West Virginia Torture Horror

[Vincent Vega]

Goebbels, Heidrich, Himmler or Eichmann were intelligent people, you can't deny that. Of course, total idiots in their own right, but from their IQ they wouldn't be stupid.

Hitler went nuts some time in his life. He wasn't stupid, but not highly intelligent either. But he was a very manipulating orator.

Then there is Goering... well, he was full of drugs and he was stupid, indeed.

But even people like Hjalmar Schacht, who ended the Great Inflation and was a genius in finances, fell for Hitler.

 

[Kiki]

thats just....disgusting.

Maybe it's just my way of thinking.....but why on earth if you actually HATE someone and are that horrible to do something like that to another human being.....why would you EVER want to have sex with them or have them perform sexual acts with or on you?????????

Doesnt that kind of go against your whole..... "I hate you and think you're dirt" thing?

uh...I'm so not saying any of this is right either...I hope I didn't come across sounding like I was saying it was right.

 

[redhotswami]

the nature of rape isn't really to engage in a mutual sexual experience with someone. as sick as this sounds it is more to defile somebody, and penetrate them to their very core. it is an intrusion, violation, whatever word you want to use, but ultimately somebody else is in control and they are forcing themselves on the victim.

 

[dazzledbylight]

The Neshoba County Fair, August 3, 1980. Reagan chose that as his first, kickoff campaign stop after his nomination, and yes, he talked about being a firm believer in "states' rights" and how if elected he'd restore to state and local governments the powers which "properly belonged" to them. Monumentally cynical or monumentally insensitive--take your pick. We lived about 90 minutes northwest of there at the time...I was only nine, but I can still remember the verbal explosion that occasioned from my father when we heard about it; those murders had hit particularly close to home.

ETA: I have to say I personally never saw or heard of any officially separate drinking fountains after 1970, though it wouldn't surprise me if there were places where that was "de facto" still true.

yolland!

there's actually a little know illustration by omg just forgot his name FAMOUS reaslistic illustrator - the Four Freedoms..../ thnaksGiving fasmily pics...
well anyway, his pic of one of the grade school black girls heading for the white school for the first time with national guard protecting her.
there's actasully ANOTHER LESSER-NKOW one he did with one with i think tg\he black voter's rights student volunteer with the shadow of one of the [psoon to be] muderers aproaching him. yikes!
really. I've only seen it once.

 

[dazzledbylight]

I would actually suggest an intelligent bigot is quite possible. What motivates racism is hatred, greed, and fear, all three of which are completely seperate from a person's intellectual abilities. In fact, it's the "smart" racist I find most offensive. Someone who just doesn't know any better I can understand, but often highly intelligent people are behind the most heinous examples of racism (see Nazi Germany).

the Nazis got part of their ideas about purity of race etc from the USA's eugenics movement. #disgust#

 

[Butterscotch]

i am very sorry about what happened to your cousin, Butterscotch give my regards to your family. that is a terrible and unfair thing to go through. based on your account, it sounds to me like the man getting his car taken away committed the true crime here by coming up with a lie so he can get out of having his car taken away. was the car taken away after all? was him lying to get your cousin locked up worth it?

i can see why you are weary of "hate crime" now, but to be honest with you i don't think it is fair to then not trust when it happens to others. people get each other locked up for all sorts of other lies, not just for hate crime legislation. i'd be more inclined to direct my anger at a corrupt justice system for not getting to the bottom of this than at hate crime legislation. but then again, i'm looking on the outside in here.

Thanks. I can't figure out how it's supposed to be a 'hate' crime when it was not at all racially motivated and he never hated the guy. My cousin was repo-ing a vehicle and was attacked. Maybe he used excessive force, but it was no hate crime. His punishment of 20 years is extreme and does not fit the crime, yet I don't see thousands crusading for justice for him. And that hurts.

