It took them long enough, but Google, who owns blog publishing service Blogger, finally canceled the hate-filled ranting at the blog, WhyBlacksSuck. blogspot.com. The blog owner (under INDRA MAGHAVAN) tried to say that his site was not a hate site, but from his name down to his postings the real story was the opposite. Over the past six months, the blogger had begun to run out of hate-gas, but the site needed a hard ending nonetheless. It was last cached on Dec. 14, 2010.I complained to Blogger regularly, once I became familiar. I also realized that he was pointing his twisted brethren to this blog, perhaps because I ‘air out the laundry’, at times. To be clear, I respect and depend upon protected speech, via the First Amendment; however, if Google wants any resemblance of good citizenship they sure-as-hell had better bring their hammer down on people who use hate-speech to incite violence on others, regardless of their affinities.
I see plenty of blog owners who write just this side of the hate-line, claiming they are simply expressing their opinions. However, when you read the vitriol-laced carnage fantasies that makes it into the comments, you understand better the relationship between the spark and fire. Absolving one’s blogging-self of hate comments, moderated or not, under some twisted sense of the First Amendment is nothing but crap.
All groups have their burdens, and blogs are powerful vehicles for openness and honesty pertaining to such. However, Why Blacks Suck was just hate that earned its participants an over-due exit to the internet bottoms.
James C. Collier
READ MOST RECENT POSTS AT ACTING WHITE...
Technorati Tags: Google Pulls Plug on "Why Blacks Suck" Blog, Racism, Hate Speech, First Amendment, Acting Black, Acting White
25 comments:
I always, naively I suppose, thought the constitutional right to free speech meant the ability to disagree with authoritative entities, the government, etc. and not receive a backlash or just plain be thrown in jail for it.
Not everything else it has been used to pass off as "freedom of speech.
And that they thought moral thinking would prevail in other matters or "speech" and living.
Now "freedom of speech" is used to ok saying almost anything and doing almost anything one can imagine.
Boy howdy, were the writers of the constitution fooled. They had way too much faith in this country and it's future citizens.
Not that I miss a hate-filled website but isn't this a contradiction on free speech? Based on this, Fox news should be next.
Weary Zebra, Free-speech, protest, and civil disobedience are hall marks of a democratic society, while inciting and encouraging violence against particular groups is quite different. I don't like FOX NEWS but they are not the same boat as WBS.
I have to ask, knowing what was said by some black panthers at a rally about killing white people, killing their babies, how many websites exist where hate speech towards whites happens as regularly as the opposite occurred on this google banned site?
If the answer is factually none, good.
If that is not the answer..........
Anon 9:21, I deplore hate-speech that invites lawbreaking, regardless of who is doing it, or the target. Your tit-for-tat logic is juvenile. The fact that the panthers were criminals doesn't change the fact that some of their enemies were the same, as well. No free passes, for anyone.
"I have to ask, knowing what was said by some black panthers at a rally about killing white people, killing their babies, how many websites exist where hate speech towards whites happens as regularly as the opposite occurred on this google banned site?"
Anonymous do you concerns extend to individuals who yell and print hate speech at KKK rallies (who have chapters in all 50 states) and websites such as Stormfront (who have thousands of registered users)?
And to Mr. Collier, what makes the Black panthers criminals but not members of the KKK, aryan nation, and other White supermacists groups??? Last time I checked the Panthers have NEVER attacked, assaulted, or killed ANY White person. But the same cannot be said for the mentioned white organizations.
And to all other people who want to yell the Consitution guarentees this or that, where was the consitution during slavery, Jim Crow, the killing and stealing of Native American lands, and the internment of Japanese AMERICANS in US concentration camps during World War 2????
Marcus Garvey
MG, Why do you say I believe the KKK, etc. not to be criminals? As for the panthers NEVER killing a white person, to begin, there is a former Marin County judge by the name of Harold Haley, whose dead body is missing its head, by way of a shot-gun purchased by Angela Davis two days before it was used on him. Never you say?
So the Black Panthers are the same organization as the Black Guerllia Family (BGF)? It is interesting that YOU say that she was involved in the attempted takeover of the courthouse, even though she was taken to trial and acquitted because of LACK of evdience. Furthermore, the person who had organized that event, George Jackson, by that had his own organization, the Black Guerllia Family (BMF),and the event was done to rescue two of BGF's members. But I guess in your mind all Black lefist organizations are the same. And since you are so good with the stats on violent acts committed by Black lefits, maybe you can come up with the number of Blacks that have been killed by the KKK.
