BLACK MAN SHOT WHILE JOGGING IN GEORGIA

You keep peddling that same nonsense. Are YOU black is a better question. Mine doesn't wash off and I've had to live as a black man, a 6'2 black man, in America, all my life.

Cut the noise just because you disagree with my politics.

IMG_9499.jpg

HANDSOME
 
How woke or conscious a person is has nothing to do with the fact that a person under the threat of 2 armed white men on a country road in a racist country is a different topic and threat level than a person arguing with someone online, neither of which having any idea what the other looks like or where they live.

You don't have to concede; the difference there is undeniable, meaning that even if the difference is denied, it still exists.
What you fail to realize is that through our experience, we can also see those threats online, those who use dogwhistle, coded terms. There may not be a gun involved, but an unaware moderator, or one with an agenda can and will add fuel to the fire. Apparently, dirtylicious and jrose executed such acts with frequency. Nike Air’s comments were up for a while, as well as gentrication’s, which are still there.
 
Can someone explain to me the whole reason why the DA has to approve the police making an arrest, especially for a huge case like this where there is loss of life? The whole argument about self defence was weak from the start, considering one person was un-armed.

If what the article says is true, that the police wanted to but were denied, I'm confused about a few things.

1. Would the officers on scene get reprimanded for making the arrest despite being told not to (even though they believed it was the right decision at the time)?
2. Is there anyone above the DA that can overrule a DA's decision in that moment? Seems silly that such a huge decision would be made by one person and not a panel of people.
3. Does this vary state by state, or is it normal practice everywhere?
 
I’ve stop trying to convince white folks in my circle about racism. They often live in a bubble. Once I realized that I just stopped caring. They love the visceral side of our culture but gives no damns about the plight of African amareicans/minorities. When I explain to “them” that I’ve been pulled over numerous times coming out of my neighborhood. “ You must’ve been speeding, broke headlight..etc”. No they said I fit a profile. All I can do as a man is to educate my kids on how society is.
I’ve seen it first hand living in central florida and now Atlanta. Most folks don’t realize they are racist.
Idk bro...can't really say they'd still be in my circle with that way of think. Might need to evaluate who you surround yourself with b. They'll never be able to fully relate or empathize...and doesnt sound like they're really trying either. You might be their black friend so they can say they arent racist. You be like 'but but..I'm black.' 'Yeah, but you're different Jamal'.
 
Please see marikomorose marikomorose 's post on page 1 or 2 about why POC is disrespectful to use when there is a SPECIFIC color being discussed as being treated unfairly.
We’ve posted information showing why such a term is insulting, especially in cases like this, as POC is a term that diminishes the travails of the Black experience in this world. We are not all in this thing together, and non Blacks do not experience the same discrimination in this country, as the descendants of African slaves in the western hemisphere.
Men of Color... Women of Color... People of Color...

People of Color is an exclusionary term masked as an inclusionary term that undermines the plights of Black Americans
(American, Canadian, British, Dominican, Haitian, Puerto Rican, French, Nigerian, etc included)
by grouping other minority groups together as one as if their historical and future struggles have been or will be equal to the struggles Black ppl have faced in the Americas.

Elizabeth Warren claimed Native American for the longest which technically made her a "pEARson oF cOLoUr." Anyone w/ 2 non legally blind eyes can see that Elizabeth Warren is a white woman.

All in all "People of Colour" is disingenuous.
People of Colour is used to appease ppl that yearn to be apart of a struggle they'll never face.
People of Colour sugarcoats & (over)simplifies racism.
People of Colour even more so contributes to the continued marginalization of black people, and the way you just used it exemplifies this.

If you wish to continue using that term then remarkable, but you're no longer ignorant to negative effects it has after/if you read this.

Appreciate these posts. Missed the post by marikomorose marikomorose So I'm glad I was able to link with it today.

And I completely agree. That term is just another way to deminish our plight. While under no fault of darthska darthska , heart was in the right place, I'm glad he made that post, and then edited once he got more information like all litrature should be able to do once new information is acquired.

But absolutely. I felt away about that term as sound as it sprang up. Same breath as all lives matter. Marginalizing our struggle on the same level as MExican people, Filipino, Indian people, and pretty much all other melanated people to take away our voice.