 

[CTU2fan]

I agree with you, I don't see how it's a hate crime. It takes more than crime + 2 different races to equal a hate crime. Even if the witnesses claimed your cousing used the N word etc the altercation arose out of a confrontation over the car; I'm sure the guy would have tried to stop your cousin from taking his car whether he was white or black, and I'd assume your cousin would have used the stick on his attacker whatever his race was.

He might be in trouble because of the stick (I'm assuming the other guy was unarmed?). But hate crime? I don't see it, unless there's more to the story (no telling what was told to the police etc).

 

[Butterscotch]

I agree with you, I don't see how it's a hate crime. It takes more than crime + 2 different races to equal a hate crime. Even if the witnesses claimed your cousing used the N word etc the altercation arose out of a confrontation over the car; I'm sure the guy would have tried to stop your cousin from taking his car whether he was white or black, and I'd assume your cousin would have used the stick on his attacker whatever his race was.

He might be in trouble because of the stick (I'm assuming the other guy was unarmed?). But hate crime? I don't see it, unless there's more to the story (no telling what was told to the police etc).

Thank you for your understanding and support. The same thing would have happened no matter what color the guy was, it's not a hate crime. The 'witness' neighbors never even came outside until the cops pulled up after it was over backing their friend up and trying to get revenge on the repo man. They were probably also trying to make their friend look like the victim and get him off totally free since he was the one who jumped my cousin first. Did they ever wonder why my cousin would call the cops if he was about to commit a 'hate' crime?

I have heard because the federal prosecutor is involved there is no chance for him. I am not saying he should get no punishment at all, but 20 years and being labeled with a 'hate' crime is excessive and wrong. It's a terrible injustice.

I will keep you all updated on this case. Thanks for caring.

 

[Sue DeNym]

there's actually a little know illustration by omg just forgot his name FAMOUS reaslistic illustrator - the Four Freedoms..../ thnaksGiving fasmily pics...
well anyway, his pic of one of the grade school black girls heading for the white school for the first time with national guard protecting her.
there's actasully ANOTHER LESSER-NKOW one he did with one with i think tg\he black voter's rights student volunteer with the shadow of one of the [psoon to be] muderers aproaching him. yikes!
really. I've only seen it once.

Norman Rockwell. I recall the other pictures, but not the last one you mentioned.

 

[BVS]

Fear isn't always irrational and it's possible to make a "rational" argument for why we should fear "Them".

I've never seen one.

Racism enabled the slaveowner to keep making the big plantation bucks and still be able to sleep at night. Greed and self-deception, pure and simple.

But I guess the point I was trying to make is 'what comes first the ignorance or the greed'? Did greed motivate them to think black people are lesser human or was it the ignorance that allowed them to think this? In other words, if you were taught that the world was flat and didn't question it, then the world was flat. But let's say you weren't taught the world was flat, but it would be profitable to believe so, could you convince yourself to believe the world was flat just because it would make you money?

I'm sure this is not your intention, but the reason I object to your chalking it all up ignorance, is that it provides a sort of excuse for racial prejudice. It removes a certain level of responsiblity from the racist. Ignorance sometimes is the source of racism, but not always. It's not accurate to say that all racists just need to be "educated", that they are somehow "clueless" about how wrong and corrosive their hatred is. I'm willing to bet no amount of education could have cured Goebbels or Hitler. These guys made a conscious choice to hate, for the sake of their own advancement and gain. A scapegoat is a very useful thing when you have megalomaniac ambitions.

No, it wasn't my intention. I don't ever see ignorance as an excuse. When I use the term ignorance I use it to describe somone who is making a choice to ignore the truth. I believe there is a difference between being eneducated on a subject and being ignorant of a subject.

 

[phillyfan26]

the nature of rape isn't really to engage in a mutual sexual experience with someone. as sick as this sounds it is more to defile somebody, and penetrate them to their very core. it is an intrusion, violation, whatever word you want to use, but ultimately somebody else is in control and they are forcing themselves on the victim.

Exactly. I had a health teacher who said that's the biggest misconception about rape. Rape is about showing power over someone and taking control through sex in almost every case.