Marcus Garvey
Marcus, you give the strong impression of arguing for the sake of argument. Davis was a panther. Jackson was her lover. She did purchase the shotgun. The judge is dead by that gun. Juries do acquit guilty people, as well as convicting the innocent. Find something else to gnaw on.
Mr. Collier said,
Your tit-for-tat logic is juvenile. The fact that the panthers were criminals doesn't change the fact that some of their enemies were the same, as well. No free passes, for anyone.
Sir I said nothing about anyone getting any free passes and I certainly said nothing to imply tit-for tat logic. All hate speech IS hate speech regardless of who is being denigrated.
What I am saying is since it was right and proper for google to pull the plug on that site IF any others exist that use hate speech against blacks, whites, such as the black panthers, or against anyone else for that matter, they should also have their plug pulled.
Yes no free passes, none at all.
I am disappointed in your jump to your conclusion of what I wrote.
As a journalist I hope communication is a top priority instead of automatic negative assumptions.I imagine by my post you considered me white and entered that assumption into your mental calculator before punching the equal button instead of simply asking me to further clarify my meaning.
Your site here shows that happens often. Since it does I expected more from the author.....
Anon 1:28, I went back and read your earlier comment, "I have to ask, knowing what was said by some black panthers at a rally about killing white people, killing their babies, how many websites exist where hate speech towards whites happens as regularly as the opposite occurred on this google banned site?", and I must confess it makes less sense each time I re-read it. Would you like to try again?
Anon 9:15, your point, made round-about, seems to be that their is a double-standard. Why did you not state and defend it as such? I do not and have not supported such a double-standard, so addressing me is all the more confusing. This is not a forum for you to address black people at-large with your issues. The topic was Google's response to one particular site. You may be correct that Google is selective, and I believe they are, but point here is that Why Blacks Such needed to go, and it finally went.
I am sorry it has been construed as such.
Earlier I said IF, in caps those sites exist they should not be allowed, same as the blog site you are speaking of. IF there is a double standard I would hope you would denounce it. At present it seemed your concern was only with the blog google finally let go.
I would hope in the same breath you would denounce all hate speech.
And I never intimated that since the panthers were criminals as you describe that their enemies were NOT the same. No where did I say that. That is what is bothersome, that you assumed I meant that.
I hope you understand now I most certainly do not condone hate speech from any side and hope you do feel the same.
I guess we will all be able to thank Al Sharpton when he gets Rush Limbaugh finally taken off the air. We are stil waiting, however, for him to speak out against the beating of the white couple in the Florida movie theatre by black thugs.....
Good luck on that.
Recall Eve Carson?
Did he ever speak against that murder?
Recall the Duke La Cross team members ordeal with being accused of rape and how the NAACP came to her "rescue" marching about how racist it was only for the truth to come out from the other women there that it was all made up.
Not a word of apology for all the lies and slander from the NAACP.
How about the woman that sold her little girl for drugs and the drug dealer later killing the girl.
Woman black, dealer black.
Why the hell does Sharpton consider only any conflict involving blacks newsworthy if it is one he can use to play the race card with??? Does he not care at all about all the other types of racism, murders, and injustices within the black community??
I spoke at length with a co-worker, a black woman, who assured me that some black people look down on other black people with lighter skin, that she had been treated this way.
What kind of crap is that?
If anyone should be extra sensitive to racism shouldn't it be blacks people? And they actually treat each other badly because of skin color alone???
How quickly THEY forget MLK and his dream.
And white people are expected to be tolerant of blacks that act in this manner. Yeah right.
Some example they set, treating their own badly because of skin color...
"We are stil waiting, however, for him to speak out against the beating of the white couple in the Florida movie theatre by black thugs....."
Why must Al Sharpton speak out on this or any other incident?!? Doesn't HE have a RIGHT to CHOOSE what he should champion? White people love to define him as a BLACK CIVIL RIGHTS LEADER, so of course, he is going to CHAMPION issues related to BLACK civil rights!
"And white people are expected to be tolerant of blacks that act in this manner."
Since when have White people been tolerant of Blacks? Was this during slavery? Jim Crow? Now, with residential segregation and economic disparities at 40 year high?!? White people can scream and shout about reserve racism, supposed race biters like Al Sharpton, and other fabrications, but at the end of the day YOU are the ones that made skin color an issue, so it is about time that YOU get a taste of your own medicine.
Nat Turner
MLKs dream, you know, the one about judging a person by the content of their character and NOT the color of their skin.
Obviously your version is something altogether different.
And black people sometimes judge each OTHER by the color of their skin?!?
If ANYONE should know better shouldn't black people know better??
Try explaining that Mr. Turner.