I don't want to hear the news say 'another unarmed person of color was gunned down today'........That doesnt hit the mark. It doesnt draw attention. That's background noise. Because it can be anybody. If a black man was killed, dammit, say that **** 'ANOTHER UNARMED BLACK MAN WAS GUNNED DOWN TODAY'..........Then maybe it'll start to bother the people that aren't directly affected. 'Like, damn, that makes like 4 or 5 this week.' Like even if you ignored the first couple deaths, same way people ignored the early corona deaths.....after a while you gotta be like...ok now...wtf.
 
Members of five Native American nations, the Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek, and Seminole Nations (known as the Five Tribes), owned black slaves. Then located outside the territorial boundaries of the US in a region known as Indian Territory (modern-day Oklahoma), these sovereign nations were not affected by proclamations or constitutional amendments. Instead, separate treaties had to be made between the US and these Native American nations not only to free enslaved peoples, but also to formally end the American Civil War battles and antagonism between American and Native American troops.

The fact that by the time of the Civil War black chattel slavery had been an element of life among the Five Tribes for decades is rarely discussed. It is, however, an important aspect of US history which serves to remind us of the complexity of colonialism, exploitation and victimisation that laid the foundations of our country.


WASH. YOUR. FACE. B.

Bonus:

While the former slaves of the Cherokee, Creek, Seminole, and Choctaw Nations became tribal citizens due to the Treaties of 1866, throughout the 20th century, all of the Five Tribes eventually rescinded the tribal membership of these freedpeople and their descendants. Although their former slaves had lived among them for generations, sharing land, history, and trauma with them, the Five Tribes claimed that they were interlopers who had no place among them because they had no Native ancestry.


wow. i didnt know this stuff. damn. this is even more eye opening. Everybody used us and tossed us away.

They treated us like animals, like robots only used for our abilities and strong bodies. Tried to keep us uneducated, dumb, slow behind. They want us to forget our history of kings and queens. But in like all of the movies they've made, Our awareness grew, our abilities grew, we progressed, became more than just their tools. And wanted to be looked at on the same level, with the same respect, same rights. And the system hated us for it. Because they still want us to be what we were, but we're so much more.
 
Members of five Native American nations, the Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek, and Seminole Nations (known as the Five Tribes), owned black slaves. Then located outside the territorial boundaries of the US in a region known as Indian Territory (modern-day Oklahoma), these sovereign nations were not affected by proclamations or constitutional amendments. Instead, separate treaties had to be made between the US and these Native American nations not only to free enslaved peoples, but also to formally end the American Civil War battles and antagonism between American and Native American troops.

The fact that by the time of the Civil War black chattel slavery had been an element of life among the Five Tribes for decades is rarely discussed. It is, however, an important aspect of US history which serves to remind us of the complexity of colonialism, exploitation and victimisation that laid the foundations of our country.


WASH. YOUR. FACE. B.

Bonus:

While the former slaves of the Cherokee, Creek, Seminole, and Choctaw Nations became tribal citizens due to the Treaties of 1866, throughout the 20th century, all of the Five Tribes eventually rescinded the tribal membership of these freedpeople and their descendants. Although their former slaves had lived among them for generations, sharing land, history, and trauma with them, the Five Tribes claimed that they were interlopers who had no place among them because they had no Native ancestry.
Good. LORD. 😕😕😕😕😕

I...

giphy.gif
 
It’s real out here
I'm well aware of that. I'm not new to the idea that black history is the worst history in this country. I'm not some Johnny-come-lately that is just now hip to the traumas of black history in the land of the free (to be a straight, white, Christian, male).

But continuing to learn new layers like once slavery and segregation had both been legally abolished and those 5 nations were given their own land, they looked at those black slaves that had been a part of their life for decades and said 'Nah, you're not a part of us. Get the hell on'... there's just always a new angle, a new trauma, a new discovery that speaks to how thoroughly the fibers are woven into this BS (allegory intended).
 

If any of y’all wanna help, all proceeds go to Arbery’s family


did they make it $140 so average people couldnt get them? You see way more bodies in they if they were 40-50. And with more sold, the family would ultimately see more dough. this feels like a curve on the humble.
 
did they make it $140 so average people couldnt get them? You see way more bodies in they if they were 40-50. And with more sold, the family would ultimately see more dough. this feels like a curve on the humble.
Compared to supreme/palace pricing it is not thaaat high. Price went up in streetwear.
 
did they make it $140 so average people couldnt get them? You see way more bodies in they if they were 40-50. And with more sold, the family would ultimately see more dough. this feels like a curve on the humble.
I'm not feeling this. Not at all.
 
Back
Top Bottom