 

[redhotswami]

Thanks. I can't figure out how it's supposed to be a 'hate' crime when it was not at all racially motivated and he never hated the guy. My cousin was repo-ing a vehicle and was attacked. Maybe he used excessive force, but it was no hate crime. His punishment of 20 years is extreme and does not fit the crime, yet I don't see thousands crusading for justice for him. And that hurts.

maybe because people don't know about it? i didn't hear about this until you said something. you should start by making a web site, and then try contacting some media. i'm sure it will grow attention if the word was spread out.

 

[BVS]

Thanks. I can't figure out how it's supposed to be a 'hate' crime when it was not at all racially motivated and he never hated the guy. My cousin was repo-ing a vehicle and was attacked. Maybe he used excessive force, but it was no hate crime. His punishment of 20 years is extreme and does not fit the crime, yet I don't see thousands crusading for justice for him. And that hurts.

Well unfortunately your cousin has a lot of evidence(be it factual or not) against him.

 

[yolland]

^ The way Butterscotch described it though, it's difficult to see how there would be evidence indicating a hate crime charge specifically. Especially a federal hate crime charge, where they have to show that one of a small number of federally protected benefits was interfered with, and that that was the intent of the crime--I can't imagine what the benefit(s) in question would be. And even with a state hate crime charge, as CTU2 fan pointed out, the mere "fact" that e.g. racial or homophobic epithets are uttered while committing the "primary" crime does not constitute grounds for hate crime charges (there was actually a Supreme Court case which resolved that; Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 1993). Now if the prosecution could show beyond a reasonable doubt that racism was the precipitating factor in committing the crime itself, that's different--but if you were a cop, wouldn't you find it a bit suspicious that a man who was present at the crime scene in order to repossess a car, as required by his job (not hard to prove), supposedly just happened to unprovokedly attack the car's owner purely out of racism while he was there?

Butterscotch is wrong about one thing though, it has nothing to do with whether the criminal "hates" the victim in general. What hate crime laws seek to punish is criminal conduct motivated by hatred of the victim insofar as s/he belongs to a protected class (e.g. ANY race, religion, nationality, gender or sexual orientation)...not hateful feelings or beliefs themselves, which are protected by the First Amendment. Because, such crimes are more likely to stir broad community unrest, provoke retaliatory acts, and intimidate other members of that protected class. That's why racism would have to be shown to be the precipitating factor.

 

[BVS]

All I was saying is that the witness backing racial slurs(truth or not), the fractured skull, and the fact that he isn't allowed to carry a weapon is very damning evidence.

 

[Butterscotch]

He did use a weapon, but he did not utter the n word. I told you he's a gangsta guy, loves hiphop and dresses and acts black and has always been the furthest thing from racist. The neighbors didn't even come outside until it was over and they saw the cops's lights and wanted to save their friend from being charged with attacking my cousin. They were lying. I think the white cops feeling forced to take up for the black guy over the white because they were being afraid of being called racist is a big part of this.

He's also beat up plenty of white guys too but was never charged. He does have a temper, and he was defending himself from an attack. As much as I don't like it I can understand him being charged with the wounding and even given a year or two but 20 years and a hate crime is totally outrageous and wrong. It was a result of the repo, he was the one who called the cops before he was attacked when he saw trouble brewing, and there was not hate crime in any way. He would have done the same thing if they guy was white, the guy was not targeted or hurt for his color, it was because he attacked my cousin from behind in a headlock and started beating him up. If that hadn't happened he never would have touched him. He was only there to do his job and take the car.

As for spreading the word, I will have to ask the family, they are embarrassed and don't want names mentioned. I don't think it would do any good, though.

 

[BVS]

He did use a weapon, but he did not utter the n word. I told you he's a gangsta guy, loves hiphop and dresses and acts black and has always been the furthest thing from racist. The neighbors didn't even come outside until it was over and they saw the cops's lights and wanted to save their friend from being charged with attacking my cousin. They were lying. I think the white cops feeling forced to take up for the black guy over the white because they were being afraid of being called racist is a big part of this.