As far as Sharpton and his poor excuse for a group that claims to want to advance colored people, NAACP, how can you advance anyone when you never discuss ALL the issues that keep blacks down, just the ones that pit black against white? You cannot.
What he advances is the donations to his wallet and you buy right into it. Keep believing that load..
MLK's I Have A Dream Speech
http://www.usconstitution.net/dream.html
"But one hundred years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languishing in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. So we have come here today to dramatize a shameful condition."
"Those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual. There will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges."
"We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied, as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as the Negro's basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their selfhood and robbed of their dignity by signs stating "For Whites Only". We cannot be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream."
Like I said before chump, this speech isn't about kum by ya. Its about Black people having equal access to everything our society has to offer, and this can only happen if White Supremacy is ended.
MLK's views on Vietnam War
www.americanrhetoric.com
www.youtube.com/watch?v=b80Bsw0UG-U
Read for yourself and get back to me....
Nat Turner
"And black people sometimes judge each OTHER by the color of their skin?!? If ANYONE should know better shouldn't black people know better?? Try explaining that Mr. Turner."
Obviously, SOME Black people feel that way about themselves. But the better question is WHY are YOU asking me to explain their feelings of self-hatred?!? I don't know them nor share their belief systems.There are some White people who hate themselves, and wish they could be Black, Asian, Blond, Brunette, etc. Would YOU like to explain to me why they feel this way about themselves?
"As far as Sharpton and his poor excuse for a group that claims to want to advance colored people, NAACP, how can you advance anyone when you never discuss ALL the issues that keep blacks down, just the ones that pit black against white?"
Ohh so you are an expert on ALL OF THE ISSUES that are keeping Blacks down?!? I would love to get your incite on this subject. Please tell me, expert on Black people and Black interests, what ISSUES have the AL Sharptons of the world and NAACP ignored that are more important that systematic racism that keep Black people down?
White people are natural defenders of White Supremacy, so any actions that Black people take against such a system, i.e. speak out against police brutality, residential segregation, disparities in employment and income, will ALWAYS pit Blacks against Whites. White people love the current system, YOU GUYS CONTROL EVERYTHING!!!
Nat Turner
Read this again.
"And black people sometimes judge each OTHER by the color of their skin?!? If ANYONE should know better shouldn't black people know better?? Try explaining that Mr. Turner.
They sometimes judge each other, not themselves. I got that straight from a lady where I work. I also had a man tell me how when he was in school a long time ago, he is about 48, that others black kids would talk trash about the ones that tried to do well in school, that they were trying to be white. You discount all that so easily and still fall back to the same old tired worn out mentality, it's all the white man's fault.
Well you just keep fellow blacks downtrodden by riding the I'm a victim train. Mr. Collier has shown time and time again the issues blacks deal with and especially the self-destructive issues they deal to themselves.
But you refuse to see those.
It's always someone else fault.
Blacks do have all the chances as whites today. If not why are there black doctors, lawyers, politicians, teachers, professors, and oh yeah, a president??
But I am sure you have some pat NAACP answer for that too.
Don't even bother to answer.
Your logic shows exactly what you are about. You don't want to be able to work for the same things as everyone else, you want it given to you because it's just a whole lot easier to play the race/victim card.
Ad hominem attack usually involves insulting or belittling one's opponent in order to invalidate his or her argument. This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and even true negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions.
Examples of an Ad hominem attack:
"Well you just keep fellow blacks downtrodden by riding the I'm a victim train."
"But you refuse to see those. It's always someone else fault."
"Your logic shows exactly what you are about. You don't want to be able to work for the same things as everyone else, you want it given to you because it's just a whole lot easier to play the race/victim card."
Nat Turner
Those are facts. They have been proven out time and time again on this site and by stories in today's headlines but you don't want facts.
You want to be able to blame it all on "white supremacy".
As far as personal attacks and how they define the attacker....
Hilarious.
You called me a chump.
I didn't miss it.
So how does resorting to name calling define you?
typical liberal, free speech for people as long as you agree with it. I read why blacks suck on line and didn't agree with it but it did not promote violence. the problem is that blacks and their supporters don't like the truth. welcome to BRA (Black Run American with the head excuse maker for blacks, King Obama.)
So, you support free speech as long as it doesn't offend you, eh?
The first amendment applies to ALL speech, not just what you like. If you can classify anything as 'hate speech', you might as well do away with the bill of rights as a whole.
People should be able to say whatever they want. If you don't like it, you don't have to read it.
Free Speach?
Not anymore. Now it's a hate crime to critize some people.
Progress?
No.
Post a Comment