through acquisitions -- owned slaves, Wachovia said in the statement.

Records revealed that the Georgia Railroad and Banking Company owned at least 162 slaves, Wachovia said, and that the Bank of Charleston accepted at least 529 slaves as collateral on mortgaged properties or loans. The Bank of Charleston also acquired an undetermined number of people when customers defaulted on their loans.

This makes it even MORE absurd. :roll:

 

[allisolm]

Originally posted by: SLU MD

Originally posted by: labgeek

Originally posted by: SLU MD
rediculous

I knew docs couldn't write legibly worth a damn, but they can't spell either??

oops, looks like my brain is fried today already from board studying. ha ha. not gonna fix it, screw it, its a message board; this isnt the ER.

Then it won't matter that it is apologizes, not apoligizes.

Oh, and blame Chicago for this particular one. "The... bank issued a 111-page report to comply with a Chicago ordinance that requires companies that do business with the city to disclose whether they profited from slavery, which ended in the U.S. in 1865."

 

[Doboji]

Yeah doesn't really make sense to consider legal actions against people who did something that was believed to be moral, and legal hundreds of years ago. Retroactive legality is stupid. Next thing you know after abortion is made illegal, people will run around prosecuting people who had abortions done years ago.

Stupidity... that is all

-Max

 

[GasX]

Kunta! Kunta Kinte!

wuh PISH!

I said your bank is Wachovia!

 

[y2kc]

so stupid, uneccessary. i believe stuff like this hurts current race relations.

 

[BobDaMenkey]

That is incredibly dumb. Why does it matter what happened 150 years ago? The same people are not still running the corperations, they don't have the same polocies today. Jebus.

 

[DnetMHZ]

I'd like to apologize for my caveman ancestor slapping your caveman ancestor back in the Palaeolithic era.

 

[Amused]

Folks read the Article.

Wachovia NEVER OWNED OR TRADED SLAVES.

Two banks they bought out AFTER THE FACT had, in their past, owned slaves.

This fact makes it even more absurd.

 

[BlueWeasel]

Originally posted by: Mwilding
Kunta! Kunta Kinte!

wuh PISH!

I said your bank is Wachovia!

:evil: :evil: :evil:

 

[Doboji]

Originally posted by: Amused
Folks read the Article.

Wachovia NEVER OWNED OR TRADED SLAVES.

Two banks they bought out AFTER THE FACT had, in their past, owned slaves.

This fact makes it even more absurd.

Yeah I read that part.... but really... are you surprised at all?

-Max

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Doboji

Originally posted by: Amused
Folks read the Article.

Wachovia NEVER OWNED OR TRADED SLAVES.

Two banks they bought out AFTER THE FACT had, in their past, owned slaves.

This fact makes it even more absurd.

Yeah I read that part.... but really... are you surprised at all?

-Max

Actually, yes. Those companies are dead.

Wachovia itself wasn't even founded until the late 1870s nearly 15 years after the Civil War.

The other banks were bought out over 100 years after the Civil War.

 

[Martin]

so, will you guys get as mad if a company celebrates past achievements?

 

[Doboji]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Doboji

Originally posted by: Amused
Folks read the Article.

Wachovia NEVER OWNED OR TRADED SLAVES.

Two banks they bought out AFTER THE FACT had, in their past, owned slaves.

This fact makes it even more absurd.

Yeah I read that part.... but really... are you surprised at all?

-Max

Actually, yes. Those companies are dead.

Wachovia itself wasn't even founded until the late 1870s nearly 15 years after the Civil War.

The other banks were bought out over 100 years after the Civil War.

The banks in this country have bought out and merged so many times that I think you would be hard pressed to find one that doesnt have SOME roots back to the slavery era. You would also be hard-pressed to find any american business that existed in that era that doesnt have at least distant ties to slavery, as it was a legal and socially accepted business institution at that time.

Add that to a society of today where the TV features such intellectual masterpieces like "How to be a hilton"... and voila... we have this press release.

I'm not surprised at all.

-Max

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Doboji

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Doboji

Originally posted by: Amused
Folks read the Article.

Wachovia NEVER OWNED OR TRADED SLAVES.

Two banks they bought out AFTER THE FACT had, in their past, owned slaves.

This fact makes it even more absurd.

Yeah I read that part.... but really... are you surprised at all?

-Max

Actually, yes. Those companies are dead.

Wachovia itself wasn't even founded until the late 1870s nearly 15 years after the Civil War.

The other banks were bought out over 100 years after the Civil War.

The banks in this country have bought out and merged so many times that I think you would be hard pressed to find one that doesnt have SOME roots back to the slavery era. You would also be hard-pressed to find any american business that existed in that era that doesnt have at least distant ties to slavery, as it was a legal and socially accepted business institution at that time.

Add that to a society of today where the TV features such intellectual masterpieces like "How to be a hilton"... and voila... we have this press release.

I'm not surprised at all.

-Max

Well, I still hold out hope. I try not to be so jaded.

 

[spiderrasmon]

I'll bet if this was about Wachovia having part ownership in the makers of the B-52 bombers that hit Hiroshima and Nagasaki, some of you would be upset.

either way, reparations is a joke, let God sort 'em out.