Read my post again. I'm not saying he's a racist. I'm saying the evidence against him is very damning, be it true or not.

The cops have to report what they are told, they aren't doing their job if they do anything less.

He broke the law, there's no doubt about that, but the burden of his defense will have to be trying to prove the witness wrong.

 

[dazzledbylight]

THANKS sue!

how could i forget ole NR!

i kept thinking
andrew wythe and think nah, that's not quite right!

well, like i said i've only seen it once..not printed up as an example often i guess.

 

[Butterscotch]

Read my post again. I'm not saying he's a racist. I'm saying the evidence against him is very damning, be it true or not.

The cops have to report what they are told, they aren't doing their job if they do anything less.

He broke the law, there's no doubt about that, but the burden of his defense will have to be trying to prove the witness wrong.

I know that, but when you have no witnesses other than yourself, you are in trouble. They should consider things like the fact he called the cops first, and that he was on a repo job and not out to attack anybody on purpose.

 

[BVS]

I know that, but when you have no witnesses other than yourself, you are in trouble. They should consider things like the fact he called the cops first, and that he was on a repo job and not out to attack anybody on purpose.

Yes you are in trouble, if it's just you.

I agree that his call to the cops should be considered, but the repo job doesn't help his case much, people don't take kindly to repo men with weapons.

 

[Butterscotch]

He was told to carry one because other repo men had been attacked, even shot at. People don't take kindly to repo men but it's not okay to attack one.

 

[BVS]

He was told to carry one because other repo men had been attacked, even shot at. People don't take kindly to repo men but it's not okay to attack one.

I never said it was ok... You sure jump to conclusions a lot.

It doesn't matter what he was told, it's illegal.

 

[maycocksean]

I've never seen one.

There's a difference between "rational" and "right." If you can convince people that Minority Group X are dangerous, then it's easy to make a "rational" argument for why certain restrictions or negative actions must be taken against them.

But I guess the point I was trying to make is 'what comes first the ignorance or the greed'? Did greed motivate them to think black people are lesser human or was it the ignorance that allowed them to think this? In other words, if you were taught that the world was flat and didn't question it, then the world was flat. But let's say you weren't taught the world was flat, but it would be profitable to believe so, could you convince yourself to believe the world was flat just because it would make you money?

I would argue that the greed came first. In the early years of the settlement of the New World, blacks and whites were both brought over as indentured servants and essentially treated eqaully as far as I understand it. Look at the way black/white racism has developed in this country and it's radically different and far more corrosive than the more common "fear of the foreign Other" prejudice found in many other parts of the world. Whites NEEDED blacks to be inferior, that's my point. There was a point where they weren't treated any differently than white indentured servants and then there was a point where they were.

I see where you're coming from and I don't entirely disagree. I just think saying that "all racists are ignorant" is too easy. . .kind of like saying "all terrorists are cowards" (another common sentiment I disagree with). It feels good to say but I question how true it really is.

 

[AnnRKeyintheUSA]

Look at the way black/white racism has developed in this country and it's radically different and far more corrosive than the more common "fear of the foreign Other" prejudice found in many other parts of the world. Whites NEEDED blacks to be inferior, that's my point. There was a point where they weren't treated any differently than white indentured servants and then there was a point where they were.

Though they did look at the blacks as 'inferior' they never hated them or became extreme in their segregation tactics until after reconstruction. I think they resented the blacks who had been 'beneath' them being put in positions over them and after the occupying union army left they took out their resentment on the blacks themselves. This extended up until the Civil Rights movements of the 50's and 60's. It's not right, but that's what happened and why you hear about the blacks being treated so bad.It is a disgrace on our nation. The concept of blacks being 'inferior' to whites is a US invention. It was never anywhere else as far as I know. In the days of the Bible the Africans were regarded as equals and their kings and queens revered.

I see where you're coming from and I don't entirely disagree. I just think saying that "all racists are ignorant" is too easy. . .kind of like saying "all terrorists are cowards" (another common sentiment I disagree with). It feels good to say but I question how true it really is.

Terrorists are not cowards, they are the bravest people in the world to have the inner strength to commit an act they know is going to kill them. Even military people, while always at risk, never intend to die. I'm not defending them, I think they're terrible, but they're not cowards! Of course it is their religion and brainwashing by their leaders that they will be glorified in the afterlife for what they to that gives them the courage. It's not something many Americans would ever do.

 

[Vincent Vega]

^Well, the Nazis saw them as inferior, as did for example Rudolf Steiner, the founder of the Waldorf education.

You would find this resentment all over Europe as they saw themselves as the highest being on earth.

Everything that was not white and Christian was seen as inferior: Africans, Asians, Jews, Muslims, Aborigine, Maori...

 

[bonocrazy88]

So terrible. They give West Virginians (like me) a bad name. Screw them.

 

[maycocksean]

Though they did look at the blacks as 'inferior' they never hated them or became extreme in their segregation tactics until after reconstruction.

Because they didn't have to. They ran the show until the Civil War. They could afford to be expansive and generous with "their people" because ultimately they had complete control over the lives of their slaves. While many slaveowning whites might not have felt they "hated" their slaves, their feeling were hardly what I would call "okay." And I think there was ALWAYS, always, an undercurrent of fear of their slaves. The closest thing I can think of to this outside of the American culture would be the description of the relationship between the main character in the novel "The Kite Runner" and his best friend/servant who was of a minority group in Afghanistan that were generally treated as servants.

There is something deeply ugly about this type of prejudice--it's a prejudice borne not out ignorance and distance, but out of "knowledge" of a sort and close proximity. Blacks and whites in the South before slavery, and to a degree, after, lived, worked, and played very close together. Black women nursed white babies, raised white children. There were even sexual unions of questionable consensuality. The problem here, was not ignorance. Far from it. There was nothing you could have done to "educate" whites in the South. They had an evil system--a system that dehumanized both the owners and slaves-- on which their society, economy, and culture were built, and prejudice was their way of protecting that system and their own consciences.

 

[BVS]

They had an evil system--a system that dehumanized both the owners and slaves-- on which their society, economy, and culture were built, and prejudice was their way of protecting that system and their own consciences.

But isn't the definition of such a system ignorant. I mean they were ignoring the facts that black people bled just like white people, they felt just like white people, they loved just like white people...

I think you and I are talking about the same thing we're just defining it differently. Maybe that's why we can't erase it. Maybe we can't find the defining moment in human existence that actually causes one to be racist... I don't know. I'm just thinking out loud. I've always found it to be a conscious effort to ignore the facts, which in my mind equals ignorance. But maybe it's greed that allows folks to ignore the facts... I don't know, I'll never understand it.

 

[maycocksean]

But isn't the definition of such a system ignorant. I mean they were ignoring the facts that black people bled just like white people, they felt just like white people, they loved just like white people...

I think you and I are talking about the same thing we're just defining it differently. Maybe that's why we can't erase it. Maybe we can't find the defining moment in human existence that actually causes one to be racist... I don't know. I'm just thinking out loud. I've always found it to be a conscious effort to ignore the facts, which in my mind equals ignorance. But maybe it's greed that allows folks to ignore the facts... I don't know, I'll never understand it.

I think I see where we differ. I see ignorance as "unconsciously ignoring the facts" or being "ignorant" of the facts. Perhaps comon ground for us would then be "willful ignorance." Which would fit, I think with your first paragraph. After awhile, though the self-deception that began it all is complete and of course in future generations, who have known nothing else the racism becomes engrained.

 

[BVS]

I think I see where we differ. I see ignorance as "unconsciously ignoring the facts" or being "ignorant" of the facts. Perhaps comon ground for us would then be "willful ignorance."

Fair enough. I always found it interesting that the word ignorant has the root word ignore, which implies an effort, yet 'ignorant' is often defined as just lack of knowledge...